Added 16-11-01
Updated 19-4-11
There are some readers that will dismiss the following as Science Fiction, and they may be right. However, I suggest that they spend an hour reading H.G Wells' short story “The Land Ironclads”, published several years before World War One in The Strand magazine, December 1903.
Not only does Wells predict a trench stalemate, he also details how such a stalemate could be broken by small infiltration units- exactly as was achieved by German Stormtrooper units in the later part of the war.
Wells also has the other side breaking the deadlock with armoured vehicles. The actual form of the vehicles differs from the tanks that were eventually used, but the tactics he describes are very credible and very similar to those that would be used a few decages later.
One wonders how many millions of lives would have been saved if a few generals had read that piece of “Science Fiction.”
Much of a dismounted infantry squad’s offensive ability is due to the heavy weapons, usually carried by just a few members of the unit.
Suppose we mount some of these weapons on a chassis, about the size of a donkey. This lets us carry heavier weapons, more ammo and a greater variety of ordinance. Suppose we put the weapons on a light turret and give the chassis four robotic legs, so it can move on the same terrain as its human squad members.
The machine can be remote controlled by the squad, but may have some autonomy. The operator tells it where to go and the machine decides how it places its feet. Control for the most part may just be a simple mimicry behavior -the robot moves were the operator does, and aims at what he is looking at. Other movements can be directed by fibre optic link or tight beam transmissions.
The four legs will probably take a wide low stance like a spider, but the joints have a greater range of movement, allowing other walking modes. In confined terrain or when the machine has to keep a low profile the legs are folded along the sides and articulated like those of a cat, with the addition that the machine can move with equal faculty backwards. Sideways motion like a crab is possible, as is a stork like wading stance, also useful for tip toeing through minefields or popping up over cover. Bipedal locomotion could be used in the event of damage or special situations.
The Heavy Weapons Robot, HWbot or Huwbot for short has several applications.
In a static or ambush situation it is dug in and used as a strong point. Since the operator can be some distance away he is not so vulnerable to counter fire.
Huwbot can act as a mobile fire base. Infantry men “paint” a target with a helmet or weapon mounted laser and send a target to the robot, which then responds with appropriate direct or indirect fire.
Huwbots will also probably be used as section level tanks, forming the van of any assault.
If the section is vehicle mounted the Huwbot can be carried on the roof till needed. In this position it can serve as an additional light turret. A likely armament configuration for the Huwbot is the IFV Type 1 turret (qv). On a light personnel carrier the Huwbot may be the only turret. When the squad “debuses” and takes to the woods the vehicle’s heavy weapons climb off and accompanies them.
The Huwbot is a specialist and as such is a supplement to the human infantryman, not a replacement. Humans are responsible for tactics and target selection. The machine needs humans to reload its weapons and construct entrenchments. In certain terrain the machine may need to be disassembled and man-packed into position. In such a situation it may be simpler to just remove the machine's weapons and sensors for manual use.
If “ether” superiority can be assured such robots can be operated from much greater distances, including by operators in aircraft or offshore. The same control mechanisms could be applied to tanks and IFVs when terrain was suitable. Personally I think that weapon systems operated by personnel in the field will still have advantages, since they'll be able to see more of what is happening.
Huwbots could be left in hidden silos on a border area and activated in time of invasion. Land lines linked to short range transmitters would make remote control more secure.
A Huwbot could be made to patrol a airfield perimeter and only come under operator control if it detects something -allowing the sentry to sit in the warm with his coffee and newspaper while the blizzard rages.
Much of the technology for such a machine already exists. Walking robots are already in production for certain jobs. The tracked “Wheelbarrow” bomb disposal robot has been in military use for decades and has been equipped with weapons such as shotguns and antitank missiles.
For the Huwbot to be practical it will need a long duration power system and need to move as quietly as the rest of the section. Neither of these requirements is insurmountable.
The idea of mounting the heavy weapons on a chassis has an alternate solution. The machine mounting them could be manned and take the form of being either a compact wheeled or tracked vehicle (like the Slope), or a suit of powered armour, like the exo-skeleton used in “Aliens". Personally I think the Huwbot is the most compact and versatile option.
I see a role for a smaller version of Huwbot. This will be about 2ft high and armed with a Hose and/or a OICW and possibly a couple of LAWs. This is a Scout-Attack machine (SCATer) -ie the first thing you send though the doorway then let it kill anyone shooting at it.
The legs should be capable of and long enough to operate door handles.
A robot this size is very easy to conceal for ambushes or to act as a sentry. The robot is equipped with “mecho-geko” feet allowing it to climb walls or trees. The Scater would be a useful addition to sniper teams, since it can go many places a full grown man can't. Once in position the sniper can aim the robot's weapons using his skill and experience. The robot is of course expendable, so can be used from firing positions from which escape would be impossible.
Small robots can be used for reconnaissance. Flying robots are often suggested, but given weight considerations I can see these being easy prey to soldiers with skeet shooting experience.
Snakes, centipedes or some hybrid of the two could be a better option, being stealthy, all terrain, amphibious and capable of climbing or entering small spaces.
Another application for small crawling robots is the mobile mine. A crab, spider or snake like machine that creeps to where it will have the most effect before exploding. For example, a mobile mine might crawl to the hatch of a parked tank and drop inside before exploding, or hide itself and wait until the tank crew return.UPDATE
One of the main threads of my original article was to caution against being too anthropomorphic when designing warbots. Much of my inspiration above was from animals, but it should be apparent that a mechanical organism would have capabilities that organic organisms do not. It would be foolish to simply think of these as mechanical spiders, crabs or insects.
The design proposed for SCATers and HWbots is that of a body with a turret mounted on it and supported by six legs. Six legs allows the machine to remain mobile if one or more legs is damaged. It is also possible that the underside of the body will have wheels or treads that can be used to move the machine at greater speed over good terrain.
The terms “turret” and “head” are essentially interchangeable for these machines, and forward is whatever direction the machine happens to be looking. The main sensors of the machine are aligned with the main armament, so the machine follows the usual tactical practice of aiming at whatever it looks at. Unlike a human the warbot will also have eyes in the back of its head, in the top, and also on its body and legs. Having eyes near the end of its legs will be very useful, since it will allow the robot to scrutinise footholds or look for mines. An eye mounted on the end of a limb can also be used to peek around corners or high objects.
Each “leg” of the robot can also serve as a arm when needed. The foot of the limb is a rubber pad. This may be solid but more likely is that the internal pressure can be varied, so the foot can be hard on firm ground and have a lower pressure when moving over soft ground. By reducing the pressure further the surface of the foot can act like a suction cup, facilitating picking objects up or climbing. Above the rubber foot are three or more fingers/toes that can be used to grip either when walking or manipulating. When not in use these fold out of the way.
The limbs of such a robot are capable of a far greater range of movement than those of an organic. The human elbow can move through an arc of a little under 180°, while the joints of the proposed robot limb will be capable of at least 300°. Each joint on a limb will have this range of movement so a limb will appear to have a flexibility close to that of a whip. This, combined with the length of a limb means that the robot is capable of throwing objects such as hand-grenades and rocks great distances should the need arise.
Above a certain size and weight it no longer becomes practical to have a walking robot. Large warbots will probably be tracked machines, externally looking a lot like manned tanks. One difference is that the robo-tank can be more compact. A human crew requires a certain amount of interior space to move around, and this space must be protected by armour and this adds weight.
Another difference is that a robotank will have better situational awareness than manned tank. A manned AFV has from two to five crew. No matter how many vision devices a vehicle has, each man can only look in one direction at a time, and will at times be distracted with other duties such as loading. A robot brain, on the other hand, can parallel process so give its full attention to each viewpoint while also performing other tasks. It may also be possible to give each eye an armoured shutter and a “blink” reflex to protect the robotank from being blinded. I can imaging such tanks jewelled with eyes, rather like the “Squidies” in the Matrix movies.
Under certain conditions the robotank may still need “infantry” support for close protection and scouting. This role can partially be filled by SCATers that ride on the tank rather like spiderlings on their mother.
Robotanks may contain a passenger seat for a human observer.
Despite what I have said above, there will be applications for man-shaped robots, since the human world is designed for the human form. Man-shaped warbots are most likely in military installations and bases.
Most human shaped fighting robots in science fiction have weapons built into their arms. There is nothing wrong with this as long as the machine retains hands to operate door handles and other controls. These robots are usually portrayed standing square on to their targets, but it makes better tactical sense to expose as little of the robot to enemy fire as possible. Robots may be programmed to use stances rather like those of martial artists –the lead arm out to the side, the rear across the chest or raised above the head. Extra eyes built into the arms may help aiming and serve other purposes. Building weapons into the head is also an option. A projectile weapon needs a certain length, so the head of the robot may have an extended snout. In fact the robot I'm proposing may look like a man with a dinosaur head. Working jaws for close combat or biting through obstacles is a possibility, and would certainly be intimidating. Flame-thrower “breath” or a LLW chemical spray is another option.
Another intimidation feature of these machines would be their height. I see them being 6’4” –just small enough to pass through a standard door.
The feet of the robot will probably be tracked, giving more traction when moving up steep inclines. When moving at speed the robot will probably move with a skating action, and when moving at high speed will drop into a speed skier's crouch. This posture also produces a small target while allowing the use of the arm and snout guns.
There is no reason why a robot should have only two arms. A pair of snap-on extra arms might be added for certain duties.
Although human shaped, such a machine can perform many non-human actions. The head can rotate 360° and the arms move through an unnatural range. A robot attacked from the rear may simply point its arms and head directly behind it.
There may be applications for robots of an externally human appearance, such as “Bishop” in the film “Aliens”. In the movie the “squad synthetic” was part of the unit to serve as repositories of scientific and technical information and perform non-combat tasks. One can also infer that they would also be medics and translators. As a medic an android would have encyclopaedic knowledge and wouldn't be a host to many infectious agents. Tools for specialised tasks could be built into the android, for example, forceps that extend from under a finger nail, an AVO meter in the finger tips, etc.
The “Aliens-Colonial Marines’ Technical Manual” by Lee Brimmicombe-Wood tells us that synthetics have a “Carbon-fibre skeleton …muscles are vat-grown silicone colloids powered either by pumped micro-hydraulics or electrical stimulation.” and that they have a human appearance for psychological reasons to smooth interpersonal interaction.
“........most synthetics in Colonial Marine service appear as mature, average males or females around 40 years of age. Their personalities…can best be described as passive or non-threatening. ….have an important role to play in small infantry units, both as a passive neutral party, and as a maternal/paternal influence in nurturing and sustaining the group dynamic at optimum efficiency”
Personally I prefer my androids looking like Winona Rider or Lexa Doig in “Andromedia”, but the above is logical. Although it is preferable for androids to appear human, it may be desirable for them to be recognisable as androids. Probably the best way to do this is to give them a unique ethnicity. My choice would be to give them the features of a grinning little Tibetan monk, but with lilac and magenta shades to the skin.
There are numerous applications of an android for espionage if they are capable of passing through metal detectors etc. Not only can an android be made to look like anyone, but also programmed with all known mannerisms. Their memories are not only photographic, but downloadable.
In the section above I suggest a smaller version of the HWBot I call the SCATer. This would be about the size of a typical dog and used for scouting and light attack. What form might a “pure scout” robot take? It would need to be small, compact and easily overlooked but robust. It should be capable of handling obstacles such as stairs.
A good design for such a robot might be that of the common woodlouse, of around a foot in length. On the right is a deep sea relative of the woodlouse that gives us some idea of what such a robot might look like. The robot would probably have less legs. It would mainly move by treads, using extendable legs to climb stairs and smaller sharp feet for climbing tree trunks, rubble and walls. Antennae would be useful in detecting tripwires.
The small size of the Scout bug means that it would be easily overlooked and this property would be increased by the use of camouflage, radar absorbent coating and a low heat signature. Its small size also means that one or more scout bugs could be carried by a Soldier or larger Warbot and deployed as needed.
Both Woodlice and Giant Isopods can roll into a protective ball. If our Scout bug robot can do the same this offers the interesting possibilty that sometimes it may use rolling as a means of locomotion when this is quickest. It also offers the posibility that at times a Scout bug might be deployed by throwing it. For example, a Scout bug might be thrown through an upper storey window or over to the other side of a gully.
The size of the Scout bug limits the armament that it can carry, but it may have something equivalent to a silenced pistol. This could be used defensively or against targets of opportunity.
As a platoon advances several Scout bugs would range ahead and to the flanks to detect enemies before they can see the platoon. When the platoon is halted the Scout bugs function as a self-deploying sensor perimeter.
By the Author of the Scrapboard : | |
|---|---|
 | Attack, Avoid, Survive: Essential Principles of Self Defence Available in Handy A5 and US Trade Formats. |
 | |
 | Crash Combat Second Edition with additional content. Epub edition Second Edition with additional content. Crash Combat Third Edition Epub edition Third Edition. |
 | |
 | |
