Military Review

Titanic drone with dimensions of Boeing 757 will be the new scout of the US Navy

122
Titanic drone with dimensions of Boeing 757 will be the new scout of the US Navy

The new titanic drone with a wingspan like the Boeing 757 is preparing to take on the duties of a scout for the US Navy.


Northrop Grumman and the US Navy have just completed the ninth test flight of the Triton drone, an improved version of the Global Hawk drone.

With a wingspan of 40 meters, Triton will deliver real-time reconnaissance data from its sensors, which are surveyed in 360 degrees over 2000 nautical miles.

And if he needs to look at something closely, the unique protection against lightning and icing will allow Triton to pass through the clouds for close observation and automatic identification of ships. And in the last tests, the drone also showed an excellent ability to recover from imbalances caused by turbulence.

Although Triton has a higher degree of autonomy than most other drones, ground operators can receive highly detailed images from it at any time, use a radar to detect targets, and deliver important information to other military units.

To date, Triton has completed flight tests with a duration of 9.4 hours at an altitude of 15 kilometers. According to Northrop Grumman, he is able to stay in the air for up to 24 hours.

Under the terms of the original 1.16 contract for a billion dollars from 2008, the US Navy ordered 68 UAVs MQ-4C Triton with expected delivery times in 2017.
Originator:
http://www.wired.com/
122 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. klimpopov
    klimpopov 10 January 2014 11: 53
    +6
    Well, what is the era of drones? gentlemen ...
    1. Manager
      Manager 10 January 2014 12: 02
      +14
      Obviously not in Russia, unfortunately. We have a circle "Skillful hands" sooner. (with regards to drones)
      1. A.YARY
        A.YARY 10 January 2014 12: 14
        +1
        Quote Manager
        Obviously not in Russia
        So about the identity!
        "Can you try?
        Maybe inappropriately?
        What the hell is he for us?
        There is space, but this one for what?
        What is nothing to spend money on?
        Yes, we have Voronezh! It's stronger!
        What if it shies away? "

        While ours are doing something in the Moscow Region, such as theft, and the justification of their idiocy and betrayal, the vorog becomes stronger and stronger.

        "I ought to say that they are uncleaning guns with bricks!" m \ f "Levsha"
        1. pavlo007
          pavlo007 10 January 2014 12: 25
          -2
          And ours, if there was a war, shoot is not good ...
          1. sds555
            sds555 10 January 2014 20: 36
            +9
            Here is another piece of news that is a bit off topic but still: About how Russian Su-27 fighters abused Kitty Hawk, an American aircraft carrier
            After 1991, when an Iraqi MiG shot down one of the American Hornites over the Persian Gulf, the F / A-18 had no military contact with Russian-built fighters. However, in November 2000, there was still a meeting of American carrier-based aircraft with fighters of the Russian Air Force, which was "as close as possible" to combat.

            To begin with, one should give the floor to the American pilot, a direct eyewitness to the described events (the text of his letter sent by e-mail from the aircraft carrier “Kitty Hawk, in addition to the will of the author of the message, became public).

            “... Swimming was quite easy and interesting: 54 days at sea, 4 - at the port and 45 hours of flight in October alone! (for comparison, many pilots of the Russian Air Force have an annual flight time of about 45-60 hours with the required 200-250) Yeah, we flew our asses! Since I became one of the squadron commanders, I have been flying a lot. Here is an interesting story (and this is not bullshit).

            So, I’m sitting there and chatting about all kinds of garbage with my deputy, and we hear a bell ringing from the BIC (the combat information center - the "brain" of the ship) .- They say: "Sir, we spotted Russian planes."

            The captain replies: "Announce the alarm, raise the fighters." They say from the center: only “Alarm-30” can be announced (departure in 30 minutes (!) From the moment of announcement). The captain swore and said: "Take into the air all that is possible, as quickly as possible!" I ran to the navigator's telephone and contacted the squadron duty officer. That day it was not our squadron that was on duty, so I ordered him to find out who was on duty and have them raise their asses and race to the flight deck (only Alarm-7 assumes that you are already on the take-off deck and are ready to go up into the air: "Alarm-30" means that you are still sitting in the waiting room).

            Soon, the Russian Su-27 and Su-24 at a speed of 500 knots passed directly above the Kitty Hawk bridge. Just like in the movie "Top Gun"! Officers on the bridge spilled their coffee and said ...! (An obscene expression, which has a very emotional Russian counterpart.) At that moment I looked at the captain - his face was crimson.

            The Russian fighters made two steep turns at low altitude before we finally launched our first plane from the deck. It was ... EA-6V "Prauler" (electronic warfare aircraft). Yes, yes, we launched the unfortunate "Prawler" one on one against the fighter right above the ship. Our pilots already asked for help when finally the F / A-18 from the "sister" squadron (I use this term literally, because they looked like a company of "easy-going women" (the phrase in quotation marks has been replaced with a more decent one) flirting with the Russians) took off in the air to perform an interception. But it was too late. The whole team lifted their heads and watched the Russians make a mockery of our wretched attempt to stop them.

            The funny thing is that the admiral and the commander of the aircraft carrier were in the command room at the morning meeting, which was interrupted by the rumble of turbines of Russian aircraft circling the aircraft carrier’s cabin. An officer in the headquarters of the commander told me that they looked at each other, at the flight plan, were convinced that the launch was planned for that day only a few hours later, and asked: “What was that?”

            Four days later, the Russian intelligence service sent an e-mail to the Kitty Hawk commander, photographs of our pilots rushing about on the deck, desperate to lift planes into the air ... ”It was October 17, 2000 near the Korea Strait
            1. sds555
              sds555 10 January 2014 21: 35
              0
              http://warfiles.ru/45874-o-tom-kak-rossiyskie-istrebiteli-su-27-nadrugalis-nad-a

              merikanskim-avianoscem-kiti-hok.html Link to the full article
            2. The comment was deleted.
        2. Civil
          Civil 10 January 2014 13: 06
          +4
          Quote: A.YARY
          Quote Manager
          Obviously not in Russia
          So about the identity!
          "Can you try?
          Maybe inappropriately?
          What the hell is he for us?
          There is space, but this one for what?
          What is nothing to spend money on?
          Yes, we have Voronezh! It's stronger!
          What if it shies away? "

          While ours are doing something in the Moscow Region, such as theft, and the justification of their idiocy and betrayal, the vorog becomes stronger and stronger.

          "I ought to say that they are uncleaning guns with bricks!" m \ f "Levsha"


          Still need to add:
          "Why are you so smart chtol ?! Play with these models at home!"
      2. afire
        afire 10 January 2014 12: 14
        +1
        they trust the development of some kind of monsters that are motionless and terribly bureaucratic, expect something useful from them without options, they only have a plan plan plan, they cook up a quick raw thread and try to run it, but as a result, the wretchedness of the devices does not fit into any framework at all.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Cherdak
        Cherdak 10 January 2014 13: 07
        +5
        Quote: Manager
        We still have a circle "Skillful hands"
      5. itkul
        itkul 10 January 2014 14: 00
        -12%
        Quote: Manager
        We have a circle "Skillful hands" sooner. (with regards to drones)


        Come on, here is our answer to the Americans

        1. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 14: 16
          0
          Is this the drone that the Iranians planted at their base or the drone of the video from which only the lazy did not watch live?
          1. iwind
            iwind 10 January 2014 14: 23
            -4
            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            Is this the drone that the Iranians planted at their base or the drone of the video from which only the lazy did not watch live?

            Hmm .... with the knowledge of the issue you have big problems. This is the x-47b, the first ever drone to land on aircraft carriers.
            And the RQ-170 that they allegedly planted, most likely just fell (he’s already too beaten), they fall unmanned.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. Evgeny_Lev
                  Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 14: 47
                  -8
                  Who told you about such a future?

                  You see, the control of the human brain in flight cannot be intercepted, and with the help of EMP it cannot be disabled, unlike popuhogons. I think it will be nice for you to get on the head with your own ammunition from your own same aircraft, he is such a masochism ... god.

                  Regarding the "level of knowledge" of the subject matter ... it's funny to me, dude, if you've learned a couple of three worthless abbreviations of the name, it doesn't make you a specialist, well, at least in Russia, in the states, maybe you would have a reputation for that, among overweight users but not here.
            2. rolik
              rolik 10 January 2014 14: 32
              +9
              Quote: iwind
              just fell (too beaten already)

              And gide he beaten by a daraga ?????
              Gentlemen of the jury! Please show the traces of beatings on the victim ?????
              1. iwind
                iwind 10 January 2014 14: 47
                +2
                This has been discussed so many times ... Scotch, the lower part was closed.
                However, I'm not going to convince you. Do you want to believe it, I don’t believe it, so professional activities slightly affect the work with digital communications.
                1. rolik
                  rolik 10 January 2014 15: 10
                  +10
                  Quote: iwind
                  This has been discussed so many times.

                  Recently, there was infa that Kim Chen fed his uncle to the dogs. So it turned out it was a fat duck from a Chinese blogger.
                  I do not think that falling from the height at which this unit was, you can only break off the wing and put a couple of neat scratches on the body. With such aerodynamics, this apparatus would tumble down in all directions, and it certainly crashed much more than in the picture. And the nature of the damage just corresponds to a forced (or forced) landing on an unprepared runway. Simply put, he sat on his belly without the landing gear extended, and moreover, he did not sit evenly, but hook his wing to the ground, or a stone. And how strangely the Iranians sealed the damage, the wing with white tape, and two scratches with black. Is the scotch tape over ??? or in Iran with a great deficit ???? Believe me, as a person who has been working for more than one year at the "Seva", in the experimental department)))) this is not a device that has collapsed from a height. In order not to go far for examples, look at the video posted above where our UAV crashes. What gorgeous damage and explosion there, and the mattress drone flew at a more decent height and speed.
                2. rolik
                  rolik 10 January 2014 15: 49
                  0
                  Quote: iwind
                  so professional activities slightly affect the work with digital communications.

                  Are you repairing the receivers in the service center ????
                3. Professor
                  Professor 10 January 2014 16: 48
                  +3
                  Quote: iwind
                  This has been discussed so many times ... Scotch, the lower part was closed.

                  My 5 kopecks. And here is a photo of a "grounded" UAV, however, it did not splash down. Pay attention to the damage and guess what they covered with a camouflage net ...



                  1. rolik
                    rolik 10 January 2014 17: 41
                    +3
                    Quote: Professor
                    My 5 cents

                    Which once again proves a hard landing, and not a fall from a decent height. Now look carefully at the white tape. On both wings it is oddly the same. It even suggests that both wings broke (equally in the same place) during landing, or were cut off (which is most likely) for easy transportation from the place of impact.
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 10 January 2014 18: 40
                      +1
                      Quote: rolik
                      Which once again proves a hard landing, and not a fall from a decent height.

                      He ran out of fuel and sat down hard. That's why the Persians repainted it I do not understand. request
                      1. rolik
                        rolik 10 January 2014 19: 11
                        +1
                        Quote: Professor
                        He ran out of fuel and sat down hard

                        ????? He had a newcomer sitting at the helm ???? When the fuel level approaches a critical level, it should automatically return to the base in the machine. And the flight program itself is set taking into account the amount of fuel on board. Moreover, this UAV, at that time, was secret. And, I think, probably it was equipped with a self-liquidation system in case of an unexpected landing.
                        No, the fuel version is not good. And why is this color ??? So we don’t see what color it is from below. I won’t be surprised if it’s blue, but white on top, so that it is suitable for color with desert terrain.
                      2. Professor
                        Professor 10 January 2014 19: 18
                        0
                        Quote: rolik
                        ????? He had a newcomer sitting at the helm ???? When the fuel level approaches a critical level, it should automatically return to the base in the machine. And the flight program itself is set taking into account the amount of fuel on board.

                        I say he had a failure. Drones have it all the time. He got lost, developed kerosene and plopped down. Hence such damage. But the Persians repainted it, the Americans do not use such a coloring.
                      3. rolik
                        rolik 10 January 2014 20: 03
                        +2
                        Quote: Professor
                        He got lost, developed kerosene and plopped down.

                        Nonsense. Even if he flew at an altitude of 500 meters, he crashed much more thoroughly. There you can’t even fix it with a mallet)))))) Moreover (as they say in open sources) most of the UAV is non-metallic. The flight altitude, I repeat, was much more than 30-50 meters. I think below 3 kilometers he did not fall.
                        This is how the drop of a Sokat light motor from a height of approximately 2 km looks like it is all iron))))) you don’t understand what it was (Sokata fell in Crimea with 2012 people on board in 3) they say the engine was covered .
                      4. Professor
                        Professor 10 January 2014 22: 03
                        0
                        Quote: rolik
                        Nonsense

                        Immediately I will believe you as soon as you name the reason why his Persians repainted. wink
                      5. rolik
                        rolik 10 January 2014 22: 24
                        +1
                        Quote: Professor
                        Immediately I will believe you as soon as you name the reason why his Persians repainted.

                        Damn)))) I have to buy a tour package to Iran, or go savage)))))))
                        And I already booked a bungalow in Vietnam in April))))))
                        I’ll definitely go on a guided tour of the partisan moves, and look in Hanoi for a downed mattress bomber)))))
                      6. GHG
                        GHG 11 January 2014 00: 08
                        +1
                        Cut and repainted for disguise. The answer is fine? Although knowing your temperament and eternal dissatisfaction ... I think not. laughing
                      7. rolik
                        rolik 11 January 2014 00: 17
                        +1
                        Quote: Professor
                        the reason that his Persians repainted.

                        Why did you get the idea that it was the Iranians who painted it. The coloring is most likely done by the former owners. Light above, to mask against the background of the surface, if you look at it from above. Puzo can't see what color, but I think the blue faded. So that when viewed from the surface of the earth it was not visible against the sky.
                        Like in this photo.
              2. GHG
                GHG 11 January 2014 00: 04
                +4
                I wonder how they would gently plant him? Without accurate data or landing characteristics and without trained personnel? They planted as they could and what they could ... the fact remains.
              3. Professor
                Professor 11 January 2014 09: 26
                -1
                Quote: GES
                I wonder how they would gently plant him? Without accurate data or landing characteristics and without trained personnel?

                Well, finally you start to think. Not having an idea of ​​the control command protocols, algorithms, communication channels, etc., etc., it is not possible to intercept control. The fact that he was planted can only be argued by those who absolutely do not understand what they are talking about. The most interesting thing is that these drones continue to fly over Iran, but no one else “jumps” them. Is the Persians' sadilka over? wink

                This is how it looked original:


                and this is how the Persians "planted"
              4. rolik
                rolik 11 January 2014 19: 54
                +1
                Quote: Professor
                and this is how the Persians "planted

                Heh)))) I said that the wings were screwed, for ease of transportation)))) You don’t have to be a special person to notice the amazing uniformity of breaks on the wings. And, of course, they put him hard not on take-off, but on ordinary pebbles. But the fact that they still fly there .... that's another question))))
                Pepelats normally set on the belly. Not running out of fuel (in consequence of which it would have simply crashed), although this version is one of the most (how to say it, so as not to offend) naive. Not even a mistake in determining the horizon line by automation. In all cases, except for the landing, albeit hard, this (due to its "aerodynamic") apparatus would fall as a dry leaf. Because I couldn't even plan with the engine off. As a result of this fall, on the ground there would be a bunch of unused trash, and not a whole (with intact wings) UAV.
              5. Professor
                Professor 11 January 2014 21: 10
                0
                Quote: rolik
                And, of course, they put him hard not on take-off, but on ordinary pebbles.

                Who will plant him? He is a monument ...
              6. rolik
                rolik 12 January 2014 14: 46
                0
                Quote: Professor
                Who will plant him? He is a monument ...

                lol
                In the sand steppes of Iranian land
                Mattress "miracle", everything lies in the dust)))))
  • The comment was deleted.
  • rolik
    rolik 10 January 2014 14: 23
    +1
    Quote: itkul
    Come on, here is our answer to the Americans

    Confused the picture ??? Now fix, here is our answer to the Americans)))))
    1. alone
      alone 10 January 2014 22: 12
      +1
      By God, it’s funny when some try to prove that Iran is able to land an American BLP. If those who say this, at least once visit Iran, I think they would not write more.
      1. rolik
        rolik 10 January 2014 22: 26
        0
        Quote: lonely
        God, it’s funny when some try to prove that, Iran

        Having in hand the appropriate equipment and specialists capable. Even other countries of the Caspian zone are capable of this, which have the appropriate equipment)))))
  • bif
    bif 13 January 2014 01: 41
    0
    am
    Quote: itkul
    Come on, here is our answer to the Americans

    “The system of Russian drones guarantees Syrian victories.
    Roni Daniel, a military observer for the Israeli TV channel 2, delivered sensational material on Russian participation in the Syrian war on June 17.
    According to Daniel, "the Russians have organized a whole system of aerial reconnaissance in the skies of Syria." Its core is Russian-made drones. "More http://warfiles.ru/show-33393-sistema-rossiyskih-bespilotnikov-garantiruet-siriy
    skie-pobedy.html
  • Nick
    Nick 10 January 2014 18: 15
    +3
    Quote: Manager
    Obviously not in Russia, unfortunately. We have a circle "Skillful hands" sooner. (with regards to drones)

    In the USSR, already in the 70s of the last century, quite large reconnaissance drones of the "Flight" type, weighing about 1.3 tons, were used. True, the technologies of that time did not allow the transmission of data on the air, they took aerial photography and then decoded the data after the air reconnaissance officer returned to the base ...
  • Andof odessa
    Andof odessa 10 January 2014 14: 02
    +3
    Not the era of drones, but cyber war. Let them build, the more they build, the more you can download the necessary and cheap information from them if you hack them qualitatively and quietly. and you can drop if you make the right software bookmarks. for a country incapable of paying the blood of its soldiers for victory, the war will end at the time of its declaration.
  • Horde
    Horde 10 January 2014 14: 45
    +1
    Titanic drone with dimensions of Boeing 757 will be the new scout of the US Navy


    TITANICAL means to kill these connoisseurs of the Russian language. TOLMACH turned out to be stupid, or - "to translate for him, but he does not knit bast, we cooked it in boiling water." Here is a typical example of Putin's EDUCATION REFORM - ILLITERACY, senseless and stupid.
    The Titanic is usually used with the word effort TITANIC EFFORT, and TITANIAN is applicable to the drone, it is good if the MATERIAL is not with AVISMA ...
    1. Garrin
      Garrin 10 January 2014 15: 30
      +2
      Quote: Horde
      The Titanic is usually used with the word effort TITANIC EFFORT, and TITANIAN is applicable to the drone, it is good if the MATERIAL is not with AVISMA ...

      But why? Size is also very applicable. Titans, they were not little guys.
      1. Horde
        Horde 10 January 2014 16: 39
        0
        Quote: Garrin
        But why? Size is also very applicable. Titans, they were not little guys.


        did not understand, give an example ...
        1. Ezhaak
          Ezhaak 10 January 2014 17: 06
          +1
          Quote: Horde
          did not understand, give an example ...

          The Titans are the gods of the second generation among the Greeks. In myths created in years closer to us, they were compared with giants. fellow
          1. Garrin
            Garrin 10 January 2014 17: 59
            0
            Thank. Get ahead.
            The Titans are the children of Earth and Heaven. ... From their union, many children were born: first the titans - six giants of the male sex and six women, then the cyclops (cyclops)
            1. Horde
              Horde 10 January 2014 19: 44
              0
              Quote: Garrin
              Thank. Get ahead.



              But how does this relate to drones? aircraft and Greek mythology are not near, in principle, is it so easy to talk?
  • AVV
    AVV 10 January 2014 16: 08
    0
    The Americans love to do everything with the help of drones, soon and before the wind robots will go for them, and most importantly the best way to cut the military budget, soon they will not need pilots !!!
    1. Ezhaak
      Ezhaak 10 January 2014 18: 10
      0
      Quote: AVV
      to the wind, robots will walk for them,

      Your untruth. But drones to pee them will carry a pussy. That's for sure. :)))
  • Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 11 January 2014 03: 56
    +1
    if the weather continues like this, the states will not need any fleet except icebreakers soon ... wassat
  • saag
    saag 10 January 2014 11: 55
    +1
    the fact that real-time information can be obtained from it increases its value
    1. Field
      Field 10 January 2014 12: 07
      +3
      Quote: saag
      the fact that real-time information can be obtained from it increases its value


      "But the men don't know that" wassat
  • Stiletto
    Stiletto 10 January 2014 12: 04
    +2
    68 drones until 2017 year! Mom is one, it's the same natural skynet in action what
  • ed65b
    ed65b 10 January 2014 12: 05
    +2
    No gentlemen, the era of terminators has not yet arrived. Until the run-in in a real collision by armies having not only powerful air defense but a sufficient number of combat aircraft will pass. The last thing the Georgian drone shot was a rocket from a manned aircraft. could shoot a shot from MANPADS.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 10 January 2014 12: 17
      +2
      Quote: ed65b
      Until the run-in in a real collision by armies having not only powerful air defense but a sufficient number of combat aircraft will pass.

      Triton is a marine scout, of course, it is also possible to catch missiles over the sea, but the probability is much less, because hide the ship in the sea is almost impossible, Triton will be the first to see it. And fighters over the sea fly mainly American ...
      1. Evgeny_Lev
        Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 12: 21
        +6
        Comrade, this crap emits signals for 2 km, what do you think, where can you notice it?
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. iwind
        iwind 10 January 2014 13: 03
        +1
        Who can bring him down at an altitude of 18000 above the ocean, and do not forget whose base and aircraft carrier control the oceans.
        68 tritons + Posedny will be able to very closely correlate the ocean, and therefore almost all international trade. I'm not talking about warships, you will not noticeably swim.
        And as soon as they finish refueling in the air, he will be able to pour long ...
        I think this is one of the most correct and dangerous projects in us nave.
        1. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 13: 54
          0
          18 meters is that height? And what, do not get anything? o_o
          Everything was gone ... I covered myself with a sheet and crawled towards the cemetery ..

          According to the subject, "to control" means to be able to influence. How will this device affect? Is there electronic warfare on it?
          pysy. Only here it is not necessary about thousands of planes plowing the vast expanses of the oceans ..
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 13: 58
          +2
          And yet, with what specific ammunition or type of weapon, will aircraft from aircraft carriers hit an enemy warrant or a separate ship?
          1. iwind
            iwind 10 January 2014 14: 13
            +2
            Well, for example, Harpoon c F / A-18E / F Super Hornet. Did you seriously know that?
            1. Evgeny_Lev
              Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 14: 19
              -5
              Harpoon))))
              Boo-ha-ha.
              The maximum launch range of Harpoon, compare with naval air defense. I’m generally silent about the flight speed.


              You inserted the word "for example" out of despair?
              1. iwind
                iwind 10 January 2014 14: 29
                +2
                Have you heard about the horizon?
                Especially for you picture. Do you read a little bit about the action of aviation against ships.
                1. Evgeny_Lev
                  Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 14: 40
                  -4
                  I have two questions:
                  And then the radio horizon?
                  And in what kindergarten did you draw this picture?
                  1. iwind
                    iwind 10 January 2014 14: 56
                    +6
                    Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                    And then the radio horizon?

                    I'm tired of you already.
                    Like a ship, hovering on a plane that flies on PMV?
                    ROUND ROUND (no need to burn me).
                    Here is the calculation formula
                    D = k * (sqrt (h1) + sqrt (h2)), where
                    D - horizon
                    K is a coefficient depending on the choice of a system of units and wavelength.
                    h1 and h2
                    Should I count?
                    1. Evgeny_Lev
                      Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 15: 22
                      -6
                      Those. In your opinion, it turns out that an airplane flying on PMV MAY direct a missile at the maximum launch range, but a ship with masts with radars MORE THAN the PMV of an attacking aircraft, no? (do not write about growlers for guidance, their mere presence will already make the crew of the ship prepare for the attack)
                      Let's say.

                      A link takes off from an aircraft carrier and runs to the target all the way to the PMV, the question is, how far should the AUG be so that launched aircraft, with a combat load, do not run out of fuel to be able to return to AUG?
                      Let me explain, at PMV the speed of an aircraft is lower than at altitude. Fuel consumption is higher.
                      It can be assumed that you are not appealing to this, but to the fact that the aircraft will follow part of the path at an altitude that is SIGNIFICANTly higher than PMV, and then decreases to launch to PMV. So?

                      And in general, where does the term "radio horizon", which is applied to the detection range of SHIPS and vessels !!! ??? You were going to launch this UG from the planes ...
                      1. SkiF_RnD
                        SkiF_RnD 10 January 2014 16: 27
                        +3
                        Since when does the "Harpoon" need guidance? And why Growler? You probably made a mistake in the era. It will be E-2C Hawkeye, he will find the ship and will barge in hundreds of kilometers from it. The ship will undoubtedly prepare for an attack (well, suspect something, that's for sure). So, what is next? How long will it be ready to attack, is it a ship? How does this help? Yes, nothing. Hornets will fan out to the attack range, which is much further than the radio horizon for the NLC (the radio horizon for ships is nonsense, the term is also applied to aviation. For example, the radio horizon for an altitude of 5000 meters is like this.) And for objects at an altitude of 30 meters, the range will be approximately the same as for ships (the range of the ability to detect, not the range of actual detection. After all, Hornet's RCS is incomparably less than that of a ship) There will be a salvo, let's say from 70 kilometers, with a margin. The rockets were old. You never know. And the ship will still not see. The strike group will receive the coordinates of the target on its way, far from the shipborne RTR means (if, of course, they are on the ship), the INS of the missiles will be wound on a mustache and go to visit. And what other target designation is needed for anti-ship missiles? No. Most likely, the ARGSN Garpunov and the radar of the ship will see each other at the same time, at ~ 30 kilometers. And there will be a dozen Harpoons. And from the ship will remain flaming ruins. From our ship. Therefore, people who know the capabilities of AOG will never call it useless. Today, the balance of precision weapons is such that it is much more profitable to strike first, or without any response, than to repulse the attack first. This is because, in practice, air defense systems will not hit all missiles. Such a probability is vanishingly small. They can bring down the majority. All is not. For a successful attack, one FA-18E link is enough.
                        Passage about the range does not make much sense. Aircraft carrier may come closer. After all, he sees the goal. She is not. And the range of the air group in any case is greater than that of the weapon of the ship. That's really not worth mentioning. Good consolation - to sink us, you have to go up to fifty miles. Can they get tired?

                        And for that matter, the 84 AGM-1985D has a range of 220 km. Placed in the army (sooo long ago).
                        Our best naval air defense missile system, standing on the ship (in the singular, yes. "Peter the Great") hits 200 km. The rest are with a shorter range. And this means that even entering the affected area, the Hornets will have time to turn around and leave, the missiles will not have time to intercept them (because 200 km is not a range that cannot be approached, but the maximum range of a missile meeting with a target, no matter how it may seem strange to some experts). So what did you write about the range?
                        Harpoon))))
                        Boo-ha-ha.
                        The maximum launch range of Harpoon, compare with naval air defense. I’m generally silent about the flight speed.

                        Harpoons in modification D on all American aircraft carriers. On the only RRC pr. 1144 ("Peter the Great") for today, there are two long-range air defense systems, one "Fort" and one "Fort-M".
                        I love the freedom of the country (you, too, it seems), but to love does not mean to shield and justify out of place, contrary to common sense. There is nothing worse than underestimating an adversary. Strength begins with the recognition of our own weakness, and we are still very weak after 1991.
                        Sincerely. hi
                      2. Evgeny_Lev
                        Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 17: 10
                        -1
                        Quote: SkiF_RnD
                        Since when does the "Harpoon" need guidance? And why Growler? You probably made a mistake in the era. It will be E-2C Hawkeye, he will find the ship and will barge hundreds of kilometers away. The ship will undoubtedly prepare for an attack (well, suspect something, that's for sure). So, what is next? How long will it be ready to attack, is it a ship? How does this help?

                        As much as the captain of the SHIP deems necessary. Forewarned is forearmed. At a minimum, there will be no surprise attack, drugs will take up positions according to the staff list, systems will be given in bg.
                        Quote: SkiF_RnD
                        The Hornets will fan out over the attack range, which is much further than the radio horizon for NLC (the radio horizon for ships is nonsense, the term also applies to aviation.

                        Before the hornets reach this same "attack range", will they fly over the water, or all the same at high echelons?
                        Quote: SkiF_RnD
                        For example, the radio horizon for a height of 5000 meters is such.) And for objects at a height of 30 meters, the range will be about the same as for ships (the range of the ability to detect, not the range of actual detection. After all, the Hornet’s EPR is incomparably smaller than that of the ship)

                        The same thing, the Hornets from the AUG itself will fly 30 meters?
                        Quote: SkiF_RnD
                        Most likely, the ARGSN Garpunov and the radar of the ship will see each other at the same time, at ~ 30 kilometers. And there will be a dozen Harpoons. And from the ship will remain flaming ruins. From our ship. Therefore, people who know the capabilities of AOG will never call it useless. Today, the balance of precision weapons is such that it is much more profitable to strike first, or without any response, than to repulse the attack first. This is because, in practice, air defense systems will not hit all missiles. Such a probability is vanishingly small. They can bring down the majority. All is not. For a successful attack, one FA-18E link is enough.

                        About the air defense system is not talking. Here it will be more useful to use SPRAKES and simply anti-aircraft guns, of which there are a sufficient number on ships of different displacement. Do you think the subsonic UG, the probability of occurrence of which was identified in advance, can break through in the counts that you wrote?
                      3. iwind
                        iwind 10 January 2014 17: 29
                        +3
                        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                        the same thing, the Hornets from the AUG itself will fly 30 meters?

                        What for? As the distance decreases, the height will decrease.
                        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                        About the air defense system is not talking. Here it will be more useful to use SPRAKES and simply anti-aircraft guns, of which there are a sufficient number on ships of different displacement. Do you think the subsonic UG, the probability of occurrence of which was identified in advance, can break through in the counts that you wrote?

                        The last 30 km of the rocket will fly in 2,5 minutes (flight altitude from 2 - 5 meters). He used to not see them.
                        And if there are 20 missiles and from different sides? Part of the missiles will certainly be knocked down but everything is not real.
                      4. rolik
                        rolik 10 January 2014 20: 15
                        0
                        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                        About the air defense system is not talking. Here it will be more useful to use SPRAKES and simply anti-aircraft guns, of which there are a sufficient number on ships of different displacement. Do you think the subsonic UG, the probability of occurrence of which was identified in advance, can break through in the counts that you wrote?

                        And again, they forget about the ship’s electronic warfare, which will prepare the Harpoons a worthy meeting.
                      5. SkiF_RnD
                        SkiF_RnD 10 January 2014 22: 15
                        +2
                        Harpoons will sink the ship without surprise. Willingness will ultimately not solve anything, will not change the outcome. And he is alone. In this case, the death of a warship, which is obvious, despite your stubbornness. The direction of the blow will still be unknown (for example, two pairs from different traverses, under 45 degrees. To each other at converging courses, so that life does not seem to be honey).

                        In terms of flight speed, iwind already answered you well.

                        If we are not talking about the SAM, then the link is not needed. Enough couples. You very vaguely imagine the effectiveness of ZRAK. In general, go go to ... Google. smile I also did not upload articles to you in the comments. I can only say that eight harpoons (the ammunition of a pair of Hornets) will surely break through the air defense of a lone ship, if you use only ZRAK. These complexes carry out drone of single bursting missiles at minimum distances (even less than 30 km laughing ), and you are going to reflect 16 RCC blow by them ... request Subsonic UG is the main anti-ship weapon in almost all countries of the world. Think the smartest? Supersonic anti-ship missiles are better at group attack AUG. Against one ship, this is unnecessary. Enough harpoons, believe me. Sincerely. hi
                2. rolik
                  rolik 10 January 2014 15: 33
                  +1
                  Quote: iwind
                  Should I count?

                  Count, the people are asking.
                  1. iwind
                    iwind 10 January 2014 16: 20
                    +3
                    Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                    And in general, where does the term "radio horizon", which is applied to the detection range of SHIPS and vessels !!! ??? You were going to launch this UG from the planes ...

                    Shocked.

                    Quote: rolik
                    Quote: iwind
                    Should I count?
                    Count, the people are asking.

                    H1 = 50m (ship radar)
                    H = 60m (airplane)
                    k = 3.6
                    D = 53,34132422.
                3. rolik
                  rolik 10 January 2014 19: 36
                  0
                  Quote: iwind
                  ROUND Earth (no need to burn me)

                  D = 4.124√H This is the formula for calculating the radio horizon, where H is the antenna suspension height.
                  Accordingly, with an antenna height of (say) 200 meters, the range of the radio horizon is (approximately) 60 km. It is understood that the antenna of the second radio station or receiver is located at ground level (without raising the antenna). If the antenna of the second radio station or receiver is also raised above the ground, then it is necessary to take into account the heights of both antennas and add the obtained ranges.
                  1. rolik
                    rolik 10 January 2014 20: 17
                    0
                    Quote: rolik
                    range fold.

                    But the woodpecker, does not want to calm down. They delete the comments, and he writes again)))))))))
                  2. iwind
                    iwind 11 January 2014 11: 30
                    0
                    Quote: rolik
                    D = 4.124√H This is the formula for calculating the radio horizon, where H is the antenna suspension height.

                    This is a formula for radio communications.
                    mmm coefficient 4.124 is used for CBS radios (27 MHz), use it in for radar, shows your ignorance of the basics of radio physics.
            2. The comment was deleted.
    2. rolik
      rolik 10 January 2014 16: 20
      +1
      Quote: iwind
      Who can bring him down at an altitude of 18000

      It can be brought down by the FORT air defense missile system and its modifications.
  • A.YARY
    A.YARY 10 January 2014 12: 34
    +1
    Edward good afternoon
    Let me disagree with you!
    the era of terminators has not yet arrived.
    Until the run-in in a real clash with armies having not only powerful air defense
    shot a Georgian drone is a rocket from a manned aircraft.

    You do not see contradictions in your statements?
    Strange.
    When it is run-in, Borjomi will drink late.
    Because this "run-in" will be on our pilots.
    But the air force personnel of our enemy will drink their Coca-Cola and make bets.LIVING AND HEALTHY.
    But as I understand it, YOU have deliberately made a mistake, because we are talking about reconnaissance UAVs, and not about shock.

    And ento is a completely different fairy tale.
  • propolsky
    propolsky 10 January 2014 12: 07
    0
    I don’t know how its capabilities are, but the dimensions are already impressive. This is more than the Tu-154 and B-733!
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 10 January 2014 12: 14
      +3
      Quote: propolsky
      I don’t know how its capabilities are, but the dimensions are already impressive. This is more than the Tu-154 and B-733!

      Well, the Global Hawk / Triton is the same U-2 only unmanned, and the size of the U-2 was not small.
    2. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 12: 19
      -10%
      Gigantism and a scout ... it's like a ridiculous thing.

      Of course, I believe that in its name one way or another there is the word "stealth", which automatically adds karma by +20 and cost by + order, but think for yourself, a device the size of a passenger plane and also a data emitter for broadcasting 2 km in real time...
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 10 January 2014 12: 20
        +3
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        Of course, I believe that in its name one way or another there is the word "stealth", which automatically adds karma by +20 and cost by + order, but think for yourself, a device the size of a passenger plane and also a data emitter for broadcasting 2 km in real time...

        It has no such thing either in the name or in the design, no one positions it as "stealth" ...
      2. rolik
        rolik 10 January 2014 13: 15
        +2
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        another data transmitter for broadcasting over 2 km in real time ...

        Then, continuing the topic, detect it two times. With the subsequent knocking down, if he, as it is written in the article, flies closer to the interested ship.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • saag
    saag 10 January 2014 12: 15
    0
    and on such a device you can hang any different missile defense
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 10 January 2014 12: 19
      +1
      Quote: saag
      and on such a device you can hang any different missile defense

      Nooo, this is a pure scout working in conjunction with the P-8 Poseidon.
  • yehat
    yehat 10 January 2014 12: 35
    0
    Quote: Evgeny_Lev
    Gigantism and a scout ... it's like a ridiculous thing.

    Of course, I believe that in its name one way or another there is the word "stealth", which automatically adds karma by +20 and cost by + order, but think for yourself, a device the size of a passenger plane and also a data emitter for broadcasting 2 km in real time...

    wingspan! not the plane itself is big.
    otherwise it’s impossible to hang at high altitude for a long time.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 13: 56
      -3
      This is certainly true, but not essential.
      Compared to the fact that he radiates this little things.
  • Nayhas
    Nayhas 10 January 2014 12: 53
    +2
    The MQ-4C Triton marine reconnaissance aircraft is a part of the reconnaissance system consisting of both the UAVs themselves and the P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft. Three MQ-4C Triton + P-8 Poseidon carry out reconnaissance of surface targets in a huge space, while operators with the P-8 Poseidon can control UAVs, receiving information from all UAVs. This information on the Link11 communication system is transmitted to all consumers (any ship of the US Navy).
    A long time ago in the USSR, the Tu-95RC was developed and produced with similar functions, its task was to search for enemy surface ships
    The complex of the unified system "Success-U" provided a maximum target designation range for ships and submarines up to 800 km. Aircraft radar made it possible to detect a group of ships at ranges of 380-420 km, single ships - 200-240 km. Groups of ships were sometimes observed in the form of general illumination. If the distances between them exceeded 10 km, they were observed separately. Subsequently, when the aircraft radar was supplemented by the UVHC, the resolution increased slightly.

    Using air refueling, the patrol time was 22 hours (depending on atmospheric conditions). This was a huge step forward, which unfortunately remained the only one. Our Navy is currently blind because all Tu-95RTs were written off ...
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 10 January 2014 13: 15
      +1
      Quote: Nayhas
      Our Navy is currently blind because all Tu-95RTs were written off ...

      On the basis of "Geofizika" they were going to do something similar to "Triton", but now there is little information on heavy UAVs developed in Russia, as always, everything is in secrets.
      Maybe it didn’t work out or it turned out to be a shame to show
      maybe a breakthrough in the aircraft industry, who knows?
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 10 January 2014 17: 12
        +1
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        Maybe it didn’t work out or it turned out to be a shame to show
        maybe a breakthrough in the aircraft industry, who knows?

        Without a properly functioning GLONASS, all aspirations about strategic UAVs are useless, and even more so about marine ones.
    2. Gregazov
      Gregazov 10 January 2014 15: 49
      +3
      Quote: Nayhas


      The complex of the unified system "Uspekh-U" ensured the maximum target designation range for ships and submarines up to 800 km.



      You have provided really real information. The data in the article contradict all the laws of optics. The surface target can be observed only in direct visibility. No tropospheric refraction in this case will help. For a height of 10 m. Direct visibility is approximately 000 km, then for a height of 450 m, it will be approximately up to 15 km and no more. Suppose that the lack of energy in the emitted signal is compensated by a large interval of coherent accumulation (the ship will not float away in milliseconds), but the range of up to 000 nautical miles is not even unscientific fiction, but LITTER.
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 10 January 2014 17: 09
        +2
        Quote: GregAzov
        but the range of up to 2000 nautical miles is not even unscientific fiction, but NONSENSE.

        The range of 2000 nautical miles is not the target detection range, but the range of command communication with the UAV.
    3. clidon
      clidon 10 January 2014 20: 19
      0
      C Ne-95 has always been a problem - someone had to protect them from enemy aircraft. Therefore, they hoped that the plane could somehow manage to convey information about the enemy, and only then how lucky. Triton does not have such a problem in the first place.
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 10 January 2014 21: 23
        0
        Quote: clidon
        C Ne-95 has always been a problem - someone had to protect them from enemy aircraft. Therefore, they hoped that the plane could somehow manage to convey information about the enemy, and only then how lucky. Triton does not have such a problem in the first place.

        Yes. The crews of the Tu-95RC were in great danger after being detected by enemy aircraft, but the concept was correct, with more advanced equipment, the Tu-95RC could be the first to detect enemy aircraft and conduct evasion maneuvers, use electronic warfare equipment, and radar power would allow this. Triton is a logical continuation of the Tu-95RC, more advanced equipment, the absence of a crew, a high-speed data transmission system ... that's just not our design ...
        1. clidon
          clidon 11 January 2014 00: 05
          0
          Avionics Tu-95RC primarily responsible for the detection of sea targets. Therefore, a collision with an air adversary (especially the reinforced AWACS), combined with a relatively modest speed, was a disadvantage that had to be put up with. To make these aircraft supersonic did not allow finances.
  • Iamfromrurik
    Iamfromrurik 10 January 2014 13: 13
    +3
    As you can see, the rumors about the imminent demise of the United States are clearly exaggerated.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 14: 00
      -3
      Based on what such a statement is made?
      1. Victor-M
        Victor-M 10 January 2014 15: 22
        -4
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        Based on what such a statement is made?

        Based on the fact that he Troll laughing .
      2. Ezhaak
        Ezhaak 10 January 2014 16: 10
        +2
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        Based on what such a statement is made?

        On the grounds that this supporter of Amerope_ndosia is most likely one of the "sausage settlers" with family ties in the Middle East.
    2. Victor-M
      Victor-M 10 January 2014 15: 21
      +1
      Quote: IamFromRurik
      As you can see, the rumors about the imminent demise of the United States are clearly exaggerated

      Today, the fourth German flag, only the rainbow is not enough laughing .
      1. rolik
        rolik 10 January 2014 17: 36
        +1
        Quote: Victor-M
        Today, the fourth German flag, only the rainbow is not enough

        Coming soon, it will be 2 in 1.
  • lewerlin53rus
    lewerlin53rus 10 January 2014 13: 45
    +1
    The larger the cabinet, the louder it falls.
    1. evgenii67
      evgenii67 10 January 2014 15: 34
      +2
      Quote: lewerlin53rus
      The larger the cabinet, the louder it falls.

      the smaller the bedside table, the farther it flies.
  • ed65b
    ed65b 10 January 2014 13: 45
    +1
    I can not agree with the conclusions of my opponents, admirers of the "terminators" to watch the sea ocean can and have been watching from space for a long time. Show-off and sawing money on programs have been mastered a long time ago, and far from Russians were pioneers in this matter. he sees from 2000 nautical miles and I can say that he does not see even 500 miles. and what does he see ???? and how will the user behind the joystick evaluate what he sees over 2000 nautical miles (and on what scale) ??? or there will be more than one of them ???? surrounded by monitors ?? or 20 pictures in one monitor ??? We listen a lot and almost began to believe it (some). But I believe that a droid will never replace a living person in anything. and there is nothing to say about combat effectiveness. Rather, it is possible, but only in relation to the 8 countries of the world. And an attempt to replace the monitoring of the situation around the AUG with unmanned vehicles can simply lead to the destruction of the AUG, since the overweight pilots, relying on their mechanical deputies, simply will not have time to take off. hi
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 10 January 2014 21: 49
      0
      Quote: ed65b
      they can follow the sea by the ocean for a long time from space.

      This is far from the case. Reconnaissance satellites have one advantage, the operating time, it has been launched and has been hovering there for years ... As far as possible, everything is not so simple. Intelligence. satellites with optoelectronic equipment can see a lot, but are very dependent on weather conditions. The usual cloud cover (which is not uncommon over the sea-okiyan) deprives him of the opportunity to observe. Intelligence. Of course, radar reconnaissance satellites can work in the interests of the Navy, but there are very few of them. For example, the United States has only three (Lacrosse) left, of which one will soon cease to work.
      Next, the intelligence. there are enough satellites of tasks even without an IUD (monitoring the enemy’s strategic forces, and the United States is also looking at Iran and Al Qaeda), and it’s not always the right satellite to be in the right area, therefore only UAVs.
  • Muadipus
    Muadipus 10 January 2014 14: 00
    +4
    Somehow, the stream of news about the development of this industry among the enemy is alarming.
    I can understand that part of the tracking function can be taken over by satellites and radars and the keen eye of a hearing aid on a birch. But the point is not in tracking, but in the fact that the enemy is honing the technology for creating full-fledged combat drones. Stuffing cones, finding solutions. And we are not only lagging behind, we have not even reached the start. Even Belarusians entered the foreign market.
    1. itkul
      itkul 10 January 2014 16: 10
      +5
      Quote: Muadipus
      Somehow, the stream of news about the development of this industry among the enemy is alarming.


      And where did you get the idea that the US is our enemy, our deputies don’t think so, and send their children to study at their military academies

      http://gazaryan-suren.livejournal.com/114255.html

  • iwind
    iwind 10 January 2014 14: 02
    -1
    Quote: ed65b
    00 nautical miles and I can say that he doesn’t see even for 500 miles. and what does he see ???? and how will be appreciated

    Have you heard about computer analysis and image / video recognition? An elementary example, which is done by one qualified person http://habrahabr.ru/post/118486/.
    And they have much stronger software.
    A person does not need to constantly look at monitors, the computer itself will select objects for detailed control.

    Also on the radar triton with a synthesized antenna aperture (http://tors.psuti.ru/metod_web/lb_sar.pdf).
    Quote: ed65b
    And an attempt to replace the monitoring of the situation around the AUG with unmanned aerial vehicles can simply lead to the destruction of the AUG because fattened pilots, hoping for their mechanical assistants, simply will not have time to take off.

    And what does it have to do with it? He must find the target, not hit it.
  • Muadipus
    Muadipus 10 January 2014 14: 04
    +1
    Campaign Pend0s solved the problem of obesity in the army. To each fat trust on a drone.
  • bulvas
    bulvas 10 January 2014 14: 24
    +2
    Who cares, according to our drones:
    http://freebeacon.com/russia-to-deploy-long-range-attack-drone-by-2016/

    or here:
    https://www.google.ru/#newwindow=1&q=russian%20drones
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 14: 55
    -2
    And it will also be very clever for the pilots of the co-creation, which is 100% necessary for this device, the pilots will be VERY glad to put their lives, for some kind of pilotless tin can.
  • Garrin
    Garrin 10 January 2014 15: 03
    +1
    What a good goal. Simply-Pvoshnik's dream (BIG).
  • JonnyT
    JonnyT 10 January 2014 15: 10
    -2
    there are no unattainable goals ....... we will find a council for these newts .....

    So he sees on 2000km with the help of sensors, but if you install an autonomous buoy with jamming equipment along the route?

    On the contrary, Americans because of their hope for cars and computers will suffer
    1. rolik
      rolik 10 January 2014 15: 20
      +1
      Quote: JonnyT
      Here he sees for 2000km

      What nafig 2000 km, brad of net cable))) AWACS sees at a shorter distance, but the equipment is more powerful there.
      200 kilometers, or even less.
      1. rolik
        rolik 10 January 2014 15: 45
        +3
        Practical ceiling IL 76 9000-12000 meters. The A-50 is made on the basis of this aircraft. So here are the characteristics for target detection in the A-50. The radar station of the complex is capable of detecting a fighter-type target flying at low altitude against the background of the earth at a range of 200-400 km, with a high altitude of the target's flight, at a range of 300-600 km. Sea targets are detected at a distance of up to 400 km.
        With the height of the mattress ashtray (even) at 18000 meters. He cannot see for 2000 km. Another boastful bike.
        There’s some wise guy broadcasting about a radio horizon. Judging by his calculations, the radio horizon is not in control of American technology. As, however, the rest of the laws of nature.
        1. iwind
          iwind 10 January 2014 16: 57
          +4
          ]
          Quote: rolik
          With the height of the mattress ashtray (even) at 18000 meters. He cannot see for 2000 km. Another boastful bike.
          There’s some wise guy broadcasting about a radio horizon. Judging by his calculations, the radio horizon is not in control of American technology. As, however, the rest of the laws of nature.

          Imperious. and of course can’t see.
          All questions to our translators.
          And 2000 Nautical miles, and this is not a detection range, but an area patrolling.
    2. clidon
      clidon 10 January 2014 20: 17
      -1
      What are you going to fasten the buoy to? Nekhai waves and puts interference? )
  • Saburo
    Saburo 10 January 2014 15: 15
    +2
    And at this time, Russia is eyeing the United 40 Arab drone. Azerbaijan also showed interest in this aircraft, which only confirms the correctness of our choice!

    Hmm ... It would be funny if it were a joke. But this is not a joke.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 15: 33
      -1
      I understand that if you were a general, you would not have bought the enemy’s equipment for study?

      Yes, this pepelats in the photo, apparently flies only when the operator performs the prayer? I just do not see him dvigla.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 10 January 2014 16: 44
        0
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        Yes, this pepelats in the photo, apparently flies only when the operator performs the prayer? I just do not see him dvigla.

        In the ass installed engine.
        1. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 17: 23
          0
          Do you find the thrust vector to the axis strange then?
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 10 January 2014 20: 42
            0
            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            Do you find the thrust vector to the axis strange then?

            There is little, well, probably he was tested.
        2. The comment was deleted.
  • alex-kon
    alex-kon 10 January 2014 15: 33
    +1
    Good model laughing
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 10 January 2014 15: 34
    +2
    Quote: Muadipus
    Somehow, the stream of news about the development of this industry among the enemy is alarming.
    I can understand that part of the tracking function can be taken over by satellites and radars and the keen eye of a hearing aid on a birch. But the point is not in tracking, but in the fact that the enemy is honing the technology for creating full-fledged combat drones. Stuffing cones, finding solutions. And we are not only lagging behind, we have not even reached the start. Even Belarusians entered the foreign market.

    Yes, it doesn’t hone the technology, but correctly invests in advertising, they say give me more money, I’ll come up with such a whack for you (with a wingspan of 80 meters and a range to the nearest star). Judging by the almost daily squeak, there is a struggle for a large piece of cheese. fellow
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 15: 43
      -1
      Somehow you are tough with the local drone droners, but now they will have an attack ...
      1. rolik
        rolik 10 January 2014 16: 11
        +2
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        Somehow you are tough with local drones

        With dronorochers who sharply increase the pressure at the word American, and there are polecics after the next fantastic waffle from the country of Disneyland. Moreover, these characters are brought in evidence by advertising campaigns of the same mattress MO, without considering other options.
        1. rolik
          rolik 10 January 2014 16: 41
          +1
          Quote: rolik
          With drone guns that have a sharp increase in pressure

          I’m looking at some completely smart drone drone, they’ll constantly delete comments. Apparently in the comments there is one obscene language, which is actually not surprising for the drone drone)))))))) An intellect raised on mattress agitation is not able to survive in a normal environment, without being fed by hamburgers, McKane's speeches, and American militants.
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VwsU7H-EL6s
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 10 January 2014 15: 46
    +2
    The idea came that apple-growers are the same as drone-growers.
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 10 January 2014 16: 11
    +1
    In general, current drones are prototypes of future sixth generation aircraft.
    It is quite obvious that we are lagging behind, and then we will have to catch up with all this for crazy money. Will they give time for this, another question.
  • Altona
    Altona 10 January 2014 17: 55
    0
    Quote: klimpopov
    Well, what is the era of drones? gentlemen ...

    ----------------------
    If he flew on solar batteries ... In the meantime, this is a flying radar with "over-the-horizon vision" and quite expensive to operate ... One carbine will fly into the exhaust!
  • Ustian
    Ustian 10 January 2014 18: 09
    0
    ability to recover from disturbances caused by turbulence
    And after working on it, the air defense system will also recover?
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 10 January 2014 18: 12
    +2
    Quote: chunga-changa
    In general, current drones are prototypes of future sixth generation aircraft.
    It is quite obvious that we are lagging behind, and then we will have to catch up with all this for crazy money. Will they give time for this, another question.

    Bullshit, an unmanned fighter is a utopia, and in the next 100 years it will remain. Until they make artificial intelligence like a human. Intelligence issues yes, bombing yes, but not in full, the drone will not be able to solve some issues (where high-speed maneuvering is required) hi , there is no fighter (too clumsy and late in making decisions. (at the moment the task is unsolvable).
    1. chunga-changa
      chunga-changa 10 January 2014 21: 44
      0
      I wrote
      ... current drones are prototypes of future sixth generation aircraft.
      you managed to read -
      ... current drones are the prototypes of future sixth generation FIGHTERS.
      Why? In your opinion it is normal to attribute your words to me and immediately call them nonsense?
    2. Sergey_K
      Sergey_K 11 January 2014 01: 33
      0
      Brave claim. And why, excuse me, is he "like human intelligence"?
  • mechanic driver
    mechanic driver 10 January 2014 18: 33
    0
    [quote = propolsky] I do not know how its capabilities are, but the dimensions are already impressive. This is more than the Tu-154 and B-733! [/ Quo In Soviet times, a very large drone was in service, by the way, of the Tupolev company but was expensive to operate. I couldn’t land after take-off, the nose block landed on a parachute. But there was a case flew back and forth supposedly by mistake.
  • kelevra
    kelevra 10 January 2014 19: 14
    +1
    A scout the size of a Boeing! It’s somehow not reconnoitering where such a size is, only if it flies at such altitudes that it will not be visible! Then the optics are extremely precise and powerful.
  • Fofan
    Fofan 10 January 2014 19: 33
    +1
    Quote: kelevra
    A scout the size of a Boeing! It’s somehow not reconnoitering where such a size is, only if it flies at such altitudes that it will not be visible! Then the optics are extremely precise and powerful.

    Oh, the darn was looking under the water.
    the main thing is to give the submarine a rocket not the one that flies to the other side of the world through Kotzmas, but it’s shot down large somolets with a darn.
    you and your drones do not see the forest.
  • Ram chandra
    Ram chandra 10 January 2014 19: 59
    +2
    For Russia, creating a drone of similar parameters, I think, is not very difficult.
  • Docklishin
    Docklishin 10 January 2014 20: 58
    +1
    Totally agree with you. Of course, in connection with more advanced electronics, the Americans will have some more perfect UAVs for some time but ...
  • Docklishin
    Docklishin 10 January 2014 20: 59
    +1
    and I almost forgot ...
  • Docklishin
    Docklishin 10 January 2014 21: 01
    0
    Fully automatic mode, as far as I know hi
  • 120352
    120352 10 January 2014 21: 56
    +1
    It seems that in which case we will again have to put up barrage networks on balloons as in the Great Patriotic War. Only networks are now needed more firmly, and balloons should rise higher ... What a pity!
    Yes, it’s still useful to acquire shotguns. In case of organizing MPVO.
    1. rolik
      rolik 10 January 2014 22: 40
      +1
      Quote: 120352
      Only networks are now needed more firmly, and balloons should rise higher ..

      And to put the radar guidance and missiles air-to-air, air-to-surface on erostats. Here is the air defense point.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • voliador
    voliador 11 January 2014 00: 31
    +1
    ed65b
    And an attempt to replace the monitoring of the situation around the ACG with unmanned aerial vehicles can simply lead to the destruction of the ACG since fat pilots, hoping for their mechanical assistants, simply will not have time to take off.

    First - you, dear, you must carefully read the title of the article.
    The second - and so a normal person understands that an apparatus of this size, mass and low accelerating speed from an aircraft carrier simply cannot take off, no catapult will help.
    And in the detection range of up to 2000 km - this is nonsense. To do this, you need to place an over-the-horizon radar on this hearse. Does the author know its size? And how much energy does she need to work?
  • rocketman
    rocketman 11 January 2014 00: 36
    0
    Well, what is the argument? the larger the size - the more EPR - the higher it flies - the faster it will be detected and the S-300/400/500 will fill it up. Well, the Americans want to wash themselves another dough, and fix with them. Just copy them and not be afraid. Useless is a child prodigy ..
    1. Fofan
      Fofan 11 January 2014 01: 50
      0
      Quote: rocketman
      Well, what is the argument? the larger the size - the more EPR - the higher it flies - the faster it will be detected and the S-300/400/500 will fill it up. Well, the Americans want to wash themselves another dough, and fix with them. Just copy them and not be afraid. Useless is a child prodigy ..

      there is no dispute. there is a test to identify the mental abilities of members of the topwar :)))
    2. clidon
      clidon 11 January 2014 07: 49
      +2
      Well yes. That is, Orions and Tu-95RC were completely stupid and useless thing. ) After all, they could be brought down.
  • sapsan11
    sapsan11 12 January 2014 16: 57
    0
    http://stringer-news.com/publication.mhtml?Part=48&PubID=9912
    Americans, Russians will not give you “hammers” with filling

    Do you think you can land a UAV with one such machine?
    and if there are more than one ...

    http://izvestia.ru/news/341822
    Our military experts believe that six jeeps (five Hummers and one Land Rover) are a whole reconnaissance and information center with a command and staff vehicle that provides command and control of troops on the battlefield. In the machines were not only closed encrypted communication systems and equipment for accurate location and guidance of weapons using a GPS signal, but also a system that allows you to receive data from American satellites for early warning of a missile attack in the interests of a conventional air defense system. Now our specialists are working with all this equipment. They intend to thoroughly examine the contents of the machines.