Short History Of R&d In Military Technology
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Short History Of R&d In Military Technology as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,429
- Pages: 68
Military technology comes from club to attack/defense robots by Research and Development (R&D) Dr. György Seres DSc. 2003
What’s different between animal and human being?
What’s different between animal and human being? Only human being uses military technology.
Military technology comes from club to attack/defense robots by Research and Development (R&D)
I show selections from history of Military R&D for illustration
Selections from history of Military R&D Attack tools
Versions of clubs Version 1.0
Version 2.0 Beta version
Version 3.0
Version 4.0
Swords and sabres
Individual distance shooting
Artillery
Bombs
Selections from history of Military R&D Defensive tools and vehicles
Defensive tools
Vehicles
Unmanned land, undersea and air combat vehicles
Selections from history of Military R&D Systems
Air Defense System
Strategic Defense Initiative ( SDI or Star Wars)
Selections from history of Military R&D Future
By US Army “”The nature of modern warfare demands that we fight as a joint team. … Joint Vision 2010 provides an operationally based template for the evolution of the Armed Forces for a challenging and uncertain future. ….” John M. Shalikashvili Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Digital
battlefield
„Air For ce The Air Force University conducted 20 25 ” a study to identify the concepts,
By US Air Force
capabilities, and technologies the United States will require remaining the dominant air and space force in the first quarter of the 21st century.
The study was called Air Force 2025.
Worldwide C4I system
Virtual theatre of war
By NMD Team The primary mission of National Missile Defense is defense of the United States (all 50 states) against a threat of a limited strategic ballistic missile attack from a rogue nation. Although intended to protect the United States only, the proposed NMD system will not work without the use of radars in Europe or in territories controlled by European countries.
National Missiles Defense system ( NMD )
Only two type of weapons were developed, against which wasn’t effective defense!
First conclusion
Only two type of weapons were developed, against which wasn’t effective defense! Nuclear weapon
Club
&
Defensive tool against club was frightful mask only
The SDI was planned as defensive tool against nuclear weapon It hasn’t been realized, but as a result the USSR collapsed
Universal model of military systems
I developed a model for study of Military R&D, like an old model creator
Universal model of military systems Environment Attack, defense
Military system
Purpose
Alliance, national armed forces, branches, etc.
Enemy
Technology Survival
Command, neighbours, logistics, etc.
Friendly
Human
Geographical, meteorological, daytime, etc.
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
Purpose of military systems must be determined by friendly environment Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
… ordestroying, threat, Victory, deterrent, extortion, occupation, defense, etc.
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
But purpose can be determinated also by neutral environment Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Surviving a desert or sea storm, etc.
Capabilities
And purpose can be determinate also by enemy environment Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
Human
Retreat, etc.
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
R&D mission: to reach all the purposes of military systems
Second conclusion
R&D mission: to reach all the purposes of military systems Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
… ordestroying, threat, Victory, deterrent, extortion, occupation, defense, etc.
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Surviving a desert or sea storm, etc.
Capabilities
Retreat, etc.
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat
Third conclusion
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat by increasing radius of attack tools Environment
Military system
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Technology
Survival Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat by increasing effectiveness of defense tools Environment
Military system
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Survival Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat by automation Environment
Military system
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Survival
Computer Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
The ultimate goal of R&D: to make military systems capable to reach its purpose without human participation
Fourth conclusion
The ultimate goal of R&D: to make military systems capable to reach its purpose without human participation Environment
Military Militarysystem robot
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Survival
Human Friendly
Computer Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
Role of technology in armed combat: contact two adverse systems
Fifth conclusion
Role of technology in armed combat: contact two adverse systems Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
If somebody remembers On the first ROBOTWARFARE conference in 2001 I presented a model like this
ARMED COMBAT SYSTEM Rt
Vt ATTACKER C
B
Z
I Iv
R
v
DEFENDER
Ik Io
Vv
Zv Zo OBJECT
On the first ROBOTWARFARE conference in 2001 I presented a model like this Vo
ARMED COMBAT SYSTEM Rt
Vt ATTACKER C
B
Z
I Iv
R
v
DEFENDER
Ik Io
Vv
Zv Zo OBJECT
ARMED COMBAT AS A SYSTEM
Vo
The basic ideas of my Armed Combat model are the followings: •
The Attacker against the Object and it’s Defender are related in combat as close as two subsystems of a big-system. • Resources of the combat-activity (Rt or Rv) are the inputs, and the losses (Vt or Vv and Vo) are the outputs. • The relationship between the components are: – reconnaissance (I or C) – and strikes (Z or B). • Consequently, the two subsystems form an independent big-system, which is the Armed Combat System itself as such. This model includes all specifics of a cybernetic system, and that’s why we are able to analyze Combat with adequate and rich cybernetic tools.
Reviewing the past: I put some questions for myself in 2003 • When two armed forces did really engage using comparable military technology? – 1975, in Vietnam War!
• Which two antagonistic superpowers had comparable military technology, and when? – USA and USSR in 1991!
Fifth conclusion That’s why I try: how does my new model work if technology level of two systems isn’t comparable?
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Kamikaze type Enemy
Organization Survival Human
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology
Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Yugoslavia type Enemy
Organization Survival Human
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology
Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Guerilla type Enemy
Organization Survival Human
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology
Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
How can we compare different input and output parameters of the Armed Combat System?
If somebody remembers On the second ROBOTWARFARE conference in 2002 I formulated a question:
My answer was:
… and the proposed value-model of the Armed Combat System was ARMED COMBAT SYSTEM K(Rt)
K(Vt)
ATTACKER K(C+B)
K(I+Z) K(Vv)
K(Rv)
DEFENDER
Where: •K(Rt), K(Rv) – material and moral value of resources •K(Vt), K(Vv) – material and moral value of losses •K(I+Z), K(C+B) – material and moral value used for getting information or for strikes resources
Reviewing the past: I put a question for myself in 2003 What does the phrase „MATERIAL AND MORAL VALUE” mean for terrorist organizations?
Reviewing the past: I put a questions for myself in 2003 What does the phrase „MATERIAL AND MORAL VALUE” mean for terrorist organizations?
Sixth conclusion That’s why I try: how does my new model work, if military system is a terrorist organization?
Role of technology in terrorist systems Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Survival Human
Strikes
Result
A special case of state terrorism is the coup, when military system has its own goal Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Survival Human
Strikes
Result
This model of military systems is universal, because it is suitable for study :
Ultimate conclusion
This model of military systems is universal, because it is suitable for study : • any level of military systems • coherence among human, technology and organization subsystems • influence of different purposes for military systems • armed combat, if technology level of sides isn’t comparable • role of technology in terrorist military system
Dr. György Seres [email protected] http://www.jata.org/drseres/
What’s different between animal and human being?
What’s different between animal and human being? Only human being uses military technology.
Military technology comes from club to attack/defense robots by Research and Development (R&D)
I show selections from history of Military R&D for illustration
Selections from history of Military R&D Attack tools
Versions of clubs Version 1.0
Version 2.0 Beta version
Version 3.0
Version 4.0
Swords and sabres
Individual distance shooting
Artillery
Bombs
Selections from history of Military R&D Defensive tools and vehicles
Defensive tools
Vehicles
Unmanned land, undersea and air combat vehicles
Selections from history of Military R&D Systems
Air Defense System
Strategic Defense Initiative ( SDI or Star Wars)
Selections from history of Military R&D Future
By US Army “”The nature of modern warfare demands that we fight as a joint team. … Joint Vision 2010 provides an operationally based template for the evolution of the Armed Forces for a challenging and uncertain future. ….” John M. Shalikashvili Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Digital
battlefield
„Air For ce The Air Force University conducted 20 25 ” a study to identify the concepts,
By US Air Force
capabilities, and technologies the United States will require remaining the dominant air and space force in the first quarter of the 21st century.
The study was called Air Force 2025.
Worldwide C4I system
Virtual theatre of war
By NMD Team The primary mission of National Missile Defense is defense of the United States (all 50 states) against a threat of a limited strategic ballistic missile attack from a rogue nation. Although intended to protect the United States only, the proposed NMD system will not work without the use of radars in Europe or in territories controlled by European countries.
National Missiles Defense system ( NMD )
Only two type of weapons were developed, against which wasn’t effective defense!
First conclusion
Only two type of weapons were developed, against which wasn’t effective defense! Nuclear weapon
Club
&
Defensive tool against club was frightful mask only
The SDI was planned as defensive tool against nuclear weapon It hasn’t been realized, but as a result the USSR collapsed
Universal model of military systems
I developed a model for study of Military R&D, like an old model creator
Universal model of military systems Environment Attack, defense
Military system
Purpose
Alliance, national armed forces, branches, etc.
Enemy
Technology Survival
Command, neighbours, logistics, etc.
Friendly
Human
Geographical, meteorological, daytime, etc.
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
Purpose of military systems must be determined by friendly environment Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
… ordestroying, threat, Victory, deterrent, extortion, occupation, defense, etc.
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
But purpose can be determinated also by neutral environment Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Surviving a desert or sea storm, etc.
Capabilities
And purpose can be determinate also by enemy environment Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
Human
Retreat, etc.
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
R&D mission: to reach all the purposes of military systems
Second conclusion
R&D mission: to reach all the purposes of military systems Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
… ordestroying, threat, Victory, deterrent, extortion, occupation, defense, etc.
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Surviving a desert or sea storm, etc.
Capabilities
Retreat, etc.
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat
Third conclusion
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat Environment
Military system
Enemy
Purpose
Technology Survival
Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat by increasing radius of attack tools Environment
Military system
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Technology
Survival Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat by increasing effectiveness of defense tools Environment
Military system
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Survival Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
One of main goals of R&D: to decrease danger for human in combat by automation Environment
Military system
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Survival
Computer Friendly
Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
The ultimate goal of R&D: to make military systems capable to reach its purpose without human participation
Fourth conclusion
The ultimate goal of R&D: to make military systems capable to reach its purpose without human participation Environment
Military Militarysystem robot
Purpose
Technology
Enemy
Survival
Human Friendly
Computer Human
Result Organization
Neutral
Requirements, conditions
Capabilities
Role of technology in armed combat: contact two adverse systems
Fifth conclusion
Role of technology in armed combat: contact two adverse systems Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
If somebody remembers On the first ROBOTWARFARE conference in 2001 I presented a model like this
ARMED COMBAT SYSTEM Rt
Vt ATTACKER C
B
Z
I Iv
R
v
DEFENDER
Ik Io
Vv
Zv Zo OBJECT
On the first ROBOTWARFARE conference in 2001 I presented a model like this Vo
ARMED COMBAT SYSTEM Rt
Vt ATTACKER C
B
Z
I Iv
R
v
DEFENDER
Ik Io
Vv
Zv Zo OBJECT
ARMED COMBAT AS A SYSTEM
Vo
The basic ideas of my Armed Combat model are the followings: •
The Attacker against the Object and it’s Defender are related in combat as close as two subsystems of a big-system. • Resources of the combat-activity (Rt or Rv) are the inputs, and the losses (Vt or Vv and Vo) are the outputs. • The relationship between the components are: – reconnaissance (I or C) – and strikes (Z or B). • Consequently, the two subsystems form an independent big-system, which is the Armed Combat System itself as such. This model includes all specifics of a cybernetic system, and that’s why we are able to analyze Combat with adequate and rich cybernetic tools.
Reviewing the past: I put some questions for myself in 2003 • When two armed forces did really engage using comparable military technology? – 1975, in Vietnam War!
• Which two antagonistic superpowers had comparable military technology, and when? – USA and USSR in 1991!
Fifth conclusion That’s why I try: how does my new model work if technology level of two systems isn’t comparable?
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Kamikaze type Enemy
Organization Survival Human
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology
Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Yugoslavia type Enemy
Organization Survival Human
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology
Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
Armed combat, if technology level isn’t comparable Guerilla type Enemy
Organization Survival Human
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Result
Technology
Survival Human
Strikes Organization
Result
How can we compare different input and output parameters of the Armed Combat System?
If somebody remembers On the second ROBOTWARFARE conference in 2002 I formulated a question:
My answer was:
… and the proposed value-model of the Armed Combat System was ARMED COMBAT SYSTEM K(Rt)
K(Vt)
ATTACKER K(C+B)
K(I+Z) K(Vv)
K(Rv)
DEFENDER
Where: •K(Rt), K(Rv) – material and moral value of resources •K(Vt), K(Vv) – material and moral value of losses •K(I+Z), K(C+B) – material and moral value used for getting information or for strikes resources
Reviewing the past: I put a question for myself in 2003 What does the phrase „MATERIAL AND MORAL VALUE” mean for terrorist organizations?
Reviewing the past: I put a questions for myself in 2003 What does the phrase „MATERIAL AND MORAL VALUE” mean for terrorist organizations?
Sixth conclusion That’s why I try: how does my new model work, if military system is a terrorist organization?
Role of technology in terrorist systems Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Survival Human
Strikes
Result
A special case of state terrorism is the coup, when military system has its own goal Organization Survival Human Enemy
Technology
Reconnaissance
Friendly
Neutral
Survival Human
Strikes
Result
This model of military systems is universal, because it is suitable for study :
Ultimate conclusion
This model of military systems is universal, because it is suitable for study : • any level of military systems • coherence among human, technology and organization subsystems • influence of different purposes for military systems • armed combat, if technology level of sides isn’t comparable • role of technology in terrorist military system
Dr. György Seres [email protected] http://www.jata.org/drseres/
Related Documents
Short History Of R&d In Military Technology
May 2020 1
Military History
December 2019 31
Short History Of Tanzania
April 2020 20
History Of Technology
April 2020 5
History Of Educational Technology
October 2019 26
Vulcan: Journal Of The Social History Of Military Technology
November 2019 13More Documents from "Peter Konieczny"
Quandary Scribd
June 2020 1
Short History Of R&d In Military Technology
May 2020 1