“That is probably the case for any kind of UGV – they will be used in roles we don’t even envision or place a priority on today. And those roles will just continue to grow. I would say it is likely, in the logistics world, we will see some kind of vehicle being used, at least experimentally, within a resupply convoy – either a fully or partially unmanned convoy – potentially before we leave Afghanistan. There is nothing the Corps specifically has budgeted to buy in that time frame, but there are commercial vendors who have developed some technologies that likely could show up in Afghanistan before all our forces pull out.”

 

Terminator – NO; R2D2 or C3PO – Probably

Before 9/11, few Marines likely would have thought the Corps would become one of the major military users of small robots – in the air and on the ground – in less than a decade. Where the relationship between Marines and combat robots goes in the future is equally difficult to predict – other than to say the Corps, funding issues aside, is likely to be a leader in the innovative use of autonomous and semi-autonomous platforms.

As to weaponization, from UCAVs to some future version of Gladiator, not being in the current roadmap is not the same as not being a potential part of the future MAGTF. As McConnell noted, “as soon as you say no about something being developed, it will be.”

Give Marines in the field an autonomous Humvee to deliver supplies and odds are it soon will be equipped with a remotely controlled weapon. Demonstrate not every vehicle in a convoy needs a human driver on board and soon there will be completely unmanned convoys on the road, accompanied by other robots seeking out and destroying IEDs along their routes.

“Today, some type of tracked vehicle is most likely just because that is the easiest type system to build and operate and is the most reliable. But the science and technology world is looking at other things, such as BigDog, which is pretty impressive. They’ve done a heck of a job with that, but it is not a mature technology,” McConnell said, in references applying equally to the future of UAVs.

“If someone asks me what I want a robot to do, I really can’t answer that. But if they look at what Marines are doing and come up with a robot to do that, that is how our problems will be solved – having people who not only understand the technology but also what the users are really doing and need. If an unmanned system shows up and proves useful – or certainly essential – then that’s where we will start to invest.”

“Technology development will not stop. Sitting in an office today, you may wonder when or if we will ever buy something like that, but as long as we let the science and technology communities continue to move forward, there will [come] a point where that technology becomes useful.”

For all forms of combat robotics, two major obstacles currently outweigh all others, even funding: Communications bandwidth and power. Of those, power is the most elusive.

“Power is the key to everything. It seems like it has always been the case that the next power source is just around the corner – but we still aren’t there. Having a power-generating source that is small, lightweight, cheap to buy, cheap to use is an elusive technology a lot of people are focusing on, but we’re only making small steps to getting there,” McConnell acknowledged, noting bandwidth is a close second.

“Anytime you start working in the longer-range VHF spectrum, having to generate power to talk to a robot out even a kilometer or two, you will start interfering with somebody else’s communications. Also, in a recent conversation about such robots, the question is do those signals have to be encrypted. In general, the thinking now is for these very short-range, specifically tasked robots, we don’t have to do encryption. But if the mission and communications range start expanding, then securing those comms, in the same way we have to secure UAS comms, will become necessary.”

Solving both is not likely to come about anytime soon, Beach added, but bandwidth may benefit from developing an all-inclusive battlespace network.

“MCWL is studying enhanced company operations, in which you have large, geo-dispersed small units that rely upon some type of comms relay system in order to bridge those distances and facilitate command and control. So, in the future, I see the necessity for an aerial network, whether unmanned aircraft or tethered aerostats or something on a manned aircraft that allows the ability to create a network that would allow you to bridge many communications gaps, including digital information,” he said, adding that would be part of a move to multi-mission platforms, especially unmanned systems.

“The days of specialized mission platforms are fast coming to an end. Because of the expense of the platforms and budget realities, we try to ensure they are capable of doing as many tasks as possible.”

Just how robotic systems fit into the future of the Marine Corps is dependent on further advances in three different, but key, industry segments, McConnell added: Computing power – small and fast – mechanical engineering to create a system that can perform increasingly delicate maneuvers, and power to operate everything.

“Today, unmanned ground robots are just one small part of this division’s portfolio. But looking across that portfolio at how it has worked out in the past decade, when you find a role a specific type of robot can fill, it prioritized pretty well. In countering the IED threat, for example, we went from no robots in the Marine Corps 10 years ago to several hundred robots today. So when they fill a mission well, then unmanned systems prioritize well in a huge portfolio,” he said.

“As to the next 10 years, that is hugely dependent on what happens [after Afghanistan]. If large Marine units are deployed in a combat role, I think robots could be a huge growth industry. If, on the other hand, we are largely in a peacetime standing in the next decade, within the Corps we may see that technology stall out a bit. In either case, it will be budget-dependent, which looks pretty bleak, as far as the future goes.”

What is likely to drive future developments and expanded use of unmanned systems is a combination of cost and independent efforts by industry, he added.

“That is a major robot utility – they are saving money and, more importantly, saving lives. But the story of any future robot probably will depend on industry to independently develop capabilities that somehow match what our requirements are in the future,” McConnell concluded. “So, in the realm of unmanned systems, for industry to match what the military is doing is key.

“If someone asks me what I want a robot to do, I really can’t answer that. But if they look at what Marines are doing and come up with a robot to do that, that is how our problems will be solved – having people who not only understand the technology but also what the users are really doing and need. If an unmanned system shows up and proves useful – or certainly essential – then that’s where we will start to invest.”

This article first appeared in Marine Corps Outlook: 2011-2012 Edition.