Slashdot Log In
America's Robot Army
Posted by
Zonk
on Sunday March 16, @08:07AM
from the the-few-the-proud-the-computational dept.
from the the-few-the-proud-the-computational dept.
Popular Mechanics explores the increasing level of reliance the US military has when it comes to robotic assistance. In the last few years, robot drones have reached an all-new level of sophistication, with several models already deployed in the field. Now, the next generation of robot helpers is nearing the end of its test phase. PM offers up a preview of what we could expect to see in the field within the next five years. "The MULE (Multifunction Utility/Logistics and Equipment) is roughly the size of a Humvee, but it has a trick worthy of monster truck rallies. Each of its six wheels is mounted on an articulated leg, allowing the robot to clamber up obstacles that other cars would simply bump against ... Barely a year old, the prototype is a product of the Army's Unmanned Ground Vehicle program, which began in 2001. It has yet to fire a single bullet or missile, or even be fitted with a weapon. Here at the test track it's loaded down with rucksacks and boxes, two squads' worth of equipment."
Related Stories
[+]
Killer Military Robot Arms Race Underway? 332 comments
coondoggie writes to tell us NetworkWorld is reporting that one researcher seems to think that a military robot arms race may be imminent between both governments and terrorists. "We are beginning to see the first steps towards an international robot arms race and it may not be long before robots become a standard terrorist weapon to replace the suicide bomber, according to professor Noel Sharkey, from the Royal United Services Institute Department of Computer Science. [...] Currently there is always a human in the loop to decide on the use of lethal force. However, this is set to change with the US giving priority to autonomous weapons - robots that will decide on where, when and who to kill, according to the professor."
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More tanks (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds like a tank. And haven't retired generals criticized the DoD in the last couple of decades for developing the tank technology we wished that we had in World War II instead of concentrating on anti-guerilla strategy?
Re:More tanks (Score:5, Insightful)
I highly doubt if that will happen though.
To truly fight guerilla you must fight them like you fight pirates. You take away the economic/political incentive for it to begin with.
Re:More tanks (Score:4, Funny)
... with Ninjas?
Re:More tanks (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds really like a tank with no one to get injured in it.
It's pretty much a "more of it"-approach. They want to solve all the problems with more technology. The rational behind it is the wish to reduce one's own side's casualties as far as possible. Al
Re:More tanks (Score:4, Insightful)
You really have no clue what a tank is? Or the difference between a tank and a truck? This is *not* a tank. It is a utility vehicle! The variant currently being shown is design to haul crap around so soldiers don't need to. Of course it does have armed variants that are designed to shoot weapons, keeping soldiers from harm. But, still, it is not heavy armor.
And w.r.t. air strikes, do you realize what the alternative is to our current approach of guided weapons? Yes, carpet bombing. Creates a lot more civilian casualties. Instead of killing civilians who the bad guys are hiding next to, they'll also kill the civilians in the buildings down the street.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, I can. I just kept the label my parent-poster gave it. AFV (or reconnaissance AFV) would probably the best manned correspondence, but I'm not going to argue about it.You are right, but please see that it was not my point.
> And w.r.t. air strikes,
Re: (Score:3)
It does? are you sure I think you are confusing a BGM-109 Tomahawk [wikipedia.org] or a AGM-84H/K Harpoon [wikipedia.org] with a AGM-114 Hellfire [wikipedia.org]. The Hellfire is a semi-active homing anti-tank we
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair Iran has tanks... Whoop
Personally, (Score:2, Interesting)
And in the m
Robots? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Robots? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Irony of ironies (Score:3, Interesting)
Over-reliance on tech (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Over-reliance on tech (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember reading something online about the specs being requested by the military on one of these UAV air
Re: (Score:2)
However in response to your post, many (not all) military vehicles are hardened to some degree to EMP.
Also, at Paxtuxent River MD the capacitors that are used to gene
They should consider low tech options. (Score:5, Insightful)
All of it to be ultimately undone by a hundred dollars worth of high explosive, some household shrapnel and a triggering device operated by a guy living a cave who MAY have spent a total of three weeks at the local militant training camp.
We are living in the age of guerilla warfare. It's no longer about the size of your Deathstar. Its about how many plucky farm kids you can convince to join the cause.
I guess there new moto could be "Army of 00000001"
Re:They should consider low tech options. (Score:5, Insightful)
When we hear news reports of raids on insurgent strongholds by our forces you often hear about how 10s, 100s were killed compared to maybe 2 or 3 allied soldiers. It's the very fact we have high tech. weaponry that allows this, be it simple things such as night vision to full on portable video link ups with drones above the battlefield - the fact is high tech. weaponry is saving the lives of our soldiers.
Similarly, I understand that an expensive roboting land vehicle like this could be blown apart but if it can traverse more difficult terrain than your average hummer can then surely that allows us to transport things off standard roadways and across tougher terrain hence avoiding the sides of the road where IEDs are often hidden? Surely the best defense against a trap is to be able to not walk into it in the first place?
There's a lot to be said for the point you make - that we mustn't start using technology in warzones for the sake of it. Used well however it can and already is making our forces a lot better off than they ever have been previously. Whilst 4,000 odd US soldiers may have died in Iraq to insurgents, that figure is dwarfed by the number of insurgents that have died to high tech. weaponry in US hands.
One final point is that Iraq and Afghanistan are fairly different in terms of weaponry and tactics used, the typical IED made by a taliban tribesman living in the mountains isn't going to do an awful lot to an MBT, but as soon as you go to Iraq where you have insurgents potentially armed by the Iranians using charges shaped specifically to penetrate tank armour it's a different story. The insurgents the US is dealing with in Iraq aren't the same insurgents you describe in your post (i.e. next to no training and only using cheap weaponry) that are more commonly found in Afghanistan. Many insurgents in Iraq have been given vast amounts of training and are aquiring some pretty expensive weaponry themselves. The problem is now that some of the tactics in Iraq are spilling over into Afghanistan.
Technology does matter in the warzone when it comes to saving soldiers lives, sure a multi-million dollar MULE may get blown to pieces, but I'd rather see that than a patrol of actual humans suffer the same fate.
What are the chances (Score:3, Interesting)
Enjoy the music of the game here [youtube.com]. Ah, nostalgia...
It's all fun and games now (Score:2)
But what happens when one of these things goes off the reservation and kills innocents? Or a UAV collides with an airliner. Or suppose some clever hacker figures out how to take control of our drones and uses them to bomb us. Is that an act of war even
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
with separate electric motors for each wheel then you must have a way to synchronize all the motors to run at the same speed... i would be willing to bet the electronic that would go in to a system would be plenty complicated, not impossible - but not a