project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > Off-Topic Forums > Off-Topic Discussion > Military Technology
22 Apr 2018, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Military Technology Discussion on military hardware.

View Poll Results: Do you think high tech has the advantage in present days warfare?
Yes 65 66.33%
No 18 18.37%
Not sure 15 15.31%
Voters: 98. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-14-2007, 11:18 AM   #1
Michael_Denmark

Michael_Denmark's Avatar
Question High Tech vs. Low tech

The military technology evolves every month.

Many nations/organisations even the small ones use high tech in their military elements.

The human being got a 7000 year long written history of organized violence, named warfare, and has probably conducted this very essential human activity since the first human/human or human/animal conflict began.

Now, through these seven thousands years of written history of warfare, high tech has beaten low tech and low tech has beaten high tech, for various reasons related to the specific time period. And from time to time the very distance between high and low tech has been both short and long. So in that sense the distance has been a fluid dynamic.


Today, in our time, in ROBO time (or at least the initial period of ROBO time) we see a huge distance between high and low tech in some of the present human organized violence activities.


So in short:

Do you think high tech has the advantage in present days warfare?

Define irony. A bunch of guys playing PR year after year. A game teaching initiative as the prime mover.
However, in regard to EA, these guys never took the initiative.
We who play these kinds of games are the first generation of war robot pilots.Today we pilot a camera in 3D heaven,Tomorrow... http://gametactic.org/pr
Michael_Denmark is offline
Last edited by Michael_Denmark; 06-14-2007 at 11:45 AM..
Old 06-14-2007, 11:40 AM   #2
SiN|ScarFace
Default

Yes. We are able to see and kill people in the dark, from long range with precision with little or no risk of retaliation from the target.

Warfare has become more and more of a stand off ranged fight throughout history. The days of night being the break time and bad weather stopping fights are over and if you are not able to match this capability with technology you are at a serious disadvantage.

SiN|ScarFace is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 11:42 AM   #3
ArmedDrunk&Angry
Banned

ArmedDrunk&Angry's Avatar
Default

I am waiting for a way to spoof NVG's because the US seems so dependant on night vision that it would seriously impact the fighting abilities of the troops.
EMP is another way I can see our tech-dependant troops getting caught unprepared to fight w/o a PDA and a sat-phone.

Edit: nice timing on getting the second post, thinking I was first, and having it relate to the first post.
ArmedDrunk&Angry is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 11:44 AM   #4
El_Vikingo

El_Vikingo's Avatar
Default

No, watch any movie where humans fight off aliens, we always win, even though they got the space ships!

Anyway, by high tech you mean electronic gadets or the latest protection?

If you are reading this dont stop, cause if you do, I'll kick you in the balls.
El_Vikingo is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 11:57 AM   #5
M.0.D
Default

i'm all for low-tech, because it is more indipendent.. one EMP on an high-tech fighting unit and they are nearly useless

that is not saying that latest material and techniques are bad, just i do not like to have to depend on electronic systems


This message has been made of environment-friendly recycled letters and words from deleted mails and is fully digital-degradable.
M.0.D is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 11:59 AM   #6
::Major_Baker::
Default

yes, high tech genarlly has an advantage, but low tech is not ineffective, and Iraq has showed us.

High tech can only get you so far. When fighting a conventional army, it gives you a huge advantage. When fighting a hit-n-run insurgency, its effectiveness is decreased.
::Major_Baker:: is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 12:03 PM   #7
Michael_Denmark

Michael_Denmark's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by El_Vikingo
No, watch any movie where humans fight off aliens, we always win, even though they got the space ships!

Anyway, by high tech you mean electronic gadets or the latest protection?
Yes.

Everything from nano-sized chips able to detect specific types of explosives in specific types of ranges related to specific types of environments to today’s magnetic amour (still prototype level) and to low level thinking weapon platforms of all kinds (fully autonomous systems), including computer decision making in war, where the human decision factor is being ignored from development stage 01.

Define irony. A bunch of guys playing PR year after year. A game teaching initiative as the prime mover.
However, in regard to EA, these guys never took the initiative.
We who play these kinds of games are the first generation of war robot pilots.Today we pilot a camera in 3D heaven,Tomorrow... http://gametactic.org/pr
Michael_Denmark is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 12:13 PM   #8
daranz

daranz's Avatar
Default

Advanced technology certainly gives you an advantage over the enemy, just like numbers, location, etc. However, history has proven many times that it comes down to how good the people are at fighting. We won't see machines capable of waging wars independently for many years, so for now, it comes down to human-developed strategies, and human skills. Fancy technology won't help you if you don't know how to employ your forces in combat.

daranz is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 12:14 PM   #9
Michael_Denmark

Michael_Denmark's Avatar
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by ::Major_Baker::
yes, high tech genarlly has an advantage, but low tech is not ineffective, and Iraq has showed us.

High tech can only get you so far. When fighting a conventional army, it gives you a huge advantage. When fighting a hit-n-run insurgency, its effectiveness is decreased.

So just to understand you correct, low tech can under the right circumstances beat high tech on today’s battlefield?

And in addition to that question, do you think that low-tech winning fights/battles vs. high tech actually will an effect on the short future development of high tech?

Define irony. A bunch of guys playing PR year after year. A game teaching initiative as the prime mover.
However, in regard to EA, these guys never took the initiative.
We who play these kinds of games are the first generation of war robot pilots.Today we pilot a camera in 3D heaven,Tomorrow... http://gametactic.org/pr
Michael_Denmark is offline
Old 06-14-2007, 12:18 PM   #10
SiN|ScarFace
Default

Technological advancements in war tools has and always will progress. It gets filtered down from the people who create to the people who buy it or copy it eventually. As for EMP and stuff, that too is high tech so to counter tech you gotta develop other tech. You don't stop a tank with a rock you use a mine or explosive device which has more in common with the tank than a rock. When armed groups fight armed groups, the one with better equipment has an advantage.

SiN|ScarFace is offline
Closed Thread


Tags
high, low, tech
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:08 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2018, Project Reality