Military Review

Against terrorists and insurgents - “Predators”, against China and Russia - X-47В - Chinese source

38

According to media reports, the 14 of May from the deck of the atomic aircraft carrier George HW Bush (CVN 77).


In an article published in a single American magazine, experts identified niches for the use of combat drones - the “front” MQ-1 Predator (“Predator”, and its development MQ-9 Reaper - “Reaper” - note “VP”) will be used against terrorists , insurgents and militarily weak countries, while the newest X-47В will be used to strike at “potentially strong opponents”, hinting at China and Russia, a Chinese source believes.


Drones with a long duration of flight, equipped with a turboprop engine and light rockets, are used mainly to destroy bases and groups of terrorists who do not have strong air defense, and much more powerful jet X-47В with heavy precision weapons it is planned to use for the destruction of missile positions, air bases and other military facilities, covered with a powerful air defense system. The MQ-1 Predator and the MQ-9 Reaper have shown their effectiveness in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The most modern “screw” drone UAVs cost about 15 million US dollars per unit (probably meaning MQ-9 Reaper - approx. “VP”)), MQ-1 total 4 million dollars. New American Security Center expert Bob Walker (Bob Walker) believes that X-47В is designed to fight "strong opponents." Although Walker does not directly name China and Russia, these countries are developing new missiles, stealth fighters and combat UAVs, as a result of which they are “strong opponents” for the United States, a Chinese source writes.
Originator:
http://www.militaryparitet.com/
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Nayhas
    Nayhas 22 May 2013 10: 12 New
    +2
    On May 17, the Kh-47V first performed the "touch-and-go" mode - approaching the deck in landing mode - touching the deck - leaving to re-enter. The Chinese need to hurry ...
    1. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 22 May 2013 10: 13 New
      +2
      Still not strong, they thought all the time savages to bomb and brag about it?
      1. orff
        orff 22 May 2013 10: 20 New
        +3
        The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee on May 21 authorized the supply of weapons to Syrian rebels. About it writes The Wall Street Journal.
        Now we are waiting for the X-47B in Syria. Who is toothier: S-300 or UAV?
        1. Atrix
          Atrix 22 May 2013 10: 35 New
          0
          Quote: orff
          Who is toothier: S-300 or UAV?

          Damn C300 is already a big cloud of years, or do you think this is a panacea for all ills like plantain in childhood. Yes, and you need to take into account that there are no people on the UAV, and operators are sitting in the C300 / 400 systems and whoever you think will lose more. Not one system can not withstand a 10-20 UAV raid, here's a video half there cartoonBut development directions I think it’s clear where the USA is striving.
          1. orff
            orff 22 May 2013 10: 49 New
            +2
            Well, where will the states move this device to testing at the moment? To Beijing, to Moscow? Of course not. These birds still need to be fired. The nearest theater with serious air defense is Syria. Recently, in Jordan, the Americans built an UAV air base. Kakbe all converges. But Syria does not have an S-400. Therefore, let’s look at what “junk” in the form of S-300 is capable of. And 10-20 UAVs of this class cost as much as an army. Will the Pentagon take such a risk now?

            From TTX S-300:
            Number of targets fired simultaneously: 6
            Number of simultaneously launched missiles: 12
            1. Atrix
              Atrix 22 May 2013 11: 05 New
              +1
              If you watched the video, then you can buy for 1 F22 = 12 UAV. The same Ripper costs about 16 million, which is not so much money for the United States. The same planes are 3-5 times more expensive, so it's a fairy tale about the high cost. And when it comes to saving people's lives, the price should fall back to 2nd place. The same Su34 costs about 33 million, and what is more effective is an air defense raid of 3-4 Su34 or a raid of 6-8 rippers.
          2. Wedmak
            Wedmak 22 May 2013 11: 06 New
            +6
            Oh damn, cartoon! The United States ate more than one dog for propaganda.
            As usual - performance characteristics are overstated, the enemy’s capabilities are underestimated, etc. In general, Goebbels is a puppy compared to them ...
            Damn С300 is already a fucking cloud of years, or do you think this is a panacea for all ills like plantain in childhood.

            What a dick cloud of years? C-300 has several modifications - enough for everyone.
            The main weapon of Americans and companies is propaganda and distortion of reality in the media. Over the past decade, they have not won a single war! Where they do not fit in - the full w..a comes. Moreover, for both sides.
            1. Papakiko
              Papakiko 22 May 2013 11: 24 New
              +3
              Quote: Wedmak
              The United States ate more than one dog for propaganda.

              There is no way to get rid of dogs, along with all insects and other creeping-sucking-gnawing.
              In the photo, the prototype X-47B (it inspired from the first photo to the article).
            2. Joker
              Joker 22 May 2013 12: 59 New
              0
              I am amazed at your hats. If the United States attacks, then no one will remember the price, believe it, even if it makes hundreds of gold stamped, there will be losses among hp. no most important thing. For droneless future and most modern in the United States. What can our air defense do against simultaneously attacking 5 000 drone? Do not worry, even if half slaughtered, the second half will cover the air defense, and here already and the F-22 will fly and other aircraft with pilots.
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 22 May 2013 13: 47 New
                +5
                The US will not attack as long as we have nuclear weapons. Only tactical is enough to shower NATO in Europe with guaranteed destruction. And if you still do not forget that the United States itself is across the oceans and secretly transferring thousands of pieces of equipment to Europe they simply will not succeed, we get that there is no question of any global war.
                What can our air defense do against the simultaneous attack of 5 000 drones?

                Uh ... and how many operators will you need to manage this flock? How many radio channels, communication lines, satellite transponders, etc. This will not happen. In the next eleven years.
                So far, drones are toys against countries without air defense. They can’t do more.
                1. Joker
                  Joker 22 May 2013 14: 46 New
                  +3
                  EE ... and how many operators are needed to manage this pack?


                  but not at all. You do not notice the trends in the development of the US Army? What is the weak point of the drone? This is certainly a dependence on the ZHPS and satellites, we will destroy the satellites and that’s all, this is already pieces of metal. Now remember the article about the fact that the United States is looking for a replacement for RPS, and the coordinates will be calculated autonomously without communication with the satellites, that is, look, the drone's 5 000 sets the coordinates of the targets, these are radar stations, nuclear weapons bases, airfields, etc. and they are released into free flight, it is impossible to intercept them, since there is nothing to intercept, they act completely autonomously, it is unrealistic to shoot everything down at once, understand me? And the operators, 10 000 people a lot or something? They are pennies, besides, their task will be only to set goals and everything, but about the fact that you need to know the goals, so everything is sold and bought from us. And after it will fly ballistic missiles, F-22 and so on and so forth. Money will be killed, of course, Nemer, but the jackpot will still be a hundred times the largest. What do you think about that? (I do not pretend to the truth in the last resort wink )
                  1. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 22 May 2013 20: 38 New
                    -1
                    You do not notice the trends in the development of the US Army?

                    I notice one trend - the rise in price of all armaments being created. Moreover, on a grand scale, so ... But in fact, what have they created really new and really combat-ready (and taking part in battles) over the past couple of decades? Offhand, I remember only one thing - they developed the Kyrgyz Republic robustly. And they can release them in hundreds.
                    Now, recall the little article that the United States is looking for a substitute for ZhPS, and the coordinates will be calculated autonomously without communication with satellites, that is, see, 5 000 m drones set the coordinates of the targets, these are radars, locations based on nuclear weapons, airfields, etc. and they’re released on free flight, it’s impossible to intercept them, since there is nothing to intercept, they act completely autonomously, it’s unrealistic to bring down everything at once, understand me?

                    Let's remember. Rivet 5000 drones at US prices - the navel will untie. Not all targets are stationary. The stationary ones will be protected enough to minimize possible losses from the attack of blunt drones, hollowing missiles at predetermined coordinates. Whose is it impossible to intercept? EW and radars have not been canceled. Fighters too. In the latter case, there will be fun - they will shoot from guns, as in a shooting gallery.
                    And the operators, 10 000 people a lot of what?

                    Yes, as if dofiga. They eat, sleep and ... it is necessary. And places for everyone? And the training of this breakthrough? What channels will this sea of ​​information go through?
                    And then ballistic missiles, F-22 and so on and so forth will already fly.

                    That's just the opposite. Several hundreds of missiles and dozens of ICBMs will be released. This is the end of the war. The result is a half-planet radioactive desert.
                    Money will certainly be killed unmeasured, but the jackpot will still be a hundred times the largest.

                    Kush? And what is the jackpot ?? Territory? Resources? Do you think it will be the same here as in Iraq? Or Libya? The history book is in your hands - many have already tried, the result for the attackers is mostly deplorable.
                2. Atrix
                  Atrix 22 May 2013 15: 21 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Wedmak
                  Uh ... and how many operators will you need to manage this flock? How many radio channels, communication lines, satellite transponders, etc. This will not happen. In the next eleven years.
                  So far, drones are toys against countries without air defense. They can’t do more.

                  Well, what's the problem with 5000 operators? After all, they do not die in a place with drones, like pilots. And considering that one operator can control 2-4 drones. In general, this is not a problem at all for the country.
                  It is planned that the AEHF satellites will replace the Milstar orbital constellation. They will be compatible with old satellites and ground-based communication terminals, which will allow for a smooth transition to new technologies. The use of extremely high frequencies allows AEHF satellites, compared with Milstar, to increase the data transfer speed by six times and increase the traffic volume by ten times. In addition, AEHF systems are more resistant to electronic interference and provide enhanced protection of classified information.

                  And by the way, as for the downing of the satellite, everything is not going smoothly either, all the satellites that shot down were at an altitude of about 1000 km
                  a missile launched by Beijing with a so-called kinetic warhead at an altitude of more than 864 km above Sichuan province hit the obsolete Fengyun-1C meteorological satellite

                  To the geostationary orbit, where most communication satellites work, what will you get?
                  In a given orbit - about 35 thousand kilometers above the Earth - the satellite will leave in about three months.
                  1. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 22 May 2013 20: 42 New
                    -1
                    Well, what's the problem with 5000 operators? After all, they do not die in a place with drones, like pilots. And considering that one operator can control 2-4 drones. In general, this is not a problem at all for the country.

                    They need to be trained, provided with a workplace, dressed, shod, fed. Drones will knock down dozens of what to do with lounging operators then? One cannot control 2-4 drones. A simple example is a flight simulator. In a straight line, on the echelon, you can still lead a few boards, and as soon as problems begin in the form of air defense, electronic warfare, fighter jets, your brain will smoke in a couple of minutes.
                    To the geostationary orbit, where most communication satellites work, what will you get?

                    The same that brings them there.
          3. ovgorskiy
            ovgorskiy 22 May 2013 11: 54 New
            +7
            Frankly stupid commercial drone manufacturers.
            Solid bloopers. An UAV flies freely over enemy territory, and no one discovers them. What radars stopped working?
            What, air defense systems have absolutely no cover systems near range? What, in UAV missiles, the radius of action far exceeds the radius of action of ground-based air defense (s300 \ 400 \ 500)? Where did the combat laser come from on the drone? The video showed how 10 UAVs will destroy 1 Shell., And the rest of the air defense went on vacation at once. Banal money scam. UAVs are a good thing, of course, but to assign victory to it in a war is silly. Perhaps they are dangerous, but only in the amount of hundreds of thousands of pieces, which is unlikely. Expensive even for Amer, not that for Russia.
            The best and cheapest option to counter the UAV armada will be an armada of cheap self-guidance air defense missiles loaded into Grad launchers (conditionally), 40 pcs in one salvo from ONE installation, and if there are 10 \ 100 \ 1000 of them? How do you like this option?
            1. Papakiko
              Papakiko 22 May 2013 12: 24 New
              +1
              Quote: ovgorskiy
              Grad launchers (conditionally), 40 pcs in one salvo from ONE installation, and if there are 10 \ 100 \ 1000 of them? How do you like this option?

              He smiled sincerely. Asymmetric "answer to Chamberlain." good drinks
          4. Atlon
            Atlon 22 May 2013 12: 09 New
            +9
            Quote: Atrix
            Damn C300 already a dick cloud of years

            And there are still no analogues in the world ... laughing

            Quote: Atrix
            or do you think this is a panacea for all ills like plantain in childhood.

            We don’t think, but we know! And not only us, but "civilized" too! Otherwise, we wouldn’t take turns bowing to Putin, asking them not to deliver the S-300 to Syria ... laughing

            Quote: Atrix
            Yes, and you need to take into account that there are no people on the UAV, and operators are sitting in the C300 / 400 systems and whoever you think will lose more.

            To lose people on the S-300, you need to get to it ... And this is very, very problematic! no

            Quote: Atrix
            Not one system can not withstand a 10-20 UAV raid

            And you take a chance! And we will laugh! bully

            Quote: Atrix
            here is the video half there cartoon

            Do you like cartoons? Well look, see what Hollywood will show you! smile
          5. Joker
            Joker 22 May 2013 16: 39 New
            +4
            And there is such a video, just made by Almaz-Antey wink

          6. Ghenxnumx
            Ghenxnumx 22 May 2013 16: 56 New
            0
            Quote: Atrix
            Damn C300 is already a fucking cloud of years, or do you think this is a panacea for all ills like plantain in childhood. Yes, and you need to take into account that there are no people on the UAV, and operators are sitting in the C300 / 400 systems and whoever you think will lose more. Not one system can not withstand a raid of 10-20 UAVs ...

            Uh, scared a hedgehog naked ... laughing
            1. The S-300 is now not the same as 10 years ago, and NATO knows this, otherwise why these trips to bow to Moscow;
            2. In air defense, not only the S-300 has other systems, and (I’ll tell you a secret laughing ) even fighter interceptors (for 10-20 UAVs 2x are more than enough) laughing and the range of their missiles is several times greater than the capabilities of the UAV;
        2. kirieeleyson
          kirieeleyson 22 May 2013 12: 16 New
          +4
          I would like to express my opinion on this subject:
          - The appearance of the X-47B in Syria is generally unlikely, this project provides for a greater degree of development of a separate niche for a new generation of weapons, both carriers and weapons.
          - The prototype will be tested for a long time, in a single complex with weapons, developing a new concept of "global strike." Such “birds” will not go into the series soon, given that even before the appearance of “childhood diseases” and other refinements of the project, DARPA will break many more copies. An example is the implementation of the F-35 project, various modifications. This project stands like a cast-iron bridge, and is more reminiscent of another wunderwafel, but for special covert operations, such as secret attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, such a machine is the very thing.
          - In addition, the spraying of technological capacitive projects allows us to implement our sustainable protective equipment and monitor complex threats.
          Against us and, possibly, China - such projects are pointless now for many reasons: the extremely low degree of guaranteed survival in solving the tasks, with the slightest exposure to such a machine, any action of a global strike will lead in a war where everyone will receive a lethal dose of radiation within half an hour.
          Bottom line - the US will soon use this project as an experimental combat research complex for testing and developing new weapons and will continue to modernize its fleet of aircraft. This is a prospect and touched a minimum of 20 years. This project also has a hidden method of influencing the stall of China and the Russian Federation in a new arms race, which should not be fought.

          -
          1. Atlon
            Atlon 22 May 2013 12: 29 New
            -1
            Quote: kirieeleyson
            This project also has a hidden method of influencing the stall of China and the Russian Federation in a new arms race, which should not be fought.

            That's it!

            Quote: svp67
            The main thing is not to be "late" to us ..

            While they are in the role of catching up. They have nothing against the Russian Federation!
    2. svp67
      svp67 22 May 2013 10: 17 New
      +7
      Quote: Nayhas
      The Chinese need to hurry ...

      The main thing is not to be "late" to us ...
      1. patline
        patline 22 May 2013 10: 29 New
        +4
        While he has an “X” index (X-47B), then this is not yet included in the series device. So there is still time. Yes, and many of their advertised flying expensive toys did not justify the investment. There will be hunters for this beast.
        So for now it’s Piar or Ponte for intimidation.
        1. rauffg
          rauffg 22 May 2013 11: 57 New
          +4
          it should be noted that the F-117 stealth was also invulnerable at one time, before flying over Serbia. but we know how it all ended. soldier
    3. Mitek
      Mitek 22 May 2013 10: 27 New
      +1
      Quote: Nayhas
      On May 17, the Kh-47V first performed the "touch-and-go" mode - approaching the deck in landing mode - touching the deck - leaving to re-enter. The Chinese need to hurry ...

      Here we need to hurry.
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 22 May 2013 12: 01 New
        +1
        We have neither aircraft carriers, nor UAVs even without STELS technologies. China is preparing to build a series of aircraft carriers, they also have an extensive UAV program including STELS, so only they have a chance ...
        1. Atlon
          Atlon 22 May 2013 12: 31 New
          +2
          Quote: Nayhas
          China is preparing to build a series of aircraft carriers, they also have an extensive UAV program including STELS

          China makes the USSR mistake, gets involved in an arms race, and according to the rules of others. History does not teach anything ... It makes no sense to build expensive toys that can be knocked down by a "nano slingshot"! Nano-slings need to be riveted! wink
          1. Nayhas
            Nayhas 23 May 2013 04: 24 New
            0
            China has clear goals in this world, absolute dominance, there is no way to do without weapons.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. shtabs
    shtabs 22 May 2013 10: 19 New
    0
    how to intercept the "base" let then yell that technical failure.
  4. avant-garde
    avant-garde 22 May 2013 10: 24 New
    +3
    And who said there is no arms race what or is it now called differently?
    1. Baron Wrangell
      Baron Wrangell 22 May 2013 10: 36 New
      +6
      an arms race has always been!
      And note, ours have the best defense systems, the Yankees of the attack system are all improving. question! Who is going to attack anyone !!! ????
      Another interesting thing is that you can create many many cheap UAVs and direct them in flocks at the enemy, the air defense system detected them and started to shoot them down, while all the radars are illuminated, the ammunition is shot, and here you can send such drums to both pilots and missiles using air defense systems! complete domination in the air! This is such a thought!
      1. avant-garde
        avant-garde 22 May 2013 10: 52 New
        +3
        Who is going to attack anyone !!! ????
        ____________________________________
        Today, only "democracy" attacks everyone, from which we build the world's best defense systems!
      2. Atlon
        Atlon 22 May 2013 12: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: Baron Wrangell
        That’s complete air supremacy! This is such a thought!

        Fucking idea ... Any wunderwaffle is unmanned, much more vulnerable than you think. They don’t fly by themselves. There is NO artificial reason. Each electronic toy has wireless (read the radio) communication with the operator on the ground. Failure of communication lines (consider active interference) will lead to absolute uncontrollability, loss, and possibly interception of the wunderwaffle by the enemy! Any pilot will give a handicap to a pack of wunderwafers! For a MAN flying an aircraft in manual mode, while out of competition ...
  5. Dmitry 2246
    Dmitry 2246 22 May 2013 10: 29 New
    +1
    In the USA, the military budget is a legal way to get rich.
    What just do not come up.
    The idea for the cut: it is necessary that the drones in the air refuel, otherwise Russia and China are large.
    The Germans were the first to "hear" a scam with drones.
    1. UFO
      UFO 22 May 2013 12: 44 New
      +2
      "Of course"! And now they are buying UAVs in Israel! wink
  6. Wedmak
    Wedmak 22 May 2013 10: 30 New
    +3
    The expert of the organization New American Security Center Bob Walker (Bob Walker) believes that the X-47V is designed to deal with "strong opponents."

    Pentagon regularly pays expert for such horror stories? Something I have big doubts that this device is protected from electronic warfare, and it will not dodge the missile. And we already heard about the notorious stealth. A pair of radars spaced in a range catches these airplanes with a bang.
  7. Apollo
    Apollo 22 May 2013 10: 33 New
    -1
    video about Х47В


  8. JonnyT
    JonnyT 22 May 2013 10: 38 New
    0
    Hmm, probably according to their plans, people will face a total reduction in order to optimize the management of the world ....
    Who will tell you what is cheaper and more profitable in a strategic plan? To develop and launch a drone drone in a series, or still train pilots and create attack aircraft?
    1. Atrix
      Atrix 22 May 2013 10: 50 New
      +1
      Quote: JonnyT
      Hmm, probably according to their plans, people will face a total reduction in order to optimize the management of the world ....
      Who will tell you what is cheaper and more profitable in a strategic plan? To develop and launch a drone drone in a series, or still train pilots and create attack aircraft?


      And in the strategic plan, to raise a first-class pilot is probably about 30 years from his birth to his peak, and I think you can build a UAV in a couple of weeks if it is mass-produced, and not as it is now in Russia.
      And how can you compare the life of a living person with a piece of metal? Is life in Russia so precious that they ask such questions?
      1. Atlon
        Atlon 22 May 2013 12: 46 New
        +2
        Quote: Atrix
        And in the strategic plan, to raise a first-class pilot is probably about 30 years from his birth to his peak, and I think you can build a UAV in a couple of weeks if it is mass-produced, and not as it is now in Russia.

        Have you ever been involved in radio modeling? So, UAVs do not fly by themselves! They also need a "pilot" (operational). It’s no less difficult to grow a good operator than a pilot. Of course, the "expense" of such pilots will be less (by injury, death or age), but to operate the machine at a distance is no less difficult than being on board. Or maybe more complicated. The eyes of television cameras are not at all what human eyes are! And do not give a full picture. In the case of attacks by savages, UAVs may be effective, but in the case of counteraction with a strong enemy, it is unlikely ...
        In the era of moon exploration, the USSR lost one lunar rover only because the operator controlling it accidentally hooked the crater slope with a cover. And on the lid were solar panels. The breed fell asleep, the batteries were discharged, and the Lunokhod was lost for control ...
      2. JonnyT
        JonnyT 22 May 2013 13: 19 New
        +1
        let's try to compare without emotions, which is more profitable:
        In my opinion, a human pilot is better than a computer both economically and in terms of combat effectiveness. There is no artificial intellect equal to human in the generation of ideas (and there will be no 100 years), which means the UAV operates according to a clear algorithm and never deviates from it. The operator cannot respond promptly to changes in the situation due to a delay in the transmission of data. Conclusion - having studied the algorithm of the UAV's action, it is possible to develop an effective strategy for counteracting both in air and from the ground. A human pilot is more versatile than a computer.
        But people have minuses - they are emotional, they can not obey, but the computer can glitch.
        As for the economic component, it is not clear what is cheaper. A complex UAV needs to be serviced by a large number of narrow-profile specialists. A huge amount of highly sensitive electronics, along with developments in the field of artificial intelligence, cost a lot of money. Its production is also not cheap (I compare X-48B)
        UAVs are needed for what Atlon said, to protect the golden billion, and not to protect the interests of the people!
        1. Atrix
          Atrix 22 May 2013 14: 56 New
          0
          Quote: JonnyT
          There is no artificial intelligence equal to human in the generation of ideas (and there will not be another 100 years), which means that the UAV operates according to a clear algorithm and never deviates from it. The operator cannot respond to changes in time due to a delay in the transmission of data

          Did you see somewhere in the article a mention of artificial intelligence? As far as I understand, they can patrol, return to base and the simplest functions without operator intervention. Second is your question, who told you that the operator cannot respond in a timely manner? It used to be so now when the data transfer rate has increased so much gigabytes of data can be transferred in a couple of minutes and this is at home. What is the situation with the US military, I think is much better than ours, so there is no complication with the data transfer speed and delays of a hundredth of a second do not play a critical role. But focus on the task and less nervous stress on the operator is much less than the pilot is experiencing.
          Quote: JonnyT
          As for the economic component, it is not clear what is cheaper. A complex UAV needs to be serviced by a large number of narrow-profile specialists. A huge amount of highly sensitive electronics, along with developments in the field of artificial intelligence, cost a lot of money. Its production is also not cheap (I compare X-48B)
          UAVs are needed for what Atlon said, to protect the golden billion, and not to protect the interests of the people!

          Once again, how can you compare the life of a pilot who risks being shot down and a piece of metal that is not a pity? The cost of a UAV is much lower than an airplane, take the same Ripper, its price is 15 mil. the price of SU34 is 33 mil. What do you think will be more effective attack 10 SU34 or attack 20 Ripers? Even if we take into account that, for example, out of 10 Su-34s, 4 will be shot down, this is already 8 pilots lost. It is already necessary to train 8 pilots in time, it is 6-10 years, excluding 18 years of human birth. And what does it mean to lose 10 rippers or 15? This is just a piece of metal, the operators remain intact and after a couple of hours will again be able to control new drones. German aviation lost at the end of the war not because of poor or poor aircraft, but because of the lack of experienced pilots.
          1. rereture
            rereture 22 May 2013 17: 20 New
            +2
            gigabytes of data can be transferred in a couple of minutes and this is at home

            By wire, optic.

            Quote: Atrix
            What do you think will be more effective attack 10 SU34 or attack 20 Ripers?


            10 su34.
          2. Atlon
            Atlon 22 May 2013 18: 23 New
            +1
            Quote: Atrix
            As far as I understand, they can patrol, return to base and the simplest functions without operator intervention

            This is TOO little for combat use. For reconnaissance, perhaps, for real combat, no.

            Quote: Atrix
            Second is your question, who told you that the operator cannot respond in a timely manner? It used to be so now when the data transfer rate has increased so much gigabytes of data can be transferred in a couple of minutes and this is at home.

            Well, he didn’t express himself a bit. The data transfer rate, of course, can not be taken into account. But the speed of data acquisition, for the subsequent reaction ... Well, I will explain. The fighter pilot turns his head to understand what is around. Of course, the UAV can "twist" the camera, but this is completely wrong! No wonder I asked about radio modeling. Who did not do this, try to play some kind of simulator on the PC, and evaluate what is more convenient: "twist" your own head or camera? Well, the last, while the UAV does not work autonomously (patrolling and return does not count), its most vulnerable point is the communication channel with the operator ... No need to shoot them down! You can intercept and plant, or smash it to the ground!

            Quote: Atrix
            But focus on the task and less nervous stress on the operator is much less than the pilot is experiencing.

            You definitely NEVER dealt with radio models ... smile

            Quote: Atrix
            Once again, how can you compare the life of a pilot who risks being shot down and a piece of metal that is not a pity?

            Do you seriously think so ?! What does one of the puppeteers think about the life of some pilots ??? Not in this case. The fact is that wars are getting dirtier. Everything is tougher and shameless. A pilot (person), no matter how frostbitten he is, may refuse to fulfill the order. UAV - will not refuse ...
    2. Atlon
      Atlon 22 May 2013 12: 39 New
      +2
      Quote: JonnyT
      Hmm, probably according to their plans, people will face a total reduction in order to optimize the management of the world .... Who will tell you which is cheaper and more profitable in strategic terms? To develop and launch a drone drone in a series, or still train pilots and create attack aircraft?

      And then looking from which side to look ... If we turn to conspiracy theory, then there are attempts to create an army of machines to protect the golden billion from slaves, as well as to force these slaves to peace, work, obedience, etc. Soldiers -people can betray, get scared, retreat, get out of obedience, etc. Machines supposedly cannot. Although, to get out of obedience, and just break down, it’s quite for yourself!
  9. Enjoy
    Enjoy 22 May 2013 10: 44 New
    +2
    Let them send some to Georgia. Such pepelats will not hurt our specialists. You can sell Israel, I think, the Iranians will also be allowed to touch)
  10. Warrawar
    Warrawar 22 May 2013 10: 45 New
    +4
    Whatever it was, but we also need to move in this direction, because it is promising and sooner or later this topic will fire.
    And UAVs proved their effectiveness in the course of military operations, in recent years, in Afghanistan - what is bad about pokraming a detachment of dushmans without spilling a drop of blood from their soldiers. And ours are dying in the Caucasus ....
    1. KononAV
      KononAV 22 May 2013 14: 19 New
      0
      There they are fighting in a foreign land, and in our Caucasus, all civilians are supposedly or not typical, and you cannot beat them high.
  11. bubla5
    bubla5 22 May 2013 10: 55 New
    +3
    While UAVs have low speeds, and at large speeds interaction is lost, then the so-called strong opponents have nothing to fear, when natural drones appear that will make decisions themselves, then yes, head to sand
    1. Atlon
      Atlon 22 May 2013 18: 32 New
      0
      Quote: bubla5
      when natural drones appear that will make decisions themselves, then yes-head in the sand

      When they make decisions themselves, they may turn out to be more principled, honest, and noble than a handful of world Jews ... And they will make a decision, fuck them at their creators, so that they wouldn’t be so bad! So, to whom to hide, another question ... In all the fantastic stories, the created monsters at the end devoured their creator ...
  12. Jackyun
    Jackyun 22 May 2013 11: 24 New
    +1
    All this crap is controlled via satellite. In the event of a conflict (as they say, with a strong enemy), serious electronic warfare will be used and the satellite constellation will be destroyed. In the layout with the S-300, these "drones" become just a toy, a target for training defense calculations.
    Against Arabs and banana republics, it’s a very good ride, but nothing more. For an adversary with a debugged VKO system, these are seeds. F-117 was dumped by the ancient system as the world, and the United States fell silent about the invincibility of stealth, and now they have come up with a new scarecrow.
  13. sergey4920
    sergey4920 22 May 2013 11: 35 New
    +1
    In general, to bring down a UAV, the S-300 is not needed! it's like a gun from sparrows)))
  14. KononAV
    KononAV 22 May 2013 14: 17 New
    0
    Likely as a means of breaking through air defense this thing is not very good, but if MiG 31 meets it in the sky, then ............
  15. Lion
    Lion 22 May 2013 14: 42 New
    0
    I remember reading about the development of the USSR, to destroy the satellites of the aggressor. There were developments on throwing away meta-blanks that fall into the satellite (cheap and cheerful) repeat .And after the aggressor is like a blind kitten. (UAV Star Wars-continued). It is necessary to introduce Glonass faster.
    1. Atrix
      Atrix 22 May 2013 15: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: Aslan
      I remember reading about the development of the USSR, to destroy the satellites of the aggressor. There were developments on throwing away meta-blanks that fall into the satellite (cheap and cheerful) repeat .And after the aggressor is like a blind kitten. (UAV Star Wars-continued). It is necessary to introduce Glonass faster.

      Communication satellites are located at a distance of 35 thousand km from the earth. Can you even imagine how much these blanks need to be put into orbit? Is it the same as getting into a fly from a distance of 100 meters, even if you imagine that you raise a dick cloud in the tone of these discs, which prevents changing the orbit a couple of hundred kilometers up or down? And do you feel that your companions are not sorry for yours or that you will not have a vulnerable satellite or will you communicate with your troops in Morse code?
      1. shinobi
        shinobi 22 May 2013 16: 23 New
        -1
        In general, a blank shot in orbit, it was intended to remove a single satellite. For larger sawing, it’s enough to blow only one megaton charge per hemisphere in a specific orbit. And truncated.
      2. Atlon
        Atlon 22 May 2013 18: 36 New
        0
        Quote: Atrix
        Communication satellites are located at a distance of 35 thousand km from the earth. Can you even imagine how much these blanks need to be put into orbit?

        Structurally, this is a "pressure cooker" with bolts ... That's right! A container the size of a 200 liter barrel filled with steel balls and explosives. When undermining, everything will be taken out of orbit! You do not need any blanks for shooting flies. It is necessary to demolish the entire space grouping (along with their satellites), and again you have to fight with machine guns and sapper shovels. And who will win this war, baaaalsh question! But obviously not cowardly amers ...
      3. Atlon
        Atlon 22 May 2013 18: 38 New
        +1
        Quote: Atrix
        And do you feel that your companions are not sorry for yours or that you will not have a vulnerable satellite or will you communicate with your troops in Morse code?

        No pity! And as for the Morse code ... You are completely off topic if you tie the absence of satellites to the need to teach the Morse code (by the way, I know her, I'm a military signalman).
  16. ovgorskiy
    ovgorskiy 22 May 2013 14: 44 New
    0
    Recently reviewed a dock. the Weapon of Victory series from Wings of Russia, and there is one tendency there, not high-tech devices and weapons win in the war, but those that can be produced quickly, cheaply and without the use of scarce materials and large quantities. It is such weapons that become the best weapons in a war. Our three-line, PPSh, T-34, IL-2, ZIS-5, etc., etc. And of course people. Of course, this does not cancel progress, but you do not need to completely rely on the super-duper, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I think no 20th-generation aircraft can withstand a group strike of 20-30 cheap missiles ??????
  17. shinobi
    shinobi 22 May 2013 16: 36 New
    +2
    Any device controlled by radio, no matter how cool the channel is, has, in addition to the danger of breaking the encoding, one significant and so far unresolved problem. Vulnerability against EMR. That is, just an ordinary powerful jammer, not to mention pulsed EMR emitters on solid-state masers There is such an experimental device in the Russian army. But as the Iranian experience shows, for the time being, what is in the army is enough. So far, enough.