Interesting Changes In Technology & Weapons Of War

[DougGuy]

The title only refers to one German weapons system, the rest of the video explores a few other new and not quite so new trends.


https://youtu.be/0YAHK9rDd9c

This one's pretty cool, soon enough we will have unmanned carriers and launchers for the unmanned drones, along with unmanned defense systems to protect the vessels and drones.


https://youtu.be/IwL8yH3sXxg

And later on, if they can put a drone in the air, I am sure the day will come where they can put them under the sea. The future of warfare will be nothing short of an adult toy store for defense contractors and their clients.

And..... THEN!!! This will spawn a whole new Hollywood genre of computer generated war machines that break away and develop their own AI, talk to one another, develop their own impenetrable, un-hackable network, taking over anyone and anything that comes to attack them... Lord what will our great grandkids grow up watching? :bigsmyl2:

[pworley1]

Very interesting.

[popper]

Biggest problem with this stuff is size and weight. New 'abrams' design is to reduce weight by 20%.

[white eagle]

I want one
don't matter which one either

[405grain]

"day will come where they can put them under the sea."
That ship already sailed.

[john.k]

And cost!.....a toy helicopter sized drone 6"x1" costs $200,000 ........probably a bit if slack there to pay a few retired generals and admirals consultancy fees.

[Winger Ed.]

All through history- since the first caveman figured out how to tie a sharp rock onto a stick:
The highest level of any society's technology has been used to make weapons.

Air superiority military aircraft pilots aren't quite obsolete yet, but in the not too distant future,
I can see their wingman being an armed drone that can maneuver better and pull way more 'G's than a human.

Underwater drones are coming along.
The closest we have now is nuclear warhead torpedoes that don't miss.
A ship hit with one---- there are no survivors.

[Wag]

Okay, so what happens when both sides in a conflict are using remote operated equipment and shooting each others' stuff. No people die any more. Who decides who wins?

Rhetorical question with an obvious answer but it makes me wonder, nonetheless.

--Wag--

[Larry Gibson]

"Who decides who wins?"

"Win" seems to be an archaic concept since WWII. "When both sides in a conflict are using remote operated equipment and shooting each others' stuff" is basically what some, if not most, think the future of "warfare" will be. However, one side may very well understand the concept of "total war" where "winning" is actually possible. That is when one side will understand that destruction of of those, even if they are 'civilians"/"non-combatants" who support the development, the production, the deployment and the use of such "toys' are the real key to controlling, occupying, taking over, conquering, etc as in destroying the "enemy's" total war making capability thereby "winning". That concept of total war may be momentarily forgotten but someone will not only remember but will use that concept.

[Soundguy]

So when does skynet go active?

[Larry Gibson]

So when does skynet go active?

Probably sooner than we think......

[Winger Ed.]

Okay, so what happens when both sides in a conflict are using remote operated equipment and shooting each others' stuff. No people die any more. Who decides who wins?


It's drones against people, and equipment.
Not just drones against drones.

Drones are sent out to attack an enemy's infrastructure, bases, ships, armor, aircraft, troop concentrations, high value targets, etc.
Collateral damage and casualties may or may not be less,

The object of the game is to destroy the enemy's ability to make war and to (maybe) kill as many of them as possible,
with as few of your own casualties as possible.
.

[MaryB]

Okay, so what happens when both sides in a conflict are using remote operated equipment and shooting each others' stuff. No people die any more. Who decides who wins?

Rhetorical question with an obvious answer but it makes me wonder, nonetheless.

--Wag--

Which country will be the first to rent an area to fight a war in, no nukes allowed. Be it unmanned or manned war... yes this is a scifi book scenario, a planet that rents entire continents to fight a war on. Opponents sign contracts with the winners spoils laid out in advance... failure to pay up and the planet landlord wipes you out...

[kerplode]

Okay, so what happens when both sides in a conflict are using remote operated equipment and shooting each others' stuff. No people die any more. Who decides who wins?

Rhetorical question with an obvious answer but it makes me wonder, nonetheless.

--Wag--

Oh don't mistake the objective here...This isn't drones v. drones. It's drones v. meat. Plenty of people will still die on both sides.

[Jtarm]

Okay, so what happens when both sides in a conflict are using remote operated equipment and shooting each others' stuff. No people die any more. Who decides who wins?

Rhetorical question with an obvious answer but it makes me wonder, nonetheless.

--Wag--

Wasn’t that a Star Trek episode?

[Alex_4x4]

Computer graphics blur the line between illusion and reality and disorientate impressionable human beings.

:-)

[gwpercle]

Maybe this will be the start of a way to fight a war and not have real men bleed and die .

Real life Rock-Em Sock-Em robotic fighting ... winner takes all ... no blood shed .

Think about it .

[Frosty Boolit]

We already have unmanned men so I guess it all fits together. :kidding:

[Geezer in NH]

We need drones that attack and kill politicians on the opposing side. Politicians will say not fair, but all grunt types will think it is the best solution.

Or we could have paid preview of Polotik duels using smooth bore flint lock pistols and knives duel to the death would be the proper outcome.

[Winger Ed.]

Computer graphics blur the line between illusion and reality and disorientate impressionable human beings.

:-)

The control centers where the big weaponized drones are flown from really do like the 'pilots' are playing a real big video game.
It is a disconnect from reality.
Especially if that drone flying over Iraq is piloted from an air conditioned office in Arizona
or some place on the other side of the world..

[john.k]

Putin has adopted an interesting strategy of destroying all surface infrastructure with large numbers of cheap Iranian drones.........the theory of cheap drones is they are shot down using vastly more costly air defence systems........I have no doubt the Israelis are taking all this onboard......the obvious answer to the Iranian drones is to destroy the production sites.

[Freightman]

Glad I am not going to be here all this tech talk makes my head hurt, now back to my solitary game.[smilie=b:ry

[Winger Ed.]

.the obvious answer to the Iranian drones is to destroy the production sites.

When word first got out they'd sold a bunch of them to the Russians--- the Israelis did just that.
They're supporting Ukraine also, but just being rather quiet about it.

The other way to defeat large numbers of them is hit them with whatever the 'drone rifles' use.
A micro wave, a laser, something that fries its radio controller guidance system.
Then putting that technology into a big unit on a truck that sends out a large umbrella of however it works.

[MaryB]

When word first got out they'd sold a bunch of them to the Russians--- the Israelis did just that.
They're supporting Ukraine also, but just being rather quiet about it.

The other way to defeat large numbers of them is hit them with whatever the 'drone rifles' use.
A micro wave, a laser, something that fries its radio controller guidance system.
Then putting that technology into a big unit on a truck that sends out a large umbrella of however it works.

Since they probably use between 2.4ghz and 10ghz for control frequencies a cheap 10' TV satellite dish and a wide band amplifier can create enough interference to lose control and crash... if lower than 1ghz it gets a lot harder to jam them. Would need to know the exact frequency they are on.

The 2.1 meter dish I use on 1.296.1ghz has 27db gain. I transmit with 550 watts giving me an effective radiated power of 168,081 watts. Thing is RF power falls off at the square f the distance... at 118 feet that is safe to stand in front of! And there lies the problem, getting enough power density to do damage. I could probably severely interfere with control signals at 5-10 miles but would not cause any damage.

On these smaller drones they need a giant shotshell that sends a wall of tungsten BB's into the drones path. Shredded control surface/damaged engines/props and crash. Would be easy to make an autoloader that fired a shell that explodes sending the BB's flying into the path... would be reasonable cheap to fire too

[Alex_4x4]

307538

307539

[MUSTANG]

Putin has adopted an interesting strategy of destroying all surface infrastructure with large numbers of cheap Iranian drones.........the theory of cheap drones is they are shot down using vastly more costly air defence systems........I have no doubt the Israelis are taking all this onboard......the obvious answer to the Iranian drones is to destroy the production sites.

Saw on the news this week that Iran is going to "License" the drone production in Russia and send Technical Staff to produce the Drones in Russia. Goal is to avoid the International hostility of Iran selling drones to Russia for use In Ukraine.

[popper]

Guess we need drone controlled ships or skippers that can steer a boat.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/02/warship-chicken-two-u-s-navy-ships-narrowly-miss-collision-in-san-diego-bay/
Most small drones use GPS to get to target, then visual or IR camera to find target. Attack control is from remote. Technology began in the 50's (IIRC Germany tried in WWII). Remote controlled planes, target drones, missiles. GPS was derived from army tank practice fields (Ft Hood).

[MUSTANG]

Guess we need drone controlled ships or skippers that can steer a boat.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/02/warship-chicken-two-u-s-navy-ships-narrowly-miss-collision-in-san-diego-bay/
Most small drones use GPS to get to target, then visual or IR camera to find target. Attack control is from remote. Technology began in the 50's (IIRC Germany tried in WWII). Remote controlled planes, target drones, missiles. GPS was derived from army tank practice fields (Ft Hood).

I believe that Joe Kennedy Junior died in WW-II while taking a B-17 heavily loaded with explosives across the English channel in a the "Super Secret" project. He was supposed to bail out and another Aircraft would take remote control of the B-17 using remote controls and a new fangled TV Camera set up to pilot the aircraft into the Target.

[36g]

Guess we need drone controlled ships or skippers that can steer a boat.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/02/warship-chicken-two-u-s-navy-ships-narrowly-miss-collision-in-san-diego-bay/
Most small drones use GPS to get to target, then visual or IR camera to find target. Attack control is from remote. Technology began in the 50's (IIRC Germany tried in WWII). Remote controlled planes, target drones, missiles. GPS was derived from army tank practice fields (Ft Hood).

The Fritz-X was a WWII German guided bomb using TV type of signal guidance. They also had a small contingent of explosive boats called Linsen that were piloted by a crewman up to a point who bailed out and the control was taken over by a remote guidance from a master boat.

[barnetmill]

Robotics and drone technology has more application than just the military. With time they will be able to do just anything that people can do and do it cheaper and better. The need for human combat soldiers may cease to be a need. There will no need for sailors or pilots.
Same in factories, no need for workers. Or human law makers and executives. Skynet is science fiction today and who knows what tomorrow will bring.
But I will not be around to see it.

[Winger Ed.]

I believe that Joe Kennedy Junior died in WW-II while taking a B-17 heavily loaded with explosives.

I'd always heard it was a B-17, but later found out it was a converted B-24.
They might have been able to carry more, or had a longer range. If nothing else, they were cheaper than B-17s.
The idea was to fly it into the incredibly heavily fortified submarine pens.

Maybe the first drone bomb was the German one that was guided like a RC model airplane
from another plane following behind the one that released it.
The Japanese had a glider bomb too, but weren't up to speed with RC electronics--- so they put a pilot in theirs.

The drill for the remotely piloted bombers was to get them up to 2,000 ft. arm the Torpex explosives, then jump out.
Kennedy and his co-pilot never made it. Their plane blew up fairly shortly after take off.
well informed folks at the time thought the wiring of the detonators had a design flaw.
It was never proven, but the time frame was about right to get it up off the ground, then go back and work on arming the bombs.

[Alex_4x4]

Robotics and drone technology has more application than just the military. With time they will be able to do just anything that people can do and do it cheaper and better. The need for human combat soldiers may cease to be a need. There will no need for sailors or pilots.
Same in factories, no need for workers. Or human law makers and executives. Skynet is science fiction today and who knows what tomorrow will bring.
But I will not be around to see it.


https://youtu.be/ShfGVQsqBMQ

[popper]

Fritz was radio controlled. BAT was US radar guided bomb. Hs-293D (german) was rudimentary TV control but not used.
Civil war balloons turned from observation to 'bombers' late in the war. Israel used model AC for observation drones in first war, then went to making armed drones.
edit: interesting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K9_Thunder being sent to Poland along with tanks. Also relates event of battles between north and south Korea that were NOT in our news reports.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_Black_Panther tank. Pretty impressive weapons.

[Good Cheer]

Like with treaty battleships we need to take away their internal combustion engines and anything more powerful than black powder. The killing was bad enough with only flintlocks, sails, sabers and horseflesh.