The degree of intellectual rigor being applied to unmanned
systems is nearly non-existent.
For example, here’s an article about the first exercise
involving a Turkish ULAQ 11 m unmanned surface craft. The article lists claimed benefits of
unmanned and joint manned-unmanned assets (they refer to the combined
manned-unmanned operations as MUM-T, for some unfathomable reason). Along with the claims, I’ve added the most
cursory of intellectual and analytical rigor, in red, to examine the
claim.
Here’s the exact quotes and claims
Increased Operational Efficiency: MUM-T allows for
the simultaneous operation of manned and unmanned vessels, enabling a more
comprehensive and efficient coverage of a given area. Autonomous or remotely
operated USVs can handle routine or monotonous tasks, freeing up human
operators to focus on more complex decision-making.
There is no evidence that teaming an
unmanned boat and a manned asset allows for more comprehensive and efficient
coverage of a given area. In fact, most
unmanned assets are small and decidedly underpowered compared to equivalent
manned assets and, therefore, have reduced sensor coverage compared to purely
manned assets. Further, human operators
are not freed up for more complex decision making; they’re merely transferred from one tedious
job to another: in this case, from direct sensor observations and
interpretation to indirect sensor observations and interpretation … same
exact job, just using second hand data instead of direct observations.
Further, most unmanned sensors,
being mounted on smaller unmanned platforms, have a significantly smaller field
of view compared to a similar manned platform and are, therefore, less
efficient in their coverage than purely manned platforms.
Risk Reduction: MUM-T can be used to mitigate risks
associated with certain tasks. Unmanned vessels can be deployed for missions in
hazardous or high-threat environments, minimizing the exposure of human
operators to potential dangers.
This is partially true on a limited
basis, depending on what capabilities the unmanned asset has. Typically, the unmanned asset is far less
capable than the equivalent manned asset and the manned asset must still be put
at risk.
A closely related consideration is
that if the risky task requires any degree of sophisticated capability, the
unmanned platform will be correspondingly expensive and while the unmanned
asset reduces (note: does not eliminate)
the human risk, the monetary risk is equal to, or greater than, the manned
asset.
Extended Endurance and Range: Unmanned surface
vessels can be designed for longer endurance and extended range. This is
particularly beneficial for tasks such as persistent surveillance,
reconnaissance, or data collection in remote or challenging environments.
Manned assets can equally be
designed for longer endurance and extended range. There is nothing inherently superior about
unmanned asset range and endurance.
Further, longer endurance and extended range comes with a concomitant
decrease in capabilities. For example,
an aircraft, manned or unmanned, can achieve longer range/endurance by reducing
the weight of the payload. Of course,
reduced payload equates to reduced capabilities.
Flexibility and Scalability: MUM-T provides a
flexible and scalable approach to maritime operations. Depending on the mission
requirements, the combination of manned and unmanned assets can be adjusted to
achieve optimal results.
This is ridiculous buzzword bingo. Manned systems are equally flexible and
scalable and can be adjusted to achieve optimal results. Unmanned assets have absolutely no inherent
benefits in this regard.
Sensor Fusion and Information Sharing: MUM-T
facilitates the integration of various sensors and data sources from both
manned and unmanned platforms. This enables enhanced situational awareness and
information sharing, leading to better-informed decision-making.
As the quote correctly notes, ‘integration’
of sensors and data is not an inherent characteristic of unmanned assets and
applies equally to manned assets.
Unmanned assets offer no ‘enhanced situational awareness’.
Coordinated Missions: Manned and unmanned vessels can
operate in a coordinated manner to execute complex missions. This collaboration
allows for a synergistic approach, combining the strengths of human intuition
and adaptability with the precision and endurance of unmanned systems.
More marketing bilgewater. Manned assets can, and do, ‘operate in a
coordinated manner to execute complex missions’. Again, there is zero inherent superiority in coordinating
unmanned assets and, indeed, some significant drawbacks in that manned assets
can act independently and with intelligence as situations change whereas
unmanned assets cannot.
Training and Skill Development: MUM-T scenarios
provide opportunities for training human operators in controlling and
interacting with unmanned systems. This helps in developing the necessary
skills for seamless collaboration between manned and unmanned assets.
This is the ultimate in self-licking
ice cream cone logic. Of course operating
unmanned assets develops skill in operating unmanned assets. So what?
Operating elephants develops skill in operating elephants but that doesn’t
help warfighting and neither do unmanned assets.
Conclusion
This article was a marketing blurb, pure and simple. Its only value was in clearly illustrating the
lack of analytical rigor being applied to unmanned systems. The West has made the leap directly from concept
to implementation of unmanned systems without bothering to stop at the analysis
step.
The article reads like a Turkish arm sales marketing brochure and should be an embarrassment to the Naval News website.
_________________________
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/12/ulaq-combat-usv-proves-efficiency-on-the-field/
