Sarek1
Ylipäällikkö
Riskinsä näissä teknisissä vekottimissa tietenkin on:
http://www.iltasanomat.fi/digitoday/art-2000001929315.html
UAV / UCAV / LAR (robotit) Uutiset ja jutut
- Viestiketjun aloittaja Raveni
- Aloitus PVM
Mitä tarkoitat? Minikoptereissa on nähty stinger varustusta muutaman vuoden verran. Ja isompiin on varattu pidempää puikkoa.
BlackFox
Ylipäällikkö
Aijaa! Siis jotain tuollaista. En tiennytkään että joku on jo kerennyt pultata stingeriä tai vastaavaa lennokkiin kiinne. Tosin en ole yllättynt että on jo.
Siis lennokkia mikä suhteellisen halpa valmistaa ja se kykenee toimittamaan jonkinlaisen esim stingerin tarpeeksi korkealle tai sitten vihollisen valvoman alueen yläpuolelle.
Siis lennokkia mikä suhteellisen halpa valmistaa ja se kykenee toimittamaan jonkinlaisen esim stingerin tarpeeksi korkealle tai sitten vihollisen valvoman alueen yläpuolelle.
http://warontherocks.com/2016/10/flying-ieds-the-next-big-threat/
On Tuesday, French media broke the story that two French soldiers in Erbil had been severely injured and two Peshmerga fighters killed by what appears to be the first successful use of a drone carrying explosives.
At this point, little information is available. The French daily Le Monde reported that “two paratroopers were struck by the booby-trapped drone, sent by a group linked to the Islamic State. The exact circumstances of the attack remain to be specified.” The article also mentions a number of light injuries among other soldiers.
On Tuesday, French media broke the story that two French soldiers in Erbil had been severely injured and two Peshmerga fighters killed by what appears to be the first successful use of a drone carrying explosives.
At this point, little information is available. The French daily Le Monde reported that “two paratroopers were struck by the booby-trapped drone, sent by a group linked to the Islamic State. The exact circumstances of the attack remain to be specified.” The article also mentions a number of light injuries among other soldiers.
Airbus teams with DCNS to develop VTOL UAV for French Navy
http://www.janes.com/article/64806/airbus-teams-with-dcns-to-develop-vtol-uav-for-french-navy
"While no performance specifications for the VSR700 have been disclosed the Cabri G2 on which it is based is powered by a 180 hp Lycoming O-360 piston engine (derated to 145 hp), has a gross weight of 700 kg, a maximum speed of 185 km/h, a range of 700 km, and a service celling of just under 13,000 ft."
http://www.janes.com/article/64806/airbus-teams-with-dcns-to-develop-vtol-uav-for-french-navy
"While no performance specifications for the VSR700 have been disclosed the Cabri G2 on which it is based is powered by a 180 hp Lycoming O-360 piston engine (derated to 145 hp), has a gross weight of 700 kg, a maximum speed of 185 km/h, a range of 700 km, and a service celling of just under 13,000 ft."
Tällaisia meillekkin tykistön maalitiedusteluun ja osoitukseen .. hyvillä sensoreilla ja kameroilla sekä tehokas kuvan jakaminen tilannekeskukseen...
Raveni
Greatest Leader
Ruotsi alkaa olemaan maa jossa mennään vähän asiassa kuin asiassa perse edellä puuhun ja myöhemmin ihmetellään veristä, oksien raapimaa takamusta. Tuossakaan kiellossa ei meinaan ole järjen häivää. Onneksi ainakin Suomen poliisi oli jo sitä mieltä, että tuollaiselle kiellolle ei ole tarvetta eikä perustetta.
Tuo kielto tuntuu jotenkin oudolta, ehkäpä piakkoin ilmenee mitä tuossa oli takana, mutta juuri nyt tuosta paistaa läpi jonkinlainen poliittinen paniikkireaktio.
Raveni
Greatest Leader
Vaikea ajatella, että ainakaan huoli yksityisyydensuojasta olisi ainoa peruste. Nuo alkavat olemaan sen verran yleisiä vempeleitä ihan tavis valo- ja videokuvaajilla ja ihan hyödyllisiä. Saa ihan uuden laista perspektiiviä tuollaisella vehkeellä.
Enemmänkin tuolla halutaisiin peittää jokin asia mikä olisi noloa jollekin poliitikolle.
Raveni
Greatest Leader
Niin ja uskoisin, että Ruotsissa lainsäädäntö on suhteellisen samanlainen mitä tulee yksityisyyden suojaan jonka loukkaaminen on kriminalisoitu. Eikä tuo kielto oikeastaan edes ongelmaa poista jos sellainen edes on koska samalla tavalla normi kameralla ja pitkällä putkella ne paparatsit kuvat saa otettua. Tietysti tuollaisella vempeleellä on näppärä kuvailla mellakoita ja autojen polttoja kun ei tarvitse itse paikalla olla niin josko kielto johtuu jostain tuollaisesta syystä.
Ajattelin itse asiassa Laivue 2020:a, mutta molempi parempi.
Onko tulevaisuus tätä? Jenkit valjastaa teollisen potentiaalinsa numeerisen ylivoiman saavuttamiseen dronejen avulla.
Marines Seek To Outnumber Enemies With Robots
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/10/marines-seek-to-outnumber-enemies-with-robots/
PENTAGON CITY: Since World War II, the US military has always expected to fight outnumbered. Soon, however, expendable unmanned systems may change that. For the first time in 70 years, America could have numbers on its side. That turns traditional assumptions about tactics, technology, and budgets upside down.
“It does flip things,” said Lt. Gen. Robert Walsh, deputy Commandant of the Marine Corps. “We’ve been down the path of each system getting more expensive, more complicated, and therefore we’re buying less of them….What we see is the opportunity with unmanned systems to provide more mass.”
Mass, as a principle of war, boils down to “quantity has a quality all its own.” The US has spent decades developing ever-smaller numbers of ever more expensive and “exquisite” weapons. Each fighter, helicopter, tank, or ship is vastly more capable than its predecessors, able to hit more targets over a wider area in a shorter period — but it still can only be in one place at a time, which limits your flexibility. Each high-end system can also be killed by one lucky shot, which limits your resilience against damage.
These factors may not have been crippling in counterinsurgency, but in an all-out war, there’ll be enough shots that some will get lucky. (It’s an old problem, as Kipling wrote of British officers on the Indian frontier: “Two thousand pounds of education/Drops to a ten-rupee jezail.”) And enough brute force can flatten finesse. At the receiving end of, say, a Russian cluster-munition barrage, expensive advanced technology blows up as easily as cheap stuff.
To reduce casualties in future landing operations, Walsh has already called for amphibious forces to have robotic vanguards. “Instead of Marines being the first wave in, it’s unmanned robotics, whether it’s in the air or the surface or subsurface…sensing, locating, and maybe killing (targets),” he said this morning at the AUVSI Unmanned Systems Defense conference. But today he also went into greater detail about a wider range of robotic applications that the Marine Corps’ considering.
In the air, a manned fighter like an F-35B could launch aerial drones ahead of itself and then hang back as their digital “quarterback,” Walsh said, keeping the human pilot out of the worst danger zones while extending his or her influence over much more space. You could even replace the manned mothership with an unmanned one and have a large, long-range drone disperse a swarm of smaller, short-range drones once it reached the target area.
On the ground, Walsh said, the Marines’ Light Armored Reconnaissance (LAR) troops — mounted in eight-wheel-drive armored cars called LAVs, akin to Army Strykers — locate threats the way the horse cavalry once did, “by running into the enemy.” But if a recon patrol launched small drones to scout ahead, he said, “that is mass we wouldn’t be able to have if we were just moving vehicles.” The drones could detect enemy radio transmissions, triangulate their locations, and then attack by themselves or pass targeting data back to heavier weapons, Walsh said, all without a human Marine getting in harm’s way.
“We see that swarm-type technology…being able to dominate the battlespace…at a lower cost,” Walsh said. “We find more mass, more affordable, because unmanned systems are going to be less expensive”:
“Swarms of low-cost uninhabited systems absolutely have to be part of the mix,” said Paul Scharre of the Center for a New American Security. “They won’t obviate the need for capital platforms to move Marines and equipment, but once in the fight, swarms have a number of advantages. They can complicate enemy targeting by presenting the enemy with a larger number of threats. They can overwhelm enemy defenses. They can disperse across a wide area, searching for threats and performing surveillance. They can act as expendable decoys, drawing fire away from higher-value manned assets.”
“The Marines have done some very innovative experiments,” Scharre said, “so it’s no surprise to hear this interest from Marine Corps leadership.”
In the near term, based on these experiments, the Marine Corps is buying enough quadcopter drones to equip four battalions of Marines, Walsh said. Equally significant, to help troops on the ground deal with all this data, the Marines are adding an additional Assistant Squad Leader to every squad. “We don’t want the commander, the squad leader in this case, heads down” looking at a screen, Walsh said. You’ll still need a few good men — but they’ll be helped along by a whole lot of cheap robots.
Marines Seek To Outnumber Enemies With Robots
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/10/marines-seek-to-outnumber-enemies-with-robots/
PENTAGON CITY: Since World War II, the US military has always expected to fight outnumbered. Soon, however, expendable unmanned systems may change that. For the first time in 70 years, America could have numbers on its side. That turns traditional assumptions about tactics, technology, and budgets upside down.
“It does flip things,” said Lt. Gen. Robert Walsh, deputy Commandant of the Marine Corps. “We’ve been down the path of each system getting more expensive, more complicated, and therefore we’re buying less of them….What we see is the opportunity with unmanned systems to provide more mass.”
Mass, as a principle of war, boils down to “quantity has a quality all its own.” The US has spent decades developing ever-smaller numbers of ever more expensive and “exquisite” weapons. Each fighter, helicopter, tank, or ship is vastly more capable than its predecessors, able to hit more targets over a wider area in a shorter period — but it still can only be in one place at a time, which limits your flexibility. Each high-end system can also be killed by one lucky shot, which limits your resilience against damage.
These factors may not have been crippling in counterinsurgency, but in an all-out war, there’ll be enough shots that some will get lucky. (It’s an old problem, as Kipling wrote of British officers on the Indian frontier: “Two thousand pounds of education/Drops to a ten-rupee jezail.”) And enough brute force can flatten finesse. At the receiving end of, say, a Russian cluster-munition barrage, expensive advanced technology blows up as easily as cheap stuff.
To reduce casualties in future landing operations, Walsh has already called for amphibious forces to have robotic vanguards. “Instead of Marines being the first wave in, it’s unmanned robotics, whether it’s in the air or the surface or subsurface…sensing, locating, and maybe killing (targets),” he said this morning at the AUVSI Unmanned Systems Defense conference. But today he also went into greater detail about a wider range of robotic applications that the Marine Corps’ considering.
In the air, a manned fighter like an F-35B could launch aerial drones ahead of itself and then hang back as their digital “quarterback,” Walsh said, keeping the human pilot out of the worst danger zones while extending his or her influence over much more space. You could even replace the manned mothership with an unmanned one and have a large, long-range drone disperse a swarm of smaller, short-range drones once it reached the target area.
On the ground, Walsh said, the Marines’ Light Armored Reconnaissance (LAR) troops — mounted in eight-wheel-drive armored cars called LAVs, akin to Army Strykers — locate threats the way the horse cavalry once did, “by running into the enemy.” But if a recon patrol launched small drones to scout ahead, he said, “that is mass we wouldn’t be able to have if we were just moving vehicles.” The drones could detect enemy radio transmissions, triangulate their locations, and then attack by themselves or pass targeting data back to heavier weapons, Walsh said, all without a human Marine getting in harm’s way.
“We see that swarm-type technology…being able to dominate the battlespace…at a lower cost,” Walsh said. “We find more mass, more affordable, because unmanned systems are going to be less expensive”:
“Swarms of low-cost uninhabited systems absolutely have to be part of the mix,” said Paul Scharre of the Center for a New American Security. “They won’t obviate the need for capital platforms to move Marines and equipment, but once in the fight, swarms have a number of advantages. They can complicate enemy targeting by presenting the enemy with a larger number of threats. They can overwhelm enemy defenses. They can disperse across a wide area, searching for threats and performing surveillance. They can act as expendable decoys, drawing fire away from higher-value manned assets.”
“The Marines have done some very innovative experiments,” Scharre said, “so it’s no surprise to hear this interest from Marine Corps leadership.”
In the near term, based on these experiments, the Marine Corps is buying enough quadcopter drones to equip four battalions of Marines, Walsh said. Equally significant, to help troops on the ground deal with all this data, the Marines are adding an additional Assistant Squad Leader to every squad. “We don’t want the commander, the squad leader in this case, heads down” looking at a screen, Walsh said. You’ll still need a few good men — but they’ll be helped along by a whole lot of cheap robots.