Impact UAV: ​​what could this special operation be like

100
Impact UAV: ​​what could this special operation be like

At the end of 2021, in Dubna, near Moscow, mass production of the Pacer UAVs was launched.

Alas, the big special operation happened, as always, at the wrong time, and the plant did not have time to reach serious production volumes.



It is my deep conviction that if this event had happened at least 2 years earlier, the special operation in Ukraine would have taken place according to a completely different scenario, and reconnaissance and strike UAVs would have made a key contribution to this special operation.

At the same time, I continue to come across informational materials, the general message of which is aimed at a derogatory attitude towards this type of weapon. In the framework of this article, I would like to dot the “and” in matters of efficiency drones and their role in the RF Armed Forces.

About aviation and air defense


A phrase from Articles:

Indeed, in battles with a normal regular army, such “shock” UAVs will be completely useless.

Speaking about the special operation, a number of publicists believe that if at the start of the conflict both sides had a “full-fledged regular army” (I would venture to suggest that it means the presence of aviation and a full-fledged layered air defense system) - this will happen throughout the entire special operation.

And it is not.

The radius of use of aviation and missile weapons makes it possible to attack the enemy throughout the entire depth of his communications.

And this means that the first phase of the war will be a battle between these branches of the armed forces (naturally, air defense forces will also participate). This battle will become extremely fleeting and will be fought until the defeat of the mentioned components of one of the parties. Losses received in this phase are not replenished, and even reserves may not have time to be used (recall the example of the destroyed aircraft repair plant in Ukraine).

The first phase will inevitably lead to the fact that one of the parties will receive the "keys to heaven."

Therefore, regarding the role of UAVs in such a war, it would be more correct to describe the situation as follows:

- if we lose this phase, no UAVs will help;

- if we win, UAVs are able to make a key contribution to the further development of events.

In the case of Ukraine, we won this phase.

In the context of the topic under discussion, this means that arguments like "if fighters arrive" no longer work, because fighters already they won't arrive. They were at the start of the conflict. But they were gone. Exactly the same logic is valid for air defense (with some reservations).

Phase 2


What happens to the side that loses the first phase?

The army loses the ability to transfer large forces, forming columns of military equipment, and begins to work as a "second number", completely giving up the initiative. Most of the technology is driven into cities, simply because, not by doing this, the command with a high probability dooms this very technique to rapid destruction.

Ukrainian MLRS in the city

We can see examples of this now in Ukraine everywhere, including in Mariupol.

Regarding the latter, the same Aristovich, who claimed that the air defense of Ukraine would destroy the Russian Aerospace Forces in a week, already explains that after a month of conflict, it must be understood that the Russian Aerospace Forces, already destroyed 4 times, will not allow the AFU group to reach Mariupol in order to try to deblock the city.

Does this mean that the war is over? Not at all.

Personally, I tend to single out 3 full-fledged tactics that will be used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the future:

1) the imposition of urban battles;
2) "guerrilla";
3) counter strikes against the advancing forces of the Russian Federation.

Let us dwell in more detail on the third point - counter strikes on the advancing units of the Russian army.

The most unfavorable option for the Russian Federation is the use of the tactics of artillery ambushes by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The fire weapon occupies a position that is well camouflaged, areas of concentrated fire are planned in advance, in the worst case, zeroing is carried out. Then it remains only to wait for the column to approach one of the sections. Observers on the ground, disguised as local residents, can monitor the movement of Russian troops and even adjust the fire.

In the case of towed artillery, even a single gun can operate with a rate of fire of 5-8 rounds per minute and, until the moment of destruction, is capable of inflicting certain damage on the advancing units. But things are much worse with MLRS.

Such a system is capable of sending 40 (!) 122-mm rockets in the direction of the enemy in less than 30 seconds, and then withdraw from the position and go to the rear to reload. There will be simply nothing to get and destroy it - aviation will not have time to react. The counter-battery work of our artillery also does not guarantee success, because the count will go on literally for seconds - the MLRS collapses too quickly and leaves the position.

This means that each MLRS system can be repeatedly used in artillery ambushes, each time carrying out a fire defeat comparable to an attack aircraft raid.

Detecting MLRS at an already prepared camouflaged position in the "standby" mode is the most difficult (although possible). The greatest chance of detection is at the moment of movement. Either when the system moves to the front, or when a position is being set up, or when it opens fire or moves to the rear, having already fired back.

Below is a video of the discovery of the MLRS followed by surveillance of the vehicle in order to determine the point where ammunition is stored and reloaded. Although there is information that initially this supply point was “surrendered” by a random civilian inhabitant, who, out of “curiosity”, took a picture of the positions of the cars on his phone and posted this photo on the network.

[media=https://youtu.be/bJRaRPyOVXs]

However, it should be understood that the basing of MLRS systems inside buildings is not at all necessary. The photo below captures the moment of reloading the MLRS, which is called in the field. At the same time, an ordinary civilian truck was used as a "warehouse" or a transport-loading vehicle, as you like.


There is every reason to believe that since a similar approach was practiced back in 2015, and in recent years Ukraine has been preparing for war, then in Ukraine today there may be many such “mobile” supply points. Which, firstly, are mobile, and secondly, they do not look like a military warehouse or military equipment. That is, it is possible to identify them precisely as a supply point only by catching them “by the hand” during reloading. 1 ATGM in this case should be quite enough.

As a conclusion: the destruction of large warehouses is good, however, the functioning of the MLRS will be possible for some time after their destruction due to "transport-loading trucks".

In view of the foregoing, it is necessary to tightly control the movement behind enemy lines at a distance of up to 100 km from the front line, which is just easily feasible by attack UAVs. Moreover, the use of strike UAVs for these tasks has practically no alternative.

Indirectly, the correctness of this conclusion is indicated by the results of the operation. In particular, we are talking about the losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in cannon artillery (“more than half”), armored vehicles (also “more than half”) and MLRS - more than ... a quarter (!). This ratio is explained simply - both cannon artillery and armored vehicles, having entered the battle once, have a great chance of being destroyed in this battle. MLRS, on the other hand, do not enter into a classic battle, having fired from a distance, they quickly go to the rear.

Thus, at the beginning of the conflict, strike UAVs should be used primarily to detect and destroy:

1) air defense remnants;
2) MLRS;
3) cannon artillery;
4) all other purposes.

It is from the MLRS that our troops can potentially receive the most damage.

Urban combat tactics


We justified the need for the participation of strike UAVs as a means of combating oncoming strikes and artillery ambushes, but what about urban battles?

Before participating in city battles, you need to approach the city. According to the testimony of civilians evacuated from Mariupol, at the beginning of the conflict, MLRS "packages" sent shells towards the approaching Russian troops. That is, the problem is still the same. And it would be nice, before bringing your equipment to the city, to surgically clean it of heavy enemy equipment, moreover, in conditions when this equipment is pressed close to civilian infrastructure.

This will significantly reduce losses, both during the blocking of the city and during the subsequent assault.

The role of UAVs when escorting strike units


Tanks traditionally used in the vanguard to overcome the enemy's defenses, however, in addition to the obvious advantages, they have a significant drawback - they "see" very poorly. A logical addition to the work of tanks on the ground is the control of the environment of the UAV, including the strike ones. The strike function can be required in cases where the column does not have its own forces to effectively defeat the enemy detected from the UAV - this may be due to the presence of the enemy behind buildings (mortars), or behind terrain folds. An example of such a situation could be the defeat of a Russian tank from the roof of an airport.

I will not post this video here, but anyone can find it on their own. In the context of the topic, it is important that the position from which the Russian troops were fired is easily detected by the UAV, it was not disguised, the AFU soldiers were running imposingly on the roof. At the same time, the calculation of this ATGM could well have been hit by the simplest ammunition.

Strictly speaking, this example reveals another problem of our Armed Forces - due to the weak saturation of the army with UAVs (even reconnaissance ones), the principle of network-centric warfare, about which there was a lot of talk, was not implemented in practice.

Although its implementation in the framework of the mentioned example did not require any significant difficulties. It was enough to have a small UAV control vehicle as part of the tactical level, whose tasks would include at least visually control the situation around the group at a distance of 2–3 km. And also include an 80 mm self-propelled mortar in the link. This would already be enough to, in the situation described, first detect an equipped enemy position, and then hit it with a mortar.

The imperfection of Russian weapons for UAVs


Another argument against strike UAVs in general and Russian versions in particular is the opinion that their weapons are extremely outdated.

In one of articles it is worded like this:

In general, laser guidance is the last day today. More than enough protection and countermeasures.

The general meaning of the arguments weapon The 2nd generation is worse than the third generation weapons, then ... in simple terms, the Russian version of the strike UAV is a poor craft that is not applicable in a war with a “serious enemy”. Suitable only to disperse rallies.

What is the fundamental error of the applied approach?

Are there active defense systems? Yes.

Are there systems that allow you to track the direction from which the laser is irradiated? Yes.

Are there air defenses? Yes.

Are there fighter jets? Yes.

Are all vehicles in Ukraine (or in the army of any other country) high-end tanks? Over which fighters fly, covered by air defense from the ground? We have already dealt with fighters and air defense.

As for ground equipment, even in the US and Israeli armies, the percentage of equipment equipped with KAZs is a fraction of a percent.

At the same time, we have already determined that the priority targets for UAVs are not tanks at all, although they can be destroyed.

In other words, we have a 5nd generation missile that is 2 times cheaper, which allows us to successfully perform 95% of the tasks that 3rd generation weapons can perform. This does not mean that you do not need to develop.

But this also does not mean that 2nd generation weapons cannot effectively perform a wide (!) Range of tasks.

Psychological effect and range


Those who criticize UAVs absolutely do not take into account the psychological effect of their use. And it's worth considering.


The distance at which a battle between motorized units is possible reaches several kilometers. Artillery damage in most cases is possible at distances up to 20 km.

If the advancing army has strike UAVs in its composition, it becomes possible to create a zone in which enemy equipment will be hit pointwise, without being able to shoot back.

The psychological effect of such a situation is enormous - even unaffected equipment is simply abandoned, because there is no point in sitting in it.

The tactics begin to acquire the following features - first, drones fly into the area, clear it of equipment, and only then ground forces advance there, against which only the enemy's manpower remains. The morale of these units is also in question, because fighting against heavy vehicles without heavy vehicles is not the most pleasant experience.

Immediately at the time of the advancement of the UAV columns, they provide a safe zone within a radius of 20–40 km in order to exclude artillery damage.

In this format, without fuss, the entire territory can be cleared.

The assault on large cities, in which the enemy's armed forces decide to dig in, cannot be avoided. However, here, too, preliminary cleaning by strike UAVs can significantly reduce losses.

Attack UAVs will also be useful in patrol missions in the rear, protecting columns from the actions of small "partisan" groups.

Conclusion


Alas, everything that was written in the previous chapter is my fantasy. In reality, behind the beautiful term "air supremacy" there are situations when our tanks are burned from the roofs, without masking the position from above at all. They fire at columns with artillery, and at the same time this artillery does not have active defense systems. This happens because we do not have enough Orions. Russia needs at least 200, and preferably 300 or 400 strike UAVs.

I also see very well that we are lagging behind Western countries in this direction. However, the meaning of the article is to prevent the opinion that this direction is futile and not suitable for a war with a “normal enemy” from taking root in society.

The fact that a plant for the serial production of UAVs has been built inspires cautious optimism. It is unfortunate that this plant did not have time to work for at least a couple of years, because in this case the special operation would have been completely different.

In conclusion, I can recommend for viewing an excerpt about why we are lagging behind in this direction.

Our news channels

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

100 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    March 31 2022
    It is from the MLRS that our troops can potentially receive the most damage.

    From the MLRS and get the most damage.
    1. +7
      March 31 2022
      From the MLRS and get the most damage.

      Arta, MLRS
      1. +3
        April 1 2022
        Let us dwell in more detail on the third point - counter strikes on the advancing units of the Russian army.
        How very tragically the author describes this situation. Kind of stupid columns go AI-driven in easy mode. In this case, there is an organization of movement in general, air cover is planned, advanced patrols and combat guards, a lot of things must be done in cooperation with other forces and means. And as the author described, well, sadly it turns out.
    2. +8
      March 31 2022
      The author is completely right! UAV for cleaning the rear, for working on combat targets, especially in open areas, to disrupt logistics, the very thing you need! actively work on the enemy!
      1. +5
        April 1 2022
        Hmm, here last year, foaming at the mouth, they argued that UAVs are still children's toys and their successes are an accident or inflated.
  2. +15
    March 31 2022
    Strictly speaking, this example reveals another problem of our Armed Forces - due to the weak saturation of the army with UAVs (even reconnaissance ones), the principle of network-centric warfare, about which there was a lot of talk, was not implemented in practice.
    . If only this....
    The reconnaissance and strike component of the troops is not only needed, but many times more is needed ...
    Still learn, work out schemes, tactics of network interaction !!!
    In general, study, study and replenish the material and technical base of the troops.
    It's not cheap, but it's very necessary.
    1. -10
      March 31 2022
      [quote=rocket757][quote]
      In general, he is studying, studying and replenishing the material and technical base of the troops.
      The thing is, not cheap, but very necessary. [/ Quote]
      oh yes, you can still be tormented by putting a soft sign in the word "learn"
      1. +1
        March 31 2022
        Put and sho, the meaning has changed?
        Spelling, grammar, alas, not mine ...
        Everyone who puts cons to the "teacher" DO NOT.
        I can't fix them all...
        I have always treated teachers with respect, and those who receive ... so they punish themselves, in the end!
    2. 0
      April 1 2022
      Quote: rocket757
      It's not cheap, but it's very necessary.

      very cheap too!
      Bayraktar TB2 was a hit. The drone itself does not have any special technologies, it is rather a constructor made from imported components, but the constructor is cheap - the price ranges from $2,5 million to $5 million apiece, and a set of six drones, two control stations, two hundred ammunition and an auxiliary equipment is offered for less than $ 70 million .....
      The most modern T-90M Breakthrough costs, on average, 300-330 million i.e. about 4 million dollars ....
      1. 0
        April 1 2022
        Quote: KIND LAVRENTIUS
        very cheap too!

        Not about the ratio of price, one product to another ... about the maintenance of a large, modern, well-equipped army in general ... in total.
      2. +4
        April 1 2022
        Quote: KIND LAVRENTIUS
        Bayraktar TB2 was a hit. There are no special technologies in the drone itself.

        A successful combination of characteristics, price, reconnaissance and strike capabilities. In principle, it is necessary to consider the TV2 complex with MAM-L bombs, they provide the capabilities of systems of a class higher but at an order of magnitude lower price.
  3. -5
    March 31 2022
    One thing pleases us - at this level of intelligence, we don’t even have conscripts after KMB.
    In the case of towed artillery, even a single gun can operate with a rate of fire of 5-8 rounds per minute and, until the moment of destruction, is capable of inflicting certain damage on the advancing units. But things are much worse with MLRS.
    I don’t even know how to call it (the word characterize it 24 levels higher) Damn, maybe they’ll really ban me for another month so that I don’t read such stupidity on the site I once respected. The question is why am I still here? Yes, it's like that dog who was taken for a walk to his favorite pole .... laughing
    1. +2
      April 1 2022
      had this event happened at least 2 years earlier, the special operation in Ukraine would have taken place according to a completely different scenario
      Already the level of "analysis" shows.
  4. -19
    March 31 2022
    The author was so carried away by pulling an owl on a globe that he completely ignored such a kind of videoconferencing as helicopters. From personal experience, I will say that no UAV carrying a 50 kg load can be compared with a pair of "crocodiles" accompanied by an advancing column. well, all these arguments "from the evil one" oh, they will reload with civilian trucks and no one will check them. If we take air supremacy as an introductory one, who interferes with landing a group of MTRs - with an inspection of a truck or simply firing at them - located in the combat zone - on wheels and let them stand until further proceedings what they carry there - watermelons or reloading for MLRS. And about the psychological effect - when a couple of alligators enter the comb on greenery - there is not only delight but also fear, although they are their own, but you never know - they suddenly confuse or the radio operator messes up the coordinates of interaction and the effect of psychological amazing - thunder and lightning - death from the sky . So why fence a garden there, after all, there is not enough to rivet a UAV plant, here, after all, for each trained operator, communication and landing means are also needed. In general, drum UAVs are currently a very niche product. So far we can do without it, but we'll see how it goes. When attacking the Gostomel airfield, the Vitebsk system on the Ka 52 made it possible in one of the episodes to repel 18 launches of the Stinger MANPADS, but is a piston UAV capable of such? big question.
    1. +23
      March 31 2022
      This is not the author pulling an owl on the globe, it is you pulling an owl on the globe, imposing unusual goals for UAVs and ignoring the advantages of network-centrics that have already been implemented in other countries regarding the use of UAVs.
      UAV, here, after all, for each trained operator, communication and landing means are also needed

      And for each helicopter - a trained pilot, and more often two. And the training of a helicopter pilot is longer than the training of an UAV operator. Incomparably longer. Therefore, the more likely loss of one is even more expensive and more difficult to replace.
      who interferes with the landing of the MTR group - with an inspection of the wagon

      You are a great original - write down the MTR-shnikov in the VAI.
      1. +1
        April 1 2022
        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
        ignoring the benefits of network-centrics that have already been realized in other countries regarding the use of UAVs.

        We do not use only one link, the shock one, and it may simply not be reported on, reconnaissance and target designation from UAVs is widely used.
      2. -1
        April 1 2022
        U .. Comrade .. This classic with inspections by groups showed itself back in Afghanistan, and what does the wai have to do with it ?? Thinking with your head is not destiny?
        1. -4
          April 1 2022
          what's up wai??

          Despite the fact that it is equally delusional, like the method proposed above. Little hope that at least in comparison some will start
          think with your head
    2. +10
      March 31 2022
      Quote: vervolk
      as long as we manage without it

      Apparently, the losses of our pilots do not bother you.
      For the embezzlement of those close to the trough, Russia must now pay with the lives of officers.
      1. +1
        April 1 2022
        Ours learned to shoot them down very well and apparently considered these things to be frivolous. The experience of Syria may have convinced them. Especially the attack of foam drones that disabled two bombers. It was a direct spit in the face, I think so.
    3. +11
      March 31 2022
      Quote: vervolk
      From personal experience, I’ll say that no UAV carrying a 50 kg load can be compared with a pair of "crocodiles"

      And how long can this pair of "crocodiles" be continuously in the air? Hour? Two?
      A pair of Orions around the clock.
      1. -10
        March 31 2022
        And how long can this pair of "crocodiles" be continuously in the air? Hour? Two? A pair of Orions around the clock

        How many days do Bayraktars hang in the sky, huh? )))
        1. +2
          April 1 2022
          Quote: lucul
          How many days do Bayraktars hang in the sky, huh? )))

          12 o'clock exactly! maximum 24 hours, but this is in laboratory conditions.
          1. -2
            April 1 2022
            12 o'clock exactly! maximum 24 hours, but this is in laboratory conditions

            It was in the form of hanging in the sky of Ukraine, before being shot down)))
      2. -3
        April 1 2022
        You compare the firepower of drones and a pair of crocodiles or 52x..
        1. +2
          April 1 2022
          Quote: Andrey VOV
          You compare the firepower of drones and a pair of crocodiles or 52x..

          Well, let's compare.
          Orion carries pieces of 4 bombs or 1 pettur. Hangs constantly in the right place and sees everything. If he can't do it himself, he'll call for help.
          The helicopter stands at the airfield and occasionally happens in the right place, and then, if someone sees something and calls.
          That's the whole comparison.
          1. 0
            9 2022 June
            Here ! they saw through the drone and the helicopter came to a familiar place as to a training ground with pre-known targets .. It's just that the author did not set himself the task of all the avionics.
    4. -8
      March 31 2022
      The author was so carried away by pulling an owl on a globe

      I support.
      The author of the article EVERYWHERE in the text focuses on IMPACT UAVs, even when describing the need for reconnaissance functions.
      Reconnaissance and strike UAVs are, to put it mildly, not the same thing. And the author is everywhere the same. For disposable strike UAVs, installing expensive reconnaissance modules is redundant, it is enough to aim at external target designation - it’s much cheaper.
      Russia lacks precisely INTELLIGENCE UAVs, and not strike ones - we have something to hit and in excess (self-propelled guns / MLRS), but intelligence is lame.
      The author focuses specifically on shock UAVs)))
      Why did Bayraktar fail in Ukraine? Yes, because in Karabakh Bayraktar performed reconnaissance functions, and fired MLRS with guided missiles, and in Ukraine Bayraktars were used as IMPACT - hence their failure.
      For Russia, first of all, reconnaissance UAVs + MLRS based on Tornado with active homing missiles are needed.
    5. +6
      March 31 2022
      That is, is it normal for you to substitute a car and pilots under MANPADS? Just to instill fear. The result of this has already been seen, at the beginning of the NWO. While a normal UAV can track and attack targets outside the range of MANPADS and short-range air defenses.
    6. +2
      April 1 2022
      Quote: vervolk
      I'll tell you from personal experience,

      what experience do you mean? and why do you think that your experience is useful?
      Quote: vervolk
      who interferes with the landing of the MTR group - with an inspection of the wagon

      are you out of your mind??? behind the front line to land troops to inspect a truck ???
      Quote: vervolk
      In general, drum UAVs are currently a very niche product. For now, we can do without it, but we'll see how it goes.

      we manage .... only the price is very high !!!!
      look at the work of the UAV as a spotter, it is extremely effective !!!!
      Quote: vervolk
      the Vitebsk system on the Ka 52 made it possible in one of the episodes to reflect 18 launches of the Stinger MANPADS, but is a piston UAV capable of such? big question.

      For your information, 3 helicopters did not reach the Gostomel airport and were shot down over the Dnieper to the landing point ....
      A bayraktar-type UAV flies at heights inaccessible to MANPADS ....
    7. +1
      April 1 2022
      The operator is essentially a gamer. A lot of things are automated.
  5. +12
    March 31 2022
    At the end of 2021, in Dubna, near Moscow, mass production of the Pacer UAVs was launched.
    It is my deep conviction that if this event had happened at least 2 years earlier, the special operation in Ukraine would have taken place according to a completely different scenario.

    And in my deep conviction, if this plant had been built 2 years earlier, now we would have had enough of these UAVs. Well, the Pacer has been tested, in principle, for a long time. Supplied in small batches. What prevented the plant from being built right away? Moreover, the war has been looming for a long time. So you only have yourself to blame.
    1. +8
      March 31 2022
      It's not about the factory. The plant, as I understand it, will only produce gliders. We don’t have electronics, optics and precision mechanics of our own - this is a more serious problem than gluing wings. With suitable engines is also a problem.
      1. KCA
        -1
        March 31 2022
        The gliders and the assembly of the UAVs themselves will be produced by the recently built workshop, and all the filling will be manufactured by the nearby DMZ, which was bought by Krondshadt, everything is pretty even with optics, Shvabe makes both optics and night vision devices, maybe not of the highest level, but quite applicable for military use
      2. +1
        April 1 2022
        Quote: DenVB
        We don’t have our own electronics, optics and precision mechanics - this is a more serious problem,

        if you don't have your own - buy it abroad!!! buy a license!!!
        a night light was bought for a pine-y license !!!!
  6. +14
    March 31 2022
    Impact UAV: ​​what could this special operation be like

    What could this special operation be like if new armored vehicles had not been tested for ten years? Even the one that rode in the parades, apparently remained there.
    1. +3
      March 31 2022
      Under such conditions, the differences between the new BT and the old one are minimal and not fundamental .. UAVs have a completely different level of database maintenance, which is what the author is talking about ..
  7. -12
    March 31 2022
    Impact UAV: ​​what could this special operation be like

    Unambiguous association:
    Sometimes, looking from the porch to the courtyard and the pond, he talked about how nice it would be if suddenly an underground passage was made from the house or a stone bridge was built across the pond, on which there would be shops on both sides, and that merchants and sold various small goods needed by the peasants.
    (Manilov. "Dead Souls" (N. Gogol)
  8. -20
    March 31 2022
    The whole article is the thoughts of a couch journalist.
    The most unfavorable option for the Russian Federation is the use of the tactics of artillery ambushes by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The fire weapon occupies a position that is well camouflaged, areas of concentrated fire are planned in advance, in the worst case, zeroing is carried out. Then it remains only to wait for the column to approach one of the sections. Observers on the ground, disguised as local residents, can monitor the movement of Russian troops and even adjust the fire.

    How this genius was going to hit moving targets with unguided artillery shells, only his fantasies are known.
    1. +17
      March 31 2022
      Quote: KKND
      How this genius was going to hit moving targets with unguided artillery shells

      Yes, just as it has been done for hundreds of years.
    2. +7
      March 31 2022
      And how do Grads work now with correction from UAVs?
    3. +7
      March 31 2022
      How this genius was going to hit moving targets with unguided artillery shells, only his fantasies are known

      Just like any moving object is hit - by pre-emptive shooting.
    4. +1
      April 1 2022
      Quote: KKND
      How this genius was going to hit moving targets with unguided artillery shells, only his fantasies are known.

      the network is full of similar videos ... and consequences ....
      and there is also a video of an ambush on the network where 5-6 soldiers are exchanged for t72b3 and 9-12 motorized riflemen ... and the UAV corrects Vushnikov ...
    5. +1
      April 1 2022
      Quote: KKND
      How this genius was going to hit moving targets with unguided artillery shells, only his fantasies are known.

      How have they been doing this for 100 years? belay
  9. +9
    March 31 2022
    Impact UAVs are needed, even in the form in which they are. Especially for urban battles, hunting for nomadic guns (MLRS) and escorting columns. Loitering ammunition is also very much needed, in much larger quantities than they are now.
  10. +20
    March 31 2022
    The author missed one very important issue. The article stipulated that if they launched the production of "Pacers" and indeed any UAVs 2 years earlier, they would have managed to saturate the troops with this equipment. Yes, at least 5 years earlier, they could not for one simple reason, there are no domestic serial piston aircraft engines. Aviation appears when aircraft engines appear in the country. In the country, not only is there no production of piston aircraft engines, but the factories were closed, and the engine design bureaus were dispersed. Here is "a fried rooster pecked at the sciatic nerve." Now a violent, that is to say, a stormy activity of responsible "effective competencies" will unfold, financial flows will flow and flow, flow, flow. Here they are the fruits of general optimization and the global division of labor. As the saying goes: "Eat, don't get dirty." We say that Ukrainians like to jump on a rake, but they themselves are the same.
    1. +4
      April 1 2022
      Now they will create a new design bureau, in which the director and the top will be charged a salary of 1-2 million, they will recruit students for 20 thousand, and they will wonder for a long time why the process of developing a new engine is not going as we would like.
  11. +12
    March 31 2022
    I agree with the author. Even if we had a hundred Bayraktars (or analogues), most likely, Donbass would have been completely liberated, and with much fewer losses than we have today. And also both in Kiev and in the Nikolaev direction there would be more success than we have.

    And here's what I don't understand - if we realized that we didn't have time to produce it ourselves, was it really impossible to hurry up and buy a hundred or two "Wing Loong" from China?
    1. 0
      March 31 2022
      Quote: DenVB
      was it really impossible to hurry up and buy a hundred or two "Wing Loong" from China?

      HOW BEIJING WIN AND LOST THE GLOBAL DRONE MARKET
      One of the rising stars of the unmanned aerial vehicle market has become the People's Republic of China, which in the shortest possible time launched the production and sale of a number of affordable strike UAVs.

      A few years ago, many analysts prophesied that China would become the leading supplier of military drones, but since then the situation has become diametrically opposed.

      Instead of enthusiastic praises towards the Beijing military industry, statements full of skepticism about the complete incapacity of Chinese designers and engineers are increasingly heard. The answer to this question will be simple and prosaic - Chinese-made drones have shown themselves in an extremely negative light in all conflicts in which they took part.

      Moreover, they turned out to be extremely ineffective even in peacetime conditions.

      ▪️ Two out of three UAVs had non-functional GPS equipment since the introduction of devices into military operation.

      ▪️ Nitrogen leaked from EO/IR cameras mounted on UAVs on an ongoing basis, rendering electro-optical/infrared systems virtually useless.

      ▪️ Serious malfunctions were discovered in a high-performance synthetic aperture radar (SAR) within hours of the drones entering service.

      ▪️ Another critical issue is related to SATCOM (satellite communications). The failure of satellite communications antennas on Chinese drones was recorded even before the start of test flights.

      ▪️ One of the most common fuel system defects is a fuel pump failure (in 60% of the fleet). The items listed above, which indicate typical problems of Chinese attack drones, were taken from the official reports of the Pakistan Air Force. (By the way, an ally of China!)

      In addition, similar information was provided by other buyers of Chinese drones (Jordan, Iraq, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia), who faced exactly the same difficulties in their operation.

      In all these countries, about 80% of the drones delivered by Beijing turned out to be unable not only to carry out combat missions, but even to make regular sorties. In this case, the history of the operation of Chinese CH-4B UAVs in the Royal Jordanian Air Force is quite eloquent.

      The drones showed such a low degree of technical reliability that Amman put them up for sale less than two years after purchase.

      From 2015 to 2018, the Iraqi Air Force lost 8 out of 20 purchased CH-4Bs (40% of the fleet!) in non-combat incidents, and the remaining 12 since 2019 have never been able to take off the ground due to technical problems, and subsequently - lack of spare parts ( which will be discussed further below).

      Curiously enough, upon delivery of the first batch of 10 drones in 2015, the Iraqi military found that only one of them was fully combat-ready, while the rest needed repairs, despite being delivered to the country literally from the factory. As mentioned above, the situation described is seriously aggravated by the fact that the People's Republic of China refuses to carry out any after-sales work and engineering support for customers - any service is not available by default
      It is worth noting another important fact - Chinese drones, contrary to popular belief, do not consist of components made in China.

      Beijing has repeatedly become a participant in international scandals related to the illegal acquisition of technologies and components for the construction of military drones in Europe (for example, this was the case in Italy in 2018), and thanks to the active use in combat conditions, this was also confirmed in the form of frames of component parts Chinese UAVs.

      So, a few months ago, photographs of a downed CH-4B drone from Saudi Arabia were published, in the wreckage of which elements are visible ... of the engine of the Austrian company Rotax. inoperable even in peacetime. Saudi Arabia replaced them with electronic optics from the German company Hensoldt with the participation of the South African company GEW Technologies and Optronics Ltd.

      The second modernization package touched on weapons.

      High-precision Chinese weapons during operation had an extremely large number of cases of failure in combat conditions (this information is also confirmed by the experience of the Air Force of Ethiopia and Iraq). Riyadh signed a contract with French gunsmiths, adapting the CH-4A and CH-4B UAVs to the use of Western weapons. Separately, it is worth mentioning another important (and very strange!) Nuance in the design of Chinese drones, which also showed in all its negative glory themselves during the fighting.

      Contrary to all world practice, they are made of duralumin, not composites.

      Of course, this negatively affects their ability to remain undetected by radar - unlike composite drones, they are a well-marked target and have suffered significant losses in conflicts even against an enemy with underdeveloped artisanal air defense, as was the case in Yemen.

      At the moment, China is actively losing the UAV market - old customers refuse its products due to negative results of operation.
      1. +6
        March 31 2022
        You know, there is a saying: in the absence of a maid, they love a janitor. I guess that Chinese UAVs are not perfect. Do you think our Pacers are ideal? I suspect they will have to be brought to mind for another ten years.
        1. -4
          March 31 2022
          Quote: DenVB
          Do you think our Pacers are perfect? I suspect they will have to be brought to mind for another ten years.

          Do you suspect? Are there concrete arguments? Otherwise, without this, your words somehow resemble the advice of a sexologist doctor to a 70-year-old pensioner ...: "Well, you say that you can!" ...
          1. +4
            March 31 2022
            Well, if you believe you're perfect, you can follow the advice of a sexologist. I don't believe it, so I won't.
          2. +1
            April 1 2022
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            Do you suspect? Are there concrete arguments?

            Bayraktar weighs 630kg, load capacity is 150kg.
            the pacer weighs 1100kg and has a carrying capacity of 200kg.
            which already shows imperfection ....
  12. DPN
    +3
    March 31 2022
    And apple trees will bloom on Mars - the words from the song, but this was prevented by the destruction of the Soviet Union, which also led to these special operations.
  13. +2
    March 31 2022
    In the framework of this article, I would like to dot the “and” in terms of the effectiveness of drones and their role in the RF Armed Forces.

    Boldly! Especially given the heaps of absolute absurdities voiced by the author below. However, it has long been noticeable - the less a person is savvy in the topic that he undertakes to talk about, the more categorical his judgments are.
    The first phase will inevitably lead to the fact that one of the parties will receive the "keys to heaven."

    For some reason, the author is sure that the confrontation in the air is a sneeze-puff and that's it, one won, the second is helpless. And this is far from always the case even in the case of overwhelming superiority, which the Russian Aerospace Forces has in comparison with the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Here again, a typical mistake of a survivor: the author sees that our airborne forces are working, and sees that they are shot down very rarely, hence the conclusion: Ukrainian air defense is suppressed. What he does not see is the restrictions that were imposed on the operation of our Ukrainian air defense aircraft. And it was called destroyed by EMNIP only on March 25, that is, a month after the start of the operation.
    That is, the fact that air defense does not shoot down does not mean at all that it does not limit the capabilities of aviation.
    The most unfavorable option for the Russian Federation is the use of the tactics of artillery ambushes by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The fire weapon occupies a position that is well camouflaged, areas of concentrated fire are planned in advance, in the worst case, zeroing is carried out.

    Yes, of course, the disguised artillery has nothing more to do, as soon as to shoot at the squares of the area :))))))
    But the main question is not this, but that in order to destroy this magnificence, FIRST OF ALL, this very battery must be found. And this is not the task of a strike UAV. And the destruction of this battery is already a matter of technology, and it is far from a fact that from the available set of means (OTR, combat aircraft, helicopters, artillery, etc.), an attack UAV will be the most preferable means.
    Of course, strike UAVs are needed and important. They have their own specific tasks, with which "no one but them." Well, in the sense, it’s not that no one at all, but in the sense that there are tasks for the solution of which it is strike UAVs that are optimal. But to say that their presence is like this - rrraz!
    a special operation in Ukraine would have followed a completely different scenario, and reconnaissance and strike UAVs would have made a key contribution to this special operation.

    a little... utopian.
    1. +7
      March 31 2022
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      That is, the fact that air defense does not shoot down does not mean at all that it does not limit the capabilities of aviation.

      Attack drones are in themselves an excellent means of combating air defense, especially if air defense uses ambush tactics and nomadic air defense systems.

      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Yes, of course, the camouflaged artillery has nothing more to do, as soon as to shoot at the squares of the terrain

      Why nothing and why in squares? Benchmarking is a standard artillery tactic.
      1. +1
        April 1 2022
        Quote: DenVB
        Attack drones are in themselves an excellent means of combating air defense

        "On their own" they are not a great remedy. They are an excellent tool as an element of the system and are optimal for solving a number of combat missions, which I wrote about. But "by itself" the presence of attack UAVs does not solve the problem of destroying enemy air defenses. And it doesn't solve anything at all.
        The first task in the fight against air defense is to identify its location. And this is the task of reconnaissance means, including reconnaissance (and not strike) UAVs.
        Quote: DenVB
        Why nothing and why in squares? Benchmarking is a standard artillery tactic.

        Yes. Only now, in conditions where the enemy dominates the air and uses modern reconnaissance systems, even an engine turned on can be fatal for military equipment (the Iraqis, for example, turned off tank engines without fail in positions). And you offer ... what? Drive the battery to a spare position and shoot a little from it? It's a disguise in its purest form.
    2. +7
      March 31 2022
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      here - rrrr!
      a special operation in Ukraine would have followed a completely different scenario, and reconnaissance and strike UAVs would have made a key contribution to this special operation.

      a little... utopian.

      Can you explain why you think so? Personally, this reminds me of the situation when I, with a group of my comrades, tried to explain to people in uniform, especially the older generation, about the need for UAVs. Even if it's reconnaissance. Honestly, I'll tell you, we sometimes received the usual rudeness in response. Like: jerks, what do you understand about war? We fought, we shed blood!
      It was. They did not believe that electronics could develop so rapidly. After all, many senior officers did not trust the ZAS, preferring the usual relay one. Those people could not believe that a modern phone was enough to transmit video. It was from the realm of fantasy! Of course, they knew about satellites, but they were sure that they could not do without film.
      1. 0
        April 1 2022
        Quote: Bumblebee_3
        Can you explain why you think so?

        That's how it was explained.
        Quote: Bumblebee_3
        Personally, this reminds me of the situation when I, with a group of my comrades, tried to explain to people in uniform, especially the older generation, about the need for UAVs. Even if it's reconnaissance.

        I do not deny the need for UAVs and their usefulness. I'm talking about the fact that the presence of shock UAVs would not fundamentally change the "drawing" of the special operation
    3. +5
      March 31 2022
      For some reason, the author is sure

      In theory, it is strike UAVs that are convenient at the stage of the struggle for air supremacy, at a great distance from the line of contact, to work on targets for the destruction of which 100-200 kg of guided bombs or ATGMs are enough, especially where the enemy has medium and long-range air defense systems. You can complete the task without substituting the pilot.
  14. +8
    March 31 2022
    And why prove obvious things, everyone understands perfectly well that drones (good ones) are excellent weapons of both reconnaissance and strike types. Particularly valuable are disposables of the Lancet type, for the destruction of individual pieces of equipment, even hidden in the residential sector between houses, which, by the way, was not enough now.
    You just need to recognize the errors and eliminate them.
  15. -10
    March 31 2022
    Quote: vervolk
    The author was so carried away by pulling an owl on a globe that he completely ignored such a kind of videoconferencing as helicopters. From personal experience, I’ll say that no UAV carrying a 50 kg load can be compared with a pair of “crocodiles” accompanied by an advancing column

    Well, that's complete rubbish. Well, I forgot the man.))
    But you must admit, it's so fashionable now. True, something went wrong with the huntyaev. ALL Bayraktars profukali, having really failed to apply, although they had such hopes! A weapon of victory, no less. We made so many show-offs! And how it went...
    1. +7
      March 31 2022
      They couldn’t use them, for this it is necessary to gain air superiority .. But having won this very superiority, we cannot use it qualitatively because there are not enough tools in sufficient quantity .. So both sides were not ready .. We will pay with losses , and they will pay even more with much greater losses .. But it doesn’t calm everything early ..
  16. +2
    March 31 2022
    The Russian army is in dire need of drones with high-quality long-range thermal imaging cameras to detect and destroy enemy troops and military equipment at night. In addition, a military aircraft such as the AC-130 gunship could be very useful in eliminating enemy battle groups hiding in cities and in the field, minimizing direct contact and limiting casualties.
    1. +6
      March 31 2022
      Quote from redul
      Also, a military aircraft like the AC-130 gunship could be very useful.

      Could, but only with a guaranteed absence of air defense from the enemy.
  17. +2
    March 31 2022
    Why exactly a strike UAV for escorting columns? The strike is large, it requires airfield infrastructure for takeoff / landing, and it is desirable to have several drones in the battalion, preferably with an LCD launched from a catapult. Several, so that at least one is in the sky all the time.
  18. 0
    March 31 2022
    Only scientists and engineers understand that the potential for the use of drones and aviation technology in general depends on a banal mover. The propeller determines all the capabilities of the aircraft.
  19. +7
    March 31 2022
    "uselessness" in a battle with a "normal enemy" apparently meant the use of electronic warfare capable of landing a UAV. Well, how did they land, in the same Ukraine? in fact, in the not so distant future, UAVs will become invulnerable to electronic warfare due to an epoch-making technological breakthrough - the use of autonomous artificial intelligence. Moreover, having started in the air, after some time this technology will descend to the ground, into unmanned land robotic systems. and it will be a revolution in military affairs much larger than the invention of gunpowder
  20. +11
    March 31 2022
    On the 6th day of the operation, it became clear that we were fighting very poorly. It is poor precisely in terms of the use of high-precision weapons in the company-battalion link. There are very few anti-ambush weapons at this level, the situational awareness of captains and majors is low, and UAVs would be most welcome here. And yes, of course, UAVs against high-quality air defense and air forces do not work well, but in all other cases they work well, and even perfectly well in sufficient quantities. And for poverty you have to pay the most expensive thing that the army and the people have ...
  21. +1
    March 31 2022
    Maybe it’s worth urgently buying at least a hundred from the Chinese? As long as you don't have enough!
  22. +4
    April 1 2022
    What happens to the side that loses the first phase?
    The army is losing the ability to transfer large forces, forming columns of military equipment


    it's noticeable...
    we are officially informed that the dill is calmly creating a 40-strong group (somewhere in front of Dnepropetrovsk) with the transfer of mechanized and tank units, even transferring units from the west that have not yet taken part in hostilities ...
    and that the entire railway from the west to Kromatorsk is functioning and the RF Armed Forces are not even trying to bomb the echelons - in general they don’t touch the piece of iron ...
  23. +3
    April 1 2022
    Observers on the ground, disguised as local residents, can monitor the movement of Russian troops and even adjust the fire.


    why shouldn’t they correct it: mobile phones work, the Internet works, there is electricity, there are no jammers - the electronic warfare, you see, doesn’t have enough strength ...
  24. +2
    April 1 2022
    That is, it is possible to identify them precisely as a supply point only by catching them “by the hand” during reloading.

    in a war, you need to engage in war, and not play Cossack robbers ...
    destroy "everything that moves" on the side of the enemy ...
    especially trucks...
    the Arabs shot a video - they go on missions in an ambulance ...
  25. +9
    April 1 2022
    This happens because we do not have enough Orions.

    Apparently we don’t have enough aviation either ...
    MO: aviation worked the whole day, 50 sorties were made
    in 24 days, the RF Armed Forces made about 1400 sorties ...
    for comparison, the United States flew more than 1000 sorties on the FIRST day of the 2003 Iraq war
    "smeared" the available number of aircraft along a front of 3000 km, from Kiev to Kherson - that's not enough ...
    according to the published radio intercepts of our troops, you can only hear that where is air support ...
    by the way, they work over an open connection - any radio amateur can intercept, why they don’t work over a “closed” connection - you see, no or it doesn’t work
    agree on upcoming operations - they are immediately listened to ...
    dill, mocking, wedged into the conversation ...
    and you are "Orions" - there is no normal connection ...
    1. +1
      April 1 2022
      apparently the point is not in the number of our aircraft, but in the enemy's air defense, which is still working very effectively despite the statements of the media. And they work in conjunction with NATO AWACS aircraft and, of course, reconnaissance satellites, receiving from them all information on the air situation over the territory, getting involved in work only when our aircraft enters the air defense strike zone. So our seemingly air supremacy is somewhat offset by this.

  26. +4
    April 1 2022
    I fully agree with the author of the article. A technical gap due to the lack of strike UAVs is costly during a special operation. The combat and economic effect of the use of UAVs was recognized all over the world 40 years ago, we have just approached this. And we are not even talking about two years behind. The pacer is a crude machine. It obviously does not reach the Turkish one, especially in equipping with weapons, but even in this form it could be useful in the military aspect, saving more than one life of Russian military personnel. In my opinion, it was necessary to buy these UAVs in China in the early 2000s, when they began to dawn in this direction. And not even to buy, but to change it for military equipment that the Chinese took with pleasure at that time, and even now they take it. Buy and learn, yes yes learn, and somewhere to steal technology. Our Chinese friends did not shy away from doing this until they learned, and we, as always, "ourselves with a mustache."
  27. -4
    April 1 2022
    Oh, yes, now the alepts of the bespitnik sect are beating in ecstasy from the article.
  28. -2
    April 1 2022
    If, yes, if only, mushrooms would grow in the mouth. It would turn out not a mouth, but a whole garden.
    And so, Ukraine was preparing for war, it can be seen. And we only have Soviet galoshes, and we fight with them.
  29. +3
    April 1 2022
    The fire weapon occupies a position that is well camouflaged, areas of concentrated fire are planned in advance, in the worst case, zeroing is carried out. Then it remains only to wait for the column to approach one of the sections.

    How well they don’t disguise themselves, but light UAVs with IR devices will open the position, and the covering attack helicopters that fly nearby in a column will be destroyed.
  30. +3
    April 1 2022
    Yes, we didn't! Fatal omission! They did not fully underestimate the role of UAVs in modern warfare, but the enemy has appreciated and levels out his certain backwardness in military technical terms, skillfully using drones, especially for reconnaissance purposes. Why, having such a tense situation on the border with Ukraine, exhaustive measures were not taken to saturate the Armed Forces with drones is not clear! Even if there were not enough of their more advanced devices, it was possible to buy them from Turkey as part of military technical cooperation, because nothing prevented them from purchasing S 400 from us ?!
    In general, the situation when people are not responsible for the implementation of certain tasks, projects, plans turned into a disaster for us! Every year we see for 6-7 years, we see at parades, all these Armats, Kurgans, Boomerangs, Typhoons in the sky of SU57, and we fight in Ukraine mainly on BMP1,2, all the same BTR80, ageless Matalyga, and our fighters cut open spaces Nezalezhnoy в Basically in the Urals and Kamaz with sandbags on the wings and hood and with armor in the doors, although of course there are Typhoons and other armored trucks, armored personnel carriers 3, but the basis still does not correspond to today ... and yes, drones, drones. ..


    1. 0
      3 2022 June
      Americans have been mass-producing them for 25-30 years, if I'm not mistaken. The 3rd generation is already on the way.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  31. +1
    April 1 2022
    to effectively defeat the enemy detected from the UAV - this may be due to the presence of the enemy behind the buildings (mortars), or behind the folds of the terrain.


    "In conditions of dense urban development, there is little that is effective from field weapons. Mortars firing along a hinged trajectory more often hit roofs or facades, but at such an angle that mines do not fly inside. Artillery hits from distant positions and hits badly behind a solid wall of houses - the enemy feels calm under the buildings from the "leeward" side. Tanks are vulnerable and clumsy - the same with other armored vehicles. Wearable "artillery" in the form of hand-held flamethrowers and grenade launchers, as well as SPG-9 - in fact, low-power , and you need to hit it clearly into the openings, otherwise there will be no sense from it.We even sawed one hundred and twenty incendiary mines, pushed the incendiary mixture into fragmentation grenades to the grenade launcher to enhance the effect - but the thing, although useful, however, the ballistics is violated, and it is difficult to understand how it will fly."

    Alexander Khodakovsky.
    1. +1
      April 1 2022
      Khodakovsky spent three weeks hanging around one house, and now he is giving interviews.
      In Afghanistan, an excellent weapon was invented, an AGS welded to the roof of the MTLB. A versatile weapon for fighting both in the mountains and in cities. But our armored vehicles of the front line are armed only with direct fire weapons, not even Nonna, which entails a quick return fire. So the tanks are shooting at point-blank range, in danger of being destroyed by anti-tank weapons carried. And what can we say about the UAV.
  32. -1
    April 1 2022
    The author describes a kind of war... Columns of equipment are moving towards the enemy's camouflaged ambushes, where they are fired upon. And what, ours howl like that? Stupidly, over and over again substituting for blows? Then the losses of the attackers must be many times greater than the losses of the defenders. In general, someone is lying.
    In general, for the rapid liquidation of ambushes, it is enough to have a sufficient number of artillery batteries, some of which are ready to open fire, others at this moment are moving after the troops, and reconnaissance patrols with fire spotters. Then the next ambush will only delay the movement for how many minutes, until it is gouged by artillery. Yes, and the MLRS will not have time to leave, it is only necessary to determine its place along the trajectory, but we already know how to do this.
    As for the war in the cities, look how the Americans took Mosul. It is in this operation that we have a reason to act carefully, but this will not always be the case, there is no need to project this operation on future wars - they will not, for example, the Americans stand on ceremony with us. Are we with them?
    I am not against UAVs, they have their own niche in the war, you just don’t need to make light in the window out of them, you need to competently use all available means.
    1. 0
      April 2 2022
      Military equipment (iron) and a cluster of infantry (iron) are quietly opened and identified by side-scan locators 100 km away, disguise do not disguise in greenery will not help. The question, of course, is to detect equipment located in the building. Amers on UAVs have this economy, in addition to radio and electronic intelligence, as I understand it, plus a satellite communication channel. In this situation, they probably transmit to Poland and Romania via a direct channel, and then it’s clear where. What about us, what about us? ………………no comment.
      The stake should be placed on aerial reconnaissance, combined with strike assets into a single information or reconnaissance-strike system. Starting with cheap quadrocopters in each platoon and ending with electronic reconnaissance aircraft, incl. and inhuman UAVs. Inhuman, because in one smart book it was written that the crew of the aircraft consisted of flight and ground personnel, and on the next page it was written that the UAV was an aircraft without a crew. And strike UAVs have their own niche in zones of local conflicts - to drive partisans, be careful not to drop anything on anyone's head.
      1. +1
        April 9 2022
        Absolutely in the hole !!!
        We do not have an analogue of E-8A !!!
        Basically no! But there is no such system with which the E-8 works !!!!
        There is no system that would provide detection, identification, generation of data to kill !!!!
        There are no global UAVs that could hover over Ukraine for hours at an altitude of 12t.m and monitor it all.
        no ...
        we don't have a lot of things.
        and also annoying is the lack of understanding of the military that they need it !!!!

        Z.Y. I looked right now - and the E-3A hung over the Romanian .. just flew in an hour ago, and the KS-135 is also hanging nearby .... and a couple of tankers are circling over Poland ....
        And what do tankers do - and they refuel someone ... probably both E-3 and E-8 .. yes, a lot of people ..
        1. 0
          3 2022 June
          What E8? I beg of you. Just now, someone wrote about the mode of operation of the super-new Tu214
  33. +1
    April 2 2022
    What prevents you from buying bayraktars if there are not enough of your own?
  34. 0
    April 3 2022
    Why they didn’t buy bayraktars from the Turks before the special operation, I don’t understand. no, of course I understand that the interests of the military-industrial complex of their own would not be allowed to do this, but not as a manager to go into battle.
    1. -1
      April 3 2022
      and how your bayraktar would destroy the fortified areas of Mariupol and Azov steel, where direct fire tanks cannot always cope with a fortified firing point, for a bayraktar with his pipette there is not a whole one.
  35. 0
    April 3 2022
    Good article.
  36. -1
    April 3 2022
    I read the article, there are the right moments, but as usual, "everything is lost" prevails. many sober comments critical of the author. it directly reminded me of the battles of the past, DOES RUSSIA NEED AUG !? Time and military science have answered this question for us.
    lose new battles in VO, and, as always, two extremes from enthusiastic choking to complete denial. and I'm so happy. that you guys are not in the General Staff. here is the place for you. the pros will figure it out.
  37. 0
    April 10 2022
    The author is right! Here, my comrades and I almost got into a fight over these Bannermen! Someone claims that they are g ... but. Others argue that if they don’t have their own, it’s necessary to buy at least a hundred from the Turks (if they sell) or from China, and finish the NWO. It is clear that "there is no ideal and cannot be" and the Bairiki are shot down and the Orions too. But Karabakh opened our eyes to all of us!!! Without shock UAVs, we will stomp to "Kyiv" for a long time ...
  38. 0
    April 10 2022
    How difficult is the article.
    And it’s easier - UAVs are convenient to use after military air defense with search and targeting radar is destroyed, since the use of MANPADS with an infrared guidance head is ineffective against aircraft with their stealth and low heat radiation. Azerbaijan, with the help of corn workers, opened the air defense of Karabakh, forced it to use up the entire stock of anti-aircraft missiles, and then used drones very effectively and with virtually no losses. In the current situation in Ukraine, UAVs show their effectiveness and invulnerability from MANPADS, unlike manned aircraft.
  39. 0
    16 May 2022
    Where is the space surveillance? Or just Khokhloma?
  40. 0
    3 2022 June
    The author, why did you decide that if the production had been opened 2 years earlier, then by 02.2022 they would have been riveted enough?
    Well, about your other "if". If a grandmother had ..., then she would be a grandfather
  41. 0
    3 2022 June
    The USSR and Russia have traditionally lagged behind in electronics. UAVs need a good and reliable two-way communication channel. And if, say, the Americans, sitting in Nevada, can control a UAV flying in Iraq, then this shows that they have this channel and it works well.
  42. M_5
    0
    10 2022 June
    Here is the specification for the UAV that we really need. Weight full 100 kg, empty 65 kg. "Head" - 10 kg, armament -15 kg, fuel 10 kg. To be able to carry 15 kg for 4 hours. In service: against air defense - ZALA Lancet -1 (3 pieces) or 4 pieces of guided cumulative fragmentation bombs of 3,5 kg each (76 mm caliber). More or less like this.
  43. 0
    17 2022 June
    The author's reasoning can lead far. Since "there is no money" - they are in the West, "but hold out." But using the author's method, we will find such an "if", which was to be executed with two fingers ....
    If in 1991 the Soviet army had simply fulfilled the oath given in the USSR, then there would have been no "independent Ukraine" now.
    And to solve problems with UAVs, there would be huge funds that would not be in the West now. But then, in 1991, only Marshal Akhromeev remembered the oath, who, along with this conviction, had to shoot himself.
    For the rest, the Lord has prepared much worse fates. They just haven't figured it out yet.
  44. 0
    19 2022 June
    This happens because we do not have enough Orions. Russia needs at least 200, and preferably 300 or 400 strike UAVs.
    Recently there was news that there are already 48 Orions in the troops. Not much, of course, but the role of attack UAVs, after the war in Karabakh, is greatly exaggerated. Even if there were 400 Orions now, this would not significantly affect the events at the front.
    We need more Tos-1, Tos-2, this is a really effective weapon. And not only in the combat aspect, but also in the psychological.

"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"