Wenn man die Entwicklung von FPV-Drohnen und herumlungernder Munition in den letzten Jahren beobachtet, fühlt es sich an, als stünden wir direkt am Anfang von etwas viel Größerem.

    Und derzeit sind die meisten dieser Selbstmorddrohnen immer noch manuell gesteuerte, im Grunde ferngesteuerte Bomben mit Kameras. Aber es ist offensichtlich, wohin das führt. Mit der Verbesserung der elektronischen Kriegsführung und Störsender wird Autonomie weniger zu einem „coolen Feature“ und mehr zu einer Grundvoraussetzung.

    Wir sehen bereits visuelle Navigation, Objekterkennung und sogar Prototypen, die landen, warten und erneut angreifen können, wenn das Ziel auftaucht. Diese werden keine Wegwerfwaffen bleiben. Sie werden zu geduldigen Raubtieren. Und wenn das passiert, werden sie über die Rollen auf dem Schlachtfeld hinauswachsen, die wir ihnen ursprünglich zugewiesen haben.

    Wenn herumlungernde Munition billig, autonom und einsatzflexibel wird, wie lange dauert es, bis sich diese Technologie auf unbemannte Bodenfahrzeuge ausbreitet? Oder Marinedrohnen? Dies scheint der Beginn eines Drohnen-Wettrüstens zu sein, das die autonome Kriegsführung schneller beschleunigen könnte als jeder andere Bereich der Robotik.

    Es spiegelt das wider, was wir bei Panzerabwehrraketen gesehen haben: Zuerst gelenkt, dann „feuern und vergessen“. Es ist das gleiche Spielbuch, nur ein anderes Medium.

    Aus meiner Sicht sieht das wie der Funke (Wortspiel beabsichtigt) aus, der die meisten bemannten Kampffahrzeuge vom Schlachtfeld verdrängen könnte. Nicht sofort. Aber die Richtung ist klar. KI-gesteuerte Kamikaze-Drohnentechnologie wird sich wahrscheinlich auf das breitere Fahrzeugdesign auswirken, sei es in der Luft, zu Land oder zu Wasser. Die Kriegsführung strebt immer mehr danach, durch Stellvertreter zu kämpfen, nicht nur mit menschlichen Verbündeten, sondern auch mit Maschinen, die an unserer Stelle handeln.

    Weitere Einzelheiten: BurstComms.com

    Kamikaze Drones Are Just the Beginning

    Share.

    6 Kommentare

    1. We’ve spent decades automating the workforce now we’re automating the battlefield. Suicide drones are evolving rapidly from human-guided tools to fully autonomous, decision-making weapons. As AI takes over the target selection and engagement process, we’re inching toward a future where manned warfare may only exist at the control nodes coordinating vast swarms of ultra-committed AI drones executing missions without fatigue, without hesitation, and without accountability. Are we prepared for a future where the decision to kill is no longer human?

    2. Cheapskate-DM on

      Naval warfare is the biggest area at risk, imo, because so much of the function of a navy is to serve as a mobile base of operations. Being able to deploy roaming „intelligent torpedoes“ for area denial against foreign battleships seems great for anyone who doesn’t care to field a navy of their own.

      Unfortunately, this also risks friendly fire, especially against merchant vessels. I can see this being a major argument against investment in this area outside of very tight shore defenses.

    3. There is a reason why most armies spent significantly more (by few orders of magnitude) on heavy land vehicles. People need to realise that drones are basically worse missiles with only selling point being price.

      When you start adding fancy features to platform that has neither the speed nor payload of a missile you are narrowing the price advantage.

      And no, drones did not show us that tanks or IFVs are outdated. They showed us that tech from ’80s is outdated. Shocked picachu much. The fact west (not even gonna bother with Russian developments at this point) saw hard kill systems work in the ’80s, perfected them two decades ago and those are still neither standard nor really developed since paints the picture of why drones even work on the battlefield dated as one in Ukraine.

    4. feedthebaby2 on

      Russia is running out of money and will be forced to stop the war. And if it does I doubt we will have the tech advancements that we are having. All the other wars are between weak nations or very specific operations there is nothing that will push advancements like Ruso Ukraine war.

    5. The flying drones may return to a role as a mini AWACS system that can paint targets and track them for cheaper ground based drones that can carry a heavier payload than a flying one. Send a bunch of wheeled car-sized bomb drone against armored columns and troop locations.

    6. BalianofReddit on

      Id agree if countermeasures from microwaves, lasers ballistic defences weren’t also being developed at a pace.

      Loitering, cheap munitions are great but theyd have to be so advanced in a peer to peer conflict i see them outgrowing and negating their benefits through their cost. They will certainly become part of the battlefield though.

      The largest growth area for that is in the naval arms race as I believe anything other than fast attack aircraft will become far too vulnerable to countermeasures.

      Autonomous naval drones that can submerge are an interesting prospect, but they still fall foul of current manned craft issues, namely cost, heat signature and ability to negate countermeasures effectively. Such weapons would be difficult to affordably equip with enough computing power to perform the desired functions to make it worthwhile while also maintaining stealth.

      Autonomous Loitering torpedos are interesting but could be negated by disposable screening drones that would come at a significantly reduced cost.

    Leave A Reply