Counter Robotic Warfare

7/31/2019 Counter Robotic Warfare

1/13

COUNTER ROBOTIC WARFARE

J. Crofthttp://freedomguide.wordpress.com

http://freedomguide.blogspot.com

American military and law enforcement have murdered women and children with poison

gas at Waco, shot nursing mothers with infants at Ruby Ridge, slammed elderly women onthe ground after Katrina just for having a revolver to protect herself from the gangs.

This same irresponsible, criminal government has raised a standing army of badge heavy

enforcers-tin badge gods who get their lifes purpose out of dominating and abusing us.They in the coming government provoked and stoked Second American Revolution will

use all the tools at their disposal to finish us off. Among the newest and most deadly are

the combat robot. Its important to understand just how dangerous these things can be,how a wicked government has the resources-our willingness to pay taxes and obey our

oppressors-to use machines controlled by immoral cowards to impose its will on us.

CURRENT GROUND THREATS

On the ground, robot killing machines, like the current generation remote controlledSWORDS-essentially armed bomb disposal remote controlled robots-present a threat

somewhat greater than an infantry patrol.

With the operators embedded with a infantry squad for protection, or with the newest

versions remote operated from a satellite feed from anywhere, a group of two or three

maneuverable remote operated machine guns with grenade launchers can cover each other

and advance.

The controllers, viewing their enemy through cameras and computer screens-conditioned

by a childhood spent blasting digital bad guys on video games-have no problem pressing

the fire button.
http://freedomguide.wordpress.com/http://freedomguide.blogspot.com/http://freedomguide.wordpress.com/http://freedomguide.blogspot.com/


2/13

Theyre not armored-theyre vulnerable to rifle fire(if youre accurate)and can be blinded,

their power train damaged, or their weapons disabled, although theyre rugged enough to

survive a moderate bomb blast. Im certain body armor plates will be retrofitted that canturn a .30 AP round, protect the battery/fuel cell or motor, or ammo can. Provided

materials are available improvised recoilless guns firing some kind of shell would certainlyknock one out.

They are remote controlled; so the control signal can be jammed and deactivate the deviceor it can be hacked and turned back on its former controllers as allegedly happened in Iraq

recently. This will require the services of some good hackers and the proper equipment to

hijack the control signal.

Theyre relatively slow so they can be maneuvered against-more importantly their

controllers signal can be triangulated with the proper equipment or surveillance used topinpoint them. Kill the controllers, stop the machines. Basic maneuver tactics canovercome anything but a full scale methodical offensive.

Newer models like the MAARS robot are going to be a tougher opponent:


3/13

These are miniature robot tanks, purposefully designed instead of adapted from a bombdisposal robot. The weapon, electronics and motor are protected in a light armor casing;

perhaps even .50 BMG armor piercing rounds might not be enough. The sensors can stillbe shot out but the robot has to sit still and expose its lenses and if it exposes its lensesit is aiming its armament at you. The tracks require explosives. Certainly, this model will

likely be controlled from a comfy air conditioned work station hundreds of miles away.

Youd need heavier anti-armor weapons, and lure this robot into enclosed spaces like urbanareas or densely packed forests, hilly terrain etc. Treat this design type and any other

tracked, turrented robots like smaller tanks. A HESH squash warhead would be a better

choice than a HEAT round, these robots arent looking to withstand 120mm tank cannon.

More worrisome are the legged robots:

This four legged robot is designed to be a latter-day mule; carry the soldiers gear intobattle, evacuate wounded soldiers, resupply, etc. It is run off a gas motor and looks goofy-

but look at the video.


4/13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww

It is eerie just how it can negotiate hilly, difficult terrain; it can be knocked about and

quickly recover. This is a threat? This model as is, no.

What if a bipedal guided robot is developed? What if an improved fuel cell can be

developed to make it run silent, extend operating time, the whole designed made rugged,carrying a thousand pounds of weaponry; thats a machine gun, automatic grenade launcher

and a large quantity of ammunition. We can be certain such developments will happen.

A bipedal design, something out of a science fiction movie could run, leap, crawl, bust

down doors and kill as long as the fuel cell can provide power. 300lb diabetic nerds sited

hundreds of miles away in their air conditioned workstations can control their assigned

machines like a video game, hunting Americans down trying to get their Freedom back.

You would have to lure the machines into traps-and the operators would gain experience

quickly about when and where a likely trap would be sprung.


5/13

These machines could run 20, 30, 40mph or more; leap 30 or more feet; climb effortlessly

up buildings and walls; smash through concrete walls and steel reinforced doors; be

immune to small arms fire and continuously run and gun. I could see two operators

running a machine-one drives, the other shoots with gyrostabilized machine guns,automatic grenade launchers, cannon, battlefield lasers. They could effortlessly engage

Americans scrambling desperately to what covers about or into tunnels, lobbing

homemade anti-tank weapons hoping they calculated the right amount of lead before firing,

hoping they werent rushed.

Such machines would like tank warfare be best employed en masse; twenty, fifty or ahundred robots assaulting a stronghold. A defense in depth would be required; traps,

difficult and very crowded terrain to divide and ambush individual robots, tunnels to avoid

being tracked, lots of small anti-armor weapons. An acceptance of heavy casualties.


6/13

Traps would have to be deep enough, wide enough into the ground to trap these kinds of

robots until they can be destroyed in place-before they climb or hop out. Traps could also

be made of buildings, with explosives in the ground or in the walls to collapse the buildingatop it. Booby traps could also be, ironically, crude robots with a motion sensor rigged to

track those robots and a improvised anti-armor weapon, emplaced in an corridor.

Quicksand would work better than pits at trapping these robots.

When and where possible, these high performance robots must be lured into crowded,

difficult terrain to maximize the difficulties they and their operators must face. Denseforests come to mind, as stated before, especially in hilly or mountainous terrain. If they

have to climb, descend, are unable to hop, have to maneuver between trees then they lose

much of their mobility and speed. Dense urban areas with lots of buildings offers literally

a million opportunities to entrap and ambush these machines.

You must have tunnels and hidden paths to move between fighting positions or enemy

sensors will quickly pick you out. Whether in the dense forests or in the cities tunnels are

essential for field counter-robotic operations to avoid the highly accurate heavy firepowerthe enemy will wield. Being caught out in the open is a death sentence.

Anti-armor weapons suitable for man sized robots can be made smaller than models used

on main battle tanks and other armored fighting vehicles. They must be cheap to make,

accurate, easily operated, not disclose their firing position for other enemy weapons to lockon. Basically a miniaturized Armbrust-a German anti-armor missile that uses a

counterweight that expands like a umbrella once it leaves the tube that balances out the

projectile being fired. This also eliminates backblast thatwould otherwise kill the operator and any companions in a enclosed setting.


7/13

This kind of warfare will produce heavy casualties no matter the precautions taken on thebattlefield. Having to face advanced capability robots, or even the current generation

SWORDS and Predator remote controlled drones, defeating them on the battlefield is no

recipe for victory as the same operators gain more experience, the designers gain valuableexperience and come up with upgrades and new models. A guerilla army just looking to

combat enemy forces equipped with robot weaponry is asking to be ground up. To defeat

such advanced combat robots will require more than sound tactics, a larger strategy isneeded. More on that later

AIRBORNE COMBAT ROBOTS

The first generation Predator drones first fielded in Afghanistan and Iraq are slow, highflying craft controlled from a comfortable station hundreds or thousands of miles away.

They carry two Hellfire anti-tank missiles; laser guided, fire and forget the targets lased by

a onboard designator or a soldier with a laser. Once fired, the missile guides itself. These

small arms fire will not bring down as they fly way too high for small arms fire, present atroublesomely small heat signature to thwart a IR guided missile, and is also designed to be

difficult to spot by radar.


8/13

Getting at the remote operator is problematic-hes at a well protected base out of reach.

The control signal is a encrypted, spread spectrum-hacking and jamming the signal is very

difficult. So the only options are decoys and shooting it down. Decoying the drone meansspoofing the operator, command authorities and any troops the drone is supporting, and

would involve the use of dummies, tunnels and other escape routes not already covered by

the enemy. Shooting it down would take either a high performance piston driven aircraft,which can be found and armed with machine guns, or anti-aircraft weapons. The .50 BMG

is almost certainly out as it lacks the range to effectively hit. So heavier caliber automatic

cannon, which are much bigger than any .50 BMG weapon and nearly impossible forAmericans to procure, or some kind of constructed surface to air missile-or their own

drones but that would require resources and manufacturing capacities of a nation to field.

How to guide it if its got a low infrared and radar signature?

Sound.

Currently, all powered aerial threats use some form of piston or jet engine. They have one

shared characteristic that is impossible to hide-they are loud. Below is a conceptualdrawing for a cheap sound guided surface to air missile:

This is a conceptual schematic, not a hard design but Im fairly certain once the software

issues are hammered out the rest of the concept will sort itself out. The actual missile

should be designed as large as possible to transport to be able to engage larger/higherflying targets.

Some upcoming aerial threats ironically will fly low and slow enough to be engaged withby gunfire, and any opportunity that can be taken to take out a machine gun equipped drone

that isnt being used to reveal your position-take it. The drone pictured above is mainly for

recon in urban areas, its a ducted fan with sensors and a fuel tank bolted onto it. Latter


9/13

versions of this type will undoubtedly have a light machine gun turrent and if engaged will

automatically draw the fire of a much higher flying drone with missiles and bombs.

The US Army is currently fielding glorified remote controlled airplanes equipped with light

cameras for squad and platoon level recon. If one of these is buzzing around then contact

is iminent, but fortunately the machine itself isnt the threat, its the information it transmitsabout your position that is lethal. Perhaps if the thing flies close enough a shotgun blast or

well aimed rifle rounds can break it up, but that should be done after contact is initiated,

but by then perhaps the operator has gathered enough information about your position tocall in reinforcements to cover your escape routes. Act very quickly before youre trapped!

Another counter would be acquiring aircraft, outfitting them with machine guns and

shooting down the drones. Gyrocopters; a helicopter with a propeller in the back forforward thrust can land in a few hundred feet, can incorporate a gunner for taking on the

lower, slower flying drones. For the Predators, a World War Two fighter plane could shoot

one down provided its position known.

Eventually, some sort of counter airborne drone system will have to be developed-it would

have to be autonomous because the enemy is guaranteed to be able to hack any remotecontrolled drone Patriots could eventually field. Inspiration for this weapon system comes

from the World War Two Me 163 Komet rocket interceptor; liquid fuel rocket, with wings,

pilot and a pair of 30mm cannon it was a point defense fighter. It took off, rocketed tocombat altitude in a few minutes-so fast its climb rate was only matched by the F-15

fighter in the 70s. Its weakness was that it burnt through the propellant in ten minutes

allowing only a couple passes through the massed bomber formations. The concept is

sound but it needs updated, but first some prerequisite conditions need to be met.


10/13

Building robot weapons requires holding territory and being able to shield the production

facilities and guarding transportation to and from resource sources and combat formations,but by the time Americans can build such drones a good part of the country would have

been liberated anyway. Then our robo-Komet can be built to begin challenging the enemy

for control of the skies.

This will require manufacturing facilities, access to raw materials and adapting current

commonly available electronics into new configurations that allow on-board fullyautomated decision making. A beowulfis several processors or computers cross-linkedinto a neural net. This overcomes the linear, serial limitations of processor design by

linking each processor with all others in the network, like neurons are in the brain. This

would allow older, slower, more commonly available processors to be used-this does nothowever overcome the programming that would be needed but motion detection, target

discrimination and flight monitoring programs are already out and can be adapted. The

good news on that is aerial combat is in many ways simpler than ground combat as far as

targeting and engaging.

A fully automated drone may be necessary anyway as working electronic componentscould be too scarce to throw away on surface to air missiles. Potential problems will be

detection of stealth craft but a visual and sound based sensor suite and a simple program to

engage any intact craft within computed combat range would be a workable solution.

The drone would have to be fast-jet engines but turbine blades require titanium or ceramics

precision engineered, which requires a huge manufacturing base. A ramjet would work,

being basically a tube with a fuel sprayer and ignitor, but a ramjet cannot work below200mph or so. So a rocket booster has to be strapped to the drone that can be ejected; this

can also be used to extend flight time and range.

The aircraft design should allow both low speed maneuverability and high speed at both

low and high altitudes. It should be made of commonly available, light materials allowing

mass production and expendability if shotdown. Basic stealth characteristics such as lowmetal content, recessed engines, minimized sharp edges should be incorporated. The

design should be as small as possible while allowing good short range performance and an

adequate payload.

As for armament, a single .50 machine gun with a combat load of ammunition would work.

Theyre common and Raufoss rounds incorporate a small explosive charge that can shred

aircraft materials. Since this is purely an anti-aircraft design(and a true autonomous robotas opposed to a remote-operated robot) the overall craft can be made much smaller than its

projected opponents. Larger craft like strategic bombers will need a automatic cannon.

THE FUTURE-THE TERMINATORS REALLY ARE COMING


11/13

Robotic warfare is sustainable only by advanced industrial economies. As described

earlier, the fully autonomous heavily armed hunter-killer machines depicted in the

Terminator series of motion pictures will in the coming decade start to become terrifyinglyreal battlefield threats. Coupled with next generation weapons like the Active Denial

System, battlefield lasers and integrated in a literal Skynet-like communications and

surveillance network an army allowed to equip and field unmerciful killing machinescapable of sustained high speed, maneuverability and endurance will have a decisive

advantage.

Also touched on, it is not enough to counter the machines. You must counter the enemys

ability to design, produce, field and control them. You have to politically, economically

and militarily defeat the government fielding them.

Some principles of a counter-robotic army strategy:

Denial of innovation

The enemys scientists and engineers are flesh and blood just like us. They have desires,

fears, hopes-just like us. Many will see what they have wrought as they too are enslavedby the beast; their challenge will be to summon the courage to SACRIFICE their

comfortable lifestyle and risk death to fight for Freedom. Many however will just want

their weekend barbecues and ball games. They must be eliminated, but they will be amongthe most heavily defended personnel, deep in the cities and military bases. So the cities

must have pre-existing intelligence networks with operatives ready to turn or kill them.

Denial of production

Robot weapons systems will be made in factories; these require huge amounts of electrical

power, constant supply of parts and raw materials, and highly trained workers andmanagement to run things. Blow their electrical grid; cut the wires, shoot out the

transformers, sabotage the power plants, cut off the fuel pipelines. Avoid taking on nuclear

power plants, they will be heavily guarded-always go for the weak links. Hijack theirsupply trucks. Blow the trains off their tracks, blow the bridges.

Infiltrate the facilities themselves and sabotage the machinery, or turn workers to do the

same, or get the design specs so that the machine can be studied for its weak points. If thepeople working at the assembly plants wont turn they must be considered as enemy

soldiers.

Eventually territory will have to be gained and held, and the cities isolated from each other

through incessant sabotage and expanding political, economic, and social initiatives as

Americans take their nation back. Taking the rural areas and cutting off the cities will denyfar flung factories the resources and parts needed to build the robots and other war

materials and resupply of lost units. This is not as fanciful as it sounds if Americans dont

follow the Germans, Russians, Chinese and British fully into slavery and accept it.


12/13

Denial of the ability to field the robots

The robots still have to be transported to their bases; sabotage the rail and road networksout of the production facility. Explosives will work well enough and are much cheaper to

make than the robot killing machines. The enemy will adapt but they cannot protect every

square mile of American infrastructure even with their robots. The robots can be stolen iftransported by truck by hijacking, or if escorted by convoy by ambush and then destroyed

or turned on the traitors who have ruined this country.

Denial of the ability to control them

As detailed earlier, battlefield robots currently are controlled from nearby by operators

embedded in combat formations so they must be flanked and engaged. Remote operatedaerial drones however are controlled hundreds or thousands of miles away so the origin of

the signal must be found. Forget about doing something to the satellites, hit the ground

stations if the forces are available-otherwise use assassins and hunt down the controllers

and command staff.

Denying the enemy the ability to design, produce, ship out and employ the cominggeneration of battlefield robots is the best option Free Americans have. Engaging the

coming fully automated killing machines will be problematic to guerilla fighters equipped

with light weapons. As stated, you have to think of these things as reusable, maneuveringmines, as potentially infantry sized armor, as reusable missiles. The above denial strategy

is but part of the only long term viable option for Americans; the rest involves retaking

local communities in rural areas, and spreading the Second American Revolution in the

countryside and smaller cities until continuously held territory can be taken. Only then willa industrial economy be able to be constructed and weapons systems produced to counter

the threat.

What is the best counter?

To politically stop them-now. We need to start taking back our government; the nationaland much of the state governments have been systematically hardened politically, but the

local governments are still vulnerable. We the People need a political machine anyway and

those have to be built up from the ground up.

The ball has to start getting rolled. Start with one town and get all the Patriots in range to

concentrate their efforts; stage a emergency recall election. Select a town that is obviously

corrupt and the People ready for change. Run a full slate of candidates to sweep the townclean.

Once you win the election, make your town an example of what living in Freedom is like-because Americans only think theyre free, they dont know what true Freedom is. You

make that town an example, the buzz will develop and your people will go to surrounding

towns and counties. The Second American Revolution will grow exponentially like a virus


13/13

as people find out there is a way to fight back. Eventually whole states will be regained

and influence on the federal government will be possible.

Will this strategy be entirely successful? Probably not, but getting politically active while

we still have a representative government we can peacefully take back rather than

unaccountable totalitarianism, we can gain territory we can produce what we need tosurvive. And win.

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	leechster
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

Counter Robotic Warfare

Documents