Military Review

The developer called Russia a leader in the creation of combat robots

72
Russia is five years ahead of leading military powers in creating tactical-level combat robots (weight from 5 to 30 tons), said in an interview RIA News Director General of the enterprise-developer of robotic complexes of the Uran family, 766, Production and Technological Equipment Administration (UPTK) Dmitry Ostapchuk.


Speaking of military robotic complexes, in the segment I have already named from 5 to 30 tons, today in the world we are at the forefront. True, we can say that our competitors are already breathing in the back - if, according to expert estimates two years ago, the lag of our closest competitors in reconnaissance-strike complexes was estimated at 15-17 years, today they managed to reduce the gap to five years and this is serious indicator
- he said.

The developer called Russia a leader in the creation of combat robots


Among the examples of the most promising foreign projects in the field of combat robotics, Ostapchuk cited the program for lung robotization renewed in 2017 by the British BAE Systems tank Black Knight, whose tactical and technical characteristics are comparable with the Russian reconnaissance and combat robot "Uranus-9". At the same time, the agency’s interlocutor emphasized that while the British company had just presented the layout of its robot tank, the serial production of Uraniums has been established over the past few years.

The developer added that with the weight of "Uranium-9" in 11 tons, the robot has compact dimensions - two times less than BMP or BTR. At the same time, the unmanned vehicle surpasses the armored vehicles of this class in composition of armaments and combat capabilities.

766 UPTK OJSC (Production and Technological Equipment Division) is a defense-industrial enterprise founded in 2013 year, which specializes in the development of various types of robotic systems. One of the most advanced developments of the company is the Uran robots, which were involved in the antiterrorist operation in Syria, including the demining of Palmyra. 100% stake in the company today belongs to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.
Photos used:
provided by OJSC "766 UPTK"
72 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. _Jack_
    _Jack_ 29 November 2017 11: 28 New
    +3
    And what can Uranus-9 do by itself, without operator control, if it is a “tactical combat robot”?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 29 November 2017 11: 41 New
      +3
      There has long been a division of combat robots into
      - "T-robots", the control of which is retained by the operator, only a part of the functions, more or less, is robotic.
      - "F-robots", from the word "free", which operate either completely autonomously, or with minimal human intervention

      And those and others still belong to combat robots. Regardless of the level of participation / non-participation of the operator in their management
      1. maxim947
        maxim947 29 November 2017 11: 50 New
        +2
        The developer called Russia a leader in the creation of combat robots

        A dubious achievement, and rather controversial, taking into account the fact of a backlog in UAVs, it would be better to develop industrial robotics.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 29 November 2017 11: 55 New
          +2
          "Combat" robotics, unlike production, does not require precision precision actuators. But in terms of software, much more complicated.
          Therefore, there is an opportunity to gain experience in programs, why not use it?
          1. My doctor
            My doctor 29 November 2017 14: 03 New
            +3
            In the USA, they have been developing and testing various robotic systems for several decades. In such projects, a lot of human resources are invested by enthusiasts of scientific engineers and programmers. As it turned out, having a huge advantage in the element base, optics and having a huge number of people involved, America was five years behind. It seems only yesterday that the Kalashnikov concern set about manufacturing robots and is already ahead of the rest.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 29 November 2017 14: 10 New
              0
              They just have different priorities. First of all, air. Ground-based exclusively small sapper robots. Well, recently, they finally began to realize a huge backlog on unmanned vehicles, which those same enthusiasts have been laying in contests for so many years.
              And then the Aviation and Navy accused the Army of trying to pull a budget blanket over itself. And whether it will have a continuation is unknown.
              1. Mih1974
                Mih1974 30 November 2017 09: 23 New
                +1
                At the same time, note that “civilian” developments in UAVs are already easily catching up with the best examples of the American Air Force, but this is a very small segment of the market, whereas ground-based “drones” and, most importantly, are truly “without a pilot”. good The fact that the automated wagons shown in the Logan movie is our immediate future does not raise the slightest doubt. Also, agriculture - fully robotic combines and tractors have already shown their efficiency! good And here it is just - a huge Market (loot).
                Why am I "all about money", we’re kind of talking about the defense of the Motherland, but to that, remember how the USA overtook the USSR in development The answer is simple - they are the best expensive developments for the military “citizenship” - creating a huge self-sustaining market, thereby reducing the cost of military products. Moreover, as smart people say, "dumping" the civilian market "the advanced idea of" the military-industrial complex of America "waited" until the idea is "licked from all sides", until all shortcomings and possible mistakes were found and eliminated. good, and then these even more advanced developments - were taken to the military-industrial complex. bully
                Therefore, the emphasis of Russia in "ground" drones is the most correct solution. We are acting like aviation Stalin immediately after the Second World War - for not leveling the huge hordes of heavy Western bombers, we focused on fighters and air defense. good While the Americans are making UAVs, we are making “UAV fighters,” and we are catching up with the UAVs step by step. But what is it, the United States has not shown anything so revolutionary in UAVs for a long time, and even all sorts of Turkey and Iran are making quite large modern UAVs. lol
            2. bk316
              bk316 29 November 2017 20: 43 New
              +2
              As it turned out, having a huge advantage in the element base, optics and having a huge number of people involved, America was five years behind.

              Here they are not strong in software, I somehow explained why.
              In short, Amer citizens do not want to be coders.
              1. In100gram
                In100gram 29 November 2017 21: 00 New
                0
                Quote: bk316
                Here they are not strong in software

                Here I agree. Our creativity programmers will surpass all.
                And the element base is not manufactured by them, for a long time. Processors a long time ago even in Costa Rica
            3. askme
              askme 29 November 2017 20: 46 New
              0
              The answer lies in the same plane as the problem of writing programs for the F-35. Nesk. years can not pass the plane because of problems in writing programs for him. Dumb. And with iron, everything is in order. Nearly...
          2. Sotskiy
            Sotskiy 29 November 2017 21: 04 New
            0
            Quote: Spade
            Therefore, there is an opportunity to gain experience in programs, why not use it?

            It is not economically justified).
            It’s easier to buy ready-made products from our Western "partners", which is being implemented until now in the form of components).
            It is interesting if in the event of a war the last, piece enterprises of the military-industrial complex are destroyed, will we refuse to sell oil to the aggressor in protest?)
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 29 November 2017 21: 07 New
              +2
              Quote: Sovetskiy
              It is not economically justified).

              Write your own programs? In my opinion, the opposite.

              Quote: Sovetskiy
              It’s interesting if in the event of a war the last, piece enterprises of the military-industrial complex will be destroyed

              In the event of such a war, precision machines around the world will not be needed for a long time.
              1. Sotskiy
                Sotskiy 29 November 2017 21: 50 New
                0
                Quote: Spade
                It is not economically justified).
                Write your own programs? In my opinion, the opposite.

                This is your opinion, the Government, judging by the lack of a country's modernization program and the latest adopted budget, considers it differently.
                Who do you think will be prioritized?)
                Quote: Spade
                In the event of such a war, precision machines around the world will not be needed for a long time.

                It depends on who starts). Judging by the ring of bases around the Russian Federation, this will not be us. But we cannot bomb nuclear weapons of “innocent lambs” unreasonably?) Yes, and after the attack, it will be necessary to confer, to work out a decision on how to respond asymmetrically to “challenges” so that later they will not be accused of aggression against the entire “world community”. That’s probably the industry doesn’t need “us” right now).
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 30 November 2017 08: 37 New
                  0
                  Quote: Sovetskiy
                  It depends on who starts). Judging by the ring of bases around the Russian Federation, this will not be us.

                  So what? Reciprocal-counter-the main method of using our nuclear deterrence.

                  Quote: Sovetskiy
                  And after the attack, it will be necessary to confer, to work out a decision on how to respond asymmetrically to “challenges”, so that later they will not be accused of aggression against the entire “world community”.

                  I do not think that the current authorities are as spineless as the Communists.
                  1. Sotskiy
                    Sotskiy 30 November 2017 11: 26 New
                    0
                    Quote: Spade
                    I do not think that the current authorities are as spineless as the Communists.

                    And what, the "Perimeter" Democrats invented and implemented?)))
                    And at the expense of spinelessness, to recall what the USSR did in response to the deployment of US medium-range missiles in Turkey in 1961?) Or in Eastern Europe, to the subversive activities of the West in the form of "color" revolutions in Hungary, Czechoslovakia?
                    Then explain how it happened that our democratic "ironborn" pro ..... The Eastern bloc of NATO and the Nazis, together with NATO, is already in Ukraine?
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 30 November 2017 11: 39 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Sovetskiy
                      And what, the "Perimeter" Democrats invented and implemented?)))

                      I generally doubt its existence. For it is practically useless.
                      Trying to strike back is stupid, because there is practically nothing. The ideology of nuclear deterrence has always been a retaliatory strike, for which no "Perimeters" are needed.

                      Quote: Sovetskiy
                      And at the expense of spinelessness

                      ... I can only say one thing. As many territories as communists squandered, and under pressure from the West, all Russian tsars combined did not squandered. The first time was in 1917, the second in 1991.
        2. Monos
          Monos 29 November 2017 13: 35 New
          +4
          Quote: maxim947
          A dubious achievement, and quite controversial

          That is, the industrial production of combat robotic systems is a dubious achievement for you? Ahhh ... well, yes ... it's not an iPhone. There is nothing to talk about ... smile
      2. _Jack_
        _Jack_ 29 November 2017 12: 23 New
        0
        What type of Uranium-9 belongs to? Even if "only a part of the functions was robotic," this was the question - what exactly can Uranus-9 do by itself, without operator control?
        1. Nasrat
          Nasrat 29 November 2017 12: 49 New
          +6
          I don’t know what advanced battle robots we have, but these robots hit me:


          1. In100gram
            In100gram 29 November 2017 21: 10 New
            +1
            Quote: Nasr
            I don’t know what advanced battle robots we have, but these robots hit me:

            The show goes on. Not strong in English, I do not know him. He studied German all his life. Distinguish combat missions from shows. It is important. Our complexes perform combat missions, and not decorative stunts perform
            1. Nasrat
              Nasrat 29 November 2017 22: 57 New
              0
              Quote: In100gram
              .... Distinguish combat missions from shows. It is important....


              Tell us about it at the air show when the SU-30 is flying ...
          2. shans2
            shans2 30 November 2017 08: 17 New
            0
            yes, yes, but Japanese robots seemed to be struck by something, but when Fukushima happened, the Japanese did not give out anything other than dolls and shows, and they had to buy German robots ....
            1. Nasrat
              Nasrat 30 November 2017 08: 31 New
              0
              Quote: shans2
              .... and they had to buy German robots ....

              So not Russian ... but German wassat Horseradish are rare, not sweeter ...

              By the way, in the video, the American company is engaged in robots .... bully
              Boston Dynamics is an engineering company specializing in robotics. Known for designing DARPA for military purposes, the four-legged BigDog robot ... is located in Waltham (Massachusetts) USA

              Those. the company is engaged in military development, including ....
              And they, I think, have made great progress in the development of a humanoid robot, it remains to teach him how to shoot ....
              1. shans2
                shans2 30 November 2017 08: 39 New
                0
                In principle, they won’t buy Russian, only in Russia at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant they used telecontrolled bulldozers and so on, which the Japanese didn’t die after 25 years ... You didn’t jump and ride here, but looked at Fedya, and not that American useless shit which is 15 years old at the same level ...
                1. Nasrat
                  Nasrat 30 November 2017 08: 42 New
                  0
                  Excuse me .. but the remote control used in the open to deactivate ... why deactivate in the focus. Ocean? So the Americans conceived during the construction - in the case of a sheher everything is poured into the ocean ...

                  Doesn’t pride and inappropriate patriotism make it impossible to recognize the technical achievements of the American company?
                  FEDOR:

          3. Mih1974
            Mih1974 30 November 2017 09: 35 New
            +1
            laughing
            All that is shown is “on short wiring” due to the lack of an autonomous power source. Well, there are no breakthroughs in the field of batteries so far, and running and jumping is beautiful, but you need to move for hours and carry out various other energy tasks. tongue Moreover, there are no reasons for the superiority of humanoid robots over "transport-like" ones. request
            Well, the last - almost everything that is shown is ready-made program code, but the real Robot will have to decide for itself! And with this, there is precisely the main problem - while there are no systems capable of adequately evaluating and making decisions similar to what a person does at the subconscious level (walking, using various objects, "moving over unfamiliar rough terrain.")
            1. Nasrat
              Nasrat 30 November 2017 12: 14 New
              0
              Some 100 years ago, planes barely flew .... tongue Progress can not be stopped! Not to be then in the role of catching up (remembering drones say ..). bully

              By the way, look at FEDORA (I posted the video) - he generally walks barely, while on a “leash” !!!
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 29 November 2017 13: 44 New
          +1
          Quote: _Jack_
          What type of Uranium-9 belongs to?

          To the first.

          Quote: _Jack_
          Even if "only a part of the functions was robotic," this was the question - what exactly can Uranus-9 do by itself, without operator control?

          In principle, such robots cannot be controlled exclusively by hand.
          1. _Jack_
            _Jack_ 29 November 2017 13: 54 New
            0
            A man sits at a remote control with a screen and controls manually remotely.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 29 November 2017 14: 12 New
              +1
              Manages everything manually? This is simply not possible. 8)))
              When operating even a children's radio-controlled car, remember, most of the functions for you are performed by automation.
              1. _Jack_
                _Jack_ 29 November 2017 15: 02 New
                0
                so you do not completely control everything in a passenger car, "most of the functions are performed by automation", but you don’t call your car a robot on this basis?
                1. bk316
                  bk316 29 November 2017 20: 42 New
                  +3
                  so you do not completely control everything in a passenger car

                  Of course, a modern passenger car is largely a robot, and will soon become a robot in general. You just saw enough fiction (or read) and everything is much more prosaic
                  By the way, to feel the difference, a quadrocopter is best suited.
                  Take a copter for training in piloting and some kind of phantom, they have the same remote controls, but in the first case, ALMOST direct control in the second is done by the machine itself. You will be surprised how much more difficult it is to operate a light and slow but not a robotic machine (and despite the fact that stabilization there is still automatic)
                  1. _Jack_
                    _Jack_ 29 November 2017 23: 08 New
                    +1
                    You write a lot of superfluous and almost nothing in essence. In essence, the question is - how much is Uranus-9 a robot? If at the level of a modern passenger car, then, I'm sorry, but in the modern world this term means slightly different - the presence of AI elements for independent decision-making and self-training, at least in the simplest cases (for example, loss of communication with the operator). If you just control this machine remotely, then this is not a robot at all, Germans had remotely controlled fighting vehicles in the Second World War at that level of technology. And call a remotely controlled car a robot based on the fact that you do not remotely control fuel injection, etc. it's just demagogy.
                    1. bk316
                      bk316 30 November 2017 08: 44 New
                      +2
                      the presence of AI elements for independent decision making and self-training, at least in the simplest cases (for example, loss of communication with the operator).

                      I did not mean fuel injection. Want about AI? You are ready? This is not a simple topic. Well, let's try.

                      Return to the starting point when the connection is lost AI element?

                      Canceling a maneuver command (or operator warning) when an AI element is detected by an obstacle?

                      Compensation of environmental influences to maintain motion parameters (speed, direction) is an element of AI?

                      You can formulate aboutgenerally accepted definition ELEMENT AI?
                      1. _Jack_
                        _Jack_ 30 November 2017 09: 53 New
                        0
                        Again you try to be smart and do not answer the question on the merits. Such a manner of discussion will not lead to anything good. You are trying to assert yourself and not answer the question. In any case, you can continue to call a remotely controlled car a robot, but as they say - "no matter how you say halva in your mouth, it will not become sweeter"
                2. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 29 November 2017 21: 10 New
                  +1
                  Quote: _Jack_
                  but you do not call your car a robot on this basis?

                  Because I am sitting in it, and not controlling it remotely.
                  But, for example, modern self-propelled guns can rightfully be called robots. Despite the available crew. Because most functions are performed automatically, and the control center is outside the machine.
      3. okko077
        okko077 30 November 2017 12: 47 New
        0
        What nonsense Ostapchuk voiced by the author !!! So with the UAV we are 5 years behind, given that they are not even robots, and here we are ahead of the curve, although they are already robots, and this is much more complicated .... Parade of freaks of thought ....
    2. Soran
      Soran 30 November 2017 09: 13 New
      0
      A simple task is to guard the perimeter. You can set yourself a robot to monitor the sector. At night, it can warn of advances by the enemy.
      Do you want the robot to shoot itself? Then ask the next question, who will answer when the robot shoots "wrong way"?
  2. Dimmih
    Dimmih 29 November 2017 11: 35 New
    +1
    Is the BM remotely controlled by the operator, is it a robot? BM, as I understand it, lacks artificial intelligence.
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 29 November 2017 11: 40 New
      +2
      Do you want the battle robot to be "crazy"? belay
      1. Dimmih
        Dimmih 29 November 2017 11: 52 New
        0
        Dear interlocutor, in Russian, “crazy” means the absence of a tower in BM. Learn your mother’s native speech.
        1. siberalt
          siberalt 29 November 2017 12: 48 New
          +2
          If you have "learned" your native written language, you should know what quotation marks are in it. lol
      2. Slovak
        Slovak 29 November 2017 12: 26 New
        0
        with this question, to Ukraine.
    2. RASKAT
      RASKAT 29 November 2017 11: 58 New
      0
      Yes, we would have been doing so well in our aviation (UAV). And then in the same Syria we’ve been fighting for two years, and not one heavy drone was adopted. I'm already silent about the shock UAVs. I would like to remind you that this is a small, in fact, almost a toy airplane, which is certainly easier to assemble than a fighter or bomber. At the same time, we stamp tens and hundreds of planes and helicopters every year, but is everything sad with a heavy UAV? request Unclear. request
    3. KaPToC
      KaPToC 29 November 2017 22: 19 New
      0
      Quote: Dimmih
      BM, as I understand it, lacks artificial intelligence.

      For warfare, artificial intelligence is not needed, artificial intelligence is needed to make a decision, but we are not going to remove people from the army at all.
  3. Hagalaz
    Hagalaz 29 November 2017 11: 37 New
    0
    And what is it in the photo? Our or aglitskoe? And why such a high combat module?
    1. Chertt
      Chertt 29 November 2017 12: 01 New
      +1
      But imagine those sitting Barmaley in the trenches, and here above him such a "high module" hangs and looks at it with interest
  4. Elephant
    Elephant 29 November 2017 11: 50 New
    0
    Of course, all this is good. But it would be even better if our "robotics leaders" would use low-noise electric motors with new lithium-ion batteries with synthesized graphene balls "like Samsung's, which can increase the battery capacity by 45% and increase the charging speed by five times!
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 29 November 2017 11: 57 New
      +2
      Quote: Elephant
      lithium-ion batteries with synthesized graphene balls "like Samsung

      To make robots on the battlefield more fun? Safer stuffed with gunpowder.
  5. Azazelo
    Azazelo 29 November 2017 11: 58 New
    0
    Everything is wonderful in these glands except for the possibility of intercepting control. Well, if you stick the AI, it’s just the desire that everything Cameron removed in 80 years will come true.
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC 29 November 2017 22: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: Azazelo
      it’s just the desire that everything Cameron removed in the 80s will come true

      Do you seriously think that what the director there invented will come true?
      For your information - man is the most valuable resource and will remain such for AI, if computers take over the world. Computers will not destroy a person, much less use them as batteries - as we were shown by some of the cinema idioms.
      And if one day there will be a war between people and machines in various combinations, then machines will win in sybiosis with people (or vice versa), and if they lose, they will separate cars and people separately.
  6. kamski
    kamski 29 November 2017 11: 59 New
    0
    Learn to make UAVs.
    1. In100gram
      In100gram 29 November 2017 21: 13 New
      0
      Quote: kamski
      Learn to make UAVs.

      Already affairs. Google help. Or Yandex. Optionally
  7. Mihanishche
    Mihanishche 29 November 2017 12: 20 New
    +1
    Well done our !!! Wipe your nose to NATO! :)
    Analogs of the enemy are worse and this will guarantee us victory in a future war. But war cannot be avoided - now it is crystal clear! A year or two, it doesn’t matter, let’s take up arms, the Slavyanka’s march, and finally, forward and forward!
  8. Santa bear
    Santa bear 29 November 2017 12: 23 New
    +3
    What kind of lead for 10-15 years are we talking about if there is still really no electronics? And the one that is massively dimensionally inferior to the foreign one? just a few years ago, there were practically no simple robots in the troops. rather, on the contrary, they lagged behind the West by 10-15 years and only recently have reduced the backlog
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC 29 November 2017 22: 57 New
      +1
      Quote: Santa Bear
      What kind of lead for 10-15 years are we talking about if there is still really no electronics? And the one that is massively dimensionally inferior to the foreign one?

      And where is "their" analogue of Almaty? They don’t have it, because it’s the military electronics that are lagging behind, and what’s the electronics there, the Negroes still manually load the guns, here the lag in mechanics is half a century.
  9. Belarus is Russia
    Belarus is Russia 29 November 2017 13: 55 New
    0
    Weapons, equipment, development, and technologies — necessary and useful. Good news.
  10. komynist
    komynist 29 November 2017 15: 21 New
    0
    Sometimes you need to face the truth about what kind of advance is being discussed. Here it would be to catch up with the Americans in their designs, and their drones are worth it, it is clear that they have already achieved something but we need to catch up and not them.
  11. Aimpoint
    Aimpoint 29 November 2017 19: 00 New
    0
    Hmm, dreamers ...
  12. Fanat85
    Fanat85 29 November 2017 21: 16 New
    0
    Quote: Nasr
    I don’t know what advanced battle robots we have, but these robots hit me:



    and besides how to jump and somersault what else can these robots know? More precisely what useful can?
    1. Sergei75
      Sergei75 29 November 2017 23: 35 New
      0
      Well, to yellow, to add something, it can even flicker, or bring a backpack ...
      When he was running around the corner, he also thought and would mark him ...

      And how the machine keeps balance and the campaign without control, but according to a given task.
      1. Soran
        Soran 30 November 2017 09: 20 New
        0
        Now think about the cost of this robot. How much for this day can be hired frost-bitten on the head barmaley from the poor layers of the population of countries such as Sudan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and others. They too can quite take their backpack where they need to.
        1. Sergei75
          Sergei75 3 December 2017 11: 19 New
          0
          we are talking about our own, but with mass production it will be much cheaper.
  13. APASUS
    APASUS 29 November 2017 21: 16 New
    0
    Ostapchuk led the Black Knight light tank robot program, renewed in 2017 by the British BAE Systems, whose tactical and technical characteristics are comparable to the Russian reconnaissance and combat robot Uran-9.

    Black Knight was already shown in 2007. Actually, Black Knight, the tank as such, is not yet - we are talking about a research prototype that will allow us to work out the design of the robot tank, the principles of its combat use, and will become an important stage in the creation of combat-ready serial robotic tanks .
    the leader of the development of land combat robotic systems was at one time the Soviet Union. The greatest progress in this matter was achieved by the designers of the Leningrad Tank Design Bureau "Spetsmash". Of course, not without the help of leading industry research and development institutions. Some elements of the combat robotic system were worked out as part of the creation of a remotely-controlled complex of engineering vehicles “Komplekt” and “Phoenix”. Technical vision was developed on the basis of T-80 tanks and promising platforms.
    Robotic combat interaction scheme
    development complex Design Bureau "Spetsmash"
    By the mid-1990s, it was planned to create full-fledged prototypes of the combat system. However, with the collapse of the USSR, these works stopped, although the very idea of ​​robotization of military and auxiliary military equipment did not die. In a sluggish mode, relying on the enthusiasm of individual designers and researchers, work continued. From 1988 to the present day, as part of the 38th Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, there is a department of robotics and information-control systems consisting of three laboratories working in the areas of systemic research and robotization of BTWT models, communication and data transmission systems, control systems and information-control systems. Actually, a number of scientific organizations are engaged in the development of control systems for robotic armored vehicles. At the same time, a feature of the Russian approach to the creation of robotic tanks is currently minimizing the cost of creating the actually basic chassis.





    MSTU named after N.E.Bauman is working on the actual tanks. Here is another development
  14. Normal ok
    Normal ok 29 November 2017 21: 26 New
    +1
    The developer called Russia a leader in the creation of combat robots

    Rogozin style statement. It can also be said that Russia is a leader in the field of intergalactic contacts))
  15. Fedya2017
    Fedya2017 29 November 2017 21: 50 New
    +2
    And in the production of industrial robots - they lagged behind ...
  16. vel pro
    vel pro 29 November 2017 22: 19 New
    +1
    why is 5 years ahead and not 10-20 or 100 years
  17. Sergei75
    Sergei75 29 November 2017 23: 31 New
    0
    He called himself a leader - is it somehow strange ?!
    Better = would call the Americans a leader, you see, and increase funding, would ....
  18. Mentat
    Mentat 30 November 2017 02: 06 New
    0
    The area where we are lagging behind the Americans is biomorphic robots (humanoid, animal-like). However, at the moment they are not positioned as military, and they are still quite far from receiving real products in this direction.
    In this article, we mean the serial technique of the battlefield on the "standard" tracked and wheeled chassis.
    1. shans2
      shans2 30 November 2017 08: 22 New
      0
      our FEDA is beyond competition, more or less NASA robots are approaching it, and that’s it.
  19. bk316
    bk316 30 November 2017 12: 59 New
    +2
    _Jack_,
    Again you try to be smart and do not answer the question on the merits.

    No, I'm just trying to understand your opinion of where you actually draw the border.
    Therefore, I ask specific questions, but you do not answer them.

    Personally, I believe that not every remotely controlled unit is a robot.
    But on the other hand, the need for an operator does not mean that the unit is not a robot.
    Well, that is, for example, a drone to which you can say "patrol along a circular route" is quite a robot, even if he does not know how to dodge missiles and does not understand at all that he was attacked. And a tank that will not fight against a rock is also a robot.
  20. Mentat
    Mentat 30 November 2017 16: 13 New
    0
    Quote: shans2
    our FEDA is beyond competition, more or less NASA robots are approaching it, and that’s it.

    FEDOR is a completely different concept, it is an “avatar”, i.e. it is controlled by a person. His main feature is very accurate feedback. The American Atlas can operate autonomously.
    According to the biomorphic “chassis”, at the moment Russia is significantly behind, at least, judging by the open information.