DRDO to expedite production of 16 Nishant UAVs for CRPF

[thestringshredder]

With the Army clearing the indigenous Nishant UAV for an extended 4.5 hour surveillance sortie and things progressing well in the final stages of operationalisation for army operations at the battalion level, the DRDO is now focusing on meeting an order of 16 Nishants for the CRPF for anti-Maoist operations. The paramilitary force chose the Nishant as it requires no runway and minimal infrastructure for launch and recovery. The Nishant’s launch vehicle carries a rail launcher and the UAV is recovered by a parachute at any chosen location.

The CRPF has had a chance to evaluate the platform and has been impressed with its capabilities. Its decision to own and operate its own fleet of UAVs followed problems with coordination with other agencies like the NTRO. Other paramilitary forces like the BSF, ITBP and SSB are also looking to acquire UAVs and MAVs, and are at various stages of processing such requirements. The police services of several states, including Punjab and Chattisgarh are also looking for mini UAVs for operations in build-up areas.

Link - DRDO to expedite production of 16 Nishant UAVs for CRPF | idrw.org

 

[That Guy]

UAVs have really revolutionized warfare as a whole. Every nation is trying to acquire them, and a few nations that already have them, are trying to build combat drones (UCAVs).

Every major military power is building armed drones, From the US and UK, to Israel and Iran, all the way to Pakistan and India. I don't doubt that once these nations have a formidable UCAV fleet, they'll start concentrating on Unmanned Combat ground vehicles (UCGVs).

Though, there is a major risk.

If drones start taking over the battlefield and become increasingly autonomous, who will be held responsible for the death of civilians? Military officials? Government officials? The ones in charge of the program? International law is behind on this issue. I fear that the lack of moral choices that drones are incapable of making, will inevitably lead to civilian deaths and the lack of laws governing this type of warfare will lead to no one being held responsible for the deaths of innocent bystanders. If this were to occur, the term "collateral damage" will become increasingly used in military terminology. No matter what happens, soldiers must remain a vital part of combat and drones must remain dependent on a human controller to decide if a life must be taken.

On the other hand, while the world does not need a skynet, but it would be foolish to say that these drones will not lead to tremendous good. Less lives will be put at risk, as drones will take the place of living, breathing humans. These drones could be programmed to follow the geneva convention on the laws of war, but I doubt that any military that operates these drones will not have a switch to turn those commands off.

In the end, it all depends on how the world reacts to these machines, whether they be for simple surveillance and rescue, or for assassination and warfare. International law must catch up, the world cannot afford to wait for another decade. Research and technology is moving at a rapid pace, as such International law must also future proof the use of this technology. It must find any scenario that may pop up and create laws accordingly. If this is not done, I fear abuse of this technology from both nations who seek to subjugate a foreign and/or domestic population and non-state actors that seek to topple governments and cause mass murder.

 

[mirage2K]

UAVs have really revolutionized warfare as a whole. Every nation is trying to acquire them, and a few nations that already have them, are trying to build combat drones (UCAVs).

Every major military power is building armed drones, From the US and UK, to Israel and Iran, all the way to Pakistan and India. I don't doubt that once these nations have a formidable UCAV fleet, they'll start concentrating on Unmanned Combat ground vehicles (UCGVs).

Though, there is a major risk.

If drones start taking over the battlefield and become increasingly autonomous, who will be held responsible for the death of civilians? Military officials? Government officials? The ones in charge of the program? International law is behind on this issue. I fear that the lack of moral choices that drones are incapable of making, will inevitably lead to civilian deaths and the lack of laws governing this type of warfare will lead to no one being held responsible for the deaths of innocent bystanders. If this were to occur, the term "collateral damage" will become increasingly used in military terminology. No matter what happens, soldiers must remain a vital part of combat and drones must remain dependent on a human controller to decide if a life must be taken.

On the other hand, while the world does not need a skynet, but it would be foolish to say that these drones will not lead to tremendous good. Less lives will be put at risk, as drones will take the place of living, breathing humans. These drones could be programmed to follow the geneva convention on the laws of war, but I doubt that any military that operates these drones will not have a switch to turn those commands off.

In the end, it all depends on how the world reacts to these machines, whether they be for simple surveillance and rescue, or for assassination and warfare. International law must catch up, the world cannot afford to wait for another decade. Research and technology is moving at a rapid pace, as such International law must also future proof the use of this technology. It must find any scenario that may pop up and create laws accordingly. If this is not done, I fear abuse of this technology from both nations who seek to subjugate a foreign and/or domestic population and non-state actors that seek to topple governments and cause mass murder.

India is already working on unmanned combat ground vehicles and robo soldiers

 

[Koovie]

UAVs have really revolutionized warfare as a whole. Every nation is trying to acquire them, and a few nations that already have them, are trying to build combat drones (UCAVs).

Every major military power is building armed drones, From the US and UK, to Israel and Iran, all the way to Pakistan and India. I don't doubt that once these nations have a formidable UCAV fleet, they'll start concentrating on Unmanned Combat ground vehicles (UCGVs).

Though, there is a major risk.

If drones start taking over the battlefield and become increasingly autonomous, who will be held responsible for the death of civilians? Military officials? Government officials? The ones in charge of the program? International law is behind on this issue. I fear that the lack of moral choices that drones are incapable of making, will inevitably lead to civilian deaths and the lack of laws governing this type of warfare will lead to no one being held responsible for the deaths of innocent bystanders. If this were to occur, the term "collateral damage" will become increasingly used in military terminology. No matter what happens, soldiers must remain a vital part of combat and drones must remain dependent on a human controller to decide if a life must be taken.

On the other hand, while the world does not need a skynet, but it would be foolish to say that these drones will not lead to tremendous good. Less lives will be put at risk, as drones will take the place of living, breathing humans. These drones could be programmed to follow the geneva convention on the laws of war, but I doubt that any military that operates these drones will not have a switch to turn those commands off.

In the end, it all depends on how the world reacts to these machines, whether they be for simple surveillance and rescue, or for assassination and warfare. International law must catch up, the world cannot afford to wait for another decade. Research and technology is moving at a rapid pace, as such International law must also future proof the use of this technology. It must find any scenario that may pop up and create laws accordingly. If this is not done, I fear abuse of this technology from both nations who seek to subjugate a foreign and/or domestic population and non-state actors that seek to topple governments and cause mass murder.

Good points.

However, the UAVs for the CRPF and all other central police forces and paramilitary organizations will be unarmed... and it should stay like this. Armed drones should never be used outside the military.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Good points.

However, the UAVs for the CRPF and all other central police forces and paramilitary organizations will be unarmed... and it should stay like this. Armed drones should never be used outside the military.

Exactly- law enforcement agencies which by nature are inward looking should NEVER feel the need for armed drones.


Just like in India's case where of course the offensive air power is there but it hasn't been used to deal withthese internal issues as these are Indians no matter which way you cut it!

@Topic- very, VERY good news. Will be a real boost to Op Greenhunt. I am very impressed at how quickly Indian police units are adopting the latest tech and particularly UAS. For instance in the recent Uttarakhand rescue effort the NDRF were using Nishant UAS!

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

We need much smaller UAVs for situational awareness for small teams.

 

[Sergi]

We need much smaller UAVs for situational awareness for small teams.

Didn't we buy that kinda UAVs from Israel ???

http://articles.timesofindia.indiat...3475241_1_uavs-global-tender-northern-command

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

Didn't we buy that kinda UAVs from Israel ???

Army to buy 20 mini-UAVs for J&K operations - Times Of India

I doubt CRPF would have that.

Major General (Retd) Dhruv Katoch, Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS) mentioned, "I am all for providing the man of the ground with mini-UAVs which are of tactical use and can be carried by the troops. MHA should allow the CRPF to procure that. But beyond that, it is the NTRO which has the capability. The CRPF has little use investing in such high-tech systems."

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/mha-uav-mission-anti-naxal-operations-impossible-ntro-crpf/1/257165.html

 

[Sergi]

I doubt CRPF would have that.

Well I am not sure but if "that" deal has been cleared then they might have it. The deal was on fast track. So lets hope its been cleared. But agree that there is no news on it after that.

What about IA ???

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

Well I am not sure but if "that" deal has been cleared then they might have it. The deal was on fast track. So lets hope its been cleared. But agree that there is no news on it after that.

What about IA ???

I think that the deal was for IA not CRPF...and according to @Abingdonboy the SF has it.

 

[Sergi]

I think that the deal was for IA not CRPF...and according to @Abingdonboy the SF has it.

Yup deal was for IA but it was supposed tobe extended to CRPF ( according to the link "I" posted and according to your link they ( CRPF) are on their own fast track procedure )

My intention was if you had come across anything like that in JK ???
I am almost sure deal's been clear and IA had them but nothing to confirm.

 

[That Guy]

India is already working on unmanned combat ground vehicles and robo soldiers

Yes, but their current concentration is in the air, not the ground. Every major military nation (even Pakistan) is probably working on UGVs, but they're just not focusing on them as of yet, because there is no real need for them, unlike UAVs which are badly needed.

Good points.

However, the UAVs for the CRPF and all other central police forces and paramilitary organizations will be unarmed... and it should stay like this. Armed drones should never be used outside the military.

True, but I don't doubt that police forces around the world will try and acquire armed drones, even if they don't need them.

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

Yup deal was for IA but it was supposed tobe extended to CRPF ( according to the link "I" posted and according to your link they ( CRPF) are on their own fast track procedure )

My intention was if you had come across anything like that in JK ???
I am almost sure deal's been clear and IA had them but nothing to confirm.

According to @Abingdonboy SF has them in Kashmir.

 

[SRP]

Good news. This will help crpf and local police in tackling maoists. And they don't have to depend on iaf for reconaissance.

 

[indoPunjabi]

CRPF UAVs should be named YAMDOOT as it'll be yamdoot for maoists :p