Russia continues to seek new ways to attack Ukraine, while the Ukrainian defense industry is developing its own technological solutions. Against the backdrop of a shortage of missiles for the Patriot system, new Russian developments and the capabilities of Ukrainian ballistics are drawing particular attention.
Aviation expert Kostyantyn Kryvolap discussed this in an exclusive interview with 24 Channel. He explained the dangers posed by the “Geran-5” missile drone, assessed the prospects for establishing Ukraine’s Space Forces, and stated that the Ukrainian FP-7 missile is already in flight and capable of destroying Russian “Iskander” and “Pantsir” systems.
popular videos
Is there an alternative to Patriot missiles, and how can Russian ballistic missiles be shot down?
Missiles for the Patriot systems will be available in about a year. That’s what our partners are ready to provide to Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia is expanding its ballistic missile arsenal. Do we have any alternative for defending our airspace right now, when it’s winter and we really need those PAC-3s?
You said they’ll be available in a year. But where will they come from? The PAC-3 missiles that the Americans are contractually obligated to transfer to us won’t arrive until at least 2028 – and possibly even later.
Moreover, our partners have already exhausted their ability to supply these missiles to Ukraine. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius also emphasized this, noting that further deliveries would threaten the country’s national security.
Therefore, I do not think we will be able to obtain them in the necessary quantities. Perhaps we’ll be able to negotiate certain deliveries from the Middle East. There’s also a chance that, following changes in the composition of the U.S. Congress and House of Representatives, we’ll be able to revise existing agreements and exchange missiles with other countries so that Ukraine receives them sooner.
However, even in that case, the number of missiles will not be enough to intercept all the ballistic targets launched by Russia.
As for Russia’s stockpile of ballistic missiles, the enemy may have about 50–55 missiles ready for launch. That is the best-case scenario for us. If we multiply that number by 12, we get approximately 600 missiles.
In addition, Russia produces about 400 “Iskanders” and has approximately 350–400 48N6 missiles. There are also North Korean KN-23s – about 100 units.
Please note that Russia continues to use KN-23 ballistic missiles, which it receives from North Korea. In particular, on November 7, 2026, Russian troops likely used them to strike one of Ukraine's key energy facilities. This was reported by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Russia used North Korean KN-23 missiles.
In August 2026, the Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) also reported that Russia had received a new batch of 40 KN-23 and KN-24 missiles. In total, Moscow planned to acquire up to 120 North Korean ballistic missiles and six launchers.
In other words, even if the Lockheed Martin plant were to operate exclusively for Ukraine’s needs, its capacity would not be sufficient to provide us with even half the required number of missiles.
Therefore, we should rely not only on intercepting missiles in the air but also on neutralizing the threat before launch. This involves strikes against missile production facilities and enterprises that manufacture missile components, as well as targeting “Iskander” operational-tactical missile systems as they move into launch positions.
Another priority is the destruction of the launchers for the S-300 and S-400 systems, from which 48N6 missiles are launched. To be honest, I don’t see any other effective ways to counter this threat.
Full interview with the aviation expert: watch the video
How the “Palyanytsia” works and what is known about the Ukrainian FP-7 ballistic missile
At the same time, we’re now seeing that Ukrainian “Palyanytsia” cruise missiles are successfully striking Russian military facilities. So what’s the situation there, exactly? Is their air defense system unable to shoot down a cruise missile? What do you know about this?
To shoot down a cruise missile, you need the appropriate air defense systems. The Russians are currently intercepting “Palyanytsia” using A-50U long-range radar detection aircraft. They have three or four of these systems left, no more.
They detect the missile at a considerable distance, since the “Palyanytsia” is quite large. After that, Su-35S fighters are scrambled, and usually MiG-31BMs as well. These are aircraft converted from MiG-31Ks, which were previously used to launch “Kinzhal” missiles.
This is how the Russians try to shoot down the “Palyanytsia” missiles. They manage to intercept a significant number of them, but some still get through. The “Palyanytsia” has a range of up to 3,000 kilometers and carries a 150-kilogram warhead.
The Russians are literally hunting this missile because they fear it so much. Our General Staff reports the results of strikes only when there are significant hits.
At the same time, not all attacks are successful. For example, Russia has the Kh-101 missile – a modern, effective missile that is resistant to electronic warfare and incorporates stealth technology. It is a much more complex target than it might seem. The fact that we shoot down 90–95 percent of such missiles does not mean they are inferior. As I’ve already said, this is the result of the fact that we’ve learned how to intercept them.
That’s why the “Palyanytsia” exists and is flying. There’s a constant struggle to gain control of this missile and see the results of its operations. The Russians are trying to prevent this in various ways. This struggle is constantly evolving.
Right now, people are often asking in the comments what’s happening with Ukrainian ballistic missiles and when they’ll take flight. We were promised this would happen in the fall, but so far we haven’t heard of any significant strikes carried out specifically by ballistic missiles. Are Ukrainian ballistic missiles already flying, or is this information not yet being made public?
The Ukrainian FP-7 ballistic missile is already in operation. It is destroying Iskander launchers and Pantsir systems and fulfilling its missions. The General Staff has made almost no official announcements about this, but such information does exist.
As for the FP-9, it is still under development and undergoing initial testing. It appears that testing will begin as early as December of this year.
As for the FP-7.X missile, it is essentially a ballistic missile derived from an anti-aircraft missile. The Russians have taken a similar approach. In general, an anti-aircraft missile can be converted into a ballistic missile, and vice versa. These are two directions in the development of missile weapons.
The Russians combined the capabilities of missiles for the S-300 and S-400 systems to create the 48N6 missile. It effectively follows a ballistic flight path. The missile climbs to an altitude of approximately 70 kilometers and then falls back down. Its warhead, weighing over 200 kilograms, combined with the mass of the missile itself, generates significant kinetic energy.
Six such missiles struck the North Bridge in Kyiv. Four of them hit their target. The scale of the destruction they caused demonstrates the power of this weapon.
As a reminder, on November 7, 2026, during a Russian attack on Kyiv, the North Bridge sustained damage. Specifically, the road surface, the trolleybus overhead contact system, and the power lines were damaged. Due to the damage, traffic across the bridge was temporarily blocked in both directions.
At the same time, the Russians are trying to improve the guidance system of the “Iskander” missiles to increase their strike accuracy. This threat is very real. They are installing cameras designed to capture images as the missile approaches the ground. It is still difficult to say whether this solution will work, but the Russians are working seriously on improving the accuracy of the “Iskander” missiles.
What Is the “Geran-5” and Why Is Russia’s New Missile Drone Dangerous?
At the same time, Russia continues to actively deploy its jet-powered drones and, in particular, is launching a new “missile drone,” as it’s called. This is the “Geran-5,” K5-K. It is capable of reaching speeds of up to 1,000 kilometers per hour. It’s essentially a mini-winged missile. Let’s talk a little more about the characteristics of this – I’m not sure if we can call it a drone or not. Why is it dangerous for us? To what extent do we have the capability to shoot it down? And has Russia already put it into mass production?
How does the K5-K differ from the standard “five”? Its length has changed from six and a half meters to four meters, and its wingspan is now three meters instead of 3.2 meters. Its drag has decreased, so it can fly at higher speeds.
They say it can fly a thousand kilometers. It seems that such capabilities exist, but this would be in some kind of economy mode. And this speed of 1,000 km/h refers to the fact that a 200-kilogram engine – assembled in Alabuga from Chinese components supplied by Telefly – is capable of accelerating this rocket to 1,000 kilometers for a short time. But this is literally just for brief intervals, because it cannot operate in this mode for long.
It’s also interesting that this rocket is equipped with a map- and terrain-based navigation system. This is the so-called "Susanin" system. It was originally installed on the “Geran-4,” and now they’ve started installing it on the “Geran-5” as well. This is intended to increase the rocket’s accuracy.
And now, the boundaries between a drone, a drone-missile, and a missile have shifted so much that all of these can be classified as either missiles, drones, or aircraft – because that would be the correct way to describe what’s flying.
But it’s very difficult to say for certain whether it’s a drone or a missile, because the components are almost identical in both the “Geran-4” and the “Geran-5.” Whether it’s a small winged missile or a more or less medium-sized drone – they have the same onboard systems.
Why the Su-57 Remains More of a “Prestige Aircraft”
Ukraine continues to strike Russian territory. At the same time, Russia has suffered its heaviest losses of Su-57 aircraft since the start of the full-scale invasion. Why is this happening, and how important is this aircraft to the Russians from a combat operations perspective?
I would say it’s a prestige aircraft. It’s positioned as a fifth-generation fighter, although in reality it lacks the characteristics to back that up. We’ve discussed this on numerous occasions.
In general, the division into third, fourth, fourth-plus, and fifth generations is rather arbitrary. Aviation experts and developers have agreed on certain criteria for determining which generation an aircraft belongs to.
First, all weapons must be housed in internal bays. For the Su-57, these were specially designed; in particular, the Kh-59 missile was modified into the Kh-69 so that it could fit inside the aircraft. However, a problem arose: when exiting the bay, the missile does not always clear the compartment properly. It can be caught by the airflow, which affects its subsequent flight.
After several tests, the Russians decided to mount the missiles on external pylons. If we take a closer look at the issue of external armament, it’s worth noting that the F-35 also has external pylons on which AIM-9 missiles are mounted. This is a close-range air-to-air missile with a range of approximately 25–40 kilometers. It can be compared to a pocket knife that you always keep on hand in case of an immediate threat.
However, I don’t quite see how the F-35 could engage in close-range air combat. Moreover, this aircraft is currently undergoing testing with Meteor missiles.
So, Russia needs the Su-57 primarily to demonstrate that it is supposedly capable of producing fifth-generation fighters. But in reality, this is not the case. Two such aircraft were transferred to Algeria, though it remains unclear whether the country has fully paid for them. Algeria has long had close ties – including corrupt ones – with Russia and traditionally purchases Russian weapons.
As for the Su-57’s use in combat operations, only one such instance has actually been documented. During a large-scale missile and drone attack on Kyiv, the Kyiv region, and, in particular, the Trypilska Thermal Power Plant, Russian aircraft were able to approach at low altitude, remaining nearly undetectable by Patriot radars.
The systems were nearby but were configured to detect ballistic targets and were looking upward. Then, Su-57 aircraft launched X-69 missiles, which effectively destroyed our Trypilska Thermal Power Plant. This happened in 2024.
In my opinion, this aircraft was unable to demonstrate anything on a larger scale. India also participated in this project and funded it for a long time. However, it later withdrew from the collaboration because the aircraft’s development had already lasted more than 15 years, and a reliable engine had still not been developed.
The Russians promise to install the AL-51F engine, but for now, the Su-57 flies with the AL-41F. Incidentally, it was developed by a Ukrainian aircraft designer who moved to Moscow back in the Soviet era.
I don’t see much potential in the Su-57. I don’t think Russia will be able to use it effectively against our air defense system. The aircraft cannot approach the line of engagement or the border undetected and launch an attack. First, we’ll spot it, and second, we have the means to intercept it.
New Ground Robotic Systems and the Creation of the Space Forces
There’s a lot of talk right now about a drone that evacuates wounded soldiers from the front lines. It keeps getting showcased because it’s a new development – one that, they claim, has no analogues in the world. How promising is this technology, especially if it can be put into mass production?
Unmanned technologies and remote control now make it possible to replace humans in many situations. The use of ground-based robotic systems has become one of our advantages. It’s fair to say that we were the first to actively develop this field.
Just a few days ago, I saw a report that a modern Challenger tank – which essentially functions as a ground robotic system, meaning it’s fully robotic – was showcased at an arms exhibition. But this raises a question for me: isn’t it obvious that such a Challenger, as soon as it enters the battlefield, can still be destroyed? And it doesn’t matter whether there’s a crew inside or whether the tank is remotely controlled.
By the way, the Challenger 2, the United Kingdom's main battle tank, which was also transferred to Ukraine to counter Russian aggression, is equipped with a 120-millimeter rifled gun, has multi-layered armor, and is considered one of the best-protected tanks in the world. British military equipment uses modern targeting systems that allow it to engage targets at significant distances.
With the emergence of a large number of FPV drones, the situation regarding the use of armored vehicles has changed dramatically. They can see practically everything, as reconnaissance operates around the clock. Weather can be somewhat of a hindrance, but not critically so. Therefore, for a tank to approach unnoticed to an effective range, the operation must be prepared very carefully. This is, in fact, a separate special operation.
Even back in Soviet times, there was a concept for tank offensives in the event of World War III. Two main breakthrough directions were envisaged: one toward the English Channel, the other southward toward the Indian Ocean. According to calculations from the 1970s and 1980s, the expected lifespan of a tank in such combat operations was only 30–35 minutes. After that, it would most likely be unable to continue carrying out its mission.
Nowadays, even large armored vehicles are being adapted into unmanned platforms. But this requires an entirely different class of equipment. The ground-based robotic systems currently available in Ukraine are quite versatile. For example, a combat turret can be mounted on them. The Third Army Corps is already conducting a significant number of combat operations using such robotic systems.
All of this is fundamentally changing approaches to the use of unmanned technologies and the conduct of tactical combat operations. Accordingly, our understanding of what equipment the army needs – and what it can now do without – is also changing. This is even affecting the entire arms market.
Today, an order was signed to establish the Space Forces as part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Could you explain in more detail what these units are and what they will be doing?
In my opinion, this is quite an interesting story. Recent events related to Starlink influenced this decision.
Since last year, Elon Musk has repeatedly restricted our access to communications, explaining where Starlink would work and where it wouldn’t. And recently, there have even been statements claiming that it wasn’t him, but Starshield. But that already sounds like an excuse.
We realized just how dependent we are on external sources when, for two weeks, we stopped receiving intelligence data in the volume we were accustomed to.
New problems with access to intelligence only confirm that Ukraine must be completely independent in this regard. This raises the question of creating our own satellite constellations.
These are needed primarily for reconnaissance, to understand what is happening on Russian territory, as well as to ensure communications and intercept targets. As far as I know, tests related to intercepting targets in outer space were also recently conducted.
This may be part of efforts to defend against missile attacks, particularly those involving the “Oreshnik.” I cannot say exactly what technologies were used, what specifically was tested, who conducted this work, or when it took place.
Why the integration of the Meteor missile into the F-35 is being called historic
Finally, I’d like to discuss the fact that an F-35 fighter jet launched a long-range Meteor missile from its internal bay. What do you know about this event, and why was it called historic?
I call this a historic event because it’s truly a significant achievement. Launching a missile from the internal bay of a modern fifth-generation fighter jet is a rather complex technical challenge.
Imagine this: you open the bay, and at that moment, the aircraft’s aerodynamics change significantly. How do you launch the missile correctly? Should it be fired forward or backward? How can this be done safely?
That’s the first, purely technical question. The second is that this is one of the first instances of integrating a European missile onto an American aircraft. In fact, it’s an acknowledgment that the Americans don’t have a fully-fledged replacement for a missile like the Meteor.
This missile is unique. Most air-to-air missiles operate on different principles, whereas the Meteor is equipped with a ramjet engine. Thanks to this, it can cover a distance of approximately 250 kilometers, and according to some estimates, up to 300 kilometers.
At the same time, the missile is capable of maintaining a speed of about Mach 4 even during the terminal phase of flight. At such a speed, it is extremely difficult for an aircraft to evade the missile through maneuvering.
If the Meteor locks onto a target and is closing in on it, the chances of avoiding a hit are very low. This is an extremely dangerous weapon. Now, this missile is being integrated into the American F-35.
So far, only a mock-up simulating the missile has been dropped. Actual live-fire tests are still ahead. The first attempts at integration were not entirely successful, so both the aircraft’s internal compartment and its bay doors had to be redesigned.
This is no simple technical challenge. What surprises me is this: the first instances of combat use of such missiles are not expected until at least 2028. If this were the Ukrainian defense-industrial complex and we needed to integrate the Meteor onto another aircraft, I think we could have done it in three or four months. We would have worked around the clock, but we would have gotten it done.
But the Europeans and Americans aren’t in such a hurry. They need to anticipate everything, conduct a full cycle of tests, and check every detail. That’s their approach.
This interview has been condensed, corrected, and edited for better audience understanding.
If you find an error on this page, select it and press Ctrl + Enter