Please Lower Your Weapon. You Have 15 Seconds To Comply

[jerome_oneil]

Gah!

Robot Cannon Kills 9, Wounds 14

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/10/robot-cannon-ki.html

[SlakeMoth]

Damn, beat me to it.

I welcome our new robot overlords....

[RexRider]

 

[UFO]

Robots with weapons...not a good idea.

[atypical1]

Well, these are nothing new. Our ships carry these types of weapons as defense against missiles. I don't really know about these specific weapons though.

The concept of them is great. They just need to be perfect in their execution.

james

[Real Bad Attitude]

I wonder if it micro stamps the cases    

[UFO]

Well, these are nothing new. Our ships carry these types of weapons as defense against missiles. I don't really know about these specific weapons though.

The concept of them is great. They just need to be perfect in their execution.

As long as they are created by and run by humans...this will never happen.  We haven't even come close to perfecting ourselves, thus nothing we create will ever be perfect.

[atypical1]

OTOH, we are not perfect either. Plenty of friendly fire incidents out there to prove that. Bottom line is that all weapons are, by their very nature, dangerous and deadly. You don't see too many bullets with airbags because they are not meant to be safe. They are meant to harm.

I think that these make sense in an environment where everything moving at you is hostile (in the case of ships). It can be used as anti-aircraft but I think that a better solution would be to have an identifier (think RFID) in all friendly equipment. But that is impractical right now.

james

[jerome_oneil]

 It can be used as anti-aircraft but I think that a better solution would be to have an identifier (think RFID) in all friendly equipment. But that is impractical right now.

I don't know how impractical it is.  We've got IFF in all aircraft right now.

[toddrod]

They need an Easy button on one of those things...

or at least an emergency shut off

[bizarro]

How do you put a deadman switch on something that's unmanned?

[Shhted]

How do you put a deadman switch on something that's unmanned?

We need a safe word.  

[toddrod]

We need a safe word.  

How bout 'David Hasselhoff'

[Req]

Robots with weapons...not a good idea.

I don't know how else you plan on directing fire at a low-altitude strike aircraft.  The days when you could line up an ME-109 in your gunsight are long gone.  Willing to bet the only way you can accurately hit a fast aircraft or god forbid a cruise missile from a ground platform is to let the robots do the aiming.

[atypical1]

I don't know how impractical it is.  We've got IFF in all aircraft right now.

That's true. But you really need that in all equip including ground weapons too. At least I would want it in all ground equip. That would add to what those weapons could do.

james

[jerome_oneil]

That's true. But you really need that in all equip including ground weapons too. At least I would want it in all ground equip. That would add to what those weapons could do.

james

I certainly agree that any safeguard is a good one, but I think of weapons systems like CIWS (the R2D2 looking gun on most navy warships) and what it's intent is.   It is intended as a last ditch defense against inbound missiles and aircraft.   The way that thing operates is you turn it on, and it kills everything it can see until it's out of ammo.   So once the decision is made to arm it, it's generally a matter of seconds before you're blown up.

Tough choices.  I guess the rule is "keep your head down."

[Rogue]

We already employ a semi-automotous anti-aircraft gun mounted on all our ships:  The CWIS.  Close In Weapon System.  It has its own radar and is able to automously track and destroy incoming hostile aircraft.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-in_weapon_system

[jerome_oneil]

We already employ a semi-automotous anti-aircraft gun mounted on all our ships:  The CWIS.  Close In Weapon System.  It has its own radar and is able to automously track and destroy incoming hostile aircraft.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-in_weapon_system

That there is just what I was talking about.  That thing *by design* destroys everything in it's target field.

[Req]

We already employ a semi-automotous anti-aircraft gun mounted on all our ships:  The CWIS.  Close In Weapon System.  It has its own radar and is able to automously track and destroy incoming hostile aircraft.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-in_weapon_system

Per Jerome's post, I fixed that for you.

edit:  the linked article makes a good point that the Phalanx CIWS has an effective engagement time of about 1/3 of a second before a missile closes from maximum engagement range to impact.  Hence why it's important that it's completely autonomous and that there aren't any humans in the loop.

[atypical1]

I certainly agree that any safeguard is a good one, but I think of weapons systems like CIWS (the R2D2 looking gun on most navy warships) and what it's intent is.   It is intended as a last ditch defense against inbound missiles and aircraft.   The way that thing operates is you turn it on, and it kills everything it can see until it's out of ammo.   So once the decision is made to arm it, it's generally a matter of seconds before you're blown up.

Tough choices.  I guess the rule is "keep your head down."

True about the intent of the weapon. The CWIS certainly falls into the last ditch effort category.

But if you look at these weapons as potentially offensive in nature or broaden their defensive scope (perimeter security against all targets ground and air) then you would have to have some way of identifying what is friend and what is foe. In our multi-national environment that might be hard. Imagine these type of weapons against a car bomber for instance and their impact on troop morale.

james