Military Review

Secrets of a deserted tower

67
Trends in the development of Russian combat modules


Modern military operations have shown that one of the most vulnerable elements of infantry fighting vehicles (BMP) and armored personnel carriers (APCs) is the tower in which the weapons are located.

In order to reduce the losses of personnel and, probably, further reduce the number of crews, remote-controlled tower modules (DBMS) were developed. Virtually all modern armored personnel carriers and, to a lesser extent, infantry fighting vehicles are equipped with an anti-aircraft defense vehicle with a machine gun-grenade launcher (less commonly cannon) armament. A number of domestic enterprises are also developing SDMs that are in line with global trends. And in spite of the fact that in Russia DBMS are less common than in the West, domestic designers have proposed a number of technological solutions that can be called innovative.

For shooting and reconnaissance

The need to increase the level of security and capabilities for reconnaissance currently determines the development trends of light tower modules with remote control for reconnaissance, patrol and combat armored vehicles (BBM). According to the Western weapons nomenclature, these modules are designated as RWS (Remote Weapon Station) or RCWS (Remotely Controlled Weapon Station). The combat module, equipped with various optoelectronic sighting systems, plays an important role in ensuring the crew’s awareness of the combat environment, allows for the collection of reconnaissance data and, in case of synchronization with the recorder, ensures their transmission in a distributed network. An important task is to provide a different angle of lift for the sighting devices of the combat module and the main armament. In a situation, for example, patrolling an urban area, a machine gun that is aimed at local residents can provoke a negative reaction. At the same time, it is necessary to use optoelectronic systems for collecting environmental data.

Recent armed conflicts have once again confirmed the critical importance of reconnaissance and location of targets. Uninhabited combat modules are often installed specifically for reconnaissance and intelligence gathering, and not for defeating the enemy. In some cases, a concept is adopted in which a light DBM is mounted on a man-made turret with medium or large caliber weapons. The use of modern materials and technology for damping recoil allows you to set a full 105 and 120 mm tank guns in the towers of military vehicles, the mass of which is 25 tons or more. While the range of wheeled chassis for such vehicles is quite limited, there are a large number of tracked counterparts that can withstand the mass and recoil of tank guns, which can lead to resuscitation of a class of light tanks.

Modern armored vehicles allow the installation of not only traditional manned, but also uninhabited towers, equipped, as a rule, with automatic guns of 20 – 50 caliber of millimeters. The main advantage of the towers is the complete protection of weapons from both climatic precipitations and from enemy fire. At the same time, the manned turret should be equipped with a reservation equal to the level of the base machine, which allows you to reliably protect the operator-gunner of the main armament. This significantly increases the overall mass of the BBM.

The placement of the commander and gunner operator in the tower gradually loses expediency, especially in the conditions of the modern battlefield. As a result, it becomes possible to reduce the booking level (most modules of the RWS / RCWS class are armored according to the 2 level of the NATO standard STANAG 4569, which means protection against 7,62x39 mm and 7,62x51 mm cartridges), which in turn reduces the overall weight of the combat vehicle.

The overwhelming majority of Western OCRs are equipped with machine-gun and grenade launchers. The most popular model on the market are the M151 / M153 Protector modules (Protector) manufactured by the Norwegian company Kongsberg. The United States adopted this model under the CROWS II program to equip armored vehicles, which is in service with the national army. The modules of this class were developed by the Belgian company FN Herstal (FN Herstal), the German Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (Krauss-Maffei Wegmann) and Dynamite Nobel Defense, Israeli Raphael and Israel. military industries ”(Israel Military Industries). The major manufacturers of UAB with machine-gun and grenade launcher are the British BAE Systems (BAE Systems), the South African Reutech (Reutech), and the Italian Oto Melara (Oto Melara).

The aforementioned companies are developing the development of a double-arm construction with a heavier weapon, as a rule, with automatic guns of 20 – 25 caliber of millimeters. Despite the fact that many manufacturers declare their readiness to integrate tank guns of 105 and 120 calibers of millimeters, at the present time there are practically no serial models with such weapons. The only machine with a large-caliber DUBM equipped with large-caliber weapons that comes into service in large quantities is the American self-propelled anti-tank gun (SPTP) M1128 MGS (Mobile Gun System) based on the Stryker M1126 BTR. It is equipped with a tank gun M68A2 as the main armament. Installing a cannon in an ECDM lowered the vehicle’s ammunition - it makes up 18 shells. At the same time, as the developer claims, M68A2 is not intended to defeat the main battle tanks. Its task is to disable the armored personnel carrier, infantry fighting vehicles, enemy’s engineering structures and the destruction of manpower. The use of the DBMS also complicates the installation of air conditioning systems and, in general, significantly complicates the work of the crew.

Proudly builds the "Petrel"


Domestic developers of remote-controlled combat modules do not lag behind their Western competitors, offering solutions that are not inferior to foreign products. At the same time, innovative developments are proposed, which have no direct analogues in Europe and the USA.

The Russian TsNII "Burevestnik" continues to modernize the DubNS 6C21, the supplies of which to the Armed Forces have recently increased significantly. The module is offered to the customer in three versions, which differ in the main armament, the amount of ammunition, weight, and a number of other characteristics.

Secrets of a deserted tower


The 6C21 includes an armament unit, an aiming complex, a platform with guidance drives, an ammunition system. The operator’s workplace inside the combat vehicle is equipped with a gunner panel with an integrated ballistic computer, a control panel, and auxiliary equipment. The 6C21 DBMS can be used as a station for intelligence gathering. Service information and video are transmitted via CAN 2.0, RS485, HD-DSI, Ethernet (Ethernet) channels. Thus, the domestic module is multifunctional and not inferior to foreign analogues, which are often installed specifically for the purpose of conducting reconnaissance and data transmission (in this case, they are not equipped with weapons).

Depending on the modification, the standard XHUMX6 anti-aircraft gun is equipped with two types of weapons: the 21-mm 12,7P6 “Kord” machine gun (49 version) or the Kalashnikov 01-mm machine gun (tank version 7,62 and 02). The maximum amount of ammunition ammunition is respectively 03, 200 and 500 cartridges.

At the military-technical forum "Army-2015" and the international exhibition of armaments RAE 2015, another modification of the DBNM 6-21 was presented, which is not available in the official data provided by the Burevestnik Central Research Institute. As the main armament, the module is equipped with an Vladimirov 14,5-mm large-caliber machine gun (KPVT), the exact data on its ammunition was not presented. A set of optoelectronic equipment, drives, and ammunition are placed inside a closed armored casing, which significantly increases the survival rate of the SDM on the battlefield.

The manufacturer did not indicate the level of body armor, however, based on the characteristics of similar foreign modules, it can be assumed that it corresponds to the 1 – 2 level of the NATO standard STANAG 4569 (protection from 5,56 – 7,62 mm caliber bullets, including armor-piercing-incendiary). It is also not known whether the principle of loading a machine gun from the armored space is implemented in this modification.

The mass of the MFDM in the three main versions is no more than 230, 200 and 185 kilograms, respectively. The corners of the main armament are sufficient to use the module in peacekeeping operations: they range from -5 (optional to -15) to + 75 degrees at a pickup angle of 360 degrees horizontally. In the basic version, the EAR is not equipped with a weapon stabilizer, however it can be installed at the request of the customer. Repeated remote arming of the firing mechanism of a weapon is allowed. The anti-theurist system in the 03 version can be equipped with a hydropneumatic system for cleaning protective glasses of optoelectronic equipment. The 01 6C21 is equipped as a standard sight with a television rangefinder module (MTD), while the 02 and 03 versions are equipped with a sight with a tele-thermal rangefinder module (MTTD). At the request of the customer, all versions of the DUBM can be equipped with both MTD and MTTD.

The 6С21 module can be used on the widest range of military equipment, including MRAP (Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected) class TAPM "Tayfun-U" and "Tayfun-K", Tiger multi-purpose armored vehicle, armored personnel carrier BTR-80. A modification of the 6-21 DUBM for equipping warships is currently under development. The 6C21 module is installed on the promising Russian armored vehicles, including the BTR on the Kuragnets-25 and Boomerang platforms. In this case, apply a new modification of the module, enclosed in an armored box. As the main armament, it is equipped with a machine gun caliber 12,7 millimeter.

Thus, on the basis of the 6C21 module, a whole line of combat modules is created to equip light and medium armored vehicles of all classes, as well as ships. It is possible that this particular model will become the main SDM in the Russian Armed Forces. Its characteristics are at least not inferior to Western counterparts. The only drawback is the lack of automatic grenade launchers (AH) and 902 “Tucha” smoke grenade launchers as standard weapons. However, the specialists of the Petrel Research Institute are probably already working on solving these problems on the integration of AH and Tuchi, which will greatly enhance the combat characteristics of the module. At the same time, the integration of 14,5-mm KPVT 6C21 provides fire superiority over Western counterparts in the class, which are most often armed with 12,7-mm machine guns M2 or M3, whose characteristics are not enough to effectively defeat light and medium armored vehicles on modern battlefield.

Light Crossbow


The Russian company "Weapons workshops "together with the Kovrov Electromechanical Plant (KEMZ, part of the holding" High-precision complexes ") has developed its own version of the promising DBM, which has received the designation" Crossbow-DM ". At the moment, his tests are being completed, and in the near future it can be taken into service.

On the RAE 2015, the module was demonstrated on three platforms: the Tigr-M armored car, the MTLB multi-purpose light armored tractor, and the ANT-1000Р robotic loader. "Arbalet-DM" can be installed on other land and marine equipment.

The mass of the DBMS does not exceed 250 kilograms. As standard weapons used 12,7-mm heavy machine gun 6P49 "Kord". The module is equipped with an electromechanical stabilizer that improves the accuracy of shooting. The maximum target range during the daytime is 2000 meters, and at night - 1500. The module can destroy low-flying subsonic aircraft. The machine gun of the module is reloaded manually; reloading from the reserved space is not provided. Horizontal lifting angles range from -20 to + 70 degrees. The standard ammunition 6P49 "Kord" has 450 ammunition, of which 150 is already installed in the cartridge box of the module. The UAB is also equipped with four 902В “Cloud” grenade launchers.

"Arbalet-DM" is equipped with a surveillance and sighting television (TV) cameras, as well as sighting thermal imaging (TPV) camera. Sighting TV camera allows you to recognize the target at a distance of 2500 meters, and TPV - 1500 meters. The integrated laser range finder provides distance measurement within 100 – 3000 meters. The data of the sighting system of the module are displayed on an 17-inch monitor with a resolution of 1280x1024 pixels.

Stable "Kalashnikov"


The new DUBM has also developed the Kalashnikov concern. He received the designation MBDU. For the first time, the model of the module was shown at the Army-2015 military-technical forum, and the firing of the weapons installed on it took place on the RAE 2015. The MBDU is equipped with a two-axis gyrostabilization system, automatic tracking of the selected moving target and memorization of fixed targets to 10. Booking a module provides protection against B-32 B-7,62 mm caliber armor-piercing bullets (complying with the NATO standard STANAG 3 4569 level).

Four types of weapons can be installed on the module: machine guns of 12,7 and 7,62 calibers of a millimeter, an adapted version of the 30-mm AGS-17 automatic grenade launcher, and a new 40-mm automatic grenade launcher.

The horizontal angle of rotation of the rotary platform of the module is 360 degrees, and the angular velocity of rotation is 60 degrees / s. The unit is equipped with a wide and narrow field of view video cameras, a laser range finder, and image enhancement filters under nonnormable observation conditions. The maximum measured distance to the target is 2,5 thousands of meters.

Plus a gun


Russian developers are paying attention and direction, which in the West is practically not worked out. In particular, the development of jointly launched double armored vehicles with combined cannon armament are being created. A prototype of such a module, mounted on a perspective modification of the Dragoon BMP-3, was demonstrated at the RAE 2015. As the main armament of the UAB is the gun-launcher 2А70. 30-mm automatic gun 2А72 is paired with it. OAKM is associated with the Vityaz fire control system (FCS). The control system of the module is installed in the housing of the combat vehicle.

The developer of "Draguna" - concern "Tractor Plants" continues to work towards the creation and enhancement of the characteristics of a promising module. In the event that it will be developed, successfully tested, adopted and put into mass production, the firepower of the BMP-3 will increase significantly. It is noteworthy that, unlike the M1128 MGS, the working conditions of the crew do not deteriorate. Despite the fact that the prototype occupies a significant place in the reserve space, the redevelopment of the BMP-3 "Dragoon", on which it is installed, allows the crew to stay comfortably in the car and quickly leave the battlefield.

Probably, the new SDS will receive a mechanized loading system, which will contain more shots than the M1128 and is easier to equip. The module retains the 902 smoke cloud grenade launchers. As a result, the upcoming deployed motorized rifle units can be covered with a smoke screen. With the exception of M1128, the new Russian DBMS has no direct analogues.

Thus, the latest developments of Russian designers allow us to state that at the technological level, domestic developments are at least not inferior to foreign analogues. It is important that remote-controlled combat modules firmly take up their position in the range of weapons of modern Russian technology and begin to be actively used in the troops. Their integration will simultaneously increase the market competitiveness of Russian weapons. In the event that this happens, it is possible with good reason to believe that after a not too long period of time, domestic SDMs will be worthy of competition to Western models.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/27399
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Hammer
    Hammer 11 October 2015 05: 32 New
    17
    N-yes, most of all mankind has succeeded in killing science
    1. dima mzk
      dima mzk 11 October 2015 11: 11 New
      +1
      this is a clinic, do not get away from it
    2. War and Peace
      War and Peace 11 October 2015 13: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: Hammer
      N-yes, most of all mankind has succeeded in killing science



      to shoot does not mean-to kill-these modules for machines not of the front edge of the front, but of all kinds of transport, engineering i.e. more in order not to advance, but to fight back from the attack ...
    3. kalebasula
      kalebasula 11 October 2015 19: 10 New
      +5
      man is a predator by nature. If we do not create modern weapons, then where are the guarantees that the Americans will not continue their aggressive policy and will not take advantage of our hypothetical pacephism ???
      1. kalebasula
        kalebasula 11 October 2015 19: 17 New
        +8
        By the way - for example, most large herbivores have formidable natural weapons in the form of horns, fangs, spikes and all kinds of poisonous glands for self-defense. This is a weapon to protect. Russia is about the same way developing its methods of defense, and this does not contradict evolution in any way. Note - evolution, not self-destruction
    4. dmi.pris
      dmi.pris 11 October 2015 19: 33 New
      +2
      There is one well-known claim that war is the engine of progress. A large number of advanced inventions, from a ballpoint pen to a computer, are the fruit of military development.
      Quote: Hammer
      N-yes, most of all mankind has succeeded in killing science
      1. Scraptor
        Scraptor 11 October 2015 23: 12 New
        -5
        a ballpoint pen - maybe, but a computer - no ...
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 12 October 2015 12: 56 New
          0
          The Americans say that they invented the computer and it was for the needs of the military, in fact, their first computer was for the needs of the American census and other statistics (for the Angians and the Germans, for engineering calculations). Later they were posted to Nazi Germany and were registered as prisoners in concentration camps. One of the founders of IBM even received a medal from the Fuhrer for this, lay in the museum, then recently "returned" when the addressee had already left ... The Anti-Fascist Committee even apologized from this company and, it seems, even knocked out grandmothers. "IBM + Fuhrer Medal" google and enjoy ...
  2. NEXUS
    NEXUS 11 October 2015 05: 44 New
    +7
    One amusing thought doesn’t leave me - we are on the verge of the appearance of transforming robots, aircraft of three environments (water, atmosphere, space), laser and plasma weapons, and, in general, technologies that are much more destructive than nuclear weapons. Humanity has a tendency to self-destruction at the genetic level. .
    1. Old warrior
      Old warrior 11 October 2015 05: 52 New
      +7
      In humanity at the genetic level is the desire for self-destruction.

      Schwarzenegger said this in the second Terminator laughing
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 11 October 2015 06: 32 New
        +6
        Quote: Old Warrior
        Schwarzenegger said this in the second Terminator

        laughing
      2. Michael_59
        Michael_59 11 October 2015 09: 08 New
        +2
        Quote: NEXUS
        In humanity at the genetic level is the desire for self-destruction.

        Quote: Old Warrior
        Schwarzenegger said this in the second Terminator


        This is what the Satanists told you to justify all the evil they did and attribute it to people. To make, so to speak, a natural part and a sign of human civilization.
      3. Juborg
        Juborg 11 October 2015 11: 46 New
        +2
        Quote: Old Warrior
        In humanity at the genetic level is the desire for self-destruction.

        Schwarzenegger said this in the second Terminator laughing


        Poor you know history, and even worse philosophy. No .... This is a feature of all people .... And not everyone as a whole, everyone wants to live !!!! Self-destruction is a payment for progress !!!!
        Read at your leisure Freil Z. or his follower, for seed. And what religion offers us in this regard is generally an awareness of divine impunity.
    2. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 11 October 2015 06: 22 New
      +2
      Secrets of a deserted tower
      Yesterday I was at a wedding (niece), I tried to unravel this secret, I couldn’t ... I had to drink stupidly ... recourse
    3. Boris55
      Boris55 11 October 2015 07: 35 New
      +6
      Quote: NEXUS
      In humanity at the genetic level is the desire for self-destruction.

      I disagree.
      God is not a sadist and he, for the sake of entertainment, does not arrange "gladiatorial battles" between people, does not put in his creations, at the genomic level, the desire of some to kill others. This is the work of human hands - the desire of some to live at the expense of others. He would like to get rid of the human race - he would arrange another flood. God is not a sadist.

      From the book of the prophet Isaiah: (Bible)
      60.11. And your gates will always be open, they will not be shut neither day nor night, so that the wealth of the nations may be brought to you and their kings brought.
      60.12. For the people and kingdoms that do not want to serve you will perish, and such peoples will be completely destroyed.
      1. Valga
        Valga 11 October 2015 08: 30 New
        +2
        It is unnatural for a human to kill. Only with mental health problems is it possible to kill. Even for the purpose of self-defense, or "for the Motherland" it is very difficult. The more people who managed to step over this barrier, the more chances to win.
        It's like dogs, for example, there is no concept of fighting breed in cynology, but there is a dog with a broken and damaged psyche.
        There is a need for killings, and there are fewer people capable of it. First, uninhabited towers, (from the monitor it’s easier, like a game), and then with artificial intelligence.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 11 October 2015 10: 21 New
          +1
          Quote: Valga
          It is unnatural for a person to kill.

          If this were taboo and unnatural for people, then there would be no weapon in principle. There are norms, commandments, conscience and laws, but there is greed, self-interest, envy, greed and hypocrisy.
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 11 October 2015 10: 18 New
        +1
        Quote: Boris55
        I disagree.
        God is not a sadist and he, for the sake of entertainment, does not arrange "gladiatorial battles" between people

        But God does not suit. All wars, murders, etc., are created by man himself.
        Quote: Boris55
        I disagree.

        Then explain why everything is the most advanced: thought, decisions, will is connected precisely with the invention of weapons? And in general, why does mankind make so much effort to invent the most sophisticated types of destruction not just of people, but of entire nations, cities and continents?
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 11 October 2015 11: 39 New
          +1
          Quote: NEXUS
          Then explain why everything is the most advanced: thought, decisions, will is connected precisely with the invention of weapons? And in general, why does mankind make so much effort to invent the most sophisticated types of destruction not just of people, but of entire nations, cities and continents?

          I gave a link to the concept of the device of the current world and gave a couple of quotes from it.
          First thought - then action. As we think, we do so. We all live in biblical culture, the last book of which is the apocalypse. Change the concept - and change the priorities.
        2. Scraptor
          Scraptor 11 October 2015 13: 10 New
          +2
          Quote: NEXUS
          why is everything the most advanced: thought, decisions, will is connected precisely with the invention of weapons?

          Not at all ... It's just more in sight for those who are interested.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 11 October 2015 13: 24 New
            +2
            Quote: Scraptor
            Not at all ... It's just more in sight for those who are interested.

            Do not tell me ... the defense industry has always been the locomotive that drives progress forward. There are many examples, from the advent of the Internet, GPS, mobile phones to nylon tights. hi
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 11 October 2015 15: 08 New
              +3
              And how do these two, for example, directly relate to the defense industry?
              Internet - academically proct, GPS - civil transport, mobile - also, except for nylon, it is full of other plastics.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 11 October 2015 15: 14 New
                +3
                Quote: Scraptor
                And how do these two, for example, directly relate to the defense industry?

                Tesla discovered the principles by which HAARP and Sura appeared, and Einstein, one might say, the grandfather of nuclear weapons. hi
                1. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 11 October 2015 15: 26 New
                  +3
                  Tesla was a practitioner, principles were discovered by someone Maxwell (and a group of comrades before him).
                  The Germans invented nuclear weapons, to which the French tried to cling, but failed.
                  1. NEXUS
                    NEXUS 11 October 2015 15: 37 New
                    +3
                    Quote: Scraptor
                    Tesla was a practitioner, principles were discovered by someone Maxwell (and a group of comrades before him).

                    Tesla showed that this is possible.
                    Quote: Scraptor
                    The Germans invented nuclear weapons, to which the French tried to cling, but failed.

                    Einstein was directly involved in the appearance of the atomic bomb in the United States.
                    1. Scraptor
                      Scraptor 11 October 2015 15: 47 New
                      +5
                      Tesla showed that his products work and benefit. He was an inventor and not a scientist. Read how much he has done.

                      Because Einstein saw her drawings from Heisenberg at the University of Berlin, after which he hit the road with something in his beak from the USA repeat
                      And he is involved in another.
              2. anti-Semite
                anti-Semite 11 October 2015 21: 34 New
                +2
                GPS was not the first navigation system, for the first time a satellite navigation system was made in the USSR for the needs of the Air Force since there were problems with orientation during night flights above the sea surface
              3. philosopher
                philosopher 5 January 2016 23: 39 New
                0
                Are these two to the defense industry? - Nothing.
                One (Nikola Tesla) is a real scientist who wanted to give people free electricity to improve the lives of everyone; put forward many useful ideas that were realized much later than his death.
                And the other is a scoundrel who stole another's hypothesis (also false) in order to grab a prize and laurels (however, it didn’t work on the first try).
          2. kalebasula
            kalebasula 11 October 2015 19: 24 New
            +4
            simply, any invention in principle is potentially a probable part of military affairs. For the modern world with its norms of interstate relations, moral and spiritual norms. With what is commonly called human genetics (animal predispositions), there are three of the most important components of statehood - this is the army, science, and medicine. Among these three, by far the most important component unfortunately is the army. It may be several millennia before the genotype of a person across the earth changes in favor of pacifism and anarchy. Although I don’t believe in it (in the possibility of anarchy and complete peace on earth) ... The military simply thinks about the best achievements of scientists faster than others. And it is right
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 11 October 2015 23: 07 New
              0
              with atrocious ... that's different.

              military? Yes, not always. more right engineers and technologists, and then back scientists and business executives, entrepreneurs or managers ...
    4. kalebasula
      kalebasula 11 October 2015 19: 12 New
      +1
      More than half of the inventions of mankind, including those designed to improve the world, were created either during the creation of weapons or are directly former military technologies.
      1. Scraptor
        Scraptor 11 October 2015 22: 50 New
        +1
        For example, a sewing machine, a water and windmill, a cart, a loom, a tea clipper, a paper, a plow, a harrow, an agricultural processor, a melting furnace, a telegraph, a blender, a food processor, a refrigerator, a condenser, a radio, an inductor, dyes, polynesia outriggers, pomeranian kochi, pencil, roller skates, stadium, hockey stick, billiards, bowling alley, light bulb, metro, balloon, candle, airship, konka, tram, bus, vacuum cleaner, sailing yacht, toilet bowl, tv, tv camera, trolley bus, elevator, elevator, sleigh, bicycle, mining machine, airplane, electric motor, arch, arch, suspension bridges, seine, car, engine, telephone, tractor, steam locomotive, diesel locomotive, icebreaker, electric locomotive, drilling platform, fishing trawler, (partontel laughing ) iPhone, communication and navigation satellites?
        Military inventions are 2-3 percent and another 5 percent is a side effect of them.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 11 October 2015 23: 07 New
          +1
          Quote: Scraptor
          Military inventions are 2-3 percent and another 5 percent is a side effect of them.

          All that you listed, with few exceptions, is either a product of the defense industry, or it has developed and improved thanks to it. In any state, approximately 7 to 13 people in related industries work for one person in the defense industry.
          Let's take the same TU-160, the resumption of its production ... You look at how many CIVIL enterprises worked in the USSR for this final product. Or an eternal theme, the Russian aircraft carrier ...
          Microelectronics now, and in the days of the union, where did it come from and thanks to what is it developing? ... There are many examples.
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 12 October 2015 00: 57 New
            +1
            Justify at least two or three examples from the list so as not to be completely unfounded ... laughing

            Microelectronics has emerged from academic science and is developing in laboratories, both in the same and in commercial ones. With such a worldview, they will soon believe that the military tractor, the tank, appeared before the peace.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 12 October 2015 02: 00 New
              +2
              Quote: Scraptor
              Justify at least two or three examples from the list so as not to be completely unfounded ...

              Izvolte. I take it off ... PLOW. Maybe it was created with a metal tip earlier than the simplest knife, which is still very debatable, but it was the war that moved metallurgy ...
              Continue. TELEGRAPH. The military began to use the telegraph quite seriously, and improved it.
              DIRECTORY: Excuse me, weren't the military used them heavily in the First World War? And then, if not airships, but balloons were used in the defense of Moscow? Again, here is chemistry (working with gases), and materials and engine building ... To Edinburgh. Now they are slowly returning in civilian fashion to this relatively cheap form of transportation. A balloon, a balloon is all from the same song.
              As for iPhones, communication satellites, and navigation ... so I'm sorry, but let's say GPS was created specifically for military needs, just like our Glonass, too. And about the iPhone and generally computers, mobile phones, etc. ... I'll ask you one question-And where would it all be if the Internet weren’t? By definition, the military means of communication are created and developed to a greater extent, since communications are vital in military affairs.
              The military-industrial complex of any country is the engine that gives the development of industry of any (heavy, light), science (chemistry, physics, mathematics, etc.), technical thought (an example of astronautics). Unfortunately, it is WAR and MILITARY pushing progress forward.
              Remember at least Sikorsky, with what he began, or Porsche.
              1. Cat man null
                Cat man null 12 October 2015 02: 17 New
                0
                Quote: NEXUS
                The military-industrial complex of any country is the engine that gives the development of any industry (heavy, light)

                Let us suppose..

                Quote: NEXUS
                sciences (chemistry, physics, mathematics, etc.)

                Oh well, in the stump! Rather, the military-industrial complex finds application for discoveries made by fundamental science (not to be confused with industry, there the military-industrial complex may act as the customer of any research)

                Quote: NEXUS
                technical thought (example of astronautics)

                Mdya .. Tsiolkovsky, of course, precisely about the Kyrgyz Republic Caliber and dreamed .. wink

                IMHO you skidded slightly. Although in many ways you are right.
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 12 October 2015 08: 55 New
                  +2
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  Mdya .. Tsiolkovsky, of course, precisely about the Kyrgyz Republic Caliber and dreamed ..

                  I actually meant the Queen, Chelomei, Yangel ... they worked primarily on the defense industry.
                  1. Scraptor
                    Scraptor 12 October 2015 11: 32 New
                    0
                    Cosmonautics did not start with them.
                    1. NEXUS
                      NEXUS 12 October 2015 13: 20 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Scraptor
                      Cosmonautics did not start with them.

                      They were one of the first PRACTICES. Tsialkovsky was more a theorist.
                      1. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 13: 31 New
                        0
                        Where would these practices go without him? Korolev began with gliders in Koktebel.

                        You actually meant cosmonautics - like the imperial X-fighters and battleships_yamato with the queens zadolbali, it is not yet visible. wassat
                      2. NEXUS
                        NEXUS 12 October 2015 13: 46 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Where would these practices go without him? Korolev began with gliders in Koktebel.

                        Does this somehow contradict my claims?
                      3. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 13: 51 New
                        0
                        The allegations contradict the fact that astronautics is an invention of the civilian and predominantly civilian field.
          2. Scraptor
            Scraptor 12 October 2015 02: 39 New
            0
            About the PLOW was not about metallurgy. Without a metal tip, it was created even earlier. In terms of metallurgy, no one needs bridges to collapse, steam engines / turbines (and the latter were still in antique) or which part failed (even if the chronometer has abrasion or variable loads).

            TELEGRAPH (electric) - civilian, and certainly not for the military it was invented. For mail, news press and zdorora.

            DIRECTORAL - read how Zepellin collected a penny from the Germans and they carried them to him, and the military was not interested ... Then - yes, they used it, but it's not the other way around, as you all try to imagine! And then it died out - because it’s too cheap a transport, competitors are heavier than air and their allies, you can’t cut the dough.

            GPS was not made for military use, but for navigating ships at sea. The military simply "relaxed" and began to use it. Satellites are easily disabled. They didn't like it.

            Internet is an academic project. A network between four universities, not military research centers. Communication is everywhere needed.

            The military-industrial complex usually removes foams and secrets them. Tsiolkovsky was not going to use space for military purposes wassat

            WAR and MILITARY business are repelled by technological progress!

            Sikrosky began with civilian aircraft, Porsche - with a civilian car.

            "YOUR" is a machine gun, a catapult, a trebuchet, a cannon, Greek fire, a cuirass, a shield, a sea mine, a sword, a fighter (they put a machine gun on an airplane) and then (after the sword - a large hunting dagger) not inventions but a compilation of them (how to put machine gun on the plane and get a fighter).
            an optical sight, and even that was created for hunting, like a bow with arrows, and not for hunting wild animals, but against them (for example, tigers of eating Indians were shot in India). like the walls / outskirts so that they do not climb ... then people began to water each other, and when they do ... repeat
  • Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 11 October 2015 05: 58 New
    +2
    Good line. (in three main versions). KPVT classic repeat
    1. Basarev
      Basarev 11 October 2015 08: 20 New
      +2
      Only the article looks more like an advertisement. And I was waiting for a serious technological analysis.
      1. lelikas
        lelikas 11 October 2015 12: 07 New
        -1
        Quote: Basarev
        Only the article looks more like an advertisement. And I was waiting for a serious technological analysis.

        In the last topic on "Dragoon", no one explained to me, except for the minuses, how they put everything in this tower - and the answer here is - right in the article - In the event that it will be developed, successfully tested ,,,,,
  • aszzz888
    aszzz888 11 October 2015 06: 07 New
    +2
    Campaigns at DBMs have a very great future. And in various variations - a lot of modifications.
  • fa2998
    fa2998 11 October 2015 08: 42 New
    -1
    Quote: aszzz888
    Campaigns at DBMs have a very great future.

    And the deserted tower at the "Armata" is the same from this opera? I thought that the deserted tower is a sharp decrease in geometric dimensions, a frontal projection (which reduces the possibility of defeat). Looking at "Armata" is some kind of exception! hi
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 11 October 2015 13: 55 New
      +2
      Quote: fa2998
      I thought that a deserted tower is a sharp decrease in geometric dimensions, frontal projection (which reduces the possibility of defeat)

      Firstly, at present, with all high-precision weapons, reducing the frontal projection does not make much sense - it will fall anyway. This time, two - how are you going to reduce the silhouette of the car due to uninhabited modules, if most of them contain everything inside the module itself - and weapons and ammunition, which in the inhabited towers were located mainly in the hull (at least part of it), and Now it’s all shoved into the tower itself, of course, that in this case it can become even larger than before.
      Now with regard to our long-suffering armor: let's remember that this is a tank for a moment, and the tank has serious armor. And the tower, even if it is uninhabited, should be the most armored part of the tank, because it catches most of the hits. Moreover, in light of the appearance of all good things in our "partners" like "spikes" or "javelins" that hit the upper hemisphere, it would be nice to place decent armor on the "roof" of this very tower. So it turns out that a seemingly uninhabited tower, which should be small, increases in size due to the thick armor hung on it (moreover, the thick roof armor will seriously increase the height). I do not pretend to be true in the highest instance, but nevertheless the variant I described looks very plausible.
      1. Scraptor
        Scraptor 11 October 2015 14: 51 New
        +2
        Is it from a high mind?
        Quote: Albert1988
        it doesn’t make much sense to reduce frontal projections - it’s still going to

        Well, walk along the battlefield in height, anyway a sniper will hit you.
        For other questions - look at how the "long-suffering" armata is arranged, there are answers ...
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 11 October 2015 16: 06 New
          +2
          No, this is just a common opinion among the military now, based on their own experience or analysis of other people's experience, I only retell it))))
          Quote: Scraptor
          Well, walk along the battlefield in height, anyway a sniper will hit you.

          It’s not possible to book a person so far, and snipers do not have homing bullets yet, so crawling along the plastunks for infantry - until the norms, as they will create an acceptable exoskeleton with normal armoring, it will be possible to go around in some places with your own gogol. But when they invent homing bullets capable of independently finding the goal and changing the trajectory, only then they will only weigh themselves with armor and will remain ...

          Quote: Scraptor
          For other questions - look at how the "long-suffering" armata is arranged, there are answers ...

          This is the main thing, but here's the catch - armata is still classified for the most part, so we, ordinary people, have only to guess, but I think one thing should be taken into account - our engineers have a huge experience in the design of armored vehicles, and they obviously do not sit in the design bureau. " alternatively thinking ", so if the T-14 has such a large turret, then there is a technical need for that.
          By the way, the photo (in terrible quality, true) of the T-14 without a casing - you can see that the whole tower there is essentially a rotating flat base with devices and a gun box mounted on it, and in volume much smaller than with a casing, a logical question arises - what located between the tower itself and the casing?
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 11 October 2015 17: 07 New
            0
            With the exoskeleton, they will still crawl on all fours (or hexagons). There are no walking tanks, unlike walking excavators.
            The low side will give the best camouflage and concealment behind the folds of the terrain, makes it difficult to aim and facilitates the removal of the WTO interference.

            In fact, the crew of Almaty in a separate armored capsule (this can be seen even in the hatches from above), the rest is already secondary - it will not reach him.

            It seemed that you are only a specialist in genetics and social Darwinism ... wink
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 11 October 2015 20: 35 New
              +1
              Quote: Scraptor
              With the exoskeleton, they will still crawl on all fours (or hexagons). There are no walking tanks, unlike walking excavators.

              Here you are most likely right, booking a person well, most likely, will not work, although I still think that when exoskeletons begin to be produced in large quantities, they will save some "Papuans" from the old firearms (in fact, why are the Americans so actively developing them - mostly fight with the Papuans).

              Quote: Scraptor
              The low side will give the best camouflage and concealment behind the folds of the terrain, makes it difficult to aim and facilitates the removal of the WTO interference.

              Unfortunately, now the detection of equipment is carried out not so much by ground means as by unmanned aerial vehicles, and they, "looking from above," you know, do not care what silhouette the equipment has.


              Quote: Scraptor
              In fact, the crew of Almaty in a separate armored capsule (this can be seen even in the hatches from above), the rest is already secondary - it will not reach him.

              It is clear, only that the claims go to the tower - they say "too big, but because of that the frontal projection is large, and this is bad." But it should be borne in mind - our engineers are far from "alternative thinking", and such a tower configuration is hardly just a "miscalculation", which means it is interesting to know the reasons for its size (although I perfectly understand that this will not happen very soon).



              Quote: Scraptor
              It seemed that you are only a specialist in genetics and social Darwinism ...

              Well, yes I'm a professional geneticist smile , but I am not fond of "social Darwinism" - the primitive and fundamentally incorrect theories of insolent Saxon chauvinists do not interest me. And in terms of armored vehicles - I'm just interested in the topic, after all, modeling is my hobby (I just collect armored vehicles), I would be a specialist - I would not ask questions and I would not build assumptions based on simple logic ... although if I were a specialist, and know the device "armata" - I certainly would not write about it on the forums)))))
              1. Scraptor
                Scraptor 11 October 2015 23: 59 New
                0
                Exoskeletons have been around for a long time. Used to carry goods.

                They may not care, but the soldier in the trench and his weapons - no. Even if it is the WTO.

                The point is that he basically moved evolution while it was in the low-intellectual stage, and now it slows down more. lol
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 12 October 2015 10: 56 New
                  0
                  Quote: Scraptor
                  Exoskeletons have been around for a long time. Used to carry goods.

                  There are, but for now, purely experimental defective - either on a leash in the form of a wire, or too weak to carry anything other than a small payload strapped to their frame (for example, the American "Hulk", which does not even have hands, but which is already active in their troops are advancing as part of the trials). Although you forget about such an important segment as medical exoskeletons, they are now developing rather quickly, but on the other hand, they do not need to endure loads other than the human body (and even then not completely). I allowed myself to fantasize about a full-fledged exoskeleton with a powerful compact power source and mounted bulletproof protection, which provides good protection from not the most powerful bullets at the end. With due progress in the relevant fields of science, this can be realized in the near future.

                  Quote: Scraptor
                  They may not care, but the soldier in the trench and his weapons - no. Even if it is the WTO.

                  The WTO is just guided by the data from the drone, so it doesn’t give a damn, the main thing is to catch the signal, on the other hand the means for which you need what’s called visual contact are now used at such distances that any tank will be visible well (to the pancake state you still can't flatten it).

                  Quote: Scraptor
                  The point is that he basically moved evolution while it was in the low-intellectual stage, and now it slows down more.

                  What are you talking about? Social Darwinism? Well, in that case, I doubt that he moved something there in principle. after all, in fact, it was an attempt to bring the natural science base under the teachings of Mr. Malthus, and it, in turn, was aimed at justifying the great social stratification in Victorian England and the unwillingness of the authorities to do something about it. But many did not agree with Malthuanism in its pure form (especially the socially unprotected strata, which were the majority), so they had to “prove” that social inequality is a type of “natural phenomenon” and nothing can be done about it.
                  1. Scraptor
                    Scraptor 12 October 2015 12: 11 New
                    0
                    Purely were on the armament of the Soviet Army. With gasoline engine or air spring. Used for example in Afghanistan, especially in the mountains.

                    Visual contact with the target at low side is difficult. Unmanned aerial vehicles are not guided from the trenches; they are shot down or interfered with, like the WTO. The most effective tool for the tank now is BOPS.

                    About social Darwinism in the world of animals and animals. All about the same. The tortoise got its shell for a very definite purpose, like the mollusks that hide in other people's shells. Do not count them as fools.
                    1. Albert1988
                      Albert1988 12 October 2015 14: 25 New
                      0
                      Quote: Scraptor
                      Purely were on the armament of the Soviet Army. With gasoline engine or air spring. Used for example in Afghanistan, especially in the mountains.

                      Very interesting, where are they now? With gasoline engines and air cylinders ...
                      Quote: Scraptor
                      Visual contact with the target at low side is difficult.

                      Difficult, but not critical - again, watch the video of the "moderate" Syrian opposition about how they burn the tanks of the government army with "non-lethal" American TOWs - the fire is fired from such distances and appropriate positions that even if the tanks are hiding behind the folds of the relief or entrenched, then the low silhouette does not save them (the T-64, for example, has a small silhouette). The tank still cannot be completely hidden, alas, by definition, it should be at the forefront, which means that it will be in the line of direct fire of bearded men with a shaitan's pipe, that is, some of its parts will still protrude from behind the shelter.
                      Quote: Scraptor
                      The drones are not guided from the trenches, they are shot down or interfere with them like the WTO

                      Of course, the drone can be knocked down or hammered by obstacles, the problem is their large number and cheapness, and therefore the impossibility to completely get rid of them, on the other hand, the protection of the upper hemisphere in modern tanks is so weak that any knock on it guarantees defeat of the tank, which means the drone can calmly detect the tank, transmit its coordinates and die calmly. Even the not very accurate hit of the WTO in the tank’s roof will cause its death, and there are still not enough EW tools to cover all the armored vehicles in the database area - they are expensive infections ... for now ...
                      Quote: Scraptor
                      The most effective tank tool now is BOPS

                      Not really, because the BOPS hits mainly in the frontal / lateral projection, and there the protection is very serious (the forehead at least), and far from portable installations that can drag 1-2 men and put them in the nearest bushes or on the roof shed. Another tank / self-propelled gun / towed cannon is much easier to spot than a person with the same Javelin on his shoulder.
                      On the other hand, even tanks and anti-tank guns have now begun to shoot from closed positions, so that the defeat of the tank is possible without its direct line of sight, which means that the low silhouette is no longer as effective as before.
                      Quote: Scraptor
                      On social Darwinism in the world of animals and animals

                      Uh, no, you don’t confuse, my friend - the very simple Darwinism, refined, without any prefixes, is used (or rather used before) in the animal world, in fact, it was born from observing these very animals. And social Darwinism applies exactly what to human society, for which it was invented by the gentlemen of the British - I wrote above ...
                      1. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 15: 09 New
                        0
                        Ask the ensigns and generals.

                        Significantly difficult.
                        Only successful ones show there?

                        It’s hard for BOPS to interfere.
                        Even without taking them into account, the WTO is much easier to get into Leo-2 than into the "Swedish bitch".
                        Not every soldier has a drone and a strike reconnaissance kmplex. RPG-30 each.

                        You are confused and / or confused. According to social Darwinism, not even all interspecific relations are built. Masons came up with it for people, like Darwinism for animals before, in order to overshadow even more.
                      2. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 12 October 2015 15: 46 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Ask the ensigns and generals.

                        Which specifically? Here is a friend of my late grandfather, a former colonel himself, who was in Afghanistan and had never heard of such a thing. So, most likely, if there were any developments, then they were only experimental, otherwise how can one explain that after Afghan they all disappeared?
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Significantly difficult.

                        Of course, getting into a squat target is much harder than a high one, only if your target still has a tower that protrudes from behind cover and you shoot at a maximum of a kilometer and aiming at least at the laser beam, you will still get without problems. And if the T-14 abandoned the low profile, then the rejection was in favor of something that overlaps the pros from the squat design.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        It’s hard for BOPS to interfere.

                        It’s only easy to find out who was going to shoot this BOPS and take action, and it’s much harder to find a guy with an RPG.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Even without taking them into account, the WTO is much easier to get into Leo-2 than into the "Swedish bitch".

                        And taking into account the WTO - no matter who - that Leo, that STRV-103 - all one - flew from above and there is no car.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Not every soldier has a drone and a strike reconnaissance kmplex. RPG-30 each

                        If it comes to that, then the "hook" is not universal for everyone, on the other hand, a tank can reach a maximum from a distance of 300-400 meters (the official range is 200m) - and at this distance, even on the notorious STRV-103, you won't miss too much if you know how to aim. The low profile is relevant only at distances over a kilometer.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Confused you and / or confused you

                        No, you confuse it, read what social Darwinism is and when it arose, and relations between species are described not by social Darwinism, but by ordinary Darwinism, or rather they were described earlier - now there are more advanced theories.
                      3. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 16: 49 New
                        0
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        otherwise, how then to explain that after Afghan they all disappeared?

                        Perestroika was probably sold like the Yak to America. now something is running there too ...
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Which specifically?

                        There were more than a dozen exoskeletons there, ask the profile ensigns and generals (of those who were there). Or maybe they are on a subscription, although there’s nothing very complicated about them.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Of course

                        It’s more difficult to notice a small tower than a large one, then take aim at it, and then get there.
                        The laser beam, like light, does not always go in a straight line.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        It’s only easy to find out who was going to shoot this BOPS and take action, and it’s much harder to find a guy with an RPG.

                        And a man without an RPG, or an RPG without a man, is even more difficult.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        And taking into account the WTO - no difference

                        Imagine there is: first you need to detect, then the WTO flew in and flew past due to interference.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        If it comes to that, then the "hook" is not the same for everyone

                        The "hook" seems to be reusable, not everyone has it.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        read ...

                        These advanced theories are also wrong. Behaviorism (a change in heredity from behavior) describes everything. Both in humans and in animals.
                      4. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 12 October 2015 17: 15 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        ask the relevant warrant officers and generals

                        You understand what the hitch is - I personally do not know such people, but I did not find any other evidence, all the developments about which there is information, only recent Russian ones.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        A man without RPGs, or RPG without a man - even harder.

                        Well, why do they create PT complexes with remote control, which are placed in the right bushes, and are triggered by a remote command or generally automatically, responding, for example, to thermal radiation from the engine? Only now they have a lot of restrictions - in the angles of fire, in range and, of course, they are vulnerable to electronic warfare.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        The "hook" seems to be reusable, not everyone has it.

                        No, the hook is the same RPG 30, one-time, with two charges - a false target for KAZ and the grenade itself, first the false target flies out, then with a delay of the grenade. And as far as I know - a toy is very expensive, because there are far from everywhere.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        It’s more difficult to notice a small tower than a large one, then take aim at it, and then get there.

                        Then a logical question arises - why did the T-14 abandon the low-profile towers familiar to Russian tanks and make such a tall fool? (in the tower, its height is primarily confusing). Why sacrifice a low profile?
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        The laser beam, like light, does not always go in a straight line.

                        The stump is clear, only the tank tower for normal fire will always protrude from behind the shelter, which means nothing will hurt the laser. And if the tank is in a closed position, then it will be affected along ballistic trajectories to the upper hemisphere and a low silhouette will not save him here.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        These advanced theories are also wrong.

                        Well, think whatever you want, your opinion is your right, in the end, you need to discuss biology problems in relevant forums, and here they discuss weapons ...
                      5. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 18: 15 New
                        0
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        all developments about which there is information, only recent Russian.

                        In the 1960s, such a thing was definitely running,

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        RPG without a man

                        had a friend request

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        No, the hook is the same RPG 30

                        Why so called?
                        RPG-28 db everywhere.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Then a logical question arises

                        It is uninhabited ... although it is still better to lower.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        The stump is clear

                        he fled, fled away behind the mound, leaned out again and fired - that is how the Israelis are fighting.
                        mirages know what? even when he is in a fog, you can miss him.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        biology problems

                        this is a problem of biology and psychophysiology, there are generally no such sites, since it is banned.
                      6. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 12 October 2015 18: 51 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        In the 1960s, such a thing was definitely running,

                        Infa about her is not widely available, how did you find out about her?
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Why so called?

                        And why, for example, RPG-28 was called "cranberry", and RPG-29 - "vampire"?
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        It is uninhabited ... although it is still better to lower.

                        The question was precisely why they abandoned low profile? It is also interesting what makes the tower so tall - take a look at the photo in my post above - notice. that without a casing the silhouette of the tower is not so high.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        he fled, fled away behind the mound, leaned out again and fired - that is how the Israelis are fighting.

                        The Israelis are fighting opponents whose technical level is much lower and they are simply not conceived to hit the car in a closed position when it "hid behind the embankment", but modern western (and ours too) tanks and tank destroyers are already calmly hitting targets. not within the line of sight, that is, they can throw "behind the embankment" according to ballistics ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        mirages know what? even when he is in a fog, you can miss him.

                        Probably, only Papuans, who doesn’t have the same thermal imager, can confuse the scuffle with a real car ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        there are no such sites in general

                        Which sites do not? biological or psychophysiological? What is banned? And if this is nowhere to be found, then how do you know about this?
                        here, for example, in my native Moscow State University: http://www.psy.msu.ru/about/kaf/psychophysiology/
                        tadam)))) What is banned there?
                      7. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 19: 27 New
                        0
                        From the Internet. NASA also re-opens water on Mars once every 1,5 years, and Mat Damon had to get it all ...
                        also constantly invent entot bike laughing
                        http://www.popmech.ru/adrenalin/8056-ya-kiborg-testiruem-sapogi-skorokhody/#full


                        A hook larger than 29ke will do, there is a bipod.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        It is also interesting what makes the tower so tall - look at the photo in my post above - notice that without the casing the silhouette of the tower is not so high.

                        So the casing ... or something else not shown.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        that is, they can throw in ballistics "for the embankment" ...

                        the tank rides - does not stand still ... back obstructions.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Probably, only Papuans, who doesn’t have the same thermal imager, can confuse the scuffle with a real car ...

                        The laser is not Papuan, so it is confusing.
                        but the Papuans are more mistaken in holograms lol


                        Quote: Albert1988
                        What is banned there?
                        http://www.psy.msu.ru/about/kaf/psychophysiology/

                        for example, about its connection with evolution and degeneration ...
                      8. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 12 October 2015 20: 09 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        From the Internet.

                        Well, if you found out about these exoskeletons from the Internet, then why are you sending me to the "ensigns and generals" instead of just throwing a link?
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        A hook larger than 29ke will do, there is a bipod.

                        Well, it's not for us to decide, but for the military, they say they have a whole algorithm for this))))
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        So the casing ... or something else not shown.

                        This is interesting ... Including the vile casing ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        the tank rides - does not stand still ... back obstructions.

                        Modern systems allow you to get into the canopy quite normally on a moving target, but in order to interfere with it, you must first find out what to jam and at what frequency to jam, and if it is something (the same drone) is observing in passive mode, then it is much more difficult to detect .
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        The laser is not Papuan, so it is confusing.

                        The laser does not confuse anything, besides the laser there is also a thermal imager, a camera of polarized light, so such a phenomenon as a mirage is relevant only in rare conditions and only in relation to the human eye.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        for example, about its connection with evolution and degeneration ...

                        Heh, and by whom is it classified and when? And most importantly, how did you find out if it’s all so top secret?
                      9. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 20: 18 New
                        0
                        Some kind of reference was, and the one to look for a long time and in it incomplete information.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Modern systems allow you to get into the canopy quite normally on a moving target, but in order to interfere with it, you must first find out what to jam and at what frequency to jam, and if it is something (the same drone) is observing in passive mode, then it is much more difficult to detect .

                        Imagine much less modern systems that all discover and stun. laughing

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        an Azerbaijanian does not confuse anything, besides the laser there is also a thermal imager, a camera of polarized light, so such a phenomenon as a mirage is relevant only in rare conditions and only in relation to the human eye.

                        All this is light, and it bends not only at ... holes but is also refracted in a glass of water for example.

                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Heh, and by whom is it classified and when? And most importantly, how did you find out if it’s all so top secret?

                        Yes, all the same "Englishmen" ... laughing And, the second question, this is another question. wink
                      10. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 12 October 2015 21: 36 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Some kind of reference was, and the one to look for a long time and in it incomplete information.

                        but to me, though not complete))))) And in general it’s strange that you lost such an important link, given that this information is not very common.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Imagine much less modern systems that all discover and stun.

                        Again, I say - first you need to find all this, before drowning it out, and then again the question of the number of these "not the most modern systems" - I repeat - EW is still an expensive thing, although ours are working on this.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        All this is light, and it bends not only at ... holes but is also refracted in a glass of water for example.

                        How can I tell you, my dad was the chief designer of the optical component of the "curtain" system, so I know about the behavior of the laser in the atmosphere, and how they also struggle with laser guidance, only in order to fight the laser, you must first find out what they shine on you, it is clear that in conditions of fog or when the dust is piled high, no one will use it.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Yes, all the same "Englishmen" ...

                        Names, surnames, dates ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        And, the second question, this is another question.

                        So he doesn’t give me rest - if the British still kept secret it was not clear when, then how did you find out about this?
                      11. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 12 October 2015 22: 02 New
                        0
                        In general, I don’t collect or store them.
                        For me it’s not important.

                        This is not EW.

                        Is it so hard to know what a laser is shining on you? Especially since ATGM flies? As soon as it flies, they make fog and dust for a while with a pillar, and whatever you want, and this is shown on the training video even (not of the tank biathlon, of course).

                        What for?! Take any, unmistakable ...

                        And this was the second question, just omitted the quotes from the word "English" ...
                      12. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 12 October 2015 22: 24 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        In general, I don’t collect or store them.
                        For me it’s not important.

                        But this is in vain, because such information without specifying the source is essentially "nonsense" ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        This is not EW.

                        and then, enlighten ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Is it so hard to know what a laser is shining on you?

                        you will not believe it, but yes - the laser is not visible, it also has no taste or smell, otherwise what kind of lads did we turn up a complex optical system for its detection (optical component of the "curtain") wink
                        And only then you can put smoke screens, etc ....
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        What for?! Take any, unmistakable ...

                        What are you doing?
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        And this was the second question, just omitted the quotes from the word "English" ...

                        maybe he missed it, but that’s not the point, because you still haven’t answered the main question - how do you know about the secret connection of behaviorism, as you say, with evolution and heredity? You stubbornly shy away from the answer ...
                      13. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 13 October 2015 01: 25 New
                        0
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        in fact "brahnya" ..

                        when they see it on the link where at least about 1974 is mentioned - too?

                        You yourself then immediately wrote below ...

                        Yes, all the same ...
                        and talk less about your people and who did what.

                        With heredity (bad) - for example, Klimov. And good heredity is the same evolution.
                      14. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 13 October 2015 10: 58 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        when they see it on the link where at least about 1974 is mentioned - too?

                        And where is this "link"? Information without links is so, no more chatter ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Yes, all the same ...

                        Why the same? You need to express yourself more clearly and darken less ...
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        and talk less about your people and who did what.

                        And what? My father does not make this secret, moreover, he is already retired, although you are unlikely to find his name and surname, at least I found in all available sources only links to the enterprise, without mentioning specific employees, so there’s nothing superfluous didn't say wink
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        With heredity (bad) - for example, Klimov.

                        Klimov read - his experiments do not stand up to criticism from the point of view of the statistical reliability of the results, which means that his conclusions are incompetent, moreover, this is a very "ancient" work, when, for example, it was not known at all about the molecular mechanisms of this very heredity, and if you only you rely on Klimov, then we can state the sad fact that you are 80 years behind the times of the commercials ... And by the way, Klimov is not classified, just no one else needs it - it is outdated.

                        In general, it is clear - you do not want to report anything interesting, including on the "secret", you have no interesting considerations on the "armature", so I propose to end our discussion with you, since it has essentially turned into a transfusion from empty to empty ...
                      15. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 13 October 2015 12: 36 New
                        0
                        Above was on the magazine Popular Mechanics.

                        No need to blame everything on the British - the Irish can be offended.

                        fool

                        What kind of experiments did Klimov have? bully
                        Do not confuse the Harvard project of the Central Intelligence Agency with Manhattan.
                      16. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 13 October 2015 17: 12 New
                        0
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Above was on the magazine Popular Mechanics.

                        Where is it higher? And then you contradict yourself for:
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        In general, I don’t collect or store them.

                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Some kind of reference was, and the one to look for a long time and in it incomplete information.

                        Quote: Scraptor
                        No need to blame everything on the British - the Irish can be offended.

                        Who will be offended there is their personal sexual difficulties.
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        What kind of experiments did Klimov have?

                        You yourself must know what his experiences and observations were (mostly observations of course), if you read him wink
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        Do not confuse the Harvard project of the Central Intelligence Agency with Manhattan.

                        It is especially nice when a person confusing behaviorism with Lamarckism writes it ...
                        Let me take your leave on the sim, as I see any future communication with you as futile ...
                      17. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 13 October 2015 21: 49 New
                        -1
                        Ctrl-F "popmech" type on this page without too much fuss. The link will be (for now) on the first match of the two.

                        What kind of experiments? And also experiences? If you started it of course and read it.

                        What is Lamarckism - I read. lol What real behaviorism (from the word bihevior) can still be confused with?

                        Bow down as much as you like ... who really is against it?
                      18. Albert1988
                        Albert1988 14 October 2015 13: 23 New
                        0
                        I think I made it clear that the discussion is over, but since you still can't calm down, I will answer about your reference - I have known about the development of such "boots" for a long time, and I can assure you that they cannot be called an exoskeleton, this is only a possible element of it - one element, Karl, and optional. Moreover, in this article it is written in Russian and white:
                        “In 1985, the Minister of Defense Dmitry Ustinov gave a special order. It was necessary to make sure that the UMB turned from a“ weight on the leg ”into a light working device weighing about 1 kg. When scientists began to approach the goal (today, the eleventh in a row, the model weighs 2,3 kg), perestroika broke out, and for other army concerns in the Ministry of Defense forgot about the miracle boots." laughing
                        That is, even this very development did not go en masse to the troops, and moreover, it
                        Quote: Scraptor
                        With gasoline engine or air spring. Used for example in Afghanistan, especially in the mountains.

                        There are no indications at all, it is simply said that the military was interested.
                        And once again, this is absolutely not an exoskeleton, although there is something there, if you are convinced that behaviorism is somehow related to the problems of heredity, then I think that you also have a vision of such a thing as an exoskeleton ... your ... lol
                        And now for you to understand - the discussion is over due to its meaninglessness hi
                      19. Scraptor
                        Scraptor 15 October 2015 04: 19 New
                        -1
                        Well, finish it ...
                        What was immediately above the link written in the same paragraph about the "bike"?
                        The exoskeleton consists of such identical elements placed on a common frame.
                        There is nothing complicated in this, or in the booster technique.
                        A loading and unloading exoskeleton was made during the Soviet-Chinese split, because the Chinese special forces alone outnumbered all Soviet troops stationed along the border combined.
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        although what’s there, if you are convinced that behaviorism is somehow related to the problems of heredity,

                        Why immediately "with problems"? ... And why are you actually convinced of the opposite? You don't have to answer - I know. Something unpleasant for you in this direct connection ...
  • would
    would 12 October 2015 18: 45 New
    +1
    A wonderful example. The fact that a sniper rifle is directed by a person, not a computer, and as a result of the pointing time is a large and high probability of error, pointing is made with rare exceptions in the visual spectrum, the bullet is not able to change its direction, the bullet is not able to hit the target from the upper hemisphere, etc. Doesn't bother you?

    ATGMs and others like them have long been capable of such.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 12 October 2015 18: 51 New
      0
      ATGM is also induced by a person and not by a computer, and the WTO is interfered.
      1. would
        would 12 October 2015 19: 47 New
        +1
        Homing (like the most modern) just induces a computer. All that is required of a person is to roughly aim at the target and press the start button, and then high-tech sensors and electronic filling come into play, which themselves are aimed at the tank, themselves monitor it, etc. etc.
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 12 October 2015 20: 21 New
          0
          It is more difficult to aim at an "inconvenient" target and press for a person, and then the systems for deceiving these sensors begin to work (as on airplanes, but slightly different).
          1. would
            would 12 October 2015 20: 52 New
            +1
            Are you seriously trying to argue that coarse pointing with the start key is more difficult than firing from a sniper rifle where you yourself must accurately visit, make the right lead, calculate the distance, etc.?

            This is a bad case, in a good target designation it will generally be external. For example, with an UAV. Here the guidance will be even rougher.

            Yes, the sensors can be fooled, the projectile can be shot down. Well, how many tanks are such systems? Even in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation on the most massive T-72B3 there are no such systems. And on those tanks where they are a regular RPG, it is just as inefficient almost regardless of the size of the tank.
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 12 October 2015 21: 15 New
              -1
              After that, do you think that in the course of how the ATGM is induced and then controlled? Or even a personal grant?

              In a good case, aviation works on tanks, this reconnaissance-strike complex is called.
              Both sensors and shells are deceived.
              Quote: rait
              Well, how many tanks are such systems?

              Why are you asking? If suddenly now they’re not standing, then they’ve removed as DZ before Grozny ...
              1. would
                would 12 October 2015 22: 23 New
                0
                After that, do you think that in the course of how the ATGM is induced and then controlled?


                More than, especially considering the fact that it was about homing ATGMs that afterwards are not managed in any way, which you apparently are not aware of.

                Why are you asking?


                Then you can have any kind of the coolest active defense systems, as long as they are not on the tanks, they are of no use. And not "now they are not standing", but on the T72 (and I will repeat this as the most massive tank of the RF Armed Forces) KAZ has never been in large quantities, only in single ones.
                1. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 13 October 2015 01: 34 New
                  -1
                  Directs - the gunner. It is homing in most cases on the backlight that it provides, if not, it is nevertheless controlled.

                  "KAZ" is not a jamming complex.
                2. would
                  would 13 October 2015 05: 20 New
                  +1
                  Read, for example, the Javelin manual, everything is clearly and clearly written about how the ATGM is guided in this case by heat and why it does not need illumination and how the 3rd generation ATGM differs. I tried to explain, but apparently I don't explain it that way. "Shot and Forget" I hope says anything to you? So this is the main difference between modern anti-tank systems, no illumination, no missile guidance.

                  "KAZ" is not a jamming complex.


                  The KAZ can also include (and the modern ones include) a complex of jamming for the operation of ATGM sensors. KAZ "Afganit", for example, is capable of automatically creating a smoke screen impenetrable for all existing ATGM sensors.
                3. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 13 October 2015 05: 30 New
                  0
                  Read how GOS cheats ... it's even easier for a tank

                  Quote: rait
                  .. for example, it is able to automatically create a smoke screen impenetrable for all existing ATGM sensors in automatic mode.

                  The Stone Age - this began. Was that what they called it for fun, or to sell better? laughing wassat
                4. would
                  would 13 October 2015 06: 43 New
                  +1
                  How it is deceived is very well known. Only now I repeat, systems that are capable of this have not yet received wide distribution.

                  Stone Age - it began with this


                  Well, if you consider the advanced development (on a global scale) the Stone Age ...
                5. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 13 October 2015 07: 14 New
                  0
                  What kind of systems? bully

                  "Stone Age" - about a quote ...
                6. would
                  would 13 October 2015 08: 01 New
                  +1
                  And then you went in a circle without clear answers. There are a lot of systems, jamming, compensation and / or changing the thermal signature, setting the same smoke screens, optoelectronic suppression, etc. Why are you asking this, because you must know this? In the same way, self-guided ATGMs do not require any illumination or further maintenance, and that the KAZ also includes a complex of jamming.

                  About the Stone Age: KAZ "Afganit" is the newest complex on a global scale. But for some reason it became the Stone Age for you, so I would like to know how many decades ago (well, since the Stone Age, then the count goes for decades) a tank was created that originally carried a similar system?
                7. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 13 October 2015 12: 29 New
                  -1
                  Why would I ask about this? Walk in a circle. Homing RVVs have also been around for a long time - they are somehow struggling with them, although this is more complicated.

                  repeat the second half of the previous comment?
  • Michael_59
    Michael_59 11 October 2015 09: 23 New
    +2
    Quote: fa2998
    this is some kind of exception!

    In fact, a conscript from Rostov is being tightly brewed into the "Armata" tower. From each side. Now you write it on the "Censor" - you will immediately become a "hero".
  • Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 11 October 2015 10: 23 New
    +3
    "And despite the fact that DBMS are less common in Russia than in the West, domestic designers have proposed a number of technological solutions that can be called innovative."
    I did not understand what the innovativeness of our technological solutions is.
  • Michael_59
    Michael_59 11 October 2015 11: 46 New
    +1
    Quote: Nikolai K
    the innovation of our

    That is a good question. Isn’t it that on our technology they are the first time, so to say, these solutions are applied? laughing
  • wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 11 October 2015 12: 40 New
    +6
    This is how the DUBM 6S21 from the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik" looks like, and not what is shown in the photo in the article.





    1. cosmos111
      cosmos111 11 October 2015 15: 45 New
      +3
      Quote: wanderer_032
      This is how the DUBM 6S21 from the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik" looks like, and not what is shown in the photo in the article.


      in the photo, actually the bourgeois module ...

      ON PHOTO, DUBM module developed by Rafael, the main armament is, 7,62-mm machine gun, 12,7-mm machine gun or 40-mm automatic grenade launcher .... ((We WOULD have one for light BBMs)))



      http://topwar.ru/50046-ognevoe-moguschestvo-na-vse-sluchai-zhizni-obzor-boevyh-m



      oduley-i-bashen-dlya-mashin-legkoy-i-sredney-kategoriy-po-masse-chast-3-iz-5.htm



      l
  • bulat
    bulat 11 October 2015 15: 07 New
    +2
    I see something of the Achilles' heel in these modules. Combine it from the KPVT and everyone is blind. There are a lot of optics and decent sizes.
    1. cosmos111
      cosmos111 11 October 2015 16: 13 New
      +4
      Quote: bulat
      .Remove him from KPVT and all are blind


      enclose from KPVT, you can and the tower of the tank ... the size, there are also decent ...

      DBMS, can also be used to guard the perimeter of bases ((now very important)))

      DBM, Rafael has developed a database protection system
      1. Hello
        Hello 12 October 2015 17: 12 New
        0
        Quote: cosmos111
        Quote: bulat
        .Remove him from KPVT and all are blind


        enclose from KPVT, you can and the tower of the tank ... the size, there are also decent ...

        DBMS, can also be used to guard the perimeter of bases ((now very important)))

        DBM, Rafael has developed a database protection system

        Oh, and when I served, there were none belay
  • k_ply
    k_ply 11 October 2015 15: 57 New
    +1
    It is interesting, of course, that the photo shows foreign DBMS, where in meaning there should be modules from a specific Russian manufacturer. So in the section Proudly builds the "Petrel" a module with a 40-mm AG Mk.19 and a 7,62-mm machine gun M240 (FN MAG), and in the section Light Crossbow pictured is a DBM with a 40 mm HK GMG AG.
    Similar photos with the same success can be taken out, for example, from this page:
    http://www.kmweg.com/home/armament-systems/remote-controlled-weaponstations/flw-
    200 / product-information.html
  • Disant
    Disant 11 October 2015 16: 01 New
    +1
    I have not been to exhibitions - I did not feel it, but the main thing is that the crossbow is not undressed to the point of disgrace - a thermal imager, hydropneumatic cleaning, stabilization - so to speak, "to the basic design - economical. Well, protection from shrapnel, machine guns and dirt - you can do without it.
    and reloading from the outside - well, you have to choose - either the landing, or there is no part of the reserved space (landing) and the complexity of the design.
    caught a wedge - go outside, take a walk.
    .
    in the import photo, something is too big a point, and the ribbons are sticking out, they are beckoning straight for them ..
  • SuperEnot
    SuperEnot 11 October 2015 17: 22 New
    +1
    I see two main problems:
    1) System for the protection and cleaning of telemodules (namely safety glasses)
    Even the T-34 had a set of triplexes, which were easily replaced in the event of a break, directly by the driver in a couple of actions.
    2) The system of remote reloading of ammunition from the reserved space.
    It’s more complicated here. You may need to be smart with a highly specialized robot manipulator or with a system with lowering the unit with a machine gun and a charging box.
  • Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 11 October 2015 17: 39 New
    +3
    The horizontal elevation angles of the machine gun are in the range from -20 to +70 degrees.

    What is the horizontal angle of elevation? request
    1. IAlex
      IAlex 11 October 2015 18: 01 New
      +1
      This is when the Anglo-Saxons, who have everything big and cool, the appearance of Russian causes problems with the angle of rise from 13:00 to 17:00 ... :)))))))))))))))))))) ))))))))))
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 11 October 2015 18: 07 New
        +1
        Quote: IAlex
        with a rise angle from 13:00 to 17:00 ... :)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

        And sometimes even until 17:30. laughing
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Wolka
    Wolka 12 October 2015 05: 34 New
    0
    combat modules is wonderful, but I am confused by their high profile over the general silhouette of an armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicle, which is not buzzing, it makes sense to make a folding remote-controlled turret platform for the entire combat module
  • patsantre
    patsantre 12 October 2015 18: 26 New
    -1
    Deserted, they would have written inhumane.