Military Review

American drone drone MQ-9 Reaper got new features

93
American drone drone MQ-9 Reaper got new features

The American reconnaissance and strike drone MQ-9 Reaper has received new opportunities. According to Flightglobal, the upgraded version of the MQ-9A UAV is now able to automatically go to the alternate aerodrome and automatically land with a larger mass.


General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, the UAV development company, has conducted a series of tests on the upgraded version of the MQ-9A Reaper UAV. According to the company, the new version of the drone is able to automatically go to the alternate aerodrome in case of bad weather or damage to the landing strip. Operators were given the opportunity directly in flight to add alternate aerodromes to the program and issue a command to leave for them.

It is alleged that the drone is able to make an automatic landing even at an unfamiliar airfield. To do this, he first flies around a new landing point under the control of the operator, examines it using his sensors, and then lands automatically.

Details of other enhancements to the MQ-9 are not disclosed.

The first flight of the MQ-9 Reaper drone took place on February 2, 2001. The drone is equipped with a turboprop engine. According to General Atomics, the Reaper, which has become the main strike UAV in the United States, has a flight duration of more than 27 hours, a maximum speed of up to 400 km / h and a cruising speed of up to 250 km / h, a ceiling of up to 15 km and a carrying capacity of 1740 kg with 6 suspension points.

The MQ-9 is equipped with a fault-tolerant flight control system and triple redundancy of the avionics system architecture. Able to carry Hellfire missiles with GOS and GBU-12 Paveway II laser-guided bombs, as well as GBU-38 satellite-guided bombs.

Intelligence and combat UAV MQ-9 are in service with the Air Force and the CIA, as well as the Air Force of Italy, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Kazakhstan, France, the United Kingdom and other countries.
93 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. alexmach
    alexmach 26 June 2020 10: 38 New
    -4
    It is alleged that the drone is able to make an automatic landing even at an unfamiliar airfield. To do this, he first flies around a new landing point under the control of the operator, examines it using his sensors, and then lands automatically.

    It will be great when, after examining the alternate airfield in automatic mode, the drone decides to strike at it :)
    1. Elena Zakharova
      Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 10: 41 New
      -16
      All these drones are easily destroyed, both physically and using electronic warfare systems.
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 26 June 2020 10: 45 New
        +6
        It seems to me that you are very far from reality. Only this week the discussion of the situation with the combat use of drones and their prospects for the future barely subsided.
        By what means are they easily destroyed?
        In what conditions?
        In the dash? In the dash, everything is easy.
        1. Elena Zakharova
          Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 10: 55 New
          -8
          Means for destroying drones are enough, especially such as this MQ-9 Reaper.
          All this equipment is for the war with the poits.
          So far, there has not been a single conflict with the use of drones among equal opponents.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 26 June 2020 11: 04 New
            +8
            Enough to destroy drones

            Well, list them, at least fluently. Let’s say, using the example of the Russian army, say a few words about their number, well, since in your opinion there are enough of them, and under what conditions do you think they can easily cope with this task.
            So far, there has not been a single conflict with the use of drones among equal opponents.

            Seriously? What if I told you that such a conflict is happening right now? Say in Libya? There are quite equal opponents at war. Tell the Papuans? Well, let's not look at the Papuans. Show at least a few words how the use of the Russian army will differ in such a situation? Against an equal opponent, of course. And there is no need to write empty general words like "enough funds" and "easily destroyed" from a comment to a comment. Sketch out, at least, by whom and by what means and who has enough of them. We have been breaking spears on this topic for a week now. And you have enough of everything and everything is easy.
            Do not duplicate nonsense.

            What you want.
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 26 June 2020 11: 16 New
              +1
              When people talk about Libya and Syria I always remember this little rabbit:
              https://youtu.be/4uAXBCod04E
            2. Charik
              Charik 26 June 2020 12: 23 New
              0
              On February 4, 2008, Reaper dropped a bomb on a truck carrying a Taliban mortar crew near Kandahar. [17] In 2009, Reaper UAVs were deployed in the Seychelles for operations against pirates in the Indian Ocean. [18] 2010 in Afghanistan, the third person in the leadership of Al-Qaeda, Mustafa Abu Yazid, was killed by a Reaper UAV strike; in 2012, one of the leaders of the Yemeni Al-Qaeda wing, Fahd al-Qusa, was killed by a Reaper UAV strike. 2016 was killed by a Reaper UAV strike. the leader of al-Qaeda in Yemen, Abdallah al-Sanaani. On January 3, 2020, an Iranian military leader, major general and commander of the al-Quds special forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), designed to conduct special operations outside Iran, Qasem, was killed Suleimani-UNDERWORKED POISONS-Ceiling: 15 km-Maximum speed: 400 km / h-HUSIT in Yemen, P27 from the ground- F15 Arabian shot down
            3. +5
              +5 26 June 2020 15: 40 New
              -2
              Well, on the one hand, the existence of quite regular parts of a foreign state somehow immediately made this conflict a little less equal. Yes, and there were plenty of UAVs crushed there, the account for the third dozen ... and the UAVs were crumbled on both sides .... moreover, the most powerful air defense system was the near-range air defense system ... which they drove through the desert.
              To ask how to bring down a high-altitude low-speed target with a wingspan of 20 meters is no less stupid than to ask how to shoot down a Malaysian Boeing ... all that gets in height, and the very first missile ...
              1. alexmach
                alexmach 26 June 2020 15: 46 New
                +2
                Well, on the one hand, the presence of completely regular parts of a foreign state somehow made this conflict a little less equal

                And are there generally regular parts or mainly Syrian proxies?
                Yes, and there were plenty of UAVs crumbled there, the account for the third ten goes ... and UAVs of both sides were crushed ...

                The number of UAVs shot down should be divided by approximately the same coefficient as the number of "Shells" destroyed there.
                It’s still I’m silent about the fact that the UAV, in theory, is just the easily replaceable vehicle that can be lost, and the lost air defense system is usually a lost crew.
                To ask how to bring down a high-altitude low-speed target with wingspan of 20 meters is no less stupid than to ask

                The answer "whatever you like" goes in the same place and "funds are sufficient."
                all that gets in height, and the first SAM

                Do you live in a one-dimensional world? Only the height is important, and the distance to the target does not play any role?

                After all, if I don't say that it is impossible to shoot down these rappers at all. I'm just saying that building an effective defense against them is not a trivial task at all. And even with such a defense, they are quite capable of "getting things done"
                1. +5
                  +5 26 June 2020 16: 52 New
                  -1
                  Well, what proxies with Bayaktars? After all, here it is because the UAV supposedly had the outcome of the Stalingrad, pah, El Alamein battle, pah, the pair of gang’s collisions ...

                  Well, I don’t see at all why the Carapace will not detect and will not be hit by the UAV that entered its detection / defeat zone, if it’s serviceable .... like the Growlers were not seen right above them. Of course, you can and should share, but there are a lot of fragments, unlike clearly glued videos, do not understand what.
                  Even the mediocre Bayaktar stands under 10 lyam - underreporting ....

                  Range .... I thought this was an obvious parameter ... taking into account the fact that Riper has only ATGM and UAB, and not AGM-158V, I think it should not be discussed at all. Any medium-range complex with a normal ceiling will bring down as many Ripers as it has rockets ... well, almost.

                  Again. What is an effective defense against Reapers? He goes astray with everything that he can reach ... no, if you only have a Shell or some other small complex, and the Ripper flies 14 km .... and so what's the problem? There are no easier and simpler targets, only civilian .... speed - no, maneuver - no, hundreds of kg of electronic warfare equipment - no ...
                  1. alexmach
                    alexmach 26 June 2020 17: 00 New
                    0
                    Range .... I thought this was an obvious parameter ... taking into account the fact that Riper has only ATGM and UAB, and not AGM-158V, I think it should not be discussed at all. Any medium-range complex with a normal ceiling will hit as many Ripers as it has rockets ... well, almost

                    Quickly googled, the range of target detection by Ripirah by itself, no one points anywhere. They only report that there is some kind of radar on it.
                    A medium-range complex, you say, well, this is at least a Buk in terms of military air defense, right? Is it possible to cover the entire "front" line with Buks?
                    no, if you only have a Shell or some other small complex, and the Ripper flies 14 km .... and so what's the problem?

                    The problem begins if he does fly at least at a distance of 24 and not 14 km. What can he do from such a distance? Well, even if no weapon is used, it could theoretically detect the position of the radar that detected it.
                    1. +5
                      +5 26 June 2020 17: 07 New
                      +1
                      Listen, if you can’t cover the entire front line (where did the line come from in the 21st century, oh well), then why ripper for 17 lyamas? SuperTukano is the best drummer. Cheap, make them 2000-5000 thousand and alga .... pilot training is also not like the F-35 will cost ..

                      14 km - this is the height if anything, we were talking about the air defense system MD.

                      Do you understand that a Reaper is a corn maize (according to LTX) with bombs, but expensive, without a pilot and capable of flying long and high?
                      although that "flying high" is no longer an ice, it seems like Powers was explained near Sverdlovsk ...
                      1. alexmach
                        alexmach 26 June 2020 17: 19 New
                        +1
                        Listen, if you can’t cover the entire front line (where did the line come from in the 21st century, oh well), then why ripper for 17 lyamas? SuperTukano is the best drummer. Cheap, make them 2000-5000 thousand and alga .... pilot training is also not like on the F-35 will cost

                        With Super Toucans, there will be a lot of pilots. And this is expensive. Reaper can also take the risk of looking for "where is the enemy's hole here?"
                        No front line? Oh no. Look at the same Idlib. Well, there is not a solid line, but a bunch of focal points of contact, in fact, near each settlement + as the columns move already mentioned ... where they move, because if there is no front line then there is no rear either. In the area of ​​hostilities moving.

                        14 km - this is the height if anything, we were talking about the air defense system MD.

                        Well, what kind of air defense missile system MD reaches 14 km in height? Desirable from existing military complexes. Here you are all repeating "anything" and what for example?
                        You understand that a ripper is a corn bomber (according to LTX) with bombs

                        Yes of course. Not maneuverable, not cheap. But not inconspicuous to the same. In general, really alone in the field, he is not a difficult goal.
                        Do you understand that this is primarily a means of long-term intelligence? That the enemy will not use only one Reeper, but will say more and cover him with something, shoot artillery at his intelligence. Well, as a last resort, he will sacrifice a pair of Ripers, but in return will reveal the firing positions of air defense systems and suppress them?
                      2. +5
                        +5 26 June 2020 17: 32 New
                        +1
                        Take a risk, with a slow boat with 400 km / h for 17 Lyamov seek out a hole ???? God grant your thoughts, but to the American generals in the ears !!!
                        Idlib - this is papusia, for the Papuans Riper - believe good! although the Americans themselves with F-XX bombs hundreds of times more dumped there ... for some reason ...

                        You again are going to exchange a microscope for an ax .... there are planes and much cheaper UAVs (which are not a pity) and false targets, etc. for reconnaissance, and Ripper is a drummer.
                      3. Grazdanin
                        Grazdanin 26 June 2020 18: 50 New
                        +1
                        Riper flight altitude 15 km, range JDAM 28 km. Carapace rocket 57E6E height 15, range 20. Carapace in the scrap. Beech with 9M317ME rocket. Height 25, range 50. May knock down. Who does he have? In that region in Syria, it’s like 20, Egypt 40, Azerbaijan 18. Can they cover the “front”? Not. Some part? Not. For effective work, they must be at a distance of up to a maximum of 25 kilometers from the “front”. This is the flight distance of an artillery shell. And if you consider that the fronts are now patchwork, it is better to keep it even further. What are they for? Covering important objects in the deep rear. How to bring down that? Fighter! Well, if there is of course. Very reasonable decision. Until it finds its radars, until it sends its rocket, until it shines on it, just something not good will fly into it. Well lucky, Ripper knocked down, what's next? Someone does not care about it? Of course not, to the manufacturer, because a new order will come.
                        And all your arguments about the cost are so ridiculous. This is generally few people care. If there are no human losses, they will write off any loss of technology, instead they will buy something new. In this case, in general, everyone is happy.
                        These rippers yesterday so soon, all will be written off. They have dozens of UAV development programs.
  2. Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 26 June 2020 10: 46 New
    0
    Yeah, they are easily destroyed, both on the Internet and with the use of a magic wand.
  3. Antidote
    Antidote 26 June 2020 10: 46 New
    -1
    For this reason, it is more profitable to let the pilot consume, because the plane cannot be destroyed both physically and using electronic warfare systems. On the other hand, they still give birth, and all sorts of hunters, altiuses and outposts are stupid. Yes.
  4. Freemason Mason
    Freemason Mason 26 June 2020 10: 47 New
    -1
    Quote: Elena Zakharova

    All these drones are easily destroyed, both physically and using electronic warfare systems.

    Apparently, they personally destroyed, since with such confidence you declare it lol
    1. Elena Zakharova
      Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 11: 49 New
      -1
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 26 June 2020 11: 53 New
        0
        According to official Russian sources, during the war in Georgia in 2008, four planes were lost - three Su-25 attack aircraft and one Tu-22M3 long-range bomber (initially talked about the reconnaissance modification of the Tu-22MR, later about the Tu-22M3 with a special reconnaissance container instead of a bomb load).
        In total, according to Georgian data, during the war 21 aircraft and 3 helicopters were shot down. However, later Georgian Defense Minister David Kezerashvili somewhat lowered his assessment: “Let's say this: 14 planes were shot down, among them the Tu-22 strategic bomber. This is a lot. "
        1. Elena Zakharova
          Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 11: 59 New
          -5
          And where are the losses of military aircraft mainly from Ukrainian beech and drones?
          Essentially nothing to say?

          Count the losses of Georgia in that war game.
      2. alexmach
        alexmach 26 June 2020 11: 58 New
        +5
        Russian Mig 29 shot down a Georgian drone

        What are you saying? And what did you write above about the war with the Papuans and not with equal rivals? In that war, the airborne forces won complete domination in the air in a couple of days, suppressing the entire ground-based air defense system, and Georgia, in principle, did not have fighter aircraft. Yes, in a situation of complete control of the air with the enemy, anything can be done at all, and this is not news, since the time of the Great Patriotic War, it’s generally known. But what equal rival will allow you such domination here is how easy it is to get it?

        Yes, it’s easy to fight the Papuans. It’s easy for everyone.
        1. Elena Zakharova
          Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 12: 01 New
          -8
          blah blah blah blah ......
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 26 June 2020 12: 21 New
            +1
            The drain is counted.
            All these drones are easily destroyed.

            Enough to destroy drones

            blah blah blah blah ......

            All you need to know about the level of your knowledge and the reasoning of your position.
        2. Pete mitchell
          Pete mitchell 26 June 2020 14: 37 New
          -1
          Quote: alexmach
          that war in a couple of days won complete dominance in the air

          Ask how it all happened, it seems to me, be surprised, unpleasant. The war of the “three eights” will not go down in history as a positive example. Although without her, there would not have been everything else
    2. Elena Zakharova
      Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 11: 51 New
      -5
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 26 June 2020 12: 07 New
        +6
        Though TTX take a look. Draw 2 ovals where R1 is the height of the shell damage and the flight height of MQ9 and R2 is the range of both. Do not make people laugh.
      2. alexmach
        alexmach 26 June 2020 12: 19 New
        +9
        Yeah .. we’ve already talked about the Papuans a bit, now let's sort it out on other issues.
        - By what means
        - In what conditions
        - who has enough of these funds.
        Let's start with the last one. Carapace C-1.
        Russian Aerospace Forces - 42 units 96K6, as of 2018 [50]
        Russian Navy - 12 units 96K6, as of 2018 [51]

        Only 54 units, as of 2018. Exactly enough? Why, to cover one single base of Heimim from how you put the Papuan attacks? Yes, I agree, enough for that. And for nothing more. Take an interest in how many of these rippers in total.

        Conditions .. But is it anything that the Shell is generally an object of air defense and is not suitable for covering the troops on the front line in principle? Well, their number is not enough to cover troops.

        Well, the last resort. Do you seriously compare Ripper with homemade drone drones in Syria? For Ripper, excuse me for the opportunity to hang in the air from day to day, approaching the line of contact and leaving for it, detecting anti-aircraft weapons and directing artillery fire at them or something else. And in general, conducting reconnaissance of positions and rear. I'm not saying that he himself has a radar and will probably find the same Shell without entering its affected area.

        Drones of this class already pose a serious threat to troops and a challenge to air defense systems, not the fact that there is an adequate answer to this call other than complete gaining dominance in the air, but you still try to conquer it, in a collision with an equal enemy then.

        And yes ... if you don’t go into details, everything is easy, just enough.
        The clips are wonderful, patriotic, caress and post them further.
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 26 June 2020 12: 28 New
          +7
          There is no point in explaining. If the shell is considered as a means of defeating MQ9. This means understanding the topic at the Star channel level.
    3. Elena Zakharova
      Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 11: 57 New
      -10
      Here is still very visible
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 26 June 2020 12: 27 New
        +9
        Really clear, then there’s simply nowhere else to go.
        By the way, what is there in the frame? not phalanx by chance? And what does he do at Heimim? Oh, and this is not fake news by accident?

        Really clear. Further, it makes no sense to discuss with you.
        1. Hagen
          Hagen 26 June 2020 12: 50 New
          +5
          Quote: alexmach
          not phalanx by chance?

          Just taken off the tongue laughing I think this is the Centurion C-RAM, which is based on the Mark 15 Phalanx CIWS.
        2. Nosgoth
          Nosgoth 26 June 2020 17: 17 New
          +1
          Either from the game ARMA 3 or DSC :-))))
      2. Hagen
        Hagen 26 June 2020 12: 39 New
        +4
        Quote: Elena Zakharova
        Here is still very visible

        In general, I am not opposed to the fact that UAVs worth $ 16-18 million are acceptable to destroy a commensurate in value missile. And we have those. However, I’ll notice to you that it’s not the Shell that shoots on the video, but something like the Amer Centurion. I won’t talk about the place, I don’t understand.
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 26 June 2020 13: 22 New
          +7
          I won’t talk about the place, I don’t understand

          everything is clear about the place. This is a video from a computer game. Pay attention to the movement of the camera.
        2. +5
          +5 26 June 2020 15: 44 New
          +1
          SAM so many (16-18 million) do not cost .... the latest coolest Standard SM-6 costs 6,8 lyam ... therefore they will be bought (even according to plans) a rather limited number - ten for each Mk41 carrier for 20 years. ..
      3. Pete mitchell
        Pete mitchell 26 June 2020 14: 41 New
        +2
        Elena Nikolaevna, well, mine, how so. I was ready to explain myself to ..., and here they are lol lol love
      4. vadim dok
        vadim dok 26 June 2020 17: 20 New
        +1
        By chance - these are not computer shooters? More thoroughly necessary, more thoroughly it is necessary to prepare!
  5. pereselenec
    pereselenec 26 June 2020 10: 49 New
    -5
    Quote: Elena Zakharova
    All these drones are easily destroyed, both physically and using electronic warfare systems.


    Why then in Libya they were not easily destroyed physically or with the use of electronic warfare systems, but a bunch of "Pantsirev" was poured onto them?
    1. Elena Zakharova
      Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 10: 52 New
      -5
      Do not duplicate nonsense.
  6. pardonov
    pardonov 26 June 2020 11: 00 New
    -1
    Quote: Elena Zakharova
    All these drones are easily destroyed, both physically and using electronic warfare systems.

    Madame Really Donald Cook USS Donald Cook (DDG-75)
    1. Elena Zakharova
      Elena Zakharova 26 June 2020 11: 01 New
      -1
      What did you want to say?
      1. Jack O'Neill
        Jack O'Neill 26 June 2020 13: 57 New
        +2
        Elena, and you fatly watched people. Vidos with ARMA3 is normal.)
    2. pereselenec
      pereselenec 26 June 2020 12: 02 New
      0
      Quote: pardonov
      Madame Really Donald Cook USS Donald Cook (DDG-75)


      It’s time for another medal, this time for scaring Amer’s drones.

      1. Pete mitchell
        Pete mitchell 26 June 2020 14: 43 New
        0
        Quote: pereselenec

        Where can I get one? He will collect
  7. shahor
    shahor 26 June 2020 17: 54 New
    +1
    Quote: Elena Zakharova
    All these drones are easily destroyed

    And how many have you personally destroyed? Fly swatter?
  8. meandr51
    meandr51 28 June 2020 09: 53 New
    0
    We in the pioneer camp made radio-controlled models of aircraft. Why not reinstate this business? Let the kids solve the problem of liberating heaven from enemy drones ...
  • Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 26 June 2020 10: 54 New
    +2
    Quote: alexmach
    in the automatic mode, the drone decides to strike at it

    Technically, this is the same thing. Landing is even more difficult, and much more.
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 26 June 2020 11: 19 New
      0
      Well yes. But they just trust him to sit down and apparently not very much to shoot. Even here in the article they write that he is flying around a new airdrome under the supervision of an operator.
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 26 June 2020 11: 22 New
        +1
        The question is purely ethical. From the series, if an accident occurs with the car on autopilot, then the noise is for the whole world. And no one cares that on this day there have been thousands of accidents of ordinary cars.
      2. Pete mitchell
        Pete mitchell 26 June 2020 14: 54 New
        -2
        Honestly, the article left a vague impression: a database covering probably the whole world is stitched into this typewriter and, in principle, there is no problem setting an airfield and the typewriter will go and sit down. This technology has been tested for a long time. Now, if he circled the strip is able to assess its suitability for landing - that would probably be interesting.
        The original article said that he had restrictions on the crosswind raised - that’s what they are not well done
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 26 June 2020 15: 28 New
          +1
          a database covering probably the whole world is stitched into this machine

          Yes, there is no such database, and it is impossible to flash it into the drone. Therefore, he needs to fly around an unfamiliar airfield before landing. So to say "look around".
          Now, if he circled the strip is able to assess its suitability for landing - that would probably be interesting

          On the whole, yes, the idea is interesting. But the fact is that someone sent him to this alternate aerodrome? It seems to me that this someone should have thought about his suitability.
          1. Pete mitchell
            Pete mitchell 26 June 2020 16: 07 New
            +1
            Quote: alexmach
            Yes, there is no such database, and flash it in ...

            Correct me if I'm wrong: you from Estonia seem? Ask why Combat Talon visited the country in '97? And at low altitude has passed the entire eastern border?
            So in '97 he built a sunset having two points in space, into the light. And today this technology is available for all users, and they perform calls using data from directories. Something like this
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 26 June 2020 17: 03 New
              0
              Ask why Combat Talon visited the country in '97?

              Want to say mapped the terrain?
              Yes, I readily believe. The thing is that a detailed "map of the whole world" somewhere on the Pentagon's servers can and can be had, but it is not possible to shove it into a drone. This is evidenced by the need to fly around an unfamiliar airfield before landing.
              1. Grazdanin
                Grazdanin 26 June 2020 17: 08 New
                -1
                I agree. In detail there is no surface map and is not needed. A new house can be built in 3 months, and destroyed in a minute.
              2. Pete mitchell
                Pete mitchell 26 June 2020 22: 26 New
                +1
                Quote: alexmach
                mapped the area ... The thing is that a detailed "map of the whole world" can be found somewhere on the Pentagon servers ....

                I still wildly apologize, but how do you imagine the use of digital cards? A flyover may be necessary to assess the condition of the strip, otherwise there is no point. Just now, one of my friends traveled on his own site: this thing builds a call profile “from around the corner” for the director / autopilot using databases ... easily
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 26 June 2020 22: 39 New
                  0
                  using databases ... easy

                  Local databases or the same database available to her online during the flight?
                  1. Pete mitchell
                    Pete mitchell 27 June 2020 00: 26 New
                    +1
                    Quote: alexmach
                    Local databases or the same database available to her online during the flight?

                    Do you run the risk of loading databases during the flight? I would say boldly. It is clear that if the device is used in a specific region, then they drive a specific database into it, which is adjusted as necessary. Many years ago, on the MiG-23 aircraft navigation allowed to use a square of 6000x6000 km, and we used only 2000x2000, for a guarantee. Estimate what is now available.
                    The article by the way does not say about the transfer of a big data file in flight.
          2. Grazdanin
            Grazdanin 26 June 2020 16: 49 New
            +1
            The article was not fully translated. Another cool feature not described. He can do all this regularly, i.e. fly to an unprepared field airfield, not far from the mission, refuel and continue to fly. T.O. From one control point you can control a large number of drones, but large distances.
          3. Grazdanin
            Grazdanin 26 June 2020 17: 00 New
            0
            Quote: alexmach
            think about its suitability.

            The issue is not suitable, UAVs need to understand how to land. Which side to approach, what are the obstacles, at what speed to do it. This is not about abandoned airfields, but ordinary civilian or military, but without UAV equipment.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 26 June 2020 17: 06 New
              +1
              The issue is not suitable, UAVs need to understand how to land

              I understood. By the way, this is already a very advanced level of self-control, if "on the fly" having flown around the device can independently develop a landing plan. And yes, you are absolutely right about the fact that it simplifies the work of operators and increases the number of drones controlled by one operator.
              1. Grazdanin
                Grazdanin 26 June 2020 17: 14 New
                -1
                Development goes like a snowball. Each time more and more opportunities. I think all this is from the X58a project, without such technologies, this project simply can not do.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 26 June 2020 17: 23 New
                  0
                  C'mon, the Shuttle and Buran still sat in automatic mode, the atronaphs only inserted cassettes with the landing program.

                  Yes, this is a very useful function for UAVs, I would say even necessary for their mass and successful use. And the operator giving the command "follow the route, refuel there, then, if an enemy is detected, let them know and be ready to strike" a dozen drones are already practically a reality, in contrast to the recently discussed drone-versus-drone battles in automatic mode.
                  1. Grazdanin
                    Grazdanin 26 June 2020 17: 32 New
                    -1
                    Quote: alexmach
                    automatically sat down

                    It’s different, to programmatically prescribe that at what moment it’s not a problem to do. When you know where to land and what time it takes to land, but for the drone to paint everything, it’s my respect.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    drones against drones in automatic mode

                    Yes, it’s not such a problem, Akinchi will have radar with AFAR and short-and medium-range B-B missiles, as the Turks say. Stinger was placed on these MQ rockets. Naturally, while under the control of the operator. The x58 program is just exploring the possibility of automatic combat. Let's see what happens.
        2. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 26 June 2020 16: 03 New
          -1
          Where did you read the original?
          1. Pete mitchell
            Pete mitchell 26 June 2020 16: 32 New
            +1
            Where indicated - flightglobal.com
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 26 June 2020 16: 43 New
              0
              Hmm .. it's too simple and logical))
        3. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 26 June 2020 17: 21 New
          -2
          Quote: Pete Mitchell
          flying around the strip is able to assess its suitability


          I understand the drone does this.

          Quote: Pete Mitchell
          probably a database covering probably the whole world


          As far as I remember, such a base is in civil aviation, all certified airfields are included in it. And all changes must be reported. So civilian aircraft of the latest generations have developed autopilots, allowing almost the entire flight on autopilot. In business jets, it is already commonplace to have one pilot.
      3. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 26 June 2020 16: 54 New
        -1
        Quote: alexmach
        it flies around the new airdrome under the supervision of the operator.


        Not the logic is this:
        1. The operator sends the coordinates of the desired airfield and the command to fly there.
        2. The drone arrives, scans the airfield, builds its model at home.
        3. The operator gives the command sits down.
        4. The drone lands itself, without operator control.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 26 June 2020 10: 44 New
    +5
    After such articles, it remains only to ask the toad so that it does not strangle so much, for Russian shock drones so far exist only in the form of models and prototypes. ...
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 26 June 2020 10: 45 New
      +4
      Missing class MALE in principle.
      1. Genry
        Genry 26 June 2020 11: 57 New
        -6
        Quote: Grazdanin
        class male

        What is the FEMALE class then?
        Do not come up with controversial reductions. And then you will understand horseradish.
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 26 June 2020 12: 02 New
          +5
          The abbreviation is unambiguous, generally accepted, clearly describing the UAV class. It’s not my fault that you are ignorant.
          1. Genry
            Genry 26 June 2020 12: 05 New
            -7
            Quote: Grazdanin
            It’s not my fault that you are ignorant.

            Are you pretending to be "respectable"?
            It uses Russian terms, and not those that you have behind the puddle.
  • Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 26 June 2020 10: 44 New
    +2
    So got a pseudo AI of a new generation. Accordingly, it can independently determine the goals, determine the best way to destroy them.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 26 June 2020 10: 50 New
    +2
    Now this is already normal, military equipment. There is a specificity in terms of the tasks performed and the conditions for their implementation ... so this rule applies to everyone and always.
  • Alien From
    Alien From 26 June 2020 10: 54 New
    +6
    Since the days of the Union, we have lagged far behind in these weapons.
    1. APASUS
      APASUS 26 June 2020 11: 47 New
      -2

      The Iranian military intercepted the video transmitted by the American attack and reconnaissance drone MQ-9 Reaper, after which they landed a drone in Iraq.
      Yes MQ-9 Reaper is not the best sample, Iranians intercept video
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 26 June 2020 12: 15 New
        +8
        Yes Yes. The interception was carried out by a 1L222 Avtobaza-M radio-technical reconnaissance vehicle. Don't make people laugh with fakes, they were debunked back in 2011.
        1. APASUS
          APASUS 26 June 2020 13: 22 New
          -2
          Quote: Grazdanin
          Yes Yes. The interception was carried out by a 1L222 Avtobaza-M radio-technical reconnaissance vehicle. Don't make people laugh with fakes, they were debunked back in 2011.

          You said that the interception was carried out by 1L222 Avtobaza-M and you debunked yourself.
          1. Grazdanin
            Grazdanin 26 June 2020 14: 19 New
            +1
            This is not what I said, but a few articles came out and a lot of news in various media))) And how else to explain this "cartoon"?)) Only fabulous systems))
        2. Andrey.AN
          Andrey.AN 26 June 2020 14: 49 New
          -1
          the reconnaissance machine transmits the coordinates of the drone they are needed to know which satellites to interfere with, and these interferences can be induced from the deep rear.
          1. Grazdanin
            Grazdanin 26 June 2020 16: 10 New
            0
            Quote: Andrey.AN
            interference may be induced from the rear.


            Where can I read the publication on this discovery? Documents filed for the Nobel Prize?
            1. Andrey.AN
              Andrey.AN 26 June 2020 16: 22 New
              -1
              maybe you yourself will reach that the REB station will be better heard by the satellite than the drone, even if it is fifty kilometers further.
    2. Genry
      Genry 26 June 2020 12: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: Alien From
      Since the days of the Union, we have lagged far behind in these weapons.

      In the days of the Soviet Union, everything was just fine. There were also Tu-141 "Strizh" and Tu-143 "Reis" and Tu-243 (VR-3D) "Reis-D" ...
  • Karaul73
    Karaul73 26 June 2020 12: 52 New
    0
    Quote: Elena Zakharova
    Means for destroying drones are enough, especially such as this MQ-9 Reaper.
    All this equipment is for the war with the poits.
    So far, there has not been a single conflict with the use of drones among equal opponents.

    Such drones, which are even worse, stopped the army's offensive in Syria in Idlib. Do not underestimate them.
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 26 June 2020 12: 58 New
      +2
      Not worse, but much worse))
  • Kerensky
    Kerensky 26 June 2020 15: 22 New
    0
    It seems to me that the "automatic landing at an unfamiliar airfield" function works somewhat for the drone hijackers?
    1. Andrey.AN
      Andrey.AN 26 June 2020 15: 38 New
      0
      theoretically, in any case, he receives directives from a satellite, even if the satellite is deaf and the operator does not know what is with the drone.
    2. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 26 June 2020 16: 14 New
      -1
      Not. Hacking a military drone's control system is possible with a complete list of documents. If the intelligence got them, but the enemy does not know about it. Otherwise, this is technically not possible, or rather, it will take ten years.
      1. Kerensky
        Kerensky 26 June 2020 16: 22 New
        -2
        Hacking a military drone's control system is possible with a complete list of documents.

        And a full hack is not required here. Activate the above function and bite off the communication channel. He’ll sit somewhere. :)
  • +5
    +5 26 June 2020 15: 33 New
    0
    Yeah ... for UAV lovers who think that they fly without human intervention and do not suspect that the correct name is not unmanned, but remotely piloted, go ahead and break the brain .... you can !!! send !!! another!!!! airfield !!!
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 26 June 2020 16: 08 New
      -1
      UAV - Unmanned aerial vehicle, if it is difficult in Russian, then you can:
      UAV - unmanned aerial vehicle