Home
Latest images
Register
Log in+88
archangelski
Hole
southpark
bolshevik345
Rodion_Romanovic
higurashihougi
Tsavo Lion
ATLASCUB
GunshipDemocracy
dino00
Nibiru
LMFS
marcellogo
Azi
Batajnica
Arctic_Fox
miketheterrible
franco
Benya
Isos
JohninMK
storm333
SeigSoloyvov
theking950
jaguar_br
d_taddei2
Book.
OminousSpudd
x_54_u43
r111
Backinblack
Neutrality
ult
Zivo
GJ Flanker
Kyo
KoTeMoRe
Dima
PapaDragon
mutantsushi
Project Canada
2SPOOKY4U
max steel
RTN
victor1985
Vann7
par far
kvs
Mike E
Cpt Caz
Werewolf
eridan
Strizh
magnumcromagnon
Hannibal Barca
AbsoluteZero
zg18
Deep Throat
Morpheus Eberhardt
mack8
TR1
flamming_python
Firebird
AlfaT8
xeno
Hachimoto
ahmedfire
Pyrrus
collegeboy16
Mr.Kalishnikov47
KomissarBojanchev
Sujoy
victor7
TheArmenian
Russian Patriot
George1
Cyberspec
Flanky
Pervius
medo
Viktor
nightcrawler
NationalRus
Austin
GarryB
sepheronx
Vladislav
Admin
92 posters
UAVs in Russian Armed Forces: News
x_54_u43- Posts : 336
Points : 348
Join date : 2015-09-19
sepheronx- Posts : 8828
Points : 9088
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Why?x_54_u43 wrote:I'll never say an ill word against Sputnik ever again.
https://www.rt.com/news/332045-tank-destroyer-drone-complex/
What ever happened to the drone that Transas was working on?
Guest- Guest
sepheronx wrote:Why?x_54_u43 wrote:I'll never say an ill word against Sputnik ever again.
https://www.rt.com/news/332045-tank-destroyer-drone-complex/
What ever happened to the drone that Transas was working on?
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....
sepheronx- Posts : 8828
Points : 9088
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
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?
Guest- Guest
sepheronx wrote: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?
Pacer they even stopped mentioning. Altius-M they mentioned during 2015. as it might "enter service in 2017."...
sepheronx- Posts : 8828
Points : 9088
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
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.
Project Canada- Posts : 662
Points : 663
Join date : 2015-07-20
Location : Canada
it must be just some kind of a test platform for future UCAVs.
I really hope they continue the pace with their heavy UAV developments despite the present funding difficulties
I really hope they continue the pace with their heavy UAV developments despite the present funding difficulties
magnumcromagnon- Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan
Militarov wrote:sepheronx wrote:Why?x_54_u43 wrote:I'll never say an ill word against Sputnik ever again.
https://www.rt.com/news/332045-tank-destroyer-drone-complex/
What ever happened to the drone that Transas was working on?
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....
Why spend a buttload of money on something as disposable as a UAV/UCAV? Something cheap, easily mass produced and put in to service would suffice at least as a stop-gap for more ambitious and capable designs.
Guest- Guest
magnumcromagnon wrote:Militarov wrote:sepheronx wrote:Why?x_54_u43 wrote:I'll never say an ill word against Sputnik ever again.
https://www.rt.com/news/332045-tank-destroyer-drone-complex/
What ever happened to the drone that Transas was working on?
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....
Why spend a buttload of money on something as disposable as a UAV/UCAV? Something cheap, easily mass produced and put in to service would suffice at least as a stop-gap for more ambitious and capable designs.
UCAVs are cheap, easily mass produced compared to what they offer. They are alot cheaper than gunship helicopters or CAS aircraft, you do not risk your pilot, you remove pilot training expences, fly hour price is like for better car, and some can spend even almost a day in air. If they were not required for modern warfare noone 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. They talk about their UCAVs since early 2000s and till now we have seen only mockups.
Guest- Guest
Project Canada wrote:it must be just some kind of a test platform for future UCAVs.
I really hope they continue the pace with their heavy UAV developments despite the present funding difficulties
Not sure what would they test on this thing. From what i undersood they are dead serious with this thing, they are trying to sell it to FSB....
OminousSpudd- Posts : 942
Points : 947
Join date : 2015-01-03
Location : New Zealand
Geez, there goes the perception of Russia's military again. Why do they insist on sabotaging their image with this crap time and again, if you're testing a system that is nothing fancy, why bother showing it off until you've at least got a marginally finalised version. An area where America has outstanding expertise; sleazy presentation, so much so that they make their absolutely shite products look like the ultimate on the market, not unlike a used-car salesman who is outside cleaning his lot's stock everyday, while underneath the vehicle is rusted out. They have full-blown constant saturation of HD mil-vids pouring out of their nation like vomit, and through these methods (Video Game: War etc) they have garnered the reputation of being unbeatable. There is something to be said for this philosophy.
Russia on the other hand seems completely polarized to this altogether. Everything is kept relatively grounded and (factual?), during war, their gear performs far beyond that of Western equivalents. 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. /rant
Russia on the other hand seems completely polarized to this altogether. Everything is kept relatively grounded and (factual?), during war, their gear performs far beyond that of Western equivalents. 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. /rant
Guest- Guest
OminousSpudd wrote:Geez, there goes the perception of Russia's military again. Why do they insist on sabotaging their image with this crap time and again, if you're testing a system that is nothing fancy, why bother showing it off until you've at least got a marginally finalised version. An area where America has outstanding expertise; sleazy presentation, so much so that they make their absolutely shite products look like the ultimate on the market, not unlike a used-car salesman who is outside cleaning his lot's stock everyday, while underneath the vehicle is rusted out. They have full-blown constant saturation of HD mil-vids pouring out of their nation like vomit, and through these methods (Video Game: War etc) they have garnered the reputation of being unbeatable. There is something to be said for this philosophy.
Russia on the other hand seems completely polarized to this altogether. Everything is kept relatively grounded and (factual?), during war, their gear performs far beyond that of Western equivalents. 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. /rant
When they show something like this on RT as "tank killer drone" i just stare in shock for 5 minutes. Okay i understand, this is totally fine if flip-flop guys in Yemen came up with this, but srsly... second biggest military exporter in the world bought drone on Ebay for 3.000$ and placed RPG on it?
I looked at the comments on local military forum regarding this, even hardcore Pro-Russian guys were laughing at it... just fkn humiliating.
magnumcromagnon- Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan
Interesting while everyone was hyperventilating, I came across this:
If the RQ-170 told us anything than even the most advanced and expensive drones can be jammed/spoofed/defeated by countries with living fossils of air-defense networks, such as Iran. So to be practical it makes sense to save money on the expendable portion (the drones) but spend the sufficient funds on the reusable most important part (the command post).
In addition, the company "Vega" was presented at the exhibition upgraded hardware and software system of group control of UAVs and ground robotic systems (on vehicle KAMAZ-43116). The complex has a UAV controls and robots, equipped with five workstations for operators. With the help of high-performance supercomputer, which is part of the product, it is possible to control up to 10 UAVs and ground-based robotic systems simultaneously. The machine has high maneuverability and can operate autonomously for up to seven days. Time deploy mobile control station - no more than 15 minutes.
CMO presented a draft impact multikopternogo complex
If the RQ-170 told us anything than even the most advanced and expensive drones can be jammed/spoofed/defeated by countries with living fossils of air-defense networks, such as Iran. So to be practical it makes sense to save money on the expendable portion (the drones) but spend the sufficient funds on the reusable most important part (the command post).
Guest- Guest
magnumcromagnon wrote:Interesting while everyone was hyperventilating, I came across this:
In addition, the company "Vega" was presented at the exhibition upgraded hardware and software system of group control of UAVs and ground robotic systems (on vehicle KAMAZ-43116). The complex has a UAV controls and robots, equipped with five workstations for operators. With the help of high-performance supercomputer, which is part of the product, it is possible to control up to 10 UAVs and ground-based robotic systems simultaneously. The machine has high maneuverability and can operate autonomously for up to seven days. Time deploy mobile control station - no more than 15 minutes.
CMO presented a draft impact multikopternogo complex
If the RQ-170 told us anything than even the most advanced and expensive drones can be jammed/spoofed/defeated by countries with living fossils of air-defense networks, such as Iran. So to be practical it makes sense to save money on the expendable portion (the drones) but spend the sufficient funds on the reusable most important part (the command post).
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.
Sure, command post is nice thing to have, actually mandatory for UCAVs, however... even technologically backward countries like Serbia developed those on their own with partially imported components so its not really a big deal. On other hand what for are they going to use those command posts.. to control for next 50 years Orbiters 10 and these eBay quadcopters?
sepheronx- Posts : 8828
Points : 9088
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
The software and how the robot handles. I admit that it was very swift and precise. But yes, it looks like some ebay drone. But no ebay drone has such capabilities.Militarov wrote:Project Canada wrote:it must be just some kind of a test platform for future UCAVs.
I really hope they continue the pace with their heavy UAV developments despite the present funding difficulties
Not sure what would they test on this thing. From what i undersood they are dead serious with this thing, they are trying to sell it to FSB....
The other helicopter uavs look very professional. I imagine this was a test platform and cosmetics come later.
x_54_u43- Posts : 336
Points : 348
Join date : 2015-09-19
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.
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.
sepheronx- Posts : 8828
Points : 9088
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
The other drones you mention is the ones in the rt link as well?
That said, I was saying im impressed how swift it was and pinpoint accuracy. I am also criticizing the look but you are correct.
That said, I was saying im impressed how swift it was and pinpoint accuracy. I am also criticizing the look but you are correct.
Guest- Guest
sepheronx wrote:The software and how the robot handles. I admit that it was very swift and precise. But yes, it looks like some ebay drone. But no ebay drone has such capabilities.Militarov wrote:Project Canada wrote:it must be just some kind of a test platform for future UCAVs.
I really hope they continue the pace with their heavy UAV developments despite the present funding difficulties
Not sure what would they test on this thing. From what i undersood they are dead serious with this thing, they are trying to sell it to FSB....
The other helicopter uavs look very professional. I imagine this was a test platform and cosmetics come later.
Software changes drastically depending on platform that you use it on, so i dont think so they really tested software on these toys. Back on college we made 20ish kg UAV that could land/take off on its own with gyroscope, gps reciever and few other sensors tied to computer (Basically industrial PLC or microcontroler) and we wrote our custom software for it, when Slovenian technical college tried same took them weeks to change our code to suit their drone. Note that i am talking here about drone software/Digital Flight Control Systems not consoles.
And if they need to test their software like this Russians are in trouble, coz this kind of testing is mostly connected to pioneering in some technology, when you are mature in something like this software is mostly just bench tested and later fixed via field reports and updated though time if needed.
Like this for an example:
When its about Russian helicopter/quadcopter based drones, there were many mentioned or "mockuped" last few years. I know that Russians bought few years back (and some assembled locally apparently) Schiebel Camcopter S-100 i belive it appeared in some RT video as "Russian domestic product". Kamov wants to build own helicopter drone Ka-175, but i do not know how far did they go with it.
UAE Adcom Systems was approached by Russians to help them turn Berkut VL ultra-light helicopter into attack drone some years ago, again not sure what happened with it. Then those fairly small Garnet-VA-200/Garnet-VA-1000, but those are produced by licence obtained from German Microdrones. TsAGI is working last year or two on similar designs but nothing solid just testing, trying, making concepts...
Guest- Guest
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
? 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.
max steel- Posts : 2930
Points : 2955
Join date : 2015-02-13
Location : South Pole
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.
https://www.russiadefence.net/t3722p195-iran-latest-and-breaking-news#149887
Guest- Guest
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.
https://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- Posts : 40499
Points : 40999
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
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.
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- Posts : 8828
Points : 9088
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
And what is this assumption based on? Russia has already tested various engines for drones, russian made, not Chinese.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
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 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- Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan
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- Posts : 8828
Points : 9088
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
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.
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.