Not sure how this category of vehicles should be used, even though it has appeared popular enough to be tested by the Russians (Uran-9) and Americans (RCV-Medium) as well.

The above vehicle appears to big and expensive to be recon/screen. Flying sensors seems generally a better investment than land ones, especially one that may not be able to get enough bandwidth to make use of the sensors. (I don't think autonomy is in the near future for this category) Long range indirect fires seems generally a better investment in fire support. If you have bandwidth to operate a RCV you have enough to run a battle network to call in fires.

For infantry support vehicles, compact size and terrain crossing ability is likely more important than marginal improvements in firepower and armor.
For big UGVs, the best CONOPS I have seen comes from an old short story collection from about 2000. In the "CAV" story by James Cobb, the UGVs were the point vehicles of a cavalry recon section with a single manned vehicle as their local controller. 2x UGVs and the manned vehicle, all on the same big 8x8 chassis.

The manned vehicle could take local control of the UGVs when going into combat. The UGVs replaced pretty much all the "people carrying" space with weaponry. A big hypervelocity AT gun and some vertical launch missiles on the UGVs, while the manned truck had a telescoping sensor mast with a gun/missile platform on top of it, a VTOL scout UAV, and a team of 4 dismount scouts in the back. Crew of 3 in the truck, driver, TC, and vehicle electronics operator.
The widespread adaption of tactical radio relays really makes UGVs much more viable than concept of operations that rely on LOS radio links.

I think for the near future, combat UGV will take the role of anti-entrenchment more than anything. Let look at existing roles

1. Recon: flying is better.
2. Screening: mines and sensors can be air dropped cheaply
3. Fires: long range precision is cheap

The artillery model of warfare is dominant, however:
1. Fortifications are too tough for artillery and ranged fires
2. Mines are too stealthy and cheap to be defeated by artillery

UGV will be the arm that deals with the above problem.

In the medium term however, say 10year (if intensely invested into), UGV will become "robots" that can conduct the fortification role, ejecting infantry from field battle except as command and versatile stopgap.

Similar threads

Top Bottom