Reply With Quoteinterestening..... for CQB and building cleaning could be useful.
although properly backed up, by troops, we don't want a terrorist to take it from the back and simply switch the power off.
Ground 'Predators' is it feasible?
I have been nursing the idea of remote-operated combat vehicles for a long time. I'm wondering why there are not ground versions of predators being used in the field right now.
Terrorists are using 'holy sites' in Karbala and elsewhere as firing positions and ammo dumps [as well as schools, hospitals, etc.]. It would seem that a ground drone would be highly effective in such tactical situations.
It would be armed with a gun, RPG, tear gas canisters, etc. It could be operated by a 'driver' in a stationary command post and/or in a nearby vehicle. Of course it would be equipped with whatever optical and audio capabilities necessary to functionality
Civilian bomb squads use vehicles to extend their reach while minimizing risk to human life -- why can't there be an adaptation for offensive military actions?
interestening..... for CQB and building cleaning could be useful.
although properly backed up, by troops, we don't want a terrorist to take it from the back and simply switch the power off.
Thats what auto-destruct is for. About 2 pounds of C-4 should do.
I always wanted to make "Active Mines".
A little RC car with simple directional mikes and some computer controls. It hears something close enough it turns on, drives towards it, and explodes.
There are alot of ethical issues to use of robots in combat even if they're still operated by a human. Many feel that it will depersonalize war too much and make war and death more acceptable to both soldiers who operate them and politicians who decide to go to war. Personally, I'm all for them in certain applications, such as clearing tunnels and caves rather than sending a man in.
Killing the enemy while minimizing our troops' [and thier civilians'] risk is perfectly acceptable to me.Originally Posted by Ratamacue
Death is indeed acceptable for our enemy to the point that war is already 'depersonalized' because life has no value to them. Let us then oblige them in their quest for a quick trip to paridise with 72 virgins, while preserving our own.
They have no problem hiding behind their own women and children while firing at us. Our soldiers are expected to fight a squeaky clean war while their tactics merit little public mention, much less criticism.
Creative solutions must therefore be sought. This is not a fair fight.
War is not ment to be fair,butI aggreewith you on creative solutions
Actually, the US Army has been working on this for the last ten years.
Nothing new really.
Hell, they just had that big robotics race out in the desert. Grand prize was a million dolalrs...all funded by the Department of Defense.
And all ****ed up
with all of these computers fighting our wars now. where is the glory?
Sounds good.. Seems like they can put cameras into anything these days.. I'm sure they can make a small enough, and mobile recording system to use. As for equiping it with some sort of weapon, like an explosive would be adding more to it and probably taking away more of the stealth capabilities. Putting, chem or bio weopons in one would surely work i think, but that's against the rules.
[quote="Lt_Crooks"]with all of these computers fighting our wars now. where is the glory?
War isn't glorious.
The glory is that less relatives get a flag...
You're right, it isn't a fair fight. We have big tanks, loads of men, weapons, helicopters, aircraft. What do they have? Um..ak47s, rpg7s, an' roadside bombs. Of course they won't go where the enemy can shoot them!! It's plain logic.Killing the enemy while minimizing our troops' [and thier civilians'] risk is perfectly acceptable to me.
Death is indeed acceptable for our enemy to the point that war is already 'depersonalized' because life has no value to them. Let us then oblige them in their quest for a quick trip to paridise with 72 virgins, while preserving our own.
They have no problem hiding behind their own women and children while firing at us. Our soldiers are expected to fight a squeaky clean war while their tactics merit little public mention, much less criticism.
Creative solutions must therefore be sought. This is not a fair fight.
Using robots in war will of course make it eaiser for us, but is still has to go where there are civvies. And there will still be casulties. The point I think some people try to make, is that if we just fight through robots, war will simply be like a computer game, but with real enemys (who don't have robots)
So the "it's not fair" statment applys to both sides anyway.
Once they get power supply worked out I think the military will find lots of applications for these devices. I have a sneaky felling that the Japanese are in the lead in this field.
The USMC Gladiator.
CAMP SMITH — It looks like something out of Robocop, a mini tank-treaded terror bristling with so many cannon and guns that only a Hollywood screenwriter could have dreamed it up.Marines at Camp Smith demonstrate the crowd-control capabilities of the Gladiator Tactical Unmanned Ground Vehicle.
U.S. Marine Corps photo
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/ar.../mn/mn01a.html
Posting Permissions
