Slashdot Mirror


AT-ATs Coming to a Forest Near You

Audent writes "Not strictly speaking anything any of us should classify as work related, or even open source, but holy shitbags! I want one of these. Plustech, a subsidiary of tractor maker John Deere, has built a six-legged walking logging machine that just has to be the prototype for an AT-AT walker. Imagine parking this puppy at the mall!"

139 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Doesn't look like an AT-AT by PaxTech · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It does look like a giant mechanical ant though. From the videos, it looks SLOW and LOUD.

    Still, I want one.

    --
    All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
    1. Re:Doesn't look like an AT-AT by The+Dobber · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes but if it fell would you hear it?

    2. Re:Doesn't look like an AT-AT by langed · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The site also shows a big simulator for training. It looks like your average 6-wheeled ATV. So, apparently they've experimented with a series of wheeled designs too. And they don't look like big green ants.

      On a side note, it rather reminded me of a grasshopper, not an ant.

      But I just want to see that simulator software GPL'd. Run it on Windows or Linux, I don't care. Even if it weren't turned into a game, it'd be cool for the geek factor! :)

    3. Re:Doesn't look like an AT-AT by WowTIP · · Score: 2

      Knives and Vodka? :)

      --

      --

      "I'm surfin the dead zone
      In the twilight, unknown"
  2. Different Walk styles.. by Kraphty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I noticed that in one of the videos is walks with three legs at a time, keeping a tripod, and in the other it moves one leg at a time. Is there a specific reason for this? Perhaps something to do with the terrain?

    --


    Watch out, or I'll have the penguins eat you.

    Oh...and, I'm liquid talent
    1. Re:Different Walk styles.. by rchatterjee · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's exactly how insects move, the alternating tripod method. For something with 6 legs its the most efficient and stable way to move.

    2. Re:Different Walk styles.. by Sweetums · · Score: 5, Interesting
      If I remember right, the alternating 3 leg movement is the best case for a 6 leg walker. There were some interesting experiments done with simple walking robots, disabling legs and such and watching how it parallelled insects with a damaged leg.

      I'd bet it depends on if there is an imbalance in weight distribution and one side can't pick up 2 legs at the same time, which would probably force it into one at a time movement. Just a guess though. Theres lots of research done on simple walking robots done with really minimal fedback control circuits. They do teh same stuff. Of course the extra degrees of freedom in the joints makes things a little harder.

      --
      ------------------------
      Jack not name, jack job!
    3. Re:Different Walk styles.. by rchatterjee · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sorry about replying to myself but i found a relavent link about insect movement:

      http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/entomology/topics/moveme nt.htm

    4. Re:Different Walk styles.. by Phil+Wilkins · · Score: 2

      > 3 points form a plane. it will never wobble.

      Unless its centre of gravity moves outside the triangle defined by the feet in contact with the ground.

      </pedant>

      Interested to see just how steep a slope it can traverse.

    5. Re:Different Walk styles.. by McCart42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Gaits: they're a tradeoff between efficiency (speed) and stability (not falling over). Insects seem to be the best example: starting with millipedes and centipedes, which move one set of legs at a time in a serial pattern over many legs...moving all the way up to cockroaches, which nearly always move with tripod gait, which allows them to skitter so quickly across floors and scare the living bejesus out of people.

      Props to EECS 391: intro to artificial intelligence...

      --
      "I may be quite wrong." - Socrates
    6. Re:Different Walk styles.. by susano_otter · · Score: 2

      Actually, the "pedant" tag references "pedant mode", which is where the pedantry actually takes place.

      [/nitpick]

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    7. Re:Different Walk styles.. by Imperator · · Score: 2

      On flat terrain it kept only 3 legs on the ground at a time. Walking downhill (in the other video) it kep more feet on the ground at a time.

      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
    8. Re:Different Walk styles.. by PD · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually arthropods cover spiders, centipedes, and insects. Arthropods is the phylum. Centipedes are class Chilopoda, spiders are class Arachnida and order Araneae, and insects are class Insecta.

    9. Re:Different Walk styles.. by troc · · Score: 2

      There was me thinking he meant watching women walk along the beach whilst carrying beer ;)

      i.e the women were carrying the beer.

      whatever

      Troc

      --
      Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
    10. Re:Different Walk styles.. by colmore · · Score: 2

      The KPCOFGS system has always bugged me. (pun intended) It's a a more or less arbitrary system, that only does a so-so job of reflecting evolutionary descent.

      But I can't really think of a better replacement.

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    11. Re:Different Walk styles.. by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2

      And put on armor that's "too strong for blasters!". But of course you've still got to worry about harpoons and tow cables...

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  3. an improvement by faeryman · · Score: 5, Funny

    the harvester advances forward and backward, sideways and diagonally. It can also turn in place and step over obstacles

    Good. Maybe then those pesky forest rebels will have a harder time wrapping thier grappling hooks around me when I'm out logging.

    --


    ,
    faeryman
  4. Lethal looking motherfucker... by sfled · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...a little bullet-proof glass, some armor & weapons...the little bitch is made for close-quarter urban demolition zone warfare.

    --
    I'm not really a web designer, I just play one on the Internet.
  5. How long until it's hacked? by FyRE666 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I imagine someone's already working on a hack to make this bad-boy dance the funky chicken. It'd be cool to watch a bunch of them dancing in sequence...

    1. Re:How long until it's hacked? by southpolesammy · · Score: 2

      ROTFLMAO...

      One of the best laughs I've had in weeks. Just picturing it in my head brings a smile to my face. Thanks.

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
  6. Re:They look rather insectile. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    BTW, I feel the use of language in the main article is a bit innappropriate.

    What the fuck are you talking about?

  7. evil by khold · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now all we need is to put the friggin laser (the high powered laser mounted on a jet) and mount it on the friggin 6 legged logging machine.

    --
    rm -rf sig
  8. AgroMech's! by xdroop · · Score: 2, Funny

    Cool -- Nice to see the underpinnings of BattleMechs are coming along nicely. I'll be flying my Phoenix Hawk LAM any century now!

    --
    you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
    1. Re:AgroMech's! by Maran · · Score: 2

      "I'll be flying my Phoenix Hawk LAM any century now!"

      Yeah, but then you'll get sued by Harmony Gold for copyright infringement.

      Although a few medium lasers would sort that particular problem...

      Maran

    2. Re:AgroMech's! by jafac · · Score: 2

      Hell, just talking about it violates the DCMA. Call the cops!

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  9. It moves like a 6 legged cat by gelfling · · Score: 2

    In the movies it lifts its feet like a cat. This is the cool ass machine of the year.

    1. Re:It moves like a 6 legged cat by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2
      Too bad that two-headed kitten didn't live long. Would have been cool seeing that thing as an adult. I have seen a 6 legged cow, but the extra two weren't exactly usable. There was, I think, a two-headed snake that did quite well.

      Ripley's Believe It or Not, what a great place!

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  10. ~Imagining~ by Kedanoth · · Score: 4, Funny
    Imagine parking this puppy at the mall!

    Yeah, that would rock, until I see an old lady with a cart full of soda cans pass me at full speed on the mall's perimeter road. ~sob~

  11. What are the costs? by MisanthropicProggram · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's nice to see someone trying to lower the impact on forests, but if this machine costs too much to opperate, it won't sell. Margins are EXTREMELY important to logging companies. That's why they have to low ball the Fed. Gov. to harvest in public forests and why the US logging companies lobbied our Government to impose those protectionist tarriffs on the Canadians.

    If this company wants to make a go of this, they're going to have to make a military version. I don't know about you, but if I saw one of these things comming at me, I'd run for the hills!

    --

    There is no spoon or sig.

    1. Re:What are the costs? by JohnsonWax · · Score: 2

      It's nice to see someone trying to lower the impact on forests, but if this machine costs too much to opperate, it won't sell. Margins are EXTREMELY important to logging companies.

      Clearly you've never seen one of these loggers operate. They're pretty common because in spite of their high initial costs, they are extremely efficient.

      The harvester head grips a tree near the base and cuts the tree off. The arm is strong enough to control the descent of the tree so it doesn't fall back on the operator. (see the Phase I photo)

      As soon as the tree hits the ground, the two wheels that you see will pull the trunk through and trim the trunk to lengths specified by the operator - to maximize the use of each log. As it pulls the log through, the branches are stripped and left on the ground to decompose. And it's FAST.

      The whole process from grabbing the virgin tree to loading the logs on the truck takes about 15-30 seconds. It's absolutely amazing to watch how fast it works, especially if you've ever had the privilege of taking a tree down with a chainsaw. It can take a tree down every 60-120 seconds - look at the length of the boom on the harvester in the top photo.

      Look at the videos on the simulator page. It shows more of the process. In fact, the simulation looks a little slower than these do in practice.

      The wheeled vehicles are problematic because of the amount of debris this process leaves behind. The walker should be able to cruise through forests, plucking out trees without compacting the ground, or destroying much other foliage.

      The next real problem is extracting the logs from the forest where they're left. It'll cut a truckload of logs in 15 minutes. There must be a legged forwarder in development that just brings logs to the trucks to haul off.

      I think they also incorporate forest management systems in these as well. The harvester measures the diameter of the tree when it locks on so the operator can reject a tree which is too small. I think there's a GPS device in the harvester that records the locations of the trees for the forwarder to find, but also to track which trees are going to mature when. The next season, they can optimize where they cut.

    2. Re:What are the costs? by ces · · Score: 2, Informative

      I note this was developed in Finland. I suspect logging machines with a low impact on the forest environment are more popular in Scandinavia and Europe in general where there is a greater belief in sustainable forest practices than in the US or Canada. Also if these machines are fairly effcient at logging compared to traditional thinning or clearcutting practices I can see them being used in the US, after all many of the machines used in logging are already quite expensive, heck in some places they log with helicopters!

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    3. Re:What are the costs? by SerpentMage · · Score: 2

      Why do you assume that this company needs to sell in the US and Canada to make money? The original company that designed this is based in Europe (namely Finnland). And there lower impact on the forest ground is extremely important. In Europe there is more selective logging than elsewhere and hence something like this would go miles.

      North America does not practice that much selective logging. Most of it is clear cut, with replanting. The only place where selective logging is partially used is on the West Coast. On the West Coast selective logging must be used because otherwise there would be no more grand trees.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
  12. Re:Wonderful... by Eccles · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because of course the world certainly needs newer, bigger, and better ways to cut down even more trees.

    If they could harvest efficiently with this puppy without clear-cutting or requiring tractor-trailer-capable roads, it could actually be ecologically beneficial.

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  13. Silly submitter... by Flamerule · · Score: 2, Informative

    We must be careful with our Star Wars nomenclature. Both in tactical operation area (um, the woods), size, and appearance, this wood-cutting thingy most closely resembles an AT-ST, not an AT-AT. I think this may invalidate the numerous rebel grappling-hook jokes I see popping up. Unless that rope they used to trip 1 or 2 of the walkers in Return of the Jedi were grappling hooks....

    1. Re:Silly submitter... by delta407 · · Score: 2

      Actually, there was an AT-AT in Return of the Jedi, in one shot on the lower-left side of the screen.

    2. Re:Silly submitter... by delta407 · · Score: 2

      No, I'd say they're closer to AT-PTs. Though not strictly Star Wars canon, the design is much closer.

    3. Re:Silly submitter... by susano_otter · · Score: 2
      Actually, the A-10 is in no way, shape or form an antipersonnel weapon. It was conceived, commissioned, designed, built, and deployed as a dedicated antitank attack plane. That big gun you're drooling over makes it one of the most effective tank-killers on the modern (or any) battlefield.

      It's remotely possible that it could be used against personnel as a secondary mission (maybe with bombs), but since personnel are protected from heavy weaponry by both the Geneva Convention and the Warsaw Pact, it's highly doubtful. I know for a fact that the calibre of the gun is far too large to be legally targetted against troops. Furthermore, the milk-crate-sized rounds it uses are far too expensive to expend against anything but big-money targets (where their muzzle velocity and the extreme focus of their penetrating power makes them very cost-effective).

      [/nitpick]

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    4. Re:Silly submitter... by OneFix · · Score: 2

      Well, according to one of the documentaries on the History channel I belive, the specified use was always for tanks, but in reality...the whole idea surfaced out of the cold war and the "remote" threat of soviet occupation of the US. The whole idea was really that if this were to happen (it was certainly a possibility then)...All of that would pretty much go out the window and what we really needed would be what is essentially a flying tank with a bad-ass gun.

      And I'm also quite aware that the gun heats up fairly quickly, which means that it wouldn't be so easy to take out a whole bunch of troops.

      Of course, if I'm not mistaken, a good bit of these were use to drop Napalm in Vietnam...needless to say the A-10 is still a great asset to the military...I mean, the whole plane is designed to carry that huge-ass gun.

    5. Re:Silly submitter... by glwtta · · Score: 2

      I hope there's somebody there to slap you...

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    6. Re:Silly submitter... by Drachemorder · · Score: 2
      since personnel are protected from heavy weaponry by both the Geneva Convention and the Warsaw Pact, it's highly doubtful.

      If you're about to lose a war and have your nation taken over or wiped out, would you care anything about what "international law" says?

    7. Re:Silly submitter... by susano_otter · · Score: 2

      Probably not. The point is that currently only one country has this plane, and that country isn't currently at risk of losing its homeland to an invader, and knowingly targetting personnel with that gun would be a war crime, and firing milk-carton-sized shells made of a material that you can only get from spent fission reactor fuel rods would be laughably cost-ineffective, it's a safe bet that the A-10 was never intended as an antipersonnel weapon (and has never purposefully been used as such).

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    8. Re:Silly submitter... by jafac · · Score: 2

      Additionally, though the GAU-8/A's 30mm Depleted Uranium shells are easily capable of penetrating the side-armor of most tanks, it's most effective against the TOP armor, which is often thinner. Easily done from the air.

      Also, the gun has such significant recoil, that it's hooked up to the plane's engines. When the gun fires, the engines fire up. Otherwise the plane would lose too much airspeed when it fires.

      Also, the gun is very long - consider about HALF the length of the A-10 plane.

      I don't see the GAU-8/A being put deployed in a land vehicle any time soon. Walker, wheeled, or tracked. Just wouldn't be half as effective.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    9. Re:Silly submitter... by jafac · · Score: 2

      There's actually a lot of really cool design built into this plane.
      It was designed for low altitude, risky missions. Killing tanks or other hardened targets.

      It was designed with two engines, so if one got shot-off, it could still fly. Dual rudders, both for the same redundancy purpose, and also to block IR emissions from the engine's tailpipes as viewed from the side. It was also designed to be able to fly with half a wing blown off.

      Also has the best payload options as far as armament goes in the whole US arsenal of warplanes. More hardpoints, more total carrying capacity.

      Very tough planes. Never vary popular, because of their looks, compared to other planes - until they were proven in the Gulf War.

      There is a lot of talk about when these planes are retired, that they could be very easily repurposed to fight forest fires, due to their incredible carrying capacity, and quick turnaround time on the ground.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    10. Re:Silly submitter... by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2
      It was designed for low altitude, risky missions. It was designed with two engines, so if one got shot-off, it could still fly. Dual rudders, both for the same redundancy purpose, and also to block IR emissions from the engine's tailpipes as viewed from the side. It was also designed to be able to fly with half a wing blown off.

      I have three words in response to that:

      Engineers. Kick. Ass.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  14. a 6 legged cat^H^H^H killing machine by MouseR · · Score: 2

    I give it 2 years before it makes it into the military.

    1. Re:a 6 legged cat^H^H^H killing machine by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2
      ever seen those walking toys that fall on their side and can't do anything? they'd have to work that out)

      It loks like the center of mass for this thing is low enough that anything that could tip it over on its side would be enough to give a wheeled/treaded vehicle problems too. I think the big problem would be keeping the legs moving correctly if they're going at a high rate of speed. Wheels and treads are nice because they're so simple. Round and round and that's it.

      Psychological effects of weapons are cool, but they don't last long. Familiarity breeds contempt, and so forth. So unless it's inherent in the design (like it is here :), one shouldn't really spend much effort towards that end.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  15. Ted Geisel's spinning in his grave... by Lurkingrue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does anyone else think this looks like one of Dr. Seuss' worst nightmares?

    Somewhere, a Lorax is crying...

  16. AT-AT dead ahead! by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Trooper: Sir, small green AT-ATs approaching!

    Rebel Officer: Damn! Are you sure?

    Trooper: Yes, can't you hear it? ... Its that loud "lawn-mower" sound... Kind of like a trash-compacter...

    Rebel Officer: Oh yes... Whats the ETA?

    Trooper: Well, given their current rate of speed, I would say 2... no make that 3 weeks.

    Rebel Officer: Good work Trooper - We had best begin to pack up the base and move out by no later than... noon tomorrow.

    Trooper: Roger roger.

    --

    my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    1. Re:AT-AT dead ahead! by Maeryk · · Score: 2

      Trooper: Sir, small green AT-ATs approaching!

      Rebel Officer: Damn! Are you sure?

      Trooper: Yes, can't you hear it? ... Its that loud "lawn-mower" sound... Kind of like a trash-compacter...


      Officer: are they coming for tea?

      Trooper: No Sir.. I think its worse than that.. they have a FLAG.. (and saws)

      Maeryk

      --
      Feminine Protection? What is that? A chartreuse flame thrower?
    2. Re:AT-AT dead ahead! by daeley · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're loud and slow to give the trees a chance to get out of the way. Rather sporting, don't you think? ;)

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    3. Re:AT-AT dead ahead! by dboyles · · Score: 4, Funny

      Trooper: Roger roger.

      Roger Murdock: We have clearance Clarence.

      Captain Oveur: Roger, Roger. What's our vector Victor?

      Tower voice: Tower's radio clearance, over!

      Captain Oveur: That's Clarence Oveur! Oveur.

      Tower voice: Roger.

      Roger Murdock: Huh?

      Tower voice: Roger, over.

      Roger Murdock: Huh?

      Captain Oveur: Huh?

      --
      -- "Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
    4. Re:AT-AT dead ahead! by MrCreosote · · Score: 2

      "Elvis has left the forest!"

      --
      MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
  17. military version by lingqi · · Score: 5, Funny

    would probabbly look a lot like the "tank" in [Ghost in the Shell]. which would make sense, IMO, because the manuverability would be *so* superior to track-driven tanks.

    well, with a couple decades of engineering work to make it move faster and more adaptable, anyway.

    at the mean time, i want to see a consumer version for *real* off-roading. and the crane thing can be used to grab hot women out of their convertables while dozing around downtown LA.

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

    1. Re:military version by Saeger · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Sure, legged maneuverability is great, but you'll have to trade off speed and ruggedness for something the size of a tank ('AMIE' from the movie Red Planet is a cool beast though).

      A conventional tank's armor protects its means of locomotion pretty well (like a tortoise), but legged creatures have it all hanging out there.

      Just concentrate your attack on the weak joints and it's game over.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    2. Re:military version by guttentag · · Score: 2

      So by the time we invade Iraq, these will be about 100 feet tall, manned by Desert Storm Troopers and equipped with laser guns? This gives Saddam time to equip his air force with grappling hooks. Only I thought this scene was supposed to take place on the tundra...

    3. Re:military version by lingqi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      hmm... you know...

      1) if you rip the belt / track with a mine, etc; a conventional tank is out of service. i assume a military version of a walker can walk with 4 or 5 out of the six legs, albeit slower, etc

      2) there are "armored" creatures in nature too where the legs are not exposed. think armadillo for example

      3) same goes for humans as to the "attack on the weak joint". that's why there are such things as ARMOR. hell, take a look at a medieval knight and how every joint they have are armored.

      lastly, with *enough* manuverability you no longer even have to worry about being hit (as much), because you can
      a) dodge the damn shells (lateral movement)
      b) get to them before they get to you (terrain adaptability advantage)
      c) get to a place where they can't get to you or where you would have a significant tactical advantage (climb a steep hill / up side of a building, etc)

      --

      My life in the land of the rising sun.

    4. Re:military version by Nightpaw · · Score: 2

      Just concentrate your attack on the weak joints and it's game over.

      No, I played that game. I had to shoot a magnetic grappling line at it and fly around it a few times. Then it fell over and blew up.

    5. Re:military version by nelsonal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually by the time we invade Iraq, even if we had them, they would sit unused. Deserts are almost ideal for tank battles. I still have an excellent book by a military stratigest, written from the stand point of being at the WWII African battles, he actually went down to study these. Since by and large tank strategies haven't changed alot since WWI or even before, the strategy didn't change the peices just got bigger. Our tank heavy forces are nearly unbeatable. That is one of the main reasons Desert Storm, was so much more successful than Vietnam. Wheeled and tracked vehicles don't have many disadvantages to walkers on flat open ground. This might get used in heavly damaged urban areas, but that would be about it.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    6. Re:military version by Moofie · · Score: 2

      Major problem is...trees.

      There's not a lot in the way of terrain that can't be negotiated by a tracked vehicle. Yes, there are some steep slopes that are tough to climb, but frequently those are covered with trees. Hard to drive a tank through trees.

      Modern MBTs have a speed of 30+mph over broken terrain. Outside of Mechwarrior, no legged vehicle of anything like the mass of an MBT comes near that speed.

      Legged battle machines seem like a cool idea, but I don't see the advantage that outweighs their fragility.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    7. Re:military version by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 2

      It MIGHT be possible, given sufficient systems for detecting the trajectory early enough on, and sufficient distance to the gun. Of course, the movement would be too jerky for humans, but the machines are becoming autonomous anyway. Secondly, if you dodge a direct hit, you will still suffer some damage when the shell hits the ground a few feet away.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    8. Re:military version by jafac · · Score: 2

      Maneuverability is superior to track-driven tanks only in very bad terrain or close quarters. But out in the open, the tank's ability to go 50-60 mph would still be unmatched. Getting outmaneuvered or encircled is a bad thing.

      So a "walker" tank would only be of benefit in areas where you're trying to flush out troops that have hidden someplace where tracked tanks can't go. (like the remote mountains of Afghanistan?)

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    9. Re:military version by Moofie · · Score: 2

      Seems to me like any sort of heavy weapon is going to be a long-range weapon, and the mean free path in a forest is pretty short.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm no expert on armored warfare doctrine, and there may well be a place for a system like this...but my suspicion is that a much much smaller (say, man sized) powered walker would be far more useful and flexible than one the size of a tank.

      Assuming, of course, that it can be made to be FAST. Slow things die on modern battlefields, unless they're REALLY good at hiding.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  18. Re:Wonderful... by 10+Speed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    a properly managed forest is a renewable resource

  19. Re:Wonderful... by Bowling+Moses · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you ever seen a logging operation in action? Didn't think so. The fact is that the tractors that are used tear up a good sized swath and compact the soil making it harder for the forest to re-assert itself. This six-legged beastie is a great idea if they can make it competetive with current logging vehicles as it will reduce the ecological impact that logging has and that's a good thing. It's not like all research put into logging tech is bad; for example the use of log skidders (bulldozers pushing logs from where they've been cut to where they're put on the truck) has been greatly reduced by stringing up huge cables at the top of the hill being logged. Logs are attached to said cable and are carried downhill to log landings to be put on waiting trucks. This results in less damage done to the log so less needs to be logged and fewer necessary roads and less use of skidders meaning lower environmental impact and quicker restoration of the forest.

  20. needs claws by mr_burns · · Score: 5, Funny

    HAIL ANTS!!!!

    This thing needs pneumatic claws so it can grip the sides of mountains and buildings. Walking a cliff face or wall vertically or horizontally would be a requirement for any kind of urban deployment of this technology

    Also, it should look more like an actual giant armored space ant.

    turret with high powered water/foam/fire cannon would be a nice option. Perhaps with harpoon/grappling hook gun with high test line on gear reduced winch. That way it would be able to swing from building to building and fight fires, mothra or those angels from evangelion.

    --
    "Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
    1. Re:needs claws by happyclam · · Score: 2
      Also, it should look more like an actual giant armored space ant.

      Have you seen an actual giant armored space ant? You must be the same guy that said this walks like a six-legged cat.

      :op
      --
      He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington."
  21. rover by !splut · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think we've found the perfect replacement for those boring Mars rover designs. I'd like to see this think hobbling around the red planet taking mass spec measurements of things.

    And when the Martians come to investigate the lander, it'll be alien stompin' time! Ka-krash!

    --
    The angel in the oatmeal.
  22. But can it run like a deere? by LauraLolly · · Score: 2

    My ten-year-old is in love with it. Oh, cool! will it ever be seen at state fairs in the NW?

    I wonder if we can convince Deere to have one at the state fair in Iowa.

    Woohoo!

  23. speed bumps by Garion911 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Awesome! Now I'll never be bothered by speed bumps, I can just step over them!

    Oh wait...

    --
    Slashdot is like Playboy: I read it for the articles
  24. Re:Wonderful... by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 2

    I want to see one scurry, and I do mean scurry, around the woods carrying a tree. Then the lumber companies might be interested.

    --
    That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
  25. Can't view mpegs? by Jon+Howard · · Score: 3, Informative

    I cannot view the videos, since I run Linux...

    Dude! Get MPlayer or Xine. There are others, but those two seem to be pretty well done.

    1. Re:Can't view mpegs? by lamz · · Score: 2

      He must run Linux the way Toonces the Cat drives a car...not very well.

      --

      Mike van Lammeren
      It will challenge your head, your brain, and your mind.

  26. Eco-goodbye by greygent · · Score: 2

    Great... yet another mechanism to destroy the Pacific Northwest's (formerly) vast forests, after "buying" them from the corrupt US Forest Service.

  27. Fuel Spent vs. Fuel Harvested by Jon+Howard · · Score: 2

    Considering that these things burn some kind of fuel, and that they harvest wood which can also be used as a fuel (or turned into methyl alcohol to create fuel), what do you suppose the ratio of fuel spent to fuel harvested is for these puppies?

    I'd bet it leans heavily to one side, specifically the spent one.

    1. Re:Fuel Spent vs. Fuel Harvested by canadian_right · · Score: 2
      It can't be worse for fuel than using helicopters, which is quite common when logging rough mountain sides where road building is expensive, and has undersirable environmental effects (even more so than for flat land).

      Big trees are worth quite a bit of money.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
  28. Downsides by Tablizer · · Score: 2


    (sniff sniff) "Sir! I think your car stepped in something on the way to work this morning."

  29. Whew! by eyepeepackets · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm so glad I saw this article here before I ran into one while hiking and found myself wishing I had brought a change of underwear. Not only that, but I'd probably never, ever again eat those funny mushrooms.

    Thanks Slashdot!

    --
    Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    1. Re:Whew! by Dirtside · · Score: 2

      Offtopic reply:

      Your sig should really say, "Everything in the universe blows", not "sucks". A friend's physics teacher in high school taught his class the phrase, "Physics doesn't suck. It blows." If you're in a pressurized ship in space (i.e. vacuum), and you open a door to the vacuum, the actual newtonian force that moves you out of the ship is the atmosphere pushing you out. There's no "sucking" force. ("Suction" is really just the effect of a high-pressure area pushing into a low-pressure area.)

      Well, that's enough physics for the day. :)

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    2. Re:Whew! by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      Hiya,

      Well, two things. First, one day I was reading on /. and I was seeing a large number of negative posts, which resulted in the sig. I wanted to poke fun at all the negative posters and I have this love of the double entendre. Second, "suck" is a reference to the gravitational force which, if I remember correctly, manifests in all things with mass, so a more accurate sig might say "pulls" instead of sucks, but that would kill the double entendre.

      Thanks for the post though, was interesting.

      Cheers,

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
  30. Re:They look rather insectile. by esper_child · · Score: 2, Interesting

    First think I thought of when I saw it was to mount guns on it. Maybe a 20mm gun or a .50 cal minigun (neither being in a fixed mount). Would be quite useful for military applications, and wouldn't surprise me if it was already being developed with some in mind. Refine the technology enough and you will have some really nice battle platforms for ground operations. maybe we can make it look and act like a scorpion too :)

  31. Slow and loud? Huh? by bleckywelcky · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Have you ever even been around any construction/industrial equipment or machinery in your life? That thing is not loud by any means. In fact, until I watched the videos, the impression I was getting from all the loud comments was that this thing sounded like a jet engine or something (kinda like my comp sounds, heh). This thing is suprisingly quiet. I mean, if you listen closely as it walks, you can even hear the chains on its feet dangle and clank as the feet pads move. Sure, it isn't museum quiet, but your typically lawn mower is probably louder than this thing. I'll agree that it isn't all that fast, but I think the speed is almost just right for walking through forests, you don't wanna run into trees going too fast now.

  32. Now all the eco-terrorists have to do... by Kredal · · Score: 2

    Is wrap the legs of these things with cables a few times, and *CRASH* the walkers come tumbling down... Come on, haven't they ever seen Empire Strikes Back?

    --
    Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  33. Less logging my ass... by greygent · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You're obviously not clued in on how the logging industry works. These advancements will in NO WAY WHATSOEVER reduce logging. It will, however, increase profit, but don't think for a second that logging companies are going to log any less of their "purchased" parcels of land.

    1. Re:Less logging my ass... by BrookHarty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You obviously missed his point. :)

      There will be more logging, the world is growing, and wood products are needed. This 6 legged beast can save land by not crushing it like a bulldozer, so the forest grows back quicker.
      The solution is not less logging, its reforestation and proper management. These machines are just tools to help. If there was no requirements to reforest, companies would just use large machines and flatten the land, its much easier.

      *But* this technology is only for American forests (we have laws about our own soil). Companies like Citigroup and Boise Lumber cant get away with that in the America. But the rest of the world, its rape and pillage time.
      -
      Beer Good, strippers and beer better...

  34. Other fun legged machines by big+tex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    if you think the logging machine is cool, check out the Spiderplow http://www.spiderplow.com

    I worked on a crew that used one of these, installing fiber optic cable down the median of an interstate. The frickin' thing can go through the legs of highway signs, climb off of an 18-wheeler trailer SIDEWAYS, and stand on 1 leg while it's ripping.

    The controls seem to be a little more involved than the logger, though. It's got a panel of about 30 two-way levers to control all of the motions. each leg can extend/retract, swivel forward/back, raise/lower, rotate each wheel right /left independently, plus about a dozen controls for the fiber burying blade.

    Spiderplow = more bandwidth.
    John Deere Forester = toilet paper.

    It's ovious which one is the high-tech toy for the nerds :)

    --
    I think I need a new sig here.
    1. Re:Other fun legged machines by BgJonson79 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Spiderplow = more bandwidth.
      John Deere Forester = toilet paper.


      With all the shit on Slashdot, isn't more toilet paper good?

      --

      There are four boxes used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order.

    2. Re:Other fun legged machines by jpmorgan · · Score: 2

      If we're talking plows... I prefer the PL2. It's a Subsea plow owned by Saipem and it looks mean (it gets used to trenching things like undersea oil/gas pipelines and fibre optics)

      You can see some brief info on it here. The thing weighs 150 tonnes, and operates at depths of up to 400m. Not the kind of beast you want to meet in a dark alley at night. ;P

  35. Not at all by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Those legs are way too vulnerable.

    Imagine rope or netting looped around a couple. I doubt they have much power for moving, simply strength for holding up. Think of your own legs when someone tied your shoelaces together. A puny little shoelace and you couldn't break it with your legs! One of the few things I believed in whatever Star Wars episode that was (New Hope?).

    The legs need armor, but trying to armor them individually and completely would add way too much weight and bulk.

    Consider a tank -- all that armor on the sides and some on the top. Battleships armored the individual turrets, but almost all the rest was on the sides and under the deck. Individual compartments were not armored. Not even magazines had their own armor, they were simply buried as deep as possible within the armor.

    1. Re:Not at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      One of the few things I believed in whatever Star Wars episode that was (New Hope?).

      You doubt the Star Wars documentaries?

    2. Re:Not at all by NorthDude · · Score: 2

      Hmmm, if it looses 3 legs, it means that it will be left with one leg only on one of its side. Won't be able to move with that.
      It can't afford to loose more then 1 leg per side...

      --


      I'd rather be sailing...
    3. Re:Not at all by Xaoswolf · · Score: 2
      Actually, since these things are going to be moving some rather large logs around, I would think that they might have rather strong legs. A net would still trip them up, but it would probably be able to get free.

      As for armor, the legs could be built out of stronger material, as opposed to actually putting 3 inch thick plates on them. And since this is a slow one or two man vehicle, I don't really see being on the front lines in the middle east. Possible as a scouting vehicle, or to move vehicles that are stuck in the sand. Until we start fighting where there are trees or other obstacles that would slow a normal apc or tank, we probably won't be using these too much.

    4. Re:Not at all by jafac · · Score: 2

      Most likely, the first application of such a vehicle militarily would be to tear down Palestinian houses. The Israelis already have some fairly specialized vehicles designed for this purpose.

      In fact, this would be a great combat engineering vehicle if you think about it.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  36. Another Misconception abounds by Hott+of+the+World · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most environmental groups either worry about the effect of logging on local wildlife, or the rampant destruction of trees in south america.

    The fact that a cool-ass tree-cutter comes along really doesn't bother them too much. Its more of the parking lot thats gonna replace the tree they hate more.

    --
    | - | - |
  37. Re:Wonderful... by Chad+Stansbury · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually, logging roads have turned out to be very beneficial for fire fighting here in the West. Turns out that fire crews would have a much more difficult times getting to the remote (and as is the case here in Denver, not so remote) burns. Not only do logging roads help get the equipment to the burn site, but they also provide a good fire break.

    Just goes to show that nothing comes free in this world.

  38. Re:They look rather insectile. by uhlume · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...*blink* You object to the use of language? I suppose you'd rather see the author attempt to make his point with gestures and inarticulate grunts.

    --
    SIERRA TANGO FOXTROT UNIFORM
  39. Re:Wrong!!! by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

    Or that pumping oil from the ground takes MORE energy than we get out of the oil?

    Hello Mr "I can't think back any further then my ass."

    How is THIS one for you.

    Energy gone into producing oil:

    Dinosaurs born, big ass trees grew, dinosaurs ate trees, died, turned to oil. We pump oil out, burn.

    Now then, you have entropy going all to hell throughout there, you have the energy used up by the trees, by the dinosaurs, by the dinosaurs EATING the trees, and so forth. Energy IS used and spread about, there is NEVER A NET GAIN IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF SHIT THE UNIVERSE HAS TO PLAY AROUND WITH.

    Just because YOUR sorry ass did not have to sweat to make something work does not mean that somebody (or something) else did not use up the energy!

  40. Looks cool, but what does it do? by Brant · · Score: 2

    I watched the videos, and I can't imagine this thing hauling logs around and keeping balanced. What would this actually be used for in a logging operation?

    Brant

    1. Re:Looks cool, but what does it do? by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 2
      Cutting logs without damaging young trees and the rest of the forest.

      It's not meant to haul a pile of logs. Just the one that it cut. If you look at the second photo, that shows exactly what it's going to do. Cut a log, strip it of it's branches (I've seen those cutters before. That's what the roller looking parts are for), and stack it for some other truck to haul away.

  41. Re:Where are the wacko's complaining about defores by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually, if used wisely (which as always is a big if), something like this could be quite good for helping to stop deforestation. No roads need to be cut into the forest, and no clearcutting; instead a couple of guys with these could pick out a tree here, a tree there, and still leave the forest basically intact. It's like plucking a few hairs from your head here and there, vesus shaving one spot.

    Oh, and the question is not "tree" supply. It's forests. A forest is more than just a bunch of trees, ya know.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  42. Good hoax - but no cigar by bangzilla · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Go to the John Deere home site http://www.deere.com/en_US/deerecom/johndeere_worl dwide/index.html - no mention of "PlusTech" at all. If you look closely at the photo's of the machine and the video you'll notice they look 'artificial' -- a little too clean and crisp compared with the background. Also, if you're going to video your state-of-the-art vehicle wouldn't you get a better location for your camera than back behind a boat-load of trees and bushes? Funny how the web site is unfinished (i.e. the boaring elements to fake up havn't been done -- but the fun graphics have). Well executed mind-you, but someone should tell the guys (or gals) who did this that it's "April 1" they should have been shooting for, not "August 1"

    --
    Rich people are eccentric. Poor people are strange. Me, I'd be happy with odd.
    1. Re:Good hoax - but no cigar by bogomipe · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Sorry to spoil your fun, but the project has been popping up in Finnish media for several years now. The company developing the beast was bought up by John Deere some time ago.. maybe the integration of the companies and websites is a bit behind schedule?

      --
      - mipe -
  43. too slow by MrCreosote · · Score: 2

    I want to see them make one that can go as fast as a Zoid.

    With weapons to match.

    --
    MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
  44. Like This? by ashitaka · · Score: 4, Funny
    --
    If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
  45. AT-AT made me think star wars, but by Archfeld · · Score: 3

    the actual pictures make me think Terminator, one of these coming out of the foggy woods, on a hunting day....hilarity is bound to ensue :)

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  46. Re:real? by flacco · · Score: 2
    I cannot view the videos, since I run Linux (Linux forever!)

    What the hell are you talking about? there are a half-dozen viewers for linux. I just watched it minutes ago on gtv.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  47. One Step Closer to Mechwarrior... by Txiasaeia · · Score: 2, Funny

    If anybody has read anything about the history of the Battletech universe, WorkMechs, the predecessors to BattleMechs, were developed in the 21st century. Only 900 years until total Mechwarrior happiness!

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
  48. What About the Steeper Slopes?? by sexecutioner · · Score: 3, Informative

    Look, in Tasmania the forestry industry is pretty fucked for lots of reasons. Yet "they" still come out with the same crap that you've just spouted. Chain logging may reduce the impact on the soil due to wheeled and tracked vehicles. However, it also means that the idiots can also log some of the steepest slopes, that is those that they would have never been able to log before. They (the logging companies) don't give a rats ass about the ecological implications of what they are doing, they are simply trying to subdue the public (and Government in many cases) long enough for them to screw us all over. I only feel a bit churned up over this because in Tasmania we have 400 year old 70+ metre tall Eucalyptus Regnums (the tallest hardwoods in the world) being sold for chips at just over AU$1000 a pop - it makes me sick

  49. It's the New Millennium humvee! by Gray · · Score: 2

    I'm sold, do they have any color other then Deer Green?

  50. Damn! by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2

    I just about dropped my Jedi training ball when I read that!

  51. It's... it's... it's... by happyclam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IT'S A GIANT COOTIE!

    Seriously, remember the game "Cootie" when you were kids? (Those of you who aren't kids anymore anyway.)

    --
    He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington."
    1. Re:It's... it's... it's... by happyclam · · Score: 2
      Or... we're not from the US and therefore didn't share the same sort of childhood experiences as you... would you mind explaining to those of us who don't understand you, exactly what you're talking about?

      Sorry, I figured "Cootie" must already have been in every country in every language since it was so ubiquitous when I was five years old... or at least it seemed that way when I was five.

      Try these:
      YesterdayLand Toys, with pictures
      Instructions for the game
      and Milton Bradley's product page.

      --
      He looked at me and said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington."
  52. slow and loud for a reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    These walking machines are great for reducing damage while logging by reducing the need for road building and reducing the tracks they make on the ground.

    All present walking machines share one big problem though, they are inefficient. This one needs a big diesel to generate constant hydraulic pressure, most of which is used just to keep it standing. Hardly any is left to propel the machine forward.

    Animals typically use almost no energy to stand, and get most of their locomotion energy back through tendons etc.

    Another problem is that bugs fall a lot. The six legged gait is not particularly stable at speed. Fast bugs switch from six to four leg gait when they speed up, and even two leg gait for sprints.

    So this machine is stuck with the dead-slow one-at-a-time gait or the tippy six leg tripod gait, which is still pretty slow, and it has to have a big ass engine because of the inherent inefficiency.

    I guess JD figures all of the above are worth it to silence the whining Greenies who cry over every tree. I'd say this year's fires are a pretty good argument in that direction. I expect to see a bunch of these things running up and down in the next few years, thinning the over grown bush.

    Hope this works out for JD, as in a few years these things will hit the used equipment market. Then we can hot rod 'em!

  53. Forestry has been subsidised for years by Howzer · · Score: 2
    It's NEVER profitable on its own.

    Why doesn't the government pull the money out and then we can all go straight to growing hemp for all our pulp needs?

    And you could use the zero THC varieties, so don't go crazy with the "evil weed" bullshit, ok?

    1. Re:Forestry has been subsidised for years by j-beda · · Score: 2

      It is a challenge to get dimensional lumber out of hemp however. The steel instustry might be happy with going to steel framing systems, but most housing in the USA and Canada is still built with lumber.

    2. Re:Forestry has been subsidised for years by Howzer · · Score: 2
      >It is a challenge to get dimensional lumber out of hemp however

      And so that's what you use timber for. I didn't say (actually, no-one is saying) never cut down trees, but cutting down old growth for pulp is just idiotic, when there are better, cheaper, cleaner alternatives, triply so if the government has to prop it up with my money!

      And of course, that's what is happening. Using plantation timber for lumber? Go right ahead. Great use of resources.

  54. Re:Wrong!!! by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you're going to try to randomly repeat what smart people once said, at least try to get it right.

    Remember the tuna sandwich rule: When you eat a tuna sandwich, you profit in energy. If this wasn't true, people would die of starvation eating tuna sandwiches.

    --
    -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
  55. Draft horses by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 2
    The tool depends on the task.

    In some areas it might make sense to consider draft horses and sledges and drag the trees to the nearest road. They're probably cheaper to operate and less impact on the terrain. Certain types of soft terrain or areas where you may not build roads are examples. If the cutting is done when the ground is frozen, movement is easier. Adding modern materials or design (tracks?) to the sledge could reduce the number of draft horses used.

    Six legged walking machines definitely have a hi-tech coolness, but are a young technology. Four legged walking machines have been refined by us for thousands of years for the specific task of dragging heavy things.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  56. Shouldn't that have been .. by AftanGustur · · Score: 2

    With regard of Yesterday's news a better title might have been:

    Talibans: AT-ATs are Coming to a cave Near *!You!*

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  57. Re: mode by susano_otter · · Score: 2

    It's like the paragraph tag. Your browser shouldn't complain if you close a paragraph you never officially opened (like this one).

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  58. Re:Wonderful... by Cryptnotic · · Score: 2
    On the other hand, leaving as much of the tree behind to decompose IS good for the rest of the trees.

    Encouraging canibalism among trees is a good thing? :-)

    --
    My other first post is car post.
  59. I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK by wheany · · Score: 2, Funny

    I always wanted to be... a LUMBERJACK!

    Leaping from tree to tree, as they float down the mighty rivers of British Columbia! The larch! The redwood! The mighty Scotch pine! With me
    best girl by me side, as we sing, sing sing!

    Oh, I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK, I sleep all night and I work all day.

    (He's a lumberjack and he's OK, he sleeps all night and he works all day.)

    I cut down trees, I eat my lunch, I go to the lava'try, On Wednesdays I go shopping, and have buttered scones for tea.

    (He cuts down trees, he eats his lunch, he goes to the lava'try, On Wednesdays he goes shopping, and has buttered scones for tea.)

    I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK, I sleep all night and I work all day

    I cut down trees, I skip and jump, I like to press wildflow'rs, I put on women's clothing, and hang around in bars.

    (He cuts down trees, he skips and jumps, he likes to press wildflow'rs, He puts on women's clothing... and hangs around in BARS?!?!)

    I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK,
    I sleep all night and I work all day

    I cut down trees, I wear high heels, suspenders and a bra I wish I'd been a girlie, just like my dear Pappa!

    (He cuts down trees, he wears high heels... suspenders and a BRA?!?!)

    Oh I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK, I sleep all night and I work all day Yes I'm a lumberjack and I'm O-K... I sleep all night and I work all day!

  60. Not a good idea by ciryon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Someone could easily disable it by flying an aircraft with wire around its legs!

    Ciryon

  61. Indeed, old news from Finland ;) by korpiq · · Score: 2

    Instantly when seeing the vehicle I noticed it was the same that made the news here years back. Glad to see it's making progress.

    Can't wait to have the "civilian" version: never mind parking problems - just step over 'em!

    Finland, Finland, Finland; the place I want to be
    freezing, drunken, paid and prized for innovative anarchy

    --

    I think, therefore thoughts exist. Ego is just an impression.
  62. I speak for the trees by frenchgates · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I realize that the purpose of this device is to lessen the impact of vehicles on the forest, which is great, but is anyone else freaked out by its resemblance to the rapid forest destroying machines in Dr. Seuss's "The Lorax"? Maybe Hollywood can make a live action version now.

    --
    Syntax error: loose != lose, affect != effect, then!=than
  63. AT-AT: Bah! What's REALLY cool is... by jbarr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...the cutter mechanism on the end of it's boom. That is REALLY cool. I saw a show on TLC (I think it was Modern Marvels or something) that showed how this cutting head works. It grabs onto a tree trunk, cuts it off, rolls the length of the trunk stripping off the branches, and then rolls back over the trunk cutting it into pre-determined lengths. It estimates these lengths by determinig the tree's length by using the tree's diameter and stored "tree data" based on tree type. Seeing this thing in action leaves your eyes glued to the TV and your jaw glued to the floor!!!

    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
  64. It's gotta be said... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nothing perambulates like a Deere...

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  65. The Hills? by IPFreely · · Score: 2
    if I saw one of these things comming at me, I'd run for the hills!

    The Hills? NONONONONO! That's where they are most effective. You need to run to the flat wide open spaces. That way you could out run and out manouver it on your trusty tricycle.

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
  66. Walkers need close-quarter arms by maddogsparky · · Score: 2
    Walking battle platforms need close-quarter arms, in addition to the mid-range and long range armements that they have been depicted with in existing movies/games. Flaws that easily restrict movement have been available as a plot forwarding device to give the little guy a chance to stand up to the behemoth. In Star Wars, entanglement devices were used. In the original Mech Warrior, if the smallest mechs could get in close enough, the main armements of the giants couldn't aim low enough to hit them.

    If the walkers in Star Wars were equipped with close weapons, they would have a) been able to dispatch the Ewoks/rebels that cast the nets or set the triplines and b) been able to destroy the entaglement device. In Mech Warrior, close quarter armements would have been able to hit mechs that were below the range of the main weapons, eliminating the "save zone"

    A real-world waling weapons platform would be able to use a rapid-fire projectile weapon to the same effect. Small belly-mounted turrets would be able to fill this niche.

    --
    science is a religion
  67. Riiiight... by tgd · · Score: 2

    Like any Slashdot readers go hiking. That means actually going outside and being with Nature!

  68. Uhh, no, it's not possible by DG · · Score: 2

    Modern tank main guns, when used in the anti-armour role, don't use an explosive projectile. Instead, they fire a dart of dense metal (like tungsten or depleted uranium) at very high velocities. The pure kinetic energy drives the penetrator through the armour, and the sudden pressure rise within the fighting compartment superheats the air inside, killing the crew and (usually) cooking off any ammo inside the turret in a secondary explosion.

    The muzzle velocity of these projectiles ranges from 1400 m/s to 1800 m/s.

    Typical engagement ranges in open country extend from 5000m at the very outside, down to about 1000m Ranges in close country are correspondingly closer.

    That means in the best possible case (a 5000m engagement in open country) you will have roughly 3 seconds to realize you have been fired upon, attempt evasive action, and get the vehicle clear of the space that will be occupied by the penetrator.

    At more typical ranges, you have 1 second to accomplish same.

    Not going to happen. Sorry.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  69. Gun platform stability and ground pressure by DG · · Score: 2

    There's two more disadvantages to consider - gun platform stability, and ground pressure.

    A legged vehicle is probably pretty stable while stationary, but what happens if you fire a 125mm main gun while walking, with legs up in the air?

    The other consideration is ground pressure. Tanks weigh between 40 and 70 tons. They spread all that weight over the large surface area of the tracks, and get the ground pressure down to a more reasonable level. What happens if you move from the high-surface-area tracks to 6 low-surface-area legs, especially in muddy or soft terrain?

    Kinda embarrassing to get your AT-AT stuck in the mud....

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  70. Re: mode by j-beda · · Score: 2

    I think you missinterpret. I think that the paragraph tag is an opening tag which should use a closing tag with a slash, but most browsers will not complain if you never close it.

  71. Re: mode by susano_otter · · Score: 2

    I've noticed that my browser does not complain when I close paragraphs that I never explicitly opened (like this one).

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  72. How many gaits? by lamz · · Score: 2

    That's one of the coolest machines I've seen in a while. The videos show two gaits: Going down the hill, it moves one leg at a time -- walking. On flat land, it moves three legs at a time, always keeping a tripod on the ground -- trotting. I wonder if it has any other gaits? Galloping would be something to see...

    --

    Mike van Lammeren
    It will challenge your head, your brain, and your mind.

  73. you got me wrong by lingqi · · Score: 2
    1) modern armor is *quite* capable of stopping inert projectiles. see here about M1A1/2 op notes:

    excerpt:
    Protection -- According to the Army report, 8 Abrams crews reported being hit by fire from the Iraqi T-72 , but there was no damage. Later reports claimed that 100-mm rounds fired by T-55 tanks simply glanced off. 125-mm rounds from the T-72 dented the M1A1's armor, but did not penetrate. Of the over 1,950 M1s and M1A1 tanks in the Kuwaiti Theater of Operations (KTO), only four suffered catastrophic damage and four were damaged but repairable, the Army report stated. Later analysis revealed that of the four that caught fire, three were hit erroneously by US AGM-114 Hellfire missiles. No crewmen were injured because the bustle doors and blow- off panels worked as designed to vent the explosions upward.

    please note that US army post a more serious threat to itself than any enemy shells, due to the advances in armor technology

    2) a tracked tank makes an easy (easier) target because you have *zero* lateral movement. a tank's position can be predicted with reasonable accuracy and simplicity. add side-back movement, however, aiming becomes much more of a pain in the ass. that's why you run zig-zag to lessen your chance of being hit by bullets (if you are a lowly infantry unit).

    3) one other reason for legs is the ability (i am not sure on this as per the current state of technology, but hopefully this is something they would strive for) -- sudden and fast acceleration. the time for you (as a person) to run, stop, hop sideways, etc is minimal compared to if you wan to do similar things with the best of tanks. hence making the dodges (if you are concerned about those still) possible.

    i firmly believe that legged battle vehicles will be the future; i could be wrong, of course. but in my view there are simply too many benefits to pass up by sticking with current sort of technology.

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

  74. Re:They look rather insectile. by Dirtside · · Score: 2

    Perhaps he knows of some way for the editors to write besides using language. :)

    TV Show Host: You can't use that kind of language on TV!
    Beavis: We use language?

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  75. Predicted by an SF writer in 1976... by alispguru · · Score: 2

    Dean Ing wrote a short story called "Malf" in which he describes a legged vehicle designed for logging. One of the walkers gets stolen by a Mafia-linked guy who uses it to rob a bank (!) and the good guys have to chase it down with another walker.

    The story isn't online anywhere, but it can be found here.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  76. Elephant by Mittermeyer · · Score: 2

    There is already a bioengineered solution to this problem- it's called an elephant.

    --
    ________________________________________ History Must Not Fall Into The Wrong Hands ___________________________________
  77. No, you're just wrong by DG · · Score: 2

    Keep in mind that I'm a retired tank troop commander, so I sorta know what I'm talking about.

    1) Modern armour can stop APFSDS rounds

    Under the right circumstances, yes, but consider what the "right circumstances" are.

    Firstly, any data from the Gulf war vs American tanks is data that describes second or third line equipment vs state of the art equipment. In case you didn't know, the digits in the designation of Soviet-era equipment represent the year it was first identified by NATO - so a T55 was first encountered in *1955* and a T-72 in *1972*

    Related to this is that the Soviets never sold their top-line equipment to client states. They kept the good stuff for themselves, and sold derated stuff to customers.

    Secondly, the price of all that armour protection is a great deal of mass. While the exact composition of the M1's armour is still top secret, it is known to have at least one layer of depleted uranium in it (the same stuff used in the penetrator) It also has a bunch of ceramics to defend against HEAT warheads, and an anti-spall layer to help the crew.

    On a legged vehicle, you have to not only move this mass forward, you have to LIFT it too.

    On a tracked vehicle, the tank rolls over its tracks much like a train. There is suprisingly little friction there - ask anyone who ever made the mistake of trying to change both tracks at once, and had the tank roll away from them.

    The idea of 65 tons JUMPING straight up in the air is just ludicrous. Work out how much energy that would take! And then work out the ground pressure when it lands, and figure out how far it'll be driven into the soil.

    2) Tanks are very much more manouverable than you seem to realize. They can spin in place at very high speeds, and then squirt out in unexpected directions. The first time you actually see a tank in motion, it'll scare the crap out of you. These are not giant lumbering monsters, they are 65 ton sportscars.

    3) Even if you somehow manage to find a power source that could drive a legged vehicle, even if you can solve the ground pressure problem, you still have to deal with the fact that you're still completely dependant on crew reaction time to recognise you're being shot at, assess the incoming tradjectory, and then make an appropriate evasive action. The incoming round is supersonic, so no help there. Radar and other active sensors give away your position, so that's no good. You're down to the Mark I eyeball picking up the muzzle blast... and at an average of 1 second from firing to impact, you'd have a better chance at dodging a bullet.

    Not gonna happen.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book