<p>shoot, there goes the human factor to field artillery.</p>
<p>i understand that it lowers the risk of casualties, but all this "unmanning" makes me nervous...maybe i've seen The Terminator or automotive industry layoffs a few too many times</p>
<p>what i always liked about the army was its reliance on the human rather than the machine</p>
<p>what you guys say?</p>
<p>I like the military keeping its manpower -- adds the human impact.</p>
<p>However, this machine isn't unmanned, so to say that this is the next step is a bit presumptuous. My impression is that it keeps the operator from harm caused by the machine itself, not necessarily as an unmanned combat machine. The two man crew opperates the cannon.</p>
<p>Even if its completely computerized, manned crews will be necessary to repair broken machines as well as ensure our unmanned vehicles aren't compramized by the enemy (reprogrammed/ hacked into) and used against us. Man will always have an important role in war. </p>
<p>Imagine this, if both sides are using remote controlled vehicles the targets will be the location of those controlling the robots not the actual robots. </p>
<p>Don't fear terminator, machines don't work that way...</p>
<p>"Man will always have an important role in war."</p>
<p>Maybe that's man's problem...........</p>
<p>I don't think a two-person crew qualifies as "Unmanned". The new generation self-propelled artillery is some pretty awesome equipment. I saw a similar German-developed weapon system on the show "Future Weapons". It's ability to repidly fire 5 rounds a minute enables the weapon to fire 3-5 shells using different trajectory angles so that the shells hit the target virtually simultaneously. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, more of today's battlefield tactics require sustained "up-close and personal" involvment by our troops. The "Shock and Awe" component of the Iraq war passed fairly quickly and has been replaced by the "Knock and Enter" door-to-door urban warfare. Our troops have had to supplement their warrior skills with police and community-building expertise. </p>
<p>Our future military leaders are being called upon to develop and command an increasingly complex set of leadership skills. USMA recognizes this and has modified it's programs accordingly.</p>
<p>now what I think is that a unmanned convoy is a good idea or anything that doesn't do any actual fighting.</p>
<p>The good news is that the army are investing in new weapon systems - and more importantly in APC's.<br>
Our experiences in Mogadishu in 1993 taught us that the HUMMWV (aka Humvee) is not a suitable vehicle for combat situations. The up-armoured Humvee has not proved successful in Iraq but by all accounts the South African developed RG-31 Charger has been very successful. South Africa is the world leader in mine proof vehicles and the army has ordered over 100 of these vehicles (<a href="http://www.army-guide.com/eng/article/article.php?forumID=80)%5B/url%5D">http://www.army-guide.com/eng/article/article.php?forumID=80)</a>. US companies have now been contracted to provide the Cougar APC (<a href="http://www.forceprotectioninc.com/models/cougar/%5B/url%5D">http://www.forceprotectioninc.com/models/cougar/</a>) using the South African technology. The Marines will use the 4x4 version and the army the 6x6 version.</p>