Unmanned Systems Save Lives, But Only When They’re Told

March 22, 2010 - PRLog -- In an interview with DefenceIQ, Brigadier General Robert M. Dyess, Director of Requirements Integration at the US Army Capabilities Integration Centre (ARCIC), argues that unmanned systems have ‘saved many, many lives and casualties’ of US and allied troops. He adds that the development of military robotics is a high priority for the US Army in improving war fighting capabilities, but affirmed that they will never be fully self-determining.

Military robots have become increasingly important in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, growing significantly in number and innovation. In 2003 there were only a handful of military robots in Iraq but by the end of 2008 there were over 12,000. iRobot Corp, which manufactures the Packbot, a robot introduced in 2002 to detect improvised explosive devices (IEDs), has reported record sales in its fourth-quarter with revenue rising by 12% in January 2010. The United States is leading the revolution in automated military technology investing $230-billion dollars in its Future Combat Systems (FCS) programme.

Dyess explains that unmanned systems such as UAVs and Packbots are mainly used for ‘reconaissance, surveillance and counter-mines and counter-IEDs, and they find and identify and designate targets.’ Even though many of these devices are equipped with lethal capabilities, the vast majority of unmanned systems are used in non-combative situations.

The use of military robots has also of course been controversial. In 2003, US Patriot Missiles mistook two allied planes for Iraqi rockets and shot them down. In 2008, nine South African soldiers were killed when an automated anti-aircraft gun backfired. Even though humans can be held accountable when things go wrong, what happens when a machine is responsible for a problem? One of the major ethical caveats to unmanned systems is the fear that they will one day be entirely autonomous and will override the human decision-making process.

When asked whether the US army aims to develop unmanned systems that may have the autonomy and authority to execute deadly missions, Dyess responded with a resolute no.

‘The decision to kill or harm based on intelligence, analytics, evidence, collected by the system will still remain with the commander on the ground.’ He added: ‘I really don’t see us evolving in that direction.’

Dyess will be discussing the development of unmanned systems at Military Robotics 2010, a conference that intends to discuss the requirements and procurements of future robotics, the development of enhanced unmanned technologies and the ethical and legal implications of autonomous military systems. It will be held at Jolly St. Ermins, London on 25th-26th May.

Other early senior level confirmations for Military Robotics 2010 include:
Frank Schneider,NATO Chair of Applied Interoperability and Autonomy for Military Unmanned Systems;
Dr. Julia Richardson, Team Leader of Stellar, MOD Grand Challenge Winners;
Luke Perkins, Software Engineering Manager, QinetiQ;
Major Chris Durant, OC EDO Squadron of the Canadian Forces.

Visit www.miltaryrobotics.co.uk/ for further details.

# # #

IQPC leverages a global research base of best practices to produce an unrivaled portfolio of problem-solving conferences. Each year we offer approximately 2,000 worldwide conferences, seminars, and related learning programs.