Future wars to be fought by machines: DRDO Chief

JAISWAL

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
1,527
Likes
1,027
Source--http://idrw.org/?p=17982
+
+
+

.
.
DRDO chief Vijay Kumar Saraswat, who is also
the scientific advisor to the Union government's
ministry of defence, said future warfare would be
on a remote level, without contact and minus
conventional weapons. He underlined the need to
develop systems like high-power lasers and
'guided' energy weapons.
Dr Vijay Kumar Saraswat was conferred a
doctorate in Science by the KL University during
its second convocation in Vaddes-waram village
of Guntur district on Monday.
Speaking on the occasion he said, the defence
scientists had made great strides in the
development of Micro electro mechanical
systems-based censor technologies, smart
materials, Network Centric Warfare, Nano-
materials/nano composites, nano fuels and nano
censors.
Dr Saraswat said that another incredible
achievement of DRDO was the indigenously
developed light combat aircraft Tejas.
Describing the development of the first nuclear
submarine, INS Arihant, as an engineering
'marvel', he pointed out that with its launch, India
had joined the exclusive club of similar six
countries.
The DRDO scientists are now working for the
development of scramjet-propelled aircraft
required for hypersonic flight, which could reach
New York from Delhi in an hour.
He said "Demand for skilled engineers and
technologists will increase in the coming years in
the country, with science and technology more
actively pursued." He suggested that the country
introduce schemes which would ensure more
fluid collaborations between scientists,
technologists and industry, academic institutions
and research and development laboratories.
Addressing the university students and faculty,
he said the mission of the DRDO is to design and
develop state-of-the-art defence systems and technologies required for the country.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Air power at one time was said to be able to win a war alone. History shows we will always need infantrymen. Real people. There is no substitute for the guy in the foxhole with the enemy in his sights.
 

average american

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
1,540
Likes
440
They say airpower cant win a war, but that is not true,, USA defeated Japan with airpower, thought it took a couple of atomic bombs to do it. But because some was true in the past dont mean its going to be true in the future. With the advent of smart bombs, it may be able to win a war with air power alone.

It would be brutal but with smart bombs a county with air superiority could take out every bridge, every utility, ever dam, communication facility. ship barge, even trucks and buses at a certain point air power could win.
 

ice berg

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
2,145
Likes
292
They say airpower cant win a war, but that is not true,, USA defeated Japan with airpower, thought it took a couple of atomic bombs to do it. But because some was true in the past dont mean its going to be true in the future. With the advent of smart bombs, it may be able to win a war with air power alone.

It would be brutal but with smart bombs a county with air superiority could take out every bridge, every utility, ever dam, communication facility. ship barge, even trucks and buses at a certain point air power could win.
Do tell how you occupy a territory with smart bombs.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,280
Country flag
Air power and smart bombs are good against nations with limited air defenses.
but they don't automatically guarantee a win, vietnam and afghanistan are good
examples.
 

average american

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
1,540
Likes
440
Air power and smart bombs are good against nations with limited air defenses.
but they don't automatically guarantee a win, vietnam and afghanistan are good
examples.
We did not have smart bombs in vietnam, and we have not put smart bombs to use to the point of destroying Afganstan or Pakistan. How would life be in your country with out power, sewage or water plants, all bridges, dams destroyd, all communications facilites and no trucks allowed to move. no goverment buildings, ships, barges.with drones patrolling every road and overhead 24 hours a day.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,280
Country flag
They were guided bombs, more bombs were dropped in Vietnam than in ww2 and
it still did not defeat the communists.
 

average american

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
1,540
Likes
440
I will have to admit it did not, though there were not many smart bombs available dureing vietnam, bombing N Vietnam did force them to the table and the release of american prisioners.
 

Known_Unknown

Devil's Advocate
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
2,626
Likes
1,670
You dont occupy the terroritory, you give the people there the choice of living in the stone age or doing what ever they are told.
That's why those people say fvck it and develop nukes, because they know that even 1 or 2 nukes will scare Uncle Sam off. Case in point: North Korea.
 

GromHellscream

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
274
Likes
33
No smart bombs in Vietnam, but orange juice.

By the way, it's mainly the US navy who defeated the japanese.

The first rank US military force won't tolerate their contributions being stolen by the second rank US military force.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Air power at one time was said to be able to win a war alone. History shows we will always need infantrymen. Real people. There is no substitute for the guy in the foxhole with the enemy in his sights.
Well, you can't occupy ground without boots... but French air power has been the deciding factor in all three African interventions.
 

JBH22

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,479
Likes
17,799
Well, you can't occupy ground without boots... but French air power has been the deciding factor in all three African interventions.
Deciding Factor now you have to push your analysis a bit further.

Airpower useful against poor Libya, Ivory Coast that possess no airforce and derelict air defense system but can it be the lone winning factor in all out war?

Airpower is more like to complement the Infantry who will always remain the key factor on the battlefield. Let's take last war India fought the Mirage-2000 was used to attack key target which eased the task of Infantry but airstrikes itself could not have helped us win this war.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Deciding Factor now you have to push your analysis a bit further.

Airpower useful against poor Libya, Ivory Coast that possess no airforce and derelict air defense system but can it be the lone winning factor in all out war?

Airpower is more like to complement the Infantry who will always remain the key factor on the battlefield. Let's take last war India fought the Mirage-2000 was used to attack key target which eased the task of Infantry but airstrikes itself could not have helped us win this war.

Well, take Libya... we had worthless rebels that couldn't move one inch without an airstrike. You are just talking about bodies to hold ground there. Take Mali, the local Army here is utterly worthless in combat, we just need them to hold ground. Cote d'Ivoire was just about scaring Gbagbo to surrender, it was French bombs hitting his compound that did that job. We have three interventions that were decided by air power. Of course you need bodies, but it seems a superior Air Force can substitute a shitty Army.
 

JBH22

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,479
Likes
17,799
Well, take Libya... we had worthless rebels that couldn't move one inch without an airstrike. You are just talking about bodies to hold ground there. Take Mali, the local Army here is utterly worthless in combat, we just need them to hold ground. Cote d'Ivoire was just about scaring Gbagbo to surrender, it was French bombs hitting his compound that did that job. We have three interventions that were decided by air power. Of course you need bodies, but it seems a superior Air Force can substitute a shitty Army.
Seriously you are taking Mali and Libya as paradigm to follow?
Here even our smallest neighbour Bangladesh has Mig-29 in its airforce, airpower is a winning factor but not decisive factor for us we will still need infantry.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Seriously you are taking Mali and Libya as paradigm to follow?
Here even our smallest neighbour Bangladesh has Mig-29 in its airforce, airpower is a winning factor but not decisive factor for us we will still need infantry.
And that where a superior AF comes into play again. You first have to gain air superiority so you can bomb the crap out of them. Air power was a major factor in the Gulf War, but surveillance and weapons have come so far, it can define the battle field now.
 

Sam2012

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
743
Likes
205
Foot soldier wins the war even in mordern day warfare:thumb:
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top