DARPA looks to win the future by making drone swarms and out-building China

DARPA has admitted that stealth technology has reached its limit and the US may no longer be able to asset air dominance against China and Russia.

DARPA wants to accomplish its goal without air superiority. DARPA wants to use a combination of overwhelming performance (e.g. hypersonics) and overwhelming numbers (e.g. swarming low-cost weapons).

They want to shift from expensive systems like F35 to lots of inexpensive drones.

In order to win in a world of inexpensive drone swarms that means the US will need to get cheaper than China’s production and be able to out-build China.

On the ground, DARPA wants Starship Trooper-like exoskeleton armor.

21 thoughts on “DARPA looks to win the future by making drone swarms and out-building China”

  1. I think that is backwards. The USA shouldn’t be working to reduce costs. The USA should be working to INCREASE costs. With the (to some extent) exception of China, the USA has far more resources than any enemy. The more expensive every new weapon is, the more the USA can afford it, but their opponents cannot. Developing weapons systems can can be used by, for example, Palestine, is going in completely the wrong direction.

    Reply
  2. I think that’s the way to go. 80% less costs, at 20% less performance (or more probably 95%/50%). Think about Matrix third movie final battle… Drones will improve quickly, implementing immediately any advance in artificial intelligence. They won’t need expensive defensive systems, so, they can be made even cheaper. If made by advanced origami like techniques, they could be rapidly and cheaply manufactured, stored, and transported by the thousands within few hours anyway on earth. On top of this, they won’t be bottlenecked by a human in the cockpit, and, assuming they will have “licence to kill”, their reaction time will be way faster, too. Paradoxically, it’s the Palestinians that are developing this idea, by “bombarding” Israel with thousands of ultra low costs “fire devices” (essentially a balloon carrying a burning payload), with the sole purpose of cause massive economic damage to Israel (direct damage by creating fires along the crops in the border, and indirect damage by the Israel forced tusing human resources and missiles/bullets to put them down). I say paradoxically because often, in history, is who is “legacy free” who can get the most cost/benefit to implement a new technology (otr, in this case, a war strategy). Palestinians are as legacy free as it gets (I’m talking about supply contracts, army specializations, acquired experience, etc).

    Reply
  3. I think that’s the way to go.80{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} less costs at 20{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} less performance (or more probably 95{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}/50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}).Think about Matrix third movie final battle…Drones will improve quickly implementing immediately any advance in artificial intelligence. They won’t need expensive defensive systems so they can be made even cheaper. If made by advanced origami like techniques they could be rapidly and cheaply manufactured stored and transported by the thousands within few hours anyway on earth.On top of this they won’t be bottlenecked by a human in the cockpit and assuming they will have licence to kill””” their reaction time will be way faster too.Paradoxically it’s the Palestinians that are developing this idea”” by “”””bombarding”””” Israel with thousands of ultra low costs “”””fire devices”””” (essentially a balloon carrying a burning payload)”” with the sole purpose of cause massive economic damage to Israel (direct damage by creating fires along the crops in the border and indirect damage by the Israel forced tusing human resources and missiles/bullets to put them down).I say paradoxically because often in history”” is who is “”””legacy free”””” who can get the most cost/benefit to implement a new technology (otr”” in this case a war strategy).Palestinians are as legacy free as it gets (I’m talking about supply contracts army specializations acquired experience”” etc).”””

    Reply
  4. If you’re not planning on having a war, any money spent beyond deterrence is wasted. The US might currently be the richest country, but if they keep wasting their capital and brainpower on dead ends, and quagmire wars in the third world, they won’t stay that way. The US built a massive overkill nuclear force, and the Soviets copied them, while the rest of the country went to wrack and ruin. Then the US wasted more billions on the Star Wars boondoggle. Meanwhile China built just a few hundred warheads, instead of thousands, and got on with business. Now Trump wants every ally to put 4% of GDP into the military. What happened to the peace dividend we were supposed to get ? ‘..of the more than 50,000 service members wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan who are considered polytrauma patients, 1,600 have moderate to severe brain injuries, 1,400 are amputees, and 900 were severely burned. Since then, about 200 service members have lost limbs in a combat zone.’ That was five years ago, Americans are still being killed and maimed in the Middle East (though not nearly as many as locals), and these half wits want to start yet another war.

    Reply
  5. If you’re not planning on having a war any money spent beyond deterrence is wasted. The US might currently be the richest country but if they keep wasting their capital and brainpower on dead ends and quagmire wars in the third world they won’t stay that way. The US built a massive overkill nuclear force and the Soviets copied them while the rest of the country went to wrack and ruin. Then the US wasted more billions on the Star Wars boondoggle. Meanwhile China built just a few hundred warheads instead of thousands and got on with business. Now Trump wants every ally to put 4{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of GDP into the military. What happened to the peace dividend we were supposed to get ?’..of the more than 50000 service members wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan who are considered polytrauma patients 1600 have moderate to severe brain injuries 1400 are amputees and 900 were severely burned. Since then about 200 service members have lost limbs in a combat zone.’ That was five years ago Americans are still being killed and maimed in the Middle East (though not nearly as many as locals) and these half wits want to start yet another war.

    Reply
  6. I think that is backwards. The USA shouldn’t be working to reduce costs. The USA should be working to INCREASE costs.With the (to some extent) exception of China the USA has far more resources than any enemy. The more expensive every new weapon is the more the USA can afford it but their opponents cannot.Developing weapons systems can can be used by for example Palestine is going in completely the wrong direction.

    Reply
  7. In order to win in a world of inexpensive drone swarms that means the US will need to get cheaper than China’s production and be able to out-build China.” “… cheaper than China…” Dream on. The future belongs to China.

    Reply
  8. In order to win in a world of inexpensive drone swarms that means the US will need to get cheaper than China’s production and be able to out-build China.””””””… cheaper than China…”””” Dream on. The future belongs to China.”””””””

    Reply
  9. The American is instigating a war with China in the western Pacific, the number of Americans get killed and maimed in that confrontation will make those numbers in the ME look dwarfed.

    Reply
  10. American can dream anything except cheap (low cost but high value). DARPA’s goal is contradictory to MIC’s goal, it will not succeed.

    Reply
  11. The American is instigating a war with China in the western Pacific the number of Americans get killed and maimed in that confrontation will make those numbers in the ME look dwarfed.

    Reply
  12. American can dream anything except cheap (low cost but high value). DARPA’s goal is contradictory to MIC’s goal it will not succeed.

    Reply
  13. Well, we knew this was coming. Once they start putting AI targeting systems into them … then human emotion and discretion will be removed from the equation … meaning when a psychopath gets control of this system – and such is inevitable … genocide will be a simple option.

    Reply
  14. Well we knew this was coming. Once they start putting AI targeting systems into them … then human emotion and discretion will be removed from the equation … meaning when a psychopath gets control of this system – and such is inevitable … genocide will be a simple option.

    Reply
  15. Well, we knew this was coming. Once they start putting AI targeting systems into them … then human emotion and discretion will be removed from the equation … meaning when a psychopath gets control of this system – and such is inevitable … genocide will be a simple option.

    Reply
  16. The American is instigating a war with China in the western Pacific, the number of Americans get killed and maimed in that confrontation will make those numbers in the ME look dwarfed.

    Reply
  17. “In order to win in a world of inexpensive drone swarms that means the US will need to get cheaper than China’s production and be able to out-build China.”

    “… cheaper than China…” Dream on. The future belongs to China.

    Reply
  18. If you’re not planning on having a war, any money spent beyond deterrence is wasted. The US might currently be the richest country, but if they keep wasting their capital and brainpower on dead ends, and quagmire wars in the third world, they won’t stay that way. The US built a massive overkill nuclear force, and the Soviets copied them, while the rest of the country went to wrack and ruin. Then the US wasted more billions on the Star Wars boondoggle. Meanwhile China built just a few hundred warheads, instead of thousands, and got on with business. Now Trump wants every ally to put 4% of GDP into the military. What happened to the peace dividend we were supposed to get ?
    ‘..of the more than 50,000 service members wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan who are considered polytrauma patients, 1,600 have moderate to severe brain injuries, 1,400 are amputees, and 900 were severely burned. Since then, about 200 service members have lost limbs in a combat zone.’ That was five years ago, Americans are still being killed and maimed in the Middle East (though not nearly as many as locals), and these half wits want to start yet another war.

    Reply
  19. I think that is backwards. The USA shouldn’t be working to reduce costs. The USA should be working to INCREASE costs.

    With the (to some extent) exception of China, the USA has far more resources than any enemy. The more expensive every new weapon is, the more the USA can afford it, but their opponents cannot.

    Developing weapons systems can can be used by, for example, Palestine, is going in completely the wrong direction.

    Reply
  20. I think that’s the way to go.
    80% less costs, at 20% less performance (or more probably 95%/50%).
    Think about Matrix third movie final battle…
    Drones will improve quickly, implementing immediately any advance in artificial intelligence. They won’t need expensive defensive systems, so, they can be made even cheaper. If made by advanced origami like techniques, they could be rapidly and cheaply manufactured, stored, and transported by the thousands within few hours anyway on earth.
    On top of this, they won’t be bottlenecked by a human in the cockpit, and, assuming they will have “licence to kill”, their reaction time will be way faster, too.
    Paradoxically, it’s the Palestinians that are developing this idea, by “bombarding” Israel with thousands of ultra low costs “fire devices” (essentially a balloon carrying a burning payload), with the sole purpose of cause massive economic damage to Israel (direct damage by creating fires along the crops in the border, and indirect damage by the Israel forced tusing human resources and missiles/bullets to put them down).
    I say paradoxically because often, in history, is who is “legacy free” who can get the most cost/benefit to implement a new technology (otr, in this case, a war strategy).
    Palestinians are as legacy free as it gets (I’m talking about supply contracts, army specializations, acquired experience, etc).

    Reply

Leave a Comment