US Navy moves toward unleashing killer robot ships on the world’s oceans

Boxall’s plan to develop and unleash unmanned killer robot ships is an integral part of the Navy’s new tactics to counter Chinese maritime advancements and, to a more limited extent, those of Russia.

Though public details of what the Navy is calling “distributed maritime operations” are scant, it seems to stem from an idea that was developed inside the surface Navy, known as “distributed lethality.” The idea was to put the Navy’s surface combatants back on the offensive, spreading out to stretch Chinese intelligence and surveillance assets and leave openings for offensive strikes.

Additionally, the plan called for putting missiles on everything the Navy put to sea to force the Chinese to think about every single ship, not just combatants. The Navy further evolved this idea, and in 2017, the service’s top admiral began talking about relying on networks to broaden the reach of any group of ships.

US Navy moves toward unleashing killer robot ships on the world’s oceans

There are a lot of possibilities with robot ships. You could use swarm intelligence with smaller craft that only have one missile. Small "carriers" with one or even a few UAV's to launch.

Think about 100's or even 1000's of tiny undetectable water bots that attack a ships haul and eat a hole into it. Everything networked and working together.

You could have 1,000,000 tiny undetectable bots released from above or below that could jam communications, keep track of enemy movements or clog up propulsion systems. I bet the Navy has some really wicked stuff out there.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Look at the bright side, at least the robots won't be peeing in bottles in the radar room.
Apparently that's a problem in the navy now.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Yup, and maybe less time spent colliding with other vessels.

The Navy can't seem to avoid collisions with a whole boat full of Sailors.

Is this to 'FIX" that problem or to create many more collisions?

Besides there are some interesting maritime laws regarding vessels that are 'Abandoned.'

I can see other countries nicking them and then claiming they were abandoned.

P

ETA. US Drone aircraft have been stolen by having their controls taken over. A ship is a lot easier to take over since it is sailing rather than flying.

So ... take over the controls, send it into Chinese waters and then China can create a # storm ... and keep the boat!

Very cool stuff! Seems like a natural progression with todays drone tech, why not? We've had drone subs for a long time. I would imagine that someday humans will never physically enter into battle zones. In many respects we're not far off from that now.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Just in time to test out on Iran's flotilla to the Atlantic!

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Cool and all, but going all tech, or remote controlled, also increases the probability that all you would have to do to stop all that in its tracks is just hit them with an EMP attack. No matter how fancy, still hard to beat a good ol fashion big bada boom.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

All military equipment is hardened against EMP's. The military has lots of electronic equipment and vehicles. All of it is protected against EMP's.

a reply to: LookingAtMars
Well that goes without saying, I mean you would not build a house without a roof?

But there are EMPs and then there are EMP'S. Its just a matter of how big to boom is. I mean I suppose one could call an atomic bomb going off some few miles away from all those toys, a direct hit. But anyways, still more operational and functional then the previous methods.

Someone had an ACTUV thread awhile back. It's an interesting concept, along with distributed lethality.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

We need numbers so anything to that end should be pursued.

Mor robo bote

What about having autonomous mini-subs that rise to the surface and launch explosive equipped guided drones?

How far are we from a time when the oceans are filled with A.I. controlled submersible drones that patrol the waters of a country?

If anyone needs any dystopian uses for technology, I come cheap. DARPA I’m looking at you.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

And sky net is born.

Somewhere somehow there is a whacked out computer hacker whom is getting his rock's off to this, imagine that a pimply pale greasy unwashed hacker in a dark dingy room somewhere surrounded by month's of unwashed clothing and empty sweet wrappers gaining control of these thing's and the damage he could do.

Or terrorists, create international incident's by hacking some US ship's and using them to act in unstable regions in order to provoke conflict.

Personally a nearly fully automated ship fine but a fully automated ship armed to the teeth with state of the art weapon's no thank you, even a crew of marines on board to keep it from being raided in the event of a system failure (on one of those windows 95 computers they are still using - perhaps a bit premature on the sky net bit) would be merely window dressing there should always - always be a command staff aboard a vessel whom would make the final decision and be fully aware (theoretically at least) of there immediate situation.

A mistaken decision, a wrong order cancelled by the guy on the ground so to speak, not going to happen with an obedient computer system, an abuse of military power to suppress your own people after a coup would also then be very likely as once again the power is no longer in the hand's of human being's with there own opinion's and belief's so whomever is pulling that long distance trigger is then REALLY in charge of the gun and that mean's there own psychosis and mental situation is then THE most dangerous threat to the world.

Sooo.... the Pentagon gets hacked, the NSA gets hacked, major banks get hacked, the German government gets hacked, social media gets hacked, security companies get hacked, all the people and corporations and governments that can afford to spend vast amounts of money on cybersecurity get hacked.... but our drone ships will be safe from hacking? Disable a computer and the whole ship becomes useless vs a ship with people that may be able to fix things?

a reply to: jaxnmarko

It's called plausible deniability, someone launches a Nuke and then blame's a hacker.

You know, there's a big philosophical angle to 'bot technology on the battlefield:

When everything is robotized, what does "war" mean?

Is it only about money then? Assets?

When 'blood', the most precious asset of all, is removed from the equation, "war" has no meaning. Machines doing the bidding for man.

Soon, man has no meaning. Skynet is real then.

Now, some may say ..."Good! We don't need war!"...but that's not how it works. Like it or not, as long as there is man there will always be war. Always has been, always will be. The animal kingdom is no different.

So, when war becomes breaking more of the other guy's stuff, costing him more money, it won't take him long to figure out a way to come up with a more destructive form of war which takes out the command and control, the decision making element, of war...people. He'll skip the formalities and go straight for the jugular.

What then? The soldier has been removed from the battlefield, and all that remains is your stuff and the other guy's stuff. Pretty soon the other guy is just going to take his stuff and go home.

**KA-BOOM!**

That once unique pretty blue orb, the only one like it, becomes a dark and dusty grey orb...and mankind is just a memory.

What if they get hacked into? Then what?

originally posted by: underwerks
What about having autonomous mini-subs that rise to the surface and launch explosive equipped guided drones?

How far are we from a time when the oceans are filled with A.I. controlled submersible drones that patrol the waters of a country?

If anyone needs any dystopian uses for technology, I come cheap. DARPA I’m looking at you.

Hmmm, not a bad idea, possible be able to rotate between loadouts for soft targets, like humans/other hostile life forms, something along the lines of fragmentation.

We could cut cost by downgrading the "drone" component of the munition, rather rely on something similar along the lines of LRLAP.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Just because robots are doing the killing doesn't mean robots are the only ones being killed. The means may change, but the overall goal is always the same: dominance.

The distributed lethality doctrine is a direct response to developing threats to concentrated assets such as the DF-21 "carrier killer" anti-ship ballistic missile, stealth drones and cruise missiles, hypersonic weapons and lowering thresholds for the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

The loss of even a single aircraft carrier, let alone an entire carrier strike group, would be devastating. Accomplishing that is a top priority objective for potential adversaries. They continue to improve their capabilities for doing so, and make no secret of it.

There need to be alternatives.