Military Review

Prospects for the development of Russian UAVs

56
Currently, the development prospects of combat unmanned aviation (UAVs for military purposes, the so-called drones) are due to a number of factors. First of all, the ever-increasing price of manned planes and helicopters, the increase in the cost of training pilots for them - while to solve a fairly wide range of problems, having a man today is not necessary. For this reason, the emerging trend towards an increase in the percentage of UAV combat sorties in the future will continue. In addition, many countries are actively working on the development of fundamentally new models and designs of a drone-glider, which would be designed for increased loads in comparison with manned aircraft, as well as equipping such devices with advanced control systems to simplify the work of the ground operator of the device.


Do not discount the human life - the most valuable thing we have. In this regard, the use of UAVs is the possibility of reducing human casualties among the pilots. Given the fact that modern air defense systems are not only perfect weapons, but also widespread in the world, it becomes even more relevant. The modern air defense system severely limits the use of tactical aviation in almost all theaters of military operations and seriously complicates the possibility of attacking enemy ground targets.

Simultaneously with the development of air defense systems, a major jump occurred in aircraft armament. Today it is a high-precision weapon with a high range of use, which eliminates the need for the aircraft to approach the attacked target. Gradually manned aircraft turns into just a carrier of weapons. The shock functions of modern aircraft are reduced to almost 2-m models. In the event that the attack targets are known in advance, the plane only delivers the weapon closer to them. If the attack targets are identified directly in the course of the hostilities, the aircraft must be on duty in the zone of application in order to ensure the minimum time from the moment the target is detected until it hits.

Prospects for the development of Russian UAVs
Light UAV "Irkut-10"

In both these situations, they are trying to carry out reconnaissance of targets with the help of separate means, and not with the arms carriers themselves. Since, the longer the aircraft "hangs" in the zone of the enemy's air defense, the more likely it is to lose. As a result, the pilot is no longer needed to attack ground targets. The pilot loses his function of detecting targets and pointing weapons at them. Moreover, the presence of the pilot makes the aircraft larger in size, which increases their visibility for air defense weapons. Also, manned aircraft are limited by the overloads that a pilot experiences while performing certain maneuvers while evading enemy air defenses or maneuvering when approaching the target. Also, the presence of the pilot reduces the duration of possible patrols.

All this together leads to the abandonment of the use of manned aircraft to combat ground targets. At the same time, fighter aircraft will remain manned for quite a long time, since replacing a fighter pilot in air combat is much more difficult than solving the task of delivering various weapons to a ground target.

The domestic program for the creation of unmanned vehicles in the interests of the Russian Armed Forces is designed to overcome a strong lag in this area from the leading countries of the world. Today, many countries, including Russia, are capable of producing light UAVs. A large number of Russian companies produce sufficiently high-quality samples of small UAVs of short range that are capable of flying at low altitudes. Such UAVs are used by Russian law enforcement agencies, the Ministry of Emergency Situations, civilian companies, and even are sold abroad. However, with high-altitude UAVs that have a significant range, everything is not so good, in this area the leadership of the United States and Israel is undeniable. Even European countries are forced to acquire their equipment, although they continue to work on developing their own models. And here Russia has one more problem, we, unlike some European countries, cannot purchase ready-made armaments if they cannot be produced independently.

This happens for 2 reasons. First of all, no one will sell us a truly modern technique - it so happened that for the leading countries in this field, Russia is a “likely enemy”. It was not possible to acquire enough modern equipment even from Israel (partly because of the desire of Israel itself to maintain the technological gap from a likely competitor in the arms market, and partly under US pressure).

UAV "Altius"

Secondly, for Russia the development and production of its own military equipment is a matter of national security. Russia cannot depend on any external sources of supplies of military products, as they may cease at the most inappropriate moment for this. In addition, any exporter of high-tech armaments tries to exclude the possibility of using these weapons against themselves, allied countries and even third parties, if this somehow contradicts their own interests.

Taking this into account, at present, on the order of the Russian Ministry of Defense, work is underway in our country to create 3-type UAVs. The first of these is the “Pacer” medium-altitude operational tactical drone with take-off weight up to 1 tons. According to its characteristics, it is close to the American MQ-1 Predator. The second drone (called the "Altius") - weighing up to 5 tons should have a great height and duration of flight, in its characteristics it is analogous to the American MQ-9 Reaper. Perhaps this UAV will be able to deliver rocket attacks on ground targets. The third promising Russian drone is a heavy drone UAV (R & D project “Hunter”), there are simply no serial analogues of this unit in the world today, but work in this direction is underway in many countries.

At present, information on all these three projects can be found quite a bit. All of them are at the stage of research, therefore, it is rather difficult to speak about any specific characteristics of promising Russian UAVs. In particular, for the “Pacer” project, there is information only about the cost of carrying out research and development work on the project - 1 billion rubles. The competition for the work was won by the St. Petersburg group of companies "Transas".

The competition for the creation of UAV "Altius" won Kazan OKB "Sokol", the contract amount also amounted to 1 billion rubles. The result of the work of the Kazan Design Bureau was the development and creation of a prototype demonstrator "Altius-M". 5 February 2013 of the year during the visit of Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu to CAPO im. The Gorbunov (Kazan) UAV model developed by the Altius-M R & D project was first publicly demonstrated. It is assumed that the tests of the flight model of the drone will be launched in 2014-2015 years.
UAV "Altius-M" is made according to the normal aerodynamic design and has a wing of large span with 2-TVD and V-shaped tail. Mass of the device - up to 5 tons. Many UAV systems - onboard control equipment, power supply systems - will be fully or partially unified with UAV counterparts developed under the Pacer project by Transas.

UAV MQ-9 Reaper, USA

In 2011-2012 years in EMZ them. Myasishchev planned on the basis of the high-altitude aircraft M-17РМ to begin the development of a flying laboratory for the development of the on-board control complex of the promising Russian UAVs "Pacer", "Altuist-M" and "Okhotnik-B". It is noteworthy that M-17PM (M-55 "Geophysics") are going to choose to test the drones. This aircraft has a maximum flight altitude greater than 21 km. In this case, if other platforms did not fit for testing new Russian UAVs, the creators of Russian UAVs may have swung at very high altitudes.

Of particular interest is the creation of a large impact drone, since it is he who is the most difficult part of the program. Currently, the development of a specialized UAV, which would be close in its capabilities to tactical aircraft, is too tough for even market leaders. Moreover, the United States came closest to success. America already has drone drone conventional schemes and experience in their combat use. In addition, a number of programs to develop a new drone drone (such as the Northrop Grumman X-47A, Boeing X-45 and X-46) were closed, but this does not mean that the development of these projects have passed without a trace. Over time, all research results and the experience gained by companies will be embodied in a real combat vehicle.

The project of the Russian heavy impact UAV within the framework of the Okhotnik research and development project involves the creation of a vehicle weighing up to 20 tons. Its development in the interests of the Russian Air Force is the company "Sukhoi". For the first time, the military announced their plans to get into service a drone drone at the MAKS-2009 air show. According to Mikhail Pogosyan’s statement, which was made in August 2009, the creation of a new Russian drone UAV will be the first joint work of the relevant units of the Sukhoi Design Bureau and the MiG RAC, the official agreement on this issue was signed by aircraft manufacturers in October 2012.

The technical assignment for the new drone drone was approved by the Russian Defense Ministry in early April 2012. At the same time, information began to appear in the press that the new shock UAV, developed by Sukhoi, would simultaneously be a fighter belonging to the 6 generation. It is assumed that the first model of the new drone will begin the active test phase no earlier than 2016, and its adoption is scheduled for the 2020 year. By design, this unit will presumably be manufactured according to a modular scheme, which will allow the military to easily change its payload depending on the assigned combat missions.
Scat UAV model

It is worth noting that the RAC "MiG" had its interesting experience on the drone drone, we are talking about the heavy unobtrusive attack UAV "Skat". The full-size model of this aircraft was first shown at the Max-2007 air show. Then this model made quite a lot of noise, since work in this direction is work on creating the most complex and advanced types of military equipment, the development of which is not available for most countries of the world. However, the work on this project went rather slowly and the developers did not advance further on creating a full-size mockup.

In this sense, combining the efforts of different companies (Sukhoi Corporation and RAC MiG) to implement a fairly complex project seems justified, this is quite common global practice. And the choice of the corporation "Sukhoi" can hardly be called accidental. This manufacturer of manned military equipment has the most sophisticated flight control automation systems, which are installed on the Su-30 and Su-35 serial fighters, as well as the Su-34 front-line bomber. These systems are able to simplify the process of piloting airplanes with an unstable aerodynamic scheme, reducing control of the most complex aircraft to simple manipulations for the pilot.

In general, it can be noted that in Russia everything is not so bad in the field of UAV development. Although at the moment there are very few unmanned systems in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, it’s still possible for Russia to change this state of affairs, not by acquiring foreign technology, but by domestic developments. In addition, the deadlines for the implementation of the most promising Russian programs are comparable in terms of implementation with promising foreign projects.

Information sources:
-http: //www.odnako.org/blogs/show_24467
-http: //www.memoid.ru/node/Perspektivy_razvitiya_bespilotnoj_aviacii
-http: //militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-719.html
-http: //militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-681.html
Author:
56 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Canep
    Canep 7 May 2013 07: 14
    +7
    UAVs are still mostly scouts, and attack aircraft that can only be used against civilians or terrorists. It is necessary to create UAVs for maneuverable air combat, here it can surpass any aircraft. This is probably the next stage in the evolution of the fighter (and not the F-22 as Americans believe).
    1. vadimus
      vadimus 7 May 2013 07: 25
      +4
      It's time to make a breakthrough. And taking into account such a huge country, one must do his own and tailored for himself ...
      1. Refund_SSSR
        Refund_SSSR 7 May 2013 08: 23
        +1
        Can all military units be tolerance first with modern weapons? and then engage in breakthrough technologies?
        1. Nick
          Nick 7 May 2013 12: 43
          +3
          Quote: We refund_SSSR
          Can all military units be tolerance first with modern weapons? and then engage in breakthrough technologies?

          Breakthrough technologies allow you to "cut the corner" in pursuit of increasing the combat capabilities of the army, and not trail behind leaders in the status of always catching up.
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 7 May 2013 15: 13
          +1
          UAVs are modernity, not breakthrough technologies.
          1. Nick
            Nick 7 May 2013 17: 45
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            UAVs are modernity, not breakthrough technologies.

            Not certainly in that way. The term UAV refers to a wide range of unmanned aerial vehicles, not only existing today, but also only being developed, promising, with a new set of functions, capabilities, and tasks, the construction of which, at the current technological level, is still impossible.
          2. UFO
            UFO 7 May 2013 19: 55
            0
            Oh well, with flight control automation systems from leading aircraft manufacturers, and if there are artificial intelligence elements on there (and development is underway), then in the future it will be possible to replace the pilot with a CIRCU. It all starts with a simple, the main thing is to keep up. wink
      2. Joker
        Joker 7 May 2013 10: 09
        11
        The article embellishes our reality.
        In addition, a number of programs to develop a new strike drone (such as Northrop Grumman X-47A, Boeing X-45 and X-46) were closed, but this does not mean that the development of these projects went unnoticed. Over time, all research results and experience gained by companies will be embodied in a real combat vehicle.

        It has long been embodied in the Northrop Grumman X-47B which 50 has already tested and planted and launched from an aircraft carrier. It remains to finish a little and voila.
        So this statement
        Currently, the development of a specialized UAV, which would be close in its capabilities to tactical aircraft, is too tough even for market leaders.

        Sheer lies, well, or simply the author is a patriot and embellishes everything.
        Our problem does not even lie in the fact that the UAV itself is difficult to design, then there are no problems at all, I took an American UAV and copied the circuit with improvements, the whole difficulty lies in the electronics, which we unfortunately have not, and the next few years 5 will not be accurate, but This is the most important part of the drone.
        It's time to make a breakthrough.

        It’s time, only first you need to assemble at least one computer from domestic components and so that it is not inferior to Western models, then there will be a breakthrough in UAVs and everything else. In the meantime, we are buying all the electronics abroad, there will be no breakthrough. It seems that IBM with 2011 started cooperation with Skolkovo, only last week, it seems, IBM absorbed Intel. And news about domestic processors, video cards, hard drives, etc. I have not heard for a hundred years. I don’t even know the TV, is anyone able to do it? So what kind of breakthroughs in UAVs can we talk about? With foreign components, the maximum we can count on is a UAV somewhere at 20% with worse performance than the United States, since no one will sell us the latest electronics.
        1. Simple
          Simple 7 May 2013 14: 08
          0
          "Northrop Grumman X-47B which has already been tested 50 times and has already landed and launched from an aircraft carrier"

          UAV X-47B did not land and take off from the aircraft carrier.
          YouTube has a landing animation.
          This year, it is planned to land the X-47B "under its own power" on an aircraft carrier.
        2. Bongo
          Bongo 7 May 2013 14: 38
          +4
          At KnAAPO, in Komsomolsk, Chinese and Indian electronics are used to equip the Su-30.
        3. Batman
          Batman 7 May 2013 15: 50
          -4
          all the complexity lies in electronics, which we unfortunately do not have and the next 5 years will not be accurate, and this is the most important part of the drone.

          eh ... why the USSR was destroyed :( If we had not destroyed, then we would have produced the coolest computers ...

          from the history: The Soviet scientist Pentkovsky (by the way, many believe that he was named after the processor) after the project was closed, Elbrus left for America in 1991 in Intel and became the chief designer of the processor. As a result, they release Pentium (P5, or 586), according to similar schemes with Elbrus. But Pentium was about 2 times faster than the prototype of Elbrus ...

          everything is sad .. But we do not give up! And GO FORWARD! By the way, we are now doing great Supercomputers.

          And all the main world electronics is created in Thailand)))
          1. ism_ek
            ism_ek 7 May 2013 17: 33
            -1
            Do not need ultra-modern computers in the UAV. The ISS in space is controlled by 386 processors with an enclosure protected from radiation. The USSR has always lagged behind America in microelectronics and this has never been a particular problem.
            UAVs require miniature, economical and reliable engines with very stable operating modes. Need lightweight and durable materials for the body. We need modern monitoring devices, etc.
        4. El13
          El13 7 May 2013 16: 04
          +3
          Exactly, the S-400 is an analog machine exclusively on lamps and mechanical gears ...
        5. UFO
          UFO 7 May 2013 20: 00
          +2
          It seems like Franks offer to collaborate in the development of UAVs. You can select one KB for this, for example, Yak or Tu, there is nothing to lose, but you can gain a lot.
      3. ism_ek
        ism_ek 7 May 2013 17: 15
        +6
        Now they are collecting Israeli DRONs in Yekaterinburg.
        "Israeli" specialists came to us and it turned out that they were entirely from Russia. And they left in the "well-fed" Putin years.
        To produce breakthrough technologies - it is necessary to establish a management system. That the money would reach the engineers, and not settle in the pockets of crooks.
        The FSB should catch spies stealing our specialists and technology, and not demonstrators.
      4. Phantom Revolution
        Phantom Revolution 7 May 2013 23: 02
        0
        Quote: vadimus
        It's time to make a breakthrough. And taking into account such a huge country, one must do his own and tailored for himself ...

        It is necessary to invest in science, microelectronics and even nanoelectronics. But in fact, we get Skolkovo, which creates portals in the pockets of officials, for the allocated money.
        If this continues, then we will not go further than promises to do this. Factories also need appropriate wages for specialists, and not "golden parachutes" for "effective managers."
    2. svp67
      svp67 7 May 2013 08: 02
      0
      Quote: Canep
      strike aircraft that can only be used against civilians or terrorists
      This largely depends both on the imperfection of the design of the UAVs themselves, and because of the low training of the "pilots"
    3. Refund_SSSR
      Refund_SSSR 7 May 2013 08: 21
      -3
      Quote: Canep
      An UAV for maneuverable air combat, here it can surpass any aircraft.

      But the pilot of this aircraft, computers will not be replaced soon. Because machines can perform a tremendous amount of operations per minute, and in terms of reaction speed and adaptation to a dynamically changing situation - they are inferior with a bang even to the least trained pilot ...
      Read less fiction ...
      1. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 7 May 2013 09: 57
        +3
        I can advise you to fly in the simulator IL-2, and even in a one-on-one battle with a game plane, win his battle. In fact, the virtual airplane control in the game is the beginnings of the demon pilot airplane control program. everything depends only on the number of sensors. A computer can track several dozen parameters simultaneously, which no one is capable of. Choose the most optimal solution. I agree only that there may be no such program yet, but the capacities of the existing processors are quite sufficient to create such a program.
        1. cyclist
          cyclist 7 May 2013 13: 55
          0
          game simulators, alas, are far from real combat training programs, you know, in a game, he pressed a button and killed a virtual enemy, but in a real situation he pressed a button - he buried civilians!
          1. vladsolo56
            vladsolo56 7 May 2013 14: 09
            +4
            You may not be aware, but due to errors in intelligence, pilots also strike the wrong way, Maybe you are not aware but the pilot does not see who he is shooting, civilians on the ground or the military. In addition, in a war, if a pilot wonders who is downstairs, beat or not beat, then he is no longer a pilot, at least not a military one.
            1. cyclist
              cyclist 7 May 2013 14: 26
              0
              I'm talking about the training of UAV operators, but not on military simulators to train military laughing
              1. vladsolo56
                vladsolo56 7 May 2013 14: 43
                0
                I’m talking about autonomous systems, and you are talking to me about operators, do you feel the difference?
                1. cyclist
                  cyclist 7 May 2013 14: 47
                  0
                  something like to fully automate? not ...
                  1. Refund_SSSR
                    Refund_SSSR 8 May 2013 05: 05
                    0
                    Yeah, it's called - "hello terminator" laughing
                    And if autonomous combat vehicles appear in the air, then there will be the same autonomous terminators on earth.
                    Z.Y. Apparently the man loves mushrooms ... soldier
                    1. vladsolo56
                      vladsolo56 8 May 2013 05: 54
                      0
                      What are you the smartest? who awarded you such a title? if you talk like you, define everything as HUGE, then you can put an end to all promising developments. The most "smart" always do nothing but interfere. if fantasy doesn't work, then it's better to just shut up.
        2. Refund_SSSR
          Refund_SSSR 8 May 2013 04: 33
          0
          Quote: vladsolo56
          I can advise you to fly in the simulator IL-2

          Once again, like an adult, and such FALL carries that no words.
          In the first in computer games, the computer cheats a little - this time.
          Secondly, in computer games, the computer sees the enemy more than perfectly because everything is computer and your aircraft also (i.e., the computer, in principle, cannot lose sight of you or cannot but calculate your trajectory and possible angle of attack and possible speed . Plus, the computer is not affected by electronic suppression systems).
          And number three - Yes, I played IL-2 on but not on the keyboard, but with full security controls and I can offer you to play with me on the network and try to survive at least 5 minutes in a contact battle and to level the chances, I suggest you take to help one or two computer players whom you so praise.
          Number four: In no computer game and not only on aviation topics, today there is no sufficiently sophisticated AI that could not be blunt and could not be outwitted by finding a hole in the algorithm, and even more so there is no self-learning AI.
          ETOGES what should be in order to give an example of stupid bots from computer games ...
          Maybe you should first study the issue, and then already carry nonsense?
          By the way, you can hack into Lockon
          Well, as if to finally finish off: Why is there still no UAV working in the air in a shunting battle? and why are there no autonomous UAVs at all?
          Read less comics.
          1. Refund_SSSR
            Refund_SSSR 8 May 2013 05: 13
            0
            Yes, and the complexity of AI in games is caused by a blunt increase in accuracy, immunity to damage and banal cheating, for example, in racing simulators, a computer can enter a 90-degree turn 300 km / h not only without using brakes, but without a tire screeching.
            Significantly yes? So what? in real battle too cheat so cheat? So leave this nonsense to your American friends .. Let them cut budgets, but we don’t need this in the near future.
            By the way, hell would be with him with an air bot. call me at least one ground bot that did not stumble on itself and on the walls, not only fully combat-capable, capable of not only being equal to humans, but also exceeding human capabilities.
          2. vladsolo56
            vladsolo56 8 May 2013 05: 59
            0
            You’re so smart, but you don’t know how to think, I wrote that it’s stupid to copy the gameplay? I am amazed at the self-confidence of a person who doesn’t even want to read carefully. I gave only an example of the fact that autonomous flight is possible, and not only straightforward. Next, you need to improve the software, of course, if you agree with you, then there is no need to do this, your plane can only be controlled by communication and nothing more.
      2. Canep
        Canep 7 May 2013 10: 09
        0
        Quote: We refund_SSSR
        But the pilot of this aircraft, computers will not be replaced soon.

        So waters on this need to work in the most serious way, in terms of the scale of this work should be consistent with the program for manned space flight.
        1. igor.borov775
          igor.borov775 7 May 2013 20: 40
          0
          Yes, they coped with such a program, you just forgot there were pilots that taught computers and gained experience, did you really forget Squadron VOLKOVA of course everything is lost, you have to start all over
        2. Refund_SSSR
          Refund_SSSR 8 May 2013 04: 53
          0
          First of all, you should work not on UAVs as such, but on developing robotics (which, incidentally, is being conducted in our country and shows good results in world competitions).
          Today, a UAV is for the most part a scout and nothing but.
    4. Batman
      Batman 7 May 2013 15: 38
      +2
      UAV for maneuverable air combat

      I agree, manned aircraft are limited to overloads per person ... but UAVs)
    5. Civil
      Civil 7 May 2013 18: 10
      0
      after so many moaning about UAVs, the first more or less surging article,
  2. svp67
    svp67 7 May 2013 08: 00
    +2
    With this in mind, at present, by order of the Russian Ministry of Defense, work is underway in our country to create 3-x UAVs.
    I wish everyone who is engaged in this very necessary business for our country success, success and success again. These machines were needed "already the day before yesterday" so we must hurry very, very much, but without unnecessary fuss. We need to learn to use our technical potential more in saving the lives of soldiers ...
  3. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 7 May 2013 08: 25
    +1
    It seems to me that strike UAVs should be developed in terms of autonomous flight with a mission in mind. Aircraft control systems must be super modern and reliably protected from interference. The plane receives a mission and ceases communication with the ground. Next is the protection of the computer from external influences. Before completing the task, the computer will check the presence of the target, identify it, and only after that it strikes, after which it leaves for the base. in addition, attack sensors should be installed in it both from the ground and by air. Accordingly, the implementation of a program to avoid threats or countermeasures. Only such an airplane can be efficient and necessary.
    1. svp67
      svp67 7 May 2013 09: 57
      +1
      Quote: vladsolo56
      Before completing the task, the computer will check the presence of the target, identify it, and only after that it strikes, after which it leaves for the base. in addition, attack sensors should be installed in it both from the ground and by air. Accordingly, the implementation of a program to avoid threats or countermeasures. Only such an airplane can be efficient and necessary.

      You are not consistent, on the one hand - immediately after take-off, the termination of communication with the command post, and on the other hand, in order to effectively avoid dangers, an active locator must be installed on the UAV — and then what's the point of radio silence?
      1. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 7 May 2013 12: 30
        +1
        The point is that when exchanging radio commands, they can be tracked and intercepted, and as a result, the aircraft can be taken under control. Everything should be protected from interception of the communication channel, therefore the aircraft should be autonomous, equipped with the necessary number of sensors to ensure monitoring of the horizon.
        1. alean245
          alean245 7 May 2013 15: 37
          0
          A good cryptographic code will reduce the likelihood of an interception of control to the minimum. And the work of active sensors can also be tracked (and their work is easier to detect than radio communication with the command post). In addition, it would be nice to ensure the interaction between UAVs and manned aircraft (for example, the ability to attack an object using an UAV for target designation from a manned aircraft).
        2. svp67
          svp67 7 May 2013 19: 28
          0
          Quote: vladsolo56
          The point is that when exchanging radio commands, they can be tracked and intercepted, and as a result, the aircraft can be taken under control. Everything should be protected from interception of the communication channel, therefore the aircraft should be autonomous, equipped with the necessary number of sensors to ensure monitoring of the horizon.
          There are many ways to "protect" communication channels, and they can be very high, almost "guaranteed" strength.
  4. Vtel
    Vtel 7 May 2013 10: 32
    +3
    UAVs are needed like air, but without the development of domestic microelectronics, they will be just primitive devices of a narrow direction. It is necessary to create combat drones with elements of artificial intelligence, so that such a UAV could instantly make decisions on its own and also cluster with others from its flock to increase combat effectiveness. While RUSNANO and OSKOLKOVO are running NonRusi, there is no good to expect - they will rob everyone, they say it should have been, and the GDP will say that it is better not to touch his homies, they are "Big Benefit", as well as from Gorbachev.
  5. roial
    roial 7 May 2013 10: 34
    +1
    The article is interesting, but it's not that clear on this issue.
    If you create a glider and a power plant is not difficult and costly, the control system of the drone will cause quite a few difficulties.
    How will the commands be transferred to its control ???
    On the radio channel ??? So the flight range will not be very large.
    By satellite channel? Are there satellites in the MO suitable for this? Or do they still need to be created and run?
  6. 17085
    17085 7 May 2013 11: 10
    0
    Why not continue the Tu-141 or Tu-123 program? In a new quality of course. Earnings million. There is a positive experience.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 7 May 2013 12: 04
      +1
      It is quite possible to create an easy and durable glider, problems begin with engines and end with electronics with software. Well, if the problem of engines is more or less solved even by copying (unfortunately, the domestic industry does not produce engines for small aircraft, and out of piston engines only old people AI-14 (with modifications), ASh-62), then electronics is bad.
    2. Bongo
      Bongo 7 May 2013 14: 41
      +3
      I need equipment made at a new technological level, it hardly makes sense to return to the bulky designs of 40 years ago.
  7. Astartes
    Astartes 7 May 2013 12: 16
    +1
    Even on Chinese electronics, it is already possible to create quite tolerable drones, although first you need to determine what role these drones will play in the troops. Under this role, define tasks and specifications. And so the article is empty, "UAVs are needed", but why ??
    1. svp67
      svp67 7 May 2013 19: 30
      0
      Quote: Astartes
      Even on Chinese electronics, you can already create quite tolerable drones

      Yes, that's just not sure that such UAVs will not immediately fly into the "heavenly"?
  8. engineer74
    engineer74 7 May 2013 12: 55
    +5
    Again, we confuse RPV (remotely piloted, i.e. controlled through a communication channel by a pilot, aircraft) and UAV (unmanned, i.e. autonomous, independently performing aircraft tasks). On the UAV in the Union was not a bad start, remember "Buran" (can be represented in the form of an orbital strike UAV, if you hang weapons and find adequate targets for them) or "Granit" (an automatic attack aircraft capable of interacting in a group, solving reconnaissance tasks , selection and distribution of targets, the development of group attack tactics), all this was implemented on the element base of the early 70s.
    I do not think that the implementation of such systems requires precisely "nanotechnologies", which we do not have yet. Microelectronics of the late 90s are already redundant.
    EMNIP F-22 on a 486 processor flew with Windows 95th and did not hum.
    IMHO
  9. Simple
    Simple 7 May 2013 13: 25
    0
    "In addition, a number of programs to develop a new attack drone (such as the Northrop Grumman X-47A, Boeing X-45 and X-46) have been closed."

    More about this fact, if possible.
  10. rudolff
    rudolff 7 May 2013 14: 04
    +1
    Unmanned attack systems operating on ground targets are already the reality of today. And the area of ​​their application is far from only the destruction of terrorists or "forcing peace" of underdeveloped states. They are also quite suitable for full-scale military operations against modern armies of developed countries. This is the opening of air defense systems, the destruction of air defense facilities, including both radar stations and the launchers themselves, the destruction of infrastructure facilities, as well as the accumulation of military equipment, manpower, headquarters, communication centers, warehouses, etc.
  11. rudolff
    rudolff 7 May 2013 14: 32
    +3
    The further development of unmanned aircraft can develop along the path of creating long-range strategic strike systems and implementing the fighter functions of UAVs. And if in the first case the main problems are associated with the unconditional reliability of the functioning of all systems and assemblies, as well as with the exceptional security of communication channels, then in the second case, with regard to fighters, everything is somewhat more complicated. There are also two ways of development here. This is either the creation of computer systems close to artificial intelligence and capable of largely replacing the pilot, or it will be the implementation of the concept of "contactless" air combat, when the UAV remains the same weapons carrier, and all the emphasis is on improving weapons systems and related systems. using these weapons. Then the clash occurs at a considerable distance of tens or hundreds of kilometers and without the need for intensive air maneuvering. But on any, no matter what way of creating promising submarine systems not to go, one cannot do without a developed radio-electronic industry.
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 7 May 2013 14: 43
      +5
      You are of course right, but apart from fire damage, intelligence is also needed. Such devices as "Global Hawk" have a great future.
  12. rudolff
    rudolff 7 May 2013 15: 03
    +4
    Bongo, I did not mention the Global Hawke, for the simple reason that I myself do not breathe evenly to this machine and in any case I will be subjective. After our Buran, today it is the most advanced and most high-tech unmanned aerial system. Yesterday I mentioned about him in one of the comments. A pair of devices similar to Hawk could control our entire Arctic coast from Magadan to Anadyr. Plus the Northern Sea Route. By the way, Canadians ordered from the Americans exactly the Arctic version of this machine. I am very sorry that we do not yet have such systems.
  13. Watchman
    Watchman 7 May 2013 15: 21
    0
    The Sukhoi Design Bureau is undoubtedly the leader of the Russian aviation industry, but it is not rational to give him all orders. There must be competition. It would be nice if a 5th generation fighter for the Russian Air Force would develop 2 KB, and the Ministry of Defense would choose the best, say, between the MiG 1.44 and the Su-50. Taking the development of a drone from the MiG means leaving the design bureau out of work. Well, I can't believe that the former will have at least some significant role in the joint project between RSK MiG and the Sukhoi Design Bureau.
  14. washi
    washi 7 May 2013 15: 32
    0
    For tactical intelligence, we need them. And for the rest? If the satellites are cut down, then again for operational tactical reconnaissance and guidance.
    We do not fight against the Papuans.
    To fight a serious adversary (who has EW troops), they are useless.
    Why spend money on something that doesn't come in handy?
    In the fight against militants, it is better to work out the interaction between ALL structures so that the aircraft arrives at the address and with the necessary ammunition. She knew the counter options and was able to strike at the enemy. On simulators you can’t work it out. A dozen stupid people would die better, but thousands will later live.
  15. duchy
    duchy 7 May 2013 16: 26
    0
    The article is quite optimistic that it will be in reality, we still need to live out. Mass application is probably problematic, but it is just right for point strikes. What are the pluses: microelectronics will pick up, electronics, logistics, processes, etc. etc.
  16. abc_alex
    abc_alex 7 May 2013 16: 34
    +2
    Damn, already got these plywood imitators of the prospects for the development of UAVs in Russia. :) Give in the end at least something working serial and exceeding the dimensions of the combat ...
  17. killganoff
    killganoff 7 May 2013 18: 35
    +3
    Ours only succeeded in the production of beautiful plastic models for the show, and the "combat" UAV samples at the level of a children's model airplane mug ...
  18. 12061973
    12061973 7 May 2013 19: 29
    0
    In the photo with an Amersky UAV in the background, IL -76 is, what is he doing there?
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 7 May 2013 21: 33
      0
      Amers have their own drone-strike, reconnaissance, we have our own, transport. belay
  19. Saraev
    Saraev 7 May 2013 19: 51
    +2
    While Ivan is on the stove
  20. Saraev
    Saraev 7 May 2013 20: 11
    0
    Quote: 12061973
    In the photo with an Amersky UAV in the background, IL -76 is, what is he doing there?

    Carries cargo for the coalition
  21. Justme
    Justme 7 May 2013 20: 52
    0
    The most curious thing about such developments is not a bunch of flying "iron" but the mathematics of the work of the "brains" of such a system, at least - their adequacy
  22. shpuntik
    shpuntik 8 May 2013 01: 18
    +1
    It will be cheaper and more promising to revive and improve the Buran project.
    1) He sat down unmanned, thirty years ago.
    2) Launch is possible from "Mriya".
    3) The transport compartment is large, the armament will be good.
    4) Duty for half a year is real. After: landing, maintenance and restart.
    5) Docking with the ISS is possible, i.e., dual-purpose work if necessary.
    Or Lozino-Lozinsky's project: "Spiral".
    This is instead of a heavy shock, of course.
  23. Saraev
    Saraev 8 May 2013 19: 43
    +1
    Quote: shpuntik
    It will be cheaper and more promising to revive and improve the Buran project.
    Or Lozino-Lozinsky's project: "Spiral".


    Will not work. Technology has been lost; personnel who have not left already retired.
    The average age of a specialist in the space industry is 65 years.
  24. I think so
    I think so 9 May 2013 00: 32
    -1
    Russia at the present stage CANNOT produce UAV itself ... That's ALL PROSPECTS ... And all sorts of arguments on this subject, including this article, are MANILOVSCHINA ...
    There is no element base for electronics ...
    No constructors ...
    There are no plants to do this ...

    And therefore, it makes no sense to discuss this topic ...
    1. vit24
      vit24 12 May 2013 01: 04
      -2
      And nobody will sell modern UAVs to you No. As Israelis, I also oppose the sale of modern UAVs to Russia. You are not friends with those, but why arm the enemies through you bully
  25. realist
    realist 15 December 2013 10: 53
    0
    Quote: Joker
    It seems that IBM began cooperation with Skolkovo in 2011, but last week it seems that IBM absorbed Intel. And news about domestic processors, video cards, hard drives, etc. I have not heard for a hundred years.

    While a redhead and other craftsmen are cutting in Skolkovo, we will not see another hundred years.