I’ve been out late tonight and admittedly I am a bit tired, so forgive my grammar at times but none the less the following review occurred to me after viewing the Futureweapons’ show covering UMVs. I didn’t see why they weren’t combining the various designs into a more potent whole, so I tried brainstorming on the implications of such a deployment. Let me know what you think in terms of viability:

A new device, as seen on Futureweapons (Military Discovery Channel), shows future Intelligent Munitions Systems as being able to stand guard through definitive force over a zone. And best, a definitive force that presents no present target to attack back to cease their counter’s force. Why are these designs of essentially geographic supremacy being presented as purely stationary? What roles could the IMS coupled with new options such as the squad supply carrying unmanned surface vehicles bring to modern warfare? (also featured within the same show) If a squadron of unmanned mobile IMS is deployed and maneuvered through a region in a manner appreciative of each individual unit’s effective success range, then could not a consistent front of mobile force supremacy be solidly and precisely employed for covering or holding an area? Could these slow moving masses of unmanned vehicles be used to enter into a region and secure it more efficiently than current life-jeopardizing methods? While not lightning warfare; the ability to scan, catalog, categorize, and even surround remaining threats of potentially large regions of land at a time could be a method used to secure theaters with minimal actual live-fire combat and no American casualties. Forests to fields to canyons miles wide could be swept fairly quickly with sufficient numbers of all-terrain platforms operating in cohesion, could they not?


Beyond mobilizing these potential emerging weapons systems, one of the basic scenarios that seems most likely to me for the IMS seems to be the following. A soldier standing guard at a military checkpoint is off at a distance, holding a tablet computer. A car approaches the checkpoint: on the soldier’s screen, a list is brought up in a set form. The car’s tag numbers, supposed owner with reference to records; visible occupant information is listed out by sex, approximate age, and even with options such as emotional biometrics; vehicle weight with model comparisons are simulated for the car and the observed occupant’s weight total, documented to check for discrepancies; all while a live video feed of the car at multiple angles helps the screening soldiers keep a watchful eye on this situation while appraising it. All seems clear, so the commanding soldier takes their stylus and taps a large checkmark button at the bottom of the display. The car remains trailed by camera and targeting but armaments are set to not stop the vehicle. Moments later, a vehicle passes the weighing pad. A warning light comes up flashing on the display; 600 pounds are unaccounted for in projected estimates. A moderate bomb is suspected. The car is attempted flagged down: signs go up saying to pull into the inspection area. On reaching the inspection point, the driver sees no visible people but only armored equipment, so the bomber guns their engine in an effort to likely reach the populated market on the other end of the traffic stop. The soldier taps the X icon, a Prompt flashes but the soldier waves it through by quickly signing a large checkmark across the tablet. A flash from a roadside IMS, a moment more, and a sudden explosion of dust billows up as the 10 feet surrounding the vehicle are decimated by the IMS’s fire. The driver and the vehicle are both stopped cold by the controlled demolition, and the only hindrance to the roadblocks continued operability for rapid response is the car smoldering on the asphalt.

Does anyone else think, or indeed hope, this is the future of operational methods? It seems both more effective and easier to man to me, which hopefully in time will justify their cost. If anyone has any ideas relating to, or best of all knowledge of such efforts in development, I’d love to discuss the direction these types of weapons will most likely take in the future. I went more in depth in my own take on how this type of situation might play out but I cut it down quite a bit to post it on the forum, so a chance to delve more into the various deployment options I would love.

I would have to deffinatly agree with your point of view. Why send in soldiers and have them standing at check points and on guard or occupation duty when they can sit in a bunker and let remote controlled machines do the work for them? Why risk there lives when it is not necessary? We have the technology. We can build IMS's and just have people in bunkers operating them with laptops and maybe even something like a video game controller. Sure it would make it seem like war is more of a game then a war but essentially it is a game anyway. Instead of people dying machines would be damaged. Soldiers would not be in harms way nearly as often. The cost would be great to turn our army in to remote controlled machines but then there would not be as many people in the military in the first place and you dont have to feed machines and they dont sleep. Even though if some one was to say, well how do we power them? My answere use solar panels and ethenol and more economic means of fuel. Overall it is a great idea and should be further looked into and developed.