Long-awaited breakthrough: what really is "Hunter"?

88
Recently, the network posted the first photo of a promising Russian UAV, known under the designation C-70 "Hunter". Despite the first doubts about its authenticity, the experts eventually agreed that this was really his. Moreover, soon we were pleased with the new portion of the now high-quality photos, where the device can be seen in all its glory.

Long-awaited breakthrough: what really is "Hunter"?




"Hunter" and his prey

Immediately it is worth making a reservation that the material does not claim to be the ultimate truth and is an attempt to understand what the notorious UAV really is. Caution in this matter will not interfere, as it is simply impossible to find any detailed information about the new development of Sukhoi. The project is extremely secret, even by the standards of the Russian military-industrial complex, not accustomed to sharing details with the general public.

Suffice it to recall how long the appearance of the apparatus remained secret. By the way, some users of the Network have already called the new photos “leakage”. True or not - we do not know.

According to open source data, the Hunter is a heavy assault unmanned aerial vehicle. It is developed from 2012 year. The first run-out was made in June 2018 of the year, and in November the UAV made the first run on the runway on the eve of the first flight. Recall that running tests provide an opportunity to evaluate the performance of engines, control systems and on-board equipment. Engineers receive important information about how ailerons, elevators and directions work. It is also worth noting that, according to data from various sources, some of the onboard UAV systems are now being tested on the T-50-3, one of the prototypes of the fifth-generation Su-57 fighter. At the moment, this car can be easily distinguished from other prototypes by a new color: on it you can discern the silhouette of the “Hunter”.



In general, they often talk about the unification of the onboard equipment of the Su-57 and the Okhotnik. This is even somewhat strange due to the conceptual differences between the two complexes. "Hunter", despite the fact that he is sometimes referred to as the sixth generation, is not a fighter. At the same time, as far as one can judge, specific plans to create on the basis of the Su-57 drone also no. At least for now.

What is the concept of the UAV? At its core, as can be judged by its appearance, is stealth technology. The mass of the device is presumably 20 000 kilograms. Presumably, the “Hunter” will reach 1000 kilometers per hour, and its range will be up to six thousand kilometers.

According to reports, the concern "Radioelectronic Technologies" has already created the following systems for the new UAV:

- information management complex;
- automatic control system;
- equipment for interfacing with general object equipment;
- a system for monitoring and diagnosing onboard equipment;
- inertial satellite navigation system.



Most surprisingly, a number of sources cite as a date for the adoption of the “Hunter” into service 2020 a year or even earlier. At the same time, everyone familiar with history modern aviation a person knows that from the moment of the first flight of an aviation complex (which the “Okhotnik” has not yet completed) and before being put into service, ten or more years can pass. To this it is worth adding at least five more years to bring to a truly combat-ready state and another ten years, until all the originally planned aviation weapons are integrated into the complex. In this regard, the reports of the central Russian media are involuntarily recalled on the day of the first flight of the T-50, when the presenters announced that the aircraft was “fully operational”. It is also worth noting that the T-50 program and the Hunter program may have different tasks. If the latter was initially positioned as a prototype of a fighter of the future, then the new UAV is, rather, a stand for testing technologies with which Russia has a very difficult relationship (we are talking specifically about UAVs).



Types and analogues

If at the sight of the “Hunter” you have experienced a feeling of deja vu, do not be surprised. The creation of such complexes is one of the main aviation trends of recent years. You should not confuse the new UAV and the old Russian “Scat”, which was developed (is it?) By the MiG company and which was previously presented as a model. It has external differences, although, for example, the estimated mass of the “Skate” is also up to 20 000 kilograms.

The most famous "relative" of the Hunter is the American Northrop Grumman X-47B UAV, which made its first flight back in the 2011 year. Recall that this project has already been closed after the construction of two samples. But behind the back of the X-47B were quite real achievements. Back in July 2013, the drone first landed on the deck of an aircraft carrier. And in April, 2015, the X-47B, performed the first-ever procedure for refueling in the air in a fully automatic manner. The reason for the folding test was the high cost. Maybe there were some critical design flaws, but nothing is known about them.



Of the European fellows of the Hunter, we can recall the French Dassault nEUROn, which performed the first flight in 2012, as well as the British Taranis, capable of autonomously taking off and landing, as well as performing an autonomous flight en route. However, the Chinese leap in this area looks even more surprising. Recall that in recent times, China has revealed to the world a whole family of large unobtrusive UAVs. Recall that in January of this year, Chinese television presented a flight sample of the latest Sky Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle. Similar to the Russian UAV, but smaller in size.

Prospects for the "Hunter"

Someone sees in such devices a prototype of future combat aircraft: unmanned, unobtrusive, multifunctional. On the other hand, developers from different countries just have to solve the main tasks. First, any (or almost any UAV) can be neutralized without direct physical influence by intercepting control. The task in most cases is very difficult, but not impossible. Recall that the 9 of December 2011 of the year on Iranian television showed footage of the captured American RQ-170 Sentinel without visible damage - one of the most secret, expensive and complex UAVs in the world.

The way out can be the autonomization of drones through the widespread use of neural networks. However, this already raises questions of a moral and ethical plan. Indeed, in this case, only the robot will decide who will live and who will not. Therefore, as a possible scenario, experts are increasingly calling the concept that a single human-controlled fighter be able to control and target a group of UAVs. Perhaps Russia also decided to go this route. In this case, the rumors about the maximum unification of the electronic equipment of the Hunter and the Su-57 are also understandable. However, it is worth repeating that so far all these are only plans for the future.
88 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    25 January 2019 05: 42
    Finally, we gave birth to our military-industrial complex of a drummer ... now the question is how long will it take for all the stages of development and testing ... when will it really appear in the troops?
    1. +10
      25 January 2019 06: 13
      The same Lech - as long as no one gave birth to anything, this is just a flying stand, and no more. And a real drummer with us may appear in 5 years at best. The reason is extremely simple - those who oversee these projects simply do not see the point in drones!
      1. +5
        25 January 2019 06: 17
        The reason is extremely simple - those who oversee these projects simply do not see the point in drones!

        In what sense is that?
        In Syria, drones have shown their best side ... even the Jews have managed to hit our installation with their cheap kamikaze drone.
        So what is the specific reason?
        The thoughtlessness of technological progress or economic issues or the military’s reluctance to develop this piece of unmanned aircraft?
        1. +17
          25 January 2019 10: 04
          In that there is scientific and technological progress.
          When in 1938 the first jet airplane flew, a man knew about it. 100.
          The rest were chopped for what is steeper - a biplane or a monoplane with PD is far from even a thousand horses.
          Here, I think that we are here on the sofas also now.
          As always, they tell us and show what is possible.
          And, God forbid, how it comes down to the matter - here we have the removal of the brain ...
          So it’s not a fact that this unmanned one will be needed.
          Science and human brains do not stand still.
        2. +7
          25 January 2019 10: 30
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          So what is the specific reason?

          Technical backwardness. Our military-industrial complex is not capable of creating shock UAVs without using foreign components.
          Even small scouts make from foreign components. There are no miracles.
          PS: for an example. Everyone knows Hephaestus or SVP-24. It was born only after the acquisition of the French technology of inertial navigation system using laser gyroscopes. Now they give it out as mega-achievement, saying that unguided weapons are becoming effective as controllable in effectiveness ... While similar systems appeared in the West at the end of the last century and were used in the war with Iraq in 1991.
          This is one of the best examples.
          1. +4
            25 January 2019 12: 42
            Quote: Puncher
            Technical backwardness

            I can’t get it at all - how can our country, which is one of the world leaders in aircraft construction, moreover, military, finally build a drone? Which, in fact, is much simpler than an airplane and a little better than crafts from a circle of aircraft enthusiasts. In this matter, we are overtaken by countries that can never be called the leaders in aircraft manufacturing.
            1. -1
              25 January 2019 13: 08
              We can partially military. But our citizen proa
              1. +1
                30 January 2019 11: 50
                Quote: valek97
                We can partially military. But our citizen proa

                This is a dangerous fallacy, without the civilian sector, there will be no good dynamics and prices in the defense industry. And this means that the products will not be mass.
            2. +9
              25 January 2019 19: 47
              Quote: Gritsa
              as our country, one of the world leaders in aircraft manufacturing

              airplane building has nothing to do with it. All salt is in control and automation.
              1. +3
                26 January 2019 11: 39
                Quote: Dart2027
                All salt is in control and automation.

                But Buran flew and sat on the strip himself - is that what? So that we have the Hunter for the Predator and not only for him, and if we put AI in it, then everyone else will have a kirdyk, and we will have AI, remember this ..
                1. +3
                  26 January 2019 12: 40
                  Quote: Tatar 174
                  But Buran flew and sat on the strip himself - is that what?

                  Different tasks, Buran was not a weapon.
          2. +16
            25 January 2019 14: 44
            Quote: Puncher
            It was born only after the acquisition of the French technology of inertial navigation system using laser gyroscopes.
            I personally touched and tinkered with optical gyroscopes in the form of prototypes back in 2002 at one "non-flickering" enterprise. He was experienced at the time, but had problems with the longevity of the wholesalers. The production of fiber optic was hard. I don't know what they bought from the French, but that company has been doing it itself since the 90s. Maybe they bought it from the French, of course - our stewards can do anything. If you have your own, they can easily buy an imported one.
            1. 0
              3 March 2019 03: 21
              Yes, this fellow fantasized about the fact that we are not able to do gyroscopes) Iskander and other BRs, as he believes, fly, or the same type of caliber like a gyroscope there is one of the main autonomous navigation systems
          3. +4
            25 January 2019 21: 17
            So it’s not capable .. Cadres decide everything, as you know. We grow sapphires of 300 kilograms, of which very precise instruments are grinded :))
        3. 5-9
          -9
          25 January 2019 15: 50
          In the Great War, this (a 20-ton strike drone) is a big, expensive, but worthless thing. First, they are still remotely piloted, i.e. can be suppressed with the help of electronic warfare, and in 1 .... well, imagine it in the air defense zone (although it’s ground-based, at least F-2). This is a sacrifice. And why is it, how to use it? In the Great War, UAVs will be disposable things, so only small and soft ones are good. And we are preparing / preparing for BV.
          Now they have prepared a little and you can do other things, and there is a craving for counter-Po-Po wars, where they, big expensive shock UAVs, are just right for the place.
        4. 0
          3 March 2019 03: 41
          effective drones are now mostly small and medium-sized reconnaissance aircraft. drone drone shit because of the small bomb load and the need to use the WTO - because in the military they did not receive widespread use - they are mainly used for special operations to eliminate the leaders of the NBF, etc. Israeli ammunition is created primarily for automatic search for radar by radiation, arrival at a place by optical means to search for a target and destroy it.
          Any modern IFI bomber or attack aircraft is much more efficient and versatile than a strike UAV. And if you hang a bunch of different equipment on an UAV like on an MFI, then it will be worth it and there is no sense in such an UAV anymore.
          In short, summing up - an attack UAV bomb carrier should be able to use ordinary free-falling bombs and other types of deshmansky and powerful weapons, the same planning bombs, etc. The meaning of an expensive carrier is that he could use Deshman weapons,
          Regarding the domestic strike UAV in this article, it will most likely be a replacement for the su25 or su 24. But again, the question arises; what for is it needed if there are bombers and IFIs.
      2. 0
        25 January 2019 13: 43
        Quote: ANCIENT
        it’s just a flying stand, and no more.

        Unfortunately, not yet flying ..
        ..from the first flight of the aviation complex (which the "Hunter" has not yet completed) and before being put into service, ten or more years can pass ... (from the text).
      3. +1
        25 January 2019 17: 16
        "in 5 years at best" - 15 - 20 do not wait earlier
    2. +3
      26 January 2019 07: 27
      Recall that in recent times, China has revealed to the world a whole family of large unobtrusive UAVs. Recall that in January of this year, Chinese television presented a flight sample of the latest Sky Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle. Similar to the Russian UAV, but smaller in size.


      Here are just shown clone RQ-170 most likely ...


      And the "similar" to the Russian UAV took off already in 2016 ...

  2. -6
    25 January 2019 05: 51
    It’s just a hobby, perhaps a stand for testing control and communication systems, EMDS ...
    1. They did it in Chekalda, and this is the most technically backward plant in the Sukhoi system. No advanced machines can be made on it. This can only be done in KnA.
    2. To sculpt the fuselage under the stealth, and to leave such a terrible stern that frankly ruins all attempts to make stealth, stupid. Unless of course we are talking about an experimental machine for testing technologies.
    1. +7
      25 January 2019 14: 46
      Your half can have feed, either the ship or the ship. And the aircraft has the tail.
    2. +7
      25 January 2019 15: 59
      Another thing struck me. If the MiG Skat was designed with approximately the same take-off weight - 20 tons, and the engine was planned from the MiG-29 without an afterburner (max. Thrust of 5 tons), then the Okhotnik already had an AL-41F with an afterburner (and possibly controlled by a vector), thrust 9,5 tons without afterburner and 14,5 tons with afterburner ... The thrust-to-weight ratio is the same as that of the MiG-23 !!!
      Why such power for subsonic cuttlefish?
      Or is it not subsonic?
      For a quick and short take-off?
      For vigorous maneuvering without loss of speed?

      The sizes are also amazing. The wingspan is even larger than that of the T-50 (based on the proportion, if their chassis is unified). A lot of things can be shoved into such a glider, especially if you take into account the weight and volume savings on the cockpit with everything in it - an ejection seat, life support systems, control and display systems (for a person), a flashlight in the end ...

      The "amazing ass" may desecrate stealth in the rear hemisphere, but it seems that this flaw has been sacrificed to other options - high thrust-to-weight ratio, maneuverability, controllability (SWT) and quite possibly ... speed. For her, the old saying may be true: "Do not stand back to the forest, but attack it in front".
  3. +9
    25 January 2019 06: 03
    And in the last picture I liked the K-701, at TAPOiCh these planes were also dragged!
  4. +2
    25 January 2019 06: 21
    in which one man-driven fighter will be able to control and direct a group of UAVs at the target

    If so, then the fighter should be double. One person will not be able to control his own car + drone. In a quiet flight, it can still be when the UAV is on the machine behind the fighter, in a combat situation it is unlikely.
    1. +1
      25 January 2019 16: 09
      Here, rather than UAVs should follow the control plane, but on the contrary - it follows them at a distance, like a shepherd after a herd. With the unification of avionics, the pilot can fully rely on the "autopilot" to fully engage in combat control. Although the two-seater option is still preferable, the Indians jumped off the program of the two-seater T-50. And this is hardly useful to us in the foreseeable.
    2. +3
      26 January 2019 03: 31
      I think that such a serious machine as the S-70 simply cannot work without AI elements. The task of the pilot-operator in the presence of these very elements is simply to "set the dog on the target, and this, as you understand, is much easier. Although, your proposal for a two-seat Su-57 is interesting.
      1. +1
        26 January 2019 13: 23
        Although, your proposal for a double Su-57 is interesting.

        Yes, what a proposal, boh with you, although such a bundle would surely be a big headache for our non-friends. You can even turn the Su-34 (like a production aircraft with great modernization capabilities) into such a flying drone control platform. Only not with one UAV, but with 2-3. Such a squadron would control vast spaces. And with the possibility of a quick hit.
        1. +2
          26 January 2019 14: 24
          Personally, I think the Su-34 is at least outstanding. But in our case, it loses to the Su-57 in EPR, flight speed and super-maneuverability. The Su-34, after all, is more of a bomber than a fighter. Its maximum takeoff weight (45 tons) is 9,5 tons more than that of the Su-57. Therefore, nevertheless, "Frazor" (as the Americans "christened" the Su-57), in my opinion, is much preferable to "Fullback" but as a control center for the S-70 flock.
  5. +7
    25 January 2019 06: 22
    Even if this is just a demonstrator, then it touched on it which our specialists will receive will give us a lot of experience, and not only him. Well, probably right from the most important thing - software, structural materials and hardware stuffing. And here, probably, the software is the most important thing, everything will depend on its parameters in the first place, the further development of the UAV.
    1. -4
      25 January 2019 07: 15
      Quote: jonht
      construction materials and

      It is "iron", at NAPOiCH there is no equipment for creating elements from composite materials and specialists, too.
      1. +10
        25 January 2019 14: 49
        Quote: Puncher
        NAPOiCH has no equipment for creating elements from composite materials.
        There is such a word - "cooperation". Or maybe this UAV has an engine made of birch boards because there is no equipment and specialists for the production of aircraft engines?
      2. +3
        25 January 2019 16: 29
        For MC-21, the wings are shaken, and even without baking in an autoclave. They can also wind the "Hunter", what is the fundamental difference.
        They seem to be shutting down the assembly of the Su-34, they want to include it in cooperation on the MS-21 (they wanted to go to the Japanese fortel with carbon fiber and resins). I wondered why they limited themselves to such a limited series - 120 Su-34, but maybe they are going to put the future of strike aviation on such "Hunters"? Risky, of course, but if it works out under control - a link of "Hunters" for one Su-57, then he will manage and cover if necessary ...
        Well, that’s it - sophistry on a freshly filed topic.
        1. +3
          25 January 2019 23: 21
          Quote: bayard
          link "Hunters" for one Su-57

          - something from the category "Me and Selma Hayek in the central barbecue house of Gavrilovsk". Of the believable, only "I". :)
  6. -2
    25 January 2019 06: 32
    Of course, it is necessary to bring to mind (as much as the most ridiculous "mind"), but how can, in the coming decades, a machine replace a person !? Yes, I am an adherent of the old and I am suspicious of such things. And where is the line between this UAV - a cruise missile, of various modifications - and the latest fighter, bomber, man-controlled?
    1. +3
      25 January 2019 13: 48
      Less skepticism. Skepticism has never been an engine of progress. All once for the first time. I need to invent, experiment. I think they are waiting for the engine type 30 of the second stage and ROFAR, which should be on this plane. Is it interesting to use air-to-air missiles? product 180?
      1. +1
        25 January 2019 16: 48
        Yes, if in such a "ass", yes "Product-30", this is what power will trample !!! Then he will dance any lezginka on his tail without a tail ... I smile, ... for good. Indeed, the type and power of the selected engine (AL-41F) hints at not quite 1000 km / h of maximum speed, but rather much more. But will the chosen aerodynamic scheme allow it? ... He'd rather be a drummer, but on ships. With an arsenal of 2 X-31s and 2 X-35s (4 in total), any Arlie-Burke unit of such pepelats will be eaten, and the AUG will be bitten ... If they learn to fly.
    2. +2
      25 January 2019 16: 21
      Well, in fact, the introduction of AI logic into such a device is quite a reasonable and safe measure. The bottom line is that the device is largely planned to be used for combat in the air and against targets on the ground. The goals are agreed in advance, and in the air the "friend or foe" system will help make the right decisions.
      So at this moment there is no complicated specificity of decision making. This is of course in the framework of discussions about the role of man.
      This question is more acute for ground-based automated systems. There could easily be a false target, or an unsafe fire. There, a solution is required soon enough, and there is a much higher risk of losing contact with the management center.
  7. 0
    25 January 2019 06: 54
    Are there not too many rounded elements for Stealth?
    1. +2
      25 January 2019 11: 19
      Roundness is not a problem for stealth. In the 80s, when the first generation of "invisible" was created, there simply were no computers powerful enough to calculate the reflection of radio waves from curved surfaces in a reasonable time frame. Therefore, shape F-117 was formed by flat panels.
      Now there are no such problems with computing power and calculation of curved surfaces is quite affordable.
      Here the question is different - how is the situation in Russia with full-size anechoic chambers in which EPR is measured? In the states of such, EMNIP, 5 pieces, including one very large one, containing B-2. In Russia about 5 years ago there was not a single one. And I have never met information that such was built somewhere.
      1. 0
        25 January 2019 16: 51
        One definitely is, it was even shown on TV. But I will not give the link - I am not a collector.
      2. 0
        26 January 2019 03: 53
        Maybe I’m not quite in line, but look here:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMYBhJymYfc
    2. +1
      25 January 2019 16: 22
      As "Puncher" has already stated in the comments, most likely the glider is not the final solution. And this copy was given for the development of technologies, with which he will quite cope.
  8. +7
    25 January 2019 07: 00
    The most surprising thing is that a number of sources cite 2020 as the date of adoption of the "Hunter" for armament, or even earlier.

    They will take them into service, but they will not give money for the construction, because it is too expensive.
    1. +3
      25 January 2019 13: 14
      Quote: Tashkent
      they won’t give money for the construction, because it’s too expensive.

      Well ... you can use "roundabout" ways ... "be satisfied" with ,, intermediate ,, samples! Those. , to develop everything that is possible: a glider, mounts for weapons, weapons, engines, "simple" control systems .. To bring it to such a state that it can be produced and used ... at least against the "Papuans"! Subsequently, as problems are eliminated, upgrade "on the fly"! To do this, drones must be modular in "open architecture" ... I remember when the first Ka-52s were "issued". In terms of performance, the amount of memory the avionics of these devices were akin to "Spectrum" compared to the latest "models" of Pentiums! And still "made a splash"! Let there be drones not the Horse Pegasus, but a "workhorse" ... after all, the drones Tu-141, Tu-143, Tu-300 were in service with the Soviet Air Force ... They could do something ... they did and had something what ! Don't start from scratch!
      PS If you look back, we can say that the Israelis used drones with television "guidance" against the Arab air defense in the 70-80s of the last century (I had to read the memoirs of Soviet military "advisers" in the Middle East ...). It's a pity that so much time has been wasted! Methods for countering unmanned aerial vehicles were not developed ... small-sized UAVs of the operational-tactical, tactical level were not developed ...
      1. +1
        25 January 2019 13: 53
        Well ... you can use "roundabout" ways ... "be satisfied" with ,, intermediate ,, samples

        It may be so, but they still will not give money. For it’s all expensive and pampering.
        1. 0
          25 January 2019 16: 59
          But if you promise that according to the functionality it will be like an attack aircraft / bomber, but will not require a pilot, they can give it. For to make a pilot - for the money it’s the same as building another plane. But the pilots are not enough.
  9. +2
    25 January 2019 08: 15
    Firstly, any (or almost any UAV) can be neutralized without direct physical impact by intercepting control. The task in most cases is very difficult, but not impossible. Recall that on December 9, 2011, Iranian television showed footage with the captured American RQ-170 Sentinel without visible damage - one of the most secret, expensive and complex UAVs in the world.
    That is. That is. And in general looking at the "Hunter" from the rear, so to speak. Is he definitely stealth? Well, as seen earlier on American airplanes. The rear generally differs even in the shape of the engine nozzle. And ir radiation feel In general, everything is clear that nothing is understandable yet. We will wait impatiently for the development of "Hunter" hi
    1. +3
      25 January 2019 17: 12
      Have you ever looked into the "ass" of the F-35? There is the same story, perhaps even wider.
      If you have installed a powerful engine with an afterburner and (possibly) UVT, then apparently someone needs it. Apparently speed, thrust-weight ratio and controllability turned out to be more important. In addition, this flaw is only in the rear hemisphere. And it is not necessary to turn "back to the forest", unless only after completing the task.
    2. +1
      26 January 2019 04: 02
      What about the rear view of the F-35? lol
  10. -1
    25 January 2019 08: 58
    "Hunter" in the army by 2030 -35. The author looked far away. No, of course, knowing our reality, such an option is plausible, but highly undesirable
    1. -1
      25 January 2019 23: 13
      Quote: mark1
      "Hunter" in the army by 2030 -35. The author looked far away. No, of course, knowing our reality, such an option is plausible, but highly undesirable

      - Is this already with Navalny? Yes, I wouldn’t look so far ...
  11. BAI
    +2
    25 January 2019 09: 31
    what is the “Hunter" really?

    Layout for testing solutions for the new long-range bomber.
    1. +1
      25 January 2019 10: 18
      Quote: BAI
      Layout for testing solutions for the new long-range bomber.

      Thinking "analog plane"?
      1. BAI
        +1
        25 January 2019 11: 52
        Seem to be. After all, we don’t have a single serial flying wing. No experience.
        1. 0
          25 January 2019 17: 16
          Well, the French at one time also experimented - according to the "Concorde" program, and the famous "Mirage" turned out. From an analogue demonstrator to fighters. Moreover, they are quite successful.
          1. 0
            25 January 2019 23: 11
            Quote: bayard
            Well, the French at one time also experimented - according to the "Concorde" program, and the famous "Mirage" turned out. From an analogue demonstrator to fighters. Moreover, they are quite successful.

            - I think you are very confused. A mirage with a deltoid wing appeared before Concord. Moreover, the first delta was FD.2.
            1. +1
              25 January 2019 23: 25
              Of course earlier, but with the delta wing, the French (like the British) began to work under the Concorde program, aviation then generally only reached Mach two. We also had our own experimental aircraft for testing the "Bartini wing" - a converted MiG-21 with just such a wing. Then, by the way, they tried to install a similar wing (like on the Tu-144) on the first version of the Su-27 (T-10), but it didn't work out very well ...
              And I read about the history of the creation of the Mirage and its wing back in the cadet years ... Just about the story with Concord.
              1. -2
                25 January 2019 23: 37
                Quote: bayard
                Of course earlier, but with the delta wing, the French (like the British) began to work under the Concorde program, aviation then generally only reached Mach two. We also had our own experimental aircraft for testing the "Bartini wing" - a converted MiG-21 with just such a wing. Then, by the way, they tried to install a similar wing (like on the Tu-144) on the first version of the Su-27 (T-10), but it didn't work out very well ...
                And I read about the history of the creation of the Mirage and its wing back in the cadet years ... Just about the story with Concord.

                - You're wrong. Delta came from Germany and began to work on them from the mid 40s. The same FD.2 is the beginning-mid-50s. And Mirages are about that period.
                Concord is much later.
                Bartini Wing ???????????????? Hrenini.)))) Mig-21I was worked out precisely under the revival wing of the Tu-144. When it turned out that the Europeans switched to the Concord project in the revitalizing wing, they made the Mig-21I.
                All you could read in your cadet years is Tsikhosh. :)))
                1. +4
                  26 January 2019 01: 30
                  The Bartini wing is a deltoid wing with variable sweep along the leading edge. Bartini was proposed and calculated in (if memory serves) 1942 for airplanes with a speed of Mach 2 - 2,5. Theory So before the Germans, but not Russian, but the red Italian prince.
                  The wing of the Tu-144, although ogival, has a pronounced kink along the leading edge, which gave the best aerodynamic quality and was more perfect in this regard than the wing of the "Concorde".
                  About the MiG-21A really - the wing was lively.

                  I hope the last word in your opus is not obscene?

                  And what I read in my cadet years, I borrowed from a very good library, including particle board. I just studied the history of the creation of various aircraft. Then a detailed story about "Concorde" and about the developers of the Mirage, who took advantage of the developments on the wing of the Concorde.
  12. +3
    25 January 2019 11: 17
    However, this already raises moral and ethical issues. Indeed, in this case, only the robot will decide who lives and who does not.

    There are no moral and ethical restrictions to strike at previously explored targets. Automatic / semi-automatic takeoff, passage along the route in automatic mode, dropping bombs or launching missiles with a laid down flight task at a point with coordinates XX / YY and return to base. Issues of ethics and morality in the context of the "three laws of robotics" arise only on the battlefield during hostilities with the need to detect and reliably identify / identify the enemy, make a decision to defeat and choose a method of destruction. This is where our options begin, not earlier. And then many authors and commentators forget about the complete automation of such weapons as: mines of all kinds, anti-aircraft missiles with a homing head, cluster warheads with self-aiming elements, etc. All questions of ethics and morality have long and repeatedly been comprehended, the necessary decisions and restrictions are laid down in the Combat manuals and instructions for combat use and are successfully used.
  13. +2
    25 January 2019 12: 54
    ".... A way out of the situation can be the autonomy of drones through the widespread use of neural networks. ....."
    =========
    Well, in general, the phrase "neural networks" is better to write in quotes (after all, these are not neurons in the biological sense of the word, and their "miserable likeness" based on microelectronics) .... But, this is so .... (K word) ...
    The question is: Are there any "neural" elements of "artificial intelligence" on the Iskander, Caliber, Tomogavka ??? The question is MIXED (who - what considers "an element of artificial intelligence" ... someone also counts a calculator). But there is also "electronic terrain maps and a satellite course correction system and a homing system for the IR and optical images of targets included in the program ...
    1) cheapest option : It is possible to make the "drone" fully telecontrolled (the danger is clear: the possibility of "jamming" the remote control channel or even "intercepting control") ...
    2) the most expensive option : You can try to make a completely "independent" "drone" with elements of "artificial intelligence, which will not only patrol in a given square, but also independently find targets (along the way, distinguishing between" fellah with a shovel on his shoulder "and" barmaley with "Kalash" on the shoulder ".... Terribly expensive and not too effective ...... (this idea incidentally ruined the X-47B project !!!)
    3) but you can try to make some analogue of "Caliber" or "Tomahawk", which using the same principles could get close to the target, but not "rush into the embrasure" but drop the ammunition (it is possible to aim it at the target) and also "on "soft paws" to try to return home "... This option seems to be the MOST OPTIMAL and COMPLETELY REALIZABLE at the modern technological level at COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE (not" cheap ", namely," acceptable "(according to the criterion of" cost / efficiency ") cost ...
    God forbid! I am not saying that this is "easy and simple" - simply: POSSIBLE !!!
    1. +6
      25 January 2019 15: 44
      Last night there was a presentation of the English neural network DeepMind.
      StarCraft 2 game was chosen as the testing ground. Quite by chance I found out about the broadcast and decided to see, I’m a little familiar with it. Whoever doesn’t know this is a military strategy, where the base and resources are given under control (which are located not only near the base, but also on the entire map and you also need to capture them and protect them). Next, you have to build buildings, develop technology, build troops. Where there is aviation, infantry, tanks. And only you decide what and how to build, try to find out what the enemy is doing and somehow change plans in order to resist its development. There are a lot of combinations, moreover I don’t even dare to discuss the sequence of actions, chess is not at all nearby. Here you need to solve a huge number of problems in real time and in real time react to the enemy. It is necessary to manage troops, send detachments, decide what and where will be, who defends, who is for reconnaissance, and what the enemy is doing. In general, it is an extremely difficult thing for a computer that will act not according to patterns, as in chess, but think and react to what is happening on the battle map.
      So, this neural network has broken people to the smithereens, clean it up. Using different tactics and strategies, sometimes adjusting, sometimes taking completely inhuman moves, while remaining extremely effective. There even commentators with experience of 20 years were amazed, saying that they had never seen such a thing on a professional level.
      True, one player was able to win one battle yesterday, taking advantage of the dormant activity of the neural network, which for some reason was in no hurry to go on the offensive, as well as a competent landing in the rear of the AI. They write that before this battle they changed the settings of the neural network, disabling some of the capabilities. Apparently there should be no 10-0 account in favor of the AI.

      Nevertheless, the neural network acted competently, not clumsily like a robot beating in a jamb and unable to get through the door. For example, once it was extremely effective in winning one duel, completely encircling the player’s army, dividing his into three squads and attacking from three sides through three very narrow passages. Using one, the whole army would not be able to get through - it would have to take turns through a narrow passage to a superior enemy. Very impressed.

      This is what I am for. 30 years ago, to make a call it was necessary to go to the neighbors and dial a number on a spinning dial)) And now the phone in your hands does so much that it was impossible to even imagine. I think the Wright Brothers also laughed. What will happen to neural networks in 10 years, in 20 years? I think very soon they will reach a level at which it will be very easy for them to provide control, at least in the narrow specialty, under which this or that equipment will be sharpened.
      1. 0
        29 January 2019 10: 01
        SC2 bots still click a lot. And SC2 has a limited set of rules. Plus adjustments for specific cards. Indicate a detour on the map, well, even for the dumbest AI in RTS, it was perfectly done. And yes, the mechanics of SC2 are very primitive compared to the same C&C, where, for example, you can form fortified areas from buildings.
        1. 0
          29 January 2019 12: 37
          If you were interested, this is not a bot for CK2. AI allowed to watch replays of games of top and not so players. Then, having understood the basics, the AI ​​began to play with itself (for about 2 weeks like playing, if not confusing). At first, some tactics (in particular, rush) prevailed, but over time he was able to adapt to them and find an antidote. They stopped bringing victory, AI played and played, found new and new tactics that bring victory, and then found an antidote against them. And as a result, after 2 weeks I was able to take out 10-0 top players. That's all. And here the dumbest AI, where does the bypass? They knew how to move around the map back in the 90s, if not earlier. Fortifications in SK2 are also built by dense building. Anyway, where does C&C have to do with it?))
          And the average number of clicks for this AI is less than that of most top Koreans. In general, for each item you wrote something different.
          If interested - google and read, look =)
          1. 0
            29 January 2019 12: 40
            A bot is an AI running through human interfaces. In this case, an unreadable AI is exactly a bot on 100%, in contrast to the usual AI, which can receive resources through scripts and see the map completely.
            1. 0
              29 January 2019 12: 50
              Sorry, there is no desire to talk about the meaning of the word bot, etc. I gave a specific example. Everything else is a completely different question, be it C&C, AI, which sees the entire map as a whole, and so on. I don't understand what it is)
              I wrote what I wrote. I’m interested in talking about this issue, but not so much about the rest. Yet this is not the subject of drones request
              1. 0
                29 January 2019 12: 55
                In addition, in this case there is an attempt to create a bot that can play as a person, receiving the same information. And to the drones completely, because the real drone must perform the task without human intervention based on the information available to the person.
                1. 0
                  29 January 2019 13: 54
                  Well drone strife =))
                  In different ways, you can set the framework and draw the boundaries of the allowed AI drone. About that and speech. In this case, I would rephrase a little. A real drone must perform a task without human intervention on the basis of available drone information. And he gets it from a person or from his own funds, this is not a matter of principle.
                  As we can see, a fully trained AI is capable of acting independently of a person, knowing the "rules of the game". It is clear that right now pushing such an AI (or similar) into a drone is risky, but if you hone its skills, where it can manually correct the behavior (set extreme boundaries), it will be quite workable in my opinion in the near future. In fact, if we replace the map with a real one, but naturally in 3D, if we replace the units with real units (tanks, self-propelled guns, ships, ground objects, etc.), then it will not make much difference, if exaggerated. You can explain the rules, where to fly at what altitude, how to fly around dangerous air defense zones, and revealed online, which targets are priority, which ones pose a threat, all the same by and large. Moreover, in parts, all this, in principle, already exists now in one form or another, such as the gradation of threats at air defense systems, where the computer calculates the most dangerous targets. You just need to combine it all, explain what is needed for what, show how to work with it, set a task. I am sure this work is already underway.

                  Well, thinking out loud. In the west, there is the experience of drones doing landings, takeoffs, refueling and other "routine". Why not use these blocks again separately from AI, for example, that is, call them "landing" and so on. When the AI ​​needs to sit down, it just refers to this block and that's it. Collect these tools separately and the AI ​​will use them when needed. That is, part of the work has already been done. In terms of movement, training will not be needed - the terms are reduced. Although, of course, how it is there, as far as possible such a pairing, I certainly do not know =)
                  1. 0
                    29 January 2019 14: 00
                    And how does a neural network fundamentally differ from an imperative algorithm? In general, nothing. It is clear that the landing algorithm can be prescribed strictly. With training, the question here is that in real combat the vehicles will die quickly. Training l / s in such conditions is conducted on the basis of external analysis. That is, the staffs are beginning to think about new tactics of application. The drone is still autonomous, even if the network is there, it will be autonomous. And correcting the behavior will be a simple rewriting of settings for all machines.
                    1. 0
                      29 January 2019 15: 33
                      And how is a neural network fundamentally different from an imperative algorithm? In general, nothing.

                      At this stage, differences are not enough. I think the difference is that manually you do not need to register a huge number of reactions. Itself is thought through practice.
                      With training, the question here is that in real combat, cars will die quickly

                      So who will be in their right mind to release the chick from the nest on the very first day. Six months, let the various simulations drive non-stop, which will be comparable to 1000 years of practice.
  14. +1
    25 January 2019 12: 56
    The vulnerability of UAVs is very high.
    For example, if you put interference in the GPS navigation ranges and in the channel of the radio altimeter — which for the manned aircraft will create some inconvenience, but will not lead to a critical situation, then for the UAV this will cause unsolvable problems — it will lose the ability to determine the flight altitude (except in the barometric way) .
    For example, having interrupted the signal of the radio altimeter, you can force the device to decrease, even touching the surface (if it is not equipped with a barometric altimeter).
    1. 0
      25 January 2019 17: 25
      A frequency-code-manipulated signal with tuning according to a random law can solve the problem of noise immunity ... altimeter.
  15. 0
    25 January 2019 15: 57
    and then they will start to fall .... while the small ones fell yesterday, it’s not a pity, but how will the big ones start tomorrow too?
  16. +2
    25 January 2019 16: 10
    The solution to the situation could be autonomy of drones through the widespread use of neural networks. However, this already raises moral and ethical issues. Indeed, in this case, only the robot will decide who lives and who does not.
    Well, from what. to whom to live, and to whom not, the operator decides, and the robot only solves the task of fulfilling the target designations.
    moral and ethical claims against the robot are justified as far as they can be justified against a solid fuel accelerator carrying an RPG grenade to the window of a house.
  17. 0
    25 January 2019 20: 35
    For some reason, I want to have a lot of such devices.
  18. -1
    25 January 2019 22: 43
    The whole story with this letak will end in the same way as with SU57. Sawing the budget, they will report on success in the media in everything they can with this device, they will declare unimaginable quantities and by the 200 ... swagger year they will make 2 pieces - they will amuse the king and ride at exhibitions for the amusement of people. I almost forgot - "The military acceptance at the Star about unparalleled analogues will work out. Sadness ...
  19. 0
    26 January 2019 00: 36
    Damn, we didn’t come up with a wheel, not to mention numbers and the alphabet ...
  20. +1
    26 January 2019 08: 21
    In this whole project, I like the idea of ​​unification. I myself am engaged in the small-scale construction of cargo drones.
  21. +1
    26 January 2019 09: 34
    Quote: Puncher
    Quote: The same LYOKHA
    So what is the specific reason?

    Technical backwardness. Our military-industrial complex is not capable of creating shock UAVs without using foreign components.
    Even small scouts make from foreign components. There are no miracles.
    PS: for an example. Everyone knows Hephaestus or SVP-24. It was born only after the acquisition of the French technology of inertial navigation system using laser gyroscopes. Now they give it out as mega-achievement, saying that unguided weapons are becoming effective as controllable in effectiveness ... While similar systems appeared in the West at the end of the last century and were used in the war with Iraq in 1991.
    This is one of the best examples.

    It’s like three years ago they shouted that devices with arrows are the coolest thing, now they are boasting on the contrary)) well, or another example, air conditioners on Mercedes in the 70s, but what about Vaz and me?)
  22. -2
    26 January 2019 09: 45

    Quote: Herrr
    I think that such a serious machine as the S-70 simply cannot work without AI elements. The task of the pilot-operator in the presence of these very elements is simply to "set the dog on the target, and this, as you understand, is much easier. Although, your proposal for a two-seat Su-57 is interesting.

    It is unlikely (although it may be for export later) that will be su 57 .... but for the A100, the prime minister is yes ... good depth is obtained because with 70 with such a mass can carry long-range rackets
  23. 0
    26 January 2019 12: 52
    judging by the duckling twenty years can go
  24. -5
    26 January 2019 15: 29
    VNA Ukraine pErEmoga. We have a breakthrough. No difference. We have a little better, but the methods of processing the population are the same.
  25. The comment was deleted.
  26. 0
    26 January 2019 16: 22
    Mdaaa, money ... Go find their detectives so that the UAV project can be developed normally, when there are no connections at the top or a position of sovereign bread ... when everything is by itself ...
    1. 0
      26 January 2019 17: 28
      It turns out that the Skat from the MiG was ruined? They don’t let MiG rise at all ..
      1. 0
        26 January 2019 17: 46
        Who knows, we’ve just screwed up and how it turns out)
  27. 0
    26 January 2019 22: 41
    Only someone who has done nothing himself can criticize other people's work.
    A ,, Hunter ,, - good luck!
  28. +1
    28 January 2019 12: 30
    As soon as the Hunter learns to carry tactical nuclear weapons, you can talk to the Americans heart to heart, whether the UAV corresponds to the description of a "cruise missile" or you need to compose a new treaty ... such attacks of iskanderophobia?
  29. 0
    29 January 2019 09: 56
    What are 20 kg? This is for a typical fighter (MiG-000, "Typhoon") almost max. takeoff weight. For comparison, the tractor-tractor in the photo weighs 29 tons. There is a maximum take-off maximum of 10 tons. And most likely even less.

    He has neither a cabin with life support systems, nor strength requirements due to the absence of very large weapons. And all this again reduces the required weight of the fuel, ext. volumes, etc. downward spiraling.