Military Review

The robot revolution: the US Army intends to arm remotely controlled vehicles


Pratt Miller's remotely controlled EMAV vehicle (pictured during initial tests of the US ILC), equipped with a QinetiQ control kit, will become the base for the RCV-L prototypes that will take part in the tests of the second stage of the American army

The plans of the US armed forces to embed robotic machines into the structure of their ground forces will largely depend on the results of the three experiments and the reliability of the communication network. Let's see how the robotic war machine program is progressing.

The US Army is preparing a fleet of new experimental remotely controlled vehicles (ROVs) for a series of exercises over the next few years. Their goal is to assess the level of effectiveness of such systems, which would allow the army to begin a new development and procurement process with the aim of officially adopting robotic combat vehicles (RBM) for supply.

Army commanders are optimistic about the potential of a combination of sensors and weapons equipped with SAMs and a reliable communication network and are ready to rethink tactics, methods and methods of warfare.

Robot revolution

“Robots have the potential to fundamentally change the way ground combat operations are conducted,” said Ross Kofman, NGCV CFT (Next-Generation Combat Vehicles Cross-Functional Team) head of the complex. "In addition to the fact that they will increase the firepower of a dismounted patrol trying to knock the enemy out of position, or leading an RCB reconnaissance, it seems to us that such vehicles will give commanders more time and space to make decisions and reduce the risks for soldiers."

The Army has launched a Robotic Combat Vehicle (RCV) program that is exploring ways to integrate unmanned combat vehicles into ground forces.

The goal is to determine the need for robotic capabilities in a series of virtual and real experiments so that an official program for the development and procurement of light and medium variants can be launched by 2023, and subsequently to take on a heavy tank-like model.

The Army will increase investment in its BSR project over the next five years by 80%, from $ 420 million in its five-year plan, which began in 2020, to $ 758 million in the forward-looking plan included in the 2021 budget request.

By investing new technologies in the form of prototypes in the hands of soldiers and working closely with industry, the army plans to develop principles of combat use and a doctrine of interaction between robots and personnel, in fact, a theory of joint actions of inhabited and uninhabited platforms. The army hopes that the project will identify new methods of warfare, assess the limitations and advantages of new RBM technologies, and possibly start producing a new class of combat vehicles.

Fantastic Four

The RBM is one of four main projects in the portfolio of the complex group, which also includes: the optional Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, which will replace the Bradley BMP; lung project tank Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) for infantry units; and the universal armored vehicle Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, designed to replace the M113 armored personnel carrier.

The army, having decided on a preliminary set of requirements, currently sees the need for three versions of the BSR - light, medium and heavy. “I believe the army is serious about experimenting with this class of vehicles. In theory, we know our requirements, but we don't know them in practice until we pull all these systems into real conditions, ”said Major Corey Wallace, BSR project manager in the integrated group.

The lightweight RCV-Light (L) platform should be primarily equipped with sensors capable of coordinating with other weapon systems for convincing fire effects on targets. "The military wants to get a small expendable platform that can perform a maneuver with relative advantage, quickly provide the commander with information about the situation, and enable him to use all suitable firepower on selected targets," Wallace said.

The larger medium platform RCV-Medium (M) is seen as a low-cost platform that requires minimal maintenance.

“It is preferable that she was not lost, but if she should die, then so be it, it is better for a robot to die than a soldier. The car is a little more reliable; its armament must be capable of hitting medium armored threats. That is, a light platform works on manpower and non-armored vehicles, while the middle platform has more firepower and can cope with threats such as armored personnel carriers. "

Major Wallace of the NGCV CFT group stands in front of the M113, adapted for use as a dummy RBM and equipped with special weapons and sensors.

The army envisions the RCV-M as a direct-fire platform with more power and a larger volume for modular target loads. Platforms of both classes will have a common chassis so that the commander has the opportunity to configure the RBM for the needs of a specific task. “The RCV-Heavy (H) platform is planned to give the soldiers what they need,” Wallace said. - It has the same firepower as a crewed armored vehicle. It will maneuver in tandem with a crew tank or armored personnel carrier and provide decisive firepower from a vantage point. "

Dependent relationship

The BSR program will make full use of the groundwork gained over decades of scientific and technical work of army specialists in the field of ground robots. But the army is not looking for fully autonomous systems. "They will never be completely autonomous," Wallace said. - Complete autonomy means that people are not needed at all. There will always be a person in the control loop, at any given moment, especially with regard to endowing the RBM with the ability to fire at targets. A robot will never be able to give itself permission to engage in combat, to use its weapons and protective equipment.

However, new systems will be allowed to defend themselves regardless of the operator's actions. RBMs will, for example, be able to intercept attacking RPGs with their active defense systems.

“We are betting on extended telecontrol, which means that the RBM is, in fact, a remotely controlled platform. But it has additional capabilities, for example, very limited navigation by intermediate coordinates, very limited detection and avoidance of obstacles. "

The Army has defined a "BSR Campaign Plan," which calls for three main real-world experiments (each preceded by a pair of virtual experiments) to refine their plans for robotic machines.

The plan is divided into three phases with progressively increasing difficulty in maneuvering vehicles and soldiers while expanding the capabilities of prototype platforms.

During its implementation, a number of new technologies were used with the aim of adopting large remotely controlled platforms for the ground forces. The first of these is the deeply modernized Bradley BMP, designated MET-D (Mission Enabler Technology-Demonstrator - a technology demonstrator that can help in the task). These BMPs will become the base platforms for soldiers in control of unmanned combat vehicles.

A deeply redesigned Bradley vehicle, modified to a MET-D configuration, will serve as a base platform to house four control stations for BSR soldiers.

The MET-D program of the Detroit Arsenal Ground Vehicles Center is funded by the Army Advanced Projects Agency. Prototypes are equipped with the most advanced subsystems, including a camera system around the vehicle, improved crew seats with touch screens and a remotely controlled turret with a 25mm cannon.

These armored vehicles provide protection for the workplaces of operators operating BSR platforms. In addition, the army intends to use MET-D as a test bed for experimenting with new technologies, in particular to promote projects created in government laboratories or industry, that is, promising functional prototypes that can accelerate the implementation of these technologies. In addition, this could be helped by information from the soldiers participating in the experiments, justifying the need, as well as determining the directions for further improving the projects.

Layout stage

For stage 1 of the RBM project, the army integrated remote control into the BTRM 113, converting them into running models of the RBM for initial experiments. “Phase 1 will validate the concept of co-operation between inhabited and uninhabited platforms,” Wallace said. "The goal is to start developing basic tactics, methods and methods of warfare that the army will use after adopting robotic machines, as well as further expanding and confirming the concept of robotic warfare."

In early 2020, even before the coronavirus rush began, the army planned a month-long experiment in Fort Carson in March and April with the participation of a platoon from the 4th Infantry Division, providing its soldiers with two MET-D dummies and four RBM dummies based on M113. In the spring, the experiment was postponed indefinitely.

These specially modified M113 vehicles are equipped with a remote-controlled weapon system, including the Picatinny Lightweight Remote Weapon Station turret and an electric 7,62mm machine gun.

Two of the four BSRs are equipped with advanced situational awareness tools, including a target detection and recognition system, as well as an advanced third-generation long-range surveillance system. In addition, these two vehicles will be equipped with an enemy fire detection system and a set of situational awareness cameras. The program provides for the conduct of initial unmanned maneuvers with the soldiers driving the RBM mock-ups by means of telecontrol with continuous control of the vehicles.

The Phase 1 experiment will focus on reconnaissance missions to demonstrate basic obstacle detection and avoidance at speeds of 32 km / h on road and over 16 km / h off road. It is planned to move on paved roads, dirt roads and semi-autonomous control in open areas. It is also expected to work with RBM in light dusty conditions, during rain, snow and fog.

Each MET-D platform will initially be equipped with four RBM control stations - two for motion control and two for weapons control. The modified Bradley vehicle will also be modified for wire-guided control, an electronic control kit and a laser detection and ranging kit for optional crew operations. In addition, the army plans to experiment with helmet-mounted displays while driving with closed hatches.

Textron will supply medium-sized RBMs based on the Howe & Howe Ripsaw M5 tracked platform

Planned tasks include route and area reconnaissance, obstacle surveys and cover. In the final part of the experiment, the MET-D and BSR mock-ups should demonstrate a “future scenario” that includes decentralized scheduling and execution of tasks, driving with closed hatches with a crew of two, and assessment of maneuvers with a maximum BSR control cable.

In addition, this final phase will assess how BSR units operate with the latest technology and tactics in modern warfare, including aggressive low-flying drones, electronic countermeasures, precision targeting and signature management.

“We're trying to solve simple problems in the first place,” Wallace said. "And then move in a spiral: the experience that we received in the previous experiment, build in the next experiment."

Spring Campaign

The Army will then begin work as part of Phase 2, scheduled for spring 2022, in which the experiment will expand from a platoon demonstration to a company demonstration.

“This phase is expected to provide food for thought on the broader application of the BSR. We know that we can transfer the experience gained with the company to the brigade. "

The 2022 event will focus on expanding the synergy between inhabited and uninhabited platforms, as well as increasing the autonomous capabilities of robotic platforms. The 2022 experiment will involve six MET-D platforms that will control a dozen BSRs.

“We are now in the process of creating these additional MET-Ds. We are looking at some additional technologies ... We are thinking what this experiment will be like. "

In the Phase 2 experiment, the set of tasks will change, reconnaissance will give way to the organization of offensive and defensive actions, including the demonstration of making passes at once using a certain type of robotic capabilities - either demining with a small robotic platform or a special armored vehicle for making passes. The experiment is also planned to conduct remote chemical reconnaissance using sensors installed on one of the robotic platforms.

“Clearing passages and scouting for poisons are two of the most dangerous tasks our soldiers perform,” Wallace said, adding that outright clearance is one of the most risky and difficult maneuvers a mechanized force can perform.

Rapid prototyping

In January 2020, following an RFP from industrial enterprises for an expedited delivery of BSR variants for Phase 2, the Army selected QinetiQ North America to build four RCV-L prototypes and Textron to build four RCV-M prototypes.

The RCV-L platform is based on the Pratt Miller Defense Expeditionary Modular Autonomous Vehicle (EMAV), originally created for the Marine Corps Combat Laboratory. The RCV-L variant is a combination of Pratt Miller's EMAV chassis and QinetiQ control systems. The company points out that this proven platform has good characteristics, as a result of which the risks of falling behind the delivery schedule and getting unsatisfactory characteristics are seriously reduced.

“EMAV offers a unique combination of proven technological maturity and high performance. Our state customer receives a platform that he can use not only in the next experiments, but also boldly adopt it ",

- explained the representative of QinetiQ.

The development of the RCV-H faces a number of technical challenges. One of the solutions could be the choice of platforms manufactured by BAE Systems (pictured) or GDLS for the MPF program

A Pratt Miller Defense spokesman added that he “has no doubt that EMAV will exceed the expectations of the US Army's experimental group. Corpus Labs have independently experimented with the EMAV over the past two years and the results have been phenomenal. Our main goal is to provide the US Army with a proven platform to experiment with without worrying about the capabilities of the technologies integrated into it. ”

For its part, Textron has teamed up with the small tracked vehicle manufacturer Howe & Howe Technologies, as well as FLIR Systems, to offer the army an RCV-M variant based on the Ripsaw M5 vehicle. The company calls it "a fifth generation robotic platform, which combines stackable armor, reliable suspension and power drives that allow you to solve a variety of tasks."

Although these two contracts give the winners the opportunity to help the army formulate the requirements for the BSR, the matter is unlikely to be limited to them. “I don't think this is the end of the competition. We also have contracts for prototypes and demonstration samples for testing, ”Wallace said. He noted that innovative activities in other branches of the armed forces could affect the future plans of the army. For example, this is the Marines' Rogue Fires program, under which a High Mobility Artillery Rocket System will be installed on an unmanned Joint Light Tactical Vehicle.

“Some very interesting things are happening in other military structures outside the army, but they can come back and have an impact on the army. I don't think the choice of QinetiQ / Pratt Miller and Textron is the end stories... I believe this is just the beginning. "

Difficult task

Phase 3, which will carry out the final real-world experiment, is slated for the spring of 2024. It will assess the possibility of using uninhabited combat platforms to perform the most dangerous task - a combined arms breakthrough.

“A combined arms breakthrough is usually the maneuver that can cause the greatest losses for mechanized forces,” Wallace said. - It is also the most difficult because it requires good synchronization of actions. You try to synchronize direct fire, you try to synchronize engineering assets, synchronize your forces and assets that secure the flanks, fire to suppress and then launch an attack. That is, it is a very risky, very difficult business. For RBM platforms, the principles of combat use and tactical techniques should be developed that would make it possible to fully use their potential. After all, you must not only get through the obstacle, you must also break through the enemy, which is in prepared defensive positions, ”said Wallace, emphasizing the complexity of the tasks included in the last three planned experiments.

According to the army, at the third stage, when working with prototypes of the RBM, the experience gained in the first two experiments will be used, various approaches will be studied to solve emerging problems. Current plans include the study of new modular target loads for innovative uninhabited platforms. The goal is to issue at least two contracts for the design and manufacture of 12 new BSR platforms for participation in the experiment, scheduled for 2024.

Phase 3 platforms will focus on firing missions, with an emphasis on remote work and the integration of automatic weapons, missile systems and advanced sensors. The software for such modular subsystems as, for example, the smoke screen, the electronic warfare subsystem, chemical-biological and reconnaissance sensors will be improved and integrated.

As part of its BSR project, the Army has issued a so-called “Preliminary Capability Development Document” which includes an estimate of the total number of platforms purchased based on various factors such as average cost per vehicle and total life cycle cost. Typically, such a document will not be finalized until after the official launch of the Milestone B program, currently scheduled for 2023.

The choice of platforms for initial testing does not mean that companies that have already delivered their prototypes will receive contracts for serial production.

“After each virtual experiment, after each natural experiment, we take the documents with the requirements, update them based on the information we receive from the soldiers and the test results. By the time we reach Milestone B, these requirements will have been reviewed by the soldiers, verified in real-world testing, and then through a regular approval process. We will have a complete set of requirements when Milestone B starts, ”Wallace said. - The army wants to be the first to launch either the RCV-L project or the RCV-M project. The most mature and finished platform will arrive at Milestone B in 2023.

Weight problems

The RCV-H project, unlike other options, is still very far from being realized. “There are many problems that we have to solve in this difficult option project. For example, we want it to be as resilient as a tank, but it weighs 30 tons, ”Wallace said. This is an ambitious target as the current Abrams tank weighs 72 tons.

“Technologies are not yet ready for this type of platform with this kind of requirements. That is, in order to avoid the same past mistakes that were with the promising Future Combat System [$ 20 billion wasted since the early 2000s], we do not want to move this program until we are absolutely sure of the capabilities industry ".

In anticipation of working out technical problems for the RCV-H platform, for example, the development of an automatic loading system for a 105-mm or 120-mm main cannon, which would be comparable in speed to the speed of the crew, the army plans to solve various organizational and doctrinal issues. “But we can include many questions in virtual experiments. We don't want to wait for technology to fall into our hands. "

While army commanders do not publicly discuss the RCV-H's development and procurement strategy, some in the industry see potential candidates in the MPF (Mobile Protected Firepower) program, which will develop a light tank for infantry units. In December 2018, the army chose General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) and BAE Systems, which will produce twelve MPF prototypes, respectively, based on the British Ajax chassis with an M1 Abrams turret and on the basis of the M8 Armored Gun System.

“The Mobile Protected Firepower program has some good potential,” Wallace said. - But one of the questions is very important - do the selected companies BAE and GD have relevant experience in developing unmanned operations or robotic tethered platforms. If they have it, then it will only benefit the cause and the implementation of the chosen MPF ​​project will gain much needed momentum. "

The need for the network

Although the BSR program is actively testing the technology and demonstrating the potential of robotic capabilities aimed at increasing the fire efficiency of ground forces, the final fate of the project lies in the hands of developers and experts in the field of communication technologies.

“The biggest problem we have is with the network,” Wallace said. “To be honest, we could have the best platforms in the world, the best and latest helicopters, the best and latest artillery assets. But all this will not cost anything if there is no network. Secure digital transmission of data, excellent resistance to hacker attacks, resistance to electronic suppression, independent choice of means of countering electronic warfare or cyber attacks. This is what is extremely important and necessary for us. "

“I'm not going to oversimplify things here, but this is really an engineering problem that can be solved with enough money and time. This network is very complex. A lot of people are working on it. Before we go any further, we need to make sure our main digital highway is secure. I guarantee you that we will not move forward with the BSR program if the network is not ready to support it. When it comes to the operation of uninhabited ground combat systems, reliable communication between the operator and the machine comes to the fore. "
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 14 September 2020 18: 06 New
    It makes sense as an auxiliary machine. Mine clearance, work in the contaminated zone, emergency situations, patrolling objects, etc. As a combat unit, it is not very soon. There are too many disadvantages and difficulties. The UAV is much easier to work with.
  2. Asad
    Asad 14 September 2020 18: 22 New
    A neighbor, a veteran of the Great Patriotic War, said that at the end of the war, the Germans had remote-controlled vehicles to blow up bunkers.
    1. Free wind
      Free wind 14 September 2020 18: 39 New
      Self-propelled mine "Goliath", carried from 60 to 100 kg of TNT, about the effectiveness, and FIG knows it, but released almost until the end of the war.
  3. The eye of the crying
    The eye of the crying 14 September 2020 18: 32 New
    Remotely controlled vehicles are not robots.
  4. Qwertyarion
    Qwertyarion 14 September 2020 18: 54 New
    But the age of intelligent robots is just around the corner.
  5. GREG68
    GREG68 14 September 2020 19: 14 New
    It looks like the "Terminator" scenario is starting to come true.
    1. RealPilot
      RealPilot 14 September 2020 23: 02 New
      Terminator scripts are scripts only. Hollywood will stay in California and the cars will be brought to the battlefield.

      But these machines are very vulnerable. They are controlled remotely, they are afraid of jamming of various origins.

      For example, there are very easy-to-manufacture generators of EMP (electro-magnetic impulse), which are disposable and generate a pulse by the explosion method. Calmly placed in the dimensions of artillery shells, for example 152 mm.

      Well, now let's imagine that there were a lot of these robots, but they went out of order in a few minutes with cheap asymmetric actions of an insidious adversary. And these are not only robots, but in general all the "smart" systems in which our "partners" so believe!

      Imagine, the guys are sitting in their Abrams Sep V3, and suddenly all the screens have gone out, or they lit up in blue, with the inspiring inscription "no signal" ... Here, not only Coca-Cola will not help, but the paper will end abruptly soldier
      1. GREG68
        GREG68 15 September 2020 06: 58 New
        My colleague agrees with you. But I was talking about the distant future. The current level of development of microelectronics and robotics is far from perfect. However, you know that progress does not stand still and someday it will be finished. But I don't think we will see it.
      2. psiho117
        psiho117 16 September 2020 18: 51 New
        Quote: RealPilot
        Imagine, the guys are sitting in their Abrams, and suddenly all the screens have gone out, or they glowed blue, with an inspiring inscription "no signal" ...

        It is naive to think that our, unparalleled-in-reliability vehicles and tanks - suddenly will be less vulnerable to EMP or interference.
        Our cars, just like the American ones, will burn out electronics, wiring, candles, communication will be lost, air defense will not be able to reflect air raids, the headquarters will not be able to direct hostilities, and a bunch of others, extremely fatal for any high-tech army of things.
        And by the way, it is they, not us, who are in full swing developing a variety of EMP ammunition and means of delivery - for example, the American CHAMP system is equipped with a reusable microwave emitter, and, as stated in the article:
        "is able to pass a rather long and difficult route and in one flight" cover "several targets. The version of the CHAMP system for the AGM-158B is capable of producing up to hundreds of pulses per flight"
        Do you seriously think that after this, infantry Vasya on foot, without armored vehicles, communications, air cover and artillery, shouting Cheers! will run, clutching the unkillable Kalash, and destroy the enemy with one of his inflexible Russian spirit?
        Here, not only will Coca-Cola not help, but the paper will end abruptly.

        Yeah, and the "Khibiny" neutralize five "Cookies" per minute.
        How long have you tried to crap without paper? Don't joke about it ... negative
      3. Airdefense
        Airdefense 27 October 2020 17: 00 New
        About five years ago, they said the same thing about UAVs, our Rubella will land them all without straining.
  6. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 14 September 2020 19: 24 New
    There are also 4x and 2x legs from Boston Dynamics ..... once they will give them Machine guns, grenade launchers and ATGMs and go into battle.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 14 September 2020 22: 24 New
      These were going to be supplied for the Marines and Special Forces as porters.
      ammunition on rough terrain.
      But the problem was in the motor. Gasoline was noisy, while electric
      the battery did not give the desired range.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 15 September 2020 07: 50 New
        So progress does not stand still.
  7. 501Legion
    501Legion 14 September 2020 19: 44 New
    Good article, thanks
  8. ximkim
    ximkim 14 September 2020 19: 53 New
    Well, what ... Americans are the engine of world weapons and new developments ..
  9. rocket757
    rocket757 14 September 2020 19: 59 New
    And SKYNET will come! The truth is not soon! But dreams at the Pentagon are already cherished.
    And so, there will be a new "weapon" and there will be new means of counteraction! Although in the old fashioned way, all this can be turned into scrap metal.
  10. Vovanya
    Vovanya 14 September 2020 20: 32 New
    The level of competence of the developers is demonstrated by a car in summer camouflage on the snow ... Apparently, there are other "troubles" in their heads.
  11. Aleks2000
    Aleks2000 14 September 2020 21: 56 New
    Uh ... They only intend, and we already have a bunch of varieties?

    Again, we overtook them and survived? And is there an ambush somewhere?
  12. g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 15 September 2020 07: 03 New
    The more complex the system, the more expensive it is, and the whole point of robotization is to replace a person with a cheap and quickly replaceable resource. Attempts by the military to get at once "an athlete, and a Komsomol member and just a beauty" are not yet realizable, they definitely noticed this. Today, you can confidently create a swarm of cheap non-anthropomorphic or tank "terminators" on 3D printers that will simply mow down everything that moves, it's cheaper, not weapons of mass destruction (yet), but comparable in efficiency.
    On the whole, the Americans are not surprising, the same concept of "killing Indians with impunity."
    1. Lad
      Lad 15 September 2020 15: 43 New
      Yeah, it is necessary, like the Japanese, for example, once did: put suicide-kamikaze planes on board and forward, and not be smart about something with homing missiles or shells like these stupid and soulless Americans. After all, murder with impunity should be repugnant to normal people. We must set as our goal "punished" murder: you killed and you were immediately killed. This is the correct military logic. This is the only logic that normal people strive for. And in general, these Americans got it, well, they don't do it all somehow wrong. (((
      1. Grazdanin
        Grazdanin 15 September 2020 18: 01 New
        The Americans in the Second World War have already used remotely controlled aircraft in battle, this is the answer to the Japanese.
      2. g1washntwn
        g1washntwn 16 September 2020 06: 47 New
        The concept of unpunished murder is a concept of technological superiority: firearms against cold, remotely controlled and robotic against manned and manpower. So I didn't say anything contradictory. It's just that the Americans have this concept greatly reduced the threshold of losses for which they will not stick. The image of white and fluffy invincible supermen needs to be maintained, and you really want to rob and spread your influence with impunity.
        In addition, robotization fits perfectly into the use of weapons of mass destruction, more precisely - in the period after the massive use of nuclear weapons, chemistry and bacteriological. <- think about this scenario.
  13. Lad
    Lad 15 September 2020 23: 21 New
    Quote: Grazdanin
    The Americans in the Second World War have already used remotely controlled aircraft in battle, this is the answer to the Japanese.

    Well, it turns out the Americans did everything wrong, not in a human way, but the Japanese did it right, in a human way, in our way.
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 15 September 2020 23: 34 New
      Quote: Lad
      the Japanese are correct, humanly, ours.

      Biorobots have a more ancient history wink
  14. Lad
    Lad 15 September 2020 23: 29 New
    By the way, Americans are not alone. Here is, purely for example, the latest news about South Korea:
    Over the next ten years, the country will invest $ 2,3 billion in the creation of various military UAVs. "It is planned to create several types of drones to perform various tasks - from reconnaissance to combat," - said in a statement.
    Some of the combat drones can be armed with assault rifles, machine guns and grenade launchers, which in theory will partially replace real soldiers on the battlefield.
    Technologies that will make it possible to implement the above plans may appear by 2022: in the coming years, they intend to work within the framework of the direct creation of a weapon platform.

    But this godly path is certainly not for normal people. So let other countries do it. (((
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 15 September 2020 23: 41 New
      UAVs of various classes will come to the fore by the end of the decade. Mini drones in reconnaissance are already in use in the US, arm them is the next step. When clearing the territory, it will save them.
      1. psiho117
        psiho117 16 September 2020 18: 57 New
        Quote: Grazdanin
        Mini drones in reconnaissance are already in use in the US, arm them is the next step. When clearing the territory, it will save them.

        As stated by the American warrior in the article, the problem is still in reliable communication.
        How will the problem with communication be solved, another will appear - the lasers will have worked out enough by this time, and these drones will burn in batches.
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 16 September 2020 18: 58 New
          Quote: psiho117
          As stated by the American warrior in the article, the problem is still in reliable communication.

          This is for ground vehicles. For UAVs, this problem is not.
          1. psiho117
            psiho117 16 September 2020 19: 03 New
            How is it not? Or is it not the Iranians, the American Sentinel, pissed off?
            Or maybe not the Americans are now talking about the unreliability of the gps system, and about the need to replace this whole concept, tk. the connection is catastrophically unreliable?
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 16 September 2020 19: 09 New
              Quote: psiho117
              How is it not? Or is it not the Iranians, the American Sentinel, pissed off?

              RQ170 failed and fell. There was no interception. Dozens of planes fall a year.
              Quote: psiho117
              Or maybe not the Americans are now talking about the unreliability of the gps system, and about the need to replace this whole concept, tk. the connection is catastrophically unreliable?

              GPS positioning system, there are problems with the 1st and 2nd generations, the 3rd generation is already in orbit, it cannot be drowned out.
              1. psiho117
                psiho117 16 September 2020 19: 29 New
                Quote: Grazdanin
                The RQ170 failed and fell. There was no interception
                So big, but he believes in fairy tales bully
                The Iranians have stirred it up, as it is. We jammed the connection and GPS, replaced the GPS signal with our own, with a different coordinate grid, and brought us to our airfield. True, they could not plant it, it broke in half.
                3 generation in orbit, it cannot be drowned out.

                Nonsense. You can drown everything. The 2nd generation differed from the first in the presence of an atomic clock on board, and the 3rd generation differs in that it uses the military M-code for communication, with the possibility of transmitting it to a specific area with a diameter of several hundred kilometers, where the signal strength will be higher by 20 decibels. The regular M-code is already available in the 2nd generation satellites, while the narrow-beam M-code will be available only with the help of GPS-III satellites.
                Also, the new satellites have the ability to maneuver for more accurate support over a certain area of ​​the terrain.
                There are no other innovations there, the same radio range, the same power.
                And yes, there are only 3 of them in orbit. Out of 32.
                Even the second generation 12 - could no longer, expensive.
                1. psiho117
                  psiho117 16 September 2020 19: 36 New
                  Ha, I read it again - this feature of theirs, with a narrowly targeted signal, will only be connected in 22. And only 10 satellites are planned.
                  Will launch the GPS-IIIF generation.
                  It is planned that 22 GPS-IIIF satellites will begin to launch in 2026, and the launches will last until at least 2034.
                  1. Grazdanin
                    Grazdanin 16 September 2020 19: 54 New
                    Three pieces are already enough for the Middle East or Western Pacific region. In other places, they are not particularly needed. The technical means you rewrote will not allow you to jam the signal from the ground only if you hang the aircraft with the electronic signal directly above the drone.
                    1. psiho117
                      psiho117 16 September 2020 20: 09 New
                      Quote: Grazdanin
                      only if you hang the aircraft with the REP directly above the drone.

                      Signal from a satellite in geostationary orbit, at an altitude of 20 meters - always will be weaker than the stronger or closer signal.
                      Physics my friend hi
                      And this conceptual vulnerability has led to the fact that now the military around the world are looking for solutions to replace GPS positioning technology.
                2. Grazdanin
                  Grazdanin 16 September 2020 19: 45 New
                  Quote: psiho117
                  The Iranians have stirred it up, as it is.

                  Is there any confirmation? Only words. Dozens of airplanes and drones fall down every year due to errors and breakdowns. This year 6 US aircraft crashed Iran too?
                  Quote: psiho117
                  We jammed the connection and GPS, changed the GPS signal to our own, with a different coordinate grid,

                  Drowned out or replaced? What device? Where was it?
                  1. psiho117
                    psiho117 16 September 2020 20: 01 New
                    Quote: Grazdanin
                    Is there any confirmation? Only words. Dozens of airplanes and drones fall down every year due to errors and breakdowns. This year 6 US aircraft crashed Iran too?

                    The trick is that American Sentinels and Global Hawks spy DUE TO limits of Iran. And if it broke and fell, it would fall on the territory of the Middle Eastern allies of the United States, over whose lands they mostly fly (and it would also crash soft-boiled, but that's so, little things wassat ).
                    And since it is intact in the hands of the Iranians - draw a conclusion.
                    Sapienti sat hi
                    Quote: Grazdanin
                    Drowned out or replaced? What device? Where was it

                    Iran first managed to jam the drone's communications with US operators, causing the drone to switch to autopilot mode, which relies solely on GPS to return to its base in Afghanistan.
                    Then the GPS coordinates were changed by broadcasting a stronger fake GPS signal from the ground, which drowns out the satellite one.
                    Then, when the drone was over Iranian territory, a radio signal sent from the ground made the UAV's GPS receiver think it was going straight up. Thus, the UAV tried to descend, which allowed the spoofer operator to sharply lower the UAV vertically downward.
                    Google what GPS spoofing is, you will understand a lot.
                    The electronics in the spoofer are cheap, 300 bucks with Ali-express.
                    1. Grazdanin
                      Grazdanin 16 September 2020 20: 17 New
                      Quote: psiho117
                      And if it broke and fell, it would fall on the territory of the United States' Middle Eastern allies

                      The crash of the MiG-23 in Belgium is a plane crash that occurred on Tuesday July 4, 1989. The fighter MiG-23M of the USSR Air Force took off from the Kolobrzeg airfield in Poland, but it had a temporary interruption in the operation of the engine (surge). After the engine failure, the pilot ejected, and the uncontrolled plane flew 901 kilometers over the territory of the GDR, Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium and fell on a residential building near the Franco-Belgian border. 1 person died on the ground.
                      Quote: psiho117
                      Google what GPS spoofing is, you will understand a lot.
                      The electronics in the spoofer are cheap, 300 bucks with Ali-express.

                      I know very well what it is. I also understand that this cannot be done with military drones, for civilians it is not a problem, they work at standard frequencies. If they could do this, it would be done by several drones at the same time or in a row. And so once every 2-3 years drones fall on combat missions, which is not surprising.
                      1. psiho117
                        psiho117 16 September 2020 20: 31 New
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        drones fall every 2-3 years on combat missions

                        He didn't fall No. Do you have any idea what remains after the UAV, after falling from a height of more than 10 meters?
                        I know very well what it is. I also understand that this cannot be done with military drones.

                        does not look like it...
                        Alternative physics is not for me.
                      2. Grazdanin
                        Grazdanin 16 September 2020 21: 09 New
                        Quote: psiho117
                        after falling from a height of more than 10 meters?

                        RQ170 Plan and sit quietly. The "flying wing" has an extremely high lift.
                        Quote: psiho117
                        does not look like it...
                        Alternative physics is not for me.

                        You are telling me an empty theory that has never been confirmed in practice. It works for simple civilian devices, but not for the military. The signal power from the ground cannot be provided necessary for jamming at the RQ170 flight altitude, especially for giving a false signal. Only from the REP plane. Determining the signal source is also not a problem
                        Any theory is confirmed by experiment. Where are the 2 cases when UAVs were intercepted in a row with a difference of at least a month? Besides the words, is there any confirmation that the RQ170 was intercepted? Photos, videos, official messages? The fact that this UAV went out of order, planned and sat down there is an official message.
                      3. Lad
                        Lad 16 September 2020 21: 45 New
                        For a body with a large specific surface area (such as a drone), it makes no difference to fall from 10 km or from one. When falling, the body picks up some speed and then falls at this constant speed. This also applies to almost all bodies. For example, the human body also touches.
              2. Airdefense
                Airdefense 27 October 2020 17: 04 New
                The Iranians have stirred it up, as it is. We jammed the connection and GPS, replaced the GPS signal with our own, with a different coordinate grid, and brought us to our airfield. True, they could not plant it, it broke in half.

                And that the stupid American military and developers did not guess about such an attack at the design stage and did not use the transition to an encrypted communication channel, especially since the American GPS system distributes such for military needs?
  • Misha Smirnov_2
    Misha Smirnov_2 7 November 2020 23: 58 New
    The point is to control it ... A robot rides and kills, everyone who has not put on a mask ...