Ground Forces of the Future

Ground Forces of the Future



In recent years there has been a serious change in the views of military theorists on the nature of modern warfare, the form and methods of its conduct. The appearance of fundamentally new means of warfare, the introduction of qualitatively new production technologies for weapons and military equipment (IWT), and the active development of social engineering technologies play an important role in this. The problem is aggravated by the multidirectionality of the development of modern military practices.

On the one hand, for the implementation of armed aggression of the state use regular armies equipped with a large number of modern military equipment and weapons. On the other hand, no less dangerous were the actions of the “cloud adversary” - a pseudo-regular army, combining teams of professionals and non-professionals and the opposing regular army due to the primary destruction of the economy and population of the state - the victim of aggression. The destructive capabilities of such armies were widely demonstrated in the course of the new type wars deployed by the United States and its allies in the Middle East as part of the so-called Arab Spring. The deliberate destruction by the "cloudy adversary" of industry and transport infrastructure of the states of North Africa and the Middle East, which were victims of the "revolutions", led to their actual disintegration and removal from the international arena as serious players.

WAR - PLEASURE DEAR

The presence of such contradictory trends in the development of the armed forces makes it difficult to determine the rational directions for improving the military organization of any state. The problem is aggravated by the growth of the necessary economic base for the conduct of modern wars by regular armies. After all, war costs money, often a lot of money. And with each new round of the arms race, the cost of defeating the enemy only increases.

For example, according to statistics, Soviet troops spent more than 16 million tons of various ammunition (shells, mines and cartridges) during World War II. When correlating this figure with the number of official irretrievable losses of Hitler's Germany and its allies on the Eastern Front, we can assume that, on average, the Red Army required one soldier of the German fascist troops to expend up to ammunition 2 – 3. A similar assessment in other wars of the second half of the twentieth century will give comparable, and in some cases, great values. Of course, we are talking about the conditional amount of ammunition consumption, because an ever-increasing proportion of those who received fatal injuries during the hostilities are civilians. However, the above figure - 2-3 t of ammunition for hitting a single enemy - illustrates how powerful economic support should be for the current army when millions of armies converge face to face.

Naturally, such huge expenditures on a large-scale war made it economically inexpedient not only for small countries, but even for states - world economic flagships. Over the past few decades of the last century, this economic deadlock was veiled by the presence of geostrategic opponents weapons mass destruction, primarily nuclear. It is this “umbrella” that has come to be considered the absolute weapon that ensures the military security of any state during the creation of new means of warfare. The means capable of changing the strategic balance of forces in the world in favor of the country that is the first to realize the opportunities provided by the information revolution.

WTO - NOT PANACAIA

One of the promising ways out of the economic deadlock was the creation of effective precision weapons (WTO) in the 80 of the last century. The ability to significantly reduce the number of weapons required to destroy one enemy object through the use of such weapons has captured the minds of military experts in almost all the advanced states of the West. This immediately affected not only orders for industry, but also the structure of the armed forces of all economically developed countries of the world. A period began to diminish the role and place of the ground forces in the warfare system in favor of other, so-called high-tech types of armed forces.

However, the subsequent practice of military action confirmed the old truth: there is no absolute weapon. The widespread introduction of the WTO in the armed forces of economically developed countries did not give them a strategic advantage. The cost of hitting one target continued to grow. As a result: today, if the application of the WTO on the critical objects or high-tech models of the enemy's weapons and military equipment still has economic and tactical meaning, then its use against a single opponent (especially of low qualification) only leads to an economic depletion of the one who uses it so. This thesis is vividly confirmed by the low effectiveness of the struggle of the United States and its Middle Eastern allies against the Islamic State (formerly the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant — ISIL), a terrorist organization operating in Iraq and Syria.

The experience of US military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq (2001 – 2014), as well as the experience of the Soviet troops in Afghanistan (1979 – 1989), reaffirmed the high role of ground forces in solving military tasks. No WTO can provide full control of the enemy’s territory. You must have a powerful ground grouping. Everything else is relative.

At the same time, powerful ground forces capable of conducting strategic operations are today virtually none in the world’s armies. In the course of the various reorganizations that the armed forces of almost all economically developed countries of the world have undergone in recent decades, the combat and operational capabilities of the ground forces have been significantly reduced. Simultaneously, a simple quantitative increase in the number of these opportunities today is not restored.

Firstly, it is very expensive. The equipment is already in service, which, due to its technical complexity or the required level of qualification, practically does not differ from the equipment of such traditionally considered high-tech armed forces as the Air Force and Navy. In addition, the social obligations of maintaining a large number of both troops and ground troops discharged from military service become a heavy burden for any state.

Secondly, in all economically developed (or rich) countries there is a steady tendency to reduce the number of people willing to serve in the land forces. The situation is aggravated by the decline in the quality of the human mobilization resource, which in its intellectual, psychological and physical abilities is able to effectively master and use modern technically sophisticated military weapon systems.

Thirdly, such a generally positive trend for society, as an increase in the value of the life of any serviceman, right up to the individual soldier, plays a negative role. The need for large material payments in the event of a soldier being injured or dying also limits the state’s ability to significantly increase ground forces.

The consequence of all these reasons was a steady decline in the number of ground forces in any economically developed country. This is an objective trend.

Thus, today the ground forces face two important and controversial problems. On the one hand, the volume of combat missions assigned to them in modern hostilities significantly increases, on the other hand, there are serious limitations on the number and quality of specialists directly involved in the battle.

ARMY OF NEW GENERATION

The way out of the controversial situation is the adoption by the ground forces of new weapons systems that would ensure a significant reduction in the number of tactical formations while maintaining or increasing their combat capabilities.

In the twenty-first century, robotic systems, or combat (military) robots, as they are called, become such weapons.

In recent years, thanks to the rapid development of technology and huge money invested in information technology in general and in the development of robotics in particular, the era of robots has arrived. This is facilitated by increased technical capabilities and new scientific discoveries: new innovations in the field of robotics appear every few months - a year. Modern robots are becoming more and more human-like: they can move as a person, read, recognize human emotions. Even a material has been created to cover humanoid robots, which feels like human skin.


Today, ground robots are only helpers of a soldier, but in the future they will be able to completely replace him. Photo from www.army.mil

The strength of robots for any commander is that they can replace people in solving a wide range of especially difficult or especially dangerous combat missions. For example, robots can be very useful in conducting combat operations in the multidimensional conditions of a modern city, effectively solving complex combat missions in conducting reconnaissance or combat in various hard-to-reach places. Such as the ruins of reinforced concrete and stone buildings, roofs, attics, basements, collectors and cavities under the rubble.

Many military experts generally consider the development of combat robots the third technological revolution in the production of weapons and military equipment. The previous key revolutions include two key events that forever changed the battlefield: the invention of gunpowder and the invention of nuclear weapons.

Already today, thousands of units of robots are in service with various armies in the world. And the process is growing. Of course, most modern combat robots are designed for reconnaissance operations and demining, but it’s no secret to anyone actively using them to directly kill people. An example of this - thousands of missiles killed by airborne robots - unmanned aerial vehicles of the United States in the Middle East.

The use of ground-based robots in general combat is a qualitatively new stage in the art of war. In particular, the long occupation of the enemy’s territory has always been fraught with large losses of personnel during the rebel actions of the local population. Such losses significantly affect public opinion and may force the military and political leadership of the occupying forces to curtail their presence on foreign territory. The widespread use of combat robots to control territory removes this problem. The funerals will stop coming, they will stop talking about the war on TV, so everything is calm and good. Before the losses of robots and the number of "natives" killed by them, most likely nobody will care.

The continuous development of new technologies for the production of warfare equipment with artificial intelligence allows putting on stream production of ground-based robotic systems (complexes) for practically the entire spectrum of ground combat missions. Even today, in many armies of the world, robots are striving to shift some of the tasks that are now being carried out by living people. The priority is the development of combat robots, replacing soldiers on the battlefield, unmanned armored vehicles and other automatic platforms (including trucks).

According to American experts, the rapid pace of development of robotic and information systems leads to the fact that in the coming years the number of soldiers in brigade tactical groups can be reduced by a quarter - from 4 thousand to 3 thousand - while maintaining and, in some cases, increasing their combat capabilities. It is assumed that this approach will significantly reduce the total cost of maintaining each individual brigade.

Even today, some types of robots are capable of solving some combat missions much better than humans. This means that as software improves, their participation in the war will significantly expand in the coming years. For example, it is expected that by 2020, the US Ground Forces by 30% may consist of robotic systems for various purposes. In the first place, ensuring the widespread introduction of full-fledged combat robots into the ground forces of various armies in the world, according to some forecasts, can be expected after 2030. In our opinion, this period may be significantly less. This is evidenced by the high dynamics of the development of new information technologies and new production technologies of modern technology.

DISADVANTAGES OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

In the short term, the most likely widespread introduction into the ground forces of various semi-autonomous auxiliary robots and automated vehicles for the organization of autonomous convoys.

For example, Google has been developing a car for several years, the “driver” of which is artificial intelligence. In December, 2014, the corporation has already presented the first working prototype of such a fully autonomous unmanned vehicle. At the same time, Google engineers did not hide its flaws. In particular, the autopilot could "not notice" a bump or an open hatch in the asphalt. However, active development in this area and targeted investment in this niche allow us to successfully develop information and communication technologies for automobiles. So, according to the Auto Evolution portal, Google already in the middle of 2015, patented a new technology for fully automatic collection of information about poor quality road surfaces and the subsequent transfer of coordinates about pits and bumps on roads to special servers for generalizing and creating interactive maps. There is reason to believe that the task of creating a standalone Google car can be completed on time. A number of other foreign and domestic companies have equally interesting developments in this area.

Although the problems and technical challenges on this path are many. First of all, they are associated with the development of artificial intelligence. No less important are the legal aspects of organizing joint traffic on the roads of people and robots. For example, if an accident occurred through the fault of artificial intelligence, especially with casualties - who would be responsible: the manufacturer, the programmer, or someone else?

There are many other problematic issues that life poses to those who seek to the widespread introduction of robots in the ground forces. For example, robotization fundamentally changes not only the organizational structure and tactics of actions of the ground forces, but also the social structure of the army. In particular, a significant redistribution of social roles and social status of military professions should be attributed to the challenges generated by robotization.

This also includes the problems associated with the new type of social relations: a man is an autonomous combat robot with artificial intelligence. Robotization translates the “living” servicemen from the psychologically understandable state of war as a man’s fight against man into a man’s plane against a rational machine aimed at killing people. In the new conditions, a separate solution will require not only the organization of joint actions of robots and people on the battlefield, but also the problem of joint deployment and joint combat training of people and robots outside this time.

Another difficult problem that should be singled out separately is the problem of communication. First of all, between people-performers and robots-commanders. The problem may be aggravated by the degree of adaptation of robots to collaborative actions with humans. There is no doubt that not only friction can arise on this basis, but also open confrontation.

Socio-psychological adaptation of military servicemen who have been interacting on the battlefield with combat robots as allies and as adversaries can also be no less difficult. Since the times of the ancient wars, there have been cases in which servicemen animated their weapons. This practice has especially spread since the Second World War, when technically sophisticated weapon systems became widespread. In the course of the active introduction of robots into the groupings of American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, many cases of attachment of military personnel to their “sponsored” robots are also known. To the perception of them as their comrades or talismans. The future active interaction of servicemen with autonomous robots with advanced artificial intelligence can only exacerbate the problem. To return to the full-fledged peaceful life of people such servicemen may need a new “finding themselves”.

There are a lot of similar issues. However, even a summary of them requires several publications.

The main thing - the war changes its face. The role and place of the armed man in it is changing. What is required now is the joint work of specialists from various fields of human activity. Not only gunsmiths, but to no small degree - philosophers, psychologists, sociologists and specialists in the field of information technology and artificial intelligence. This must be understood and taken into account in the construction of the armed forces.

In general, the designated trends in the development of ground forces indicate that in the near future we are expected to see qualitative changes in their organizational structure, technical equipment, and combat capabilities. The ground forces were and will remain the most important service of the armed forces of any state, but their functions and capabilities will grow by an order of magnitude.

The difficulty is that everything must be done in the conditions of a pronounced shortage of time. That army, which is the first to be ready for the qualitative transformation of its ground forces, has every chance of becoming an army of winners.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. GDV
    GDV 13 September 2015 14: 32 New
    • 14
    • 0
    +14
    The final one, sooner or later we will not need them.
    1. kil 31 13 September 2015 14: 51 New
      • 13
      • 0
      +13
      Quote: GDV
      The final one, sooner or later we will not need them.

      Well, why so pessimistic, a couple of locksmiths would be left to be repaired (just kidding). Do not watch Hollywood fiction.
      1. Babr 13 September 2015 15: 57 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        It would be nice if they killed each other, and left people alone. lol
        1. Tanais 13 September 2015 17: 01 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          For example, according to statistics, during the Great Patriotic War, Soviet troops used up more than 16 million tons of various ammunition (shells, mines and ammunition). When correlating this figure with the number of official irretrievable losses of Nazi Germany and its allies on the Eastern Front, we can assume that on average the Red Army required up to 2-3 tons of ammunition to defeat one Nazi German soldier.

          The cunning woman, this statistic. Able to let the fog ...

          No, to put it bluntly, these 16 tons are included in the ammunition (mountains) lost in certain situations ...
          1. Predator 14 September 2015 16: 36 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            They come in a hundred pounds. This is what was written off by industry to the army. From my experience as a search engine, I can say that half of all this lies in the ground. A third remained in warehouses. A part died during delivery and now there remains only about 2 million tons.
        2. KaPToC 13 September 2015 17: 30 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          Quote: Babr
          It would be nice if they killed each other, and left people alone.

          You have mixed something up, these robots will say "let people kill each other, but they will leave us alone."
          1. wild weld 14 September 2015 16: 13 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            everything is possible with a new development of technology, God forbid, it happens like foreign films
        3. CALL. 14 September 2015 08: 05 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          According to statistics, during the Great Patriotic War, Soviet troops used up more than 16 million tons of various ammunition (shells, mines and ammunition). When correlating this figure with the number of official irretrievable losses of Hitlerite Germany and its allies on the Eastern Front, we can assume that on average the Red Army required up to 2-3 tons of ammunition to defeat one Nazi German soldier.

          Russian and German historians have disputed the figures for the military losses of the Hitler coalition. Until now, all researchers have relied on Goebbels’s propaganda statistics. At the same time, the number of well-known German graves in the territory of the former USSR is twice the official data.
          New research on the history of the Second World War leads RBC daily. Despite the considerable time elapsed since the end of World War II, there are countries that still have not been able to calculate their demographic losses. And, oddly enough, they include Germany. Unlike Russia, whose historians seemingly plowed up and down the topic of losses in the Great Patriotic War, the Germans consider their deaths only according to Goebbels statistics of the war era. Moreover, these data are so underestimated that the number of well-known German graves in the territory of the Soviet Union exceeds them almost twice.
      2. smershxnumx 13 September 2015 18: 49 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Like Doomsday, Rise of the Machines ??? But, it seems, yemana, it seems ... IMHO!
    2. 222222 13 September 2015 18: 23 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      GDV RU Today, 14:32
      The final one, sooner or later we will not need them. "

      ..And aren't we robots? .. A continuous series of wars..conflicts..Robots of war ... laughing
      1. Haettenschweiler 13 September 2015 18: 49 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: 222222
        ..And aren't we robots? .. A continuous series of wars..conflicts..Robots of war ...


        We are not robots.
        We are the highest predators of this planet.
        We kill, fight among ourselves, arrange genocides and Holocausts simply because ... because we like it. And there are no more natural enemies.
        1. not main 14 September 2015 00: 05 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Haettenschweiler
          And there are no more natural enemies.

          I don’t agree here! Three days ago we went for mushrooms, my wife went to the side, then she came running and said that she had almost entered a bunch. I went and checked it really from the bear and no more than half an hour ago! You know, I’m not very keen on meeting the owner! Even with a gun I would prefer not to meet!
          1. Logos 14 September 2015 04: 13 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            The bear would also prefer not to meet with you.
      2. Babr 13 September 2015 19: 03 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Here there are such words "Then the land was prevented from war to war"
        So we are probably not robots.
        1. lecturer 13 September 2015 22: 13 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Bubr (2) SU Today, 19:03 ↑

          Thank you, Victor ... I have not heard this song anywhere before!
        2. alexander 2 14 September 2015 04: 34 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          The fact of the matter is that in a fully robotic army all this will not be necessary. Honor, conscience, shame are not familiar to them. The robot will not ask itself why it kills. He does not need any ideology. If a person has a lot of money, then he will be able to buy himself an army that will fight for his interests. That is, any pr ... ok, who has money, will be able to start a full-scale war.
    3. anokem 13 September 2015 20: 23 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Explanatory article, there would be more of these in
      1. victor 13 September 2015 23: 28 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Yes, review the terminators - it will be cooler. This is again about the war with the natives who do not have electronic warfare equipment, tactical nuclear weapons, etc. And when the day of judgment comes, all this scrap metal will be dead for a long time, and again, the remaining homo (without) sapins will have to decide for yourself.
    4. Civil 13 September 2015 22: 33 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Skynet must die)))
    5. bootlegger 13 September 2015 22: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, how do you want? And our turn will come, not only Neanderthals to puff off ...
      1. marlin1203 13 September 2015 23: 16 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Yes, everything is fine! .. A good electromagnetic pulse and long live the technologies of the generation before last! laughing In general, whistles, flags and a checkmate! And here we definitely have no equal! soldier
        1. alexander 2 14 September 2015 04: 38 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Unfortunately, this will not work. Now all military electronics are protected from electromagnetic impulse.
    6. Garris199 15 September 2015 00: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Yeah. There should be a monumental bookmark. Raised the manipulator to the "owner", immediately went and drowned. smile
  3. MIKHAN 13 September 2015 14: 35 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I really hope so! Need to change .. Hybrid wars are our invention and very effective!
    the army, which will be the first to be ready for a qualitative transformation of its ground forces, has every chance of becoming an army of victors.

    gold words!
    1. EGOrkka 13 September 2015 14: 50 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      smile Hybrid war is your invention?
      1. Babr 13 September 2015 16: 43 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Can anyone explain to me what a hybrid war is?
        I understand that.
        Here in the Great Patriotic War, Hitler's legs were pulled out and the end of the campaign. (Conditionally)
        Although I suspect that he had more than two “legs”.
        Today's enemy can be compared to a centipede. Tear off two, still crawl to eat on the foliage.
        Until these “legs” are revealed, it is impossible to defeat the enemy.
        1. jan
          jan 13 September 2015 17: 25 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Well, for what. you can, in the old fashioned way, come in and take your head off to the one who steers it. We are conservative in this matter. therefore invincible))))
        2. EGOrkka 13 September 2015 17: 37 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Babr
          Can anyone explain to me what a hybrid war is?


          ..... this is when you muddied the “rottenness revolution”: paid and trained “theatergoers” and militants, distributed scripts and words, set snipers to inspire the masses, made promises and delivered cookies, but you don’t succeed, then you say nothing Tipo not shmogla! unnecessarily against me hybrid war odnoohooo ..... wassat
          1. Babr 13 September 2015 18: 24 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: EGOrkka
            Odahoooo .....

            Odnahooo .. I didn’t get there. belay
            I beg your pardon. Wrong address. Sorry. request Odnahooo ....
      2. KaPToC 13 September 2015 17: 33 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: EGOrkka
        Hybrid war is your invention?

        Previously, when the rulers trusted their people, they won the hybrid war easily - all the men in the state were armed and ready to fight back all kinds of bandits.
        1. EGOrkka 13 September 2015 19: 16 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          but seriously ... "hybrid war" ..... that would not be called by their own names, but what is happening in ruin now is a real CIVIL WAR-Slavs with Slavs !!!!!!!!!!
  4. bronik 13 September 2015 14: 39 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I understand with my mind that the future is inevitable for robots, but it’s creepy to somehow trust the lives of people with soulless pieces of iron. When a soldier holds a weapon, it fulfills the will of pulling the trigger HUMAN.A interception of robot control is easier than re-agitation of a fighter.
    1. i80186 13 September 2015 14: 59 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: bronik
      I understand with my mind that the future is inevitable for robots, but somehow creepy.

      C'mon, did Star Wars watch? Droids are dumb and useless. In clones, they will win. laughing
      1. saygon66 13 September 2015 17: 58 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        - "Screamers" by Stephen King?
  5. yuriy55 13 September 2015 14: 44 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    A very effective weapon against all kinds of robots - electronic warfare systems. Donald Cook knows about this.

    All these fantasies about war games are appropriate for those sitting in a room, on a bench in the yard. If our Krasnoyarsk Territory covers Europe with its area, like a bull sheep, suppose there is an operator who can not get lost in these open spaces? lol

    And, besides, the idea of ​​bloodless war from around the corner came from the Americans. It’s they who, having seen enough of Hollywood films, transfer the fantasies of directors to the field of real battles. It’s they who, having removed Star Wars, continue to purchase rocket engines in Russia ... laughing
  6. GDV
    GDV 13 September 2015 14: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Amy weapons are a bit of a colt equalizer.
    1. saygon66 13 September 2015 17: 48 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      - Not! NANO-products that decompose enemy soldiers into compost in a matter of minutes! Moreover, given the requirements of modern morality, it is painless for decomposable individuals! smile
  7. Mountain shooter 13 September 2015 15: 00 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Improving robots in all areas of application will inevitably lead to crowding out humans from dangerous and tedious industries, one of the options of which is war. And if robots still do not have the instinct of self-preservation, it is scary to think what such monsters will be capable of. Intelligent mines are already appearing, "aiming - forgetting" sighting systems, drones, etc. etc.
    Even our Armata is equipped with so many different software bows that in principle it should have a crew of two people, which, apparently, will be done as a result of experimental operation in the troops.
    1. gladcu2 13 September 2015 19: 21 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Mountain shooter.

      All the same leave 3.

      In my opinion this is the most optimal number. And it is for field service.
  8. Mainbeam 13 September 2015 15: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It is good that ours are learning from someone else's example - they take into account the experience of military operations of the Yankos.
    I remember how it broke the generals during the abandonment of the cavalry and the transition to tank troops.
    The troops of the Second World War were being improved, and now the army is ready for a qualitative step.

    As for me, the first clear example of a revolution in the army is aircraft drones.

    1. mosquit 13 September 2015 15: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      These "drones", UAVs, "a hundred years at lunch" ...
      1. Mainbeam 13 September 2015 16: 01 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: mosquit
        These "drones", UAVs, "a hundred years at lunch" ...

        Yes, only now they began to be actively shot down. Maybe due to the fact that UAVs began to be actively used? Currently, unmanned technology of military engineering is being integrated into the troops. Reconnaissance and single missile strikes - was the first real step in the application of unmanned technology. Further - for strike aircraft, and, presumably, for tank troops.



        The use of artificial intelligence, as in Robocop (a film thirty years ago) is unlikely to be received soon. Rather, the next step will be the use of exoskeletons, well, or walking combat suits.





        1. mosquit 13 September 2015 16: 30 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Yep ...
          //airwar.ru/enc/bpla/tu121.html
          //airwar.ru/enc/spy/tu123.html

          And this, in "Alien-2" pictures will be cooler than the data models ...

          Yes, only now they began to be actively shot down. Maybe due to the fact that UAVs began to be actively used? Currently, unmanned technology of military engineering is being integrated into the troops. Reconnaissance and single missile strikes - was the first real step in the application of unmanned technology. Further - for strike aircraft, and, presumably, for tank troops

          This is to the Strugatsky, "Inhabited Island" ... hi

          In general, we are not talking about "devices" ...
        2. TOR2 13 September 2015 19: 30 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: MainBeam
          Rather, the next step will be the use of exoskeletons, well, or walking combat suits

          These gizmos need a powerful source of energy.
        3. ProkletyiPirat 14 September 2015 02: 32 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          any questions?
  9. mosquit 13 September 2015 15: 14 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    They write a lot about the "army of the future" or the "war of the future" ...
    Moreover, the authors, as usual, are not inclined at all to describe the "business process" War ...
    What is this (war)?
    Conflict ?, Yes.
    For what?
    What are the goals and objectives of the parties to the conflict?
    What methods do they want to achieve their goals?
    What resources are there?

    All these chaotic descriptions of the "military gadget" having "awesome" capabilities of the balancers and doing awesome stunts, is this the face of the modern Army?
    So far, among the mass of writers, there is confidence that the number of different aircraft, UAVs, CRs and other abiatures can somehow affect land conflict.
    1. gladcu2 13 September 2015 19: 28 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      mosquit

      All conflicts in the world have an economic basis.
      If you have a centipede. That makes no sense to deal with pulling her legs.
      As noted earlier. But it makes sense to pay attention to the head. And this is the answer why everyone is talking about the shadow government.
      Hence the conclusion. The important thing is the weapon that hits the head, but does not pull out the legs.

      And what kind of weapon? Answer. Informational.
      Intelligence, target definition, misinformation.

      Such weapons in terms of economic efficiency are superior to the most robotic army. And all these drones ...
      1. gladcu2 13 September 2015 20: 59 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Speaking of the shadow government.

        Very comfortably. And they will not be re-elected and physically destroyed. And the policy can be stable and unchanged.
        One problem. If politics is not nationally oriented, then changing it is as difficult as winning a war.

        Examples are nearby. This is the Russian Federation. And the USA. Someone else rules the ball. However, in other countries you can find similar symptoms.
  10. sabakina 13 September 2015 15: 37 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    As for me, it would be best to end like in the video. The Russian man will survive, and the rest ... And this will be their problem.
  11. Evilcat 13 September 2015 16: 33 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    introduction of qualitatively new technologies for the production of weapons and military equipment
    What is it like? Invented a new way to drill a rifle barrel?
    1. nrex 13 September 2015 19: 02 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And the barrel is no longer drilled and forged
  12. saygon66 13 September 2015 17: 39 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    - "2-3 tons of ammunition per German soldier ..." And this is only the Soviet Army! And if you add here the expenses of the allies? Enchantingly effective German soldier! smile
    1. alexander 2 14 September 2015 04: 56 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      First:
      This is taking into account all the losses. Including those shot at ranges and shooting ranges at targets.
      Secondly:
      Do you think the Germans had lower costs?
  13. flSergius 13 September 2015 17: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Just leave a link to an interesting article. This is not my opinion.

    http://samlib.ru/a/annit_o/ubertanc.shtml
  14. taseka 13 September 2015 18: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Remembering the wonderful words from the affiliate "Only old people go into battle," I will say this - the flag over the US Congress will be set not by a robot, but by a simple infantryman!
    1. 31rus 13 September 2015 18: 21 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      And it will be right and fair!
    2. gladcu2 13 September 2015 20: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      taseka

      There is no point in talking about this, since in my opinion you have not identified the enemy correctly.
      Americans tool. But who is the enemy, I find it difficult to say. I do not want to look ridiculous, but it always seemed to me that they were aliens.
      The evidence is that even the Americans are slandering themselves.
  15. 31rus 13 September 2015 18: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Ammunition consumption statistics are just economics, and for the military, the task is accomplished in all available ways, so that statistics, although objective, do not reflect the truth, one more remark, you don’t need to frighten humanity with advanced robots, etc. humanity doesn’t so stupid that everything would be left to the machines (there is love, anger, joy, all that is called feelings) and not some of the most intelligent artificial intelligence will not comprehend, so we have good chances of survival
  16. acetophenon 13 September 2015 18: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    So, another arms race.
  17. Evilcat 13 September 2015 19: 04 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: EvilCat
    introduction of qualitatively new technologies for the production of weapons and military equipment
    What is it like? Invented a new way to drill a rifle barrel?
    How are you wise men minusers tired! What made you so upset? Can you really name qualitatively new technologies, namely technologies, and not types of weapons? I assure you, there is nothing qualitatively new in the technology for the production of small arms. And in the welding of tank corps too. And even the most sophisticated airplanes are assembled by airplanes.
    However, what to expect from you? Take advantage of the fact that you can’t say who puts what kind of ratings? Well, okay.
    1. Babr 13 September 2015 19: 22 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I agree.
      Regarding the topic, no boom-boom.
      But with respect to minusculers, yes.
      I hate it. lol
    2. SIvan 13 September 2015 23: 33 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      How are you wise men minusers tired! What made you so upset? Can you really name qualitatively new technologies, namely technologies, and not types of weapons? I assure you, there is nothing qualitatively new in the technology for the production of small arms. And in the welding of tank corps too. And even the most sophisticated airplanes are assembled by airplanes.

      For example, composite materials. PAK FA has a significant part of the glider made of carbon fiber. There, the production technology is different from that of metal parts.

      Also, for example, 3D printers (this is also called by the fashionable word "additive technology"). Plastic parts are not cut out, but "printed" in layers, this gives some material savings.
      1. ProkletyiPirat 14 September 2015 02: 40 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        firstly: they print not only with plastic but also with other materials such as titanium
        secondly: far from always saving! sometimes the consumption of material is even greater!
        thirdly: in metals and plastics, excess material goes like a recyclable material, so crazy savings are a myth ...
  18. Byordovvv1 13 September 2015 19: 14 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Here she is the future infantry and not otherwise.
    1. narval20 13 September 2015 20: 51 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      You are absolutely right!
      If anyone survives the local war of the new millennium, he will begin his “rearmament” precisely with the sword and quiver with arrows.
      I agree with you - a very sad and not inevitable (with such a development of the situation) perspective.
      1. tokens2 13 September 2015 21: 10 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        If anyone survives the local war of the new millennium, he will begin his “rearmament” precisely with the sword and quiver with arrows.

        In antiquity, all weapons were of the 2nd purpose.
        there were no grocery supermarkets.
        The pitchfork of the peasant was not originally for war, like arrows.
        So ... rather office folders paired with a wrench.
        So shaky.
  19. kuznec 13 September 2015 19: 29 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I would like to see a robot that would follow me into the taiga for fishing. There, jump over bumps in a swamp, then climb over a fallen cedar, then crawl bent under a pine tree in three deaths ... Either old woman or now windbreak. Nonsense. There the tank will not pass, the drone will not fly, and the Amer commando will sit down and cry. And we, the Siberians, are a common thing. Every summer I spend the night from the principle in the taiga on a bare ground under a Christmas tree, at least once a lynx meows somewhere, then a bear or a long-haired one breaks in the distance. Most scared to horror. And I teach my son. He just - lay down and sleeps. And I burn the fire all night until dawn. There are such impassable places that it is impossible to express. And no mules of Amer’s spawn will pass there. So Siberia - mother - our reinforced concrete bridgehead.
    1. gladcu2 13 September 2015 21: 09 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      kuznec

      You have a chance to survive. Take a bunch of women fishing. Revive the nation.

      :)
      1. kuznec 14 September 2015 06: 37 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Took already :-)
  20. nrex 13 September 2015 19: 34 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Gentlemen Have you played a toy online for a long time ?. You go in and see what happens on the net. There are millions of trained operator fighters, they are prepared in terms of developing a strategy for waging war on robotics. Previously, boys holding a stick with a plywood horse head and holding a wooden saber in their hand, rushed along the street depicting cavalrymen. Growing up, they mounted real horses and took real sabers. Now imagine what or what our children will sit on when they grow up. This future is fantastic and blurry for us, but they already live in it, this is a new world. No need to go far, look at our old people they are terrified, they have panic, they do not understand what is happening. So fast is electronics and cyberspace. These are not the best of times. I'm already scared from this. What will happen to us? We will lag behind cyber life even more. Previous generations have always been afraid of progress. A new life requires a new understanding. Play with your grandchildren, this is useful. Develops. )))
    1. kuznec 13 September 2015 19: 57 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      And if after global EMI all this riffraff will prostrate? Who will fight then? Gamers with cola and burgers? Oh, excuse me, but there will be no more cola and hamburgers - there will be no electricity! And the psychologists who will be treated for the syndrome of lack of computers will also not be like the Internet and such nonsense. I myself am an IT specialist, but I keep my children on hard it-rations. The network is only necessary, and under tight control. But from the age of 4, my son has a textbook “Discrete mathematics for an engineer”, all sorts of different pieces of iron — radio parts, I throw devices for him into breaking. In addition, he practices sambo-judo, prize-winner-champion, etc. He goes with me to the taiga. Yes, there are problems with him, but it is with them, with our children, that we need to raise our Motherland ..
      You need to at least make the children do exercises! And do not puff with them in a new game on an iPhone.
    2. TOR2 13 September 2015 23: 21 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: nrex
      No need to go far, look at our old people they are terrified, they have panic, they do not understand what is happening

      You won’t believe it, at the beginning of 0x they told me several cases when participants in the Second World War levels played on relevant topics perfectly while the younger generation was at school. good
    3. victor 13 September 2015 23: 38 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, I agree - after all, if you were killed, then you can try to kill all the bastards 3 times ... By the way, the cat has 000 lives ... On old consoles like Dandy, Sega, Nintenda - there were 7-3 games ... Now - infinity ... Do you also think that after real death you will be reborn in cyberspace and will endlessly fight in the real world ??? Play with your grandchildren not in cyber life, but in the real one. Otherwise, they will have cyber powers and you have cyber great grandchildren .. .
  21. tokens2 13 September 2015 19: 45 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Everyone will have an armored capsule. laughing
    In a major war, of course, the reserve will win.
    Without armored capsules.
    Well, to everything that can crawl, walk, fly, swim ... add a camera and a motor.
    And worst of all ... any civilian products can become a puzzle for the military. It always has been. However, the transfer to military rails can happen much faster.
    Here, as they say, we can talk about the limitations of the gross domestic product, i.e. the economy.
    joke.
  22. iliitchitch 13 September 2015 20: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Kil 31
    Quote: GDV
    The final one, sooner or later we will not need them.

    Well, why so pessimistic, a couple of locksmiths would be left to be repaired (just kidding). Do not watch Hollywood fiction.


    Exactly, they have seen enough of all nonsense, and begin the blizzard of revenge. In ALL wars, ALWAYS put the last point on the infantry with engineer blades - that was, is and will be. I do not call for primitivism, but all these "high-tech" will be asymmetrically raked, because it’s easier to destroy. Figuratively speaking, there is always an orbital barrel with rusty nuts with a kilo of TNT inside any orbital robotic laser of exorbitant cost. They want to "master" the money - yes, on the way. The main thing is to know that they are stirring up, and then we will be ready. And this is the concern of the 1st Main Directorate of the KGB (I don’t know what it is now called).
    1. gladcu2 13 September 2015 21: 15 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      illitchich

      You have a key phrase. "the main thing to know"
      That's the main thing and you need to start. And everything else is by default secondary.

      And not the KGB should know, but everyone. The KGB has overslept one country.
  23. atamankko 13 September 2015 21: 06 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Until the infantryman takes up the bridgehead, there is no victory.
    1. max702 13 September 2015 23: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: atamankko
      Until the infantryman takes up the bridgehead, there is no victory.

      Not quite so, for example, with Yugoslavia, they drove the country into the Stone Age by air strikes and the uncomfortable life of the population forced the politicians to raise their paws .. So simultaneous brainwashing and bombing of bodies gives very good results .. Tell me in Afghanistan, it didn’t work out. and the tasks were completely different, it would have been necessary if Afghanistan had been stupidly genocidal by applying a chemical biological, and possibly nuclear, and proud Afghans wouldn’t have gone anywhere .. It’s also possible with ISIS, the carriers of good will disappear from them and they will cover the whole shop .. Whatever they say, but technologies rule, I think that everyone saw the shots of light elf hunting from the Apache pepelats on Iraqi residents? Something there I didn’t notice any threat to the helicopter’s crew, this experience will be expanded and all the technologically backward opponents have no chance .. And so there would be as many such opponents as possible and the current mess organized around the whole world would mean the collapse of stable countries and the drop in education . morality and other signs of a developed society .. the plans should remain one player with technology for 3-4 generations superior to all the others .. There is only one question, but have you started early? It does not seem that earth technologies have reached the level of self-support and self-restoration .. Or we don’t really know what it is ..
  24. NSerzh 13 September 2015 21: 14 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    here he is a soldier of the future, and now the money is laundered at government orders.
  25. Asadullah 13 September 2015 22: 48 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    the era of robots


    Well, right! They are trying to push the era of manipulators remotely controlled through the air. Only now the electronic warfare is poured into the toilet all these flying and crawling cars. From that they are effective only against a knowingly undeveloped enemy. Sit in the bunker, and push the buttons, will not work. It all depends on the task, and the methods for solving it are simple - strength, strength, and again strength.

    As for artificial intelligence, the seekers of such a micron have not come nearer to their searches. For, all that can be created is a very large database and a high speed of data manipulation. Artificial intelligence is, first of all, the ability to analyze and to creatively recombine when the device improves its capabilities without the influence of a programmer. What can I say, there is not even a semblance of analytical thinking. Yes and no. For such something, first of all, must realize itself. Otherwise, air spoilage and tadpole divorce of moneybags infected with comics from childhood.
  26. GDV
    GDV 13 September 2015 22: 50 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: iliitch
    Exactly, they have seen enough of all nonsense, and begin the blizzard of revenge. In ALL wars, ALWAYS put the last point on the infantry with engineer blades - that was, is and will be.

    Yeah, gunpowder stopped igniting, TNT detonated, and the nucleus stopped dividing - the apocalypse is predicted by the dear.
  27. victor 13 September 2015 23: 30 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The article would be called - << Ground Forces of the Future Against Militant Aborigines with AK-74 >>.
  28. akudr48 14 September 2015 09: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yes, automation has created the problem of "extra" humanity.

    Maybe automation will finally solve this problem, and not only on the battlefield.

    Like Taras Bulba.
  29. Prutkov 14 September 2015 11: 44 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The experience of recent wars (hybrid) has shown that warfare is based on semi-professional volunteer, sometimes semi-gang, formations led by professional military (revolutionaries). Wars between nuclear superpowers, at this stage, are impossible. Commanders really should have military experience, which can only be acquired in the army. And here, their fighters, for the most part, will be laymen. Accordingly, the requirements for weapons follow - weapons should be extremely easy to operate and reliable. So it’s too early to write off a Kalashnikov assault rifle. And electronics and robots on the battlefield, of course, are needed. But for a long time they will not be enough.
  30. iouris 14 September 2015 17: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The main thing is not to forget that all these developments are carried out for the introduction of consumer goods and services into production. The leader in the production of these products will win.
  31. Mikhail3 14 September 2015 18: 37 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    Nonsense. And terribly funny nonsense! The author correctly identified the problems of modern weapons and military doctrines. The development of weapons predictably made war incredibly expensive. All military specialists, eternally preparing for the last war, rush around, trying to figure out how to observe innocence and acquire capital. The author offers his "original vision." What is it about? But:
    In the twenty-first century, robotic systems, or combat (military) robots, as they are called, become such weapons.
    Lord, well, rzhaka! The author, without hesitating, offers to cure the problem of the rise in price of the war ... its gulf. That is, increasing costs thousands and thousands of times. Robots, so that you, the author, know much more than existing weapons! And they will always be more expensive. Because robots need this very weapon. And plus the price of the robot! Moreover, the robot is much stronger than people, faster than them, it moves in several environments (it can, for example, take off on disposable accelerators), which forces a significant increase in the price of the weapons used. Understood, author? This is much more expensive!
    Alas, mass computerization did not make people smarter, but on the contrary, it was massively stupid. Article - peer review? Alas ... This is just a big-grown, stupid and ill-mannered butuz screaming - I'm scared !! And I want toys !! That's all. A lie about cheapening is just a mask of fear and a desire to translate war into a game. Nothing more.
    Author, all in vain. First, nobody will pull the robot. The economies will give up much earlier than they will master the mass of deserted warheads with all the infrastructure and means of movement. And secondly, forgive me, but you’ll be shot anyway. Yes, you will lie in the bunker and it is pleasant to click the manipulator. But one day the dirty infantrymen will open the bunker and kill you. And they’ll do something like they did to the First World with dirty tricks who used a saw on the edge of a knife. Robotization will not solve the problem of a terrible death in war ...
    What will the army-winner of the next non-nuclear civilizational conflict look like? A serious topic ... and not for "military experts" who carry all this cybernetic nonsense.
  32. Mentat 15 September 2015 15: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: kuznec
    And if after global EMI all this riffraff will prostrate?
    ... will not be like the Internet and such nonsense.
    I myself am an IT specialist.

    It does not fit at all. IT specialist says that the Internet and the like is bullshit ?? You do not like your job so much? Less to you for the implausibility and inertness of the language. "Prostrate" has a completely different meaning.
  33. Mentat 15 September 2015 15: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Mikhail3
    Robots, so that you, the author, know much more than existing weapons! And they will always be more expensive. Because robots need this very weapon. And plus the price of the robot!

    You probably consider yourself incredibly smart. However, you do not understand and do not understand anything about the topic you are writing about. A hypothetical “robot” commercially available that can replace manpower on the battlefield will always be cheaper than the total cost of training, provision, medical and social support for a living soldier, even at the operator’s need. Therefore, so much effort is directed towards the development of this direction.