PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

S

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
GOODTREE said:
Seriously, if you use either of these, carrying them is difficult on its own, not to mention the noise they make when carrying them. A robot dog avoids both of these problems. What's more, it can basically move over all terrain for a much wider range of applications, and I'm only talking about one particular case here.
Click to expand...
Ones with electric motors will be quiet.

Doesn't even have to be a whole golf cart, could be as simple as a skateboard.

Long story short, the dog is a complex device, many multiple servo motors for the articulation, control chips, etc.. If your example is just a suicide bomb truck (a la 2000's-style terrorism), then those are a waste of thousands of dollars. Also the increased complexity means more possible points of failure.

The Ukraine conflict is basically on the cutting edge of novel drone applications. We actually have seen them experiment with the Unitree, but suicide attacks are uncommon.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Aside: Hilariously, the article mentions that some other sources state that the dogs are 'British-built' which I have seen referenced as well, but it is just a Unitree, so I guess they are stealing Chinese IP, lol.
 
GOODTREE

GOODTREE

Junior Member
Registered Member
supersnoop said:
Ones with electric motors will be quiet.

Doesn't even have to be a whole golf cart, could be as simple as a skateboard.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply.
Yes, but you mean with the engine running. What I do know is that whether it's a skateboard or a cart, there's definitely some terrain it can't get over, and moving them should cause noise in itself. The skateboard is probably a little better, but after all, it's also dead weight for a soldier. There would also need to be someone dedicated to making room for them. The robot dog doesn't need these.
supersnoop said:
Long story short, the dog is a complex device, many multiple servo motors for the articulation, control chips, etc.. If your example is just a suicide bomb truck (a la 2000's-style terrorism), then those are a waste of thousands of dollars. Also the increased complexity means more possible points of failure.
Click to expand...
That being said, suicide bombers are popular, or rather popular in the mountainous areas I'm talking about indeed because they work so well, and they have a big effect.
Yeah, cost does seem to be an issue, maybe they could develop a version with a simpler structure? I'm not too worried about that to be honest though, Chinese robotic dogs usually cost a fraction of what they do in other countries, some to the tune of a few tenths. Massive production in wartime could also keep the price down. Honestly though, assuming it ends up costing a thousand dollars, I'd say it's worth it to use it to easily blast fortifications and attack convoys.
supersnoop said:
The Ukraine conflict is basically on the cutting edge of novel drone applications. We actually have seen them experiment with the Unitree, but suicide attacks are uncommon.
Click to expand...
I read the article, but I didn't see exactly how Ukraine used those robot dogs, but I did see this quote:
While the quadrupedal design of the robot dogs means they are, in theory at least, more capable of climbing stairs than tracked or wheeled UGVs their utility remains to be seen. They have less capability to carry payloads and its unclear if they’ll be used in a one-way role with explosive payloads – though given every other unmanned system in Ukraine has, it is probably a just matter of time.
Click to expand...
Also, this picture looks a lot like it's carrying an explosive.
photo_2024-08-16-03.42.17 (1).jpg
supersnoop said:
Aside: Hilariously, the article mentions that some other sources state that the dogs are 'British-built' which I have seen referenced as well, but it is just a Unitree, so I guess they are stealing Chinese IP, lol.
Click to expand...
What?! lol If the UK could do that, its industry wouldn't be so far down the drain right now.
 
Last edited:
S

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
GOODTREE said:
Thanks for the reply.
Yes, but you mean with the engine running. What I do know is that whether it's a skateboard or a cart, there's definitely some terrain it can't get over, and moving them should cause noise in itself. The skateboard is probably a little better, but after all, it's also dead weight for a soldier. There would also need to be someone dedicated to making room for them. The robot dog doesn't need these.

That being said, suicide bombers are popular, or rather popular in the mountainous areas I'm talking about indeed because they work so well, and they have a big effect.
Yeah, cost does seem to be an issue, maybe they could develop a version with a simpler structure? I'm not too worried about that to be honest though, Chinese robotic dogs usually cost a fraction of what they do in other countries, some to the tune of a few tenths. Massive production in wartime could also keep the price down. Honestly though, assuming it ends up costing a thousand dollars, I'd say it's worth it to use it to easily blast fortifications and attack convoys.
Click to expand...

Still, what is the use case scenario? It's seemingly something really specific like "a patrol suspecting there are militants hiding at least 50 - 100m deep inside a mountainside cave".

A soldier might need to carry an explosive skateboard, and the dog can move itself, but then the range of the dog is limited the further you move from base. How do you plan for this? If the load the soldiers are carrying is a concern, then you might even get more utility from the dog carrying a bunch of rockets/mortars than exploding itself. This is even more relevant considering this discussion is centered around the idea of needing to fight in Taiwan provincial highlands.

Many of the "war on terror" suicide bombers were attacking checkpoints and forward operating bases. In the Taiwan scenario, it would be the PLA that would be operating the checkpoints and FOBs, so the requirement for suicide attacks is less relevant. Opposition would be the ones setting up ambushes. Not the other way around.

If a patrol is caught in an ambush attack, is the dog more useful as a suicide bomb or could it better utilized carrying sensors and providing soldiers with some kind of non-line of sight counter measure? Something like a acoustic/thermal/electro-optical sensor fusion + grenade launcher.

GOODTREE said:
I read the article, but I didn't see exactly how Ukraine used those robot dogs, but I did see this quote:

Also, this picture looks a lot like it's carrying an explosive.
View attachment 144162
Click to expand...
It could be. I'm not debating whether a dog can carry an explosive, just it doesn't seem like the best or most useful of options. The list price for the B2 is $100K USD. The Go2 which is less capable is $3K. Therefore we already have an idea of the cost of a "simplified version". Furthermore, you would need a support chain for these, technicians/chargers/generators/etc. Does it present a big increase in capability over "give people a GPS/laser designator and call in a drone/artillery strike?". Again, in the Taiwan scenario, if resistance has retreated to the mountains, then the PLA should have total air dominance. Persistent drone support should be available to combat patrols. FOBs should have artillery support available.
 
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
I don't think we should give any specific roles to 4 legs/6 legs/leg wheel combo animal shape robots. They are modular carriers or platforms that can carry various packages from recon, data relay, general transport, assault rifle, grenade launcher, explosive, laser target designator and whatever you can deploy as long as the robots have the payload capacity.

Endurance will depend on the battery size, and replacing depleted battery with another fully charged one should be as easy as that of electric bikes and doable in battle fields. By the way electric bikes are already deployed in Ukraine war.

The key in using robots is they are expendable and can be deployed in large numbers, instead of sending out 2 or 3 robots they can be a swarm of hundreds or thousands in a single wave of attack against an enemy line. Their costs may varies according to their roles and sizes. A one time use only suicide drones can be made of cheap materials with simplified sensors and instruction sets.

Also a robot attack group can be a mix of aerial drones, legged robots, wheeled robots and tracked robots, each with different payloads and functions. And they can be backed up by a few human soldiers and operators. Technically ths should be feasible with today's know how.

The days when robots can be made like smartphones with millions or tens of millions units per year may already be here, if not in a very near future. China should have this industrial capacity, example their EV production capacity is 10 million cars in 2024.
 
Last edited:
AZaz09dude

AZaz09dude

Junior Member
Registered Member
A cheap, practical, and effective use could be to create an adapter kit for mounting and remote firing existing DZ or PF series disposable launchers. The LOS exposure and firing signature from those things means high risk to the user from enemy return fire, so a small quadruped UGV would be perfect for the job.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
supersnoop said:
If a patrol is caught in an ambush attack, is the dog more useful as a suicide bomb or could it better utilized carrying sensors and providing soldiers with some kind of non-line of sight counter measure? Something like a acoustic/thermal/electro-optical sensor fusion + grenade launcher.
Click to expand...

I think grenade launchers would be the ideal weapon to mount on a robo dog. Combine this with a flying drone for targeting, a small squad of soldiers equipped with these would be unstoppable in urban combat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top