"Taranis" and smarter UAV's

[AZRedhawk44]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/nov/21/military-robots-autonomous-machines

This paragraph made me think:

Taranis is just one example of a huge swing towards autonomous defence systems: machines that make decisions independent of any human input, with the potential to change modern warfare radically. States with advanced militaries such as the US and the UK are viewing autonomy as a way to have a longer reach, greater efficiency and fewer repatriated body bags.

Of the 5828 casualties I found via Google search (http://icasualties.org/), I rather doubt that a high proportion of them are pilots.

As-is, American planes damned near never get shot down.

As cool as drones are, I don't see them as being a replacement for manned aircraft.

Drones are for going into airspace you're not "supposed" to be in.  They have a smaller radar signature, and are relatively expendable in comparison to the loss of a pilot (and explaining his death) and the cost of a full aircraft rather than a small drone.

Stealth drones, IMO, mean bad things for liberty.

Taranis = Tyrannis. 

Sic Semper Tyrannis.

[French G.]

Sometimes drones just exist so that you have an explanation for the media why something went asplodey. No those guys who weren't in there really weren't in there. Ground troops undeclared in a foreign country? No, how silly, we'd never do that.

[MicroBalrog]

I don't think you understand.

THe beauty of drones is that they are cheap.

As in, you can give recon UAVs not just to strategic command assets, but to battalion commanders, platoon commanders... individual soldiers even.



This is Russia's new UAV - did you know Russia's military is making forays into high-tech infantry equipment?.

This one is small enough to take off from recon jeeps.

Advancing UAV technology is good because it gives insane recon assets to American and allied forces. Better recon = more dead terrorists.

[AZRedhawk44]

Micro:

I understand your point.

UAV's like that one, and similar hobbyist style RC planes that I've seen pics of soldiers using for local recon, aren't a big deal.  They're typically for recon of the immediate area around a patrol unit and are intended for ranges of a few miles.  They're not armed and they're not very autonomous.



Ain't got a bone with it.

The above "Taranis" UAV, however, does the following:
-Long range recon
-Long range strikes
-Makes its own engagement decisions
-Applies stealth technology
-First of a generation actually intended to engage other aircraft

The above UAV could be used to knock civilian air traffic out of the sky with no trace of the attacker, ditching the craft into a no-man's land when done with it.  Or to assassinate inside the US, with no trace.

[Jamisjockey]

In theatre, the aircraft could loiter on station without concern for crew.  If there is a ground unit in dire straights, the thing could stay there till it runs out of fuel.  Crew relief?  Yeah, just switch operators in the trailer at Nellis....

-Makes its own engagement decisions

That kind of worries me though.

The above UAV could be used to knock civilian air traffic out of the sky with no trace of the attacker, ditching the craft into a no-man's land when done with it.  Or to assassinate inside the US, with no trace.

And the current UAV aircraft couldn't do that?

[AZRedhawk44]

I don't like 'em.

Especially given my current growing appreciation for robotics, as you guys know.

I'm starting to see just exactly HOW easy it is to build certain kinds of things.

I really don't like the notion of the US government having 800 of the things by next year.  With some of those having "self defense" logic.  I'm not afraid of SkyNet coming to life... these things don't have that sophisticated an AI  by a long shot.  I'm afraid of a programmer glitch, or a malicious bit of code put in by NSA/FBI/DHS/ICE/whatever to increase the AI aggressiveness or proactive defensive logic with domestically deployed units.

[French G.]

RC helicopter with a camera and downward facing claymore. How's your foxhole looking now? 

[seeker_two]

Drones can do things that pilots might conscienciously object to doing....think about it....

[Tallpine]

Drones can do things that pilots might conscienciously object to doing....think about it....

The future is here and I don't like it 

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

Wave of the future. Only a matter of time before cargo planes are remote-controlled/drones, then other planes. Airlines might be the last.

We really need AI-controlled cars. Shipments by truck would be much faster if the trucker never needs to sleep or pull over for anything but gas. AI-controlled vehicles would also allow for safe higher-speed travel. Speed limits could be doubled. Travel by car would be much easier than airline travel. No waiting for weather and no need to stay awake. You get to work and away from work in half the time, allowing you to sleep longer.

It would reduce piracy quite a bit, too. Strap in the cargo very securely in the origin port, set the destination, and have nobody on board. When the ship arrives at its final port, it would probably need a human pilot to guide it in, and need humans to unload the cargo. Guiding it in could be done remotely.

[Jamisjockey]

Wave of the future. Only a matter of time before cargo planes are remote-controlled/drones, then other planes. Airlines might be the last.

We really need AI-controlled cars. Shipments by truck would be much faster if the trucker never needs to sleep or pull over for anything but gas. AI-controlled vehicles would also allow for safe higher-speed travel. Speed limits could be doubled. Travel by car would be much easier than airline travel. No waiting for weather and no need to stay awake. You get to work and away from work in half the time, allowing you to sleep longer.
.

And no more aholes whipping in and out of traffic...

[Physics]

Wave of the future. Only a matter of time before cargo planes are remote-controlled/drones, then other planes. Airlines might be the last.

We really need AI-controlled cars. Shipments by truck would be much faster if the trucker never needs to sleep or pull over for anything but gas. AI-controlled vehicles would also allow for safe higher-speed travel. Speed limits could be doubled. Travel by car would be much easier than airline travel. No waiting for weather and no need to stay awake. You get to work and away from work in half the time, allowing you to sleep longer.

It would reduce piracy quite a bit, too. Strap in the cargo very securely in the origin port, set the destination, and have nobody on board. When the ship arrives at its final port, it would probably need a human pilot to guide it in, and need humans to unload the cargo. Guiding it in could be done remotely.

I do not see a reason why this is not reality already, other than infrastructure.  Also, forget remote controlled cargo planes, autonomous is more like it.  Same for airlines I bet. 

[seeker_two]

Wave of the future. Only a matter of time before cargo planes are remote-controlled/drones, then other planes. Airlines might be the last.

We really need AI-controlled cars.

...and that'll be the day I get a horse.....

[erictank]

I do not see a reason why this (AI controlled cars) is not reality already, other than infrastructure.  Also, forget remote controlled cargo planes, autonomous is more like it.  Same for airlines I bet. 

Think about how easily even a computer is confused by changing conditions today that a person would react to without even a conscious thought.  Put such a computer in control of a 2-ton hunk of steel hurtling down the road at 100+mph, where it will interact with not only other AI cars, but also human-driven ones (I'm not sure I'd EVER buy a car I could not instantly assume full manual control of - and how many people simply won't be ABLE to afford to replace their old manual-only "clunkers", or beloved classics, with shiny new Skynet models :D?), weather and other environmental changes, etc.

What could POSSIBLY go wrong?