US expert: Drones are not a replacement for combat aircraft

In terms of flight range and the mass of weapons carried, combat aircraft are significantly superior to unmanned aerial vehicles. That's why drones are needed not to replace the B-21 strategic bombers and the latest generation of F-35 Lightning II fighters, but to supplement manned aircraft.

This opinion was expressed by Mark Ganzinger, director of advanced weapons and potential assessments at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Research, in his article published by Breaking Defense.

He notes that some defense experts believe that inexpensive Drones, which are currently under development, are capable of replacing a significant number of modern manned aircraft. But Gantzinger does not agree with this opinion and considers it erroneous, believing that drones are not a replacement for combat aircraft. An expert from the United States believes that the drone is significant as a complement to the manned aviation... According to him, the air force needs a combination of next-generation drones, including strike systems, and fifth-generation aircraft. Their joint actions will make it possible to achieve maximum effect in future combat operations.

At the same time, he notes that it makes no sense to try to improve the characteristics of drones to the level of combat aircraft. This will not only lead to a rise in the cost of drones, but also unnecessarily complicate their operation. After all, the attractiveness of UAVs lies in the relatively low cost, long range and size suitable for flights without a runway.

Let us remind you that the Su-57 is being tested in tandem with the Okhotnik strike UAV.

Comments

[Ka-52]

But Ganzinger disagrees with this opinion and considers it erroneous, believing that drones are not a replacement for combat aircraft.

Well, they sailed .... and here for the second month in the comments the signature blazes, assuring that now only shock drones are able to win the war. So many keyboards broken by "experts" and all in vain?

[rocket757]

Different flames, in turn or together!
Either there are tanks, everything, a skiff, then artillery, then ... and so on according to the list of military equipment from the list of classics.

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: Ka-52

Well, they sailed .... and here for the second month in the comments the signature blazes, assuring that now only shock drones are able to win the war. So many keyboards broken by "experts" and all in vain?

This is completely wrong. UAVs and barrage ammunition are only a serious but auxiliary tool in the aircraft system.

[Ka-52]

This is completely wrong. UAVs and barrage ammunition are only a serious but auxiliary tool in the aircraft system.

I agree. But the hegemons from the strategy here somehow convinced me that they (drones) can comb even settlements. They say infantry, tanks and artillery are old and old-fashioned methods .

[Fungus]

Drones against Papuans are good. Against a normal army, they will be shot down, burned and planted.

[Horon]

For a serious modern army, drones are an annoying factor, for an enemy with an underdeveloped army, with weak forces of its own aviation and air defense, this is a cheap option for aviation.

[Hypertension]

Quote: Fungus

Drones against Papuans are good.

It remains to decide: who is the Papuan and who is the "white man". The Armenian army is not the most modern army in the world, but you can't even call it a popuass. But at the same time, she has suffered a lot from drones. And drones are improving every day.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Hyperion

The Armenian army is not the most modern army in the world, but you can't even call it popuans.

and where does the Armenian army? in Karabakh, Azerbaijan is at war with the NKR, but not with the Armenian army
but the NKR army is quite at the level of the "Papuans", that is, there is no aviation and echeloned air defense of its own, and the focal one was represented by the samples of the last century.

[Hypertension]

Quote: SanichSan

in Karabakh, Azerbaijan is at war with the NKR, but not with the Armenian army

[Sanichsan]

come on, tell us about 5 S-300 divisions of Armenia destroyed in Karabakh

[Hypertension]

And what about MLRS Smerch, which the NKR does not have? I can tell and show. There was even an article on VO.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Hyperion

And what about MLRS Smerch, which the NKR does not have?

2? right? 1 more radar and 1 launcher S-300 and 4 Wasps ... is this the Armenian army? how interesting .. continue

[Hypertension]

The S-300 and the Wasps of the NKR, and the Smerch is already Armenian. And anyway, where did you get the idea that the NKR itself. Tell me more that Turkey is no sideways there.
"The NKR Defense Army is closely connected with the Armed Forces of Armenia, which help with weapons and military equipment. Officers from Armenia participate in the training of military personnel of the NKR army, although the Armenian leadership declares that there is not a single representative of the Armenian Armed Forces in Nagorno-Karabakh and around it. According to available estimates, from one third to one half of the personnel of the NKR Defense Army are conscripts from Armenia. Military unit No. 33651 of the Armenian Army is located on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. "
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Армия_обороны_Нагорно-Карабахской_Республики
ZY And where did the "Papuans" S-300 come from? Unbelievable ... What advanced "Papuans" ...

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Hyperion

And anyway, where did you get the idea that the NKR itself.

first, you will poke your friends at school.
the second where I wrote that Armenia has nothing to do with it? apparently the adherents of the "ninja aircraft carrier" sect are forbidden to go into such deep matters as the difference between supporting their proxies and direct participation by their own armed forces.

Quote: Hyperion

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Армия_обороны_Нагорно-Карабахской_Республики
ZY And where did the "Papuans" S-300 come from? Unbelievable ... What advanced "Papuans" ...

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%83%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8
enlighten
already in 2016 1 division was registered in the NKR. but this is for 2016, and by 2020 the Tornadoes could well have adjusted it. those same 2 pieces.

[Hypertension]

Quote: SanichSan

first, you will poke your friends at school.

You started poking. Or are you special and you can?

Quote: SanichSan

where I wrote that Armenia has nothing to do with it?

Yes, here:

Quote: SanichSan

and where does the Armenian army? in Karabakh, Azerbaijan is at war with the NKR, but in no way not with the Armenian army

No way, Karl! No way. Neither proxy nor indirectly. No way.

Quote: SanichSan

apparently adherents of the "ninja aircraft carrier" sect

Calm down, calm down. All aircraft carriers will be found, don't worry. We will charter a steamer with you and go through a telescope to look for these harmful AUGs.

Quote: SanichSan

and by 2020, the Tornadoes could have adjusted it. those same 2 pieces.

I didn't argue about the S-300. The S-300 are listed in the article, the link to which I provided. It's just that the S-300 and the "Papuans" somehow don't look close. But "could well" about the Tornado - these are so-so arguments. After all, the Armenians "could well", for example, send you to the NKR by 2020 as a military-technical expert. Why not? Could you? - Quite! And how it really is - another story.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Hyperion

No way, Karl! No way. Neither proxy nor indirectly. No way.

and? What's not clear? Armenian Armed Forces in Armenia, NKR Defense Forces in NKR. these are separate formations. Yes, Armenia saturated the region with weapons, but the Armenian army itself does not participate in the conflict, although it tried. well, that is the story with the Iskander, but even then they were on the territory of Armenia. and this is rather an Armenian provocation.

Quote: Hyperion

It's just that the S-300 and the "Papuans" somehow don't look close.

anti-aircraft complexes of the last century and the Papuans? what is the discrepancy here?

Quote: Hyperion

But "could well" about the Tornado - these are so-so arguments.

exactly as much "so-so" as the statement that this is the Armed Forces of Armenia. Do you have data for 2019-20 to assert that they were not in NKR at the beginning of the conflict?

[Hypertension]

Quote: SanichSan

but the Armenian army itself does not participate in the conflict,

"Major of the Special Forces Detachment of the Republic of Armenia Sargsyan Levon was destroyed."
https://vk.com/military_az
People killed by the Armenian Armed Forces are almost published every day. And again, I quoted the lines that almost half of the personnel of the NKR army are draftees from Armenia. Therefore, there is not only an analogue of "vacationers", but also a direct integration of both armies. In fact, the NKR Armed Forces is a separate group. Almost like Nakhichevan for Azerbaijan.
Or this:
"The border troops of the National Security Service of Armenia ambushed and destroyed enemy armored vehicles.“As you know, the Armenian Border Guard is part of the armed forces of the Republic of Armenia.

Quote: SanichSan

anti-aircraft complexes of the last century

Clarification required. And then the last century was, you know, very different in terms of military technology ... So: the anti-aircraft complex last quarter last century (since 1984), which in various modifications is in service with countries such as: Russia, Belarus, Iran, Greece, South Korea, China, etc. That is, absolutely not "Papuan" countries, huh?
ZY MiG-31 has no analogues, also "from the last century". Also put the Papuans next to them?

Quote: SanichSan

Do you have data for 2019-20 to assert that they were not in NKR at the beginning of the conflict?

Let's start from what is. Otherwise, you can fantasize and assume anything. The article with the help of which you got to the bottom of Timokhin is all replete with the words "probably", "possible" and "presumably".
At the moment, it is not indicated in the public domain that the Smerch MLRS is in service with the NKR army. Dot. There will be an update of information - we will discuss it.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Hyperion

Almost every day they publish. And again, I quoted the lines that almost half of the personnel of the NKR army are draftees from Armenia. Therefore, there is not only an analogue of "vacationers", but also a direct integration of both armies. In fact, the NKR Armed Forces is a separate group. Almost like Nakhichevan for Azerbaijan.

Yes, I don’t argue with that either. all right. but there is one nuance .. for political reasons, the Armed Forces of Armenia (those on the territory of Armenia) cannot directly take part in the conflict, that is, enter there with equipment even from Iskander from their territory they cannot support, because then they will be left one on one with an undisguised ass and not only against Azerbaijan, but against Turkey.
of course, manpower, ammunition and light weapons will drive. its direct affiliation with Armenia is difficult to prove.

Quote: Hyperion

So: the anti-aircraft complex of the last quarter of the last century (since 1984), which in various modifications is in service with such countries as: Russia, Belarus, Iran, Greece, South Korea, China, etc. That is, absolutely not "Papuan" countries, yeah ?

if modernized then "aha!" and if not modernized from the 80s, then the Papuans

Quote: Hyperion

ZY MiG-31 has no analogues, also "from the last century". Also put the Papuans next to them?

and how many upgrades were there?

Quote: Hyperion

Let's start from what is. Otherwise, you can fantasize and assume anything. The article with the help of which you got to the bottom of Timokhin is all replete with the words "probably", "possible" and "presumably".

Duc is an article on the basis of which Timokhin composed his opus! I also seasoned it thickly with my assumptions! here is not only the original "possible" and "presumably", but also Timokhinsky "most likely" and "admitted"

Quote: Hyperion

At the moment, it is not indicated in the public domain that the Smerch MLRS is in service with the NKR army. Dot. There will be an update of information - we will discuss it.

I agree, but even Azerbaijan does not insist that these two tornadoes prove the direct participation of the Armenian Armed Forces ... well, OK. in any case, 2 Tornadoes are definitely not all the Armed Forces of Armenia, and somehow there was no other

[Hypertension]

Quote: SanichSan

and if not modernized from the 80s, then the Papuans

All the same - no. Modern "Papuans" are barmaley in Syria: air defense - at best, MANPADS, technical equipment, tactical slippers and a pair of wrung-out T-55s. And in the NKR there was even an electronic warfare system "Repellent". She was listed, by the way, in the Armed Forces of Armenia. Modern development, our century! Papuans smoke on the sidelines ...

Quote: SanichSan

so even Azerbaijan does not insist that these two tornadoes prove the direct participation of the Armenian Armed Forces ...

Yes, this is Openel's secret. Everyone knows everything perfectly. Give proof of the participation of the Armenian Armed Forces to you alone.

Quote: SanichSan

well, OK. in any case, 2 Tornadoes are definitely not all the Armed Forces of Armenia, and somehow there was no other

Firstly: no one speaks "about all the Armed Forces of Armenia," and secondly: the range of weapons of NKR and Armenia is practically identical. In addition to aviation, Iskander and the same Tornadoes. So it's not difficult to pass one off after another. You don't even need to repaint - you've changed the emblem and you're done.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Hyperion

All the same - no. Modern "Papuans" are barmaley in Syria: air defense - at best, MANPADS, technical equipment, tactical slippers and a pair of wrung-out T-55s. And in the NKR there was even an electronic warfare system "Repellent". She was listed, by the way, in the Armed Forces of Armenia. Modern development, our century! Papuans smoke on the sidelines ...

but at the same time Os 6 and not 178, S-300 1, not 5 divisions, there are no tactical ballistic missiles, etc. and so on ... so what is howling there may not be the most backward, but definitely not the Armed Forces of Armenia very much thinner ...

Quote: Hyperion

First: no one talks about "all the Armed Forces of Armenia"

how is it nobody? It is you who are here to convince me that Azerbaijan is at war with the Armenian Armed Forces. if not, then with the NKR, which I originally stated
you decide ... if you say that the Armed Forces of Armenia and the NKR are one and the same, then where are the attacks with tactical ballistic missiles, where are 178 Os, where are 5 S300 divisions? if what I have mentioned does not participate in the conflict, then on what basis do you ascribe to the non-participating parts participation in the conflict?

[Hypertension]

Quote: SanichSan

but at the same time Os 6 and not 178, S-300

For the third time I am writing to you: Wasps and S-300 are not an indicator of participation of the Armed Forces of Armenia. But the Tornado and the Repellent - some no, but an indicator.

Quote: SanichSan

It is you who are here to convince me that Azerbaijan is at war with the Armenian Armed Forces.

I also gave examples. And a link.

Quote: SanichSan

you will decide ... if you claim that the Armed Forces of Armenia and the NKR are one and the same, then where are the strikes with tactical ballistic missiles

Which ones? Point-U? There were such blows. Iskander is still being held as a bargaining chip in his sleeve.

Quote: SanichSan

where are 178 Os, where are 5 C300 divisions?

The Chief of Staff of the Armenian Armed Forces should be asked about this. While the infantry and equipment are at war.

Quote: SanichSan

if what I mentioned does not participate in the conflict, then on what basis do you ascribe to the non-participating parts participation in the conflict?

Where did I attribute the participation to the parts you mentioned in the conflict? If I correctly understood your stream of consciousness. You mean those 178 Wasps and 5 S-300 divisions, right?
I tell you about Thomas, you tell me about Erema. I mean Tornado and Repellent with special forces, tankmen and motorized riflemen, you are driving me about air defense.

[Krasnodar]

Quote: Fungus

Drones against Papuans are good. Against a normal army, they will be shot down, burned and planted.

Rape and eaten.
UAVs are a big headache - while they are being dealt with by air defense, protecting itself, it receives heavy blows from aviation. You can't do without your own developed air force with good fighters, and your own drones will not interfere

[APASUS]

Quote: Ka-52

But Ganzinger disagrees with this opinion and considers it erroneous, believing that drones are not a replacement for combat aircraft.

Well, they sailed .... and here for the second month in the comments the signature blazes, assuring that now only shock drones are able to win the war. So many keyboards broken by "experts" and all in vain?

If you do not understand, then the Americans are very concerned about this conflict. Why buy an expensive F-35 with super bombs, for guidance from space, when you can buy cheap kamikaze UAVs. The depreciation of their products is the main concern of the Americans

[Ka-52]

if you can buy cheap kamikaze UAVs. The depreciation of their products is the main concern of the Americans

First, I didn't see exactly this concern in the article. The Americans have UAVs like shoe polish for the cat's uncle Matroskin.
secondly, if you suddenly want to pee again on the topic of kamikaze drones and compare them according to the tasks performed, then at least think that the combat radius of an attack fighter ranges from 750 to 1500 km, and that of a kamikaze drone - 40 km. The kamikaze drone carries an explosive weighing 3,5 kg, and only one of the 12 bombs of an attack fighter (FAB-500 type) has an explosive mass from 190 to 200 kg. Hence the ability to complete tasks.

[APASUS]

Quote: Ka-52

secondly, if you suddenly want to pee again on the topic of kamikaze drones and compare them according to the tasks performed, then at least think that the combat radius of an attack fighter ranges from 750 to 1500 km, and that of a kamikaze drone - 40 km. The kamikaze drone carries an explosive weighing 3,5 kg, and only one of the 12 bombs of an attack fighter (FAB-500 type) has an explosive mass from 190 to 200 kg. Hence the ability to complete tasks.

I may have confused something, do not combat drones perform a combat mission? And the rest is lyrics! An excellent example of Karabakh shows a new type of war, without the use of F-35, B-2, destructive 500 kg bombs and other super weapons

[Ka-52]

An excellent example of Karabakh shows a new type of war, without the use of F-35, B-2, destructive 500 kg bombs and other super weapons

Karabakh is a great example of the fact that most people see only what they want to see. No more. In Karabakh, both sides are actively using artillery and infantry. The question is, how did the Armenians manage to fill dozens of Azerbaijani tanks, in fact, without being armed with shock drones? Here's a blank then In truth, Azerbaijanis generally approached the NRC in a more organized and technological manner. And drones are just one of the tools here.

[APASUS]

Quote: Ka-52

The question is, how did the Armenians manage to fill dozens of Azerbaijani tanks, in fact, without having shock drones in service?

Everything is very simple, the use of tanks in the mountains can be very limited, they are hammered in columns. Tanks in the mountains cannot turn around, there is not enough tactical space ... Forgot the lessons of Afghanistan, did not teach our mistakes to Chechnya.

Quote: Ka-52

And drones are just one of the tools here.

So far, drones are doing 90% of all the work here, as the infantry is not capable of anything, either on the one hand or on the other.

[Ka-52]

It's very simple, the use of tanks in the mountains can be very limited, they are hollowed out in columns

no need to compose on the go. The Armenians filled a lot of Azeri tanks even before the start of the fighting in the mountainous terrain. Do not pull the owl over the globe - where did you see the mountains here?

So far, drones are doing 90% of all the work here.

what nonsense how tired of schoolchildren who burn from "beautiful" videos on YouTube and who do not know how and according to what laws the war is waged. Will you clear the forest with drones? Or a settlement? How old are you that you carry such nonsense?

[APASUS]

Quote: Ka-52

It's very simple, the use of tanks in the mountains can be very limited, they are hollowed out in columns

no need to compose on the go. The Armenians filled a lot of Azeri tanks even before the start of the fighting in the mountainous terrain. Do not pull the owl over the globe - where did you see the mountains here?

So far, drones are doing 90% of all the work here.

what nonsense how tired of schoolchildren who burn from "beautiful" videos on YouTube and who do not know how and according to what laws the war is waged. Will you clear the forest with drones? Or a settlement? How old are you that you carry such nonsense?

I posted one photo and everyone has to believe it?
At https://lostarmour.info/karabakh/ 170 photos of loss fixations, be serious!
Have you been in the mountains for a long time yourself? Have you been clearing the forests long ago? In the course of the specifics of the database in the highlands? If you don't even know, don't carry a blizzard.
This is my service

[Horon]

Is there a modern air defense system and aviation is used in Karabakh? The armament of Armenians in Karabakh is not modern, there is no use of aviation and satellite surveillance, so the drones are effective there. It can fall sharply if the enemy can not only defend, but also attack. The Americans are counting not only on a weak enemy, but also on a strong one, and then drones become only one of the tools and far from the main one.

[lucul]

An excellent example of Karabakh shows a new type of war, without the use of F-35, B-2, destructive 500 kg bombs and other super weapons

Do not make me laugh . There, all of Armenia is smaller than the Moscow region in size - where can aviation roam there?
The size of Russia is another matter - how are you going to hit strategic objects of Russia, with the capabilities of a drone of 250 km range? )))

[Krasnodar]

The old Horop has a range of 1000 km))

[APASUS]

Quote: lucul

Do not make me laugh . There, all of Armenia is smaller than the Moscow region in size - where can aviation roam there?
The size of Russia is another matter - how are you going to hit strategic objects of Russia, with the capabilities of a drone of 250 km range? )))

Don't you find a semantic contradiction in your comment?

[lucul]

Don't you find a semantic contradiction in your comment?

Pffff ...
And you ? In your words - the drones did a great job, without any B-2 and F-35.
I pointed out that these drones will not have enough range in the vastness of Russia.
But some people are so suggestible that they believe any propaganda. Even when experts say otherwise. The military experts of the two superpowers (Russia and the United States) do not attach that importance to drones (a panacea for all problems), as the local UAV fans after watching videos.

[APASUS]

Quote: lucul

experts say the opposite. Military experts of the two superpowers (Russia and the United States) do not attach that importance to drones (a panacea for all problems)

Well, excuse me, do not believe your eyes, believe the experts (Russia and the USA) who do not attach that importance to drones.
With the help of the UAV in the conflict, in the region of 1000 pieces of equipment (or close to it) were hit or damaged, and I have to believe that the UAV is manure?
As I understand it, the Armenians also believe in this nonsense until now, as they did not disguise themselves, they do not disguise themselves. Just as they did not use electronic warfare, everyone is waiting for something.
And paradoxically, no super invisible F-35s were used in the conflict.

[lucul]

Well, excuse me, do not believe your eyes, believe the experts (Russia and the USA) who do not attach that importance to drones.

You see ... it's like an advertisement for, say, anti-dandruff shampoo - according to the commercial it turns out that dandruff is perfectly cured by this shampoo, but in fact it is not at all.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: APASUS

I may have confused something, do not combat drones perform a combat mission?

perform, but you did not specify what

Quote: APASUS

An excellent example of Karabakh shows a new type of war, without the use of F-35, B-2, destructive 500 kg bombs and other super weapons

example of what? an example of how you can hang around for 2 weeks under a village not being able to take it despite the presence of a UAV? or is it one of those aspects that you don't want to see?

[Goffman]

Quote: Ka-52

the combat radius of the strike fighter ranges from 750 to 1500 km, and that of the kamikaze drone - 40 km. The kamikaze drone carries an explosive with a mass of 3,5 kg, and only one of the 12 bombs of an attack fighter (such as FAB-500) has an explosive mass from 190 to 200 kg. Hence the ability to complete tasks.

What, the only question is the radius and load ?! Is it technically impossible to build a drone with a combat radius of 1500 km and the same combat load as a strike fighter? ("Buran" in the first flight into space flew like a drone).
Plus, the drones do not have any restrictions on maneuvering / overloading caused by the presence of a pilot.
Plus, there is less sensitivity of the command and society of the belligerent country to the loss of drones, and not fighters with pilots (there is also no need for rescue operations).
EW vulnerability in drone? And the manned fighter's vulnerability to electronic warfare is really less in terms of navigation, situational awareness, communications, radar operation (like they wrote about some case, though controversial, with the destroyer "Donald Cook", which suffered from electronic warfare?)

[Ka-52]

What, the only question is the radius and load ?! Is it technically impossible to build a drone with a combat radius of 1500 km and the same combat load as a strike fighter? ("Buran" in the first flight into space flew like a drone).

well, if you take care of reading the entire dialogue, and not just one phrase from it, then unexpectedly for yourself you will see that I answered my opponent to the phrase about

if you can buy cheap kamikaze UAVs

a drone capable of flying over 1500 km (and therefore worth more than one million dollars), do you want to make a one-time use and crash against some kind of tank? Then it's easier and more effective to shoot a cruise missile.

Plus, the drones do not have any restrictions on maneuvering / overloading caused by the presence of a pilot.

and this is what? Are you going to maneuver the drone at the level of destructive G-forces? I'll tell you right away - for a UAV with its maximum aspect ratio wing, it will fall off much earlier than the overload approaching 4-5G

EW vulnerability in drone?

all the same, drones are not completely autonomous and it is possible to break communication with the operator. In this case, the pilot will simply take the plane out of the zone.
ps Get the idea - drones are good and manned aircraft are good too. But each for their own tasks. So far, there are no weapons in the UAV segment that can completely and fully replace guided combat aircraft. Well, the future, it is already shown to us in blockbusters, there is so much there. Sooner or later it will come

[Goffman]

Quote: Ka-52

Are you going to maneuver the drone at the level of destructive G-forces? I will tell you right away - the maximum aspect ratio of a UAV with its wing will fall off much earlier than the overload approaching 4-5G

Those. Do you think fighter drones will definitely have the same wing shape you see on current drones?

Quote: Ka-52

drones are not completely autonomous and you can break communication with the operator. In this case, the pilot will simply take the plane out of the zone.

In the event of a communication failure, as far as I remember, the drones have a program to return to base.

Quote: Ka-52

So far, the UAV segment does not have weapons that can completely and fully replace guided combat aircraft.

And I'm talking about the same as so far. And then a surprise can happen, like the Armenians now.

[lucul]

What, the only question is the radius and load ?! Is it technically impossible to build a drone with a combat radius of 1500 km and the same combat load as a strike fighter?

How are you going to fly a drone at such a distance? ))))
So far, the range of the drone does not exceed the radio horizon)))

[Goffman]

Quote: lucul

So far, the range of the drone does not exceed the radio horizon)))

Tell that to the operators of Global Hawks and Reapers.

[lucul]

Tell that to the operators of Global Hawks and Reapers.

Ahahaahah)))
Announce the cost of Global Hawks and Reapers? ))))

[Goffman]

Quote: lucul

Announce the cost of Global Hawks and Reapers? ))))

Announce the cost of a downed fighter with a dead pilot. Cheaper?

[lucul]

Announce the cost of a downed fighter with a dead pilot. Cheaper?

So is UAV being touted as a cheap replacement for aviation? ))) No ? )))
You can do all this and cheaper with Calibers)))

[Goffman]

Quote: lucul

You can do all this and cheaper with Calibers)))

I doubt that front-line work with Calibers, as well as "expendable" manned aircraft, will be cheaper than using reusable UAVs with an ammunition load equal to the strike aircraft (I'm talking about the future).

[lucul]

I doubt that front-line work with Caliber. as well as "expendable" manned aircraft. will come out cheaper than using reusable UAVs with ammunition equal to the strike aircraft.

Easy - the cost of Caliber is equal to Bayraktar, especially since you have nothing to shoot down Caliber, and drones are shot down in 1001 ways)))

[Goffman]

Quote: lucul

Easy - the cost of Caliber is equal to Bayraktar, especially since you have nothing to shoot down Caliber

OK, you won. The war will show, as they say, and if anything, we will catch up again.

[lucul]

OK, you won. drinks The war will show, as they say, and if anything, we'll catch up again.

Understand, I am not an opponent of UAVs, I perfectly see their prospects with AI, but sculpting them as a panacea for everything is too much. UAVs are just one type of weapon.

[Krasnodar]

Satellites, repeaters, GPS))

[lucul]

Satellites, repeaters, GPS))

Native, Russia recently demonstrated the capabilities of new anti-satellite missiles. In the event of military action, not a single enemy satellite will fly close, even close to Russian territory. So we cross out satellite guidance immediately.

[Krasnodar]

In the event of large-scale military operations between the Russian Federation and the United States, I, first of all, will be interested in protection from radiation
But, even in this case, the problem of drones is their stealth for air defense systems. Until the decision comes and the order to shoot down the satellites, they will break the wood

[Mishanya74_2]

No, not in vain ..
Modern technologies will win the war ..
Drones are just them ..

[rocket757]

Therefore, drones are needed not to replace the B-21 strategic bombers and the latest generation F-35 Lightning II fighters, but to complement manned aircraft.

Everything is logical. Drones are one of the types of weapons in addition to everything else.

[Koval Sergey]

the drone is significant as an addition to manned aircraft

He said nothing new. Everyone already knows that the use of drones avoids the risk of death of pilots.

[OgnennyiKotik]

According to him, the air force needs a combination of next-generation drones, including strike systems, and fifth-generation aircraft. Their joint actions will make it possible to achieve maximum effect in future combat operations.

One of the most interesting concepts at the moment. If you take the "big" UAVs and Air Force.

But a swarm of small UAVs with quasi-AI will be able to destroy everything on the battlefields of the future.
And shock and reconnaissance propeller driven and jet UAVs are just entering the arena. The same Predator C jet with 2,9 tonnes of payload. This is a direct replacement for stormtroopers.

[Ka-52]

But a swarm of small UAVs with quasi-AI will be able to destroy everything on the battlefields of the future.

first solve the problem of the range and load of your quasi. To be a company of MFIs, their speed must be at a level close to SZ. So we throw out the current piston engines of the Rotax 912 type with their economy and put something like a turbojet engine. To ensure the flight range and acceptable load, something like the RQ-170 Sentinel or our Hunter is already being uprooted. That at a cost per unit, well, in no way will it pull to create swarms
ps And so yes, the fields of future battles for the Jays and Ewoks

[OgnennyiKotik]

"Horses, people mixed up in a heap." All of you have mixed loyal wingman, shock-reconnaissance jet, MALE, "flying wing", kamikaze drones, etc. All these are different systems for different tasks and types of troops.

Quote: Ka-52

type RQ-170 Sentinel or our Hunter.

They are absolutely not suitable for the role of slave UAVs.
We need the following types of machines:

[Ka-52]

"Horses, people mixed up in a heap." All of you have mixed loyal wingman, shock-reconnaissance jet, MALE, "flying wing", kamikaze drones, etc. All these are different systems for different tasks and types of troops.

well this heap is small only in your head. Specifically, there is something to object? Will you be sawing a piston-powered drone with a speed of 190 km / h behind a strike fighter with a lower stall speed? How will your fictional swarm accompany him?

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Ka-52

You will be sawing a piston-engine drone with a speed of 190 km / h behind a strike fighter

This idea was invented and suggested by you. Read what I write and what kind of UAVs I suggest as wingmen. I cannot argue with your fantasies about what I wrote.

[Ka-52]

Read what I write and what kind of UAVs I suggest as wingmen

you do not write, do not sound. You have thrown pictures that do not open for me. Is it weak to express your thoughts yourself?

I cannot argue with your fantasies about what I wrote.

I asked questions. And fantasies about the darkness of swarms of UAVs, surrounding strike fighters, burning hectares of the battlefield are your legends of the level of the Brothers Grimm But since you didn't work out with the answers, you went trolling

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Ka-52

You have thrown pictures that do not open for me.

Are these my problems or yours? If you don't understand what I am writing, why are you answering? It is clear that senile insanity is already on the doorstep.

[Ka-52]

Are these my problems or yours?

to post pictures instead of explanations and then cry out "don't open, your problems"? Oh yes, a very reasoned way of conducting a dialogue about technology just say that there is nothing to say yourself. And then he wrote here: "spaceships plow the vastness of the universe ...."

[lucul]

They are absolutely not suitable for the role of slave UAVs.
We need the following types of machines:

What are they needed for?
Russia, for example, will knock out all your factories producing drones with Calibers (to any operational depth) exactly like warehouses with drones - what do you want to replenish and produce drones with then? )))

[Ksanatos]

As far as I know, the S-300 has special missiles. appointments with a nuclear warhead, although they are in warehouses. In general, at least some, but there is a solution to this problem.

[Horon]

The solution is much simpler, and its name is reconnaissance and medium and long-range weapons. Warehouses, factories and mobile carriers of these devices are being hit. Brains already launched are carried out with the help of electronic warfare, suppressing orientation and data exchange between drones. The Americans correctly say that drones cannot yet solve the entire spectrum of combat missions, so they will not give up manned aircraft for a long time.

[lucul]

But a swarm of small UAVs with quasi-AI will be able to destroy everything on the battlefields of the future.

This is not true ))))
So far, the most effective method is a cruise missile flying around the terrain. The range of the caliber is increased to 4 km.

[rotmistr60]

drones are not needed to replace B-21 strategic bombers and the latest generation F-35 Lightning II fighters, but to complement manned aircraft.

This is how it should be - to complement. In every country, of course, there is someone who ardently proves the thesis - the future belongs exclusively to the UAV. But let's remember the 60s in the USSR when N. Khrushchev, having got a rocket, suddenly decided that planes and tanks were no longer needed, because we will fight exclusively with missiles. Who does not know how it ended may ask. But Khrushchev was at the root not right.

[Konnick]

Even reconnaissance drones and kamikaze minidrones will be delivered to the combat zone from a carrier aircraft (control point), which is out of the reach of the air defense system. UAVs are an addition to front-line aviation, although the most important task of UAVs is target identification and guidance.

[Mountain shooter]

Quote: Konnick

Drones-reconnaissance and mini-kamikaze drones will be delivered to the combat zone from a carrier aircraft that is out of the range of the air defense system. UAVs are an addition to front-line aviation, although the most important task of UAVs is to identify targets and aim

You can also rockets. The "Tornado" has such an option - DRON, which is thrown into the target area for additional reconnaissance.
I looked at the three-dimensional pictures that make up the drones in the sky, and I thought - this could be a three-dimensional minefield. Right in the sky. Controllable, and can hang for a long time ... Nothing will fly through such a cloud. Not a fighter jet, not a helicopter, not a drone. I am afraid that the locator will not be able to break through such a field either. Especially if the drones have Luneberg lenses or something similar. Well, 200 gr. Oktola ...

[OgnennyiKotik]

Something like this the United States tested. How it might look on radars is shown.

[askort154]

It happened historically. An offensive weapon is created - in response, a defense against it is created. The novelty of the 20th century is the UAV. Their active use is just beginning. But just as actively begins, the creation of means to counter them. The most vulnerable in UAVs is electronics. There are developments how to influence this. Both for individual UAVs and for the "swarm". Has already :
- "Battering ram" - stationary, effective for massive raids
UAV.
- "Sapsan" - to combat any type of UAV in R = up to 100 km., In
infrared and radar bands, providing their data
Air defense.
- "Pischal" - a 3 kg "gun", detects the target and suppresses its communication and navigation.
Developments are underway for more powerful, stationary installations, based on the principles of EMP, or "laser", which are capable of "burning out" all the UAV electronics at large distances.
So, "non-kill" capabilities of the UAV in the future will not work.

[Goffman]

Quote: askort154

The most vulnerable in UAVs is electronics. There are developments on how to influence this. Both for individual UAVs and for the "swarm". Has already:

Is the electronics of manned aircraft immortal for all this? (not like on the destroyer "Donald Cook"?) If not, then the pilot will be lost along with the submarine.

[Thrifty]

And what did he say wrong? Drones are used to mold such an icon, a fetish for the supporters of unmanned aircraft. Even the Yankees in Afghanistan used drones selectively, supplementing them with turntables, while the war in Transcaucasia only demonstrated the truth that without air defense any army in the world is worth little!

[Kostadinov]

Silly comparison - you can always make a drone with better range, speed, overload, and so on than a manned aircraft. It will always be cheaper. The man on board gives only intellectual superiority so far.
But here you can approach from the other side. It is possible to make a manned aircraft with the characteristics of medium and large modern drones and much cheaper. Thousands of such aircraft can be riveted and they will have some advantage over drones (you cannot take over control).

[Thrifty]

Kostadinov - such a drone will not be cheap, because replacing the crew is more expensive and complex electronics, it is expensive optics, it is a bunch of sensors for the continuous exchange of information, otherwise, such an isolated drone will quickly become an easy prey for any armed aircraft. ..

[OgnennyiKotik]

Well, it won't be cheap, so what? Is the UAV task to be cheap?
For some reason, UAVs interfere in one pile of kamikaze drones, shock-reconnaissance propeller and jet, flying wing, operational and tactical, etc.
UAVs are a huge class of technology where there is a place for both cheap and super expensive. So, in the implementation of the hypersonic unmanned SR-72, there will clearly not be thousands of them, there will not even be hundreds if they do it at all, but UTAP-22 is not a problem to make several thousand.

[Old26]

Quote: lucul

What are they needed for?
Russia, for example, will knock out all your factories producing drones with Calibers (to any operational depth) exactly like warehouses with drones - what do you want to replenish and produce drones with then? )))

Now you are making another "wunderwaffe" out of "Caliber". With dorsonic speed, they will not knock out anything and no one, if the enemy has serious air defense.
And in fact, it's time to tie any weapon system right away to make another "wunderwaffe" ???
UAVs are a fairly serious type of modern weapon. Not taking it into account on the battlefield is stupid. But it is even more foolish to think that this is a panacea for everything.
At the current stage, UAVs cope with a number of tasks. Both at the tactical depth and at the operational-tactical and strategic depth. But the further the range (combat radius) of this or that drone, the higher its "payload" - the more and more expensive it becomes. In some situation, "swarms" of drones can be used, in some they are powerless. So do not break spears, proving the unprovable to each other (or proving something by mixing everything together)

[ZEMCH]

Therefore, drones are needed not to replace the B-21 strategic bombers and the latest generation F-35 Lightning II fighters, but to complement manned aircraft.

Only the comprehensive development of the Armed Forces using all the capabilities of existing means and effective training in their use will help to resist any enemy. By prioritizing individual weapon systems, we risk failing in others, and this is fraught with bottlenecks. Yes, UAVs are good at separate theaters of operations, with individual opponents, but as practice has shown, an untrained army, with sufficient equipment for use, is a good target. I repeat once again - understanding the application and learning how to use it correctly)))

[lvov_aleksey]

I found it funny, that is, they want to merge the 6th generation of aircraft?
ps or another article rubbish (question to the moderators)

[Zomanus]

Well yes. A drone is a type of car trailer that allows you to take on a little more combat load. Well, there are specific tasks where drones rule, the same reconnaissance and target designation.

[migsu]

It's just ridiculous to read the nonsense of reasoning illiterate non-specialists !!!
What can be the targets when the planetary caps of the electronic warfare-missile defense system of the RF Aerospace Forces are included in the combat mode! ???