Slashdot Log In
Bionic Bugs To Fight Terrorists
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:54 PM
from the really-strong-swatter dept.
from the really-strong-swatter dept.
dptalia writes "Israel is looking to create a small robot, no larger than a hornet to follow, film, and kill terrorists. It's just one of a series of weapons the country is considering as an alternative to conventional technologies. Other ideas floating around include gloves that would give their user 'bionic strength', and ultra-miniaturized sensors to detect explosives on suicide bombers." From the article: "The research integrates nanotechnology into Israel's security department and will find creative solutions to problems the army has been unable to address, Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres told Yedioth Ahronoth. 'The war in Lebanon proved that we need smaller weaponry. It's illogical to send a plane worth $100 million against a suicidal terrorist. So we are building futuristic weapons,' Peres said."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
gah (Score:5, Funny)
Cowardly (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Cowardly (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hmm (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe it's just me, but that sentence makes it sound like we're running terrorists over with our jets. Teehee
This is SOOO futuristic that it won't happen soon (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus, it's reasonable to assume that $100's of millions would need to be invested in such a "nanohornet" for it to be feasible. Heck, the current world's smallest flying robot [gizmodo.com] is massive compared to a bee, and can only fly a few minutes (yes, this link is from 2003, and the the robot is still considered the smallest working prototype of a flying robot).
In my opinion, the israelis need to invest in far better armor and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. During their conflict with Hezbollah, the UAVs were a huge success [tmcnet.com]. Also, wouldn't highly armored robotic vehicles be better than a hornet? For example, maybe an armored ball (kind of like those hamster balls) that would essentially be indestructable and roll around doing reconaiscence and shooting things. Just a thought.
Re:This is SOOO futuristic that it won't happen so (Score:5, Informative)
Well you're right the UAVs worked great, and you're right that they need far better armor if they want to continue using armor. The RPG-29s and guided missles used by Hezbollah did a number on the IDF's Merkava MBTs, considered one of if not the most heavily armored tanks in service. Between those relatively cheap shoulder-fired infantry weapons, and the shaped-charge mines Hezbollah had sprinkled throughout their territory, it was demonstrated pretty conclusively that today's armor isn't standing up to even the guerilla weapons. More armor is needed, though I'm not sure that's the right tack to take.
First, tanks aren't that great in the kinds of environments we're talking about: hilly terrain with valleys and choke points that can be littered with mines and give attackers on the ridges an ideal firing line to hit the tank's weak point, and cities and villages that have basically the same properties. A slow moving tank with an enemy on high ground is vulnerable.
Second, there is no such thing as "essentially indestructable". In the ages-old battle between weapons and armor, weapons always win eventually. There have been times that armor would have a brief period of success, but then the weapons would advance one generation and the armor would fall behind. This is just the nature of the beast: it's easier to destroy than to resist destruction. It's easier to focus a large amount of energy on a small area, whether the tip of an arrow fired from a longbow or the shaped-charge explosive of an RPG, than it is to build a material that can resist that energy, whether steel armor or the advanced composites used in MBTs. Reactive armor was designed to defeat the shaped charge rockets, so the rocket designers responded by simply adding a smaller charge ahead of the main one to defeat the reactive armor so the big charge can hit the main armor with full force. Just as the cannon signalled the end of the castle, the RPG-29 and ilk are signalling the end of MBT armor.
Not that tanks aren't useful and further armor developments serve no purpose, it's just that you aren't going to get much of a lead even over non-state-militaries like Hezbollah. An autonomous tank would be nice because when it gets destroyed you haven't lost a tank crew as well. Plus you could design it to be more robust than a manned tank (where breaching into the crew compartment is basically all you need to do). But it isn't going to be an indestructable ball of death, that is for sure.
Parent
Re:Side tracking on the subject of tanks. (Score:3, Interesting)
If you make a tank automous or at least remote controlled, then you don't really have worry about protecting the crew anymore. Hence you can replace the saved weight with something devoted to firepower, fuel, and speed.
In fact, why not make the tank cost $500,000 rather than $10 to $25 million and make a whole slew of them with mass production
Sure an RPG could kill it with one hit, but a well placed mine or RPG could immobilize the best armored tank
Re:Side tracking on the subject of tanks. (Score:4, Insightful)
2) stealing the tank remotely
Parent
So ... (Score:5, Funny)
Just gloves? (Score:3, Insightful)
Saw this once before... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sounds like the flying robotic syringes in Dune, they silently fly around to find their target, then fly directly into them and inject some sort of fast acting poison (the spice?).
tm
Re:Saw this once before... (Score:5, Informative)
William
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Greeeat. (Score:4, Funny)
Futuristic you say? (Score:5, Funny)
FFFFFFFFFFACE!!
Israel, why must you have such wretched PR? (Score:4, Insightful)
Great inventions! (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember, no matter how intelligent the weapons inventors are, it's still violence; and "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent".
There's high tech and higher tech... (Score:5, Funny)
Already here. They already use them. (Score:3, Informative)
If the bullet was following someone cleaver enough to move out of the way, it is very very cheap to send another.
All they need is... (Score:3, Funny)
Remember Bugs, anyone? (Score:5, Informative)
Welcome... (Score:3, Informative)
...to the Diamond Age.
For further reading and insightful predictions about the sociological effects of nanotech, see Mr. Neal Stephenson.
Among his other speculations: as nanotech becomes ubiquitous (in the way that bacteria are today), societies will manufacture nanotech-based airborne immune systems for themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not very wise when the armies invading and attacking you have not done the same.