>>64450207
You have the situational awareness and mobility of an RC car with a GoPro taped to it, you can’t do any corrective action for a jam, and your position gets triangulated and mortared.
You don’t die if it gets shot.

Advantages
>you don't need to leave fortifications in order to defend positions (much like FPVs), removing the risk of losing valuable soldiers in order to do operations
>dramatically less vulnerable to enemy fire, and shell fragments can potentially fly through the whole thing without the unit crying in agony and requesting evacuation which wastes even more resources, but instead can continue to carry out its mission with damage
>typically very modular and adjustable on the fly for different types of missions
>great for defense in general
Disadvantages
>extremely limited ammo count for missions due to a complete lack of a supporting robotic ammo resupply system in place
>occasional terrain navigation issues, especially if using wheels instead of tracks (another point making it not always a very good offensive option)
>very expensive versus buying gear for a soldier
>takes significantly longer to build new UGV, versus to recruit a new soldier
>more vulnerable to drone bombers and kamikaze FPVs due to inability to take cover like humans
>extremely vulnerable to EW
>takes up valuable fiber optic cable resources if controlled that way instead
Equal
>both can be taken out of action, either by critical damage or injury

The advantage is that your infantry man is now stationed in a bunker with a controller in his hands. The next step forward will be a squadron with all types of remote controlled vehicles working as a unit

>>64450273
The next step is to make all UGVs smart enough to differentiate soldiers from civilians so that they don't need human drivers anymore. Removing the human element completely and making wars won by those who can pump out robots faster than the other side can destroy them

>>64450289
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umH0ZpLaAwI

>>64450207
Pros:
-Smaller profile.
-It can be produced at scale.
-It is cheaper and easier to sustain in the field.
-Doesn't require training, housing, food, or sleep.
-It can't desert.
-It doesn't tire so long as it has batteries / fuel. Its operational capabilities don't degrade over time unless damaged.
-It is a one off purchase, you don't need to set a slice of your budget for its salary, medical, expenses or other extraneous costs like paying its next of kin a monthly stipend for decades.
-It carries no political costs when it inevitable gets taken out of commission.
-It can carry heavy weapons with greater ease, which in turn can be mechanically stabilized.
-It can be equipped with thermals and NV.
-If it gets taken out of commission by small arms fire, it can theoretically be brought back into action.

Cons:
-If it gets taken out of commission by small arms fire, it can theoretically be brought back into action.
-It requires a different logistical chain, specialized technicians and operators.
-Its situational awareness is tied to the number of cameras it has on board and their field of vision as well as the operator behind the screen.
-It is sluggish and has a limited capability to traverse rough terrain.
-It is weak against EW / its fiber optic cable being severed.
-It is limited to whatever ammo it has on board. To reload it as to RTB.
-It its main weapon jams it can't fix on the field and has to RTB or serve as a decoy to draw fire at best.
-Overall it has a limited operational range.

>>64451116
>it is cheaper and easier to sustain in the field.
not really, they basically cant operate at distance from a regular infantry squad because they cant load themselves, fuel themselves, perform basic maintenance on themselves, or even unstuck themselves

>Doesn't require training, housing, food, or sleep.
but it does have the same mechanical upkeep as a light truck

wheeled or tracked gunmounts are, at best, an additional piece of equipment that the weapons company can take to boost their firepower
or maybe a dedicated UGV platoon at the company level to parcel out to support troops
but they arent even remotely close to the same mission profile as a rifle squad

File: 1748106131916999.jpg (253 KB, 1280x721)

253 KB JPG

As usual, Russia is ten steps ahead in the ass

>>64450273
>>64450289
No you retards, the next step is to develop a method to resupply these remotely.

>>64451160
It’s cool that they’re finding a use for their paralyzed soldiers

>>64450207
you don't use these in place of infantry, you use them with infantry

>>64450207
It can't look through a window
It can't cross ditches
It can't climb stairs
It can't climb a ladder
It can't do construction work
It (probably) can't swim
It (probably) has less situational awareness than a human being

Oldheads
>Nooo you can't just put a gun on wheels, it won't work, you need a real person out there

Future
>Send out the next wave of AR RC cars

File: Paris Gun shell impacts ((...).jpg (391 KB, 1280x930)

391 KB JPG

>>64450289
>Removing the human element completely and making wars won by those who can pump out robots faster than the other side can destroy them
Or... or... get this, the side losing that exchange decides that if sticking to the robot-on-robot war of the factories is mathematically certain to lead to their defeat, it'd be better to bet everything on one big roll of the dice and switches to countervalue strikes in hopes of forcing the enemy to come to terms.
>inb4 terror bombing civilians has never been effective!
I know, but that's never stopped us before.

File: 1755423952933487.jpg (292 KB, 1744x798)

292 KB JPG

>>64451160
>Same energy

File: LiT_Jj6pX7h0PhjqIb8a6YStF(...).jpg (110 KB, 640x363)

110 KB JPG

>>64450207
A wildly different definition of "obstacle"

>>64451146
>they cant load themselves, fuel themselves, perform basic maintenance on themselves, or even unstuck themselves

The first two are just a design puzzle : make the drone come back on its own to a charging station with a fucking solar panel, together with a rack of prepackage weapon/ammunition that the drone Can just eject/plug by running at it at the right angle. I'm no engineer but this isn't a problem of complexity so much as a problem of cost.
If you value an individual citizen-soldier at roughly 10 millions $US, you Can afford to lose a lot of complex drones as long as industrial output bottlenecks aren't an big issue.
Of course, if your industry is barely running, if your transport system is a mess ans the few countries trading with you are doing it at marked up prices, sacrificing your citizens might be the right choice n'y default, simply because you cannot get enough drones.

The third is a problem if the drone cannot move to a nearby pickup spot, where a bigger drone could just collect the damaged units and bring them back further away from the front. So it's partially a design puzzle.

The fourth can be solved but is more tricky because it requires the drones to identify the cause and come up with a solution against a very vast array of situations which are hard to map and script... and might require complex manipulators, of which human hands are still the more cost/effective.

>>64450207
when its sitting still it'll be hard to spot right away

>>64450207
>advantages
you dont die
>disadvantages
funny traps will work on it

>>64451818
a service station staffed entirely by robots would need to be the size of a shopping mall because all the mechanics would be the size of an ATV and cant go up and down stairs
so the whole thing would be a giant hodge podge of ramps and roads like a hot wheels course
at that point, just use human mechanics

File: the future of robotic warfare.png (1.67 MB, 1377x775)

1.67 MB PNG

>>64450207
>What advantages/disadvantages does this present compared to a infantryman?
A future of round robot asses vs a future without round robot asses.

>>64451853
if you're spending all that money making a robot anyway might as well give it a nice round ass

>>64451838
You only need mecanics away from the frontline.
If a drone is nearly out of energy/ammo, it get back to a charging station, which is basically a battery, a solar pannel and racks where to pickup ammo packs and/or battery packs. Basically a slightly scaled up version of what is already used for rumba or gardening robots.
If it cannot get back there, sleep mode, with a sensor to trigger an alarm if somebody tries to move it and a self-destruct if the correct safety code isn't entered. You just converted it into a AP mine.
If it can get back but is damaged or if there are no more packs available for reload, it get logged for evac at a later date, going on sleep mode or traveling to a pickup point, whatever is optimum.
Make the charging station's module air droppable and you got yourself a semi-mobile area denial weapon.

>>64452129
As the saying goes, "Who the hell makes a robot that you can't fuck?"

File: 1761604694355597.jpg (328 KB, 1466x1518)

328 KB JPG

>>64451853
>>64452129
>>64452748

File: 46765675.png (563 KB, 2016x440)

563 KB PNG

>>64452748

>>64450250
>>64450272
This.

I'd use them as cannon fodder to suppress enemy positions while actual humans flank, sweep, and clear.

File: 1530301564187.jpg (71 KB, 750x1000)

71 KB JPG

>>64450207
I've seen them used as target practice for machine gunners. Tracers bounce off them aND fly all over the place aall around behind them.

without a meat-drone, how are they supposed to reload/deal with malfunctions when they're on the line?

>>64453109
They don't, they pull back and get serviced by the drone wrangler.

>>64453109
Down the line there is going to be a modification to all UGVs that allows them to pull the feed tray cover up, pull the belt up, rack the charging handle really fucking hard a few times, then reseat the belt and pull the cover back down. There will also be a UGV that will autonomously be able to deliver more ammo cans to the armed UGVs. A lot of anons in the thread have mentioned the need for the latter, since shitty ammo logistics is really the only major long-term issue with UGVs that they will have to work on. They are extremely lightweight compared to IFVs and don't really need much fuel or power to drive around at all. There are a variety of solutions to the EW threats that they are working on. Situational awareness is also not as bad as people think: pretty much every UGV comes standard with thermals and an aerial recon drone typically is constantly surveying the terrain for the UGV anyway, regardless of whether there is one active on the ground or not.

>>64451116
>-It can't desert
Though it *can* be captured by your enemy and, with a bit of rigging, be put into use by their side
I wonder if the future of UGVs has them being loaded with scuttling charges/"suicide" packs to prevent this type of capture

>>64451587
All modern war up to and including the Russo-Ukrainian one has included the indiscriminate bombing of civilians in one way or another- I dont think UGVs/Robots really factor into it

>>64453486
There is indiscriminate and terror bombing

>>64450207
advantages
-no one cares when it gets blown up
-if gets damaged you dont have to pay for its rehabilitation for years
-people wont protest over this getting drafted and sent to frontlines
-you wont get tv filled with crying mothers even if all 3 gets blown up
-it wont get ptsd, or mental issues from chemical agents, overpressure, etc and cause epidemy of violence and domestic abuse after returning from war
-it wont get it hearing damaged even when it doesnt get hit and thus needing more money to be spent on hearing aid

>>64451160
What's going on in the upper right corner?

>>64454777
Checked, you forgot the best part:
- you can make more of them;