Military Review

Digital fire, or the death of an advanced observer


Advanced observers are the eyes of modern artillery and often use high-power optoelectronics and laser rangefinders. Today they are connected to data terminals that allow you to download fire calls in a given format.

As in many areas of military affairs, digitization changes the way artillery fire is controlled. Guns react faster to changing situations and quite possibly become less dependent on a complex network of headquarters, observers and spotters.

Since the advent of artillery, calculations have played a very important role, allowing for a more accurate impact on the enemy. They were needed even before the appearance of gunpowder. Say, the “commander” of the Byzantine catapult in the year of two hundred BC should have known and applied certain knowledge in the field of physics and mathematics, which, for example, it was not necessary for the infantrymen to know. The difficulty of defining firing solutions simply increased with the advent of the powder; according to Chinese sources, this happened in January 1132 in the Chinese province of Fujian. Since that very first use of a powder gun, the factors that influence accuracy and which should be taken into account when firing, by and large, have not changed: the angle of vertical guidance, powder charge and fuse equipment.

Around 1900, tactics for using artillery guns began to change gradually, from direct fire and firing attacks, when the calculations saw their goal, to fire at indirect fire or from closed positions, when the guns were positioned behind the forward positions. Since the gun crew numbers could no longer see the target, the detailed data on the target and its location must either be entered in advance in the firing task, or the advanced observer who saw the target should have transmitted information about it to the gun crew. Initially, fire control was carried out by visual signals, initially by signal flags, and later by telephone. The phone was quite enough in such positional hostilities, such as the trench warfare on the western front during the First World War, but not enough when maneuver was required. Wireline lines were also very often subject to cliffs, both from enemy fire and as a result of the movement of their own forces.

With each new stage in the development of artillery, the number of factors taken into account in fire control increased, and the requirements for the qualifications necessary for maintaining fire support increased. This concerned both gun crews and advanced observers. Determining the exact location of the target has become critical, and therefore the ability to read the map, the assessment of distance and direction have become essential skills. However, even an excellent possession of them did not guarantee against errors that could easily be made in the smoke, rumble and chaos of the leading edge. Now it became very important to know the position of the weapon, so much attention was paid to the intelligence position for its exact determination. It is not surprising, therefore, that during World War I, rigidly planned and scheduled fire support became generally accepted. This rather inflexible practice often did not reflect the changing needs of advanced forces. The appearance of tactical radio stations made it possible to increase the reaction speed of artillery guns to a change in the situation. Sighting due to the reception of a “lock-in target” became easier and even allowed the artillery to correct the fire from the plane. Simply put, the “grip fork” is used for range adjustment, with two shots being performed, one with a flight, the other with an undershoot. After seizing the fork, you can start shooting to kill, using the average values ​​between the values ​​of the shooting settings for the first and second shots, if they are not too different. If the plug is too large to go to fire to kill, the plug will be cut in half (half) until sufficient accuracy is achieved.

During World War II, it became common practice to include an observer in the process of controlling artillery fire. However, accurate determination of target position and range remained a challenge. Restrictions in determining the position quite seriously restrained the development of self-propelled artillery. Subsequently, the development and development of mechanical calculating devices simplified the calculation of data for tool guidance. They could be used, for example, in the fire control center of the division, which then transmitted data on the radio to the gun crews. So, by the 50 years of the last century, a tandem of gun crews and advanced observers was finally formed, which allowed artillery to reach a qualitatively new level.

After the invention of microprocessors in the 50s, their rapid penetration into all spheres of human activity, including defense, began. Looking at the rapid development of electronics in the 70s, gunners quickly appreciated the potential of using even the simplest electronic computers, which allow you to quickly obtain more accurate data for firing. A few years later, with the advent of inertial navigation systems (INS), it became possible to determine the position of the guns and targets even more accurately and faster. Typically, such a system consists of a computer and motion sensors and rotation angle for dead reckoning in order to determine the speed and / or location of the vehicle. However, the size and cost of these first systems limited their use in artillery instrumental reconnaissance groups and self-propelled artillery installations. Companies such as Sagem (now Safran Electronics and Defense) and Sperry (became part of Unisys and Honeywell), with extensive experience in the field of inertial systems for ships and aviationWe have worked hard to adapt this technology for ground use. Most of this activity was based on the early work of Charles Draper, a scientist and engineer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Nexter’s 155-mm self-propelled howitzer GCT-155 was one of the first artillery systems to integrate not only the ANN, but also many functions, including loading. The machine was adopted by the French army in 1977; Despite its relatively small calculation of four people, the howitzer could quickly take a position, shoot back and quickly withdraw from it, moving to the next.

Around the same years, two more developments had a positive effect on the development of artillery. The first one is the Hughes AN / TSQ-129 PLRS Positioning and Reporting System, a system of ultra high frequency terrestrial stations (from 300 MHz to 3 GHz). The development of the system was carried out in the interests of the US Marine Corps, and after it was completed, it entered into service not only the Corps, but also the US Army, where it was operated in the 80-e and 90-e years. Although AN / TSQ-129 PLRS later replaced the satellite global positioning system (GPS), at that time it was able to meet the needs of the military in accurately determining the coordinates of objects in real time. The second key event in the field of artillery fire control was the emergence of range-finding systems using a laser. The laser range finder, which was a portable or tripod-mounted device, at the touch of a button provided real-time measurement of the distance to the target with meter accuracy. The combination of the exact position of the observer, the azimuth and the distance to the target made it possible to determine and report the coordinates of the targets with unprecedented accuracy. The representative of the artillery training center of the American Army noted in this connection that the implementation of these technologies formed the basis of many of the possibilities that modern artillery provides today using more advanced systems.

The self-propelled howitzer GCT-15S was one of the first artillery systems, in which much attention was paid to automating the process of firing, including the use of inertial navigation, positioning, course counting and an electronic ballistic computer

The digital revolution that followed, which began in 90's with the rapid spread of the global Internet and personal computers, today offers systems that are smaller in size, have more memory, better performance and lower cost than previous generation fire control computers. This further changed the methods of controlling artillery and firing. The main advantage is that the digitization process allowed more extensive use of computer power, since modern computers are more reliable than their predecessors, they are easier to carry, they are also easier to install on a gun or car. The latest technology can also be networked to transfer data from one device to another, which increases the level of situational awareness of the calculation of the instrument and the command post. Where once fire guidance was a matter of a divisional or battery command post, today one or a couple of guns can accomplish the fire mission independently, faster, with equal or greater impact on the target.

Forward observer

The advanced observer or artillery spotter is the point of reference from which an effective indirect fire begins to support ground maneuver or defense. The foremost observer is the eyes of guns. And modern systems of advanced observation, figuratively speaking, reduce the interpupillary distance to a minimum. Such systems as the GonioLight family from Safran, which is produced by its Vectronix division, provide the advanced observer with azimuth and target coordinates using an integrated digital magnetic compass. A Safran spokesperson noted that “GonioLight can be equipped with an image converter (image intensifier) ​​or a thermal imager (from the family of popular handheld thermal imagers from Safran JIM), it detects objects at a distance of 25 km and identifies them at a distance of 12 km. A new device with a built-in GPS receiver determines the coordinates of the object with an accuracy of 5 meters. It is quite portable for tactical use, the weight depending on the configuration ranges from 8 to 20 kg. "

Meanwhile, Vinghog's LP10TL Target Locator and FOI2000 Forward Observation System offer similar capabilities. A Vinghog spokesperson said that “They provide accurate and reliable target designation for day and night operations, including the management of artillery, mortars and naval guns, as well as surveillance and reconnaissance.” SENOP's LISA system takes a different approach. This manual device for target designation and surveillance for round-the-clock use weighs only three kilograms. It has a direct optical channel for daytime use, an uncooled thermal imager for night conditions, a laser rangefinder, a digital magnetic compass, a camera and GPS. The detection range of the main combat tank is about 6 km.

Detection of a target and gathering information about it is only the first step in the delivery of artillery shells to the target. These data still have to get into the guidance system and into the guns on a tactical digital network. The TLDHS (Target Location, Designation and Hand-off System) target coordinate system from Stauder Technologies, which is in service with the US Marine Corps, demonstrates the benefits that can be gained by integrating these capabilities. The TLDHS allows infantrymen to determine the location of targets, indicate their exact GPS coordinates and, via protected digital communications, call for direct aviation support, support for land and / or ship artillery. The system includes a laser range finder, a video receiver and a tactical radio station. Using such a system, the observer / gunner also gets the opportunity to determine their own coordinates, accompany the targets, specify the coordinates for inertial-guided munitions, and generate requests for fire support. Through a combat communications network, the system sends calls of artillery fire or direct air support in the specified format without the need to send a voice message.

The Marine Corps continues to further improve the TLDHS system by developing the 2.0 version. According to the project manager TLDHS V.2, "Infantrymen with a new version will receive a lightweight device that can provide a real-time picture of where their enemy positions are and transfer target data for fire support." The TLDHS V.2 system uses commercial ready-made smartphones, which reduces the overall weight of the system. He also noted that "the system automatically generates the coordinates of the targets determined by the infantrymen, and digitizes information into a map application installed in smartphones, which eliminates the manual entry of information."

Such an application for sending digital messages and transmitting information about targets in a specific digital format speeds up the process of calling for a call to fire, eliminates possible misunderstandings and ensures that the request is received even in the conditions of electronic suppression and jamming. Information can also be sent simultaneously to several guns, which are able to respond with the greatest effectiveness due to their proximity to the target, which allows them to assess the obtained task in advance and be ready to open fire. Deployment of the TLDHS 2.0 system in the divisions of the Corps began last year.

Digital fire, or the death of an advanced observer

The Nexter CAESAR self-propelled howitzer of the 155 mm caliber of the French army is equipped with an on-board digital fire control system FAST-HIT, an initial velocity radar and a ring laser gyro with GPS

On guns

Computing and networking in digital format also changed the process of firing. The AFATDS (Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System), an advanced tactical data transfer system for field artillery from Raytheon, is an operational fire support control system that automatically provides for the planning, coordination, control and execution of fire missions. It matches fire support requests, prioritizes targets, and analyzes using the latest situation data. AFATDS can recommend the highest priority fire assets and coordinate direct fire support, naval artillery fire, as well as the operation of several batteries simultaneously. The newest version of AFATDS V6 will be fully digitized in accordance with the modernization contract won by Liedos at the end of 2016. AFATDS is in service with the Australian and American armies, as well as the US Marine Corps. It is compatible with all the operational fire support systems of NATO countries, including the German Army’s Taranis ADLER system, the British Army’s BATES (Battlefeld Artillery Information System) system, the French Army’s Thales ATLAS system, and the Kongsberg ODIN fire control system of the Norwegian Army.

Currently, the process of automation of self-propelled artillery systems. The latest German self-propelled howitzer PzH-2000 developed by Krauss-Mafei Wegmann and Rheinmetall was designed from the very beginning as a completely autonomous system. Fire control is handled by the on-board computer MICMOS developed by EADS / Hensoldt. In automatic mode, the PzH-2000 howitzer armament performs all tasks without calculating intervention, using an onboard navigation system, communications and ballistic calculations. The PzH-2000 howitzer can shoot three shots in 10 seconds and can fire at MRSI Multi-Round Simultaneous Impact for more fire impact on the target (“Flurry of Fire” - shooting mode, when several shells fired from one cannon at different angles, at the same time reach the goal). The necessary adjustments to the fire mission are determined and monitored by the system without the intervention of any of the two crew members.

This combination of integrated computerized fire control and the automation of all gun functions is currently in widespread use. The Archer self-propelled howitzer from BAE Systems is also fully automated and can operate as an autonomous system with its own ammunition replenishment and maintenance equipment. The magazine's automatic loader, built-in navigation system, automatic tool control and a digital computer allow the calculation of their four people to make the first shot in less than 30 seconds after the stop. The howitzer can make three shots in 15 seconds, and in MRSI mode before 6 shots; All functions are performed without the participation of the calculation automatically.

Thanks to the development of electronics, onboard electronic ballistic computers and digital fire control systems are now available for both towed guns and self-propelled platforms. The US Army developed the TAD (Towed Artillery Digitalisation - Digitization of Towed Artillery) system for its 155-mm self-propelled howitzer BAE Systems M-777A2. The head of the TAD program in the US Army noted that it “is based around a navigation system with ring laser gyros. It performs all the functions previously assigned to the divisional fire control center, and transfers them to each weapon. ”

The integrated fire control system IFCS (Integrated Fire Control System) from MAS Zengrange provides, according to its data, “full-fledged integration capabilities of reconnaissance and firing means”. A flexible autonomous IFCS system can be deployed at a divisional command post or directly on a weapon system. It not only performs all ballistic calculations, but also accepts the fire mission directly from the advanced observer, allowing to improve the responsiveness of the response and eliminate duplication of personnel functions. The growing capabilities of digital systems regarding the wide distribution of not only data but also images provide additional advantages when requesting and monitoring fire support. This allows observers, commanders, and fire support centers to exchange images of maps, targets, and target areas with other means of observation, such as drones. In this case, you can get a more accurate assessment of the goal, since all interested parties have the same information and can come to a common understanding of the situation on the battlefield, and respond accordingly.

The PzH-2000 howitzer, with a smaller number of calculations, responds faster to the fire calls with a greater impact on the target. This is achieved by maximizing workflow automation.

Full cycle

Digitization of the process of fire guidance and control and the introduction of network communications allow an increase in the level of interaction between the advanced observer and gun crew. Modern computers with their capacities help to return the fire support process back to a separate artillery system. This allows you to exclude a number of stages and levels in the process of firing, which more than ever increases the speed of response. In addition, the ability to share the entire shooting process, from requesting a fire to responding, makes it possible to also monitor and coordinate it both by commanders of higher echelons and by neighboring units. As can be seen from the article, the use of operational fire support systems, such as ATLAS, ODIN and AFATDS, simplifies the process of firing by working almost in real time.

The increased efficiency offered by digital fire will not only shorten the response time and increase the level of impact on the target, but also make it possible to distribute artillery systems using them as independent elements. Now a smaller number of guns can deliver equivalent or greater firepower faster and with less risk. As they say, back to basics - the technologies once again unite the instrument and the advanced observer.

On the materials of the sites:
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. gorenina91
    gorenina91 27 February 2018 05: 38
    -Cool howitzer .., plus + drones ... + satellite communications ...
    - It’s not clear .. but how did it happen that in Russia there is a “152 mm” caliber in life ...? “It would be much more convenient to switch to the 155 mm long ago ...” - then it would probably be possible to shoot with our guns and “other people's ammunition” ...
    - Is it really that once in Russia they shot so many 152 mm shells that they still can’t spend them ..? - Is this the whole thing ..?
    1. andrewkor
      andrewkor 27 February 2018 07: 50
      Already there was a precedent with the adoption of the Red Army 82-mm mortars, while the Western had 81,4 mm caliber. Ours could shoot with trophy mines, but ours weren’t!
    2. iouris
      iouris 27 February 2018 12: 51
      Quote: gorenina91
      how did it happen that in Russia the caliber "152 mm" in life

      And the width of the rails in Russia is also different. But this is not the case, but the industry’s ability to produce micromechanical systems (MEMS), which is provided by D. Rogozin. It is impossible to create an effective system of destruction and defense without sensors and data processing systems. This is completely dependent on US technology.
      1. Midshipman
        Midshipman 6 March 2018 09: 29
        The military has no and never had any dependence on US technology, do not invent it.
    3. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 27 February 2018 20: 02
      152 mm is the caliber of 6 inches. Historically, for over 100 years it has been like our main calibers - 76,2 mm, 102 mm, 152 mm, 203 mm, 305 mm, etc. - these are 3 inches, 4, 6, 8, 12 and so on.
      1. race
        race 28 February 2018 19: 17
        You forgot to mention the caliber of 122 mm, it is also 48 lines, which is considered historically Russian. The same caliber was still smooth-bore muzzle-loading copper 12-pound guns. Then this caliber went into rifled artillery, but only in the Russian army.
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 28 February 2018 20: 33
          Yes, of course, and I still didn’t go through the caliber of small arms (7,62; 12,7)
        2. CTABEP
          CTABEP 1 March 2018 16: 33
          And the 107mm 42-linear is forgotten. But somehow I don’t remember 4 inches ...
          1. race
            race 1 March 2018 20: 13
            A 4-inch caliber was distributed only in the navy, for example, they were on Novikov. A 42-line (also Russian, caliber 9 pound guns) was not very common, but after WWII was forgotten, it was replaced with a caliber of 100 mm.
      2. Mikhail Matyugin
        Mikhail Matyugin 23 July 2018 23: 49
        Quote: Aviator_
        152 mm is the caliber of 6 inches. Historically, for over 100 years it has been like our main calibers - 76,2 mm, 102 mm, 152 mm, 203 mm, 305 mm, etc. - these are 3 inches, 4, 6, 8, 12 and so on.

        And this has its own historical truth. But andrewkor is also right in speaking of the correct decision on adopting mortars with caliber in 82 mm, while the European ones were in 81,4 mm.
  2. Vard
    Vard 27 February 2018 06: 10
    It was smooth on paper ... But in real life, after several shots, the system stops working ...
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 27 February 2018 07: 39
      It was smooth on paper ... But in real life, after several shots, the system stops working ...

      Judging by the fact that the Wagnerites and Igilov hunters were covered, the system works well ... the modern battlefield can, in principle, be regarded as a real-time digitized image and if it is tied to a general integrated fire engagement system of military branches, I don’t envy anyone who decides to fight in the old way with a bang ... Wagnerites have already paid for it.
      At VO there was an article on this topic ...
    2. Vadim851
      Vadim851 27 February 2018 12: 03
      And more is not needed (for one gun) or simply will not be allowed to do at least one position. Unless, of course, fight with bearded men
      1. Pax tecum
        Pax tecum 27 February 2018 14: 37
        in conditions of electronic suppression and jamming

        Countermeasures will also be digital.
        And at some point we’ll move on to the good old PUO-9m (fire control device) or PUO-12 with a “processor brain” of a full-time topogedesist-calculator.
        According to the experience in Bosnia in the middle of the 1990's and comparing the standards when entering firing positions, we did pin dos with their "number", incl. and according to the results of the shooting.
        1. Glory1974
          Glory1974 27 February 2018 21: 09
          According to the experience in Bosnia in the middle of the 1990's and comparing the standards when entering firing positions, we did pin dos with their "number", incl. and according to the results of the shooting.

          However, after 10 years in Chechnya, the best artillerymen determined their location in the area with an error (checked by GPS) of 10 meters. That is, the figure was ahead in speed and accuracy. And now it’s probably still sadder.
  3. demiurg
    demiurg 27 February 2018 07: 20
    Advanced observers are not needed. In each compartment there should be devices transmitting the coordinates of the target with its description to the means of destruction (starting from company AGS to brigade / division artillery, or for air strikes). And there should be a system that allows you to allocate weapons for a specific purpose. Glonass or inertial system, this is a secondary issue.
    1. KVU-NSVD
      KVU-NSVD 27 February 2018 07: 40
      In each compartment there should be devices transmitting the coordinates of the target with its description to the means of destruction
      So in each department there should be a person who knows how to determine these coordinates of the target and use this device? Those. in fact, an art corrector .. Of course it’s ideal, but in addition to specific training and this device, he needs to have at least a rangefinder and an angle meter and a laser target indicator, and you must admit that everything is fine of course, but unrealistic, if only in terms of teaching such a person the skills of actually a gunner in each department ...
      1. 82т11
        82т11 27 February 2018 23: 41
        For the "banana republics" this is not very realistic, but for the highly developed countries it is. Everything goes to that, that each infantryman will become a gunner.
  4. andrewkor
    andrewkor 27 February 2018 07: 46
    For the great work done, I forgive the Author for the Byzantium of the second century BC he mentioned!
  5. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 27 February 2018 08: 32
    [/ Quote] Figuratively speaking, they minimize interpupillary distance. [Quote]
    It is, of course, good that the author tries to think figuratively, but the interpupillary distance is responsible for binocular vision, that is, for stereoscopic perception. With decreasing this distance, the ability to determine the range decreases. Is this what the author wanted to say?
  6. Operator
    Operator 27 February 2018 10: 25
    The accuracy of determining the coordinates of the artillery position and target using satellite navigation and / or reference to a digital map is 1 meter, with the help of an inertial system, plus or minus bast shoes.

    Therefore, for artillery - only GLONASS and / or digital maps. ANN - only in the homing system of guided missiles whose flight time does not exceed one minute (ANN error does not have time to accumulate over 1 meters).
    1. Yuriy_999
      Yuriy_999 27 February 2018 11: 46
      Therefore, for artillery - only GLONASS and / or digital maps. ANN - only in the homing system of guided missiles, the flight time of which does not exceed one minute (ANN error does not have time to accumulate more than 1 meter). [/ Quote] The GLONASS signal, like GPS, can be jammed or distorted. Papuans drive yes, companions. In a serious war, one must be able to use cards.
      1. Operator
        Operator 27 February 2018 18: 05
        In modern warfare, you need to use digital maps, then GLONASS is not required.
        1. Pax tecum
          Pax tecum 27 February 2018 18: 29
          For artillery, the error in 200 meters is not a mistake.
          Military experts say so.
          1. Operator
            Operator 27 February 2018 20: 07
            There is a way to extend the target with a square-nested method of shells of a hundred, then yes: KVO 200 meters - not a mistake laughing
  7. alex-cn
    alex-cn 27 February 2018 10: 32
    Facilitation and acceleration of the work of advanced observers is evident. But where did the author see their death?
  8. Lopatov
    Lopatov 27 February 2018 10: 44
    Something I did not understand what the author was trying to say 8)))
    I did not see the "death of the forward observer".
    The author decided that the "digitization of data" and light range finders, angle meters will eliminate the need for them?
    First of all. Let it be known that even from the time of the Second World War, sighting has not been the main method of determining the settings for shooting to kill. Complete preparation or transfer of fire is basic. If this is not possible, then shooting.
    Further, the shooting is possible by two methods - by observing the signs of discontinuities (the same “plug”, by the way, it has a very indirect relation to the shooting in range, it all depends on the relative position of the target, battery and observer 8))), the second method is according deviations (from rangefinder to radar and helicopter). Zeroing on the measured appeared in the days of the Second World War
    All this did not lead to the "death of the advanced observer"

    Secondly An advanced observer has more tasks than the author thinks.
    - Home - the implementation of interaction between artillery and combined arms units. "digitizing the transmission of target coordinates" is not a substitute
    - Determining the coordinates of targets, if necessary;
    - Control of shooting to kill, if necessary, - adjusting the fire during shooting to kill (here, there is currently no way to get away from the same "plug")
    - Implementation of target illumination when using guided and adjustable ammunition with semi-active LGSN

    As can be seen from the above, electronics is not able to completely remove the need for a person observing a target during a fire at it.
    1. kov123
      kov123 27 February 2018 11: 20
      You can add shooting lighting and smoke shells, shells with remote fuses. And there is such a type of fire - as barrage. And also determining the priority of the goal. And much more, where do you need a trained "human brain" (or machine intelligence?)
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 27 February 2018 12: 33
        Here, in fact, the “Russian school” advantage “pops up”. At our forefront, along with combined-arms commanders, are the commanders of the batteries and divisions. Knowing the combat capabilities of artillery, tactics of its use, types of fire, etc. Anglo-Saxon, which has become the "NATO standard", provides for the presence on the front line of sergeants-commanders of sections of advanced artillery observers. With the father-commander in the rank of lieutenant who does not monitor the battlefield, but exercises general leadership and interaction with the commander of the infantry battalion, to which he is subordinate.

        That is precisely why the same Poles did not follow the path of bluntly copying "standards", leaving artillery commanders along with infantry.
        1. chenia
          chenia 27 February 2018 14: 31
          Well, we also have a unified system of fire destruction of the enemy involves a single command, when the unit commanders are "parrots" duplicate teams (on the fire control network), in the unit networks (planned targets (fires) during the artillery attack). This is the result of the preliminary work of the observer (scout), and other types of intelligence. Yes, and on the defensive too, having heard their callsigns, and the “group” they drop all other matters (to whom they were assigned) and fulfill the command of the senior art chief.
          This is the result of the preliminary work of the observer (scout), and other types of intelligence. And a monotonous report every 2 hours about reconnaissance targets, and not shooting to kill (destruction). There is naturally an immediate priority report. or report and shooting for destruction. It is forever.
          Well this is a big war.

          A local conflict. there are more separate directions, limited tasks (and at certain moments of the battle of the great war) our system is more flexible, and the reaction is faster (not the technical side, but in terms of decision-making).
    2. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 23 July 2018 23: 51
      Quote: Spade
      As can be seen from the above, electronics is not able to completely remove the need for a person observing a target during a fire at it.

      I agree.
  9. 82т11
    82т11 28 February 2018 00: 05
    Here, on the contrary, it turns out not the death of an advanced observer, but an increase in its importance in battle.
    In principle, the author shows what the battle will be like in 5 to 15 years.
    Cheaper and miniaturization of electronics will make it possible to turn every infantryman into such an observer, add drones, various self-propelled guns, a system like Carapace C, and combine this all into a single command network. And as a result, we get a mobile combat unit capable of pushing through any defense or fighting off any opponents, if only there would be enough ammunition.
    But ours will be able to do this or not soon see.
  10. race
    race 28 February 2018 19: 22
    ... to the “commander” of the Byzantine catapult in the year of two hundred hundred BC

    Nicholas, in two hundred years BC to Byzantium, as a state, and especially an empire, it was still so far away. I tell you so, for the overall development I inform you.
  11. hezbola
    hezbola 2 March 2018 15: 12
    against the Russian Federation and Asad, their papalats are not very helpful, legionnaires and PMCs die hundreds of them ..
  12. sxfRipper
    sxfRipper 4 March 2018 15: 08
    digitization changes the way artillery fire is controlled

    Digitization of the guidance and fire control process

    I did not understand - what the Author puts into the concept digitization!
  13. John22
    John22 16 March 2018 19: 18
    Shooting from closed positions was used by the Russian artillery in 1904 during the defense of Port Arthur.