Assault in Berdychi: ground robotic platforms enter the battle
Image t.me/boris_rozhin. Still from the movie "Terminator"
Assault in Berdychi
In Berdychi, which is now being liberated by Russian troops, a promising Russian ground robotic platform was tested. The ground-based robotic tracked platforms, armed with AGS-17 automatic grenade launchers, deployed during the operation, moved forward to suppress enemy positions and fired several hundred 30 mm caliber grenades at their positions.
It is stated that ground drones showed good results, surviving where losses among personnel (people) would have been almost inevitable. There are even parallels between the first attack tanks during the First World War (WWII). In the future, the range of ground robotic platforms is planned to be significantly expanded, ensuring that they are equipped with other types of combat and auxiliary modules.
Ground robotic platforms armed with AGS-17 grenade launchers, used during the assault in Berdychi. Image t.me/boris_rozhin
The project to create ground-based robotic platforms involved in the assault in Berdychi is being implemented with the support of Boris Rozhin (https://t.me/boris_rozhin) and Chingis Dambiev (https://t.me/ChDambiev).
Today we’ll talk in more detail about the prospects for ground-based robotic platforms on the battlefield.
Born to crawl
After several years of SVO, few people have any doubts that the robotization of the battlefield is real and inevitable. It is characteristic that ground-based robotic platforms have long been considered as one of the main and important areas of battlefield robotization - the first remote-controlled wedges appeared during the Second World War (WWII), if not earlier.
In reality, everything turned out differently - the first in the armed forces (AF) of the leading countries of the world were unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), first in the reconnaissance version, and then in the reconnaissance-strike version. In addition, UAVs for various purposes immediately began to be used during combat operations, while ground-based robotic combat vehicles almost never left the training grounds.
FPV drone attack on a ground robotic platform participating in the assault in Berdychi - not a single person was injured. Image: Telegram channel “Two Majors”
However, in one niche, ground-based robotic systems have proven themselves - as engineering machines for working with explosive objects, mainly as part of counter-terrorism tasks.
Why did it happen?
Most likely, as always, there are several reasons. Firstly, at the initial stage, the United States and Israel made a very large contribution to the development of unmanned systems, and these countries have always relied primarily on the power of their air forces (Air Force). It is not surprising that promising solutions were tested primarily in this branch of the armed forces.
Secondly, it can be assumed that the greater complexity of controlling ground combat vehicles played an important role. Yes, it would seem that many people can drive a car, but few pilot airplanes and helicopters; nevertheless, it is much easier to automate the control of aircraft during the cruising phase of a flight than to automate the movement of ground vehicles - how long ago did the autopilot appear in aviation and how hard is it for the autopilot to make its way on the ground? This is compounded by communication problems - the radio communication range on the ground is greatly influenced by the terrain, natural and artificial hills, under these conditions it is easy to “lose” a robotic complex simply because it drove to some point where communication with the operator was simply lost.
The MQ-1 Predator UAV in many ways became the prototype of modern medium-altitude MALE class UAVs. Image by Wikimedia Commons
And finally, thirdly, there is the issue of cost. On the one hand, aviation technology has always been, is and will be more expensive than ground vehicles, so it is logical that, first of all, they tried to supplement manned airplanes and helicopters with unmanned solutions. On the other hand, a UAV located at a high altitude can only be shot down by an anti-aircraft guided missile (SAM), which is often comparable in cost to the UAV itself, or even has a significantly higher cost, as in the case of the Russian kamikaze UAV "Geran-2" ( 60 thousand US dollars) and missiles for the American Patriot anti-aircraft missile system (SAM) (5 million US dollars), while the ground robotic complex in any case will be exposed to a wide range of threats, including “cheap” weapons such as heavy machine guns, hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers, mine-explosive barriers, and now FPV drones and much more, that is, there is a high chance that a ground-based robotic complex will bring “for the same money” much less benefit than a UAV.
Nevertheless, the development of ground-based robotic systems has been going on for a long time; sooner or later they were supposed to appear on the battlefields, and, judging by the assault in Berdychi, their time has come.
How will ground robotic platforms evolve?
In the material Wrong turn: increasing complexity and cost of UAVs as a dead-end path for the development of this type of weapons We said that recently there has been a tendency for a significant increase in the cost of UAVs - in some cases it is approaching the cost of manned combat aircraft, while in terms of characteristics and capabilities such UAVs still do not catch up with manned aircraft.
The situation with ground robotic platforms is similar - if you create a robotic complex comparable in cost to a tank, but inferior to it in characteristics and capabilities, then it will not be in demand. It can be assumed that ground robotic platforms will have to go through the same evolution as UAVs, according to the principle “from simple to complex”, starting from simple and inexpensive solutions, with a search for potential niches and areas where the use of ground robotic platforms will be effective and justified.
Textron M5 Ripsaw Robot Tank
Let us take a closer look at the possible options for promising ground robotic platforms.
Variety of species
The most common UAVs on the battlefield are kamikaze UAVs. Does a ground-based kamikaze robot have a right to exist?
Yes, why not, but its scope of application will be narrower than that of numerous FPV drones and their “bigger” brothers such as the kamikaze UAV “Geran-2”. At least ground Robots-kamikaze will be more difficult to manufacture, at least initially. Since ground-based robotic systems have not become as widespread as UAVs, accordingly, everything for them needs to be developed from scratch, selected and purchased the necessary components.
It can be assumed that the advantage of ground-based kamikaze robots will be the mass of charge that the kamikaze robot can deliver to the target. If for a kamikaze UAV the mass of the warhead is measured in kilograms - tens of kilograms (for “older” models), then a ground platform can transport from fifty to several hundred kilograms.
A simple chassis - four car wheels, possibly used with a roughly welded tread, a pair of electric drives, a video camera, a battery, communications and controls from FPV drones, possibly power and control by wire. The tasks to be solved are the destruction of enemy strongholds, the organization of passages in the walls of buildings and structures. It is possible that the power of the warhead of some ground-based kamikaze robots will even make it possible to “fold” buildings or their individual parts.
The next possible option is a mobile mine, when a kamikaze robot is located on the route of advance of enemy equipment or manpower, and is detonated when they approach. Accordingly, in the first case it can be a directed charge capable of penetrating the side of a tank or other armored vehicle, and in the second case it can be a shrapnel charge with ready-made destructive elements, for example, something like MON series mines. Depending on the capabilities and imagination of the manufacturer, an air blast can be implemented in anti-personnel ammunition to obtain the maximum affected area; for example, such ammunition can be made on the basis of the OZM-72 mine. By the way, Ukraine is already developing the Gnome Kamikaze project, a ground-based robotic platform capable of carrying an anti-tank or anti-personnel mine.
Ukrainian ground robot kamikaze – Gnome Kamikaze
It is possible that it does not make sense to blow up a kamikaze robot entirely; in this case, it can serve as a delivery/installer of mines, both anti-tank and anti-personnel. This could be a simple drop from a platform or a better installation using some special devices, masking the installed mines. Again, the Ukrainian Armed Forces are already using UAVs to drop mines.
Of course, there is no escape from the installation of various weapons on ground robotic platforms - these can be various types of small arms weapons, for example, machine guns or automatic mounted grenade launchers, as was implemented in the ground robotic platforms involved in Berdychi.
Also, weapons such as hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers (RPGs) or even helicopter units for launching 80 mm unguided aircraft missiles (UAR) can be installed on ground-based robotic platforms. According to some reports, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are already trying to install NAR units on unmanned kamikaze boats (BEC) - another promising direction that has already proven its right to life, unfortunately, in our sad experience.
The next level is the installation of guided weapons, for example, anti-tank missile systems (ATGM). Soldiers of the Russian Armed Forces were able to install a fairly “ancient” ATGM “Fagot” even on a UAV, so there won’t be any particular problems with the ground platform. A combination of an ATGM and a ground mobile robotic platform will significantly increase the survivability of crews, even without the use of expensive “fire and forget” solutions.
The Russian combat multifunctional robotic complex Uran-9 was demonstrated back in 2019. Image by Wikimedia Commons / Vitaly V. Kuzmin
Ground-based robotic platforms can also accommodate weapons designed to attack air targets. In principle, machine guns and ATGMs, which were mentioned earlier, can act as such, but, for example, to defeat FPV drones they can be placed on ground robotic platforms remote-controlled turrets with smooth-bore weapons.
Or it could be electronic warfare (EW) means. The advantage of placing electronic warfare equipment on ground-based robotic platforms is the presence of a power source on them; in addition, if the enemy locates the electronic warfare equipment, the strike will not lead to the loss of soldiers or equipment, but only the platform itself.
And, finally, ground robotic platforms themselves can act as a carrier of FPV drones and a repeater for controlling them. In this way, it is possible not only to increase the operating range of FPV drones, but also to minimize the risks for their operators, who are being hunted by the enemy.
Ground-based robotic platforms can not only kill, they can also be used to clear terrain, ensure the delivery of ammunition and other cargo to the front line, as well as evacuate the wounded to the rear for medical care and solve many other problems.
Conclusions
Ground robotic platforms are still only at the very beginning of their journey on the battlefield.
Over time, the range of ground robotic platforms and the number of tasks they solve on the battlefield will only increase, especially given the intensity of hostilities in the Northwestern Military District zone in Ukraine.
Information