Creation of a scientific and technical reserve in the interests of the development of weapons systems and the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation. The team’s scientific background on the project Why is this happening, what is it connected with

S.BUNTMAN: Good evening. Today we have a reduced line-up of hosts, Alexander Kurennoy is on vacation, Anatoly Yermolin and Sergey Buntman are in the studio, and Yuri Mikhailov, Deputy Chairman of the Military Industrial Complex under the Government of the Russian Federation, is our guest. But this is not a new formation, there have been organizations in different formats before. Who were engaged in military science. And what else?

YURY MIKHAILOV: Indeed, the Military-Industrial Commission itself, which we celebrated 60 years in March, as well as the scientific and technical council, a structure that provides the military-industrial complex with some kind of expert potential, research assessments, they have existed for a long time - about 60 years. And always the scientific and technical council of the Military Commission - it was especially strong in the period 1955-1957, until the end of the existence of the USSR - it was a very strong body that carried out not only expert assessments, but also financing of the most priority, breakthrough work and research in the system defense security of the state.

S. BUNTMAN: Is it mainly the coordination of scientific centers and institutes?

YURI MIKHAILOV: Including. Today, the emphasis is shifted, first of all, to the field of expert assessments, assessment of the capabilities of a particular scientific and practical area in the interests of defense security, or a fundamental area. Also in the assessment of those activities that ensure the performance of the functions of the military-industrial complex, in particular, in the implementation of military-technical policy, policy in the field of development of the defense industry - that is, all the functionality that is the task of the military-industrial complex.

S. BUNTMAN: You are talking about expert assessments - who are the experts, how are they selected?

YURY MIKHAILOV: This is a very interesting question. Perhaps I will tell you about the structure of the military-industrial complex and it will immediately become clear how the examination is carried out. Our scientific and technical council was approved together with the military-industrial complex of a new type, this is 2006, a presidential decree, then a government decree, and the scientific and technical council began to exist in its current format.

The Council included approximately 50 of the strongest specialists in the military-industrial complex in the field of science, engineering, technology, representatives of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and general designers. Of these, approximately 15 were members of the RAS. Several sections were created on the main tasks of military-technical policy. In 2010, we slightly expanded the format of those solutions and tasks, and now we have 70 people, including 24 members of the Russian Academy of Sciences, including two vice-presidents of the Russian Academy of Sciences, academician Aldushin and academician Oseev, chairman of the Novosibirsk Scientific Center. The membership includes truly outstanding scientists of our country, among them Academician Fortov, who is running for the post of President of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and other outstanding scientists should be noted.

We have the opportunity to learn from our veterans - these are the Heroes of Socialist Labor, academicians Fedosov, Shapunov, who has recently passed away, unfortunately. We have an academician Sokovich, a hero of Socialist Labor, the Siberian branch, the city of Biysk. And there is also a Hero of Socialist Labor Spassky. For a very long time he headed the Rubin Central Design Bureau - this is our entire nuclear submarine fleet.

Now we have a lot of Heroes of Russia in our squad - in particular, Academician Mikheev, these are helicopters, the hero of Russia Makarov, these are multiple launch rocket systems, there are also other academicians and Heroes. , 19 general designers in the main areas. Now the council has 12 areas - these are systemic issues, strategic, naval tasks, air, the Aerospace Defense section, and in almost all areas, including non-traditional types of weapons

A. YERMOLIN: Can we say that this is a kind of analogue of technological platforms, such a technical task in the broad sense of the word, which is formulated by the state in the person of you and the Ministry of Defense? - these directions?

YURY MIKHAILOV: I wouldn't compare it with technological platforms. To be honest, it seems to me that those tasks that were assigned, or rather, those expectations that were assigned to the platforms, unfortunately, they were not realized. Maybe things will change in the future, but not yet. Our directions are absolutely pragmatic. We concentrate under them the leading specialists in these fields of knowledge. In addition to these sections, we also have working groups, there are significantly more of them than sections, they work under the sections, and they are already spreading their tentacles to significantly larger teams of scientists and these groups are led by members of the Scientific and Technical Council, and involved specialists go into the composition.

And on these platforms - I use that word too - there are real brainstorming sessions. There are specialists who discuss specific works, proposals, projects, and this is very interesting. This is actually our find, the ion justified itself. In fact, the proposals and solutions that we find at these working groups, they then go to the sections, then to the meetings of the scientific and technical council.

A. YERMOLIN: An agenda? To organize a brainstorming session, there must be an agenda. For what?

YURY MIKHAILOV: Let me first talk about the structure. We want to know how scientific opinion is formed and peer review is carried out. So, in addition to this mechanism, we have the so-called extended sections. And for these 12 sections, we are already attracting all specialized organizations, the most interesting of the Ministry of Defense and the defense industry - mainly these are institutes and design bureaus. And then it turns out that the sections that are approved by the VPKkommission, and the composition is approved by government decree - those already, as if burdened by membership in the Council, people, they unite together with their entire scientific and technical fraternity, and in these expanded sections they also work out in the most detailed way those documents I mentioned.

Let us suppose that a program for the development of the defense industry is being formulated. We scatter the materials of the programs in the relevant areas - space, strategic weapons, and in these extended sections there is a specific discussion of these materials. We are given conclusions, they are very impartial in relation to those federal executive bodies that have developed certain proposals - this is in terms of policy documents. We legitimize these things by the decision of the Council of the VPKcommission, and then send them to the VPKcommission. And everything that is needed is already being done there - “at-ta” to these feds. And there is a correction in the right direction.

I must say that we are succeeding in almost all programs in coordination with the executive authorities, but I must say that we have very good relations with the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, Roscosmos, Rosatom - we are twisting all these programs for the common benefit, common interests from the point of view of solving state problems at a higher scientific and technical level.

A. YERMOLIN: So your product is a scientific and technical conclusion?

YURY MIKHAILOV: In fact, yes. And suggestions.

S.BUNTMAN: How can an interesting idea, at first glance, crazy? So the groups can keep track of what's going on? If a group of scientists put forward proposals, what is the technology of passage?

YURY MIKHAILOV: The technology is as follows: if someone comes up with an initiative, that is, develops an interesting proposal, for example, the most unrealistic idea - the creation of anti-gravity devices - we have such proposals. In addition to planning documents, we have to look at the appeals of citizens, developers - maybe someone has retired, is not working, - there are all sorts of proposals. From organizations, of course, no, they mainly come from former scientists, people who are concerned about the fate of the country's weapons and are trying to offer something.

By the way, these proposals come in my name, in the name of Rogozin - all proposals go through us. And they don't go unnoticed. If this is not what we have assessed, what is interesting - after consulting, determining the scope of the proposal, or I convene a meeting at the beginning with key specialists in the direction. Of course, we invite a developer and see how interesting it is. He proves to us, that is, there is a specific dispute, discussion. And then we take it further.

If there is interest, then it turns out that we give recommendations to the federal executive authorities, the developer of federal programs - on the formulation of appropriate studies, the inclusion of measures in one or another federal target program. And often it turns out, in agreement with the feds, interesting, and it is included in the program. There are many such examples.

S. BUNTMAN: what are the fuses? You have named many high-profile names of academicians, but everyone has their own addictions to certain technologies, things, love for one direction or another. This requires a balance.

YURI MIKHAILOV: That's right. It still exists, you are absolutely right. This is due to the interest of a person, his life baggage, addictions, maybe his youth, his views in one direction or another. And this is where our will comes in. We try to organize the work in such a way that the interaction is complementary, so that scientists complement each other and there is no rejection of an unverified idea. Naturally, with the appropriate scientific and technical justification.

There are many examples - of course, they are beyond discussion, since most, 99% of our discussions are confidential or closed. But the examples are vivid of the most painful points in the development of the weapons system. And you know, the battles are such that you won’t say “hello” up to “hello”. But then, of course, everything goes back to normal.

A. YERMOLIN: A classic story, when they brought a microchip and did not know what to do - when everything was on lamps and transistors, the inventor was sent to hell.

YURY MIKHAILOV: I must say that, of course, the solution to this problem that you have touched upon is, of course, still far from ideal. We try to make sure we don't throw the baby out with the water, but we don't miss big things. I think the smaller ones too. At least when we look at all federal targeted programs, we have a lot of constructive additions and, of course, we try to make sure that the most interesting developments are not forgotten.

A. YERMOLIN: Is the problem of commercialization relevant to you?

YURY MIKHAILOV: Of course. In general, I believe that one of the systemic key works, publications that were published in the pre-election period in Rossiyskaya Gazeta is Putin’s platform, the article was called “Be strong”, guarantees of national security for Russia. And in this article, I believe that this is a key article that sets out the whole ideology and, in fact, further presidential decrees that were made in May, the so-called "May decrees" and subsequent actions for the development of the defense industry, the armed forces, education, science and technology - practically , if you read every line of this article, it is implemented in these decrees.

And I must say that in this article the question was raised that the defense industry should not close in on itself and those very large funds that the state invests in the development of the army, the defense industry, in the form of federal targeted programs - these funds should give impetus to the development of civilian Sciences. That is, the issues of technology transfer - in this formulation it all goes well - they are certainly relevant.

S. BUNTMAN: We will talk about this again - about the level of our scientific thought, after the break.

S.BUNTMAN: We continue the program. So, new footage. Quite new structures have now been created that are striving to work in a new way, for specific tasks. In the general scientific community, we are largely confronted with the old system - the very structure of the Russian Academy of Sciences, we are not in vain proud of it, but something must be done with it.

YURY MIKHAILOV: Indeed, this is an extremely important and topical issue. If we talk about cadres, and cadres really decide everything, the wording is old, but correct. It must be said that if we talk about personnel, then of course, today the situation could have developed in such a way that, with the abundance of funds allocated by the state for solving military-technical tasks, there are so many that there was already fear that there was no such personnel potential. enough to competently, - I emphasize, - constructively, purposefully, reasonably spend these funds.

After all, the task is not to process these funds and get in the end it is not known what, but it is necessary to obtain the most promising, most advanced weapons systems, the most working, promising technologies, respectively, safe, those that will work for more than one year.

That is, we are actually talking about the creation of a new technological order, both for the defense industry and for the country as a whole. And of course, the solution of this or that innovative task, whether in the civilian or military-industrial sphere, is, of course, the innovative potential that society has. Because first of all we are talking, of course, about innovations in the technical sphere.

We analyzed the structure of the scientific and technical potential and came to the conclusion that it is a certain combination of material and technical, human, financial, informational and organizational resources. These five components, in fact, determine the ability of society to solve the problems of modernization.

If we are talking about personnel potential, we need personnel to organize this science, to correctly and competently build the entire system of predictive assessments for the development of scientific and technical areas, to build a system for evaluating the results obtained in order to correctly allocate funds in terms of their income dynamics, - so that there is no mess and chaos.

This problem, I think, at the moment, for us, our state, is no less important than the actual creation of iron. Often we have specialists in federal executive bodies who do not know what they are doing. And this is a problem.

A. YERMOLIN: To the question of leapfrog and mess. We had, it seemed to me, very talented managers and inventors of one of the new productions - “Weapon systems, the guys are engaged in sniper weapons, and they gave out amazing information that in their field, in the field of small arms, more than 600 technologies at the level of resins, impregnations - all the same, this is know-how, unique things. Question - do you create your own internal knowledge management systems so that knowledge and skills are not lost? In fact, every design bureau should have such a system, taking into account world experience. Do you have something similar?

YURY MIKHAILOV: I personally, as a scientist, it exists - in my laboratories, at the institute, where I am the supervisor. And moreover, I welcome this in design bureaus, institutions - in fact, if we are serious, then in Soviet times, and even now, passionate people actually decide the development of directions. Well, for example, Korolev, Shepunov, Makarovets and many of our other specialists. I'm not talking about our pilots and aircraft designers. These are passionate people who brought with them not only a spark of knowledge, but also a kind of fuse, enthusiasm for support, development of their direction.

Of course, this is a problem that needs to be addressed. We encourage our designers and heads of enterprises to do this. This is a task, at the very least, but it can be solved. You touched on a slightly different topic - the loss of technology.

A. YERMOLIN: This is part of knowledge management.

YURY MIKHAILOV: Yes, and part of the system that works to create a modernization potential is the material and technical basis for creating this knowledge base, these technologies. So here is the material and technical aspect: it is, of course, materials and technologies. Right now, the big task is not only to return the lost technologies - by the way, this is being successfully done in terms of materials from one of the programs on strategic and replacement materials. Which is scientifically led by Academician Abov, director of AVIAN. All directions are very well visible there, and we have benefited greatly from the ending program, and now there will be a new program of this kind.

But you need to do the most interesting design and prototyping technologies. The beginning of this was laid in the program for the development of the defense industry, since promising, breakthrough, basic, industrial-critical technologies are being laid there. But new technologies are already on the agenda. And these are really design technologies - 3D, 4D - these are the tasks that our society faces and we have to master this. Now I'm starting to promote this issue, attracting people, specialists. /This is the most powerful simulation, including super-computer technology, where, without additional preliminary experiments, one can already come up with some operational solutions in order to quickly check them.

These technologies are breakthrough. It will be a breakthrough into the future. And here we need, of course, to catch up, definitely. If we set a task, we will catch up. Because there are many such technologies, if we are talking about hyper-sonic technology, these are new types of weapons, directed weapons - everything that is put up as non-traditional weapons, something that will be fought in the future. This is the development of high-precision weapons, new control systems for them.

If we raise a simple topic - all the US precision weapons, which is the most advanced state in the possession of precision weapons, in particular, all the operations that we know about - Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan - all these military operations were carried out, first of all, with the help. Sea-based high-precision weapons are Tomahawk missiles, which hit certain targets, flying into the window, as they say. And these approaches will certainly be improved.

You know that the US President recently made a proposal to reduce nuclear potential, they are actually exploiting their superiority in the field of precision weapons. That is, in this way, an attempt is actually being made to reduce the nuclear potential, reducing the nuclear potential - in principle, correctly - in the Russian Federation - if we proceed from general humanitarian goals. In the future, perhaps, this will be possible when the Russian Federation possesses the necessary number of high-precision weapons. But now - of course, this is the area of ​​political discussions, not scientific and technical ones. It seems to me that this question needs to be weighed again.

But I will continue about high-precision weapons - this is a very interesting thing, because these are perspectives. All high-precision weapons are aimed through the American GPS - you know, and not the one that we use when we drive in a car, where plus or minus 30 meters is not the same.

GPS in military use - one meter - they have such criteria. But you need to understand that during the period of hostilities, especially against a country that is more or less - I'm not talking about Russia or China, which have satellite destruction technologies, but even more or less Iran has such technologies. And then these weapons, during the period of hostilities - if, of course, they manage to use weapons of destruction and incapacitation of GPS systems - they begin to not work. That is, they are vulnerable, these funds are located in space, they are quite vulnerable.

And the United States is now setting the task of creating an inertial guidance system, that is, it will not be connected with satellites. In fact, just like our first intercontinental missiles and today's - they are guided inertially, that is, a gyroscope spins there, it keeps the missile along a certain ballistic trajectory, and it hits where it is needed, only with a radius of 150 meters - at best.

A. YERMOLIN: A kind of "combat information and control systems."

YURI MIKHAILOV: Yes. And given the fact that the power of a nuclear explosion is colossal, it does not really matter. And before these - it should already hit the stake, in terms of missilemen. And of course, non-nuclear weapons, missiles equipped with non-nuclear warheads, they must fly right on target. So in order not to depend on this case, the United States has now set the task of reaching a new level of control of guidance systems. In fact, we are talking, I think, about a revolution, about the creation of a micromechanical, actually magnetic-nuclear, based on the resonance of nuclei in a magnetic field. Here are the tasks set - they are published on the Internet.

The task is set in such a way - that all this device should be arranged in a volume of 20 cubic centimeters. Accordingly, the actuation time is 10 seconds. Before you start the gyroscope, you need to spin it in order to then keep the desired trajectory. That is, the actuation is much longer, and here - 10 seconds.

S.BUNTMAN: Is this a task or a reality?

YURY MIKHAILOV: This is a task, this is a competition, they set such a task. But campaigns, backlogs, they have to do with it.

S. BUNTMAN: Problem of task formulation.

A. YERMOLIN: DARP generally sets fantastic tasks - so that a fighter can fly, storm a 5-story building without devices - this is the essence of DARP - she formulates, it would seem, such insane tasks.

S.BUNTMAN: Can we follow this path? Or should we solve mundane tasks?

YURI MIKHAILOV: I think, and my leadership thinks so, Rogozin, and he sets such a task for us and for everyone - even further these tasks were set for us by the president in the same program article, and, accordingly, by his subsequent decrees. Since we have already slept through several innovation cycles, we do not need to catch up, we need to go ahead. As Rogozin says, we must cut the corner, and in this regard, the Advanced Research Foundation, which we created at the end of last year, sets itself the following task: to look for such breakthrough developments that will provide a leap into the future.

S.BUNTMAN: That is, we do not have to go through all the stages.

YU.MIKHAILOV: They shouldn't. We must move forward.

A. YERMOLIN: But not enough technology.

YURY MIKHAILOV: There are not enough personnel.

A. YERMOLIN: In order to create innovations, especially in your closed area - for example, what is a closed patent, after what time should it be declassified? But the first and main question is what model will you use to build your innovation ecosystem. For the last 5 years, we have tried to take Silicon Valley as a basis, to create creative clusters, but it did not work out. There was a Soviet model of clusters. There are similar things - American scientists, European ones - they have a big backlash, they have a lot of money, they can attract serious investments as part of their research. We had the same powers in the 50s - 28-year-old captains, physicists worked there - Galperin writes about this - they had unique opportunities. So which ecosystem is more Soviet, or a la Silicon Valley?

Y. MIKHAILOV: I think that there will be a reasonable existence of both. We have already talked about the fund - the fund operates on the principle of grants. This means that the scientific and technical council of the foundation, having seen this or that promising development, as a predator, - as Rogozin says, - snatches it from the general host of developments, looks it up and down, and accordingly, if it is worth it, raises it and starts to implement at enterprises and introduce into the troops.

And the fund, having sufficient funding - and it will constantly increase - can in free flight, as they say, in creative - of course, under the control of the supervisory board, which includes the heads of the VPKkommission - these developments will be financed not in an arbitrary, but in a free option. It's not software stuff.

And we have federal targeted development programs, there is a program of fundamental research, which is also being prepared, is also important - there will also be relatively free approaches to research, they will already be ordered according to the standard scheme for ordering work. It's about funding.

As for the personnel involved in this, of course, the personnel problem exists and will always exist, because talents always appear only in the background, on a platform where something is already growing quite strongly, when there is a community of intellectuals who can give birth to his environment - it happens naturally - genius. Because if you don’t cook, especially now, at a high scientific and technical level, or at the level of fundamental science, you won’t be able to jump out with a brilliant solution. Cherepanov will not succeed now.

S. BUNTMAN: And you won't even come from Kholmogory. Therefore, let's talk about the scientific context - what is needed in the scientific system, academic, - what reforms does it need?

Y. MIKHAILOV: Let's talk about this, especially since I am not indifferent to the fate of the RAS, since I myself am a member of the RAS, and my colleagues in the academic workshop, in the applied science workshop, are members of the RAS and are also very concerned about this.

Of course, heated debates are going on right now - not in terms of military science, but of course, they are completely relevant here, from the point of view of whether fundamental science is managed correctly in our country, how research is being conducted, where we are moving - “what is coming.”

And two extreme points of view, which are often opposed. I think that it may not even be entirely correct to oppose them. Oppositionists, on the one hand, say that, as before in Soviet times, we must carry out all fundamental research on a broad front, and the other does not concern us at all. We look beyond fundamental science, patterns, phenomena, and everything connected with it. And others say: stop doing such research that does not give any sense. We have a scientific and technological revolution in the yard, we need a breakthrough to a new technological order, so we need to think about focused fundamental research, that is, those that have applied research as the next step.

The truth, as always, is in the middle. The first position - I would say that in a good sense, these are ardent supporters of the former RAS, and that position, the second, about which I spoke - such a view is professed by the Ministry of Education and Science. I'm sure the truth is in the middle. Undoubtedly, the RAS does not need to be restructured, but simply to place accents in its activities and not try to show that the RAS is engaged only in fundamental research.

Always, both in Soviet times and later, the RAS had a lot of applied developments that were perfectly used in the national economy.

S. BUNTMAN: I don't think that the Ministry of Education is trying to reduce everything to a general theory of a bolt and a nut.

YU.MIKHAILOV: No, it is not. I said that we are talking about oriented fundamental research. These are studies that are colored by the perspective of practical development.

A. YERMOLIN: In your opinion, will it be possible to create an American or European-style university science in our country, and will we not lose traditional branch science, for which, in fact, the RAS stands.

YURY MIKHAILOV: Industry? I believe that all three forms of research organization have the right to life - and the Russian Academy of Sciences, of course, as the leader of fundamental research, and university science - an excellent science that has now embodied a lot of wonderful scientists. By the way, many employees of the Russian Academy of Sciences work in universities, employees of defense enterprises and other industrial enterprises also work in universities. In fact, this is a single system of people who are engaged in science. And you can't compare them in any way.

S.BUNTMAN: Are we not facing a choice?

YURY MIKHAILOV: Everything should be complementary, complement each other. Rogozin and I were at Moscow State University on Friday. It seems to be a purely academic university, excellent scientists who could engage in purely refined science. But oddly enough, we saw a lot of wonderful developments there, of an oriented nature, of applied significance. And not just those who have, but which are already being used in many specific issues. Great work. People are looking forward to interacting with the OPK with great enthusiasm and interest. And what do you think - as a result of this visit, a proposal was born to create a center for science, technology and education at Moscow State University - in the interests of the military-industrial complex, - in parentheses, - a laboratory for the military-industrial complex, - you see, the chain continues: a laboratory. In fact, the guys asked - what will this center do, will it be able to promote the developments of MSU scientists into practice? I replied: that's what it's made for. And his second task - guys, look beyond the horizon, 30-50 years ahead, as the president sets the task for us. Look ahead and work on those tasks that we may not even know about now - only you can see it.

S. BUNTMAN: Thank you very much. We end the show on a promising note.

To improve the efficiency of the organization and implementation of research work, the NRC “Institute named after N.E. Zhukovsky" develops an innovative system for managing the development of technologies in the aircraft industry. Its main feature is the focus on the formation of an advanced scientific and technical reserve, which will minimize the risks of reducing the technical, economic and performance characteristics, as well as reduce the time for mastering the mass production of new equipment.

In the future, the decision on the design and production of a specific sample should be made only if there are technologies that have been worked out and confirmed on demonstrators and prototypes.

The innovation system provides for the introduction of new mechanisms for managing the creation of aircraft technologies in applied science, both at the strategic and tactical levels.

Strategic plans for the development of technologies set a system of goals in quantitative terms - for this, a system of indicators for the development of technologies in the aircraft industry has been formed for the short (2020), medium (2025) and long-term (2030) periods.

The general goals of the development of science and technology in the civil aircraft industry are:

• achieving an acceptable level of safety performance;
• increasing economic and physical accessibility, as well as the quality of services provided using Russian-made aviation equipment;
• reducing the harmful impact of aviation on the environment.

A similar system of goals and indicators of their achievement has been formed in the field of development of military aviation equipment.

In long-term technology development planning, it is necessary to determine what characteristics the aviation technology of the future should have in order to achieve these goals. To do this, system modeling tools will be used, with the help of which these indicators of achievement of general goals will be decomposed to lower levels - lists of requirements for aircraft classes, called platforms. For example, system models in the field of civil aviation will take into account the behavior of the subjects of the air transportation market: airlines, passengers, government bodies, and, based on such an analysis, form requirements for the integral characteristics of a promising aircraft fleet.

The target values ​​of the characteristics of advanced technology can be achieved in various ways, depending on the selected priority areas of search, existing ideas and technical concepts, for which an assessment of the impact on the specified characteristics of aviation technology should be carried out.

For example, a reduction in fuel consumption can be achieved by:

• reducing the specific fuel consumption of the power plant (i.e. improving the engine itself)
• improving the aerodynamic quality of the airframe (using solutions such as new aerodynamic layouts, natural or hybrid laminarization, wingtips, etc.)
• increasing the weight perfection of the aircraft (due to the use of composite materials, improving structural power schemes).

Specific combinations of the values ​​of these parameters, which will ensure the achievement of the target value of fuel consumption, in this case, can be determined analytically using the so-called. Breguet formulas. For other areas of technology development, a quantitative assessment of their impact on the achievement of goals can be carried out using statistical models or in an expert manner.

To ensure the creation of a scientific and technical backlog by a given deadline determined by market requirements, a scale of technology readiness levels is introduced, which is already widely used in world practice.

The readiness level of a technology is a formalized assessment of the degree of its maturity for practical use in development and production, from an idea to a prototype of a complete system, tested in conditions close to real.

The scale adopted in foreign aviation science and industry provides for 9 levels of technology readiness, of which the first six cover the period of creating a scientific and technical reserve, and the next three relate to the creation of specific models of aviation equipment.

Achievement of technology readiness levels should be confirmed on a certified experimental base, united within the framework of centers for collective use.

At technology readiness levels 1-3, the development of science and technology in the aircraft industry is implemented within the framework of problem-oriented projects in priority scientific and technological areas.

As the level of readiness of technologies for industrial application increases, their system integration (4-6 readiness levels) takes place within the framework of complex scientific and technological projects, as a result of which a set of proven technologies is formed that allows creating new products with a given level of characteristics.

Within the framework of complex scientific and technological projects, the mutual influence of technological innovations in various components of complex systems is taken into account. At the same time, the risk of negative mutual influence of new technologies is reduced to an acceptable level. As a result, an integrated scientific and technical reserve is being formed, which will be used both for the creation of civil and military aviation equipment, and in the interests of other sectors of the economy.

In May, the government approved the federal target program "Research and Development in Priority Areas of Development of the Scientific and Technological Complex of Russia for 2014-2020". The program is sponsored by the Ministry of Education and Science, and it is planned to allocate more than 200 billion rubles from the federal budget for its implementation within seven years. Andrey Petrov, Director General of the Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution "Directorate of Scientific and Technical Programs" of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, spoke about the goals and objectives of the program, the prerequisites for its appearance, as well as the level of research and development in the country in general.

What is the main difference between the new program and the previous one, designed for 2007-2013?

Andrey Petrov: The main objective of the last program was to demonstrate the possibility of implementing a complete business cycle from idea to production and bringing a science-intensive product, product or service to the market. The project was implemented in such a way that it began with applied research, and as a result, a specific product appeared on the market. The main difference of the new program is that due to the emergence in the country of various tools to support applied scientific research both within the Ministry of Education and Science and within other departments, the Federal Target Program "Research and Development 2014 - 2020." the task of forming a technical reserve in the pre-commercial stage was assigned. There is no article "Commercialization of developments" in the new program. Although it is still focused on all priority areas of science and technology - life science, nanosystems industry, information and telecommunication systems, environmental management, energy efficiency, energy conservation and nuclear energy, transport.

The 2014 - 2020 program is aimed at creating a scientific and technical reserve. Performers are not directly required to create new products or technologies. They are required to provide full-fledged research results, which in the future, of course, can and should be used to create science-intensive products. First of all, we are talking about improving the effectiveness and quality of research.

What is meant by scientific and technical groundwork?

Andrey Petrov: For me, these are three concepts: the results of specific projects, the availability of modern scientific infrastructure and research equipment, and the availability of professional research personnel. Back in the mid-1990s, we had a fairly large scientific and technical reserve left over from the developments of Soviet science. This can be seen from the way in which scientific teams then participated in shaping the topics of scientific and technical programs. There were a lot of proposals from scientific institutes and teams. Now this number has decreased significantly. And the qualitatively proposed developments are either outdated in terms of approaches and topics, or simply repeat what has often been done long ago by others. Twenty years ago, most modern scientific technologies did not exist at all, and now they have appeared, but have not been reflected in the Russian scientific environment. Many researchers continue to develop using old scientific technologies, they live in an old paradigm that is different from the world scientific community, which has long been using fundamentally different tools and approaches. This gap is emerging today in many areas of science.

It must be overcome by creating a scientific and technical reserve, which should be formed within the framework of the new program. Instrumentally, through the FTP "Research and Development 2014 - 2020", the state is trying to recreate the scientific community that owns modern tools and technologies. At the first stage, the community must perceive the results obtained by someone else, the next stage is to reproduce these results, and then it must be able to produce competitive science-intensive products itself and be a leader in this. We are talking about the creation of an active scientific environment, the formation of qualified teams and the acquisition of new knowledge.

Why was it decided to abandon commercialization in the new program?

Andrey Petrov: For two reasons. First, the ones I mentioned above. And secondly, because large FTPs have appeared in many specialized departments, where there is also a research part. The government made a fundamental decision: issues related to commercialization and implementation became the responsibility of relevant departments. For example, the Ministry of Economic Development is responsible for the commercialization of innovations. Therefore, this was removed from the functionality of the Ministry of Education and Science, as the government decided. The Ministry of Education and Science is responsible for research work at the pre-commercial stage, and to a greater extent intersectoral, when the results of the work are valuable for several areas at the same time.

The text of the document says that the new program provides for the directive formation of topics for research, based on an analysis of the needs for the development of sectoral ministries and departments, companies with state participation, industry associations and business representatives. How will this mechanism be implemented?

Andrey Petrov: In the previous program, the formation of topics was commissioned either by the scientific community itself or by business structures. The new program assumes that there will be priority projects that the state, together with science and business, will implement to solve the problems that society faces. For example, the construction of some kind of research center or the development of drugs to combat diseases that pose a threat to society, that is, something that solves not local, but significant problems for the country.

The Ministry of Education and Science has an appropriate department that develops priorities, it will coordinate them with other departments (the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Energy, the Ministry of Natural Resources, etc.), and directive topics will be developed at the junction. These may be projects in which several departments are interested. Or maybe, for example, funding a large research facility to solve a major state task, a facility that no institute can afford with its own budget. And at the state level, a decision will be made to provide such an installation for the institute.

The Ministry of Education and Science also interacts with regional departments, governors, technology clusters to identify existing problems and find ways to solve them. On the basis of this interaction, projects will be formed that will actually be implemented by order of the state and society as a whole.

How will businesses get involved in this?

Andrey Petrov: As far as directive topics are concerned, no. These are projects for solving the problems that the state faces directly. For interaction with business, a number of other activities aimed at the implementation of projects in which business may be interested are retained. The degree of his interest can be different - from absolute to partial. However, I do not rule out the participation of businesses in individual projects, for example, with the same expensive installations that are being done in Europe "by the whole world." It is well known that purely scientific research on elementary particle physics at CERN led to the emergence of the Internet. So, perhaps, the same collider and the results obtained with its help will be of great practical importance, and large corporations will also be interested in them. If something like this is created in our country, nothing prevents the business from taking part in such a large-scale project.

And what industries do you think are most in need of research today?

Andrey Petrov: Everyone needs. If public or private companies want to stay and be successful in the market, they must do research. So far, both business and Russian research teams are, at best, in the role of catching up. And, unfortunately, Russian scientists are working in many areas, lagging behind for years and dealing with objects that have either already been worked out or are of little interest.

Why is this happening, what is it connected with?

Andrey Petrov: First, the country was undergoing major transformations that rarely benefit science. And secondly, there is no direct order for science in the country. Science is always actively developing where there is a direct order for the results of its activities. All fundamental research arose as a kind of side effect of an industrial or military order. In our country, in recent decades, the Russian economy has not shown interest in the scientific and technical sphere. Even when it comes to innovation, it's mostly off-the-shelf, packaged technologies, most of them previous generations.

It is no secret that most business owners perceive their business not as a technological entity, but as a financial asset that must be as liquid as possible in order to exchange it for an even more liquid one at the right time. According to the media and the Internet, they are restructuring their assets. As long as this happens and there is no real need for science to order within the economy, nothing fundamentally will change.

Can you name any examples of successful full-cycle projects implemented under the previous program?

Andrey Petrov: Certainly. For example, the development and production of cold-resistant steels for large-diameter pipelines and the construction of offshore drilling platforms. This project has gone through all the stages from laboratory technology for the production of a new alloy to the release of batches that are purchased by real companies for the construction of northern gas pipelines.

If we talk about the products that were planned to be produced under the program, who is the customer of these innovations, new technologies - large state-owned companies?

Andrey Petrov: If we are talking about cold-resistant steels, then this, of course, is Gazprom and oil companies that plan to work on the shelf. Another major project is tunneling microscopes. This is a new class of equipment that has emerged in the last decade. In fact, in parallel with other countries, a research environment and the production of this equipment have emerged in Russia. The company carried out this project as part of the program, and today it has secured a fairly significant share of this market. This is a good example of a full-cycle project, which resulted in the creation of equipment that is in demand all over the world.

Another project is related to the creation of new types of synthetic rubbers, this project has also been brought from laboratory technology to large-scale production. These are highly sought-after materials - today they are used in almost everything, from cars to iPads, etc. - everything that is pleasant to the touch. This material is very promising in terms of export.

Overall, how successful was the program for 2007-2013? Has everything been achieved?

Andrey Petrov: All formal indicators that were set have been met. But you always want to achieve the impossible. This, unfortunately, does not always work out. The financial crisis fell on the period of implementation of the ending program. As a result, the budget of the program was heavily redrawn, as a result, all our plans for launching projects were violated. In one of the years the budget was actually cut three times. The state gave money as best it could, but it is clear that if we are talking about large, multi-stage projects, funding jumps many times from the planned ones do not allow them to be successfully implemented. Yes, the vast majority of projects have been completed, all indicators have been achieved, but due to uneven funding, some plans, especially those related to the implementation of large projects, had to be curtailed, because they did not have the resources at first, and then the time. Some of the resources were subsequently transferred from the research part to the infrastructure part, that is, the funds were directed to the construction of scientific facilities.

By what criteria is it planned to evaluate the effectiveness of the program for 2014-2020?

Andrey Petrov: This is primarily an increase in the share of domestic spending on research and development in the gross domestic product, an increase in the number of publications by Russian authors in scientific journals and the number of applications for patents for inventions, utility models, and industrial designs. As for the expected socio-economic effect, the main criterion, as I said, will be the creation of a scientific and technological reserve in priority areas and the integration of the Russian scientific and technological complex into the global innovation system.

As a result of the scientific research carried out within the framework of the NUG project in 2012-2013. general theoretical foundations for codification and unification in PIL were developed, which made it possible to solve the following tasks:

establish scientific approaches to the definition of the object, methods and significance of the codification and unification of PIL; trace the history of the development of these processes in the field of PIL; determine the features of international and national unification of PIL; to analyze the relationship and mutual influence of modern codification and unification processes in PIL. As a result of the study, the following statements were convincingly proven:

1. In the process of PIL codification in the 21st century, the following special types of codification can be distinguished:

• "Step by step" codification - a type of codification, during which a single law-making, i.e. the formulation of isolated norms of PIL and the partial codification of its individual institutions are completed with the adoption of a new consolidated act of a systemic nature (Romania);
• consolidating codification - a type of codification carried out by combining a number of legal acts dedicated to individual institutions and issues of PIL into a single agreed act with the introduction of certain novelties into the source legal material (as a rule, this is the second stage of "step-by-step" codification) (Poland, Czech Republic);
• Blanket codification is a type of codification based on the priority of an international unified act regulating certain cross-border private law relations by direct reference to it. A specific method of blanket codification is the preservation of an article (section) of the law, reserved for a future norm - a reference to a certain international treaty in case of its ratification (Netherlands).

Due to the fact that in the 21st century significant experience of law-making practice in PIL has already been accumulated and unified, the most effective should be recognized as consolidating and blanket codification, which explains the increasing popularity of the latter in our time.

2. An inherent feature of the modern PIL codification process is the use (as the main method in terms of legislative technique) of international unified acts. In the 21st century, the national act of codification of PIL is a systematic presentation of domestic and international unified norms implemented in national law.

3. In the 21st century, national codifications may provide for the application of an international treaty that has not yet entered into force (for example, due to the lack of the required number of ratifications), provided that this treaty has already been ratified by the relevant state (Article 145 (2) Book 10 of the Civil Code of the Netherlands) . Thus, one of the possible functions of the blanket codification of PIL is to provide a leading unifying effect of an international legal act in the internal legal order. As a result of the use of reference, uniform norms acquire legal force in the system of national law earlier than in the system of international law.

4. At present, the principle of complexity is one of the specific principles of PIL codification. This principle means that the process of codification should coordinate all issues of legal regulation of certain social relations. To the greatest extent, this requirement is met by an autonomous complex codification aimed at resolving conflicts of laws and jurisdictions in the widest possible area of ​​cross-border private law relations. The effectiveness of the principle of complexity directly depends on the consistency of international legal and national legal approaches to the use of the conceptual apparatus and specific mechanisms of legal regulation in PIL (autonomy of the will of the parties, the principle of closest connection, protective clauses and return referral).

5. Along with the progressive development of domestic legislation, one of the main patterns of modern social development is the deepening internationalization of law, which means the convergence of legal systems, the deepening of their interaction and mutual influence. The internationalization of law is manifested, first of all, in the process of unification of legal norms. The unification of law is the creation of identical, uniform norms in the internal law of different states, the only way to create which is the cooperation of states. Consequently, the unification of law means the cooperation of states aimed at creating unified legal norms in the internal law of a certain circle of states. The most striking example of the international unification of PIL in the regional aspect is European private law, the most important component of which is conflict of laws.

List of the main publications related to the chosen field of research by the head and executors of the NGO for the last three calendar years before the date of the announcement of the competition for 2012, 2013 and 2014

1. Erpyleva N.Yu., Getman-Pavlova I.V. Codification of private international law in the Republic of Georgia // International law and international organizations. 2012. No. 2. C. 44-75.

2. Erpyleva N.Yu., Getman-Pavlova I.V. Codification of the international civil process in the Republic of Georgia // State and Law. 2012. No. 10. S. 54-65.

3. Getman-Pavlova I.V. Application of foreign public law norms in private international law // International public and private law. 2013. No. 4. C. 8-12.

4. Kasatkina A.S. Modern codifications of PIL in the countries of Southeast Asia (People's Republic of China and Japan) // Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2012. No. 2. S. 144-164.

5. Kasatkina A.S. Unification of conflict rules of the European Union in the field of inheritance: new approaches // Questions of jurisprudence. 2013. No. 3. S. 385-406.

6. Proshko P.V. Codification of private international law in the Netherlands // Legislation and Economics. 2013. No. 5. S. 49-54.