Notices
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Why not use RC car bombs to clear bunkers?

  1. #1 Why not use RC car bombs to clear bunkers? 
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    This is just something I've been wondering for a while. Given the incredibly low price of radio controlled mini-cars, and the incredibly cheap price of blue tooth connected cameras, why wouldn't it be practical when clearing a bunker to just strap a grenade to an RC car with a camera attached and send it around the corner?

    Probably the car and camera both would be cheaper than the grenade.


    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Ph.D. Nevyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    881
    sounds like you've been playing to much black ops

    There would also be the cost a screen to see from the camera, transmitting equiptment etc. also a single bullet could disable the wheels the controls etc making it (probably) quite easy to disable.

    There could be other reasons but I can't think of any. They might be working on it right now...


    Come see some of my art work at http://nevyn-pendragon.deviantart.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    The screen isn't lost every time you deploy one. Ideally the operator would have a bunch of little RC cars, and use the same screen to guide each of them to their targets one by one. An ordinary laptop would probably do the trick, or maybe a laptop with a reinforced casing, to make it more combat ready. I mentioned the camera using blue tooth because that is a common feature on laptops.

    If the RC cars are cheap enough, then it's ok to bring extras and miss a few times. It's not like the military is out any serious money when they lose one. Also, it's a very small, fast moving target that's very low to the ground. It won't be easy to hit. Maybe if they used a sawed off shotgun, or saw it coming from a long distance away (so the angle isn't continually changing). A soldier can probably only carry one or two, and the screen would be dead weight, but for a planned assault, why not bring a truck full of them and let loose?
    Last edited by kojax; August 5th, 2011 at 08:51 AM.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Ph.D. Nevyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    881
    Maybe its just taking awhile to become obvious, one platoon are using them to try knock potential IEDs to blow the up: Going "Outside the Wire" with RC Cars

    Remote control vehicles are becoming more common like UAVs, maybe its a possibility on the table. Another thought is I don't know how much bunker warfare comes into war these days, not sure how many bunkers are out there... However if the central base had a couple it could be quite useful
    Come see some of my art work at http://nevyn-pendragon.deviantart.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    90
    I've always thought this was a good idea but I think that I mean in my own opinion at least that it would need to be armed with something stronger then just 1 grenade. Depending on the situation obviously but it wouldn't always kill the person it was intended too instead it could just alert people around. I Like that technology but I think that simply strapping a grenade to a plastic car isn't the best way. I think if the armed forces could get a specialized armored RC car it would be better. Like that show that used to be on tv called BattleBot. They have some pretty crazy implementations of RC cars with armor. Im sure the armed forces could come up with one that drives in the bunker flash bangs assess the room and then deploys something in the center of the room to blow up without destroying the car.
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    That actually sounds pretty cool. Build like a mini-Abram's tank? Say the size a laundry basket? Also I like the FB idea. Maybe it could also shoot pepper spray out of pepper spray cannons?
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    It could work..
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    That actually sounds pretty cool. Build like a mini-Abram's tank? Say the size a laundry basket? Also I like the FB idea. Maybe it could also shoot pepper spray out of pepper spray cannons?
    I think the combination of all those ideas are pretty good actually and then you could have specialized RC's for special types of terrain and situations. Also I think certain ones could dispense a lot of Saltwater and then drop a taser depending on the mission and objective because an RC operating in these conditions could more than likely take the taser and put it right back in the carrying mechanism ones the victims are stunned. All are valid ideas which are actually kinda cool to think about.
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    You know, I think the best part is that it won't be hard to find a pool of qualified operators for them. There's a whole generation of kids that grew up on video games out there. Operating an RC vehicle isn't a whole lot different from that, just higher stakes, and the knowledge that the people you kill are really dying. (That part would certainly take some getting used to.)
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Teb
    Teb is offline
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    50
    It would be to easily to interfere with / sabotage by the opposition. anything able to be controlled by one side could easily be misdirected / disrupted by the other.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    90
    With the technology we have today we could easily encrypt and hide the transmission. Plus in close quarters it would be perfect because no one would have time to sabotage because the tether wouldn't exist... Until the second before you deploy it essntially the only problem would be driving it!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Yeah. We've got to get it through our heads that different enemies require different tactics. The Taliban isn't going hack a frequency hopping, encrypted transmitter. That would be a herculean feat for them.

    On the other hand, if we were at war with an advanced enemy like China (an unlikely event, but I'm just being hypothetical), or even maybe N. Korea or Iran, they'd have a much better chance to overcome those obstacles. Maybe the "one size fits all" theory of war preparation needs to be scrapped?
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,092
    Don't forget that if the US military adopted this idea, they would certainly not use $15 RC cars made overseas that you can buy in any toy shop. They would have to completely redesign the whole thing, build it on their own soil (arguably, I admit), and spend millions of dollars on research and design alone. They already have a robot that does much the same thing, is re-usable, shoots a submachine gun, and is not disabled as easily. There are also dirt cheap ways to disable a bunker that involve "point and shoot" rather than operating machinery in the heat of the battle.
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4
    What if this was used in a nonmilitary setting? Imagine a crazed gunman is at a standoff with the police, holding hostages in the bank vault. Now imagine one of the men has his laptop and his RC car with either a taser or some non-lethal explosive. Just drive the RC car up and finish the situation right then and there.

    Logistically, the RC would (as aforementioned) need to encrypt its signal and hop frequencies. It would also need to drive silently. In a situation where the enemy is prepared with a wide-signal-range jammer, the RC could also lay down a micro-thin wire everywhere it travels. Also, this poses a question - would it make more sense to have cheap, disposable RCs or expensive, reusable RCs?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    90
    Ok the theme one size fits all in war is but isn't true. Tactics are tactics, I believe the government plays it safe most of the time when devising tactics because of the laws/ regulations in place. (OBVIOUSLY)
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    Don't forget that if the US military adopted this idea, they would certainly not use $15 RC cars made overseas that you can buy in any toy shop. They would have to completely redesign the whole thing, build it on their own soil (arguably, I admit), and spend millions of dollars on research and design alone. They already have a robot that does much the same thing, is re-usable, shoots a submachine gun, and is not disabled as easily. There are also dirt cheap ways to disable a bunker that involve "point and shoot" rather than operating machinery in the heat of the battle.
    I dont agree with you, whatsoever. Not saying your wrong so dont be offended but I personally dont agree. I think that in the "Modernization of war" (which is a title i just invented) I think that the government wants to overall stray away from using people in as many situations as possible. If that means one day iRobot status, so be it, or if all that means is driving an RC car into a bunker on a mission to save one life then so be it as well. America as a whole does not support war, EVER. We support in a time of crysis but people dont want to see death people dont want destruction and people who feel the immediate effects like it even less. So In the event that we can slowly implement forms to replace human venerability I think america will seize every opportunity to implement such. Now as far as the government spending millions on Research and development for this idea I agree improbable, impractical, So on and so forth.... But thats where we create opportunity if someone was to pitch the idea, research and develop and refine the idea and perfect it. The government might in tern hier that person or purchase the idea, and all the research up to that point and build off that... Who's to say that america does not use 3rd party ideas? America seeks Hackers, Coders, and Talented Minds for all sorts of tasks, in my opinion this is another opportunity for someone to help the country thrive.

    Kojax, Hit me up if you want to make this happen =P hahahaha
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,325
    Quote Originally Posted by Fmp2491 View Post
    I dont agree with you, whatsoever. Not saying your wrong so dont be offended but I personally dont agree. I think that in the "Modernization of war" (which is a title i just invented) I think that the government wants to overall stray away from using people in as many situations as possible.
    Yes and no. When it comes down to the kiling part sure. But the killing is only part of the requirement--often a small part. We spend billions on new toys, half of which arent' completely tested and many of which won't work in the field and aren't used only to learn we would have been a LOT more effective teaching a tens of thousands of soldiers Arabic combined with comprehensive cultural education so they can actually get on the ground and influence in the population.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    we would have been a LOT more effective teaching a tens of thousands of soldiers Arabic combined with comprehensive cultural education so they can actually get on the ground and influence in the population.
    Yeah. I think this is what will ultimately become the role of soldiers on the battlefield. Just like how a civilian police officer's social skills are actually much more valuable than their combat skills, I think soldiers are going to be playing a more supervisory and interactive role in the future, and less focused on actual fighting. But, police still expose themselves to danger every day. Soldiering is never going to be a picnic.

    However robots will take over in terms of tactical advantage. They already have. We're just late noticing. That's what a roadside bomb is. It's the next stage. It wouldn't be any more of a robot than it already is if it were designed as an android that uses human hands to pull the pin on a grenade and blow itself up. It's same result, just a few less moving parts.
    Last edited by kojax; August 20th, 2011 at 05:38 AM.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Freshman Fmp2491's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    we would have been a LOT more effective teaching a tens of thousands of soldiers Arabic combined with comprehensive cultural education so they can actually get on the ground and influence in the population.
    Yeah. I think this is what will ultimately become the role of soldiers on the battlefield. Just like how a civilian police officer's social skills are actually much more valuable than their combat skills, I think soldiers are going to be playing a more supervisory and interactive role in the future, and less focused on actual fighting. But, police still expose themselves to danger every day. Soldiering is never going to be a picnic.

    However robots will take over in terms of tactical advantage. They already have. We're just late noticing. That's what a roadside bomb is. It's the next stage. It wouldn't be any more of a robot than it already is if it were designed as an android that uses human hands to pull the pin on a grenade and blow itself up. It's same result, just a few less moving parts.
    Like you both said, Yes and No. I agree but I dont at the same time because while trying to stray away from war as a whole, the world will NEVER achieve that feat. Essentially what you are describing is an attempt at world peace, and although noble and ideal! It is not realistic, roadside bombs although unmanned are only a small step (in my made up term lol) 'The Modernization of War'. In my opinion as long as people have the ability of independent thought, their are going to be conflicting idea's and as long as people are aloud to disagree people will fight. Hence war...

    I understand that these are seriously smarter straigys and i couldnt agree more fights fought with the mind are fights better served then ones with guns. BUT some of the people with inferior minds know this, and choose to play the cards they are dealt. Surely you guys can relate to what I am saying, we have experienced or witnessed it at some point in our lives. In my opinion we are all semi agreeing on a central point, that point being that the world as a whole... wants to stray away from unwanted causalities. We are right, but we are also overlooking the complexity of war.. We dont just fight over conflict we fight for advantage, money, many reasons far more complex then maybe any of us on this thread can understand or maybe their just stupid and simple. Regardless of the reason like I am saying as american's anyone with a business idea/ proposal that would take american troops out of harms way and put a blue-toothed camera holding, RC car that could clear even something as small as a bunker could make some serious money.

    The ideal picture that comes to my mind when I think of this is the scene in Law Abiding Citizen when the RC car with machine guns, and missels blows up that truck and no one sees it coming. That is the ideal scenario for that well at least in my opinion anyway...
    ‎"What are we doing tomorrow night?
    Same thing we do every-night Pinky - try to take over the world!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •