search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
The future is the shape of things to come “We have used unmanned ground


robotic vehicles for the past 15 years in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, primarily in a counter improvised explosive device (C-IED) role. This has been vital, allowing an increased stand off from IEDs. The US has not moved out on weaponised UGVs, but Russia is building a fleet of UGVs of various sizes, up to and including 20tonne armoured vehicles armed with anything from machine guns to rockets and anti-tank guided missiles. There is no question that UGVs will play an increasing role in future conflicts. They lag behind aircraft, as setting aside the political and legal intricacies of ground warfare which are messy and complicated, the physics of a vehicle autonomously navigating on the ground are much harder. “In the air it can be autopilot and it


can fly point to point, or hover over an area on its own, but for a vehicle to navigate over unmapped terrain, as opposed to a highway, and in an off- road, GPS denied environment with vegetation it is really difficult. The technology is improving and while still far off we will see those issues overcome


and UGVs used in a variety of roles, from carrying cargo for dismounted troops and robotic aides, whether tracked, wheeled or legged, in terms of bringing along extra gear or weapons. There is also a lot of potential for them as scouts and weapon platforms, and countries are exploring this. It is analogous to early tank warfare, the technology is maturing, so while the shape it eventually takes and the tactics are still to mature, there is no doubt there will be a role for them.” As far as conventional robot manufacturers are concerned, Paul Scharre’s vision is probably not the future they would like. Many current generation UGVs fit into the second offset concept, highly capable and highly technical. Mr Scharre’s view is that applique kits that are currently able to turn fork lift trucks or mine flails, for example, into remotely controlled vehicles, could in the near future turn M113 armoured personnel carriers into remotely controlled M113 weapons platforms. As Mr Scharre suggested the major stumbling block for now is autonomous driving capability, but as


Google et al push towards self-driving cars this future is not as far away as previously thought. Such concepts allow for a future


where one highly protected platform controls, or quarterbacks, a series of low survivability remote ones. Suddenly mass is the order of the day again, and freed from the need for crew compartments and survivability options these platforms can become more focussed on whatever their mission module is. This makes it economically difficult to target these vehicles with precision munitions. Spending hundreds of thousands to destroy a target worth tens of thousands is a battle that will eventually be lost. Mr Scharre explained: “The


paradigm shift is that robotics allow you to field relatively low cost but critical systems, their purpose is to move the balance between quantity and quality back to quantity. This is a really difficult challenge for US defence people, whose philosophy has been ‘I am going to be outnumbered so I need a smaller number of qualitatively superior weapons’. The problem is that mindset


The inability to robotically estimate the impact of terrain as well as the human eye is what is holding back UGVs ©DoD CBRNe Convergence, Indianapolis Motor Speedway, Indiana, USA, 6 - 8 Nov 2017 www.cbrneworld.com/convergence2017 30 CBRNe WORLD June 2017 www.cbrneworld.com


CBRNeWORLD


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68