Jump to content
SlowMotion

Rafael's idea of future armored vehicles

Recommended Posts

What is amusing is that the logical next step is make it basically a computer "game" and have the operators in a home base operating an AFV drone in exactly the same manner.  Why have any crew in the vehicle at all?   Taking out life support etc would save a huge amount of space, make the AFV smaller, and much cheaper.  Just as with aircraft drones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Erwin said:

What is amusing is that the logical next step is make it basically a computer "game" and have the operators in a home base operating an AFV drone in exactly the same manner.

I found it amusing that they ARE playing a computer game on those monitors of theirs. That game is called Arma, the map they're playing on is Takistan. At 1:47, it actually says Takistan, a fictional video game country, on their "GPS".

Frankly, I can't take this seriously. I always had respect for Rafael as a company, and hardly expected this sort of antics. Worst part, is that this is the second time they're trying to sell a video game IFV. Why doesn't someone try selling a AT-ST walker from Star Wars at one of these expositions? It has as much relation to realty as this:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL - good catch DerKom.  I didn't even notice it was ARMA.   What a con job!  <_<     It would be great to see a contractor try and sell something out of StarWars hehe...

Love the IED WARNING" light.  AND the "IED NEUTRALIZE" button.   Why didn't we do that in Iraq!??

Wish I had the resources to do a spoof contractor ad like that.

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the whole nonsense of using a computer game to sell a serious product to DoD's around the world that is hilarious.  It's really an ad for sitting at home and playing with your tank remotely - just like with a drone.  Think of the research going on re driverless vehicles combined with this.  That's more where the market is than for commercial vehicles on our streets.  I was in Tempe, AZ for a while and the streets were flooded with UBER self-driving cars being tested (and getting in every other human driver's way).  Then UBER killed a pedestrian and they vanished from the streets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erwin, nowadays "computer games", a "tactical simulation" in fact, are sold and used as a serious training tool, nothing phony there. Just Google it or something. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CMFDR said:

@DerKommissar it's VBS3, the pro version of ArmA3, a training platform actually used by several agencies around the world.

I believe it's actually a pro version of Arma 2 (Arma 3 was made for filthy casuals). It still gives an armaholic blue balls. It looks like what Arma 3 /should/ have been:

I still think this vehicle is vaporware. All I saw in the video is some dudes playing VBS on a cool gaming set-up. It's also poor form when VBS looks better than the animation made for the demo. To boot, this concept is 2 years old and I do not see any real progress in implementation.

Is Rafael going to be making Arma mods, now? Maybe they should get the RHS guys to help out with IFV development.

All this being said, it is an interesting case study. What do manufacturers THINK MoDs want? An Armata-like IFV, from the looks of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, CMFDR said:

Erwin, nowadays "computer games", a "tactical simulation" in fact, are sold and used as a serious training tool, nothing phony there. Just Google it or something. ;)

I understand that CMFDR.  The point that is funny is that they are trying to sell a multi-zillion dollar real world weapons platform using ARMA.   The logical extension is to use ARMA as the basis for semi-autonomous AFV's.  Which is a good idea.  So the ARMA developers should get together with UBER or Alphabet and sell that idea themselves and cut Rafael out lol. 

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2019 at 12:50 PM, Erwin said:

What is amusing is that the logical next step is make it basically a computer "game" and have the operators in a home base operating an AFV drone in exactly the same manner.  Why have any crew in the vehicle at all?   Taking out life support etc would save a huge amount of space, make the AFV smaller, and much cheaper.  Just as with aircraft drones.

What will the remotely operated vehicle do when communication with the remote operator isn't working?
This has been quite a problem in Syria when Russians have used their ECM equipment to disturb US drone flights.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/russia-has-figured-out-how-jam-u-s-drones-syria-n863931

Edited by SlowMotion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly that is a problem.  But, am confident it will be overcome by autonomous AI technology.  Kinda like when the CO loses C2 for whatever reason, the subordinates don't just give up... with an understanding of the overall objectives, they carry on.

The tech isn't there yet for civilian use.  But, on a battlefield one could take more risks with autonomous weapons systems.

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2019 at 12:56 PM, Erwin said:

The tech isn't there yet for civilian use.  But, on a battlefield one could take more risks with autonomous weapons systems.

There's that old Murphy's law: "The complexity of a weapon is inversely proportional to the IQ of the weapon's operator."

One of the advantage of modern electronics is that it gets rid of moving parts. Adding complex systems and software that are not reliable enough for the consumer market is a hard sell, right now. 

On 2/23/2019 at 10:55 AM, SlowMotion said:

What will the remotely operated vehicle do when communication with the remote operator isn't working?
This has been quite a problem in Syria when Russians have used their ECM equipment to disturb US drone flights.

Speaking of which:

Strong_failures_of_Russian_Uran_9_tank_r

I read this thing preformed horribly. They had serious issues remote controlling it even at close ranges, with no ECM. It could be user error, or maybe a shoddy design -- but it's an interesting precedent. 

message-editor%252F1522966911009-i-emtas

Not certain how this one preformed, but I think it's a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2019 at 5:56 PM, Erwin said:

The tech isn't there yet for civilian use.  But, on a battlefield one could take more risks with autonomous weapons systems.

Call to ban killer robots in wars

"A group of scientists has called for a ban on the development of weapons controlled by artificial intelligence (AI).

It says that autonomous weapons may malfunction in unpredictable ways and kill innocent people.

Ethics experts also argue that it is a moral step too far for AI systems to kill without any human intervention."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read that some time ago.  Even Uber killed someone in Tempe last year when one of their autonomous vehicles (with a human in the car as back up) ran em over. 

But, in a combat environment, where there should be few if any civilians, that could be acceptable risk.  The biggest risk might be killing friendlies.  Unfortunately, friendly fire happens now and is accepted as part of war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Unfortunately, friendly fire happens now and is accepted as part of war.

I thinks more frowned upon than 'accepted' and lessons learnt are hopefully enacted even with humans diectly in the loop   - but if potential foes start employing it like Putin and his claimed drone nuke torpedoes then I'm sure military would want to develop and use AI on frontline whatever the costs.

Initially AI I'm sure will be used more in support roles  - but even then it could have fatal consequences even then when humans have problems dealing in peacetime with machines designed to deal out death & destruction

Electronic Chart System to First U.S. Navy Ship Certified for "Paperless" Navigation - Sounds good on paper 😉 Like CM's AI vehicle pathfinding...

"The Voyage Management System provides an extra margin of safety when operating in restricted waters. “We don’t have to wait to plot visual compass bearings or radar ranges by hand on the paper chart, since the computer updates our position relative to navigation aids and potential hazards on the screen instantly,” said Shanley."

Reality: Worse than you thought: inside the secret Fitzgerald probe the Navy doesn’t want you to read

"... a Voyage Management System that generated more “trouble calls” than any other key piece of electronic navigational equipment. Designed to help watchstanders navigate without paper charts, the VMS station in the skipper’s quarters was broken so sailors cannibalized it for parts to help keep the rickety system working."

https://theaviationist.com/2018/10/14/f-16-completely-destroyed-by-another-f-16-after-mechanic-accidentally-fires-cannon-on-the-ground-in-belgium/

This robot's programmer seemed to have forgotten Asimov's Laws...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/02/robot-kills-worker-at-volkswagen-plant-in-germany

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fun articles.  If they made comedy TV series depicting such incompetence, no one would believe it!  Then again the F16's were destroyed by Belgians, and we all know that Volkswagens are Nazi inventions, so...  :rolleyes:

Of course if you read the results of the early tests of submarines in the ACW, those reports would be hair raising/harrowing as well.  (Weren't they deathtraps?)   B)

Things tend to improve...

 

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nowadays, there's this popular misconception that modern technology runs on magic. From films, to the marketing where we opt for nebulous terms like "cloud" and "AI". All technologies have advantages and disadvantages. Any solution has a trade-off and is designed, operated and maintained by fallible people. You can try to make things safe and idiot proof, but they'll always come up with better idiots. It's also important to note that all of this is part of the economy. Everyone wants to spend less, and buy more -- as such, "Top Quality" is not feasible.

All this being said, I am one FOR innovation. I would very much like to see machines take over hazardous tasks. However, I do see a trend of people ignoring limitations and believing the dream. Any solution takes time to mature -- even our most beloved ARs and AKs went through a number of critical revisions. Trying to push even a well designed solution to get implemented over-night will be a train-wreck. Always take the hype train with a grain of salt.

Artificial Intelligence is hardly intelligent, it's just some code some blokes wrote. It is still just high and low voltages creating currents going through transistors -- it's not fundamentally different from what we've had in the past 50 years. Expecting human-like intelligence from these thing is simply absurd -- and even dangerous. It's the too-big-to-fail approach, but really the more complicated the system -- the more vulnerable it is to unpredictable behavior. Putting an overly complex solution where a simple one will do is anti-intelligent.

Why would you need an AI toaster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

Nowadays, there's this popular misconception that modern technology runs on magic. From films, to the marketing where we opt for nebulous terms like "cloud" ..

There is no cloud - it's just someone eles's computer

560.jpg

https://teespring.com/shop/there-is-no-cloud#pid=369&amp;cid=6514&amp;sid=front

 

50 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

Why would you need an AI toaster?

So, someone else can hack into it and use it as part of their bot net to generate denial of service attacks for a fee.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/hacked-fridge-sends-out-malicious-emails-in-unprecedent-1503472917

https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/20/fbi-ddos-booter-sites-offline/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IanL said:

There is no cloud - it's just someone eles's computer

Every IT department should give those out to "(Worst) User of the Month". I've seen people look up to the sky when talking about "THE CLOUD".

57 minutes ago, Wicky said:

1989 accidental autonomous Mig-23 cost Kremlin $685,000 in compensation after it killed a Belgian resident.

1989 V2? You just reminded me of the Teletank:

1041582705.jpg

The Soviets had two battalions of these, in 1940. Yes, that is the flamethrower version. And yes, if there is ever a CM:Winter War, this MUST be in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2019 at 9:31 PM, Wicky said:

1989 accidental autonomous Mig-23 cost Kremlin $685,000 in compensation after it killed a Belgian resident.

 

That happened not that long ago. Now USA is preparing drones that will fly as wingmen of  human flown planes. Things have changed quickly.


http://thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26656/boeing-will-unveil-this-loyal-wingman-combat-drone-for-australias-air-force-tomorrow
message-editor%252F1551212299411-boeing-

Edited by SlowMotion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...