![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.fie.undef.edu.ar\/ceptm\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/02\/QVMZ2H6EOFELVNTY7NC3VJJJCE.jpg\")
<\/p>\nLa aparici\u00f3n de sistemas aut\u00f3nomos acompa\u00f1ando a las menores fracciones en operaciones, comienza a ser una realidad. Los escenarios de guerra urbana requieren de sofisticados sistemas con capacidad de asistir al soldado en diversas acciones, pero r\u00fasticos y confiables como para soportar las rigurosas condiciones del combate. Un verdadero desaf\u00edo para los desarrolladores de estos proyectos en curso.<\/p>\n
Hunkered down behind a thick stone wall, the squad leader hears the rumble of tank treads ahead as a robot breacher plows through city street obstacles followed by its control vehicle a few blocks behind.<\/p>\n
The staff sergeant signals squad mates to launch a handheld drone that peeks around dangerous corners, scouting enemy fire positions.<\/p>\n
A larger overhead drone, run by the battalion, uses thermal sites to scan the building ahead of them floor-by-floor and spot threats.<\/p>\n
One soldier pulls a throwbot from the robotic pack mule that carries most of the team\u2019s gear, ammo, water and batteries and runs around the corner to chuck it through an open window as the squad leader toggles between drone views on a ruggedized tablet.<\/p>\n
Another team has tossed a ground robot equipped with chemical sensors and its own thermal cameras down a manhole into the intricate city sewer system. That bot is scouring the dark for potential fighters that could pop out at any moment, or worse, explosive-packed tunnels set to blow when one of the units or enough vehicles pass to trigger detonation.<\/p>\n
Through a network of robotic eyes and other sensors, a team of nine soldiers have identified three enemy positions and call for support from their loitering positions \u2014 unmanned air support, quietly tucked between skyscrapers \u2014 before they press on with their assault.<\/p>\n
There will be no mad, blind rushes across city streets or unseen shooters popping out of windows or doorways for this squad.<\/p>\n
No surprises today.<\/p>\n
This robot-heavy urban warfare scenario is what the Army aims to build through a host of manned-unmanned teaming projects that look to allow even the squad-level soldier to get a wraparound vision from nearly any vantage point.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s a vision that\u2019s been a long time coming as the concept of having \u201crobotic wingmen\u201d for ground vehicles or \u201crobot battle buddies\u201d taking on the most dangerous tasks for infantry soldiers is becoming a reality as technology catches up with science fiction.<\/p>\n
But while that scene multiplies combat capabilities, it also means that soldiers will rely more than ever on technology, even at the most primitive levels of fighting \u2013 small unit, close combat \u2013 making those same soldiers all the more vulnerable should systems fail.<\/p>\n
Robots, robots, everywhere<\/b><\/p>\n
The Army is finding ways to inject robots in ways both large and small, from deploying pocket-sized drones to Afghanistan, to building unmanned options into its Next Generation Ground Combat vehicle program.<\/p>\n
While all of the services have benefited from unmanned aerial drones for decades, putting ground robots into the formation presents a host of new hurdles, according to retired Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Spoehr, director of the Center for National Defense at The Heritage Center.<\/p>\n
\u201cOn the ground it\u2019s much harder because of the challenges of maintaining communication,\u201d Spoehr said.<\/p>\n
The terrain itself, especially off-road or in rubble-strewn urban landscapes, is more challenging.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Explosive Ordnance Disposal has been a key mission for small unmanned ground robots during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Poto by Sgt. Anthony L. Ortiz\/U.S. Marine Corps)<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen was the last time you saw a robotic car going down the road? Well, I haven\u2019t,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd that\u2019s a road with painted markings on it and traffic signals.\u201d<\/p>\n
Despite these challenges, the Army has made progress in getting systems out of the lab and into the field in recent years.<\/p>\n
One year ago, the Army announced the large-scale purchase of a pocket-sized helicopter drone made by FLIR Systems. The \u201cBlack Hornet\u201d serves as a short range personal reconnaissance system that can shoot both still images and record video.<\/p>\n
The small device gives users both control and GPS-guided autopilot. It was first deployed on a test basis with troops to Afghanistan in 2016. Newer versions all for flight times of 25 minutes or longer and better camera and video capabilities.<\/p>\n
The Army is focusing on a host of other robotic and artificial intelligence-focused efforts through various challenges to make the infantry platoon 10 times more effective in operations.<\/p>\n
In 2018, leaders established the Robotics Center of Innovation at Fort Benning, Georgia. They\u2019ve partnered with universities, such as the Georgia Institute of Technology to go after specific challenges like giving small units a man-portable ground robot for sensing and reconnaissance.<\/p>\n
The center has also experimented in recent years with throwable robots to use in buildings, aerial drones that can detect enemy aerial drones and a Small Multipurpose Equipment Transport robotic mule to run up to 60 miles, carrying all the supplies a squad needs for a 72-hour mission and soldier-controlled drone swarms.<\/p>\n
The Army also ran \u201crobotic wingman\u201d tests with a major event last year at Yakima Training Center, Washington.<\/p>\n
Soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment of the 1st Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division Stryker Brigade Combat Team ran the test.<\/p>\n
In it, they were required to navigate an obstacle that included layers of landmines, wire and a deep trench. Soldiers used a Humvee and an M113 armored personnel carrier to provide suppressing machine gun fire, all controlled from a Bradley in a line-of-sight position.<\/p>\n
The Next Generation Combat Vehicle program also includes plans for building in ways to remotely control vehicles from it, making a single, manned vehicle capable of fighting in its own ground formation.<\/p>\n
But not all efforts have succeeded.<\/p>\n
The program to replace the Bradley, the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, was recently cancelled after disqualification left only one contender in the competition. Congress then made drastic cuts to the vehicle\u2019s budget.<\/p>\n
The OMFV has been seen as critical to Army ground combat efforts. But top leaders have asked a lot of the project, wanting to have a rapidly ready, power-saving, remotely-controlled, all-weather, all-terrain shooter that also provides survivable protection for a crew of six soldiers.<\/p>\n
All roads lead to urban warfare<\/b><\/p>\n
To date, most of the systems that have been tested in the operating environments of past wars \u2013 open terrain woodlands or desert settings.<\/p>\n
That won\u2019t pass the test of future fighting, said retired Army Maj. John Spencer, chair of urban warfare studies for the Modern War Institute at West Point.<\/p>\n
The career infantry enlisted and officer said the urban environment will be the most challenging soldiers will face and, given rising population centers and instability, where soldiers are most likely to fight.<\/p>\n
\u201cNone of the Army investment is urban specific,\u201d Spencer said. \u201cWe\u2019re talking about signals, the ability to go over an environment, presence of noncombatants, all of these.\u201d<\/p>\n
Certain tech can go after very specific problems, Spencer noted, like using drones to look around corners, explore dangerous tunnel or subway systems and see through walls. One of the greatest issues Spencer believes soldiers face is knowing what\u2019s going on around them. What he believes to be most frustrating is that soldiers don\u2019t even know what capabilities they may have available at a given time, whether it\u2019s air support, equipment or supplies.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.fie.undef.edu.ar\/ceptm\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/02\/BVBAODMAD5AB5P224VKYEBSJZA.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
The Army and Marine Corps are testing four different robot vehicles recently selected for the year-long evaluation. By 2025 the Army sees the squad-level units using such robots to take the load off of the squad during the close fight. (U.S. Army image)<\/p>\n
\u201cThe biggest challenge I had was information,\u201d Spencer said of his time combat deployment in Baghdad, Iraq. \u201cWho were the right people? Who were the big power players, where\u2019s the crane I need right now? I need GoogleWar.\u201d<\/p>\n
An AI-supported system that could give tactical-level units a quick, accurate picture of the information they need, when they need it, would be invaluable, he said.<\/p>\n
Shaping the future<\/b><\/p>\n
How robots will join the ranks of soldiers will change how commanders at all levels conduct operations. But some who\u2019ve watched these developments closely caution that focusing on specific challenges, rather than a grand overhaul of the force is the way to go.<\/p>\n
Director of the Technology and National Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, former Army Ranger and author of, \u201cArmy of None: Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War,\u201d Paul Scharre told Army Times that, as systems get more sophisticated, more soldier tasks can be handed off.<\/p>\n
But not too soon.<\/p>\n
\u201cReally this is going to be an evolutionary process over time. As systems evolve over time, they will get into more roles,\u201d Scharre said.<\/p>\n
There have been basic forms of AI in some Army systems for decades, such as target identification in aircraft or air defense equipment such as the Patriot missile.<\/p>\n
Spoehr sees the new robot tools as a natural fit for a new generation of soldier that\u2019s grown up with having tech always at their fingertips.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think this generation is very comfortable getting information through screens and filters,\u201d Spoehr said. \u201cIn my generation, we always wanted to fight with the tank hatch open.\u201d<\/p>\n
But new technology means controlling one vehicle from inside another vehicle, using at least three different video feeds.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey\u2019re used to having a third eye going,\u201d Spoehr said. \u201cThey\u2019re very comfortable bringing up a window and seeing what\u2019s going on.\u201d<\/p>\n
The key for these systems is to give them tasks that take the load off of the soldier rather than adding more work to their jobs.<\/p>\n
Early long-range drone systems didn\u2019t operate themselves, instead requiring crews to fly, monitor, refuel and maintain.<\/p>\n
The Marine Corps is experimenting with a 15-Marine squad, up two positions from its traditional 13-Marine model. Those new positions include an assistant squad leader and a squad systems operator. The systems operator is tasked with running a squad-level drone and other devices for the squad.<\/p>\n
The Legged Squad Support System, a BigDog relative, was tested by the Marine Corps in 2014. Legged robot iteration and innovation has progressed since then. (Sarah Dietz \/ Marine Corps)<\/p>\n
That\u2019s where Scharre has concerns, because some of the new systems cannot run without a dedicated human operator.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s one thing to have one person to work one robot to defuse a bomb or throw up a drone,\u201d Scharre said of singular tasks. But in a more rapid, complex battle, the role of the robots should be to give information and take over routine tasks so that soldiers and commanders can focus on making decisions.<\/p>\n
The former Ranger said the Army needs a version of the 1940s \u201cLouisiana Maneuvers\u201d to test out how robots and AI would best work in warfighting as they move forward.<\/p>\n
The historic maneuvers, along with other large-scale exercises, helped the Army move from infantry focus to a more mechanized force to meet the challenge of the Axis powers in Europe during World War II.<\/p>\n
Too much reliance<\/b><\/p>\n
But for all of the advantages that robots and artificial intelligence can add to the soldier\u2019s toolkit, experts agree that over-reliance on these yet unproven systems can be dangerous.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat happens when your [robot] battle buddy fritzs out? You have a liability, not an asset,\u201d Spencer said.<\/p>\n
And all of the robotics systems are reliant on a variety of networks. If those fail, so too might the crucial systems and support that\u2019s being designed.<\/p>\n
The Army, as a result, aspires to build a \u201cself-healing network,\u201d Spoehr said. Such a network would be resilient or rapidly repairable in the case of interference, jamming, attack or GPS denial.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey\u2019re going to have to have that to bring about robots in a big way,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Scharre said that designers and Army leaders have to ensure that the systems are first controlled at the tactical level, otherwise they\u2019re too vulnerable.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou want situations in manned-unmanned teaming where the local wingman is controlled by a relatively local asset,\u201d Scharre said. \u201cCommunications networks are short range. It\u2019s an Abrams [tank] controlling a ground robot, and the tank is nearby.\u201d<\/p>\n
Scharre described a situation during his service when, in a firefight in a near-ambush, the radio operator couldn\u2019t reach higher headquarters for fire support. The radio was dead.<\/p>\n
It wasn\u2019t a bullet hole or dead battery that took it out. The cable had kinked up on a new wrist-mounted display intended to make a soldier\u2019s job easier when running the system.<\/p>\n
What was meant to add convenience also added vulnerability.<\/p>\n