- Joined
- Nov 4, 2017
I am surprised that fully robotized tanks haven’t appeared in this conflict yet.
Especially with substandard captured USSR shit, why not rig up some servos and cameras to it, add some kind of autoloader and go on a remote control kildozer rampage. Even as a decoy.
tl;dr is that RC Tank, in field conditions, becomes a liability. Forget EM jammers, EMP, or CoD wrist computers, a near miss will often open circuitry with the shockwave. This less of an issue with humans who can right the system or offline it, more of an issue with the system is fully unmanned and now the internal nav system says that west is east.
You can try to do a cable control, but now there is a cable just asking to get cut.
tl;dr its mostly a training philosophy. Having a 4th person means you have a spare if someone gets injured, and gives you a place to put a junior solider learning to tank. That is, in an Abrams, the most junior guy - the one fresh from training - is the one putting shells into the gun. In a Russian tank, it isIt's funny how the US puts great emphasis on technology, operates an all-volunteer force, isn't afraid of using expensive electronics and complex systems - yet doesn't bother with an autoloader.
The other part is autoloader issues with ammo sealing. See: T-72's doing the Pringles.
And if you can't do business with white people, the Irish and Slavs are a close second and third.TL;DR it is much easier and better to do business with white people than with others.
Last edited: