Military Review

American analyst criticized Russian robotic systems

26
Analyst Samuel Bendett from CNA (Center for Naval Analyzes, USA), listing in his article the available Russian military ground combat robots, noted that they are still not ready for active service, reports Lenta.ru report.


American analyst criticized Russian robotic systems


So far, there are few concrete hints about the time when such machines will start active service,
declared bendett.

It is reported that his list includes such systems as “Uran-9”, “Companion”, three variants of the Nerekhta robotic complex, the universal self-propelled crawler remote-controlled complex “Platform-M” and the Vortex complex based on BMP -3.

The analyst noted that all the complexes listed by him at various times passed state tests. However, "currently similar weapon (both Russian and its foreign counterparts) remains vulnerable when the enemy attacks, ”and still requires constant and direct control by the operator.

Last year, Bendett said that Russian development of military UAVs lagged behind similar developments of Western countries. At the same time, he noted the leadership of Russia in the electronic warfare.
Photos used:
Dmitry Reshetnikov / TASS
26 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 21 March 2018 13: 12
    +5
    Center for Naval Analyses, USA? This, as I understand it, is marine analytics. How does this “sailor Popayu” know the characteristics of robotic systems? Moreover, ours, standing in service?
    1. Hammerlock
      Hammerlock 21 March 2018 13: 35
      +3
      Naval Anal
    2. Serge Gorely
      Serge Gorely 21 March 2018 13: 47
      +11
      Quote: stock buildbat
      Center for Naval Analyses, USA? This, as I understand it, is marine analytics. How does this “sailor Popayu” know the characteristics of robotic systems? Moreover, ours, standing in service?

      How where ??? What about the terminator? Is Optimus Prime? Their robots are cooler, Hollywood will not let you lie.
      1. Hoc vince
        Hoc vince 21 March 2018 14: 39
        +3
        Trump: "We will never let anyone have something even close to what we have."
        Let its victories speak for the strongest army in the world (and its technical support).
  2. Azazelo
    Azazelo 21 March 2018 13: 13
    +14
    Well, after one "expert" said that the US marines defeated ISIS, there is no doubt in the truth about the next shell-shock.
  3. LiSiCyn
    LiSiCyn 21 March 2018 13: 14
    +3
    No, of course, if we did Schwarzenegger, then yes ... And so, under the control of the operator, well, what kind of robots are these ... lol
    1. bazzbazz
      bazzbazz 21 March 2018 14: 28
      0
      Unfortunately, while they really are none) The scope of their application is still very vague. Only if against a small, unorganized group, not professionals.
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 21 March 2018 21: 29
        0
        Why so? Here is one application for you - a mobile platform for heavy infantry weapons. It will even equip a platoon with a heavy machine gun, automatic grenade launcher or MANPADS with an improved target detection system.
        Or, for example, a platform for instrumental intelligence as part of the protection of strategically important objects. Only need to develop a target designation system on the battlefield.
  4. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 21 March 2018 13: 17
    +8
    remains vulnerable when attacking an adversary
    Anything is vulnerable. "What one person created, he will always be able to make out another" smile
    still requires constant and direct operator control.
    There will be artificial intelligence, then there will be no control, and not the fact that it will be so cool ... So, what is the constructivism of criticism is incomprehensible. It is quite at the level of world analogues, and in many respects, and higher ... More like an attempt to defraud an object that you envy ..
  5. shinobi
    shinobi 21 March 2018 13: 19
    0
    Yeah. We don’t have airplanes, we have cardboard tanks, we walk in bast shoes. Now all of their “analysts” will calm the commoner together. They’re not afraid of anything, Russia has nothing, and what’s bad is in single copies. How will this be combined with image of the terrible Russian being created in the West, it is not clear.
  6. Yrec
    Yrec 21 March 2018 13: 20
    0
    I also want to be such an analyst: said obviousness and cheeks from the importance of cheating. Which I am supposedly smart. It is clear that such healthy pieces of iron are difficult to integrate into the composition of combat tactical groups. They have to go through coordination with the personnel of the units, develop tactics of application, maintenance / repair, logistics, training of operators / service staff. To hell with everything, in short. This is not counting the fact that the control of these robots is crooked and how communications will work in electronic warfare conditions.
  7. Altona
    Altona 21 March 2018 13: 21
    0
    Quote: KVU-NSVD
    More like trying to cheat on an envied subject ..

    ------------------------------
    Selling girl competes in the global arms market with tail twists. Therefore, one must belittle the stranger and praise one's own. laughing
  8. Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 21 March 2018 13: 24
    0
    Almost on the topic of the article: today I read in the "military-industrial complex" that the Chinese 10 made their T-55 counterparts (which they have many in the army) made robots and now these machines are being tested.
  9. alekc75
    alekc75 21 March 2018 13: 33
    +1
    let him experience, then say!
  10. Slovak
    Slovak 21 March 2018 13: 55
    +5
    Analyst? Did he try beer with dried roach? 100%, say- Muck. Did you smear Russian mustard on bread? He is a sucker, not an analyst.
    1. Berber
      Berber 21 March 2018 15: 56
      0
      laughing drinks That you hit the point.
  11. Puler
    Puler 21 March 2018 14: 06
    +1
    If @ bak barks ... know in the right direction we are moving!
  12. pvv113
    pvv113 21 March 2018 14: 16
    +3
    The General Staff of the Wehrmacht also criticized the T-34 wink
  13. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 21 March 2018 16: 17
    +5
    It was in vain that he “ran over” these developments. Such "drones" should not be vulnerable.
    Otherwise, they will become very expensive.
    They are intended for reconnaissance in battle. Those. die, but have time
    reveal enemy firing points, and, if you have luck, manage to destroy part of them.
    I would not load a lot of weapons on such platforms. Sorry.
    Enough machine gun, two large caliber. And such a "fearless"
    the platform will be able to make a lot of noise and disorganize the enemy.
    1. the same doctor
      the same doctor 21 March 2018 20: 48
      0
      Well, then why all these militarized forms, since there is absolutely no protection against them? We take an ordinary ATV, Belarus or DT-75 and put on them a combat module that is suitable for weight. True, here's the trouble. There will be no military surroundings and the main customer will be interested in other characteristics. And it turns out. that the king is naked. We do not have fighting robots, but there is bullshit and demo samples.
      1. Vadim Kurbatov
        Vadim Kurbatov 22 March 2018 10: 18
        0
        They should not be over protected at the most caliber heavy machine gun and maximum hit grenade launcher
  14. the same doctor
    the same doctor 21 March 2018 20: 44
    0
    For some reason, they hear only foreign experts. Raise my comments over the past 5 years - I wrote the same thing. And the most annoying thing is that for amounts ten times smaller, it would be possible to create realistically applicable samples on the battlefield.
    .
    But no! We are driven by combat androids and remotely controlled sub-tanks. What to do, since the main customer does not understand anything.
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack 21 March 2018 21: 01
      +4
      Quote: also a doctor
      Raise my comments ...

      ... raised. Thanks, really fun good
      Quote: also a doctor
      if you really want to get away from the complex variable geometry of the wing, then it is easier to start with bogies that accelerate to 500-600 km per hour. At this speed, even a swept wing will lift a fighter with a double to today's ammunition. For racing cars, 500 km is not the limit. The plane, which is pretty much better, without fuel and ammunition, will sit down on swept wings at a speed of 300 km per hour. And if you sit vertically on the tail, then you can do without a chassis
    2. Vadim Kurbatov
      Vadim Kurbatov 22 March 2018 10: 16
      0
      Have you seen the British carcass in terms of a robot that uses a platform from Bradley?
  15. Stegosaurus Brontosaurus
    Stegosaurus Brontosaurus 22 March 2018 04: 01
    0
    Primary school students do not forget to unsubscribe under each article on the site. Where can you go without you?
  16. bratchanin3
    bratchanin3 22 March 2018 11: 46
    0
    Such weapons are only tested in battle, in a real environment, and here the Amer analyst is right. How much noise was there about American tanks Abrams?