Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 8:05 am

    max steel wrote:
    Militarov wrote: If they were not required for modern warfare none would bother with them, however everyone is trying to develop or at least buy one strike capable. For love of God Iranians with their "mockup army" managed to field one...

    And if Russians cant build decent UCAV i am not sure what "more ambitious" they could possibly work on.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t3722p195-iran-latest-and-breaking-news#149887

    Yes i know, i said that Iranians fielded own UCAV. First strikes were filmed some months ago even.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21140
    Points : 21688
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 11, 2016 9:56 am

    The Russian military has Su-25s and Mi-28s and Ka-52s... its need for UCAVs is not that urgent.

    they will develop and field them no doubt but such things take time.

    In the mean time their artillery gets more powerful and more accurate and longer ranged.

    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 3:02 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    x_54_u43 wrote:What you geniuses all fail to see, is that the AT drone is one of four, all the other three are for other purposes, and look very clean and developed, perfect for your like.

    All of you are incredibly shallow, seeing only the surface and judging by it. A better course of action would be to instead ponder the uses of such a system, such as in low-scale counter-terrorism operations, where a cheap system for highly accurate point attacks with in-service weaponry and microscopic logistics footprint would be wonderful to have. Instead, you have chosen Western-style thinking.

    Which would you rather have? A mindset of cold rationality and thinking geared towards achieving every possible advantage over the enemy, or the mindset of incredibly expensive elephants, of ridiculous concepts such as Javelins and APU-equipped towed artillery units? Image gives nothing in war, and does not influence anyone except for low-level intellectuals on circle-jerk forums like F-16.net, which you are turning this forum into.

    Pick and choose, intelligence/rationality versus low-minded childish squeals of something not being shiny and techy enough.

    "look very clean and developed"... You mean Amazon and Ebay ripoffs with Chinese engines Smile? There is big, big difference between mockup for military expo and something that actually can be used.

    Everyone operates quadcopters and ultra-light and micro UAVs, noone is saying that idea is somehow wrong, just these things we saw are...beyond patethic.

    Image does not bring anything, eBay equipment however does not bring much either.


    And what is this assumption based on? Russia has already tested various engines for drones, russian made, not Chinese.

    And how is it beyond pathetic?  I have yet to see a quadcopter using anti tank missile from anywhere else, doing it fast and clean.  Can you name me any other?  And which drone from Ebay or Amazon is this one you are calling it?  Most drones from ebay are not capable of pulling off such moves, using a anti tank missile and doing it that quickly.  As well, you need to field test software no matter what.  We do it all the time here at work as we always run into issues so any additional adjustments on our robotics here, requires us to field test the software.  Maybe you guys do things differently in Serbia, but in western world, that is how it is done (and why we have such little downtime).

    X54 is right, this place is turning into F-16 site.  Too much on asthetics and its pathetic.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5021
    Points : 5176
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Feb 11, 2016 6:23 pm

    GarryB wrote:The Russian military has Su-25s and Mi-28s and Ka-52s... its need for UCAVs is not that urgent.

    they will develop and field them no doubt but such things take time.

    In the mean time their artillery gets more powerful and more accurate and longer ranged.


    Which is puzzling why certain people are screaming bloody murder over this, and why should Russian MOD waste money on new and expensive drones that can be defeated by archaic, ancient, and crude ECM systems, when that money could be saved to allow more purchases of much more worthwhile 'manned' aircraft, such as the Ka-52 and the Su-32/34. Russian MOD thankfully isn't following Western method of spending immense amount of money outside of budget, so they have to spend their defense budget wisely.

    If their going to spend money on drones, I'd rather have them focus on UGV's more than UAV's.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 6:45 pm

    And as been evidence, that is what is happening.  But still uav projects are still underway.  The talk of it being an ebay or amazon drone is just really poor critical comments about a look to the device.  Yet the video showed it to be quite an effective killer and it is targeted for FSB or possibly mvd which would be a usefull tool to use in lets say snuffing off a hardened target without putting men in harms way.

    Hell, the comments are unfounded since there is no UAV that can carry weapons even as heavy as an RPG or RPO on those websites.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:16 pm

    sepheronx wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    x_54_u43 wrote:What you geniuses all fail to see, is that the AT drone is one of four, all the other three are for other purposes, and look very clean and developed, perfect for your like.

    All of you are incredibly shallow, seeing only the surface and judging by it. A better course of action would be to instead ponder the uses of such a system, such as in low-scale counter-terrorism operations, where a cheap system for highly accurate point attacks with in-service weaponry and microscopic logistics footprint would be wonderful to have. Instead, you have chosen Western-style thinking.

    Which would you rather have? A mindset of cold rationality and thinking geared towards achieving every possible advantage over the enemy, or the mindset of incredibly expensive elephants, of ridiculous concepts such as Javelins and APU-equipped towed artillery units? Image gives nothing in war, and does not influence anyone except for low-level intellectuals on circle-jerk forums like F-16.net, which you are turning this forum into.

    Pick and choose, intelligence/rationality versus low-minded childish squeals of something not being shiny and techy enough.

    "look very clean and developed"... You mean Amazon and Ebay ripoffs with Chinese engines Smile? There is big, big difference between mockup for military expo and something that actually can be used.

    Everyone operates quadcopters and ultra-light and micro UAVs, noone is saying that idea is somehow wrong, just these things we saw are...beyond patethic.

    Image does not bring anything, eBay equipment however does not bring much either.


    And what is this assumption based on? Russia has already tested various engines for drones, russian made, not Chinese.

    And how is it beyond pathetic?  I have yet to see a quadcopter using anti tank missile from anywhere else, doing it fast and clean.  Can you name me any other?  And which drone from Ebay or Amazon is this one you are calling it?  Most drones from ebay are not capable of pulling off such moves, using a anti tank missile and doing it that quickly.  As well, you need to field test software no matter what.  We do it all the time here at work as we always run into issues so any additional adjustments on our robotics here, requires us to field test the software.  Maybe you guys do things differently in Serbia, but in western world, that is how it is done (and why we have such little downtime).

    X54 is right, this place is turning into F-16 site.  Too much on asthetics and its pathetic.

    Those are not Russian engines there is not even a question about it. They never made so miniature UAV engines that actually saw light of the day. Most likely 3W International, Roton or some company of a sort.
    Its beyond patethic coz its off the shelf commercial 3.000USD UAV that is what is patethic. Its a toy with AT weapon glued to it, stop fanboying srsly.

    "I have yet to see a quadcopter using anti tank missile from anywhere else, doing it fast and clean.  Can you name me any other?" - Exacly, there are none. That just proves my point. To whom are you going to assign these toys? frontline conscripts? VDV? So they can break it after 2 days in field? I am sorry but only roles that quadcopter can be used for is perimeter recon, at least in this...beyond horrid variant. If properly developed quad can be assigned to FSB for an example as they mostly have luxury of keeping their equipment in vans and cars and just deploy it for couple of h in mostly limited counter terrorist operations. However... deploying this for the army.. you must be kidding me.



    They should quit watching FPS Russia, srsly now.

    And again... i am not aganist idea, i am aganist this junk in the video.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:21 pm

    How is it junk? Its the only of its type and very responsive. Add to that, if used for FSB and MVD, it is ideal.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:21 pm

    sepheronx wrote:And as been evidence, that is what is happening.  But still uav projects are still underway.  The talk of it being an ebay or amazon drone is just really poor critical comments about a look to the device.  Yet the video showed it to be quite an effective killer and it is targeted for FSB or possibly mvd which would be a usefull tool to use in lets say snuffing off a hardened target without putting men in harms way.

    Hell, the comments are unfounded since there is no UAV that can carry weapons even as heavy as an RPG or RPO on those websites.

    Not true, there are plenty of quadcopter UAVs that can carry more than 3kg. KittyHawk could probably carry two RPG-26s and camera. Naturally they are on expencive side of quads mostly 3.000+ $.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:27 pm

    sepheronx wrote:How is it junk? Its the only of its type and very responsive. Add to that, if used for FSB and MVD, it is ideal.

    Quit fanboying now srsly its getting very annoying. If you actually belive that thing in video is actually military product worth of any attention whatsoever by an actual armed forces and not half trained FSB unit in some Dagestani village... i will ask you nicely never again to reply to my comments... Coz that is not military product, not even by a long shot.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:28 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:And as been evidence, that is what is happening.  But still uav projects are still underway.  The talk of it being an ebay or amazon drone is just really poor critical comments about a look to the device.  Yet the video showed it to be quite an effective killer and it is targeted for FSB or possibly mvd which would be a usefull tool to use in lets say snuffing off a hardened target without putting men in harms way.

    Hell, the comments are unfounded since there is no UAV that can carry weapons even as heavy as an RPG or RPO on those websites.

    Not true, there are plenty of quadcopter UAVs that can carry more than 3kg. KittyHawk could probably carry two RPG-26s and camera. Naturally they are on expencive side of quads mostly 3.000+ $.
    Could/should but doesnt.

    Point still stands, device is swift and precise.  Ideal for fsb or mvd.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:29 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:How is it junk? Its the only of its type and very responsive. Add to that, if used for FSB and MVD, it is ideal.

    Quit fanboying now srsly its getting very annoying. If you actually belive that thing in video is actually military product worth of any attention whatsoever by an actual armed forces and not half trained FSB unit in some Dagestani village... i will ask you nicely never again to reply to my comments... Coz that is not military product, not even by a long shot.
    Then what is? Because so far, we are told its junk by you but you give no indocation as to why.

    You know what is even more annoying? Your idea of asthetics being important and calling other products shit without going into detail why.  At least X54 haf the audacity to give a statement.


    Last edited by sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:32 pm

    GarryB wrote:The Russian military has Su-25s and Mi-28s and Ka-52s... its need for UCAVs is not that urgent.

    they will develop and field them no doubt but such things take time.

    In the mean time their artillery gets more powerful and more accurate and longer ranged.


    It took 12 years since they first time annoynced that UCAV development started, it was 2004. I would probably manage to build one by now in my garage with help of few friends that were on mechanical engineering department... And SU25 and UCAV... do not have anything whatsoever in common with except fact that they both fly... Their use is totally different, in perfrect world they actually would operate together.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:34 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The Russian military has Su-25s and Mi-28s and Ka-52s... its need for UCAVs is not that urgent.

    they will develop and field them no doubt but such things take time.

    In the mean time their artillery gets more powerful and more accurate and longer ranged.


    It took 12 years since they first time annoynced that UCAV development started, it was 2004. I would probably manage to build one by now in my garage with help of few friends that were on mechanical engineering department... And SU25 and UCAV... do not have anything whatsoever in common with except fact that they both fly... Their use is totally different, in perfrect world they actually would operate together.
    Projects like Altius was only contrived about 3 (maybe at best) years ago.  It sucks but oh well. Seems they concenteated on UGV seeing all those armored weapon drones in recent pics and tests.  Maybe that is where the money went.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:47 pm

    sepheronx wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:How is it junk? Its the only of its type and very responsive. Add to that, if used for FSB and MVD, it is ideal.

    Quit fanboying now srsly its getting very annoying. If you actually belive that thing in video is actually military product worth of any attention whatsoever by an actual armed forces and not half trained FSB unit in some Dagestani village... i will ask you nicely never again to reply to my comments... Coz that is not military product, not even by a long shot.
    Then what is? Because so far, we are told its junk by you but you give no indocation as to why.

    You know what is even more annoying? Your idea of asthetics being important and calling other products shit without going into detail why.

    Where did i even mentioned aesthetics? Nowhere.

    Engine blades are unoprotected, quadcopters are famous for swallowing grass, branches but thanks God there is nothing like that in field, right, right? O.o That thing was made to take off and land on concrete or dry weather.

    Its quadcopter so its extremly hard to make modular enough for field use by army, it would make it way to complicated to assemble and disassemble. Construction is more than obviously taken from already existing commercial drone aka "we glued stuff to Chinese junk". There is reason why people made Switchblade instead of stripping AT4 to quadcopter, trust me this is not the first time someone got this idea, however it does not really work well.

    Quadcopters are extremly vulnerable and noisy in general too, but lets put that aside as that is general issue.

    Everything on it screams that components are commercial, just look at it for the love of God. This is not something military would ever use, its just cheap RT video on "super stealthy Russian killer drones" for people that havent been to technical college. Now srsly, tell me you guys are trolling me here, that you actually dont think this is really suited for the field use?
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:51 pm

    sepheronx wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:And as been evidence, that is what is happening.  But still uav projects are still underway.  The talk of it being an ebay or amazon drone is just really poor critical comments about a look to the device.  Yet the video showed it to be quite an effective killer and it is targeted for FSB or possibly mvd which would be a usefull tool to use in lets say snuffing off a hardened target without putting men in harms way.

    Hell, the comments are unfounded since there is no UAV that can carry weapons even as heavy as an RPG or RPO on those websites.

    Not true, there are plenty of quadcopter UAVs that can carry more than 3kg. KittyHawk could probably carry two RPG-26s and camera. Naturally they are on expencive side of quads mostly 3.000+ $.
    Could/should but doesnt.

    Point still stands, device is swift and precise.  Ideal for fsb or mvd.

    Which does not change fact this is most likely off shelf KittyHawk or analogue with RPG26 and rail on it.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:53 pm

    MVD tends to operate in city.  But I do tend to agree with the remainder of your points.  But even in the description in the rt video from ruptly, it states it was testing purposes.

    I appreciate at least the longer description as to why you state it is junk.  But like most designs, we have noticed nothing actually being fielded besides Orlon and other small drones.  We have seen pics of the engines and frame of what is precieved to be Atlius-M and a tiltroter being tested in the wind tunnel.  Outside of that, I was more inclined to see Dozor series or the Zond from Sukhoi, which never seen funding.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 7:58 pm

    sepheronx wrote:MVD tends to operate in city.  But I do tend to agree with the remainder of your points.  But even in the description in the rt video from ruptly, it states it was testing purposes.

    I appreciate at least the longer description as to why you state it is junk.  But like most designs, we have noticed nothing actually being fielded besides Orlon and other small drones.  We have seen pics of the engines and frame of what is precieved to be Atlius-M and a tiltroter being tested in the wind tunnel.  Outside of that, I was more inclined to see Dozor series or the Zond from Sukhoi, which never seen funding.

    I said previously that this MIGHT only find use by some MVD/FSB units and thats it, as they operate for few h only in urban regions and they can afford to keep it maybe even already assembled in suitcase.

    Well Orlan, Granat and Eleron have been issued in numbers. Some other models were issued also but not in that significant numbers. Dozor is dead as it became obsolete by now mostly due to its propulsion. Now if they do not hurry up with Altius-M it will become fkn ancient too.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Feb 11, 2016 8:06 pm

    Was the TsAGI tiltroater thing ever linked on this thread? I dunno and I am on phone (so pain enough to go through) to navigate the thread.  But Sdelanounas has a post on it from second of this month.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Thu Feb 11, 2016 8:15 pm

    sepheronx wrote:Was the TsAGI tiltroater thing ever linked on this thread? I dunno and I am on phone (so pain enough to go through) to navigate the thread.  But Sdelanounas has a post on it from second of this month.

    Yeah it was posted few weeks ago by me:

    ""Russia’s Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI) is testing an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) with the characteristics of a convertiplane, the Russian Industry and Trade Ministry’s press office said on Friday, February 5, 2016. The unmanned aerial vehicle features vertical takeoff and landing capabilities as a helicopter and a higher speed and an increased cargo-carrying capacity as a turboprop aircraft, the press office added.

    "The unmanned aerial vehicle is designed to monitor underlying terrain and accomplish transport tasks. The UAV can be based on small rough sites and will be used in various spheres in future," the press office said. "A UAV of this type features a medium-length straight wing," the press office added. According to the Industry and Trade Ministry’s press office, the tests have proved the UAV’s inherent characteristics. In particular, the trials have shown that the UAV’s design has good aerodynamic characteristics.

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 TsAGI_of_Russia_is_testing_unmanned_aerial_vehicle_features_vertical_takeoff_and_landing_capabilities_640_001

    Russia’s TsAGI will continue testing the new UAV with the characteristics of a convertiplane in 2016. TsAGI will focus on determining the specifics of the air glide effect in a wide angle-of-attack range at various flight modes. "There is a lot to do for the UAV’s dynamics, sustainability and controllability, structure strength and aeroelasticity," Chief of TsAGI’s Aircraft and Missile Aerodynamics Department and Head of Work on UAV Aerodynamics Alexander Kornushenko said."


    Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/february_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/tsagi_of_russia_is_testing_unmanned_aerial_vehicle_features_vertical_takeoff_and_landing_capabilities_tass_10502165.html"

    This on other hand with some work, actually looks like something i might use in field.
    OminousSpudd
    OminousSpudd

    Posts : 896
    Points : 903
    Join date : 2015-01-03
    Age : 23
    Location : New Zealand

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  OminousSpudd on Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:38 pm

    x_54_u43 wrote:What you geniuses all fail to see, is that the AT drone is one of four, all the other three are for other purposes, and look very clean and developed, perfect for your like.

    All of you are incredibly shallow, seeing only the surface and judging by it. A better course of action would be to instead ponder the uses of such a system, such as in low-scale counter-terrorism operations, where a cheap system for highly accurate point attacks with in-service weaponry and microscopic logistics footprint would be wonderful to have. Instead, you have chosen Western-style thinking.

    Which would you rather have? A mindset of cold rationality and thinking geared towards achieving every possible advantage over the enemy, or the mindset of incredibly expensive elephants, of ridiculous concepts such as Javelins and APU-equipped towed artillery units? Image gives nothing in war, and does not influence anyone except for low-level intellectuals on circle-jerk forums like F-16.net, which you are turning this forum into.

    Pick and choose, intelligence/rationality versus low-minded childish squeals of something not being shiny and techy enough.

    Yeah I guess I didn't make my point very clear, phones's are a bitch to write forum posts with.  What I was intending to say was that the system itself is probably excellent, especially if it's as cheap and reliable as it looked, but the fact you have an outlet like RT that has a primarily Western audience, complete with all the connotations that such an audience implies, showing it off like it's this big deal of a thing fresh out of the Russian MIC is annoying as hell. Why? Because a Western audience is majority a horde of zombies that grew up watching $1 million JDAMS being dropped on $20,000 houses to kill one militant in some backwater village in Iraq/Yugoslavia/Libya/Afghanistan, they grew up watching highly propagandised wars in foreign territories where everything was supposedly about "precision", "collateral damage" and "DARPA's bestest technology" winning battles against "terrorists that use civvies as shields every day". This mentality is nowhere near dead yet. Not even close. So for the sake of deterrence don't go showing off things that are there to do a job and need no explanation or attention. You don't put a new combat knife on a pedestal and expect people to be amazed, it's a tool for a job, nothing more nothing less.

    So in summary I'm peeved at the fact that RT sometimes doesn't seem to know its audience.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:25 am



    "Robotization of the Armed Forces of the #Russia'n Federation" - conference in Kubinka.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21140
    Points : 21688
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:55 pm

    That thing in video is quite humiliating i must say, i couldnt belive my eyes today. Why would they come up with something like this... its off shelf quadcopter with disposable AT placed on it...

    Some times you really sound like a fanboi.

    Imagine the very thought that they might develop a UCAV from an off the shelf $2000 commercial drone able to carry standard small arms and infantry weapons, and presumably are easy to fly so any fool can operate them.

    What the hell are they thinking?

    Surely you are right... they need some unique ingenious solution that costs a million dollars per aircraft and is not the same as anything else available, can fly thousands of kms with several tons of ammo because all front line troops want to carry that into battle. They will of course need their own specifically designed (at extra expense) new weapons that are totally different from anything the infantry currently uses and must operate from airfields at least 500m long. You must have a masters degree in engineering to handle it and at least 5,000 hours flight experience to use it... because then it would be COOL.

    It carries RPGs as an armament... wouldn't it be safe to assume that a unit would carry it to attack an enemy hard point from the air from a nice safe position?

    Do they need a million dollar aircraft for that?

    Agreed. But it seems that Russian uav tech is taking a back seat. I mean, their ucav drones are none existent. I imagine this system was more of a test but really, where is transas and sokol ucav?

    Yeah... because Russian soldiers are getting slaughtered every day because they don't have some fancy flying toy to shoot the bad guys with...

    Pacer they even stopped mentioning. Altius-M they mentioned during 2015. as it might "enter service in 2017."...

    Arrggh.... 2017... but all those millions of Russian soldiers that will be killed because they don't have these toys to play with... oh the humanity...

    Too many companies doing same type of program. Simply get one to make one amd be done with it. I imagine is various tests to test out such system. The drone featured is sad but the software and reaction was impressive (accuracy), but that clearly wont be the drone serviced.

    Yeah... lets just have one company compete to make all the dozens of different UCAVs the Russian military might want to use from hand held up to strategic long range... lets call that company Boeing and hmmm... a name for a product that will do the job of any drone you might think of designing... lets make it based on a VSTOL and call it an F-35... I am sure they will be able to make it work... and it will be so cheap..

    While I like this factual no-nonsense "war is hell" approach far more than the "car-salesman, war is hella fun" approach, it doesn't mean you have to show completely "naked" "poor-man" prototype devices that are about as awe-inspiring as a roll of toilet paper just because they're there.

    I am not getting what is so wrong with this drone?

    Sure it does not look expensive, and it is clearly not unique, but isn't the whole idea to have something simple to use, cheap so you can use lots of them, be expendible so if they are lost it is no big deal and noone has to go behind enemy lines to recover the crew and to be able to carry standard infantry weapons that any infantryman is already familiar with and already supplied with on the battlefield?

    This is not some F-35 that will level the enemy positions from thousands of kms... this is something you would use when you come across an enemy position and you want to have a look and if appropriate hit hard from an unexpected direction... this system looks ideal to me... I don't understand all the whining.

    Regarding the delay the infantry are only now getting Ratnik... what would be the point of issuing UCAVs if your infantry didn't have proper communications equipment including datalink stuff and recon?

    This is a drone likely operated by an Engineer unit that would be called in to tackle a building that is directing heavy fire at an attacking force. An RPO_M through a window is what they want... looks to me like it should be able to deliver.

    While I like this factual no-nonsense "war is hell" approach far more than the "car-salesman, war is hella fun" approach, it doesn't mean you have to show completely "naked" "poor-man" prototype devices that are about as awe-inspiring as a roll of toilet paper just because they're there.

    So pride is your problem... you can't show off so you bitch and moan. OK.

    Naturally they can, everything can be jammed, spoofed and defeated one way or another, its part of war, loses. However Sentinel was most likely just picked due to fact they managed to break link with satelite, US underestimated Iranians and thats all.

    Not strictly true... these things are not constantly piloted and they don't have to transmit continuously... they can operate in automatic mode and receive no instructions in flight.

    "look very clean and developed"... You mean Amazon and Ebay ripoffs with Chinese engines Smile? There is big, big difference between mockup for military expo and something that actually can be used.

    You have just looked at video of it launching rockets at targets it is hardly just a mockup. It is clearly not operational either, but this is clearly being field tested.


    Everyone operates quadcopters and ultra-light and micro UAVs, noone is saying that idea is somehow wrong, just these things we saw are...beyond patethic.

    So hurt pride on your part because you can't boast about how advanced they are?

    Doesn't matter that it might be a capable system... it has to look cool or they should just not bother.


    A rip off of an American drone... perhaps Russia might impress you with their brand new super drone... called F-35.

    And what is this assumption based on? Russia has already tested various engines for drones, russian made, not Chinese.

    He is just being an ass.

    Which is puzzling why certain people are screaming bloody murder over this, and why should Russian MOD waste money on new and expensive drones that can be defeated by archaic, ancient, and crude ECM systems, when that money could be saved to allow more purchases of much more worthwhile 'manned' aircraft, such as the Ka-52 and the Su-32/34. Russian MOD thankfully isn't following Western method of spending immense amount of money outside of budget, so they have to spend their defense budget wisely.

    If their going to spend money on drones, I'd rather have them focus on UGV's more than UAV's.

    Even the Ka-52 will have the capability to carry and use its own drones... but I am sure they will be awful because being disposable they wont be 5th gen state of the art super UCAVs...

    However... deploying this for the army.. you must be kidding me.

    So if they are no use why are you bitching that they don't have any currently in the front line saving Russian lives in the war they must be fighting that they need these damn things so desperately?

    It took 12 years since they first time annoynced that UCAV development started, it was 2004. I would probably manage to build one by now in my garage with help of few friends that were on mechanical engineering department... And SU25 and UCAV... do not have anything whatsoever in common with except fact that they both fly... Their use is totally different, in perfrect world they actually would operate together.

    Who cares how long it took... wtf does that matter?

    If they had the perfect UCAV operational 15 years ago... exactly what difference would it have made? Remember 15 years ago they hadn't been fighting in Georgia and their communications and C4IR was not very good, so how would they use all these UCAVs to best effect?

    Engine blades are unoprotected, quadcopters are famous for swallowing grass, branches but thanks God there is nothing like that in field, right, right? O.o That thing was made to take off and land on concrete or dry weather.

    Blades on a Hind and V-22 are unprotected too...

    Its quadcopter so its extremly hard to make modular enough for field use by army, it would make it way to complicated to assemble and disassemble. Construction is more than obviously taken from already existing commercial drone aka "we glued stuff to Chinese junk". There is reason why people made Switchblade instead of stripping AT4 to quadcopter, trust me this is not the first time someone got this idea, however it does not really work well.

    Blah Blah Blah... a Kornet missile launcher is quite complex too.. making something modular is making something simple... the AA-1 is complex, the AA-2 is modular and much simpler.... see how that works?

    Everything on it screams that components are commercial, just look at it for the love of God.

    And for the love of god that is a GOOD THING. Cheap, Mass produced, already half developed, disposable.

    Now srsly, tell me you guys are trolling me here, that you actually dont think this is really suited for the field use?

    Seemed to hit the targets in the test... is this a sales video trying to sell a finished product or is a test video?

    Which does not change fact this is most likely off shelf KittyHawk or analogue with RPG26 and rail on it.

    I will take 10.

    This on other hand with some work, actually looks like something i might use in field.

    Looks like it is too visible and an easy target to me.

    Book.
    Book.

    Posts : 696
    Points : 755
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Book. on Fri Feb 12, 2016 7:47 pm

    Aerob 4D good drone.

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 27SS4
    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 27SS5
    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 27SS3
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Guest on Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:27 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    That thing in video is quite humiliating i must say, i couldnt belive my eyes today. Why would they come up with something like this... its off shelf quadcopter with disposable AT placed on it...

    Some times you really sound like a fanboi.

    Imagine the very thought that they might develop a UCAV from an off the shelf $2000 commercial drone able to carry standard small arms and infantry weapons, and presumably are easy to fly so any fool can operate them.

    What the hell are they thinking?

    Surely you are right... they need some unique ingenious solution that costs a million dollars per aircraft and is not the same as anything else available, can fly thousands of kms with several tons of ammo because all front line troops want to carry that into battle. They will of course need their own specifically designed (at extra expense) new weapons that are totally different from anything the infantry currently uses and must operate from airfields at least 500m long. You must have a masters degree in engineering to handle it and at least 5,000 hours flight experience to use it... because then it would be COOL.

    It carries RPGs as an armament... wouldn't it be safe to assume that a unit would carry it to attack an enemy hard point from the air from a nice safe position?

    Do they need a million dollar aircraft for that?

    Agreed. But it seems that Russian uav tech is taking a back seat.  I mean, their ucav drones are none existent.  I imagine this system was more of a test but really, where is transas and sokol ucav?

    Yeah... because Russian soldiers are getting slaughtered every day because they don't have some fancy flying toy to shoot the bad guys with...

    Pacer they even stopped mentioning. Altius-M they mentioned during 2015. as it might "enter service in 2017."...

    Arrggh.... 2017... but all those millions of Russian soldiers that will be killed because they don't have these toys to play with... oh the humanity...

    Too many companies doing same type of program.  Simply get one to make one amd be done with it.  I imagine is various tests to test out such system.  The drone featured is sad but the software and reaction was impressive (accuracy), but that clearly wont be the drone serviced.

    Yeah... lets just have one company compete to make all the dozens of different UCAVs the Russian military might want to use from hand held up to strategic long range... lets call that company Boeing and hmmm... a name for a product that will do the job of any drone you might think of designing... lets make it based on a VSTOL and call it an F-35... I am sure they will be able to make it work... and it will be so cheap..

    While I like this factual no-nonsense "war is hell" approach far more than the "car-salesman, war is hella fun" approach, it doesn't mean you have to show completely "naked" "poor-man" prototype devices that are about as awe-inspiring as a roll of toilet paper just because they're there.

    I am not getting what is so wrong with this drone?

    Sure it does not look expensive, and it is clearly not unique, but isn't the whole idea to have something simple to use, cheap so you can use lots of them, be expendible so if they are lost it is no big deal and noone has to go behind enemy lines to recover the crew and to be able to carry standard infantry weapons that any infantryman is already familiar with and already supplied with on the battlefield?

    This is not some F-35 that will level the enemy positions from thousands of kms... this is something you would use when you come across an enemy position and you want to have a look and if appropriate hit hard from an unexpected direction... this system looks ideal to me... I don't understand all the whining.

    Regarding the delay the infantry are only now getting Ratnik... what would be the point of issuing UCAVs if your infantry didn't have proper communications equipment including datalink stuff and recon?

    This is a drone likely operated by an Engineer unit that would be called in to tackle a building that is directing heavy fire at an attacking force. An RPO_M through a window is what they want... looks to me like it should be able to deliver.

    While I like this factual no-nonsense "war is hell" approach far more than the "car-salesman, war is hella fun" approach, it doesn't mean you have to show completely "naked" "poor-man" prototype devices that are about as awe-inspiring as a roll of toilet paper just because they're there.

    So pride is your problem... you can't show off so you bitch and moan. OK.

    Naturally they can, everything can be jammed, spoofed and defeated one way or another, its part of war, loses. However Sentinel was most likely just picked due to fact they managed to break link with satelite, US underestimated Iranians and thats all.

    Not strictly true... these things are not constantly piloted and they don't have to transmit continuously... they can operate in automatic mode and receive no instructions in flight.

    "look very clean and developed"... You mean Amazon and Ebay ripoffs with Chinese engines Smile? There is big, big difference between mockup for military expo and something that actually can be used.

    You have just looked at video of it launching rockets at targets it is hardly just a mockup. It is clearly not operational either, but this is clearly being field tested.


    Everyone operates quadcopters and ultra-light and micro UAVs, noone is saying that idea is somehow wrong, just these things we saw are...beyond patethic.

    So hurt pride on your part because you can't boast about how advanced they are?

    Doesn't matter that it might be a capable system... it has to look cool or they should just not bother.


    A rip off of an American drone... perhaps Russia might impress you with their brand new super drone... called F-35.

    And what is this assumption based on? Russia has already tested various engines for drones, russian made, not Chinese.

    He is just being an ass.

    Which is puzzling why certain people are screaming bloody murder over this, and why should Russian MOD waste money on new and expensive drones that can be defeated by archaic, ancient, and crude ECM systems, when that money could be saved to allow more purchases of much more worthwhile 'manned' aircraft, such as the Ka-52 and the Su-32/34. Russian MOD thankfully isn't following Western method of spending immense amount of money outside of budget, so they have to spend their defense budget wisely.

    If their going to spend money on drones, I'd rather have them focus on UGV's more than UAV's.

    Even the Ka-52 will have the capability to carry and use its own drones... but I am sure they will be awful because being disposable they wont be 5th gen state of the art super UCAVs...

    However... deploying this for the army.. you must be kidding me.

    So if they are no use why are you bitching that they don't have any currently in the front line saving Russian lives in the war they must be fighting that they need these damn things so desperately?

    It took 12 years since they first time annoynced that UCAV development started, it was 2004. I would probably manage to build one by now in my garage with help of few friends that were on mechanical engineering department... And SU25 and UCAV... do not have anything whatsoever in common with except fact that they both fly... Their use is totally different, in perfrect world they actually would operate together.

    Who cares how long it took... wtf does that matter?

    If they had the perfect UCAV operational 15 years ago... exactly what difference would it have made? Remember 15 years ago they hadn't been fighting in Georgia and their communications and C4IR was not very good, so how would they use all these UCAVs to best effect?

    Engine blades are unoprotected, quadcopters are famous for swallowing grass, branches but thanks God there is nothing like that in field, right, right? O.o That thing was made to take off and land on concrete or dry weather.

    Blades on a Hind and V-22 are unprotected too...

    Its quadcopter so its extremly hard to make modular enough for field use by army, it would make it way to complicated to assemble and disassemble. Construction is more than obviously taken from already existing commercial drone aka "we glued stuff to Chinese junk". There is reason why people made Switchblade instead of stripping AT4 to quadcopter, trust me this is not the first time someone got this idea, however it does not really work well.

    Blah Blah Blah... a Kornet missile launcher is quite complex too.. making something modular is making something simple... the AA-1 is complex, the AA-2 is modular and much simpler.... see how that works?

    Everything on it screams that components are commercial, just look at it for the love of God.

    And for the love of god that is a GOOD THING. Cheap, Mass produced, already half developed, disposable.

    Now srsly, tell me you guys are trolling me here, that you actually dont think this is really suited for the field use?

    Seemed to hit the targets in the test... is this a sales video trying to sell a finished product or is a test video?

    Which does not change fact this is most likely off shelf KittyHawk or analogue with RPG26 and rail on it.

    I will take 10.

    This on other hand with some work, actually looks like something i might use in field.

    Looks like it is too visible and an easy target to me.


    1. "Imagine the very thought that they might develop a UCAV from an off the shelf $2000 commercial drone able to carry standard small arms and infantry weapons, and presumably are easy to fly so any fool can operate them.

    What the hell are they thinking?" - No, that is showing the sorry state of that industry branch. This thing 1/1 i can personally make if you feel like borrowing me 10.000USD.

    2. "Not strictly true... these things are not constantly piloted and they don't have to transmit continuously... they can operate in automatic mode and receive no instructions in flight." - No. Drones always have to communicate with satelite to transmit data, or they are useless, otherwise they fill buffer memory which you can later empty but what would be the point of that, this is not WW2. On other hand most of UAVs do not even have really big buffer memory to save weight, so its used only to store data long enough to it to get "uploaded". Inertial navigation on such UAVs is backup system only to prevent it to become flying brick. Even when UAV is on so called "waypoint" or "dot to dot" mode it has to transmit feed back to be monitored, noone expects pilot to sit there whole time naturally, most of the time they are on auto "pilot" (PLC controller + A* alghoritm in case of UAVs that i worked on) but even then you very often have separate console to operate optoelectronics if you have any ofc. IF you lose connection with your UAV previously loaded code gets terminanted and return function kicks in to return it to starting position or back to land if it has such capabilities, coz lets assume your satelite malfunctioned and you cant bring it online for next X hours, you want your UAV over "friendly" teritory. My actual Master degree was on AI and its application in UAV-s, i might not be working on Sentinel but i sure as hell know these machines very well.

    3. "Who cares how long it took... wtf does that matter?

    If they had the perfect UCAV operational 15 years ago... exactly what difference would it have made? Remember 15 years ago they hadn't been fighting in Georgia and their communications and C4IR was not very good, so how would they use all these UCAVs to best effect?" - Are you now serious here? "Wtf does it matter"? It matters alot, its crucal for items like this. Its called technological advance. Do you know how many technolgies that relate to drones are in use today by civilians? Some were even first time developed for drones, various drones not only UCAVs as they are after all very specific product. Do you have any idea how much Israel earned on drones production, servicing and acompanying technologies? Billions. Also war in Georgia would look alot different if they had suitable recon platforms. Georgians had only small tactical Israeli UAV-s themself too.

    4. "Kornet missile launcher is quite complex too.. making something modular is making something simple.." - That depends. When i said modular, i was refering to fact that it can be assembled and disassembled with no or little tools in field so it can be transported in backpack, as this is where this would be used, on squad lvl, mayybee on a long shot on company lvl. That thing cant be easily disassembled, let alone without tools.

    5. "And for the love of god that is a GOOD THING. Cheap, Mass produced, already half developed, disposable." - Cheap is good, true. However not THAT cheap. You for an example praise SU35S...but its 30% more expencive than SU30 variants... why is it expencive? Coz its more capable hence the price increase is legit. I never said you should turn tactical quadcopter into 2 million USD per piece Mumakil, however it should not be that junk either. Sure, use commercial electronics and optronics in it or partially, just dont fkn do what they did there.

    6. "Blades on a Hind and V-22 are unprotected too..." - Yes, truly they are not, however they have couple hundred hp engines and few m long composite rotor blades that cant really be damaged by grass or even thin branches, unless you really try to by throwing a log on it or you run into a tree. On other hand this is probably 90+ cm drone in diameter and its supposed to land in grass, hopefully you see the point.

    7. "Looks like it is too visible and an easy target to me." - I dont see how its easier target than the thing in video above. Various paintjobs can be applied to "sleeves" (which help with thrust vectoring and protect rotor/engines from smaller items damaging them) so its not much of an issue, they anyways fly quite low you will see them eventually. From engineering aspect its far better solved than thing in the video but needs again some work as i assume sleeve is not modular but casted (cant say for sure), which makes it bulky. That surely can be solved fairly easy.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7096
    Points : 7364
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:11 pm

    And yet a multibillion dollar drone project and its test unit gets hacked and lands in Iran.

    These things may not be perfect but if it is dirt cheap and works, I would take it.  I don't care if it is disposable or not.  To me, all of them are.

    Add to that, there seems to be a lot of impressive looking drones and UGV so I really wouldn't call it a sad state of affairs for that department.  I have yet to see anyone besides Israel produce such impressive unmanned ground vehicles and most of all the UAV's in Russia are surveillance, probably for a good reason.

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 WdMmbSN
    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Tu45A32

    Book. wrote:Aerob 4D good drone.

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 27SS4

    Apparently there was contract for this drone for security forces back in 2014.

    Sponsored content

    UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News - Page 19 Empty Re: UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:02 am