You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Science & Technology
Robots dying in Iraq, so soldiers don't have to
2006-02-14
EFL.
The Defense Department is rapidly expanding its army of robot warriors on land, air and sea in an effort to reduce American deaths and injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan. "We want unmanned systems to go where we don't want to risk our precious soldiers," said Thomas Killion, the Army's deputy assistant secretary for research and technology. Robots should take over many of the "dull, dirty and dangerous" tasks from humans in the war on terrorism, Killion told a conference of unmanned-system contractors in Washington last week.

Despite doubts about the cost and effectiveness of military robots, the Defense Department's new Quadrennial Defense Review, a strategic plan that's updated every four years, declares that 45 percent of the Air Force's future long-range bombers will be able to operate without humans aboard. No specific date was given. One-third of the Army's combat ground vehicles are supposed to be unmanned by 2015. The Navy is under orders to acquire a pilotless plane that can take off and land on an aircraft carrier and refuel in midair. Robotic submarines also are planned.

The Pentagon is doubling the number of Predators and Global Hawks, unmanned surveillance aircraft that have been prowling the skies since before the Iraq war began.

While they may save lives, robots can be very expensive. Operating the Global Hawk costs as much as $100,000 per flight hour, many times higher than a piloted aircraft, according to Melody Avery, an advanced-aeronautics expert at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. Still, those vehicles are being joined by a host of small robotic machines with such names as Talon, Raven, Shadow, Hunter, Pointer, Dragon Eye and Sand Dragon.
That's the American way of war. Expend hardware, not people.
Miniature drones equipped with cameras and weighing only a few pounds can be launched by hand, bungee cord or catapult, from a rooftop or a moving truck.

A hopping gadget described by John Feddema, a robotics expert at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, N.M., can jump 50 feet in the air to place a communications system in a tree or on a rooftop. A "throwbot" can be tossed over a wall or into a building to avoid a deadly ambush.

The remote-controlled Pacbot can sniff a roadside bomb 50 yards away, roll up and defuse or detonate it. A new, larger version, the Marcbot, pokes its video camera through doors or windows, looking for signs of danger.

Soldiers "love" the robots, said Army Col. Edward Ward of the Pentagon's Robotics Systems Joint Project Office. "We're in the business of saving lives, and it works."

Marine Col. Terry Griffin, who also works in the Robotics Systems office, talked about a hypothetical situation in which soldiers were ordered to check out a multistory building in which insurgents might be lurking. "Do you want to send your son or daughter in there? No, let's send a robot," Griffin said. "Three years ago, I had to beg people to try a robot," he said. "We don't have to beg anymore. Robots are here to stay."

According to Ward, the Army had 150 combat robots in 2004 and 2,400 at the end of 2005, and it will have 4,000 by the end of this year. Robots also can help in other ways; for example, they can relieve soldiers of the heavy loads they must carry in combat. The Pentagon wants to get a soldier's fighting weight down from 100 pounds of equipment to 40 pounds, Killion said.
Caddy, the number 5 grenade.
An unmanned truck - known as a MULE, an acronym for Multifunction Utility Logistics Equipment - can carry supplies, water and extra batteries. MULEs can run in convoys with or without human leaders. The Army is developing armed ground vehicles that can maneuver along trails and across country at speeds of 25 mph or more without drivers.

Next month, Boeing will deliver the first of its new X45 pilotless bombers, with a 50-foot wingspan and the ability to refuel in midair.
Darn. That thing could stay up for weeks.
Northrop Grumman is working on an X47 model that's designed for use on an aircraft carrier.

Not satisfied with the abilities of its current crop of robots, the Pentagon wants unmanned machines that can operate completely without human controllers. At present, most of these systems are controlled by radio signals or through long wires, known as a "robot-on-a-rope." "The goal is a fully autonomous system by 2020," said Jeffrey Kotora, the manager of the Joint Robotics Program in Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's office. Killion called it "a system that has the smarts to operate like a manned system."

Robotic experts at the conference, which was sponsored by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, said it would be extremely difficult to produce fully autonomous systems with what Kotora called "sensing and almost thinking ability."

Larry Jackel, the Robotics Initiatives director at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency said, "We've just scratched the surface."
And he has a great name, even if he can't spell.
Just don't connect them all to Skynet.

Posted by:Jackal

#23  Lol, DMFD! I've wargamed against those obsessed guys - and they're into it - 24x7, lol.
Posted by: .com   2006-02-14 22:55  

#22  In related news - Japan is sending several units ... piloted by teenagers with really bad attitudes and oddly colored hair.
Posted by: DMFD   2006-02-14 22:53  

#21  As long as they are not sentient I am good with them being used. Onece they cross that threshold it's no dice.

Hate to break it to you SPoD, but once they are you wont' be able to do much about it ... heh.
Posted by: rsrchr   2006-02-14 15:49  

#20  Hey Remoteman! How are your products holding out?
Posted by: TomAnon   2006-02-14 15:44  

#19  Well, for now they are not sentient and they are damn capable. Think of a mini tank with an M-240 mounted on top that is super-accurate.

They are not regarded as expendable because they are expensive. While that will change somewhat as quantities purchased and technology improves, the most significant units will never be cheap.
Posted by: remoteman   2006-02-14 15:34  

#18  Some day the order will be transmitted to the 'bot to go into some extremely hostile place and this is the reply: " I'm sorry, Dave, but I cannot do that."
Posted by: USN, ret.   2006-02-14 14:59  

#17  I'm working on an exploding frizbee. My idea is to hand launch it, but use little preprogramed compressed air jets to suspend it's flight to greater ranges. A miniature camera will send back radio images of the ground beneath the dish. When the dish hovers over the target, a signal slows, lands, and vaporizes the frizbee.
Some may say it's pie in the sky, but I think it'll work.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-02-14 13:07  

#16  Soon enough, you will be able to down load your entire conscience and being. Flash it over to a 'bot and presto immortality and sentience. Do'nt need no stinkin' remote either!
Posted by: TomAnon   2006-02-14 13:05  

#15  Duty, Honor, WD-40.
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-02-14 12:57  

#14  "Allright, Unit DNE of the line. Why did you do it? This is your Commander, Unit DNE. Report! Why did you do it? Now, you knew your position was hopeless, didn`t you? That you`d be destroyed if you held your ground, to say nothing of advancing. Surely you were able to compute that. You were lucky to have the chance to prove yourself."

"Yes, sir."

"You knew what was at stake here. It was the ultimate test of your ability to perform correctly under stress, of your suitability as a weapon of war. You knew that. You knew that General Margrave and old Priss Grace and the press boys all had their eyes on every move you made. So instead of using common sense, you waded into that inferno in defiance of all logic-and destroyed yourself. Right?"

"That is correct, sir."

"Then why? In the name of sanity, tell me WHY! Why, instead of backing out and saving yourself, did you charge? .....Wait a minute, Unit DNE. It just dawned on me. I`ve been underestimating you. You KNEW didn`t you? Your knowledge of human psychology told you they`d break and run, didn`t it?"

"No, sir. On the contrary, I was quite certain that they were as aware as I that they held every advantage."

"Then that leaves me back where I started. Why? What made you risk everything on a hopeless attack? Why did you do it?"

"For the honor of the regiment."


The Dinochrome Brigade, reporting for duty!
Posted by: Steve   2006-02-14 12:54  

#13  I agree with SPOD re: the sentience threshold. Just lookit Bender, *lol*
Posted by: Edward Yee   2006-02-14 12:28  

#12  Robots, why do they hate us?
Posted by: Perfesser   2006-02-14 12:25  

#11  $100,000 per flight hour
I'll bet that's because they're spreading the fixed costs R&D over the 15 or 20 of these things that exist. I'd like to know what the variable cost/hr is.
Posted by: 6   2006-02-14 12:17  

#10  The islamists are crying foul: The US bots are violating the first and second laws of robotics per isaac asimov. Hehehehe
Posted by: Mark Z   2006-02-14 11:22  

#9  Not satisfied with the abilities of its current crop of robots, the Pentagon wants unmanned machines that can operate completely without human controllers.
The Bersekers are comming.
Posted by: gromgoru   2006-02-14 07:43  

#8  LET MY PEOPLE GO!
Posted by: Bender   2006-02-14 07:42  

#7  As long as they are not sentient I am good with them being used. Onece they cross that threshold it's no dice.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom   2006-02-14 06:03  

#6  Amen, guys. A very effective and valuable resource to assist our great people. Especially so when expended, as designed, to leave the warriors free to do what they do best.
Posted by: .com   2006-02-14 01:52  

#5  we're all anthropomorphic with R2D2 and C3PO as images - the robots we'll get will only be identifiable by their glitches: "that one always pulls to the left when vaccuuming"
Posted by: Frank G   2006-02-14 01:11  

#4  It's remarkable how many supposed military experts, don't get the robots being expendable bit.
Posted by: phil_b   2006-02-14 01:03  

#3  "DANGER, Guillermo Robinson! DANGER!"
Posted by: Frank G   2006-02-14 01:02  

#2  Um, I thought a MULE was a Multiple Use Labor Element. I guess some people don't know their computer game history. What's next? Will people forget the signifigance of the magic word xyzzy?
Posted by: Eric Jablow   2006-02-14 00:40  

#1  Radical Islamists > "Now the decadent imperialist Americans insult our suicide bombers and the Prophet again by NOT fighting us mano-a-mano. Time for our women and children to blow themselves up again".
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-02-14 00:37  

00:00