I Didn't Want To Do It...

... but a bunch of fanboys write about alleged "response" to me by this Simplicius guy. Comments appear in this blog under my video etc.  So, let me demonstrate to you how to obfuscate this issue:

1. Recall my constant requests since ISR "piece" by this S guy (in reality compilation of headlines), I even did my own research, trying to answer simple question: WHO IS Colonel Falichev, no serious data? Guess what, this is response from the S guy:

While I certainly don’t begrudge him such thoroughness and demanding standards, I will simply note that nothing Falichev said was debunked but rather his military standing was merely called into question. This is not a response directly to Martyanov, of whom I am a fan though he appears to be less so one of me, but rather an answer to the few requests of my own audience I’ve gotten to make a response on the matter. I like for people to have their own minds and agency in making determinations, so the only things I’ll say is that firstly, Falichev’s piece was obviously published in the official Russian Army journal, hosted on their own official site:

And then he proceeds to "answer" whatever BUT the question of WHO Colonel Falichev is.  He certainly goes into copious amount of "elaborations", including, for some reason, posting biographies of the Editorial Boards of Army Digest and Military Thought (the latter one featuring prominently in my latest book's bibliography), remarkably, with all those board members having their bios known, their academic backgrounds and service being public, Mr. S still doesn't answer the question I posited from the get go: WHO Colonel Falichev is. I later elaborated--WHAT, namely military academy, did he graduate from, which will constitute his VUS (Military Registration Specialty). No answer, but Falichev bio matters a great deal. Yet, Mr. S speculates:

In this case, for instance, the takedown of Falichev could imply that I don’t use good sources in my research—but you can clearly see the contrary is the case. Not only is the Russian Army journal I used a top source, its own Editor-in-Chief has an unassailably storied career, having graduated from three different top command schools:    

You see how it is done? "Implied", I do not imply anything:

2. ... I specifically ask a simple question of military-academic background of Colonel Falichev, which determines if he has professional engineering background to pass his opinions on the issue of ISR in general and netcentric operations in particular or is he merely a military journalist with anecdotal (and rumor collection) "knowledge" of the issue. If Falichev has engineering command VUS, has experience serving as officer-operator of TsAMO (General Staff) or operational level staff officer among many other things, then his opinion is worth something. If he is not, then he merely provided a compilation of "facts" based on somebody's opinions which can differ dramatically on many issues, including what is known as "smoking room bashing" by officers. That's what professional military magazines exist for--to publish all kinds of views.

3. Then comes this issue of ISR and netcentricity in which there are satellites and there are Satellites. Starlink is called such because it is primarily communications constellation whose main purpose is to provide broad band data-links. It can provide some valuable sign-int but that's about it. The main threat for Russian Armed Forces in the field (and the sea) are the so called "spy satellites" which provide the "view" of the battlefield in optical and electromagnetic diapasons and this is primarily anchored to air assets such as E-Sentry, P-8 Poseidon, RC-135, drones and other aircraft. If Falichev doesn't understand that ALL of them fly in the international air space near Russia's borders (especially Crimea) and CAN NOT be shot down without escalating the conflict to the WW III levels, I don't know then why he begins to talk about two different ISR systems operating under completely different sets of circumstances, with NATO ISR having a gigantic advantage operating behind the wall of International Laws and Conventions regulating air and space activity in peace time. Does Falichev know the effects of RUK/ROKs in SMO zone? Does he understand what "R" stands there for? 

And here is the main issue, again, can somebody finally tell me who Colonel Falichev is? Having his full article would help too, I cannot access Army Digest, I have access to Military Thought, though. For those who want to read up of Netcentricity, at some time Lt. Colonel Kondratiev wrote extensively on that. Now, here is how I explain (for laymen) what Sensor/Data Fusion is which is in the foundation of modern ISR in 2019. 

Here I post some pages--the introductory level explanation of NCW and Fusion. 

Why the area in the lake in which the boat can possibly be located becomes not quadrangle but ellipse--that's the whole science of probabilistic analysis and based on sensor fusion and it is some damn serious math (algorithms) which are operating at the back end of network.  Here is a very basic representation:

If you want to see some math behind it, here is some interactive Kalman Filter. These are very basic things required (imperative) for understanding of modern ISR. But the question remains: WHO is Colonel Falichev because he should understand the unprecedented scale of netcentric operations Russian Armed Forces conduct in 404 and conduct extremely successfully granted with some hiccups, but this is a normal process.