How Javelin-Armed Robots Could Render The Tank Obsolete

Military Tech

Pity the poor tank. As if armored fighting vehicles didn't have enough problems, from missiles and rockets to IEDs lurking in the dirt.


Now they are going to be hunted by anti-tank robots.

A prototype variant of the Titan unmanned ground vehicle, or UGV, mounts a Javelin anti-tank missile as well as a .50-caliber machine gun.

Estonian firm Milrem Robotics makes the Titan—a sort of jack-of-all-trades mechanical mule. It's a 1.6-ton, 8-foot-long tracked robot that stands four feet tall, travels at twelve miles per hour, and can haul about a ton of cargo. The Titan can be fitted with various modules for tasks such as IED clearance, casualty evacuation, and hauling cargo. The U.S. Army is now evaluating it to haul the equipment of an infantry squad.

Meanwhile, Norwegian defense firm Kongsberg makes the Protector remote weapons station, typically mounted on vehicles to enable the crew to fire external weapons, such as turret-mounted machine guns, while remaining inside the protection of the vehicle. The U.S. military already uses about 15,000 of Kongsberg's Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS) systems on vehicles such as the Humvee and Stryker.

So why not put a remote-controlled weapon mount on a remote-controlled robot? Hunting tanks isn't the safest of pastimes, so let a robot do it while the human operator stays safely out of the line of fire.

Milrem and Kongsberg recently conducted a live-fire demonstration near Kongsberg's Norwegian headquarters. “Further testing and demonstrations, including Javelin firing, are planned for the near future,” according to a Milrem press release.

“The UGV has previously passed live fire tests with FN Herstal’s deFNder Medium RWS, ST Kinetics ADDER, and ASELSAN’s SARP,” Milrem said. “An anti-tank system with MBDA’s IMPACT (Integrated MMP Precision Attack Combat Turret) system is also in development.”

Milrem emphasizes that the robot weapons will always have a human in the loop to authorize fire. “Equipping unmanned and robotic platforms with weapon systems enhances the safety of warfighters and keeps them from harm’s way,” said Milrem CEO Kuldar Väärsi in a company announcement. “These systems will always have a human operator controlling the weapon thus eliminating the concern about ‘killer robots.’”

2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division M1 Abrams fires during Live Fire Accuracy Screening Test (LFAST) prior to live-fire gunneryU.S. Army/ Maj. Carson Petry

But Väärsi’s assurance isn't likely to soothe those who fear that armed robots are a Pandora's box that will bite their makers, especially as advanced AI enables machines to function more and more autonomously. Israel and South Korea already have armed robots patrolling their borders, while Russia has tested its Uran-9—a mini-tank armed with a 30-millimeter cannon—in Syria. Even the United States is getting into the armed robot game as it develops kits that can transform a normal vehicle into an autonomous one. The U.S. Army already has an armed M113 armored personnel carrier as a remote-controlled test vehicle.

That the Milrem/Kongsberg tank-hunter has a missile launcher instead of a small cannon, like earlier robots, is just a matter of degree. What is interesting is the potential for swarms of small robot vehicles, armed with anti-tank weapons, to overwhelm a smaller number of manned tanks. There are still many hurdles before this becomes reality, such as situational awareness of the human operators, or what happens if the datalink between robot and operator goes down or is jammed (unless anti-tank robots become autonomous, which raises its own issues).

But in robot tank versus human-controlled tank, the laws of economics are on the side of the robots.

This article originally appeared on The National Interest

Read more from The National Interest

WATCH NEXT:

The San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ship USS Arlington. (U.S. Navy/Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Chris Roys)

The Navy is investigating reports that a female Marine discovered a hidden camera in one of the women's restrooms aboard the USS Arlington, an amphibious transport dock that's currently on at port in Greece, NBC News originally reported.

Read More Show Less
The sun sets behind a C-17 Globemaster III at Joint Base Balad, Iraq, as Soldiers wait in line to board Nov. 17, 2008. (Air Force/Tech Sgt. Erik Gudmundson)

Today, an American service member died in a "non-combat incident" in Ninawa Province, Iraq according to a statement by Operation Inherent Resolve, the U.S.-led coalition fighting the Islamic State.

Read More Show Less

First came the explosion. Then, the cover-up.

"I held one [sailor] in my hands as he passed. He died in my arms."

news
USS Iowa on April 19, 1989. (Wikipedia Commons)

It's been 30 years since an explosion inside the number two gun turret on the USS Iowa killed 47 American sailors, but for Mike Carr, it still feels like yesterday.

"I knew all 47 guys inside that turret because as part of the ship's policy we had rotated between all three turrets," Carr, who served as a gunner's mate in the Iowa's aft 16-inch turret, told Task & Purpose. "We all knew each other rather intimately."

On April 19, 1989, the day of the blast, the ship was preparing for live-fire training at Vieques, Puerto Rico Naval Training Range.

Carr was wearing headphones that allowed him to hear what the crews in the other turrets were saying.

"At 10 minutes to 10 a.m., somebody came over the phones and said, 'We're having a problem, Turret 2, center gun,'" Carr recalled. "Then approximately two minutes later, I recognized Senior Chief [Reginald] Ziegler, who was the chief in charge of Turret 2, yell into the phones: 'Fire, fire, fire! Fire in center gun, turret 2. Trying to contain it.'"

Then came the blast, which was so strong that it ripped the headphones right off Carr's head.

Read More Show Less

Barracks to business: Hiring veterans has never been easier

Organizations offer training, certifications, networking to connect veterans, businesses

career
Jason Sutton

As a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and a newly minted second lieutenant, I felt well-prepared to tackle the challenges facing a junior field artillery officer in the U.S. Army. When the time came to leave the Army, however, I was much less prepared to make the transition into the yet-unknown civilian sector.

One of the primary issues facing veterans after we transition is that we lack the same sense of purpose and mission that we had with our military careers. Today, more than ever, our service members volunteer to put themselves in harm's way. They are defending our freedom across the globe and should be recognized as our country's true heroes. It's critical that employers educate veterans and provide viable options so we can make informed decisions about the rest of our lives.

Read More Show Less
Maj. Gen. David Furness

The two-star general in charge of the roughly 15,000-strong 2nd Marine Division has turned micromanagement into an art form with a new policy letter ordering his Marines and sailors to cut their hair, shave their faces, and adhere to a daily schedule that he has prescribed.

In his "Policy Letter 5-19," Maj. Gen. David Furness lamented that he has noticed "a significant decline in the basic discipline" of troops he's come in contact with in the division area, which has led him to "FIX IT immediately," instead of relying on the thousands of commissioned and non-commissioned officers below him to carry out his orders.

Read More Show Less