iRobot Demonstrates New Weaponized Robot 188
An anonymous reader writes "According to this IEEE story, iRobot and the US military have released video showing a weaponized version of iRobot's Warrior robot. In the video, the Warrior is seen firing a weapon system called the APOBS (Anti-Personnel Obstacle Breaching System), a grenade-filled line propelled by a rocket and stabilized by a drogue parachute. This system is used to clear minefields and obstructed roads. The video shows soldiers deploying a Warrior with the APOBS mounted on its back. The robot fires the device, which lands along a dirt road, exploding after a few seconds. A voice is then heard, 'Road clear; proceed forward.'"
Obvious questions... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's probably not cost effective except for straight-line clearance operations (i.e., a road).
You wouldn't want to try and clear several acres of field with this system as it would totally destroy the field. The purpose built systems are better suited for mine clearing. There's a continuing effort underway for mine clearing systems with an eye to small cost and high effectiveness and safety.
Re:Obvious questions... (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, use prisoners sentenced for execution and animals (30+ kg) tagged to be destroyed. Each prisoner is given as many animals as (s)he wants, and if (s)he steps on a mine, we'll put him/her down with a bullet to the head.
If they manage to clear a set number (say 100 mines), they're free to go.
More Than Cows (Score:5, Insightful)
These robots surely cost a lot more than running livestock across minefields to trigger the mines.
Re: (Score:2)
And it cooks your steaks at the same time!
Don't mind the lead bits...
Re: (Score:2)
Seems to be pretty close.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but if you don't need the cows to clear the mines, you can eat them or sell them or breed more cows.
If you don't need an iRobot to clear the mines, you've got a toy the kids will get bored with in a couple of hours.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you nuts? This thing's got a built-in wire-guided, parachute-controlled explosive grenade launcher.
It would take weeks for the kids to get tired of it!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And in my previous post, I forgot the cost of retrieving the cows back vs retrieving the robots back.
Re: (Score:2)
Driving a herd of cows up a road might be OK for clearing "dumb" land mines (although I would still think twice before walking there!), a herd of cattle is not so great for ensuring a lane is clear of command-detonated mines.
You're not understanding how this works. The military has has mine-clearing systems like this for 100 years (first bangalores, then the MCLC "micklick"), but they required combat engineers to get up to the suspected minefield and deploy these while exposing themselves to enemy fire (or
Re: (Score:2)
Why? These robots cost far more than a cow or even a herd of cows.
If the issue is killing the cows via landmines, then perhaps a cheap robot that runs over mines to set them off can be built.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you car them around?
In the case of a third world nation needing to clear fields of land mines, you would use local cattle.
I have been involved in the production of beef from cattle, they are extremely stupid animals.
Re: (Score:2)
I could see rats doing that, as someone who has raised both animals rats are much smarter than cows.
Re: (Score:2)
You aren't going to find many farmers who want to give up what is arguably the most valuable thing they own.
Do you mean their cow, or their iRobot ammunition?
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't expect it too be too expensive, when it comes to the cost of UAV's it usually comes down to specific type of weaponry mounted on it which increases the cost.
Things like missile fail-safes, ai based being more expensive and the very different forms of targeting and guidance systems out there, things like direct and top attack, etc ...
This one seems pretty simple, shoot in a straight line and deploy a parachute.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry I meant to say UGV ... got my acronyms wrong :)
Too expensive. (Score:2)
cheap plastic barrels + some water (to get enough weight) and roll them forward - if its down hill, even easier!
the "robot" can be some form of remote control car that rolls a few at a time... that is if you want to be fancy about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And what do I do when they accident send one of these in my new roomba box....
"honey, Why is the vacuum setting fire to the couch?"
Re: (Score:2)
How much does one unit cost, and is this actually scalable and affordable for nations where there are landmines? Most of these countries are third-world as the majority of landmines in first-world countries (e.g. Germany) was cleared years ago.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with your statement. There are third world countries that are actually well off enough. They aren't super powers like the states or anything, but they are still better off than what you probably mean as a developing nation - or something along those lines. Before the tsunami, I would have considered places like Thailand to be pretty well off for being a third world country. And Germany, contrary to popular belief, was a second-world country.
We need to come back to the history l
Re: (Score:2)
Germany was first world, it is part of NATO. East Germany was second world. These terms were updated with the cold war.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How much does one unit cost, and is this actually scalable and affordable for nations where there are landmines? ...
It is pretty clear that this device is intended to support ground attack by a first world army against an adversary like Iraq (or some other country beginning with "I"?).
Think about its specs - it is a robotic device deploying an explosive system for instantly clearing a lane through a mine field. You need an instant lane if you launching a time-critical operation (i.e. an attack), and a robot to deploy it if you expect to get shot at - i.e. you are in combat.
A minefield clearing system for a third world co
Re: (Score:2)
"It is pretty clear that this device is intended to support ground attack by a first world army against an adversary like Iraq (or some other country beginning with "I"?)."
There is also a small country next to China that is fond of raiding their neighbors as well as sinking ships now and then. Fighting them to a draw was bloody and expensive the last time.
http://rokdrop.com/2008/12/30/dmz-flashpoints-the-blue-house-raid/ [rokdrop.com]
NK not only must attack through some mine fields, but can deploy their own. In order to
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This isn't used for clearing landmines. Just "Antipersonnel Obstacle"s... IE Concertina Wire or that crazy mesh stuff the Soviets use. If you want to clear landmines with a system like they showed.. the MICLIC is used insead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M58_Mine_Clearing_Line_Charge [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
How much does one unit cost, and is this actually scalable and affordable for nations where there are landmines? Most of these countries are third-world as the majority of landmines in first-world countries (e.g. Germany) was cleared years ago.
Wha?
This is for military combat operations. Like to clear a path for a lightly armored personnel carrier through a booby-trapped road in Afghanistan or Iraq.
It's not to help third-world countries clear out old mines.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I propose we start using a new prefix letter. How about 'x'? Nice, useful letter; not tedious like 'i'.
xPad, xRobot, xSkynet, xScape (great runaway game). I think I am on to something...
This seems somewhat familiar (Score:3, Funny)
I think you better do as he says, Mr. Kinney.
Re: (Score:2)
This will end well... (Score:4, Interesting)
This older story comes to mind whenever I see a new article about military robots.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/10/robot-cannon-ki/ [wired.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That story is why I always beta-test my robotic weapons platforms with NERF and paintball weaponry first, before moving up to the beryllium-core laser rocket bullets.
Played like a bad hollywood movie (Score:2)
I know that they were demonstrating a weapons system, but it just seemed like a really bad hollywood movie where they keep playing the same SFX explosion over and over again because they thought it was cool (plus they don't have any budget for doing something different and they need to fill some dead time)
On the other hand what is really novel about this? They attached a weapons system to a robot and manually drove the robot to the optimum location to fire the weapon. Am I missing something or is this jus
Re: (Score:2)
These are the folks that make your friendly little Roomba [irobot.com] ....
(Goes upstairs, checks Roomba again, considers removing battery)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or... you know... just don't give your roomba a grenade launcher.
Re: (Score:2)
Uppity little robot.
Re: (Score:2)
All hail the conquers! (Score:2, Funny)
Well I for one welcome our new robotic overlords.
Granted the inevitable human rebellion will have a surprisingly easy time fighting these things, I mean just hide up a sufficiently steep slope and the apparently top heavy ting will tumble over backwards. Alternatively you could just walk away at a reasonably brisk pace.
And speaking of military robots, am I the only one who's creeped out by Big Dog [youtube.com]? Looks like some sort of unholy union between a deer and a spider..
Re:All hail the conquers! (Score:5, Funny)
And speaking of military robots, am I the only one who's creeped out by Big Dog? Looks like some sort of unholy union between a deer and a spider..
You can call it unholy if you want, but there was magic in the air that night. Who are you to judge true love?
Re: (Score:2)
You can call it unholy if you want, but there was magic in the air that night. Who are you to judge true love?
"The love that dare not speak it's name." Or, more like it, "The love that cannot speak it's name."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The robot fires the device, which lands along a dirt road, exploding after a few seconds. A voice is then heard, 'Road clear; proceed forward.'"
That's fine, as long as RoboCop goes first.
Re: (Score:2)
Granted the inevitable human rebellion will have a surprisingly easy time fighting these things, I mean just hide up a sufficiently steep slope and the apparently top heavy ting will tumble over backwards.
If it's as smart as the Roomba (from the same company) I can see a huge increase in popularity used couches in Afghanistan and Iraq. Maybe some fake stair cases or virtual walls [amazon.com]
Roomba accessory (Score:3, Funny)
This would be great for my roomba when it runs into a really big mess. Or for its obstacle route planning. Instead of turning to go around the obstacle it could just remove the obstacle.
Re: (Score:2)
Manual (Score:2)
I don't see why the robot is needed. A soldier could walk to where the known unmined area ends and fire this thingie.
Re:Manual (Score:5, Insightful)
Since they already have the weapon, but not the robot, I'm figuring they've tried the human-fired approach and found something wanting. I'm not certain, but seeing as how landmines are not exclusively used to deny territory to the enemy while nobody is watching it, but rather as an obstacle that slows and stops the enemy at conveniently chosen areas, and knowing some of the problems our soldiers have had over there... I'm guessing there's a good reason for robots, which can probably be summed up in two words:
"Boom! Headshot!"
Re: (Score:2)
I'm figuring they've tried the human-fired approach and found something wanting
Like snipers?
On the other hand... (Score:2)
When you send the unpopular guy to check for mines it's a win-win situation.
Not as much when you blow up the +$100k robot.
Re:Manual (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see why the robot is needed. A soldier could walk to where the known unmined area ends and fire this thingie.
Perhaps it's clearing the way for a horde of other robots carrying anti-personnel weaponry? The military of the future may not need to put lives on the front-lines. I think we're seeing a glimpse of that with the air drones that are taking out terrorists via rockets.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The military of the future may not need to put lives on the front-lines.
And that is the problem. If nobody comes back home dead, and if the war are fought outside your territory (they are called liberation wars this days), then a war is just a headline on the news for the people on the country deploying the robots.
That makes engaging in "liberation" wars a much more attractive position for your average politician, especially when you are inside an economic crisis and need some foreign enemy to control your population.
Eventually wars will be a tech show where the country with th
Re: (Score:2)
We have already reached that point. Why do you think Iran wants nukes so bad? They saw what happens when you don't have them.
Re: (Score:2)
The military of the future may not need to put lives on the front-lines.
There are a dozen different ways of delivering destruction in impersonal wholesale, via ships or missiles of one sort or another, catastrophes so widespread, so unselective that the war is over because that nation or planet has ceased to exist. What we do is entirely different. We make war as personal as a punch in the nose. We can be selective, applying precisely the required amount of pressure at the specified point at a designated time. We've never been told to go down and kill or capture all left-hande
Re: (Score:2)
Suspected terrorists.
Until they're tried and convicted, they are suspected terrorists. Granted, there is probably not solid evidence to convict them (and it's expensive to capture and detain them) even if they do blow up girl-schools, which is why it's convenient to just label them terrorists and killing them. Just look at the FBI's in
Re: (Score:2)
"A soldier could walk to where the known unmined area ends and fire this thingie."
Some folks have been known to rudely interrupt mine clearing by shooting at those clearing the mines.
Give them an iTarget instead of a trooper, that they may plink it and reveal themselves for some iPayback.
What was that? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and if you pull the string on its back again it says "yeeeha, take that", "boom-shanka, mon" and "I want a pony".
Just what the military needs... (Score:3, Funny)
...a device that runs around in circles shooting randomly.
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno... I'm going to be nicer to my Roomba, now that I know about his cousin in the Army.
Though, seriously, I do love my Roomba, even though I've only had him a week. (I think it's a girl, actually, but my son wanted a boy.) How many consumer products come with a note saying "This device has an interface which we encourage you to hack around on until it's no longer recognizable as a vacuum cleaner"?
The only problem is that he pulls to the right, and I don't know if that's by design or if he's got a p
Gee... (Score:4, Funny)
So I was happy with my Roomba and Scoomba. Now they have home defense products too. Wow. Do I have to buy the whole robot or can I just get the weapon mounts for my vacuum?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I can see it now...
"From the people who brought you Roomba and Scooba... it's BOOMBA!"
Re: (Score:2)
I want them everywhere with my attorney and a judge with an authorization button on standby 24/7. No-Knock this assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
"Do I have to buy the whole robot or can I just get the weapon mounts for my vacuum?"
Don't forget the "D & C" attachment, so you can have a Woomba.
Fuh... (Score:2)
Explosions are scary.
I'm just happy my name isn't Sarah Connor.
Remote Controlled Car (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a remote controlled car with a ridiculous rocket launcher on it. It costs $100k.
iRobot is making a mint sucking money out of the military and out of US taxpayers like me.
You could do this with a $60 RC car from radio shack and a lot of duct tape -- just rig the firing button to the horn. Buy one with big wheels.
For all the things we could be using actual robots for, this is pathetic, and a lot like a million-dollar fireworks show, circa Vietnam.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a remote controlled car with a ridiculous rocket launcher on it. It costs $100k.
Actually, it's a robot with a micro clusterbomb. But it's better than a cluster bomb because it's totally controllable, and it's a lot smaller and cheaper.
You could do this with a $60 RC car from radio shack and a lot of duct tape -- just rig the firing button to the horn. Buy one with big wheels.
You need more axes to control the weapon. You'd need at least a $500 RC car to have anything like reliability, and just one bullet hit would destroy it.
For all the things we could be using actual robots for, this is pathetic, and a lot like a million-dollar fireworks show, circa Vietnam.
It's a cool weapon, but not very exciting in terms of robot news. And by cool weapon I mean a great new way to kill people. Oh sure, it's for clearing roads, but it's for clearing roads so you can get to t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You could do this with a $60 RC car from radio shack and a lot of duct tape -- just rig the firing button to the horn. Buy one with big wheels.
The insurgents could just run to Radio Shack, pick up their own remote and push the horn button at an inappropriate time.
I suspect that the iRobot Warrior is a standard platform to which they can bolt any number of interesting gizmos. In time and with greater production volumes, the price will come down. Perhaps the generals will have one model built that can caddy their golf clubs for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Suppose you're in the army and you come across a minefield. Do you want to be the guy who carries that line grenade launcher to the front of the minefield, potentially step on a mine that's not where you expected, to stand out in the open for all to see and shoot at for however long it takes to prepare the weapon and fire it? The bad guys on the other side of the mines at looking right at you through their crosshairs. OR would you rather have a durable, bulletproof robot capable of doing that job as well as
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I'd rather have a bunch of cheap RC cars with add ons than one (or less than one) $100,000 one.
As for bulletproof RC cars, I'd rather have a fast little RC car that comes as a surprise than a slow clunky tracked thing which A. advertises more clearly where it came from (and thus where I am), B. gives the guys I'm trying to liquefy more time to get away, and C. might be bullet-proof up to a point, but there are always bigger weapons around.
As for not doing it remotely, that's not my issue -- remo
Damn Fucking Grey Hairs (Score:3, Insightful)
Yay, lets invent something that we already have (mine line clearing device, aka MICLIC) and put it ona robot, so much better! How about the fucking old grey haired bastards that are too pussy to fix our current wars snap out of their cold war mindset and start investing in things more applicable to our current situation. Oh yeah, I'm a USMC Iraq vet.
Re: (Score:2)
How about we just not engage in pointless wars?
Seems a lot cheaper.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh really?
I am sure you will want to set up that system to clear a road block, IED, etc. and risk taking fire.
I would prefer to stay out of the line of fire and use a much smaller unit mounted on a robot tha
Next-generation Bangalore Torpedo (Score:3, Informative)
In WW2, soldiers used a device called a Bangalore Torpedo [wikipedia.org] or Bangalore Mine to clear obstacles - barbed wire, barriers, etc - without coming under fire. Basically, it was a long tube filled with TNT. Screw it together, push it along (from behind cover) and detonate to clear the area and make a safe path. We used them during the Normandy invasion, for example.
This robot version is, really, just the next-generation version of the Bangalore. You deploy the robot (which might be under fire, but the operator is safely out of the way) to the barrier, launch an obstacle clearing system, and detonate to clear the area and make a safe path.
Re: (Score:2)
the only thing missing (Score:2, Insightful)
My cat was right (Score:4, Insightful)
Asimov (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Asimov (Score:4, Informative)
This robot is not designed to harm humans. It is designed to clear obstacles and explosives from the path of humans. Also, this is not an autonomous robot, but rather a misnamed remotely controlled vehicle that is 100% under the control of human. The three laws would never be applied to this device.
Re: (Score:2)
The three laws would never be applied to this device.
Tautology.
Just to make things clear: the three laws will never be applied to any device intended to be used to win a war.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Asimov was a writer of (among many things) speculative fiction, not a megalomaniacal warmonger.
The latter would not hesitate to deploy robots with no concept of humans other than as targets or debris.
Re: (Score:2)
Asimov " wrote the three laws of robotics forbidding fictional robots from harming humans" did he?
He also wrote books in which there was a unified theory of everything, allowing anything and everything to be mathematically proven. And don't forget the as-humans-as-humans robots.
But that's OK. It's entertaining science fiction - key word, fiction. (I am glad you made note of that yourself.)
In the real world, we have earthquakes which prevent city-domes; entropy preventing the prediction of everything; and hu
Re: (Score:2)
How much explosive power in a mine? (Score:2)
Would one of those big ole tire unibikes with a remote control survive a few booms? I saw pics of them from Burning Man, maybe heavy enough to set off the charges but bouncy enough to stay alive?
Re: (Score:2)
Tires only detonate mines they run over. Even if you are willing to run the tires back and forth a number of time there is no way to be sure that every square inch has been covered.
Explosives detonate mines in the area that they cause overpressure. They also break wire which would stop a small vehicle.
One small problem. . . (Score:2, Funny)
This brilliant plan will be foiled when the enemy buys a $99 add-on virtual wall and erects it in front of the minefield.
Dear iRobot Engineers (Score:2)
Great for Crowd Control (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing "iRobot" was easier to get a registered trademark on than "Robot". Finding a unique (non-generic, non-already trademarked) identifier for products is tricky, so having trendy pattern for modifying otherwise generic words is a boon to new businesses or new products.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously, they'll iBomb them!
Re: (Score:2)
Samzenpus prolly thought he was submitting an article about Apple.
Thinking Jobs was releasing a new product that would clear all 3rd world countries of Windows based PC's.
Re:Honest question (Score:4, Informative)
The earliest live 'iRobot' trade mark was filed September 2002 [uspto.gov].
There is one from Nov 1999 [uspto.gov] that is 'dead'. Both from MA, so I'm not sure if it's the same company.
The iMac was released in 1998, the iBook in 1999.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a robot. It's an RC car with a rocket launcher. The human controls it, so there is no violation of any law of robotics.
Bad idea (Score:2)
Are you kidding? It'd have to do a random walk of the entire country, unless you put little blocker thingies around the area, and even then it would take forever unless your battlefield was 15x15 feet.
Much better to buy a Neato Robotics body parts cleaning robot, which actually only goes over the battlefield ONCE.
Re: (Score:2)
That would require humanity to agree with itself. Landmines are one method of eliminating opposition. Clearing landmines is one way of...not being eliminated.
You are over-simplifying.
Re:Humanity (Score:4, Informative)
Exhale slowly and put down the glass pipe.
The nations LAYING the mines are not the nations REMOVING the mines. One is not like the other.
Side note:
BTW, the US (whose mine use is not a problem, and since no one, anywhere, ever, gives a fuck about moral examples need not set one) doesn't buy-in to getting rid of its own mines because they are useful in slowing and channelizing an attack on the Korean peninsula.
When most people were hallucinating Friendly Norks this was frowned on. Every now and then the Norks remind us they aren't friendly, and that if they DO wig out and crash across the DMZ we might ought to slow the process so we can kill enough of them to save South Korea.
Re: (Score:2)
we might ought to slow the process so we can kill enough of them to save South Korea.
All of the landmines in the world don't address the problem with the North Koreans having enough artillery in place to completely level Seoul within an hour or two.
Re: (Score:2)
"All of the landmines in the world don't address the problem with the North Koreans having enough artillery in place to completely level Seoul within an hour or two."
One problem isn't the other, though there is ample debate on their ability to "level" Seoul.
They CAN certainly chem the shit out of it and we have NO disabling retaliatory capability.
We renounced chem warfare long ago, but Obama has renounced first nuclear use too. It appears he hadn't thought that through, not having much military knowledge an
Re: (Score:2)
So wait... you're saying that when two groups work toward opposing goals, they each spend money on nothing more than negating the effect of the money the other spent?
What a shocking revelation! You should be an economist or something!
Re: (Score:2)
How so?
The USA still deploys mines, heck we airdrop little ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice to know that people are just considered to be obstacles in this system's scope :P
I think you're parsing that wrong. Think of it this way: it's a system for breaching anti-personnel obstacles such as mines, IEDs, razor wire etc.