Robotic Drone Controllers and Remote Gunnery

[swordtart]

.

In theory, a drone can operate autonomously, it's a question of how much we trust it to do so, and the guidelines programmed in to follow the operator's intent.

We need a connection to see what it's doing and what direct feedback, especially for realtime reconnaissance, updated instructions, and currently, remote control.

Three reasons to have to have a human operator is because we think we're better at assessing a situation, we want to know what's going on, and if it's armed, we decide if it should be triggered.

There seem to be two aspects of remote control, direct sensory feedback from the drone, and second hand feedback, or third party viewpoint, which would be the skill aspect in controlling a drone, in either case, understanding latency in receiving the feedback, and in carrying out instructions given by the operator.

I am inclined to agree. When we say Drones we tend to mean something with a degree of autonomy (particularly in the Robot Handbook). This is not quite the same as a conventional remote controlled vehicle. With remote control you control every actuator directly, with a drone you might tell it where to go and it will automatically navigate there. To move the drone (and get it to hover etc.) that is a straight Remote Ops roll, no other skill is required. If you don't know where it should be going, you will need to make a Navigate roll, but you can park the drone while you do so. If you do that on turn 1 and wait until turn 2 to start moving then you only have to make a single roll that turn. This can be automated by adding in a navigation module.

Once you put in a Cr100 Recon sensor you free yourself from having to do a lot of the tasks to operate the drone since it now has an intelligent sensor suite (so it could zoom the camera on moving objects rather than you having to locate them and zoom in yourself). That is one less skill check you need to conduct simultaneously with the others (unless you spend a separate turn finding the object.). There are other cheap dedicated modules that make a drone more useful to a single operator.

If you put in even a CR100 primitive brain then you can release a lot of your personal "bandwidth" from doing simple things like getting it from point A to Point B, evading enemies as it goes etc. Arguably this is no longer a Drone, but that definition is a bit blurry anyway since even robots might have a drone interface as part of their default suite.

I would also say that any module that is autonomous (i.e. does not use the host systems INT) can make skill rolls in parallel with any other skill rolls without suffering the penalty for conducting multiple tasks in a turn (since it can use its own dedicated processor to provide processed outputs). These can still form part of a skill chain if necessary, but it makes system fitted with them far more capable than a brain based system that is doing it all in software or a human drone controller doing it themselves and having to multitask without parallel processing.

Perhaps this is the real intent of Remote Ops, simply getting the best out of the on-board sensors and systems, not looking through a camera and trying to find the person in the blue jacket, instead telling the recon module to find the person in the blue jacket. One would use your Recon skill, the other is asking something else to do it for you.

 

[swordtart]

The Drone controller has to be the one doing these things it’s part of controlling the drone.

who said anything about ship combat drones are more common planet side

which is another reason for not doing the multiple rolls and instead using the Remote Ops as a limit. Also a lot depends on your drone control equipment

My point was that if you need a drone to conduct multiple tasks then you either have multiple people controlling it (which to my knowledge is not prohibited under the rules for drone controllers - each could be a specialist in their area and the drone unit could be a very effective force multiplier) or you need to do things one at a time, or you do them all less well than someone who does one of the first two.

I assumed you were talking about a ship because the post I was responding to had Comm, Remote Ops and Gunnery. Not that the specific environment matters. I would be equally precious about losing my life as losing a ship (upon which my life depended).

For your final point, I don't think doing multiple tasks via remote control should be an easy thing.

TLDR: I don't like the idea of using a skill level as a limiter. Your mileage may vary.

 

[MasterGwydion]

For your final point, I don't think doing multiple tasks via remote control should be an easy thing.

The hard part is figuring out what is a drone and what is a robot. In My head a drone is just a simple robot. For example. A human-shaped drone. When you use a drone controller, you are not manually moving each individual actuator to make the drone walk forward, you are simply telling it to move forward and the drone's computer sends the proper signals to the proper parts to create the desired effect.

TLDR: I don't like the idea of using a skill level as a limiter. Your mileage may vary.

I get that, but what other skill requires you to make a task chain just to use the skill itself?

 

[swordtart]

The hard part is figuring out what is a drone and what is a robot. In My head a drone is just a simple robot. For example. A human-shaped drone. When you use a drone controller, you are not manually moving each individual actuator to make the drone walk forward, you are simply telling it to move forward and the drone's computer sends the proper signals to the proper parts to create the desired effect.

I get that, but what other skill requires you to make a task chain just to use the skill itself?

As you say a drone is a simple robot. Using a drone controller you can move it by directing it's movements, you are not applying power to the actuators, you are commanding it to move forward. As long as a human moving similarly wouldn't require a Navigation skill check, then you can just tell the drone to move to x. Your referee can decide if that requires a Remote Ops skill check, but I would only require that if it was rough terrain or something taxing, otherwise it is a trivial task. If you are trying to target a weapon (and your drone doesn't have a Fire Control system) or using any other skill check then it is going to be harder/slower than you firing a gun yourself.

You only need a task chain if you are trying to use one of your own skills remotely. Anything you do with the drone that doesn't require a skill or for which the drone possesses a module providing a skill doesn't necessarily require a skill chain.

Innate skills of the drone such as Moving, telemetry, simple manipulation of objects as well anything covered by a module may not even require a Remote Ops roll let alone a skill chain. Remote Ops also covers other things as pointed out by others (repairs, design etc.).

 

[tytalan]

My point was that if you need a drone to conduct multiple tasks then you either have multiple people controlling it (which to my knowledge is not prohibited under the rules for drone controllers - each could be a specialist in their area and the drone unit could be a very effective force multiplier) or you need to do things one at a time, or you do them all less well than someone who does one of the first two.

While is some ways this maybe possible in many ways it’s not realistic. The use of drones/robots in combat has two purposes one is to keep your highly trained personnel safe the other is as a force multiplier. For the former having a tank crew remotely controlling a Tank is very legitimate and in that case having multiple people controlling the drone each doing a separate task like they would do in the tank is very legit. For the latter we step away from true drones which are essentially remotely operated vehicles to the range of robots. Robots unlike drones have their own skills and are capable of independent operations with in this case direction but the controller. In this case the operator is more likely to act as a NCO or Officer commanding multiple drone/robots.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Research currently is on AI enabling drones so that in the event they lose contact with their controller they can continue the mission.

The latest innovation in Ukraine is quadcopter drones dropping drone "dogs" that attack Russian positions.

When does an AI enabled drone become a robot?

 

[MasterGwydion]

Research currently is on AI enabling drones so that in the event they lose contact with their controller they can continue the mission.

The latest innovation in Ukraine is quadcopter drones dropping drone "dogs" that attack Russian positions.

When does an AI enabled drone become a robot?

That is a great question!

 

[tytalan]

The hard part is figuring out what is a drone and what is a robot. In My head a drone is just a simple robot.

A robot has a robot brain and has its own skills a drone does not. While you may have a drone controller in a robot it is still able to have its own skills and abilities a drone only has the abilities that a vehicle without a robot brain does. I think that’s where you’re getting confused. If I control a drone car for example I’m using my drive skill but I’m doing so with the disconnect that I’m not in the car so what I feel and see are not the same. If I control a Robot with a drone interface unless I’m directly controlling its actions I’m just giving it orders not actually controlling it.

Remote opts as a skill does many things it determines how well you can control a drone with the disconnect of not actually being in the drone which is when it should be used as a limiter if you don’t want to run what can be very complex skill challenges (I for one am often more concerned about the RP), it is used to determine connection when in a battlefield environment with all the complexity of ECM/ECCM, it also is used then giving commands to remote systems that have skills of their own (ie have a robot brain) on top of all this it includes repairing/building these remote control devices in both the thing being controlled and the controller itself.

Pg 208 Robots Handbook defines a drone as “While drones may have some basic autopilot and navigation features, they do not have sophisticated independent decision-making routines. They are designed to be operated remotely using the Electronics (remote ops) skill. As such, they do not have skills but options may provide modifiers to various tasks performed by their operators or place limitations on those tasks if the drone’s equipment is inadequate. Drone equipment is listed in the skills column to indicate the innate capabilities of the drone,
usable by the operator.”

 

[Sigtrygg]

The rules are not keeping up with reality.

 

[Condottiere]

At the next level, a robot could be considered autonomous in function.

It follows instructions, but isn't micromanaged.

 

[Limpin Legin]

When does an AI enabled drone become a robot?

That is a great question!

A few definitions may help answer question:
Automata - an automation that resembles a living being
Robot - an autonomous or semi-autonomous machine with real-world manipulators and sensory feedback.
Autonomous - operates independently of human interaction, where self-maintenance is based on "proprioception".
UAV - Unmanned Ariel Vehicle - a rotocraft with no human pilot/crew onboard. Aka a drone.
Drone - see UAV.
(Definitions via Wikipedia)

So a AI enabled drone becomes a robot when the human remote ops has been superseded by AI control and informational feedback.

 

[swordtart]

Research currently is on AI enabling drones so that in the event they lose contact with their controller they can continue the mission.

The latest innovation in Ukraine is quadcopter drones dropping drone "dogs" that attack Russian positions.

When does an AI enabled drone become a robot?

When the AI is hosted on the drone itself it is no longer a drone. An AI that controls drones through a drone interface is still a robot (though it could be non-mobile). If the thing being controlled has no onboard decision making capability it is a drone. We need to be careful about applying real world terminology where that terminology has a less rigorous meaning in the game.

If you want a simple test. If you smash the machine to atoms and it doesn't destroy the intelligence that was controlling it, it was a drone.

 

[Condottiere]

I think that the definition of a drone will be the capability of a controller to take over directly it's operations, if the situation warrants it.

 

[swordtart]

A few definitions may help answer question:
Automata - an automation that resembles a living being
Robot - an autonomous or semi-autonomous machine with real-world manipulators and sensory feedback.
Autonomous - operates independently of human interaction, where self-maintenance is based on "proprioception".
UAV - Unmanned Ariel Vehicle - a rotocraft with no human pilot/crew onboard. Aka a drone.
Drone - see UAV.
(Definitions via Wikipedia)

So a AI enabled drone becomes a robot when the human remote ops has been superseded by AI control and informational feedback.

These are not Traveller definitions and so are not helpful when discussing the game and even as real world definitions are not universal. Not all drones have rotors and they are not all air vehicles, we have drone ships and submarines. Not all drones have any kind of digital control, remote controlled planes from the fifties are drones. Automata are self operating machines, there is no requirement for them to be human.

 

[Limpin Legin]

Not all drones have rotors and they are not all air vehicles, we have drone ships and submarines.

What usually happens is that the definitions get extended to include the variants, rather than become discarded into obsolescence .

Not all drones have any kind of digital control, remote controlled planes from the fifties are drones.

I quite agree.

Automata are self operating machines, there is no requirement for them to be human.

"Automata" outside of computer science is kinda an archaic word when others have superseded it's use. Automata is just plural of automation. Early automata were examplified by Greek myths. For example, Aristotle claimed Daedalus used quicksilver to make the wooden statue of Aphrodite move. Later automata were animated toys where depiction of animated animals appealed to the younger audience. In the 8th Century, wind-powered satues were used to open the gates of Baghdad. Etc. ... There does seem a common theme of emulating the movement of animals as well as humans, which is well within the definition provided.

 

[Limpin Legin]

History of Automata - The Mechanical Art & Design Museum

themadmuseum.co.uk

 

[swordtart]

A robot has a robot brain and has its own skills a drone does not. While you may have a drone controller in a robot it is still able to have its own skills and abilities a drone only has the abilities that a vehicle without a robot brain does. I think that’s where you’re getting confused. If I control a drone car for example I’m using my drive skill but I’m doing so with the disconnect that I’m not in the car so what I feel and see are not the same. If I control a Robot with a drone interface unless I’m directly controlling its actions I’m just giving it orders not actually controlling it.

Remote opts as a skill does many things it determines how well you can control a drone with the disconnect of not actually being in the drone which is when it should be used as a limiter if you don’t want to run what can be very complex skill challenges (I for one am often more concerned about the RP), it is used to determine connection when in a battlefield environment with all the complexity of ECM/ECCM, it also is used then giving commands to remote systems that have skills of their own (ie have a robot brain) on top of all this it includes repairing/building these remote control devices in both the thing being controlled and the controller itself.

Pg 208 Robots Handbook defines a drone as “While drones may have some basic autopilot and navigation features, they do not have sophisticated independent decision-making routines. They are designed to be operated remotely using the Electronics (remote ops) skill. As such, they do not have skills but options may provide modifiers to various tasks performed by their operators or place limitations on those tasks if the drone’s equipment is inadequate. Drone equipment is listed in the skills column to indicate the innate capabilities of the drone,
usable by the operator.”

Drones have their own skills (otherwise they wouldn't be listed in the skills column). These skills may be provided by exactly the same component that supplies the skill to a robot. The difference is a drone cannot choose to exercise them itself, it must be initiated externally. The initialisation can be highly automated (a single button press by the controller might trigger a whole raft of pre-programmed complex activity on the part of a drone) or might require a great deal of complex control by the drone operator for even simple functions (like controlling a remote controlled aircraft with a single channel radio controller).

Robot brains can have expert software installed but so do computers with intelligent interface. These are still complex processes but again the computer does not "choose" to activate them. The expert skill cannot decide to take the day off or start singing show tunes unless it was programmed to specifically do that. They cannot learn to do something because their development is fixed at the point of manufacture.

Even Basic robot brains have decision making as part of their basic function. They can learn new skills by observing (though for Basic brains this ability to learn new skills is stated as very limited). The key thing is they have an INT stat of greater than zero. A robot might only be as intelligent as a hamster, but a drone is as intelligent as hamster food. Something with int 1 is at least capable of navigating itself around its environment. It depends on your definition of INT if you consider an insect which has only a ganglion has INT. It is capable of navigating round, but often using very simple rules that may lead to it getting stuck (flies banging against a closed window). I would class Int 1 as having some sort of problem solving skill and recognising when it is stuck in a loop.

Some drones have a primitive brain onboard to allow a bit more flexibility (e.g. Repair Drones). This will enable them to recharge themselves when they get low on power or return to base when they stop receiving commands from the controller. Many real world drones have this as a safety feature but is it really that different to a cockroach fleeing the light or a moth running to it.

 

[swordtart]

"Automata" outside of computer science is kinda an archaic word when others have superseded it's use. Automata is just plural of automation. Early automata were examplified by Greek myths. For example, Aristotle claimed Daedalus used quicksilver to make the wooden statue of Aphrodite move. Later automata were animated toys where depiction of animated animals appealed to the younger audience. In the 8th Century, wind-powered satues were used to open the gates of Baghdad. Etc. ... There does seem a common theme of emulating the movement of animals as well as humans, which is well within the definition provided.

Automata is the plural of automaton not automation (was that autocorrect?). From automatos (acting of itself).

Animals and human simulation is an obvious application when you have made a machine that moves by itself (since they also move by themselves), but there are plenty of examples where this was not the case (player pianos, fairground organs, mills, clocks and orreries). The definition of something needs to be always true since it is a statement of the exact meaning of a word, not something that is merely usually true.

Sorry, I hate when people state something is a definition when it is merely an example.

 

[Limpin Legin]

Automata is the plural of automaton not automation (was that autocorrect?).

Just my dyslexia, apologies. I wouldn't have noticed until you pointed to it.

The definition of something needs to be always true since it is a statement of the exact meaning of a word, not something that is merely usually true.

Yes, I would agree, unless the word has a casual or colloquial meaning. Here I am referring to academic meaning (not just my own). See link in post #96 for affirmation. Or, if you are unconvinced, try again with this academic source here:

By automata we shall mean here, moving artifacts that imitate real or fictional creatures and contain the energy source that makes them function. In this sense, clocks are not automata, as they are not such imitations. And the medieval and renaissance animated figures on clocks weren’t automata either, as their source of energy was external, namely, the weights that moved the clock.

Source: https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-319-31069-5_239

 

[swordtart]

Just my dyslexia, apologies. I wouldn't have noticed until you pointed to it.

Yes, I would agree, unless the word has a casual or colloquial meaning. Here I am referring to academic meaning (not just my own). See link in post #96 for affirmation. Or, if you are unconvinced, try again with this academic source here:

Source: https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-319-31069-5_239

Since the definition in the source cited at post #96 disagrees with the definition in the source cited at post #99 it points up the danger of citing any found "definition" as an absolute. The very fact that the source in post #99 says "we shall mean here" makes it absolutely clear that the author is aware of other definitions of automata but for their discussion they are limiting the scope to the categories mentioned. "Automata were first developed in the sixteenth century" makes it clear that Ancient Greek automata are for example being excluded from the definition.

If someone wishes to use a word to have a specific meaning in any statement they need to set out that meaning at the start of that statement, that does not mean that definition has any meaning outside that context. These are labels not immutable concepts. We cannot use external definitions of a word to dismiss an argument that uses the word differently in a specific context if that word is being used in a manner consistent with that specific context.

If a Frenchman argued that a cactus thing was not Green the discussion would be without value if his only justification was that it was because grass is in fact Vert. All we have learnt is how he labels things, nothing at all about grass. “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” as Humpty Dumpty said.

Drone has a specific meaning in the Robot Handbook of MGT2. When discussing the rules attached to drones within the context of MGT2 we need to stick to the definition of drone set out there.