Does the Military need indirect fire Unmanned Ground Vehicles? | ARTILLERY ROBOTIC DRONES

Does the Military need indirect fire Unmanned Ground Vehicles? | ARTILLERY ROBOTIC DRONES

I have looked at many different forms of robots and drones that the military has wanted to implement but in today’s video we discuss a new weapon system that is being made as a concept for a Unmanned Ground Vehicle artillery unit. I have my doubts in the configuration its shown as in this video as being worthwhile or not military technology for the modern battlefield.

Hope you enjoy!!

💰 Want to support my channel? Check out my Patreon Donation page!


Matt’s DREAM:

👕 Check out my Merch:

📬Wanna send me something? My PO Box: Matthew James 210A – 12A Street N Suite
#135 Lethbridge Alberta Canada T1H2J

📸 My instagram: Matt_matsimus
🎮 Twitch:


📘 Facebook:



  1. Pablo Pervguy on July 15, 2021 at 11:56 pm

    why are all these UGV’s all have either wheels or tracks? why not robotic spider legs? robotic spider legs tech already exist. Spider legs can traverse more terrain than ordinary wheels or tracks.

  2. Mr. J on July 15, 2021 at 11:56 pm

    probably "wingman" systems limited range with a set intercept range sorta like raptors used in Jurassic park deployed from your tank or group automated flanking systems or other simple maneuvers full on automation some day? probably hybrid systems in our lifetimes.

  3. cyberfrank 2010 on July 15, 2021 at 11:56 pm

    it reminds me of the gi joe pac rats.
    I only have ‘action figure’ battlefield experience, lol.
    but I d say it depends on the mission.
    I d rather have this as cover than nothing.
    but if it gives my position away in a situation where
    I would not have been seen, well, it s not helping much.
    I imagined my pac rats with A.I., autonomous patrols around the base.
    I never used them in attacks, I might see them to attract enemy fire.
    good decoys to distract the enemy at point A while sending troops at point B.

    losing your job…
    this is more than your job, it s pretty much your life.
    I like better to lose robots than people s lives.
    as leader, I d never risk you, I d send them, and keep you behind safely.
    you don t lose your job, your job is getting safer.
    I don t think that we will ever see in our lifetime a robot
    that is as smart as a human on the battlefield.
    they will only be cannon fodder as intended, and rightly so.
    I think that by using those, humans will stop making war over time.
    as they will evolve softer and softer, and no more willing to die in battle.
    once all robots are destroyed, the war will be considered lost…
    they will no longer think of sending people to their deaths.
    in some way, this is the beginning of the end of wars.
    no money = no robots = no war…
    good show!

  4. Saksham Mishra on July 15, 2021 at 11:57 pm

    @matsimus do you think this could be utilised as a battalion level weapon for quick light artillery support? On a really wide frontline spanning 100s of kilometres, this frees up heavy artillery units for use elsewhere where they may be required more. Say the adversary were attacking a position manned by 300-400 soldiers and you have no available air or artillery support at this moment. Wouldn’t a group of 10 such units stationed 10-20 kms behind you, firing rockets which could be laser guided onto the advancing enemy, halt their advance for sometime at least??

    Your "go big or go home" is understandable but is only doable by bigshot economies like USA, Russia and China. Others cannot afford such systems, hence they will sooner or later resort to these solutions.

  5. Solstice on July 15, 2021 at 11:58 pm

    This Mission Master thing of Rheinmetal is allready in use and testing in the German Millitary, SF and EF.
    Mission master can operate a bit above 72 hours with 1 charge and up to 9 days with recharge generator.
    There are diffrent Mission modules for this thing, not only the Rocket launcher, so it would be handy to have some of those, in some Units.
    The other point is, it follows with out remote control and can operate in Convoy, resupply and so on …
    The Idea isn´t really bad, but the real use in reality is something diffrent !?
    For real artillery it would make more sense, if you got a mobile operation station with 8 or 10 unmanned units and I think it is still the battery/energy factor for those things, to keep them 24/7 going, why you won´t see them comming soon and as well the resupply for those.

  6. Michael Edwards on July 16, 2021 at 12:02 am

    I think if you used a system like the M5 RIp saw. You could load two in a C130 or four in a C17. Sworm attack the enemies rear, supply calm, ambush mech units. No human wants to fight a drone.

  7. Kabutar on July 16, 2021 at 12:03 am

    you missed a lot of things here mate

  8. Ender Craft on July 16, 2021 at 12:03 am

    Hey mat,
    You are Right they are not useful as artillery but I look at these drones more as a kind of infantry support. For example, if you are on patrol and come under fire, air support is often requested, but if this unit has such a drone with it, it does not have to wait for the air support.
    Greetings from Germany.

  9. MrMorvana on July 16, 2021 at 12:03 am

    The problem of this specific thing is the low amount of rockets, but why couldn’t it carry more? I don’t know how much a rocket weight (here the support seams heavier than the rockets…), but it shouldn’t be to much for this thing, supposed to be able to move hundreds of kg of material. You could probably put around 50 rockets on it.

    Sure, you wouldn’t use it to make your patrol, but for a battle you could have a powerfull support without having to move a tank.

  10. Семён Лопаткин on July 16, 2021 at 12:05 am

    Russian Uran-9! Although I’ve heard the UK intelligence did not rate its performance to be good enough in Syria.

  11. Tankart 364 on July 16, 2021 at 12:05 am

    Usually UGV are controlled from far away, we can see this with the Estonian troops in Mali, who use Milrem Robotics THeMIS UGV’s instead of going themselves on patrols, minimizing the risk of casualties. This is probably gonna be the same with the new Type-x unmanned tank, where they are going to send out like a small squad of 12, to destroy and eliminate the target, without ever even themselves stepping on the battle ground.

  12. n/a n/a on July 16, 2021 at 12:07 am

    Why not scrap the surplus? "We spent too much on them." Well then the issue is not the vehicle, it’s having more money than common sense.

  13. EpicHistoryMaker on July 16, 2021 at 12:07 am

    Mat, I’m going to have to disagree with your points on logistics. Any manned vehicle also suffers from a minute quantity of fuel, ammunition, and other expendables. So do the infantry.

    What is demonstrated in this video is not a replacement, but a supplement. That would be a hellova lot of supplemental firepower given to a fire team.

    You did a video on the Weisel not that long ago. Not the most useful vehicle when it’s being shot at, but still an effective and cheap way to get information and additional firepower down range.

    The Tubby soldiers were funny though!

  14. NEO CON WAR HAWK on July 16, 2021 at 12:07 am

    Eh tuk er jerbs

  15. Novrian Hide Soul on July 16, 2021 at 12:10 am

    Send this drone tank going to saving palestine for freedom…

  16. Living Corpse on July 16, 2021 at 12:10 am

    I think the rockets are very situational, combine them with APKWS (Advance Precision Kill Weapon System) for urban combat to minimize collateral damage. Every other situation, machine gun, supplies and maybe two missiles to deal with a tank or aircraft if the need arises.

  17. gin-N-aujus on July 16, 2021 at 12:10 am

    Might come in handy for the US Marines doing shore invasions but they got to be able to float.

  18. Randy Ross on July 16, 2021 at 12:10 am

    Yeah, your Job would be to repair the Robots… They don’t make and repair themselves bud!

  19. Living Corpse on July 16, 2021 at 12:15 am

    I don’t think you’re gonna lose your job. Man and machine are both good and bad at different things, it’s why we still have fighter pilots even though we have UAVs.

  20. AllenSeeAllenDo on July 16, 2021 at 12:16 am

    Ok so the 50 cal robot isn’t going to kill an enemy with every bullet. But a guided Med range rocket might get a kill with every shot especially if it could link to a spotter drone. But when it’s empty it has no way to defend itself.

  21. Jakub P. on July 16, 2021 at 12:21 am

    I see them (the 6 – 12 round artilerry UGV) as great first response or patrolling units support, not as your main artillery. Like, if you spot enemy convoy on your patrol, call your HQ, send that few artillery on them right now and back up at the same time.

  22. steelgear on July 16, 2021 at 12:21 am

    Mobile arty? No. Mobile HMG? Sure….sounds do-able. Small UGVs in the light indirect role is just not worth it not enough ammo. Direct mobile MG support seems more practical to me.

  23. Chilledfish on July 16, 2021 at 12:23 am

    On what do you base that those cute little artillery UGVs need a squad to babysit them? Or that they’ll be deployed individually as an indirect artillery?
    Those launchers look a bit similar to hydra launchers, and those get used up pretty quickly too. I doubt that you think that they are useless.

  24. Eli Zorn on July 16, 2021 at 12:24 am

    To be fair, these could probably be used as “disposable” platforms to send out where there is a high chance of insurgent interference and you don’t want a crew to be at risk.

    For instance, firing missions whose optimum angles require you to already be in hostile territory if you want to mitigate the chances of damaging civilian infrastructure.

    Another example is, that if it’s a relatively close range platform, it can be used for limited fire support for otherwise clandestine missions where you want to, for instance, support a team of operators while also minimizing the amount of personnel involved to prevent information leakage. If Seal Team Six is doing a mission in (REDACTED), and it’s legality is questionable, why involve more people than you have to?

  25. ihatemybosses on July 16, 2021 at 12:27 am

    Just itching to get back into a war. Worried he is not going to be able to kill in a stupid war the US probably started. Don’t worry governor. Even if these are purchased it will likely be used in conjunction with your prized gun.

  26. Mark Brisec on July 16, 2021 at 12:27 am

    I think that the UGVs with vertical launchers, similar to Navy’s VLS, would be a great access to ground troops. These vehicles with VLS tubes loaded with NLOS missiles like Spike or even the ground launched SDBs, would give a small tactical unit an organic heavy hitting capability beyond what they have today in the mortar tube. This UGV would be paired with an UAV flown by the soldier which would give it detecting and targeting capability. Imagine killing tanks that are waiting in an ambush, 10 miles from your position, with a pin point precision? VLS would give it a 360 degrees firing range while additional missiles could be hauled on a UAV and be reloaded fast in a field.

  27. Aidan Preuss on July 16, 2021 at 12:30 am

    Artillery that can’t load

  28. wookieiam1 on July 16, 2021 at 12:32 am

    The artillery gunners could have their own vehicle. Also something like this can be used to gaurd the batallion.

  29. Ioachim Savian Popovici on July 16, 2021 at 12:35 am

    I think it’s a replacement for mortars

  30. Yelectric on July 16, 2021 at 12:35 am

    I think the concept is to have it ferry rockets from a storage truck to close ranges, and back to not put the artillery on the front line and expensive logistics in the range of other artillery

  31. rolyan trauts on July 16, 2021 at 12:36 am

    Seems you are missing the point and ignoring the huge investment in ‘lifter’ technology as a squad will not be operating a singular a device.
    A singular squad will be dropped off with drones in number with recon drones at the front and unlike manned vehicles they are acceptable loss.
    The squad for most part are loaders for a force that has unparalleled deployment speed for firepower that is likely to also include some auto canons so if needed they will cover a retreat for no loss of life.
    "well it was unmanned" is the mantra.

  32. Scar626 on July 16, 2021 at 12:36 am

    I would love to hear a field marshal’s opinion on this

  33. Randy Ross on July 16, 2021 at 12:38 am

    Robot Resupply Vehicles are pretty cool, like a Unit Could be Completely Cut Off, barely a Hope of Getting them Supplies, but who cares, send some Robots in, one will get through, something you’d never do with hugh-mons. You could waste 30 Robots to save 3 Hugh-mons, you would always no back up is being sent, even if it doesn’t make it there, you know they tried, so people would even stick their necks out that much further. You never leave a man behind, to make sure everyone will go in the 1st Place, but those can be costly missions, but if done with Robots, you’d hate to be around an American Left behind, that would be a bad place for an enemy to be around, as the waves of Drones and Robots storm in!

  34. Marc Browne on July 16, 2021 at 12:38 am

    I see the use for these as making more sense if they can be autonomous.
    Imagine, a small special forces team plans to attack a camp from the south. One or two of these attack from the North, then autonomously drive back to a staging area without any assistance.

    In a traditional shoot & scoot artillery role, 12 of these could shoot, then scoot automatically, to a new location, rearm with troops, drive to a new location and shoot again, rinse repeat.

    Thirdly, have a strong ATGM missile on a vehicle, a special forces team comes across an armoured target, tank, etc, they can launch large ATGM weapons without needing to lug them around the place, and again the autonomous nature means that these don’t need to travel with the soldiers.

    Once the vehicle is empty, it can drive home on its own.

    Of course this is all based on them being able to drive better than vehicles do in ArmA 3.

  35. Joy House on July 16, 2021 at 12:40 am

    100% again artillery drone would need more artillery. Better to use heavy weapons systems on a drone like a machine gun’s / ant-tanks missiles/ UGL machine gun / smoke launches too . Drones with artillery weapons are pointless 😒 without alot of firepower 🔥. Just use artillery tank’s/ jet fighter’s/ mortars . I believe drones can help in war but idea 💡 is pointless without manpower/ heavy tank’s/ jet fighter’s/ mortars power still .

  36. flodA reltiH on July 16, 2021 at 12:42 am

    South African Special Forces at 4:03 to 4:05. Nice to see them on a video even if they weren’t being spoken about. They get to test out all the cool new gear.

  37. Randy Ross on July 16, 2021 at 12:42 am

    Um… Dude we need every type, and half our infantry like special forces operating in the middle of all of them and the other Half, Super Hardened, and Under Ground and surrounded by Robots!

  38. csnation on July 16, 2021 at 12:42 am

    I won’t consider it artillery per se but just a force multiplier.

    In short patrols or just doing guard duty, such light platform can allow a small patrol to at least temporary engage above their weight before breaking contact.
    Or have they rolling around FOBs as early heavy weapon platforms.

    But 50 cals will definitely have far more endurance if used in such a role..

  39. Echo Mande on July 16, 2021 at 12:43 am

    I know this is a very late comment to an older video but what the hey, I only just saw it.

    I think the answer to what you are asking is ‘smart munitions’. I agree that the 8 wheeler sized UGVs probably couldn’t carry the dumb ammunition to make them worth escorting onto the battlefield. However, what I can see them being used for is as a mobile launch system carrying a dozen or more heavy loitering ammunition type UAVs or guided rockets. I also don’t really see them as targeted for frontline heavy combat situations though in numbers they should be useful there.

    In the direct support mode something along the lines of the BAE APWKS should do. This is in production and can fit in standard 75mm rocket pods As I understand it these rockets are guided by laser designator which could be on a vehicle-carried mast, carried by a soldier or both. A dozen rockets should last for the length of a patrol or until reinforcements or fire support can be called in.

    As ranged fire support, a UGV could carry a dozen of something like the AeroVironment Switchblade 600, which weighs about 50 lbs. This suicide drone can apparently wander over 30km from its launch and control station and loiter for a while. The UGV could carry the launchers and control station (or more than one) pretty much in ready to launch configuration. I don’t know if drones can be handed off between control stations but if so this could allow someone running the UGV’s control station to direct drones fired from rear areas.

    While it isn’t really a part of this video, the communications systems the UGV could (should) be equipped with to support all of the above are IMO just as important as the weapons. These UGVs should be able to fit communication systems to let them be battlefield communications nodes and allow reachback, so the UGV weapons could, in addition to troops on the ground, also be controled by someone back at base or continent away. Even just letting troops to talk to aircraft, artillery or drone controllers elsewhere without having to manpack the equipment needed ought to be really welcome.

    Could all of this be done with a truck sized UGV? Probably. It would however not be as transportable as a smaller UGV.

  40. Tony Navarro on July 16, 2021 at 12:45 am

    The artillry drone idea doesn’t make sense unless it’s an automated firebase with a centralized ammo bunker with an autoloader mechanism feeding a series of guns arranged around it. This might make sense if you wanted to free up more soldiers for combat leaving a crew of three or four to maintain the firebase. The autoloader would be a sort of carousel type feeding ammunition to six to eight guns from an ammo bunker. Fire can be directed by the on site crew, or from a distant control station, Replenishing the bunker would be by helicopter, or resupply truck., and the ammo replenishment could be packed in magazine format so as to quickly swap a depleted magazine with a new one. Then, when the firebase needs to be moved, everything can be disconnected into seperate transport units which could then be led by the lead crewed vehicle, or autonomously from a distant control station.When the new site is reached, each gun carraige would position itself around the central ammo bunker, while the crew attatches the ammo feeding belts to each gun while each gun starts orienting itself via GPS and/or satellite positioning.. Not so sure if such a set up can shoot and scoot quickly if needs be, but it would theoretically need only a small crew to service the guns of the whole firebase.

  41. Ali Chahin on July 16, 2021 at 12:46 am

    Those guys seem like farmers doing farmer shit and are not placing a bomb

  42. Stormie Wutzke on July 16, 2021 at 12:46 am


  43. Mr D on July 16, 2021 at 12:47 am

    I`d be interested to hear your opinion on the old german Faun KraKa.
    This robots could have a simmilar use.
    In addition to that if they are waterproof they could be hidden and travel in rivers or lakes and/or even resupplied there as well as in small caves after shoot and scoot missions.
    They could also be used as/in a heavy company of a infantry or any other combat bataillon:
    The troops who make contact mark the target (could also be marked automatically through cameras or radar or the machines that automatically triangulate where you are shot from), mark this on a interactive offline or gps based map and then, moves into range (maybe is already there) shoots on the marked target and leaves.

  44. Caoszombey_HD GG on July 16, 2021 at 12:48 am

    It were better with a lmg with 338 to 14,5mm cal. With a atgm and a stinger. With that you hat a anti tank , anti air and extra fire in a small packet.

  45. Andrew Broeker on July 16, 2021 at 12:48 am

    I feel like a 40 mm grenade launcher would be a an effective way to add limited indirect fire capability to a combat ugv while still keeping it useful in a direct fire role. Maybe co-mount it with a machine gun to allow for closer support. Alternatively maybe some sort of autoloading light mortar system could be developed. Clearly they’re developing around existing weapon systems for now but that doesn’t need to be the case forever.

    I’m not sure the rocket artillery concept as shown is that impractical though. Your accompanying drone operators can’t carry enough ammo to reload it? Add more luggage drones. Stuck in a ditch? The other drones can help pull it out. Too slow? I don’t know how fast these drones can go, but if they can keep with an ATV you can add a lot of mobility by putting the drone operators on those, or in an MRAP or humvee or something. What’s the added value? Your troops aren’t where the drones are when the shooting starts, and the drones can be placed in much less secure positions than you would be comfortable with for people. It’s also way smaller than vehicles you would need for similar manned capabilities, though I suppose just giving your mortar team some luggage drones would accomplish that. Still, for some sort of short special operations mission this might be a good for factor for fire support, especially since if you don’t want to reload it then there’s no reason the drone operator can’t be spending most of his time running around being infantry.

    Things could get even more interesting if you consider long-term restructuring of military forces around distributed capabilities. You could potentially fit the same kinds of fire capabilities a much larger modern formation has into a much smaller force, barring particularly heavy weapon systems, all pieces of which can be easily transported by helicopter while retaining significant ground mobility. Direct fire, indirect fire, anti-aircraft, motorized infantry, logistics, combat recovery, engineering, reconnaissance, command and control, medical operations, support for light UAVs, all packed neatly into perhaps a dozen CH-47s with no slingloading and all minimizing human presence in combat. I don’t know if that’s a good idea, but I wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand for fast reaction capability.

  46. yiggdrasill on July 16, 2021 at 12:49 am

    Your idea of swarms of heavy self loading artillery drones has merit. Artillery is used either for sustained fire or more commonly brief heavy bombardment and i can see great use for it in the second role. A group could move into position, fire and then leave for resupply before counter battery hits. As for a small thing like is shown here….yeah its a waste of time. Not only does it add time and effort for the infantry i personally would not feel safer having it around or have much confidence in its fire support ability. As you said, go big or go home

  47. videre on July 16, 2021 at 12:50 am

    Could strong jammers prevent the drone from receiving signals from the operator? They are also used successfully against UAVs.

  48. Barret Campbell on July 16, 2021 at 12:52 am

    A zamboni carrying an artillery piece is absolutely the Canadian Armed Forces spirit animal.

  49. 이름 on July 16, 2021 at 12:54 am

    Well, I see consistent opinion of "Do it much sastisfying in all aspect, or it should be rejected" in your ‘future tech’ videos.

  50. Andreas Leonardo on July 16, 2021 at 12:55 am

    Excellent explaining of abilities of drones and increasing its important recent thanks for sending friend

Leave a Comment