What's preventing the adoption of self-driving tank drones? If you have remotely controlled drone tech plus self driving tech plus an autoloader, presumably you wouldn't need any armor anymore (nobody inside that needs protecting) and you could put the tonnage towards more ammunition or a larger main gun.
I really haven't heard of any plans towards using drone tanks or drone naval destroyers/carriers
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
>If you have remotely controlled drone tech plus self driving tech plus an autoloader, presumably you wouldn't need any armor anymore (nobody inside that needs protecting) and you could put the tonnage towards more ammunition
Congratulations, you just invented an RCVBIED.
As soon as you get jammed they're lost or forced into a return mode. Both makes them mission killed, at the least.
youtube.com
Because the future is about making the drones smaller and faster.
I'd imagine problems would arise that require human assistance. Maybe matainece issues involving moving parts and such
the US military has communication tech that makes it physically impossible for electronic jamming to work
>HURRRRRRRR I make things up on the internet because I'm a fat sad never-served loser
Sorry forgot about the 7 minutes of cyka blat here is where the action starts.
>physically impossible for jamming to work
user, if you saturate a large swath of frequencies with broadband jamming even the fanciest frequency hopping radio isn't going to work
>the US military has communication tech that makes it physically impossible for electronic jamming to work
There's no room in the tank for all the evil robot parts. If they put all that extra stuff in there where would the crew sit?
Q U A N T U M
why isn't it used for the birds in the sky then?
dude I forgot about that video, such a classic
to be fair he's not completely wrong madl is very difficult to jam. however it's very complex big and secret and not the kind of thing you want on a ground vehicle which can be easily captured not in a million pieces like an aircraft also range problems not being thousands of feet in the air
It costs vast amounts of money to stuff 4 people in each tank just so that they have extra hands for maintenance.
There is no reason why a tank needs more than a 2 person crew.
Optimally you'd go to 1 person.
Just program it's failsafe to attack pre set coordinates rather than return to home or shutting down.
Its always impossible until someone does it
>*breaksdown in slavic dialectical*
Nothing?
Tank crew don't personally fix anything that actually causes breakdowns
This might work for missiles but "attack" is a lot more complex for a tank.
>t. never served
>the US military has communication tech that makes it physically impossible for electronic jamming to work
I'm in ur communication environment, capturing your latest sekrit drones.
Sure, but self driving cars are here right now. Why wouldn't a similar system work in a tank? And if you had it travel to a specific location and go vbied as a failsafe, that would be even simpler than just attacking.
Honestly why aren't we seeing RC truck of peace attacks already?
The stuff is out there right now. Why is no one doing it?
Lol
Well, for one, SKYNET.
t. guy who spent 4 years raking sand & shooting bullets into empty buildings & wrecking his body
Why the fuck did I get emotionally invested in this video?
Bullshit! Do you think the tank crew just sit around on their ass waiting for triple A when the throw a track?
Crock of doody black cocks doesn't count user.
comes complete with towable vatnik casket on wheels
That technology exists everywhere. It's called shouting.
Maintenance is a thing. The Soviet took a lot of effort to switch to a 3 man crew. Case in point: a T-55 has a starter battery that weights about 50kg. It needs to be installed before action. How do you do that efficiently with 3 men instead of 4? And that's only one step in the whole maintenance routine.
Having 1 4 person crew of maintenancer for 12 tanks with 3 crews each is better than having 1 maintenancer for every 3 people.
yes
You must be 18 to post
>eliminating your ride-along field maintenance crew for expensive electronics
>What's preventing the adoption of self-driving tank drones?
- Controlling robot vehicles is difficult. Maintaining command/control links during a battle where the enemy is trying to disrupt these links (through EW and such) is even more difficult.
- Tanks need huge amounts of maintenance virtually every single time they are driven. This maintenance must be performed by a dedicated crew regardless of whether they ride in the tank or not.
- We can't even build a car that won't drive itself directly into a semi-trailer. The chance that we'll be able to build tanks that drive themselves anytime soon is a fantasy.
Which has been shown to be an effective weapon in Syria and Iraq. It has not been as reliable as human crewed SVBIEDs though, humans are still the better option if you have them.
>presumably you wouldn't need any armor anymore (nobody inside that needs protecting)
The armor is for protecting the engine and the gun, dumbass.
If your tank can be stopped by a child with a .22LR you have a problem.
how do you make a homemade jammer?
All crew members have to perform maintenance duty. Can't always expect a depot near by under war conditions.