RTK "Marker" turns into ZSU

Anti-aircraft version of the "Marker" on a wheeled chassis

The development of the experimental project of the Marker robotic complex continues. Due to various improvements in technology, computing tools and software, the complex receives additional capabilities and new functions. Recently it became known that after another such refinement, the Marker turned into a self-propelled air defense system of the near zone.

Latest tests

On February 12, RIA reported on the latest work within the framework of the Marker project. News with reference to the management of the enterprise-developer. Technical aspects, goals and results of recent events were revealed by Evgeny Dudorov, Executive Director of NPO Androidnaya Tekhnika.

In the course of recent tests, issues of countering unmanned aerial vehicles were worked out. "Marker" was planned to be turned into a light self-propelled air defense system capable of detecting and hitting complex targets, incl. group. "Roy" drones represent a particular danger, and therefore technologies for protection against them are needed.

The experimental anti-aircraft complex was made on the basis of one of the available Markers. He received new hardware and software to solve new problems. Test firing was carried out using sports equipment. The role of inconspicuous small-sized air targets was entrusted to skeet targets launched from the stand.

Wheel "Marker" in one of the combat configurations

It is reported that the first stage of such tests ended with acceptable results. At the same time, the development of the project and its components will continue. Due to various changes, it will be possible to improve the overall characteristics of the complex.

Technical details

The anti-aircraft version of the "Marker" was built on the basis of the existing three-axle wheeled autonomous platform. Previously, this car was used in sea trials and demonstrated its autonomous driving capabilities on various tracks. It was also equipped with combat and other modules.

In the air defense version, a combat module with machine-gun and grenade launchers is mounted on the platform. A normal caliber machine gun is capable of effectively dealing with a wide range of ground and air targets. The drives of the machine-gun-grenade launcher provide rotation at a speed of up to 350 degrees / sec., which is enough to solve all the expected tasks. It is noted that no other combat module has such a rate of fire transfer.

The regular means of the module were supplemented with a small-sized radar station. Its antenna was placed on top of the module under a radio-transparent dome. The type and characteristics of the radar are not reported. At the same time, it is mentioned that it is capable of detecting targets with a low RCS and determining their coordinates with high accuracy.

The fire control system is built using neural networks. Such tools are used to analyze incoming data and recognize air targets. In the course of further development, it is planned to increase the efficiency of this part of the complex. The neural network in its final version should identify targets and direct weapon faster and better than a human operator.

Tracked RTK

As follows from the disclosed data, during the tests, the anti-aircraft "Marker" monitored the air situation using radar. Tracking of the detected target was carried out by automation with the help of optoelectronic means. After recognizing the object, machine gun fire was fired.

Standard target plates were used in the tests. This is a visually contrasting object with a diameter of 100 mm, flying at a speed of about 90 km/h. With certain reservations, such a target is capable of imitating a small-sized UAV. Reportedly, in the course of the tests, the Marker showed a probability of hitting a target of approx. 80%.

Performance Boost

Apparently, testing and testing of the anti-aircraft version of the Marker RTK will continue. Recent tests have shown that such a complex as a whole is capable of solving the tasks, but so far there are serious limitations. It is necessary to continue the development of the hardware and software, which will eventually bring the combat characteristics to the required level.

First of all, it is necessary to improve the reliability of the SLA. It is this component of the complex that is responsible for the search, detection and defeat of targets. All operations are carried out autonomously and without the participation of an operator, which places high demands on speed and efficiency. The fundamental possibility of solving the problem has already been shown, but further improvement of all systems is necessary.

Multipurpose combat module

The development of hardware and software should lead to the achievement of one hundred percent or close to it the probability of hitting targets. In addition, "Marker" must learn to fight not only with cymbals that have a predictable trajectory. It is necessary to provide escort and destruction of maneuvering UAVs.

The solution of all these problems will lead to the emergence of an extremely interesting and promising model of military equipment. Lightweight and compact robotic ZSU with maximum automation of work will definitely find a place in air defense systems. Such a complex will be able to effectively solve typical modern problems, independently or in groups.

New Features

It should be recalled that the Marker project is experimental and experimental in nature. Its main goal is the creation and development of promising technologies in the field of military robotic systems. As part of this work, Androidnaya Tekhnika created and tested several variants of autonomous platforms on caterpillar and wheeled chassis, suitable for installing various payloads.

Earlier, within the framework of the Marker project, issues of autonomous traffic control were worked out. Computer systems and software have been created that can independently drive a car along a given route, taking into account the terrain and obstacles. The RTK was also tested in a combat configuration. With the help of optics on the combat module, such a complex observed the terrain, searched for and accompanied targets. However, the decision to open fire remained with the operator.

After field tests, experiments were carried out under conditions close to real operation. So, "Markers" were used in the protection of the Vostochny cosmodrome and carried out patrols. Offline, they moved along the protected lines and searched for violators.

As it has now become known, Android Technology is working on another feature for the experienced Marker. The complex masters the observation of the air situation and the fight against flying targets. Some success has already been shown, and further growth in performance and capabilities should be expected in the future.

Reserve for the future

Thus, the Marker project continues to develop and again becomes a platform for the creation and testing of promising technologies. Based on the results of ongoing work, in the foreseeable future, the list of such developments and solutions will increase again. It will include new technologies in the field of detection, control and weapons systems suitable for use in air defense, incl. when solving complex problems.

It is known that the Marker complexes in their existing configurations will remain experimental platforms for exploring new ideas and testing components. At the same time, the Android Technology project will lead to the emergence of a wide range of developments of various kinds, suitable for use in real projects.

It should be expected that in the near or medium term, the developments on the "Marker" will form the basis of new types of military RTK, suitable for real operation. From the latest news, it follows that among such complexes there may be an automated self-propelled anti-aircraft gun with special functions.

How soon the current work on the "Marker" will be completed, and the automation will learn how to reliably hit complex targets in the form of UAVs, is unknown. The timing of the appearance of a real combat RTK with new features is also in question. However, the prospects of the project are already clear. Developments on the "Marker" - both in the field of air defense and in other areas - will certainly find application in the future and will affect the development of the army.

Comments

[Lech from Android.]

Hmm ... It is interesting to watch the evolution of these controlled robots, where will this evolution lead ... fantasy is slowly starting to come true.

[Civil]

Ground robots are very limited in use, but UAVs do not have such obstacles in the form of minefields, trenches, folds in the ground ... therefore, all these crawlers will be on the sidelines without air cover.

[Nyrobsky]

Quote: Civil

Ground robots are very limited in use, but UAVs do not have such obstacles in the form of minefields, trenches, folds in the ground ... therefore, all these crawlers will be on the sidelines without air cover.

However, for the protection of especially important objects, it is quite a good thing.

[Jacket in stock]

Quote: Civil

but UAVs do not have such obstacles in the form of minefields, trenches, folds on the ground

Ага.
But they also have nowhere to hide. Hang in the air, shine.

[musketon64]

And in order to hang in the air, they still need the absence of barriers in the form of atmospheric fronts. And they are not always favorable. Blow from the sky like flies.

[APASUS]

Quote: Civil

because all these creeps will be on the sidelines without air cover.

Bring ammunition, cover the unit with a curtain, evacuate the wounded and these are secondary roles?

[English tarantas]

I will even say more - dilute heavy armored vehicles on the offensive. Firstly, an increase in firepower, secondly, the diversion of enemy fire, and thirdly, saving the crews of armored vehicles, instead of which they will knock down an empty piece of iron

[28st region]

They still need to be covered with tanks, artillery, a couple of infantry regiments in case of landing.

[antivirus]

this technique ate 10 ABs of 100 V each - the control of Eurasia and the rise of passionarity require such decisions from the leaders of the country.
In 30-50 years, the descendants of Genghisides will trample on to Lisbon and Dublin, we are the first on the way.
The mentality must be prepared for that confrontation. for now it’s enough to get used to swallowing the dust of the steppes (to develop immunity in the bacteria of semi-deserts)

[KCA]

And where will the Kazakhs trample? After all, they are the descendants of the Genghisides

[antivirus]

In zurih, dispossess the gnomes.
It seems like a marshpl, otherwise you don’t think far.
Are you all worried about 10AB?

[English tarantas]

Still, alcohol is poison.

[antivirus]

who has tried everything - he speaks the truth.
I'll take your word for it.
connoisseurs respect

[serg.shishkov2015]

I especially liked the phrase about the capabilities of normal-caliber machine guns, over the past decades I have read and heard a lot about the ineffectiveness of such machine guns as air defense weapons! Didn't believe! and here is the confirmation! I agree - not for all purposes! but it’s too early to write off from the air defense arsenal!

[Lech from Android.]

In Syria, such controlled robots with machine guns showed themselves well ... in ambushes for militants.
You don't have to risk your people... sit at the monitor and make a hole in the terrorist's choice.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

It is rather where it is impossible to put large equipment or a larger installation, on small boats, outposts or checkpoints, for example.

[28st region]

And the phrase under the photo of the platform with a grenade launcher that they become ZSU

[Nikolaevich I]

Mdaaa...! This is how "a fairy tale becomes a reality"! ... I mean, fantasy becomes a reality ... In general, not "in a dream, but in reality" they began to fight with "flying saucers"! Whether there will be more! Where should the common man go?

[Lech from Android.]

It's sad, of course ... but such plates are already peeking into our windows ... violating privacy.

[riwas]

About machine guns in air defense.
In Poland, at one of the air force training grounds, at the end of last year, tests of a towed countermeasure system for mini- and micro-class unmanned aerial vehicles were carried out.
It is reported that this remote-controlled installation is armed with a 12,7-mm WKLM multi-barreled machine gun, has sighting daytime television and night thermal imaging cameras, as well as a radar station that can detect miniature drones at a distance of up to 3500 meters.
Three operating modes are programmed. In the first, the installation is completely controlled by the operator. In semi-automatic mode, the target is accompanied by an automated system under the control of a soldier. In automatic mode, everything is done autonomously, a person only needs to issue a command to defeat.
The declared rate of fire reaches 3600 rounds per minute. Length - 1300 mm, weight - 50 kg, firing range - 2000 meters.

[Jacket in stock]

Quote: riwas

In Poland, at one of the air force training grounds, a towed system was tested at the end of last year

And how does this differ from the long-known Phalanx or AK-630?

[28st region]

The fact that the projectile is not explosive. The rest is all the same. If you shoot down drones, then using shells with a remote fuse. Even during WWII, the Americans, using such shells, reduced the cost per downed aircraft from several thousand to 400 (!). You can shoot at small targets until you turn blue and smear. A projectile, a bullet will pass in a millimeter, it seems that the error is almost zero, but the target is not hit.

[Jacket in stock]

Quote: 28st region

The fact that the projectile is not explosive. Everything else is the same

Duc and these old men, too. I don't know about Phalanxes, but the AK630 does not seem to have a programmer for remote fuses.

[28st region]

Exactly. Our 30 mm shells do not have radio fuses. On the TV channel Zvezda there was a video, it seems Military acceptance about the Shell. They showed shooting at a small target. The little plane was spun for a minute, maybe more. They hit from a cannon like they poured water from a hose. Ultimately shot down by a rocket.
But still there is potential. You can put a radio fuse into a 30 mm projectile, I doubt it very much into a 12.7 mm bullet.

[sen]

The fact that the projectile is not explosive.

Falax has a projectile that is not explosive, but sub-caliber.
For destruction, the Mk149 sub-caliber projectile with an aluminum detachable pallet, a nylon leading belt and an armor-piercing core with a diameter of about 12 mm from depleted uranium is used as ammunition. Projectile weight 0,12 kg (with pallet). The effective firing range is 0,2 - 1,8 km.

[28st region]

Neither the Falax nor the AK-630 was designed to deal with targets such as UAVs. Their goals are RCC. And I don’t think it’s correct to talk about them in this regard. What are UAVs at sea. And in the ports they will appear in a row due to the distance from the borders of the b / d.
This threat appeared not so long ago. They will look for methods and means of dealing with them. And if a 30 mm projectile has potential, then a 12.7 mm cartridge simply does not have it.
There will be tons of metal sent to the sky with very mediocre results.

[sen]

And how does this differ from the long-known Phalanx or AK-630?

Less weight, dimensions, cheaper.

[Vadim237]

Here is approximately such an analogue of the 12.7 machine gun, you need to install the Marker platform and there will be an air defense system of the near zone against UAVs.

[Maks1995]

In general, work is underway, the eternal race of shells and armor.

And according to old developments, such as the Uranus family, they began to write less.

[Jacket in stock]

"Marker" must learn to fight not only with plates that have a predictable trajectory. It is necessary to provide escort and destruction of maneuvering UAVs.

Interestingly, how does the author imagine the destruction of maneuvering targets with a machine gun?

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

So I say that we need shrapnel from 152-mm howitzers of the "Acacia" type or 130-mm guns of the "Bereg" complex.

[prior]

More recently, such gadgets as a pager have been popular.
And where are they now?!
So it is with mini-robots. Play with them, play and forget.
For serious weapons, all these toys are one-shot.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

RTK "Marker" turns into ZSU

In the air defense version, a combat module with machine-gun and grenade launchers is mounted on the platform. Normal caliber machine gun

and apparently a single-barreled machine gun. How do the authors propose to carry out air defense with a single-barreled 7,62-mm machine gun?
First, the low density of fire. After all, you need a direct hit, and nothing else. an error of a few centimeters is enough for the trace to pass by without harm to the drone. And the drone needs to be shot down. This helicopter can be frightened by tracks, with an UAV, especially a kamikaze drone, this option will not work. There is no person on board the drone, and the kamikaze is already on its last flight.
Secondly, low reach in height and range.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

If they write about skeet hits, then these were direct hits. The mentioned 80% result is a very good result for such small targets.
Replacing the photographic 7,62mm PKT with the 12,7mm KORD is not a big deal, and the 12,7 caliber has a large selection of effective ammunition, albeit requiring a direct hit.
The most difficult technical problem, for me, seems to be the manufacture of a high-speed and accurate drive for the installation, as well as a sensitive radar, and it seems that they coped with this.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

The most difficult technical problem, for me, seems to be the manufacture of a high-speed and accurate drive for installation

Are the pointing speeds of the existing ZAK insufficient? The same "Shell", for example, has a horizontal guidance speed of at least 100 deg / s. What is the required speed? For example, the target is 300 meters away, its speed (linear) is 500 km/h (rounded up 140 m/s). Its angular velocity will be 25 deg/sec. At 100 meters - 55 degrees / sec. Do you understand? The speed characteristics of drives (even existing ones) more than cover the requirements. But this system is not even designed to hit targets at such a speed. What quadcopter will fly at a speed of 500 km/h? This is the maximum for a kamikaze screw drone at its peak. Therefore, statements about the speed of guidance cause ... let's say, misunderstanding.
Accuracy - yes, there were problems, both in land complexes and in sea ones.
For high-resolution radar, it will certainly need to be converted to the millimeter range. Not only do mm-range radars themselves have physical limitations - millimeter waves are absorbed by the atmosphere, which limits their range of propagation and requires increased receiver sensitivity. . Rain, fog and any moisture in the air greatly increase the attenuation of the signal. Good n-order filters and serious software will be needed to filter out interference. That is, the thing is rather complicated and expensive. We don’t put radars (SM and UHF) even on short-range air defense systems, but here is such chic for a machine gun? And all in order to get "a squirrel in the eye." But is it necessary if the problem can be solved in other ways - for example, by hitting a fragmentation field or GGE, or by scattering a pile of threads (for example, Kevlar or other material) in the area where the UAV is located, which will block the screws and the drone itself will fall? After all, as we understand, this installation is designed to destroy small-sized propeller-driven drones and quadrocopters.

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

If they write about skeet hits, then these were direct hits.

without any doubt. But here, too, there is a but. The trajectory of the "saucer" is predictable. She is ballistic. Yes, and the firing range there was probably a toy. The firing range during the tests is not reported, but the cymbals do not fly further than 85 meters. Even if a person, with certain skills, breaks these plates from a shotgun without any problems, then it’s not a problem for a computer-based FCS to provide a direct hit at all.

In the distant 60s, both here and abroad (in the UK), they tried to make a KAZ for armored vehicles based on a multi-barreled machine gun. ATGMs then were larger than the current ones, the six-barreled rate of fire reached 10 thousand rounds / minute, 400 bullets were fired continuously, there was a radar - but there was no defeat. Yes, the ATGM does not go in a straight line, with unpredictable changes in the trajectory within small limits, but even such a flurry of bullets did not allow hitting the target.

Of course, such an exact setting can be made - is it necessary, is it justified? Or follow the path of using the same programmable detonation projectiles and small-sized cheap missiles?

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

You have too many theses, but I will try to answer at least partially.
For a drive, not only speed is important, but also, as it were, resolution, that is, smoothness and pointing accuracy. With all this, the speed of the plates at 90 km / h is not at all small.
Do I need to do an installation? So it has already been made and a very encouraging result has been obtained.
What is the cost of the radar, I have no idea and I don’t want to know, it can turn out to be very inexpensive.
And this is the lower echelon of air defense, and there is a mass of equipment where this can be installed. Almost every vehicle with a machine gun or a small-caliber cannon will be able to participate in this.
Small-sized missiles will not be unambiguously cheaper and will not be able to work out on several targets flying close by.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

Almost every vehicle with a machine gun or a small-caliber cannon will be able to participate in this.

not each, but with an expensive radar. In the end, any BMP-3 has a chance to hit a UAV, but what are the chances?
Drives designed for a machine gun are not serious. Who is interested in a kilometer now?

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

Small-sized missiles will not be unambiguously cheaper

at one time, guided missiles turned out to be cheaper than hundreds and thousands of cannon artillery shells. it could also be made very accurate, only the rockets were still cheaper. And here, in general, an unguided rocket with a GGE charge or a network - threads suggests itself.

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

and will not be able to work out on several targets flying close

why? For ATGMs, the fuse is cocked at a distance of no more than 50 meters, for some - even earlier. and they can also successfully work on NC. The main thing here is not to beat your own calculation.

In general, there are questions. And you can't get away from them.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Why is it inconvenient to shoot a rocket at several small targets? Because each small-sized missile will need to be equipped with an equally small-sized homing head, and even along a steep overtaking trajectory.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

And why is it necessary to follow? And NAR can be fired in the same way as shells - at the intended preemptive point. Only the defeat will not be due to a direct hit, but in other ways. At such a range - a kilometer or two, which is provided by a machine gun - a rocket can generally be a cardboard cylinder with a checker and a fuse (it will be the most expensive element) to work according to a pre-programmed laser rangefinder setting. Anything cheaper than a radar and a supercomputer, these tasks are being solved now.

In general, what's the point of having a machine gun mount, i.e. installation of such a small detail? It is not more logical to accept the existing one - 30-mm with shells with remote detonation provides a zone of up to 3,5-4 km, followed by guided missiles? As an air defense and a universal piece on the ground. For ground soft targets, yes, machine-gun and garnet-gun garbage can take place as an automated firing point.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

And the size of the ammunition load, what to do with it? And something has not been heard about the successful testing of drones with cardboard containers.
And about a zone of 3,5-4,0 km for a 30-mm gun, this is from the realm of fantasy. According to personal experience, so to speak, from visual observation of the trajectory, there is at most 1,5-2 km, and then the flight along an unpredictable trajectory under the influence of unknown forces of nature.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

And the size of the ammunition load, what to do with it?

so the same problem with the machine gun. How many bullets will hit the target and how many will go into the milk? Judging by the data of WWII, when there were already radar fire control systems, and according to the recent time, the consumption of shells and cartridges that required a direct hit was generally wild. Not the same as according to the ancient POISOT, but still very large. And it doesn’t mean that the BC and the time for shooting the target would be enough. It was not for nothing that they came to the conclusion that shells with a programmable detonation were needed. But those ZSUs were far from the worst radars.

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

And about a zone of 3,5-4,0 km for a 30-mm gun, this is from the realm of fantasy

why? The projectile quite flies so much along a predictable trajectory.

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

from visual observation of the trajectory

but this thing is generally interesting) especially at night shooting. You can see such trajectories there ...))

It all comes down to price/value ratio. You can create everything, even a squirrel in the eye with a bullet to get. How much will it cost, and is it not cheaper to use other methods, despite the fact that it is not at all necessary to leave the drone's skin intact.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

There is no point in seriously considering the experience of firing from machine guns during the Second World War, because there the shooting was carried out without an electric drive, optics, and, most interestingly, it was carried out from a standing position!
And what can be the price ratio, judging by this installation, it is quite acceptable.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

There is no point in seriously considering the experience of firing from machine guns during the Second World War

Quote from Tomcat_Tomcat

judging by WWII data,when there were already radar fire control systems, and in recent times, the consumption of shells and cartridges that required a direct hit was generally wild. Not the same as according to the ancient POISOT, but still very large. And it doesn’t mean that the BC and the time for shooting the target would be enough. It was not for nothing that they came to the conclusion that shells with a programmable detonation were needed. But those ZSUs were far from the worst radars

And even more so on marine memory, such systems were the first to appear.

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

then according to this setup

we don't know anything about her. There is nothing to judge. Especially about the cost.. But nonetheless the presence of some kind of accurate radar and a high-speed data processing system for controlling a machine gun cannot but strain, it costs money, and a lot of it. (despite the fact that we consider it expensive to install a radar even on small air defense systems, in which the missile itself is not cheap). If you think that there are two transistors, then ...

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

On naval machine guns then there were good radars and POISOT was used? Do you understand what you are writing?

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

On marine storage. Even before WWII, there were good POISOs (for example, Hazemeyer), during WWII, radar fire control systems appeared. Even more so after the war. I am writing about this.

Everyone is free to have their own opinion. My job is to sow reasonable doubt. Every system should go through constructive criticism)

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Were there machine gun mounts equipped with POISO and radar fire control systems?

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

and how is a machine gun fundamentally different from a small-caliber cannon?

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Nothing, but on small-caliber 20-mm guns there was also no equipment for POISO and radar systems. The device is not fundamentally different, but different ammunition, different installation weights and different returns.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

40-mm Bofors already had radar guidance towers during WWII. Even then, the basic principle of firing was not each installation independently, but a centralized fire. Not to mention the post-war period. Phalanx has its own radar for each installation. The 20 mm is almost a machine gun, especially since all his shells are only designed for a direct hit. And then he spends a lot of rounds to hit the target.
And at that time and now they are not put on simpler systems and machine guns due to the discrepancy between the cost of equipment and the effect - it is expensive for such a worthless system.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Was there an electric guidance drive?

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

on the Bofors - yes. Even on the pre-war Dutch hazemeier. It was not only fully electrified and paired with POISOT, but also stabilized. The most unique thing of its time, but it shows that they did it even then. The British (who shamelessly removed the installations from the interned ship) and the Americans rushed after them. They took off their pom-poms and Chicago pianos and set up their improved hezemeiers. Even more so on post-war systems. So, in fact, nothing new was invented, except that they decided to put an expensive radar system on a machine gun.

Yane is against the automated machine gun being able to do a lot. sooner or later we will come to that. But for now ... especially in our conditions, price plays a role. For a machine gun, such a thing is expensive. I think this is nothing more than an experimental sample. where should you focus your efforts? not to create robots that shoot skeet, but to increase the efficiency of at least ship-based ZAKs - a ship is a very expensive thing to allow anti-ship missiles to hit it. This is a good area where you can make an effort. But there is no visible share of the marine theme. at sea, you need your own radar station, which does not "glare" from waves, etc.

[eehnie]

The main thing in the Marker project is to understand it as a platform for the development of new technologies and the necessary equipment. All this work is carried out at the stage preceding the actual application of technologies on combat platforms.

This will later be applied to real combat platforms. And between the first, it is very likely that there will be modernization by robotization of 2S9, BTR-D and BMD-2. All this work can be directly applied to the modernization by robotization of the air defense variant of the BTR-D.

(Automatically translated from English. Below is the original commentary in English)

The key about the Marker project, is to understand it like a platform for the development of new technologies and the hardware necessary. All this work is done in a stage earlier to a real application of the technologies to combat platforms.

Later it will be applied to real combat platforms. And between the first, very likely will be the modernization by robotization of the 2S9, BTR-D and BMD-2. All this work can have a direct application to the modernization by robotization of the air defense variant of the BTR-D.

[bovi]

In terms of countering swarms and controlled detonation of ammunition ... I would like to note that the neural network has no problems with calculating speed and range, it can use discrete, non-intelligent PSUs with a delay in the formation of a cone of propagation of striking elements. Obviously, such a PSU will be cheaper than things with radio control and command execution on the PSU. Put three barrels on the Marker with a controlled charge queue and it will create a cloud of buckshot in the desired area along the explored direction. Put three Markers on the field and unite them with a net - the cloud will be thicker and "more powerful". To make it even more fun, it is worth supplementing the "autonomous radar" with network coordination and a specialized radar.
And it would be wasteful to send swarms of loitering BPs into a protected area, because all the (apparent) advantage of a swarm looks like that from a human perspective.

[Electrical]

Their evolution will lead to another cut of the budget! Any boy gamer understands that without AI, this is just a vegetable and a target.

[Mint Gingerbread]

Like nerehta or uranium, a highly specialized platform. It cannot conduct a city battle, it cannot cover, there are many protruding and very vulnerable elements. There is no booking at all. Why is he needed in the back echelon of battle? Then it's useless. The robot must go ahead of the unit and open fire points and suppress them, that is, withstand at least 7.62 without breaking through. Such a platform does not need super cameras. All modern high-resolution cameras have long been smaller than 10 kopecks. There are no redundant systems, knock out the review and the operator is blind.
Why don’t they make combat robots for the hot phases, which would be engaged in the assault and cover of operational groups and platoons, where manpower cannot approach because of snipers and heavy fire.
The only plus is the development of automatic recognition, memorization and target tracking.

[Dimon-chik-79]

The development of the experimental project of the Marker robotic complex continues.

we can watch the development of one or another project for ages, then oh, fuck this project, another one arises!
but I would like to see footage of the operation of such a complex, in a special operation. For example, in the battles for Mariupol, such machines could not be useful .. and so

[firemann]

I'm afraid to say a banality, but there are a lot of BMP-1s in the warehouses, which are just waiting to be made into robots

[Electrical]

Good targets for anti-materiel rifles!

[stankow]

Normal caliber machine gun? Nichesa

[bischofite]

And where are these complexes on the battlefields?
May we not see them! Expensive and inefficient, too large targets from expensive imported components that are not mass-produced.
Does anyone have approximate data on the cost of such a sample and how much it will cost in case of mass production?
How will such a sample storm a trench or building? Therefore, it must be equipped with a manipulator (like loaders, excavators), with the possibility of attaching a turret with automatic weapons and a guidance camera.
During the Second World War, our tanks were worse in their characteristics than the German ones, but we had mass production. In addition, the produced equipment was very simple and reliable. It could be quickly, without sophisticated equipment, repaired and put into battle again.
Designers are simply obliged to follow the path of unification for the development of technology! This is written in all GOSTs! The mass production of components for electronics in our country was destroyed, has not developed over the past decades, and at present this problem has not been solved. This means that the electronics for these units will have to be installed in China, but you need to take from the one that is mass-produced.
An example is UAVs (mavics).
If the basic platform for such complexes will cost up to 300 thousand rubles. (without a body kit), then for sure they will be adopted by PMCs to attack complex objects, and then the RF Ministry of Defense will buy them. And this complex does not need super brains at this stage, a remote control with a range of 5 km is sufficient, and at the next stage it will be possible to think about installing artificial intelligence.