Re: Future of Tanks
- From: Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:41:52 +0000 (UTC)
Dan Holdsworth wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 23:46:26 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Swallow
<am.swallow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> was popularly supposed to have said:
You can send your remote controlled vehicle ahead of your men and manned vehicles.
If you're going to do that, you need something cheap, that survives being shot fairly well and that when someone takes a pot at it, starts dodging like mad and possibly shooting back with something aggravating but not all that lethal; fine shotgun shot, say, or paintballs full of skunk essence.
That way any fool who decides to have a go at the infernal machines of the infidel soldiers gets to waste ammo, look a complete twerp in front of his colleagues, and possibly even gets dead for his trouble, or at the very least gives away his position.
Give the robot a second camera, that looks sideways and backwards, by replaying the recoding you may be able to spot where the sniper firing at the troops is hiding.
Andrew Swallow .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Future of Tanks
- From: Colin Campbell
- Re: Future of Tanks
- References:
- Re: Future of Tanks
- From: Andrew Swallow
- Re: Future of Tanks
- From: Paul J. Adam
- Re: Future of Tanks
- From: Andrew Swallow
- Re: Future of Tanks
- From: Andrew Swallow
- Re: Future of Tanks
- Prev by Date: Re: XM109 + G11 = ???
- Next by Date: Re: Future of Tanks
- Previous by thread: Re: Future of Tanks
- Next by thread: Re: Future of Tanks
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|