LarryH57 Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 Its only a matter of time before robots start fighting! See link below https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6456851/adsasd.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terryb Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 Terrier, which has been in service for some time, has, I believe full remote control capability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashcollection Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 Been playing with Big remote stuff for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johann morris Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 God help us if there was ever a war, the MOD wastes money like water. In a major war the army with biggest battalions and most tanks will win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john1950 Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 History is littered with instances of inferior forces tenaciously applied and well led carrying the day. Do not despair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
11th Armoured Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 Never fear! Putin's already on the back foot - we sent a hydrographic survey ship to show him what's what... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46657470 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 No we have sent a Spy Vessel! After all, what else is a Hydrographic Ship? You can't send in the War Canoe without up to date charts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonBrown Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 RARDE Chertsey developed a radio controlled Chieftain back in the late 80s/early 90s. Known as Crazy Horse, the Chieftain was controlled from a Spartan APC. It did need an operator, and was remote control rather than autonomous. If memory serves me well it did feature in a TV program at the time...but cannot remember the details. Apparently its in storage now at the Tank Museum down in Bovington. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarland Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 18 hours ago, johann morris said: God help us if there was ever a war, the MOD wastes money like water. In a major war the army with biggest battalions and most tanks will win. Aye. MoD can't project manage anything - just look at the FRES/Scout debacle...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatchFuzee Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 4 hours ago, SimonBrown said: Known as Crazy Horse, the Chieftain was controlled from a Spartan APC. It did need an operator, and was remote control rather than autonomous. If memory serves me well it did feature in a TV program at the time...but cannot remember the details. It was used as a training aid, not as a fighting vehicle. Text in original Preserved Tanks In Britain (http://preservedtanks.com/Profile.aspx?UniqueID=2022 ) publication: Project Crazy Horse was initiated in 1987 to provide a manoeuvrable hard target for guided missile operators firing inert anti-tank rounds. 00EB33 was originally in service with the RAC Training Regiment at Catterick which was converted into a radio controlled target tank by RARDE Chertsey. The conversion involved removing the gun, ammunition stowage, radios and NBC system and then fitting hydraulic extensions to the driver’s steering controls that could be worked by a driver situated low down in the centre of the tank using a colour TV link to see outside. A very reduced fuel tank was also fitted to reduce the risk of the tank running away. On the firing range the driver would leave and operate the tank from a mobile command centre based in a modified Alvis Stormer control vehicle. Trials at Shoeburyness revealed that the tank could be controlled at a range of up to 6 km, the remote driver using a link to the tank’s camera equipment. The radio control equipment was supplied by the Skyleader company based on its model aircraft products. (Source: Museum Vehicle Record). This Chieftain was built as a Mark 1 by Vickers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonBrown Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 15 minutes ago, MatchFuzee said: Project Crazy Horse was initiated in 1987 to provide a manoeuvrable hard target for guided missile operators firing inert anti-tank rounds. 00EB33 was originally in service with the RAC Training Regiment at Catterick which was converted into a radio controlled target tank by RARDE Chertsey. The conversion involved removing the gun, ammunition stowage, radios and NBC system and then fitting hydraulic extensions to the driver’s steering controls that could be worked by a driver situated low down in the centre of the tank using a colour TV link to see outside. A very reduced fuel tank was also fitted to reduce the risk of the tank running away. On the firing range the driver would leave and operate the tank from a mobile command centre based in a modified Alvis Stormer control vehicle. Trials at Shoeburyness revealed that the tank could be controlled at a range of up to 6 km, the remote driver using a link to the tank’s camera equipment. The radio control equipment was supplied by the Skyleader company based on its model aircraft products. (Source: Museum Vehicle Record). This Chieftain was built as a Mark 1 by Vickers. Now that did bring back a few memories. Spent a few weeks in the summer covering Crazy Horse as it was used to conduct trials on how much delay an operator could cope with on the TV signal. Thanks for the reminder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Farrant Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 The 'robots' are from a company in Estonia which is linked to QinetiQ North America, a concern that took over the UK's military research and development agency, which we knew of from various titles over the years, such as MVEE, RARDE. Here is a link for more info: https://qinetiq-na.com/products/unmanned-systems/titan/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashcollection Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 picture on QinetiQ's site reminded me that Blackboard could be driven remotely to drop off the other little remote vehicle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terryb Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 check out boston dynamics' Atlas. bear in mind this is an old 2018 robot video that was released officially into the public domain consider this company has almost unlimited US military funding, then think what they're not showing you. frightening? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryH57 Posted January 8, 2019 Author Share Posted January 8, 2019 In any future conflict it would be technically possible to have a line of robot sentries, darlek like, placed in line and in depth to shoot at anything with the correct heat, shape or movement profile until the ammo ran out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashcollection Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Yes add face recognition in to that and off we go!! it could be done now, there is a rumour that its not that reliable yet though. haha. I would not want to go up against a Reaper or a Autonomous Apache or some such. Some may say its a waste of money, but as they say, "he who has the most toys wins" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johann morris Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 3 hours ago, LarryH57 said: In any future conflict it would be technically possible to have a line of robot sentries, darlek like, placed in line and in depth to shoot at anything with the correct heat, shape or movement profile until the ammo ran out Until the ammo runs out and who will pay for the robots when cannon fodder is readily available at very little cost and as in life, eventually he who has the most toys dies. In ww2 the Germans had the most advanced conventional toys but the Russians had the most tanks and lots of human fodder that they didn't mind expending. Technology is all well and good and exciting but costs, I wonder how many T72 you could buy for 1 challenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Am I the only one who hears The terminator soundtrack in his mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashcollection Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Si-Fi seem to predict the future in quite a scary way haha. and on the other point, tech is interesting and expensive, and I don't think these days we can convince the population to be cannon fodder, the army can't recruit enough now even with our massively reduced requirement. I run machines and I can run 4 with 1 man, be nice to be back employing more, but people don't want to do the work, its the tech that's kept us in the game. it will be the same for the military. sad but true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryH57 Posted January 9, 2019 Author Share Posted January 9, 2019 (edited) What I was thinking regarding my 'chain gun armed darlek sentries' is to allow real soldiers to be used more effectively. No gadget is a complete sucess in war, but at least it could block an approach or warn of intruders. Robot sentries could be used to watch our coast line for 'boat people' or drug runners landing at night and alert the authorities, rather than shoot first. Properly equipped, such robots could 'see' at night or in fog 24/7 and be better than those volunteer cliff top watchers used by HMCG, who have to go home sometime. So they would be CCTV Plus - the plus being the ability to kill, fire flares, illuminate anything with white light, provide warnings and target acquisition to others. The more you build the cheaper they get! Something the East Germans or Albanian Government of old would have spent their entire wealth on if they had only known! Edited January 9, 2019 by LarryH57 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatchFuzee Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 15 hours ago, Enigma said: Am I the only one who hears The terminator soundtrack in his mind? No, there are at least 2 of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 5 hours ago, MatchFuzee said: No, there are at least 2 of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryH57 Posted January 10, 2019 Author Share Posted January 10, 2019 (edited) Equally I could also start a thread called Navy Robot Wars, as its already in progress to have unmanned subs to carry out various tasks from reconnaisance, mining someone elses harbour mouth, firing cruise missiles apart from the usual torpedo attacks. The most worrying is the potential for a robot / drone nuclear sub to closely follow a Polaris sub, closer than an ex-partner or stalker, just waiting and watching for the right moment to explode. Thats why the Government needs to get some serious advice before spending £50 Billion on a Polaris replacement, as such a replacement might be as effective as a Zeppellin in the 1940 Battle of Britain Edited January 10, 2019 by LarryH57 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashcollection Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 same for the RAF, be gutted to but a couple more squadrons of euro fighters and f22's then come up against a load of drones that can pull 20G Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatchFuzee Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 1:32 PM, LarryH57 said: the plus being the ability to kill, Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.