Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[magnkarl]

On 24/07/2024 at 22:47, sidcow said:

This story was in a lot of newspapers yesterday

 

 

I hope they can deploy this to Lviv or West Ukraine for trials and develop it as they go, because this sort of thing is what Ukraine needs around its nuclear power grid, hospitals and civil infrastructure.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, magnkarl said:

This is interesting, isn't it. Drones in Ukraine use AI to get to their target if they get jammed. Where does this fall in within the rulebook?

Surely just 'arming' a laser system to shoot down drones would be the same as launching a missile from a plane which finds its target itself, akin to the joint strike or naval strike missiles who can get to their goals without external input?

Where's the boundary? It's a fascinating subject.

The boundary is that a human has to command release/firing of the weapon. On a NATO aircraft for example there are 3 interlocks - a MASS (Master Armament Safety Switch) which is set to Safe whilst on the ground. There’s a Late Arm switch, which is set to Arm, when in the process of commencing an engagement, and there’s the trigger, which will fire the weapon. [Special weapons ( Nukes) have one more interlock].
With unmanned systems these interlocks are operated from the Ground control station, or from the airborne or seaborne station. With missile air defence stations or DEWs, it’s still a human who presses the switch to arm and to fire. With suicide drones, FPV drones that drop grenades, there are fewer interlocks, potentially in Ukraine with home made ones, just a release button, but it’s still a human who presses the button after confirming what they see on the video feed is a legitimate target.

It’s perfectly possible to design and build and engineer systems to do the whole lot autonomously, but Western governments do not allow fully autonomous operation of weapons systems.

Again, perhaps nitpicking, but I’m not sure that “Drones in Ukraine use AI to get to their target if they get jammed” is how I’d describe it. What they have is 2 loops of software, plus sensor(s). The inner loop is the pilot, responsible for safely flying the vehicle. The outer loop is the Navigator, responsible for asking the “pilot” to fly to a position in space (LLH), which might be a waypoint, or might be a destination. Those loops run constantly. The “Navigator” will have present position data from sensors. Typically GNSS of one sort or another ( e.g. GPS), and if GPS is denied then more complex UASs will also have IN for example, which will drift in accuracy over time, but is still pretty good. LINS/GPS systems use clever software to resolve position from the two sensors. Even without sensors like that, the mark 1 eyeball can be used (via pilot camera).  There are other tools/ systems such as terrain maps (databases) and so on. It’s not really AI, that’s just a buzzword in this context.

[magnkarl]

21 minutes ago, blandy said:

The boundary is that a human has to command release/firing of the weapon. On a NATO aircraft for example there are 3 interlocks - a MASS (Master Armament Safety Switch) which is set to Safe whilst on the ground. There’s a Late Arm switch, which is set to Arm, when in the process of commencing an engagement, and there’s the trigger, which will fire the weapon. [Special weapons ( Nukes) have one more interlock].
With unmanned systems these interlocks are operated from the Ground control station, or from the airborne or seaborne station. With missile air defence stations or DEWs, it’s still a human who presses the switch to arm and to fire. With suicide drones, FPV drones that drop grenades, there are fewer interlocks, potentially in Ukraine with home made ones, just a release button, but it’s still a human who presses the button after confirming what they see on the video feed is a legitimate target.

It’s perfectly possible to design and build and engineer systems to do the whole lot autonomously, but Western governments do not allow fully autonomous operation of weapons systems.

Again, perhaps nitpicking, but I’m not sure that “Drones in Ukraine use AI to get to their target if they get jammed” is how I’d describe it. What they have is 2 loops of software, plus sensor(s). The inner loop is the pilot, responsible for safely flying the vehicle. The outer loop is the Navigator, responsible for asking the “pilot” to fly to a position in space (LLH), which might be a waypoint, or might be a destination. Those loops run constantly. The “Navigator” will have present position data from sensors. Typically GNSS of one sort or another ( e.g. GPS), and if GPS is denied then more complex UASs will also have IN for example, which will drift in accuracy over time, but is still pretty good. LINS/GPS systems use clever software to resolve position from the two sensors. Even without sensors like that, the mark 1 eyeball can be used (via pilot camera).  There are other tools/ systems such as terrain maps (databases) and so on. It’s not really AI, that’s just a buzzword in this context.

Then what about things like this, where the drone appears to be deciding on targets itself based off how armaments/people look? I mean, the video could be fake, but I've also read that the Switchblade and such variants do similar things. The same can be said about some missile types who will go after radar/acoustic signatures. Is that someone 'firing' or is it autonomous? I find it really hard to distinguish. Wouldn't everything after the point of being jammed be against the principle of knowing what you've targeted?

Edited July 29 by magnkarl

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Then what about things like this, where the drone appears to be deciding on targets itself based off how armaments look? I mean, the video could be fake, but I've also read that the Switchblade and such variants do similar things. The same can be said about some missile types who will give after radar signatures. Is that someone 'firing' or is it autonomous. I find it really hard to distinguish. Wouldn't everything after the point of being jammed be against the principle of knowing what you've targeted?

The single point to remember is that which I’ve already mentioned multiple times. So with a missile, whether it is radar or IR guided, it doesn’t follow that guidance until after it’s been launched at the target by a human. UAVs and their on onboard sensors and processors can and do identify targets, this is just as true for manned aircraft. But attacks on any targets require a human to authorise them, under the rules of engagement.

[Xann]

Watching these clips, assault rifles are crap vs drones, particularly if fired from a moving vehicle.

Reckon I'd want a weapon with some dispersal going forward?

Sod the grenade launcher underneath, a shotgun might improve your survival chances?

[chrisp65]

45 minutes ago, Xann said:

Watching these clips, assault rifles are crap vs drones, particularly if fired from a moving vehicle.

Reckon I'd want a weapon with some dispersal going forward?

Sod the grenade launcher underneath, a shotgun might improve your survival chances?

I thought this the other day, a crude weapon, a small version of the blunderbuss appears appropriate. Even potentially, one that tangles the propellers with string or net rather than one that sends shrapnel through a bomb.

[Panto_Villan]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Watching these clips, assault rifles are crap vs drones, particularly if fired from a moving vehicle.

Reckon I'd want a weapon with some dispersal going forward?

Sod the grenade launcher underneath, a shotgun might improve your survival chances?

Yeah, troops carrying shotguns to knock out the small FPV drones is becoming increasingly common. Bit like clay pidgeon shooting - except if you miss, you die.

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Watching these clips, assault rifles are crap vs drones, particularly if fired from a moving vehicle.

Reckon I'd want a weapon with some dispersal going forward?

Sod the grenade launcher underneath, a shotgun might improve your survival chances?

Underslung shotguns are a thing already, though used less than grenade launchers. Perhaps they'll get more common if the cheap drone threat grows. 

Or we might see a resurgence of actual shotguns used on the battlefield, which have to now largely been reduced to niche roles like blowing hinges off doors.

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

 

[NoelVilla]

33 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

 

Was just a matter of time. Thought it would take a bit longer but good news.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Watching these clips, assault rifles are crap vs drones, particularly if fired from a moving vehicle.

Reckon I'd want a weapon with some dispersal going forward?

Sod the grenade launcher underneath, a shotgun might improve your survival chances?

There’s loads of C-RAM stuff in service that’s ideal for the job. Radar guided Gatling gun type thingumies. I’m surprised Ukraine hasn’t got them.

[Chindie]

30 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

 

High windows are going to be following her like a bailiffs star employee.

[Panto_Villan]

Thing is, if 500,000 dead Russians doesn’t bother Putin then I doubt economic stagnation is going to bother him that much either.

Russias economy isn’t in great shape (inflation is at 9% even though interest rates are at nearly 20%) but there are countries in worse shape where people have held on much longer. Like the inflation numbers in Turkey are crazy, but they have been for years now.

It’s obviously good news nonetheless but it’s not going to ride to Ukraine’s rescue any time soon. It’s more likely to be a factor in how fast Russia can rearm once the war is done imo.

[bickster]

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

High windows are going to be following her like a bailiffs star employee.

She's tried to resign a number of times and Putin just doesn’t accept her resignation.

Now she seems to have resigned from life

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

Russia stepping up their hybrid warfare over the last week or so. Germany’s largest chemical plant exploded today,  French and German trains sabotaged in the last week, more hybrid warfare on Finland, apparently the French also intercepted mail containing the bubonic plague. NATO to deescalate 

[limpid]

9 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Russia stepping up their hybrid warfare over the last week or so. Germany’s largest chemical plant exploded today,  French and German trains sabotaged in the last week, more hybrid warfare on Finland, apparently the French also intercepted mail containing the bubonic plague. NATO to deescalate 

Any sources?

[Mandy Lifeboats]

27 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Russia stepping up their hybrid warfare over the last week or so......... the French also intercepted mail containing the bubonic plague. NATO to deescalate 

So Russia intended to spread plague in Paris.  That would be an attack on the athletes from almost every other country in the world.  I don’t think Russia is stupid enough to risk a world war where it's literally the world vs Russia. 

 

[bickster]

1 minute ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

So Russia intended to spread plague in Paris.  That would be an attack on the athletes from almost every other country in the world.  I don’t think Russia is stupid enough to risk a world war where it's literally the world vs Russia. 

 

It was sent to a government minister

[Mandy Lifeboats]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

It was sent to a government minister

If the attack was successful it risked spreading to others.  

[Genie]

2 hours ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Russia stepping up their hybrid warfare over the last week or so. Germany’s largest chemical plant exploded today,  French and German trains sabotaged in the last week, more hybrid warfare on Finland, apparently the French also intercepted mail containing the bubonic plague. NATO to deescalate 

We need to be careful not to upset Putin though in case he does something nasty…