Russian 'Marker' Combat Robots to Be Sent to Ukraine Skynetski Ground Sea and Air

Posting in the Weaponry forum, because I'm more interested in just the battlefield ramifications than a political pissing match.

Is this a game-changer? Guess it depends on how battled hardened they are and how many Russia can deploy. But Id imagine being hunted by a robotic drone is a different experience than dealing with humans.

3 tons sounds huge but it's armored to take a little punishment, but I'd expect smaller and quicker ground drones to be more effective.



www.thedefensepost.com...

Navigates, Shoots Bullets
The wheeled platform is equipped with a hybrid propulsion system that allows it to function autonomously for up to three days. It can navigate for several kilometers without human assistance and can fire bullets with discretion.

“We have already taught the Marker to fire not only from a sporting gun but also to hit flying discs from a Kalashnikov machine-gun many times faster than people do,” Foundation Center for Robotics head Oleg Martyanov revealed.

Eventually, the developers will use the platform as a testbed for the interaction between ground robots, unmanned aerial vehicles, and special operations forces as part of future warfare models.

www.newsweek.com...

Russian "Marker" combat robots will be deployed to the front lines of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Russian state media reported on Sunday.

The combat robotic platform will undergo a "baptism of fire" on the battlefields of the Donbas region of Eastern Ukraine, Dmitry Rogozin, the head of the "Tsar Wolves" military advisor group, announced on his Telegram account.

Rogozin, the former head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, added that the "Marker" combat robot "works autonomously" to perform combat missions, as well as locating targets from a distance of around 9.3 miles, according to state news agency TASS. The combat robot can also pinpoint and fire upon enemy targets "in the affected area with its own fire weapons," Rogozin wrote.

The robots have been tested at Russia's Vostochny Cosmodrome, TASS reported, ahead of "several" units heading for Eastern Ukraine. the developers had "already taught the 'Marker' to fire not only from a sporting gun, but also to hit flying discs from a Kalashnikov machine-gun many times faster than people do."

He added that the combat robot could distinguish between civilians and military personnel to target those posing a "direct threat," therefore "skipping the objects that are found along the trajectory of fire."

On Wednesday, Russia's state news service, Ria Novosti, reported that work on the "Marker" combat robot had been completed. The report said the combat robot weighed in at around 3 tons, and was capable of being furnished with various weapons systems.

Ria Novosti hailed the "Marker" as having the "most advanced autonomous driving skills in Russia with object recognition based on artificial intelligence technologies."

In November 2021, Ria Novosti reported the "Marker" had been upgraded to serve as an autonomous "courier," as well as being outfitted with the ability to evacuate wounded military personnel from a battlefield.

The previous month, TASS reported the "Marker" will be able to combat unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) or drones, through "electronic pulses" and "suicide drones." TASS, citing manufacturer Android Technics' press service, said the combat robot would be able to detect unauthorized drones, personnel, and vehicles.

a reply to: putnam6

somewhere there's a thread on here from years ago about farty going to a demonstration for autonomous ground assault robbots. it might have been drones. they were a joke, and the look on farty's face said it all. can't remember the name of the thread and can't find anything with a search.

but remembering that thread and knowing how strapped for cash russia was /is, having to turn to people like iran and others. willing to bet they didn't build them and if they did their not going to deploy many cause they probably don't have many.

a reply to: putnam6

Russian ED-209ski

Autonomous eh?

I guess if the vehicles don't have a big Z slopped on the side they're open targets? Both sides have been using nearly identical equipment during most engagements.

I envision Russia coveting these while still sending ill-trained and equipped men forward in human wave attacks as they have been. While these would be used to mop up and hold positions. I doubt they would be used in main frontal assaults. Too lightly armored. If the Ukrainians can toss MBTs and APCs these would be vulnerable to lower yield RPGS etc they're only around 3 ton.

Whatever happened to Russian "Terminator tanks" ?

oh yeah, they sucked too

a reply to: putnam6

The future of war , on paper it looks like a beast.

A modular multispectral vision and data processing system, featuring neural network algorithms, supports autonomous operations. Other mission systems include a laser warning system, thermal sensors, day/night infrared (IR) cameras, laser rangefinder, target detection, early warning system, identification, and tracking equipment. This generates a new way of cooperation between man and robot where AI-powered sensors take aim and the human checks in before firing. It turns infantry into spotters for robots that will progress on the path of autonomy. ARF clearly sees the Marker as a learning tool, saying “the evolution of combat robots is on the path of increasing the ability to perform tasks in autonomous mode with a gradual reduction in the role of the operator."

The Marker robot will be able to carry a machinegun, loitering munitions and two types of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), the press office of the Android Technics Research and Production Association told TASS. “The Marker robot can be used with various modules and can carry a machinegun, loitering munitions, military and medical equipment, electric rockets, and two types of unmanned aerial vehicles, i.e. tube-launched and towed ones,” the press office said. Earlier, Head of Russia’s Roscosmos state space corporation Dmitry Rogozin said that the Marker robotic platform had started to patrol the Vostochny cosmodrome. According to him, the Marker operated in remote-controlled and autonomous modes.
www.armyrecognition.com... tification_mode.html

a reply to: putnam6
If true,I thought this was the most scary part- "can fire bullets with discretion"

That means decisions soley made by the on board computer-Maybe not a full A.I. but still making life or death decisions.
In this case I guess it would look for the yellow/blue tape the Ukrainians wear-see a human shape with that color on the arm area..Shoot.

No human oversight,killer robots,rudmentary A.I.

Yep that sounds like skynet to me.

Nah, I'm thinking the real juice is in lighter and more agile systems. Russia is sucking wind on troop numbers. Fielding a small, fast, autonomous AI hunter/killer weaponized Big Dog [ala Boston Dynamics' initial groundbreaking work tasked and outfitted to annihilate human beings] would be very destabilizing and a huge force multiplier. Given the lag between capabilities and public-facing abilities, I'm quite sure these are already ready to go on a significant level. Whether or not this is the theater to expose the capability to the World or not will depend on how badly Russia continues to get its ass handed to them.

Armed Robots

What will robotski do if one jumped up on top of the turret ?

a reply to: putnam6

Is this a game-changer?

They can still be blown up. From a number of sources.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: putnam6

Is this a game-changer?

They can still be blown up. From a number of sources.

Where did I say or suggest they couldn't be blown up? I actually said the effectiveness would depend on how hardened they are.

BTW guess which armaments the US is running short of and takes a long time to replace. the Javelin, like years to replace.

If nothing else they could be useful for Ukraine to drain its supply of anti-tank weapons

a reply to: putnam6

Where did I say or suggest they couldn't be blown up?

You didn't.

I am saying it, as you where asking if it's a game changer. In short, no it's not, as they can still be blown up.

Ok now ?

a reply to: putnam6

Sometimes I think that a bunch of backroom deals were done before the war and russia, ukraine, u.s.a., some of europe, and the u.k are all working together to test military equipment. With a side of money laundering and bribes.

And the military heads are for the most part going along with it for recruitment and budget reasons.

a reply to: putnam6

Is this a game-changer?

It might actually be one yes.

But not because of what it is. I'm 100% sure that the u.s. has something like this but better and ours probably flies.

But the fact that this type of drone is going to be used for the first time thus opening the door for everyone to start using them. That is the game changer here. I Might live another 40 years and maybe just maybe I will see a war that's fought without humans on the battle fields at all.

The wheeled platform is equipped with a hybrid propulsion system that allows it to function autonomously for up to three days

That's it? 3 days? You can bet that ours would have solar panels so it could recharge itself .

a reply to: gortex

Only has enough energy or fuel for 3 days.
And then what? A russian soldier has to go pick it up from the battlefield or go recharge it?
Can it be charged or does it use gas?

Most likely they will turn it back a drive it to a refuel area before the 3 days are up. Cut it's time on the field in half.
Or as slayer69 said these drone tanks will only be used in safe areas.

a reply to: BaconCrusader

Big Dog [ala Boston Dynamics'

This tiny russian tank drone kind of seems like a toy when you compare it to big dog, doesn't it.

Do russian scientists not have much imagination? Lets make a tank but smaller! And unmanned!

Which takes away every advantage that tanks had going for them. Armor and humans aiming and moving them.
Why didn't they just make a full size autonomous tank that has extra armor because you don't need space inside for the people. And allow it to be driving by remote so a person is still making the decisions on the battlefield??

our side has remote flying drones that are controlled from miles away. One of those could take out these tiny tanks easily.
Are am I missing something about this tank design?

a reply to: Spacespider

Self destruct?

a reply to: putnam6

Those aren't real numbers. Trust me we don't let the world see our true stock piles.

We have javelins for centuries. Were not running out anytime soon.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: putnam6

Where did I say or suggest they couldn't be blown up?

You didn't.

I am saying it, as you where asking if it's a game changer. In short, no it's not, as they can still be blown up.

Ok now ?

Apologies this is such an in-depth and highly technical analysis you are bringing to the discussion, it took me a while to understand the concept you are proposing and it's ramifications. So let me get this straight when Russia deploys these robotic drones in Ukraine you are fairly confident the Ukrainians can blow them up? Fascinating

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: putnam6

Those aren't real numbers. Trust me we don't let the world see our true stock piles.

We have javelins for centuries. Were not running out anytime soon.

FWIW research Mark F. Cancian is he wrong in his assessment?

www.csis.org...

www.csis.org...

www.republicworld.com... rticleshow.html

Why the US could experience a shortage of Javelin missiles?
The report compiled by Mark F. Cancian claimed that since the US has not publicly revealed the latest figures about its Javelin anti-tank missiles in its arsenal, the numbers are likely to be "deduced" given its massive supply to Ukraine. Also, the US has only produced 37,739 Javelin anti-tank missiles since 1994, according to US Army budget books. After using quite a number for training purposes, Washington is expected to hold near about 20,000 to 25,000 remaining and 7,000 of which represent one-third of its total inventory.


While a majority of two-thirds remain in the stock, military planners are "nervous" fearing potential empty Javelin inventory. "The United States maintains stocks for a variety of possible global conflicts that may occur against North Korea, Iran, or Russia itself. At some point, those stocks will get low enough that military planners will question whether the war plans can be executed. The United States is likely approaching that point," the CSIS report explained.

How can the US make up for the imminent shortage?
The easiest answer is by increasing the production of the Javelin anti-tank missiles systems. According to the report, Washington only produces 1,000 Javelin missiles per year despite having a capacity of 6,480. The delivery time for each artillery is at least 32 months. This means, if depleted, the US will need about three-four years to rebuild its stock. In the meantime, more supplies to Ukraine will expand the gap between supply and demand.

According to the CSIS report, the US might have had over-supplied artillery in a bid to beef up its support to Ukraine against a Russian attack. For example, Washington has limited inventories and replenishment options for Stinger anti-aircraft missiles.

Now, the US has already supplied 2,000 of these to Ukraine despite now having purchased for itself since 2003, when the total production was 11,600. Given testing and training losses, which amount to a loss of 1% of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, the remaining stock could be around 8,000, which means the US has already given a quarter of its stock to Ukraine.

Is the United States Running out of Weapons to Send to Ukraine?
September 16, 2022

The United States has given Ukraine dozens of different munitions and weapon systems. In most instances, the amounts given to Ukraine are relatively small compared to U.S. inventories and production capabilities. However, some U.S. inventories are reaching the minimum levels needed for war plans and training. The key judgment for both munitions and weapons is how much risk the United States is willing to accept.

The Risks of Weapons Drawdown
For weapons, inventory concerns arise because the United States needs to have enough systems to equip operational units and an amount for maintenance pipelines and training organizations. In theory, the United States could take some systems from late-deploying units. For example, the U.S. Army could temporarily equip some artillery batteries with four howitzers instead of the customary six or eight. In the unlikely event of a major conflict, these units could get additional systems from overhead or new production. Because the units are late deploying, there would be enough time to redistribute assets.

Nevertheless, there would be risks. Unit training would be more difficult without a complete set of equipment, and mobilization might be slowed due to the cross-leveling process. Furthermore, there is a political challenge: most of these late-deploying units are in the National Guard. Because of its ties to states, the National Guard has strong representation in Congress and has historically been reluctant to accept any policy that implies second-class status.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: putnam6

Sometimes I think that a bunch of backroom deals were done before the war and russia, ukraine, u.s.a., some of europe, and the u.k are all working together to test military equipment. With a side of money laundering and bribes.

And the military heads are for the most part going along with it for recruitment and budget reasons.

That's an interesting theory,

I'm thinking if true it's just a handful of crooked politicians and overzealous defense companies. If it is that organized by country to country we are indeed likely screwed.