Remote controlled Tanks?

[Deleted]

What's the possibility of this happening?

The technology is there to create stuff like "the badger" and some of them are allrdy controlled by a PS3 controller.
If they can control Drones from range, why not tanks?

[Reg]

What's the possibility of this happening?

The technology is there to create stuff like "the badger" and some of them are allrdy controlled by a PS3 controller.
If they can control Drones from range, why not tanks?

If the demand exists, they will create it. There is potential to make pretty much any vehicle unmanned. It probably already exists.

[Deleted]

What's the possibility of this happening?

The technology is there to create stuff like "the badger" and some of them are allrdy controlled by a PS3 controller.
If they can control Drones from range, why not tanks?

Tank or armoured drone? They are very different things entirely.

[Deleted]

Tank or armoured drone? They are very different things entirely.

The mechanism isnt. Forward, back, rotate, shoot, reload, aim.

[Roose]

They likely already have them. At least in development. I would be shocked if they did not.

[Codyak]

What's the possibility of this happening?

Would be cool to see regardless.

[Deleted]

The mechanism isnt. Forward, back, rotate, shoot, reload, aim.

Tanks do a lot more than that, just as drones are not the same as apache helicopters.

[Palmatum]

There already is a remote controlled track vehicle that's in production and I think already being sold to the US Military.

It's fast as fuck.

[Reeve]

I think the issue with a drone tank is that unlike an aircraft, latency is pretty damn important when driving on the ground. The difference between a couple meters in an aircraft isn't usually gonna cause you to crash, whereas the latency of a second or two with a tank could send it through a house.

[Reg]

I think the issue with a drone tank is that unlike an aircraft, latency is pretty damn important when driving on the ground. The difference between a couple meters in an aircraft isn't usually gonna cause you to crash, whereas the latency of a second or two with a tank could send it through a house.

Lag in real life! World PvP just got interesting...

[Collegeguy]

You want to have infantry support tanks as well. There's not much of a point of making them remote control when they need humans with them regardless. Plus, that close relationship with other ground forces would be deteriorated greatly.

[LilSaihah]

What's with all the war threads lately?

I don't really see the point of a large remote-controlled ground-based assault vehicle. Why put the guns on the tank when you could put them on the plane and use it instead?

[Monolith of Mazes]

Yeah, tanks like infantry support in urban situations. The way many conflicts are being fought nowadays, though, tanks aren't seeing quite as much use. You can't use a tank to run into a building and kill/capture an insurgent. If widespread conventional warfare were to break out, you might see some remote tanks being developed.

[Mihalik]

I think the issue with a drone tank is that unlike an aircraft, latency is pretty damn important when driving on the ground. The difference between a couple meters in an aircraft isn't usually gonna cause you to crash, whereas the latency of a second or two with a tank could send it through a house.

Believe it or not...Lag is not really an issue. (Aimbot will fix it). Well not exactly but something like that. Limited AI can be capable of collision detection, threat assesment etc. as well as assisting targeting, controlling countermeasures etc.

The real issue with a remote controlled tank is actually two fold. One is in it's actuall role, which is usually close quarters infrantry support. How do you achieve quick and smooth communication betwen a 50 ton tank armed with multiple machine guns and a cannon and God knows what else and the infrantry around it? How do you avoid friendly fire and really have the thing giving support?

The other issue is that even the newest autoloaders are not quite there yet to compete with human loaders. Manual loading is still faster. Also there is less chance of a mechanical malfunction. Plus the configuration of existing autoloaders is such that the magazine is usually place inside the turret, which is by far the weakest point of any tank. Hit that and you will have the entire thing entering orbit in a mini nuclear detonation.

[PACOX]

Possible today but impractical.

[Skroe]

In 2002 the Army planned 1/3rd of its forces unmanned by 2015. That fell by the wayside because the ground combat of Iraq and Afghanistan changed military needs.

Autonomous Fighting Vehicles aren't going to happen anytime soon, but what you will see happen in the next decade is ground combat logistics becoming highly automated. Reloading vehicles. Fueling vehicles. Resupply convoys. These things were attack magnets in Afghanistan and Iraq. There is little compelling reason for every vehicle, or even any vehicles in them, to be manned at all. Even if one out of every five vehicles were manned in a supply convoy, that's extensive automation right there. In-battlefield equipment resupply, like pack-bots, are in the pipeline.

But with ground combat vehicles, the focus is on making them lighter. The still in planning M1A3 Tank, just announced at the end of last year, is focusing on shedding tens of tons of weight but having the same form factory and survivability. Automation isn't really a priority.

[Reeve]

In 2002 the Army planned 1/3rd of its forces unmanned by 2015. That fell by the wayside because the ground combat of Iraq and Afghanistan changed military needs.

Autonomous Fighting Vehicles aren't going to happen anytime soon, but what you will see happen in the next decade is ground combat logistics becoming highly automated. Reloading vehicles. Fueling vehicles. Resupply convoys. These things were attack magnets in Afghanistan and Iraq. There is little compelling reason for every vehicle, or even any vehicles in them, to be manned at all. Even if one out of every five vehicles were manned in a supply convoy, that's extensive automation right there. In-battlefield equipment resupply, like pack-bots, are in the pipeline.

But with ground combat vehicles, the focus is on making them lighter. The still in planning M1A3 Tank, just announced at the end of last year, is focusing on shedding tens of tons of weight but having the same form factory and survivability. Automation isn't really a priority.

It'd be nice to be able to have a pack mule type vehicle follow soldiers on march in order to carry a lot of their heaviest goods, like ammunition.

[SektheGnome]

They exist now... I have briefly operated an Abrams tank remotely with the turret removed and a mine roller added.

[Deleted]

Why wasting money in other war machines?
Better to use them for social purposes

[smelltheglove]

Lag in real life! World PvP just got interesting...

the future of warfare, people on computers and teamspeak, raging and calling each other noobs. awesome, lol