Military Review

The Americans launched a drone made from an F-16 fighter

55
The Americans launched a drone made from an F-16 fighter

The United States Air Force, in conjunction with Boeing, completed the first tests of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), converted from an aging combat aircraft.


The test flight of the fighter drone was held at the US Air Force "Tindall" base in Florida. According to Sky News, the UAV performed takeoff and landing, a series of maneuvers, as well as flying at supersonic speeds. From the ground, the apparatus was controlled by two professional pilots.

“It was a bit strange to see the F-16 rise into the sky without a pilot on board, but it was a beautiful flight in every sense,” Lt. Col. Ryan Inman shared his impressions.

A successful test proved that in the future, the modified F-16 fighter jets can be used to test weapons and train pilots. Alteration of a combat fighter into an unmanned version, which was called QF-16s, was carried out by the company Boeing.

Aircraft F-16, developed by General Dynamics, which is now part of Lockheed Martin, entered service with the US Air Force at the end of 1970-s. It is expected that more 200 obsolete aircraft will eventually be converted into unmanned versions. Until now, they have been preserved.

Representatives of the US Air Force said that work on reworking the F-16 in a QF-16s modification lasted about six months.
Originator:
http://russian.rt.com/
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 26 September 2013 09: 43 New
    +9
    If we are not mistaken with us, too, previously decommissioned and obsolete aircraft were turned into unmanned ones, although they were used only as targets ...
    1. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 26 September 2013 09: 44 New
      0
      There will be fewer victims of pilots if you learn to remake controlled equipment into unmanned ...
      1. Refund_SSSR
        Refund_SSSR 26 September 2013 09: 55 New
        +9
        The United States already has effective strike drones.
        And there is a bunch of trash in the form of whole fields of obsolete F-16s, which are very expensive to dispose of.
        You dare why they are needed in unmanned form?
        There are two options, either for delivering a massive blow to enemy targets with a missile defense breakthrough at a super sound or use as targets (in both cases this is a kamikaze target).
        But since no global war is foreseen, and the content of at least the manned, at least unmanned F-16 differs hardly very much, it is not difficult to predict plans for their use.

        (etozh as it was necessary to want more pluses to delete the comment below and post it above laughing )
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 26 September 2013 10: 23 New
          +6
          Quote: We refund_SSSR
          You dare why they are needed in unmanned form?


          So here it is incomprehensible
          1. Freelancer7
            Freelancer7 26 September 2013 14: 47 New
            0
            It seems to me that drones are both saving space and weight, a pilot + an ejection seat + devices + life support systems. In my opinion a good increase in combat load or fuel weight. Well, in principle, yes - how guided missiles go too.
            1. the polar
              the polar 26 September 2013 16: 07 New
              0
              Quote: Freelancer7
              It seems to me that drones are both saving space and weight, a pilot + an ejection seat + devices + life support systems. In my opinion a good increase in combat load or fuel weight. Well, in principle, yes - how guided missiles go too.

              The rocket is ten times cheaper than the converted, it is not known why the F-16. There are signs of degradation of the military and staff thoughts of the American people, which cannot but rejoice. And portraying an “guided projectile” from the F-16 is what the target for the attack must be in order to recoup such a “guided projectile."
              1. Freelancer7
                Freelancer7 26 September 2013 20: 20 New
                +1
                You confuse sharpening for a specific task and just an additional feature. This feature is a feature of the combat unit sacrificed in the right situation. You don’t have to make kamikazes out of an airplane, but in my opinion even the combat loss of such a unit in the field simply does not burden the launch of an operation to rescue the pilot. But such operations are quite risky on the territory of the enemy and can be even more losses than a rescued pilot.
              2. Patriot.ru.
                Patriot.ru. 26 September 2013 21: 02 New
                +1
                I fully support you. But it seems to me that they even do not suit like kamikaze. Because they must have a stable connection with the "two pilots" on the ground, which is likely when using them in Somalia. But not in any serious cases.
        2. Maks111
          Maks111 26 September 2013 16: 44 New
          0
          There are two options, either for delivering a massive blow to enemy targets with a missile defense breakthrough at a super sound or use as targets (in both cases this is a kamikaze target).
          But since no global war is foreseen, and the content of at least the manned, at least unmanned F-16 differs hardly very much, it is not difficult to predict plans for their use.

          Who told you that there’s not going to be a global war? Just like that. Nobody has canceled the war for resources. If there is no global war, then why did the NATO troops surround us with their bases? Why is China very actively developing its armed forces and building military roads near our border? No guys, we are still fighting with you.
          1. Patriot.ru.
            Patriot.ru. 26 September 2013 21: 08 New
            0
            Roads at the border on the Chinese side. There are NO roads on our side.
      2. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 26 September 2013 15: 28 New
        0
        ShturmKGB
        There will be fewer victims of pilots if you learn to remake controlled equipment into unmanned ...


        That's the problem - instead of a pilgrim chair, put a radio station and a computer with drives. Amerikosov such equipment in the store radio toys sold. So for a long time they got involved, as much as 6 months.
    2. Refund_SSSR
      Refund_SSSR 26 September 2013 09: 46 New
      +1
      And earlier there was news that the amers plan to make targets out of their F-16s.
      A very practical approach to disposal.
      1. evgenii67
        evgenii67 26 September 2013 10: 52 New
        +1
        Targets, perhaps, but on the other hand, why create an impact drone, because it’s possible to make such an impactor, by the way, a 4 ++ generation such as the Su-35 can withstand overloads that a person can’t withstand, and sitting “drinking coffee” behind the monitor Overloads are not felt.
    3. Ruslan_F38
      Ruslan_F38 26 September 2013 10: 43 New
      0
      Representatives of the US Air Force said that work on reworking the F-16 in a QF-16s modification lasted about six months.
      - There is something to think about, just six months. Maybe we should do the same not to write off the planes, but to make satellites out of them? Can't we?
      1. Patriot.ru.
        Patriot.ru. 26 September 2013 21: 13 New
        0
        I don’t know how it is with them, but in our country it’s an airplane with a developed resource, you will put expensive electronics on it, but it simply won’t take off.
    4. Civil
      Civil 26 September 2013 10: 43 New
      +1
      For some reason, our obsolete planes turn into cottages ... mysticism
    5. VAF
      VAF 26 September 2013 16: 48 New
      +2
      Quote: svp67
      the truth was used only as targets ...


      Hello, namesake! And you are absolutely right, +! And the amers specifically made the TARGET!
      Just for everyone - read carefully what and who writes from the "airspeel world" affectors wassat otherwise they, these hurries, put their own "thoughts" into the incorrect translation "and it turns out ...." compote "that you won’t pull on any head.

      A "casket" opens "very simply wink :

      On September 23, this year, the first flight of the QF-16 aerial target from Tyndall Base (Florida) was completed.
      The flight lasted for an hour, the target performed maneuvers (barrel, turn) and access to supersonic flight mode.

      “The flight itself went very well. The capabilities of the target are excellent, we are looking forward to it for military 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. ”

      Boeing has converted six F-16s to remote-controlled targets so far as part of the trials.
      Small-scale re-equipment is planned to begin at the end of the year, and serial deliveries to the troops from 2015. wink

      1. vadim dok
        vadim dok 26 September 2013 19: 56 New
        +1
        I agree 100%. Absolutely false and provocative article! Yesterday in Lente.ru there was an article-Remaking an OLD combat aircraft into an UNMANED TARGET, not a PESPILOTNK! And the comments are off topic!
      2. Patriot.ru.
        Patriot.ru. 26 September 2013 21: 24 New
        -1
        In 2015, the air forces of most countries will be armed with aircraft better than the F-16. So the F-16 becomes obsolete even as a target.
      3. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 26 September 2013 22: 53 New
        0
        Thank you very much for your rare comments. Personally, I often, corny lack of knowledge to properly evaluate the publication.
    6. The comment was deleted.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Kosatka
    Kosatka 26 September 2013 09: 51 New
    16
    Well done. And so weak?
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 26 September 2013 09: 54 New
      +9
      quote- “It was a little strange to see how the F-16 rises into the sky without a pilot on board, but it was a wonderful flight in every sense,” said Lt. Col. Ryan Inman.

      topic video
    2. atalef
      atalef 26 September 2013 10: 26 New
      +7
      Quote: Kosatka
      Well done. And so weak?
      Landing an UAV in automatic mode on the deck of an aircraft carrier (moving) is much more difficult. So for the info.
      1. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 26 September 2013 23: 50 New
        0
        Quote: atalef
        Quote: Kosatka
        Well done. And so weak?
        Landing an UAV in automatic mode on the deck of an aircraft carrier (moving) is much more difficult. So for the info.


        Nuka, tell me, for info naturally, what is the difficulty? automatic mode, or planted with hands?
    3. 0255
      0255 26 September 2013 10: 38 New
      +1
      Do you think the American UAVs based on the F-16 and F-4 Phantom land differently? Maybe the Americans have long stolen or bought cheaply developments on the “Buran” and are using them now. sad
      Although they promise that the PAK FA will be able to land in the event of something without a pilot. Hope this is true.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 26 September 2013 12: 08 New
        +5
        Isn’t it that Americans have UAVs in the modern sense since the beginning of the 70s?
        1. No_more
          No_more 26 September 2013 16: 39 New
          0
          But it didn’t help Shuttle, he sat in manual mode all the time of his existence. Studying the dynamics of flight at the university, I realized that landing from orbit and landing from the atmosphere are by no means equally simple tasks.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 26 September 2013 21: 58 New
            +2
            Quote: No_more
            But it didn’t help Shuttle, he sat in manual mode all the time of his existence. Studying the dynamics of flight at the university, I realized that landing from orbit and landing from the atmosphere are by no means equally simple tasks.

            I would recommend that you first familiarize yourself with the Shuttle program. He had an unmanned version long before the Buran.
            1. Alex 241
              Alex 241 26 September 2013 22: 12 New
              0
              Zhen hi
              Quote: Pimply
              Unmanned option
              from this place in more detail. Shuttle-C project?
              1. studentmati
                studentmati 26 September 2013 22: 37 New
                0
                Quote: Alex 241
                from this place in more detail. Shuttle-C project?


                I would be very interested too!
                1. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 26 September 2013 22: 47 New
                  0
                  Hi Sash, this project was closed due to lack of funding.
                  1. studentmati
                    studentmati 26 September 2013 22: 55 New
                    0
                    Quote: Alex 241
                    Hi Sash, this project was closed due to lack of funding.


                    Hi Sasha. Interest in the depth of the project? Apparently no further paper development?
                    1. Alex 241
                      Alex 241 26 September 2013 23: 03 New
                      0
                      Sasha judging by the photo in iron embodied.
                      1. studentmati
                        studentmati 26 September 2013 23: 10 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Alex 241
                        Sasha judging by the photo in iron embodied.


                        I will not argue, it is necessary to delve into, is there something unexplored for me?
                      2. Alex 241
                        Alex 241 26 September 2013 23: 14 New
                        0
                        Sasha, if I dig in, I’ll share it.
                2. Bort radist
                  Bort radist 27 September 2013 06: 40 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Alex 241
                  Hi Sash, this project was closed due to lack of funding.

                  Literal translation - Mind was not enough.
  4. me
    me 26 September 2013 16: 37 New
    -3
    They are no longer weak. Plyusikov chtoli decided to dial?
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 26 September 2013 10: 00 New
    +7
    By the way, as a target for revealing the positions of enemy air defense for second-wave vehicles, this is quite a serious idea. The number of air force vehicles in a particular area is always easier to increase than the number of air defense batteries.
    1. vlad_pr
      vlad_pr 26 September 2013 10: 39 New
      +1
      The idea has long been in the air. Moreover, reconnaissance, strike and other weapons are hung. It is a pity that we will not soon be implemented, or even not implemented at all.
      Sincerely.
      1. Aryan
        Aryan 26 September 2013 10: 48 New
        +2
        and how did you decide on the old approaches to the consumption of inexpensive fuel?
        and the same recharge in the air to catch up?
        Why is a UAV and what tasks should it solve
        compared to manned?
        I do not understand ... explain request
        1. vadim dok
          vadim dok 26 September 2013 20: 05 New
          +1
          Sorry! Of course they didn’t understand, this is not a drone but a RADIO target
      2. Bort radist
        Bort radist 26 September 2013 12: 42 New
        +4
        Quote: vlad_pr
        or even not implemented at all

        He wrote not long ago - in 1975 already in our unit there was an office redesigning the MiG 15, 17, 19 under the target, we were told so. Buran flew from scratch and sat down. So there are programs and algorithms.
      3. aviator_IAS
        aviator_IAS 26 September 2013 14: 39 New
        0
        Quote: vlad_pr
        The idea has long been in the air. Moreover, reconnaissance, strike and other weapons are hung. It is a pity that we will not soon be implemented, or even not implemented at all.
        Sincerely.


        With us and without any additional equipment, an unmanned fighter was able to fly half of Europe.

        http://history-afr.fatal.ru/belgium.shtml

        Intercepted F-15 pilots were very surprised belay and with great difficulty were able to describe the situation to the guidance services. And there have been cases of independent successful landings (both with us and with them) http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D1

        %84%D0%B0_%D0%9C%D0%B8%D0%93-23_%D0%B2_%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B

        8_4_%D0%B8%D1%8E%D0%BB%D1%8F_1989_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0
        But this is already from the category of miracles.
        1. Bort radist
          Bort radist 26 September 2013 18: 03 New
          +2
          Quote: aviator_IAS
          And there have been cases of independent successful landings

          In Brzeg (Poland) were our SU-7B. I don’t remember the subtleties were on a business trip, the locals told. After the launch of the rockets, the engine "choked". The landfill was near the airfield. The pilot was young. Reached his neighbor. He wanted to plant ordered to eject. The plane went to the center of the strip and rolled over. They talked a little - and they could sit down.
          1. Su-9
            Su-9 27 September 2013 06: 44 New
            0
            Maybe a little off topic, but: Su7b had no missiles, only NURSES. The seven had problems with AL-7F all the time - stops, surges, etc. The most emergency plane was (worse than my nickname). So the launch of the missiles was nothing to do with. And the bike was exactly like that.
    2. The Indian Joe
      The Indian Joe 26 September 2013 10: 49 New
      +2
      It will already be a war of resources.
      One F-16 costs about 34 million dollars, S-300 (all the machines in the complex) - about 115. But one rocket to it is only about 1,2 lemons. It turns out that one S-300 = 3 F-16. But this is, of course, approximate and inaccurate calculations ... And how many targets the S-300 will have time to hit before its destruction, given that not one machine with missiles on each, but 2-3 can stand in position, and the probability of hitting targets her missiles are about 0,9?
  • USNik
    USNik 26 September 2013 10: 31 New
    +1
    By the way, as a target for revealing the positions of enemy air defense for second-wave vehicles, it’s quite a serious idea
    And not only. There are suspicions that the machine is packed much more seriously than the target and the shock drone. On hostile sites they say that he is capable of flying at extremely low altitudes in the mode of terrain envelope, the piloting system has been improved and he beats the manned vehicle by this indicator, plus a radar with a bunch of sensors that expand the capabilities of reconnaissance ... In general, everything depends only on the question of the price of such "upgrade", I think that this is not cheap. winked
    1. Patriot.ru.
      Patriot.ru. 26 September 2013 22: 01 New
      0
      at extremely low altitudes, pilots no longer fly.
  • Chukcha
    Chukcha 26 September 2013 10: 32 New
    0
    Well, that’s a logical decision. We also have such developments are rumored.
  • aud13
    aud13 26 September 2013 10: 37 New
    +2
    About three months ago there was a conversation on a similar topic - that amers want outdated aircraft to make flying targets. And then the thought was already generated that this is not entirely effective, since in fact a one-time use is obtained. There was another proposal - to make cruise missiles out of old aircraft. Almost everything for this is in the plane itself.
    It is also relevant for us. In our places of storage, as far as I have heard, there are still in stock the outdated models of aircraft. If you refine it, you can get a good shock group.
    Assume the characteristics of the MIG-21:
    - speed up to 20140 km.h .;
    - flight range up to 2000km (when flying at 1 end).
    The combat load - I won’t say for sure, not a specialist, but if you remove some systems that are unnecessary in unmanned mode, I think that there should be more than 2 tons.
    This is just a matter of fighting aircraft carrier formations. Here at the forum, the figure already sounded that to fight with 1 AUG almost up to two regiments of strategic aviation are required.
    The question is why send dozens of expensive aircraft along with crews to death if it is possible to upgrade old aircraft (MIGI 21-23-27, SU-17, etc.). Turn their army of drones under control (or on a machine gun like anti-submarine granite missiles).
    So by the way, our designers could extend the life of tested and well-deserved aircraft. To help our allies and friendly countries to obtain weapons that can help them effectively deal with the aggressor, including aircraft carrier groups.
    1. cherkas.oe
      cherkas.oe 26 September 2013 11: 21 New
      +1
      Quote: aud13
      upgrade old planes (migi 21-23-27, su-17, etc.)

      these machines have mechanical control drives, and the F-16 has an EMF, so it’s cheaper and easier to remake. And 17,23 and 27 also with variable geometry, an additional smut, so that only 21 remain.
      1. 0255
        0255 26 September 2013 17: 05 New
        +1
        upgrade old planes (migi 21-23-27, su-17, etc.)

        but they remained in flight condition in Russia? Back in the Chechen war, they remembered that they wrote off the MiG-27, which showed themselves well in Afghanistan. They wanted to restore them, but they were in such a deplorable state that they could not be found NONE machine to be repaired.
        these machines have mechanical control drives, and the F-16 has an EMF, so it’s cheaper and easier to remake. And 17,23 and 27 also with variable geometry, an additional smut, so that only 21 remain.

        in Soviet times, MiG-15, 17, 19 with mechanical control were remade into radio-controlled targets. And nothing flew
        1. VAF
          VAF 26 September 2013 17: 52 New
          +4
          Quote: 0255
          with mechanical control. And nothing flew


          MiG-21 and Tu-16 .. also +! soldier
    2. mirag2
      mirag2 26 September 2013 12: 42 New
      0
      Cool idea !!!!
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 26 September 2013 11: 08 New
    0
    These f-16s retain the ability to pilot man. There is an opportunity to send to dangerous tasks in an unmanned version, and to relatively safe with a pilot. It is clear that with a person on board the circle of tasks to be solved is wider, and the execution is more flexible. Another factor is that it’s cheaper to prepare UAV operators than a fighter pilot, and I suspect lower salaries for operators.
    1. Volkhov
      Volkhov 26 September 2013 14: 10 New
      0
      You can still return the wounded pilot remotely in principle.
      In the 80s in the USSR they wanted to do something like this with obsolete aircraft like the Mig-17 ... 19 ... 21, but the incoming democracy turned everything into scrap metal.
    2. VAF
      VAF 26 September 2013 17: 57 New
      +4
      Quote: chunga-changa
      These f-16s retain the ability to pilot man


      Yes, but only on the way to the place of basing, and then ... only in the afternoon and in the PMU, so that all the "navigation" and avionics ... are removed ... all that remains is P / S p-832 for the stage, but the bull's-eye - KI -13.

      After all, do not forget that the "system of" control "of the target, the same requires space.

      Therefore koment forumchanina from Ukraine..o a super modern radar with a bunch of sensors, with advanced avionics..this .... nonsense of enemy sites. soldier
  • The comment was deleted.
  • de bouillon
    de bouillon 26 September 2013 11: 21 New
    +1
    will be massively launched at the S-300 position

    and what? Jews very effectively used UAVs in 82 in Lebanon, though not so
  • MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 26 September 2013 12: 05 New
    -1
    Note .. in recent years, the amers began to conduct real exercises (when they are attacked ..) There will be no unmanned zones and unpunished bombing (even small countries) and their vaunted strike UAVs will soon click like a raven .. Russia reappeared on the world stage and began to twist the tails of the insolent. And this is only the beginning .. Let them train so as not to be disgraced in the sky!
  • Gur
    Gur 26 September 2013 12: 11 New
    0
    A successful test proved that in the future, modified F-16 fighters can be used to test weapons and train pilots.


    Yes, I also think that this will not be limited, but as for the S-300, I think they will run out of f-16s quickly. Do not forget the S-300 is friends with the shell and does not go alone, but our military should be wary
  • marat1000
    marat1000 26 September 2013 12: 25 New
    0
    Why are there to rejoice, put a couple of cameras and a control controller in the cockpit, and threw the pilot away. Business something.
  • Draz
    Draz 26 September 2013 12: 30 New
    +1
    Like all drones, the weak point is the control signal
  • aud13
    aud13 26 September 2013 12: 39 New
    0
    Quote: cherkas.oe
    Quote: aud13modernize old planes (MiGi 21-23-27, su-17, etc.) these machines have mechanical control drives, and the F-16 has an electric motor, so it’s cheaper and easier to remake. A 17,23 and 27 also with variable geometry, an additional smut, so that only 21 remain.

    Yes, I understand that the cars were created for a long time, but in my opinion nothing is impossible. This is just a matter of military interest in the reuse of aircraft that have already served. They have already practically exhausted their resources, but using this way it is possible to deliver a lot of pain in the enemy, for minimal funds. Because for the destruction of one such obsolete aircraft you will have to spend at least 1 modern anti-aircraft missile (or maybe 2-3, not the fact that the first will be shot down). In addition, as has already been said here, other goals can be achieved, for example, to open the air defense system. If, for example, in Georgia in 2008 they had previously sent several such aircraft to "intelligence". The maximum that the Georgians would have achieved - they simply revealed their potential in the field of air defense. And we would save the lives of our pilots.
    In addition, here, after all, a broader question can be posed about how inefficiently sometimes squandered military property. I just read on the same site that in Primorye about 13 strategic bombers were simply dismantled along with the runway.
    Nonsense. You might think that Russia's bins are bottomless and we can all afford it. Moreover, after all, you do not even need to invent the useful use of some samples of equipment yourself, you can just see how they act in other countries. For example, the United States donates surplus weapons systems to them to different countries. On the one hand, it seems to be self-harm. And on the other hand, if you think:
    - Surplus weapons must be stored, taken care of, and this requires considerable expenses;
    - by supplying surplus armaments, the Shtatovs, on the one hand, are getting rid of obsolete weapons, and on the other hand, providing for the future their defense industry with future orders from recipient countries for spare parts, shells, ammunition, bombs for delivered equipment, personnel training, etc .;
    - In addition, the military-political linkage of the country of the recipient of military property is strengthened, well, etc.
    What prevents us from acting in a similar way to transfer to countries that sympathize with us the equipment that rusts in our warehouses?
  • mirag2
    mirag2 26 September 2013 12: 44 New
    +1
    Yes, in the UAV the main control signal + software.
    So they probably run in the take-off and landing software, plus maybe some scripts of possible situations.
  • spirit
    spirit 26 September 2013 13: 11 New
    +1
    F16 There is, A10 is the same there. Now we wait until x47 is brought to mind and transplanted its brains in f18.
  • Boot under the carpet
    Boot under the carpet 26 September 2013 15: 24 New
    +1
    Well done, you can’t say anything!
    1. alone
      alone 26 September 2013 20: 10 New
      +1
      The period of -6 months is especially striking. Just six months and the project has already been almost completed.
  • Ivan Tarasov
    Ivan Tarasov 26 September 2013 17: 29 New
    +1
    Time will pass and manned flights will be perhaps in the BTA.
    "Fighter pilot" will sit in slippers behind the monitor, chewing a sandwich ...
    For the UAV future.
  • nazgul-ishe
    nazgul-ishe 27 September 2013 02: 06 New
    0
    With their stock of old equipment, sticking in the rolled-in UAV filling in a short time will turn out to be a weak armada. And how many C300 do we have?