
Could you imagine the recruiting possibilities of this photo? Bet the Ukrainians aren't short of officers for the next 20 years...
Gerad, you made my dayGerard wrote:Not Your Father's Ukrainian Army
![]()
Could you imagine the recruiting possibilities of this photo? Bet the Ukrainians aren't short of officers for the next 20 years...
GerardGerard wrote:Not Your Father's Ukrainian Army
![]()
Could you imagine the recruiting possibilities of this photo? Bet the Ukrainians aren't short of officers for the next 20 years...
But if you really want to hear it from 'Jack' himself, click right --> here"There is nothing on this earth sexier, believe me gentlemen, than a woman that you have to salute in the morning."
A fight between Ugandan and Libyan presidential guards sparked chaos during a ceremony attended by the heads of state from 11 African nations on Wednesday.
Minutes after Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi and his host, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, jointly unveiled a plaque to mark the event, the Libyan guards pushed away the guards of other delegations at the mosque's entrance.
The Ugandan guards -- who had traded hostilities with the predominantly-Arab Libyan guards at every joint event since Gadhafi's arrival in the country Sunday -- reacted with fury and fought back.
Museveni briefly lost his balance when a hefty Libyan guard pushed him to a wall. Another Libyan guard pushed Rwandan President Paul Kagame, who also lost his balance but was caught by his own guards.
The vice president of Tanzania was knocked over by fighting guards as he was taking his shoes off to enter the mosque.
Guards to the rest of the visiting presidents and prime ministers kept their respective leaders out of the fray, with some drawing their guns as the dignitaries looked on in disbelief. Some leaders -- notably those from Somalia, Burundi and Djibouti -- were visibly uneasy as guns were drawn on all sides.
By the time the fight was over more than six minutes later, about a dozen presidential guards were left bleeding from compound fractures and the Libyan and Ugandan protocol officials traded bitter accusations of disrespect and racism.
India with its vast knowledge and good pool of scientists can no doubt make significant contributions towards robotics. Wish the Army would pay may attention towards robots for guard duties.What is the difference between a child with a toy gun and a man on his knees who is armed to the teeth? To an armed robot, there's no difference whatsoever, according to one robotics expert. It would shoot on sight and without discrimination. Similarly, it would not distinguish between a pregnant woman and a suicide bomber.
These are two possible scenarios suggested by Noel Sharkey, a professor of artificial intelligence and robotics at Britain's Sheffield University, who warned that automated weapons, or armed robots, pose a new threat to humanity.
Professor Sharkey said battlefield robots that could autonomously decide when to kill would be in action within 10 years. Armed robots are already used in Israel and South Korea for border control. Deployed in the demilitarised zone since last year, South Korean robots are not fully mobile, but they can swivel, "see" for 3km and are fully armed.
China recently unveiled an armed robot for use at the Olympic Games. The reconnaissance and bomb-defusing robot can also attack targets, according to People's Daily.
Many nations are involved in developing technology for robot weapons, led by the US and Britain with more than 4,000 unmanned remote-controlled or fully automated vehicles deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most are used for surveillance and some robots are useful in clearing explosive devices. But Professor Sharkey said they were also easy to arm.
"My complaint is not that they're using robots but that the robots are armed to the teeth," he said. "The idea of a robot making decisions about human termination terrifies me. There is no possible way a robot can discriminate between combatants and civilians."
Amid the trend, a number of concerned scientists and specialists in artificial intelligence are calling for a code of ethics to be drawn up for the use of robots in combat.
Ronald Arkin, of the Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, has funding from the US army to design a robotic soldier with an "artificial conscience".
Professor Sharkey said such an artificial conscience was unlikely to be in place before fully autonomous armed robots were deployed in battle.
Meanwhile, experts fear robots could mount potentially devastating attacks from a safe distance, which could then be denied because the perpetrator may not always be identified. And some envisage atrocities committed by robots.
"What if in some years' time a robot marches in to a crowded market and blows it up. Who did that? An unmanned suicide bomber?" said Rear Admiral Chris Parry of the Royal Navy, a strategic analyst. "Someone has to be responsible."
Professor Sharkey said: "A robot cannot be tried for war crimes, and what would be the punishment? Switch it off? Is that a punishment?"
The use of robots also could expand a conflict because they are cheaper than large armies and do not have to be supplied with food. With robots, the military "use a lot more bombs and bomb a lot more targets than they used to and this has resulted in a lot more civilian casualties relative to combatant casualties", said Peter Asaro, a philosopher and ethicist at Rutgers University in the US.
David Whetham, of Kings College London's department of defence studies, said: "Robots might tempt the use of force at an earlier opportunity. What might be a last resort might become a first response. It is much more palatable because the risk to your own personnel is much reduced."
Professor Sharkey said: "Robots are extremely useful because you have a risk-free war, fewer people on the front line and no body bags."
Already the US wants one-third of military ground vehicles to be unmanned by 2015. Robots do not get tired and can carry out surveillance missions for 14 hours at a time. They are never emotional, angry or demoralised.
"Robots are faster at finding targets and they are more accurate," said Professor Sharkey. "An autonomous plane can make a decision in nanoseconds, a person takes milliseconds."
Yet for all their increasing programming sophistication, warrior robots cannot always interpret what they see. Even changes in weather conditions or lighting can confuse them. Most military robots are tested in desert conditions where there are few obstacles and little chance of confusion.
"They are not intelligent in any sense. They blindly apply the rules. But conflict is not always a predictable environment," said Professor Sharkey. "At best, artificial intelligence gives robots contingencies to deal with unforeseen circumstances. But the number of such circumstances that could occur simultaneously in military encounters is vast and could cause chaotic robot behaviour with deadly consequences. Killer robots are coming soon."
Professor Sharkey said that even "humanitarian" uses of robots might not remain solely humanitarian for long. The Bear (Battlefield Extraction Assist Robot), with its forklift-style arms, retrieves wounded soldiers from the war zone. It is 1.83 metres tall, with a teddy bear's head to comfort soldiers who might otherwise fear the rather grotesque robot. "The US has been extracting soldiers with Bear, but last November they sent in four armed ones as well," said Professor Sharkey. "We sleep-walk into a robotic arms race very gradually by using robots at all. I can envisage very soon there will be a swarm of armed robots that can communicate easily."
The European Union is funding research on small robots which can exhibit swarming behaviour. The Symbrion (Symbiotic Evolutionary Robot Organisms) programme is developing robots that can co-operate and communicate to achieve different tasks without human supervision.
Although not intended for military use, scientists admit they have little control over their wider use.
DSO National Laboratories in Singapore is also reportedly working on robots that can co-operate on the battlefield as a swarm.
The world has taken its first steps towards an international robot arms race, said Professor Sharkey. "With robot prices falling and robot technology becoming easier, robot armies are becoming a possibility even for poorer countries," he said. "The countries involved include China - it wants to be seen to be strong against the US and is a developing superpower. And it could sell robots to North Korea.
"The Chinese certainly have all the skill; they have very strong infrastructure, ability and know-how."
Other nations involved in robot technology include Russia, Israel, South Africa and India. Singapore has already pushed up the stakes by looking at the use of armed robots in urban environments. Singapore's Defence Science and Technology Agency announced last year they would pay a S$1 million (HK$5.6 million) reward to anyone who could design a robot that can "operate autonomously in urban warfare conditions".
It should be able to open and close doors, move in and out of buildings and, most importantly, "search and destroy targets like a human soldier". Shortlisted robots, some built in collaboration with partners from countries such as China, India and Malaysia, will be tested this May.
Few contestants appear worried about the moral implications of the challenge. But other experts are sounding the alarm.
"Use in an urban environment would be horrific," said Dr Malcolm Cook, senior lecturer in military-human factors at the University of Abertay in Scotland. "People find it difficult enough to differentiate who is who; I can't imagine letting loose an autonomous machine in an urban context."
London-based defence analyst Paul Beaver said: "A huge market for automated weapons is developing, with over 100 countries interested in acquiring them. Ethics almost does not figure in the conscience of either the government departments or military."
The growing trade will mean that proliferation becomes an issue. South American drugs barons are known to have used unmanned underwater vehicles to carry drugs into US territory. "Criminals and terrorists are not going to abide by the rules. When it comes to criminals and terrorists we are out of the ethical arena. It is a Wild West situation," said Rear Admiral Parry.
Rather than indulging in wishful thinking that governments would abide by a code of ethics, Rear Admiral Parry said all robots should be tagged using radio frequency identification. "Ethical arguments rarely survive first contact with warfare," he said.
But public pressure could hold governments back, at least in the west. The British military has made a conscious decision not to fully automate but to have someone operating the robot, in part due to public perception but also because of the risks of mistakes.
Public pressure may well help control robot wars, as it did with landmines where a public campaign led to the treaty banning them in 1997. "We are certainly concerned with the possible development of weapons that are targeted and activated by sensors and not people," said Richard Moyes, policy director for the campaign group Landmine Action.
"It is not an immediate problem in the same way as landmines are, but it could be for the future. People have a sense of anxiety about killer robots."
U.S. investigators are looking into accusations that a company hired by the U.S. military supplied corroded and decades-old Chinese ammunition to the Afghan Army and police.
All the A-50s currently in Russian inventory will be upgraded with AESA antenna and new equipments and is likely to be completed by 2015.05 February 2008
A-50 RADAR PATROL AND GUIDANCE AIRCRAFT PREPARING FOR NEXT EXERCISES
/RF Defense Ministry/
A large-scale exercise conducted by AF and Navy A-50 radar patrol and guidance aircraft involved more than 10 aircraft flights during which pilots were performing missions as assigned. A specific feature of the involvement of A-50s in the exercises was that the flights were performed in the North altitudes, under the conditions of terrain without landmarks, in the adverse weather conditions. The participation in the similar exercises helps a good deal to improve a level of combat skills. Our aircraft are always involved in the similar measures and this is a serious practice for our crews, said colonel Igor Plokhikh, commander of the A-50 aircraft base.
Analysis: US military examines pitfalls of relying on commercial aircraftA derivative of the Aim-120 AMRAAM missile, the Pentagon’s established long-range air-to-air missile, is once again being tailored for a new mission – this time the interception of Scud-type short and medium-range ballistic missiles.
they have old info. indeed the payment was transferred and the next two Su-30MKAs already came to Algeria apropos.shetty wrote:From Russia, With Love
Yep....Igorr wrote:they have old info. indeed the payment was transferred and the next two Su-30MKAs already came to Algeria apropos.shetty wrote:From Russia, With Love
Russia agreed to return them back. They will enter service in RuAF.shetty wrote:Yep....Igorr wrote:they have old info. indeed the payment was transferred and the next two Su-30MKAs already came to Algeria apropos.
Russia continues deliveries of Su-30 fighters to Algeria
Question: This talks about the Su-30, what happended about the Mig-29, any update on that? Sounds like they terminated the Mig-29 order.
Citation:shetty wrote:Algeria spat shows challenge to Russian arms sales
In a totally different world, probably an equally appealing photo.........Gerard wrote:Not Your Father's Ukrainian Army
![]()
Could you imagine the recruiting possibilities of this photo? Bet the Ukrainians aren't short of officers for the next 20 years...