Originally posted by tripwire:
History has shown that high tech machinary may not neccessary do well in actual combat situations. One example is the Vietnam war where lowly equiped Vietcongs managed to devastated a technogically superior army
----------------------------
that's your intepretation.... in my opinion.. technology merely enhances the combat capability of the soldier...
if the soldier or his superiors are a bunch of idiots... no high tech weapon would prevent them from loosing....
the weapon is only as effective as the man behind the weapon.....
that is until we can implant AI into some of those airheads who cant think anything else except eat sai sleep F..K
Technology can make idiots of their operators.....when you over spec the GUI etc.....and automate the soldier into airheads.
IMO you need to leave some room for the operators to not totally trust the system such that 30% of his/her brain is running contingency scenarios.....
So if he/she is tired......then he can run with more safety margins.
But when system has an alarm and worst, an automatic fallback condition for ALL SITUATION ALL THE TIME......he/she tends to take it easy.
When things go wrong, blame it on system malfunction!
I have seen a system in Taiwan during April (very hot), when the transistors threshold driving LEDs start going haywire and alarms keep beeping off everywhere.
Wah, good training for all! Of course today everything is on BARCO screens and you have built-in simulators to wake you up. Still not quite the same.