In the Russian Federation developed underwater drone "Cephalopod"

99
In Russia, work is underway to create an atomic uninhabited submarine designed to destroy enemy submarines, writes resource Popular Mechanics.





Information about this development first appeared in 2015 year. From the information on public procurement it became known that the TsBB Rubin is developing an uninhabited underwater robotic complex Cephalopod. The project on the project, costing about 8 billion rubles, also involved the Research and Development Institute of Marine Technology, concerns Agat, MPO-Hydropribor, OKBM them. Afrikantov and other enterprises.

Until recently, this project remained in the shadow of another Russian development - the nuclear supertorpedy “Status-6” (“Poseidon”). Now the picture is gradually becoming clear: "Cephalopod" is created as a submarine hunter, armed with compact MTT torpedoes. Ammunition has a small radius of action and carries a smaller charge, but in an underwater battle they are able to destroy an enemy submarine by breaking through its solid hull, expert Sutton (HI Sutton) said in an interview with the resource.

According to him, these are quite large Drones (the size of a bus), perhaps more than the US Navy. This is evidenced by the "bending" (multi-bladed) propeller, which is very similar to those that are installed on full-size boats.

One of the possible areas of application of Russian drones can become escort of submarine missile carriers during combat duty. "Cephalopod" would also be able to guard ports and other marine facilities. Good maneuverability of the mini-submarine is provided by thrusters in the bow and stern
  • https://twitter.com/o_gilvi
Our news channels

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

99 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    1 August 2018 11: 29
    It seems that it will have a sufficiently large radius of action to get the submarine ... That is, not a toy ...
    1. Maz
      +12
      1 August 2018 11: 30
      Well, name, kapets! Immediately throws into a shiver, a monster from nightly horrors
      1. +3
        1 August 2018 11: 36
        Just wanted to write! Exactly - a creepy name!
        1. +4
          1 August 2018 11: 42
          Quote: asar
          Just wanted to write! Exactly creepy name

          Fifth-generation cephalosporin in pills! laughing (Antibiotic from enemy submarines Yes )
          1. +4
            1 August 2018 12: 43
            Cephalopod is, translated from Latin, tentaclemonster cephalopod
            But I agree, the cephalopod doesn’t sound like a scary one. In Latin, worse.
      2. +2
        1 August 2018 11: 37
        Normal is such a name
        Cephalopods (cephalopods) - a class of mollusks characterized by bilateral symmetry and 8, 10 or more tentacles around the head, developed from the “legs” of mollusks
        1. 0
          2 August 2018 09: 59
          Great. Perhaps it will be developed in different areas of specialization within the same apparatus. Fantasy, but who knows ...
      3. AUL
        +2
        1 August 2018 11: 40
        Quote: Maz
        Well, name, kapets! Immediately throws into a shiver, a monster from nightly horrors

        It seems that the names of all new products are assigned by a group of specially selected perverts!
        Cephalopod - cephalopod, if human.
        1. +1
          1 August 2018 11: 56
          What confuses you?
          Cephalopods are common.
          1. +2
            1 August 2018 13: 20
            Would call in Russian -kryakin! ! wassat
          2. AUL
            +1
            1 August 2018 15: 03
            Quote: kakvastam
            What confuses you?
            Cephalopods are common.

            What confuses me, in particular, is that my mother tongue is despised! Overseas, of course, prettier, it sounds smarter, that's all sorts of "cephalopods" and, God forgive me, "falcauses" sculpt. Why not call in Russian an octopus? A "cephalopod" for the Russian ear sounds like the name of an indecent disease!
            1. +1
              1 August 2018 15: 05
              Most likely, the guys already have a dictionary ending ...
              Surely there is an "Octopus", and a "Squid", and some other cuttlefish, so you have to look for something unusual!
              1. 0
                2 August 2018 09: 53
                Quote: kakvastam
                Most likely, the guys already have a dictionary ending ...

                On a nationwide discussion like Poseidon laughing
              2. 0
                3 August 2018 01: 26
                Well, they would call silver carp or burbot =)
        2. +4
          1 August 2018 12: 04
          is it Kraken?

          laughing
        3. +5
          1 August 2018 12: 42
          Quote from AUL
          Cephalopod - cephalopod, if human.

          Well, I hope that it will not be a reign. feel laughing
        4. +1
          1 August 2018 20: 44
          Quote from AUL
          Cephalopod - cephalopod, if human.

          Well, damn it, you give! (with)
          If humanly, it turns out "head-to-foot" - this is when head over heels from the mountain! So, a hint that the “head” is artificial intelligence, and the “legs” are the ability to move ... somehow it’s not particularly impressive. Octopus, lamprey, well, at the worst end of moray eel - where it didn’t go. There, they took and called the Scythom submarine missile system - and nothing, we live. And then, damn it, they hit Latin ... faint of heart! Then they would call it, CHEBURASHKA - the same absurd hydrodynamic as a cartoon hero!
          IMHO.
      4. +6
        1 August 2018 12: 00
        Quote: Maz
        Well, name, kapets! Immediately throws into a shiver, a monster from nightly horrors

        Yes, fullness, my friend! Forget about monsters. Everything is simpler here. "Tse" - in Ukrainian "this". "Falos" - from Latin you know what. “Under” is already from the Russian language, or an excuse, or part of the root. Well, then - make up the meaning yourself. laughing
        Our people know how to joke with names. Either the 203-mm deadly fool is called Peony, then the submarine killer Cephalopod. But the best jokers who went down in history turned out to be from the combat unit of the GRU of the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces. They, sending the future Marshal of the armored forces Rybalko on a business trip to China in 1936, produced documents with a very common Chinese name for him. I will not write it here, so as not to earn myself another warning (suddenly the admin has no mood to joke today). But anyone interested can easily see it on the Internet. I know for sure that the Chinese name Rybalko sometimes brought his friends to laughter to tears. That’s what the military men learned! Could any other Chinese name, but gave just that! laughing
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
        3. +2
          1 August 2018 14: 26
          Quote: Nikolai Fedorov
          I will not write it here, so as not to earn myself another warning (suddenly the admin has no mood to joke today).

          I wrote and a warning was issued to me. Well, they have such a job drinks
          That's how our clerks were able to joke in combat units. good They gave a name for which they now issue warnings. wassat
          It’s all the Chinese to blame - as parrots repeat after the Russians ... they call the children ... but they forget to understand the meaning of the words ... the main thing sounds beautiful and easy, like exhaling after inhaling .... laughing
        4. AUL
          +1
          1 August 2018 15: 15
          When he served, he got to the hospital. There, with us guys, for some reason, they put a Vietnamese from some academy. And they called him Do X .. Chong. You understand how his guys called in abbreviated form. He was not offended, although he knew the translation.
      5. +2
        1 August 2018 13: 56
        Title from the film: People in Black. In the 1st part, the hero of Will Smith chased him.
      6. +1
        1 August 2018 18: 46
        Quote: Maz
        Well, name, kapets! Immediately throws into a shiver, a monster from nightly horrors

        And what? Well, at least not Hydrocephalus ...
        1. 0
          1 August 2018 18: 52
          Επικεφαλής, Greek head ... Or just kephalos (cephalos). Well, then migrated to Cefalo ..
      7. +1
        1 August 2018 23: 43
        Quote: Maz
        Immediately throws into a shiver, a monster from nightly horrors

        have a conscience. your opponents haven’t left the “Dagger” yet, but you’re showing them that ... belay
    2. +4
      1 August 2018 11: 32
      Article
      to create atomic uninhabited submarine
      So the radius of action is unlimited.
      1. +4
        1 August 2018 11: 44
        In the original article, not a word about the "atomicity" of Cephalopod. Not too lazy and got to google. The result is contradictory: some Cephalopods have an atomic effect, while others do not. request
        1. MPN
          +2
          1 August 2018 12: 18
          Well, if he is tasked with escorting and guarding missile carriers, then only a nuclear power plant.
      2. 0
        1 August 2018 12: 45
        Quote: rotmistr60
        So the radius of action is unlimited.

        If only by stable radio communication or whatever else you can issue commands in the underwater position.
      3. +1
        1 August 2018 13: 07
        It is not a matter of range (how can they, without a crew, manage a thousand miles?) But autonomy. It can take a long time to patrol an object or secretly accompany an order on a campaign.
      4. AUL
        +1
        1 August 2018 15: 27
        Quote: rotmistr60
        So the radius of action is unlimited.
        IMHO, the boat should be driven by man. AI is not yet so perfect as to trust him to make decisions independently. I think it will still be controlled from the carrier via cable, so the radius of action will be, like a conventional guided torpedo. And letting this one go on her own — she can do this if her AI turns off or just can't handle the situation! Therefore, I think there is no need for nuclear power plants there.
    3. 0
      1 August 2018 11: 33
      Yes, how can I say ... You cannot shove great autonomy into such dimensions! :)
    4. +4
      1 August 2018 11: 44
      Quote: Vard
      It seems that it will have a sufficiently large radius of action to get the submarine ... That is, not a toy ...

      The Cephalopod is created as a submarine hunter armed with MTT compact torpedoes. Ammunition has a small radius of action and carry a smaller charge, but in underwater combat they can destroy an enemy submarine by breaking through its solid body, expert HI Sutton said in an interview with the resource.



      Control and guidance system - acoustic homing system (CCH) developed by GNPP "Region".
      CCH response radius:
      - the depth of the water area is more than 200 m - up to 2500 m
      - water depth less than 200 m - up to 1200 m

      The engine is an energy-moving module with a thermal axial piston engine using a unitary fuel of the pronit type with a water-jet propulsion device developed by the Morteplotekhnika Scientific Research Institute. EDM was created during the research work "Baby-EDM", the lead designer is V.F. Gurov.

      TTX torpedoes:
      Caliber - 324 mm
      Length - 3200 mm

      Weight - no more than 390 kg
      Explosive weight - up to 60 kg

      Range of travel - up to 20 km
      Travel speed:
      - 50 knots (1st mode)
      - 30 knots (2st mode)
      Depth of travel - up to 600 m
      http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-482.html
      1. +4
        1 August 2018 12: 01

        hi ... US (manned) model:
      2. +1
        1 August 2018 13: 04
        and if you add Chilim torpedoes to the BC Cephalopod, you can also carry out mine defense
    5. +1
      1 August 2018 11: 59
      The radius of action is likely to be determined by the maximum distance from the operator, so it’s not a fact ...
      1. 0
        1 August 2018 14: 16
        Quote: kakvastam
        The radius of action is likely to be determined by the maximum distance from the operator, so it’s not a fact ...

        Well, of course, it’s for this OKBM them. Afrikantov was invited to the project, not otherwise, a nuclear propulsion system with an unlimited range and your operator, how will it be on cable or do you think there will be radio commands there? Uninhabitability solves two problems - the depth of the dive and the power reserve, why all this with the operator and how will it be better than existing boats?
        1. +1
          1 August 2018 14: 45
          It is unlikely that such crap will be completely autonomous, the consequences of an AI error in that case are too great. This is not for you "Tesla" entering a fire truck, it can turn into thousands of lives.
          1. 0
            1 August 2018 15: 15
            Quote: kakvastam
            This is not for you "Tesla" entering a fire truck, it can turn into thousands of lives.

            The level of discussion is clear.
            1. 0
              1 August 2018 15: 55
              Similarly.
            2. ZVO
              0
              1 August 2018 16: 46
              Quote: Pajama
              Quote: kakvastam
              This is not for you "Tesla" entering a fire truck, it can turn into thousands of lives.

              The level of discussion is clear.


              Incidentally - the highest level of expert systems in terms of "decision-making" on the management of mechanisms at the moment for unmanned vehicles ...
              Even the Boston Dynamic mix is ​​behind.

              And your opinion is just wrong.
        2. +3
          1 August 2018 20: 59
          Quote: Pajama
          Uninhabitability solves two problems - immersion depth and power reserve,

          Uninhabitability solves the problem of mass and size: no life support systems for the crew are needed ... saving the lives of sailors, the cost of their training and maintenance, etc. And immersion depth and power reserve are engineering solutions.
  2. +3
    1 August 2018 11: 32
    “Cephalopod” is how much you need to take on your chest in order to come up with such a “drive” ?! wassat (from ancient Greek - head-foot clam)
    1. 0
      1 August 2018 12: 23
      Giant squids from fables of sailors were probably meant, but it is not obvious wassat
      1. BAI
        0
        1 August 2018 13: 22
        Then there would be a Kraken.
  3. +1
    1 August 2018 11: 46
    Given that the native environment for this device is water. It would not be bad to add that it is an aquatic cephalopod mollusk, then the name would be formidable and serious and more or less marine - "hydrocephalopod"
    1. +2
      1 August 2018 11: 53
      Quote: Vladimirovich_4
      Given that the native environment for this device is water. It would not be bad to add that it is an aquatic cephalopod mollusk, then the name would be formidable and serious and more or less marine - "hydrocephalopod"

      "Hydrocephalopod" - smacks of hydrocephalus. laughing
  4. +6
    1 August 2018 11: 49
    What can I say? The sleep of reason gives rise to monsters.
  5. +1
    1 August 2018 11: 52
    In the Russian Federation developed underwater drone "Cephalopod"

    And then Borisov will come and ruin everything. am
    1. ZVO
      0
      1 August 2018 16: 49
      Quote: Skay
      In the Russian Federation developed underwater drone "Cephalopod"

      And then Borisov will come and ruin everything. am


      That’s interesting - when did they start to hate Borisov sincerely?
      Just as they hate Serdyukov, Rogozin, etc.
      After all, it was him, Borisov, who would begin to blame failures for the new T-14, Su-57, etc. etc.
  6. +2
    1 August 2018 11: 55
    Quote: rotmistr60
    So the radius of action is unlimited.

    I’ll clarify. The duration of combat duty is conditionally unlimited. THAT has not been canceled. But the radius of action should be limited, communication for target designation and telemetry is needed ... I really don’t know how with the satellite at depth ?!
  7. +4
    1 August 2018 12: 10
    I won’t be surprised if this boat was unified with the Status on energy and drives.
  8. +4
    1 August 2018 12: 11
    hi For some reason, I expected such an unmanned development of combat and reconnaissance-combat submarines in connection with miniaturization, with a simultaneous substantial increase in speed, “electronic brains” equipped with “correct algorithms”! good
    This is the best solution to the problem of maritime supremacy of NATO countries and other countries. smile .
    On external contours, IMHO, "not ice", there is still work to do! But apparently the interests of manufacturability and economy of mass production, as well as the convenience of transportation by all means of transport dominated the designers ?!
    It is clear that the presented appearance is just a “fantasy on the subject,” since on the Web I have already seen other images of “Cephalopod” unlike this. The name is long and unsuitable for the military ear, but it is surmountable “during operation” —the sailors will call their own way, in the sailor’s name, if only the device was good to justify and exceed all our best expectations!
    Only glad fellow such an addition to the Russian Navy!
    1. +1
      1 August 2018 12: 27
      Quote: pishchak
      This is the best solution to the problem of maritime supremacy of NATO countries and other countries.

      This is another mediocre squandering of budgetary funds, obviously unable to solve the tasks.
      1. +5
        1 August 2018 13: 26
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Quote: pishchak
        This is the best solution to the problem of maritime supremacy of NATO countries and other countries.

        This is another mediocre squandering of budgetary funds, obviously unable to solve the tasks.

        hi Why, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk ?! With the correct algorithms embedded in the "brain" of such an autonomous drone, and the correct tactics, will such devices be a good help for coastal defense (when using anaerobic power plants) or for supporting strategic missile carriers and solving independent tasks in the ocean zone (when using nuclear power)? !
        In the "babbling mode", slowly, nowhere to patrol in the depths of the ocean than help, such an unsteady "active minefield" with a "friend or foe" system ?!
        In the construction and operation of such a drone is obviously cheaper than a full-size submarine, in addition with great specialization and modernization potential, especially with a block design. Yes, and repairs and re-equipment of such devices can be carried out much faster.
        So I believe that this is still only a concept on which all these nuances of production, operation and tactics of combat use will be worked out ?!
        "Poseidon (I read in your article about him - you clearly underestimate the military and technical potential of this" device ", but I'm not surprised anymore request ) "- this is a monostrategic underwater" rogue ", and" Cephalopod "- multi-tactical, and for such devices the future (IMHO), they are only at the beginning of their journey!
        Sincerely.
        1. 0
          1 August 2018 15: 03
          Quote: pishchak
          In the "babbling mode", slowly, nowhere to patrol in the depths of the ocean than help, such an unsteady "active minefield" with a "friend or foe" system ?!

          You forgot one word "deafblind" :))) On such a ship there is obviously no place for any serious ASE, so that he will consider the enemy so with 800 from the force.
          Quote: pishchak
          In the construction and operation of such a drone is obviously cheaper than a full-size submarine

          But even a hundred of them lose in the effectiveness of the 1 nuclear submarine. Just because the submarine can solve problems, and this is a miracle - no, and in any quantity
          Quote: pishchak
          So I believe that this is still only a concept on which all these nuances of production, operation and tactics of combat use will be worked out ?!

          Sure, not a problem. I propose to urgently take me into the army (my vision just reached minus five) and, having forbidden to wear glasses, but armed with an automatic machine, "work out all the nuances of operation and combat use." I promise to manage much cheaper 5 billion rubles!
          1. +4
            1 August 2018 16: 23
            Comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, in the image of the “Cephalopod” presented in the article, is there really no clearly marked fairing of the gas station in the lower, rather voluminous, nose of the hull ?! Indeed, otherwise it would be there, in the dimensions of the hull, that torpedoes would be placed, and not outside on the sides ?! That is, the presence of an underwater lighting complex is clearly declared!
            Again, depending on which "solve problems (you did not write which ones)" and how ?! This has yet to be worked out in practice in order to identify the strengths and weaknesses of such drones, because "practice is the criterion of truth" and not our speculative "conclusions" based on scanty fragmentary information and, of course, distorted images ?!
            Do you think that the "Poseidons" and "Cephalopods" are useless and unpromising ?! And I have a diametrically opposite opinion!
            You remembered Voltaire last time, and so am I!
            Threat yours (like mine too Yes !) the combat value with AK in hand is ridiculously incomparable with the combat value of these underwater drones, as well as the corresponding costs, and rightly so!
            For such drones, the future, I know it, but you have not yet made out request
            1. 0
              1 August 2018 19: 30
              Quote: pishchak
              Comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, in the image of the “Cephalopod” presented in the article, is there really no clearly defined fairing of the gas station in the lower, rather voluminous, nose of the hull ?!

              There is. So what? :)))) Do you realize that a modern SJC of the Irtysh-Amphora type is several times larger than the entire Cephalopod combined? :))))) So, he generally does not guarantee anything.
              Quote: pishchak
              Again, depending on which "solve problems (you did not write which ones)" and how ?!

              Because there are no tasks that this freak could solve
              Quote: pishchak
              because "practice is a criterion of truth", and not our speculative "conclusions" based on meager fragmentary information and, of course, distorted images ?!

              Yes, no difference. Communication under water is one of the main problems, it is sound underwater there, and it is easier to kill yourself, if you build on this, everyone will hear you. And in automatic mode, this device is simply useless, because it is unable to accommodate a decent GAS in size. In other words, there is neither our own search tools, nor the ability to accept target designation from the outside, and at the output we have an absolutely incapable unit
              Quote: pishchak
              Threat yours (like mine too yes!) Combat value with AK in hand is ridiculously incomparable with the combat value of these underwater drones

              There is no doubt, because even by touch I have a chance to kill someone (with great luck). Cephalopod - no
              1. +2
                1 August 2018 21: 52
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Quote: pishchak
                Comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, in the image of the “Cephalopod” presented in the article, is there really no clearly defined fairing of the gas station in the lower, rather voluminous, nose of the hull ?!

                There is. So what? :)))) Do you realize that a modern SJC of the Irtysh-Amphora type is several times larger than the entire Cephalopod combined? :))))) So, he generally does not guarantee anything.
                Quote: pishchak
                Again, depending on which "solve problems (you did not write which ones)" and how ?!

                Because there are no tasks that this freak could solve
                Quote: pishchak
                because "practice is a criterion of truth", and not our speculative "conclusions" based on meager fragmentary information and, of course, distorted images ?!

                Yes, no difference. Communication under water is one of the main problems, it is sound underwater there, and it is easier to kill yourself, if you build on this, everyone will hear you. And in automatic mode, this device is simply useless, because it is unable to accommodate a decent GAS in size. In other words, there is neither our own search tools, nor the ability to accept target designation from the outside, and at the output we have an absolutely incapable unit
                Quote: pishchak
                Threat yours (like mine too yes!) Combat value with AK in hand is ridiculously incomparable with the combat value of these underwater drones

                There is no doubt, because even by touch I have a chance to kill someone (with great luck). Cephalopod - no

                hi You did not convince me, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, that I, as a design engineer, see these technical problems as completely solvable.
                Especially if, on a single universal platform, assemble specialized devices. It's all about developing the right concept for their application. For specific tasks it is much easier to create (or select from the finished) the necessary equipment than for the vague "wide universality".
                The same thing with the HACK - should not be super-duper, but optimal, according to the criterion of cost / effectiveness, an option that ensures the detection of the enemy at ranges guaranteed to exceed the self-detection distance by the adversary (in passive mode). Since the drone promises to be low noise, and its 324 mm torpedoes are not very long-range, is it quite possible to get by with a low-power sonar system ?! And this is one of the options for solving the problem of the SAC, but more interesting and complex ones are possible, which are caused precisely by the specifics of this type of new naval weapon; it’s all a matter of design thinking! You, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, think too linearly (I already wrote about this in our Holovar on Novorossiysk) and therefore you rest against the limits you have hijacked and stubbornly “slip” without even trying to get around these red flags of mine it hurts to see, for many reasons.
                Friendly lyrical digression smile : Creating an unprecedented, “breakthrough”, machine or mechanism, a good designer proceeds from the level of technology development known to him, but he does his best to look into the future and anticipate future technical progress in order to lay in his project what is commonly known as “design stock (defining the "life and fate" of the created structure). " If you take a good look at the future, then it will also look at the designer, send his news and show a picture, this is real!
                So with this “Cephalopod” - something that seems unthinkable to you in the dimensions of this “device” will become mundane in five or seven years — the technology is developing (including miniaturization!) Now by leaps and bounds. The same with the applied physical effects, there are a lot of hitherto unused and little-known ones, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk!
                “The connection there is only sound underwater” is another example of a “slipping” of your thinking - boldly ask yourself the questions: “Why is it necessary and can not do without it, in what ways? Why is it so? And how can it be done differently? Maybe I I don’t know something, or I see it from the wrong angle? " and the like.
                Go beyond the artificial limits of your conscious and unconscious, study related disciplines and have a keen interest in non-adjacent ones, and you will be surprised how much more “spatial” you will think, how much your horizons will expand and from what unexpected perspectives you can look at familiar phenomena! And, as a colleague in falling vision, I recommend doing friendly exercises for the eye muscles, eating carrots, taking breaks in reading, not sitting up in front of the computer, often doing exercises in the fresh air and trying to get enough sleep, at least on weekends!
                All the best to you Good and Good Health, comrade Andrey from Chelyabinsk!
                PS Your "touch someone to kill (with great luck)" winked Chesslov, I don’t even know how to comment ?! request I believe, nevertheless, that the torpedo-bearing “Cephalopod” will be much more deadly than you (even with the biggest “luck”, even “by touch” and with complete non-resistance of “someone”!) ?!
                1. ZVO
                  +1
                  1 August 2018 23: 02
                  Quote: pishchak

                  hi You did not convince me, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, that I, as a design engineer, see these technical problems as completely solvable.


                  ...
                  We see the new Cyrus Smith from Mysterious Island ...
                  Well, or a child who grew up on Jules Verne ...

                  Over 100 years, many scientists and engineers of the world have been working on a high-quality data transmission system in the aquatic environment.
                  I’m like a thrice engineer with a third-party education. in no way related to hydroacoustics and I understand that the problems in ensuring two-way communication in water:
                  The first is secrecy and its maintenance.
                  The second is the range of covert transmission and reception.
                  The third is a sufficient “transfer rate” for data exchange and target designation in both directions under the conditions of the required stealth and range.

                  Water is a slightly different medium. compared to air.

                  By the way, are you even familiar with the situation with the transmission of code signals for SSBNs? Which using ADD waves?
                  Well, at least read this so that a glimpse appears in your head - what are the costs of finding a solution ... and the solution is not yet ...
                  https://topwar.ru/31764-kak-svyazatsya-s-podvodno
                  y-lodkoy.html
                  1. +2
                    2 August 2018 01: 47
                    Quote: ZVO
                    Quote: pishchak

                    hi You did not convince me, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, that I, as a design engineer, see these technical problems as completely solvable.


                    ...
                    We see the new Cyrus Smith from Mysterious Island ...
                    Well, or a child who grew up on Jules Verne ...

                    Over 100 years, many scientists and engineers of the world have been working on a high-quality data transmission system in the aquatic environment.
                    I’m like a thrice engineer with a third-party education. in no way related to hydroacoustics and I understand that the problems in ensuring two-way communication in water:
                    The first is secrecy and its maintenance.
                    The second is the range of covert transmission and reception.
                    The third is a sufficient “transfer rate” for data exchange and target designation in both directions under the conditions of the required stealth and range.

                    Water is a slightly different medium. compared to air.

                    By the way, are you even familiar with the situation with the transmission of code signals for SSBNs? Which using ADD waves?
                    Well, at least read this so that a glimpse appears in your head - what are the costs of finding a solution ... and the solution is not yet ...
                    https://topwar.ru/31764-kak-svyazatsya-s-podvodno
                    y-lodkoy.html

                    hi It's all about the approaches and clarity of thinking, comrade "three times an engineer with a third-party education" ZVO!
                    Alas, "multiple" higher education absolutely does not add anything to the quality of thinking — this, like logic, was not specially taught either in Soviet high school or in higher education, although in vain! I had to get to everything myself "in the process", for years, through a stump deck, blood and bruises, both literal and figurative! Now, it’s easier for young people, probably, already in modern books to mention mentions of “systemic thinking” and the like, some kind of foundations, apparently, already give in the learning process or not ?!
                    There were, there were, I met people without any higher or secondary education, only with the pre-revolutionary 2 classes of the central vocational school, but who had clear thinking, looked at the essence of the phenomena, how honored academics and academic professors came to be with associate professors, real confusion, who liked to speak a lot and scintillatingly but clearly did not understand what they were talking about. So the "tower" is not an indicator, and there was enough "engineering" of the inflated one under the Union, and in the post-Soviet era I observe only the degradation of education ... but this, so much for the lyrics.
                    Although I haven’t been working in radio for a long time, photocopies of the original books on antennas and ultra-long-distance radio communications from Nazi Germany (I hope you know where the SDV antennas came from ?!) had to be read in Soviet times and even translated explanations to the diagrams and texts from them to our factory fans of distant I read radio communications, as well as magazines from the 70s through the 90s from cover to cover, including articles on the problems of communication with submarines - I was always interested in submarines, as well as about bathyscaphes, I consider them to be more interesting and complex designs, than spaceships, no wonder smart people call the depths of the sea underwater space!
                    I also always read with interest about the experiments of Soviet submariners in the development of sound underwater communication. So, I hope, I have some idea and a little in the discourse of the topic raised.
                    But it's not that! The COMMUNICATION of material objects can be different and not necessarily sound-absorbing or super-long-wave, because not the connection itself is important, but the end result!
                    For example, to stimulate your imagination, answer your own question: what kind of “connection” can there be between an anti-submarine aircraft barging low above the water and a submarine located in the water column beneath it, is it exceptionally hydroacoustic and much more secretive for outside observers ?!
                    Imagine now that these two objects also interact in the same environment ... This is one of the options.
                    Put the horse in front of the cart, and not behind her, and ask yourself the right questions, comrade ZVO, to get the right answers!
                    For example: "Why exactly do you need a connection and what, how can you otherwise achieve the same goals ?!" and write down all the answers that come to mind, even the most absurd ones at first glance, then re-read and think ... it’s unlikely that the connection will be the premiere of your list when it comes to a programmable autonomous combat robot with the rudiments of artificial intelligence ?!
                    PS Yes, you're right, Jules was read to our Faithful as a child, and "The Mysterious Island" and "20 Thousand Leagues Under the Sea" were my favorite books, like many others from the science fiction genre. I was even more lucky in my life - my Dad was a real Russian "Cyrus Smith" Yes !
                2. 0
                  2 August 2018 00: 44
                  Quote: pishchak
                  The same with HACK - should not be super-duper, but optimal

                  So I tell you - the Irtysh-Amphora is still not optimal. We are still lagging behind, in the best case scenario, we have reached the level of the USA in terms of the SAC, what optimality can a liliputik have in a cephalopod? :)))
                  Quote: pishchak
                  Since the UAV promises to be low noise, and its 324 mm torpedoes are not very long-range, is it possible to get by with a low-power sonar system ?!

                  Do you see a water cannon on it? :)) And where is the low noise?
                  Quote: pishchak
                  And this is one of the options for solving the problem of HAK

                  I will disappoint you - the HOOK is not connected in any way with the noise of a particular device, reducing it while raising it will not solve the HAK question.
                  Quote: pishchak
                  but more interesting, complex, due precisely to the specifics of this type of new naval weapon, are possible — it is all a matter of design thinking!

                  Good luck :))) Then the whole USSR broke his head about it, now the people barely barely catch up with the USA (if it catches up), but, of course, you better do all this and put it in a suitcase - just spit
                  Quote: pishchak
                  So with this "Cephalopod" - something that seems unthinkable to you in the dimensions of this "device" will become mundane in five to seven years - the technique is developing

                  If the technique is developing at such a pace, then after 5-7 years the cephalopod will completely become obsolete. The only misfortune is that it does NOT develop with such conceit. And the second trouble is that at one level of technological development, the submarine hull will cover the cephalopod hack like a bull - a sheep. Thirdly, you just don’t understand how much the machine will lose under the water of a nuclear submarine, which is controlled by man, alas. From the word "in general". The quality of torpedo fire alone ...
                  Quote: pishchak
                  “The connection there is only sound underwater” is another example of a “slipping” of your thinking - boldly ask yourself the questions: “Why is it necessary and can not do without it, in what ways? Why is it so? And how can it be done differently? Maybe I I don’t know something, or I see it from the wrong angle? " and the like.

                  Yes, it’s not a question, apply TRIZ, find a solution, become a dollar billionaire and live happily ever after :)))))
                  Honestly - this is a joke about mice and a wise owl
                  1. +1
                    2 August 2018 03: 30
                    hi Don’t make me laugh, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk! You yourself tried to "apply TRIZ and become a dollar billionaire" smile ?!
                    And you, alas, do not make the impression of a “wise owl”, and apparently in this way you will start working on a material for your next publication, now about the allegedly “useless” “Cephalopod” ?! wink
                    In the figure for the Article there is no water cannon, and in public drawings of modern submarines with a water-jet propulsion, for some reason it is not ?!
                    And what technically prevents the water washer from being delivered ?! The point is to create a minisubmarin, noisy as a full-sized one, or do you really think the creators of the Cephalopod are complete ignoramuses ?!
                    You, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, could no longer “disappoint” you with your misconceptions about the allegedly incoherent sonar noise of the underwater object and the range of its detection by the SAC, however, you still were a little surprised by your militant ignorance of even basic.
                    It is desirable, but not necessary, to have a long-range SAS for a low-noise drone that enemy submarines in passive mode can detect only by approaching a distance shorter than the range of their weapons?! - This was already in my previous comment “inattentively read” by you Yes .
                    It is quite possible to fit into the dimensions of the bow of the painted hull a compromise solution by the SAC with an acceptable detection range of a more noisy full-size submarine, which allows the use of unmanned weapons before it is detected by the SAC of an enemy submarine.
                    The concept of "Cephalopod" will not become obsolete in the coming years, and the design will be improved, visibility will decrease, the inevitable "childhood illnesses" will be "cured" and tactical methods developed, so that your cheap "shepherd's maxims" though look rollicking (apparently designed "for the public ", love to" play with the words " smile ?), but they completely do not reflect the essence of the problem wink
                    About torpedo shooting, it’s more interesting for me to listen to torpedo shooting masters and torpedo weapon designers, but you, Andrey, alas, do not seem to me authoritative at all in this matter! request And about the possibilities of automating the process of artillery, rocket and torpedo firing, I probably know more than yours smile (at least enough to form their own competent opinion) ?! The future belongs to unmanned aerial vehicles, comrade Andrey from Chelyabinsk, regardless of whether you admit it or not, this is an objective process!
                    Good luck to you!
                    1. 0
                      2 August 2018 07: 32
                      Quote: pishchak
                      Don’t make me laugh, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk! You yourself tried to "apply TRIZ and become a dollar billionaire"

                      My friend, unlike you, I do not presume to solve issues over which many scientists have been struggling for more than a dozen years with "one left", as you do. So don’t turn the arrows on me, it’s not at the address :)))
                      Quote: pishchak
                      Yes, and the impression of a "wise owl" you, alas, do not make

                      An anecdote about something else - the mice ran to the wise owl, and complained that they were all offended. The wise owl advised them to become hedgehogs. The mice were delighted and ran away, but then realized that they did not know how to become hedgehogs and returned to the owl. They asked: "Eagle owl, how do we become hedgehogs?" To which the eagle owl replied, "I do not deal with any nonsense, I solve strategic issues."
                      So the wise owl here is not me, but you laughing It would be strange if I were like him laughing
                      Quote: pishchak
                      In the figure for the Article there is no water cannon, and in public drawings of modern submarines with a water-jet propulsion, for some reason it is not ?!

                      All US nuclear submarines of the 4 generation with a water cannon, Boreas also with a water cannon :)
                      Quote: pishchak
                      And what technically prevents the water washer from being delivered ?!

                      And what prevents a bad dancer? :)))
                      Quote: pishchak
                      The point is to create a minisubmarin, noisy as a full-sized one, or do you really think the creators of the Cephalopod are complete ignoramuses ?!

                      Yes.
                      Quote: pishchak
                      You, comrade Andrei from Chelyabinsk, could no longer “disappoint” you with your misconceptions about the allegedly incoherent sonar noise of the underwater object and the range of its detection by the SAC, however, you still were a little surprised by your militant ignorance of even basic.

                      Are you sure that I do not know the elementary? :)))))
                      Quote: pishchak
                      It is quite possible to fit into the dimensions of the bow of the painted hull a compromise solution by the SAC with an acceptable detection range of a more noisy full-size submarine, which allows the use of unmanned weapons before it is detected by the SAC of an enemy submarine.

                      Do you even think about what you write. You are fixated on the ratio of the distance HAK - the range of use of weapons. So I will reassure you - yes, on a small cephalopod you can make him see the nuclear submarine earlier than she - his. Difficult (personally, I believe that it is impossible), but theoretically possible.
                      Only this will not make the cephalopod more useful even one iota, because it will look like this - it is, for example, guaranteed to detect the enemy nuclear submarines for one and a half kilometers, and it for him - for one kilometer. And what will he find in the sea with such a range? :))))) Nothing. Therefore, I write about the deaf-blind unit
                      Quote: pishchak
                      so your cheap "shepherd maxims" although they look rollicking

                      Well, you didn’t have any arguments, you don’t have, the slogans also came to an end, banal rudeness began.
                      And about the "shepherd's" - you see, in a conversation with my opponents I have to adapt to the level of the audience. And if I have to talk, for example, with people whose intellect is frozen at the ram level, then it’s clear that I have to use the shepherd’s vocabulary - just to be understood correctly laughing
                      1. +1
                        2 August 2018 09: 00
                        Well, friend Andrei from Chelyabinsk, from cheap “shepherd maxims” did you slide even lower ?! Yes Pechalka request Still, there was a better opinion of you.
                      2. 0
                        2 August 2018 11: 11
                        Quote: pishchak
                        Well, friend Andrei from Chelyabinsk, from cheap “shepherd maxims” did you slide even lower ?!

                        Adapting to your level, alas. Or did you believe that in your rudeness and chanting of slogans I would kindly persuade you to listen to the voice of reason? :) Seriously? :)))
        2. 0
          2 August 2018 14: 18
          The most important benefit is the lack of human factor. hi
    2. +1
      1 August 2018 16: 06
      Quote: pishchak
      This is the best solution to the problem of maritime supremacy of NATO countries and other countries.

      Despite the intended purpose
      One of the possible areas of application of Russian drones may be escort of underwater missile carriers during combat duty. Cephalopod could also guard ports and other offshore facilities
      Serious problems may arise from the point of view of the Law of the Sea.
      For example, the discovery of this drone by any NATO ship in neutral waters can be regarded as a legitimate target for its destruction, since formally it could interfere with navigation or be a threat, and as a matter of fact, even then, when a submarine crashes, few will figure it out. Another negative option for combat use is unmasking, as drone detection will be a sign of being in the strategic nuclear submarine area.
      1. +1
        1 August 2018 18: 43
        Quote: scientist
        Quote: pishchak
        This is the best solution to the problem of maritime supremacy of NATO countries and other countries.

        Despite the intended purpose
        One of the possible areas of application of Russian drones may be escort of underwater missile carriers during combat duty. Cephalopod could also guard ports and other offshore facilities
        Serious problems may arise from the point of view of the Law of the Sea.
        For example, the discovery of this drone by any NATO ship in neutral waters can be regarded as a legitimate target for its destruction, since formally it could interfere with navigation or be a threat, and as a matter of fact, even then, when a submarine crashes, few will figure it out. Another negative option for combat use is unmasking, as drone detection will be a sign of being in the strategic nuclear submarine area.

        hi Comrade Scientist, we are only at the beginning of the coming heyday of marine drones. Already there are, as it were, surface sea drones cruising in neutral waters and monitoring the underwater situation (somehow they don’t drown them, they don’t interfere with shipping yet ?!), now there will be more and more underwater, Russian and every possible in the ocean depths "partners".
        Not strong in knowledge of the International Law of the Sea, but, it seems, the ship is part of the territory of his country and an attack on it is regarded as an attack on the country or not ?! Do NATO ships now, having discovered a Russian or any other submarine in neutral waters in peacetime, "see it as a legitimate target for destruction" and "destroy" this "threat to shipping" ?! No, they don’t ruin, they just keep track of them ?! That is, there is, no, but compliance with international agreements on mutual non-destruction in peacetime ?! And what will happen today, NATO ships will nibble the Cephalopod or Poseidon, and tomorrow Russian ships, in response, will detect and destroy the NATO drone or what sort of aerial submarine and what will happen, "very few will figure it out then ?!" wink
        With the probable detection of an UAV by a PLO ship, if this happens (due to its a priori much less noticeability than the strategic and multi-purpose submarines escorting it), not everything is so simple! After all, escorting an underwater "strategist" is only one of the options for the combat use of the Cephalopod! It would be more like a distracting “setup” maneuver, which specifically allowed itself to be detected with noticeably greater own abilities to evade and detach from the pursuit, and in the place of the anti-submarine commander I would think about the nature of my further actions (but, especially, if such, far not defenseless !, torpedo-carrying drones will be effectively applied on the vast expanses of the sea and operate according to complex, unpredictable algorithms) ?!
        So these are more questions of combat employment in a specific situation, and there can be no war without loss. But, in which case, to sacrifice a soulless drone, and even a group of drones to cover the departure of the “strategist” is somehow more acceptable than a full-fledged nuclear submarine with the entire crew of highly qualified submariners, as you think, all the more so since drones can also be riveted in much larger quantities ?! IMHO.
        Sincerely.
        1. +2
          1 August 2018 21: 38
          Quote: pishchak
          Comrade Scientist,

          A couple of remarks on the post.
          1. The boat in the underwater position is absolutely "powerless." If it is found in its cirrus, then it can be pursued in the waters of the open sea. If it pops up and hoists the flag, it’s under the IMF! It must be dealt with as a flag ship raised above a retractable fence. But you can’t lift the atomic ship into the eyelids, and it’s hard to detect the DPS. So ... Se la vie!
          2. Multipurpose submarines have not grazed strategists for a long time. They close the threatened direction, according to the "schedule" ... so to speak. Therefore, "protection" from autonomous underwater vehicles is likely to be "positional" rather than a veil.
          3. About a large number of underwater drones.
          AI is an extremely complex "product." Something I don’t really know about the performance of our "silicon" valley. Building a building is one thing, but putting stuffing there into a condominium is a completely different matter! Remember the Polement Redoubt. So, about "riveting" ... (Vague doubts gnawing at me ... (c)) Group "A" needs to be raised, not traded in raw materials! Diversification of production is called, however!
          AHA.
          1. +1
            1 August 2018 22: 34
            Quote: BoA KAA
            Quote: pishchak
            Comrade Scientist,

            A couple of remarks on the post.
            1. The boat in the underwater position is absolutely "powerless." If it is found in its cirrus, then it can be pursued in the waters of the open sea. If it pops up and hoists the flag, it’s under the IMF! It must be dealt with as a flag ship raised above a retractable fence. But you can’t lift the atomic ship into the eyelids, and it’s hard to detect the DPS. So ... Se la vie!
            2. Multipurpose submarines have not grazed strategists for a long time. They close the threatened direction, according to the "schedule" ... so to speak. Therefore, "protection" from autonomous underwater vehicles is likely to be "positional" rather than a veil.
            3. About a large number of underwater drones.
            AI is an extremely complex "product." Something I don’t really know about the performance of our "silicon" valley. Building a building is one thing, but putting stuffing there into a condominium is a completely different matter! Remember the Polement Redoubt. So, about "riveting" ... (Vague doubts gnawing at me ... (c)) Group "A" needs to be raised, not traded in raw materials! Diversification of production is called, however!
            AHA.

            hi I fully agree with you, Comrade Udaw KAA, regarding Group A (he himself from this group smile ) "and the cessation of mediocre squandering of non-renewable natural resources!
            I also most clearly see the positional use of such “cephalopods” in defense in threatened areas, in the likeness of a moving “smart minefield”. But I do not exclude the use of individual drones in various "special missions" in any corner of the oceans.
            And only with the increase in the available number of combat and reconnaissance drones, is it possible to use them massively to gain superiority in long-distance sea communications Yes !
            “Minced meat is not the main thing!” IMHO. The main thing is the action algorithms embedded in the "brain" of the machine, since if the input is "zero", then the output is also "zero"! Even the most advanced drone by design, with the most substandard elemental base, but with "rotten brains" in the "stuffing" is a waste of material and human resources! And all brains, natural and artificial, begin with a family, a kindergarten, and figuratively “with a school teacher” ...
            Sincerely.
  9. 0
    1 August 2018 12: 12
    In all such devices, the only concern is their loss of control. They are unlikely to return to the docking station themselves. smile And will they not be in this case like those robots from the story “The Inhabited Island” of the Strugatsky ...
    1. 0
      1 August 2018 13: 14
      In case of loss of control, “looked around” if there was an adversary nearby, threw the buoy, determined its coordinates, paved the way to the base and forward. With an unlimited resource of course.
      1. ZVO
        +1
        1 August 2018 16: 53
        Quote: Rostislav
        In case of loss of control, “looked around” if there was an adversary nearby, threw the buoy, determined its coordinates, paved the way to the base and forward. With an unlimited resource of course.


        There is no reset button .... And where there is no forced reset, a stably progressing glitch is always possible ....
  10. 0
    1 August 2018 12: 39
    It would be better called - Megalodont. Sophisticated machine. Torpedoes are probably inside. Otherwise, the speed does not get. And the speed of such a "beast" is needed. The fighter must be faster than the game. How to solve the connection? Letting out such people in autonomous mode without control ... Oh!
    1. ZVO
      0
      1 August 2018 17: 01
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      It would be better called - Megalodont. Sophisticated machine. Torpedoes are probably inside. Otherwise, the speed does not get. And the speed of such a "beast" is needed. The fighter must be faster than the game. How to solve the connection? Letting out such people in autonomous mode without control ... Oh!


      Which fighter?
      What is the speed?
      The physical size of the HAS is an extremely important parameter in the detection range and resolution ...
      As Andrei said - with a meter-sized GAS - the maximum will be a couple of kilometers ...
      Okhotnik ... Yeah ... Like in Prostokvashino ...
  11. +2
    1 August 2018 12: 40
    It would be interesting to read the terms of reference for this boat.
    In the sense of how they plan to use it.
    Even without numbers it is already interesting.
    Because I immediately think of an underwater drone,
    waiting in the wings at the bottom of the sea.
    1. +3
      1 August 2018 14: 49
      Quote: Zomanus
      It would be interesting to read the terms of reference for this boat.
      In the sense of how they plan to use it.
      Even without numbers it is already interesting.
      Because I immediately think of an underwater drone,
      waiting in the wings at the bottom of the sea.

      hi Comrade Zomanus, who are quietly “waiting in the wings at the bottom of the sea”, is a long-standing and used stationary ground sea mines of various designs (with an optimal minimum of “artificial intelligence”), including those equipped with anti-submarine torpedoes. They are much, much cheaper to manufacture and operate than an underwater drone!
      The mega-mobile "Cephalopod" is not intended for passive waiting at the bottom of the sea, but for the active search and destruction of enemy targets by all types of naval weapons (I think that torpedoes are just one of the options for arming them), although hiding in the depths of the sea, with tactical necessary, it can, like drift by the will of sea currents. IMHO.
      In the future, “cephalopods” should act in “swarms”, quickly gaining local superiority (which is impossible for stationary mines with a limited radius of action and depths!) In a particular area of ​​the World Ocean and conducting a wide front search, exchanging information and distributing identified targets between each other is much more "interesting" and more productive than waiting and hoping for a chance!
      There is a cyclical progress in technology and military art - the "well-known old", but at a qualitatively new round of development of knowledge!
      Sincerely.
  12. 0
    1 August 2018 12: 41
    Quote: Nikolai Fedorov
    Quote: Maz
    Well, name, kapets! Immediately throws into a shiver, a monster from nightly horrors

    Yes, fullness, my friend! Forget about monsters. Everything is simpler here. "Tse" - in Ukrainian "this". "Falos" - from Latin you know what. “Under” is already from the Russian language, or an excuse, or part of the root. Well, then - make up the meaning yourself. laughing
    Our people know how to joke with names. Either the 203-mm deadly fool is called Peony, then the submarine killer Cephalopod. But the best jokers who went down in history turned out to be from the combat unit of the GRU of the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces. They, sending the future Marshal of the armored forces Rybalko on a business trip to China in 1936, produced documents with a very common Chinese name for him. I will not write it here, so as not to earn myself another warning (suddenly the admin has no mood to joke today). But anyone interested can easily see it on the Internet. I know for sure that the Chinese name Rybalko sometimes brought his friends to laughter to tears. That’s what the military men learned! Could any other Chinese name, but gave just that! laughing
    1. +4
      1 August 2018 12: 42
      Uighurs and Dungans called Pavel Semenovich Fu Dzi ..ui. Such a nickname may seem offensive to Russians, but every resident of Xinjiang understood that only a very noble and respected person who covered himself with unfading military glory can bear such a name. The name Fu Jiui is composed of three languages ​​- Chinese, Japanese and Mongolian. The hieroglyph “FU” means wealth, and in different combinations it can mean both material and spiritual wealth, the hieroglyph “DZI” is a samurai. The word ..ui ”in the Mongolian language has many meanings, one of which is an important, respected person.
      Thus, the Chinese name of Pavel Rybalko can be translated into Russian as an Important military man, or a wise, brave warrior.
  13. +1
    1 August 2018 13: 00
    A good watchdog is obtained. And help to protect the base, and on the road against dashing people help.
  14. +2
    1 August 2018 13: 13
    This next expensive toy destined for the fate of the Su-57, T-14, T-15 and other nishtyakov from the defense, for which there is no money.
  15. Mwg
    +2
    1 August 2018 14: 36
    Cephalopod ... Should have been called the "Arkelian Cruiser"
    1. +4
      1 August 2018 15: 44
      Quote: MVG
      Should have been called the "Arkelian Cruiser"

      It’s impossible, because it’s dumb. The cruiser (and heavy one) is now hanging in orbit, as if observing earthlings. Yes And if something goes wrong, then ... am wassat
  16. +1
    1 August 2018 14: 58
    At the expense of speed - a big question ...

    Must be faster than American boats.

    hi
    1. +1
      1 August 2018 15: 38
      Quote: Horse, people and soul
      At the expense of speed - a big question ...

      Must be faster than American boats.

      hi

      hi High speed when entering the area of ​​combat duty and when patrolling on a position is useless, only excess noise from speed and a guaranteed loss of stealth! winked And the torpedoes (not to mention the upright squalls) seem to be faster and more maneuverable than most modern submarines ?!
      IMHO. Much more important is the low-noise patrol mode, which allows you to detect the enemy earlier than he (you, of course, if you have the appropriate technical capabilities!). After all, whoever discovered earlier, he, ceteris paribus, won.
      Although, if you intercept, “encircle” and “drive” the entire “flock” of drones, a single target with weak defensive capabilities, or leave, maneuver and break away from an attacking torpedo, as well as from pursuing a single ship with weak attack capabilities in the absence of its interaction with other PLO forces, then the advantage in speed can also work, as in the confrontation with enemy drones ?!
      Sincerely.
  17. +1
    1 August 2018 17: 49
    It would be better called "Gudgeon" or "Bream" .. There are Carnations and Cornflowers ..)
  18. +2
    1 August 2018 22: 17
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: pishchak
    In the "babbling mode", slowly, nowhere to patrol in the depths of the ocean than help, such an unsteady "active minefield" with a "friend or foe" system ?!

    You forgot one word "deafblind" :))) On such a ship there is obviously no place for any serious ASE, so that he will consider the enemy so with 800 from the force.

    Obviously, this device will have an external target designation and command channel. You write some nonsense.

    Quote: pishchak
    In the construction and operation of such a drone is obviously cheaper than a full-size submarine
    But even a hundred of them lose in the effectiveness of the 1 nuclear submarine. Just because the submarine can solve problems, and this is a miracle - no, and in any quantity

    This is a means of escort and protection. Have you read the article? For the further independent search and fulfillment of tasks, Cephalopod is not intended.

    Quote: pishchak
    So I believe that this is still only a concept on which all these nuances of production, operation and tactics of combat use will be worked out ?!
    Sure, not a problem. I propose to urgently take me into the army (my vision just reached minus five) and, having forbidden to wear glasses, but armed with an automatic machine, "work out all the nuances of operation and combat use." I promise to manage much cheaper 5 billion rubles!

    You took off your glasses when you read the article. It seems that she has not reached you in a defocused state.
    1. ZVO
      0
      1 August 2018 23: 25
      Quote: Mentat

      Obviously, this device will have an external target designation and command channel. You write some nonsense.

      And I will offer you to master the following material ...
      https://topwar.ru/31764-kak-svyazatsya-s-podvodno
      y-lodkoy.html
    2. 0
      2 August 2018 00: 50
      Quote: Mentat
      it is obvious that this device will have external target designation and a command channel. You write some nonsense.

      You write nonsense, because you have no idea about the problems of underwater communications. Do you think that cable torpedoes are still controlled by the stupidity of sailors, or what?
      Quote: Mentat
      This is a means of escort and protection. Have you read the article?

      In order to protect something, you must be able to detect the attacker. I understand that this is new and unexpected for you, but think about it.
      And yes, if you now say that the SAC of the SSBN will detect, then better keep silent if you do not wish my death from laughter.
      Quote: Mentat
      You took off your glasses when you read the article. It seems that she has not reached you in a defocused state.

      No, I read the article very carefully. And you are strongly advised, first study the Navy for at least several years, then demonstrate your aplomb. It may not look as stupid as it is now
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. +2
    1 August 2018 23: 51
    Quote: ZVO
    Quote: Mentat

    Obviously, this device will have an external target designation and command channel. You write some nonsense.

    And I will offer you to master the following material ...
    https://topwar.ru/31764-kak-svyazatsya-s-podvodno
    y-lodkoy.html

    Clever again? You would have to master the context yourself, then you will not have to write pathos with links to well-known data.
    Once again: Cephalopod does not act independently in a deep search or autonomously in the open ocean. He does not need to receive or transmit information over vast distances. It acts only in conjunction with a leading vessel or coastal structures from which it receives target designation. The data transmission range in this case is orders of magnitude smaller, so the range of possible solutions is expanding incomparably.
    1. 0
      2 August 2018 00: 51
      Quote: Mentat
      It acts only in conjunction with a leading vessel or coastal structures from which it receives target designation.

      wassat fool
      Examine the condition of domestic EGSONPO before you carry such nonsense
  21. +2
    2 August 2018 08: 11
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Mentat
    It acts only in conjunction with a leading vessel or coastal structures from which it receives target designation.

    wassat fool
    Examine the condition of domestic EGSONPO before you carry such nonsense

    1. Confuse local and global structures, control directly from the lead vessel and the information environment.
    2. You are not aware and cannot be aware of the current state of local system segments.
    3. Product only developed, obviously, there can already be ready-made product management systems, as it is a single complex. Obviously, the management infrastructure for such products cannot already be put into operation, because it has not yet been developed.
    You at least bring the elementary logic to the ON state before writing posts.
    1. +1
      2 August 2018 11: 25
      Quote: Mentat
      You confuse local and global structures, control directly from the lead vessel and the information environment.

      Do not try to speak in clever words - you do it very poorly. You wrote
      Quote: Mentat
      It acts only in conjunction with a leading vessel or coastal structures from which it receives target designation.

      All these are elements of EGSONPO
      Quote: Mentat
      You are not aware and cannot be aware of the current state of the local system segments.

      But the rear admirals are in the know, including those involved in its development. And they swear very much about this, which the five-year-old is diagnosing the failure of the work to create it
      Quote: Mentat
      The product is only being developed, it is obvious that there can already be ready-made product management systems, because it is a single complex. Obviously, the management infrastructure for such products cannot already be put into operation, because it has not yet been developed.

      "Do not go into yourself, mechanic, they will find you there in two counts." I do not need to talk about spaceships plowing the expanses of the universe. There are some simple facts.
      1) We are not ahead of the US in sonar. Our latest HACs are in the best case not inferior (and in the worst - still inferior) to American
      2) We have completely failed the task of lighting the underwater environment, and the saddest thing is, it is completely unclear when this task will be solved, because there is no EVEN EVEN CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING how to solve it.
      3) The state of our ability to detect enemy atomarines is such that “From February 11 to August 13 of August 2014, the New Hampshire submarine unhindered all the strategic containment of the Northern Fleet in the Barents Sea.” (Rear Admiral Zhandarov)
      on this about the possibilities of cephalopod can and end
  22. +2
    2 August 2018 08: 40
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Mentat
    it is obvious that this device will have external target designation and a command channel. You write some nonsense.

    You write nonsense, because you have no idea about the problems of underwater communications. Do you think that cable torpedoes are still controlled by the stupidity of sailors, or what?

    There is an impression, “Andrei from Chelyabinsk”, that you are trying in a cheap way to fetch some data about the status of underwater communication systems here. Occupation is amazing in terms of its stupidity. Are you there from Ukraine or from the Baltic states?

    Quote: Mentat
    This is a means of escort and protection. Have you read the article?

    In order to protect something, you must be able to detect the attacker. I understand that this is new and unexpected for you, but think about it.
    And yes, if you now say that the SAC of the SSBN will detect, then better keep silent if you do not wish my death from laughter.

    Another ridiculous attempt. Do you expect that you will have detection technologies dump here or what? Here you will see only what got into open sources / media, obviously. Just because none of the products writing here have real data on the product and cannot have it. In my opinion, this conclusion is accessible even to a middle school student.

    Quote: Mentat
    You took off your glasses when you read the article. It seems that she has not reached you in a defocused state.

    No, I read the article very carefully. And you are strongly advised, first study the Navy for at least several years, then demonstrate your aplomb. It may not look as stupid as it is now

    Explore further. True, judging by your attempts and questions, a certain crisis has come in the “study”.
    1. 0
      2 August 2018 11: 29
      Quote: Mentat
      There is an impression, “Andrei from Chelyabinsk”, that you are trying in a cheap way to fetch some data about the status of underwater communication systems here.

      Why bother them? :))) The thing is well-known. Well, those who are interested in the topic, of course, are not talking about you
      Quote: Mentat
      Another ridiculous attempt. Do you expect that you will have detection technologies dump here or what? Here you will see only what got into open sources / media, obviously. Just because none of the products writing here have real data on the product and cannot have it. In my opinion, this conclusion is accessible even to a middle school student.

      A middle school student is certainly his level. But unlike you, the dreamer you are rampant, I worked a bit in the field of state defense orders and I have a good idea of ​​how such R&D and research are now opening up. Therefore, if you believe that "but in fact we have such devices, but we do not know about them," then I will not break your youthful dreams.
  23. 0
    2 August 2018 09: 41
    Cthulhu would be called ... with fantasy along the way wassat
  24. 0
    2 August 2018 11: 04
    Quote: BoA KAA
    Quote: Pajama
    Uninhabitability solves two problems - immersion depth and power reserve,

    Uninhabitability solves the problem of mass and size: no life support systems for the crew are needed ... saving the lives of sailors, the cost of their training and maintenance, etc. And immersion depth and power reserve are engineering solutions.

    Confuse cause and effect
  25. +2
    2 August 2018 12: 26
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    I worked a little in the field of state defense orders and I am well aware of how this kind of research and development is being opened now. Therefore, if you believe that "but in fact we have such devices, but we do not know about them," then I will not break your youthful dreams.

    Senior Assistant Junior Clerk? :) It seems that you have found a conversation on your favorite / desired topic and are trying to pull out some details. Who will tell you them? Admirals whisper in his ears)
    What does EGSONPO and Cephalopod have to do with it? You are trying to compare the reconnaissance with the GRU on a blue eye. Warm on a soft smear and squash with a square. This underwater BA is a means of ensuring tactical superiority, or an element of the security complex, but they clearly wrote to you what it is and why.
    You deny on some fantastic basis that the admirals report to you personally, even the possibility of the existence of local segments of the system. Ostensibly because there is no global information field. Can you at least understand that these are not related things? For example, they built an object, it needs to be protected. Built locally cephalopod control system. For this task, there is no need to complete the construction of a global system of management and control of the situation at the country level.
    Want to say that this whole project is a fake? No appliances, no features, nothing. Where is the firewood from?
    1. ZVO
      0
      6 August 2018 13: 26
      Quote: Mentat
      Built locally cephalopod control system. For this task, there is no need to complete the construction of a global system of management and control of the situation at the country level.
      Want to say that this whole project is a fake? No appliances, no features, nothing. Where is the firewood from?


      You apparently didn’t understand anything ...

      In order to build your “Local Submarine Vehicle Control System” in real time, you need to change all the traditional science, which still cannot create a high-speed safe transmission in the WATER ENVIRONMENT.
      Does it not reach you that basic science cannot do this?
      And you, about some kind of local project. who overtook fundamental science ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"