АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/itm2026.02.010 Aerostatic systems of the airship type have more than a century of engineering development and continue to attract attention within the scientific and technical community today. On the one hand, this can be explained by the fact that lighter-than-air vehi...
Saved in:
| Date: | 2026 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
текст 3
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journal-itm.dp.ua/ojs/index.php/ITM_j1/article/view/187 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Journal Title: | Technical Mechanics |
| Download file: |  |
Institution
Technical Mechanics| _version_ | 1870378172144418816 |
|---|---|
| author | SHAMAKHANOV, V. K. TEROKHIN, B. I. LAPKHANOV, E. O. |
| author_facet | SHAMAKHANOV, V. K. TEROKHIN, B. I. LAPKHANOV, E. O. |
| author_institution_txt_mv | [
{
"author": "V. K. SHAMAKHANOV",
"institution": "https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0007-8753-6359 Institute of Technical Mechanics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and the State Space Agency of Ukraine, 15 Leshko-Popel St., Dnipro 49005, Ukraine"
},
{
"author": "B. I. TEROKHIN",
"institution": "https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-2381-8190 Institute of Technical Mechanics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and the State Space Agency of Ukraine, 15 Leshko-Popel St., Dnipro 49005, Ukraine"
},
{
"author": "E. O. LAPKHANOV",
"institution": "https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-3821-9254 Institute of Technical Mechanics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and the State Space Agency of Ukraine, 15 Leshko-Popel St., Dnipro 49005, Ukraine; e-mail: ericksaavedralim@gmail.com"
}
] |
| author_sort | SHAMAKHANOV, V. K. |
| baseUrl_str | https://journal-itm.dp.ua/ojs/index.php/ITM_j1/oai |
| collection | OJS |
| datestamp_date | 2026-07-10T18:52:11Z |
| description | DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/itm2026.02.010
Aerostatic systems of the airship type have more than a century of engineering development and continue to attract attention within the scientific and technical community today. On the one hand, this can be explained by the fact that lighter-than-air vehicles require lower fuel consumption and onboard energy to maintain their position in the airspace. On the other hand, optimal airship configurations may be effective means of cargo transportation and platforms for equipment of various purposes, including scientific, meteorological, and military payloads. Considering these factors, this paper analyzes the state of the art in the development of aerostatic and airship systems for various applications. Based on this analysis, the paper identifies the advantages and drawbacks of using lighter-than-air vehicles in the Earth’s dense atmosphere and challenges associated with their use for different purposes. It is also shown that airship systems can serve as an effective element of air defense systems against hazardous unmanned aerial vehicles.
In this context, the objective of this study is to identify key challenges in the design of airship systems intended for the protection of Ukraine’s critical infrastructure against dangerous unmanned aerial vehicles. To achieve this objective, the paper analyzes the state of the art in the development of materials for envelopes and structural elements of modern airships, the features of navigation and control system development, and the payload capacity depending on the aerostat geometry. As a result, technical requirements for the development of airship-type aerostatic systems for airspace and critical infrastructure protection are formulated, and lines of further research aimed at resolving the key challenges in the design of such systems are identified.
REFERENCES
1. Manikandan M., Pant R.S. Research and advancements in hybrid airships-A review. Progress in Aerospace Sciences. 2021. V. 127. Art. 100741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100741
2. Dasaradhan B., Das B.R., Sinha M.K., Kumar K., Kishore B., Prasad N. E. A brief review of technology and materials for aerostat application. Asian Journal of Textile. 2018. V. 8. Pp. 1-12.https://doi.org/10.3923/ajt.2018.1.12
3. GAO, Defense acquisitions: Future aerostat and airship investment decisions drive oversight and coordination needs, United States Government Accountability Office, Report GAO-13-81, Washington D.C., 2012, 69 pp. URL: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-13-81.pdf (Last accessed on March 25, 2026).
4. Byelyaev D.M., Rasstryghin O.O., Semeniuk R.P., Bunakov V.P., Analysis of the world's experience in the use of military aerostat aircraft and prospects for their use in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Ozbroyennia ta Viiskova Tekhnika.2015. V. 7. No. 3. Pp. 67-72. (In Ukrainian).https://doi.org/10.34169/2414-0651.2015.3(7).67-72
5. Kumar A., Sati S.C., Ghosh A.K., Design, testing, and realisation of a medium size aerostat envelope, Defence Science Journal. 2016. V. 66. No. 2. Pp. 93-99.
6. Orlov V.V., Korkin O.Yu., Kovalishin S.S., Naumov O.I., Placement of robotic missile defense complexes on an unmanned air vehicle. Zbirnyk Naukovykh Prats Viiskovoi Akademii. 2023. No. 2 (20). Pp. 108-116. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.37129/2313-7509.2023.20.108-116
7. Frontliner / Texty.org.ua, Drones on an aerostat: Ukraine is developing a new complex to counter Shaheds. 2025. URL: https://texty.org.ua/fragments/114662/drony-na-aerostati-v-ukrayini-rozroblyayut-novyj-kompleks-dlya-protydiyi-shahedam-foto/ (Last accessed on March 25, 2026).
8. Carrión M., Steijl R., Barakos G.N., Stewart D., Analysis of hybrid air vehicles using computational fluid dynamics. Journal of Aircraft. 2016. 2016. V. 53. No. 4. Pp. 1001-1012.https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033402
9. Pai A., Manikandan M. A comparative study of aerodynamic characteristics of conventional and multi-lobed airships. The Aeronautical Journal. 2025. V. 129. Pp. 2435-2459. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2025.39
10. Lv J., Zhou Y., Zhang Y., Nie Y., Wang Q. Study of performance of aerostat envelope materials on the coast. Frontiers in Materials. 2022. V. 9. Art. 992984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2022.992984
11. Kayenzemale J. I., Ibwe K. S. Energy-efficient tethered aerostat platforms for providing last-mile connectivity in national parks. Journal of Electrical Systems and Information Technology. 2025. V. 12. Art. 7.https://doi.org/10.1186/s43067-025-00197-x
12. Ram C. V., Pant R. S. Multidisciplinary shape optimization of aerostat envelopes. Journal of Aircraft. 2010. V. 47. Pp. 1073-1076. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.46744
13. Rajani A., Pant R. S., Sudhakar K. Dynamic stability analysis of a tethered aerostat. Journal of Aircraft. 2010. V. 47. Pp. 1531-1538. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.47010
14. Adak B., Joshi M. Coated or laminated textiles for aerostat and stratospheric airship. In: Advanced Textile Engineering Materials. H. R. Mattila (Ed.). Hoboken: Wiley. 2018. Pp. 191-214.https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119488101.ch7
15. Kim D.-M. et al. Mechanical property characterization of film-fabric laminate for stratospheric airship envelope. Composite Structures. 2007. V. 79. No. 3. Pp. 351-359.
16. Cao M., Qu S., Li J., Lv M. Thermoelasticity of a fabric membrane composite for the stratospheric airship envelope based on multiscale models. Applied Composite Materials. 2017. V. 24. No. 1. Pp. 209-220.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-016-9522-3
17. Liggett P. E., Carter D. L., Dunne A. L., Darjee D. H., Placko G. W., Mascolino A. I., McEowen L. J. Metallized flexible laminate material for lighter-than-air vehicles. US Patent US8524621B2. 2013. Pp. 1-10.
18. Zhai H., Euler A. Material challenges for lighter-than-air systems in high altitude applications. AIAA Aviation, Technology, Integration and Operations Conference (ATIO). 2005. Pp. 1-12.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-7488
19. Lai Z., Tang M., Hu X., Shu X., Huang W., Pan Y. Dynamics modeling and motion evaluation of a near-ground tethered balloon cable system under severe wind environments. Actuators. 2024. V. 13. No. 10. Art. 402. https://doi.org/10.3390/act13100402
20. Stockbridge C., Ceruti A., Marzocca P. Airship research and development in the areas of design, structures, dynamics and energy systems. Int. J. of Aeronaut. Space Sci. 2012. V. 13. Iss. 2. Pp. 170-187.https://doi.org/10.5139/IJASS.2012.13.2.170
21. Pillai A.S., Oruganti V.R.M. Modelling and simulation of aerodynamic parameters of an airship. Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal. 2020. V. 5. Pp. 167-176.https://doi.org/10.25046/aj050420
22. Husynin V. P., Husynin A. V. Dirigible Aeronautics. Kyiv: Kafedra, 2012. 364 pp. (In Ukrainian).
23. Mano S., Ajay Sriram R., Vinayagamurthy G., Nadaraja Pillai S., Pasha A.A., Reddy D.S.K., Rahman M.M. Effect of a circular slot on hybrid airship aerodynamic characteristics. Aerospace. 2021. V. 8. No. 6. Art. 166.https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8060166
24. Zhang L., Lv M., Sun C., Meng J. Flight performance analysis of hybrid airship considering added mass effects. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Transactions of the ASME. 2018. V. 140. Art. 111001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040220
25. Gomes S. B. V., Ramos J. G. Airship dynamic modeling for autonomous operation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 1998. Pp. 3462-3467.https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.1998.680973
|
| first_indexed | 2026-07-03T01:01:13Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
10
УДК 629.78 https://doi.org/10.15407/itm2026.02.010
V. K. SHAMAKHANOV, https://orcid.org/0009-0007-8753-6359
B. I. TEROKHIN, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2381-8190
E. O. LAPKHANOV, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3821-9254
AEROSTATIC SYSTEMS IN DEFENSE APPLICATIONS: CURRENT
CHALLENGES AND STATE OF THE ART
Institute of Technical Mechanics
of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and the State Space Agency of Ukraine,
15 Leshko-Popelya St., Dnipro, 49005, Ukraine; e-mail: ericksaavedralim@gmail.com
Аеростатні системи дирижабельного типу мають більш ніж столітню історію інженерного розвитку
та продовжують привертати увагу науково-технічної спільноти в наш час. З одного боку, це можна пояс-
нити тим, що апарати, які легші за повітря, потребують менших витрат палива та бортової енергії на підт-
римання свого положення в повітряному просторі. З іншого боку, при розробці оптимальних конструкцій
дирижаблів, вони можуть стати ефективними у якості засобів перевезення вантажів та платформ для роз-
міщення обладнання різного призначення (науково-дослідного, метеорологічного, військового тощо).
Враховуючи це, в роботі проведено аналіз сучасного стану розробки аеростатних і дирижабельних систем
різного призначення. На базі цього аналізу виявлено переваги та недоліки застосування апаратів легших за
повітря для польотів в щільних шарах атмосфери Землі, а також сформовано перелік проблемних аспектів
їх експлуатації для різного призначення. Також показано, що дирижабельні системи можуть бути викори-
стані як ефективний елемент систем протиповітряної оборони від небезпечних безпілотних літальних
апаратів.
З огляду на це, метою дослідження є виявлення проблемних аспектів проєктування дирижабельних
систем для застосування у якості засобів захисту об’єктів критичної інфраструктури України від небезпе-
чних безпілотних літальних апаратів. Так, для досягнення мети, в роботі проаналізовано сучасний стан
розвитку матеріалів, з яких виготовляються оболонки і елементи конструкцій сучасних дирижаблів, особ-
ливості розробки їх систем навігації та керування, а також вантажопідйомність в залежності від габарит-
них параметрів аеростата. В результаті цього сформовано технічні вимоги до розробки аеростатних засо-
бів дирижабельного типу для захисту повітряного простору та критичної інфраструктури, а також визна-
чено шляхи для наукових досліджень, що спрямовані на рішення проблемних аспектів проєктування цих
систем.
Ключові слова: аеростатні системи, апарати легші за повітря, безпілотні літальні апарати, ана-
літичний огляд, дирижаблі.
Aerostatic systems of the airship type have more than a century of engineering development and continue
to attract attention within the scientific and technical community today. On the one hand, this can be explained by
the fact that lighter-than-air vehicles require lower fuel consumption and onboard energy to maintain their posi-
tion in the airspace. On the other hand, optimal airship configurations may be effective means of cargo transporta-
tion and platforms for equipment of various purposes, including scientific, meteorological, and military payloads.
Considering these factors, this paper analyzes the state of the art in the development of aerostatic and airship
systems for various applications. Based on this analysis, the paper identifies the advantages and drawbacks of
using lighter-than-air vehicles in the Earth’s dense atmosphere and challenges associated with their use for differ-
ent purposes. It is also shown that airship systems can serve as an effective element of air defense systems against
hazardous unmanned aerial vehicles.
In this context, the objective of this study is to identify key challenges in the design of airship systems in-
tended for the protection of Ukraine’s critical infrastructure against dangerous unmanned aerial vehicles. To
achieve this objective, the paper analyzes the state of the art in the development of materials for envelopes and
structural elements of modern airships, the features of navigation and control system development, and the pay-
load capacity depending on the aerostat geometry. As a result, technical requirements for the development of
airship-type aerostatic systems for airspace and critical infrastructure protection are formulated, and lines of fur-
ther research aimed at resolving the key challenges in the design of such systems are identified.
Key words: aerostatic systems, lighter-than-air vehicles, unmanned aerial vehicles, analytical review, air-
ships.
Introduction. Aerostatic systems based on lighter-than-air (LTA) technology
represent one of the oldest branches of aerospace engineering, yet they continue to
attract considerable scientific and engineering attention. Compared with conven-
tional rotary-wing and fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), LTA vehi-
© V. K. Shamakhanov, B. I. Terokhin, E. O. Lapkhanov, 2026
The article is an open access article distributed underthe terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attributions ( CC BY) license (https/creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ISSN 1561-9184 (Print) ISSN 2616-6380 (Online) Технічна механіка. 2026. № 2.
https://doi.org/10.15407/itm2026.02.0
mailto:ericksaavedralim@gmail.com
11
cles require lower on-board energy consumption to maintain their position in the
airspace, since the aerostatic lift generated by the displaced air mass supports most
or all of the vehicle weight [1]. Depending on the configuration, LTA systems are
classified as unpowered – balloons and tethered aerostats – or powered, which in-
clude non-rigid, semi-rigid, and rigid airships, as well as hybrid semi-buoyant ve-
hicles [2]. Among these, tethered aerostats are especially attractive for persistent
surveillance missions, because the tether simultaneously anchors the platform,
supplies electrical power to the payload, and provides a high-bandwidth data link
to the ground control station, that significantly reduce the volume and mass of on-
board energy storage and propulsion correction systems [3]. The operational cost
per flight hour of an aerostat system has been assessed at $20–50, compared with
$400–1000 for a helicopter and $1000–30000 for a UAV, making aerostatic plat-
forms one of the most cost-efficient solutions for long-endurance aerial surveil-
lance tasks [4].
The operational value of tethered aerostats in the defense context has been
confirmed through extensive military use. Beginning in the 1980s, the U.S. Teth-
ered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) network deployed a series of large aerostats
along the southern and south-eastern borders for low-altitude radar surveillance,
achieving detection ranges of 220–260 km at operating altitudes of 3000–3500 m
[4]. Starting in 2003, the U.S. Army and Lockheed Martin deployed 66 Persistent
Threat Detection System (PTDS) aerostats in Iraq and Afghanistan, providing
round-the-clock wide-area surveillance that directly reduced casualties among coa-
lition forces [3]. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimated the
total DoD investment in aerostat and airship programs at nearly $7 billion from
fiscal years 2007 through 2012, reflecting the strategic importance of LTA plat-
forms for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities [5]. The
Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System
(JLENS), placed on operational service in 2011, demonstrated that two aerostats
floating at 3.3 km could control the airspace within a radius of 544 km, detecting
cruise missiles, aircraft, and tactical ballistic missiles on the ascending portion of
their trajectory, while simultaneously providing fire-control data to surface-to-air
missile systems [5]. Israel deployed the large-scale Sky Dew aerostat (approxi-
mately 70 m in length) as part of the HAAS surveillance network to counter threats
from UAVs, multicopters, cruise missiles, helicopters, and low-flying aircraft [6].
Turkey has supplied its armed forces with the Aselsan Water Drop and Global
tethered aerostats specifically designed for cruise missile detection and border pro-
tection, and has exported airship and aerostat platforms to Iraq for the protection of
strategic facilities and ports [6]. These examples confirm that aerostatic systems of
the airship type have evolved from scientific observation platforms into a key ele-
ment of layered air defense architectures in numerous nations.
The rapid proliferation of small commercially derived attack drones as in-
struments of asymmetric warfare in the ongoing armed conflict in Ukraine has cre-
ated an urgent demand for cost-effective, long-endurance aerial platforms capable
of protecting critical infrastructure and airspace. As demonstrated by Orlov et al.
[6], an aerostat-mounted radar positioned at an altitude of several kilometers pro-
vides a line-of-sight detection range for low-flying targets several times greater
than that of ground-based systems: when a radar antenna is elevated to 100 m, the
detection range of a cruise missile flying at 36 m altitude increases from 35 km to
65 km, nearly doubling the reaction time available to air defense forces. At an alti-
12
tude of 10 km, the radar horizon extends to approximately 400 km, enabling detec-
tion and tracking of up to 100 low-altitude targets at distances of 40–150 km with
a radar weight within 200–500 kg, acceptable for installation on large aerostats [6].
Furthermore, electronic warfare equipment and GPS spoofing systems mounted on
an aerostat above the flight path of an incoming missile can effectively disrupt its
navigation, since the jamming signal is directed from above the protected zone of
the anti-jamming antenna array [6]. As shown by Byelyaev et al. [4], the operation
of 22 low-altitude detection radars mounted on aerostat platforms could replace
147 conventional ground-based radar units while generating annual savings ex-
ceeding one billion hryvnias, demonstrating the economic attractiveness of the
aerostat-based approach for the defense needs of Ukraine. More recently, Ukraini-
an company Aero Bavovna has developed a tethered aerostat capable of ascending
to approximately 800 m and carrying up to 10 kg of payload independently of
weather conditions; the platform concurrently serves as a communications relay,
an electro-optical and thermal imaging surveillance node, a radio-electronic war-
fare carrier, and — through a novel integration concept — as an elevated launch
platform for FPV interceptor drones designed to counter Shahed-type attack UAVs
[7]. These developments confirm the unique suitability of aerostatic systems for
the protection of the airspace and critical infrastructure of Ukraine against hazard-
ous unmanned aerial vehicles.
The successful design of aerostatic airship-type systems for defense purposes
requires the resolution of several coupled technical problems. The first concerns
envelope materials: the multi-layer laminate structure of an aerostat hull must sim-
ultaneously provide a high strength-to-weight ratio, low gas permeability, re-
sistance to ultraviolet radiation and coastal atmospheric degradation, and adequate
flex-fatigue endurance under continuous outdoor deployment [8]. The second con-
cerns the quantitative relationship between hull geometry and payload capacity:
buoyant lift scales with envelope volume, so the choice of hull shape, fineness ra-
tio, and ballonet configuration directly governs the disposable load available for
radar, optical, and electronic warfare systems [9]. The third concerns station-
keeping under wind loading: a tethered aerostat develops complex aerodynamic
forces, tether tension, and pitch trim that must be analyzed through equilibrium
modeling and managed through appropriate tether management and ballonet pres-
sure control [9]. The fourth concerns aerodynamic shape optimization: the conven-
tional body-of-revolution (BOR) hull has well-understood drag characteristics, but
multi-lobed and hybrid configurations offer improved aerodynamic efficiency and
payload capacity at the cost of more complex flow physics that require careful
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis [8, 9].
In Ref. [1], Manikandan and Pant present a comprehensive review of hybrid
airship research covering conceptual design, aerodynamics, structural analysis,
dynamics, and thermal modeling, demonstrating that the field has advanced sub-
stantially since mid-century. The limitation of this work is that it focuses on free-
flying hybrid vehicles and does not address tethered aerostat systems or defense-
specific operational requirements. The article [2] by Dasaradhan et al. reviews the
textile and polymeric materials used for aerostat envelope construction, examining
load-bearing fibers, gas barrier films, environmental protection layers, and joining
techniques; high-performance Vectran liquid-crystal polymer fabric and polyure-
thane-based laminates are identified as the most suitable candidates. The short-
coming of this work is that it does not link material properties to envelope sizing
13
or to defense system-level constraints. The paper [5] by Kumar et al. describes the
full design cycle, stress analysis, and flight-trial validation of a 2000 m³ tethered
aerostat with 300 kg payload capacity at 1 km altitude, presenting an iterative siz-
ing methodology, finite element analysis, and tether profile estimation. The study
is limited to a single tactical-class BOR configuration and does not address multi-
lobed hull geometries or counter-UAV mission requirements. The article [8] by
Carrión et al. presents a RANS CFD study of the Airlander multi-lobed hybrid air
vehicle, demonstrating that fins, leading-edge root extensions, and strakes contrib-
ute more than half of the total dynamic lift at high pitch angles and have a signifi-
cant stabilizing effect on the pitching moment. This work addresses only a free-
flying commercial hybrid airship and does not consider tethered operation. The
paper [9] by Pai and Manikandan provides a systematic CFD comparison of con-
ventional single-lobed and multi-lobed (bi- and tri-lobed) airship configurations
using the k-ε turbulence model; the tri-lobed Garg-profile configuration is found to
exhibit the highest lift-to-drag ratio, while bi-lobed designs show a (47–69) % in-
crease in drag coefficient relative to conventional designs at the same hull volume.
The shortcoming of this study is that it does not extend to tethered system design,
payload-to-volume scaling, or defense applications. In Ref. [4], Byelyaev et al.
systematically analyze world experience in the application of military aerostat air-
craft and formulate prospective directions for their use in the Armed Forces of
Ukraine, covering radar surveillance, border control, communications relay, and
mine detection. The limitation of this work is that it does not address structural and
aerodynamic design methodology for airship-type aerostats, nor does it consider
the specific threat environment posed by modern attack UAVs.
The main shortcomings of the existing studies can be summarized as follows:
1) the design of envelope materials, hull geometry, and navigation and station-
keeping systems is typically studied in isolation, without a system-level analysis
linking these aspects to defense-specific operational requirements for the protec-
tion of critical infrastructure; 2) the application of aerostatic airship-type systems
as a means of protection against hostile UAVs — a threat that has become acute
following Ukraine's experience since 2022 — has not been systematically studied,
and the corresponding technical requirements have not been formulated.
The objective of the present article is to identify the key design challenges of
tethered aerostatic airship-type systems intended for the protection of critical in-
frastructure and airspace of Ukraine against hazardous unmanned aerial vehicles,
and to formulate technical requirements for their development. To achieve this
objective, the paper analyzes the current state of development of envelope materi-
als and structural elements of modern aerostats, studies the dependence of payload
capacity on the geometric parameters of the aerostat envelope, examines the fea-
tures of navigation and station-keeping system design for tethered LTA platforms,
and identifies promising directions for further research.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the current state of enve-
lope materials and structural elements used in modern aerostatic systems. Section
3 analyzes the payload capacity as a function of aerostat geometric parameters and
examines the flight control approaches applicable to tethered airship-type plat-
forms. Section 4 formulates technical requirements for the development of aero-
static airship-type systems for airspace and critical infrastructure protection. The
main conclusions are summarized in the final section.
14
The analysis of the envelopes and structural elements. The main compo-
nents of aerostat systems include the envelope, gondola, load-bearing frame (sus-
pension lines and structural tapes), suspension nodes, cable attachment systems,
ballast systems, and stabilizers.
The envelope is the key element of an aerostat system. It ensures the gas-
tightness of the lifting gas chamber, defines aerodynamic characteristics, and
largely determines the overall service life of the vehicle [10]. The envelope geome-
try also affects stress distribution and the structural strength of the system as a
whole. Therefore, the selection of the envelope shape must account for multiple
factors, including lift generation, aerodynamic drag, and stability in wind flow
conditions.
The most common aerostat configurations include spherical, ellipsoidal, tear-
drop-shaped, and hybrid designs [5, 11, 12]. The choice of geometry depends on
the intended mission of the aerostat. To improve aerodynamic stability, a spherical
front section is often combined with a teardrop-shaped or kite-like tail (similar to a
kite), as seen in systems such as Helikite and TARS 420K. This configuration re-
duces drag and significantly improves stability in atmospheric conditions while
also providing additional aerodynamic lift under crosswind conditions. Consider-
ing torsional moments and transverse loads, stabilizing surfaces such as fins or
stabilizing tails made from the same envelope material are often integrated into the
design [12, 13].
A critical aspect is the selection of envelope materials, which must combine
low mass with high strength, thermal stability, gas impermeability, and resistance
to ultraviolet radiation and environmental degradation.
Typically, multilayer composite materials are used, including polyester, nylon,
Lavsan, and polyurethane-coated fabrics reinforced with Kevlar or other high-
strength fibers. Each layer of the envelope performs a specific function (Fig. 1) [2,
10, 14 – 18]:
The load-bearing layer consists of high-performance synthetic fibers, most
commonly aramid (Kevlar), polyester (Dacron, PET), liquid crystal polymer (Vec-
tran), and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE). These synthetic
fibers provide a significantly higher strength-to-weight ratio compared to earlier
cotton-based fabrics. This layer provides the primary tensile strength of the enve-
lope and exhibits high resistance to tearing, abrasion, and impact loading [17,18].
Such fabrics typically have a density of approximately (1–1.5) g/cm³. Mechanical
properties vary significantly depending on the material; therefore, selection de-
pends on operational requirements. For high-strength fibers (aramid, UHMWPE,
LCP), the elastic modulus ranges from approximately (70–130) GPa, with tensile
strength up to (2.5–4) GPa, whereas polyester fibers exhibit lower values, with an
elastic modulus of (8–12) GPa and tensile strength of (0.7–1.4) GPa.
The gas barrier layer is a thin polymer film or laminate (polyethylene tereph-
thalate PET/Mylar, EVOH, PVDC, polyamide, or polyimide Kapton) that seals the
pores of the fabric and retains the lifting gas. It provides sufficient mechanical
strength at low thickness and exhibits low gas permeability. This layer must ensure
strong adhesion to adjacent layers [13,18]. The glass transition temperature of these
materials must also be considered, as it defines the transition to a rigid, glassy state.
The protective layer is an outer coating designed to protect against ultraviolet
radiation, atmospheric exposure, and other environmental factors. It is typically a
thin layer of polyvinyl fluoride (PVF, Tedlar) or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF),
15
sometimes with aluminum metallization. For example, in the TARS project, the
envelope uses a PU-coated PVF (Tedlar) system, providing solar resistance and
stable performance across a wide temperature range (−72°C to +107°C) [18].
These polymers exhibit high chemical stability and excellent UV resistance.
Adhesive or intermediate layers consist of polyurethane or silicone-based ad-
hesives that bond the structural layers and eliminate voids.
Fig. 1 – Multi-layer structure of typical hull material
In regions of abrupt geometric transitions (nose section, wing-like extensions,
or tether attachment points), local stress concentrations may arise. Therefore,
smooth conical transitions and rounded edges are used in structural design, par-
ticularly in reinforced seam regions. The choice of materials for load-bearing ele-
ments critically influences the overall strength and reliability of the system.
Key load-bearing elements include [5, 13]:
Suspension lines and structural tapes are high-performance synthetic cables or
woven straps made of aramid (Kevlar, Vectran) or UHMWPE (Dyneema). They
distribute the lifting force of the envelope either to the gondola via load tapes or
directly to the tether system. Structural tapes reinforce the upper part of the enve-
lope, while suspension lines connect reinforcement patches to the gondola.
The gondola and payload platform consist of lightweight structures made of
aluminum, carbon fiber, or composite materials and carry the payload (sensors,
equipment, power systems). For example, Sheldahl employed a welded aluminum
truss suspended beneath the envelope. In the TARS system (USA), the gondola is
attached to the lower structural frame and houses a generator rotor, electronics,
and a fuel or storage tank.
Suspension nodes are reinforced attachment points where suspension lines
connect to the envelope. Load redistribution is achieved using specialized load-
spreading tapes or parabolic stitching patterns. In the Sheldahl system, parabolic
reinforcement patterns were used to avoid stress concentrations in seam regions.
Stabilizers are additional lifting or control surfaces made from the same fabric
material as the envelope. They are typically located at the tail section and ensure
directional stability under wind loading.
Metallic and composite components (aluminum rings, fasteners, and duralu-
min strips) are used only at structural reinforcement points where rigidity is re-
quired. For example, suspension points may be reinforced with aluminum hoops or
phenolic (Bakelite-based) stiffening elements.
Envelope panels are cut from roll-based composite fabric sheets, typically us-
ing wedge-shaped or segmental circular templates. Panel joining is performed us-
16
ing thermal impulse welding or ultrasonic welding to form airtight seams. Rein-
forcement tapes are sewn or bonded along seam lines, and seams are sealed with
polyurethane or epoxy-based compounds. Double bonding (tapes applied on both
sides of the seam) increases reliability.
Maintainability is achieved through modular replacement of damaged sec-
tions: the affected area is cut out together with adjacent seams and replaced with a
new patch using identical technology. Anti-corrosion and anti-static coatings ap-
plied to mechanical joints and textile structures extend service life.
Military applications of aerostat systems impose significantly stricter require-
ments [2, 13, 15]:
Wind resistance: the envelope and suspension lines must withstand gusts up to
(30–40) m/s (approximately (60–80) knots) in tethered operation. A safety factor
of 2–3 relative to design loads is typically applied. Reinforcement tapes and seams
must withstand repeated cyclic loading induced by wind oscillations. This is
achieved through heat-treated fabrics and bias (diagonal) reinforcement along the
longitudinal axis.
UV and environmental resistance: the outer coating based on PVC, PVF, or
TPU protects against ultraviolet radiation and ozone exposure. Typical service life
is 5–10 years without significant loss of gas tightness.
Icing: the envelope surface is designed to have low wettability, and fluoropol-
ymer additives reduce ice adhesion. Some systems include heating or vibration-
based de-icing mechanisms.
Gas tightness and self-sealing: metallized coatings (e.g., aluminum-coated
PET film) reduce gas leakage. In case of puncture, self-sealing compounds or
patching systems are used.
Fire resistance: most aerostat envelope materials are inherently flammable.
Therefore, fire-retardant coatings or additives (boron compounds, flame retard-
ants) are applied in critical applications.
Further development of aerostat systems involves advanced materials such as
nanocomposite coatings (graphene, nanoclays, and carbon nanotubes), aimed at
reducing mass and improving barrier properties. Structural optimization, including
topology optimization and variable-thickness laminates, helps reduce stress con-
centrations within the envelope.
Simulation of 6-dof motion and flight control problem analysis. The pay-
load-to-size ratio represents a critical design parameter for aerostatic systems.
Thus, an increase in payload mass leads to a corresponding increase in aerostat
volume, which in turn amplifies aerodynamic perturbative forces and necessitates
more powerful thrusters for motion control. Conversely, the use of power units
with greater thrust leads to a further increase in the airship’s total weight. The
problem of optimal airship configuration design, considering payload constraints,
is addressed in [5]. The authors demonstrate that the determination of optimal air-
ship design parameters requires comprehensive analyses of the aerodynamic char-
acteristics of the airship hull, as well as structural strength calculations, taking into
account payload mass, operating altitude, and flight dynamics. The study also jus-
tifies the use of approximate analytical models for obtaining preliminary estimates
of airship parameters at the early stages of design. However, it is noted that such
estimates are only initial and require further refinement through the application of
finite element methods for improved aerodynamic and structural analysis, as well
as 6-DoF models for flight dynamics and controllability assessment.
17
In turn, [19] shows that the analysis of flight dynamics for complex airship
configurations with cable connections and structural attachments requires the use
of comprehensive mathematical models. In particular, [19] places special emphasis
on the mechanics of cable-based airship systems, as well as on aerodynamics and
wind loads, which constitute critical factors affecting the flight of such configura-
tions. However, the proposed model is not fully universal for all types of airship
and aerostatic systems and is primarily applicable to configurations such as that
shown in Figure 2.
Fig. 2 – Layout details of the tethered balloon cable system [19]
Particular attention in airship flight analysis is given to the optimization of its
geometry in terms of aerodynamic performance and mission requirements [20]. It
is shown that airships can be classified into the following categories: non-rigid,
rigid, heavy-lift vehicles, high-altitude airships, and hybrid airships, each of which
has specific requirements for structural design and dynamic characteristics. The
study also shows that a key aspect in determining design parameters is the full 6-
DoF dynamic modeling, taking into account fully computed aerodynamic
coefficients, a defined control law, and the characteristics of control aerodynamic
surfaces. Thus, a wide range of methods exists for estimating the aerodynamic
coefficients of airships, including analytical approaches [21], semi-empirical [19,
22] methods, and classical CFD techniques [23]. In turn, analytical and semi-
empirical methods for aerodynamic coefficient estimation are reasonable to apply
during the preliminary stages of design parameter determination, whereas CFD
methods are more appropriate immediately before flight testing. In Ukraine, a
detailed description of semi-empirical methods for aerodynamic coefficient
estimation is presented in monograph [22]. The work presents analytical
relationships for determining drag and lift coefficients using a method based on the
approximation of historical trends in the evolution of various airship components
over previous years. According to [22], this method made it possible to estimate
the airship drag coefficient with an error of up to 5 %. However, the work also
18
indicates that other lift, side-force, and moment coefficients require refinement
through empirical methods, taking into account the position of the airship relative
to the ground surface, propeller wake effects, and other factors.
As can be seen from previous publications, analytical and semi-empirical
methods are valid only within a relatively narrow range of angles of attack and
sideslip, typically up to 10–30 degrees [21, 22]. This makes it possible to evaluate
airship dynamics only in the vicinity of small deviations from the aerodynamic
equilibrium attitude. Such limitations do not allow for a full assessment of 6-DoF
airship motion and dynamics, especially under nonlinear wind disturbances. Thus,
a comprehensive simulation of airship flight ultimately requires the determination
of aerodynamic characteristics using CFD methods.
Another challenging aspect is the determination of added masses and added
moments of inertia of the airship [24]. Unlike traditional aircraft, for airships the
effect of the displaced air mass may be comparable to the vehicle’s own mass,
which can significantly alter its dynamic characteristics. Currently, several
methods exist for determining added masses and added moments of inertia. Among
them are methods based on the formulas of Horace Lamb and Max Munk, which
are applicable only to simple geometries such as spheres, ellipsoids, or oblate
spheroids and are not suitable for the complex configurations of hybrid airships
[24]. Also, according [24] for symmetric configurations, some coefficients may be
equal to zero; however, nonzero cross-coupling terms still remain, reflecting the
interaction between vertical motion, longitudinal acceleration, and pitch. In
addition, the added masses strongly depend on the hull shape and flight conditions,
with the largest effects typically observed in the vertical direction and in pitching
motion due to the large projected area of the airship hull. Another challenge is that
the added mass coefficients vary near the ground during take-off and landing,
where ground effect can reduce some of these coefficients by approximately half
compared to cruise conditions. To address these difficulties, the authors proposed
the use of a CFD-based method with a dynamic mesh technique for determining
the full added mass matrix of the airship, which remains a highly challenging task.
In turn, the equations of the 6-DoF dynamic model of the airship can be writ-
ten as follows:
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
,
,
+ + + ,
+ + = + + ,
+ + + =
+ +
A A t
A A r
d
mI M m
dt
d
J J J
dt
3
g B aer T
aer B aer.contr T
V
V V, F F F F
V, M M M M
f
f
(1)
where m is the mass of the airship; AM is the translational added mass matrix
[25];
T
x y zV V VV = is the translational velocity vector expressed in the
body-fixed reference frame;
T
x y z= is the angular velocity vector
expressed in the body-fixed reference frame; J is the rigid-body inertia tensor of
the airship; AJ is the rotational added-inertia tensor [25]; ( ),A t V,f is nonline-
ar translational added-mass coupling term; ( ),A r V,f is the nonlinear rotational
added-mass coupling term; gF is the gravitational force vector with respect to the
body-fixed reference frame; BF is the buoyancy force vector with respect to the
19
body-fixed reference frame; aerF is the aerodynamic force vector with respect to
the body-fixed reference frame; TF is the propulsion force vector with respect to
the body-fixed reference frame; aerM is the aerodynamic moment vector with re-
spect to the body-fixed reference frame; BM is the buoyancy-induced restoring
moment vector with respect to the body-fixed reference frame; aer.contrM is the
aerodynamic control moment vector with respect to the body-fixed reference
frame; TM is the propulsion-induced moment vector with respect to the body-
fixed reference frame.
Thus, as can be seen from the structure of the input parameters of Eqs. (1),
airship flight modeling is a rather complex task from the viewpoint of obtaining
adequate initial data for aerodynamic coefficients, added-mass and added-inertia
coefficients, as well as the displacement between the center of buoyancy and the
center of mass. The determination of these parameters requires extensive CFD
analyses and detailed airship structural design, which in turn implies the need for a
full range of relevant specialists and equipment. Taking this into account, at the
initial design stages and during preliminary assessments, it is reasonable to employ
analytical and semi-empirical formulas to estimate the above-mentioned
parameters for classical airship geometries [19, 21, 22]. However, when
performing comprehensive pre-flight 6-DoF simulations, such as Software-in-the-
Loop and Hardware-in-the-Loop simulations, a complete aerodynamic model of
the airship is required, including full added-mass and added-inertia parameters,
aerodynamic coefficients, and turbulence effects.
General technical requirements for the development of aerostatic airship-
type systems for airspace and critical infrastructure protection. The military
use of balloons and airships has a long history dating back to the First World War.
Modern aspects of their application for defense purposes were discussed in the
first section of this paper. Considering these features, balloon and airship systems
may be conventionally divided into active and passive ones.
Active systems emerged as early as the First World War and were represented
by manned bomber airships such as the Zeppelin LZ 1. Passive systems, in con-
trast, were widely employed during both the First and Second World Wars, partic-
ularly on the Eastern Front, to protect Soviet cities from attacks by heavy fighters
and bombers. These systems generally consisted of tethered balloons filled with
hydrogen and connected to the ground by cables, thereby creating aerial obstacles
for enemy strike aviation. In addition, a collision between an aircraft and such a
barrier could lead to the ignition or detonation of the gas contained in the balloon,
which could destroy the aircraft and potentially damage nearby aircraft through the
resulting blast wave during massed air raids.
In turn, the development of microprocessor technology, robotics, and electron-
ics has led to the emergence of a new subclass of balloon and airship systems,
namely unmanned systems. Thus, the deployable balloon-based apertures, aerial
reconnaissance platforms, and communication relay systems described in the first
section may also be classified as active systems in the form of unmanned con-
trolled balloons and airships.
Modern wars, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine and conflicts in the
Persian Gulf region, demonstrate the extensive use of unmanned strike drones,
which are often orders of magnitude cheaper than the available air defense sys-
20
tems, with the exception of machine-gun-based weapons employed by mobile fire
groups in Ukraine. Such an imbalance in military economics places the defending
side in a disadvantaged position in terms of resource and financial expenditure on
air defense. Consequently, there is a need to identify optimal means of protection
against unmanned strike aerial vehicles. One of such solutions may be based on
balloon and airship technologies implemented using modern technological capabil-
ities, including microprocessors, robotics, and autopilot systems. Thus, both active
airship-based systems and passive balloon-barrier systems may be employed to
protect critical infrastructure facilities and populated areas against unmanned
strike aerial vehicles. So, generalized technical requirements for both active and
passive systems may be formulated according to their intended military purpose.
Passive systems are expedient to deploy in the vicinity of critical infrastruc-
ture facilities or other protected targets. Such systems may be used either as aerial
mines, similarly to those employed during the Second World War, or as platforms
for deploying additional obstacles for strike UAVs, such as nets. In this case, the
general technical requirements for such systems include:
• determination of the wind resistance limits and tether loads under different
wind gust conditions, with recommended operability in winds within the
range of (0–20) m/s;
• minimization of deployment and recovery time during operation;
• determination of the optimal number of balloons required for a given pro-
tected object, taking into account the specific system type, such as aerial
mines or net-based barriers;
• determination of the structural strength characteristics of fastening elements
and barrier nets while minimizing the overall system mass.
Active systems, in turn, may be employed as unmanned mothership-type aerial
platforms carrying interceptor drones and lightweight air-to-air missiles. Such ve-
hicles may patrol in the vicinity of protected regions at a considerable distance
from the line of combat contact and serve as an effective means of intercepting
swarms of strike UAVs outside populated areas. In addition, «loitering» airborne
platforms are significantly less vulnerable to long-range ballistic missile strikes
compared to deployed ground-based air defense systems. Accordingly, loitering
airship-based carriers of interceptor drones or lightweight missiles should be spe-
cifically designed for sustained patrol operations, which imposes the following key
technical requirements:
• flight endurance should satisfy the requirements of the combat mission, for
example, rapid launch following the detection of enemy strike UAVs and
transit to the estimated interception area;
• sufficient resistance to wind gusts during flight;
• requirements for the propulsion system, which must be capable of compen-
sating for wind perturbations under different flight conditions, including pa-
trol and station-keeping modes;
• the use of onboard power-generation capabilities, such as flexible solar pan-
els, together with hybrid propulsion systems in order to minimize the overall
mass of the airship;
• requirements for control aerodynamic surfaces to ensure stable and control-
lable flight under various operating conditions and determined range of
wind perturbations.
21
Thus, general technical requirements for balloon and airship systems intended
for the protection of infrastructure facilities against unmanned aerial vehicles have
been formulated. In turn, detailed technical requirements for such systems should
be developed on the basis of the tactical and technical characteristics of the attack-
ing unmanned systems, as well as the specific features of the protected infrastruc-
ture facility.
Conclusions. Thus, the analysis of the current state of balloon and airship ap-
plications has shown that these lighter-than-air vehicles continue to be actively
employed in modern projects of various purposes. With the development of sci-
ence and technology, lighter-than-air vehicles have acquired additional capabilities
compared to their early twentieth-century predecessors, namely:
– the emergence of new aerodynamically optimized geometrical configura-
tions for balloon and airship structures;
– advances in materials science have enabled the use of lighter yet simultane-
ously stronger structural materials for balloons and airships;
– balloons and airships are being considered for active military applications of
various kinds, ranging from reconnaissance stratospheric apertures to mothership-
type aerial platforms;
– unmanned systems, microprocessor technology, and modern avionics have
once again made balloons and airships attractive for the development of unmanned
lighter-than-air vehicles.
However, one of the main challenges in the design of modern controlled air-
ships with different geometrical configurations remains the accurate determination
of their aerodynamic characteristics and added-mass and added-inertia parameters.
Modern approaches, including analytical, semi-empirical, and CFD-based meth-
ods, provide different levels of accuracy for these parameters. Analytical and semi-
empirical methods are generally less accurate and are primarily used during the
early design stages of classical airship configurations. CFD methods, in contrast,
provide the highest accuracy and are typically employed during later stages of de-
velopment, as well as for lighter-than-air vehicles with complex geometries, such
as composite or combined configurations. The accuracy of aerodynamic parameter
estimation directly affects the adequacy of 6-DoF airship flight simulations under
different operating conditions, particularly in the presence of significant wind dis-
turbances. Therefore, the development of rational methods for determining the
aerodynamic characteristics of airships remains a highly relevant scientific and
engineering problem.
The paper also proposes potential directions for the use of balloons and airships
as means of countering strike UAVs for the protection of critical infrastructure.
Financing. This work was carried out in accordance with agreement No.
07/01-2026(7) dated 02.03.2026 between the NAS of Ukraine and the Institute of
Technical Mechanics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and the
State Space Agency of Ukraine, which was concluded on the basis of the Order of
the Presidium of the NAS of Ukraine dated 16.02.2026 No. 76. The research that
led to the preparation of the manuscript was development of priority areas of sci-
entific research» (CPCVK 6541230)
1. Manikandan M., Pant R. S. Research and advancements in hybrid airships–A review. Progress in Aerospace
Sciences. 2021. V. 127. Art. 100741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100741
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100741
22
2. Dasaradhan B., Das B. R., Sinha M. K., Kumar K., Kishore B., Prasad N. E. A brief review of technology and
materials for aerostat application. Asian Journal of Textile. 2018. V. 8. Pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.3923/ajt.2018.1.12
3. GAO, Defense acquisitions: Future aerostat and airship investment decisions drive oversight and coordination
needs, United States Government Accountability Office, Report GAO-13-81, Washington D.C., 2012, 69 pp.
URL: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-13-81.pdf (Last accessed on March 25, 2026).
4. Byelyaev D. M., Rasstryghin O. O., Semeniuk R. P., Bunakov V. P. Analysis of the world's experience in the
use of military aerostat aircraft and prospects for their use in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Ozbroyennia ta
Viiskova Tekhnika.2015. V. 7. No. 3. Pp. 67–72. (In Ukrainian).
https://doi.org/10.34169/2414-0651.2015.3(7).67-72
5. Kumar A., Sati S. C., Ghosh A. K. Design, testing, and realisation of a medium size aerostat envelope, Defence
Science Journal. 2016. V. 66. No. 2. Pp. 93–99.
6. Orlov V. V., Korkin O. Yu., Kovalishin S. S., Naumov O. I. Placement of robotic missile defense complexes on
an unmanned air vehicle. Zbirnyk Naukovykh Prats Viiskovoi Akademii. 2023. No. 2 (20). Pp. 108–116. (In
Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.37129/2313-7509.2023.20.108-116
7. Frontliner / Texty.org.ua, Drones on an aerostat: Ukraine is developing a new complex to counter Shaheds. 2025.
URL: https://texty.org.ua/fragments/114662/drony-na-aerostati-v-ukrayini-rozroblyayut-novyj-kompleks-dlya-
protydiyi-shahedam-foto/ (Last accessed on March 25, 2026).
8. Carrión M., Steijl R., Barakos G. N., Stewart D. Analysis of hybrid air vehicles using computational fluid
dynamics. Journal of Aircraft. 2016. 2016. V. 53. No. 4. Pp. 1001–1012. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033402
9. Pai A., Manikandan M. A comparative study of aerodynamic characteristics of conventional and multi-lobed
airships. The Aeronautical Journal. 2025. V. 129. Pp. 2435–2459. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2025.39
10. Lv J., Zhou Y., Zhang Y., Nie Y., Wang Q. Study of performance of aerostat envelope materials on the coast.
Frontiers in Materials. 2022. V. 9. Art. 992984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2022.992984
11. Kayenzemale J. I., Ibwe K. S. Energy-efficient tethered aerostat platforms for providing last-mile connectivity
in national parks. Journal of Electrical Systems and Information Technology. 2025. V. 12. Art. 7.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43067-025-00197-x
12. Ram C. V., Pant R. S. Multidisciplinary shape optimization of aerostat envelopes. Journal of Aircraft. 2010.
V. 47. Pp. 1073–1076. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.46744
13. Rajani A., Pant R. S., Sudhakar K. Dynamic stability analysis of a tethered aerostat. Journal of Aircraft. 2010.
V. 47. Pp. 1531–1538. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.47010
14. Adak B., Joshi M. Coated or laminated textiles for aerostat and stratospheric airship. In: Advanced Textile
Engineering Materials. H. R. Mattila (Ed.). Hoboken: Wiley. 2018. Pp. 191–214.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119488101.ch7
15. Kim D.-M. et al. Mechanical property characterization of film-fabric laminate for stratospheric airship enve-
lope. Composite Structures. 2007. V. 79. No. 3. Pp. 351–359.
16. Cao M., Qu S., Li J., Lv M. Thermoelasticity of a fabric membrane composite for the stratospheric airship
envelope based on multiscale models. Applied Composite Materials. 2017. V. 24. No. 1. Pp. 209–220.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-016-9522-3
17. Liggett P. E., Carter D. L., Dunne A. L., Darjee D. H., Placko G. W., Mascolino A. I., McEowen L. J. Metal-
lized flexible laminate material for lighter-than-air vehicles. US Patent US8524621B2. 2013. Pp. 1–10.
18. Zhai H., Euler A. Material challenges for lighter-than-air systems in high altitude applications. AIAA Avia-
tion, Technology, Integration and Operations Conference (ATIO). 2005. Pp. 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-7488
19. Lai Z., Tang M., Hu X., Shu X., Huang W., Pan Y. Dynamics modeling and motion evaluation of a near-
ground tethered balloon cable system under severe wind environments. Actuators. 2024. V. 13. No. 10. Art.
402. https://doi.org/10.3390/act13100402
20. Stockbridge C., Ceruti A., Marzocca P. Airship research and development in the areas of design, structures,
dynamics and energy systems. Int. J. of Aeronaut. Space Sci. 2012. V. 13. Iss. 2. Pp. 170–187.
https://doi.org/10.5139/IJASS.2012.13.2.170
21. Pillai A.S., Oruganti V. R. M. Modelling and simulation of aerodynamic parameters of an airship. Advances
in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal. 2020. V. 5. Pp. 167–176.
https://doi.org/10.25046/aj050420
22. Husynin V. P., Husynin A. V. Dirigible Aeronautics. Kyiv: Kafedra, 2012. 364 pp. (In Ukrainian).
23. Mano S., Ajay Sriram R., Vinayagamurthy G., Nadaraja Pillai S., Pasha A. A., Reddy D. S. K., Rahman M.
M. Effect of a circular slot on hybrid airship aerodynamic characteristics. Aerospace. 2021. V. 8. No. 6. Art.
166. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8060166
24. Zhang L., Lv M., Sun C., Meng J. Flight performance analysis of hybrid airship considering added mass ef-
fects. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Transactions of the ASME. 2018. V. 140. Art.
111001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040220
25. Gomes S. B. V., Ramos J. G. Airship dynamic modeling for autonomous operation. Proceedings of the IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 1998. Pp. 3462-3467.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.1998.680973
Received on April 24, 2026;
approved on June 29, 2026;
published on July 2, 2026.
https://doi.org/10.3923/ajt.2018.1.12
https://doi.org/10.34169/2414-0651.2015.3(7).67-72
https://doi.org/10.37129/2313-7509.2023.20.108-116
https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033402
https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2025.39
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2022.992984
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43067-025-00197-x
https://doi.org/10.2514/1.46744
https://doi.org/10.2514/1.47010
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119488101.ch7
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-016-9522-3
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-7488
https://doi.org/10.3390/act13100402
https://doi.org/10.5139/IJASS.2012.13.2.170
https://doi.org/10.25046/aj050420
https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8060166
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040220
https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.1998.680973
|
| id | oai:ojs2.journal-itm.dp.ua:article-187 |
| institution | Technical Mechanics |
| keywords_txt_mv | keywords |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2026-07-11T01:00:24Z |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publisher | текст 3 |
| record_format | ojs |
| resource_txt_mv | journal-itmdpua/58/a2db4366d515894c3d2fe5d71c5f8558.pdf |
| spelling | oai:ojs2.journal-itm.dp.ua:article-1872026-07-10T18:52:11Z AEROSTATIC SYSTEMS IN DEFENSE APPLICATIONS: THE CURRENT CHALLENGES AND THE STATE OF THE ART АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ SHAMAKHANOV, V. K. TEROKHIN, B. I. LAPKHANOV, E. O. aerostatic systems, lighter-than-air vehicles, unmanned aerial vehicles, analytical review, airships. аеростатні системи, апарати легші за повітря, безпілотні літальні апарати, аналітичний огляд, дирижаблі. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/itm2026.02.010 Aerostatic systems of the airship type have more than a century of engineering development and continue to attract attention within the scientific and technical community today. On the one hand, this can be explained by the fact that lighter-than-air vehicles require lower fuel consumption and onboard energy to maintain their position in the airspace. On the other hand, optimal airship configurations may be effective means of cargo transportation and platforms for equipment of various purposes, including scientific, meteorological, and military payloads. Considering these factors, this paper analyzes the state of the art in the development of aerostatic and airship systems for various applications. Based on this analysis, the paper identifies the advantages and drawbacks of using lighter-than-air vehicles in the Earth’s dense atmosphere and challenges associated with their use for different purposes. It is also shown that airship systems can serve as an effective element of air defense systems against hazardous unmanned aerial vehicles. In this context, the objective of this study is to identify key challenges in the design of airship systems intended for the protection of Ukraine’s critical infrastructure against dangerous unmanned aerial vehicles. To achieve this objective, the paper analyzes the state of the art in the development of materials for envelopes and structural elements of modern airships, the features of navigation and control system development, and the payload capacity depending on the aerostat geometry. As a result, technical requirements for the development of airship-type aerostatic systems for airspace and critical infrastructure protection are formulated, and lines of further research aimed at resolving the key challenges in the design of such systems are identified. REFERENCES 1. Manikandan M., Pant R.S. Research and advancements in hybrid airships-A review. Progress in Aerospace Sciences. 2021. V. 127. Art. 100741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100741 2. Dasaradhan B., Das B.R., Sinha M.K., Kumar K., Kishore B., Prasad N. E. A brief review of technology and materials for aerostat application. Asian Journal of Textile. 2018. V. 8. Pp. 1-12.https://doi.org/10.3923/ajt.2018.1.12 3. GAO, Defense acquisitions: Future aerostat and airship investment decisions drive oversight and coordination needs, United States Government Accountability Office, Report GAO-13-81, Washington D.C., 2012, 69 pp. URL: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-13-81.pdf (Last accessed on March 25, 2026). 4. Byelyaev D.M., Rasstryghin O.O., Semeniuk R.P., Bunakov V.P., Analysis of the world's experience in the use of military aerostat aircraft and prospects for their use in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Ozbroyennia ta Viiskova Tekhnika.2015. V. 7. No. 3. Pp. 67-72. (In Ukrainian).https://doi.org/10.34169/2414-0651.2015.3(7).67-72 5. Kumar A., Sati S.C., Ghosh A.K., Design, testing, and realisation of a medium size aerostat envelope, Defence Science Journal. 2016. V. 66. No. 2. Pp. 93-99. 6. Orlov V.V., Korkin O.Yu., Kovalishin S.S., Naumov O.I., Placement of robotic missile defense complexes on an unmanned air vehicle. Zbirnyk Naukovykh Prats Viiskovoi Akademii. 2023. No. 2 (20). Pp. 108-116. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.37129/2313-7509.2023.20.108-116 7. Frontliner / Texty.org.ua, Drones on an aerostat: Ukraine is developing a new complex to counter Shaheds. 2025. URL: https://texty.org.ua/fragments/114662/drony-na-aerostati-v-ukrayini-rozroblyayut-novyj-kompleks-dlya-protydiyi-shahedam-foto/ (Last accessed on March 25, 2026). 8. Carrión M., Steijl R., Barakos G.N., Stewart D., Analysis of hybrid air vehicles using computational fluid dynamics. Journal of Aircraft. 2016. 2016. V. 53. No. 4. Pp. 1001-1012.https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033402 9. Pai A., Manikandan M. A comparative study of aerodynamic characteristics of conventional and multi-lobed airships. The Aeronautical Journal. 2025. V. 129. Pp. 2435-2459. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2025.39 10. Lv J., Zhou Y., Zhang Y., Nie Y., Wang Q. Study of performance of aerostat envelope materials on the coast. Frontiers in Materials. 2022. V. 9. Art. 992984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2022.992984 11. Kayenzemale J. I., Ibwe K. S. Energy-efficient tethered aerostat platforms for providing last-mile connectivity in national parks. Journal of Electrical Systems and Information Technology. 2025. V. 12. Art. 7.https://doi.org/10.1186/s43067-025-00197-x 12. Ram C. V., Pant R. S. Multidisciplinary shape optimization of aerostat envelopes. Journal of Aircraft. 2010. V. 47. Pp. 1073-1076. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.46744 13. Rajani A., Pant R. S., Sudhakar K. Dynamic stability analysis of a tethered aerostat. Journal of Aircraft. 2010. V. 47. Pp. 1531-1538. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.47010 14. Adak B., Joshi M. Coated or laminated textiles for aerostat and stratospheric airship. In: Advanced Textile Engineering Materials. H. R. Mattila (Ed.). Hoboken: Wiley. 2018. Pp. 191-214.https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119488101.ch7 15. Kim D.-M. et al. Mechanical property characterization of film-fabric laminate for stratospheric airship envelope. Composite Structures. 2007. V. 79. No. 3. Pp. 351-359. 16. Cao M., Qu S., Li J., Lv M. Thermoelasticity of a fabric membrane composite for the stratospheric airship envelope based on multiscale models. Applied Composite Materials. 2017. V. 24. No. 1. Pp. 209-220.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-016-9522-3 17. Liggett P. E., Carter D. L., Dunne A. L., Darjee D. H., Placko G. W., Mascolino A. I., McEowen L. J. Metallized flexible laminate material for lighter-than-air vehicles. US Patent US8524621B2. 2013. Pp. 1-10. 18. Zhai H., Euler A. Material challenges for lighter-than-air systems in high altitude applications. AIAA Aviation, Technology, Integration and Operations Conference (ATIO). 2005. Pp. 1-12.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-7488 19. Lai Z., Tang M., Hu X., Shu X., Huang W., Pan Y. Dynamics modeling and motion evaluation of a near-ground tethered balloon cable system under severe wind environments. Actuators. 2024. V. 13. No. 10. Art. 402. https://doi.org/10.3390/act13100402 20. Stockbridge C., Ceruti A., Marzocca P. Airship research and development in the areas of design, structures, dynamics and energy systems. Int. J. of Aeronaut. Space Sci. 2012. V. 13. Iss. 2. Pp. 170-187.https://doi.org/10.5139/IJASS.2012.13.2.170 21. Pillai A.S., Oruganti V.R.M. Modelling and simulation of aerodynamic parameters of an airship. Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal. 2020. V. 5. Pp. 167-176.https://doi.org/10.25046/aj050420 22. Husynin V. P., Husynin A. V. Dirigible Aeronautics. Kyiv: Kafedra, 2012. 364 pp. (In Ukrainian). 23. Mano S., Ajay Sriram R., Vinayagamurthy G., Nadaraja Pillai S., Pasha A.A., Reddy D.S.K., Rahman M.M. Effect of a circular slot on hybrid airship aerodynamic characteristics. Aerospace. 2021. V. 8. No. 6. Art. 166.https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8060166 24. Zhang L., Lv M., Sun C., Meng J. Flight performance analysis of hybrid airship considering added mass effects. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Transactions of the ASME. 2018. V. 140. Art. 111001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040220 25. Gomes S. B. V., Ramos J. G. Airship dynamic modeling for autonomous operation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 1998. Pp. 3462-3467.https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.1998.680973 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/itm2026.02.010 Аеростатні системи дирижабельного типу мають більш ніж столітню історію інженерного розвитку та продовжують привертати увагу науково-технічної спільноти в наш час. З одного боку, це можна пояснити тим, що апарати, які легші за повітря, потребують менших витрат палива та бортової енергії на підтримання свого положення в повітряному просторі. З іншого боку, при розробці оптимальних конструкцій дирижаблів, вони можуть стати ефективними у якості засобів перевезення вантажів та платформ для розміщення обладнання різного призначення (науково-дослідного, метеорологічного, військового тощо). Враховуючи це, в роботі проведено аналіз сучасного стану розробки аеростатних і дирижабельних систем різного призначення. На базі цього аналізу виявлено переваги та недоліки застосування апаратів легших за повітря для польотів в щільних шарах атмосфери Землі, а також сформовано перелік проблемних аспектів їх експлуатації для різного призначення. Також показано, що дирижабельні системи можуть бути використані як ефективний елемент систем протиповітряної оборони від небезпечних безпілотних літальних апаратів. З огляду на це, метою дослідження є виявлення проблемних аспектів проєктування дирижабельних систем для застосування у якості засобів захисту об’єктів критичної інфраструктури України від небезпечних безпілотних літальних апаратів. Так, для досягнення мети, в роботі проаналізовано сучасний стан розвитку матеріалів, з яких виготовляються оболонки і елементи конструкцій сучасних дирижаблів, особливості розробки їх систем навігації та керування, а також вантажопідйомність в залежності від габаритних параметрів аеростата. В результаті цього сформовано технічні вимоги до розробки аеростатних засобів дирижабельного типу для захисту повітряного простору та критичної інфраструктури, а також визначено шляхи для наукових досліджень, що спрямовані на рішення проблемних аспектів проєктування цих систем. ПОСИЛАННЯ 1. Manikandan M., Pant R. S. Research and advancements in hybrid airships–A review. Progress in Aerospace Sciences. 2021. V. 127. Art. 100741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100741 2. Dasaradhan B., Das B. R., Sinha M. K., Kumar K., Kishore B., Prasad N. E. A brief review of technology and materials for aerostat application. Asian Journal of Textile. 2018. V. 8. Pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajt.2018.1.12 3. GAO, Defense acquisitions: Future aerostat and airship investment decisions drive oversight and coordination needs, United States Government Accountability Office, Report GAO-13-81, Washington D.C., 2012, 69 pp. URL: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-13-81.pdf (Last accessed on March 25, 2026). 4. Byelyaev D. M., Rasstryghin O. O., Semeniuk R. P., Bunakov V. P. Analysis of the world's experience in the use of military aerostat aircraft and prospects for their use in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Ozbroyennia ta Viiskova Tekhnika.2015. V. 7. No. 3. Pp. 67–72. (In Ukrainian).https://doi.org/10.34169/2414-0651.2015.3(7).67-72 5. Kumar A., Sati S. C., Ghosh A. K. Design, testing, and realisation of a medium size aerostat envelope, Defence Science Journal. 2016. V. 66. No. 2. Pp. 93–99. 6. Orlov V. V., Korkin O. Yu., Kovalishin S. S., Naumov O. I. Placement of robotic missile defense complexes on an unmanned air vehicle. Zbirnyk Naukovykh Prats Viiskovoi Akademii. 2023. No. 2 (20). Pp. 108–116. (In Ukrainian). https://doi.org/10.37129/2313-7509.2023.20.108-116 7. Frontliner / Texty.org.ua, Drones on an aerostat: Ukraine is developing a new complex to counter Shaheds. 2025. URL: https://texty.org.ua/fragments/114662/drony-na-aerostati-v-ukrayini-rozroblyayut-novyj-kompleks-dlya-protydiyi-shahedam-foto/ (Last accessed on March 25, 2026). 8. Carrión M., Steijl R., Barakos G. N., Stewart D. Analysis of hybrid air vehicles using computational fluid dynamics. Journal of Aircraft. 2016. 2016. V. 53. No. 4. Pp. 1001–1012. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C033402 9. Pai A., Manikandan M. A comparative study of aerodynamic characteristics of conventional and multi-lobed airships. The Aeronautical Journal. 2025. V. 129. Pp. 2435–2459. https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2025.39 10. Lv J., Zhou Y., Zhang Y., Nie Y., Wang Q. Study of performance of aerostat envelope materials on the coast. Frontiers in Materials. 2022. V. 9. Art. 992984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2022.992984 11. Kayenzemale J. I., Ibwe K. S. Energy-efficient tethered aerostat platforms for providing last-mile connectivity in national parks. Journal of Electrical Systems and Information Technology. 2025. V. 12. Art. 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43067-025-00197-x 12. Ram C. V., Pant R. S. Multidisciplinary shape optimization of aerostat envelopes. Journal of Aircraft. 2010. V. 47. Pp. 1073–1076. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.46744 13. Rajani A., Pant R. S., Sudhakar K. Dynamic stability analysis of a tethered aerostat. Journal of Aircraft. 2010. V. 47. Pp. 1531–1538. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.47010 14. Adak B., Joshi M. Coated or laminated textiles for aerostat and stratospheric airship. In: Advanced Textile Engineering Materials. H. R. Mattila (Ed.). Hoboken: Wiley. 2018. Pp. 191–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119488101.ch7 15. Kim D.-M. et al. Mechanical property characterization of film-fabric laminate for stratospheric airship envelope. Composite Structures. 2007. V. 79. No. 3. Pp. 351–359. 16. Cao M., Qu S., Li J., Lv M. Thermoelasticity of a fabric membrane composite for the stratospheric airship envelope based on multiscale models. Applied Composite Materials. 2017. V. 24. No. 1. Pp. 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-016-9522-3 17. Liggett P. E., Carter D. L., Dunne A. L., Darjee D. H., Placko G. W., Mascolino A. I., McEowen L. J. Metallized flexible laminate material for lighter-than-air vehicles. US Patent US8524621B2. 2013. Pp. 1–10. 18. Zhai H., Euler A. Material challenges for lighter-than-air systems in high altitude applications. AIAA Aviation, Technology, Integration and Operations Conference (ATIO). 2005. Pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-7488 19. Lai Z., Tang M., Hu X., Shu X., Huang W., Pan Y. Dynamics modeling and motion evaluation of a near-ground tethered balloon cable system under severe wind environments. Actuators. 2024. V. 13. No. 10. Art. 402. https://doi.org/10.3390/act13100402 20. Stockbridge C., Ceruti A., Marzocca P. Airship research and development in the areas of design, structures, dynamics and energy systems. Int. J. of Aeronaut. Space Sci. 2012. V. 13. Iss. 2. Pp. 170–187. https://doi.org/10.5139/IJASS.2012.13.2.170 21. Pillai A.S., Oruganti V. R. M. Modelling and simulation of aerodynamic parameters of an airship. Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal. 2020. V. 5. Pp. 167–176. https://doi.org/10.25046/aj050420 22. Husynin V. P., Husynin A. V. Dirigible Aeronautics. Kyiv: Kafedra, 2012. 364 pp. (In Ukrainian). 23. Mano S., Ajay Sriram R., Vinayagamurthy G., Nadaraja Pillai S., Pasha A. A., Reddy D. S. K., Rahman M. M. Effect of a circular slot on hybrid airship aerodynamic characteristics. Aerospace. 2021. V. 8. No. 6. Art. 166. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace8060166 24. Zhang L., Lv M., Sun C., Meng J. Flight performance analysis of hybrid airship considering added mass effects. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Transactions of the ASME. 2018. V. 140. Art. 111001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040220 25. Gomes S. B. V., Ramos J. G. Airship dynamic modeling for autonomous operation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 1998. Pp. 3462-3467. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.1998.680973 текст 3 2026-07-02 Article Article application/pdf https://journal-itm.dp.ua/ojs/index.php/ITM_j1/article/view/187 Technical Mechanics; No. 2 (2026): Technical Mechanics; 10-22 Институт технической механики Национальной академии наук Украины и Государственного космического агентства Украины; № 2 (2026): Technical Mechanics; 10-22 ТЕХНІЧНА МЕХАНІКА; № 2 (2026): ТЕХНІЧНА МЕХАНІКА; 10-22 en https://journal-itm.dp.ua/ojs/index.php/ITM_j1/article/view/187/82 Copyright (c) 2026 Technical Mechanics |
| spellingShingle | аеростатні системи апарати легші за повітря безпілотні літальні апарати аналітичний огляд дирижаблі. SHAMAKHANOV, V. K. TEROKHIN, B. I. LAPKHANOV, E. O. АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ |
| title | АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ |
| title_alt | AEROSTATIC SYSTEMS IN DEFENSE APPLICATIONS: THE CURRENT CHALLENGES AND THE STATE OF THE ART |
| title_full | АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ |
| title_fullStr | АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ |
| title_full_unstemmed | АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ |
| title_short | АЕРОСТАТИЧНІ СИСТЕМИ В ОБОРОННОМУ ЗАСТОСУВАННІ: СУЧАСНІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТА СУЧАСНИЙ СТАН ТЕХНІКИ |
| title_sort | аеростатичні системи в оборонному застосуванні: сучасні проблеми та сучасний стан техніки |
| topic | аеростатні системи апарати легші за повітря безпілотні літальні апарати аналітичний огляд дирижаблі. |
| topic_facet | aerostatic systems lighter-than-air vehicles unmanned aerial vehicles analytical review airships. аеростатні системи апарати легші за повітря безпілотні літальні апарати аналітичний огляд дирижаблі. |
| url | https://journal-itm.dp.ua/ojs/index.php/ITM_j1/article/view/187 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shamakhanovvk aerostaticsystemsindefenseapplicationsthecurrentchallengesandthestateoftheart AT terokhinbi aerostaticsystemsindefenseapplicationsthecurrentchallengesandthestateoftheart AT lapkhanoveo aerostaticsystemsindefenseapplicationsthecurrentchallengesandthestateoftheart AT shamakhanovvk aerostatičnísistemivoboronnomuzastosuvannísučasníproblemitasučasnijstantehníki AT terokhinbi aerostatičnísistemivoboronnomuzastosuvannísučasníproblemitasučasnijstantehníki AT lapkhanoveo aerostatičnísistemivoboronnomuzastosuvannísučasníproblemitasučasnijstantehníki |