Slashdot Mirror


USMC Shows Off New Toys

jonerik writes "And speaking of the future of unmanned combat, Wired today has this article on several new toys being developed for the U.S. Marine Corps. The Dragon Eye is a small remote-controlled airplane which can be disassembled and carried in a field pack. The Dragon Runner is a miniature camera-equipped wheeled truck about the size of a shoebox which can be sent into dangerous areas as a scout. The Dragon Warrior is a small unmanned helicopter which looks like a toilet seat with wings. Perhaps most intriguing is a device unofficially dubbed the RoboLobster, which skitters around on eight mechanical legs, detecting and disarming mines. Although the Dragon Eye is scheduled for deployment next year, the other three devices are still in the development stage."

132 comments

  1. did they recruit ENIX to name these? by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 2

    Dragon Warrior? sheesh.

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

    1. Re:did they recruit ENIX to name these? by (outer-limits) · · Score: 1

      Your sig is no doubt referring to their initiation ceremony and why I refuse to join them.

      --

      Microsoft - Where would you like to go today, Maybe Jail?

  2. Uh-Oh!! by donnacha · · Score: 2


    The Dragon Runner is a miniature camera-equipped wheeled truck about the size of a shoebox which can be sent into dangerous areas as a scout.

    What's the betting that the Web will soon be swamped with pop-ups offering to sell us the X10.Com version of these?

    1. Re:Uh-Oh!! by danamania · · Score: 2

      ...would it be cheating to take them into a paintball game?

      a grrl & her server

    2. Re:Uh-Oh!! by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      First write the rules: Is the plane "dead" when a paintball hits it anywhere, or only when it is blinded?

    3. Re:Uh-Oh!! by jasonkohles · · Score: 1

      You can already buy them on thinkgeek.

    4. Re:Uh-Oh!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure a paintball would be sufficient to rip up the balsa wood wings on one of these things. It would at least disrupt its flight significantly.

  3. Attack by Krapangor · · Score: 3, Funny
    The Dragon Warrior is a small unmanned helicopter which looks like a toilet seat with wings

    I don't want to know how it attacks the enemy.
    BTW: Is the rumor true that the Trud Report has signed up with the army ?

    --
    Owner of a Mensa membership card.
  4. *sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A toy plane, a shoe box, and a toilet seat.

    Where's a dragon when you need one? You'd be amazed what a 500 lb pile of crap will do when dropped from > 1 mile.

  5. Now that's a killer app for home automation by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Drive the goddamn thing around your backyard, with a .22 on it, and wait for groundhogs.... ELL OH ELL.

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  6. Dragon Runner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who wants to be that the draggon runner gets a claymore mine attached to it?

    Screw scouting, just blow them to pieces.

    1. Re:Dragon Runner by Srakkt · · Score: 1

      We don't use claymores anymore. I know how to arm/disarm one, but that's just school of infantry stuff. We don't use mines anymore because of some international anti mine treaty.

    2. Re:Dragon Runner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just coz the US doesn't use hem doesn't mean that other countries follow the treaty or even recognise it.

      It is meant to DISARM mines.... not lay them.

    3. Re:Dragon Runner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know what type of fucked up unit you're in, but we use claymores, AT mines and other mine-type explosives all the time.

    4. Re:Dragon Runner by olin01 · · Score: 1

      No- the US has not ratified the treaty banning mines, saying we need them in Korea and Cuba.

    5. Re:Dragon Runner by BoneFlower · · Score: 2

      ACtually, the US does use mines, though rarely. The border between north and south korea is covered in mines, as is the area around Guantanamo Bay Cuba. Those two locations are why the US did not sign the mine ban treaty.

    6. Re:Dragon Runner by Krach42 · · Score: 1

      Claymore Mine is a mysnomer. It's detonated by a human controlled accuator, and thus, not a "mine" as defined by the treaty.

      But as for using one on the Dragon Runner, unless you'd have a damned good reason (namely, you're going to die if you don't) they probably wouldn't look highly on it, because the claymore has a 16' backwash, that you need to watch out for. That means that it would literally destroy the Dragon Runner that it was mounted on.

      The Dragon Runner will be used in reconicense (sp) missions, where the idea is to see something with a unit on the ground... I'd much prefer to roll a little shoe box in there rather than risk my hide on getting seen.

      --

      I am unamerican, and proud of it!
    7. Re:Dragon Runner by Governerd · · Score: 1

      That, and the things don't do much for a force that's trying to be mobile.

  7. Windows-based? by ZigMonty · · Score: 4, Insightful
    And the plane will pretty much fly on its own. After a few commands are given to a Windows-based navigation program, the eye will pilot itself using a global positioning system.

    Nooooooooo...

    [Insert obligatory BSOD joke]

    1. Re:Windows-based? by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      "If a Marine can use (Microsoft) Word, he can get this plane to fly."
      • I'd like to introduce that Marine to the Word document from the corporate office last year that crashed Word upon opening.
      • Can you tell the Dragon Eye to look for "Taliban" without additional windows to spell check it?
      • This device contains restricted encryption technology and is not for export.
      • The Dragon Eye can not be shot down because that is considered technology which can break a protection device. The J.A.G. is ready to prosecute violators.
      • "Sarge, I need your credit card so I can get Tech Support to tell me the workaround so I can land the Eye. They already said it's a known problem that will be fixed in the next major revision."
      • The Dragon Eye weighs five pounds. The Microsoft Field Control Interface Device weighs eighteen pounds and uses a gallon of gasoline an hour.
    2. Re:Windows-based? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Microsoft Field Control Interface Device weighs eighteen pounds and uses a gallon of gasoline an hour.

      Geesh! Is it a bloated pig running emacs or something?

    3. Re:Windows-based? by bleckywelcky · · Score: 1



      Even worse...

      He added, "If a Marine can use (Microsoft) Word, he can get this plane to fly."

      Does that include dodging all the crashes? Perhaps they should have left out that (Microsoft) part and just left it as Word, as in any generic Word Processing office tool.

    4. Re:Windows-based? by ctimes2 · · Score: 1

      "Sarge, I need your credit card so I can get Tech Support to tell me the workaround so I can land the Eye. They already said it's a known problem that will be fixed in the next major revision."

      If a Marine called another Marine "Sarge" he probably wouldn't get a chance to call tech support. In the Marine Corps, "Sarge" is derogatory.

      And even so, the complaint to tech support would still have to be made from the circa 1950's era radios, and as such would run out of batteries before any useful information could be gleaned.

      --
      My cube. My friend. My solace. My prison.
  8. ROBOLOBSTER!! by kupo+zero · · Score: 0, Troll

    How does this lobster disarm? Just shoot it and hopes it blows up? Geez, they better come up with better names for these new "gizmos".

    1. Re:ROBOLOBSTER!! by trustno_one · · Score: 1

      I think the idea is that the robot will blow up itself and the mine. The safest way of disarming a mine actually. A lot of robots could crawl around for days looking for mines before detonating at the same time just before a beach landing.

    2. Re:ROBOLOBSTER!! by SEWilco · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Instead of blowing up the robot, it would be cheaper for it to put an explosive on the mine and detonate it after moving away. Radio-controlled explosive is cheaper than a robot.

    3. Re:ROBOLOBSTER!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tom Selleck knew how blow these things up.
      Run to your nearest MPAA/RIAA acredited movie outlet and rent the movie 'Runaway' today.
      Starring:
      Tom Selleck as the no nonsense 'Joe Friday' cop of the 21st century.
      Gene Simmons (of KISS fame) as the eye bulging maniacal robot spider building mad scientest.

      I guarantee you won't be disappointed. Rent it now and help support the MPAA/RIAA so they can make more fine movies like this one.

  9. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No research on super-smart patriotic deadly mosquitos?

  10. 11 Sept 2001 by ZenJabba1 · · Score: 0, Troll

    This being 9 months old, and happening on that day, this is very old old old old old news!

    --
    `find / -name "*your_base*" -exec chown us:us {} \;`
  11. Hate lobsters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hate the idea of a lobster toy?

    Try crabs instead

  12. NO replacement for human bravery by yeOldeSkeptic · · Score: 5, Insightful


    The escape of Osama Bin Laden and the invisibility
    of the Abu Sayyaff in the jungles of the Philippines
    show one thing. No amount of high tech weaponry
    and no surfeit of surveillance equipment can beat
    a human on the ground. After several months of
    scrutinizing the tiny island of Basilan, using
    satellites, aircraft and what not, no trace
    of the kidnapped Burnhams have been detected.
    The Abu Sayyaff and their hostages have effectively
    vanished.


    As the US Marine Corps continues to progress
    towards its vision of the modern warrior, I
    hope it remembers that human brains and
    courage is still more valuable than all the
    modern technology in the world.

    1. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't talk any crap about osama bin laden you fucking twat. till today we didn't get a proof of his liability.

      so please shut the hell up, a lot of mulsim people all over the world don't belive in the truth of usa. i doubt that it is a wise idea to force muslim countries their sights.

    2. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by kupo+zero · · Score: 1

      How could this help to find Osama? Fly the plane into his little caves?

    3. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe the next plane stops by at your house.. who knows...

    4. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by BoneFlower · · Score: 2

      Since General Charles Krulak kick started the heavy modernization a few years ago, the Marine Corps has been holding to the concept of "Equip the man, not man the equipment". The Marine Corps philosophy is that all the weapons and equipment they use exists for one reason and one reason alone- Get the infantry into a position where they can do their thing and blow apart anything that faces them.

    5. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by Nindalf · · Score: 2

      You obviously haven't heard of next year's project: "I Can't Believe It's Not Human Bravery!" the human bravery substitute in a can.

      Now, these results are purely preliminary, but in early field testing 9 out of 10 guerilla soldiers, terrorists, and hostage-takers couldn't tell the difference!

      Folgers Defense Contracting is also working on a crystalline substitute of some kind.

    6. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't figure out why flame throwers and poison gas couldn't clean out those caves.

      The poision gas could be carbon dioxide, btw. Just put a big stinky fire in front of the cave opening.

    7. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by rmohr02 · · Score: 1

      I agree, there is no substitute for a man on the ground. However, an officer on the ground is aided if he has a collapsible airplane that he can send over an enemy position to scout it before he commits his (or now, her) command to that position. Ditto for the Dragon Runner. The Dragon Warrior's uses are scouting (for areas a fixed-wing plane can't enter) and sighting missiles, another job a fixed-wing aircraft can't do. Also, the "RoboLobster" will almost always beat a man at its simple job--find and detect mines. Humans alone only have one way to do this--trial and error--and that can be quite costly for a small unit.

      In short, none of these are meant to replace a soldier on the ground--they are merely there to help him.

    8. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are small enough (size/agility of insects), they'd be much better than human scouts.

    9. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by hitzroth · · Score: 1

      Crystalized EtOH? Why bother when it's so easily available in liquid form?

      --
      In mathematics, one does not understand things, one merely gets used to them.
      --VonNeumann
    10. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by Squalish · · Score: 1

      We used a much more powerful variant of that. Bunker-Busting Bombs(tm) are actually hyperbaric weapons. First they hit the land, sink down a bit, then when they hit free air, they explode(probably via pressurized air or something) into a large cloud of dust. A second explosion ignites the high-explosive dust. The speed with which this happens over such a large surface area causes gigantic pressures and temperatures. The air literally ignites, causing anything not destroyed in the enormous overpressure situation to both choke on non-oxygenated air and to breath in fire. Thats how it works in theory, anyway.

      --
      People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation
    11. Re:NO replacement for human bravery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because a lot of people don't believe something doesn't make it right. A lot of people don't believe the earth is a sphere but it doesn't make it a lie.

      Speaking of Osama Bin Ladin, he's right here sucking my nuts while my dog takes him up the ass, oh wait, my bad its just his mom, that damn beard she has keeps confusing me.

  13. and the most amazing ... by zdzichu · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... DragonBall with super-killah mode called DragonBallZ!

    No one can stand on your way now, ha!

    --
    :wq
    1. Re:and the most amazing ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      troll? it isn't troll. it jus making fun of naming.
      bleh

  14. Re:The amazing GOATSE.CX troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    3522329841 is hick.org. http://www.hick.org/goat/ is a mirror of goatse.cx. goatse.cx has a disgusting picture of a huge distended "analog hole." If you don't want to see gay pr0n worthy of rotten.com, don't click the link in parent.

  15. Toilet seat? by KFK+-+Wildcat · · Score: 1

    The Dragon Warrior is a small unmanned helicopter which looks like a toilet seat with wings.

    What kind of toilet seats do you have? And...huh, where are the wings? IMHO, that looks very much like an helicopter.

    1. Re:Toilet seat? by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      I wonder what device the author was trying to describe. The Moller Aerobot is round, but taller than a toilet seat and has no wings.

    2. Re:Toilet seat? by RapaNui · · Score: 1

      Erm. seems someone has the _wrong_ Dragon Warrior.

      Look Here

      If you want to see a _real_ flying toilet seat, look for the Cypher, the Dragon Warrior's predecessor.

    3. Re:Toilet seat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well then, what's the non-toilet seat helicopter? The picture was in the story, was the only non-airplane flying vehicle, so either it's the Dragon Warrior or someone screwed up with the pictures and/or names.

    4. Re:Toilet seat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look again at the picture. It's written "Dragon Warrior" on the helicopter...

  16. Well this is a perfect toilet seat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or what kind of seat do you have in the US ?

  17. Re:My secret revealed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    only for information goatse is a vhost dude. so in reality you ping'ed someone else...

  18. Also in the works by Darth+Paul · · Score: 1

    Rumour has it there is also a handheld missile called the Dragon Punch which features voice activation. Soldiers should extend their hands towards their enemies, palms out and joined at the wrist, and loudly yell "ah-DOOOH-ken!" to launch the distinctive blue projectile.

    However, the device has been found only to work with Super-Saiyans. Researchers are currently looking at ways to increase the KI of soldiers....

    (OK OK I'm mixing animes ... shoot me :) )

    1. Re:Also in the works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shoot you? Ok....

      kameeee haaaa meeeeee haaaaaaaa!

  19. Noise Issues by sheriff_p · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sounds a bit noisy to me, personally. I know I'd get pretty suspicious if I was a soldier and saw one coming towards me. Plus, I'd probably take aim at it - I hope they're cheap.

    --
    Score:-1, Funny
  20. But getting them to use it... by globaljustin · · Score: 2

    These new toys are great, but the challenge will be to get these "18 and 19 year old" grunts (I use the term respectfully) to actually use them in battle.

    Unless the Marine Corps. has changed recently, no self-respecting Marine will want to be dicking around with an RC car when they are in the middle of combat.

    Nevertheless, I applaud the Marines for using technology to its fullest in the battlefield.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:But getting them to use it... by hs81 · · Score: 1

      Bring on the force sword! I'm astonished they have not got around to inventing this one yet.
      Once they get those we'll all be joining up.

    2. Re:But getting them to use it... by BoneFlower · · Score: 2

      The Marine Corps already fields UAVs. It is likely that these goodies will be fielded to reconnasaince units and the already existing UAV squadrons.

      Don't worry too much, the Marine Corps is updating the full spectrum of combat gear, from the socks Marines wear(not joking) to their ambhibious armored vehicles and their fighters.

    3. Re:But getting them to use it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      from the socks Marines wear(not joking)

      Now matter how many pretty fancy toys you have, your best freinds in combat are your feet and your weapon. If you doubt that, just walk around for ten hours or so without sitting down.

      ICB (infantry combat boots) are the most comfortable boots I ever wore. Now if only someone in the civilian world would make them with a steel/safety toe.

      Semper fi.

    4. Re:But getting them to use it... by BoneFlower · · Score: 2

      "Now matter how many pretty fancy toys you have, your best freinds in combat are your feet and your weapon. If you doubt that, just walk around for ten hours or so without sitting down."

      Done it. It sucks.

      "ICB (infantry combat boots) are the most comfortable boots I ever wore. Now if only someone in the civilian world would make them with a steel/safety toe."

      I agree. When I left Iwakuni, I had gotten mine the day before my flight. I figured, why not wear them home and break them in conveniently? 36 hours straight I had those things on and not a problem.

      "Semper fi."

      Semper Fi

    5. Re:But getting them to use it... by Afrosheen · · Score: 2

      Actually they're going to pack in RC Pro-Am with the Dragon Eye so it'll be entertaining enough for the jarheads.

  21. little boys with teddy bears? by cruelworld · · Score: 2

    So which one is the Second Variety?

    1. Re:little boys with teddy bears? by georgeha · · Score: 1

      good pk dick allusion

  22. Kind of makes you wonder... by pjdoland · · Score: 5, Funny

    Doesn't the USMC run "Toys for Tots?"

    --
    -- "The reward of suffering is experience." - Aeschylus
  23. Wave of the Future by Detritus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It looks like technology is starting to catch up with science fiction. When I was a soldier, I wished that someone would invent a small, remote controlled, video camera that could fly like a helicopter. I was never a big fan of detecting the presence of the enemy by getting shot.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  24. Microsoft Word Competence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If a Marine can use (Microsoft) Word, he can get this plane to fly."

    Every Marine who's a geek worth his salt is out of luck. But I suppose it's better than trying basing it on a Linux text editor...

    "If a Marine can use emacs, he can get this plane to fly."

    (the vi party screams NOOOOOO)

    "If a Marine can use vi, he can get this plane to fly."

    (with this one, we'd end up sending all the scouts in the world to Biggs, Oregon :)

  25. Summary missed some details. by Nindalf · · Score: 2

    What about the Dragon's Breath (a self-propelled, autonomous microwave for warming field rations) or the Dragon's [censored] (a self-propelled autonomous latrine)?

    These are especially important since the Dragon Warrior is unlikely to ever be put into service due to issues with infinite loops in the control software ("Dost thou love me?" "No" "But thou must!"), and a vulnerability to enemy subversion, despite self-destruct failsafes. Also, there is a considerable amount of tuning and calibration that each unit must go through under battlefield conditions, and there aren't always enough slimes and drakees to use for target practice. Finally, budget cuts threaten to drastically under-equip each unit, and simulations show that the operators quickly resort to looting defeated enemies.

  26. Lets me understand this..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are part of a deep recon patrol in a hostile area moving forward looking for the enemy and you want to send this up to let him know that you are in the immediate area??

    On top of that you are going to have some grunt carry all this shit (when he could instead be hauling a GPMG and ammo) on the off chance that it might see use on a clear day with low winds, no rain, no snow, no hail, etc, etc, etc.

    rrrright!!!

  27. Communications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the article says something about it being suited to urban situations... over a range of 10 kms..
    how do you think they communicate?? high bandwidth data (i.e. video feeds), waves bouncing off buildings etc ... they can't have 3G cell towers in the enviornment can they!!

  28. Spiffy New Gear. by Srakkt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When these are issued out at Combined Arms eXercise at 29 Palms, and the geek-infantryman (believe me, they exist, I am one) is told to report to the commanding officer and figure the damn thing out so that it can be used, I'll believe these things are being used.
    Still, the point here is that if it's not exceedingly easy to use, it won't get used. If there are lots of little parts that have to go in the case, they're going to get lost. SL-3 gear for night vision gets lost all the time. The PEQ-2 infrared laser sight for the M-16 is a good example. There's a neato little switch that mounts, using adhesive and velcro, to the handguard. We never use it, though. it's supposed to stay in the pouch, but it gets lost. All the little bits and pieces that come with this junk get lost. Just like the little pieces of MoLLE gear, just like the little pieces of SL-3 for anything that comes with little garbage.
    A note to you engineers out there designing stuff for us to go kill people with: Make it monolithic. Configurable is nice and stuff, but if there are little parts that can get lost, they will get lost.
    It happens with all the stuff we have now; it'll happen with the DragonEye. Which, by the way, I don't ever want to have to hump into an LZ. I bet it doesn't de well wet, either. Well guess what? Grunts get wet and muddy on a sunny day. We're not happy unless we're wet and muddy. This thing isn't going to last long, I surmise. It's going to get broken too much.

    1. Re:Spiffy New Gear. by BgCntry · · Score: 1

      Some of you reading the parent post might wonder why we Marines are so resistant to Spiffy New Gear. This is because it's hard enough to keep the more basic stuff in working condition e.g. NVGs, radios, hummers, M-16s (!). Nothing kills combat effectiveness worse than a dead radio or a blown up engine on a hummer. Oftentimes, if you break or lose an item or a portion of its SL3, it can be a *long time* before that stuff gets replaced. Remember that in any large scale endeavor, "what's important is simple, what's simple is hard"

      On the bright side, DragonEye and its kin are exactly the kind of gear that Marines have been asking for, and now we're getting it in a surprisingly timely fasion. Lately the Corps has put good emphasis on getting new gear out to the battalions as quickly as possible. While mistakes are made (MOLLE) there's also good gear coming out of the initiative (new cammies, boots, polarfleece!). I'd rather have good gear in my hands now over somewhat better gear delivered too late.

    2. Re:Spiffy New Gear. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep in mind what they demonstrate is actually a prototype. I saw the video and it's quite obvious that in a combat situation, nobody is going to have time to do all of that, much less lug around two briefcases on the battlefield. I bet the final product will be much more sturdy and portable.

      This sort of technology will be extremely useful in war, and if it's not marine proof now, the gov't will sure as hell make it that way by the time it is deployed.

  29. Re:Attack (of the Flying Toilets) by Mad+Man · · Score: 1

    So that's what they did with those $600 toilet seats the Air Force developed back in the 1980s.

  30. Anyone else scared by this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    We modeled the controller after the PlayStation2, because that's what these 18-, 19-year-old Marines have been playing with pretty much all of their lives," said Maj. Greg Heines

    Things have been brought to light recently, and demonstrated tragically to us Canadians what these 18-19 yo playstation players can do with a little knowledge and too much power. I know this isn't a jet with a supposedly mature pilot at the helm, but it demonstrates to me the regard that the US military has for the maturity of its underlings.

    I just can't imagine a future where the jets that bomb us accidentally don't even have a pilot at the helm to ask "why?".

    1. Re:Anyone else scared by this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pilots are officers and this is meant for combat soldiers, hence making things easier to use and less complicated.

  31. Attack assistant? by ColGraff · · Score: 2

    "If a Marine can use (Microsoft) Word, he can get this plane to fly."

    It looks like you are trying to crash this plane into the ground - would you like me to autoformat your controlled flight into terrain?

    --
    I'm the stranger...posting to /.
    1. Re:Attack assistant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clippy (wearing a camo helmet): It looks like you want to land in that lake. I'll reduce throttle and begin the descent for you.

      Marine: NOOO! DAMMIT! PULL UP! *watches helplessly as his UAV crashes into a lake*

  32. It may be Marine gear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but I doubt it's Marine proof. They ought to design this stuff so the dumbest person in the world can use it, because at some point, he'll be asked to.

    If I had a dime for every devildog that came up to my armory asking for cleaning gear, or even more important stuff like magazines...

  33. Mod Parent Up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm. The only problem will be the Horus Heresy.

    I'm torn. On one hand, there's something to be said for, "Fall before the chapter!"

    On the other hand, nothing beats a good BFTBG (Blood for the Blood God!) charge.

    *sigh* Ah well, either way, I'll get some extra organs out of the deal, or die writing in pain. (Possibly both!)

  34. Re:Kind of makes you wonder...toy for tots? by dmanny · · Score: 1

    The original poster is subtle. Check the article's department.

    --
    All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
  35. uhm, the military is not a toy. it is to kill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    duh.

  36. Repeat after me: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Urban. Combat.

  37. Almost makes it worth joining up by Fear+the+Clam · · Score: 1

    Almost. I think I'll just settle for buying the draganflyer x-pro from rctoys.

  38. 300 foot altitude limit by SEWilco · · Score: 1
    "It can stay in the air for about an hour, get as high as about 300 feet in the air..."

    A 300 foot altitude limit? So it could only be used up the Mississippi River valley to Bethel Bridge (altitude 301 feet above sea level), in Ripley county, Missouri?

    And where would it be useful in mountains in Afghanistan...to fly only inside caves...caves below 300 feet above sea level?

    1. Re:300 foot altitude limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't read 'a 300 foot altitude limit' there. Why did you?

      Are you that stupid?

      It can get as high as about 300 feet in the air, at (presumably) any altitude.

    2. Re:300 foot altitude limit by olin01 · · Score: 1

      300 feet above ground level. Not 300 feet above sea level.

    3. Re:300 foot altitude limit by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      Yes, it obviously is 300 feet above ground level.

      But why?

      It can't be an air density problem, if it can operate at 1300 feet above sea level. So what's wrong with 600 feet above ground? Can't see a person from that height?

  39. My friend made this by sean23007 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    A friend of mine actually built something exactly like the Dragon Runner a few months ago. He's a real big RC Car aficionado, so he had a bunch of different cars sitting around, and he wanted to do something more interesting with one of them. He got a couple of those X10 cameras, and mounted them on one of his cars, and had them broadcast back to a little battery powered TV that he carried around with him as he controlled the car. It had a range of .5 miles and could go full speed (40 MPH) for about 45 minutes before he needed to replace his batteries.

    I should hope that the Marines could get something at least on par with something my 17 year old friend built in his spare time.

    --

    Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    1. Re:My friend made this by mikewas · · Score: 1

      IIRC, the Israeli RPVs got their start this way. They were inexpensive & expendable -- looked like they'd been mass-produced in a teen-ager's basement. The Israeli success with these "toys" is what got the US interested.

      --

      "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." --Napoleon Bonaparte
    2. Re:My friend made this by anonymous+cupboard · · Score: 1
      Remote control surveilance aircraft have been around for ages, but they used to be quite bigg and not particularly transportable unless you have a truck.

      Remote control vehicles have been in use for a very long time in the UK and Northern Ireland. The standard issue even includes a remote control shotgun (actually for blowing the locks off a car boot or destroying a timing device). It is not small and again needs a vehicle to transport it.

      The Germans have something that is being worked on that is a little like an airborn X-10. This is extremely portable, but don't ask about power. In the demo I saw on TV it was free flying with four fans. The device including the control laptop went into something the size of an attache case and that included padding.

  40. One word.... by thumbtack · · Score: 2

    Battlebots!

  41. At what point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does a smart weapon become a frightening killer robot?

    http://www.pica.army.mil/arms/Sadarm/pi_sadarm.h tm

    These things just get freakier and freakier...

  42. Re:sidestepped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought they simply renamed it an antipersonnel device, and its not classified as a mine. It doesn't really adhere to the typical definition of a mine either.

    Anyhow its similiar to bayonets. As per the Geneva convention you can't sharpen bayonets. So most armies simply gave their soldiers long "combat knives" held in sheaths in their webbing, etc. They just happen to have "attachment devices" that allow them to be attached to the barrel of a rifle. And boy ar ethose "knives" kept sharp. To be fair, they are used as knives, but then again so were bayonets.

  43. High Tech / Lo Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Good thing we're &$*^%%#^&'ing around with all these high tech warfare toys now that our enemies are using lo-tech weapons against us: Airplanes and letters full of anthrax.


    Maybe someone can invent a robotic turban that will crush Bin Laden's skull.

  44. We don't use mines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, I'll buy that but do we still manufacture mines for resale overseas?

  45. Star Trek needs this by asv108 · · Score: 3, Funny

    The Enterprise needs to get dragonfly technology, I never understood why every time there is a dangerous situation, they send in the top 3 officers ;)

  46. Mechanical Legs? by highfreq2 · · Score: 1

    As opposed to skittering around on metaphorical legs?

  47. Upgrade to the Pointer? by Animats · · Score: 2

    The USMC has had the AeroVironment Pointer for about a decade now. This is a model airplane with a TV camera, small enough to be carried in a backpack. It's Kevlar, and powered by silver-zinc batteries (which, by the way, are great, but cost too much.) Range of a few miles, endurance of maybe an hour. (The maker says 1.5 hours, reports say 30 minutes.) Toss into the air, fly over the hill, and get a small-screen peek at the enemy. Moderately useful, not overdesigned, and reasonably rugged. For example, landing is done by coming in low, pulling up into a stall, cutting the power, and crashing tail-first, the typical model airplane bad landing.

  48. moral issues? by small_dick · · Score: 2

    When the pentagon drags a mouse over a foreign country and unleashes robotic hell on them, and people dying via remote control, one has to ask how far we are from large machines crunching their way over fields of human skulls.

    Is this really where humanity wants to go?

    --


    Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
    See my user info for links.
    1. Re:moral issues? by praksys · · Score: 1

      Niiice...I can cancel my cable subscription and just watch the end of life as we know it via my living room window.

      Seriously though, this kind of objection has been raised against every revolution in military technology. Nothing has changed since we developed weapons that enabled us to kill people without having to look them in the eye (i.e. since the development of the bow and arrow).

    2. Re:moral issues? by canadian_right · · Score: 2
      The higher ups have been doing this for a long time, even back when they would use a pointer to move toys on a big map.

      If you must fight, and you can reduce or eliminate the use of your own people it would be unethical NOT to use the technology that removes people from harms way.

      A completely seperate issue is will this lack of danger for 'our' side make 'our' side more likely to resort to force? I think that the USA already has such a ridiculously high kill ratio that this is an issue now, but it seems that the USA has just gotten more and more sensitive to soldier's deaths. Expectations simply grow with the technology.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
  49. GPLed autonomous aerial robots by tramm · · Score: 3, Informative
    If you're interested in experimenting with these sorts of things, check out http://autopilot.sourceforge.net/. We're building the inertial sensors (IMU, GPS+INS) and writing the software to control autonomous helicopters.

    If you just want to try flying one, we have also have written an OpenGL simulator.

    Here's your change to try it without signing up for the Marines.

    --
    -- http://www.swcp.com/~hudson/
  50. Self-Respect by g00set · · Score: 1

    I am not quite sure of your definition of "self-respecting". If one is to truly respect oneself you should do whatever it takes to protect ones physical body. If you feel like you, or whatever son or daughter you wish to send to be killed, will have self-respect by yelling gung ho and going over the hill blind...(It is just not Marine-Like to mess around with those RC car..computer things) go right ahead.

    Personally I would prefer to have the most amount of information possible before I entered the surreal very short moments of combat. Combat almost always falls into the military term of "hurry up and wait". Intelligence (knowledge of the enemy) always trumps bravado.

    "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

    General George S. Patton

    --
    ... and furthermore ... I don't like your trousers.
  51. Re:sidestepped by Darby · · Score: 1

    Anyhow its similiar to bayonets. As per the Geneva convention you can't sharpen bayonets.

    I can at least see the justification for banning mines since they end up getting left there after the war is over, but why the hell would they ban sharpening bayonets?!?

  52. Metal Gear! Aieee! by Colol · · Score: 2

    You know that's what's coming next. Giant killer mecha that will be hijacked by terrorists for their own evil uses.

    And only Hideo Kojima will be able to save us.

  53. Dragon? Who are the next enemies again? by Howzer · · Score: 1

    Hmmm. Let me think.... two things spring to mind.

    1. What ancient culture reveres the dragon?

    2. What's the name of the only other country to still harbour superpower dreams?

    Coincidence? Don't think so. And I don't think the military of the (very large) country I am avoiding naming will think so either.

    Foolish naming. Provokes for no possible benefit.

  54. Re:sidestepped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They didn't. They banned bayonets with saw-toothed edges.

  55. I guess no one ever told you... by Jagasian · · Score: 2

    I guess no one ever told you about atomic weapons, the end of the war with Japan, and the cold war.

  56. Is this related? by wdavies · · Score: 2

    Dragon Flyer

    I saw this via Apple's homepage... sounds like you can buy your eye in the sky...

    Winton

  57. potent illustration of why these are not "toys" by the_Upsetter · · Score: 1


    I'm not trying to be priggish... and I'm not the kind of person to tilt at every semantic windmill... but calling these things "toys" (even though they have an undeniable geek/tech allure)... minimizes their deadliness.

    Something designed to efficiently kill humans isn't a "toy."

    I realize the purpose and ubiquity of war... and I'm not "above" talking about it (or the implements used in it) constructively... but let's not call these deadly things "toys."

  58. Future Risks by alienmole · · Score: 2

    The problem with better weapons is that they cut both ways. The US military may be ahead in the applications of this kind of thing right now, but they're leveraging existing technology, a lot of which is available off the shelf - microcontrollers, MEMS accelerometers and gyroscopes, and standard RC gear. How long until terrorists or guerillas are using small unmanned helicopters, planes and cars to deliver explosives inside secure facilities, or to assassinate world leaders?

  59. completely off-topic by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    good to see military boys on /. I'll be joining up soon....going to OCS ~j

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  60. Re:sidestepped by Darby · · Score: 1

    They banned bayonets with saw-toothed edges.

    OK, so why did they ban these?

  61. Re:Join the Navy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lay off on the insane juice there, tripping billy.

  62. Memo from Lucas, G. to USMC command by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 2

    Your plans to use ground and airborne autonomous robots in combat are indeed impressive. I have to warn you though, that my recent analyses strongly indicate that your entire attack force can be beaten by the first opponent who fields a well-designed clone army, or for that matter a bunch of poorly-armed semi-sentient amphibians and a small boy. Consider yourselves warned.

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  63. A terrorist's shopping list by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Using model airplanes as a military tool is very popular these days and some of the more sophisticated ones (such as the X-45) may well be the future of "safe" combat.

    However, don't fall into the trap of thinking that the US is the only force to have such combat tools or that this "off the shelf" technology can't be used against targets with the borders of the USA.

    Check out The Low Cost Cruise Missile scenario for some insight into the opportunity this stuff gives to half-smart terrorist groups.

  64. RC vehicles used before by USMC by gurudyne · · Score: 2, Informative

    When the Marines took Kuwait City in the Gulf Warr, they drove RC worn-out trucks through the "impenetrable" mine fields.

    --
    Hey, Mom! Is it beer, yet?
  65. If you look, it's *NOT* a toliet seat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But they're probably referring to this older mock-up:

    http://www.helis.com/h/cypher2.jpg

    Here's some nice stats:
    http://www.mcwl.quantico.usmc.mil/images/d ownloads / ragonwarrior.jpg

    But not as pretty a picture as the one on the wired site:
    http://www.wired.com/news/gallery/0,2072,52 766-398 1~3980,00.html

    And this fits in a backpack and works out to about 10km:
    http://www.mcwl.quantico.usmc.mil/images/do wnloads / ragoneye.jpg

    -- Ender, Duke_of_URL

  66. Re:sidestepped by Governerd · · Score: 1

    Saw-toothed bayonets tend to rip up the flesh more than usually when they come out and the resulting wound is more likely to kill. They were a particular sticking point (no pun indended) during World War I. The effort to make warfare more humane, which followed it, banned both saw-toothed and triangular cross-section bayonets.

  67. Grunt's perspective on technology by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 2

    The Marine's perspective on technology can be inferred by their description of their combat knife: It has zero electronics and zero moving parts, it is the most reliable weapon you will carry.

    The Marines are very unlikely to lose the proper perspective that the basic Marine rifleman is their most important weapon. As an organization they are extremely mindful of the fact that the character of their people and the training of their people are their most important assets. Historically they have done a good job introducing new technology while keeping their perspective.

    For example one of the most important new technologies in modern warfare has been aviation. The Marines embraced aviation but adopted the perspective that Marine aviation exists to help grunts. To become a pilot in the Marines you must first prove yourself as a rifle platoon commander. You may sign up to become a pilot but you start your career going to Officer Candidate School at Quantico where you will learn to be a grunt and how to effectively command grunts.

  68. Terminator Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone really believe we would have a chance against machines in a war:

    "Hey 1000111010 watch me make this human dance"

    http://www.lordcyber.com/
    Video Tutorials for Oracle, Excel, Dreamweaver, VB.Net, XP ...