[Closed] Team Britannia, World Police. (On a tight budget)

Lol.

Although I'm going to play devils advocate..... I don't see a scenario where a full-sized unmanned tank would be useful. Specifically, if all it's doing is bringing that big gun into play, what can it do that an armed aerial drone can't?

The uk version however.... an unmanned, mobile machine gun emplacement? That sounds quite useful.

Happy to be told otherwise.

Yeah, willing to admit my post is a little tongue in cheek.😉

The BBC article I got it from is worth reading.... If only for the mention of the failed unmanned tank the Americans trialled in the 80's.

It had a few "teething issues."😳

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50387954

I don’t get why the US one appears to be the same size as a normal tank. Surely all the space that was used to house the people is no longer needed 🤔

Surely all the space that was used to house the people is no longer needed

All the computers (and cooling systems) required to run it? More space for shells?

I was thinking more because of ego. **** yeah! Look at our massive autotank.

I guess the machine that loads shells probably isn't that much smaller than a person? And if it doesnt need to sleep then there's a benefit of giving it a longer fuel range and more ammo so you dont have to have it come home every night?

These serious logical answers are no fun at all

Hard to judge but I reckon the US tank IS smaller than a conventional one. I think the picture angle makes it look bigger.

I prefer Tesla Cybertruck.

All that crap on the front of the US tank would look great in a video game, and be a serious shot trap in reality.

I can't see the trailer for mopping up all the shells they dispense... Shirley in our environmentally conscious age we'd be expecting these tanks to clean up after themselves.

I don’t get why the US one appears to be the same size as a normal tank

Depends what you class as a normal tank but it's more light scout vehicle sized

I assume as they have a turret they're more designed for scouting or urban combat, way better to go turret-less for an unmanned MBT

Control of the weapon looks like the vulnerability. It's going to need a huge support team.

eg, I wonder how it would go if it had a fine mesh pulled over it (Faraday cage).

Asymmetric warfare experts and hackers will be salivating at the prospect of turning this against its masters.

The British one is smaller to make it harder for US pilots to accidentally bomb.

Just means when the robots take over America is history and we will be safe by putting a bin on the top of our tank.

Please put down your weapon. You have 20 seconds to comply...

It's alright until the other side hack it and seize control.  Either that or it becomes self aware and finds God.

I don’t get why the US one appears to be the same size as a normal tank

It's because it's an existing vehicle, retrofitted with control gear and a gun.

Have none of you seen Fast and Furious 7? ( or is it 8?)

They also used the Human Driven version in Mad Max: Fury Road, by all accounts it was delivered half built (due at least in part to budget constraints placed on the manufacturer by the film makers), and was lethally dangerous, even when fixed and fully operational.

Automated supply convoys are probably what we will see first in the military.

Using humans to drive trucks through war zones is a really good way of getting them killed or injured and an autonomous truck has a lot less to deal with than an autonomous tank.

Anyway, I for one, welcome our new robot overlords

computers (and cooling systems)

Good point, as it is very, very likely to be deployed in a hot country.

Can't just be me that looks on these with horror?

There's probably also a benefit in how you make them blast proof.

A tank with people in it has to stop absolutely anything getting in.

A tank with a computer in it, is
a) a lot more disposable in the first place (cruise missile Vs Jet fighter)
b) probably easier to protect, you need a tank shaped shell and a much smaller engine/computer box, small box, smaller forces, less weight, smaller engine, etc.

I guess one of the key advantages would be you could deploy tens or hundreds of them across a remote area of somewhere like Afghanistan or Northern Iraq and make it much much harder for the enemy to move around if every pass or road junction has effectively a big remote controlled turret on it.

There was a sci-fi story (written in the 60's I think- cannot remember the title) about a group of soldiers trying to escape a futuristic battle field containing such delights as acid drop and blind wort bio weapons all the time being pursued by a psychotic rogue robot tank and its minions bent on killing them.

It's getting closer to being a real account.

I was thinking more because of ego. **** yeah! Look at our massive autotank.

That is a key factor in warfare is it not?

Can the small UK one be tipped over by two blokes with a piece of wood?

Please put down your weapon. You have 20 seconds to comply…

I don't think ED-209 said 'please' did it?

I guess one of the key advantages would be you could deploy tens or hundreds of them across a remote area of somewhere like Afghanistan or Northern Iraq and make it much much harder for the enemy to move around if every pass or road junction has effectively a big remote controlled turret on it.

The small UK one could be camouflaged far more easily. I wonder if they could be air-dropped by drones? Even if they are not especially convincing up close, if you saw the drop drones you'd have to comb the area to find them. And then you could use decoy drop drones with no tanks just to force the enemy to commit manpower. Could be quite clever.

Can’t just be me that looks on these with horror?

Pretty sure that's the point.

Can’t just be me that looks on these with horror?

Never ceases to amaze me how much money governments are willing to throw at companies who are trying to perfect the art of killing people in the name of peace......probably why aliens might not ever visit us till we get that shit sorted out

probably why aliens might not ever visit us till we get that shit sorted out

Yes because aliens will be coming to spread the doctrine of universal love and harmony rather than because they are a cosmic construction team coming to obliterate the planet to build a hyperspace byway!

It’s because it’s an existing vehicle, retrofitted with control gear and a gun.
Have none of you seen Fast and Furious 7? ( or is it 8?) the A-Team?

its gone a bit

Can’t just be me that looks on these with horror?

No more than any other lethal weapon. The BBC article states that the weapon will be fired by a human operator as AI isn't that good. So its just a logical development in stand-off weapons. There not that much difference between one human killing another with an arrow at 300 yards, a rifle at half a mile, or a machine gun from half a world away - you still need to aim at your target and pull the trigger.

That little machine gun thing looks a lot more discriminating than, say, nuking from orbit.

When they start relying on the AI to make life or death decision is where it might get worrying.

Just means when the robots take over America is history and we will be safe by putting a bin on the top of our tank.

No, that just turns it into a Dalek, which is far more dangerous, if you believe Doctor Whatsisname.

I wonder if Craig Charles will be available to commentate on the next war? Sir Killabot vs USA.

Yes because aliens will be coming to spread the doctrine of universal love and harmony rather than because they are a cosmic construction team coming to obliterate the planet to build a hyperspace byway!

Is that thing on the front a towel rail?

There's been some work carried over the last six weeks on an oil pipeline that runs through one of our paddocks. To ensure the scrotes don't turn up and try to tap into the pipe they used to have security overnight, but this time the site was being watched over by a few of these video guards:
.
It doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to see the day when such duties are carried out by autonomous robots - and not far from that to the point where they are armed when protecting certain locations.
The British model looks far more suitable for such as task - smaller (harder to hit, faster, more agile) and cheaper... so you can produce more.
US version is a cludge of an existing vehicle - looks impressive but may not necessarily be the most suitable.

Can the small UK one be tipped over by two blokes with a piece of wood?

Probably not before they've been minced by the machine gun!

Imagine being able to send a couple of these in to sort out some IS types?

The BBC article I got it from is worth reading…. If only for the mention of the failed unmanned tank the Americans trialled in the 80’s.

The Sergeant York wasn't an unmanned tank, it had a crew of 3. It had automated fire control because its air defence role meant human operators struggled to respond to the very fast moving targets it was supposed to engage.

That is a key factor in warfare is it not?

Honestly no idea. I’ve never been involved in a war, the planning of one or have any real interest in shooty stuff.

I just think if you’re going to make Robo-tank show some imagination. That’s just a tank. At the very least it needs a cylon eye.

The UK version is definitely scarier. Small enough to sneak up on you 😱

That “little machine gun” is a 50cal, getting hit by that may smart a bit...

It’s all very good but we’ve had them for years...

[img] [/img]

Never ceases to amaze me how much money governments are willing to throw at companies who are trying to perfect the art of killing people in the name of peace…

When you walk round the average castle/ Napoleonic fort/ World War I or II emplacement and you will see the same lethal ingenuity/ruthlessness. There isn’t much in the way of decoration on any of them, they were all designed to give the defenders some form of advantage. Dover Castle is a brilliant example 2000 years of the advancements we have made in killing each other. The only positive is that investment in military technology and manufacturing eventually trickles down into technologies which often make peoples’ lives better.

the advancements we have made in killing each other

Actually maybe this is a sign of changing values, these devices are designed in part so you don't sacrifice lives. And of course these are likely to be attacking the oppositions robots rather than people, it's not as if everyone else isn't developing such weapons. Winning a war is largely about occupying and holding territory to deny it's resources to your enemy. In Vietnam the US just concentrated on trying to kill as many Viet Cong  as possible. Operations were launched that were no more than raids, they didn't hold the ground they'd cleared troops from. Time after time they lost men to take a position only then to withdraw. I guess the point of these weapons is to be your assault force with troops following to secure and hold an area. Far better to defend an area than attack it if you are trying to keep casualties to a minimum.

Here you go Molgrips. Very polite old ED209, at least at first!

These serious logical answers are no fun at all

Ok then - its so you can get a bike in without having to take the front wheel off.

This is possibly the drone equivalent to the little British remote ‘tank’...
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/songar-machine-gun-drone/

The British one is smaller to make it harder for US pilots to accidentally bomb.

Sadly, so very, very true. It also hasn’t got a Union Flag painted on the top, to make it an easier target for a National Guard A-10 pilot to shoot at from 10,000 ft.

somewhatslightlydazed

Member

No more than any other lethal weapon. The BBC article states that the weapon will be fired by a human operator as AI isn’t that good. So its just a logical development in stand-off weapons. There not that much difference between one human killing another with an arrow at 300 yards, a rifle at half a mile, or a machine gun from half a world away – you still need to aim at your target and pull the trigger.

Mmm. There's a difference between aiming a rifle and pulling the trigger, and sitting in your climate controlled bunker with a keyboard and pad controlling your drone. Much less connection to the reality of your actions.

Much less connection to the reality of your actions

True but also that detachment means emotions and panic reactions don't come into play, hopefully less chance of an old man with a walking stick getting mistaken for an enemy with a gun by a flawed split second decision. Whether that's the reality or not I don't know, there's obviously been a lot of civilian deaths due to drone strikes but I assume most of that comes from it being far more difficult to identify targets from the air rather than some gung-ho yank wanting to blast anything that moves as if he's in a video game.