American expert: Russian army gained "invaluable experience" in Syria

July 31 2018 78

An article appeared in the American press by a senior researcher at the US Center for Naval Analysis, Michael Kofman, in which an American analyst speculated on Russia's participation in the Syrian conflict, writes Task and Purpose.

American expert: Russian army gained "invaluable experience" in Syria

Analyzing the actions of the Russian grouping in Syria, Kofman believes that participation in hostilities helped the Russian forces gain invaluable experience and also eliminate shortcomings in armaments. In his article, he points out that Syria has become for the Russian army an "invaluable testing ground" through which most of the senior officers, mainly serving in the military space station, passed through the rotation.

The main lesson that Russia learned from Syria, according to Kofman, is that the Russian military realized the need for close coordination aviation with ground forces. According to the expert, in the Syrian armed conflict, the Russian air forces “first learned to fight, and then began to learn how to cover the ground forces,” adding that recently integration of air forces with ground forces in real time has been increasingly seen.

In addition, Kofman believes that participation in the Syrian war allowed the Russian military to identify shortcomings in the Russian weapons, tactics and training and made it possible to eliminate them. Russia has made tremendous progress in developing military capabilities since the start of the campaign in 2015, the expert said.

Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

News Zen Telegram

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Thrall

+13

31 July 2018 18: 41

Expert late for years with 75
The main lesson that Russia learned from Syria, according to Kofman, is that the Russian military realized the need for close coordination of aviation with ground forces.

This American military expert is broken, bring on the new
1. Bykov.
  
  +5
  
  31 July 2018 18: 45
  
  Quote: Thrall
  Expert late for years with 75 :
  
  You flatter him.
  1. MPN
    
    +2
    
    31 July 2018 19: 00
    
    Quote: Bulls.
    You flatter him.
    
    And the expert thinks that he flatters us. However, if he drew conclusions for himself that it’s not worth fighting with us, then this is good, although he drew no conclusions, apparently he had arguments for increasing military spending ...
    1. Thrall
      
      +4
      
      31 July 2018 19: 19
      
      The job expert works in his newspaper. And we monitor such nonsense. Something like this.
      1. MPN
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 19: 36
        
        Quote: Thrall
        с
        
        Well, there seems to be no newspaper employee. Apparently, he argues what they asked, hence the conclusion. Why do you need to raise the question in this way ...
  2. Angel_and_Demon
    
    +2
    
    31 July 2018 22: 12
    
    Quote: Bulls.
    You flatter him.
    
    you are wrong - after the 90s, there were few prepared, and Chechnya showed it - and now - look at it and make conclusions
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. The comment was deleted.
2. VO3A
  
  +8
  
  31 July 2018 19: 38
  
  The expert was ahead of reality, and a key exaggeration:
  in recent years, integration of air forces with ground forces in real time is increasingly visible
  
  This cannot be for two reasons:
  firstly, our ground forces, in the form of artillery and MLRS, are simply not there and there is no one to carry out target designations in real time;
  secondly, we don’t have this capability, even from UAVs. We don’t have any real time for target designation for ground systems, except for fire correctors from the experience of World War II .... We don’t have network-centric systems that receive, transmit, they process information about the enemy and react in real time, in the form of target designation for the destruction systems included in their composition .... And they record the destruction of the enemy, also in real time .... There are no such systems in the Russian army, there are only various ACS, who command troops without network-centric channels for receiving information about the enemy ... Command troops without knowing where the enemy is in real time ....
  1. Shahno
    
    +1
    
    31 July 2018 19: 52
    
    Come on, let people rejoice, it extends life ....
    1. VO3A
      
      +6
      
      31 July 2018 20: 07
      
      Do not wait ... As it should be, we know how to do it too .... It’s more difficult to implement, there is a lot of ballast in the manual .... And there is no lag .... There is stupidity and that's it .....
    2. Maz
      
      +2
      
      1 August 2018 05: 55
      
      By the way, our ability to fight and you in Israel prolongs life
      Quote: Shahno
      Come on, let people rejoice, it extends life ....
      
      So also smile while we are kind
  2. Dart2027
    
    +2
    
    31 July 2018 20: 16
    
    Quote: VO3A
    firstly, of our ground forces, in the form of artillery and MLRS
    
    Our ground troops are not there, but there are advisers and coordinators on the ground, that is, in the headquarters of the SAR, so that coordination with the ground forces has been completely worked out.
    Quote: VO3A
    secondly, we don’t have this opportunity, even from UAVs
    
    Russia's operation in Syria is based on the principles of network-centric warfare. About this in an exclusive interview with the channel "Star" in the framework of the forum "Army-2017" said the deputy chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security Franz Klintsevich.
    https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201708261643
    -cdur.htm
    1. Black sniper
      
      0
      
      1 August 2018 12: 02
      
      I completely agree with VPmi. The expert said everything correctly, only now everyone has known about this for a long time.
  3. purple
    
    +4
    
    31 July 2018 20: 24
    
    Quote: VO3A
    The expert was ahead of reality, and a key exaggeration:
    in recent years, integration of air forces with ground forces in real time is increasingly visible
    
    This cannot be for two reasons:
    firstly, our ground forces, in the form of artillery and MLRS, are simply not there and there is no one to carry out target designations in real time;
    secondly, we don’t have this capability, even from UAVs. We don’t have any real time for target designation for ground systems, except for fire correctors from the experience of World War II .... We don’t have network-centric systems that receive, transmit, they process information about the enemy and react in real time, in the form of target designation for the destruction systems included in their composition .... And they record the destruction of the enemy, also in real time .... There are no such systems in the Russian army, there are only various ACS, who command troops without network-centric channels for receiving information about the enemy ... Command troops without knowing where the enemy is in real time ....
    
    Yes, yes, yes ... everything is right, we don’t have anything ... and in general everything runs around with mosquitoes,
    P.S. Some still believe that the earth is flat ... because in the form of a sphere they do not represent it or do not observe it
  4. KCA
    
    +5
    
    31 July 2018 21: 34
    
    UAVs that showed the attack and destruction of the target did not participate at all in the destruction of the group of fighters involved in the attack on Khmeimim, the SSO gunners did not participate at all, the Krasnopol-2M howitzers did not fire, covering a jeep with 12 barmales with one shot, well, the Russian army in ope, where are we to the network-centric doctrine of the United States, and the question is - where did it win? If you don’t know, command and control in the Russian Federation is above all, this is not urapatriotism, this is an opinion on the other hand
3. The comment was deleted.
ANCIENT

+5

31 July 2018 18: 44

The expert is not strange, he wrote everything correctly - Syria showed us a lot of things and taught us a lot! The most important task is to draw truly correct conclusions! !!
1. Phil77
  
  +1
  
  31 July 2018 18: 58
  
  Quote: ANCIENT
  The expert is not strange, he wrote everything correctly - Syria showed us a lot of things and taught us a lot! The most important task is to draw truly correct conclusions! !!
  
  To this I add, the main thing is that there are people capable of making these right conclusions.
  1. VO3A
    
    +3
    
    31 July 2018 20: 01
    
    Yes, only the conclusions are directly opposite ... Syria has shown the inability to wage a modern war by our troops. It showed the complete absence of new network-centric systems for destroying the enemy in real time without fire interaction and death. And the fact that the ground contingent was made by the Syrians and our advisers should not justify this backwardness ... In our war, instead of the Syrians, our soldiers and officers will die ... We can not fight without a front, without military contact, even with a weak enemy ....
    1. dvina71
      
      +4
      
      31 July 2018 20: 12
      
      Quote: VO3A
      Syria has shown the inability to wage a modern war by our troops.
      
      I will take my resume - you yap. If you tell me what position you serve in the General Staff ..
      1. ANCIENT
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 20: 17
        
        dvina71 '- he serves there as a senior assistant to the younger janitor! And without his instructions, even a mosquito will not buzz! !!
      2. VO3A
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 20: 26
        
        You can take it or not take it, it’s ultraviolet to me ... If someone does not know how to think for himself, this does not mean that others do not know how. Learn the story: in Finnish we also seem to have won, but how? And then I had to rebuild already during the war, covering my fields and cities with the corpses of my soldiers, and not see the crowds of prisoners ....
        
        dvina71
        
        +4
        
        31 July 2018 21: 52
        
        Quote: VO3A
        Learn the story
        
        I know the story better than you .. believe me .. you already got everyone with your network-centricity .. At least you can explain what it is ..? Or did you like the smart word?
        
        VO3A
        
        +2
        
        31 July 2018 22: 03
        
        You at least read the Wiki, everything is written there ... And you need to read it like Gerasimov and Borisov ... Read the definition and essence, but how it is understood there, you don’t need to read .... They have everything with logic okay .... I prefer another name: Combat Information Systems, and it is wider in terms of implementation .....
        
        dvina71
        
        +2
        
        31 July 2018 22: 23
        
        Quote: VO3A
        You at least read Wiki
        
        You clearly re-read it .. BIUS .. Combat Information Management Systems .. already a given .. since Soviet times .. The only difference is the speed of information flow ..
    2. LMN
      
      +6
      
      31 July 2018 20: 18
      
      Quote: VO3A
      Yes, only the conclusions are directly opposite ... Syria has shown the inability to wage a modern war by our troops. It showed the complete absence of new network-centric systems for destroying the enemy in real time without fire interaction and death. And the fact that the ground contingent was made by the Syrians and our advisers should not justify this backwardness ... In our war, instead of the Syrians, our soldiers and officers will die ... We can not fight without a front, without military contact, even with a weak enemy ....
      
      Bullshit frank.
      1. LMN
        
        +4
        
        31 July 2018 20: 32
        
        Quote: LMN
        Quote: VO3A
        Yes, only the conclusions are directly opposite ... Syria has shown the inability to wage a modern war by our troops. It showed the complete absence of new network-centric systems for destroying the enemy in real time without fire interaction and death. And the fact that the ground contingent was made by the Syrians and our advisers should not justify this backwardness ... In our war, instead of the Syrians, our soldiers and officers will die ... We can not fight without a front, without military contact, even with a weak enemy ....
        
        Bullshit frank.
        
        By the way. How was it possible to repulse the very famous missile attack in the absence of seccentric systems ?? With an efficiency of almost 0,7 and Soviet systems?
        
        voyaka uh
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 21: 00
        
        She was not repelled. Nothing was shot down.
        
        LMN
        
        +8
        
        31 July 2018 21: 05
        
        Quote: voyaka uh
        She was not repelled. Nothing was shot down.
        
        That is, the "70" missile missiles fell themselves?
        
        As if at the second press conference of the Moscow Region, the full alignment was given: How many missiles and by what means were destroyed.
        
        Your passage is incomprehensible.
        
        voyaka uh
        
        0
        
        1 August 2018 11: 27
        
        What is incomprehensible? All American Tomahawks safely reached the complex of buildings of the institute. The fact is that on each rocket (for the first time) sensors were installed that transmit information about its flight to the satellite in real time. Therefore, the Americans were so confident in their statement.
        Perhaps there were missile crashes for technical reasons. But not in the air defense zone of Damascus, but in desert areas. The shelling was carried out from three sides: from the Mediterranean Sea, from the Red Sea and from the Persian Gulf.
        
        Dart2027
        
        +1
        
        1 August 2018 17: 55
        
        Quote: voyaka uh
        All American Tomahawks safely reached the complex of buildings of the institute.
        
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Perhaps there were missile crashes for technical reasons. But not in the air defense zone of Damascus, but in desert areas.
        
        So flew or not flew? You already decide, huh?
        
        dvina71
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 21: 51
        
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Nothing was shot down.
        
        Yeah .. and parts of the Kyrgyz Republic in Moscow blinded themselves .. from polystyrene ..
        
        And thanks for a couple of almost whole .. a room research institute is very grateful.
        
        Maz
        
        +1
        
        1 August 2018 05: 57
        
        Quote: voyaka uh
        She was not repelled. Nothing was shot down.
        
        Dream, dream. Toto your aviation only because of the corners and territory of other states works
        shaw, scary? That otozh.
        
        Black sniper
        
        0
        
        1 August 2018 12: 17
        
        The warriors themselves were told by the Western media about this! 73 out of 105 missiles were shot down!
        Have you fallen from the moon?
        
        voyaka uh
        
        -1
        
        1 August 2018 14: 05
        
        No. The Americans immediately said that not one of their Tomahawks was shot down by air defense forces. There is no exact information about the English and French missiles.
        About 73 missiles were given by the Syrians, and the Moscow Region "confirmed" without checking. And then it was a shame to back up. So this fake went for a walk.
        
        poquello
        
        0
        
        1 August 2018 22: 19
        
        Quote: voyaka uh
        No. The Americans immediately said that not one of their Tomahawks was shot down by air defense forces. There is no exact information about the English and French missiles.
        About 73 missiles were given by the Syrians, and the Moscow Region "confirmed" without checking. And then it was a shame to back up. So this fake went for a walk.
        
        a mutnik of some kind, "but I didn’t fall - but I didn’t hit hard,"
        what result? The building was covered with moss, I saw in the photo.
    3. Glory1974
      
      +3
      
      31 July 2018 20: 21
      
      showed the inability to wage a modern war by our troops.
      
      We hear this “from the time of Ochakov and the conquest of Crimea.” You can say this about all wars. But the main indicator is the fulfillment of tasks with minimal losses. From this point of view, what questions?
      It showed the complete absence of new network-centric systems for the destruction of the enemy in real time without fire interaction and death
      
      What does the Sagittarius intelligence, control and communications complex do not like?
      1. VO3A
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 20: 43
        
        I don’t like that the Sagittarius complex is served by people within the range of fire from the enemy they discover .... And secrecy will not save them ... Is that enough?
        
        Glory1974
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 20: 56
        
        the Sagittarius complex is served by people within the limits of a fire defeat from the side of the enemy whom they discover.
        
        the range depends on the equipment used, the required accuracy and the firing capabilities of the enemy.
        We really lag behind the Americans in the speed of information transfer, target designation, UAV drone. It’s silly to argue. But you can not even call this war with militants on carts modern. What was modern used there? Quadcopters?
        
        poquello
        
        +1
        
        31 July 2018 22: 41
        
        Quote: glory1974
        the Sagittarius complex is served by people within the limits of a fire defeat from the side of the enemy whom they discover.
        
        the range depends on the equipment used, the required accuracy and the firing capabilities of the enemy.
        We really lag behind the Americans in the speed of information transfer, target designation, UAV drone. It’s silly to argue. But you can not even call this war with militants on carts modern. What was modern used there? Quadcopters?
        
        where did you get so much from here? network center is not when a quadrocopter leads a battle, but when combat units are combined into one electronic information and control system, the Moscow Region does not even hide that these methods were being tested in Syria
        
        VO3A
        
        +2
        
        31 July 2018 23: 04
        
        What information system? Information about your troops is needed, but secondarily ... For troops, you need information about the enemy, in real time and the response must also be in real time ... Did you catch the difference? Considers its own or provides information about the enemy .... The second is provided by network-centric systems and the destruction of the enemy, including the first - automated for control .....
        
        poquello
        
        0
        
        31 July 2018 23: 08
        
        Quote: VO3A
        For troops, information about the enemy is needed in real time and the response must also be in real time.
        
        so who will you introduce into the ranks of the basurman?
        
        Glory1974
        
        +1
        
        1 August 2018 20: 53
        
        and when military units are combined into one electronic information and control system, the Defense Ministry no longer hides that these methods were being tested in Syria
        
        In the First World War, the Russian General Staff had already run around this idea.
        Observers were raised in balloons. Those discovered the targets on-line, and on a landline phone reported coordinates on artillery batteries. They opened fire on targets, in real time the defeat was assessed and the fire was carried on other targets.
        Now, of course, more military units have become networked, and not by wire, but by radio.
        So there’s nothing to hide.
        
        poquello
        
        +1
        
        1 August 2018 22: 09
        
        Quote: glory1974
        and when military units are combined into one electronic information and control system, the Defense Ministry no longer hides that these methods were being tested in Syria
        
        In the First World War, the Russian General Staff had already run around this idea.
        Observers were raised in balloons. Those discovered the targets on-line, and on a landline phone reported coordinates on artillery batteries. They opened fire on targets, in real time the defeat was assessed and the fire was carried on other targets.
        Now, of course, more military units have become networked, and not by wire, but by radio.
        So there’s nothing to hide.
        
        You are almost right, it remains only to exchange the ball for an aeroplane bomber and an n-sided information exchange system. )
        
        NN52
        
        +3
        
        31 July 2018 21: 04
        
        VO3A
        Andrei
        
        About Sagittarius ... why and why ...
        
        VO3A
        
        +1
        
        31 July 2018 21: 26
        
        And to the fact that in the conduct of modern hostilities, network-centric combat systems cover the position area and control it in REAL TIME, poralizing the enemy and destroying him .... And the soldiers guard the elements of these Combat Information Systems and respond to emergency situations, which should not be, with a high probability ... It enters into fire interaction with people on board, only manned aircraft, and then outside the detection zone ...
        
        Dart2027
        
        +4
        
        31 July 2018 22: 41
        
        Quote: VO3A
        It enters into fire interaction with people on board, only manned aircraft, and even then outside the detection zone ...
        
        In a computer game, huh?
        
        Black sniper
        
        0
        
        1 August 2018 12: 29
        
        Where there is a Russian SKYNET with cyborgs
    4. purple
      
      +5
      
      31 July 2018 20: 26
      
      Quote: VO3A
      Yes, only the conclusions are directly opposite ... Syria has shown the inability to wage a modern war by our troops. It showed the complete absence of new network-centric systems for destroying the enemy in real time without fire interaction and death. And the fact that the ground contingent was made by the Syrians and our advisers should not justify this backwardness ... In our war, instead of the Syrians, our soldiers and officers will die ... We can not fight without a front, without military contact, even with a weak enemy ....
      
      well yes ... without a front end then yes ..
      What will be said about the case?
      Understand that you do not own real information, from the word at all .... at least listen to the expert .... although from the USA
2. Qwertyarion
  
  0
  
  1 August 2018 11: 13
  
  Our whole history says that we don’t make any conclusions! When the thunder strikes, we first try to throw our hats over, and only then, having sucked in, we turn on the head!
  1. poquello
    
    0
    
    1 August 2018 22: 20
    
    Quote: Qwertyarion
    Our whole history says that we don’t make any conclusions! When the thunder strikes, we first try to throw our hats over, and only then, having sucked in, we turn on the head!
    
    ))))))) eg
LMN

+6

31 July 2018 18: 46

You can’t argue with that ..
Simon

+1

31 July 2018 18: 56

Quote: Thrall
Expert late for years with 75
The main lesson that Russia learned from Syria, according to Kofman, is that the Russian military realized the need for close coordination of aviation with ground forces.

This American military expert is broken, bring on the new

Yeah! No wonder they licked our Kalashnikov assault rifle! All the best and proven over the years we steal
Magic archer

+4

31 July 2018 18: 58

In addition to experience, we get the operation of equipment in hot conditions. We bring to perfection. Plus for export to Arab countries.
poquello

+3

31 July 2018 19: 02

The main lesson that Russia learned from Syria, according to Kofman, is that the Russian military realized the need for close coordination of aviation with ground forces.

I laugh at Kofman, ett not Russian ett bourgeois for years flew there but it came to pass when we looked at our
kefan

+1

31 July 2018 19: 05

And what is his dog business?
Samara_63

+3

31 July 2018 19: 33

On land, Russian Army is No. 1 in the world. The videoconferencing system needs to be tightened. The Navy never decided anything in Russia, and often lost ...
1. 1vlad19
  
  +1
  
  31 July 2018 19: 45
  
  The fleet did not decide? Yes, deep knowledge. Many things have won, Americans in the Black Sea who threw in bulk?
  1. LMN
    
    +7
    
    31 July 2018 19: 55
    
    Quote: 1vlad19
    The fleet did not decide? Yes, deep knowledge. Many things have won, Americans in the Black Sea who threw in bulk?
    
    Apparently, this means not some single, tactical victories, but the influence of our fleet on the overall result.
    The last major wars in our territory, POV (1812), Civil War, WWII, were won by us on land
    
    PS. If the Arctic, in a sense, has global significance for our country, then the fleet there is corresponding Yes, not military, but it’s the one that we need and in the right amount.
  2. Black sniper
    
    0
    
    1 August 2018 12: 37
    
    And the Turks were defeated by the Swedes, and the Nazis in the Baltic too !!!
2. nPuBaTuP
  
  +1
  
  1 August 2018 00: 28
  
  Quote: Samara_63
  The fleet never decided anything in Russia, and often lost ...
  
  And can you elaborate on the losses? .... And yes, forget about the victories ..... compare the amount if Th ....
  1. LMN
    
    +4
    
    1 August 2018 00: 55
    
    Quote: nPuBaTuP
    Quote: Samara_63
    The fleet never decided anything in Russia, and often lost ...
    
    And can you elaborate on the losses? .... And yes, forget about the victories ..... compare the amount if Th ....
    
    Can you enlighten?
    I don’t recall a single Russian war, wherever our fleet has made a decisive contribution ..
    Local successes are not accepted, for I can immediately object that without metallurgists !! nor any Navy, VKS and most ground forces would not be in principle
    
    As part of yes, as a basis alas ..
    1. 1vlad19
      
      0
      
      1 August 2018 13: 34
      
      I didn’t understand something, hitting the sea parts? Everyone is busy with his own, infantry one, artillery another, third tankers, fourth and fourth, his sailors. Who guards the sea, river border? Who catches poachers? Fish supervision only in inland waters. Remember the defense of Sevastopol, sands and ribbons in your teeth.
sabakina

+2

31 July 2018 19: 47

according to Kofman, it is that the Russian military realized the need for close coordination of aviation with ground forces. According to the expert, in the Syrian armed conflict, the Russian Aerospace Forces "first learned to fight, and then began to learn how to cover ground forces,"
Does this radish know that Hitler taught us this for four years? Migrants are bad! It is a pity, they gave California to them, a good place our ancestors "scored" ....
1. Sergej1972
  
  +1
  
  31 July 2018 22: 43
  
  We in California had a tiny piece of land, Fort Ross.
Sands Careers General

+2

31 July 2018 20: 04

Syria has become an "invaluable testing ground" for the Russian army

Pff, this is known to any civilian around the world, the American military "X-Pird" did not say anything new.
So they themselves, the Americans, run their equipment wherever possible.
1. ANCIENT
  
  +2
  
  31 July 2018 20: 20
  
  He had enough, as long as he had, the courage to “swim against the tide” —he brought the facts without turning them over !!!
Приговор

+1

31 July 2018 20: 58

Thank you, Captain Evidence! ...
Mentat

+5

31 July 2018 21: 12

Quote: VO3A
And they record the destruction of the enemy, also in real time ....

Wait, so these are all the videos that the Russian Ministry of Defense posted on its YouTube channel about controlling targets — is this all Mosfilm ?? Ay, how not good! It's not good to lie!
There are no such systems in the Russian army, there are only various ACSs that control troops, without network-centric channels for receiving information about the enemy ... They control troops without knowing where the enemy is in real time ....

And in the USA everything is there, all network centrism and hi-tech! Only for some reason, excavators are constantly bombing weddings. Is it really all Russian fake news and hackers?
1. voyaka uh
  
  0
  
  1 August 2018 11: 38
  
  "The Ministry of Defense of Russia posted on its YouTube channel about controlling the defeat of targets - is this, it turns out, all Mosfilm ??" ////
  
  Not a cartoon, but not in real time. The record from the UAV was processed on the ground after it returned from flight.
Terenin

+3

31 July 2018 22: 00

Everyone is at war, as they can. Russia does this no worse than others. And squeals that "the Russians are fighting against the rules" were heard both during Napoleon and during the Second World War. And then we had no more and no less duraloma commanders than now.
1. nPuBaTuP
  
  0
  
  1 August 2018 00: 30
  
  Quote: Terenin
  And then we had no more and no less duraloma commanders than now.
  
  Fools do not become more, they become more active. (C)
Boomandroid

+1

31 July 2018 22: 15

Quote: VO3A
The expert was ahead of reality, and a key exaggeration:
in recent years, integration of air forces with ground forces in real time is increasingly visible

This cannot be for two reasons:
firstly, our ground forces, in the form of artillery and MLRS, are simply not there and there is no one to carry out target designations in real time;
secondly, we don’t have this capability, even from UAVs. We don’t have any real time for target designation for ground systems, except for fire correctors from the experience of World War II .... We don’t have network-centric systems that receive, transmit, they process information about the enemy and react in real time, in the form of target designation for the destruction systems included in their composition .... And they record the destruction of the enemy, also in real time .... There are no such systems in the Russian army, there are only various ACS, who command troops without network-centric channels for receiving information about the enemy ... Command troops without knowing where the enemy is in real time ....

Well, these network-centric systems from your UAV are relevant only in the fight against barmaley or an enemy with weak air defense! For systems like our shell will click them like nuts!
1. VO3A
  
  +1
  
  31 July 2018 23: 27
  
  The carapace, if it is not part of a multi-level system, and in the rear, becomes a target immediately, as soon as the locator is turned on. He will only see a rocket that flies to destroy it, or rockets, at best, that he will have time to destroy, before his destruction ..... using the network-centric systems of the enemy ....
  1. poquello
    
    +2
    
    1 August 2018 00: 12
    
    Quote: VO3A
    The carapace, if it is not part of a multi-level system, and in the rear, becomes a target immediately, as soon as the locator is turned on. He will only see a rocket that flies to destroy it, or rockets, at best, that he will have time to destroy, before his destruction ..... using the network-centric systems of the enemy ....
    
    You will bear the brain with pearls for a long time? Take the speed of the tomahawk in seconds, divide the radius of the dome by it, get the flight time. Well, or look on the net as the Jews carefully prepared for the destruction of ONE Syrian shell. And the man wrote to you about the destruction of reconnaissance UAVs, because they will not fly for long, not at all for long.
iouris

0

31 July 2018 22: 22

The main thing is to prepare for the next operation, the main one. If it does not exist, then the “invaluable experience” is worthless.
Ratmir_Ryazan

0

31 July 2018 22: 23

Everything is just like that...
Hadji Murat

+1

1 August 2018 03: 18

Today, the SAA has completed the liberation of the province of Deraa from the ISIS shaitans! GLORY TO THE TIGER FORCES !!!
Ros 56

+1

1 August 2018 08: 45

I also found an expert, to any sane person who studied in school, not a fool wallowing, such conclusions seem obvious. You just need to read the right books.
Mentat

+1

1 August 2018 21: 54

Quote: voyaka uh
"The Ministry of Defense of Russia posted on its YouTube channel about controlling the defeat of targets - is this, it turns out, all Mosfilm ??" ////

Not a cartoon, but not in real time. The record from the UAV was processed on the ground after it returned from flight.

: D Well, how do you know? What a joke)) Moreover, utter nonsense. To control the UAV, real-time channels are necessary in any case.