Military sentry gun 'Adunok' by Display Inc, Belarus.

After a quick look apparently the maximum operating range between the station and a remote operator is 1000m. That leaves any stationary platform it is mounted on and the operators wide open to mortar fire and even return fire from a .50 cal.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: MrSpad

The US has spend a decade testing these things in Afghanistan and Iraq, they work well in support roles but, not so great in combat roles.

What though ?

I know the AF used predators, and reapers etc.

I know EOD used them.

I know dismounted ground forces used 'dragon runners' etc.

But what armed ground drones did we use ?

The closest thing I ever saw was lockheed Martins canceled MULE.

In 2002 they tried out the Hemes I think it was called, arming it with a shot gun. Since they have had all kinds things they use an armed version of the TALON called sword in Iraq and their have been others that I can not recall. They all have limited uses of course. They are working on real UGVs which would be effective in a real battle but, that is some ways away. For the most part right now in a combat role they are just to vulnerable and slow to be of much use. If your enemy has motor they would wipe out and army of these things rolling around.

a reply to: MrSpad

They are working on real UGVs which would be effective in a real battle but, that is some ways away

I don't get what is taking them so long.

It's basically a really expensive remote control car. All they got to do is add some collision radar, and pedestrian sensors all the automakers are selling right now.

Slap some flir, with a derivative of Microsoft kinect sensor. Slap on 'facial','Weapon' recognition software on it with a data link.

Slap a remote weapon station on it, and PRESTO.

There is NO reason we should'nt be fielding a system right now, and using commercial technology already available to do it.

At least in my opinion.

For the most part right now in a combat role they are just to vulnerable and slow to be of much use. If your enemy has motor they would wipe out and army of these things rolling around.

That's not a big problem either. There are numerous active protection systems, and there are also tactical ground surveillance radars to choose from.

Throw in a drone with GTMI. Ground Moving Target Indicator. One would be hard pressed to get near it.( Pretty much what JSTARS is)

That's not counting on See through armor systems current available. AKA 'panoramic' vision systems.

Everything they need to make one we already have. Its just integration on a single platform.

I've played enough video games, to know that these things are easily hacked- and turned against the guys with the turrets.

it only works if you are in front of it, if it can`t rotate then you could run up behind it,disconnect the battery and steal the entire gun.

Ever heard of the crow or trap system? This type of thing has been out for awhile, when I seen the crow system back in 04 or 05 it even had an attachment to drastically reduce recoil to the point it almost didn't exist, the crow system is hummer mounted and its remote display is no ***t just like a call of duty video game or vice versa. They shoot very very well.

Don't the Israelis have some thing similar controlled by their girl soldiers from a far bunker.....

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: MrSpad

They are working on real UGVs which would be effective in a real battle but, that is some ways away

I don't get what is taking them so long.

It's basically a really expensive remote control car. All they got to do is add some collision radar, and pedestrian sensors all the automakers are selling right now.

Slap some flir, with a derivative of Microsoft kinect sensor. Slap on 'facial','Weapon' recognition software on it with a data link.

Slap a remote weapon station on it, and PRESTO.

There is NO reason we should'nt be fielding a system right now, and using commercial technology already available to do it.

At least in my opinion.

For the most part right now in a combat role they are just to vulnerable and slow to be of much use. If your enemy has motor they would wipe out and army of these things rolling around.

That's not a big problem either. There are numerous active protection systems, and there are also tactical ground surveillance radars to choose from.

Throw in a drone with GTMI. Ground Moving Target Indicator. One would be hard pressed to get near it.( Pretty much what JSTARS is)

That's not counting on See through armor systems current available. AKA 'panoramic' vision systems.

Everything they need to make one we already have. Its just integration on a single platform.

Well all those sensors could be blinded, or easily damaged and unlike a manned vehicle where the crew can still move and fight without sensors these vehicles could not. They are also working on defenses against EW, jamming and such that could be a problem. Sure they could field something right now but, it would be something that could be easily adapted to defeat. When they role something out they want it to be something has a long lifetime and something have prepared for every scenario they can think of. Do not worry you will them at some point. And when you do they will be mean ugly beasts of destruction. However, the use of bots in support roles is also vital to any military effort although not a sexy as combat robots of course.

a reply to: MrSpad

Can't be that hard.



Uran 9.

Wish I could find what we got.

Easy to find Russian stuff.

One more :



Reminiscent of the 'Black Knight', the Mule and the SMSS.

a reply to: MrSpad
they look and sound badass but remember in the movie aliens they used things like this on some choke points but what happened the aliens determined how to go around them and how to run out their ammo

How stupid do I feel signing my signature with a stupid little pen when I could be doing it with a fricking machine gun , very cool although it does need to work on its hand writing, was a little messy in places