Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
The Military Robotics United States Hardware Technology

A Drone Helicopter That Can Land On a Moving Truck 60

garymortimer writes with a story (the accompanying video is worth watching) of an unmanned helicopter than can automatically land on a moving surface. Though it's shown landing on a bed of a moving truck, the real purpose is for sea-based use: "This automatic system for take-off, landing and deck-landing of UAVs is the fruit of the joint expertise of Thales and DCNS. Thales is responsible for the positioning system and its interface with the UAV system, the supply of a UAV demonstrator system and slaving of the flight path along a trajectory. DCNS is responsible for predicting the vessel motions, the harpoon system as well as the interface and integration with the vessel."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Drone Helicopter That Can Land On a Moving Truck

Comments Filter:
  • More war (Score:4, Insightful)

    by roman_mir ( 125474 ) on Monday November 21, 2011 @07:55AM (#38122678) Homepage Journal

    So I watched that video [], what can I say, I liked that trailer.

    This video explains about the robot helicopter [] and what it's really for in the first 22 seconds.

    At 1:20 they explain that this helicopter started as a commercial aircraft, but later was adopted for 'special operations'.

    As I said, it's a war based economy/ []

    This is again, Boeing. Biggest bombs [] and robot killer helicopters.

    Great economy you are having there. Glad to see you care about your environment and air and all that 'welfare'. Too bad the outcome of all this wonderful 'care' is a war economy. But ask yourselves this: once they have enough robots to kill people all around the world, why do they need you at all? You don't produce anything else and all the weapons they need they will have automated. I guess your purpose is to burn oil and their's is to make sure they get more power and weapons so you can burn more oil.

  • Re:More war (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jamesh ( 87723 ) on Monday November 21, 2011 @08:47AM (#38122886)

    The US has enough bombs to blow up the world already, what makes you think having robots will change anything?

    I'm not sure what it's like in the US, but over here in AU it makes the news when one of our soldiers dies overseas, or even when one gets hurt, and then again when their bodies arrive back home. Too many nationals (eg more than 0) getting killed makes war unpopular. The press only tags along because there are soldiers there, and we don't really hear about any of the "enemy" getting killed anyway. If it was all robots on the front line then war wouldn't seem so unpopular to the average viewer... hell it would almost seem like a sport with appropriately mounted cameras and is probably less graphically violent than most video games/movies.

    Having robots on the front line could change everything.

  • Re:perspective (Score:3, Insightful)

    by osu-neko ( 2604 ) on Monday November 21, 2011 @09:18AM (#38123022)

    "...At some point there, we left the present and entered the future."

    "The future is already here -- it's just not evenly distributed."

  • Re:More war (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Monday November 21, 2011 @10:52AM (#38123872) Homepage

    Having robots on the front line could change everything.

    Yeah, like opening you up for war crimes and really horrible mistakes.

    Someone piloting this thing from hundreds (if not thousands) of miles away, or a completely automated device, brings with it the possibility to really screw up. Hell, from the sounds of it, the automated drones are already inflicting more civilian casualties than they should be ... they don't sound like they're being used judiciously enough to prevent it. It would seem that Pakistan can attest to that fact.

    At the very least, I don't think we want war to "seem like a sport" ... it's serious business, for high stakes. It's not some game. I'm all for saving lives, but automated warfare is something which gives one pause for concern. If you make it too arm's length, you risk losing sight of what you're doing ... if it's just a game, why not strafe that schoolyard for the hell of it?

    Having your people get killed has always been "unpopular" ... it's not supposed to be "popular", but it might be a necessary thing to protect others.

    And, for the record, pretty much every Canadian who has been killed overseas gets news coverage and attention. No country likes to bring home dead soldiers ... but I don't know that I'm entirely cool with the "kill 'em all and let God sort it out" approach that seems to be happening with some of these automated drones. Way too many civilians are ending up as "collateral damage".

Where there's a will, there's an Inheritance Tax.