Military Review

American experts on Russian combat robots

54
American experts have listed the most powerful, in their opinion, Russian robotic systems. Reports about it Lenta.ru report with reference to Breaking Defense.


American experts on Russian combat robots


Russia is creating a whole zoo of armed ground robots up to the size of armored personnel carriers,
said the technology director at the New American Security Center, Paul Sharr. He noted the Russian 11-ton “Uran-9”, 16-ton “Whirlwind” and 50-ton T-14 (unmanned “Armata”).

Many of these heavy vehicles are heavily armed, and Russians often demonstrate these prototypes at trade shows,
said another expert, Samuel Bendet of CNA (Center for Naval Analyses).

Meanwhile, in their opinion, “many of the Russian robots are more like advertising tricks than practical combat vehicles,” in particular, the anthropomorphic FEDOR (Final Experimental Demonstration Object Research) robot, which is capable of firing a pistol.

Most of the products, the newspaper notes, are “converted for remote control of conventional armored vehicles,” and “they cannot be considered truly autonomous products, since managing them requires the presence of a person, although outside the car”.

In the automatic turret, created in Russia, according to Sharr, there are “problems with distinguishing between friend and foe in autonomous mode of operation”, but artificial intelligence systems developed in the country, he is sure, will cope with this task over time.

Bendet, in turn, noted that most of the US military ground UAVs are remotely controlled (this simplifies the enemy's radar suppression), "are too light and practically not equipped with weapons, that is, in fact, they are not full-fledged combat vehicles."

Scherr found it difficult to conduct a comparative analysis of Russian and American products, but he suggested that the United States lags behind the Russian Federation in developing large ground-based combat robots "because of ethical difficulties, suggesting that the machine could be destroyed by a machine", as well as "lack of ideas."

According to the resource, In 2017, the US Army will spend $ 521 million on drones, of which 79% falls on aircraft systems. Only 4% funding goes to ground systems, mainly designed to detect and deactivate roadside mines.
Photos used:
Rosoboronexport press service
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Logall
    Logall 20 October 2017 08: 26 New
    52
    Does he claim the US is lagging behind ethical concerns? What are they afraid of killing a person with a robot?
    When were Americans afraid of killing people? Hillary so delightedly admired how tormenting Gaddafi !!!
    1. Monos
      Monos 20 October 2017 08: 33 New
      15
      that the United States is lagging behind the Russian Federation in the development of large ground combat robots "because of ethical difficulties suggesting a justification for the possibility of killing a person with a machine", and "Lack of ideas".

      How so!? The iPhone, then, was done, but can’t you "gun on the tracks"? But did the Americans themselves, without the help of others, make an iPhone? Maybe, as always, stolen?
      1. Iskander Sh
        Iskander Sh 20 October 2017 08: 41 New
        +4
        Quote: Monos
        The iPhone, then, was done, but can’t you "gun on the tracks"?



        Private corporations do not like to share their secrets. And why should Apple creep into the armament market if it has been chopping billions for years trying to get the same idea for a lot of money.
        1. Thrall
          Thrall 20 October 2017 08: 45 New
          +9
          After Putin, the president of Russia will be the unmanned "Armata". Let them impose sanctions against her smile
          1. Logall
            Logall 20 October 2017 09: 01 New
            16
            The best Yars! Let them impose sanctions while flying.
            If you have time ...
            1. Shurik70
              Shurik70 20 October 2017 12: 45 New
              +6
              Laughter, laughter, but it would be nice to replace many senior officials with Artificial Intelligence. In most cases, their work boils down to choosing the most optimal one from several options. And then the robot can cope better and faster than humans. He also works around the clock, does not require a yacht and is guaranteed not to take bribes.
        2. Lganhi
          Lganhi 20 October 2017 09: 51 New
          +4
          Hehe. Just on military orders, American firms chop huge amounts of money. For example, the US military budget is almost $ 700 billion, which is 3 times the Chinese military budget and 10 times the Russian one. On military orders at the Pentagon, they saw so much loot that Serdyukov and Vasilyeva rest.
      2. 210ox
        210ox 20 October 2017 09: 02 New
        +4
        There is no worse than praising the enemy ... From the evil one, and wait for the stone in the bosom
        Quote: Monos
        that the United States is lagging behind the Russian Federation in the development of large ground combat robots "because of ethical difficulties suggesting a justification for the possibility of killing a person with a machine", and "Lack of ideas".

        How so!? The iPhone, then, was done, but can’t you "gun on the tracks"? But did the Americans themselves, without the help of others, make an iPhone? Maybe, as always, stolen?
      3. PalBor
        PalBor 20 October 2017 09: 46 New
        +2
        No wonder. After the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, which made a bunch of cute robot dogs, caring nanny robots, charming robot partners, there were no small functional intelligence robots! American had to be used.
      4. spirit
        spirit 20 October 2017 10: 10 New
        +1
        There is Google, Boston, and the same lockhead. I think everyone can take the power and the same Abrams to solder into a drone. It’s either not yet needed, or it’s being developed under the carpet, which is more likely
        1. Soran
          Soran 20 October 2017 10: 52 New
          +8
          Does the Abrams UAV include a Negro Charger?
          1. Monos
            Monos 20 October 2017 13: 04 New
            +7
            Quote: Soran
            Does the Abrams UAV include a Negro Charger?

            laughing The Negro-charging drone is also. Only serve coke.
          2. kot28.ru
            kot28.ru 20 October 2017 13: 12 New
            +6
            option "obama +" wassat
          3. NickiShnapi
            NickiShnapi 20 October 2017 15: 04 New
            +4
            Negro is not a pity, you can always buy a new one))
      5. armourer
        armourer 20 October 2017 10: 51 New
        +1
        We collected the best of all manufacturers, pasted something of their own, here you have an iPhone.
      6. opus
        opus 20 October 2017 19: 39 New
        +1
        Quote: Monos
        How so!?

        it's written
        Quote: Author
        that the United States lags behind the Russian Federation in the development of large land battle robots

        At the expense of "ethical of course nonsense.

        Quote: Monos
        Maybe, as always, stolen?

        Americans, what is there to invent
        The "very first" iPhone in 1998 was introduced by Infogear.

        The creator of the device is Robert Ackerman


        they looked at me as if my third eye had opened. “After all, the telephone is the telephone, and the Internet is the Internet! They said


        At CES-1998, the iPhone was introduced at a price of $ 499. Another $ 20 had to be paid for the opportunity to access the Internet.
        Infogear iPhone2

        In 2000, one of the investors in his project, a well-known lawmaker in Cisco networking equipment, bought Infogear and all its intellectual property for $ 300 million. Among other things, Cisco became the owner of the iPhone brand and trademark. She took advantage of her right - in December 2006 the VOIP-phone under the brand Linksys saw the light, on its case, the inscription “iPhone” was applied directly under the screen.


        and on January 9, 2007 at MacWorld, that iPhone that we all know was introduced by Steve Jobs.


        So, it combines three things: a widescreen iPod with touch controls, a revolutionary mobile phone and a breakthrough Internet communicator. iPod, telephone, Internet communicator. iPod, phone ... you understand, right? These are not three separate devices. This is one device and we call it iPhone


        So when Apple launched its iPhone in 2007, formally, she violated Cisco rights and had to be punished. A lawsuit has already been filed, but Steve Jobs once again proved himself as a genius negotiator.
        ===================
        Conclusion Iphone came up with the Americans:
        Steve Jobs and Robert Ackerman = Americans
        Infogear, Cisco, and apple = US firms.
        the END
        1. Monos
          Monos 20 October 2017 21: 24 New
          +4
          Quote: opus
          Conclusion Iphone came up with the Americans

          Thanks, Anton. As always, thoroughly. But I meant something else:
          35000 works for the company по всему миру. Moreover, 90% of them have never seen their direct employers;
          9 million people - the number of developers who are involved in creating programs for Apple gadgets and most of them are not Americans;
          only in 2014 year did Apple buy 26 companies. Among them: SnappyLabs, Burstly, LuxVue, Spotsetter, Swell, BookLamp, Prss, Semetric and Beats Electronics. In addition, Apple absorbed companies such as NeXT (1996 year), PA Semi (April 2008 year), Quattro Wireless (January 2010 year), Siri (April 2010 year), Anobit Technologies (January 2012 year). Usually the company prefers to buy small promising startups and important patent holders.
          No, I don’t argue that Jobs, Wozniak or Cook are talented managers, but let’s doubt that they “invented the phone” (as Jobs told 2007 to the year). smile
          1. opus
            opus 20 October 2017 22: 47 New
            +2
            Quote: Monos
            Moreover, 90% of them have never seen their direct employers;

            so long ago ....
            Sucks all the juices America
            Quote: Monos
            "invented the phone" (as Jobs said 2007 year)

            agree iphon invented by Steve.
            Shl. I'm here on anryuha (A5 (2017)) switched from 5S (aka dead).
            to be honest: this is (A5), not a phone.
            one +:
            word, exel, pdf reads with a bang ...
            and so- not a telephone (mobile)
            1. Monos
              Monos 20 October 2017 23: 30 New
              +4
              Quote: opus
              word, exel, pdf reads with a bang ...

              no I am a supporter of specialization - to call by phone, read on a tablet, count and draw on a computer. Therefore, the old Nokia 6303 still serves me faithfully. smile
    2. Nashensky city
      Nashensky city 20 October 2017 08: 33 New
      +6
      They are afraid that an airborne machine will kill a person. And when a person does this, this is another matter, it’s not against the moral principles of striped
      1. Logall
        Logall 20 October 2017 08: 41 New
        16
        If you didn’t get the pleasure of killing, is that bad? Then it is clear!
        1. Nashensky city
          Nashensky city 20 October 2017 08: 50 New
          +4
          They have a complex after 'Terminator' laughing
      2. Incvizitor
        Incvizitor 21 October 2017 18: 39 New
        0
        America is capitalist
        soulless car
        for murder, robbery and terror.
    3. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 20 October 2017 13: 58 New
      0
      Remember the Skaynei and the Terminator .....?
    4. Yuyuka
      Yuyuka 20 October 2017 14: 22 New
      0
      Quote: Logall
      Does he claim the US is lagging behind ethical concerns? What are they afraid of killing a person with a robot?
      When were Americans afraid of killing people? Hillary so delightedly admired how tormenting Gaddafi !!!


      these are not Americans "for ethical reasons ...", these robots cannot "enter" their logic -
      right and "told" their developers
      "Because of ethical difficulties, suggesting the justification for the possibility of destroying a person by a machine", as well as the "lack of ideas." our processors can’t stand it! belay
    5. Kent0001
      Kent0001 20 October 2017 14: 38 New
      0
      Hillary is not a Man. She is a product of dark forces, not otherwise.
  2. Iskander Sh
    Iskander Sh 20 October 2017 08: 34 New
    0
    The United States has a huge advantage; they tested their autonomous platforms back in Iraq. And so far we have only prototypes.
    1. True
      True 20 October 2017 08: 45 New
      +1
      Prototypes ... Does it mean that you are so streamlined that they are Croatian?
      1. Iskander Sh
        Iskander Sh 20 October 2017 08: 53 New
        0
        Quote: True
        Croatian?


        laughing

        No. It’s just that the USA has already gained experience of using it in real combat, and for us this is still a prospect for the future. Sometimes a banana, it's just a banana. smile
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 20 October 2017 09: 07 New
          +6
          The Americans swept small infantry robots with small arms and reconnaissance infantry robots in Afghanistan and Iraq. As well as various autonomous supply vehicles.
          Wedges for reconnaissance in battle have not been tested. Russian wedges are a useful thing.
          It is only necessary to include them in the structure of the army. This is exactly the problem for everyone. They do not fit into existing tactics. It will have to be changed.
          1. NIKNN
            NIKNN 20 October 2017 11: 03 New
            +2
            Quote: voyaka uh
            It is only necessary to include them in the structure of the army. This is exactly the problem for everyone. They do not fit into existing tactics. It will have to be changed.

            Well, these devices fit well in network-centric tactics ...
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 20 October 2017 11: 05 New
              +2
              There are “problems with distinguishing between friend and enemy in autonomous mode of operation,” however, artificial intelligence systems developed in the country, he is sure, will cope with this task over time.
              So it seems like his system - no one canceled a stranger ..
          2. Dedall
            Dedall 20 October 2017 20: 20 New
            +1
            And you also need to add the question of who will service and repair them. Pensioner Uncle Vasya, who is not going to go on business trips and sits in the PDP, or a lieutenant who, over the years of his studies at a military university (academy, institute, emphasize what he likes), only learned to get up at the sounds of the Anthem? the commandments of the Chinese Tao, that is, it is impossible to get individual blocks and because of this it is not being repaired, but is thrown out entirely.
  3. XII Legion
    XII Legion 20 October 2017 08: 34 New
    18
    Even the zoo?
    So robots animated? laughing
    Doubly interesting ...
  4. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 20 October 2017 08: 38 New
    +1
    due to ethical difficulties suggesting justification for the possibility of destruction of a person by a machine


    This should be told to civilians, thousands killed and killed from drones, even in those territories where the United States allegedly is not fighting. The winner of the Peace Prize here was especially distinguished.
    1. Iskander Sh
      Iskander Sh 20 October 2017 08: 45 New
      +1
      Quote: Gormengast
      killed by drones


      Such drones are operated quite by living operators.
    2. SpaceCom
      SpaceCom 20 October 2017 09: 48 New
      0
      Killing from heaven is the prerogative of the gods. A striped for a smaller role and do not agree. That’s all ethics!
      In general, such articles are always from the "little money" series ...
    3. Lganhi
      Lganhi 20 October 2017 09: 53 New
      +1
      These drones are not automatic machines, but remote-controlled aircraft. They are called "UAVs" - unmanned aerial vehicles, and not "ALA" - automatic aircraft. "
  5. parma
    parma 20 October 2017 09: 09 New
    +1
    If you assemble a fully autonomous combat vehicle, consider a tank, how much will it be cheaper than usual (and will it be?)? And if you also take into account the noise immunity? I don’t think that such cars have a future more than chasing natives ...
    1. kudma
      kudma 20 October 2017 10: 01 New
      +1
      If the crew retracts, then the air conditioning systems are removed, all sorts of seat displays in the end, not to mention the reduction of the combat vehicle due to living space. You can also reduce the weight of the armor since the crew does not need to be protected.
  6. win9090
    win9090 20 October 2017 09: 34 New
    0
    Nonsense 10 years ago
  7. rocket757
    rocket757 20 October 2017 10: 49 New
    +4
    Quote: voyaka uh
    The Americans swept small infantry robots with small arms and reconnaissance infantry robots in Afghanistan and Iraq. As well as various autonomous supply vehicles.
    Wedges for reconnaissance in battle have not been tested. Russian wedges are a useful thing.
    It is only necessary to include them in the structure of the army. This is exactly the problem for everyone. They do not fit into existing tactics. It will have to be changed.

    If only tactics ... the servicemen have to "format the brains" and not only in the grassroots. so work guys invent, and for now, only small autonomy models can go into business, i.e. relatively stupid.
    It’s like with the “chosen” people, for 40 years you have to go through the desert so that the old / retrograde people die.
    I do not think that the senior command wants to relearn ... sales if necessary.
    The matter will move forward when someone, very upstairs, decides that it is time and it is very necessary to implement this business !!!
  8. san4es
    san4es 20 October 2017 10: 57 New
    +2
    FEDOR (Final Experimental Demonstration Object Research), which is capable of firing a pistol.
    1. Kent0001
      Kent0001 20 October 2017 14: 42 New
      0
      Cool, if only this is not an advertising mounted video. He generally shoots from the "hip".
      1. san4es
        san4es 20 October 2017 15: 10 New
        +2
        Quote: Kent0001
        He generally shoots from the "hip".

        ... No problem ... Under the trunks of the camera (to the bull's eye)
  9. Egorovich
    Egorovich 20 October 2017 11: 21 New
    +5
    Mattresses are lagging behind “due to ethical difficulties,” and it turns out to bomb ethnically bombing weddings and civilians with a drone. The logic of holy fools.
  10. rotor
    rotor 20 October 2017 11: 34 New
    0
    Most products, the publication notes, are "converted for remote control of conventional armored vehicles", and they "can not be considered truly autonomous products


    The problem is more in electronic stuffing, and not in software.
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 20 October 2017 13: 39 New
      +3
      I wrote that looking at the filling of our electronics, I don’t want to curse, I don’t know how!
      In the union this could not be, but where is he that union fraternally, as we were told, of the peoples.
      Let's wait and see how we will now catch up / overtake the “rotting” west.
    2. SpaceCom
      SpaceCom 20 October 2017 14: 45 New
      0
      The problem, rather, is precisely in ethics! While the cars are controlled by operators, they are just remotely controlled weapons. Once they become autonomous, who then will be responsible for the murder? Programmer?! ....
      1. kasatky
        kasatky 20 October 2017 15: 28 New
        +1
        Programmers will compete - whose firmware has more than "points". And marketing will build charts, draw up presentations and advertising brochures. This is an intellectual product, it must be sold.
      2. Incvizitor
        Incvizitor 21 October 2017 18: 52 New
        0
        In the United States, in any case, no one will be held responsible, if they are not responsible for the constant killings of a civilian from an UAV, if he only carries his own terrorists.
  11. Incvizitor
    Incvizitor 21 October 2017 18: 37 New
    0
    "Due to ethical difficulties, suggesting the justification for the possibility of destroying a person with a machine"

    Well these are ethics itself laughing
    Rather
    "Lack of ideas."
  12. Mikhail Zubkov
    Mikhail Zubkov 21 October 2017 19: 04 New
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    It is only necessary to include them in the structure of the army. This is exactly the problem for everyone. They do not fit into existing tactics. It will have to be changed.

    We have only doctors of military sciences - a division, and candidates - a corps. With head shapes for sure - let them prove their head. In Syria, a whole training ground is in operation, and there are many more who are actually fighting, or they would have fought if the robots had given them. For each division, to begin with, a separate company of robotics, and let them experiment with tactics all year round! Or in each regiment in a separate company (comrades - major), and in the division - a separate battalion (up to the colonel's ceiling, its own banner of the unit) - and in a year or two they would have worked out at least for the charter of military use.
  13. mss001
    mss001 26 October 2017 17: 53 New
    0
    It's time to start developing combat robots the size of a mosquito or a fly. They should have a friend-or-foe target recognition system. Crouched on a stranger - death to him. I give an idea.