Unmanned Combat Ground Vehicle
- Thread starter rhino123
- Start date
by78
General
More images of this particular robotic dog.
Saw this interesting clip, anyone knows about this vehicle?
And some translation for the video would be great.
I remember this was shown off in some demo previously, Imma go look for it.
Soldiering is not only about pointing a gun and shooting a target. That is only one of many responsibilities of an infantryman. An infantryman has to patrol, perform reconaissance, maneuver in any terrain under any conditions, reliably identify targets, solve problems on a chaotic battlefield, maintain low visual, electronic, and other types of signatures while carrying out their tasks, and more. All of these actions may have to be performed in an operation that may last weeks. Current drones like we see China and the US experimenting with and those that we see in Ukraine are ultimately enhancers of the infantry, not replacements as of now.
that doesn't change the fact that you would want to send these things into dangerous areas first rather than having soldiers doing it
You are shifting the goal posts. You went from "who needs soldiers" to "these drones can go in first to make contact with the enemy first before soldiers go in". I said at the end of my post that they are enhancers. That means they are another tool that infantryman can use to solve a problem which include making contact with the enemy in a dangerous area.
of course you need soldiers. Even all the automated stuff we have now, we still have plenty of factory workers in China. You will just need fewer soldiers and they will be better trained to handle all the bipods, quadpods and UGVs out there. As automation gets better, we are going to get a higher and higher ratio of unmanned vs manned. Do I believe we can get to a point where robots can replace the need for soldiers to enter dangerous areas? That depends on who your enemy is. If you are high tech enough and can eliminate the target with just unmanned stuff, then why put your soldiers in more danger?
Agreed. However, I'm just addressing this claim, specifically the one in bold:
That's literally it.