By what kind of war we prepare? Opinion amateur.

Today is not a day the media tell us about the horrors of the wars of the future, which will lead NATO, including you and me against using military unmanned attack (droids). Some go further, talking about how it will look like the sixth-generation aircraft, which, as many think, will also be unmanned …

And, as usual, behind. And in horror! Just take it and hung up. We have a fifth yet, only tested, and there is already the sixth, though, and just painted. Scary! Distressed about it all. Liberals — where, they say, that the swine-snouted. Patriots — the same thing, but with a different slogan about … whether the country, and that's nothing to fight now! And samozapugivanie — is the brand today. 

A worm is sharpening me — it's something I like. Eighty-third, Reagan, SDI. For lack of time at the computer graphics — animation of how the orbital platform with a nuclear-pumped lasers famously wet missiles with a hammer and sickle on the boards. What has not finished off the platform famously shoot down ground-based interceptors.

Bullied to death, and together we rushed to do the same.

Yevgeny Velikhov told how academics urged the country's leaders and the armed forces, it is not necessary to do that, technically, it is not yet possible to implement, and make it less vulnerable to missiles and warheads cheaper … But who will listen to them — the decision is made at the top, is executed.

Gleb Lozino-Lozinski urged: let's not repeat their shuttle will do "Buran" in their own way, get better and experience has been. He answered, not clever, do as the Americans, but more …

And as always — the same, only bigger. Just some of Freud's disease.

Well, overstrained. Of course, the reasons for the collapse of the country were many: and concocted by the collapse of oil prices and the war in Afghanistan, and a lot of internal — from the betrayal of the elites to the madhouse in the economy. But our imitation of the U.S. SDI their vile role played.

Now everyone knows everything and willingly write that separated us while children that it was a bluff, and nothing more. But what it taught us?

This is our ineradicable desire to do like them. Where de intelligent people, and there is nothing clever himself. Overview — same, but more.

I wonder where would we be now in the aircraft, the Sukhoi had not defended his concept of the SU-27? Would make a copy of the F-15? Fools have always had, but experts believe its not learned. Stranger — yes, his — no. And this is not today's problem, but a very long time — solutions usually limited to those who have very little idea about the essence of the problem. This is not only our problem, but there is bad at them — I do not much care.

Note that we are ahead of the rest only where there is no catching up, and made his own way. Now — the proud, and how many heart attacks this pride has cost the chief designer, when they defended — do not remember or do not want to remember.

I am not an expert on arms and military. In terms of the latter — a dilettante. I am a design engineer will need to become more and manager to develop and manufacture engineering products. I'm just suggesting to connect the logic and nothing more. Maybe my opinions are controversial — do not judge strictly.

So, the drone — remote-controlled aircraft. The best-known examples — American «Predator» and «Reaper». This is the most common multi-droids that act as reconnaissance, targeting, and combat missions. The first — more intelligence, the second — more militant, and are generally similar. Maximum height — 10 and 15 km. Speed — 150 — 200 km / h. Time bombardment — 24 — 36 hours.

Pros: 1) remote control, safety for operators, and 2) the small size and weight, and 3) the ability for a long time to be in the air, and 4) the relatively low cost, and 5) can be used without the WFP and the road infrastructure.

Cons: 1) remote control, it is possible to lose the car hover interference or interception of enemy control, and 2) a low rate as a fee for the opportunity to stay longer in the air and as a consequence — the inability to resist the manned fighters, and 3) low maneuverability and speed of response to changes situation — the camera can not replace the pilot, especially in close combat: to turn his head to the camera — not one and the same, and 4) the high range only when operating via satellite, 5) inability to withstand air defense systems and move away from them.

Conclusions. The first — the drones are needed in large quantities. Aerial photography, including battlefield illumination purposes in a local conflict (somewhere in Africa or Southeast Asia, is not very clear what we do there, but it's another matter), the search for a caravan with drugs coming from Afghanistan Tajikistan … But it's not fighting apparatus and not for the army. And that's where the battle really need to happen is for execution of counterterrorism operations — when a few hours have quietly hover in the air and wait for the emergence of a single vehicle on which it is necessary to launch a rocket … But it's also not for the army. For the army — it's exploration of the field of battle. And then — small unobtrusive devices that are on the radar screen and will not pay attention. And the loss of such a device would not be significant.

This suggests the second conclusion: these "toys" were created at all for us. More precisely, for us, if we have a set of Voronezh, Ryazan and Tomsk republics. Here you please get a drone strike or, at worst, a "Tomahawk". Just at some point, we as a nation have already written off and thought it was a matter of time. But a possible conflict between Russia and NATO is nothing to do.

Yes, it should be recognized that the work in this direction you need, and perhaps the time will come when the aircraft will be completely unmanned. But all this is only required for the war with the notoriously weak opponent that can not cause a massive attack on the territory of the attacker's weapons of mass destruction. Or, more importantly — it all makes sense if the liberal march across the planet will lead eventually to the elimination of states and their replacement by corporations, and that will solve their local problems in this way. And they will be able to answer only lightly armed rebels. But this is from the politics and nothing to do with the armed forces has not.

The examples are not far to seek. When all NATO piled on top of a small defenseless Yugoslavia, the Serbs with microwaves made one false target F-117 and knocked their 125th air defense system established in 1961.

To suppress Libya has used drones Europe — even Gaddafi calculated using them. But it's only after the defense of Libya had ceased to exist. At the same time Europe within the framework of the operation in Libya has spent almost the entire stock of "Hatchet". And all this for Libya, 90% of which is desert, and all the fun for bombs focused on the Mediterranean Sea. When the operation is rushed freedom for restocking Caucasians in the United States … and received a bill for payment in advance.

Unmanned combat systems, cruise missiles, precision bombs were created to deal with countries where there is no or weak air defense system. Syria shot down a Turkish reconnaissance plane — a good example. And it turned out, Shilka covered with a range of up to 2.5 kilometers. So even for Iran or North Korea to begin this adventure is risky (although the desire to eat). And as for China or Russia — it's all a fantasy. And it was not a nuclear, chemical or bacteriological weapons …

The armed conflict between NATO and Russia can not be started as a humanitarian mi
ssion to change the "bloody Putin regime." This can only be a full-scale war with trying to destroy Russia as a country with tens of millions of victims of our citizens and victims of the same on the opposite side. NATO should be ready to dozens, if not hundreds of thousands of soldiers killed in the first days of the war. In attacking the soldiers must be a few million, no less. Several hundred thousand professional soldiers — do not count, they go first, and need millions of reservists. What there is now reservists — know everything, though we think about quality should be.

As for the Droid, then install the radio or disable control is not technically too difficult and we need to develop these opportunities. Everyone has heard the captured U.S. drone Iran's perspective. It is said, not without our "Carpool" (always liked the name of our military equipment). The very "depot" could not do it, it is not designed for this, but take part — probably …

Then why are all these horror stories? To me, then, to distract from the essentials. The Achilles' heel of all these systems, as well as all the modern, especially the NATO army — are precision guidance system. In short, the near-Earth space. And all the possibilities — from those who can afford to have a large satellite constellation and use it for global positioning, intelligence, etc.

So, this is not the killer drones, and in systems that allow remote control and direct them to the target. And the benefit is not the one who will be using high-precision weapons, and the one who will be able to quickly and securely remove constellation opponent — without all of these systems turn into a pile of metal (I vaguely imagine a B-2 pilot with a paper map in hand).

For this purpose it is possible to create miniature spacecraft that will quietly stick to the satellites of the enemy and control their work, and at the right time — to undermine them. This is a series of expensive exotics. But you can blankly at the right time to undermine the derived orbit containers on the counter with a small steel balls, which at 16 kilometers per second swept away everything without considering where the, and where other people. China draw — neither we nor you. When it comes to the existence of the state, a sentiment can be retained.

And I do not make a large opening, saying that in this case, the advantage will be on our side. That we have such a large number of rockets and multiple rocket launchers, as well as T-72 tanks without satellite lotions. This is our officers learn to go to the point of concentration on the map in the tablet. And is not that the tablet with the bitten apple, and a paper map in a leather plate. That we still stored in warehouses coil wire communication, etc.

That's something like — do not judge strictly amateur.

What am I doing it? And the fact that all must know when to stop. It is the Americans can play in the F-35, to spend huge money and quit the project "Comanche", to use the B-2 value of the aircraft carrier and unable to carry cruise missiles. They — you can, and we head to think and listen to those of the head can create what is called an appropriate response. Not adequate for the amount drawn investments, and on the effects turn out.

After the exchange of the "list", like it or not, we are entering a new era of cold war (it is already understood everything). The Cold War and the hot phase involves confrontation. We need a modern army, but let's approach it wisely. Let's build on the scientists and engineers on these officers and generals. Let's re-establish a scientific, engineering, and military elite. And in any case, do not try to repeat others' decisions. We must remember that not all of these solutions — the faithful. And in fact, and no pants to stay for long.

April 24, 2013 Vladimir Fomin.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: