Russian soldier of the future, what should he be
Recently, much has been said about the outfits of the “soldier of the future.” Futuristic images and articles appear on the Internet and in the media. It is known that we are preparing for the adoption of our kit, created under the program "Fighter-XXI", which is called "Warrior". He has been tested for more than a year. Recently, Dmitry Rogozin announced a delay in adopting it, although it was previously planned that it would be adopted in the coming months.
This gives reason to talk about how a soldier should look like in the new century.
To begin with, it should be said about those for whom the equipment of the future is being created. It is created for soldiers of ground forces of various specialties. That is for the infantry. There should be no illusions - in future wars, it will remain. Despite the rapid development of high-precision weapons, remote means of destruction, on the automation of command and control, the adoption of autonomous and remotely controlled robotic systems - is what will remain unchanged in the foreseeable future. Without a soldier on the battlefield is still not enough. And it will be impossible to do for a very long time.
It will be useful to say a little about the image created by the dreams of futurologists, the advertising of the achievements of high-tech corporations and the expectations of the townsfolk. The average person always wants something amazing and amazing. "Soldier of the Future" is portrayed in many publications and TV shows as something like a combat from science fiction films. He is clad in amazing armor that makes him both invulnerable and invisible. He is omniscient and knows where the enemy is thanks to tactical maps on display screens or even on the windshield of his superhelmet. He sees the enemy through the walls, and he is seen and heard by a magical assistant operator, who performs the function of either a commander or a computer player. He is armed with a fabulous, smart weapon that never misses and strikes any enemy, no matter where he hides. Muscle servos will help him walk and run tirelessly. He governs dozens of tireless robotswho carry his luggage, hover over him in the air, conduct reconnaissance and even destroy the enemy themselves. And in general, the soldier will soon not have to go to the battlefield, because technology will make war the lot of robotic system operators ...
You can continue further. But in reality, everything will be much simpler and more complicated at the same time. And the point is not that all these amazing things can not be created. On the contrary, most of the above is quite real today. But the expediency and effectiveness of many of these miracles still leave a lot of questions.
Here I recall the report from the exhibition of armaments, published in one magazine a few years ago. Under the photograph of the dummy depicting the Italian version of the “soldier of the future”, there was a long list of all the amazing and useful things that were hung on it. Here were the means of protection and convenient equipment; modern and ergonomic communications; tactical tablet, replacing the paper map, allowing you to determine your location and displaying the real combat situation; perfect and universal sighting devices, observation and reconnaissance tools, which allow to determine the coordinates of the enemy and automatically assign target designation to the general information and control network. And all this is combined into a single interactive system that allows you to maintain communication and exchange data in real time. And only at the very end of the list it appeared: "well, the Beretta assault rifle ... if he ever gets his hands on it."
Immediately make a reservation. I believe that to deny the development of military technologies and to fall into retrograde illusions - they say, our ancestors managed with bayonets and butt - as stupid as to dream of fantastic miracles fascinated. We need to determine the tendencies by which military operations develop, to understand what allows us to win and what does not. And then it will become clear that in the future it will be necessary for the fighter on the battlefield.
But to begin with, let us say that the robots and the remote precision weapons will not soon be replaced by a soldier (infantryman).
The ideas of distance war, requiring minimal participation of people in hostilities, are not new. Because of their geographical location and global ambitions, they regularly haunt the minds of the North American continent. Over the ocean, they always dreamed of how to conquer all of them in order not to fight very much themselves. For example, since the Second World War there they tend to overestimate the role of superiority in the air, which was beautifully expressed by the character of the famous feature film “They think that war can be won by bombing alone!”.
True, so far these ideas, which each time appear in a new form, have not proved their unconditional correctness. Now in the West there are military theories that say that to win it is not necessary to master the territory of the enemy. They argue that it is enough to control the space above the land, to have accurate intelligence and the ability to strike at any point on the earth's surface. This American view of hostilities largely determines the development of military science and military equipment throughout the world.
But he repeatedly breaks about the reality of war. Americans possessed virtually all of this in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. And in all these wars, the American soldier had to participate in the fighting. And no control of the airspace and the ability to strike blows on the surface were not decisive. Everywhere, the Americans controlled only the territory on which the American soldier stood.
And even the armed, trained in “democratic values” and well-paid “government armies” of the occupied territories prove to be poorly supported in real hostilities. The army of South Vietnam fell under the onslaught of worse-equipped Vietnamese people's army. Iraq, after the Americans left, is perhaps the most anti-American force in the region, openly supporting the legitimate authority of Syria. Even the Americans themselves have no doubt that the Taliban would soon win in Afghanistan.
It turns out that even the technologically advanced Western countries have nowhere else been able to do purely remote participation in the war. We could not yet. But they can dream. If you really want to win, but really do not want to fight - you can use a different approach to the war, also quite “remote”. We must find someone who will do the dirty work for the soldiers of "civilized countries." This approach has been applied in Kosovo and in Libya and is being applied now in Syria. It should be understood that here it is impossible to talk about the triumph of technology over the direct participation of soldiers in the fighting. Just in these cases, it was possible to find a replacement for his soldier on the battlefield. And by yourself just fly a little and pobombit. In search of such a replacement, the transatlantic hegemon has already reached incomprehensibility. And it is ready to rely on any regional force capable of acting in its interests, including outright bandits and terrorists. But they are able at any time to begin to act in their own interests, as soon as Western assistance strengthens them sufficiently. And having got stronger, they will become dangerous to the countries of the West. It turns out that this practice of limited participation in the war also has a downside.
Man is difficult to manage. Much better would be an army of robots. Therefore, it is so eagerly sought in “civilized countries”, hoping not even for mercenary gangs, but for unmanned and autonomous combat systems. It’s too early to talk about how much they will be able to replace the soldier. And for the time being, to the chagrin of an ambitious but cowardly West, this is too distant a prospect. Even the effectiveness of “inhuman” methods of warfare is not yet obvious. It is likely that it may be no higher than that of the current high-tech and well-equipped armies, often unable to cope with irregular guerrilla formations. And those automated weapons systems that today have already proven their viability (for example, air defense systems in which human participation has long been minimized) were mainly created against the same automated and technological weapons. And we, by the way, have the most successful experience in the world of finding a high-tech response to any high-tech military threat.
Another thing is that besides aviation, robots and cruise missiles, we are more likely to encounter "remotely controlled gangs of terrorists." And here, the ability to press buttons is indispensable. Have to be able to fight with any enemy. Neither robots nor hired militants will fight for us. We need to rely only on ourselves. We can afford limited forces of constant readiness, staffed not by conscripts, but by well-trained professionals with long service lives. This opportunity can be given to us by a high level and a sufficient number of our own high-tech types of weapons, such as the fleet, aviation, air defense, offensive and strategic weapons. But we cannot afford to separate society from the tasks of defending the homeland, granting this right only to "specially trained professionals."
Perhaps this is a distraction from the topic, but the unity and security of the country are built not only at the level of military equipment or the equipment of a soldier. It is important for us that every citizen, whatever he does, feels personally involved in the defense of the Motherland, knows that robots will not fight for him, and be at least minimally prepared for times unfavorable for his country. Here the question is not so much technical as psychological. For example, it is clear that the airborne troops must be the core of the rapid reaction force - that is their purpose and essence. It is clear that a high level of training should be maintained and even increased in view of the complexity of armaments and technical means. Probably, for the Airborne Forces there is little year of draft service. But I personally find it difficult to imagine that the Airborne Forces Day will cease to be a mass national holiday, when thousands of our compatriots remember that they are not only representatives of various professions, nationalities and social groups, but also defenders of the Motherland for whom there are no impossible tasks. But it's not even the paratroopers. We still have a lot of professional military holidays. But among the young citizens of the country, fewer are those for whom these holidays mean something, who feel personal responsibility for her fate and personal involvement in her defense. Mass military training is important in terms of possible security threats. But it is no less important for the integrity of society and for its self-consciousness.
Summing up, we come to the conclusion that the replacement of a person on the battlefield drones and robots remains an unproven utopia. NATO soldiers have a powerful support of the most advanced technical equipment, modern means of reconnaissance, destruction and control. But they are still forced to defend the interests of the military alliance of their countries by personal participation in hostilities around the world. Or look for a not very reliable replacement. Neither high-precision weapons nor absolute air supremacy decide the outcome of the war. The outcome of the war is decided in battle. Unmanned reconnaissance systems can detect targets, aircraft and remote weapons can strike the enemy massively and effectively. But all this will remain only a type of support and fire support for the ground forces. There will be no victory until the soldier has occupied the territory of the enemy or has not defended the freedom of his land. And everything else - and perfect reconnaissance equipment, and aviation, and high-precision weapons, and armored vehicles, and even robotic systems - only helps to defeat the soldier. This means that a soldier of the ground forces will be needed in the future. Moreover, the soldier is skilled and well equipped.
So it's worth talking not about whether the soldier will remain, but about what equipment will help this soldier to win.
So, we have come to the insolvency of hope for the imminent transformation of hostilities into a kind of computer game, where a person will only press buttons. With all the current and likely development of military technology - the war still remains an armed struggle of people, not machines. And for a very long time, a person (soldier) who is directly on the battlefield, occupies the territory of the enemy or defends his territory, will decide the outcome of the war.
However, it is clear that the fighting is changing over time. Arms and technical means are changing, which changes the very nature of the hostilities, tactical methods and methods of armed struggle. Consequently, what should help the soldier to win should change. What you need to ensure the life of a soldier in combat conditions, and what he takes with him into battle. All this is included in the concept of "equipment".
At the end of the 80s, it became clear that the Soviet soldier was not well equipped. During the war in Afghanistan, soldiers changed their shoes from boots to sneakers, independently made unloading vests instead of pouches. In 1989, the Central Research Institute of Tochmash was commissioned to conduct research on promising combat gear. In 1995, the first sets of equipment and weapons, which received the general name "Barmitsa", were sent to the unit for testing. It was a complete set of individual combat equipment, including weapons, controls, surveillance and communications, means of protection and life support. It was intended for use by the SV, Airborne Forces, MP, Navy, and special forces. It consisted of a uniform for all basic individual kit (BKIE) and an additional individual kit (DpIC) for a specific military specialty. The development of "Barmitsa" was completed only in 2006 year and later adopted for service. Although until the middle of the 2000-x in the army received certain types of new individual equipment, but this phenomenon was far from widespread. The soldiers and officers still took care of their equipment themselves, acquiring sights, communications equipment, comfortable shoes, camouflage and other equipment.
Later, the federal target program (FTP) “Perspective equipment of the Russian soldier” (“Fighter-XXI”) was adopted. It was based on the main elements of “Barmitsa”, which were to be gradually improved and put into mass production. According to the program, before the 2010, the next generation of the “Warrior” had to be created, and before 2015, to feed the troops. At the moment, “Warrior” is not yet adopted, as it requires fine-tuning in terms of small arms. However, we can consider the approach taken by us to equip a soldier, and assess how adequate it is to the fighting in the near future, how much it will help the soldier to win. Since the composition of domestic equipment is functionally divided into five main systems, we will consider it the same way.
Defeat system. This wearable weapons, sighting devices and ammunition. The weapon is represented mainly by well-known and proven samples - no “beam-guns” and “lightsabers”. But all models of weapons upgraded and acquired new qualities and characteristics.
One of the main positive aspects of the weapon part of the “Warrior” is that the main infantry armament, the machine gun, will officially come to the troops in two calibers: 5,45-mm and 7,62-mm. The return to the first cartridge, designed for the Kalashnikov, is actually taking place. Many special units prefer the more powerful AKM / AKMS for melee and assault operations. The 7,62x39 cartridge has a heavier bullet, which increases the stopping and piercing effect of the weapon, reduces the rebound from accidental obstacles. In addition, the low-noise version of the AK-74 chambered for 5,45 x39 failed to do so. And the old Kalashnikov has a cartridge with a reduced initial velocity of the bullet (7,62x39US). It turns a weapon into a low-noise by simply screwing a low-noise firing (silencer) onto the barrel of the device and changing the magazine. This is a useful quality for individual weapons, as it eliminates the need to carry with them different weapons for different combat conditions.
Naturally, the Kalashnikov assault rifle will remain the main individual weapon of the Russian soldier. We have already written in detail that it fully corresponds to the modern conditions of the battle. I must say that the western rifle systems (assault rifles) relatively recently began to adapt to the greater versatility of the application, which Kalashnikov possessed at once. Western assault rifles - the development of automatic rifles. They were originally intended for accurate single shooting, and not to create a dense fire. Our machine gun has grown from a melee weapon, developing towards use and at long distances. Hence the popular claim to the AK of all generations - the lack of accuracy of automatic fire, which is important at medium and large distances. Another claim was the difficulty of installing optical sights. The design feature of the Kalashnikov does not allow the optics to be mounted on the receiver cover, since such a mount will not provide sufficient aiming accuracy.
In the “Warrior” kit, several automata were tested: AEK-971Р, AEK-973Р, AN-94, АК-107Р, АК-74МР, АК-12. The first four have fundamental differences in the design, which seriously improve the accuracy of fire. Kovrov AEC and Izhevsk AK-107 are made according to a balanced scheme of automation (there is almost no return, the weapon is very stable when maintaining automatic fire, here is the AK-107 operation scheme). AN-94 (winning the “Abakan” competition at one time) has a displaced recoil impulse that allows you to fire in bursts of two shots with the same precision as single shots. True, these machines have a significantly complicated design and high cost. It is hardly advisable to completely switch to one of these samples of individual weapons. Yes, this is not necessary, since the "Warrior" involves equipping units with the weapon that suits them the most. In addition, all machines are largely unified service.
But the most interesting of the machines being tested in the “Warrior” kit is AK-103-4 (photo 1, photo 2). He previously appeared in the media under the name AK-200 and is the most versatile of the samples presented. This is the latest version of the AK-103, which was created as an export version of the Kalashnikov assault rifle, but it was limitedly purchased for domestic law enforcement agencies. It uses a powerful cartridge 7,62x39, having all the advantages of AKM / AKMS, but the design of the machine compared with its predecessors has changed significantly. The cover of the receiver has a more fixed mount. When disassembling, it is not removed at all, but only opens up — it is attached with pins where the earlier Kalashnikovs had a pillar. This allowed the Picatinny rail to be installed on the cover - a universal mount for any modern sights.
The AK-103-4 fire interpreter has four positions: fuse, single fire, in bursts of three shots, fully automatic fire. The cut-off mode after three shots previously absent from the Kalashnikov, although it allows you to save ammunition more economically, while maintaining a fairly dense fire. Automatic received a new plastic butt, adjustable in length and folding to the right. The forend of the new form is also equipped with Picatinny slats, which makes it possible to mount aiming devices, tactical lights and target indicators, additional arms and bipods for firing from a prone position - in general, everything that makes an individual weapon more convenient. On the machine you can still mount grenade launcher. At the end of the barrel there is a new muzzle brake compensator, significantly reducing recoil. It can be quickly replaced with a flameless low-noise firing device (silencer).
The mechanical sight now consists of a pillar, located at the very end of the receiver close to the shooter’s eye, and a front sight, moved from the barrel to the flue gas tube. Now it became possible to quickly change a long barrel for a short one, which is more convenient for assault actions, especially in buildings. And the reverse shift, when the distance of the battle increases.
Theoretically, the AK-103 can now be used with both a long and heavy barrel, which, together with a more capacious magazine, will make a light machine gun from a machine gun, and with good optics - a sniper weapon for medium distances. However, in the subdivision it is more useful to divide the fighters according to the functionality of the weapon into assault groups and fire support groups. The sniper and the machine gunner will still not act in the same order as the assault group. Their task is to ensure the advancement of the assault group, a change of position or withdrawal. Therefore, the transformation of the machine into a “completely universal weapon” (it has become fashionable among Western manufacturers) can hardly be considered expedient.
According to some information, the “Warrior” may include a new light machine gun with a tape feed, but under an automatic cartridge. That would be really helpful. A return to the light machine gun unit could significantly increase the firepower of small battle groups. Included are upgraded versions of machine guns for rifle cartridge - PKM and Pecheneg. This excellent weapon is the basis of the firepower of the units. But for a fight at short distances, you also need a weapon that can create a dense fire, but is easier and more convenient to use. The Kalashnikov light machine gun (PKK) does not fully meet these qualities. It is light enough and uses an automatic cartridge, which increases the wearable ammunition. However, this weapon was still created to increase the range of effective separation fire. Therefore, the PKK in combat units so often tried to “samopalno” equip optics. At one time, the necessary machine gun possessed Degtyarev machine gun (RPD). He had tape power, was easy to use and reliable. Abroad, with the help of a fairly uncomplicated modernization, quite modern weapons are being made from it (they replace the barrel, forearm, butt, add a more convenient bipod and optics — video). Soon, such weapons should return to us.
As for the sniper weapon, it will also be various in the new set. Various models are considered, which will be adopted, depending on the tasks facing the snipers of different units. But at the level of the squad and platoon, there will still be a Dragunov rifle (SVD) in various modifications. With all due respect to the magazine rifles (rechargeable manually), which have excellent accuracy characteristics of a single shot, in the lower divisions need a self-loading rifle. It better fits the definition of weapons of support. It allows you not only to destroy priority targets with aimed fire from a disguised position, but also to block the enemy's movements with a fairly dense fire of great accuracy. The designers managed to reduce the displacement of the barrel from the aiming line when fired, which is considered the main disadvantage of the SVD. It will receive new sights, including universal (day / night) and thermal imaging, a low-noise shooting device and other parts that increase the convenience of the rifle.
On sighting devices worth mentioning. If something affected the effectiveness of the domestic infantry, it was the lack of mass equipment of units with optical and night sights. In modern conditions, the enemy (his living force) does not fight at all in open battle formations, always trying to use cover, disguise and covert movement. The fighting actions of the foot units almost everywhere moved into residential buildings and inaccessible terrain. Visual detection of the enemy against the background of vegetation, window openings and shelters is very difficult without the help of optics. And the lack of mass equipment with night and thermal imaging sights, night vision means makes the units at night almost completely defensive, leaving the enemy full initiative of action.
Now, any fighter will be able to get night and day optics - all individual weapons will have a universal mount. Included appeared collimator sights, day / night multi-purpose sights for all types of small arms, thermal sights, aiming complexes with automatic range measurement, enemy optics detection systems, all-day observation and reconnaissance devices. And all this is domestic production. In the case of fairly large purchases, there is hope for a really qualitative change in the capabilities of the infantry units.
Management system. This piece of equipment most of all has the right to be called the "soldier of the future." It includes communications, intelligence, navigation and information display. That is, these are technical means of individual equipment of a fighter, which have indeed been developing rapidly in recent times and, according to many experts, are capable of changing the face of military operations and radically increasing the effectiveness of a soldier in battle. Let's look at how such systems are developing abroad, how they are implemented in the “Warrior” and what exactly they should help the soldier to become more effective.
In the West, and throughout the rest of the world, they are trying to increase the capabilities of the armed forces, including infantry units, with the help of better information support. In general, this is an absolutely logical and correct way. Another thing is that any correct and useful idea can be brought to the point of absurdity. Including the idea of equipping a fighter with various technical means. Here it is desirable to proceed from expediency and real conditions in which a soldier will have to act. And not from the fact that science is able to offer, driving the tactics of units under the "wonders of technology". Efficiency should be the criterion. But there is no doubt that it depends on the availability of communication tools.
The fact is that it is rather difficult to radically improve the characteristics of the weapon itself (especially portable weapons). It becomes more convenient, gets perfect aiming devices, but does not differ in principle from what it was, say, fifty years ago. Many samples, remaining in service for decades, have far from exhausted their potential. And the whole question is how to realize this potential, that is, to use weapons as efficiently as possible.
But in order for a weapon to be used with advantage, it must first be “in the right place at the right time.” This means that soldiers need to be well oriented on the battlefield, to know where the enemy is (to have accurate and timely intelligence), to have a stable connection with each other (within the unit) and with external sources (with the higher command level and other units). Then they will be able to use their weapons with maximum benefit. This is the information support. It develops the faster, the more developed information technology. It is able to make units equipped with even the most modern weapons, much more efficient. And if a unit is poorly oriented on the ground, poorly managed (does not have a stable connection) and is poorly informed about the enemy - no weapon, even the most “tricked”, will help him. How is it proposed to improve the information support of a fighter?
Almost everywhere the technical solutions are the same. Individual means of communication become compact and convenient, allow you to keep in touch without interfering with the battle. They are integrated into the tactical network of the unit, and many functions are performed automatically, which simplifies working with them. Portable and portable navigation tools are combined with a tactical display system. The so-called "electronic maps of the area" show the location of the enemy and their forces. They can be displayed on tactical tablets, laptops, and even in monoculars attached to a helmet. In this case, information about the enemy and the situation can be adjusted and supplemented by all participants in the hostilities. The intelligence collected by the optical, radio engineering, acoustic and engineering means at the disposal of the unit falls into the overall system, and all combatants have access to it. Orders, orders and target designation can be communicated not only with the help of oral speech, but also “in electronic form”, getting into the means of displaying the tactical situation in the form of graphic directives. At the same time, access to general intelligence allows you to transfer the adoption of many decisions to the level of commanders of units directly involved in the battle. They always have a better control of the situation on the spot, and a single combat information space will make them informed at the level of officers of command posts. Also, new technical tools should simplify the interaction of units. Getting fire support, adjusting the fire of artillery systems and targeting aviation can be more operational.
All these remarkable functions, realized in the form of technical means, certainly allow to increase the effectiveness of infantry units. But in the matter of building a system and technical equipment approaches may be different. So, the Americans, and after them, and most Western countries, initially trying to hang all these "bells and whistles" on each fighter.
In the US, work on the equipment of the “soldier of the future” has been going on since the end of the 80s of the last century. Their program initially posed the controversial task of ensuring centralized communication, control, and control over each soldier. As a result, the equipment of the first generation (Land Warrior program) weighed more than 40 kilograms, and the “digital soldier of the future” battery lasted for 4 hours. In addition, one very important, but the local function of the fighter - the ability to fire from around the corner had an impact on the composition of the equipment. A television channel was introduced into the scope of an individual weapon, which is broadcast on a helmet of a monocular and can be transmitted via communication systems. So equipment has become even more complicated and energy-intensive.
But the unsuitability of the first version of the equipment to the real hostilities did not at all lead to a logical simplification and reduction of unnecessary functions of an already overloaded set. Americans are still trying to solve the problem of weight and energy consumption with the help of technical solutions. As a result, the cost of the kit is constantly growing (each fighter will soon become “golden”), and its functionality continues to be overloaded with new “usefulness”. For example, instead of heavy batteries, the fighter must be supplied with electricity by fuel cells that run on liquid fuel and are built into the body armor! Medical suits and a microclimate system (with a power of 100 W) will be mounted in a combat suit, which the language does not turn to be called a field uniform. It will include a system of tubes through which coolant or coolant circulates! In addition, we are already talking about displaying a tactical e-card (which is hardly necessary for every fighter) not on a tactical tablet that is inconvenient in battle and not on a lowered monocular, but directly on the protective bulletproof glass of the multifunctional helmet, where the image will get from the projector in the visor! There you can also project the image from the multispectral sighting devices, which theoretically allow the fighter to shoot "from the belly" as accurately as combining the line of sight with the line of sight. And indeed, how is it still left to fire on the one on whom so many useful devices are hung? After all, they do not help too much to take a protected position and move between shelters. As a result, the fighter is gradually turning into a comfortably arranged and well-informed operator ... his own rifle!
But the purpose of introducing technical devices into equipment, I recall, is to increase the efficiency of the units through the awareness of the commanders (and not of each fighter) and increase the effectiveness of personal weapons, their use in favorable conditions. In terms of the awareness of the fighter, there is still doubt about the attempt to create a “technical lining” between human senses and reality. So far, any achievements of science are seriously inferior to what the Lord God created (or nature, to the taste of the reader). Because of this, in the battle of any soldier there is an overwhelming desire to get rid of all the excess.
In our country, the informatization of hostilities seems to have the opposite direction of development to the west. Not from the bottom up (from the fighter to the higher echelons of management), but from top to bottom (from the management to the divisions and individual fighters). And I must say that the unified information and control space itself is not an invention of recent years. In the Soviet army, automated command and control systems (ACCS) appeared earlier. Back in 80's, we proved in practice that the capabilities of the troops included in the ACCS system are several times higher than those of weapons, but not having such control systems. Elements of the Soviet ASUV "Maneuver" fell to the Americans after the withdrawal of our troops from East Germany. They were thoroughly studied and greatly influenced the Western concept of information support for the troops. In fact, we were the first to take the path of informatization of military operations. Only missed a lot of time in that period when domestic automated systems had to evolve from the field of high-precision weapons to the tactical level of the ground forces.
Communication and control equipment included in the “Warrior” kit are at the same time part of the automated command and control system of the tactical level. The hardware will be scalable, that is, the composition of the equipment can vary depending on the tasks facing the fighter. The composition of the funds in the units will be determined by expediency, rather than the desire to make a "superfighter" of each soldier. So, individual radio communications should have the commanders of platoons, divisions, fire and maneuver groups, machine gunners, snipers, rocket launchers and calculations of other means of fire support. Means of navigation and orientation - the commanders and deputy commanders of platoons and those tactical groups that can act autonomously. The means of displaying a tactical situation are also commanders at various levels, and not everything. The same applies to the means of reconnaissance and the automatic determination of the coordinates of targets, which are integrated into the general system for the exchange of tactical data. They are needed by intelligence units and those members of tactical groups that provide fire support (artillery spotters and aircraft builders). And a helmet monocular for shooting “from behind a corner” is needed by groups leading the battle in urban areas and buildings. The entire hardware of the equipment can be paired in various combinations and combinations, which will allow the unit to more effectively solve its tasks, but at the same time not overload each fighter with unnecessary functions and workload.
Many elements of the control system have already been worked out in sets of previous generations, including the first series in the 83Т215ВР (“Strelets”) KRUS and in the ECCA wearable sets created for ACCS tactical level. According to the main characteristics, the domestic system is not inferior to the already existing and only created western sets (such as the French Felin-V2, the Italian Soldato Future, the German IdZ-ES, the English FIST, the American Future Force Warrior). And in terms of weight and dimensions, it is even the best of the existing ones.
Separately in the “Warrior” kit there is an energy supply system. It consists of universal power sources, chargers, means of converting and transmitting electricity. The widespread introduction of sights and controls requires solving the problem of providing equipment with electricity. And so that the fighter does not have to carry a small nuclear or chemical reactor, the system is divided into portable and portable parts. At the same time wearable - as easy as possible
Also in the equipment set there is a protection system and life support system. The first is helmets and body armor, means of protection against so-called non-lethal weapons and weapons of mass destruction, means of warning about danger. The second is equipment, clothing and equipment (used in combat), food and medical kits.
Tactical and assault body armor will be different degree of protection against ballistic damaging factors (bullets and shrapnel). In close combat, an assault body armor is needed, which has more serious protection against small-arms bullets fired at close range. But such a bulletproof vest is difficult to make light and comfortable for constant wear - high protection area and the mass of the vest lead to a decrease in the mobility of the soldier. Therefore, we also need a lighter tactical vest, better suited for everyday wear. It has a modular design, that is, consists of a light base (made from an analogue of Kevlar), which can be enhanced depending on the situation and tasks. Its protective properties are enhanced by plug-in ceramic-composite armor panels and additional sections (apron, limb protection).
The field uniform in the new set of equipment will perform more protective functions. New materials will improve comfort in different weather conditions and can even partially perform the function of protection against blistering agents. Masking properties will also improve. This becomes especially important as the means of reconnaissance, observation and aiming devices are constantly being improved. Several options camouflage color will be the so-called "pixel" or "digital" colors. Contrary to popular belief, coloring by “squares” does not in itself affect the detection by matrix (digital) observation devices. It is just the opposite. Human visual perception has become accustomed to the fact that in nature the contours are smooth and continuous. The human brain completes the contour of the object to the whole, even if the eye sees only a part of it, and having built a contour in the mind, a person is able to distinguish it and distinguish it from other objects. In the “pixel” camouflage, the contours of the spots have unusual outlines, divided into separate squares, which reduces the ability of the brain to complete and recognize the visual image. It works at close range. But computer simulation of camouflage allows you to save its protective properties at different distances. Nearby are small spots that better blend with small outlines. At a greater distance, they merge into several large spots that are well suited to play of background colors. However, the new camouflage really helps to mask the night vision devices. Only not in the form of a picture, but using paints with different properties of reflection and absorption of infrared light waves. This helps to break the silhouette of a soldier into separate fragments even in the dark.
In general, the mass of wearable equipment, of course, increases. This is difficult to avoid, as foot units increasingly have to operate in mobile teams in isolation from the main forces. However, it is necessary to improve equipment if we want to increase the effectiveness of infantry units. The new domestic kit will not make the soldier look like the heroes of science fiction films. It will simply increase the capabilities of the soldier in the fight with both the high-tech adversary and the familiar one.
Information