Modern Warfare imitates Hollywood

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by Chuck64, Mar 15, 2006.

  1. Chuck64

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,624
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Rural Texas
    The U.S. military built a real Johnny 5.

    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30306

    http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fiction-News.asp?NewsNum=320

    As soon as my little brother and thousands of other ADD video game addicts enlist, it's open season on Humanity. He'll sneak up and shoot you in the ass with a rocket launcher at point-blank... even if you're on his team. I've seen it happen.
     
  2. D_Barbi_Queue

    D_Barbi_Queue Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    2,283
    Likes Received:
    1
    This sounds earily like the start of the war from Terminator 2
     
  3. RideRocket

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,247
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Lost in the Wild
    As long as it kills more of them than of us, game on!
     
  4. Dr Rock

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    who lives in the east 'neath the willow tree? Sex
    hahaha, that's just sad

    why they need it to be accurate if it's only providing suppression fire, on the other hand, is probably one for the conspiracy theorists ;)
     
  5. jakeatolla

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,093
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Fuck me. Does the phrase Beam Me Up Scotty mean anything ?
     
  6. D_Humper E Bogart

    D_Humper E Bogart New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,226
    Likes Received:
    2
    I am so looking forward to the next war.

    Better start writing out the British "killed by friendly fire" reports in advance then.
     
  7. Sergeant_Torpedo

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,409
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    War is glamorous. Its up to institutions like Hollywood to keep it glamorous. When it stops being glamorous politicians will start to feel uneasy.
     
  8. Sergeant_Torpedo

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,409
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Orcabomber: guess where "friendly fire" was euphemized (yeah it aint a word but you know what I mean), Ramsey McBlair never uses the term.
     
  9. ClaireTalon

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,947
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Puget Sound
    So, will you call me T-X from now on, T-800?

    I am hesitant about calling this a good development. On the one hand, it's proven and clear that a computer can aim more exact than a man, and it's less subjected to mental and physical influences, like fear, moral, heat etc. But there's other experience that tells us that complicated technology, and such a combat robot will be a piece of VERY complicated technology can still fail, and then is more difficult to be examined and repaired than a simple piece of technology, such as, say, an M-16.
     
  10. RideRocket

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,247
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Lost in the Wild
    While military technological advances give us greater control, visibility, protection and impact on the battlefield, it still cannot replace an actual soldier with 'boots on the ground' to hold that terrain.

    Even this piece of technology is still 'tethered' to a human being who makes the decisions and 'thinks' for it. Without that human interface and control, it's just an expensive chunk of metal. Plus, the more moving parts you introduce, the greater the cost and the logistical footprint involved in maintaining it.

    Anyway, it's purpose is to assist the soldier, not replace the soldier. Therefore, I consider it a good thing.
     
  11. kinkymanca

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Messages:
    55
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Southern California
    Verified:
    Photo
    CT is right about the complexity of these things. with her background, she knows a thing or two. redundancy is key with these things. and when it comes to smaller scales, you can only load so much on and still have it accomplish its role.
    you also have good old human intuition to factor in. in order to fight an enemy, it is best to understand them, and their motives. if the enemy is out to accomplish a specific goal/target, then they just might well avoid contact with such a bot to do so. but if the goal is simple, to kill as many of the other side, at any cost, then a bot might do well in a straight contact. without a bot knowing what would be the likely motive, it would be hard for it to know how to react/engage.

    the part about later adding controls and a headset is nothing new. we already have the predator drones. these are controlled by somebody on the ground, watching a monitor. something that might be of interest to CT is an article in Wired magazine a while back. it was about the debate over these being controlled by fully trained pilots, or by more common troops, trained for this purpose. at the time. one of the best "operators" was actually an army mess crew member. the many hours of video games helped him out, it seemes. of course there is the issue of a regular pilot being responsible in target selection, feasibility, etc.

    just a bit of my view.

    -Kinkyman
     
  12. ClaireTalon

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,947
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Puget Sound
    The main flaw of such a robot might be that a temporary software/hardware error may be lethal to him. While you can still take cover when your rifle is blocked, and get it working again, a robot which is temporarily unable to move makes an easy aim for the enemy, a sitting duck.

    I vaguely remember the article on the Predators, but that's another matter. The use of the predators is not combat, it is intelligence, so, keeping clear of enemy action. So, someone with special training to control them and handle the sensor electronics should be able to do the job of flying them, if he is under supervision of a pilot, or expert for photo recon. But controlling a robot in combat is something different, seeing things on a screen and acting on them, even if it's a VR display headset. Did you know that the use of NVGs by the crew led to helicopter crashes, because they lost their ability to judge distances visually, and because their vision shrunk to the angle that you can see through the optics? How will it be archieved that the robot crews will notice things happening at the border of their vision?

    The factor speaking in favor of the combat robots might be their sheer deterrence. Maybe the sight of a platoon of metallic creatures, armed with M-249, M-240, maybe M-72 or other missile launchers might be raking up so much fear among the enemy that they take a powder. But don't rely on that too much!
     
  13. 10.5andproudofit

    10.5andproudofit New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    244
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    20
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    new york
    i wouldnt mind a m240 bravo for a weekend of fun. . . joking aside: this is bad. the instance war can be dehumanized by a country, the moment attricion(sp) is not a cocern, that government will lose the fear to declare war, and it's citizens will suffer. if a country becomes void of casualties on the battle field, the blood will be brought to the homefront. soldiers killing soldiers is not glamorous, but it is understandable. both soldiers knew what they were signing up for. when the war comes home, only the innocent people will be injured.

    the response will be more war, kinda a cynic view, but i firmly believe that conflicts always have and always will be won with soldiers on the ground. air supperiority, missle defense shields, all of it be damned. its all nothing without the foot soilder doin the grunt work.
     
  14. Dr Rock

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    who lives in the east 'neath the willow tree? Sex
    are you kidding? I don't know a single soldier who'd rather go up against a living, self-aware human opponent instead of a dumb remote-controlled weapons platform.
     
  15. RideRocket

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,247
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Lost in the Wild
    Claire - Not true. Armed UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) have been used to engage targets. In fact, several years ago, a Predator armed with Hellfire missiles killed several al Quaida members in the remote deserts of Yemen while they were driving in a car. This was one of the first uses of remote controlled vehicles to engage the enemy.

    Not sure what you mean. The biggest disadvantages of flying with NVGs are field of vision loss, loss of depth perception and spatial disorientation. However, the military spends countless hours training to overcome those disadvantages and has flown countless hours at night with minimal crashes. In fact, more military helicopter crashes occur during daylight operations.
     
  16. kinkymanca

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Messages:
    55
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Southern California
    Verified:
    Photo
    I think Claire might have a point about the the deterrence factor. the inhuman aspect can make a psychological difference in how somebody might engage an enemy. knowing that it has no fear of death, while you still do, will affect your decisions. add in the factor that it is harder to judge what it is doing or going to do, from lack of natural cues. then again, this is all far off, and it is our military. after pouring millions into it, they may scrap it all together.

    a predator drone also was a key factor in the battle of Takur Ghar, AKA, Robert's Ridge, in A-stan. luckily, the spooks had one armed with a hellfire missle nearby, and was able to put it to use in taking out a key enemy position. this helped end a 12 hour engagement.
    and yes, the idea of having specialst people fly them, with supervision of others to help in decision making was all part of that article. again, it was just an article, not a difinitive answer.

    there have been many instances of pilots crashing while using NVGs, for just the reasons Claire cited. even with all the training and such, accidents still do happen. vision is still affected in those ways. a very close friend of mine is just starting WO school, helicoptor pilot instruction. one of his biggest fears is night flying, for just those reasons.

    and with Claire's background, I think she is well informed in this area.

    -Kinkyman
     
  17. ClaireTalon

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,947
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Puget Sound
    Sorry, my mistake! Don't listen to this out-of-service, support plane broad talking her head off. Of course you are right about the armed UAV's, I have heard about them, but they're mostly out of the things I professionally had my hands on. Mea maxima culpa!

    The Predator's primary use is "Armed reconnaissance", airborne surveillance and target acquisition/designation. It is equipped with targeting devices: Laser, Electro-optical, infrared, and two Hellfire missiles, but those are only for attacking perishable targets, when deploying other units to engage it would take too much time. The primary function remains to be reconnaissance.

    I am talking about exactly that: Loss of depth perception, spatial disorientation. I have been in contact with helicopter crews in my early days, and those problems were very actual then (80s), and training methods still were being developed then. But at first, that was a very tricky problem to overcome it, to improve both, the technical aspects of the NVG's and the skills of the pilots using them. Assuming they're beyond that is pretty sure.
     
  18. Dr Rock

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    who lives in the east 'neath the willow tree? Sex
    assuming we're talking about professional soldiers here, while you're in combat you're getting paid to put your mission objectives and the overall safety of your unit before your own fear of injury or death. i can't speak for anyone else, but if i'd flunked out and dithered like a little bitch every time i was afraid of getting killed back in bosnia, i'd have wound up with a big fat court-martial very early on.

    the more important flip-side of that is that it's severely limited in its responses. you already know what it's NOT gonna do, which makes it far easier to deal with than a human opponent in 95% of equivalent situations.
     
  19. kinkymanca

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Messages:
    55
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Southern California
    Verified:
    Photo
    very good points there Dr. Rock. I was envisioning more of the insurgent/militia type of enemy that our forces are mostly dealing with these days. a professional soldier would very much be a different story.

    if and when these are deployed, it will be unknown to the enemy as to what the capatilies are and are not. responsiveness might not be so limited, that is unknown yet. but still a good point. look at how insurgents have adapted to being more willing to do ambush attacks on vehicles with IEDs and RPGs, versus a more head on battle with other foot soldiers. they know the limitations of the vehicles, esp when in convoys, and have exploited them. the similarities between these and the bots are numerous. again, this is all speculation at this point. but, things are headed this way, we will have to wait and see what shakes out.

    -Kinkyman
     
  20. Chuck64

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,624
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Rural Texas
    Having never been in the military myself, I can't speak to the reaction of the enemy.

    At some point, this things will be much cheaper than a soldier - if not already. Think of cheap, disposable, semi-intelligent psuedo-soldiers in huge numbers - hundreds, even thousands of these things. It's a war-mongering dictator's wet dream

    As for the limited abilities, that's all in the software really. One robot is obviously much more limited in perception than a single human. But think about a little AI and data exchange within a swarm of these things. Think about the difference between knowing just what you see and hear vs. knowing the status of every other "soldier" on the battlefield, along with everything they "see" and "hear" in real-time.

    If you don't think the artificial intelligence technology is advanced enough to handle a real-world battlefield, consider this: Think about the AI behind the enemies in a modern video game. How many times do you get killed before you finally learn to predict the enemy's reaction? In real life, you don't get to start the level over when you die. Now consider that instead of each enemy having to share a single system (along with some intense 3D graphics processing), each enemy has their own separate computer, specifically designed for the purpose of killing you and your teammates. I certainly couldn't win.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted