The "Strike" robot continues testing

68

In 2015, VNII Signal from the NPO High-Precision Complexes showed for the first time a prototype of the Udar combat robotic complex. Various works on this project are still ongoing, and recently new details became known. Curious information from the press service of High-Precision Complexes and Rostec was published by the TASS agency.

Versatile tests


It is reported that a number of various tests have been carried out, the purpose of which was to test and test the various functions of the new RTK. First of all, the main running capabilities of the "Impact" were tested. The features of interaction with other unmanned vehicles of various types were also checked.



Tests of systems responsible for autonomous movement have been carried out. RTK "Udar" is equipped with the so-called. traffic planning subsystem. It includes a set of sensors and meters with which a map of the area is created. Taking it into account, the control automation independently builds a route and follows it.

Unmanned "Strike" can interact with other autonomous or remotely controlled equipment. This RTK has already been tested in conjunction with an unmanned aerial vehicle. In particular, the joint work with a tethered UAV, which receives energy from the Udar, was tested.


In the aft part of the "Strike" can be placed a small-sized light robot of one purpose or another. If necessary, he descends to the ground and proceeds to do his job. The interaction of a full-sized RTK with such a product has also been tested in practice during tests. Proven small Robots capable of solving a wide range of tasks, from reconnaissance to the evacuation of the wounded.

It is noted that VNII "Signal" creates its own robotic systems by equipping existing samples with new equipment. According to this principle, on the basis of the BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicle, a platform for the "Impact" was created. In addition, six different fighting compartments of different types have already gone through robotization, installed on the existing chassis.

Serial base


The combat robot "Strike" was first shown several years ago, and in the future, the developers have repeatedly revealed certain features of the project and the desired capabilities of the finished complex. Of the last News it follows that all the declared functions and abilities of the "Impact" have been tested in the conditions of the landfill. In addition, the high efficiency of the basic approach, which provides for the creation of multipurpose robots based on existing technology, has been confirmed.

During the construction of the RTK "Udar", the serial BMP-3 chassis was used. It retained all the main units, although it underwent some structural changes. The chassis is supplemented with a set of video cameras with all-round visibility, remote and automatic control systems, communication facilities, as well as actuators for interaction with control bodies.


Another version of the complex with different weapons

At the experimental "Impact" during its first demonstrations, a combat module "Boomerang-BM", controlled remotely, was installed. Tests were reportedly carried out with other fighting squads with similar and different weapons. Such products received a set of equipment necessary for integration into the general control systems of the RTK.

In order to expand combat and operational capabilities, the complex can be equipped with additional unmanned systems. So, for reconnaissance and relaying signals can be used light helicopter-type UAVs, transported directly on "Udar". Land-based RTKs for various purposes are being developed, capable of monitoring, transporting various cargo, etc.

The "Impact" project provides for the ability to work in different modes. The armored vehicle can operate under the control of the crew on board or by commands from the remote control. In addition, an automated mode is provided, in which it independently moves along a given route, without needing the assistance of an operator.

On the basis of developments in the current "Impact", it is planned to create a multipurpose robotic platform suitable for the construction of samples for various purposes. In the future, the combat vehicle will be supplemented by transport and engineering modifications with different equipment and capabilities.


"Strike" with a combat module "Bakhcha-U"

Challenges and potential


In general, the current Project Strike and the expected multi-purpose platform may be of great interest to the armed forces. With the help of such equipment, it will be possible to solve a fairly wide range of combat and auxiliary tasks. At the same time, it will be possible to reduce risks or obtain other benefits of various kinds.

A combat vehicle, such as the existing experienced "Strike", is capable of patrolling and reconnaissance, escorting convoys, incl. with automated vehicles and even participate in battles using all available types of weapons. In fact, the combat RTK becomes a functional analogue of the BMP or BRM with some differences and advantages.

The engineering vehicle must carry the appropriate equipment, from the dozer blade to the loader crane. It can be used to evacuate equipment, to prepare positions, etc. The least complex equipment will receive robotic vehicles, which will have to transport various goods and people, incl. wounded.

As the tests of the existing combat RTK show, the new models will have several important advantages. First of all, it is the flexibility of the application of technology. It can be used in manned, remotely controlled and autonomous versions. In addition, the proposed electronics complex allows the RTK to be supplemented with various additional means, from combat modules to UAVs.

The "Strike" robot continues testing
Robotic engineering vehicle "Pass-1"

At the same time, the main result of the "Blow" project should be considered an unbuilt combat vehicle and not expected samples on the same platform. Within the framework of this project, VNII "Signal" used and worked out a new approach to the creation of robotic systems. RTK is created by equipping the finished machine with a set of special tools. This makes it possible to do without the creation of a special chassis and speeds up the work, and also allows maintaining a high degree of unification with other military equipment.

This approach is being successfully implemented in new projects. The RTK "Udar" and the robotic engineering vehicle "Pass-1" are being tested. Probably, in the future, they will present new versions of the RTK on an existing base with certain features, created in the same way.

Future issues


To date, our country has created several robotic systems for military purposes with different functions. At the same time, only individual samples, such as the engineering "Uran-6", have been adopted. Newer developments, incl. equipped with weapons and capable of performing combat missions have not yet been adopted and remain at the stage of development.

The latest news on the success of Project Impact shows that work is ongoing and is yielding the desired results. The search and testing of new solutions of various kinds is carried out. This means that the project is progressing and is gradually approaching the expected final. The Ministry of Defense will be able to consider the "Strike" in different configurations and select the most successful for adoption. In addition, the ideas and developments on this project can find application in new complexes that will be presented only in the distant future.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +15
    14 February 2021 06: 18
    And I like the very concept of such machines. We have tens of thousands of outdated combat vehicles in storage bases, so that can be converted into robots and sent into battle, saving people's lives ...
    1. +2
      14 February 2021 08: 36
      And I don't like the rework from the existing ones - huge volumes intended for people.
      A special chassis can be much smaller with the same armament.
      1. +4
        14 February 2021 11: 03
        Quote: aars
        A special chassis can be much smaller with the same armament.


        Not. This is a first line car. And it should overcome obstacles and obstacles as a full-fledged BMP. And any trench will stop baby carriages.
        1. -3
          14 February 2021 11: 24
          It is not at all necessary to assemble the stroller, you can also use a joint with even better geometric cross-country ability.
          1. +6
            14 February 2021 11: 38
            Quote: aars
            a joint with even better geometric cross-country ability is also possible.


            It's right. More variety in troops, so much more fun.
            True, the heads of the relevant services (formations, units, divisions) for such a variety, would rape the generator of such ideas.
            1. -2
              14 February 2021 11: 41
              Controversial.
              It is not rational to carry air, for many reasons.
              1. 0
                14 February 2021 12: 29
                Quote: aars
                It is not rational to carry air, for many reasons.


                Existing BMPs (like the base of the robot) can be made lower (but not due to the clearance).
              2. +3
                14 February 2021 17: 26
                Quote: aars
                It is not rational to carry air, for many reasons.

                So fill it up with ammunition.
                There are a lot of old tanks and infantry fighting vehicles in storage bases. In the first line of attack, it is much more profitable to start up just such robotic machines. They do not need to be built - they already exist. You only need a complex of remote / autonomous control, and forward into the attack. They will take all the first fire on themselves, identify firing points, save the lives of l / s.
                And they will not raze the budget with new developments and production.
                And the proposals and the willingness to robotize the existing T-72s have been around for a long time - 5 years ago.
                And on the basis of the BMP-3, it is more rational to make not a combat, but a protected vehicle - for transporting the ammo to the front and evacuating the wounded. Its combat durability (stability) is not too high, and the price is fellow what.
        2. -1
          14 February 2021 17: 47
          Better as a full-fledged death star!
      2. +3
        14 February 2021 11: 12
        Quote: aars
        And I don't like the conversion from the existing ones - huge volumes intended for people. The special chassis can be much smaller with the same weapons.

        The price of the issue, one already exists, albeit redundant, and the other to create and produce, and it is not a fact that it will be better and cheaper.
      3. +3
        14 February 2021 11: 56
        Remember, at least, the use of An-2 unmanned vehicles by Azerbaijan in the recent war for Karabakh. Of course, a disposable product and not at all autonomous, but it successfully fulfilled its purpose. And I also want to note about the life time of any armored vehicle in a fairly intense conflict - minutes! So, in my opinion, modernizing the existing equipment for new tasks is the very thing.
        1. 0
          14 February 2021 15: 43
          0) In my humble opinion (PMSM), there is no need to compare aviation, sea, land and space technology, there are too different conditions and what is suitable in one case does not fit in another.
          1) For example, in the case of aviation, you can easily discard the "noise background" when scanning, but for land vehicles it is much more difficult to do this, and in the case of military equipment of the front edge, this is generally not realistic
          2) Here, the very concept of such equipment is not suitable for the front edge, drones must have different mass dimensions in order to be able to transport drones in trucks and / or inside armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles (those that have a stern ramp).
          2.1) For example, there is a drone for mine clearance "uranium-6", it can be transported by trucks but not inside an armored personnel carrier / bmp, hence the problems when using the robot to break through the defense, it will have to be landed deeper in the rear and wait longer until it reaches the target , all this negatively affects the combat situation, giving the enemy time to react.
          3) PMSM, most of these robots should be either purely aviation with VPS or hybrid. Thus, so that they could be delivered, hidden, and then quickly attacked and left or take an advantageous firing position. Ideally, these should be some kind of "flying turrets with wire control" that will act "jumps", that is, took off => flew up to 5-10 km => attacked reconnoitered targets => took up a defensive position on a certain surface => covered the attacking units => repeat the cycle. I call such drones "jumpers" - this is a certain aircraft with deteriorated performance characteristics instead of improved performance characteristics / performance characteristics.
      4. +1
        20 March 2021 13: 54
        Absolutely agree. Even the same blow can be shortened by 3 meters by cutting out the control compartment and by placing the turret above the engine. do not forget that there is almost a meter (exaggerating) of free space above the engine. Alternatively, you can reduce the height of the body by about 80 cm and shorten it by 1,5 meters leaving 5 tracks, replace the engine with a smaller engine with a capacity of 300 horses. The size and weight of the entire machine is reduced. By reducing the size of the engine, you can make the car narrower. And the cost of such an option will be much less than the conversion of a "pure" BMP-3 by a lot, and the survivability will increase on the battlefield. Oh yes, put another BM with a 57 mm AU220M cannon.
      5. 0
        April 7 2021 14: 08
        In the event of a real conflict, "like - dislike" problems will become irrelevant. All these alterations will quickly come to naught.
    2. -1
      14 February 2021 09: 39
      Quote: svp67
      And I like the very concept of such machines. We have tens of thousands of outdated combat vehicles in storage bases, so that can be converted into robots and sent into battle, saving people's lives ...

      BMP-3 is not so much smile And outdated technology may not justify the effort spent on rework.
      1. 0
        15 February 2021 11: 47
        > And outdated technology may not justify the effort spent on rework
        + 100. In theory, reworking outdated equipment looks very attractive, but in practice, the costs may be even higher than the release of completely new chassis. We should not forget that keeping equipment in storage is also not very free. And you certainly shouldn't forget about spare parts. This issue is partially resolved through cannibalization, but this is not permanent. Yes, at the moment it is possible to assemble from five BMP-3 three operating ones, but this cannot last forever. But we are talking about a reserve for at least 20 years.
    3. -3
      14 February 2021 11: 15
      All new ground and air vehicles should be optionally unmanned. What would, depending on the tasks, use people or not.
      The efficiency of old equipment converted into unmanned (unmanned) tends to zero. In reality, only suitable for use as moving targets.
      It is necessary to initially include optional or complete unmanned vehicles in the equipment during design.
      1. -2
        14 February 2021 17: 50
        Not every pilot is a good drone. MBT for example. At close range, an unmanned MBT version is not needed in today's realities.
        1. -2
          14 February 2021 18: 00
          MBTs are not needed at all, a dying class of technology.
          1. +1
            14 February 2021 18: 04
            Still needed. But the number is limited.
            1. -1
              14 February 2021 18: 16
              No, not at all. And in modern armies they are not. Abrams M1A2, Leopard 2A7, Merkava 4 in an additional city shed, additional equipment and BC weigh around 80 tons. These are full-fledged heavy tanks. Tasks characteristic of this type of tanks.
              Light and medium tanks will cope with the rest of the tasks; older MBT modifications are now used as them. Moreover, they cope with them poorly, they lack maneuverability and stealth.
              In the near future, in developed armies, MBT will be transferred to heavy tanks, new light and medium tanks will be purchased. However, the contests have already been launched.
              1. 0
                14 February 2021 18: 37
                Well, not 80, but somewhere around 70. But yes, they are real MBT, and further development will follow the path of creating a universal combat vehicle for fire support for motorized infantry, in the escort version with 30-50mm cannons and in the PT 90-105mm version and weighing 35-40t.
                1. -1
                  14 February 2021 18: 53
                  Quote: ironic
                  But yes, they are the real MBT,

                  Well, they have gone far from the original MBT with 45-55 tons of weight, and there is also a question in the tactics of use. She's closer to Tiger 2 than T-64 or Leopard 2 (without any)
                  Quote: ironic
                  the escort variant with 30-50mm cannons and the PT version 90-105mm and weighing 35-40t.

                  Yeah. Here they can be optionally made unmanned. With remote control panels.

                  1. 0
                    14 February 2021 19: 00
                    Well, in the west, MBTs have long been heavy tanks with a weight of over 60 tons. Medium tanks were actually abandoned there in the past, and then they seem to come back, but this is no longer timely, because not really a tank is needed, but a universal platform for the weight of a medium tank. For the rest, we have cosensus. drinks
                    1. -1
                      14 February 2021 19: 51
                      I'm really surprised by the Turks. They are now in serial production of 2 types of medium tracked platforms Kaplan and Tulpar from different manufacturers. In versions of armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles / PT, etc. It's the same with all other types of technology. Everywhere at least 2 manufacturers per 1 position. What makes competition life-giving. In Russia, one unfortunate Kurganets cannot be brought to a series.

                      1. -1
                        14 February 2021 19: 54
                        Well, in fact, in this case, it is not known which is better, to buy equipment from different manufacturers or to hold a competition and choose one winner platform. Here, Namer and Merkavu are making two conglomerates of firms with subcontractors, and the platform is one. Is it good?
                      2. -1
                        14 February 2021 20: 13
                        Specifically, that Namer and Markova on the same heavy tracked base is correct. In general, there are few manufacturers of heavy tanks in the world, and in Turkey, Altai has one parent company.
                        But as I understand it, you have rather a compromise Rafael and Elbit alone could make such a tank.
                      3. -1
                        14 February 2021 20: 19
                        What is the compromise? If the tank is actually made by one, and the BMP is actually the other? And this is a whole set of firms in our country and in the States, not two. The fact that a set is dictated by our characteristics, but why two sets of pancakes?
                      4. -1
                        14 February 2021 20: 26
                        The task of the state is to enable the development of domestic production. It is impossible to create conditions for the formation of monopolies. If even in a short period of time it has +, then for a long period of time it has some disadvantages. One of the tools is a state order. It is necessary to distribute this money evenly, at least for 2-3 companies. Even if it may harm the specific result.
                        It is necessary to create competition, only in competition there is progress.
                        There is no competition in Russia, that's the result. One parade technique.
                      5. 0
                        14 February 2021 20: 55
                        I see competition in creating, as free as possible from the influence, as we say, vitamin Pi (from patronage), a competitive basis for choosing projects that will then go to the state order, and not in bringing to the absurd situation when it comes to the point that one and the same machine gun in hand and easel versions will be developed by two different companies.

                        PS Now, if Namer and Eitan were made by one group of firms, it would be monopolization. And Merkava and Namer are one platform and separation is more harm than good.
    4. +1
      14 February 2021 13: 11
      And who will serve them, the same robots?
  2. -8
    14 February 2021 09: 42
    Yes, whatever you say, but in terms of combat robots, we are ahead of the rest.
    No one else has anything like Uranium-9 in terms of weapon power.
    And "Strike" is an opportunity in a short time to provide the army with thousands of inexpensive robots using existing chassis.
  3. 0
    14 February 2021 10: 26
    As for me, at this stage of development, such a machine will be stopped by an ordinary machine gun or machine gun. All these sensors will literally fly off like a spray from the armor from a couple of bursts. And everything will end there for the robot.
    1. +2
      14 February 2021 11: 14
      Quote: looker-on
      As for me, at this stage of development, such a machine will be stopped by an ordinary machine gun or machine gun. All these sensors will literally fly off like a spray from the armor from a couple of bursts. And everything will end there for the robot.

      The road will be mastered by the walking one. At the beginning they also laughed at the UAV, now we are intensively catching up.
      1. +1
        14 February 2021 12: 36
        Nobody ever laughed at UAVs in our country, Israel began to master them at the end of the 80s to protect the bases and control the adjacent territories. At that time we had a different concept for them.
        But everything is constantly changing and therefore now we have come to what we have come to.
        Speaking of hang gliders, the same story!
        1. -1
          14 February 2021 17: 53
          Have you noticed what ground drones Israel is currently testing?
  4. +1
    14 February 2021 11: 31
    Interesting toys. Let's see how long it will take to reach the "Rise of the Machines" level from "Terminator"
  5. +2
    14 February 2021 12: 31
    People have interesting jobs, I envy.
    And the fact that they do it very well in all respects is not an experience to drink.
    I can not give comments on those. data since I do not own. Although the techie himself was interesting to see with his eyes, he was not supposed to and probably right.
    Therefore, I envy.
  6. 0
    14 February 2021 17: 45
    The direction of thinking of Russian project management continues to amaze me since the first show of Uranus-9. There is nothing wrong with developing elements of a future drone on the existing element base, but pulling the existing element base onto an unmanned project, and even on the principle of me and my grandfather, I have not yet learned how to do it ... well, I don't know ... For example, the project manager of Uranus, I would immediately suggest that my director be fired if this happened in my company.
    1. +1
      14 February 2021 18: 40
      People work and this is important!
      1. +1
        14 February 2021 18: 48
        Well, the stormy activity for budgetary funds is really loved not only in your country, but the importance in this is only for themselves.
        1. -1
          14 February 2021 19: 42
          Where are you from?
          I will watch you for the second time!
          1. 0
            14 February 2021 19: 55
            I didn't even hide the city where I live, let alone the country.
        2. -1
          14 February 2021 19: 44
          you don’t worry about our budget!
          1. 0
            14 February 2021 19: 58
            No, don't worry, I am interested in the issues of the approach to its formation as a whole. I am replenishing erudition. I was taught this way even in the Soviet university.
        3. 0
          14 February 2021 19: 46
          Where are you from?
          1. 0
            14 February 2021 19: 58
            I live in Israel.
    2. -2
      14 February 2021 19: 47
      Again ! Where are you from ?!
      1. 0
        14 February 2021 19: 58
        What stuck you or your patience refused?
    3. 0
      15 February 2021 12: 29
      Quote: ironic
      For example, the project manager of Uranus, I would immediately suggest that my director be fired if this happened in my company.

      ===
      Why so? there is a ready-made all-terrain vehicle (many), why not push it there, but there is a place, weapons, equipment and controls ?!
      1. 0
        15 February 2021 16: 37
        Because pushing there is the first rule of how to ditch any project.
        1. 0
          18 February 2021 20: 45
          Quote: ironic
          Because pushing there is the first rule of how to ditch any project.

          ===
          this is the answer?
          1. 0
            19 February 2021 18: 24
            Yes, I do the same at work when I manage projects.
  7. 0
    19 February 2021 19: 04
    Such a gizmo should support well and as a robot too.
    1. 0
      28 March 2021 18: 20
      This is the Viper forerunner of the BMPT Terminator. And the BMPT saw at the Army2018 a project in the form of a bench model, in the role of a control center for a combat multifunctional robotic complex with operators of 2 Uranov-9 and standard UAVs.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"