Military Review

US Air Force General: Predator drones are useless for most tasks

92

US drones used to fight terrorists are unsuitable for performing virtually all other tasks related to the conduct of hostilities, said the head of the combat aviation command of the US Air Force, General Mike Hostage, at a conference of the Air Force Association.


According to him, the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper fleet is no match for airplanes that fly higher and faster, and are used to perform air defense missions around the world.

“Predator and Reaper are useless in a combat environment,” said Hostage, ITAR-TASS reports citing Foreign Policy.

"Today ... I could not have sent the Predator or the Reaper to the Strait of Hormuz without an escort plane necessary to protect it," he added.

The US Air Force last week released information that at the beginning of the year the F-22 fighter intercepted a fleet of Iranian F-4, approaching the American Predator UAV over this strait. At the end of 2012 of the year, Iranian planes attacked the Predator and missed in the Strait of Hormuz.

The Ministry of Defense has previously ordered up to 65 MQ-1 and MQ-9 vehicles, which, as planned for 2013, will conduct combat duty around the world in combat air patrol groups of four UAVs each. However, the Air Force is skeptical about this requirement due to the low combat capability of the devices in question.

According to Khostadzh, the leadership of the Air Force is trying to convince the service of the Minister of Defense that these 65 UAVs are not the structure that is required by the country or which the country can put up in situations where enemy aircraft come into conflict with American aircraft.

The host has admitted that in the long run, the UAVs will be used for monitoring targets, but the US military planning bodies "want to see it in a combat environment, and we cannot do that at the present time."

Another Sun official supported Hostage, stating that he would like to see the air force replace the Predator and Reaper with smarter vehicles outside Afghanistan, where UAVs can easily move in US-controlled airspace.

“My argument is that we cannot afford to store and contain all this potential, and will face the need to reduce it,” said the chief of intelligence of the Air Force, Lieutenant General Bob Otto. And he would like to invest the released funds in unmanned systems with improved capabilities to combat well-protected targets.

The host also noted that by the beginning of the 2020s of the Air Force, new reconnaissance aircraft would be needed in order to keep up with competitors - China and Russia - which create and, probably, export promising low-profile aircraft.
Originator:
http://vz.ru/
92 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Wedmak
    Wedmak 25 September 2013 11: 08 New
    37
    Well, that the majority on this site also said. All these super-pilots only Papuans shoot.
    1. Sergh
      Sergh 25 September 2013 11: 19 New
      16
      Quote: Wedmak
      these super-pilots only Papuans shoot

      I said a year and a half ago that apart from monitoring the harvest of the "fool" in Afghanistan and the city crossroads in their swamp, there are no more vacancies for them. One of their advantages, but in a light version, is reconnaissance, target designation, etc. "peeping". I agree that you can have a couple of dozen drums in the warehouse, just "in case of fire", but not more.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 25 September 2013 19: 22 New
        0
        Before clapping your hands joyfully, look at the root of the question.
        1. Heccrbq .2
          Heccrbq .2 25 September 2013 22: 57 New
          -3
          Wow pimple, I remember from my colonel on this site)))) What do you have to say against drones? In Rasei even there aren’t any now, although the USSR’s developments were several times ahead of these predeterters, etc.
      2. gunnerminer
        gunnerminer 25 September 2013 20: 43 New
        0
        I agree that you can have a couple of dozen drums in the warehouse, just "in case of fire", but not more.




        What, then, are vegas, transases, and Ilyushins trying to create shock UAVs?
      3. Patriot.ru.
        Patriot.ru. 25 September 2013 21: 39 New
        +1
        It’s not necessary to have even drums in the warehouse. Missiles (drums) must be in the warehouse.
    2. M. Peter
      M. Peter 25 September 2013 12: 58 New
      +5
      Before a deadline, one comrade argued to me that the American traitor, this super vandarwafel, which reduced our tank power to absolute zero.
      Here I will show how I like this statement. laughing
      1. eplewke
        eplewke 25 September 2013 13: 37 New
        +7
        The uselessness of combat UAVs has been proven previously. This is just a statement of fact. They cannot fulfill the combat mission against modern air defense forces, it’s like shooting peas at a tank ... But work in this direction will be introduced. Moreover, I will tell you that unmanned vehicles in the near future (20-40 years) will replace manned vehicles. The main thing is not to fall behind in this direction ...
        1. танк
          танк 25 September 2013 15: 35 New
          +2
          Correctly said !!! this is just the beginning of evolution, we recently flew on plywood planes!
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 25 September 2013 19: 22 New
          0
          Details plz.
      2. karbofos
        karbofos 25 September 2013 14: 37 New
        +4
        MANPADS Needle has not yet been canceled
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 25 September 2013 22: 29 New
          +1
          MANPADS The needle is not a panacea. Remind me what the homing head is?
          1. Alex 241
            Alex 241 25 September 2013 22: 31 New
            +1
            Hi Zhen IR GOS,
      3. Pimply
        Pimply 25 September 2013 19: 21 New
        0
        This comrade is in many ways right.
      4. gunnerminer
        gunnerminer 25 September 2013 21: 25 New
        0
        Here I will show how I like him a statement




        For a good dastarkhan, which only Dzhigits will not argue! This new campaign is designed to hide the failures in providing the RF Armed Forces units for various purposes, including drums. At exhibitions, the shock Russian Skat is only rolled out of the shed and rolled back. Here and come up with a bullet about the futility of flying and performing Traitors.
        1. Patriot.ru.
          Patriot.ru. 25 September 2013 21: 52 New
          +1
          Maybe they just realize that it is really useless.
      5. Patriot.ru.
        Patriot.ru. 25 September 2013 21: 48 New
        0
        Helicopters reduce tanks to zero if they are unpunished in the sky. There will be no helicopters during a nuclear strike. There will be tanks and 45s. Which we still have in stock.
    3. Odysseus
      Odysseus 25 September 2013 15: 16 New
      +3
      Quote: Wedmak
      Well, that the majority on this site also spoke. All these super-pilots only Papuans shoot

      Sorry, you didn't quite understand the article. It says "And he would like to invest the freed up funds in unmanned systems with improved capabilities to deal with well-protected targets."
      That is, we are talking about the fact that the US Air Force Need new more advanced drone drone.
      Regarding the utility of drones, practice is a criterion of truth. All leading powers develop / purchase them.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 25 September 2013 16: 13 New
        +2
        Sorry, you didn’t quite understand the article.

        No, I understood everything correctly. Perhaps, he didn’t quite accurately express himself - “these superdrones” refers specifically to Reaper, Predator and others. I do not exclude further development of this direction, it will be and everything will go to an autonomous drone with AI. But for now ... while these are serious toys with a serious peeping function.
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 25 September 2013 16: 35 New
          +1
          Quote: Wedmak
          But for now ... for now these are serious toys with a serious peeping function.

          Well, let's just say, hardly anyone would have abandoned the analogues of Predator and Reaper in our army. These are, of course, not "superdrones", but a useful thing in the household.
          Against global opponents (NATO, China), unfortunately, we have only nuclear weapons as the main deterrent. But in local conflicts, strike UAVs are very useful now.
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 25 September 2013 19: 23 New
          +1
          These UAVs are produced by one specific company. Who wants to bite off this piece.
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 25 September 2013 19: 23 New
        +1
        Here blankets of the military budget are pulled over themselves. In particular, in this case - from General Atomic.
    4. Army1
      Army1 25 September 2013 15: 52 New
      0
      American General "Discovered America".
    5. Pimply
      Pimply 25 September 2013 19: 21 New
      +1
      This is just another struggle, dear, between manufacturers of devices of different types and purposes, as part of a reduction in the military budget.
  2. Dmitry 2246
    Dmitry 2246 25 September 2013 11: 13 New
    +8
    Mandrake some kind of real opponents?
    And how good it is to bomb partisans.
    1. Sergh
      Sergh 25 September 2013 11: 29 New
      +1
      Quote: Dmitry 2246
      And how good it is to bomb partisans.

      Probably in a year or two, each partisan will have a Tunguska, let alone Igla-2M. And then, God forbid, and even cooler if things like in Africa continue to go. Qatar and the Saudis need to say "thank you" ...
  3. Bort radist
    Bort radist 25 September 2013 11: 15 New
    +9
    Quote: Wedmak
    Well, that the majority on this site also spoke.

    A much larger majority admired, envied and set an example.
    1. Far East
      Far East 25 September 2013 11: 56 New
      +5
      Quote: Bort Radist
      A much larger majority admired, envied and set an example.

      you hit the point! but who right now admits! good hi
      1. Bort radist
        Bort radist 25 September 2013 12: 09 New
        +2
        Quote: Far East
        but who right now admits!

        Sergey, I have two already noted laughing , and you can read the archives, those who do not remember themselves. Do we need it? hi
        1. Far East
          Far East 25 September 2013 12: 17 New
          +1
          Quote: Bort Radist
          Do we need it? hi

          hi Boris, of course not! I’m becoming more and more convinced that they don’t have double standards laughing It’s sooo funny.
      2. Committee
        Committee 25 September 2013 13: 35 New
        +2
        So I’m generally minus, for that.
    2. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 25 September 2013 13: 44 New
      +6
      When I argued that drones were a narrow specialization, they called me a patriot.
      1. mirag2
        mirag2 25 September 2013 14: 10 New
        +4
        And they called it right. I already see a bunch of such people on top. It feels like you’re living not just one day, but one second. I’ll find, though at the time of death, I’ll even figure it out: drones are already 20 years old, probably like you over they laughed at them and they already fulfilled their task. And they killed a bunch of people (both guilty and innocent) and gathered information immeasurably, and probably 10 soldiers saved lives (even if the enemy UAV is not ours).
        And while you are going to ride, the enemies will launch submarine UAVs, which by that time, by the time you find yourself already, all the boat beds are being taken out, all the fairways, and they are driving a full ocean of all kinds of reconnaissance buoys.
        But no Kursk and Komsomol members will happen. Here and think, maybe it’s enough to rest?
        And after the "rippers" and "traitors" there will be new models.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 25 September 2013 15: 02 New
          +2
          And who rests? At the moment, we only state the fact that modern drones against modern (and even a couple of generations older) air defense can not survive. What will happen tomorrow, the day after tomorrow - we will see. So far, no AI capable of independently performing military operations and returning intact to the base is not expected. And there will not be a couple of decades. These are my forecasts if you want.
        2. nikolaxp
          nikolaxp 25 September 2013 15: 29 New
          +3
          So, underwater robots with autonomous work and search in our Navy have been working for a long time. Nothing to say about deep-sea drones, ahead of all world competitors. And at the expense of UAVs, they also flew beautifully in the USSR and are now flying, they only used them, mainly not for reconnaissance, but to simulate air targets (Swift, Hawk, etc.). There were enough satellites for reconnaissance, and besides, who would have let the UAV fly quietly over NATO countries ...
        3. Lord of the Sith
          Lord of the Sith 25 September 2013 15: 57 New
          +2
          You are trying to insult me ​​in a veiled form. Where did I laugh? Where do I ride? Have I written such a thing somewhere? I wrote that drones have a very narrow specialization, that's all I wrote. They did not save 10000 lives of soldiers, they are not used to escort military supplies and colonies. They do not carry out patrolling over bases in Afghanistan, they are talking about strike drones that are used as a long spear. spotted from satellites or listened to conversations, sent a drone and hit the aul in Pakistan. the drone will not be able to disperse 150 Taliban sitting on the pass. turntables are doing this, on the same youtube a lot of material. Drones engage in point strikes.
          There are other small drones for reconnaissance, these can be of great help to detect ambushes and reconnaissance of the situation in front of the unit’s entrance to the aul.

          But here we are talking about shock drones.
          And then there were several stories about the suicides of drone operators. There was a figure of roofing felts 112 people, roofing felts 120. The latter hanged himself in May, as he killed many civilians by pressing buttons.

          The role of drones is huge and they need to be developed in all directions, but the specialization of each of them is very narrow and they are often lost.
        4. biglow
          biglow 25 September 2013 20: 24 New
          +3
          Quote: mirag2
          And they called it right. I already see a bunch of such people on top. It feels like you’re living not just one day, but one second. I’ll find, though at the time of death, I’ll even figure it out: drones are already 20 years old, probably like you over they laughed at them and they already fulfilled their task. And they killed a bunch of people (both guilty and innocent) and gathered information immeasurably, and probably 10 soldiers saved lives (even if the enemy UAV is not ours).
          And while you are going to ride, the enemies will launch submarine UAVs, which by that time, by the time you find yourself already, all the boat beds are being taken out, all the fairways, and they are driving a full ocean of all kinds of reconnaissance buoys.
          But no Kursk and Komsomol members will happen. Here and think, maybe it’s enough to rest?
          And after the "rippers" and "traitors" there will be new models.

          you don’t forget what the goals of all these drones are partisans, without the means of a pro. When confronted with a real enemy, all these drones simply will not reach anywhere. As for the new models, everything depends on AI technology. Today, a breakthrough in this direction is invisible.
          1. gunnerminer
            gunnerminer 25 September 2013 21: 25 New
            -2
            This new campaign is designed to hide the failures in providing the RF Armed Forces units for various purposes, including percussion. At the exhibitions, the shock Russian Scat is only rolled out of the barn and rolled back. Here and came up with a bullet about the futility of flying and performing Traitors.
            1. Patriot.ru.
              Patriot.ru. 25 September 2013 22: 34 New
              0
              A traitor is a traitor. This is for you.
          2. Patriot.ru.
            Patriot.ru. 25 September 2013 22: 32 New
            0
            Instead of partisans bombing weddings in Afghanistan.
        5. Patriot.ru.
          Patriot.ru. 25 September 2013 22: 12 New
          +1
          The oceans are crammed with buoys detecting the submarine. Mine torpedoes that fire when the ship passes. What else do you want to offer? Yes, there are two ships in Kamchatka, the board opens. The charge explodes in the direction of Alaska. And on the shore, receiving stations see almost the entire Pacific Ocean. Sam participated in their creation
  4. Strashila
    Strashila 25 September 2013 11: 19 New
    +5
    Patrolling and monitoring areas in which there is no air defense system ... purely for anti-guerrilla warfare maximum if in combat execution.
    1. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 25 September 2013 13: 47 New
      +1
      And with all this, they manage to lose them anyway. Clear business difficult terrain, but nonetheless.
  5. asbaev
    asbaev 25 September 2013 11: 23 New
    +9
    But all the same, the future belongs to them, so you do not have to give in to provocations, but develop and improve yours.
    1. Patriot.ru.
      Patriot.ru. 25 September 2013 22: 41 New
      0
      You think the future is for robots. I don’t believe it. Otherwise, why are we all.
  6. sven27
    sven27 25 September 2013 11: 29 New
    +7
    Quote: Wedmak
    Well, that the majority on this site also said. All these super-pilots only Papuans shoot.

    And no one wrote that drones should take part in aerial combat, their task is reconnaissance and destruction of ground targets, in particular the fight against terrorists, and they are doing very well with this! In the future, there will be destroyer drones! And they allow you not to risk the lives of the pilots! And in this amers, unlike us, have greatly succeeded! Don’t say that, but the future lies with unmanned aircraft!
    1. Far East
      Far East 25 September 2013 12: 01 New
      +7
      Quote: sven27
      And they allow you not to risk the lives of the pilots! And in this amers, unlike us, have greatly succeeded! Don’t say that, but the future lies with unmanned aircraft!

      are you sure about this sho will not replace HUMAN! don't look fiction! now minus! hi
      1. sven27
        sven27 25 September 2013 12: 21 New
        +2
        Quote: Far East
        are you sure about this sho will not replace HUMAN! don't look fiction! now minus!

        Why so pathetic, calm down nobody is going to minus you! laughing
        And no one says that a person needs to be replaced, he remains, only as a UAV operator hi
        1. Far East
          Far East 25 September 2013 12: 33 New
          +1
          [quote = sven27] Why are you so obsessed with the minuses, calm down, no one is going to minus you! laughing dear Paul! minus nothing to do with! I grew up from this age sho would tear a throat! everyone has their own opinion! but when everyone was FOR in another article for these drones, and now half are against it suggests (if "you" are not for everyone, then against everyone!) we get the law (of the majority) laughing hi
          1. sven27
            sven27 25 September 2013 12: 57 New
            +1
            Sergey, well, first of all, I didn’t get used to minus an appetite, if he has an opinion different from mine, this is his right.
            secondly, I put a minus only if a person writes either offensive statements, or absolutely zero on the topic and writes complete nonsense, or an obvious troll!
            and in this case you have your own understanding of the issue and there is nothing to minus you hi
          2. Sergh
            Sergh 25 September 2013 13: 05 New
            +2
            Quote: sven27
            And they allow you not to risk the lives of pilots

            Stop, stop ... but here is a comrade from the United States, Mike, says the opposite:
            I couldn’t send Predator or Reaper to the Strait of Hormuz without the escort aircraft necessary to protect it. ”

            Well it turns out? Comrade Mike disagrees with you at all, for him it is more expensive than a piece of iron, not a pilot.
            1. lelikas
              lelikas 25 September 2013 14: 39 New
              +2
              Quote: Sergh
              Well it turns out? Comrade Mike disagrees with you at all, for him it is more expensive than a piece of iron, not a pilot.

              No, it’s just that Comrade Mike only for this hour has learned that the enemy can also have fighters.
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 25 September 2013 15: 14 New
                0
                it’s just that Comrade Mike only for this hour has learned that the enemy can also have fighters.

                I killed him on the spot .... laughing
        2. Wedmak
          Wedmak 25 September 2013 15: 13 New
          0
          he remains only as a UAV operator

          It is unlikely. The UAV operator will not be able to control the device in the same way as the pilot does in the cockpit. In the cockpit, the pilot merges with the car, he feels it. It is currently impossible to simulate in any way. Therefore, our pilots are the best in the world - they love their cars, they are one with them. And among the Americans, it’s just smart iron.
          1. sven27
            sven27 25 September 2013 15: 23 New
            +1
            Quote: Wedmak
            Therefore, our pilots are the best in the world - they love their cars, they are one with them. And among the Americans, it’s just smart iron.
            Yes, and some of the world's best pilots in August 2008 were forced to carry out the mission of conventional UAVs (reconnaissance and target designation)
            And if such an airplane dies, our pilot dies with it, and if an unmanned aerial dies, then just smart iron dies.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 25 September 2013 16: 17 New
              +1
              Are you talking about reconnaissance drones or about fighter drones / attack aircraft / interceptors? If the first - I agree, reconnaissance and target designation drones can and should do. If about the second - early, not those technologies.
            2. Bort radist
              Bort radist 25 September 2013 19: 56 New
              0
              Quote: sven27
              and if a drone dies, then smart iron just dies.

              Just dying? But as an unfulfilled combat mission and subsequent human casualties (after all, every military unit destroys or protects a war)
      2. Jin
        Jin 25 September 2013 13: 05 New
        +4
        Quote: Far East
        are you sure about this sho will not replace HUMAN! don't look fiction!


        You know, I didn’t rip the * opa for drones, my position is somewhere in the middle, but "never say never" ... if you told a medieval knight about a nuclear submarine or an orbital station ... but what is there! If you were told 20 years ago that every person will have a touch computer (smartphone, tablet) in his pocket and he will be able to take pictures on it, shoot a "multi-pixel" video, call from it anywhere in the world, sit on VO, have Gigabytes of memory on a tiny flash drive, would you believe it? Of course, there is no question of replacing a person ... but this is a question of technology and ... time imha. We are waiting for the next breakthrough in the field of compact, but very powerful energy sources and "super-fast" processors, a lot now rests on this ...
        1. Far East
          Far East 25 September 2013 13: 54 New
          0
          Quote: Jin
          We are waiting for the next breakthrough in the field of compact but very powerful energy sources and "super fast" processors, a lot now rests on this ...

          ktozh will argue! but all of these UAV basins now, and another 20 years will be basins! time will tell! to live WOULD! hi I didn’t tell you, sho you are tearing .... opa for the UAV! hi
          1. Jin
            Jin 25 September 2013 13: 58 New
            +1
            Quote: Far East
            ktozh will argue! but all of these UAV basins now, and another 20 years will be basins! time will tell! to live WOULD!


            It would be interesting)))

            Quote: Far East
            I didn’t tell you, sho you are tearing .... opa for the UAV!


            So I to you without claims! hi I simply outlined my position on this topic.
    2. Wedmak
      Wedmak 25 September 2013 15: 10 New
      +1
      and they do a great job with that!

      I agree, they learned to shoot people as in a dash. More precisely, their operators.
      Fighter drones will appear in the future!

      Years through 30-40. If they appear ... For the operator-controlled fighter drone is a chicken with a weight, it will either throw a weight or fall with a weight.
      And amers, in contrast to us, have succeeded greatly in this! Don’t say that, but the future lies with unmanned aircraft!

      In the years through 50-60 this future may come and come, our good also began to work in this direction.
  7. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 25 September 2013 11: 31 New
    +4
    “Today ... I could not send Predator or Reaper to the Strait of Hormuz without the escort aircraft necessary to protect it,”
    And no wonder .. The time of "unmanned zones" and unpunished bombings in the world is coming to an end .. "The Russian bear got out of the den hungry and angry" Our MANPADS and fighters (and not only) will show who is the boss in the sky .. (I was always skeptical to these UAVs as to combat units ... reconnaissance agree ..)
  8. Bort radist
    Bort radist 25 September 2013 11: 36 New
    +2
    Quote: MIKHAN
    The time of "unmanned zones" and unpunished bombing in the world is coming to an end.

    Vitaly, I completely agree. And they discovered, and there was something to bring down, they did not want to get involved. Soon to sprinkle, to accompany the "girl home" to become more expensive for yourself.
    1. Sergh
      Sergh 25 September 2013 11: 51 New
      +2
      Quote: Bort Radist
      to accompany the "girl home" to become more expensive

      I sit and think, and how will the "escort plane" protect this electronic crow, substitute its belly?
      "Today ... I could not have sent the Predator or the Reaper to the Strait of Hormuz without an escort plane necessary to protect it," he added.

      I already fell into a stupor ... So, it should be the other way around, sort of like a person is now in price, or have I messed up everything again?
      1. Far East
        Far East 25 September 2013 12: 05 New
        +1
        Quote: Sergh
        I already fell into a stupor ... So, it should be the other way around, sort of like a person is now in price, or have I messed up everything again?

        right now you will be minus! hi
        1. Sergh
          Sergh 25 September 2013 12: 16 New
          0
          Quote: Far East
          will be minus!

          Namesake! Yes, this is not cold, not hot. Let them knock on the clave, I will not be offended. The main thing is that anyway, I will remain with my interests.
          1. Far East
            Far East 25 September 2013 12: 21 New
            +2
            Quote: Sergh
            The main thing is that anyway, I will remain with my interests.

            The namesake, mutually! hi but THIS IS THE PEOPLE'S ANGRIES !!! laughing
      2. yanus
        yanus 25 September 2013 12: 48 New
        +2
        Quote: Sergh
        I already fell into a stupor ... So, it should be the other way around, sort of like a person is now in price, or have I messed up everything again?

        People are in price, while on this wave you can push expensive equipment and machinery.
        Exactly the same situation with guided weapons. The main thing is to convince everyone that they should always be used. Saw the Taliban? Launch an ATGM on it! And then new orders for new birds))
        Well, the life of soldiers is still very important for politicians in some countries. Elections need to win. This is reminiscent of a fantastic series - evil aliens captured one of ours? We will send 100500 fighters to the rescue! As a result, the hero is saved, though a hundred or two fighters in the background die and the planets to shreds, but how pathetic!
      3. Bort radist
        Bort radist 25 September 2013 13: 59 New
        +2
        Quote: Sergh
        So it should be the other way around,

        Seryoga, good day! While there was an opportunity to send an escort to control the work and escort secret equipment, they worked. Bubbles are over and who will let the "girl" in such a package and without a pimp.
      4. In the reeds
        In the reeds 25 September 2013 21: 26 New
        0
        They didn’t disagree, although it’s too early to draw final conclusions, but you haven’t heard about shock UAVs in our country, they are reconnaissance and for guiding weapons. The drums are better than the pilot ones, and the drones provided reconnaissance and missile guidance
        1. In the reeds
          In the reeds 25 September 2013 21: 38 New
          0
          Due to prevailing circumstances, the Africans got the technology and decided that they were ahead of the rest and created the shock UAV ... Do not be fooled Do not need it
  9. JonnyT
    JonnyT 25 September 2013 11: 48 New
    +1
    Man is more effective than a robot.
    1. atalef
      atalef 26 September 2013 07: 17 New
      0
      Quote: JonnyT
      Man is more effective than a robot.

      While more effective. Even 100 years ago (a little more) and there were no planes.
  10. spirit
    spirit 25 September 2013 11: 50 New
    +2
    )))) Yes !! and he also wanted to push through the defense on them?))) This "General" is generally aware of what they were created for?
  11. de bouillon
    de bouillon 25 September 2013 11: 55 New
    +4
    that stuck - drones utopia .. garbage against air defense

    but the American general did not say that the UAV is a utopia! It's just that at the moment the main drones MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper are not capable of solving the role of the F-16. In principle, they were not created for this, but some staff officers in the Pentagon think differently, and Air Force General Mike Hostage very correctly expressed that these "experimenters" are mistaken.
  12. de bouillon
    de bouillon 25 September 2013 11: 57 New
    +2
    Quote: MIKHAN
    “Today ... I could not send Predator or Reaper to the Strait of Hormuz without the escort aircraft necessary to protect it,”
    And no wonder .. The time of "unmanned zones" and unpunished bombings in the world is coming to an end .. "The Russian bear got out of the den hungry and angry" Our MANPADS and fighters (and not only) will show who is the boss in the sky .. (I was always skeptical to these UAVs as to combat units ... reconnaissance agree ..)



    in Abkhazia there were MANPADS, Shilka and OSs, which was something they couldn’t bring down these damned UAVs for a long time, until the MiG-29 from Krasnodar was called.
    1. Sergh
      Sergh 25 September 2013 12: 38 New
      +1
      Quote: de Bouillon
      in Abkhazia there were MANPADS, Shilka and OSs, that somehow they couldn’t bring down these damned UAVs for a long time until the MiG-29 from Krasnodar

      Hello! For "Predator" and "Piper", Shilka and Wasp is not serious, especially MANPADS, which have a slaughter height of up to 2,5 km, and the new Wasp has up to 7 (from memory). These two pterodactyls fly high, the Predator is up to 8 km, and Piper is 15 km away (bent, of course).
      And about Georgians, at that time I even remember from memory that at least there were three shot down in the press, and the military covered a couple of them, well, sort of. Although Abkhazia was also stupid in stupor, we will not consider it an indicator, but nevertheless they called for a Russian pilot and well done.
  13. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 25 September 2013 12: 33 New
    +2
    Judging by the statement, drones are effective for fighting terrorists. We also have "terrorists", we need to learn from experience.
    1. 0255
      0255 25 September 2013 13: 46 New
      0
      Judging by the statement, drones are effective for fighting terrorists. We also have "terrorists", we need to learn from experience.

      you never know what amers lie! For them, terrorists are residents of Libya, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yugoslavia - those countries that they bomb, bomb, or want to bomb for their own purposes. To bomb the Pakistanis who have a couple of Kalash in their house, these UAVs are enough.
      RSK MiG developed the Skat strike UAV, which was abandoned in favor of the Sukhoi UAV. Is Poghosyan to blame? With normal funding, Russia would have its own drone, it could be useful in the Caucasus.
      1. sven27
        sven27 25 September 2013 15: 30 New
        0
        Quote: 0255
        RAC "MiG" has developed a strike UAV "Skat

        Unfortunately, it didn’t get any further than the plywood layout, neither engines nor a control system were developed. They showed on the MAX just a layout.
  14. USNik
    USNik 25 September 2013 12: 56 New
    +3
    "Today ... I could not send Predator or Reaper to the Strait of Hormuz without the escort aircraft necessary to protect it."
    No, well, everything is logical. An UAV with helpers flies, it is covered by the F-35 with SDB bombs and HARM anti-radar bombs, it, in turn, is covered by the F-22 with air-to-air missiles ... Beauty !! But since all this is complicated and expensive, the main dirty work is done by 15/16 and 18 decks. In general, everything follows the scheme: "cut Shura, cut, they are golden" (c) laughing
    1. Jin
      Jin 25 September 2013 14: 02 New
      0
      Quote: USNik
      Not, well, everything is logical. An UAV flies with helpers, it is covered by an F-35 with SDB bombs and anti-radar HARMs, it, in turn, is covered by an F-22 with air-to-air missiles ... Beauty !!


      If you recall the tactics of conducting any battle, then always, someone covers someone. What's so funny and when was it different?
  15. Nayhas
    Nayhas 25 September 2013 13: 27 New
    +4
    "Today ... I could not send Predator or Reaper to the Strait of Hormuz without the escort aircraft necessary to protect it."

    Gentlemen comrades, lovers of mocking American UAVs. The question is simple, but can Mr. General send the A-10 to the Strait of Hormuz today without the escort aircraft necessary to protect it? What nonsense? No one has ever claimed that the Predator and Reaper UAVs can perform air defense functions, and they have never been required to! Neither the A-10, nor the Su-25 can do anything against enemy fighters without air cover, even the F-15E in the shock version requires escort cover if the enemy has aircraft.
    1. Bort radist
      Bort radist 25 September 2013 19: 02 New
      0
      Quote: Nayhas
      can Mr. General send A-10 today?

      Thunderbolt is an attack aircraft. A scout is a punisher and a cover unit is new.
    2. In the reeds
      In the reeds 25 September 2013 21: 59 New
      +2
      So to protect the UAV you need to send a manned vehicle delirium
  16. rrrd
    rrrd 25 September 2013 13: 41 New
    +1
    without a lawsuit. Intelligence is just a toy for adults. to intelligence another 100 years
    1. Jin
      Jin 25 September 2013 13: 51 New
      0
      Quote: rrrd
      without a lawsuit. Intelligence is just a toy for adults. to intelligence another 100 years


      This "toy" really kills people ...

      These are 100 years, we need to develop a direction, otherwise the adversary will lose iron, and we will iron + human lives ...
  17. mirag2
    mirag2 25 September 2013 13: 51 New
    +1
    Against air defense, they are nothing. But any tank against a UAV is nothing. If only the crew does not have "Needles" lying around in the tank.
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus 25 September 2013 15: 22 New
      +1
      Quote: mirag2
      Against air defense - they are nothing

      And why did you decide that they are nothing against air defense? A ripper, for example, is a very difficult target for air defense.
  18. 0255
    0255 25 September 2013 13: 52 New
    +1
    The US Air Force last week released information that at the beginning of the year the F-22 fighter intercepted a fleet of Iranian F-4, approaching the American Predator UAV over this strait. At the end of 2012 of the year, Iranian planes attacked the Predator and missed in the Strait of Hormuz.

    Are F-22s based outside the US? Maybe at the beginning of this year some F-22s were written off for non-combat reasons? fellow And over which strait did the F-22 heroically enter the battle with the pride of the 1960s McDonnell Douglas? Not in Iran?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 25 September 2013 15: 18 New
      0
      Are F-22 based outside of the USA?

      In Japan, there seems to be a squadron. And somewhere else.
  19. mirag2
    mirag2 25 September 2013 14: 14 New
    +3
    Our dear cheers-patriots misunderstood the article here says that these devices are outdated, and not at all were not needed as a type!
    1. sven27
      sven27 25 September 2013 15: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: mirag2
      Our dear cheers-patriots misunderstood the article here says that these devices are outdated, and not at all were not needed as a type!

      and in patriotic ecstasy they began to prove the worthlessness and futility of these iron birds laughing
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 25 September 2013 15: 50 New
      +3
      Quote: mirag2
      Our dear cheers-patriots misunderstood the article here says that these devices are outdated, and not at all were not needed as a type!

      Our dear UAV critics have a patriotic approach. They criticize UAV drums simply because we don’t have them. As soon as they appear (I hope within 10 years) they will immediately write enthusiastic articles.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 25 September 2013 16: 22 New
        +4
        They criticize the drone UAVs simply because we do not have them. As soon as they appear (I hope for 10 years) they will immediately write enthusiastic articles.

        We criticize shock drones for the most part because operators are very succinct to see who they are launching the rocket into.
        And in the end they do not care, they do not risk their lives, while dozens of people are ruined by simple pressing of a button. And then they just write in a press release, "The drone destroyed the wedding procession by mistake." Who-who destroyed ??? Drone !!! But not an operator !!!!
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 25 September 2013 16: 40 New
          +2
          Quote: Wedmak
          And in the end they do not care, they do not risk their lives, while dozens of people are ruined by simple pressing of a button. And then they just write in a press release, "The drone destroyed the wedding procession by mistake." Who-who destroyed ??? Drone !!! But not an operator !!!!

          As for the moral aspect, I completely agree.
          And it’s not even a matter of killing innocent people, in the end, manned aircraft also sin among civilians. The thing is the feeling of complete impunity and irresponsibility arising from the use of drones.
          1. atalef
            atalef 26 September 2013 07: 27 New
            +1
            Quote: Odyssey
            The point is the feeling of complete impunity and irresponsibility arising from the use of drones.

            Saving the lives of pilots (soldiers) is the most important task of the modern army. And UAVs successfully solve this (I'm not talking about cost savings).
            And impunity and irresponsibility --- are you talking about that?
        2. atalef
          atalef 26 September 2013 07: 25 New
          +1
          Quote: Wedmak
          We criticize shock drones for the most part because operators are very succinct to see who they are launching the rocket into.

          No worse (and I think better) than a pilot of a combat aircraft (especially if he is alone (without a navigator)


          Quote: Wedmak
          And in the end they don’t care, they don’t risk their lives

          Therefore, the combat mission is performed better. Or do you think that a pilot risking his life is subject to other principles besides performing a combat mission

          Quote: Wedmak
          at the same time dozens of people are ruined by simple button presses.

          The bomber pilot also drops bombs at the touch of a button.

          Quote: Wedmak
          then they simply write in a press release, "the drone destroyed the wedding procession by mistake." Who-who destroyed ??? Drone !!! But not an operator !!!!

          No one is immune from mistakes and piloted aircraft as well, or do you think the pilots fly up before looking at the bomb and look at the object of attack from almost zero distance.
  20. de bouillon
    de bouillon 25 September 2013 14: 21 New
    +2
    Quote: Sergh
    Quote: de Bouillon
    in Abkhazia there were MANPADS, Shilka and OSs, that somehow they couldn’t bring down these damned UAVs for a long time until the MiG-29 from Krasnodar

    Hello! For "Predator" and "Piper", Shilka and Wasp is not serious, especially MANPADS, which have a slaughter height of up to 2,5 km, and the new Wasp has up to 7 (from memory). These two pterodactyls fly high, the Predator is up to 8 km, and Piper is 15 km away (bent, of course).
    And about Georgians, at that time I even remember from memory that at least there were three shot down in the press, and the military covered a couple of them, well, sort of. Although Abkhazia was also stupid in stupor, we will not consider it an indicator, but nevertheless they called for a Russian pilot and well done.


    I was struck by the words of Khrulev or Shamanov, I don’t remember which one, but I only clearly remembered that all attempts to bring down these damned UAVs were insignificant. But the fighters solved all the problems, but again there is an opinion that from a long distance it is difficult to take it on target.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 25 September 2013 15: 20 New
      +2
      but again there is an opinion that from a long distance it is difficult to take it on target.

      Why from a long distance? Spend expensive ranged missiles on him. He can’t snap back! You can practice with a gun on them.
  21. de bouillon
    de bouillon 25 September 2013 14: 23 New
    0
    Quote: 0255
    The US Air Force last week released information that at the beginning of the year the F-22 fighter intercepted a fleet of Iranian F-4, approaching the American Predator UAV over this strait. At the end of 2012 of the year, Iranian planes attacked the Predator and missed in the Strait of Hormuz.

    Are F-22s based outside the US? Maybe at the beginning of this year some F-22s were written off for non-combat reasons? fellow And over which strait did the F-22 heroically enter the battle with the pride of the 1960s McDonnell Douglas? Not in Iran?


    F-22 from last year from time to time are based in the Persian Gulf (Bahrain or Qatar)
  22. de bouillon
    de bouillon 25 September 2013 14: 41 New
    +1
    more precisely, the F-22s are based in the UAE; the base of Al Dhafra is only 6 Raptors from the 3rd Fighter Wing
  23. Averias
    Averias 25 September 2013 15: 17 New
    +2
    Approved and will continue to affirm: DARPA + Lockheed Martin + Boeing + a bunch of military concerns + Pentagon generals = CUT. Sawed on such a scale that Serdyukov nervously smokes in the corridor and chokes on the toad.
  24. USNik
    USNik 25 September 2013 15: 28 New
    +3
    Quote: Nayhas
    Gentlemen comrades, lovers of mocking American UAVs. The question is simple, but can Mr. General send the A-10 to the Strait of Hormuz today without the escort aircraft necessary to protect it? What nonsense?
    Not only a-10 but ANY other aircraft of the US Air Force, including the 5th and 4.5th generation.
    Neither the A-10 nor the Su-25 can do anything against enemy fighters without air cover, even the F-15E in the shock version requires escort cover if the enemy has aircraft.
    Well, in fact, both Rook and the second Thunderbolt can calmly hit an air-to-air missile over some lost Phantom, the base allows, not to mention the strike needle. General Hostage simply complained that in the existing form, UAVs can only drive a donkey @ bov and get into civilian houses and bombard tractor drivers with rockets:
    Helmand 24.09.2013.
    Taliban reports in Kajaki region, American drone rocket killed farmer on tractor
  25. rpek32
    rpek32 25 September 2013 15: 43 New
    0
    Well, have mastered the funds for UAVs laughing
  26. Kowalsky
    Kowalsky 25 September 2013 16: 11 New
    +2
    Yes, he perfectly copes with his tasks - blows to markets, wedding processions, residential buildings. Some kind of stupid general is simple, not democratic :)
  27. sergey261180
    sergey261180 25 September 2013 16: 13 New
    +1
    Anyway, it’s better to send a traitor to the intelligence than the Tu-22M3.
  28. 787nkx
    787nkx 25 September 2013 17: 56 New
    0
    F-16 costs from 20 million, depending on the filling, and the MQ-9 Reaper costs from 6 million.
    And tasks can be solved accordingly different.
    If there is no need to use all the combat capabilities of a fighter, why not send an UAV.
    There is always a risk of loss, either 20 million will burn out, or 6 the difference is big.
  29. vadson
    vadson 25 September 2013 18: 07 New
    0
    news from yesterday,
    The U.S. Air Force is celebrating a new milestone by completing the first flight of its QF-16 aerial target from Tyndall Base, Florida, wjhg.com reports September 23. The flight took place last Thursday, lasted for an hour, the target performed maneuvers and reached supersonic speed.



    “The flight itself went very well. The capabilities of the target are excellent, we are looking forward to it for combat use, ”said operator Thomas Mudge. The first QF-16, created on the basis of a modified version of the F-16 fighter, was delivered to the base in November 2012. The advent of fifth-generation fighters F-22 and F-35 required the creation of a target with higher characteristics than the outdated QF-4.



    “The QF-16 provides trained fighter pilots with a goal that reproduces the characteristics of modern aircraft. The new targets will allow US and Allied air force pilots to better understand what they will face in real air battles, ”says Lt. Col. Ryan Inman.



    QF-16 will replace QF-4, one of which crashed during takeoff on June 17. Six days ago, another QF-4 was blown up in flight, when it was unable to land several times, using up fuel. “QF-4 for many years as a whole performed its functions properly, but the time has come for his resignation. The new QF-16s will be used over the next 10-20 years. ”



    The US Air Force plans to acquire 126 air targets, reports aereo.jor.br.
    so in this respect the adversaries work
  30. vadson
    vadson 25 September 2013 18: 11 New
    0
    By the way, there’s more news,
    On September 24, South Korea decided to abandon the purchase of Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle fighters in the amount of $ 7,7 billion, which had previously been recognized as the only remaining competitor in the Air Force tender, and announced a new tender, Defense News reported. It was expected that on this day the F-15SE, which was the only one that fit into the tender budget, will be recognized as the winner of the competition.



    60 new fighters should be acquired to replace the outdated fleet of F-4 and F-5 combat aircraft. The competition was attended by American companies Boeing, Lockheed Martin (F-35) and the European concern EADS (Typhoon).



    Most members of the State Administration for the Procurement of Arms voted against F-15, apparently deciding that this aircraft does not meet modern requirements, especially in light of the nuclear threat from North Korea.



    At the end of August, 15 former senior officials of the South Korean Air Force signed a petition, proposing to stop the “crazy procedure” in favor of the F-15. Criticism boiled down to the fact that this fighter does not have the necessary stealth capabilities like the F-35. The tender will be launched from scratch.



    Traditionally, the air forces of the country are overwhelmingly equipped with American-made aircraft, which is a reflection of the military alliance between the two countries. But EADS hopes increased when, in January, Italian company AgustaWestland left Sikorsky, an American company, in the fight for the supply of six helicopters for the Navy in the amount of $ 567 million. To succeed in a more expensive tender for the supply of fighters, the consortium offered South Korea an investment of $ 2 billion as part of promoting a national fighter development program, if one is selected as the winner.



    Lockheed Martin, in turn, said it would support South Korea’s efforts to develop and manufacture military communications satellites.
    the less of this American iron in the air, the better for us and our allies!
  31. Altona
    Altona 25 September 2013 18: 17 New
    +1
    To paraphrase Churchill, we can say that the Americans will still buy the right shnyaga for the army, until they completely buy everything that they don’t need ... smile
    To be honest, I was about drones of a better opinion ... I thought, here they are, the epic heralds of a new era, the embodiment of the Douai doctrine, the brainless messengers of the stupid total Apocalypse flying on ugly wings, planting with their myriad of ammunition of our anti-aircraft systems ... But it turned out that this is just electric crap sharpened for a primitive task ... what
  32. scientist
    scientist 25 September 2013 18: 26 New
    +2
    Quote: sergey261180
    Anyway, it’s better to send a traitor to the intelligence than the Tu-22M3

    War 08 clearly confirmed this. Now the United States and Israel have worked very well UAV technology. And Russia must definitely develop this direction.
    A UAV with a good configuration can fulfill the tasks of breaking through air defense and the tasks of army aviation, and even fighter. After all, the UAV is not afraid, it can be sent to the most dangerous areas, only mechanical restrictions on overloads.
    The only vulnerability is the impact of electronic warfare on the communication and control system. But this problem is solvable.
  33. The comment was deleted.
  34. Strong
    Strong 25 September 2013 19: 44 New
    0
    Quote: vadson
    The US Air Force plans to acquire 126 air targets, reports aereo.jor.br.
    so in this respect the adversaries work


    It's just that there are different approaches to teaching and training. Someone prefers to use weapons on SABs on parachutes, someone on unmanned targets (which would still otherwise grow decrepit in the vast expanses of Arizona, in order to eventually be cut into metal). They were already fed up with the QF-4 phantoms, but the decommissioned early F-16s started to go.
  35. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 25 September 2013 20: 24 New
    0
    Quote: scientist
    And Russia must definitely develop this direction.
    A UAV with a good configuration can fulfill the tasks of breaking through air defense and the tasks of army aviation, and even fighter. After all, the UAV is not afraid, it can be sent to the most dangerous areas, only mechanical restrictions on overloads.

    Anyway, only specific models are criticized in the article. As far as we know, our people do not refuse, even Pagosyan speaks about the construction of a drone, based on the T-50 after launching it in series.
  36. scientist
    scientist 25 September 2013 22: 03 New
    0
    Quote: Yuri Ya.
    on the construction of a drone based on the T-50 after launching it in a series

    If this is a modernization of the T-50, then this is no longer a series, but a prototype. Theoretically, this can be done, but is there any expediency in this? Firstly, the cost of the UAV will be high, secondly, flight characteristics and other equipment designed for the presence of a pilot. I think you can find a bunch of pros and cons. But the main thing is the time factor, work on UAVs needs to be accelerated, because there are so many urgent problems with border protection in hard-to-reach areas, forest protection ...
  37. Zomanus
    Zomanus 26 September 2013 01: 50 New
    0
    Yes, a normal thing, these traitors. The monkeys in Pakistan and Libya shoot the most. It’s clear that they don’t dance against normal air defense and the air force, but they’re quite suitable to drive obyanok across Afghanistan.
    1. atalef
      atalef 26 September 2013 07: 33 New
      0
      Quote: Zomanus
      about monkeys in Pakistan and Libya shoot the very thing. It’s clear that they don’t dance against normal air defense and the air force, but they’re quite good for chasing obyanok over Afghanistan.

      But this is one of their tasks. For this, they were designed. It’s better to drive UAVs than not to drive anything. At least for now no one can feel relaxed without fear that the Predator will fly in (quietly by the way) will drive the rocket and fly away. With manned vehicles, all this is much more complicated, and in the case of capturing a pilot in captivity, it generally turns into a nightmare for any state.
      UAVs are a wonderful solution to hundreds of problems that can arise with manned aircraft (more precisely, with pilots)
  38. scientist
    scientist 26 September 2013 08: 04 New
    0
    Quote: Zomanus
    they do not dance against normal air defense and the air force

    I think the UAV can act against the Air Force and against the air defense. Back in Soviet times, there were jammers in the UAV troops, and now it is possible to hang the PRLR, and another couple of hundred cheap UAVs of the "demonstration group" will significantly overload any air defense system, distract the Air Force and come up with heaps of all kinds
  39. Chever
    Chever 26 September 2013 10: 54 New
    0
    No, drones, at least their current generation, will not be able to fully replace attack aircraft, bombers and "other fighters". Not the same technique yet, not the same ...