World News

210 readers

545 users here now

Rules:

Be a decent person
No spam
Add the byline, or write a line or two in the body about the article.

founded 1 month ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

AUKUS navies remote-control ships from 10,000 miles away in experiment (www.reuters.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"The successes experienced, including proving the ability of all three AUKUS navies to command-and-control vessels on the other side of the world in a tactically realistic scenario, show how close we are to realising our ambition of a genuine team of crewed and uncrewed systems, capable of operating and prevailing everywhere on the planet, from the seabed to space," Royal Navy Director Develop James Parkin said in a statement.

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Wouldn’t this be highly susceptible to communication blocking?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Or getting your navy hacked and under someone else’s control.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Any remotelink is vulnerable to jamming attacks, but those aren't novel issues.

There are many ways to mitigate and bypass the jamming attacks, including operating different control links, or multiple different bands, hopping, etc.

This is also where "AI" or advanced algorithms might come in, and enable the platform to continue on to its objectives unaided, or initiate some sort of failsafe to regain communication links, etc.

On a somewhat related note, this is similar to why 6th gen aircraft will include stealthy manned platforms, that are in close proximity to command and control various drone wingman platforms, as opposed to being remotely piloted from a Nevada Airbase.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I see where you're coming from, but you're overlooking a major flaw. While frequency hopping and AI might help, they aren't foolproof. Jamming tech is evolving just as fast as countermeasures, and relying too much on remote links or automation is risky. AI is still far from perfect when it comes to complex, real-time decision-making in unpredictable environments. Also, keeping manned platforms "close by" sounds ideal in theory, but it adds another layer of vulnerability—those manned assets become prime targets. It’s not as simple as slapping AI on everything and hoping for the best.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's not where I'm coming from, I'm just repeating various means, methods, and technologies, that are currently being used, or are documented requirements for current nextgen programs, by the DoD.

Here's just one example of an existing platform, with the technologies that you're alleging can't, or don't, exist: Ghost Bat (MQ-28A)

And that's just a single platform, within a much larger DoD program: Loyal Wingman.

Also, I never said it wasn't a constant race with measures, countermeasures, and counter-counter measures. I was just simply keeping my comments short and to the point of the question asked.