The Remote Controlled Military and the Future of Warfare

The Remote Controlled Military and the Future of Warfare

The Remote Controlled Military and the Future of Warfare

By David Silverberg

Digital Journal — In a secluded desert in California, two sleek 27-foot-long planes zip across the sky, dipping and swerving like air-show hotshots. But the flying turns vicious when a pop-up target appears and the Boeing aircraft quickly communicate with each other to determine which has the better chance of destroying it. One plane drops a 250-pound GPS-guided bomb from 35,000 feet, hitting the bull’s-eye. Before the planes can react, an anti-aircraft missile zooms towards them, and they each safely roll out of the missile’s path.

A mouth creases into a triumphant smile. But it doesn’t belong to any pilot, because no humans sit in these cockpits. These are autonomous robotic aircraft called the X-45A, whose successful test flights give project leader Dr. Michael S. Francis enough reason to grin.

“We’re putting fewer soldiers in harm’s way,” says Francis, director of the Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS). In partnership with the U.S. Air Force, the Navy and the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), J-UCAS is looking to put more robo-planes in the air so pilots can avoid insurgency attacks such as those in Iraq’s messy battlefield.

Rewind one week and cross the country to Uniontown, Pennsylvania, where an army-green six-wheeled vehicle climbs over a makeshift stack of wood, plants and dirt. A crowd stares intently and exclaims the expected “oohs” and “ahs.” This is the coming-out party for the Gladiator Tactical Unmanned Ground Vehicle (TUGV), a remote-controlled combat robot developed by Carnegie Mellon University for the U.S. Department of Defense. Standing far from the vehicle, a soldier holds a PlayStation-like controller to drive the TUGV. While the goal is to build robots capable of search-and-discovery missions, the military also hopes to arm the TUGVs with machine guns and other weapons.

The X-45A and TUGV are two examples of where military spending and innovation is heading: unmanned, robotic warfare where the human is kept at a safe distance. Some call this a response to increasing casualties from guerrilla insurgencies, while others see it as a natural progression to a more automated war zone.

“When four marines enter a building, they look out for each other’s backs, and [robotic] platforms can do the same,” says Francis.

But while his aerial prototypes face little obstruction once in the air, unmanned ground vehicles require more development than their high-flying cousins. These tanks must use sensors to contend with curbs, fences and ditches — almost laughable obstacles given the high-powered artillery they carry.

Northrop Grumman developed a vehicle the size of a compact car that will likely conduct surveillance, but may eventually be armed with destructive weapons such as MK-19 grenade launchers. Designed to alert soldiers to enemy presence, these self-controlled bots will be deployed in Iraq in fall 2006.

With fully automated robots, “the military doesn’t need soldiers at the remote the entire time,” says Paul Cabellon, marketing communications manager for Northrop Grumman.

Going robotic has so captured the attention of the U.S. military that other countries are taking notice. South Korea announced plans to develop sophisticated humanoid robots to complement soldiers on the battlefield, making Terminator 2 fears seem closer to non-fiction than ever.

Along with robo fever comes the desire to develop weapons to keep soldiers far from the combat zone. The most talked-about weapons involve lasers that can burn flesh or destroy missiles, a technology that has invoked both enthusiasm and anxiety. DARPA recently designed a high-powered laser that will eventually shoot a 15-kilowatt beam capable of zapping anything from air-to-air missiles to rocket-propelled grenades.

Attracting more controversy are directed-energy weapons that emit beams of electromagnetic pulses that can even penetrate walls. The Pentagon is testing one such weapon called the Active Denial System (ADS), built by weapons maker Raytheon. It produces a millimetre-wavelength burst of energy that penetrates skin at a range of 700 metres. ADS stings the top layer of the skin where pain receptors lie, so the target can only think of flight and not fight.

A non-lethal weapon like ADS may be the future on the battlefield, but it also has potentially worrisome applications elsewhere. Police units are interested in ADS, says Raytheon’s Michael Booen, and the U.S. Department of Energy may test the system as a way to repel intruders from nuclear facilities. Opponents of these weapons say directed-energy gadgets can cook political protestors who may be unable to escape their wrath quickly enough. They also point to the sometimes fatal outcomes of supposedly non-lethal weapons, like stun guns.

The scenario gets more bizarre with a glance at DARPA’s plans to totally bypass any human presence in combat: Its Human-Assisted Neural Devices Program will decode brain signals into machine commands — basically, a thought can fire a missile, no physical action needed.

It hasn’t arrived yet, but the era of robots, lasers and mind-control dominating our military will send a clear message to the public: Humans start the wars and machines finish them.

Military Weapons on the Horizon
# If Thor were to land in 21st-century Earth, he would be jonesing to own a lightning gun dubbed StunStrike from Xtreme Alternative Defense Systems (finally, a company worthy of the name “Xtreme”). This 11-foot-high weapon shoots four-foot bolts of lightning by using an electrical charge to create a path for sparks generated by a Tesla coil. Call it the next-gen stun gun or Loki’s worst nightmare.

# Artillery of the future could include bullets that burn through concrete and steel. The U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center in Virginia developed bullets coated with chemicals that heat up instantly after a high-velocity impact, allowing the projectiles to burn through armour plating or other defences.

# Protecting airports is the motivation behind Raytheon’s Vigilant Eagle, a force field to protect planes from shoulder-fired missiles. Sensors in an overlapping grid alert other components to an oncoming missile, and a microwave-type energy beam deflects the attack from the planes. Vigilant Eagle costs $25 million (US) per airport — will this be the ultimate stocking stuffer for anxious airlines?

# Underwater security is the priority for a DARPA project designed to destroy incoming torpedoes with massive shock waves. Warships outfitted with 360 transducers — essentially, the Cyclops of flat-panel loudspeakers — fire an acoustic shock wave of such intensity the attacking torpedo either detonates early or disables immediately. Forget Guile, now that’s a sonic boom!