Military Review

Mockups against air superiority: new video footage of the fighting in Karabakh

246

A new round of confrontation in Karabakh makes it possible to assess the changes that have taken place in the tactics of fighting in connection with the changes in the technical appearance of the army, and draw conclusions in relation to our own troops. Therefore, once again we draw the attention of our readers to the chronicle of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.


Only within one day, the active use of loitering ammunition made it possible to hit a number of targets: according to the Azerbaijani side, they turned out to be two BM SAM "OSA-AKM", one MLRS "Uragan" and one BMP, 4 MLRS "Grad", 4 howitzers D- 20, 16 tanks and 2 trucks with personnel.



However, it was found by observers that some of the targets were false. So, in the frames shown, it is noticeable that instead of the Osa air defense missile system combat vehicle, a mock anti-aircraft missile launch platform was destroyed. Nevertheless, this technique went into the "piggy bank" of the achievements of the Azerbaijani army.



Also in the video presented, the electronic warfare "Repellent" appears, which indicates the use of electronic warfare by the Armenian side. This product is specifically designed to detect miniature drones and suppress their control channels for powerful barrage or directional interference. Apparently, the frames show her “finishing off”; from the words of Azerbaijani sources - the Turkish drone "kamikaze" Alpagu. It is possible that the initial damage was caused by ground forces.



The high hitting accuracy can be noted: with a few exceptions, the shells accurately cover the target. Below is a rare deviation from this rule in video materials.



Attention is drawn to the fact that Armenian calculations are missing in many frames.



In general, the active use of unmanned aerial vehicles by the Azerbaijani side, including loitering ammunition, creates the impression of air superiority, which makes it possible to effectively destroy the enemy's battle formations.



Just one successful UAV hit can disable an enemy squad (in the video below - from the reserve units). At the same time, many Russian "experts" recently argued that if drones are needed by the army, then it is far from the first.




At times, entire columns of troops become targets of an aerial UAV attack.



Under these conditions, Yerevan, operating mainly with ground forces, relies on massive artillery shelling when eliminating the enemy on distant approaches.



The Armenian military claims to have successfully carried out counterattacks, during which they manage to capture the enemy's positions.



It should be noted that both sides of the conflict accuse each other of spreading false information. For example, the Armenian Defense Ministry claims that the video footage of soldiers trapped in a trench and shouting “We were left alone!” Is fabricated, as indicated, in particular, by a distinct accent and speech errors. Baku, for example, calls reports of the destruction of the Armenian Su-25 by a Turkish fighter jet a "fake".
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of Armenia
246 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. BDRM 667
        BDRM 667 1 October 2020 04: 59
        24
        Mockups against air superiority and other footage: new video chronicle of the battles in Karabakh

        Layouts, military cunning - it's all good yes .

        But kamikaze drones what ... Why do we see Turkish, Chinese, Iranian, and someone else's, but not Russian, in combat use?
        After all, a long time ago it was announced that Russian companies had such developments. For example, back in that year, the ZALA AERO group of companies, which are part of the Kalashnikov concern, announced the presence of the Cube-BLA drone in its arsenal (Yes, and the Lancet is also lying around somewhere) ...

        Photo "Lancet".
        Tactical and technical characteristics of the "KUB-BLAH" (information from the site kalashnikovgroup.ru, except for the mass of the drone):

        Overall dimensions: length - 1210 mm, width - 950 mm, height - 165 mm.
        Flight speed - 80-130 km / h.
        Flight duration - up to 30 minutes.
        Payload mass - up to 3 kg.
        The mass of the drone is up to 10-15 kg (presumably).
        Start - from a catapult.


        Why THERE DO and quite intensively (and effectively) use, and WE ONLY SPEAKING?
        Are we so far behind in the scientific, technological and industrial spheres that we are not able to fill the market with such devices?

        1. Eugene-Eugene
          1 October 2020 05: 14
          13
          ZALA has probably been teeming with a million projects for ten years, but in the materials of the RF Ministry of Defense we see only Eagles, Outposts and Aileron. Sometimes - Tachyons and Garnets. They are all scouts.
          1. BDRM 667
            BDRM 667 1 October 2020 05: 19
            19
            Quote: Eugene-Eugene
            ZALA has probably been teeming with a million projects for ten years

            Here I am about the same ...
            ZALA is teeming with projects, and UAVs teeming over the real battlefield NOT RUSSIAN PRODUCTION.

            Hats, (millions of projects), will we throw the foe?
          2. Alexander Galaktionov
            Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 06
            +2
            Well, sort of like Orion at the exhibition showed 5 or 7 types of ammunition for it from 122mm Grad shells
          3. chingachguc
            chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 22
            +1
            Attack drone Orion entered service in April this year. Three jokes. Ten years of development.
        2. Nychego
          Nychego 1 October 2020 05: 22
          +4
          Quote: BDRM 667
          Why are they DOING THERE and quite intensively (and effectively) using it, while WE ONLY SPEAK?

          An honest and complete answer to this question will lead me to the third warning of the forum moderators, so I will limit myself to just three main abbreviations: RT, EP, SKSH.
          1. Azis
            Azis 1 October 2020 22: 44
            0
            Quote: Nychego
            An honest and complete answer to this question will lead me to the third warning of the forum moderators, so I will limit myself to just three main abbreviations: RT, EP, SKSH.
            Let me inquire about the decoding of the abbreviation RT -Putin together? Others are clear - the main party and the chief geographer.
        3. Alexander Galaktionov
          Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 05: 47
          0
          Now you can see that the drone and kamikaze uavs are very effective. We don't have drums yet, which is very bad, but the kamikaze uavs are already doing ZALA well done good
          1. Grits
            Grits 1 October 2020 06: 29
            11
            Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
            Now you can see that the drums and kamikaze uavs are very effective.

            This was evident even in Syria and Libya. But no one drew any conclusions. I think looking at these footage you can imagine what would have happened to our vaunted armored vehicles and artillery if we had to face Turkey. In about the same way, their UAVs would have flipped us from the air. They are not visible, not audible, but they are beating from nowhere. And there is no opposition to this. And there is no need to convince me that our air defense system would cope with "tractors" as with seeds. I see that they could not do anything with them either in Syria, or in Libya, or in NK.
            1. Insurgent
              Insurgent 1 October 2020 06: 48
              12
              Quote: Gritsa
              Looking at these footage, you can imagine what would have happened to our vaunted armored vehicles and artillery if we had to face Turkey

              I would not unequivocally bury the armored vehicles of the RF Armed Forces in such a collision, due to the presence of electronic warfare systems and an extensive air defense system in the RF, which have proven their high efficiency in eliminating threats from UAVs.

              Of course, there may be cases when, due to bungling, or for some other reason, the troops will find themselves without cover with electronic warfare (and air defense) means - then yes Oh!
              1. Vol4ara
                Vol4ara 1 October 2020 09: 21
                -2
                Quote: Insurgent
                Quote: Gritsa
                Looking at these footage, you can imagine what would have happened to our vaunted armored vehicles and artillery if we had to face Turkey

                I would not unequivocally bury the armored vehicles of the RF Armed Forces in such a collision, due to the presence of electronic warfare systems and an extensive air defense system in the RF, which have proven their high efficiency in eliminating threats from UAVs.

                Of course, there may be cases when, due to bungling, or for some other reason, the troops will find themselves without cover with electronic warfare (and air defense) means - then yes Oh!

                The Armenians also have weapons, and the Azeris have a video of how it is being destroyed by an UAV. Where is our air defense proven effective against drones? Surely not in Syria, where drones are models made on the knee from Mr. and sticks with TNT sticks tied with tape?
                1. Insurgent
                  Insurgent 1 October 2020 09: 27
                  11
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  Where is our air defense proven effective against drones?

                  Not even Russian air defense, but Russian complexes in export performance , not included in a single air defense system, under the control of some operators, in Libya were able to demonstrate their effectiveness ...

                  I am more than confident that a balanced, echeloned system of Russian electronic warfare and air defense systems with skillful command will be many times more effective.
                  1. Vol4ara
                    Vol4ara 1 October 2020 09: 37
                    +4
                    Quote: Insurgent
                    Quote: Vol4ara
                    Where is our air defense proven effective against drones?

                    Not even Russian air defense, but Russian complexes in export performance , not included in a single air defense system, under the control of some operators, in Libya were able to demonstrate their effectiveness ...

                    I am more than confident that a balanced, echeloned system of Russian electronic warfare and air defense systems with skillful command will be many times more effective.

                    And what efficiency did they demonstrate there?) And what kind of export performances?
                    1. Insurgent
                      Insurgent 1 October 2020 09: 38
                      +6
                      Quote: Vol4ara
                      And how effective did they demonstrate there?)

                      Ask yourself about the losses of Turkish and other UAVs yes
                      1. Vol4ara
                        Vol4ara 1 October 2020 09: 42
                        -3
                        Quote: Insurgent
                        Quote: Vol4ara
                        And how effective did they demonstrate there?)

                        Ask yourself about the losses of Turkish and other UAVs yes

                        And what does the rab have to do with it? And what rab? What information do you have?
                  2. fiberboard
                    fiberboard 1 October 2020 19: 00
                    +1
                    So this, and where is it, this is the most skillful command we can take?
                2. CSKA
                  CSKA 1 October 2020 11: 06
                  +1
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  Armenians also have slave funds

                  Yes, but not the ones that are needed.
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  Where is our air defense proven effective against drones?

                  )))) And not in the SAR, not in Libya, our UAV Armor did not shoot down? If the SAR and LNA armed forces had a large number of Pantsir-S1 air defense systems and Tor-M2 air defense systems, then the drone fall would be much greater. This I am already silent about their lack of S-300V4 and a small number of Buk-M2 from SAR, which, moreover, cover important strategic facilities and cannot cover the ground forces in Idlib.
                  1. Vol4ara
                    Vol4ara 1 October 2020 13: 05
                    +1
                    Quote: CSKA
                    Quote: Vol4ara
                    Armenians also have slave funds

                    Yes, but not the ones that are needed.
                    Quote: Vol4ara
                    Where is our air defense proven effective against drones?

                    )))) And not in the SAR, not in Libya, our UAV Armor did not shoot down? If the SAR and LNA armed forces had a large number of Pantsir-S1 air defense systems and Tor-M2 air defense systems, then the drone fall would be much greater. This I am already silent about their lack of S-300V4 and a small number of Buk-M2 from SAR, which, moreover, cover important strategic facilities and cannot cover the ground forces in Idlib.

                    Indicate the brand of downed drones and the country of origin.
                    1. CSKA
                      CSKA 1 October 2020 13: 38
                      +2
                      Quote: Vol4ara
                      Indicate the brand of downed drones and the country of origin.

                      )))) Have you heard of Bayraktar TB2 and do not know the country of origin?
                      1. Vol4ara
                        Vol4ara 1 October 2020 16: 16
                        -1
                        Quote: CSKA
                        Quote: Vol4ara
                        Indicate the brand of downed drones and the country of origin.

                        )))) Have you heard of Bayraktar TB2 and do not know the country of origin?

                        I have not heard that tractors were shot down in Libya, MB is my oversight ...
                      2. CSKA
                        CSKA 2 October 2020 10: 51
                        0
                        Quote: Vol4ara
                        I have not heard that tractors were shot down in Libya, MB is my oversight ...

                        Google it. In my opinion, and on the VO photos were laid out in comments.
              2. alexmach
                alexmach 1 October 2020 17: 01
                0
                Where is our air defense proven effective against drones? Not in Syria

                Well, actually in Syria, during the last exacerbation in Idlib, after the first couple of disastrous days, the SAR succeeded in a counter-offensive, regardless of any UAVs.
            2. Bronekot
              Bronekot 1 October 2020 15: 39
              +1
              Yes bungling is rampant. And reinsurance. When we were attacked by a plane of one small but often belligerent country, the second time they decided to shoot it down, and the air defense crew did not have the codes for launch !!! They gave the wrong codes. So think bungling or reinsurance?
          2. Sovpadenie
            Sovpadenie 1 October 2020 08: 39
            +5
            Something you confuse or deliberately withhold. I remember several stories about repelling drone / UAV attacks on the Russian base Khmeimim. And it was the air defense forces
            1. chingachguc
              chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 24
              -2
              point object and handicraft litaki ... and then the first hit was missed
          3. CSKA
            CSKA 1 October 2020 11: 01
            +3
            Quote: Gritsa
            And there is no need to convince me that our air defense system would cope with the "tractors" as with seeds. I see that they could not do anything with them either in Syria, or in Libya, or in NK.

            No need to convince you?)))) Well, of course you can continue to talk nonsense? And where did you get the idea that our armored vehicles will not be covered by aviation? What makes you think that the war-depleted SAR army, which does not have a significant amount of air defense, could hold back a massive Turkish UAV raid? I am already silent about LNA. There, the remains of pre-war equipment are in service. Both in the SAR and in Libya, the UAVs were lost, even in the absence of a significant amount of high-quality air defense.
            Quote: Gritsa
            In about the same way, their UAVs would have flipped us from the air. They are not visible, not audible, but they are beating from nowhere.

            Weapons expert Bayraktar TB2 strikes ATGM UMTAS with a range of up to 8 km. Each motorized rifle brigade of the RF Armed Forces has an air defense battalion in which the air defense system is slightly less than in the entire army of the SAR or LNA. The Tor-M2 air defense system has a target destruction range of 16 km, for the Tungussk air defense missile system - 8 km.
            Quote: Gritsa
            And there is no opposition to this.

            Now look at the numbers. Probably there is opposition? This is despite the fact that you do not take into account the S-300V4 air defense system and the Buk-M2 air defense system. They would shoot down UAVs when they were still very far from their target. Once again. You have forgotten about VKS.
            1. Florian geyer
              Florian geyer 1 October 2020 13: 16
              11
              In fact, attack drones are just self-indulgence. And the apparent success of their application in modern conflicts does not say anything. There are several aspects to this:

              1. What is an attack drone (like Bayraktar)? In fact, it is a light, low-speed aircraft with low payload. If we compare, then in terms of combat qualities they are inferior to most of the WWII strike aircraft. Well, except that you can compare them with Po-2.

              2. The same battles in Nagorno-Karabakh - local low-intensity hostilities. On the Armenian side, the NK army of up to 20 thousand participates in them - two calculated divisions, and hardly more than 1/3 are directly involved in the clashes. Judging by the results, from the side of the Azerbaijanis, approximately the same forces are involved. Positional battles are being conducted with weak and not decisive attacks and artillery duels. Aviation is not used at all. In such a situation, a hundred or two corn workers (drones) may be of some importance. Mainly media - for filming videos for advertising purposes.

              2. In the context of large-scale high-intensity combat operations (at the operational-strategic level, it is permissible), what will be the role of attack drones? Exclusively reconnaissance and sabotage. How many WWII strike aircraft can cause serious damage to at least one division of a modern army? Especially if these planes are Po-2, but at a price of 1000 cornmen?
              In general, all these drones in such conditions instantly turn exclusively into a tool for reconnaissance and reconnaissance-sabotage activities.

              3.From the point of view of our army in a normal war, there is no point in waging a sluggish battlefield with small forces, and instead inflict a decisive blow on the enemy with superior forces and means, aimed at his complete defeat. That is, against any of the armies of neighboring countries, it should be at least an operation of the operational-strategic level. Where the role of drones will not be critical.
              In this aspect, the position of the leadership of our Armed Forces is fully justified - give better normal aircraft. And pampering in the form of a drone in the future, when we have good aviation.
              Those. it's not bad to have them, but that's not the point.
              And heaps of drones are pure "tukhachevshchina"
              1. NEOZ
                NEOZ 1 October 2020 15: 10
                +1
                Quote: Florian Geyer
                And heaps of drones are pure "tukhachevshchina"

                I AGREE !!!!!!
              2. CSKA
                CSKA 1 October 2020 16: 14
                +2
                In general, I agree with you. Against an army with good air defense support for the Ground Forces, I very much doubt that these expensive toys will be able to do anything. Especially against an army supported by aviation. I see perspective in the Heavy Hunter-class UAV.
                If we consider the option, for example, of forcing the peace of Ukraine, if they tried to force themselves into another adventure.
                The ground forces of the Russian Federation would enter the LDNR covered by aviation and the Tor air defense system. It is quite possible that the S-400 would have been deployed in the Rostov region. Then all these Turkish UAVs would go astray on the approach to the LPNR without any problems.
                In turn, if we would use the Hunters, Sirius or Helios. They would be patrolling the border area. At the necessary moment, they move to the desired target and strike the Kh-29, Kh-38, KAB-100 or KAB-250. It would be faster than raising aircraft or giving the order to strike with cruise missiles or OTRK. If the OTRK is of course not already deployed. But the price of an OTRK missile and the price of air-to-surface missiles have a very significant difference.
              3. Rzzz
                Rzzz 1 October 2020 16: 32
                +9
                Quote: Florian Geyer
                If we compare, then in terms of combat qualities they are inferior to most of the WWII strike aircraft. Well, except that you can compare them with Po-2

                Several key differences.
                1. Lack of a pilot on board. A processor in a box the size of a cigarette pack is much more difficult to disable than a living person. The processor has no fear, no self-preservation instinct that could make a living pilot turn away from the target. It is not necessary to carry on board many kilograms of a person and controls - this weight can be given for fuel and weapons. The loss of an aircraft in combat with a living pilot is a tragedy, the loss of drones worries only the accounting department.
                2. Replication. Drones can be glued on as much as production capacity allows. The planes will fly as many as there are living pilots. Pilots need debt and expensive to train. A pilot can steer an airplane for several hours a day, and as many percent as necessary on a drone.
                3. Smaller - harder to spot and harder to hit. The use of electric motors and composite materials with radio-absorbing coatings makes the task even more difficult.
                4. You can use tactics for which the defenders are not very ready. For example, a deep echeloned defense is simply filled with the corpses of soulless robots until the defense runs out of ammunition. What Israel has successfully demonstrated in Syria with the "Pantsir".
                Well, in general, it is incorrect to compare with WW2 aircraft.
                1. Florian geyer
                  Florian geyer 1 October 2020 18: 17
                  +2
                  Not all of these differences are positive.
                  - Just a box is often easier to disable than a living person. A person will not disconnect from EMP or any radio overload, a person will not stop working if communication with the command is lost, the person in the cockpit will better assess the situation than a remote operator.
                  - aircraft with the same characteristics will cost the same no matter whether a person is sitting on board or at a remote control panel (by the way, in long-term plans, a 6th generation aircraft also assumes an unmanned version)
                  - it is possible to rivet endless flying machines in a dendrofecal method, of course, but they will be bad, and the problem of oversaturation of air defenses with them is solved simply by returning the barreled anti-aircraft guns to operation, which with one shell will shoot down fifty such mosquitoes
                  - current strike UAVs (except for serious heavy and expensive ones) lag behind in performance characteristics and combat capabilities from most WWII strike aircraft at a higher price, so you can compare them
                  1. kiborg
                    kiborg 3 October 2020 00: 17
                    0
                    The advantages are low price and low radar signature. Bayraktars are made of composites and have a low ESR, so the Armenian radars cannot see them. Well, the Armor would probably have been noticed and knocked down.
            2. Captain Pushkin
              Captain Pushkin 1 October 2020 17: 27
              +9
              Quote: CSKA
              you do not take into account the S-300V4 air defense system and the Buk-M2 air defense system. They would shoot down UAVs when they were still very far from their target.

              There are two points:
              1. The S-300V4 and Buk-M2 air defense missile systems are many times more expensive than most drones, no money will be enough to fight like that.
              2. The number of available missiles S-300V4 and Buk-M2 air defense systems is several times less than the number of enemy drones available, you will not fight like that for a long time.
              1. Florian geyer
                Florian geyer 1 October 2020 18: 19
                +5
                Therefore, now they are again developing barreled air defense systems, especially for drones and cheap missiles for existing wax air defense
              2. Snusmumrik
                Snusmumrik 1 October 2020 22: 45
                +1
                Of course, I'm an amateur here, but is it really impossible to shoot down these drones with the Shilka?
                1. Volder
                  Volder 2 October 2020 06: 40
                  +1
                  Quote: Snusmumrik
                  Of course, I'm an amateur here, but is it really impossible to shoot down these drones with the Shilka?
                  Shilka is the last century. There were no shock drones in the last century. Shilka is not effective against drones, and there is little of it left in the troops. Well, it shoots not as far as modern air defense systems.
              3. CSKA
                CSKA 2 October 2020 10: 59
                +1
                Quote: Captain Pushkin
                1. The S-300V4 and Buk-M2 air defense missile systems are many times more expensive than most drones, no money will be enough to fight like that.

                Are you saying that a missile with an S-300V4 or Buk-M2 costs $ 30-40 million? I doubt it very much.
                Quote: Captain Pushkin
                2. The number of available missiles S-300V4 and Buk-M2 air defense systems is several times less than the number of enemy drones available, you will not fight like that for a long time.

                The example of SAR and Libya showed that UAV units are not used. And the S-300 and Buki can be deployed in a division. The S-300V4 division is 16 missiles. Azerbaijan does not know exactly how many Baykatar UAVs, but I don’t think there are more than 20-30. Do you think they will send them into battle at the same time?
            3. chingachguc
              chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 26
              +2
              S-300 against a 40-kg piece of iron)) you can't say anything))
              1. CSKA
                CSKA 6 October 2020 09: 30
                0
                Quote: chingachguc
                S-300 against a 40-kg piece of iron)) you can't say anything))

                ))))))) What are 40 kg? In fact, about 1 ton. And who told you that S-300V4 is obligatory? Most likely the Tor-M2 air defense system will be covered. But it does not matter at all even if their S-300V4, the main thing is to destroy the target.
          4. SSR
            SSR 1 October 2020 12: 55
            +1
            Quote: Gritsa
            I see that they could not do anything with them either in Syria,

            Hmm, just in Syria, Khmeimim was defended from any UAVs.
            Comrades, who can tell or what should be the effective range of a kamikaze drone?
            I just read the performance characteristics of the Stiletto and it turns out (approximately) at an average speed of 100 km / h, the time spent in the air for 30 minutes, the maximum will fly about 50 km and will start to work effectively and actively from about 10 minutes, that is, to search and destroy the target for about 20 minutes ... In general, for myself, I want to calculate the approximate optimal effective parameters of a kamikaze drone.
          5. Paranoid50
            Paranoid50 1 October 2020 14: 11
            -2
            Quote: Gritsa
            I see,

            Come on... laughing
          6. malyvalv
            malyvalv 2 October 2020 03: 52
            +3
            Well, a lot of drones there flipped technicians in Khmeimim?
            The first time we really missed a hit, but since then without options.
            "The best PVo is tanks on the enemy airfield." Therefore, the most effective fight against drones is a rocket to the control room. And if the Papuans don't have rockets, then Oh!
            1. chingachguc
              chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 30
              +1
              to understand what a loitering ammunition is. There is a launch catapult, a communication station (sometimes a satellite suitcase) and a couple of operators. They can sit anywhere, even at a remote control, in a dugout or trench. First try to track the communication station ... well, if you break the satellite dish with a rocket, the operator will sit 30 meters away and giggle
              1. malyvalv
                malyvalv 3 October 2020 12: 45
                -1
                The farther the drone's coverage area, the larger the "suitcase". The cheaper the rocket needed to destroy the operator. In most cases, a half-pack of Grad will work well. Drone operators will have no time for giggling.
                Loitering ammunition dead end branch. A conventional reconnaissance drone, in conjunction with an artillery piece that hits 25-30 km with a guided projectile, is more effective and cheaper.
                1. chingachguc
                  chingachguc 3 October 2020 13: 52
                  0
                  By the way, if the connection is via satellite, then it will not work)) it is also difficult to hammer the connection - the UAVs immediately switch to new frequencies. To hammer in all the frequencies means to deprive oneself of the connection. And the power is needed very, very large. The UAVs themselves are made of composite. Not only are they small, they are also radio-transparent. The electric motors are absolutely silent. This stuff is not visible or audible. Optical means are easier to detect ... and with thermal imagers, only special, all-aspect ones are needed. The most optimal is a passive Kolchuga-type radar, only compact. Any UAV emits radio frequencies. Without this, they cannot ...
                  1. malyvalv
                    malyvalv 4 October 2020 00: 48
                    0
                    Quite a lot has already been invented to counter UAVs. Which are not more expensive than the UAVs themselves. You just have to have them and use them.
          7. chingachguc
            chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 23
            0
            this was evident even after the Lebanese War of 1982)
        4. Alex Justice
          Alex Justice 1 October 2020 18: 09
          -2
          Now you can see that the drone and kamikaze uavs are very effective.

          The accuracy of the hits is amazing! In Syria, ours mostly missed the mark or used huge missiles against bicycles.
          1. Kart
            Kart 2 October 2020 10: 07
            -2
            Where are yours from?
          2. chingachguc
            chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 32
            +1
            or dumped a bunch of ammunition on a couple of bearded
      2. NEOZ
        NEOZ 1 October 2020 12: 32
        -1
        Quote: BDRM 667
        Why are they DOING THERE and quite intensively (and effectively) using it, while WE ONLY SPEAK?

        so far you are only talking ...
        maybe you should do this?
      3. ab111
        ab111 1 October 2020 16: 17
        +2
        Because we are waiting for the roasted cock to bite in the ass.
        God grant that Karabakh will become this peck!
        1. Kart
          Kart 2 October 2020 10: 08
          0
          By the way, yes.
          An excellent demonstration of war for everyone. True in miniature, but it is more effective than on landfills.
        2. chingachguc
          chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 34
          0
          yes they understood back in 2011 ... but they harness for a long, very long time. Orion have been doing it for 9 years. Although he is nothing special. Only in 2020 was it adopted.
      4. Volder
        Volder 2 October 2020 06: 34
        +3
        Quote: BDRM 667
        Why do we see Turkish, Chinese, Iranian, and someone else's, but not Russian, in combat use?
        Why should Russia supply drones to Azerbaijan or Armenia given their openly anti-Russian policy? Pashinyan is given to understand that Russia is not going to harness into the conflict in order to preserve his power.
      5. Thrombus
        Thrombus 2 October 2020 15: 50
        -1
        We don't really need this little thing, it is not critical, since in the event of a war there is something to plow to a depth of 500 km. and destroy the necessary targets at a strategic depth, factories, warehouses, headquarters and so on, but it would not hurt, I think they will speed up their delivery to arms for their friends, they would not interfere with DNR IMHO.
      6. SSR
        SSR 5 October 2020 16: 30
        +1
        Quote: BDRM 667
        But kamikaze drones ... Why do we see Turkish, Chinese, Iranian, and someone else's, but not Russian, in combat use?

        Don't throw bricks at me, I just want to check with my comrades.
        Where should we see the use of kamikaze drones by Russia, where there is such a need?
        If our UAVs such as Orlan and Fortpost, aim at arty and destroy targets relatively cheaply and easily, then why use a disposable drone for a beautiful shot?
        At the moment, Russia is not conducting hostilities with an enemy that has its own space groupings, strong air defense and electronic warfare, and I honestly do not understand what some comrades want. Maybe there are already supplies to the army of drones, but now there is no place or need for their use.
    2. Maz
      Maz 1 October 2020 08: 27
      +9
      Somehow unnoticed was the fact that technologies for controlling a swarm of UAVs from the Geoscan company appeared in Russia. They were simply demonstrated in the peaceful sky of St. Petersburg, but in fact this is a very great achievement for military purposes.
      1. Florian geyer
        Florian geyer 1 October 2020 13: 21
        -3
        Well yes. For military purposes. Especially considering that a battery of 85 mm anti-aircraft guns from the times of the Second World War would have destroyed this beautiful swarm of drones in less than 1 minute.
        1 Predator is more dangerous than a bunch of petty bullshit
        1. Kart
          Kart 2 October 2020 10: 10
          0
          Here, too, depending on where and how.
          For example, at ultra-low altitudes, literally near the ground, such a swarm can be dangerous.
          Of course, some will be shot down with anything, but the task will be completed by the rest.
          The whole question is in the price - how much does such a swarm cost.
    3. Maz
      Maz 1 October 2020 08: 49
      0
      In an interview with Israeli journalist Barak Ravid, adviser to the Azerbaijani President Hikmet Hajiyev avoided a direct answer to the question about the supply of weapons from Israel and the flights of military and civilian transport aircraft to the Uvda military airfield near Eilat. (https://t.me/new_militarycolumnist/43179)

      According to the adviser, there is a long-term cooperation in the military sphere between the two countries. At the same time, Hajiyev noted the active use of Israeli-made drones during the ongoing conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.
  2. The comment was deleted.
    1. Shurik70
      Shurik70 1 October 2020 05: 58
      +1
      In the second video, the explosion of the tank is VERY strange.
      If you look frame by frame, first the smoke is over the entire surface of the right caterpillar, but not from below, as it would be if you hit a mine, but from above. And only then the main undermining.
      What kind of ammunition can do this?
      1. chingachguc
        chingachguc 3 October 2020 01: 37
        0
        I understand that these landmines do not do much harm to tanks if the hatches are battened down. There is a clean land mine of 10 kilograms ... without submunitions.
  • FRoman1984
    FRoman1984 1 October 2020 04: 06
    +4
    Who rules in the air rules the point.
    Another example of future wars, where the quantity and quality of armored vehicles is not decisive.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 1 October 2020 15: 28
      +2
      Azerbaijan achieved air supremacy. Knocked out the air defense on the first day.
      Further - the defeat of armored vehicles from the air.
      1. MKPU-115
        MKPU-115 2 October 2020 09: 44
        +2
        "I knocked out the air defense on the first day." - there is no data, a beautiful video with the destruction of a wasp and models is not all air defense.
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 1 October 2020 15: 34
      0
      Quite right. Therefore, the MBT concept is dying, either light maneuverable equipment with good mine protection or super-heavy equipment is needed for individual operations and theater of operations.
      1. Florian geyer
        Florian geyer 1 October 2020 18: 34
        +3
        Nonsense, both statements. Neither Azerbaijan achieved "air superiority", nor did the MBT die.
  • Andrew 40
    Andrew 40 1 October 2020 04: 36
    -15 qualifying.
    It remains to ask the nullified one. How are we doing with drones compared to potential partners. Or again he will say the Second World War interfered, as with the pension reform.
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 1 October 2020 04: 53
      11
      How are we doing with drones compared to potential partners?

      Well, to get an answer to this question, you just need to pull your finger out of your nose and fill in Google "video of Russian air strikes Syria". There filming from drones, carrying out the correction of strikes on the bearded. Or give you only kamikaze drones, no less?
      1. BDRM 667
        BDRM 667 1 October 2020 05: 15
        +9
        Quote: Ka-52
        Or give you only kamikaze drones, no less?

        Do not juggle. It is clear that we need to talk about the balance of UAV systems. And so far there is no such balance in the RF Armed Forces. If with reconnaissance - target designation - correction, somehow, then with a UAV with shock functions (as a particular "kamikaze") - somehow not very good.

        Declared separate samples in pre-production versions, BUT ...
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 1 October 2020 05: 28
          +5
          If with reconnaissance - target designation - correction, somehow, then with a UAV with shock functions (as a particular "kamikaze") - somehow not very good.

          Let's start with the fact that reconnaissance and target designation is considered the main and main goal of unmanned aerial vehicles. This is also logical - knowing the location of the enemy, his places of concentration of forces, directions of advancement, placement of weapons, allows you to plan your strategic and tactical actions efficiently. In the end, it will bring in 100 times more dividends than surgical strikes of kamikaze drones or shock drones on individual objects. Moreover, it is easy to hit a reconnoitered target by other means (artillery or aviation).
          I will say not for the first time and I think not for the last time - the UAV fleet of the United States accounts for almost half of all combat aviation. But pragmatic Americans continue (after all, fools, they don't read your comments on VO lol ) use aircraft in 98% of cases to destroy ground targets. And only in 2% of cases, the strikes fall on drones.
          I'm not saying shock drones are unnecessary, like kamikaze drones. But I think that we need to follow the path of expediency - first, saturate the troops with what is needed in the first place and has greater efficiency.
          1. BDRM 667
            BDRM 667 1 October 2020 05: 33
            +9
            Quote: Ka-52
            only 2% of the time hits are from drones

            Do you really not understand that the kamikaze UAV is cheaper, longer-range, more functional and more effective than a number of weapons systems? The same hyped Javelin?

            Naturally,"not all drones are the same", because I wrote about the balance ...

            But in any case, there is something to THINK about ...
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 1 October 2020 05: 50
              +5
              Do you really not understand that the kamikaze UAV is cheaper, longer-range, more functional and more effective than a number of weapons systems?

              you do not understand this. Just turn on your head. I’ll explain on my fingers, since it’s hard to get it: two people were placed in a dark room. One has a super fancy gauss rifle. And the other has a simple pistol with a pair of cartridges and night vision goggles. Who will be the winner? I think all the same the one that sees enemy) Therefore, reconnaissance drones should be designed, produced and delivered to the troops in the first place.
              that the kamikaze UAV is cheaper, longer-range, more functional and more effective than a number of weapons systems

              cheaper than a number, but not most. The same goes for efficiency.
              1. Vol4ara
                Vol4ara 1 October 2020 09: 28
                -2
                Quote: Ka-52
                Do you really not understand that the kamikaze UAV is cheaper, longer-range, more functional and more effective than a number of weapons systems?

                you do not understand this. Just turn on your head. I’ll explain on my fingers, since it’s hard to get it: two people were placed in a dark room. One has a super fancy gauss rifle. And the other has a simple pistol with a pair of cartridges and night vision goggles. Who will be the winner? I think all the same the one that sees enemy) Therefore, reconnaissance drones should be designed, produced and delivered to the troops in the first place.
                that the kamikaze UAV is cheaper, longer-range, more functional and more effective than a number of weapons systems

                cheaper than a number, but not most. The same goes for efficiency.

                It turns out cool when you are placed in a dark room, and you have a pistol and a reconnaissance drone, and the enemy has a gauss rifle, a reconnaissance drone, an attack drone
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 1 October 2020 09: 48
                  +5
                  and the enemy has a gauss rifle, a reconnaissance drone, an attack drone

                  and also a yacht and a woman with tits. Let's carry on, you're headed in the right direction wassat
                  1. Vol4ara
                    Vol4ara 1 October 2020 10: 43
                    -2
                    Quote: Ka-52
                    and the enemy has a gauss rifle, a reconnaissance drone, an attack drone

                    and also a yacht and a woman with tits. Let's carry on, you're headed in the right direction wassat

                    And you are not :)
                    1. Ka-52
                      Ka-52 1 October 2020 10: 57
                      +2
                      And you are not :)

                      yes, where should I)) yachts cannot afford, but the age is not the same for boobs laughing
              2. malyvalv
                malyvalv 2 October 2020 04: 17
                +1
                In the situation with the room, you need to add a flashlight on the night vision goggles. Drones all have radio communication and, accordingly, an emitter. The signal from which is perfectly visible with the appropriate equipment. If you want to be in the wilderness, you want to knock it down. That's when AI drones come along, that's when the real problem will be.
            2. Alexander Galaktionov
              Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 00
              +6
              As for the strike uavs, the example of Syria Libya in terms of the destruction of air defense showed themselves very well.About the Air Force, it is to look for terrorists in Syria with the help of Fighters, or it is easier to send an attack uav, which can patrol and patrol from 12 to 24 hours and destroy
              1. Ka-52
                Ka-52 1 October 2020 06: 31
                +2
                example Syria Libya

                that's it. This type of weapon is good either as a means of destruction for a certain theater of operations or as an addition to other means. But not a wunderwaffe, as many dream. Moreover, a normally delivered electronic warfare reduces the potential of such UAVs to a minimum. IMHO for many countries such kamikaze drones are weapons of the poor.
                1. Alexander Galaktionov
                  Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 36
                  -9
                  Kamikaze drones are weapons of the poor) these are not weapons of the poor, this is how then why do we need a Hunter UAV?
                  1. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 1 October 2020 06: 42
                    +7
                    this is how, then, why do we need a Hunter UAV?

                    well, compared to hell with a finger .... The C70 is a heavy strike UAV, in fact, an unmanned bomber, which has its own control architecture, with the potential for integration with Su-57 aircraft.
                    1. Alexander Galaktionov
                      Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 48
                      -5
                      What is he for? There is Tu 22m3m Tu 160
                      1. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 1 October 2020 06: 54
                        +5
                        What is he for? There is Tu 22m3m Tu 160

                        Why pistols if there are machine guns? And why is an APC if there are tanks? You ask strange questions ... Each type of weapon has its own purpose. In addition, the C70 is, IMHO, not even a pre-production car, but most likely a technological laboratory. On the basis of which combatant vehicles will then be created. It is used to test the technologies of future weapons.
                      2. CSKA
                        CSKA 1 October 2020 11: 22
                        +3
                        Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
                        What is he for? There is Tu 22m3m Tu 160

                        Well, you give.))))) The Tu-160 and Tu-22M3M have completely different tasks. Tu-160 and Tu-22M3M strike missile launchers, including those with the possibility of inflicting missile launchers with a nuclear charge.
                        The UAV Hunter is more likely to have a task like the Su-34.
                2. Alexander Galaktionov
                  Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 52
                  -4
                  You can only hear the electronic warfare, then the electronic warfare, and in fact, the artisanal UAVs of the terrorists in Syria shot down Torah and the Armor, and there is such a small percentage of them saying that after the Armor was shooting down an UAV
                  1. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 1 October 2020 07: 00
                    +9
                    You can only hear the electronic warfare, then the electronic warfare, and in fact, the artisanal UAVs of the terrorists in Syria shot down Torah and the Armor, and there is such a small percentage of them saying that after the Armor was shooting down an UAV

                    because you are either listening in the wrong place, or in the wrong place. Although they could have just turned on the logic - the most successful for the barmaley was only the first attack in 2018, during which 4 aircraft were damaged. Since then, we have not heard of such catastrophic failures of our base defense. Either the bearded run out of drones (doubtful) or the defense is working successfully.
                  2. CSKA
                    CSKA 1 October 2020 11: 25
                    +5
                    Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
                    You can only hear the electronic warfare, then the electronic warfare, and in fact, the artisanal UAVs of the terrorists in Syria shot down Torah and the Armor, and there is such a small percentage of them saying that after the Armor was shooting down an UAV

                    In SAR, the Shells work very effectively on terrorist drones. SAM Tor we do not have there. And Iranian electronic warfare intercepted US UAVs.
                3. Vol4ara
                  Vol4ara 1 October 2020 09: 29
                  -1
                  Quote: Ka-52
                  example Syria Libya

                  that's it. This type of weapon is good either as a means of destruction for a certain theater of operations or as an addition to other means. But not a wunderwaffe, as many dream. Moreover, a normally delivered electronic warfare reduces the potential of such UAVs to a minimum. IMHO for many countries such kamikaze drones are weapons of the poor.

                  In which theater was a normally staged slave able to resist drones?
                  1. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 1 October 2020 09: 51
                    +1
                    In which theater was a normally staged slave able to resist drones?

                    In the Moscow Art Theater named after Chekhov, most likely. In Lenkom, too, most likely wassat
              2. Garris199
                Garris199 2 October 2020 15: 31
                0
                And if you send a fighter to snap a loitering UAV? I think that the OLS on our fighters + cannon + melee explosive missiles will give a good result.
            3. CSKA
              CSKA 1 October 2020 11: 16
              0
              Quote: BDRM 667
              UAV-kamikaze is cheaper, longer distance

              Long range of what?
              Quote: BDRM 667
              and more effective than a number of weapons systems?

              For example, what?
              Quote: BDRM 667
              The same hyped Javelin

              )))) You probably have never been on the front line, and even more so, have not fired from an ATGM. How do you imagine it? I am in position. I see the advance of enemy armored vehicles. It turns out I have to inform the headquarters through the ILC that they would contact the UAV company and they would release one or two drones? Is that instead of JUST firing one or two shots at the ATGM squad? This despite the fact that it is not possible to shoot down an ATGM, this despite the fact that it is not known how many UAVs are needed for one tank and they can just be shot down.
              1. Florian geyer
                Florian geyer 1 October 2020 13: 48
                0
                Yes, this is all "Tukhachevism" of the generation of computer games.
                No, drones are really needed, for example, in reconnaissance, but they have their own specifics
                1. CSKA
                  CSKA 1 October 2020 16: 21
                  +3
                  Quote: Florian Geyer
                  Yes, this is all "Tukhachevism" of the generation of computer games.

                  They have a very vague idea of ​​what combat is.
                  Quote: Florian Geyer
                  No, drones are really needed, for example, in reconnaissance, but they have their own specifics

                  I still think that drums are also needed for a smaller use of helicopters in cases where MANPADS can be used.
                  1. Florian geyer
                    Florian geyer 1 October 2020 18: 46
                    0
                    That is to say, you can make a helicopter unmanned. What the Americans are doing now.
                    Actually, we are talking about the fact that if you have money, you can do anything and good.
                    1. Kart
                      Kart 2 October 2020 10: 17
                      -1
                      General world practice shows that this is not always the case.
                      As a rule, a lot of money serves as an invitation not to do something, but this money is to play for yourself.
              2. nnm
                nnm 1 October 2020 19: 14
                0
                I think a colleague sees everything easier - they saw the advancement of the enemy's equipment, took out a drone from the unloading, launched it and that's it - he enjoys the video of the detonation of the BC on the smartphone screen)))
                1. CSKA
                  CSKA 2 October 2020 11: 13
                  +1
                  Quote: nnm
                  I think a colleague sees everything easier - they saw the advancement of the enemy's equipment, took out a drone from the unloading, launched it and that's it - he enjoys the video of the detonation of the BC on the smartphone screen)))

                  Most likely he thinks so, only a drone that fits into a backpack has explosives which are only enough to shoot down the dynamic defense from the tank in one place.
            4. Florian geyer
              Florian geyer 1 October 2020 13: 45
              +3
              Not more functional or more efficient. And more expensive.
              We take open sources and compare:
              "... the Ukrainian side nevertheless signed a contract worth 69 million to purchase two complexes of reconnaissance and attack unmanned aerial vehicles Bayraktar TB2 manufactured by the Turkish private company Baykar Makina ... "

              "... The USA has finally delivered the Jewelin ATGM to Kiev. Per $ 47 million, 35 launchers Javelin plus two ATGMs for disassembly for spare parts) and 210 missiles to them..."

              There is nothing to say about our, Chinese and other Iranian ATGMs.

              As a front-line attack aircraft, an attack drone is simply a Po-2 with a suspended ATM or a pair of bombs. That is why in normal armies (in the USA, France, and in our country, for example), the main strike tasks are assigned to normal aviation.

              The Americans have a lot of drones because there is a lot of money and defense budgets need to be cut. Something like this: Darleen A. Druyun (born November 7, 1947) is a former United States Air Force civilian official (Principal Deputy Undersecretary of the Air Force for Acquisition), and Boeing executive. In 2004 Druyun pled guilty to a felony in relation to her role in the United States Air Force tanker contract controversy.
          2. Grits
            Grits 1 October 2020 06: 33
            +3
            Quote: Ka-52
            But I think that we need to follow the path of expediency - first, saturate the troops with what is needed in the first place and has greater efficiency.

            So, evaluate the efficiency of Azerbaijani UAVs in comparison with aviation. The aviation has not even taken off yet, and a good part of the Armenian equipment has already been ground down by "useless" unmanned aerial vehicles.
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 1 October 2020 06: 44
              10
              and a good part of the Armenian technology has already been ground down by "useless" unmanned aerial vehicles.

              a significant part of Azerbaijani equipment was ground by Armenian anti-tank weapons, despite the fact that the Armenians do not even have kamikaze drones in service. So see for yourself - is it a matter of drones.
              1. Alexander Galaktionov
                Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 07: 07
                -1
                Their equipment ran into mine fields and was knocked out of the ATGM and from the art in the targeted areas, so they will now knock out the art with the help of shock drones and fighters from the kamikaze drones, especially since it is bad for the video there is an open area like in Syria
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 1 October 2020 07: 19
                  14
                  Their equipment ran into mine fields and was knocked out of the ATGM

                  Well, that is, we admit that in war all means are good. And not only those who jerk off snotty schoolboys who have seen enough videos on YouTube laughing
                  not now they will knock out arto with the help of shock drones and planters from a kamikaze drones

                  yes, it's easy for you to fantasize lol Orbiter price is about $ 700 thousand. The contract with the Israeli Aueronatics was about $ 15 million. In total, we get 21 devices. Not a lot for more or less prolonged hostilities. And in your dreams now Azerbaijanis will even start shooting down cyclists in Yerevan with drones. laughing
                  1. Alexander Galaktionov
                    Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 07: 26
                    -10 qualifying.
                    Kamikaze UAVs are on a level or even cheaper Ptura or anti-aircraft missile systems
                    1. Ka-52
                      Ka-52 1 October 2020 07: 36
                      10
                      Kamikaze UAVs are on a level or even cheaper Ptura or anti-aircraft missile systems

                      do not know how to read? The Israeli Orbiter costs about $ 700 thousand. Kornet ATGM missile - about $ 20 thousand. What can you calculate cheaper yourself?
                      1. Alexander Galaktionov
                        Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 07: 39
                        -11 qualifying.
                        I'm telling you now there is a cheap kamikaze uav
                      2. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 1 October 2020 07: 46
                        11
                        I tell you

                        Verily I say unto you, on May 4, 1925, the earth will fly upon the celestial axis! laughing
                        you can stick a motor to the toilet lid and hang an efka under it. It will also be cheap, but how much good is it. There are no cheap but effective systems. If you want a longer flight range - pay. If you want to use telemetry - pay. If you want carrying capacity - pay. And everything is just like two fingers under the stream fool
                      3. Sentinel-vs
                        Sentinel-vs 1 October 2020 08: 00
                        +6
                        Why argue with a schoolboy? He even writes illiterately, and you are talking to him about some military spending.
                  2. donavi49
                    donavi49 1 October 2020 08: 17
                    +8
                    Harop is now available:
                    cost around $ 70,000

                    At the same time, Harop flies to himself, chooses a target and hits auto-tracking, even if the signal is lost on the final dive (which is often). And the Cornet must be deployed, dragged to the battle line, and led until it hits.
                  3. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 1 October 2020 08: 54
                    +3
                    Harop is now available:
                    cost around $ 70,000

                    not worth the IAI Harop $ 70. In any case, I have not seen such prices. American switchblade, an order of magnitude easier both in range and in weight, starts from hundreds of thousands of green
                  4. Florian geyer
                    Florian geyer 1 October 2020 14: 12
                    +5
                    1 shot from the D-30 costs about $ 1000 (but in reality, it is 2 times cheaper) And can you imagine they can also choose a target and shoot 15 km at 360 °
                    And even corrected by small reconnaissance drones
        2. Insurgent
          Insurgent 1 October 2020 07: 09
          +8
          Quote: Ka-52
          a significant part of Azerbaijani equipment was ground by Armenian anti-tank weapons, despite the fact that the Armenians do not even have kamikaze drones in service. So see for yourself - is it a matter of drones.


          And if the Armenian side also had shock UAVs (including "kamikaze drones"), you, in turn, would assess HOW this would affect the balance of forces and the results of battles?
          1. Florian geyer
            Florian geyer 1 October 2020 14: 20
            0
            No way. All the same
        3. chingachguc
          chingachguc 1 October 2020 10: 25
          +3
          here we are not talking about the effectiveness of artillery and ATGM. Here's about the effectiveness of the UAV. They are effective. And here Russia lags behind not only the USA, but even Azerbaijan.
        4. ab111
          ab111 1 October 2020 16: 27
          +2
          However, there is no photo / video confirmation of this.
          For all 4 days of the war, only 4 or 5 units of Azerbaijani armored vehicles were defeated by the Armenians.
          And this despite the fact that from the Armenian side there is no such strong censorship for showing video from the front, as it is done in Azerbaijan.
      2. Florian geyer
        Florian geyer 1 October 2020 18: 48
        +1
        Then the Armenian ATGMs are even more effective, because in terms of the number of vehicles destroyed, drones are far ahead
    2. Dzungar
      Dzungar 1 October 2020 08: 20
      +5
      And you have not heard anything about the concept of RUK - Reconnaissance and Strike Complexes. When the defeat of a reconnaissance object occurs immediately after detection by the forces of the same reconnaissance means. That is, as quickly as possible. The advantage is evident
      1. ab111
        ab111 1 October 2020 16: 35
        +1
        We studied American HANDS back in the mid-80s. And about the Soviet / Russian did not hear anything.
        1. Dzungar
          Dzungar 7 October 2020 09: 51
          0
          Well, now we are talking about their creation in Russia. And to listen to you - so you should still have only reconnaissance UAVs
    3. Andrew 40
      Andrew 40 1 October 2020 08: 50
      +7
      This is your main target designation for drones. In practice, attack drones already now give an advantage on the battlefield to those who have more of them and who can inflict more damage on the enemy. Even if you read this article. The future is behind them. In Syria, we came across only homemade roads. In a collision with the alliance, our boys will again not die for a penny,
      including because of your hat-covering position. Are you preparing for yesterday's war again?
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 1 October 2020 09: 25
        +5
        This is your main target designation for drones.

        and you ask any officer with experience in the war - which he will choose: a reconnaissance UAV or a disposable kamikaze drone. When you get an answer, don't forget to write to me yes
        The future is behind them

        the future is possible with unmanned systems. But war is the systematic use of means of defeat. So that you don't dream on the couch, but wars have never been won with one type of weaponry.
        your hat-covering position

        maybe if you are not an empty chatterbox, then write where did I throw a hat? Maybe when I wrote this?
        I'm not saying shock drones are unnecessary, like kamikaze drones. But I think that we need to follow the path of expediency - first, saturate the troops with what is needed in the first place and has greater efficiency.
      2. Alex Justice
        Alex Justice 1 October 2020 18: 20
        +1
        In practice, attack drones already now give an advantage on the battlefield to those who have more of them and who can inflict more damage on the enemy.

        And what about the morale of a soldier when he is not sure of being protected from drones?
        1. Florian geyer
          Florian geyer 1 October 2020 22: 08
          +2
          And let's see ... The fact is that you cannot win the battle with drones alone that bombed everything, after this annihilation the infantrymen should come there and take a destroyed / suppressed position.
          And what do we see?
          First, colorful videos from Azerbaijanis about the destruction of all sorts of things from drones (in fact, video of objective control from reconnaissance drones that do not shoot themselves). It would seem, come and take everything.
          But no, the next video is from Armenians with full KamAZ bodies of Azerbaijani infantrymen.
          Apparently not very demoralized
      3. Thrombus
        Thrombus 2 October 2020 16: 26
        0
        A more or less major war, for example, with Turkey, in the first hours of unbreakable hypersound with tactical nuclear weapons, we reset the military-industrial potential, in the evening we accept the surrender, we do not agree that it is unlikely, we continue, in the morning we accept.
    4. Glory1974
      Glory1974 1 October 2020 09: 06
      +6
      Moreover, it is easy to hit a reconnoitered target by other means (artillery or aviation).

      In the video, targets in motion are hit. If you had given target designation to artillery, the fire raid would have gone blank. With the help of a drone, a result has been achieved, which means its actions are more effective.
      that reconnaissance and target designation is considered the main and main purpose of unmanned vehicles.

      Reconnaissance does not exclude fire damage; on the contrary, it is carried out for this purpose. The video shows that they scouted the targets and immediately hit them. What's bad? Air domination belongs to Azerbaijan, therefore there are results.
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 1 October 2020 09: 32
        +7
        that they scouted the targets and immediately hit them. What's bad?

        and who said that is bad? Both Azerbaijanis and Armenians equally endure each other's military equipment, moreover, in almost equal quantities, using anti-tank systems and artillery and UAVs and mining tank-hazardous directions. But the schoolchildren saw only UAVs and now they pissed all corners with the conviction that this is the only effective way of war fool
        Air domination belongs to Azerbaijan, therefore there are results.

        air supremacy? when you write this, what are you guided by, just wondering? No one won air superiority. Both sides keep combat aircraft on the ground.
        1. Glory1974
          Glory1974 1 October 2020 12: 55
          +4
          air supremacy? when you write this, what are you guided by, just wondering? No one won air superiority. Both sides keep combat aircraft on the ground.

          By air supremacy, I mean the actions of Azerbaijani drones. Both have aircraft on the ground, but those who do have drones operate in the air. What is their advantage at this stage.
          But the schoolchildren saw only UAVs and now they pissed all corners with the conviction that this is the only effective way of war

          Schoolchildren may have pissed, and experienced people have long been asking for drones in order to use them in battles.
          I personally went to reconnaissance of Tochka's strikes. Compared to additional reconnaissance and destruction of targets by drones, this is the last century. This is what I'm talking about. But while the General Staff believes that an infantryman with a raised flag is needed, everything remains unchanged. Hundreds of shells hit the squares, missiles are launched wherever, and the effectiveness of such actions is below the plinth.
          1. Ka-52
            Ka-52 1 October 2020 13: 05
            +3
            By air supremacy, I mean the actions of Azerbaijani drones

            gaining air supremacy means either destroying all aviation or making its flights impossible (ineffective).
            and experienced people have been asking for drones for a long time

            so I am writing that we need to saturate the troops with reconnaissance drones. And before you turn on the Wishlist using single-use single target ammunition (taking into account its cost), you need to understand the possibilities. Any high-precision weapons for the time being remains desirable in the troops tomorrow, and not everyday today.
            1. Florian geyer
              Florian geyer 1 October 2020 14: 46
              +2
              So far, this is until technology allows to reduce the cost and increase the power of precision weapons to the price and power of an artillery shell or an aerial bomb. And this apparently will not happen in the next 100 years.

              How many times have tanks and artillery been buried ...
            2. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 1 October 2020 15: 44
              +2
              "gaining air supremacy is either to destroy all aircraft
              or make its flights impossible "////
              ----
              Air supremacy is when your aircraft are flying
              and do what they want, but the enemy's means remain on the ground.
              Aircraft also include drones.
              1. Spartanec
                Spartanec 1 October 2020 17: 02
                +4
                you wrote the same thing only in other words)) there we are talking about air supremacy. The domination of Azerbaijan has not been won !!! The fact that their drones are flying there does not mean anything. Armenia does not use aviation, like Azrbayjan, but not because they cannot because of Azerbaijan's drones. And so the artelirian shells also fly through the air and not hit from the ground, and the drone is the same shell only several times more expensive)))) Well, one komikadze drone destroyed there, and in response, you destroyed the price tag with 10 ordinary shells from their tank compare. Read all the correspondence of the one you are commenting on. There it is not about the fact that drones are not needed at all, but about the fact that they are needed to perform specific tasks like a pistol, a sniper rifle, a cannon, etc. And a drone is not a panacea that gives a 100% guarantee of victory in a war. A balanced army will win in a war, and not one with many drones. The losses of equipment on both sides there are comparable and no one has an advantage, even though Armenia does not have drones, that's what we are talking about. But drones, as already written, are needed here and there is nothing to argue about
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 1 October 2020 17: 44
                  +1
                  "The losses of equipment on both sides are comparable there" ////
                  ----
                  I don’t think so. Howitzer artillery strikes never
                  achieved the destruction of tanks. It needs direct hits.
                  But I will not argue. This will clear up over time.
                2. Florian geyer
                  Florian geyer 1 October 2020 18: 55
                  +2
                  [quote] Strikes with howitzer artillery never
                  achieved the destruction of tanks. Direct hits are needed there [/ quote]

                  Not at all. Direct hits are optional. It all depends on the caliber. 152 close breaks are guaranteed to disable tanks
                3. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 1 October 2020 19: 01
                  -1
                  How? The shock wave dies out quickly.
                  Shards for tank armor are harmless.
                  If what you said was true, it would have been threshed long ago
                  from howitzers against tanks.
                  But no: they shoot ATGMs or OBPS.
                4. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik 1 October 2020 21: 44
                  0
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  How so?

                  World of Tanks play, they will explain laughing
                5. Florian geyer
                  Florian geyer 1 October 2020 23: 52
                  +1
                  To disable a tank is not necessarily to completely annihilate the tower in one direction, the hull in the other, flames up to the sky. Close breaks of 152 mm tear out the chassis of the tank, damage weapons, demolish external equipment, sights, damage the engine. Large fragments pierce the side armor.

                  So they shoot at tanks from howitzers and MLRS cannons from closed positions. Naturally, not for a single tank, but for a group target in area. There are rates of ammunition consumption for both stationary targets and moving ones, you will find it by yandeksite.
                  Well, for example

            3. Spartanec
              Spartanec 2 October 2020 05: 27
              0
              Believe it is something like this. In a global sense. Only officials have accurate data, but we will not find out about them in the near future. As for the official reports, I generally laughed when I read the official data of Azerbaijan about the losses of Armenia. There were not so many air defense equipment in Armenia))) it can be seen that Azerbaijan destroyed it in the bud. And there are a lot of videos of the destruction of layouts and not real equipment, but this generally does not negate that there are losses and they are not small on both sides.
        2. Ka-52
          Ka-52 2 October 2020 04: 56
          +1
          Air supremacy is when your aircraft are flying
          and do what they want, but the enemy's means remain on the ground.
          Aircraft also include drones.

          you wrote the same as me, only the words were rearranged wink
          there was no struggle for airspace in the air over the enclaves and the NKR. And Azerbaijan did not win the exclusive right to use it as a direction for attacks. The Armenians also have drones and they use them. I just don't use shock drones as much. But aerial reconnaissance is and is being conducted successfully. It is strange that you did not understand such a simple detail. No.
  • svoit
    svoit 1 October 2020 09: 41
    0
    Targeting means, of course, guidance, so of course all targets will be hit, but only in tactical or operational depth. Even if you use MLRS, the range will not exceed 100 km. The use of aviation is also not an option, if the air defense is not suppressed
    1. Florian geyer
      Florian geyer 1 October 2020 14: 39
      +2
      If air defense is not suppressed, then all targets will not be hit, but all drones will be shot down. Aviation and artillery are much more effective than UAV
  • Florian geyer
    Florian geyer 1 October 2020 14: 34
    +4
    .The video shows targets in motion. If you had given target designation to artillery, the fire raid would have gone blank. With the help of a drone, a result has been achieved, which means its actions are more effective.


    What video? All Azerbaijani videos show the defeat of stationary targets.
    Are you familiar with the work of artillery? Imagine, it turns out there are targeted landmarks and boundaries. And covering a targeted intersection or a section of road with moving targets with a battery, for example, a D-30 or a BM-21 package, is simply incommensurate with the operation of a drone. Do you know how long it takes for the Msta-S division to cover 1 hectare? And how many drones are needed for this? And what is the power of a 152 mm projectile compared to an uav bomb?
    And also, it turns out that next to the shooting officer, a reconnaissance officer who controls a light reconnaissance drone can sit and show targets in real time and give corrections

    Apparently the same Americans are just stupid people. They urgently need to turn over the Centurions to be melted down, and with the proceeds to buy Bayraktar from the Turks
  • chingachguc
    chingachguc 1 October 2020 09: 12
    -2
    Drones-strikers and loitering ammunition are more effective in conditions of strong air resistance. Azerbaijan has it, but we don't. Shame.
    1. Kart
      Kart 2 October 2020 10: 27
      -1
      So you will not.
      In Russia there will be as much as necessary, not on the advice of experts from the VO.
  • Free wind
    Free wind 1 October 2020 05: 39
    +8
    Drones spotters, normal decision, why not. A kamikaze drone is a small cruise missile, or rather even a cheap radio-controlled model with 3-5 kg ​​of explosives, you can collect it at home if you find TNT. speed of about 100 km. Can be used with a drone corrector. Or from the ground, in line of sight. After the collapse of the USSR, the Armenians used mountains of the remaining weapons, and they were withdrawn from Azerbaijan after the Baku events. Then Azerbaijan began to arm itself. And the Armenians didn't care. Well, we got what we got. Actually, I don't care, I am not at all worried about their shooters. Their malice has been accumulating for centuries, why should we interfere with this.
  • Alex Justice
    Alex Justice 1 October 2020 18: 14
    +1
    Well, to get an answer to this question, you just need to pull your finger out of your nose and fill in Google "video of Russian air strikes Syria".

    Bam, bam and past :)
  • FRoman1984
    FRoman1984 1 October 2020 23: 55
    0
    Quote: Ka-52
    How are we doing with drones compared to potential partners?

    Well, to get an answer to this question, you just need to pull your finger out of your nose and fill in Google "video of Russian air strikes Syria". There filming from drones, carrying out the correction of strikes on the bearded. Or give you only kamikaze drones, no less?

    Most likely, they meant shock drones.
  • NEOZ
    NEOZ 1 October 2020 12: 35
    +3
    Quote: Andrey 40
    It remains to ask the nullified one. How are we doing with drones compared to potential partners?

    and what did you personally do on this issue? ahh .... write comments on the couch .... well well ....
    Quote: Andrey 40
    Or again he will say the Second World War interfered, as with the pension reform.

    the failure of the birth rate in 2020 was predictable (textbook for universities "DEMOGRAPHY") everything is described there !!! explore !!!!
    1. Kart
      Kart 2 October 2020 10: 28
      0
      He doesn't need to. He struggles with mode.
    2. ANB
      ANB 2 October 2020 15: 55
      0
      I don't know anything about any failure in 2020. My wife is pregnant with her fourth child. :)
  • kot-begemot
    kot-begemot 1 October 2020 04: 47
    +6
    Quote: FRoman1984
    Who rules in the air rules the point.
    Another example of future wars, where the quantity and quality of armored vehicles is not decisive.

    Does not have, is spelled with "not".
    The quantity and quality of armored vehicles is determined by the ability to use it in conjunction with pro, air defense, military, camouflage and trained crews, support and reconnaissance equipment.
    If you are given a nuclear warhead, a suitcase with codes and put on a bicycle, then nuclear weapons will not matter.
  • Dimon71
    Dimon71 1 October 2020 04: 50
    15
    A video appeared on the BBC with an interview with a Syrian mercenary fighting in Karabakh, describing how they were transported through Turkey to Az. For $ 2000 per month. I think the BBC is clearly not a pro-Armenian channel.
    1. BDRM 667
      BDRM 667 1 October 2020 05: 27
      14
      Quote: Dimon71
      A video appeared on the BBC with an interview with a Syrian mercenary fighting in Karabakh, describing how they were transported through Turkey to Az. For $ 2000 per month. I think the BBC is clearly not a pro-Armenian channel.

      There is already a mass of materials confirming the participation of mercenaries from Syria transferred to Azerbaijan in the attack on NKAO.

      A seriously wounded SNA militant dressed in the uniform of the Azerbaijani army. He died a few hours later.



      A mercenary from northern Syria killed in Karabakh. He started a jihad against Assad, fought as part of a number of jihadist groups, but found his end in Karabakh.


      Militant Hussein Talkh (originally from Aleppo) from the Nureddin al-Zinki group (which "became famous" for the shots with the cutting off of the head of a Kurdish child) was killed in Nagorno-Karabakh.

  • viktor_ui
    viktor_ui 1 October 2020 05: 01
    +3
    Whoever owns the technology has the keys to peace ... or war. By the way, why not hear about the powerful electronic warfare systems and their effective use against UAVs ??? We recognize that UAVs, ONCE AGAIN, have combat formations of the 20th century model in tail and mane in terms of efficiency. But this is far from Europe or the United States in terms of military equipment with technologies of the 21st century. It's all sad ... and where are the prisoners in this war - I really want to ask ??? Smells like big shit.
    1. Nychego
      Nychego 1 October 2020 05: 29
      +7
      Quote: viktor_ui
      and where are the prisoners in this war

      There will be very few of them. And not only because the war is still very distant in nature, but also because of the "massive death of the enemy during attempts to surrender."
      1. viktor_ui
        viktor_ui 1 October 2020 05: 51
        +3
        You veiled your answer so vaguely ... that for me, everything that happens is beginning to tilt towards mutual ethnic cleansing. There must be prisoners, but they are not on all the videos posted.
        1. Nychego
          Nychego 1 October 2020 06: 30
          +5
          Quote: viktor_ui
          everything that happens begins to tilt towards mutual ethnic cleansing.

          Most likely, it is just a purge, not a mutual one: it is Azerbaijan that wants to return Karabakh, and there the Azerbaijanis have long been expelled, now it may come only that the turn of the Armenians in one way or another "leave and not return."
          1. Serg koma
            Serg koma 1 October 2020 07: 37
            +1
            Quote: Nychego
            now only the turn of the Armenians can come in one way or another "to leave and not return."

            On the air of the "Moscow Says" radio station, the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Armenia to Russia Vardan Toganyan said:
            "The evacuation plan, humanitarian corridors are being worked out, but we hope that it will not come to this"

            28.09.2020
            Spontaneous evacuation of civilians began in Stepanakert

            29.09.2020
            Nagorno-Karabakh recognizes the evacuation of residents to Armenia
            1500 people have been evacuated from the border areas deep into Nagorno-Karabakh, the authorities said. People leave Nagorno-Karabakh only privately; men of military age are prohibited from crossing the border.
            30.09.2020
        2. ab111
          ab111 1 October 2020 16: 43
          +2
          ... and it won't! There is such interethnic hatred that finishing off a wounded enemy with a shot is humanism towards him.
    2. PROXOR
      PROXOR 1 October 2020 10: 51
      +5
      Having modern weapons and well-trained personnel are two different things. What do you write nonsense when you have a VISUAL example of the war between the Saudis and the Houthis in Yemen. The Saudis, stuffed with modern NATO weapons, cannot do anything with the half-toed Houthis.
      It was the same in Egypt in the 70s. When it was necessary to send Soviet air defense crews to Egiped to show how to shoot down kosher. Most of the losses kosher suffered precisely from the Soviet air defense crews.
      1. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 1 October 2020 11: 52
        +2
        And even then it didn't solve anything. There should be modern aviation - air defense is important, but an addition.
        1. PROXOR
          PROXOR 1 October 2020 12: 29
          +3
          Well, nothing. Israel was unable to place unconditional terms of surrender. So it's not enough.
          1. Krasnodar
            Krasnodar 1 October 2020 12: 46
            +1
            Unfortunately, there was no talk of surrender there. Egypt began the so-called. a war of attrition after the loss of Sinai for the return of the peninsula and the deployment of Soviet air defense troops and fighter aircraft did not achieve its goal, because was forced to end the war due to the impossibility of protecting his entire territory from the raids of Heil Avir. And with good aviation, he could have put Jews at the negotiating table back in 69.
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. viktor_ui
        viktor_ui 1 October 2020 13: 41
        +4
        Saudis and Houthis = Armenia and Azerbaijan ??? Are you okay with arithmetic? I don't see any parallel at all. The presence of a control system for versatile combat drones implies a rather complex control system + search + guidance to the identified target and your barefoot Houthis at the consoles would certainly have nothing to do except burn it all with cardboard. Have the Houthis won? And those and those ragged, but the Saudis are more, because they went to war like a parade and a drinking bout + have a fighting smell below the baseboard ... and tactics and strategists from them like a bullet from manure. But nevertheless, with the competent use of the available equipment, the Saudi army or their mercenaries broke into the Houthis on occasion. In principle, I don't give a damn about those that others.
        Now about the kosher ones ... Ebipet and all the Arab brethren received then from Israel in the face with all love, and only a specific threat from the deployed expeditionary forces of the USSR did not allow the "kosher" tanks to enter the Egyptian capital - your example is rotten, because the battlefield remained with Israel with a very large profit in war booty. And the air defense of the Egyptians was dragged away with turntables directly from combat positions during prayer or whatever they were doing there at that time. That Seryoga ... do you love Arabs, or their culture? Let's inject. Post for Proxora.
    3. NEOZ
      NEOZ 1 October 2020 12: 37
      -1
      Quote: viktor_ui
      and where are the prisoners in this war

      why do you need?
      1. viktor_ui
        viktor_ui 1 October 2020 13: 44
        +2
        I then Lavrenty ... for the absence of prisoners is a sign of genocide in my understanding ...
        1. NEOZ
          NEOZ 1 October 2020 15: 06
          +1
          Quote: viktor_ui
          for the absence of prisoners is a sign of genocide in my understanding ...

          and what?
          what will you do about it?
          1. viktor_ui
            viktor_ui 1 October 2020 15: 09
            +1
            why are you interested in ... my dear ???
            1. NEOZ
              NEOZ 1 October 2020 15: 15
              0
              Quote: viktor_ui
              why are you interested in ... my dear ???

              I want to understand whether you are adequate or not.
              if a person cannot explain why he asks / does something, then I have serious doubts about its adequacy.
              1. viktor_ui
                viktor_ui 2 October 2020 03: 09
                0
                Your question-answer to my question in terms of the presence of prisoners is the standard of your adequacy? You begin to be tormented by vague doubts if I personally ask you a question ... and where are those taken prisoner from both sides ... and you, my dear bam, began to torment my adequat's question ... you are a stern uncle in epaulettes and awards judging by your avatar wassat
                1. NEOZ
                  NEOZ 5 October 2020 11: 54
                  0
                  Quote: viktor_ui
                  Your question-answer to my question in terms of the presence of prisoners is the standard of your adequacy?

                  you can once again, only in more detail .... unfortunately, the meaning of your question did not understand.
                  Quote: viktor_ui
                  You begin to be tormented by vague doubts if I personally ask you a question ...

                  sorry, but I don't quite understand this proposal either.
                  Quote: viktor_ui
                  and where are those taken prisoner on both sides ... and you, dear bam, and the question of my adekvat began to torment ...

                  I apologize again ... but even with this sentence, not everything is clear, perhaps the commas are in the wrong place ...
                  ps
                  if offended, sorry!
                  it just happens sometimes, you write to a person, give figures / facts / analysis / retrospective / world experience .... and he to you - "it's all nonsense! Putin is an alien, he has gills behind his ears, here is a link to the vidos on YouTube"
                  .......
                  THE CURTAIN........
                  1. viktor_ui
                    viktor_ui 5 October 2020 11: 56
                    0
                    read above and the power of the Jedi will help you ... oh well, let's go hi
  • rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 1 October 2020 05: 20
    10
    instead of the combat vehicle of the "Osa" air defense missile system, a model of an anti-aircraft missile launch platform was destroyed
    Models of military equipment, airfields, batteries were successfully used during the Second World War and this technique gave positive results. Given today's technical capabilities, layouts are difficult to distinguish from real b / t. In this case, we can praise the Armenian side. Regarding the fight against UAVs, military experts have noted from the first days that this is a vulnerable spot of the Armenian Armed Forces. I think that mistakes will be taken into account.
    1. BDRM 667
      BDRM 667 1 October 2020 05: 56
      +6
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Models of military equipment, airfields, batteries were successfully used during the Second World War and this technique gave positive results.


      yes

      "Kis-kis is jammed!" - feature film "Restless Economy"



      1. Alexander Galaktionov
        Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 13
        -4
        And the mock-ups and even remember Syria, the terrorists also made in the form of hummers that were destroyed with the help of US aviation
    2. Nychego
      Nychego 1 October 2020 06: 33
      -1
      Quote: rotmistr60
      I think that mistakes will be taken into account.

      They will have time to take into account. The question is rather different: will they have time and will be able to fix it.
      YET, not a single shot down Bayraktar is visible.
  • Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 1 October 2020 05: 25
    +7
    Yes, the effectiveness of UAVs and barrage ammunition has been proven by the war.
    1. unhappy
      unhappy 1 October 2020 06: 15
      +4
      Quickly conclusions. Barrage over the enemy's rear or line of defense is possible if this enemy is "behind the times." A modern grouping of ground forces must include electronic warfare and air defense systems for "air purification".
      For example, recently in Syria, an American helicopter came into the range of the Krasukha and did not fall down only because the pilots reacted quickly and took control of the aircraft. A drone could not do this, because the pilot is at a distance. wink, will read the communication loss message.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 1 October 2020 10: 02
        -1
        Soon, such drones will be produced in a portable version, say, in a 105mm grenade launcher container - you cannot put electronic warfare systems on each column of the post and vehicle, and against such a trifle air defense systems will be useless, especially in mountainous areas a sabotage group will not even need to come close at a safe distance, they will detect and hit all the enemy objects found.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 1 October 2020 10: 19
          +1
          Quote: Vadim237
          Soon such drones will be produced in a portable version, say, in a 105mm grenade launcher container

          Not soon, but already. Turkish drone - "kamikaze" Alpagu.


          There they have a whole family of this stuff.
    2. NEOZ
      NEOZ 1 October 2020 12: 38
      +1
      Quote: Pessimist22
      proven by war.

      proven by YouTube!
      when Stepanokert is taken, then they will prove something!
  • Alexander Galaktionov
    Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 05: 42
    +1
    EW Reppelent has already been destroyed by the question of what? Decided to hit twice? With the Osa meket, this is the Armenians well done good
    1. BDRM 667
      BDRM 667 1 October 2020 06: 07
      +3
      Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
      EW Reppelent has already been destroyed by the question of what? Decided to hit twice?

      There is unverified information that the "Repellent" was damaged by artillery, and then finished off by a drone ...
      1. Alexander Galaktionov
        Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 10
        0
        Yes, I also heard, but the fact that it was destroyed a second time) In general, all means of electronic warfare of UAVs and others are checked during wars
        1. BDRM 667
          BDRM 667 1 October 2020 06: 29
          +1
          Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
          Yes, I also heard, but the fact that it was destroyed a second time)


          Apparently due to fears that he could be evacuated and re-commissioned. We decided to make a "test in the head".

          Too electronic warfare annoys Turkish UAVs ...
      2. Nychego
        Nychego 1 October 2020 06: 37
        +3
        Quote: BDRM 667
        There is unverified information that the "Repellent" was damaged by artillery, and then finished off by a drone ...

        That is, if the information is correct, there is a fact of competent command and successful interaction of various types of troops. This is just a typical combined arms battle, everything as we were taught.
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 1 October 2020 09: 47
      +2
      Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
      With the Osa meket, this is the Armenians well done

      Serbs in Kosovo, under NATO air domination. actively used mockups and masking!
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Alexander Galaktionov
    Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 05: 52
    -7
    Here, even to remember, not like an uav, but like a copter with a vogue what in Syria, terrorists threw our warehouse at the stadium and everyone knows the result
    1. Nychego
      Nychego 1 October 2020 06: 25
      +3
      Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
      in Syria, terrorists threw our warehouse at the stadium and everyone knows the result

      Fortunately, not ours, but Iranian, otherwise the list of the Russian Armed Forces would have doubled in a minute.
      1. NEOZ
        NEOZ 1 October 2020 12: 40
        -2
        Quote: Nychego
        Fortunately, not ours, but Iranian,

        Yes? but it seems that it was ours ...
  • Vitaly Tsymbal
    Vitaly Tsymbal 1 October 2020 06: 11
    +8
    We do not yet know what is happening in reality. All the materials offered to us are a war of propagandistic journalists, not information from the military. Some show the "successes" of kamikaze drones, others - counterattacks and explosions somewhere near the horizon. They are trying to impose on us the opinion that victory is achieved not by people, but by all sorts of drones - purely as fans of all kinds of computer games understand, where no one really dies, where you can "smash" the enemy by pressing a button ... But who has a military education speak first of all about the direction main strike, analysis of the defense system, minefields, etc. Ing. barriers, about the number of personnel and their weapons ... therefore, for now, you can only comment on the "movie", not forgetting that wars are unleashed by politicians, and ordinary people are dying - someone's fathers, sons, husbands, brothers ...
    1. Alexander Galaktionov
      Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 31
      -3
      We are shown that drones are the 21st century, people control them, it's like sending a Su 25 attack aircraft and hoping that it will not be knocked out of a MANPADS or an attack UAV.
      1. Vitaly Tsymbal
        Vitaly Tsymbal 1 October 2020 06: 36
        +3
        Until an infantryman raises his flag on the ground, the drone operator will not be the winner !!!! So far, there are more infantrymen than operators and drones.
        1. Alexander Galaktionov
          Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 46
          +3
          The country that protects its infantrymen and not only will send robots or minelayers' cars forward. See for yourself what the Azerbaijani military is doing with the help of drums and kamikaze UAVs.
          1. Vitaly Tsymbal
            Vitaly Tsymbal 1 October 2020 06: 56
            -1
            Infantrymen quickly learn ... including from kamikaze strikes. It is easier to deceive a UAV than a simple shell from a cannon ... The effect of the UAV is still only on video clips ... Remember how the American "invisibility" was "lit" in Yugoslavia. So the kamikaze can be sent to a false target. Believe me, the best and cheapest way to protect yourself from UAVs will not be found by scientists, but by soldiers in the trench ...
            1. Alexander Galaktionov
              Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 07: 01
              -2
              From a UAV, this is only an effective air defense that will help, or an electronic warfare that will turn it off
              1. Vitaly Tsymbal
                Vitaly Tsymbal 1 October 2020 07: 16
                +2
                And the head of a soldier will also help, who, in order to survive, will put a sweatshirt stuffed with grass and a stick similar to a machine gun at a safe distance, and next to it he will set fire to a tire so that there would be more fire and smoke ... in general, "the need for invention is cunning" !!! War is not only about air defense and electronic warfare - it is one thing to fight against the "barmaley" in Syria or Afghanistan, and another - against the regular army. The experience of Donbass has shown that the war is not waged by drone operators, but by infantry, tankmen, artillerymen, sappers, signalmen, etc. It is on the ground in a direct clash that it is determined who will be the winner ... Maybe in the future UAVs will play a decisive role in the battle, but today it is just a propagandists' horror story, which has more psychological impact than real combat force.
                1. Insurgent
                  Insurgent 1 October 2020 07: 28
                  +7
                  Quote: Vitaly Tsymbal
                  The experience of Donbass has shown that the war is not waged by drone operators, but by infantry, tankmen, artillerymen, sappers, signalmen, etc. It is on the ground in direct combat that it is determined who will be the winner ...


                  You see ... we have NO attack UAVs (just) ...

                  We would have them, and they would be used. And so yes,the blood of the infantry.
                2. Alexander Galaktionov
                  Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 07: 32
                  -2
                  On the UAV there are such warm houses that they can tell that this is a sweatshirt and that the tire is on fire and they don't care about smoke
                  1. Vitaly Tsymbal
                    Vitaly Tsymbal 1 October 2020 07: 43
                    0
                    I gave this as an example, and not as an axiom ... I repeat - an effective way to protect against BLTA will be found in a trench, not in a laboratory ...
                    1. Vadim237
                      Vadim237 1 October 2020 10: 11
                      +1
                      Alas, in the trench from shock and kamikaze drones, which have thermal imagers, night vision devices and high-resolution video cameras, the soldiers cannot escape, and even more so nothing can come up with. Now kamikaze drones will start making bunkers with penetrating warheads and bunkers with bunkers will no longer be obstacles for them.
                3. Glory1974
                  Glory1974 1 October 2020 08: 59
                  +5
                  the war is not waged by drone operators, but by infantry, tankmen, artillerymen, sappers, signalmen, etc.

                  Nobody argues with this. But Azerbaijan has drones for you listed, while the Armenians do not. As with us, unfortunately.
                  It is on the ground in direct combat that it is determined who will be the winner ...

                  This is exactly what our generals think, that is why we expose our people to fire.
                  Although the Americans have already practically shown and proved, in Yugoslavia and Iraq, that after gaining air superiority and inflicting fire damage on the enemy, it is possible to achieve their goals in a war without laying hundreds of dead infantrymen.
                  1. Vitaly Tsymbal
                    Vitaly Tsymbal 1 October 2020 10: 06
                    0
                    Drones did not help the Americans in Afghanistan, drones did not help Israel in Palestine, drones did not help the Saudis in the fight against the Houthis ... As for air supremacy, this is also not always a guarantee of victory. As for Yugoslavia, politics won, not the army. Iraq was also conquered not by drones, but by ground forces. I do not argue that the army needs drones, but this is not a panacea for reducing the number of casualties. The drone war is a war of the Americans, when after the first strikes of the Air Force, a dollar bomb "explodes" on the accounts of politicians who are ready to sell their country for money. Azerbaijan, while having drones, has not achieved strategic superiority over the NKR ... so little bites and propaganda. And how many drones does Azerbaijan need to destroy Armenian soldiers ??? I am against this war, I have friends on both sides of the front ... Drones cannot gather them at one table.
                4. chingachguc
                  chingachguc 1 October 2020 10: 35
                  0
                  and now the drone operators are waging the war)) experience, why
                  1. Vitaly Tsymbal
                    Vitaly Tsymbal 1 October 2020 12: 17
                    +1
                    Now the war in the VO is shown on propaganda videos)) So what we see is a war of operators and editors of television studios)) And smart "video experts" are already drawing conclusions and creating a fake about a thunderstorm of soldiers - kamikaze drones ... to video scientists, I include those who know about the war only from computer games)))
                    1. chingachguc
                      chingachguc 1 October 2020 23: 49
                      +2
                      you are strange people - not notice the obvious things. Drones are dangerous because they are invisible; counteraction systems and anti-drone tactics are still being developed. It is one thing to protect a point object (such as an airfield), and another thing to protect a front of 200-500-1000 kilometers. While the drones are in the air, there is no talk of any active actions. Any concentration of forces and means will be immediately opened and attacked ...

                      and yes, they are still economical ...
                  2. Alex Justice
                    Alex Justice 1 October 2020 18: 46
                    0
                    drone operators are at war now

                    Where do they sit? In trenches or hotels?
  • Alexander Galaktionov
    Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 17
    -3
    How not long ago the news was the Ministry of Defense, after the Caucasus 2020 exercises, will it be determined whether or not it is worth taking the BMPT Syria has not shown?
  • Alexander Galaktionov
    Alexander Galaktionov 1 October 2020 06: 21
    -2
    Or how we in Syria sent Tu 22m3 and threw cast iron well that now there will be X-22 missiles on Tu 3m50m
  • Kapkan
    Kapkan 1 October 2020 06: 30
    +6
    Armenians are not smart in the political space. Even stupid. Well, already the genocide by Turkey against them has already been recognized.
    Well, now it is necessary to trumpet in all the media that again the genocide of the mono-ethnic people and again suits Turkey and Azerbaijan.
    They don't, and this is a strategic and tactical ... miscalculation (another word here).
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 1 October 2020 07: 55
      +3
      Quote: Kapkan
      Well, now it is necessary to trumpet in all the media that again the genocide of the mono-ethnic people and again suits Turkey and Azerbaijan.
      They don't, and this is a strategic and tactical ... miscalculation (another word here).

      In Armenia, power was seized by "sorosians" ... Who fought for power (and were sharpened for that), but they were not taught to fight for the country ...
    2. ab111
      ab111 1 October 2020 16: 56
      0
      And who was going to kill them without exception?
      It is clearly stated - liberate the occupied regions of Azerbaijan. Calm step by step. That's all!
  • Maz
    Maz 1 October 2020 08: 14
    +7
    Quote: Gritsa
    Quote: Ka-52
    But I think that we need to follow the path of expediency - first, saturate the troops with what is needed in the first place and has greater efficiency.

    So, evaluate the efficiency of Azerbaijani UAVs in comparison with aviation. The aviation has not even taken off yet, and a good part of the Armenian equipment has already been ground down by "useless" unmanned aerial vehicles.

    These are not Azerbaijani UAVs, but Turkish and Israeli ones. And apparently their number is not infinite, if planes from Baku, even on Jewish holidays, fly to Israel for new components and finished products. Yesterday, the fifth IL-76 of the Iizer airlines flew to the military airbase of the Department of Internal Affairs in Israel. He's not loading matzo there ...
  • huntsman650
    huntsman650 1 October 2020 08: 26
    +1
    SOC "Wasps" does not see small drones well on the way. In Syria, the new Carapaces are "eyed". Barmaley homemade products with a bang sees and destroys and rap lands.
    You definitely need to monitor the topic there, on the spot. Gain experience, train. Write the frequencies of the control channels as long as possible.
    It seems hp notify about the appearance of drones, tk. no calculations.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 1 October 2020 08: 44
      +3
      Well they try, but they don't always work out sad

      Here on the video you can see - probably the driver of the Grad was killed or was wounded in 22 seconds.


      And here the strikes are collected:



  • donavi49
    donavi49 1 October 2020 08: 28
    +4
    Well, layouts are used. However, real Wasps are also destroyed. It can be seen better to overlook than to miss. Here is also yesterday's video - 2 not layouts.


    But the raid on the position with the removal of everything that they reached
  • _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 1 October 2020 09: 10
    +5
    High hitting accuracy can be noted: with a few exceptions, shells accurately cover the target.
    that's right, no one will upload videos of their mistakes (with a few exceptions)
  • Operator
    Operator 1 October 2020 10: 15
    +1
    The "experts" were overwhelmed by zeal: what kind of loitering ammunition, when all the videos were filmed from reconnaissance UAVs, with the help of which Azerbaijani / Turkish operators aim guided ammunition - shells, mines and, in rare cases, notorious ammunition.

    Exactly as earlier in Idlib, the Turks defeated the Syrian troops.

    For nearly thirty years now, the RF Ministry of Defense has not been able to put into service the simplest penny reconnaissance UAVs (for forming the RUG) and the simplest penny short-range air defense systems such as the MNTK or "nails" (for the total destruction of enemy UAVs).

    When using electronic warfare against UAVs, we will quickly be left without trousers - to destroy one multimillion-dollar electronic warfare installation, one penny UAV is sufficient.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 1 October 2020 10: 28
      +2
      Quote: Operator
      when all the videos were filmed from reconnaissance UAVs, with the help of which Azerbaijani / Turkish operators aim guided ammunition at the target - shells, mines and, in rare cases, the notorious ammunition.

      Not true. Here is a series of videos from the kamikaze.
      1. Operator
        Operator 1 October 2020 10: 39
        -3
        I do not dispute that loitering ammunition is used.

        Laser-guided projectiles / mines (as part of the RUG with reconnaissance UAVs) and loitering ammunition (guided through repeater UAVs) have their own niches: the former hit targets at a range of 155-mm guns and 120-mm mortars, the latter - at flight range up to 100 km or more from the front line.

        In any case, short-range air defense systems are a universal means of countering both reconnaissance UAVs and loitering ammunition.
        1. Florian geyer
          Florian geyer 1 October 2020 19: 45
          0
          As well as a conventional barrel anti-aircraft gun
  • Archivist Vasya
    Archivist Vasya 1 October 2020 12: 10
    -1
    Bloody drones! They pulled them up ... I understand when artillery crews attack each other - this is a confrontation: who is better to aim, shoots faster, the position will quickly leave or turn around. And this hanging camera somehow does not act honestly. This issue must be resolved.
  • iouris
    iouris 1 October 2020 12: 17
    -3
    Quote: "At the same time, many Russian" experts "recently argued that if drones are needed by the army, then it is far from the first place." End of quote.
    These are the experts, these "Russian experts".
    To become an expert you need to learn a lot in a real way, be able to work with your hands with your head and pass a special exam and periodically confirm your expert level among experts.
    In addition, an inconvenient question: is the Ministry of Industry and Trade able to ensure the creation and production of modern UAVs in sufficient quantities? If not, can he influence the "expert opinion"?
  • Niki71
    Niki71 1 October 2020 13: 46
    +2
    With the modern development of photo and video technology, the big difference in the image quality of the picture is striking, some videos from drones are very similar to footage from computer games!
  • APASUS
    APASUS 1 October 2020 15: 20
    0
    I hope our Defense Ministry will draw appropriate conclusions after analyzing the battles in Karabakh? Otherwise, I look at our tactics as in the Armenians
    1. iouris
      iouris 1 October 2020 16: 21
      -1
      On the contrary. Tactics cannot be higher than the economic system by which they are conditioned.
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 1 October 2020 16: 40
        0
        Quote: iouris
        Tactics cannot be higher than the economic system by which they are conditioned.

        First of all, I'm talking about the tactics of using UAVs in military operations. About the direction of funds in the production of such systems, it's time to take care of people. And the economy is of course primary ...............
    2. Vladimir Tikhontsev
      Vladimir Tikhontsev 19 October 2020 08: 06
      0
      ABOUT! There is also about RUK / ROK and complex fire damage
      There is an impression that attack UAVs are not sufficiently reflected within the framework of complex fire damage and reconnaissance-strike / fire integration.
      But what is happening in Karabakh is very impressive. PU, and OP, and tanks and columns on the march spank.
      Here it is, that neither is the WTO, without any KSAUO with MLRS, Iskander and other "Coalitions" ..
      Artillerymen, whose drone are now? Which state?
      It seems that now in the tactical air defense link - for sure - COVERING, BUT NOT PROTECTING ..
      And in this respect, well-being with Khmeimim is not very indicative ..
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 19 October 2020 08: 55
        0
        Quote: Vladimir Tikhontsev
        It seems that now in the tactical air defense link - for sure - COVERING, BUT NOT PROTECTING ..
        And in this respect, well-being with Khmeimim is not very indicative ..

        Here I am about the conclusions of our Ministry of Defense, everything is here: from the conduct of hostilities and ending with the escort of rear columns
  • keeper03
    keeper03 1 October 2020 17: 01
    +2
    Shaw are you doing, lads?!? belay The Americans and the Turks are rubbing their hands, and you are killing each other! am You need to strive to be exactly the opposite, but you had Peace !!! request soldier
  • ab111
    ab111 1 October 2020 17: 07
    0
    OK!
    Well, what about our business with electromagnetic ammunition?
  • erased
    erased 1 October 2020 18: 56
    0
    We must fight for victory to the last drop of blood. You look, the diasporas in the Russian Federation will decrease in number.
  • nnm
    nnm 1 October 2020 19: 44
    +2
    I think the question is more complicated than - "I hope the MO will draw conclusions." Let's try to describe the range of these conclusions at least in general terms:
    Usage strategy. For what purposes, what types are needed and how much. OSH problem. At the expense of what number we are deploying, where we teach whom and how much, production capacities, will we not then disrupt the implementation of more urgent projects, the prospects for countermeasures of war, air defense, the price of the issue, we change the BUSV, etc.
    That is, in the branch, basically, I saw exactly the opinion - we urgently need a UAV. But the understanding that this is not a question that is solved "on the knee" after watching a couple of videos slips among very few colleagues
    It seems that many stages of analysis and modeling must be passed before the solution. And then test the primary model on the MTR first. And only then apply on the scale of the Armed Forces
    1. Piton_kaa
      Piton_kaa 2 October 2020 17: 34
      0
      I totally agree. It seems to be a decent site, people are adults, but they flog a fever like schoolchildren.
      The presence somewhere out there of some kind of air defense system and seemingly available radars and means of electronic warfare can hardly be called a serious way of dealing with any aircraft. And, of course, this contributes to the effective use of UAVs, but at the same time it is a limiting factor in the use of aircraft and helicopters - the loss of the latter is more likely, and the losses are more severe.
      But is it possible to extrapolate this situation to the realities of the Russian army? If Russia were in the place of Azerbaijan, wouldn't it be easier to clean out the scanty air defense of Armenia, and then calmly fly by airplanes / helicopters, and clean up not one tank or howitzer in one go, but immediately plow a whole battery with nurs? That is, the use of UAVs by Azerbaijan is not so much a sign of a modern army, but to a large extent a forced measure.
      If Russia were in the place of Armenia, how would Azerbaijan use UAVs? Who would let drones hang over positions and conduct reconnaissance / adjustments? And without target designation, how would the drones attack?
      That is, in the realities of the current war, UAVs are very decent, but this does not mean at all that they (at least with the current level of technology and tactics development) will be more effective than alternative means of destruction.
  • mainlion
    mainlion 1 October 2020 20: 27
    0
    Our prices for the Krasnopol guided missile, which were used in Syria, are also high. Like a good car. Who has a very good appetite.
  • Andrey Novoseltsev
    Andrey Novoseltsev 1 October 2020 21: 15
    -2
    Well, the handsome Armenians wet these parsley traders shamelessly. This once again proves the main thing is not a weapon.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 2 October 2020 00: 11
      0
      Quite the opposite - with drones and artillery, they kill Armenians with increasing force.
  • certero
    certero 1 October 2020 22: 07
    0
    Quote: Florian Geyer
    In this aspect, the position of the leadership of our Armed Forces is fully justified - give better normal aircraft. And pampering in the form of a drone in the future, when we have good aviation.

    No. The future of war in the air is for unmanned aircraft.
    I am sure that the 6th generation fighters will be unmanned.
    Therefore, Russia needs to make every effort to create the entire spectrum of unmanned aircraft, from light tarakhtelok to heavy night Eagles.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 2 October 2020 00: 13
      0
      The Heavy Hunter already has a kamikaze drone from the Kalashnikov concern, and now another medium-duty drone is on its way.
  • FIFA from Cardiff
    FIFA from Cardiff 2 October 2020 00: 23
    +3
    Gentlemen, the drones that are used in Karabakh-Artsakh are effective only in conditions of an almost complete absence of air defense systems tied to the system and are designed to fight weakly armed insurgent units.
    Despite the bloody diarrhea from the Turkish asses, NOT ONE Russian AIRPLANE was destroyed at the base of the Russian Aerospace Forces Khmeimim, although drones of different types, different configurations and groups of different sizes were used against this base, the account of Bayraktars and other birds, which were shot down worse by our Syrian air defense systems, and other birds already goes to tens, and in the event of a full-scale war, I generally doubt that they will be able to
  • Captain Pushkin
    Captain Pushkin 2 October 2020 10: 08
    +1
    Quote: Snusmumrik
    Of course, I'm an amateur here, but is it really impossible to shoot down these drones with the Shilka?

    Difficult. Large drones fly above Shilka's reach, while small drones are difficult to detect with radar. And the dimensions are small - Shilka needs a good sight, i.e. upgrades to be efficient with drones.
  • Captain Pushkin
    Captain Pushkin 2 October 2020 10: 13
    +1
    Quote: nnm
    It seems that many stages of analysis and modeling must be passed before the solution.

    For 30 years we have been "modeling" and we are losing pilots where drones should have been used a long time ago.
  • Serg4545
    Serg4545 2 October 2020 11: 37
    0
    Quote: Gritsa
    This was evident even in Syria and Libya. But no one drew any conclusions. I think looking at these footage you can imagine what would have happened to our vaunted armored vehicles and artillery if we had to face Turkey.

    Ha ha. Just in Syria, drones were actively and massively used against our troops and air bases.
    The result is virtually zero.
    In the end, realizing that drones were useless against us, the enemy stopped using them!
    This is what it was and is.
    Now re-read your comment again. How can you not see reality like that?
  • Slippery
    Slippery 2 October 2020 14: 08
    0
    Quote: Florian Geyer
    Mainly media - for filming videos for advertising purposes.

    would you like to take part in the filming? for example the driver of the Urals from the first video. in winter apartments it is good to reason.
    Quote: Florian Geyer
    - it is possible to rivet endless flying machines in a dendrofecal method, of course, but they will be bad, and the problem of oversaturation of air defenses with them is solved simply by returning the barreled anti-aircraft guns to operation, which with one shell will shoot down fifty such mosquitoes

    Since talking about the WWII, the T-34 suffered from "sores" riveted by schoolchildren, but became a victory tank. In general, dragging the WWII experience into modern realities is not an idea. As for the barrel anti-aircraft guns, are they there, are there enough of them? are they mobile and can accompany motorized infantry on the march, convoys?
    But in general, yes, all this pampering, looking back at the experience of WWII, it is necessary to form horse-mechanized groups and not these expensive bourgeois whistle-making.
    Quote: Florian Geyer
    - current strike UAVs (except for serious heavy and expensive ones) lag behind in performance characteristics and combat capabilities from most WWII strike aircraft at a higher price, so you can compare them

    Let's compare. MQ-9 Reaper offer a WWII strike aircraft with the same characteristics.
  • Comrade Kim
    Comrade Kim 5 October 2020 09: 31
    -1
    Quote: chingachguc
    S-300 against a 40-kg piece of iron)) you can't say anything))

    What to take from them.
    Brains washed out with the tales of Peskov and the terry propaganda of the First Channel.
    While there is time, countermeasures must be taken.
  • Hermit21
    Hermit21 15 October 2020 20: 21
    +1
    Wow, what kind of drones squatting on drones is. Are not the Ukrainians ipsoshniki from Brovar trying?
  • Vladimir Tikhontsev
    Vladimir Tikhontsev 19 October 2020 08: 04
    0
    About air defense TZ, RUK / ROK and complex fire damage
    There is an impression that attack UAVs are not sufficiently reflected within the framework of complex fire damage and reconnaissance-strike / fire integration.
    But what is happening in Karabakh is very impressive. PU, and OP, and tanks and columns on the march spank.
    Here it is, that neither is the WTO, without any KSAUO with MLRS, Iskander and other "Coalitions" ..
    Artillerymen, whose drone are now? Which state?
    It seems that now in the tactical air defense link - for sure - COVERING, BUT NOT PROTECTING ..
    And in this respect, well-being with Khmeimim is not very indicative ..