A Secret Ukrainian Drone Missile Successfully Struck Moscow
- 18.09.2026, 9:13
An exclusive interview with a firearms manufacturer.
About the Ukrainian "Bars" drone missile was announced in 2024, but the first photos of it have only recently surfaced. The product’s specifications and cost remained a secret. A reporter NV met with a representative of the company manufacturing this drone missile at one of the world’s largest arms exhibitions, MSPO 2026, where the Ukrainian booth was very popular. The interviewee’s name is being withheld for security reasons. He spoke for the first time about the “Bars” drone’s specifications and shared plans for the future.
— Please tell us about your product and its main capabilities.
— When development of systems for striking deep behind enemy lines was just beginning, we knew that all companies were designing vehicles with gasoline engines. We, however, immediately focused on the task of achieving a higher flight speed. That was the company’s vision and, in general, the requirement from our operators—the military. That’s why we created a jet-powered deep-strike drone equipped with a small jet engine. We started with a 22-kilogram payload and achieved a range of 700 kilometers.
— Have the specifications changed now?
— They’ve changed many times. We’ve now reached the point where our warheads weigh 60 kilograms, the operational range is over 1,000 kilometers, and the speed is up to 700 km/h.
— People say there are very few “Bars”...
— They’re being used every day now. More than 2,000 “Bars” units of various modifications and configurations are produced every month. They aren’t sitting in reserve somewhere—every single one is sent into combat. Targets include oil refineries, power plants, and substations. In addition, it is our drones that carry out a number of special missions about which very little—or nothing at all—has been reported so far. They are able to do this thanks to capabilities that conventional, non-jet-powered drones lack.
Furthermore, we have a “Bars” variant designed for middle strike; it is equipped with a camera and is operated by an operator. These drones have also been used by special forces of the Defense Forces to carry out special missions. Whenever it comes to the waters of the Black and Azov Seas, Crimea, and other temporarily occupied territories—the “middle strike” version is actively used everywhere.
And, of course, “deep strike”—strikes at great depth, targeting coordinates up to a thousand kilometers from Ukraine’s border. About half a year ago, I mapped out the missions. There were more than 200 of them. Since then, that number has increased significantly.
— Is production growing?
— When we started, we were producing 10 units a month. We planned to produce 600 units a year and considered that an ambitious goal. Then we reached a rate of 600 units a month. Now we’re producing about 2,000 units every month. Is there a need to scale up further? Yes! But we still want to devote more time to refining several systems. And only after that will we release version 2.0…
— Perhaps the most striking incident involving Bars was the attack on the Moscow Oil Refinery; several videos captured your device during that attack. How did it perform during that operation?
— In my opinion, unsatisfactorily. Let me explain why. If we want to achieve 100 percent defeat and 100 percent destruction of enemy targets, then Ukraine, strategically speaking, has not yet achieved its goal. Let this not sound like an official company statement—it’s simply my personal assessment.
Speaking specifically about our product, we had a certain percentage of drones that penetrated the three layers of Russian air defense and successfully struck their targets. But I believe that figure should be even better. We want the hit rate to be at least 75%.
— Are you working on improving these figures?
— We’re working on it, but it’s not just about modifications. It’s also about mission planning, real-time situational assessment, and studying the enemy’s air defense systems. I believe our special forces have the potential to prepare better for more effective operations. This isn’t a criticism—certainly not! It’s simply a vision of what can be done better, and that’s our shared goal. We work every day to provide our defenders with the necessary tools, and, drawing on their experience and feedback, we’re improving our products.
— Speaking of effectiveness, there was unconfirmed information circulating online that a single Bars costs $500,000. The Russians claim that jet-powered “shahids” are significantly cheaper. Was the price that was reported accurate?
— Absolutely not. Not at all. Let me put it this way: you’d have to divide it by, if not 10, then… a lot. There’s a basic model, and there are versions with cameras, powerful antennas, and other features. The price will vary accordingly, but it will still be several times less than $500,000—incomparably less.
— And cheaper than what the Europeans or Americans can offer?
— Several times cheaper. But the Europeans have a different approach. For example, in our case, standardizing the product took 4–5 months, and we were able to carry out this process during actual combat operations. But in Europe… We once wanted to conduct tests in a neighboring country, and they charged us about 110,000 euros per day to use the test range. And that’s just the test range! If we conduct test flights in Ukraine, it’s practically free, but over there—it costs a fortune.
The situation is similar with certification. In Europe, it costs 15–20 million euros. It’s not free here either, but it’s much cheaper. European and American manufacturers are required to ensure that their products can be stored in warehouses for 10 years—that’s one of the quality criteria. It turns out that we’re not competitive in this regard, since we can’t guarantee that our product will last 10 years and remain usable. But we don’t even need that!
When people say we need to adopt the European model in the arms market, the price of our products in Ukraine will immediately become at least twice as high.
— Will this affect not only the price but also production timelines?
— Exactly! Our company’s policy has always been: we need it now, or at the very latest, tomorrow. But ideally, we’d have it yesterday. As for safety issues, we strive to maintain high standards. But when it comes to certification, we achieve it through combat use. In other words, if it works—then it’s a certified solution.
Certifying certain components in Ukraine can take half a year. That’s just to obtain all the approvals, not counting the actual production. That’s why I always ask: do we need innovation or stamps on paper? If we need the former—something we can use right away to strike the enemy—then we can get to work on it.
— Can your product be compared to Russian jet-powered drones?
— Technically, it can be compared to the “Banderole.” We began producing similar systems as early as 2024. And, in my view, we were dismissive of the enemy’s attempts to create jet-powered “shahids” even back then. For a long time, they didn’t mass-produce them—the Russians’ approach back then was amateurish—but we can see that today this has become a serious problem. We should have prepared for this in advance. I believe this is our oversight—the fact that we did not develop a jet-powered interceptor back then. The enemy has a decent product, and we are now suffering as a result.
We were on par with them two years ago, but we’ve moved ahead since then; you could say they’re catching up to us. Technologically, we’re still ahead, but we can see that they’ve learned from studying our design and are already applying these technologies to their own drones.
— There was a recent report that Germany wants to purchase the “Bars” for its armed forces. Is that true? If so, what stage are the negotiations at?
— Yes, there is interest from Germany. We’re ready to cooperate with the Europeans. But our primary concern is what Ukraine can get in return. If Germany, for example, provides Ukraine with satellite navigation data or additional financial resources, and if our government agrees that this is in Ukraine’s best interests—we’ll be all for it.
— Have government representatives already contacted you regarding this matter?
— Yes. There is a bilateral dialogue underway between the German and Ukrainian governments. We have received a request that has been coordinated with the Ukrainian government. In principle, we are interested in cooperation. First, there is the “Build with Ukraine” initiative, which provides for the joint production of Ukrainian defense products on the territory of partner countries and the exchange of military technologies with foreign partners.
Second, there are certain components to which we have limited access—for example, jet engines. The idea is being considered that Germany would join the production of engines and expand its capacity to supply them to us.
Third, our resources are quite limited, since we receive a great many requests for modernization, and there isn’t enough time to do everything perfectly. For example, we would be interested in carrying out a project for the German army in collaboration with a German manufacturer. We can provide them with the technology and demonstrate: “Look, this is how it works for us now, but ideally, we need to take the time to ensure certification in accordance with all regulations.” That might take them several months—time we don’t have right now—but then we’ll be able to transfer this well-established process to Ukraine.
— Aside from Germany, is anyone else showing interest?
— The United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, France, Belgium, and the United Arab Emirates. These are priority markets where concrete negotiations are underway and we’re seeing progress—not just interest.
— You’ve already mentioned the “Bars 2.0” version. What stage is this development currently at? What can you tell us about it so far?
— Based on feedback from our end users, we understand that they want something more. Widespread deployment of “Bars 2.0” is scheduled for the first quarter of 2027. At the same time, we have systems that are already in the testing phase and even in combat use, and these are something far more significant than “Bars” and even “Bars 2.0.” It’s simply in a different class! But we can’t say more about that yet.
— So, should we expect even more good news about your products?
— Let the enemy wait. And then… Perhaps those who use our equipment will want to share their experiences—to tell us what, how, and when they carry out their missions. Our mission is to give them these tools.