Why are regular tan/k/s still manned? Wouldn't it make sense

>>34626793
Remote controlled ground vehicles have issues with lag and losing signal. The high techy militaryo flyamajig drones are way up in the sky and avoid those problems.

>>34626793
>Wouldn't it make sense for tanks to be remotely controlled in [the current year] ?

no it would be really little sense for anything to be remotely controlled in current year

Because you cant poke your head out the top of an unmanned vehicle to get a better view and its foolish to expect supporting infantry to know how to make quick repairs.

An autoloader takes more space than a soldier. That extra man can also perform other tasks such as maintenance.

>>34626793

oh boy I sure do love when my opponent goes full electronic warfare on my ass and lose all control over my vehicles

OR BETTER YET THEY HIJACK THE FUCKING THINGS THROUGH OUR DATA PACKETS.

File: file.jpg (107KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1000x667px

>>34626807
>have issues with lag and losing signal

How is this a problem that can't be solved by the biggest military tech developers in the world?

>>34626810
>top of an unmanned vehicle to get a better view

You mean like, a camera?

>>34626816
>OR BETTER YET THEY HIJACK THE FUCKING THINGS THROUGH OUR DATA PACKETS.

Just like Drones get hijacked every day right?

File: file.jpg (160KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1000x667px

>>34626815
An autoloader hasn't been designed without crew in mind yet.

>>34626834
>You mean like, a camera?
All modern tanks have sensors on top. letterboxy as fuck and not to be relied upon for situational awareness

File: file.jpg (128KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1000x667px

>>34626856
And what makes you think that a better camera can't be implemented? Why are you using current tech as comparison when talking about future tech that doesn't take human participation in mind?

>>34626807
Idea: what if say a four-vehicle tank platoon was replaced by two manned vehicles and two locally-piloted drone vehicles. In other words, solve lag problems by keeping unmanned vehicles within line-of-sight of manned vehicles (this could be supported by sat-comm connections as well in case vehicles do need to spread out). Of course this means the manned vehicles now require an additional crewmember now...

>>34626834
>Just like Drones get hijacked every day right?

They get jammed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident

It was a RQ-170 by the way, pretty high-tech piece of hardware.