Military Review

The project of the unmanned combat vehicle "Strike"

In recent years, the domestic defense industry has begun active work on promising projects of unmanned and unmanned vehicles. The development of such systems allows you to simplify the solution of certain tasks, as well as significantly reduce the risks for personnel who do not have to work in dangerous proximity to the enemy. Last year, for the first time, the industry presented a promising model of the Udar land combat vehicle, which was controlled by radio and had autonomous controls.

For the first time about the existence of a new car became known in early October last year. An interesting sample of an unusual type was filmed by photographers during the preparations for the exhibition “Innovation Day of the Ministry of Defense”. A few days later, already during the exhibition itself, the developers and the military revealed some information about a promising project. In particular, it was announced that the prospective model, which received the symbol “Strike”, uses remote control systems, due to which it does not need the presence of the crew on board.

The development of the project is carried out by experts of the All-Russian Scientific Research Institute "Signal" (Kovrov). Representatives of the developer organization mentioned that the main goal of the project is to create a unified system consisting of control and armament equipment that can be mounted on various basic platforms. Such features of the project should ensure its further development, which in the future may lead to the emergence of new similar models of equipment.

Fighting machine "Blow" on the track. Photo

The new project "Strike", as follows from the available data, is an experimental attempt to develop a promising combat vehicle based on existing components. The tracked undercarriage of the infantry fighting vehicle BMP-3 was chosen as the basis for the “Strike”. The armaments of the advanced model are mounted on the Boomerang-BM combat module, borrowed from another recent project. In addition, in the framework of the project "Impact" a number of completely new equipment was developed. First of all, these are control systems that use a radio channel for two-way communication of the operator’s console and a combat vehicle.

In addition to creating some new systems, the authors of the Udar project had to refine the existing components and assemblies in order to ensure the required compatibility. In particular, some modifications had to expose the armored body of the base chassis. Also, by changing and improving the existing structure, the problem of installing automated control systems, including those using a radio channel, was solved.

According to the available data, the serial chassis of the infantry fighting vehicle BMP-3 was taken as the basis for the experimental model "Strike". Such equipment has been built and operated by the army for a long time, and also has rather high technical and operational characteristics. During the construction of the prototype "Stroke" the base chassis underwent some modifications. For example, to install the required combat module, we had to change the roof structure of the existing hull: a small tower of low height appeared on it, having the shape of a truncated pyramid. The need for such a superstructure is due to the design features of the combat module, namely, the dimensions of the parts located below the shoulder straps. In addition, the design of the frontal part of the hull was changed. In view of the removal of the crew, the machine lost its course machine-gun installations, which led to the expansion of the front hull sheet and another variant of its connection with the sides.

The remaining units of the base chassis, apparently, remain without significant changes. Thus, the corps is preserved with protection from small-caliber artillery in frontal projection and with anti-bullet armor for other units. The layout of the case should also remain without significant changes. In front of the hull there is a department of management in which a part of the new equipment is placed, and also the workplaces of some crew members are saved. The fighting compartment remains in the center of the vehicle, and a compartment is placed in the stern to accommodate the power unit.

In its basic configuration, the BMP-3 is equipped with a UTD-29 diesel engine with an HP 500 power. With the help of such a power plant, the 18,7 t combat vehicle can accelerate to 70 km / h on the highway. With the help of jet propulsion, movement through water is ensured at speeds up to 10 km / h. A tracked undercarriage is used, having six road wheels each with an individual torsion suspension and additional hydropneumatic shock absorbers on each side. It is possible to adjust the tension of the tracks from the driver’s control station.

BMP-3, which became the basis for the "Impact". Photo author

In the framework of the new project, a small modernization of the armor corps was proposed, consisting in the use of a special superstructure on the roof. On this superstructure, with some excess over the original case, there is a shoulder strap for installing the tower. Apparently, the use of the superstructure is associated with the specific layout of the selected combat module, which requires some space below the shoulder strap.

The Boomerang-BM combat module, equipped with a variety of different barrel and rocket weapons, is installed on the superstructure of the Udar machine. On the rotary platform of the combat module, the required armament and optoelectronic equipment is mounted for target search or guidance. weapons. An important feature of the system "Boomerang-BM" is the use of remote control. All operations are carried out by automatic commands from the remote operator-gunner. In the case of the project "Shock", the remote can be moved outside the combat vehicle.

The 2А42 automatic caliber 30 mm is placed in the central part of the combat module. To her left on the common mounts is placed 7,62-mm machine gun PKTM. Ammunition barrel systems consists of 500 shells for cannon and 2000 cartridges for machine guns. On the sides of the tower are placed two launchers with mounts for two transport and launch containers of missiles each. The Boomerang-BM module uses the Kornet anti-tank guided missiles. Also on the outer surface of the combat module there is a set of smoke grenade launchers.

The module is equipped with two blocks of opto-electronic equipment to be used by the gunner and the commander of the combat vehicle. Gunner equipment is located to the right of the barrel weapons, on the same level with him. The commander’s sight, in turn, is placed on the roof and can be rotated around its axis. Optical-electronic equipment "Boomeranga-BM" provides a search for targets in the optical and infrared bands, which allows the use of the combat module at any time of day and in various weather conditions. The fire control system has the ability to automatically track targets, is capable of firing at external target designation, as well as fire at two targets simultaneously.

The main innovation of the project "Strike" is the original control system that provides a solution to several basic tasks. According to reports, the chassis and combat module retain the ability to control the forces of the crew. If necessary, for example on the march, the combat vehicle can be controlled by the crew. In this case, the driver is responsible for the movement, and the commander and the gunner can monitor the situation and engage in self-defense. When solving combat missions in certain conditions, the crew gets the opportunity to leave their car and use remote controls to control it. The control panels over the radio channel support two-way communication with the equipment of the machine and provide a solution to the problems posed when using several modes.

The combat module "Boomerang-BM" and the body superstructure for its installation. Photo

The crew has the opportunity to drive the car, being outside. In this case, the on-board automatics receives control commands, and also transmits to the console a signal from several video cameras installed along the perimeter of the armored case. In addition, data is transmitted on the operation of certain systems. Focusing on the image from the video cameras, the driver gets the opportunity to control the movement of the car. The situation is similar with the equipment for controlling the combat module. With the help of two-way communication, the gunner operator can receive data from the Boomerang-BM system, as well as transfer necessary commands to it.

Also developed a fully autonomous mode. In this case, the automatic machine “Strike”, having received the task, begins to move independently. Before reaching a given point, the machine does not transmit or receive any signals, which facilitates its secretive use. Arriving in the specified area, the armored vehicle can reconnect with the operator to conduct reconnaissance or destroy the detected targets.

A special case of the use of fully automatic control may be the use of the platform "Impact" for transport purposes. A mode is proposed in which the combat vehicle will be able to pass a certain route according to the driver’s commands, memorizing it. Then the control automation will be able to independently go along this route without needing the help of a person. It is assumed that such a regime will find application in routine work, for example, with the repeated transport of goods or personnel along the same route.

According to some sources, when operating in the manned mode, the strike machine uses the standard controls of the BMP-3 and the Boomerang-BM module. The crew is located in the department of management. Remote control is proposed to implement using a set of consoles and other equipment. In the case of the showpiece shown last year, the operator’s workplaces were mounted on a standard army vehicle. Some of the necessary equipment was installed inside the body, and a number of units - on the roof. During the “Impact” shows, the management machine was located not far from it and controlled all the actions.

Available information about the project "Strike" suggests that in the future it may lead to the modernization of a certain number of BMP-3 in the army using new equipment that enhances the characteristics of the combat vehicle. However, some features of the prototype shown may contradict this assumption. In particular, in discussions of the experimental machine, it was repeatedly pointed out the specific refinement of the hull. Installing a new turret box and combat module of the required model leads to a significant increase in the size of the machine. Also during modernization, the weight of the whole structure should increase significantly.

The project of the unmanned combat vehicle "Strike"
Aft part of the combat module and hull. Photo

After such alteration, some deterioration in mobility characteristics should be expected. In particular, serious problems may appear with overcoming water barriers by swimming. An increase in mass may impair buoyancy, and large aggregates placed above the hull can seriously damage stability. As a result, the existing sample in some parameters may be ahead of the existing BMP-3, but in others it may lag behind it.

Such features of the project can be explained by its experimental nature. Earlier, representatives of the All-Russian Scientific-Research Institute “Signal” stated that the purpose of the “Strike” project is to create a unified system that combines a combat module and remote control means with several modes of operation, including an automated one. After the successful completion of such work, the military department may be offered a new version of the modernization of various armored vehicles with an increase in the basic characteristics and the emergence of new capabilities.

In the future, the new equipment created in the framework of the project "Kick" can be used in the modernization of other combat vehicles. For example, we can expect the installation of such equipment on new platforms that are currently being developed. Thus, one should not exclude the possibility of creating unmanned vehicles of the families “Kurganets-25”, “Boomerang”, etc. Such equipment will have some advantages over basic models that will provide the solution of some combat missions in difficult conditions.

The first demonstration of a promising combat vehicle with the ability to work without a crew took place in October last year. At present, the prototype "Blow", apparently, is undergoing various tests, is being finalized and improved. Probably, at the new events dedicated to the development of domestic weapons and equipment, the development organization and the Ministry of Defense will again show an interesting and promising sample. What will be the future of the prototype and how the development of the project will be completed is not yet completely clear. It should be expected that in the near future industry and the military will reveal their plans for a new development.

On the materials of the sites:
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. bad
    bad 1 August 2016 07: 00
    dashing trouble, the beginning .. the main thing is working, they’re designing something .. it would be really confusing .. good luck to them .. wink
  2. aud13
    aud13 1 August 2016 08: 48
    It is necessary to be in time, while there is an opportunity, to test in Syria ...
    1. Red_Hamer
      Red_Hamer 1 August 2016 08: 59
      I believe that there will be many such opportunities without Syria.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 1 August 2016 15: 33
        Quote: aud13
        try out in Syria ...

        What are you all pulling to Syria? :) Advanced technologies CANNOT be demonstrated to the enemy just like that, they must be applied massively and suddenly. Remember how the destroyer equipped with the vaunted Ayegis was paralyzed in the Black Sea? There was a moment, and the necessary presentation of information. And Syria can be used by the Uranus UAV for a start - to protect the base.
  3. Romin
    Romin 1 August 2016 09: 53
    Is the camera from the intercom attached on board?
    Snipers can only rejoice.
    It has long been in the production of cameras less than 1cm. The idea with stand-by surveillance cameras is utopian.
    1. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 1 August 2016 15: 35
      Maybe for fun, look, what do panoramic and other sighting and optical systems on armored vehicles look like before writing this and, accordingly, blaming someone else's work?
  4. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 1 August 2016 10: 13
    Quote: Romin
    It has long been in the production of cameras less than 1cm. The idea with stand-by surveillance cameras is utopian.

    Perhaps you have long known that something that the forum does not know, claiming to post links, and if this is only your speculation, write that this is your personal opinion.
    You forgot to remember the terms "resolution", "optics" and many more.
  5. Mestny
    Mestny 1 August 2016 10: 17
    Quote: Romin
    Is the camera from the intercom attached on board?
    Snipers can only rejoice.

    This is a prototype. Or a platform for testing technologies of non-crew applications.
    At this stage, no matter what cameras there are. In such a form as it is presented, there is no question of any combat use. Actually, this is written in the article.
  6. alstr
    alstr 1 August 2016 12: 10
    Honestly, I don’t understand why it’s impossible to create a standard set for distance combat for all existing equipment. Those. Tideya is as simple as 3 pennies. We take a standard unit - we put in the remote control equipment in place of the crew. For viewing use standard installation sites for sights and panoramas. We do an automatic loader (which, in principle, is also)
    On the basis of cars with KShU (the same BMP in the KShU variant). On one KShU - 3 pieces of equipment. We get a platoon of remote tanks.
    Use - a breakthrough of defense, urban battle. Those. where there is a high probability of loss.
    By the way, you can use any junk for this, which is not a pity to lose.
    All this can be implemented quickly enough, because The experience of remote control is more than enough.
    And then gradually increase the degree of automation (see the film Robocop (where the episode with the automatic robot police at the headquarters.)

    PS But probably it will all go on vultures Top secret)))
    1. Alex von Dorn
      Alex von Dorn 1 August 2016 13: 09
      I completely agree with the use of "junk". A pile of old tanks rusts in warehouses. It is necessary to create something universal to fit (albeit with a slight modification) from the T-55 to the T-90, from the BMP-1 to the BMP-3, and forward ... Even in Syria, even in Karabakh ...
      1. AlexW
        AlexW 1 August 2016 14: 24
        Quote: Alex von Dorn
        fit (albeit with a little refinement) from T-55 to T-90, from BMP-1 to BMP-3

        That's it - in the old time-tested lorry or ZiS-5 they would "shove" halogens - xenon, leather interior with airbags, air conditioning or climate control, well, automatic transmission, ABS and so on, for a change and voila ... And then I invent each year for the new KAMAZ-MAZ. fellow
      2. AlexW
        AlexW 1 August 2016 15: 03
        Quote: Alex von Dorn
        create something universal so that it fits (albeit with a little revision) from T-55 to T-90,

        There are many questions:
        -How about the gun loading machine in the T-55, T-62? How do you imagine him? Or send into battle with one shell in the barrel? One tank, one shot - all combat mission completed ?!
        -How do you imagine aiming. Hang a video camera on outdated commander optics? So it is designed for the human eye, another one is needed for the camera.
        -How about visibility? The crew of the tank is half blind because of limited visibility, and if the cameras are hung inside on triplex, then the remote operator will not be guided in battle at all.
        -How do you imagine controlling a T-55, T-62 robot instead of a driver mechanic? Levers, pedals, hand-cranes ... and an assessment of the quality of the engine and transmission are more by ear than by instruments.
        -What power devices must be installed to remotely pull the levers, press the pedals, etc.?
        - Will there be enough engine power, network side to provide new devices? Additional power devices - electric motors, solenoids, etc., under old mechanics will be extremely energy-intensive.
        -How many cameras and sensors do you need so that the remote operator gets an objective picture of the battle and the state of the tank?
        -And where to shove it all into the T-55? So that there would still be room for a full-time crew and he could control the tank outside the battle without dismantling automatic robots.
        If you fulfill all the conditions of this "minor revision", then only the body will be old. And that will certainly not meet the requirements.
    2. AlexW
      AlexW 1 August 2016 14: 13
      Quote: alstr
      for remote combat for all existing equipment. Those. Tideya is as simple as 3 pennies. We take a standard unit - we put in the remote control equipment in place of the crew.

      Aha, but on the march we "stick out" the equipment and push the crew. and before the fight "stick" again ...

      Quote: alstr
      any junk can be used for this

      The BMP-3 has an automatic transmission. I can imagine how the terminator robot "stuck" into the T-62 is turning the levers and pressing the freaks. Or offers to put in the "old" automatic transmission, modern automation and hydraulics. Then it will no longer be "old". Is the "game worth the candle"? It may be easier to sell "old" to some "underdeveloped countries", and build "novye" with the money received.
      1. alstr
        alstr 1 August 2016 16: 15
        Well, let's say you can arrange the equipment on the ground of another crew member. And the mode of following the head is also not a great difficulty to do.

        Regarding the management of junk.
        Well have to suffer - not without it.
        So there are designers. I’m sure that you can come up with something at a low cost.
        By the way, about the review. It’s generally simple here - we change the installed systems to new ones and put them in their regular places. It is clear that the review will be lame, but you can fight.

        But the same T-72, T-80 - can do with easier processing.
        Then, a newer technique can be junk, but for example, it is very worn out, i.e. any technique that is not a pity.
        Yes, and on the new technology, this option does not hurt. Plus should be versatility - i.e. there is only one control unit, and it is already interfaced with a set of different mechanisms (different for different types of equipment) with the controls.

        The point of all this is to save the crews when the probability of a hit is high. And it’s definitely worth any money, because prepare a new crew longer than riveting a new piece of iron.

        And in the remote version, it is possible to reduce the crew to virtually one operator (hello WOT and War Thunder).
        1. AlexW
          AlexW 1 August 2016 16: 38
          Quote: alstr
          It’s generally simple here - we change the installed systems to new ones and put them in their regular places. It is clear that the review will be lame, but you can fight.

          Ergonomics - "regular places" in the tank are determined taking into account the human anatomical features. If you put video cameras in their places until the visibility becomes much worse. It is necessary to distribute as much as possible and provide a wide sector - from regular places this is not possible. If they are put in their regular places, how will the crew be able to control the equipment outside the battle - to take it off and then put it back on?
          1. alstr
            alstr 2 August 2016 10: 02
            Only equipment is placed in regular places. Sensors and video cameras are placed in regular places of triplexes and re-scopes. For control, a screen can be displayed for the driver.
            In addition, we do not forget that the crew is not even supposed to drive (it will probably be needed only when loading and unloading vehicles. The drive can be carried out by the operator either alone on all cars (in the mode of following the head one), or several operators - each his own by car.
            By the way, the same Armata is ideal for remote combat. Places with screens, outside only sensors. It remains only to make communication equipment and you're done. At least land the crew, even remotely control.
            Relative junk can be brought to such a standard (the same T72 that modernize) and use them.

            Threat is actually the most difficult thing in this matter is wireless. More precisely, ensuring channel noise immunity.
  7. OlegLex
    OlegLex 1 August 2016 13: 41
    What can I say!? I am glad that such developments are underway. And the prospects for this technique are great. especially when you consider that as a separate unit such a machine will be at the level of a similar BM with a crew, but a wolf pack led by a human operator and a digital operator is a completely different tactic of warfare
  8. slavick1969
    slavick1969 1 August 2016 15: 54
    such battle robots are needed
  9. Verdun
    Verdun 1 August 2016 19: 03
    The idea of ​​making a normal combat vehicle, for example a tank - controlled not by the crew, but by a computer, has matured for a long time. Moreover, the space for placing powerful electronic components in the tank is quite enough, and in fact there are already all the necessary drives. And the cost of electronic filling for a tank is not as critical as for a conventional car. So it’s high time to carry out active work in this direction.
  10. Former battalion commander
    Former battalion commander 1 August 2016 22: 07
    The direction is very promising, but with an element base for the production of such equipment in Russia there is a sea of ​​problems ...
  11. Aleksandr67
    Aleksandr67 2 August 2016 01: 04
    I am glad that work is ongoing in this direction, but I (as a signalman) have a question about the stability of the telemetric control channel in the conditions of the enemy using electronic warfare and electronic warfare. In developing an algorithm for moving along a given trajectory in a fully autonomous mode, there is a prospect.
  12. the47th
    the47th 2 August 2016 10: 44
    In my opinion, remotely controlled vehicles will be an easy target in battle. The problem is that the work of the commander of the machine is very complicated, the work of the gunner is also very difficult, and the work of the driver is also very difficult. 3 people sometimes can’t cope with it. And one operator will have to perform, which will receive very indirect information about what is happening on the battlefield. A remote-controlled machine that will be useful in battle must independently choose the routes of movement and evasion, independently maneuver, independently search for and determine goals, independently choose: which weapons to use for a particular target. And the operator should indicate common actions and priority goals, and determine interaction with allied units, as in a strategic game. In the meantime, remote-controlled cars are dressed only for chemical, radiation reconnaissance, and mine clearance.
    1. alstr
      alstr 2 August 2016 14: 26
      The fact of the matter is that control of automated armored vehicles is simpler than in reality. In fact, for the operator (or operators) it will be a computer game.
      To understand how it should look, you just need to play WOT il War Thurner (this is the last one, before that there were a lot of tank simulators there and infantry was present and anti-aircraft and aviation). Naturally, one must take into account that the visibility will be different and you won’t see the tank through the wall. But even one alone can be managed.
      In the worst case, two (Commander and gunner).

      Another thing is that as a result, a combat formation should be included that includes not only the tanks themselves, but UAV reconnaissance for example. And you can also launch smaller robots (with a machine gun or small-caliber gun). A lot of options. The point is to remove the crews from the first line.

      And as for easy goals - this is not so. Since management is easier, there is more time left to assess the situation. Correspondingly, you can react to something that you simply did not have time before. Yes, and the ability to perform a riskier maneuver is also a plus (i.e., the group’s tactics may change. For example, the most obvious move is to sacrifice a unit instead of completing a task, which at present will mean loss of crew. And in the case of the remote version, the machine can then carry out the task further, because there is no crew, and the machine has only a hole in the hull).
      1. the47th
        the47th 2 August 2016 20: 22
        Real combat is very different from computer tanks. The operator relies solely on vision, and even has to replace all crew members. The crew inside the car can rely on hearing, the vestibular apparatus, etc., that is, it receives more complete and timely information (example: the driver will feel that one caterpillar has got into the swamp and will react in a timely manner, not allowing the car to get stuck, and the operator - no).
        Quote: alstr
        Another thing is that as a result, a combat formation should be included that includes not only the tanks themselves, but UAV reconnaissance for example. And you can also launch smaller robots (with a machine gun or small-caliber gun). A lot of options. The point is to remove the crews from the first line.

        That is yes. The main thing - machines must be able to interact independently without operator intervention. And the operator should carry out general command and help to get out of difficult and non-standard situations. The operator does not have to control the machine directly, like tank simulators, but give commands, as in strategies, and the machine itself decides how to execute these commands, relying on information from other vehicles, satellites, UAVs, etc.
        1. alstr
          alstr 3 August 2016 11: 36
          Why only sight. Microphones, too, have not been canceled.
          In addition, there are simulators. This is simply their further development.

          But they will not be able to interact independently yet. This is the next step. Let’s be realistic.
          I talked about what can be done quickly and relatively inexpensively. But on the basis of this, it will be possible to work out the automatic interaction as well.

          Those. At this level, it is possible to create a remotely controlled machine in a fairly short time, but there is no automation of interaction. Therefore, only living people remain.
          And once again, the MAIN GOAL is to REMOVE THE CREW FROM UNDER THE IMPACT.