Robots Replace Soldiers in First Breaching Exercise of its Kind

Speaking as someone who has been a combat engineer (USMC 1302) for almost 50 years, it is heartening to see this discussion among and between nearly entirely combat engineers and EOD. Yes, I am in some sense, a dinosaur, but no, my first platoon was not equipped with catapults and trebuchets! I also am, at least for my age group, pretty data/tech savvy. I will never say "never" but there are some things that this whole matter touches on that are not likely to be overcome in the near or even foreseeable future. The first thought is that most all of today's electronic marvels benefit by human input. The main reason is that programming, even programming that "learns" can only deal with what is conceived by those developing the program. Yes, it is far more complex than the "IF ... THEN" format in its simplest examples. But ultimately if that robot does not have some connection to a human who can make judgements OUTSIDE the programming, it becomes battlefield trash when confronted with a reaction not addressed in its programming. As sophisticated as the systems are in current production civilian and military aircraft, there are a multitude of examples of when pilot flying skill, initiative, and imagination do what the automated system could not. The second thought is that the "operator" be he/she directly operating or mostly observing and whether he/she is located in close proximity or half a world away is limited by the visual, aural, and tactile sensors ability to convey the battlefield. The fantastic capability of human sight in an almost 180 degree hemisphere is hard to duplicate with imaging. It can be enhanced with capabilities not possessed by humans such as thermal and electromagnetic imaging, but it still lacks some crucial abilities unique (at least for now) to human sight. Aural is even less well supported by current technology. Human hearing, again with limits that can be offset with some technology, still has unduplicated ability to determine both direction and range for many sounds. That is still beyond the ability of technology to deliver fully to a remote operator. Finally, tactile sensation is easy to transmit at the gross level -- but it unfortunately also complicates the visual! All that said, I am all for ways that keep the young Marine or soldier farther from harm's way. If cost and time are no object, most anything is possible. Reality is that both are relevant. In the mean time, everything is constrained by the ability to maintain uninterrupted communication and as Cpt Hudson points out that's just another fly in the ointment.

Robots lacking subjective and intuitive abilities will not replace a real live soldier. Enemy already has capability to jam electronics.

I’m for anything that helps our soldiers on the line, or anywhere for that matter. Whenever I hear of Grafenwoehr or Hohenfells (which is rare) I have to smile at all the memories.