Military Review

Turkish attack drone Bayraktar TB2

327

Attack Turkish drone Bayraktar TB2


In recent years, none of the local wars has been complete without the use of an unmanned aviation... Interest in UAVs is growing all over the world. It is obvious that the future belongs to these weapons. At the same time, the range of drones on the military market is very large: from very tiny reconnaissance vehicles to large attack drones, which in their geometry are comparable to traditional aircraft. The military conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, the next escalation of which began on September 27, 2020, has already become a real drone war.

Recordings of drone strikes, which are regularly published by the Ministry of Defense of Azerbaijan, have become a vivid visual symbol of the conflict. Drones, which hit a variety of ground targets, have become one of the symbols of war and help the Azerbaijani army to achieve success on the battlefield. Frames from Azerbaijani UAVs widely diverging in social networks and forums play an essential role in the information war. At the same time, the range of drones used by Azerbaijan is diverse: here there are reconnaissance UAVs, which provide target designation, and records from strike drones, and footage transmitted by patrolling ammunition, which are also known as kamikaze drones. At the same time, the Turkish attack UAV Bayraktar has already become the most famous and often mentioned in the press in connection with this conflict.

Baykar Makina: From Automotive Components to Impact Drones


The Bayraktar TB2 attack drone was developed by the Turkish company Baykar Makina, which was founded in 1984. In the early years of its existence, the company specialized in the production of automotive equipment and automotive components, but since 2000 it has taken up work in the field of aircraft construction. Today it is the leading manufacturer of unmanned aerial vehicles in Turkey, as well as one of the leading companies in the creation of artificial intelligence systems in the country. Today the company employs 1100 employees, and the total number of drones produced has exceeded 400 units.


Bayraktar TB2 drone assembly

Having started the first research and development in the field of creating unmanned aircraft systems in 2000, the company already in 2004 carried out the first autonomous flight tests using its own electronic and software control systems. In 2005, a demonstration of the first miniature drone of the Bayraktar Mini company took place, and its production was launched the following year.

The development of its own project of an attack drone began in the late 2000s. The first autonomous flight tests of the attack drone, designated Bayraktar TB2, took place in 2014. In the same year, the delivery of the first sets of UAVs to the Turkish armed forces began. In addition to the army, these drones are also operated by the Turkish police. One of the civilian uses of drones is monitoring forest fires and helping rescuers. Currently, this model is in service with Turkey, and is also exported to Qatar (the first foreign buyer), Ukraine and, most likely, to Azerbaijan. The Armed Forces of Azerbaijan have officially announced their readiness to purchase Turkish attack drones in June 2020.

The capabilities of the Bayraktar TB2 attack drone


The Turkish Bayraktar TB2 attack unmanned aerial vehicle belongs to the class of tactical medium-altitude UAVs with a long flight duration. Aviation experts note that this development has a more modern control system and software than the Israeli Heron drone. The new Turkish UAV is able to solve the tasks of reconnaissance, surveillance, and also carry out attacks on ground targets. The avionics complex on the Bayraktar TB2 provides the vehicle with fully autonomous taxiing, takeoff / landing and flight.


For Turkey, this drone has become a landmark, as it became the first UAV delivered for export. According to the website of the manufacturing company, at least 110 such aircraft are already in use in Turkey, the total flight time of which has exceeded 200 thousand hours. This aircraft also holds the Turkish record for flight duration: 27 hours and three minutes. The standard delivery set of the UAV is an unmanned aerial complex of six Bayraktar TB2 drones, two ground control stations, a set of maintenance equipment and power supply.

Externally, "Bayraktar" is an aircraft with a straight wing of large aspect ratio and a non-retractable tricycle landing gear (only the front pillar is removed). The wingspan of the drone is 12 meters. The tail unit of the UAV is made in the shape of an inverted V letter. The maximum length of the vehicle is 6,5 meters, its height is 2,2 meters. The airframe of the drone is made of modern composite materials (most of it is made of carbon fiber). The onboard equipment of the Bayraktar TB2 UAV is represented by electro-optical and infrared cameras, a laser rangefinder and a target designator.

The maximum take-off weight of the Bayraktar TB2 strike-reconnaissance drone is 650 kg, the payload weight is up to 150 kg. The fuel supply on board the device is 300 liters of gasoline. The attack drone has four suspension points, on which four guided bombs with a laser guidance system can be located.




The drone is equipped with a Rotax 912 piston aircraft engine with a pushing propeller, the maximum engine power is 100 hp. This is enough to provide the UAV with a maximum flight speed of 120 knots (220 km / h), and a cruising speed of 70 knots (130 km / h). The declared by the developers practical ceiling of the drone is 27 feet (000 meters), the operating height is 8230 feet (18 meters). The maximum flight duration of the device can reach 000 hours.

Bayraktar TB2 drone armament


Bayraktar TB2 attack unmanned aerial vehicles have four suspension points under the wing and can carry up to four micro-ammunition specially designed for use with UAVs. Bayraktar TB2 can carry gliding ammunition with a laser targeting system: MAM-L and MAM-C. At one time, the MAM-L guided bomb was developed as a variant of the L-UMTAS long-range ATGM missile. Aviation ammunition differs from the basic version in the absence of a rocket engine and a more developed plumage, which allows gliding to the target.


Ground control station for unmanned aerial vehicles Bayraktar TB2

Aviation ammunition for Bayraktar was created by a large Turkish manufacturer of missile weapons - by Roketsan. They are gliding high-precision small-sized ammunition with artificial intelligence, which is specially designed for use with UAVs, light attack aircraft, as well as use on various air platforms of low payload. The ammunition is able to effectively engage both stationary and moving targets. Both ammunition is equipped with a laser targeting system (semi-active laser).

According to the official information from the munitions developer, the MAM-L can be equipped with three types of warheads: high-explosive fragmentation, thermobaric and tandem (anti-tank version). The ammunition weight is 22 kg, length - 1 meter, diameter - 160 mm. The operating range is 8 km. The mass of the warhead for the MAM-L ammunition is estimated at 8-10 kg. Planning ammunition MAM-C is even smaller and can carry two types of warheads: high-explosive fragmentation and multipurpose warhead. The weight of the MAM-C ammunition is 6,5 kg, the length is 970 mm, and the diameter is 70 mm. The operating range is 8 km.

Author:
Photos used:
https://baykardefence.com/
327 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. New Year day
    New Year day 14 October 2020 18: 06 New
    38
    I honestly thought pampering. Looking at Karabakh I understand that this is a problem and this is serious.
    1. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 14 October 2020 18: 23 New
      29
      You were not the only one who thought so. Remember how a few months ago the effectiveness of the use of UAVs in the Middle East was ridiculed and questioned.
      Yes to me couch patriots on the assumption that it is worth paying attention, almost through the monitor in the face laughed. Everyone told how air defense and electronic warfare would bring down drones in flocks.
      1. credo
        credo 14 October 2020 18: 32 New
        13
        Quote: Leader of the Redskins
        You were not the only one who thought so. Remember how a few months ago the effectiveness of the use of UAVs in the Middle East was ridiculed and questioned.
        Yes to me couch patriots on the assumption that it is worth paying attention, almost through the monitor in the face laughed. Everyone told how air defense and electronic warfare would bring down drones in flocks.

        It looks like you do not know, but in Russia they are very intensively working on this topic, but UAVs are not a panacea for air supremacy if equal rivals are at war.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 18: 59 New
          12
          Quote: credo
          not in the know, but in Russia they are very intensively working on this topic,

          Always judged by RESULT, and not by how and how much they work. So far, the result is this:

          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 14 October 2020 19: 07 New
            -18
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            Always judged by RESULT

            But, for example, Russia will look at this "RESULT" (c)
            Will rely on similar drone UAVs.
            Will face his likely enemy, for example, Poland. Because of Kaliningrad. And it will be defeated.
            Because even Poland is not Armenia or Syria. Not to mention one more likely adversaries - the USA

            So your "RESULT" does not mean anything.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 19: 20 New
              +5
              Quote: Spade
              But, for example, Russia will look at this "RESULT" (c)
              Will rely on similar drone UAVs.

              Well, for example, the same USA will look at similar results. So stop. They used drones en masse in World War II and Vietnam? Do they have a thousand, if not tens of thousands of drones in service? It seems like hundreds of new UAV projects, up to the next generation of unmanned fighters?
              With the fact that the UAV is not a wunderwaffle agree, they do not win wars. The whole complex of equipment, people, tactics wins. The capabilities of the current UAVs are modest and suitable for counter-terrorism and localized wars. But this direction is in development and the next generations of drones will have fundamentally higher qualities.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 14 October 2020 19: 25 New
                +3
                Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                Well, for example, the same USA will look at similar results.

                Don't give a damn.
                Russia's likely adversaries are not Syria, Haftar or Armenia.
                NATO countries, Japan, China, this UAV for one tooth. Especially when you consider the promising developments like the American MML
                1. 2 Level Advisor
                  2 Level Advisor 14 October 2020 19: 42 New
                  10
                  That is, in your opinion, we don't need drones?
                  1. lucul
                    lucul 14 October 2020 20: 47 New
                    +2
                    That is, in your opinion, we don't need drones?

                    Duplicate the post:
                    You understand, UAVs basically appeared not from a good life, but as a result of the lack, in the troops, of their full-fledged MLRS and short-range and medium-range missiles.
                    Those countries that do not have such problems (Russia / USA), UAVs are considered mainly as a target designation system and a replacement for pilot aircraft.
                    That Russia and the United States have no problems with the delivery of 150 kg of "cargo" (like Bayraktar), at a distance of 1 km to 11 km.
                    1. Temples
                      Temples 15 October 2020 10: 49 New
                      +4
                      It is necessary to suppress the UAV operator.

                      The question is why the defenders of Karabakh do not do this?

                      Destroy the operator and all the UAVs will simply flop to the ground.

                      At the same time, it is necessary to destroy the connection between the UAV and the operator.

                      The Armenians are simply technically inferior to the Azerbaijanis.

                      This war shows that small countries are forced to submit to one or another empire. Otherwise, this little thing will be destroyed.

                      Azerbaijan in this case fell under Turkey.
                      Armenians under Soros.
                      But the trouble is that Soros does not have an army, and the United States will never fight for Armenia.

                      Azerbaijan demonstrated its military-technical superiority over Armenia by using a UAV made in Turkey. But at the same time he showed his complete dependence in this matter on the external state.
                      But the loyalty of this external seller to Azerbaijan is not obvious. What will be tomorrow?
                      Turkey and Israel (arms sellers to Azerbaijan) will not come into conflict with a third party on the side of Azerbaijan.

                      As a result, neither Azerbaijan nor Armenia has a chance in this war.
                      1. DenZ
                        DenZ 15 October 2020 12: 02 New
                        +3
                        Quote: Temples
                        As a result, neither Azerbaijan nor Armenia has a chance in this war.

                        Strange conclusion. That Turkey, that Israel (arms sellers to Azerbaijan), that the US seems to have forwarded something to Azerbaijan according to the latest news. And who helps Armenia? Yes, Soros does not need to help Armenia, this is not what he needs! He needs to make a weak link from Armenia in order to heat up the conflict on our borders (if possible, we will be drawn into it). All. Whom did Soros and the United States save when?
                      2. Greenwood
                        Greenwood 22 October 2020 13: 50 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Temples
                        It is necessary to suppress the UAV operator.
                        The question is why the defenders of Karabakh do not do this?
                        Destroy the operator and all the UAVs will simply flop to the ground.
                        Yeah, the operator is running alongside a laptop there, it's so easy to destroy it. fool
                        Quote: Temples
                        Azerbaijan in this case fell under Turkey.
                        How is this manifested? Is it that Azerbaijan buys weapons from Turkey? So he bought much more of it from Russia in recent years.
                        Quote: Temples
                        Azerbaijan demonstrated its military-technical superiority over Armenia by using a UAV made in Turkey. But at the same time he showed his complete dependence in this matter on the external state.
                        Obvious stupidity and distortion. Azerbaijan is simply trying to fight with little blood. The military-technical superiority of Azerbaijan is absolutely in everything: in armored vehicles, in artillery, in aviation, in the number of troops. Azerbaijan has bought the latest technology from Russia for billions of dollars.
                        Quote: Temples
                        Turkey and Israel (arms sellers to Azerbaijan) will not come into conflict with a third party on the side of Azerbaijan.
                        The main seller of arms to Azerbaijan is Russia. Look what Azerbaijan has in service. For the most part, modern Russian or modernized Soviet technology.
                2. Ryazan87
                  Ryazan87 14 October 2020 20: 27 New
                  +9
                  Russia's likely adversaries are not Syria, Haftar or Armenia.

                  Those. Russia has not waged limited wars in the past 30 years - Chechnya, Georgia, Donbass, Syria - all of these real some other country waged war? Or drones were not needed there?
                  1. Cottodraton
                    Cottodraton 15 October 2020 04: 03 New
                    0
                    Donbass is a civil war in Ukraine. The Russian Federation does not fight there ... no need to redo history
                    1. Ryazan87
                      Ryazan87 15 October 2020 10: 51 New
                      18
                      Of course, Russia does not participate in the conflict in Donbas in any way: it does not supply weapons and ammunition, there are no Russian military specialists there, and the "north wind" in 2014 is probably myths and legends. Well then, Turkey does not participate in the current conflict in Karabakh either: it has not declared war on Armenia. Full of the fool to play with.
                      However, if casuistry is important to you, then let it be like this: "The Russian Federation is taking part in the civil war in Ukraine."
                      1. lucul
                        lucul 15 October 2020 11: 17 New
                        -9
                        Of course, Russia does not participate in the conflict in Donbass in any way: it does not supply weapons and ammunition, there are no Russian military specialists there, and the "north wind" in 2014

                        Dear, even the Arabs have telephones on which everything is perfectly filmed, in Idlib, in other places in Syria. Or in Nagorno-Karabakh, everything is also clearly illuminated.
                        But they can't prove the presence of Russia in Donbass, despite all the American spy satellites (the newspaper can be read from space, yeah), and other video cameras on smartphones.
                        And only in some of the most persistent fantasies - Russia is still at war in Donbass.
                      2. Vlad_S
                        Vlad_S 17 October 2020 20: 41 New
                        +4
                        I don’t understand what these antics are for. Are you giving testimony at the trial or on some special assignment? There is a Civil War in Ukraine, and Russia's help to the Russian people in Donbass does not negate this fact. It upsets only that it does not help directly and openly, like Turkey helps Azerbaijan or how Armenia helps Artsakh, but quietly, by antics, at the same time calling our compatriots Ukrainians, saying that Donbass is Ukraine. I left Donetsk back in 2014, but every year I come several times and people here, to put it mildly, with this fact and the current state of affairs are unhappy.
                      3. Igor Berg
                        Igor Berg 18 October 2020 22: 15 New
                        +1
                        and continue listening to Peskov, Lavrov ... the flag in your ears ...
                    2. psiho117
                      psiho117 16 October 2020 19: 29 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Ryazanets87
                      "North wind"

                      Shh ... don't fire the office.
                      There were no Russians here, we ground the dill in the boiler ourselves wassat
                      It's a pity they didn't take Mariupol. My mother lives there.
                    3. Igor Berg
                      Igor Berg 18 October 2020 22: 16 New
                      0
                      aha, and Strelkov ticked for some reason
                3. Captain Pushkin
                  Captain Pushkin 15 October 2020 19: 42 New
                  +1
                  What difference does it make whether our participation in Donbas is in one form or another or not, drones have a good effect there. This is even from the use of semi-handicraft samples of various firms and firms for reconnaissance and fire adjustment.
            2. Avior
              Avior 14 October 2020 21: 26 New
              +6
              In general, NATO countries and Japan cannot boast of a developed ground-based air defense system.
              This is more typical of less developed armies.
              NATO is more likely to have an active offensive air defense.
              And the UAV is not the most convenient enemy for her.
              1. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 21: 57 New
                +1
                Quote: Avior
                NATO is more likely to have an active offensive air defense.
                And the UAV is not the most convenient enemy for her.


                Why? The same Bayraktars are big and slow. Just targets.
                1. Cympak
                  Cympak 14 October 2020 23: 00 New
                  +2
                  A slow target is a difficult target for Doppler radar, it just doesn't see it.
                  1. The eye of the crying
                    The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 23: 25 New
                    +3
                    Quote: Cympak
                    A slow target is a difficult target for Doppler radar, it just doesn't see it.


                    This is not the case; any radar receives the reflected pulse, and the Doppler shift is just ancillary information.
                  2. Nasdaq
                    Nasdaq 16 October 2020 17: 31 New
                    +2
                    And why, then, even on the website of Rosoboronexport and Diamond-Antey, in the characteristics of the air defense system, the detection range for airplanes and helicopters (especially hovering ones) is different?
                    The signal is also reflected from mountains and buildings, but the mountains do not move, so the radar does not show all the reflected signals.
                    He can fly low (so to speak on the march), so the survival rate will increase even more.
                    In addition, the body is made of carbon fiber (radio-absorbing material)
                    Not a wunderwaffe, of course, but not an easy target either. You definitely can't throw hats on him.
            3. hrych
              hrych 15 October 2020 09: 16 New
              -1
              Quote: Avior
              This is more typical of less developed armies.

              You are a great scientist wassat Is Israel a less developed country? USA means less developed country? What is a Patriot?
          2. Petio
            Petio 15 October 2020 14: 07 New
            +1
            Yes, but in the Caucasus and Syria, it was quite useful.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 15 October 2020 01: 12 New
        +1
        By the way, Poland is armed with long-range Spikes and a kamikaze drone - so in the event of a collision, the result may be similar to what happened to the Armenian Armed Forces.
        1. andreykolesov123
          andreykolesov123 15 October 2020 18: 06 New
          -3
          Quote: Vadim237
          By the way, Poland is armed with long-range Spikes and a kamikaze drone - so in the event of a collision, the result may be similar to what happened to the Armenian Armed Forces.

          Preparing to recapture Lviv. And the United States will support Poland.
      3. lelik613
        lelik613 16 October 2020 07: 06 New
        +1
        It's about nothing. The dispute is what to choose: a machine gun, cartridges or a machine gun magazine.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 14 October 2020 20: 52 New
      23
      The bottom video is not Bayraktar, but Heron's kamikaze.
      It is easy to distinguish: Bayraktar has a video camera on a drone.
      He launches rockets and continues filming. An explosion is visible.
      Launches the second rocket and takes pictures again.
      Heron has a camera on the device itself. He descends to the target while shooting, but
      cannot take a picture of the explosion itself. The camera is killed first.
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 20: 55 New
        +7
        Video to illustrate the capabilities of UAVs to destroy electronic warfare systems that are intended to destroy them.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 15 October 2020 11: 33 New
          +4
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          Video to illustrate the capabilities of UAVs to destroy electronic warfare systems that are intended to destroy them.

          Judging by the video, the Repellent is already inoperative - there is no operator's cabin, the front platform is lowered.
          So the UAV is, it seems, a "test shot".
      2. Diverse
        Diverse 14 October 2020 22: 45 New
        +9
        Quite right, Alexey. With only one amendment, the second video presented by OgnennyiKotik uses the IAI Harop, an Israeli reconnaissance and strike UAV kamikaze. It was developed in 2001-2005. in the design bureau of the MABAT plant, a division of the Israeli concern Taasiya Avrit. The device made its first test flight at a military airfield in the Negev desert in the fall of 2003. The Harop can be controlled remotely, or it can be guided to the target using its own radar or by catching radio emission from the ground.
        The peculiarity of this UAV is that when a target is detected, the device “turns” into a homing projectile. Able to patrol a given area for a long time and destroy ground targets. When approaching the target, the command can be canceled and the drone will return to the base or continue patrolling. Launched from a container-type mobile launcher. Designed to combat enemy air defense systems. And his LTH:
        flight range 1000 km
        speed 185 km / h
        Length: 2,5 m
        Wingspan: 3 m
        weight 135 kg
        flight time 6 h
        target detection means: radio-frequency, electron-optical


        Harop is ideal for countering enemy air defenses, as the drone's small size allows it to be avoided by ground-based radars. This model is an improved version of the Harpy drone that did not have remote control capabilities.

        Here is a video of the destruction of the S-300PM radar and a launcher nearby, but it is not in a combat position.

    3. Boris ⁣ Shaver
      Boris ⁣ Shaver 15 October 2020 04: 22 New
      0
      Quote: OgnennyiKotik
      Always judged by RESULT

      Great slogan for an anonymous group of premature ejaculation sufferers. Nafik process!
    4. CSKA
      CSKA 15 October 2020 11: 39 New
      -3
      Which one? Application against weak air defense and the absence of electronic warfare? Is this the result?
  2. Dikson
    Dikson 14 October 2020 20: 34 New
    12
    intensive work can go on for decades .. It is enough to look at the appearance of the products .. And about the filling .. optics and electronics generally need to be silent ... Where is our Skolkovo Rosnoy and so on ...
  3. Looking for
    Looking for 15 October 2020 14: 35 New
    +4
    Are you by any chance one of those Soros "pacifiers" that such resources are full of? - Like, everything is fine and there is no need to panic. But how not to panic. If Turkey is already at war with drones. and sells them with might and main. and with "us" only "intensively are working on this topic "
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 14 October 2020 18: 32 New
    -7
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    Everyone told how air defense and electronic warfare would bring down drones in flocks.

    Of course they will.
    And precisely in "flocks".
    Together with control points, together with the airfields from which they take off, together with the headquarters in which they plan to use them.

    The Wunderwaffe does not exist. Like Santa Claus ....
    1. moscowp
      moscowp 14 October 2020 20: 19 New
      22
      The word "flock" is a good word. There will be exactly a flock of drones, cheap vehicles, and they will be used at the tactical level, without any airfields and control points. C300,400 and even 500 are not an assistant here. And even a rab is most likely a small assistant, tk. we are moving towards complete autonomy of drones
      1. Ryazan87
        Ryazan87 14 October 2020 23: 42 New
        16
        Exactly:

        Chinese "comrades" plan to launch up to 48 kamikaze UAVs from one package. Imagine 5-6 such installations = 250-300 drones. You get tired of blaming.
        1. CSKA
          CSKA 15 October 2020 11: 44 New
          0
          Quote: Ryazanets87
          Imagine 5-6 such installations = 250-300 drones. Get tired of blaming

          Can you remind me what range they have?
          1. Ryazan87
            Ryazan87 15 October 2020 14: 05 New
            0
            A small radius is still announced - 10 kilometers (I could be wrong). A tactical tool, but extremely unpleasant in the long term: here MZA is needed and without guarantees, some pieces will still fall on your head.
            1. CSKA
              CSKA 15 October 2020 16: 23 New
              -4
              Quote: Ryazanets87
              A small radius is still announced - 10 kilometers (I could be wrong).

              So, imagine how you can bring such an installation to a position to the enemy, who has very good intelligence, to the front zone where artillery and MLRS are intensively working? I would say that it is very difficult. And even more so if aviation works.
              1. Ryazan87
                Ryazan87 15 October 2020 16: 56 New
                +3
                To fight against an enemy carrying out constant effective reconnaissance and possessing significant forces of artillery and aviation is quite difficult in principle. Whether with a UAV or without them. It is clear that no one will fight with only one kamikaze drones. Just such compact mobile installations can create a lot of problems with the same artillery (provided the radius is increased, of course). It will not be so easy to catch them - in modern warfare, seconds are already running.
                1. CSKA
                  CSKA 15 October 2020 17: 22 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Ryazanets87
                  (subject to increasing the radius, of course)

                  I agree.
                  Quote: Ryazanets87
                  It will not be so easy to catch them - in modern warfare, seconds are already counting.

                  Just as UAVs are rapidly developing, after SAR, Libya and NK, specialized air defense against UAVs will also rapidly develop.
                  PS I wonder how effective Peresvet will be against them.
                  1. Captain Pushkin
                    Captain Pushkin 15 October 2020 19: 53 New
                    -1
                    Quote: CSKA
                    profile air defense against UAVs will also develop rapidly.
                    PS I wonder how effective Peresvet will be against them.

                    Not at all. Compare the cost of Peresvet and the flight of drones. And yet, estimate the range of Peresvet by low-flying drones, i.e. all these Peresvets are for object air defense, covering especially valuable objects.
                  2. CSKA
                    CSKA 16 October 2020 10: 24 New
                    0
                    Quote: Captain Pushkin
                    Compare the cost of Peresvet and the flight of drones

                    And here is it? It is clear that one Peresvet is more expensive than drones.
                    Quote: Captain Pushkin
                    And yet, estimate the range of Peresvet using low-flying drones

                    And I can't appreciate it, just like you, since the performance characteristics of Peresvet are classified. That's why it's interesting.
                    Quote: Captain Pushkin
                    Re-lights for object air defense, covering especially valuable objects.

                    Specifically Peresvet - yes. But it is quite possible that a lighter laser is being developed to deal with the UAV.
                  3. Captain Pushkin
                    Captain Pushkin 16 October 2020 10: 46 New
                    -1
                    Quote: CSKA
                    estimate the range of Peresvet by low-flying drones

                    And I can't appreciate it, just like you, since the performance characteristics of Peresvet are classified.

                    For low-flying targets within line of sight. That is, depending on the relief, from several kilometers to several hundred meters.
                    There is not enough money to cover the entire front line, and drones can simply bypass the object zones.
                    All these Peresvets make sense for use only against ballistic missiles (well, this is if the energy allows it).
                  4. CSKA
                    CSKA 17 October 2020 10: 54 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Captain Pushkin
                    and drones can simply bypass object zones.

                    How do they know where they are?
                  5. Captain Pushkin
                    Captain Pushkin 17 October 2020 11: 34 New
                    -1
                    Quote: CSKA
                    Quote: Captain Pushkin
                    and drones can simply bypass object zones.

                    How do they know where they are?

                    Are you asking me? They are also used in the system of the armed forces using all types of intelligence.
                    If we assume that the drones exist on their own, then it is enough to burn one with the laser, so that the coordinates of the laser become known. And then, either the others to bypass, or plan a coordinated attack, depending on the situation.
                  6. CSKA
                    CSKA 17 October 2020 12: 35 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Captain Pushkin
                    it is enough to burn one with a laser, so that the coordinates of the laser become known.

                    Coordinates may become known, but the performance characteristics are not. How can they find out the range of target destruction. And no one says that Peresvets should single-handedly cover the front line without support, for example, the Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system.
                  7. Captain Pushkin
                    Captain Pushkin 17 October 2020 12: 52 New
                    +1
                    Quote: CSKA
                    How can they find out the range of target destruction.

                    No further line of sight. The lower the flight altitude, the lower the line of sight. The performance characteristics of the laser are secondary.
                    Quote: CSKA
                    no one says that Peresvets should single-handedly cover the front line without support, for example, the Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system.

                    Short-range air defense systems require protection of medium-range air defense systems and long-range air defense systems. All this requires the appropriate means of detection and control. In general, we arrived at the air defense system, in which lasers, if they begin to be used at all, will be one of the components of the system.
                    Will the system withstand a massive attack? It all depends on the balance of forces and means of the opposing sides. Well, and from the professionalism of the personnel.
                  8. CSKA
                    CSKA 19 October 2020 09: 50 New
                    0
                    Quote: Captain Pushkin
                    Short-range air defense systems require protection of medium-range air defense systems and long-range air defense systems. All this requires the appropriate means of detection and control. In general, we arrived at the air defense system, in which lasers, if they begin to be used at all, will be one of the components of the system.
                    Will the system withstand a massive attack? It all depends on the balance of forces and means of the opposing sides. Well, and from the professionalism of the personnel.

                    I totally agree.
  • Grits
    Grits 16 October 2020 04: 58 New
    +2
    Quote: Ryazanets87
    Chinese "comrades" plan to launch up to 48 kamikaze UAVs from one package. Imagine 5-6 such installations = 250-300 drones. You get tired of blaming.

    Cool Chinese came up with and piled. Our designers, however, "work in this direction." In the UAV, Russia has already been bypassed by everyone who can make at least something out of iron. It remains for the African countries to decide.
  • t-12
    t-12 21 October 2020 14: 08 New
    -1
    250-300 drones. You get tired of blaming.

    A variant of the solution - "cluster" anti-aircraft missiles, firing clouds of small incendiary fragments.
  • Achilles
    Achilles 15 October 2020 09: 20 New
    -4
    Quote: moscowp
    The word "flock" is a good word. There will be exactly a flock of drones, cheap vehicles, and they will be used at the tactical level, without any airfields and control points. C300,400 and even 500 are not an assistant here. And even a rab is most likely a small assistant, tk. we are moving towards complete autonomy of drones

    EMP weapons are already being developed, which burns out all the electronics, they will work effectively against autonomous swarms.
    1. moscowp
      moscowp 15 October 2020 09: 39 New
      +2
      Amy's weapons are being developed (there is still a big question about its future effectiveness, because electronics are not only in the enemy's possession), and drones are already in use. If earlier the means of defense (air defense missile systems) were cheaper than means of attack, now the situation has turned upside down, taking into account the drones
      1. CSKA
        CSKA 15 October 2020 11: 45 New
        0
        Quote: moscowp
        and drones are already in use

        Kamikaze - yes, but not in flocks of 20-30 drones.
        1. moscowp
          moscowp 15 October 2020 11: 56 New
          0
          A very close question. Watch the video, in St. Petersburg, in Singapore, we made a show in the night sky from several thousand synchronized drones with backlight
          1. CSKA
            CSKA 15 October 2020 14: 14 New
            -1
            Quote: moscowp
            A very close question. Watch the video, in St. Petersburg, in Singapore, we made a show in the night sky from several thousand synchronized drones with backlight

            Well, let there be such a flock of 20-30 drones that one of the installations will release. First, this installation must still be brought to the desired distance, because their range is not great. Secondly, in a country with good satellite and UAV reconnaissance, this installation cannot be brought to the required distance, it will come under attack from aviation, artillery and MLRS. Third, in a country with a developed electronic warfare, they will be meaningless. Iran with its electronic warfare, at one time, the most modern US UAV, intercepted. Fourth, 4-5 Pantsir-C1 or ZRPK Tungussk can handle this swarm without any problems.
            1. LastPS
              LastPS 16 October 2020 19: 47 New
              -1
              The carapace has already shown how he copes, he will not survive a massive attack, like Tungusska. We need cannon complexes with a BP with a remote fuse or a TOP with super-cheap small-sized missiles for these purposes, although this is not a panacea, because it all comes out more expensive. Have you seen American plywood transport containers? Just imagine what will happen in the sky if there are hundreds - a couple of hundred cheap UAVs. They will not fall in a dense cloud, but will attack from different directions, taking into account the dispersal of fragments, albeit approximate.
              1. CSKA
                CSKA 17 October 2020 12: 26 New
                -2
                Quote: LastPS
                The carapace has already shown how it copes

                What did he show? Armor should work as a division, 4-6 ZRPK, and not as in SAR and Libya one by one. And what is the result? How many UAVs were destroyed? If you do not listen to both sides, but judge by photographs of evidence. Destroyed 3 air defense missile systems and 8 UAVs. The calculations are of course approximate. And I very much doubt that the ZRPK calculations were well prepared. Pantsir has a target detection range of 36 km, a destruction range of 18 km, and a bayraktar has a KAB range of 8 km. It turns out that the calculation just slept through the UAV.
                Quote: LastPS
                he will not survive a massive attack, like Tungusska.

                Mass attack on whom? Above, I wrote about kamikaze drones:
                Quote: CSKA
                Well, let there be such a flock of 20-30 drones that one of the installations will release.

                And there will be no mass attack by drone UAVs. In one sector of the front, no one sends such a number. And few people have such a number of UAVs. In 2003, during the invasion of Iraq, for some reason, the United States did not use swarms of UAVs, although they already had many Predators, but used conventional aircraft.
                Quote: LastPS
                Have you seen American plywood transport containers? Just imagine what will happen in the sky if there are hundreds - a couple of hundred cheap uavs.

                So what? What is the payload of these plywood? Two grenades? Kamikaze drones have more explosives, but unlike the plywood 200, you can't launch them at the same time. The Turks have kamikaze drones, but for some reason they are too expensive in the SAR, in Libya, hundreds of them. Imagine how much it would cost to attack one 200 drones on the Carapace division. It is far from certain that they will be able to destroy the division. More likely to damage several.
                Quote: LastPS
                They will not fall in a dense cloud, but will attack from different directions.

                They cannot attack from different sides, the flight range and control do not allow. For such maneuvers, it is necessary that each UAV has its own controller. So far, no one has AI technology to control the swarm.
      2. Captain Pushkin
        Captain Pushkin 17 October 2020 12: 57 New
        0
        Quote: moscowp
        Amy is developing a weapon (there is still a big question about its future effectiveness, because electronics are not only for the enemy)

        The best EMP is a nuclear explosion. By the way, and the most effective means of electronic warfare, against which any air defense and missile defense is powerless.
  • CSKA
    CSKA 15 October 2020 11: 44 New
    -1
    Quote: moscowp
    C300,400 and even 500 are not an assistant here. And even a rab is most likely a small assistant, tk. we are moving towards complete autonomy of drones

    In your opinion, the Pantsir-C1 ZRPK division will not cope with them?
  • Oleg123219307
    Oleg123219307 14 October 2020 18: 45 New
    -5
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    You were not the only one who thought so. Remember how a few months ago the effectiveness of the use of UAVs in the Middle East was ridiculed and questioned.
    Yes to me couch patriots on the assumption that it is worth paying attention, almost through the monitor in the face laughed. Everyone told how air defense and electronic warfare would bring down drones in flocks.

    Well, in any serious conflict, they will be brought down in flocks. No wool, not a sight. The speed, maneuverability and ceiling are at the level of the First World War, EPR like an aircraft, and at the same time a radio channel continuously working on radiation. A toy for wars in the third world no more.
    1. Ryazan87
      Ryazan87 14 October 2020 20: 34 New
      18
      Well, in any serious conflict they will be brought down in flocks.

      So what? Better to let the manned planes knock down? (see Georgia 2008, but you can't really call it a serious adversary).
      Real conflicts have been taking place in third world countries for the past 70 years. Russia is actively participating in them. Continue the logical chain?
      In addition, UAVs are constantly and continuously evolving. In 1910, "airplanes" were also a toy, and 30 years later they began to turn large cities into ruins.
      1. Oleg123219307
        Oleg123219307 14 October 2020 21: 27 New
        +6
        Quote: Ryazanets87
        So what? Better to let the manned planes knock down? (see Georgia 2008, but you can't really call it a serious adversary).
        Real conflicts have been taking place in third world countries for the past 70 years. Russia is actively participating in them. Continue the logical chain?
        In addition, UAVs are constantly and continuously evolving. In 1910, "airplanes" were also a toy, and 30 years later they began to turn large cities into ruins.

        Better to spend money on weapons that will benefit. Here it is well written below - UAV - anti-papua weapon. As for Georgia. You just don't have to be kind, and your soldiers and pilots need to be protected more than the population and personnel of the enemy. To demolish the OTRK and KR EVERYTHING to smithereens and in half, regardless of where the enemy air defense, command post, missiles, etc. are located, in cities or not, and there will be no losses. The Americans have successfully demonstrated this to us in Yugoslavia, in Iraq, or in Raqqa in Syria. We alone are polite, it is not clear why.
        1. Ryazan87
          Ryazan87 14 October 2020 23: 50 New
          10
          Better to spend money on weapons that will benefit. Here it is well written below - UAV - anti-papua weapon.

          Taking into account the specifics of the conflicts in which the Russian army and pro-Russian formations are involved, shock UAVs will be very useful: Colonel Khabibulin, Lieutenant Colonel Peshkov and Major Filippov would probably agree with this ...
          Demolish OTRK and KR ALL to smithereens and in half

          You have a somewhat exaggerated idea of ​​the capabilities of the OTRK and the potential use of the CD. As Americans, we simply cannot - the resources are not the same. And so in Syria, no one was almond-shaped - with might and main free-falling ammunition was used and is being used, what kind of politeness is there.
      2. CSKA
        CSKA 15 October 2020 11: 47 New
        +1
        Quote: Ryazanets87
        see Georgia 2008, but you can't really call it a serious adversary).

        What is there to watch? The number of those shot down is not great. And if you have not noticed 12 years have passed and now completely different videoconferencing.
        Quote: Ryazanets87
        Real conflicts have been taking place in third world countries for the past 70 years. Russia is actively participating in them. Continue the logical chain?

        In this I agree. For wars with third world countries, kamikaze drones and attack UAVs are suitable.
        1. Ryazan87
          Ryazan87 15 October 2020 14: 03 New
          +4
          What is there to watch? The number of those shot down is not great. And if you have not noticed 12 years have passed and now completely different videoconferencing.

          6 planes in 8 days? Well, yes, not the Kursk Bulge. But for a war with an enemy of this level, these are tangible losses.
          As for "completely different aerospace forces" - yes, I hope, now they will not send Tu-22M3 for reconnaissance, you see, they will cost a drone. And so that in 2008 the Su-25 flew and suffered losses, that in Syria in 2018 this practice continued with the same result.
          You just have to admit that unmanned solutions are the future, no matter whether on land, in the air or at sea. This, in fact, will distinguish the armies of the "first world" from any Papuans.
          Is the UAV easy to shoot down? But, say, an attack helicopter is very vulnerable to modern air defense. Does this mean that helicopters can only be used in local conflicts?
          Well, for example, let's imagine a limited conflict between the Russian and Turkish armies (well, in a "vacuum): will the Russian air defense be able to shoot down Turkish drones? Of course, yes. Will it incur losses and is in combat tension, wasting resources and being distracted from tasks? opposition to manned aircraft? Obviously, yes. Will the Turks get a tactical advantage due to this? Yes. They will simply have an additional combat tool to which they will need to react.
          R.S. the situation with drones, by the way, is very similar to the "dawn of aviation". First - intelligence, then shock functions. If in 1914 it was a curiosity, then already in 1920 a half dozen airplanes of the cavalry corps were paralyzed.
          1. CSKA
            CSKA 15 October 2020 16: 15 New
            +1
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            6 planes in 8 days? Well, yes, not the Kursk Bulge.

            Well, you compared.)))) Then and now the Air Force is completely different things.
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            But for a war with an enemy of this level, these are tangible losses.

            What is your opinion based on?
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            yes, I hope, now they will not send Tu-22M3 for reconnaissance, you see, they will cost a drone

            Of course they won't, now there are enough reconnaissance UAVs.
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            And so that in 2008 the Su-25 flew and suffered losses, that in Syria in 2018 this practice continued with the same result.

            How many Su-25s were shot down in the SAR? remind you? One. So much for the difference between 2008 and 2020.
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            You just have to admit that unmanned solutions are the future, no matter whether on land, in the air or at sea. This, in fact, will distinguish the armies of the "first world" from any Papuans.

            Again, I perfectly understand the need to develop UAVs, which is being done. The same operation in the SAR showed that reconnaissance UAVs are already in full swing and are being used. Work is being done on the development of UAVs Sirius, Helios and Okhotnik. This is also visible. Who could have said in 2015 that we have reconnaissance UAVs? Before the operation, no one.
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            Is the UAV easy to shoot down? But after all, and, say, an attack helicopter is very vulnerable to modern air defense

            I agree. This has its pros and cons. For example, a helicopter has a higher strike power, maneuverability.
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            Will at the same time suffer losses and be in combat tension, spending resources and distracting from the tasks of confronting manned aircraft? Obviously yes.

            Not obvious. Each motorized rifle division and brigade has its own air defense, whose tasks include just covering the troops during the offensive and movement. And there are anti-aircraft missile brigades and aviation that can perform various tasks. The same or parallel. All three can act on one task or differently.
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            Will this give the Turks a tactical advantage? Yes. They will simply have an additional combat tool to which they will need to react.

            From the fact that instead of 10 attack helicopters there will be 10 helicopters and 5 UAVs, the essence of the air defense of motorized rifle brigades, anti-aircraft missile brigades and aviation will not change. Just in such a conflict as with a country with a serious army. All this was foreseen in the USSR.
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            R.S. the situation with drones, by the way, is very similar to the "dawn of aviation". First - intelligence, then shock functions. If in 1914 it was a curiosity, then already in 1920 a half dozen airplanes of the cavalry corps were paralyzed.

            I am completely for UAVs, but so far we have not seen their work against serious air defense and electronic warfare. They have shown their effectiveness against terrorists and weak air defense. But this is far from an indicator. But the fact that they have a future is indisputable. Imagine the effectiveness of the Hunter UAV or the Thunder UAV. Heavy drums with stealth technology. Over time, I think, they will begin to bet on them and electronic warfare. A swarm of kamikaze drones will also be effective, but again against a country with weak air defense. If a country can deploy the required number of air defense missile systems on a certain sector of the front, then they already become useless. Over time, I think, there will be a ground-based type AK-630M2 (duet), against which it is unlikely that the kamikaze will be able to oppose something. And electronic warfare is developing.
            1. Ryazan87
              Ryazan87 15 October 2020 17: 22 New
              -1
              What is your opinion based on?

              Partly on your statement - "Then and now the BBC are completely different things."
              Why?
              1. The cost of each aircraft, the time for its production, the cost of training a trained pilot;
              2. Opportunities of the enemy army, including air defense;
              3. Duration and intensity of hostilities.
              However, a lot or a little is an evaluation category, of course. IMHO, losing a strategic bomber from scratch is unacceptable. Plus, the question arises about losses, if the enemy has a really modern and developed air defense system.

              How many Su-25s were shot down in the SAR? remind you? One. So much for the difference between 2008 and 2020.

              Only in the SAR, the militants had nothing more serious than MANPADS. And after that unfortunate incident - the use of the Su-25 was sharply limited. Although it is clear that manned attack aircraft are already in the past.

              Not obvious. Each motorized rifle division and brigade has its own air defense,

              Of course. The question is how massively the enemy will use the UAV and how to combine it with other means.
              Tunguska and Torah will be able to stop a certain level of threats.

              the essence of the work of air defense of motorized rifle brigades, anti-aircraft missile brigades and aviation will not change

              certainly will not change. Only it will become much more difficult to do it.

              Over time, I think, they will begin to bet on them and electronic warfare.


              ".... A group of electronic support for the strike was created. This group included unmanned reconnaissance aircraft such as" Scout "(Israel) and" Fireby "(USA). Flying over the positions of SAM-6 air defense missile systems, they were broadcasting live images Receiving such visual information, the Israeli command made unmistakable decisions to launch missile strikes. In addition, these same unmanned aircraft were jamming. They detected the operating frequencies of the radar and guidance equipment of the Syrian missile systems. Moreover, playing the role of "decoy", causing the fire of the Syrian air defense systems, the reconnaissance planes diverted it from the combat aircraft. "
              This is from the memoirs of Lieutenant General Yashkina, the events of 1982 ..
          2. Captain Pushkin
            Captain Pushkin 15 October 2020 20: 03 New
            -1
            Quote: Ryazanets87
            Is the UAV easy to shoot down?

            On VO there was a story about how a Syrian drone flew into Israel. There were two launches of Patriot missiles, the missiles missed. Further, the UR launched the F-16 and also past.
            I don't remember what ended there.
            As I understand it, the missile fuses are set to miss the plane, and the drone is too small a target, Israel had to modify the fuses.
    2. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 21: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: oleg123219307
      The speed, maneuverability and ceiling are at the level of the First World War, EPR like an aircraft, and at the same time a radio channel continuously working on radiation.


      The radio channel is needed only for remotely controlled devices. And the new ones are autonomous or with an offline mode.
      1. Oleg123219307
        Oleg123219307 14 October 2020 22: 09 New
        +3
        Quote: Eye of the Crying
        Quote: oleg123219307
        The speed, maneuverability and ceiling are at the level of the First World War, EPR like an aircraft, and at the same time a radio channel continuously working on radiation.


        The radio channel is needed only for remotely controlled devices. And the new ones are autonomous or with an offline mode.

        And how is the autonomous kamikaze drone different from the CD? Or do you think that there are autonomous drones like bayraktar - he took off, he flew himself, he found enemies, he selected targets, he shot himself, he returned, and then he defended the outfit and made coffee for the commander?)
        1. The eye of the crying
          The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 22: 18 New
          +6
          Quote: oleg123219307
          And how is the autonomous kamikaze drone different from the CD?


          The drone doesn't have to be a kamikaze. A kamikaze drone differs from a cruise missile in its cheapness. Some kamikaze drones are also able to return to base. By the way, this is a great reason for clowning. Will you?

          Quote: oleg123219307
          Or do you think that there are autonomous drones such as bayraktar - he took off, he flew himself, he found enemies, he selected targets, he shot himself, he returned


          It is a well-known fact that drones already know how to take off, go to a given area, return and land. There is nothing impossible in detecting and selecting a target.

          Quote: oleg123219307
          , and then another outfit defended and brewed coffee for the commander?)


          All right, there are no drones in the world that suit you. Sadness.
          1. Oleg123219307
            Oleg123219307 14 October 2020 22: 25 New
            +1
            Quote: Eye of the Crying
            Quote: oleg123219307
            And how is the autonomous kamikaze drone different from the CD?


            The drone doesn't have to be a kamikaze. A kamikaze drone differs from a cruise missile in its cheapness. Some kamikaze drones are also able to return to base. By the way, this is a great reason for clowning. Will you?

            Quote: oleg123219307
            Or do you think that there are autonomous drones such as bayraktar - he took off, he flew himself, he found enemies, he selected targets, he shot himself, he returned


            It is a well-known fact that drones already know how to take off, go to a given area, return and land. There is nothing impossible in detecting and selecting a target.

            Quote: oleg123219307
            , and then another outfit defended and brewed coffee for the commander?)


            All right, there are no drones in the world that suit you. Sadness.

            You grossly underestimate the complexity of the AI ​​you need. In essence, this is akin to the invention of a trained attack pilot. In an open field with reference purposes, something can and will work. And in the city? And in bad weather and interference? And on the front line when it is not clear where are theirs where are the strangers? And if the enemy has attached a self-made protection to the tank that distorts the silhouette? And if there are civilians in the area of ​​operation? And what if he got overwhelmed when going out on patrol / returning and he decided above his positions that there were enemies around? No, I'm telling you as an AI specialist. Another 20-30 years will pass before such systems are not in the laboratory. And no one will spend such a complex and expensive piece on an uav of this class. It will rather be a self-guided 6-7 generation fighter.
            1. The eye of the crying
              The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 22: 47 New
              +4
              Quote: oleg123219307
              You grossly underestimate the complexity of the AI ​​you need.


              Needed for what? A drone capable of taking off the aircraft carrier, refueling, and landing back has existed for several years. UR target selection has been known since time immemorial.

              Quote: oleg123219307
              In an open field with reference purposes, something can and will work. And in the city?


              That is, you understand that under some conditions it will work. The scope of these conditions is unknown, of course. And pushing them apart will be a race.

              Quote: oleg123219307
              And in bad weather and interference?


              In bad weather, drones will probably perform worse (as will airplanes). Interference - Depends on interference. If the radio is jammed, and the autonomous drone uses optics, the interference will not affect anything.

              Quote: oleg123219307
              And what if he got overwhelmed when going on patrol / returning and he decided above his positions that there were enemies around?


              To solve the problem "do not open fire on your positions" no AI is needed at all - it is enough to define the areas in which the use of weapons is allowed. In general, fire on friendly people is an ancient and respected military tradition.

              Quote: oleg123219307
              No, I tell you as a specialist in
              AI


              If you are truly an expert, you should know that AI does not exist.
              1. ZEMCH
                ZEMCH 14 October 2020 23: 29 New
                +3
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                you should know that AI does not exist.

                The definition of artificial intelligence given by John McCarthy in 1956 at a conference at Dartmouth University is not directly related to the understanding of intelligence in humans. According to McCarthy, AI researchers are free to use methods that are not observed in humans, if necessary to solve specific problems. Those. a person, with his understanding of his intellectual abilities, is not able to realize the entire volume of intelligence.
                AI is not a copy of the human brain, but the ability to solve those problems that are limited by human consciousness and choice. Disable the selection mode "good", "bad" and you will have an AI that complements the person, only the person will not like it)))
                1. The eye of the crying
                  The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 23: 30 New
                  -2
                  Quote: ZEMCH
                  The definition of artificial intelligence by John McCarthy in 1956 at a conference at the University of Dartmouth


                  And ... you also remember about the Turing test.
                  1. ZEMCH
                    ZEMCH 14 October 2020 23: 32 New
                    +4
                    We will not argue, AI specialists are now limited by its capabilities, and not by the definition of what AI is
                  2. The eye of the crying
                    The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 23: 35 New
                    +1
                    I agree. But the possibilities (and methods of functioning) of what is, just do not allow to call it "intelligence". Although the term AI is used in everyday life.
                  3. ZEMCH
                    ZEMCH 14 October 2020 23: 44 New
                    +1
                    Plusanul, but now the very definition of intelligence is in doubt)))
          2. Oleg123219307
            Oleg123219307 14 October 2020 23: 39 New
            -3
            Quote: Eye of the Crying
            Needed for what? A drone capable of taking off the aircraft carrier, refueling, and landing back has existed for several years. UR target selection has been known since time immemorial.

            For the autonomous execution of a full cycle of tasks - departure, exit to a given area, patrol, reconnaissance, selection, determination of friend / foe / civilian, deciding on a strike, strike, control, evasion, return.
            Quote: Eye of the Crying
            That is, you understand that under some conditions it will work. The scope of these conditions is unknown, of course. And pushing them apart will be a race.

            Do you need it? We will finish the game in the decisive machines for us sooner or later. Anything that one programmed the other to break can ...
            Quote: Eye of the Crying
            In bad weather, drones will probably perform worse (as will airplanes). Interference - Depends on interference. If the radio is jammed, and the autonomous drone uses optics, the interference will not affect anything.

            In bad weather, the drone will not work at all. Bo descending under the clouds for a slow tarantula of death is similar. Interference is different here you are right. But there are incomparably more ways to jam smart electronics than a live pilot.
            Quote: Eye of the Crying
            To solve the problem "do not open fire on your positions" no AI is needed at all - it is enough to define the areas in which the use of weapons is allowed. In general, fire on friendly people is an ancient and respected military tradition.

            As for the first part of the statement - if you know where your position is now, I am already silent about the civilians. According to the second - a stupid and blasphemous attempt to sharpen. Let us agree so that in order not to fight the whole world must be burned in a nuclear boiler. There are no people, everyone is happy ... The task of high-precision weapons is to exclude damage to their own people, and not to justify it.
            Quote: Eye of the Crying
            If you are truly an expert, you should know that AI does not exist.

            If you are not familiar with the terminology, this does not mean that something does not exist. Terminator T1000 yes, perhaps fantastic. And so AI has been created and is successfully functioning in many areas.
            1. The eye of the crying
              The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 23: 53 New
              0
              Quote: oleg123219307
              departure, exit to a given area, patrol, reconnaissance, selection, defining friend / foe / civilian, deciding on a strike, strike, control, evasion, return.


              It has been demonstrated in practice that software is capable of performing most of these tasks. Drones and UR. And what is cooked in laboratories and tested in an atmosphere of secrecy - God only knows.

              Quote: oleg123219307

              In bad weather conditions, the drone will not work at all. Bo descending under the clouds for a slow tarantula of death is similar.


              If the drone uses radar, the clouds are not a hindrance to it. And the drone doesn't have to be slow.

              Quote: oleg123219307
              Do you need it?


              Whether it is necessary or not, it will be.

              Quote: oleg123219307
              As for the first part of the statement - if you know where your position is now, I am already silent about the civilians.


              Close, but not quite like that. It is the area for the permitted use of weapons that is given. Your position just needs to be outside this area. Of course, if you need a simple foolproof solution.

              Quote: oleg123219307
              According to the second - a stupid and blasphemous attempt to sharpen.


              In addition to a successful attempt to joke, this is also the statement "people sometimes shoot at their own people, so this is acceptable for their replacement."

              Quote: oleg123219307
              AI created


              It is not, but it says a lot about you.
              1. Oleg123219307
                Oleg123219307 15 October 2020 08: 26 New
                0
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                It has been demonstrated in practice that software is capable of performing most of these tasks. Drones and UR. And what is cooked in laboratories and tested in an atmosphere of secrecy - God only knows.

                You strongly confuse life and computer shooters. Unfortunately, they are not the same thing. A military AI capable of all of the above, and a bot made of a toy is just STRONGLY different. Roughly like Schwartz and a real Special Forces soldier. It looks similar, but the essence is different.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                If the drone uses radar, the clouds are not a hindrance to it. And the drone doesn't have to be slow.

                Uh-huh. Top down. Against the background of the earth. In search of entrenched low-contrast targets, or even worse radio-transparent targets, like infantry. Of course the clouds are not a hindrance. From this point of view, even the absence of a radar is not a hindrance, all the same, nothing is visible. And those radars of high power and resolution that are on fighter-bombers for this purpose negate the advantages of UAVs due to price and unmasking. A fighter can both dodge and fight if detected.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Whether it is necessary or not, it will be.

                What will happen and why people decide. From my point of view, military AI, although useful, carries a lot of new risks.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Close, but not quite like that. It is the area for the permitted use of weapons that is given. Your position just needs to be outside this area. Of course, if you need a simple foolproof solution.

                And completely front-line use is excluded, as well as use in densely populated areas. And what is the advantage of such a UAV over an elementary MLRS with self-aiming BB? If you can work ONLY in those territories where only the enemy sits and no one else?
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                In addition to a successful attempt to joke, this is also the statement "people sometimes shoot at their own people, so this is acceptable for their replacement."

                Even today's primitive expert systems and AI are many times more efficient than humans in their tasks. And their mistake will be many times more expensive. Its own artillery can mistakenly cover its own unit with fire. But rarely when he can inflict such irreparable losses - the accuracy is not the same, but for a long time and massively they usually do not fire on their own. And such a UAV as you want, is able to arrange a fiery hell for its, according to the principle of one shell, one dead, until the ammunition ends, due to one mistake or the influence of the enemy, for example, intervening in the work of the geolocation signal. There are many such systems today.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                It is not, but it says a lot about you.

                Have you re-read science fiction? Understand the terms Strong and Weak AI, then we'll talk.
              2. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 16 October 2020 08: 35 New
                0
                Quote: oleg123219307
                You strongly confuse life and computer shooters.


                You have some kind of fixation on computer games. And I'm talking about what real drones can already do.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Roughly like Schwartz and a real Special Forces soldier. It looks similar, but the essence is different.


                Schwartz bears little resemblance to what the special forces were at the time. It doesn't even look like the current ones.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Top down. Against the background of the earth. In search of dug-in low-contrast targets, or even worse radio-transparent targets, like infantry.


                Yes, from above, against the background of the earth. You will be surprised, but there are not only "radio-transparent targets like infantry". And there is a synthetic aperture.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                And completely front-line use is excluded, as well as use in densely populated areas.


                Application on the line of contact is excluded. But this means that application in other conditions is possible.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Have you re-read science fiction?


                You may know who Andrew Ng is.
              3. Oleg123219307
                Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 09: 32 New
                0
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                And I'm talking about what real drones can already do.

                What?
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Yes, from above, against the background of the earth. You will be surprised, but there are not only "radio-transparent targets like infantry". And there is a synthetic aperture.

                Do you know how much such equipment costs? For what is called a 6th generation fighter in an unmanned version, it will do. And for making a mug, a young modeller like a bayraktar is not, because for the price of one such radar, you can build 15 bayraktars. It is cheaper to lose them in batches.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Application on the line of contact is excluded. But this means that application in other conditions is possible.

                Against an enemy equipped with a normal air defense system - no. Distances of application are incomparable. Against the Papuans, yes, but there is a reasonable question whether we need it and, if so, to what extent. As Syria has shown, we can manage for now.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                You may know who Andrew Ng is.

                I heard out of the corner of my ear that an American computer scientist, a fundamental specialist, but what? If we want to share with each other a view of the future of technology, then mine is well reflected in the dexler's book of the creation machine. Read, after this reading, I lost faith in the prospects of modern military technologies in general ...
              4. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 16 October 2020 09: 45 New
                0
                Quote: oleg123219307
                What?


                X-47B.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Do you know how much such equipment costs? For what is called a 6th generation fighter in an unmanned version, it will do.


                No. And you? It would be interesting.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                For what is called a 6th generation fighter in an unmanned version, it will do.


                It is already acceptable for the 5th generation.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Against an enemy equipped with a normal air defense system - no.


                Don't dwell on Bayraktar. The drone doesn't have to be a slow-moving bookcase. For example - S-70. He already looks like a full-fledged drummer. By the way, he already knows how to take off and land.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Distances of application are incomparable.


                Application distances of what? The range of a drone can be the same as that of an airplane, the weapons on it are the same. What are the incomparable distances? Although, of course, this has nothing to do with software capabilities.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                You may know who Andrew Ng is.


                Heard out of the way


                Clear.
              5. Oleg123219307
                Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 10: 07 New
                0
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                X-47B

                Don't you confuse God's gift with scrambled eggs? This is a 6th generation prototype. We have a c 70 in this class. Radars, AI, and a soda machine are shoved into such cars. And they cost like two 2th generation fighters. This is not a consumable. How does this relate to the topic of the article and discussion?
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                No. And you? It would be interesting.

                For the F-22, the old articles included data:

                “… With the price of one module of $ 500, the cost of AFAR will be $ 1 million if there are 2000 modules in the AFAR. For an aircraft worth $ 35 million, this amount is considered high, despite the reduction in operating and maintenance costs. "

                And that's just the antenna. I can give links if necessary.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                It is already acceptable for the 5th generation.

                Yes, but not for a piece of state, which, according to its characteristics, is like a model for children. To put this there - only to ruin money. The whole point of the Turkish concept of the UAV is in the mass scale and cheapness, so that it was not a pity to lose. This means that you have to put up with the limitation of characteristics.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Don't dwell on Bayraktar. The drone doesn't have to be a slow-moving bookcase. For example - S-70. He already looks like a full-fledged drummer. By the way, he already knows how to take off and land.

                I just wrote it to you above. In machines of this class I agree that everything is there, and even AI systems are possible. So we do them with the Americans. But the question is in the field of application. C 70 is in fact a fighter bomber, and bayraktar is an attack aircraft from the First World War. And the article is about such UAVs.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Application distances of what? The range of a drone can be the same as that of an airplane, the weapons on it are the same. What are the incomparable distances? Although, of course, this has nothing to do with software capabilities.

                Once again - an article about bayraktars and the like. Range of use of weapons. A drone for a shot must go deep into the enemy's air defense, where, if it is air defense, he will die halfway to the target simply by throwing money. If the air defense breakthrough was so simple, the states would not rivet all these thousands of axes ...
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Clear

                To each his own.
              6. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 16 October 2020 10: 25 New
                0
                Quote: oleg123219307
                Don't you confuse God's gift with scrambled eggs? This is a 6th generation prototype.


                It doesn't matter what you think of it as a prototype. This is a UAV, and he knew how to do all of the above 5 years ago.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                With the price of one module of $ 500, the cost of AFAR will be $ 1 million if there are 2000 modules in the AFAR.


                So it's inexpensive. The engine (one) of the same F-22 costs 15 million.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                I can give links if necessary.


                Yes please.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Bayraktar - stormtrooper from the first world


                So Bayraktar is outdated. The Turks have a jet drone on their way.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Once again - an article about bayraktars and the like.


                Article - yes. But you were just talking about "UAV".

                Quote: oleg123219307
                If the air defense breakthrough was so simple, the states would not rivet all these thousands of axes ...


                Nobody says air defense breakthrough is "so easy."
              7. Oleg123219307
                Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 11: 38 New
                0
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                It doesn't matter what you think of it as a prototype. This is a UAV, and he knew how to do all of the above 5 years ago.

                And then let us compare bayraktars with Voyager - 2 in terms of range and speed, and on this basis say that the UAV is cool. And what, too, is a UAV in fact ...
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                So it's inexpensive. The engine (one) of the same F-22 costs 15 million.

                What is inexpensive ... https://yandex.ru/turbo/bmpd.livejournal.com/s/3419802.html even for export, together with control stations, missiles and 200% wrapping, a bayraktar costs less than 10 million.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Yes please.

                For example, here is a fairly substantive discussion https://forums.airbase.ru/2014/08/t67036--stoimost-odnoj-brls-s-afar.html
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                So Bayraktar is outdated. The Turks have a jet drone on their way.

                Well, here's how it fits and we'll see. In engine building, the guys are forever behind, as we are in microelectronics, so what will come out to be honest. We are not arguing about UAVs in general, but about the opinion that things like bayraktar are the ultimate weapon, and ours do not want that for themselves. I argue that in its current form it is an anti-pauper ammunition and nothing more. Equipping it with advanced AI, radar and other things is not profitable, the flight characteristics are not the same, and the AI ​​itself requires high power, roads and, in fact, is not ready for combat use. The fact that the entire complex of these technologies will eventually be worked out in 6th generation fighters / uavs, I do not dispute.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Article - yes. But you were just talking about "UAV".

                And today, is anything other than bayraktars, Israeli kamikazes and their US counterparts used? Or is everyone in the labs like I said?
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Nobody says air defense breakthrough is "so easy."

                Well, we have the most powerful air defense in the world. Why do we bother about these crafts?
              8. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 16 October 2020 11: 53 New
                0
                Quote: oleg123219307
                In the engine building, the guys are behind forever


                As well as ... the Swedes, for example. And Koreans. And the Japanese.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                things like bayraktar are the ultimate weapon and ours don't want that. I claim that in its current form it is an anti-pauper ammunition and no more


                Bayraktar is yesterday. And the UAV - today and tomorrow.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                Well, we have the most powerful air defense in the world. Why do we bother about these crafts?


                It depends on who is "us". No one will strike at Russia with these specific crafts. It is possible to strike at Russia's allies and its "limited contingents" with them.
              9. Oleg123219307
                Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 12: 01 New
                0
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                As well as ... the Swedes, for example. And Koreans. And the Japanese.

                Explain the thought please.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Bayraktar is yesterday. And the UAV - today and tomorrow.

                And if we talk about machines of the same class C70 or X47B, what do you think is their advantage over a traditional fighter? The cost is the same, the radius is the same, the load is the same, the efficiency is comparable or lower, but what does the pilot save?
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                It depends on who is "us". No one will strike at Russia with these specific crafts. It is possible to strike at Russia's allies and its "limited contingents" with them.

                We have no allies. And it won't. And the sooner we understand this the better. About limited contingents - and do not behave like rags. Our soldiers abroad should be protected not only by weapons, but also by the understanding that for each killed the enemy will pay with 10 thousand of his own. Then there will be no desire. But all the same, as practice shows, so far our capabilities against existing opponents from the "third world" are enough with a margin.
              10. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 16 October 2020 12: 56 New
                0
                Quote: oleg123219307
                Explain the thought please.


                They will buy engines. Like Sweden, Korea and Japan.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                And if we talk about machines of the same class C70 or X47B, what do you think is their advantage over a traditional fighter?


                Isn't it obvious? Their pilot is PO. He is not afraid, does not get tired, he is the best on all devices (and not as before - one Pokryshkin, and the other has 8 hours of flight time). For small conflicts, they are not so pity, but for large conflicts, reproduction is limited only by the capabilities of industry.

                Quote: oleg123219307
                We have no allies.


                Russia, of course, is a besieged fortress surrounded by enemies, but not to the same extent.
              11. Oleg123219307
                Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 20: 00 New
                0
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                They will buy engines. Like Sweden, Korea and Japan.

                Who? The states of the campaign are no longer eager to supply them with military technology. We have - well, this will mean a slightly different level of relations. In China, I don’t know if they are capable of doing this, and if so, whether they want to sell and on what terms. But probably.
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Isn't it obvious? Their pilot is PO. He is not afraid, does not get tired, he is the best on all devices (and not as before - one Pokryshkin, and the other has 8 hours of flight time). For small conflicts, they are not so pity, but for large conflicts, reproduction is limited only by the capabilities of industry.

                And in modern combat, does a lot depend on a pilot's skills? The battle goes on at distances of a hundred kilometers ... Zasek, fired, ran away. It is now that in a fighter jet is now mainly a car, and all the pros and cons of a person in this aircraft class are minimized. The price is about the same, the most expensive units are still the same. It saves the pilot, yes, but it greatly lowers the threshold of application, which is not always good. When you think you're not risking anything, it's easier to start a war ...
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                Russia, of course, is a besieged fortress surrounded by enemies, but not to the same extent.

                Why exaggerate? Not a besieged fortress, of course, just all "neutral" countries are very fond of money. And our only serious opponent has an order of magnitude more of them. So, militarily, I would not trust small-medium allies. China is a different matter, but China, give them a chance and take us down, so it's just a good neighbor, but not an ally either.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 15 October 2020 09: 53 New
    +2
    "Or do you think that there are autonomous drones such as bayraktar - he took off, he flew himself, he found enemies, he selected targets, he shot himself, he returned" ////
    ---
    Of course I have. There is such a mode - completely autonomous.
    Everything is programmed in advance. The entire route, the battle zone, and the main goals are embedded in the memory of the drone. And the way back, of course.
    1. Oleg123219307
      Oleg123219307 15 October 2020 11: 52 New
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      "Or do you think that there are autonomous drones such as bayraktar - he took off, he flew himself, he found enemies, he selected targets, he shot himself, he returned" ////
      ---
      Of course I have. There is such a mode - completely autonomous.
      Everything is programmed in advance. The entire route, the battle zone, and the main goals are embedded in the memory of the drone. And the way back, of course.

      An example in the studio.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 15 October 2020 12: 05 New
        +1
        How did Russian calibers from the Caspian shoot at Syria? Do you think someone was flying them? We flew completely autonomously, according to photographs and inertial marks. The entire flight is determined in advance, before the start. Drones have the same mode as cruise missiles. Only with a return to base. And the goals are not one, but several.
        1. Oleg123219307
          Oleg123219307 15 October 2020 12: 15 New
          0
          When the coordinates of the target are known in advance, the drone is not needed, there is a whole range of CD, OTRK and ATGM, as well as corrected and loitering ammunition. Problems begin when you try to replace an attack aircraft with a drone, which you yourself must search and destroy. Autonomously, this is still only a theory, to distinguish a military, for example, a pickup truck from passing civilians, not every pilot can do it the first time ... and radio control strongly unmasks.
          1. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 16 October 2020 08: 58 New
            0
            Quote: oleg123219307
            there is a whole range of CD, OTRK and ATGM


            The CD is a disposable drone.
            1. Oleg123219307
              Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 09: 35 New
              0
              Quote: Eye of the Crying
              The CD is a disposable drone.

              I don't argue. I argue with those who claim that we have lagged behind in this area forever and tomorrow we will all die under the bombs of the bayraktar. I claim that for us and the states, drones with the characteristics of World War I aircraft are the day before yesterday, because these technologies eventually developed into modern CR and KB.
            2. The eye of the crying
              The eye of the crying 16 October 2020 10: 52 New
              0
              Of course, we will not die under the bombs of the Bayraktar. Under the bombs of the S-70 and his brothers ... who knows.
  • Klingon
    Klingon 15 October 2020 12: 30 New
    0
    I agree, what is so difficult about it in autonomous mode, even amateur drones like Mavik can do it, take off-landing, point-by-point flight, photographing or video filming of objects of interest. everything can except that they have no weapons
    1. Oleg123219307
      Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 09: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Klingon
      I agree, what's so difficult in offline mode

      Detection, identification and selection of targets, in conditions when the troops of their own and foes are mixed on the front line, or military facilities are located in civilian areas. The problem with advanced AI has not yet been consistently solved even in prototypes.
  • Grits
    Grits 16 October 2020 06: 07 New
    0
    Quote: oleg123219307
    Well, in any serious conflict they will be brought down in flocks.

    What does a real conflict mean? In my understanding, a real conflict with major powers is an exchange of nuclear strikes. No drones will be needed there. But the bottom line is that such a conflict will never come. And all wars are now local. That is, it turns out that while preparing for a serious conflict (with a vigorous loaf), we completely ignore the latest trends in the development of technology in local conflicts. In which Russia still participates and will participate. But he does not build or develop drones in the required quantity and in the required range, since they are not needed in a serious conflict ... a strange logic.
    1. Oleg123219307
      Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 09: 39 New
      -1
      Quote: Gritsa
      In which Russia still participates and will participate. But he does not build or develop drones in the required quantity and in the required range, since they are not needed in a serious conflict ...

      As Syria has shown, we can do it. This is the first thing. And secondly, the opinion that there will be no serious conflict, simply because there can never be, is utter optimism. So far, everything is going towards that and quite quickly. So they spend resources on what is of higher priority. We are not the USA - the budget is not rubber.
    2. fsb_buzuk
      fsb_buzuk 16 October 2020 23: 46 New
      0
      There have not been and never will be these nuclear conflicts. Why discuss them?
  • paul3390
    paul3390 14 October 2020 18: 46 New
    0
    To do this, you need to have air defense and electronic warfare and be able to use them .. And as an anti-poop weapon, drones are really not bad.
  • VO3A
    VO3A 14 October 2020 19: 18 New
    +8
    You all have pointless conversation. There is no most important parameter - the radius of action in the mode of information exchange in real time. In open sources up to 150 km. The duration of the flight in the shock version is 12 hours. There are no characteristics of communication channels and information exchange and visibility in the shock version with external suspensions, there are no security characteristics of communication channels and the range of frequencies used ... Based on this, tactical methods of using and countering, an empty article about nothing, naked ... Better to destroy anti-radar missile control point, the range allows and jamming electronic warfare systems ... You can search for control points with small UAVs and destroy precise ammunition from the ground with illumination from the UAV ...
  • VO3A
    VO3A 14 October 2020 19: 44 New
    15
    This is not a quirk for the Armenians, but for us. We must have all the information about this UAV, we must have practiced fighting techniques in exercises, and developed means ... Moreover, this UAV takes off from the airfield, which means the control point is there, they control the approach visually ... What to talk about, if we do not even control the situation either at all, much less in real time there ... Moreover, our base is there! Why is she there? Someone in our aircraft will one day start thinking? Little Syria, little LDNR, little Libya ... Now Karabakh ... Here is information technology, modern reconnaissance and target designation systems, network-centric approaches to the conduct of hostilities ... Another "oil painting" ... It's a shame that everything is for these there are systems, but there have been no systems for 20 years .. Wow heroes, wow foremost workers .... In 2nd place in the world? Oh well...
  • hrych
    hrych 15 October 2020 09: 32 New
    0
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    Yes to me couch patriots on the assumption

    And not a couch not a patriot heard about nuclear weapons. Here many tanks were buried and UAVs were magnified, but nothing that when using nuclear weapons all the electronics will burn out, and tanks are the best protection against all damaging factors of a nuclear explosion, a walking fortress, an all-terrain vehicle and artillery. And they got excited about Karabakh, ah, ah. Khmeimim has been knocking thousands of unmanned aerial vehicles down for years. And where are you such historians from? In the Bekaa Valley, as many as forty years ago, there was a successful use of UAVs, which allowed the Israelis to inflict great damage on the Syrian air defense. There was an analysis, but the USSR made the right decision not to develop this topic, because were preparing for a nuclear war. You woke up in Karabakh, and 40 years ago you forgot the experience. It was the Armenians who needed to study the Bekaa. They knew about the procurement of AzR, in 2016 they felt a rehearsal on the skin. It was not even necessary to use electronic warfare systems, but to prepare positions, spread out, etc. And they decided instead to change the owner, they say, the West will help us ... By the way, we dug in, the war is not over yet. The best kamikaze drones are the Tomahawk and Caliber, as well as their backers GPs and GLONASS. And the Armenians have not yet got all the trump cards out of their sleeves, but they have already piled up bundles of Bakuvians.
  • CSKA
    CSKA 15 October 2020 11: 37 New
    -2
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    couch patriots

    And why are they worse than standing patriots or chairs?))))) Do you consider yourself to be patriots? Are you a patriot in general?
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    Everyone told how air defense and electronic warfare would bring down drones in flocks

    And where did these UAVs collide with modern air defense or electronic warfare?
  • Hermit21
    Hermit21 15 October 2020 13: 48 New
    +1
    So they felled. There are already fewer Vidos. Now, it seems, those who are not have arrived, and for UBLA, pichalbide has come. But the Turks and Azerbaijanis will not tell about this, how and how long it takes to search, identify, defeat a target, is it really destroyed, how many dummies were "destroyed", from what time they destroyed one or another target, whether they bomb what is needed or what it is possible to see, whether they fly where they want or where it turns out, whether the strikes are linked to the needs of ground forces, what are the time, material and financial costs of hitting one target, is there any systematic use. We do not know about the real combat effectiveness of the UBLA, absolutely nothing. In any case, it is impossible to draw such conclusions from vidos on the Internet.
  • credo
    credo 14 October 2020 18: 30 New
    -11
    Quote: Silvestr
    I honestly thought pampering. Looking at Karabakh I understand that this is a problem and this is serious.

    Do you accidentally look at Karabakh through TV and what do you see there?
    Armenians report about their successes, Azerbaijanis about theirs. Full parity and radical change are not visible, despite the fact that the Azerbaijanis seem to dominate the sky, while the Armenians do not.
    1. New Year day
      New Year day 14 October 2020 18: 34 New
      20
      Quote: credo
      Armenians report their successes, Azerbaijanis - about theirs.

      With PR, let them compete until they turn blue. The picture is impressive: a tank-bang crawls and is not there. And the soldiers are running around and cannot do anything.
      Then the cost! One Turk takes 4 missiles, theoretically it is 4 tanks. How much do they cost and how much is this
      "kite"?
      1. credo
        credo 14 October 2020 18: 41 New
        -14
        Quote: Silvestr
        Quote: credo
        Armenians report their successes, Azerbaijanis - about theirs.

        With PR, let them compete until they turn blue. The picture is impressive: a tank-bang crawls and is not there. And the soldiers are running around and cannot do anything.
        Then the cost! One Turk takes 4 missiles, theoretically it is 4 tanks. How much do they cost and how much is this
        "kite"?

        So you PR and watch. Where are you in the picture you see the identification marks and chevrons of equipment and soldiers. Nowhere. And you do not see the date of this action, and you do not know the place of this action.
        So what is the conversation about, if it is not known who and where filmed it.
        1. Oquzyurd
          Oquzyurd 14 October 2020 22: 48 New
          -3
          How you got to this title is a mystery. what
        2. Grits
          Grits 16 October 2020 06: 26 New
          0
          Quote: credo
          Where are you in the picture you see the identification marks and chevrons of equipment and soldiers. Nowhere. You don’t see the date of this action, and you don’t know the place of this action.
          So what is the conversation about, if it is not known who and where filmed it.

          Duc, an Azeri, it seems, is easier and cheaper to overwhelm an Armenian tank and film it than to prepare the scenery and shoot the performances.
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 14 October 2020 18: 45 New
        -6
        Quote: Silvestr
        With PR, let them compete until they turn blue. The picture is impressive: a tank-bang crawls and is not there. And the soldiers are running around and cannot do anything.

        In 16 AD, Armenian soldiers fled from kamikaze drones.
        And here they were assigned to VO the wunderwaffe. But fashion is fickle.

        Initially, Turkey used its UAVs in Syria and Libya. Then, for some reason ( laughing ) Azerbaijan has focused on these Turkish drones and much cheaper aircraft ammunition with LGSN.
        And immediately new screams about the wunderwaffe. Although it was a definite step backward.

        In a few years, Azerbaijan will use the RUK worked out by the Americans in Mosul from a bundle of reconnaissance UAVs and tactics. missiles.
        And the local "experts" will appoint such a new superweapon. laughing laughing laughing

        "Fashion is one of the ways to bring joy to little people for big money."
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 14 October 2020 19: 05 New
          +3
          Quote: Spade
          Initially, Turkey used its UAVs in Syria and Libya. Then for some reason () Azerbaijan focused on these Turkish drones and much cheaper aircraft ammunition with LGSN.
          And immediately new screams about the wunderwaffe. Although it was a definite step backward.

          I completely agree with you here, but the thing is really effective. Not in the last place, it puts a lot of pressure on the morale of the soldiers. Up to the point of being afraid to use technology.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 14 October 2020 19: 13 New
            +5
            Quote: Odyssey
            but the thing is really effective

            The use of UAS with illumination by drones of the "Orbiter" type is no less effective.
            Not to mention conventional shells and UAVs, which are not only effective, but also cheap.

            Quote: Odyssey
            Last but not least, it puts a lot of pressure on the morale of the soldiers. Up to the point of being afraid to use technology.

            The problem is with the Armenians. They did not draw any conclusions either after 16 years or after the summer aggravation.
            Hence the problem.
            1. VO3A
              VO3A 14 October 2020 20: 26 New
              0
              The problem is with the Armenians.

              What problems do we have in this direction? Have we made at least some conclusions in 20 years? ... We have a base there, and that's it ...
      3. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 18: 48 New
        -4
        Quote: Silvestr
        how much is this
        "kite"?

        Estimated up to $ 4 million for the drone itself, without control centers. Somewhere 2-3 million for their army, for export in the region of 4 million.
      4. VO3A
        VO3A 14 October 2020 20: 09 New
        -1
        Ukraine bought 6 UAVs with 2 control stations and ammunition, other logistics - for $ 69 million
        https://topwar.ru/160634-tureckie-bespilotniki-bayraktar-tb2-v-ukrainskoj-armii.html
  • alpamys
    alpamys 14 October 2020 20: 28 New
    0
    Quote: Silvestr
    I honestly thought pampering. Looking at Karabakh I understand that this is a problem and this is serious.

    And this is all from the fact that from all Russian irons and their screens broadcasts about "not having an analogue" s300 / 400 complexes, shells and other iron shnyaga, but it turned out that the Soviet / Russian air defense complexes cannot even defend themselves.
    everything is as usual, smart to learn from someone else's mistake, and a fool on their own.
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 15 October 2020 09: 04 New
      0
      Quote: alpamys
      but it turned out that the Soviet / Russian air defense systems could not even defend themselves.

      Who told you that? A simple example is the Khmeimim base in Syria! Echeloned air defense Soviet / Russian design, with normally trained personnel. hi In fact, there is no non-penetrable air defense, just the price of a breakthrough is different, it may be acceptable, or it may not.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 October 2020 11: 41 New
      0
      Quote: alpamys
      And this is all from the fact that from all Russian irons and their screens broadcasts about "not having an analogue" s300 / 400 complexes, shells and other iron shnyaga, but it turned out that the Soviet / Russian air defense complexes cannot even defend themselves.

      This is because the complexes need brains in cabins and headquarters. Able to create a system in which various complexes cover each other, covering weak points.
      And if you pull out an uncovered S-300 into the range of drones, then it won't be like that. Or if you try to work in this area with single "shells".
  • lucul
    lucul 14 October 2020 20: 45 New
    -10
    I honestly thought pampering. Looking at Karabakh I understand that this is a problem and this is serious.

    You understand, UAVs basically appeared not from a good life, but as a result of the lack, in the troops, of their full-fledged MLRS and short-range and medium-range missiles.
    Those countries that do not have such problems (Russia / USA), UAVs are considered mainly as a target designation system and a replacement for pilot aircraft.
    That Russia and the United States have no problems with the delivery of 150 kg of "cargo" (like Bayraktar) at a distance of 1 km to 11 km.
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 14 October 2020 21: 41 New
      +7
      Do you propose to shoot medium-range missiles at single tanks?
      You don’t understand the difference between "shipping cargo" of 150 kg. in general and high-precision guided weapons?
      Don't you understand that the insignificant EPR of fiberglass Bayraktar and low speed make the search for its radar station, especially on rough terrain, an extremely difficult task?
      Don't you understand that Bayraktar's AI means allow him to perform a significant part of the flight in radio silence, which reduces the interception capabilities of electronic warfare equipment?
      Don't you understand that the enormous duration of Bayraktar's flight was made in order to suddenly deliver strikes from areas of covert patrolling?
      What do you understand then?
      By the way, the armies of Azerbaijan and Armenia have MLRS in significant numbers and are actively using them. Including the Tornado and its analogues.
      Attempts to destroy the airbase from which the Bayraktars flew by Dots failed. For takeoff, Bayraktar needs 150 meters of asphalt
      1. The eye of the crying
        The eye of the crying 14 October 2020 22: 56 New
        -3
        Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
        Don't you understand that the insignificant EPR of fiberglass Bayraktar and low speed make the search for its radar station, especially on rough terrain, an extremely difficult task?


        It is not clear what the rough terrain has to do with it, but the low speed definitely makes Bayraktar easier to find. Is there any official data about the EPR of Bayraktar?
        1. Yaik Cossack
          Yaik Cossack 14 October 2020 23: 52 New
          -1
          It is great that you understand the irrelevance of most of the theses you have expressed)))
          Of course, I have no "official data" on the EPR of Bayraktar. Moreover, I hope that you, as an intelligent person, understand that such data, even in manufacturers' advertising brochures, are also far from reality.
          Real data can only be obtained during testing, or in a combat situation.
          Its shape is clearly designed to reduce radio signature. Purely speculative, the frontal EPR of Bayraktar can be in the centimeter range from 0,1 to 0,01 square meters, which is very small.
          The military air defense was created to combat other targets - aviation and helicopters.
          Sorry to tell you about the basics, but folds of rough terrain and mountains break (reduce) the radar field and, accordingly, the detection of air targets.
          1. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 15 October 2020 00: 36 New
            -3
            Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
            It is great that you understand the irrelevance of most of the theses you have expressed)))


            It's too bad that you confused me with another person.

            Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
            Of course, I have no "official data" on the EPR of Bayraktar.


            I thought so.

            Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
            Purely speculative, the frontal EPR of Bayraktar can be in the centimeter range from 0,1 to 0,01 square meters, which is very small.


            Evaluation of EPR by eye, how touching.

            Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
            Sorry to tell you about the basics, but folds of rough terrain and mountains break (reduce) the radar field and, accordingly, the detection of air targets.


            Nobody puts radar in the folds of the terrain. Because it's ... you get the idea.

            By the way, you didn't answer about speed. Why would a low speed make Bayraktar more difficult to find?
            1. Yaik Cossack
              Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 00: 59 New
              -1
              Yes, I answered lucul.
              For your questions.
              Small ZPR is not "touching", but bad for air defense. The ZPR of Bayraktar is at least an order of magnitude less than the ZPR of a helicopter or an aircraft, which were considered the main target for the Soviet divisional-level Os and Tori complexes.
              The radar is not placed in the folds of the terrain. Uh-huh, who are you arguing with? They bet directly on the highest peaks, or what, in your opinion? Just for anti-radar equipment.
              Open the textbook Fundamentals of building radar stations for radio engineering troops (unclassified) and study the interfering reflections, the detection zone restrictions in the high-altitude sections and the lower edge of the detection zone of the medium and low-altitude radars of ONTSU and BR.
              1. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 15 October 2020 01: 02 New
                -4
                Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                Small ZPR is not "touching", but bad for air defense


                I seem to have written clearly ... it is not the EPR that is touching, whether it is small or large, but your organoleptic method for assessing the EPR.

                Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                They bet directly on the highest peaks, or what, in your opinion?


                And they also raise the antennas higher.

                So what about low speed - why is it difficult to detect?
                1. Yaik Cossack
                  Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 02: 01 New
                  0
                  In vain you start to grimace instead of a serious conversation. Your "organoleptic" hit is about nothing. I patiently explain - in open data, no one indicates EPR. My estimate is an order of magnitude estimate. Those who understand the technical level of modern Soviet-Russian military air defense are enough for those.
                  About higher antennas - so what? Can you compare the elevation of a low-altitude detector compared to a mountainous area with at least 300-400 meters of elevation difference? And to correlate the possibility of the guidance and jump of Bayraktar due to the neighboring ridge?
                  1. The eye of the crying
                    The eye of the crying 15 October 2020 02: 31 New
                    -3
                    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                    My estimate is an order of magnitude estimate.


                    You give two ratings, which differ by an order of magnitude, based simply on the appearance of the aircraft. That's funny.

                    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                    See algorithms for the selection of interfering signals. The faster an aerial target moves, the easier it is to identify it and detach from interference.


                    That is, "the low speed makes the search for its radar an extremely difficult task" means "its low speed makes it extremely difficult to distinguish it from the background of interference." Okay, maybe for the radars in use.

                    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                    About higher antennas - so what?


                    That no one is hiding the radar in the folds of the terrain.

                    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                    the jump of Bayraktar because of the neighboring ridge?


                    The low speed just makes it easier to detect in this case. The aircraft has been in the field of view for more time. But in general about the "jump" - a strange statement. Most likely, the Bayraktars simply stay above the defeat limit with the existing air defense systems.
                    1. Yaik Cossack
                      Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 02: 46 New
                      -1
                      You criticize my assessments - not knowing the approximate ranges for different purposes (cruise missile, helicopter, etc.), deliberately not noticing my reservations and, in this case, not giving your alternative data. This is called primitive demagoguery of network trolls. Continue to grimace about the radar on the peaks and the continuous radar field, but not with me, but with the local schoolboy.
                    2. The eye of the crying
                      The eye of the crying 15 October 2020 02: 52 New
                      -3
                      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                      You criticize my grades


                      Once again - no, I am not criticizing your assessments. I am criticizing the very fact that you give them.

                      Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
                      Keep grimacing about the radar on the summits and the solid radar field


                      There is no need to attribute to me what I did not say.
            2. Yaik Cossack
              Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 01: 13 New
              -1
              Yes, about low speed. See algorithms for the selection of interfering signals. The faster an aerial target moves, the easier it is to identify it and detach from interference.
              At the same time, do not forget that the Turks from their side of the border use Boeing 737 MESA for AWACS and control, which have an excellent modern radar with AFAR and an all-round view of 400 km.
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 01: 30 New
                -4
                As a radio engineer by education, blood flows from his eyes when I read here about electronic warfare and radar. The characteristics of the terrain do not affect anything, the main mast is higher, you can drown out the satellite and UAV signal from the ground from several hundred kilometers, the UAV control center is detected by radio channel and calculated at times, etc., etc.
                1. Yaik Cossack
                  Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 01: 54 New
                  -1
                  Sorry, is this sarcasm or are you serious? Seriously, look at what I write.
                  1. OgnennyiKotik
                    OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 01: 56 New
                    -3
                    Naturally sarcasm. I completely agree with you.
                2. The eye of the crying
                  The eye of the crying 15 October 2020 02: 32 New
                  -3
                  Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                  The characteristics of the terrain do not affect anything, the main mast is higher


                  Tell us how the underlying surface affects the search for high-altitude targets smile
    2. lucul
      lucul 14 October 2020 23: 31 New
      -8
      Do you propose to shoot medium-range missiles at single tanks?
      You don’t understand the difference between "shipping cargo" of 150 kg. in general and high-precision guided weapons?
      Don't you understand that the insignificant EPR of fiberglass Bayraktar and low speed make the search for its radar station, especially on rough terrain, an extremely difficult task?
      Don't you understand that Bayraktar's AI means allow him to perform a significant part of the flight in radio silence, which reduces the interception capabilities of electronic warfare equipment?
      Don't you understand that the enormous duration of Bayraktar's flight was made in order to suddenly deliver strikes from areas of covert patrolling?
      What do you understand then?

      Whinnying like a horse)))
      Do you distinguish between tactics and strategy?
      1. Yaik Cossack
        Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 01: 02 New
        -1
        Everything is clear, I no longer have questions about horses)))
        Not only can you not answer my questions, you do not understand them from the word at all. And about the saturation of both armies MLRS, and about the "delivery" of 150 kg.
        I do not discuss with sofa strategists.
        1. lucul
          lucul 15 October 2020 08: 33 New
          -6
          Not only can you not answer my questions, you do not understand them from the word at all. And about the saturation of both armies MLRS, and about the "delivery" of 150 kg.
          I do not discuss with sofa strategists.

          It can be seen by a professional ...
          Especially in the light of single target hunting in official warfare. Who will hunt for a single tank, when the priority is the target - air defense, ammunition depots, and fuel and lubricants, headquarters and key infrastructure.
          As I understand it, you have a poor idea of ​​what Iskander is capable of, and even a simple MLRS firing at 300 km.
    3. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 23: 41 New
      -1
      No, they don't understand. For them, the radar works like a mini-map in Generals - Zero Hour. As soon as something flying has entered the radius of the radar, the type and model of this object is immediately clear. It remains only to press the button and the missiles shoot him down.
  • Hermit21
    Hermit21 15 October 2020 13: 40 New
    0
    For those who did not bother with normal air defense and electronic warfare. As soon as all this drives up, especially with the right guys at the consoles, all the successes of the drones disappear somewhere.
  • Staricello
    Staricello 15 October 2020 18: 15 New
    0
    Seriously, if you don't be prepared for such technical innovations.
    Although I can reasonably assume that three links of La-7 fighters are quite capable of crumbling such aircraft into a small vinaigrette. And that's all.
  • iouris
    iouris 15 October 2020 22: 33 New
    0
    Quote: Silvestr
    Looking at Karabakh I understand that this is a problem

    They will start soon in Donbass. It's time to make a choice. It is difficult, but necessary. Otherwise they will strangle you.
  • Selevc
    Selevc 19 October 2020 15: 56 New
    0
    Quote: Silvestr
    I honestly thought pampering. Looking at Karabakh I understand that this is a problem and this is serious.

    This is such a mockery ??? Do you think so 30 years old ??? UAVs have been successfully used since the days of "Desert Storm" and on the VO there are still full quotes like "new methods of war in the air", "breakthrough of Turkish technologies" ... People wake up - in the courtyard of 2020, UAVs have been used for about 30 years all over the world in different conflicts !!!

    Here are some who say that UAVs are expensive - but I want to object with 2 answers at once:
    1) What do you mean expensive? - how much does it cost to show the effectiveness of your weapon around the world ??? How much is the fact that people will see that your weapon is winning and tomorrow they will come to you with orders ???
    2) Yes, the development and mastering of UAV technologies is millions of dollars - sorry, but what was initially cheap in the history of aviation ??? All the first projects are expensive, but then they become cheaper and the laws of the development of everything are unified ...

    I read the news about Russian UAV development and this thought does not leave me all the time. Here I compare the achievements of foreign and Russian in this area, and I have the impression that in Russia about 15-20 years ago, someone in the higher echelons gave up on this and thought that the UAV was childish and let everything go to chance... And beyond the hill, on the contrary - they always understood that this was the future !!!
    1. New Year day
      New Year day 19 October 2020 18: 55 New
      -1
      Quote: Selevc
      in the courtyard of 2020, UAVs have been used for about 30 years around the world in various conflicts !!!

      и
      Quote: Selevc
      in Russia, about 15-20 years ago, someone in the higher echelons gave up and thought that the UAV was childish and let everything go by itself.

      If they think so, SPECIES, then what do you want from us? They are paid money for this thought and considerable
  • Alexey from Perm
    Alexey from Perm 20 October 2020 02: 04 New
    0
    Still, it would be understood by those who need to understand this by duty)))
  • Livonetc
    Livonetc 14 October 2020 18: 08 New
    10
    This year, this device deserves a prize.
    Worked off the test.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 14 October 2020 18: 12 New
    +7
    This is a real weapon, and if the enemy does not have the proper means of counteraction, it can become a problem.
    So the goal, for a normal air defense, is not difficult, but spending expensive missiles on this is not rational.
    Countermeasures are known, one must have them and be able to effectively apply them.
    1. VO3A
      VO3A 14 October 2020 20: 14 New
      +1
      Countermeasures are known, one must have them and be able to effectively apply them.

      Outline ...
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 14 October 2020 22: 22 New
        -1
        Listen to Khodorenok, visiting Satanovsky, "The Hour of the Militarist" on VestiFM ... a specialist, everything on the shelves, in even rows, sorted out and explained. I can't add more from the sofa.
        1. VO3A
          VO3A 15 October 2020 00: 19 New
          -1
          This is a dilettante's chatter about nothing ... An erudite person thinks unsystematically ... about a systematic approach ...
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 15 October 2020 00: 59 New
            +3
            Did you yourself understand what you wrote?
            Try to systematically explain to a diverse audience what and how it flies, and if it doesn't, then why.
            Not a lecture at the institute, it should be easier to hear and understand.
            1. VO3A
              VO3A 15 October 2020 02: 58 New
              -4
              He even does not represent the cost of weapons ... There is nothing there except a systematic approach and the need to sharpen attention. He talks about what needs to be done theoretically, but doesn't know how to do it ... There is no specifics ...
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 15 October 2020 06: 31 New
                0
                Hussars do not think about the price .... !!!
                Even about the cost ... the person SHOWED the problem, indicated the approximate / or exact direction of solving the problem, and what else is needed?
                Show erudition and consistency, tell me that what he said was not true in principle, not feasible and UNJUSHED AT THE COST ???
                I will not give any ratings, it’s just interesting who for what ...
          2. vadsonen
            vadsonen 15 October 2020 19: 32 New
            0
            This is dilettante chatter about nothing

            From biogarafy Khodarenka:
            - Commander of the S-75 anti-aircraft missile battalion
            - senior officer of the headquarters of the anti-aircraft missile forces of the air defense
            - Head of group 1 of direction 1 of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff

            Like an amateur?
            1. VO3A
              VO3A 15 October 2020 21: 58 New
              -1
              I hear what and how he says. I analyze his thoughts and statements, assessing the style and manner of presentation ... I have such an impression. This is my opinion, I am not interested in it on this issue ... This is my choice and my decision, and my right to think so! Is it clear?
  • Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 14 October 2020 18: 12 New
    +3
    not a little bird, why can't Armenians bring them down? cruising speed is only 130 km-h
    1. Interlocutor
      Interlocutor 14 October 2020 19: 43 New
      0
      not a little bird, why can't Armenians bring them down? cruising speed is only 130 km-h

      Apparently.
      1 may not have the experience to shoot down.
      2 100 percent there is no decent EW countermeasures against drones. Freestanding cars don't count. Only echeloned defense and nothing else. Israelites (iron dome) as an example.
      A separate tank is caught by a drone for no cover. Well, the Armenians do not have anti-drone protection (do not confuse it with the quality of anti-drone protection). You just can't talk about quality.
  • Strashila
    Strashila 14 October 2020 18: 28 New
    0
    It is necessary to study the experience of application and draw conclusions. To put on the equipment laser radiation sensors and a counter system, such as the Syrian Mirages, so that the upper hemisphere is blocked.
  • OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 18: 30 New
    +6
    The success of the Turks in the development of UAVs is impressive. At the beginning of the century, they did not have anything given to you. By the 20th year, more than 36 drones of various classes. Who fought in 3 wars.

    At the same time, Akinji and Aksungur are approaching the end of the test. These UAVs are fundamentally superior to Bayraktar and Anka.
    1. New Year day
      New Year day 14 October 2020 18: 38 New
      +4
      Quote: OgnennyiKotik
      The success of the Turks in the development of UAVs is impressive.

      Initially, they bought something from Israel, then their own went. There was an understanding of the process
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 18: 40 New
        -1
        And they bought from the USA, and production is 100% not localized. But this does not matter much, the main thing is the result. As a result, UAVs are massively in their army, they are successfully fighting, they are exported.
        1. New Year day
          New Year day 14 October 2020 18: 42 New
          +3
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          As a result, UAVs are massively in their army, they are successfully fighting, they are exported.

          That's the answer, no matter what and where they make it. It is important that it flies and fights. Successfully
    2. maktub
      maktub 14 October 2020 18: 39 New
      -2
      More about Aksungur
    3. Ali
      Ali 14 October 2020 19: 08 New
      -2
      Quote: OgnennyiKotik

      The success of the Turks in the development of UAVs is impressive. At the beginning of the century, they did not have anything given to you. By the 20th year, more than 36 drones of various classes. Who fought in 3 wars.
      At the same time, Akinji and Aksungur are approaching the end of the test. These UAVs are fundamentally superior to Bayraktar and Anka.

      OgnennyiKotik.
      Considering that in Armenia and NKR sinceAll poorly organized air defense и the outdated Soviet Osa systems have a low target destruction height - H = 5 km (Osa-AK, Osa-AKM), H = 7 km (Osa-1T). Therefore, the praises about the UAV have no good reason.
      The use of "Pantsir-S2", "Pantsir-SM", "Buk-M3" will give completely opposite results ...
      1. Yaik Cossack
        Yaik Cossack 14 October 2020 21: 46 New
        +6
        So far, the experience of the Idlib operation in Syria and the strikes of the Israelis have shown directly opposite results. The carapaces were far less effective than anticipated. Even with ihtamnets
        1. Ali
          Ali 14 October 2020 22: 20 New
          -2
          Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
          So far, the experience of the Idlib operation in Syria and the strikes of the Israelis have shown directly opposite results. The carapaces were far less effective than anticipated. Even with ihtamnets

          Yaitsky Cossack (Nowhere Man)! Read carefully what I have written:
          Application "ZRK Pantsir-S2", "Pantsir-SM", "Buk-M3" will give completely opposite results ...

          And where did I write about "Shell-C1" And also do not confuse Pantsir-C1, which was acquired by the United Arab Emirates, and Pantsir-S2, which is in service with Russia! The difference is huge and not only ...
          1. Yaik Cossack
            Yaik Cossack 14 October 2020 22: 59 New
            +2
            Do you have evidence that Armor of new modifications was not transferred to Syria from the Russian Federation instead of the destroyed ones? Indeed, in some videos there are destroyed Shells at the Kamaz base, and these are clearly not Emirati ones. If there is, I will listen with pleasure. If not, then your "refutation" is not valid
      2. rocket757
        rocket757 15 October 2020 06: 37 New
        +1
        Quote: Ali
        The use of "Pantsir-S2", "Pantsir-SM", "Buk-M3" will give completely opposite results ...

        Nothing will help a bad "dancer" to become a soloist!
        However, the conversation really could have turned out differently, but this is what I would not think about.
        It has been written a hundred times that a lonely "Shell" on a hillock can drive a bunch of Drones, jumping out from behind other hillocks from different sides !!!
  • Operator
    Operator 14 October 2020 18: 36 New
    +9
    It's a shame for air defense not to have simple means to shoot down a 12-meter plastic crap weighing 650, flying at a speed of 220 km / h and an altitude of 5500 km.
    1. Dikson
      Dikson 14 October 2020 19: 40 New
      12
      What are you !!! Here you can't talk and write like that ..)) I was spat and pecked for such seditious thoughts .. How so, - our air defense, vaunted to the whole world, does not see the target with the characteristics of the last war .. But we will beat America if that .. - Here is the answer ..)) They are all God's dew here .. and Iskander and Khibiny ..))
      1. Operator
        Operator 14 October 2020 19: 42 New
        -1
        The first question (the unavailability of our air defense) is not directly related to the second (bending over the USA) laughing
    2. kapitan92
      kapitan92 14 October 2020 21: 05 New
      +6
      Quote: Operator
      It's a shame for air defense not to have simple means to shoot down a 12-meter plastic crap weighing 650, flying at a speed of 220 km / h and an altitude of 5500 km.

      What's the shame then? NKR is an unrecognized republic. All weapons systems are from Armenia (according to availability).
      Well, they don't have modern air defense systems! Well no!
      The ceiling of the "bayrak" is up to 8200m, even if it operates in the altitude range of 6500-7000m, no air defense system in the NKR will reach it. MANPADS, Strela 10, OSA akm, TOP m1 max. 6 km. There are no shells and are not expected. Mustache sailed!
      In terms of range, the weapons of the Turkish apparatus "work" at a distance of 8 km. So, how to shoot him down in NKR?
      In fact, they destroy armored vehicles, air defense systems, art. installation. and l / s.
      1. Operator
        Operator 14 October 2020 22: 37 New
        0
        What does Karabakh have to do with it - and we ourselves have enough to shoot down "bairaks", and so as not to be left without trousers (due to the cost of missiles exceeding the cost of "bairaks") and with great multichannel (otherwise we will love air defense systems)?
        1. kapitan92
          kapitan92 14 October 2020 22: 57 New
          +1
          Quote: Operator
          What does Karabakh have to do with it - and we ourselves have enough to shoot down "bairaks",

          TOP M2 damage height 10 km, PantsirS1 from 8-16 km (depending on the type of missile), BUK M1-M2 from 18-25 km.
          And the BUK in this case acts as a "heavyweight" for a UAV of this type.


          Quote: Operator
          and so as not to be left without trousers (due to the cost of missiles exceeding the cost of "bairaks")

          Ukrainian side all the same 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 delivery will include six Bayraktar TB2 UAVs, two ground control stations and 200 guided missiles (apparently, Roketsan MAM-L). The price also includes a set of spare parts, service support and training of personnel.

          Firstly, "bairaki" is not a cheap thing.
          Secondly, the means of combat that cover are even more expensive, not to mention the lives of l / s
          So, we will not be left without pants. Better overdoing than underdoing!
          1. Operator
            Operator 14 October 2020 23: 08 New
            -5
            Who has more channeling - Thor, Pantsir, Buk, or does Bayrak have a shock version with small-sized gliding ammunition?

            69 million dollars is not only 6 "bairaks", but also 2 control stations and 200 planning ammunition. In a clash between a bayrak and an air defense system, the cost of one UAV and the much greater cost of one air defense system will be at stake.
            1. kapitan92
              kapitan92 14 October 2020 23: 56 New
              +1
              Quote: Operator
              Who has more channeling - Thor, Pantsir, Buk, or does Bayrak have a shock version with small-sized gliding ammunition?

              What are you talking about???
              Now you got into an argument! You can give at least one number as an argument in defense of your statements. Let's get away from idle chatter!
              so as not to be left without trousers (due to the cost of missiles exceeding the cost of "bairaks")

              You, first, find out the cost of the UAV and the Pantsir rocket.
              For example, only intelligence UAV Orbiter 2M (Israel), which the military of the Caspian state regularly lose in Karabakh, costs at least 600 thousand dollars per unit. In 2019, Azerbaijan had at least 40 such vehicles in service, and taking into account the intense fighting and a dozen lost drones, the UAV fleet could be even larger - about 60 vehicles. If you count the costs, then only for monitoring systems for several years Azerbaijan spent $ 36 million and in the near future, judging by the losses of the UAV over the disputed territories, he will spend a lot more.
              The cost of one "bayrak" is about 5 million dollars.
              According to well-known contracts, the price of one Pantsir-C1 air defense missile defense system for export supplies is from 13,15 to 14,67 million US dollars.
              Here is the cost of a shot, (57e6E rocket) is problematic to find, one target hitting 0,7-0.95.
              The "cost" of a shell shot at an aircraft, helicopter or cruise missile is much less than the cost of an attacking weapon. And this is one of the unique advantages. The United States has no such counterpart. "

              American Edition National Interest (NI)
              Let me remind you that the cost of the Turkish "anka c" is about 30 million dollars. hi
              1. Operator
                Operator 15 October 2020 00: 53 New
                -5
                Those. "Armor" is worth three "Bayraks". In the event of a Bayrak salvo launch of ten small gliding ammunition, the Pantsir will be guaranteed to whine, and its anti-aircraft missiles will not reach the Barak launch line.

                "Thor" will undoubtedly shoot down the n-th number (in terms of the number of channels) of "Bayraks" with a salvo of its missiles even before the UAV reaches the line of launching gliding ammunition. But how many expensive "Thors" do we have?

                In addition, the "Thor" has an Achilles' heel - during the operation of the radar, its location is once revealed by RTR aircraft beyond the range of anti-aircraft missiles. After that, a cloud of penny loitering ammunition with more guidance channels will fly from the enemy's side and send the Thor to Valhalla.

                So the cards of the modern army air defense of the Russian Federation are bits.
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 01: 03 New
                  -3
                  Quote: Operator
                  Those. "Shell" is worth three "Bayraks".

                  Bayraktar TB2 costs around 4 million dollars (Ukraine is not a sin to sell for 5) this is an export price, for their army the Turks estimated the cost of Bayraktar at 2-3 million dollars. This is for the drone itself.
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 15 October 2020 01: 18 New
                    -5
                    Turks and Israelis - two boots of a pair: instead of riveting in thousandths of small reconnaissance UAVs of a penny cost (for laser guidance of any kind of guided munitions), with maniacal persistence they produce hundreds of large shock UAVs of extremely expensive cost laughing
                  2. kapitan92
                    kapitan92 15 October 2020 10: 50 New
                    -2
                    Quote: OgnennyiKotik

                    Bayraktar TB2 costs around 4 million dollars (Ukraine is not a sin to sell for 5) this is an export price, for their army the Turks estimated the cost of Bayraktar at 2-3 million dollars. This is for the drone itself.

                    Done right. 13-14 million for the Armor is also an export price. For the RF Armed Forces, the price is completely different. hi
                2. kapitan92
                  kapitan92 15 October 2020 10: 48 New
                  -3
                  Quote: Operator
                  So the cards of the modern army air defense of the Russian Federation are bits.

                  They wrote nonsense.
                  Raise your hands up the hill. The main thing is not to lose your balance and not fall off the couch. hi
  • For Courage
    For Courage 14 October 2020 18: 37 New
    +2
    Here's how to locate the UAV control center a couple of times to start and cover it so that the war does not seem like a computer shooter. Missiles aim at radars - is it really more difficult here?
    1. Interlocutor
      Interlocutor 14 October 2020 19: 44 New
      +4
      Here's how to locate the UAV control center a couple of times to start and cover it so that the war does not seem like a computer shooter. Missiles aim at radars - is it really more difficult here?

      The Armenians do not have such means.
    2. Avior
      Avior 14 October 2020 21: 38 New
      +3
      of course harder
      the radiation power of the radar is much higher, the duration of the work is also.
      only individual commands are transmitted to the drone, it is largely autonomous.
      and the radar works continuously.
  • karpusha
    karpusha 14 October 2020 18: 46 New
    +7
    You just need to develop the country, education, science, production - then the production of modern weapons systems will be on the shoulder. And then they got used to parasitizing on the developments of the times of the USSR.
    1. moscowp
      moscowp 14 October 2020 20: 23 New
      -3
      Indeed, everything turns out to be very simple, how has no one thought of it before ?! laughing
  • Odysseus
    Odysseus 14 October 2020 19: 00 New
    0
    Ooooh, the main "star" of 2020. The hero is already 3 wars - Syria, Libya (where, by the way, Armor was the enemy) and Karabakh. He drank a lot of blood ...
    And it turned out to be a very effective weapon in those wars that are really going on today.
    But there is no such thing as "super-weapons", you can find counteraction - from massing air defense systems and detection, to "the best air defense is tanks at the enemy airfield"
    We, of course, would not hurt about 100 of them.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 19: 08 New
      0
      The main thing is that this Bayraktar is just a stage in development. The same Turks have Akinji and Aksungur approaching. They already have the capabilities of light turboprop attack aircraft. Payload in the area of ​​a ton, radars, cruise missiles, air-to-air missiles, etc. Announce a jet drone, so far without specifics.
      1. Ali
        Ali 14 October 2020 19: 48 New
        -1
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        The main thing is that this Bayraktar is just a stage in development. The same Turks have Akinji and Aksungur approaching. They already have the capabilities of light turboprop attack aircraft. Payload in the ton area, radars, cruise missiles, air-to-air missiles, etc. A jet drone is being announced, so far without specifics.

        OgnennyiKotik! Akinji and Aksungur have a maximum flight altitude of H = 12,192 km and cannot have an airborne radar comparable in range to the radar of anti-aircraft complexes, in view of the small parameters of the overall mass characteristics of UAVs and weapons ). Therefore, UAVs are in the worst position. We will monitor the development of UAVs and develop new air defense systems in order to stop the threat!
        In Russia developed and is in service with Russia SAM "Pantsir-SM" for the destruction of UAVs and other air targets.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 15 October 2020 01: 31 New
          +3
          But they will be armed with gliding bombs and missiles with a flight range of 200 kilometers or more, they will bring down all air defense without entering its affected zone.
          1. Ali
            Ali 15 October 2020 02: 53 New
            -6
            Quote: Vadim237
            But they will be armed with gliding bombs and missiles with a flight range of 200 kilometers or more, they will bring down all air defense without entering its affected zone.

            Vadim237, before launching a gliding bomb, for example GBU / 39 at a range of 110 km, the carrier must rise to an altitude of 10 km, where the S-400 radar will be detected and then a 40N6 anti-aircraft missile with ARGSN will be launched along it and then it will be destroyed, and gliding bombs are destroyed by SAM systems: Pantsir-2, Pantsir-SM and others with a multi-echeloned air defense system.
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 15 October 2020 14: 33 New
              +1
              "40N6 anti-aircraft missile will be launched" Sorry, these missiles will not be ordered until 2025 a little more than 1000 units - no one will definitely launch them on drones. SAM: "Pantsir-2", Pantsir-SM "They are not in service and it is not known when they will appear in significant quantities.
              1. Ali
                Ali 16 October 2020 15: 09 New
                -3
                Quote: Ali
                Vadim237, before launching a gliding bomb, for example GBU / 39 at a range of 110 km, the carrier must rise to a height of 10 km, where the S-400 radar will be found and then a 40N6 anti-aircraft missile with ARGSN will be launched along it and then it will be destroyed, and gliding bombs SAMs are destroyed: "Pantsir-2", Pantsir-SM "and others with a multi-echeloned air defense system.

                Quote: Vadim237
                "40N6 anti-aircraft missile will be launched" Sorry, these missiles will not be ordered until 2025, slightly more than 1000 units ordered - no one will definitely let them into drones.

                Vadim237. "I tell you about Thomas, and you tell me about Erema" And here the UAV, if the conversation about carriers planning bombs ?! "Pantsir-SM" was shown at the Parade in honor of the Great Victory on May 09, 2020 and is in service with Russia, "Pantsir-C2" has long been in service with Russia!
                You are completely wrong!
      2. Oquzyurd
        Oquzyurd 14 October 2020 23: 03 New
        0
        The first flight of the jet drone is expected in Turkey by the end of this year.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 23: 13 New
          -3
          No more details?
          1. Oquzyurd
            Oquzyurd 14 October 2020 23: 27 New
            -1
            Only statements from the minister in charge of the industry (forgot his name) Serious man, never rushed with words.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 23: 48 New
              -2
              It seems like recently a similar bomb was tested in Turkey, can you recall the name?
              1. Oquzyurd
                Oquzyurd 14 October 2020 23: 55 New
                -1
                Halberd
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyrmBwajOJg
              2. Oquzyurd
                Oquzyurd 14 October 2020 23: 58 New
                -1
                This is also the new TRLG 230. Interaction with UAVs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfNuBYzJ8s0
              3. Oquzyurd
                Oquzyurd 15 October 2020 00: 01 New
                -1
                And this is already with 12 pcs MAM-L Aksungur bombs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4aRdREbq7A&t=90s
              4. Oquzyurd
                Oquzyurd 15 October 2020 00: 03 New
                -2
                Over the past 4-5 years, the Turkish military-industrial complex has accelerated so that I have no time to follow them)
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 00: 07 New
                  -2
                  Here, I found, asked about him. For new UAVs, something is necessary. And so, yes, they were overclocked, some of the main newsmakers.
                  1. Oquzyurd
                    Oquzyurd 15 October 2020 00: 19 New
                    -2
                    Yes, I confused the miniature bomb with the Teber) Although, they are all just right for the UAV. It will be very interesting to see the test of the air-to-air missile near the UAV Akinci.
                    1. OgnennyiKotik
                      OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 00: 24 New
                      -4
                      What I threw off what is called? He is ideal against air defense systems. In fact, fighters, С350 / 400, BUK will be able to fight it.
                      Tiber is already against other ground vehicles.
                      1. Oquzyurd
                        Oquzyurd 15 October 2020 00: 34 New
                        0
                        The platform for the bomb under the wings is called the Salan, and the boba itself is called the Minyatur Bomba, without any fancy. weight 145 kg, maximum range up to 100 km. 2 options, high-explosive and concrete-breaking (1 m) On tests from a distance of 65 km, hit the target, broke through a bunker with a thickness of 1 m concrete
                      2. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 00: 38 New
                        -2
                        Thanks for the information! hi Turkish videos rarely have English subtitles and without knowledge of Turkish it is difficult to understand.
                      3. Oquzyurd
                        Oquzyurd 15 October 2020 00: 39 New
                        +1
                        Yes, in this regard, I have no problems) If necessary, please contact me, I will translate any video.
  • Oquzyurd
    Oquzyurd 14 October 2020 23: 22 New
    0
    In Turkey, the Lasso (Kement) project has been successfully completed. 26.06.2019/XNUMX/XNUMX


    Thanks to the Lasso project, which was initiated with the aim of making a significant contribution to the operational capabilities and at the same time building the infrastructure of the National Tactical Data Link, it supports network-supported operations, allows the exchange of complex sets of information between elements such as aircraft, ammunition and mission systems on the battlefield in real time, and exchange critical data. National communication system operating in the structure

    The project has developed 5 types of terminals for combat air platforms, relay platforms "" "" ATTENTION "" "" --- for unmanned aerial vehicles, helicopters, etc. And ground platforms and ammunition. Acceptance tests were also successfully completed, consisting of laboratory, ground, air-ground and air-air tests.

    Air-to-ground and air-to-air tests have confirmed that ammunition-integrated lasso terminals and two separate aerial platforms are successfully communicating messages and images over an established network at distances exceeding design requirements.

    Can be used on many platforms
    A communications system, ready for use for the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK), has been created with lasso terminals both as a network-enabled data link (NEW-Network Enabled Weapon capability) and as a tactical data link.

    These products, which will become an essential element of network operations with national waveform and cryptography, especially for the movement of ammunition on the network, can be used in many applications and platforms that require high-speed transmission of tactical data from electronic warfare equipment over long distances.

    Lasso Project, a unique and nationally developed product, increasing the ability to meet the needs of these bonds, on the one hand, ammunition, and on the other hand, Turkey will take its place among the few connected countries in the world.
    ................................................... ................................................... .....................................
    If there are specialists here, they can explain to the local "sofa", what this project means.
    1. Petro_tut
      Petro_tut 15 October 2020 18: 10 New
      0
      If there are specialists here, they can explain the local "couch"

      In a nutshell, "headache" (Full ass)
      If this is really implemented at least 70 percent
  • Alien From
    Alien From 14 October 2020 19: 00 New
    +3
    Drones are a serious force. When used correctly, it is a headache for air defense.
    1. Interlocutor
      Interlocutor 14 October 2020 19: 48 New
      -7
      Drones are a serious force. When used correctly, it is a headache for air defense.

      For small countries, yes.
      Position it on us and the conclusion suggests itself. An attacking drone arrives at us, in response, according to the country's strategy, Iskander (many Iskander) fly into the country of the offender. Then the whole concept starts working differently. And the concept of the need for drones immediately begins to diminish. But to perform special tasks, they are definitely needed.
      1. Dikson
        Dikson 14 October 2020 20: 28 New
        14
        And how many Iskander flies to Syria? ))) In response to drones? The strategy of the country .. tank wedges and carpet bombing .. psychic attacks by the spetsnaz company without the support of aviation and artillery .. the heroism of loners and the exchange of generals for a dozen bearded barmaley ..- that's the whole strategy of our country ..
        1. Interlocutor
          Interlocutor 14 October 2020 20: 32 New
          -3
          And how many Iskander flies to Syria? ))) In response to drones?

          This is NOT our land. You are again confusing (or replacing) the principle of using serious weapons.
          THERE is another task. And we don't know the real answer to these drone attacks. Well don't tell us about it. So just ..... rumors ...
          1. Dikson
            Dikson 15 October 2020 02: 45 New
            +1
            The interlocutor ... rumors have a place to be, of course .. but here's a strange video about the Iskander wunderwaves so beloved here .. appeared .. And we are talking about the easy and unconstrained destruction of Armenian complexes .. with the help of UAVs ..)) Of course , again inept warriors are to blame .. (who studied in our higher military institutions and according to our textbooks for sure ..) Where did you, furious blind patriots, get the confidence that our missilemen are much more literate? Why are they quietly silent about the incident in the Caucasus exercises? When did the S-400 missile fly nowhere? If you are at least three times smart, you cannot fight against something that you cannot see stupidly ..) victory report from Syria yesterday - 4 planes destroyed 7 targets. Six pilots, airfield staff, technicians and guards ... combat mission completed. Two UAVs with four rockets on a suspension could cope in the same way .. The principle of using serious weapons .. Once again, Armenia wanted to use serious weapons .. And what came of it? An instructive story .. About the deployment of mobile complexes "in an open field" ... And before that there were instructive stories about complexes in equipped positions .. But we understand that inept fighters are to blame for everything .. Here are ours - skillful ones. And the rest are not. On one day of my service in the air defense forces, a valiant battalion of one of the brigades slept on RC135 for 45 minutes .. just lost it .. then they found it, of course .. they didn't even raise aviation .. it was a long time ago .. And during this time you can do a lot of things in modern war ..
            1. Interlocutor
              Interlocutor 15 October 2020 09: 57 New
              -1
              Well, of course, the inept warriors are again to blame .. (who studied in our higher military schools and according to our textbooks for sure ..) Where did you, furious blind patriots, get the confidence that our missile men are much more literate?


              There are two striking and clearly marked examples in front of you.
              Our base is in Syria, which is under attack and is being fought back. Where are the errors of the air defense system being corrected (in comparison with the beginning of the attacks and now. And attacks on targets in Armenia.
              I am aware that those UAVs (in Syria) may not have been controlled or controlled through weak channels. There was no opposition to electronic warfare and the like.
              But I'm talking about my territory and the concept of responding to an attack on my territory.
              Yes, they can easily hit something with a fool with a drone. The question is what will be the answer ...
              There is no answer in Karabakh. Nothing to answer ...
            2. Interlocutor
              Interlocutor 15 October 2020 20: 24 New
              0
              On one day of my service in the air defense forces, a valiant battalion of one of the brigades slept on RC135 for 45 minutes .. just lost it .. then they found it, of course .. they didn't even raise aviation .. it was a long time ago .. And during this time you can do a lot of things in modern war ..


              We found it .... So we learned it.
              1. Dikson
                Dikson 15 October 2020 21: 07 New
                0
                Learned .. - life forced .. But to get this board all the same would not have had time to do anything .. that's the point .. To see is not enough.
          2. Firelake
            Firelake 15 October 2020 19: 44 New
            0
            That is, we will bomb Voronezh again? Good yes ...
            1. Interlocutor
              Interlocutor 16 October 2020 09: 23 New
              0
              That is, we will bomb Voronezh again? Good yes ...

              Tell us what we do not know .... When you bombed Voronezh there ... If you use the word "AGAIN"
              1. Firelake
                Firelake 16 October 2020 11: 09 New
                0
                When you see the difference between an Alik UAV and a military product, then you will understand how it works.
  • Airdefense
    Airdefense 14 October 2020 19: 14 New
    +5
    The problem is not so much a UAV, but in the step taken by the electronics, on the Bayraktar TB2 there is a Wescam CMX-15D which allows you to conduct surveillance from 20 km km, distinguishes silhouettes of people, not to mention technology
    That is, in a number of cases, the UAV will detect air defense before the air defense detects the UAV, and also the UAV will be in non-electronic warfare zones.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 14 October 2020 19: 19 New
      0
      Quote: Airdefense
      That is, in some cases, the UAV will detect air defense before the air defense detects the UAV

      This is no longer "air defense", it is not known what.
      If it cannot detect such a continuously emitting aircraft at a distance of 30 km.
      1. Airdefense
        Airdefense 14 October 2020 19: 22 New
        +2
        Well, it would be so simple, UAVs would not fly at all and they would be knocked down by the Shells in hundreds.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 14 October 2020 19: 30 New
          +3
          Quote: Airdefense
          Well, it would be so simple, UAVs would not fly at all

          They don't even fly. For example, Iranian to Israel. We tried, it didn't work.

          I hope you do not consider the Armenian air defense system exemplary?
          1. Airdefense
            Airdefense 14 October 2020 19: 49 New
            +1
            Since Iran does not have such technologies, neither OLS nor communication systems, it is clear that a more technologically advanced Israel will shoot down Iranian drones.

            I hope you do not consider the Armenian air defense system exemplary?

            No, of course, I repeat, layered air defense can withstand UAVs, but be in an economically disadvantageous position.
        2. VO3A
          VO3A 14 October 2020 20: 51 New
          -3
          One Armor does not make the weather, and several workers too ... We need a system, forward posts are better with trailers and remote calculations or remote control in general ... We need a unified management of the positioning area where everything is included with powers with its own UAVs, guns, MLRS, etc. .... New control systems, new approaches ....
      2. Airdefense
        Airdefense 14 October 2020 22: 40 New
        -2
        By the way, L3 Wescam declares that they are developing optoelectronic reconnaissance stations that can recognize the silhouettes of people, equipment at distances of up to 80 km.

        But the swarm is already from Chinese comrades
    2. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 14 October 2020 21: 07 New
      0
      Recently there was news that Canada has suspended supplies of equipment to Turkey. So the Turks will have problems in their supply chains.
      1. Oquzyurd
        Oquzyurd 14 October 2020 23: 31 New
        0
        The Turkish company "Aselsan" already in the series admits that (They made the same parts for the UAV "Anki", now they will adjust with minor changes for Bayraktar) that the Canadians banned. So, the Canadians are out)
        1. d4rkmesa
          d4rkmesa 15 October 2020 08: 36 New
          0
          Yeah, and your processors, walk some more. I looked at the specs of the Turkish OEP, half of the possibilities are not there. And for an external customer, this will already be a clear minus.
  • Gvardeetz77
    Gvardeetz77 14 October 2020 19: 15 New
    +3
    Quote: For Courage
    Here's how to locate the UAV control center a couple of times to start and cover it so that the war does not seem like a computer shooter. Missiles aim at radars - is it really more difficult here?

    It is unlikely that the operators sit under the antennas, they are remote, most likely, therefore, for them (operators), "Game over" may not come when they are covered.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 14 October 2020 19: 29 New
      -2
      Quote: Gvardeetz77
      It is unlikely that the operators sit under the antennas, they are remote, most likely, therefore, for them (operators), "Game over" may not come when they are covered.

      The problem is that PTP detects the signal source with not very high accuracy.
      Therefore, or additional exploration, and the operators will not survive
      Or covering the whole square (the "Grad" division has a minimum target size of 400 by 400) with a similar result
    2. Azimuth
      Azimuth 14 October 2020 19: 44 New
      +1
      Is there an air defense system in Karabakh? Druslag, not air defense. More precisely, and no drushlag. How can you discuss the effectiveness of drones in this case? It's also like comparing the Luftwaffe in 41 and discussing how effective it is. And in 43, when the air defense and Soviet aviation gave parity. Give air defense echeloned with the development of airfields with missiles, aviation in the air plus reconnaissance, electronic warfare, and this whole drone will be blown away.
      1. Ryazan87
        Ryazan87 14 October 2020 20: 45 New
        +8
        Give air defense echeloned with the development of airfields with missiles, aviation in the air plus reconnaissance, electronic warfare, and this whole drone will be blown away.

        How simple it turns out. In order to localize the threat of this "nonsense", you just need:
        1. Build a modern echeloned air defense and strain it not weakly;
        2. To carry out strikes on airfields and control points of tactical missile systems;
        3. Engage manned aircraft;
        4. To use electronic warfare means, also massively.
        And all .. the damned "blown away". Provided that the enemy will not do anything except use the UAV, of course.
        However, in itself, the diversion of such a volume of funds already fully justifies the use of UAVs,
        1. Airdefense
          Airdefense 14 October 2020 22: 44 New
          +1
          Yes, many do not understand the "economics" of the issue, buying a hundred different types of UAVs is much cheaper than organizing air defense against them, and preparing an UAV operator is much cheaper and faster than calculating air defense. And an air defense breakthrough bears much more serious consequences than the destruction of a UAV.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • stone
    stone 14 October 2020 19: 25 New
    +3
    "Aviation experts note that this development has a more modern control system and software than the Israeli Heron drone."
    Shaw for experts, where did you get it? Heron, not even TR which will be more serious in terms of all the bells and whistles and possibilities. And the flight duration cannot be compared.
  • maktub
    maktub 14 October 2020 19: 43 New
    -2
    Wars are the best advertisement for weapons
    Won Serbia with Albania is already in the queue for the purchase of Bayraktar TB2
  • Vadim_888
    Vadim_888 14 October 2020 19: 50 New
    -1
    The question is how soon there will be a naval version for Anadolu udk, and this will seriously affect the balance of power in the eastern Mediterranean
  • Vadim_888
    Vadim_888 14 October 2020 19: 57 New
    0
    Author, you did not specify the parameters of the runway and the type of coverage from which it can fly,
    Takeoff run? How many meters do you need for planting?
  • Taoist
    Taoist 14 October 2020 20: 46 New
    +5
    To be honest, it’s not clear why this happens ... The drone is healthy, non-maneuverable and slow-moving. Works from medium heights. Electronic warfare does not carry, uses laser illumination. In theory, even the "shilka" type should not cause problems for a military air defense made for battle. Shilka will not get it, but Tunguska easily. Again - it only has an optical guidance channel - put up a curtain and it won't get through, but smoke is not a hindrance for the radar ... There is a suspicion that the Armenians simply do not have proper air defense. It is clear that for an air defense system with thermal seeker, this is a complex target (there is almost no thermal signature ...) but the radar must take it at a distance of direct visibility.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 21: 21 New
      -3
      Quote: Taoist
      Electronic warfare does not carry

      It is Bayraktar no, Anka-i yes
      Quote: Taoist
      Shilka will not get it, but Tunguska easily.

      Cannot, does not take not in range, not in height. For guaranteed destruction, BUK or fighters are needed.
      Quote: Taoist
      but the radar should take it at a distance of line of sight

      Not a fact, the goal is small, composite, low-speed. Radar stations Optimized for targets such as fighter, helicopter, cruise missile.
      1. Taoist
        Taoist 14 October 2020 21: 39 New
        +3
        Tunguska works up to 8 km ... - Bayraktar with a goal should get closer to the same 8 km ... (but really closer - there is only a planning ammunition). The composite does not mean that it is radio-transparent ... Again, bombs on the pylons ... - so it should shine from 20 kilometers ... Its armor will reach at the same 20 ... No, I think that there is no air defense there ... And the children of the mountains don't care about disguise ...
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 21: 54 New
          -5
          Quote: Taoist
          Tunguska works up to 8 km

          Don't confuse range with height? It is capable of shooting down targets at an altitude of 3 km. Bayraktar flies at an altitude of 5-7 km. He can drop bombs while directly above the Tunguska.
          1. Sentinel-vs
            Sentinel-vs 15 October 2020 11: 52 New
            0
            Cannon fire on air targets 0.2-4 km
            Rocket fire at air targets 2,5 - 8 km
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 11: 54 New
              -5
              Wikipedia failed?
              Parameters of the zone of destruction of air targets, km:
              Rockets:
              Height - up to 3,5
              In range - from 2,5 to 8
              For the course parameter — up to 4
              Anti-aircraft guns:
              Height - up to 3
              In range - from 0,2 to 4
              According to the exchange rate parameter - up to 2
              Ground targets hit range - up to 2

              https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Тунгуска_(зенитный_ракетно-пушечный_комплекс)
        2. Airdefense
          Airdefense 14 October 2020 22: 48 New
          -4
          Bayraktar can detect from a distance of 20 km, and attack from 14 km (if the specs do not lie).
      2. Ali
        Ali 14 October 2020 22: 50 New
        -1
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Quote: Taoist

        Shilka will not get it, but Tunguska easily.

        Cannot, does not take not in range, not in height. For guaranteed destruction, BUK or fighters are needed.

        OgnennyiKotik. You are wrong. Pantsir-SM will easily shoot down any UAV in Turkey and not only, it was designed for this and put into service with Russia.
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Quote: Taoist

        but the radar should take it at a distance of line of sight

        Not a fact, the goal is small, composite, low-speed. Radar stations Optimized for targets such as fighter, helicopter, cruise missile.

        OgnennyiKotik, you are completely wrong here!
        The minimum image intensifier of the target, which is detected: "Pantsir-C2", "Patsir-SM" is equal to the image intensifier = 0,0002 m2 or 2 cm2, and Bayraktar has not less than the image intensifier = 0,5 m2. Therefore, Turkey's drones have a chance no at all in confrontation with the Russian air defense systems. The radar of the newest Pantsir-SM air defense system has a detection range of D = 75 km for targets with an image intensifier = 2 m2, it will detect Bayraktar (with a minimum image intensifier tube from Turkish drones) at a distance of 53,033 km in free space and then it will be destroyed. The reaction time of the Pantsir-SM complex is less than 4-6 seconds.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 23: 23 New
          -2
          Quote: Ali
          Pantsir-SM can easily shoot down any UAV in Turkey

          Yea Yea. But the reality differs from your words.



          1. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 15 October 2020 00: 14 New
            +1
            This is Carapace-C1, not Carapace-CM.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 00: 31 New
              -2
              Quote: Eye of the Crying
              This is Carapace-C1, not Carapace-CM.

              Well, ok, let's wait for the video of the destruction of Pantsir-SM. By the way, how many were produced and to whom were they transferred?
              Yes, in theory Pantsir-SM can cope with Bayraktars, but he is not the best and not the last of their UAVs. The C350 / 400 CXNUMX / XNUMX with limited BUK of extreme modifications will be able to resist the new UAVs Akinji and Aksungur, the modernized Anka. Unfortunately, this is a new reality.
          2. Ali
            Ali 15 October 2020 00: 26 New
            -3
            Yea Yea. But the reality differs from your words.

            OgnennyiKotik. Dishonorable and ugly write outright lies and deliberately confused SAM "Pantsir-S1" of the Arab Emirates with "Pantsir-C2", which is in service with Russia. Or do you not know how to read in Russian? I have already written above to those like you, illiterate strategists:
            Quote: Ali
            Quote: Nowhere Man
            So far, the experience of the Idlib operation in Syria and the strikes of the Israelis have shown directly opposite results. The carapaces were far less effective than anticipated. Even with ihtamnets

            And also do not confuse the Pantsir-C1, which was acquired by the United Arab Emirates, and the Pantsir-S2, which is in service with Russia! The difference is huge and not only ...

            You behave vile and illiterate, strategist!
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 15 October 2020 01: 39 New
              0
              Russia seems to need to return to work on the Morpheus melee air defense system.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 14 October 2020 21: 02 New
    +6
    "that this development differs in a more modern control system and software than the Israeli Heron drone" ////
    ----
    It should be compared with the Israeli Hermes. Heron is a kamikaze drone.
  • svoit
    svoit 14 October 2020 21: 05 New
    0
    Quote: Ali
    Wasps have a low target hitting height

    So it seems that the ammunition from the Wasp does not explode very far, what actually prevents her from hitting it? At least 100 meters away?
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 14 October 2020 21: 23 New
    0
    Russia has tested and successfully in Syria dozens of new weapons. As a result, among other things, the popularity of these samples among foreign customers has increased dramatically.

    The Turks, with their really successful UAVs, successful actions in Libya and now in Azerbaijan have also expanded the circle of possible buyers of their UAVs. The competition is tough in this segment.

    In the Russian Federation, they will not buy them, but their developers of a similar class of UAVs need to accelerate. crying
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 21: 41 New
      -2
      Quote: xomaNN
      The competition is tough in this segment.

      There is practically no competition there. The United States supplies UAVs only to its closest allies, Israel also supplies the allies and the Arabs cannot buy from them, the Chinese UAVs are of poor quality and do not correspond to the declared parameters. That's the whole market.
      1. d4rkmesa
        d4rkmesa 15 October 2020 08: 40 New
        -2
        Israel has sold and is selling to everyone, except for its enemies and those who are not allowed by the State Department.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 14 October 2020 21: 43 New
    0
    I do not understand this complaint that the ceiling of the air defense system is not enough. The ceiling of the rockets can be raised more easily than the ceiling of the aircraft. You can reduce the weight of the warhead, increase the cruel area, add a launch accelerator, hang it on a drone, an aerostat, and so on.
  • vindigo
    vindigo 14 October 2020 22: 30 New
    +1
    Why not create a drone-fighter drone in turn? Arming with air-to-air missiles and let it spin in a given area. If there are more enemies than missiles in the ammunition load, you can program to go to the ram. You don't even need to control it all the time. He gave the command: to destroy all flying objects in the given area according to such parameters. Out of rockets, fuel, the time to complete the task - automatically returns home.
    1. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 15 October 2020 00: 21 New
      +1
      They will, of course. Air-to-air missiles have already been tested on the MQ-9.
  • Klingon
    Klingon 14 October 2020 23: 08 New
    +1
    Quote: Silvestr
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    The success of the Turks in the development of UAVs is impressive.

    Initially, they bought something from Israel, then their own went. There was an understanding of the process

    Russia originally bought it from Israel too, but things are still there, the Turks are using it with might and main, and everything is swaying with us, they muddied the super-expensive Hunter, when it is unknown when it is launched into the series, there is no ammunition for it either.
    Nnoe years ago, the MiG stirred up something similar (Skat), but as always, the MiG project was strangled in favor of Sukhari
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 14 October 2020 23: 27 New
      -6
      Quote: Klingon
      super-expensive Hunter, when he is launched into the series is unknown, there is no ammunition for him either.

      Why does he need ammunition, if the one that took off has no compartments for weapons?
    2. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 15 October 2020 08: 49 New
      0
      All of Turkey's "unmanned miracle" is built on Western technologies. By switching to domestic components, this advantage will be lost. As for ours ... Until a certain moment these segments were not taken seriously by the military-industrial complex. Therefore, anyhow who and anyhow did it. It was believed that it is better to sell a fighter jet for $ 100 million than 100 UAVs for $ 1 million.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 15 October 2020 00: 11 New
    +1
    For some reason, attempts are already being made to declare the Turkish drone a "wunderwaffle" ... and not only Turkish! What are the reasons? The basis is the use of UAVs against the technologically weak armies of Syria, Libya, Karabakh ... well, Armenia can be included here! Even if we take the latest events (Karabakh), it is worth noting that, in practice, electronic warfare is not mentioned or described ... in a mass character! How can you object? With just one Repellent! As mentioned in the application, and destroyed in battles! And what if we massively use electronic warfare against UAVs? Tanks in position are not detected by the UAV itself! They are detected by the UAV operator through the "remote eye" -video camera on the drone! Where is the drone and where is the operator? First, the UAV must transmit data to the operator "one way" by radio channel so that the operator can see the picture and see the tank on it, for example ... and then the operator must send radio commands to the "other side" so that the UAV will aim the laser at the "desired" tank and fired ammunition! And if you disrupt the transfer of data, at least in one direction; then you will not be able to destroy the tank! And what if this tank, when it detects a tank attack by a drone, is closed with a smoke screen? And, for now, we are not discussing how: with tank mortars, special missile defense systems, smoke generators ... And cover the equipment with special awnings that mask the tank's signature? Was this used by those actively defending against UAVs? By the way, I recalled the accusations against the Osa-AKM air defense missile system ... They say, the altitude reach is only 5 km, and the TV2 UAV flies at an altitude of over 8 km ... But did these TV2s always fly at an altitude of 8 km? And what about the fogs in the mountains, seasonal low clouds, the possibility of deploying anti-aircraft weapons at dominant heights? That was not there at all? Or was it? And how far does a gliding "Bonba" based on a 70-mm aircraft missile fly away, but without an engine? It turns out that the performance characteristics of the existing Osa-AKM air defense missile systems are enough to fight the UAV TV "... the problem is mainly in the" old "radars, unable to detect TV2 at the proper distance! There is a chance to" revive "the" Wasp ", equipping it with the latest radar with AFAR ... Ultimately, it is not worth assigning to the electronic warfare equipment the role of a "magic umbrella"! The use of electronic warfare technology to solve some problems creates other problems, given that, in the main, electronic warfare equipment is radio-emitting! .. The main problems: 1.Compatibility of radio-emitting electronic warfare equipment and our own radio-transmitting and transmitting equipment ... 2.Protection of radio-emitting electronic warfare equipment from anti-radar weapons! I reject the electronic warfare technique, but the priority has always been active means of destroying sources of threats! No matter how it may be in the future, but the shock UAVs have already made themselves and have filled a "niche" for themselves! I think that now special battle attention to the development of specialized active means of destruction of UAVs. To "lock" drones in their niche and not give them a chance for more!
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 01: 21 New
      +3
      Small addition. The air defense of the "weak Syrian army" in the Idlib operation was carried out by the networks of one very strong army. With electronic warfare and all that.
      And for Khmeimim, agreements were reached with Turkey and Israel so that they would not hit him. There is even a dedicated hotline. Apparently from the power of the air defense.
      And so ... everything is very familiar ... it looks like a meeting after the war game in 1941.
      Like, the Germans showed nothing to us with their blitzkrieg in Europe. We will beat with little blood on foreign territory ...
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 15 October 2020 01: 43 New
        +1
        All these electronic warfare in practice are so useless expensive scrap metal. Here KRET releases them, then everything is needed that they can only hammer communication channels with interference and even then you can't forget everything.
        1. Yaik Cossack
          Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 02: 19 New
          0
          Of course, drones are not miracle weapons. But the saturation at the tactical and even operational levels of battle formations with a mass of precision weapons, which, without the involvement of aviation, ensure air supremacy and defeat the enemy to a depth of 150 km without contact is serious.
          The reasons for this revolution are the development and cheapening of electronics and sensors, the creation of distributed AI systems and control of the battlefield. This is a new form of tactical aviation. The old air defense model is not capable of fending off such threats. Moreover, if UAVs are used as part of the system and massively (not 20-50 sorties per day, but 500-1000) with the expansion of the types of weapons used (anti-radar, etc.). A quantitative leap will turn into a qualitative one. In addition, it becomes possible to call barrage UAVs to strike in a dynamic tactical environment.
      2. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 15 October 2020 01: 55 New
        -4
        Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
        so ... everything is very familiar ... it looks like a meeting after a war game in 1941.
        Like, the Germans showed nothing to us with their blitzkrieg in Europe. We will beat with little blood and in foreign territory

        In fact, the problem of air defense against UAVs is extremely acute.
        The spectrum of threats is extremely diverse, from mini kamikaze drones to transonic jet UAVs.
        Previously, the concept of air defense was to inflict unacceptable damage, 30-40% of attacking aircraft / helicopters had to be destroyed. More precisely, the pilots are lost. Now you can foresee a 50-60% loss of first-tier drones and that's okay, the only question is the availability of resources and necessity.
        Modern radars are simply not designed for slow drones with low RCS. There was no such enemy. Tomahawk, Apache, F16 are the most likely targets for our air defense.
        The rumors about Pantsir-SM look extremely dubious, it is extremely costly to use older models, and if they are destroyed, the reputation cannot be restored.
        If we focus on drones, will that cancel other threats? No budget will be enough to create different systems for different threats.
        The problem is much more complicated and complex than our uryakly think.
        1. Yaik Cossack
          Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 02: 49 New
          +1
          It was ironic. I just think that at the next technological stage, air defense systems need revolutionary changes
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 15 October 2020 09: 26 New
            0
            Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
            at the next technological stage, air defense systems need revolutionary changes

            I support your statement ... Moreover, lately, in my comments to articles on VO on the topic of air defense, I often share my idea of ​​how ground air defense should (will) change!
            1. Disant
              Disant Yesterday, 21: 03 New
              0
              as I understand it, domestic MANPADS capture UAVs.
              Vicky Verba
              On August 3, 2017, the Russian military in Syria, at a checkpoint in the Eastern Guta region, from Verba MANPADS shot down a drone of the Jebhat al-Nusra group, which was correcting ground artillery fire that fired at the Russian embassy in Damascus. The UAV was shot down with the first shot.

              increase engine operating time and raise the ceiling of MANPADS up to 5 km
              I doubt that the Bayraktar TB2 loaded with rockets and the like rises above 5 km .. already overhead it will be possible to beat.
              we need to make a new rocket
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 15 October 2020 10: 08 New
          +2
          The problem is very serious.
          Israel produces both drones and air defense systems. And all sorts of anti-drones.
          But here they admit that there is no good quality / cost solution.
          Drone protection: either very expensive or unreliable.
        3. Ali
          Ali 15 October 2020 11: 50 New
          -7
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          Modern Radars are simply not designed for slow drones with low RCS... There was no such enemy. Tomahawk, Apache, F16 are the most likely targets for our air defense. The screams about Pantsir-SM look extremely dubious, ...

          OgnennyiKotik. It is ugly to spit on what you do not know about and to assume what cannot be. Moreover, without reason for this. Are you clearly not a Russian?
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          As a radio engineer by education, blood flows from his eyes when I read here about electronic warfare and radar. The characteristics of the terrain are not affected by anything, the main mast is higher, it is possible to drown out the satellite and UAV signal from the ground from several hundred kilometers, the UAV control center is detected via the radio channel and calculated at once, etc.

          OgnennyiKotik. Learn radar, strategist - translator - propagandist! Highlighted by me, your expression completely speaks of your very weak knowledge in radar, as an engineer and not only!
      3. Igor Rozhkov
        Igor Rozhkov 15 October 2020 19: 12 New
        0
        All clear. When to give up ??? Where to come ?? With things or directly into the stove ???? What flag to raise in the yard ??? Israeli? Turkish ?? Where is the scrap metal collection point? Where can you take Armor, Buki, S-400, S-500 ??? How much kg ??? Bite out precious metals or increase the price of ferrous metal ???
      4. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 16 October 2020 14: 17 New
        0
        You overstate...
    2. Recoil
      Recoil 16 October 2020 11: 33 New
      +1
      There are a lot of words and assumptions.
      As a result, the weapon of a potential enemy is successfully working according to our technology, and we have nothing to oppose to this. Loot for the development of similar weapons has been successfully sawn and is not expected in the next 20 years. There is no element base))))))))
  • Dimasius Bigfootovich
    Dimasius Bigfootovich 15 October 2020 03: 20 New
    0
    In general, looking at the question a little more broadly, there are at least two working tactics for dealing with an enemy who has an army of such drones that you do not have. In fact, the problem is not in the drones, they are not magical or invulnerable weapons, the problem is in those advantages of an attacker from the air that cannot be eliminated sitting on the ground. Unfortunately, both tactics are very poorly compatible with the modern Russian army, albeit for different reasons. The first, extremely expensive, but simpler, is the active conquest of complete air superiority, at least over their positions. A fighter jet, whether piloted or unmanned, is a near-perfect antidote to any strike drones (other than disposable ones). In contrast to the fight of a drone with an air defense system, similar to a duel, here the fight is more like a beating, where the drone has neither the speed to escape, nor even a chance to retaliate. The second, much cheaper tactic, which can be conditionally called "Lebanese", in the country where it was first used, requires at least a complete rearmament of the army and generally almost completely defensive. Unlike the first tactics, this one proceeds from a complete rejection of combat in the air, and consists in depriving the air enemy of convenient and simple targets as much as possible. All military equipment is either disguised as civilian, or it is, all stationary equipment is hiding in bunkers from which it fires, and the entire personnel is underground, the emphasis is on all available types of missile weapons (those that can be used from the simplest installations), ATGM (with minimal calculations for them) ... and drones. It is strange that the Armenians did not notice it even 14 years after its first successful application.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Gunther
    Gunther 15 October 2020 03: 36 New
    +1
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    Quote: credo
    not in the know, but in Russia they are very intensively working on this topic,

    Always judged by RESULT, and not by how and how much they work. So far, the result is this:


    where does this belief in "result" come from? wassat
    if you believe Azeri prop, then their opponents in Karabakh should already be at war with slingshots in their hands. laughing
    and the reality is that both in Libya and Syria, in a collision with a more or less systemic enemy possessing modern air defense, Turkish UAVs go through the forest.
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 15 October 2020 09: 49 New
      -1
      So far, the result is such that with the active, if not decisive, participation of the UAV, the counterstrike of the Armenian tank group was reflected in the southern sector of the front, which was supposed to turn the tide of hostilities in the theater of operations. Crushed to a tank (motorized rifle brigade) with self-propelled artillery. In addition, the UAVs destroyed a significant part of the Armenian Tochka and Iskander missile systems. These are all not tactical successes.
      Regarding the collision with modern air defense - see Syria, where systemic ichtamnets operate quite well, having the entire range of means from S-400 to Pantsyr. Even A-50 occasionally arrives. The offensive on Idlib had to be stopped and the Turks had to go to ask for a truce. The Turks and Israelis did not carry out raids on Khmeimim, but even handicraft drones of the Sadyki (the level of the circle of the House of Pioneers) broke through and destroyed several aircraft.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 15 October 2020 14: 37 New
      0
      Then their opponents in Karabakh should already fight with slingshots in their hands. This will happen soon at the current pace.
    3. Firelake
      Firelake 15 October 2020 20: 05 New
      0
      The question is not whether you can or cannot be knocked down. The question is about the economics of this process. Spending an expensive rocket on a piece of plastic that costs a penny is a loss. That is why in the West they talk about lasers. The shot is cheap, which means the economy is behind such systems in terms of defense against UAVs. And the air defense echelon is VERY EXPENSIVE.
  • Misak Hananyan
    Misak Hananyan 15 October 2020 10: 12 New
    -2
    Quote: hrych
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    Yes to me couch patriots on the assumption

    And not a couch not a patriot heard about nuclear weapons. Here many tanks were buried and UAVs were magnified, but nothing that when using nuclear weapons all the electronics will burn out, and tanks are the best protection against all damaging factors of a nuclear explosion, a walking fortress, an all-terrain vehicle and artillery. And they got excited about Karabakh, ah, ah. Khmeimim has been knocking thousands of unmanned aerial vehicles down for years. And where are you such historians from? In the Bekaa Valley, as many as forty years ago, there was a successful use of UAVs, which allowed the Israelis to inflict great damage on the Syrian air defense. There was an analysis, but the USSR made the right decision not to develop this topic, because were preparing for a nuclear war. You woke up in Karabakh, and 40 years ago you forgot the experience. It was the Armenians who needed to study the Bekaa. They knew about the procurement of AzR, in 2016 they felt a rehearsal on the skin. It was not even necessary to use electronic warfare systems, but to prepare positions, spread out, etc. And they decided instead to change the owner, they say, the West will help us ... By the way, we dug in, the war is not over yet. The best kamikaze drones are the Tomahawk and Caliber, as well as their backers GPs and GLONASS. And the Armenians have not yet got all the trump cards out of their sleeves, but they have already piled up bundles of Bakuvians.


    Armenia had 26 years to build such a line of defense, which, if it had been broken, would have been a Pyrrhic victory. But these former leaders (they betrayed the people should be hung up on fanors), whom you protect so much for some reason, did NOTHING to create defense. And "Soros" Pashinyan, even though he could build normal roads in 1.5 years, along which equipment goes there. And if it suddenly happens that the West recognizes Karabakh, then do not be surprised that it was he who helped. Yesterday a blow was struck on the territory of Armenia again, where is the response of Russia !!! "101 Chinese warnings" can only be given, the Chinese at least warned, but these express concern. Solovyov correctly said this is a slap in the face for Russia, who would want to be friends with such "allies"? Come down from heaven, open your eyes.
    1. Oquzyurd
      Oquzyurd 15 October 2020 13: 00 New
      0
      For centuries, living next to the Azerbaijanis, you still did not understand what we were telling you. For 30 years we have not been able to explain our saying to you that "he who hopes for someone else's candle will definitely spend the night without light" And no one is obliged to protect you , for the fact that you are doing aggression against your neighbor. Having received change, you do not have the right to call someone for help, since you are the aggressor.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 15 October 2020 10: 17 New
    0
    Quote: Yaitsky Cossack
    Regarding the collision with modern air defense - see Syria, where systemic ichtamnets operate quite well, having the entire range of means from S-400 to Pantsyr. Even A-50 occasionally arrives. The offensive on Idlib had to be stopped and the Turks had to go to ask for a truce. The Turks and Israelis did not carry out raids on Khmeimim, but even handicraft drones of the Sadyki (the level of the circle of the House of Pioneers) broke through and destroyed several aircraft.

    One separately taken air defense never defended and will not protect anything. Offensive means will always crush the most advanced air defense.
    The best air defense is to strike at the enemy, and then our air defense reduces losses from a retaliatory strike.
    Syria did not attack the Turkish troops and this stopped its advance on Idlib.
    The destruction of Iskenders by drones is theoretically possible but unlikely.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 15 October 2020 10: 57 New
    0
    the problem is mainly in the "old" radars, unable to detect TV2 at the proper distance! There is a chance to "reanimate" the "Wasp" by equipping it with the latest radar with AFAR ...

    The radar emits and, in principle, will be detected (with comparable technological opponents) before it detects intact.
    The wasp needs to be equipped with the passive detection systems that drones have. Under the same weather conditions and technologies, a passive system on the ground should be the first to detect an air target. Bayraktar has a plastic body and krill and is difficult to detect with radar.
    But in good weather, he will be found from the ground using binoculars.
    1. Reiter
      Reiter 15 October 2020 13: 42 New
      0
      Detecting binoculars? Well, what will be the speed of scanning space, around the clock fighters with binoculars will ransack the sky? Yes, after about 30 minutes, their eyes will look up on their foreheads from such tension. Changing fighters is not serious. In addition, they may notice barrading ammunition too late. Only automation decides. Leaders, for example, and multi-barreled machine guns for them. Then it will be something like KAZ for tanks. In short, KAZs are needed for air defense systems for self-defense. With a massive raid of at least 4 such installations on the position of the air defense missile system (battery or just one air defense missile system): 4x machine gun + lidar (AFAR) mounted on an auto chassis such as jeeps or on semi-trailer trolleys such as 2x23 SPAAG.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 15 October 2020 14: 46 New
        0
        Yes, it’s probably easier to create antidrones than new ZUSHKI that one fig from a massive raid from several directions will not save the calculations of the air defense system. And also in the arsenal of shock drones there will be supersonic small-sized air-to-ground missiles against them, anti-aircraft machine guns will generally be useless.
        1. Reiter
          Reiter 15 October 2020 15: 14 New
          0
          With a massive raid, to detonate an electromagnetic charge mounted in the warhead of an anti-aircraft missile, all this small crap will crumble, the main thing is to detect the arrival of the flock in time. This requires fundamentally different principles of detection, allowing low-speed small-sized targets to be selected in a timely manner. Optical drone guidance heads are also remarkably watery by burning video camera matrices with lasers.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 15 October 2020 18: 38 New
            0
            "All this little crap will crumble." Why it will crumble - combat drones are made with protection against EMP, and this bomb can jam your connection - it's not an option at all, you can't cover too large an area with lasers, and you can't stick them into every column, it will be a very expensive pleasure if on tanks, then it will be necessary to put radars on it - in principle, Russia has such a tank with a T 14, but it does not have a laser that could destroy drones and their entire stuffing in the form of mini missiles and bombs 360 degrees around the tank and 180 degrees in vertical at a distance of several kilometers. How much time has passed on any of our tanks in service, there is not a single KAZ that can intercept RPG and ATGM shots - and we are talking about intercepting drones.
            1. Reiter
              Reiter 15 October 2020 22: 07 New
              0
              What's the protection against EMP in a plastic case? If they do it there, then these drones will be well detected even by wasps. To burn out a matrix of IR / TV cameras, expensive megawatt lasers are not needed at all, a kilowatt is enough. And many countries have this good, including China. An accurate aiming turret and a radar in the Russian Federation seem to be available, which prevents such an approach from being applied, I cannot think of. It is necessary to scratch faster, and not look, until the Turks do it themselves and then come up with excuses like: we don't need this, we have, if anything, we don't care about yadrenbaton.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Reiter
    Reiter 15 October 2020 13: 32 New
    0
    I watched the program "Gospriyemka" a few years ago, they told about Pantsir, and there was a moment when the journalists launched a quadrocopter around the air defense system. So in hundreds of five meters from him. So the radar did not notice him. They brought him closer to the station and as a result, scanning the space, she disabled his electronics and he fell. Well, here's the answers to the questions why the Armenians have air defense systems helpless against drones and loitering ammunition and how to shoot them down: until recently, even relatively fresh millimeter-wave radars could not see such small and low-speed targets, and it is possible, with a certain power, to make electromagnetic weapons against UAV.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • andrew42
    andrew42 15 October 2020 16: 34 New
    +4
    Drones confidently occupy a part of a niche that previously belonged entirely to assault aircraft. And it's not about the "Papuan" theater of operations. , but in the efficiency and low cost of this TYPE of weapons for point attacks of ground targets on the battlefield. A flock of drones is a close in time and a serious threat to the equipment of the ground forces. The next step is the flocks of "drone destroyers". "Cannons" (expensive air defense systems) will not roll against the "sparrows", and as it was rightly noted here, electronic warfare cannot become a panacea. The war between flocks of drones seems to become a reality in the next 10-20 years.
  • Igor Rozhkov
    Igor Rozhkov 15 October 2020 17: 03 New
    0
    If there is a radio control channel, then it can be jammed. As for the UAVs, they were used by the Israelis in the late 70s. So, with their help, the battery of the Osa air defense missile system was destroyed. The fifth car was saved, which began to move and this affected the accuracy of guidance ground-to-ground missiles. UAV is a serious problem and it is necessary to prepare for it
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 15 October 2020 18: 52 New
      0
      "If there is a radio control channel, then it can be jammed." But the problem with these drones is a combined system of channels, a quick channel change to another in case of jamming one - all channels will not jam. So the electronic warfare is already flying by. And large drones also have an electronic map of the area by which the drone can navigate and recognize the signatures of military equipment embedded in the memory, if it can work autonomously, IR and TV cameras will not be able to drown out electronic warfare. There are several options to create drone fighters - killer drones, new air defense systems with mini-missiles and new radars, create new anti-aircraft systems with rapid-fire cannons using programmable detonation projectiles, and create 300 kW laser systems. It's not a problem to create - but to massively implement all of the above problem, since it will be a very expensive pleasure.
      1. Igor Rozhkov
        Igor Rozhkov 19 October 2020 12: 32 New
        0
        For drones, mini-rockets are created and installed in mines, for example, Torm3, four missiles each instead of one standard. And you shouldn't be so optimistic about the "flight" of electronic warfare. They know their stuff. Any response to a threat must be comprehensive.
      2. Disant
        Disant Yesterday, 18: 58 New
        0
        share the source of information that electronic warfare "flies"
  • Misak Hananyan
    Misak Hananyan 15 October 2020 18: 34 New
    0
    Quote: Oquzyurd
    For centuries, living next to the Azerbaijanis, you still did not understand what we were telling you. For 30 years we have not been able to explain our saying to you that "he who hopes for someone else's candle will definitely spend the night without light" And no one is obliged to protect you , for the fact that you are doing aggression against your neighbor. Having received change, you do not have the right to call someone for help, since you are the aggressor.


    You have lived alongside the Armenians for centuries. Remind Denikin's words about Azerbaijan ??? And what would you do without Turkey .... I liked the proverb. I'll take a note.
  • Gogia
    Gogia 15 October 2020 19: 04 New
    +1
    Quote: credo
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    You were not the only one who thought so. Remember how a few months ago the effectiveness of the use of UAVs in the Middle East was ridiculed and questioned.
    Yes to me couch patriots on the assumption that it is worth paying attention, almost through the monitor in the face laughed. Everyone told how air defense and electronic warfare would bring down drones in flocks.

    It looks like you do not know, but in Russia they are very intensively working on this topic, but UAVs are not a panacea for air supremacy if equal rivals are at war.

    That is why in Syria ours do not use shock UAVs at all, and ammunition for them in the form of dummies only exists. And that is why the production of internal combustion engines cannot be established in any way for small and medium-sized UAVs, and the turbojet VK-500 will not start in any way ... But I forgot to say - the long-suffering Altair did not want to fly normally until he was sent to Perm ... And now it is not in service. Our military commanders did not seem to realize that now it is necessary to urgently deal with patrolling BPs (including small-sized ones, which a tornado in the amount of 8 pieces will fit into a MLRS rocket and any UAVs, but only shock ones.) And the planes should be sharpened to destroy UAVs and air defense
  • Eahnot
    Eahnot 15 October 2020 22: 36 New
    0
    Only now, what's strange, they are hammering, hammering Armenians from drones, the Azeri Turks should have captured the whole of Karabakh, but no, the Armenians are standing, they do not bend, only a few villages were given around the perimeter and that's all, you see the devil is not so terrible as he is painted
  • Amborlakatay
    Amborlakatay 16 October 2020 10: 40 New
    0
    To be precise, the name "drone" is not at all correct. Operator controls. And he has no problems until he stumbles upon an air defense and electronic warfare system. The use of drones is realistic only in the absence of an air defense and electronic warfare system. In addition, there is no absolute weapon - air defense systems are also being improved. So it was always - something was invented, implemented - and everything is fine until they do the opposition.
    1. Reiter
      Reiter 17 October 2020 16: 18 New
      +1
      That's right, until they make a counteraction - effective and affordable (that is, it can be bought financially and without fear of sanctions on the market in almost any country and then saturate the troops with this tool and train the drug to use it correctly, so that this tool becomes as common as an ATGM For example, now there are no such solutions that combine reliability and affordability on the market, but there are effective and affordable strike and reconnaissance UAVs that really cause serious damage, not only material and human damage, but also psychologically demoralize people.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 16 October 2020 11: 04 New
    0
    Quote: Reiter
    Detecting binoculars? Well, what will be the speed of scanning space, around the clock fighters with binoculars will ransack the sky? Yes, after about 30 minutes, their eyes will look up on their foreheads from such tension.

    I gave this binoculars as an example, that it is possible in the worst case. Around the clock and the entire space does not need to be scanned. Is there only 30 minutes in the Navy?
    1. Reiter
      Reiter 17 October 2020 16: 07 New
      0
      It depends on what kind of watch, here the watchmen at the checkpoints can sit for half a day, but it's one thing you look at the dashboard with alarm lights, where the automation will give a signal if something has happened, and another thing is when you stare at the sky, a huge sky with a sector of 360 degrees with narrow-angle binoculars, trying to manually scan this sky, by the way, how often will you get it
  • Oleg123219307
    Oleg123219307 16 October 2020 11: 40 New
    0
    Quote: Eye of the Crying
    Of course, we will not die under the bombs of the Bayraktar. Under the bombs of the S-70 and his brothers ... who knows.

    Maybe. But there is a different price, a different mass, different sizes ... In general, I don't see what the 6th generation, in conjunction with the UAV, is so superior to the fourth / fifth. The reaction is better, but the battle at distances where the rocket does not fly in seconds, the cost is comparable, the size too ... We must see what they will screw there in the end.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 16 October 2020 14: 21 New
    0
    The drone is a useful weapon, but it did not bring any revolutionary changes in the war. 18 days of attack on the enemy retreating in people and technology (and in drones) many times and the result is insignificant. Practically positional warfare. They could do this without a single drone.
    1. Reiter
      Reiter 17 October 2020 16: 10 New
      0
      Well, I don’t think they could, they didn’t succeed for some reason 30 years ago.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 16 October 2020 15: 29 New
    +1
    Quote: lucul
    That is, in your opinion, we don't need drones?

    Duplicate the post:
    You understand, UAVs basically appeared not from a good life, but as a result of the lack, in the troops, of their full-fledged MLRS and short-range and medium-range missiles.
    Those countries that do not have such problems (Russia / USA), UAVs are considered mainly as a target designation system and a replacement for pilot aircraft.
    That Russia and the United States have no problems with the delivery of 150 kg of "cargo" (like Bayraktar), at a distance of 1 km to 11 km.

    - Absolute and very stupid nonsense. Drones of all stripes and calibers are used today by all the most advanced armies in the world - in terms of efficiency / cost, they simply have no equal, and the economy of hostilities has not been canceled... Therefore, what you have stated is an infantile absurdity.
    1. Yaik Cossack
      Yaik Cossack 16 October 2020 19: 26 New
      +2
      Judging by the number of people who have appeared in sync, who are pulling one melody in chorus and in every way - drones are garbage, air defense is life-giving is omnipotent, the Azerbaijanis have not achieved anything, they are marking time and making fakes - the agitprop is powerfully burnt out))))

      A breakthrough on the southern flank with the loss of Hadrut and soon Fizuli is the development of an operational failure into a strategic one. The Turks act skillfully and systematically, gradually grind their technique and are in no hurry to get into mountain contact combat. To be honest, the appearance of the Armenian age militias with Kalash is not very good.
  • karpusha
    karpusha 17 October 2020 16: 28 New
    +1
    But these are far from the best uavs in the world. Imagine what Americans can do. And we are all proud of the weapons developed in the late 70s. Shame. Another 20 years and the lag will become critical
  • Alexey Bobrin
    Alexey Bobrin 17 October 2020 20: 48 New
    -1
    In the USA and Israel, this type of UAV development direction is considered a dead end! Short flight range, low armed load, low engine life. In such conflicts as Karabakh and Syrian, it is possible that for such cases they will still have their effectiveness.
    1. Outsider
      Outsider 18 October 2020 23: 11 New
      0
      In the USA and Israel, this type of UAV development direction is considered a dead end!

      - You're lying! All types of UAVs are being developed in Israel, from mini to mega,
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unmanned_aerial_vehicles_of_Israel
      There you have to click on each letter.

      Here's the mega:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_Eitan#Specifications
      Here's the mini:




      And there are also micro and nano in the world:
      1. Alexey Bobrin
        Alexey Bobrin 22 October 2020 17: 50 New
        -1
        You will study the question! These are your thoughts. Right now, I'll post as many pictures as you like. It can be released, but experts consider this direction not promising.
      2. Alexey Bobrin
        Alexey Bobrin 22 October 2020 17: 51 New
        -1
        You at least sit down and read a couple of authoritative articles about UAVs
  • Sergei Novozhilov
    Sergei Novozhilov 18 October 2020 10: 34 New
    0
    Against the Turkish drone, it is necessary to use the Yak-130 or restore the production of the cheap piston La-11
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 19 October 2020 04: 20 New
      0
      What for? It's a wild hemorrhoid, chasing drones on an airplane. And to place them where, how to organize combat duty? One hundred pounds - the Air Force will disown this idea with its hands and feet, they have enough of their own tasks.
      A banal laser on a jeep, a kilowatt of some kind by 25 - can handle everything below 3 km, and a normal anti-aircraft gun with guided detonation shells - with the fact that up to 8 km. If something flies higher, it already costs more, and Thor can already spend a rocket on this.
      And if it's all on one more platform, oh, dreams bully
  • Outsider
    Outsider 22 October 2020 19: 15 New
    +1
    Quote: Alexey Bobrin
    You at least sit down and read a couple of authoritative articles about UAVs

    Quote: Alexey Bobrin
    You will study the question! These are your thoughts. Right now, I'll post as many pictures as you like. It can be released, but experts consider this direction not promising.

    - Combat UAVs - "unpromising direction" ?? laughing lol It is the MOST PERSPECTIVE. On the way, UAVs-fighters, UAVs-bombers, UAVs-missile carriers - including strategic ones: an option for the B-21 is being considered, the possibility of using it without crew... You would sometimes need to get out of the cellar and buy at the nearest kiosk at least a couple of newspapers, even like "Komsomolets of Mordovia". You can't be so ignorant, it's even somehow ugly ...