The European Grand Challenge

An anonymous reader writes "A European version of the DARPA Grand Challenge is being held in Germany next month. Instead of a race through the desert, the EU challenge is split into three events. Urban, non-urban, and landmine detection will be the 'courses', with multiple winners in each event. Interestingly Sebastian Thrun, winner of last year's Challenge, has been forbidden from taking part despite being a European citizen." From the article: "The trials will take place in and around Hammelburg, a mockup of a town used by the German military for training exercises. In the non-urban course the robots will have to contend with a one-kilometer route containing ditches, barbed wire fences, cattle guards, fires, narrow underpasses, and inclines of up to 40 degrees. The urban and landmine 500-meter trials will require the robots to negotiate doorways, stairs, partially collapsed buildings, and poor visibility from smoke or partial lighting. Along the way, they will also have to search for designated objects and report their findings back to base."

Comments

16 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

barstards, you dont get my comments now.

Database maintenance is currently taking place. Some items such as comment posting and moderation are currently unavailable.

Re:16 seconds?

[IamZed]

I'm disappointed that last challenge didn't involve juggling.

Re:16 seconds?

[LnxAddct]

It might as well, the vehicles can be small and also remotely controlled, they dont have to be entirely autonomous like DARPA required.
Regards,
Steve

Europe burns my ass

[cnflctd]

Why keep Sebastian Thrun out? He won the DARPA contest, and even used Volkswagen to do it. Chauvinist ankle biters.

Re:Europe burns my ass

[anarkhos]

Because it's about image, not results.

They want their own GPS system, even though we have one already. They want their own space program, even if it isn't cost efficient.

Next they'll want an EU liberty statue.

Re:Europe burns my ass

[flyingsquid]

They want their own GPS system, even though we have one already.

Or could it be, I don't know, that the Europeans feel a bit uneasy with such a commercially and strategically important piece of infrastructure in U.S. hands? Funny, it's almost as if they don't trust the USA.

A few years ago, I doubt this would have been so much of a concern. But in recent years, the U.S. has belittled Europe as irrelevant ("Old Europe"), openly mocked countries that disagree with us, put aside the idea of pursuing international consensus in favor of a "We can do whatever the hell we want" foreign policy, and taken an increasingly hostile stance towards the rest of the world ("You're either with us or against us" for instance). The Europeans are asking whether we can really be relied upon to act as their friends- and rightly so.

Re:Europe burns my ass

[Fallen Kell]

They want their own GPS system, even though we have one already.

hmmmm... could it have something to do with the fact that the USA has the ability to shutdown, jam, or otherwise incompasitate any technology that uses the US GPS system? I mean, if you really think about it, would you ever base any of your own military systems on something that you know another country can shutdown?

I mean it is just plain idiotic for them to not create their own GPS system if they want to use the full capabilities out of it. Otherwise piggy-backing on the US system is just begging for problems if it ever was a critical part of they systems (nothing like having a GPS guided missle told that the location it was aimed at is the launch vehicle itself...).

Re:Europe burns my ass

[Anonymous Coward]

"Or could it be, I don't know, that the Europeans feel a bit uneasy with such a commercially and strategically important piece of infrastructure in U.S. hands?"

Bullshit. Galileo is the lead-in, the EU ad to the world, 'see, we're the US alterative'. The EU isn't going to go to war with the US, the system is not so much for them, but they WILL sell their equipment to any country that forsees conflict with the US. iow, the EU is selling GPS for economic reasons, hardly the primary reason the US turns off GPS to nations.

Nice to see the EU brainwashing working on you. Fact is, EU is trying to play both sides--speaking like they are generally US friendly but promoting themselves as the US alternative. They're doing this successfully, and for now, until the US position is seriously undermined or until they hold the dominant position, they will play the two-faced position.

What you stated re GPS is the excuse they are pushing. Why? Galileo was planned pre-9/11. Just that post-9/11 was great for the EU to load up and sell it to the world. Yet the EU still hasn't completed Galileo yet. See, GPS is really the EU again presenting it as a US alternative. Tech is the new monument; having their own system shows the world they are independent from us, because the EU has been selling themselves as a US alternative. Their original reasons was that Galileo was a better sytem; how twisted their reasoning now is. (Having a separate GPS system means that during conflicts, any other nation can use their system against us. That suits the EU well; it's a backstab move)

Half of their big projects are exact copies in areas where they had not dominated--GPS, their space program, the huge Airbus plane (vs. Boeing), etc. While interesting, some of their projects are not exactly sane. Airbus's smaller planes are nice is fine but that massive plane appears to be a bust. Their space program is small but has some really innovative projects. Their GPS system...not sure yet. Technically, it looks good, and has better performance, but it *still* hasn't been completed yet.

And where they can't compete, they've exacted what are effectively nationalistic trade embargos, adopting regulations that purposefully exclude US products which dominate the marketplace. iow, they gave their EU companies the regs early leading to lead times, forcing US products off the shelves until they can be reformulated. This was a plain-faced lie, as the new regs had nothing to do with actual safety.

Friends you say? Hardly. They used us when they were fearing Soviet invasion while they rebuilt, and with the USSR's collapse, they no longer need us. 9/11 was the perfect scenario for them to promote themselves as the anti-US but good western alternative, playing on the sentiments.

The effect is apparent in comments like yours. See, disagreements between the US and Europe has occurred for decades. It just wasn't aired out as anti-nation sentiment. Now, whatever decision we make that they disagree with, they play up. So as much as we may disagree with the world, they are using every instance to raise and the anti-US sentiment, benefiting them.

Unfortunate that it even apparently works domestically to those who disagree with present US policy, but don't kid yourself. There is disagreement, and there is undermining. The EU is undermining. They know even when it backfires (go between with Iran) the damage is not as great as the gain when it works.

To those of us paying attention, hearing about Thrun being excluded from competition is the same old of recent years given the EU's anti-US behavior. It's little wonder the US has been more focused on NAFTA and relationships with the USSR, India, and China.

Re:Europe burns my ass

[antifoidulus]

Or it could just be that both sides are pointlessly bashing each other because things are failing at home/abroad. Europeans are also guilty of pointless America-bashing.


The US is involved in a stupid, pointless contest to see how many lives they can destroy while wasting huge amounts of capital and international goodwill. Capital that could be going to ensuring that Americans remain competitive in the global marketplace etc. And of course when someone mentions that the neocons accuse the person of being "French" like that is an insult. Enough, it is pointless and counterproductive.
Meanwhile, Europe is spinning around in circles and can't decide what it wants. You want the Euro to be the worlds new reserve currency? Say goodbye to your manufacturing sector. But Europe seems to want to have it both ways. On one hand they are screaming about free trade on the other they are blocking Chinese imports. They want to be seen as the land of tolerance and yet the European immigrants(most of whom weren't supposed to be immigrants, they were supposed to be "temporary guest workers" and should have gone home by now, but nobody in Europe likes to admit that) find it much more difficult to integrate into society compared to the US. Not to mention as a whole the EU birth rate is 1.5 children per woman(the only country that comes close to replacement in western Europe is France at 1.9), so the demographic mess Europe is going to be facing will be horrible, but nobody seems willing to do anything about it. They seem to prefer bashing Americans because that is easier than solving problems.

Meanwhile Asia's economies are ramping up and ready to destroy the economies of Europe and North America. I'm an American living in Germany and my plan now is to go home, get a masters degree while America's universities are still worth something, and study my ass off to learn Korean.
The west is dooming itself. If Europe and America really want to thrive in the upcoming century, then they really should be working together. While most hate to admit it, they have similar cultural backgrounds. The economies of both nations are much more alike than the economies of say Europe and China. And they are both facing some of the same social problems, most notably the aforementioned aging population problem. They should be cooperating instead of bickering like children, but as politicians on both sides of the Atlantic have shown, bickering is much easier than humility and doing something....

But, that is just me talking.

Re:Europe burns my ass

[tass01024]

One of the main military policies of the US is to be an early adopter and thus on the forefront of every military technology (pratically every technology, besides eco-related :-)) , therefore EU or any other will always be copying the US in some way

Some comments on the EU Galileo (GAL) project and differencies to GPS (Nav Sys / US):
- GAL - Civilian (public and pay services), GPS - (public and military services)
- GAL works in cojunction with GPS and GLONASS (Russia), GPS is not meant to work with other systems (first adopter)
- GAL and GPS both are augmented by overlayer system like WAAS and EGNOS
- GAL has a rescue service with return link (SAR Beacon), this is actually 'copied' from GLONASS :-) (USSR first adopters) ... FYI: works like this: you activate beacon, signal picked up by sat. relayed to ground, emergency services signaled and confirmation to beacon is relayed back.
- GAL has an important integrity signal relayed with nav.signal, to tell uses if the system is actually performing, nice to know if your placing a 100 ton concrete slap (EU first adopters)
- GAL will work well over most of the globe, GPS has places where the constellation is sub-optimal (like nothern EU contries), GLONASS is very poor at the moment.

Basically there is some copying going on, but I would say it's more a re-working with a broader perspective. The main point is Galileo is non-military, not hooked up to an early-response-system, and not hooked up to an total-annihilation system :-(

Yes, I'm European and work in the Galileo project, call me French if you like (but I'm not).

Re:Europe burns my ass

[MaXMC]

GAL works in cojunction with GPS and GLONASS (Russia), GPS is not meant to work with other systems (first adopter)

Well here you're right...

- GAL and GPS both are augmented by overlayer system like WAAS and EGNOS
- GAL has a rescue service with return link (SAR Beacon), this is actually 'copied' from GLONASS :-) (USSR first adopters) ... FYI: works like this: you activate beacon, signal picked up by sat. relayed to ground, emergency services signaled and confirmation to beacon is relayed back.

Here you're wrong, the USSR doesn't exist anymore. It was dissolved in 1991.

Re:Europe burns my ass

[Anonymous Coward]

*yawn*

Re:Europe burns my ass

[Itchy Rich]

Here you're wrong, the USSR doesn't exist anymore. It was dissolved in 1991.

No, he's not wrong, on that score at least. The USSR launched the first of their GLONASS satellites in the 1980's, so it's perfectly justifiable to talk about the USSR in this context.

Re:Europe burns my ass

[Tom]

Because it's about image, not results.

It often is in politics.

They want their own GPS system, even though we have one already.

If ours turns out to be better - will you be the one to convince the Neocons to shut down theirs and use ours?

Next they'll want an EU liberty statue.

I'd rather say we might want our back given that you don't live up to the promise anymore.
(Lady Liberty was made in France and given to the USA as a present for those who don't know).

Re:Europe burns my ass

[Anonymous Coward]

There you go...whining about overall population aging and then undermining kids in next sentence...you insensitive clod!

Re:Europe burns my ass

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because we don't want to be baby-sitted by the US all the time, doesn't mean we want to stab you in the back. And yet, your kind are the same people who later complain that europeans are lazy because america does all the military spending.

Why is a GPS specifically so sensitive to americans? You could say the same thing about the a number of other things as well:

Oh, you don't need your own Jet Fighters, look we've built several great ones already.
Oh, You don't need your own armies, we have military bases all over Europe.
Oh, you don't need a voice in the world, we already have a fine president.

In the minds of many americans it seems that "allied countries" means "enslaved countries" that do everything the Pentagon wants when they want it. Or else their nation is reduced to a common insult or worse.

Noone elected your country as the leader of the world. You are self-appointed. And realize that after rebuilding from WWII, Europe is capable of much more than being americas satellite states.

taxes

[Ryan Monster]

I guess staying up late getting taxes done and getting ready for Easter is more important than discussing this article.

Re:taxes

[Sterling Christensen]

I tried to post earlier, but I got a message about slashdot.org's database server being down for maintenance. At the time, the top three stories on the main page had zero comments, so I guess it was down for a while.

French Technology

[ThreeE]

I hear the french are planning to demonstrate for the first time at this event that they can build military vehicles that don't just travel in reverse. According to Phillip Chirac, "We believe the unmanned nature of these vehicles will make this possible."

COCKfuckers!

[Anonymous Coward]

No one is an "european citizen". There is no such thing as Europe-the-nation. Therefore there are no european citizens.

Fucking americans. Learn to write it out as "citizens of an european nation". I know it's tempting to split the world into yankistan, china, latin america, yurp, ozztralia, india and the middle east (and maybe africa, but who cares about the niggers, eh?) but there's a lot more detail there for you to embarrass yourselves with.

Re:COCKfuckers!

[ThreeE]

In the bigger picture, yurpean countries are really about the same as American States. Same populations, same size, etc. So, while it's technically incorrect to say "european citizens," it's pretty close to "citizens of european countries."

All in all, I'm not sure anyone but you cares.

Re:COCKfuckers!

[Anonymous Coward]

So let me get this straight. You're insulted to be called a 'European citizen', and you reply by calling them ignorant, racist 'Fucking Americans'?

Re:COCKfuckers!

[FormOfActionBanana]

In English, it's perfectly acceptable to say "European citizen." It's like "mammalian female" or, more appropriately, "anonymous coward." The noun doesn't have any stranglehold on the adjective.

P.S. You're also an arsehole.

Re:COCKfuckers!

[Dipster]

No one is an "european citizen". There is no such thing as Europe-the-nation.

A little history: Those "Fucking Americans" are citizens of the United States, meaning a collection of independant smaller states working together for the common defense. Except that over the years, those states stood as they watched the federal government power grab and now those states are insignificant compared to the whole.

Fast forward a few years: The European Union is formed, a collection of independant states working together for the common good. Do you honestly think the growth of the EU's authority is going to stop? You're on the exact same path we were dude.

Re:COCKfuckers!

[LeftOfCentre]

Actually there is in fact such a thing as a European citizenship, or more specifically EU citizenship: http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/citizen ship/fsj_citizenship_intro_en.htm

Re:COCKfuckers!

[LeftOfCentre]

Exactly. The concept of European Union citizenship has in fact already been established.

Re:COCKfuckers!

[Anonymous Coward]

If just claiming it makes it happen, I hereby proclaim that all slashdotters are citizens of my country "NERDLAND"

This citizenship entitles you:

1) Not to be discriminated against, ever, in any shape or form, for any reason, including valid ones.
2) To have an equal chance at getting First Post
3) To have a wild party every Saturday night.
4) And any other vaguely liberal Good Thing

The form of government of NERDLAND shall be Dictatorship, mitigated by assasination (which has been shown to be the most efficient form of government)

NERDLAND has an established Religion - Pastafarianism.

Nerdland will operate strict color segregation, based on the color of the skin round your anus, which is quite similar for all races. Your position in society will depend on how dark this. I expect some interesting sun-tan sessions...

Since you are all now citizens, I will expect you to speak Swedish and change your underpants every hour. They will be worn on the outside ....

Re:COCKfuckers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nerdland will operate strict color segregation, based on the color of the skin round your anus, which is quite similar for all races. Your position in society will depend on how dark this. I expect some interesting sun-tan sessions...

Since you are all now citizens, I will expect you to speak Swedish and change your underpants every hour. They will be worn on the outside ....

Except that unlike the EU, Nerdland has no power to enforce those things.

Re:COCKfuckers!

[LupusCanis]

It is a good thing, the idea of a US state type system for the EU is the only way I can see the EU countries remaining world powers. Of course, I don't like how the EU's centre is in a basically Gallic country, but ... eh.

Humans in the loop

[MBAFK]

"semi-autonomous and even remotely operated vehicles can also be entered"

Obviously is still likely to generate some useful stuff, but for me this does take some of the coolness out of it.

Urban Component

[Anonymous Coward]

Will parallel parking be part of the challenge?

---
This anonymous post was brought to you by the image-protected passphrase "nether"

What's this for?

[tverbeek]

Is it just me, or does this smell even more of munitions R&D for the military-industrial complex than DARPA's challenge?

Re:What's this for?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is all you need to know:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-513758199 1288263801

Re:What's this for?

[zippthorne]

No, it smacks of european "me-too"ism. Which frankly is unbecoming to the continent which brought us modern science.

BTW, what did you think the "D" in "DARPA" stood for anyway?

Re:What's this for?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more like a "not-be-dependant-on-a-single-country-for- something-as-important-as-this"-ism

my entry

[PresidentEnder]

This seemed that it might be more difficult and more useful than the DARPA challenge, until I read that the contest allowed semi-autonomous and even remote-controlled vehicles.

In light of this, I've begun working on my European citizenship so that I can enter a remote control car strapped to a camera.

Re:my entry

[3.14159265]

enter a remote control car strapped to a camera.
I'm not quite sure it'd work...I'd rather have instead a camera strapped to a remote control car... unless you can get a camera with wheels!

DARPA was better

[romka1]

The Official site

Participants are not as interesting as DARPA most of them are small robots not full sized cars...

Although I would like to watch how those robots will pass the mine field

In Hammelburg? "I know nothing....!"

[Anonymous Coward]

Wasn't Hammelburg the town located right next to Stalag 13?

Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[BongoBen]

A friend of mine, an officer who is currently serving in the US army in Iraq, came with me to the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge. His response to the whole event was "Hell, I don't need robots that can go 150 miles. I need robots that can go 100 yards." What he meant was that he wanted a robot capable of going a short distance that could detect/disable IUDs and mines. That's a pretty risky endeavour for a person to do.

Re:Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[Stevyn]

Those are being developed. iRobot PackBot, Foster Miller Talon, Remotec Mini Andros. They are controlled by human operators, have a coulple cameras and are being testing with explosive detection devices. The robots I mentioned are more or less designed to disable the IED after they are found, but companies are making add-ons that aid in detecting IEDs in the field.

Re:Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[Buran]

That wasn't the point of the Grand Challenge, though. The GC was designed to help develop autonomous vehicles for things like long-distance supply missions. Your friend's complaint is like complaining that a digital SLR camera can't record movies even though it's good at what it was designed for -- still image capture. It can't capture movies because its design makes that physically impossible since it wasn't meant for movie capture. Similarly, the GC robots weren't designed for clearing minefields and no one ever said they would be useful for that.

Apples and oranges.

Re:Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[MichaelSmith]

could detect/disable IUDs and mines

I would love to see a robot which can detect both IUDs and mines. Truely versatile.

Re:Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[maxume]

Perhaps the military is asking for video cameras and DARPA is giving them digital SLRs(I don't think so, but)?

It seems to me that the officer was probably capable of understanding the purpose of the grand challenge and was lamenting the expenditure of the resources on something so tangentially related to his problems; he wants a mine-hunter grand challenge, not a neato-autodrive grand challenge...

Re:Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[saider]

detect/disable IUDs

IUD's? Is the army trying to get their enemy pregnant?

For the comically impaired...
    IUD - intra-uteran device
    IED - improvised explosive device

Re:Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[Hankvb]

Tell your friend a vehicle that can be used for mine detection is currently made. It is light in weight and can be Radio or GPS controlled www.gpscontrolledvehicle.com

Re:Landmine Detection a Good Thing

[SuperElectric]

There's already a DARPA competition for small-scale vision-based navigation through cluttered terrain, though for more general purposes than landmine detection. It's called LAGR. The NYU team has a nice page on their system with pics and videos (I'm a member).

The Grand Challenge, I thought, was designed with a detrimentally macho mindset, with a needlessly high ratio of financial risk to scientific output. It sent many expensive cars through long stretches of very uniform-looking but occasionally high-risk (cliffs!) terrain. The cars had a road to follow. It was ok to hire an army of undergraduates to hand-design a path through the terrain (see the funny scenes involving CMU from chapter 6 of this online NOVA episode about the Grand Challenge).

Maybe they've learned a few lessons, because the DARPA LAGR competition does everything in almost the opposite manner:

• Focus on software: The teams all use the exact same hardware. We each get a robot for testing, but for the competition we just hand off our software to the government organizers, who load it into their robot and let the robot run the course.
• Focus on the difficult problems: Current robotic localization and mapping is heavily reliant on laser range scanners, which have a limited range (~30 feet) compared to vision, and therefore is unsuitable for long-range path planning. Instead of letting scientists wait for laser scanners to get incrementally better, this competition forces its entrants to adopt a vision-based solution, like people. As one organizer put it, we didn't get to the moon by incrementally improving the airplane.
• A sane funding structure: A pool of 10 or so initial teams start out with funding, with each successive competition (with increasing demands) weeding out more and more teams. I've heard that other DARPA robot competitions happening in parallel have adopted similar funding systems. Contrast this with the grand challenge teams, who didn't get any money until the end (CMU notably sank $3 million into their efforts to win the $2 million prize).

Search for Objects?

[Anonymous Coward]

Along the way, they will also have to search for designated objects and report their findings back to base.

Among the objects to be found: Sarah Connor

Now *this* is tough requirements.

[NightFears]

I just hope we've got a couple more years until these robots are also required to reproduce...

Denied access

[Yokaze]

> Being a native-born German now holding dual U.S. citizenship, in theory, Thrun should have been able to participate, since the rules only state that one must be a European citizen in order to qualify.

Um, in theory, he also doesn't have dual citizenship. At the moment, he aquired the U.S. citizenship, he lost his German citizenship. German law doesn't allow for dual citizenships, except for children, or you can't resign your previous citizenship.

Re:Denied access

[Anonymous Coward]

That is wrong. I am German and I have two citizenships (German and Polish). You do not lose your German citizenship if you accept another!

Re:Denied access

[siljeal]

This is not quite correct. In general, you do lose your German citizenship if you've accepted another one. However, there are exceptions. One exception would be a permit called the "Beibehaltungsgenehmigung", and the other one being younger than 23 years old. Of course, Poland might not allow you to "lose" your citizenship, so there could be a contract allowing this construction.

Re:Denied access

[pimpimpim]

I also thought that it was not possible, except for very rare exceptions, so I looked it up: The main policy of germany is to avoid letting people have two citizenships, but there are indeed exceptions, as you can read in the link below, and the links therein:

http://www.migration-online.de/publikation._cGlkPT IzJmlkPTQyNDU_.html

There's a lot of interesting stuff there, for example if you move from a country TO germany you can keep the two citizenships when the original country does not allow you to let go of their citizenship: marocco, algeria, tunesia, syria, iran (one Bundesland does not allow 2 citizenships of you're from Iran, I guess that must be Bayern ;) ) In the case of this guy however, if you move to another country and accept their citizenship you can request a 'Beibehaltungsgenehmigung' (ah, german bureaucratic words), where you have to show that you have and will keep considerable ties to Germany.

So, several things could be the matter, one is that the journalist just assumed he has two citizenships, but in reality doesn't. The second is that he actually has two citizenships, but that the organization committee doesn't accept his team because it's from a non-european university (this would make sense). Three, he actually would be able to apply, but the committee are a bunch of chauvinist pigs that want one of the european teams they are most related to win, and know that they won't stand a chance against this guy ;)

In any case, most of the european scientific community isn't a very "open" one, it's hard to get into a top-position, you'll have to make friends in the right positions, etc. And I guess sebsatian thrun has seen reconfirmed the reason that he left europe in the first place.

Disclaimer: I'm a european starting a scientific career in europe, or maybe not ;)

It's not as progressive as i'd like

[Xiph]

While like both the darpa and the euro challenges, I also find that they are more a showcase for solving tasks of yesterdays war, with newer and modern toys. So far in warfare, robots are used much like human operated vehicles were used in WWI, for reconnaissance purposes and the fact that they're spending so many resources on maneuvering excersises, is more of a showcase for their limited vision, than the capabilities of robot technology. When they make these big expensive robots for warfare, they forget the primary reason robots are used in the first place; robots are expendable, and partially autonomous.

The last part is where the european challenge at least gets something right. There's no need for fully autonomous vehicles on the battlefield, because the decisions you make on the battlefield require human accountability, when the situation is grave enough to throw away accountability, that's the time you launch the nukes.

So how do we make a robotic system that takes those two benefits into account?
My suggestion would be to use swarming, and standby robots. For instance, if I were to launch a robot air assault, with say 500 human controllers involved, i'd use standard hobbyshop vehicles, with advanced communication, some computing power and a weapon on each, keep it cheap, And i'd use somewhere along the line of 10,000 robots.
The robots can be dropped from a plane, or send off from the ground, the later option will be cheapest the former will have greater range.
The controllers will take control or partial control when they arrive, in early versions full control of a single plane, if there's no available controller, they'll go on standby somewhere close to the battlefield, When a robot goes down, they're allocated a new one from the pool of robots on standby.
In a more advanced scenario the robots would create a 3d representation of the battlefield and the controllers will just point out targets, and possibly hit the fire button (for accountability reasons).

But that's just one version, I think that a cool competition goal would be to design a system that can: Take out targets as fast as possible, as cheap as possible and as reliable as possible (reduce collateral damage), the targets can be anything from target dummies, over vehicles to other robots, in scenarios including regular, urban and guerilla warfare, police assignments and terrorist attacks.
The reason i stop here is that i don't have the vision to go further, not that others should not try to think beyond it.

Re:It's not as progressive as i'd like

[Cederic]

Mine disposal is definitely not yesterday's war.

Re:It's not as progressive as i'd like

[Xiph]

Well.. disposal of infantry mines is becoming the remnant of yesterdays war.
but i have to concede that you're right when it comes to anti-vehicle mines.
and i guess clearing infantry mines will just become clearing improvised explosives devices. New name same basic principle.

If you read my post, I'm ranting more about how they focus solely on doing things with single expensive units, and the lack of imagination in other roles. Robots are perfect for mine clearance, as long as they're either expandable, or can withstand the punishment they receive.

Re:It's not as progressive as i'd like

[Tom]

In a more advanced scenario the robots would create a 3d representation of the battlefield and the controllers will just point out targets, and possibly hit the fire button (for accountability reasons).

You've played too much Starcraft. A real battlefield is much, much, much more tricky, complicated and there's a lot of noise in your info. Navigating that alone (let alone shooting someone, much less the right guy) is a challenge for humans - robot technology is a decade at least away from just that.

Up in the air, things are easier - you don't have walls, debris, lots of moving stuff, different elevation levels and a hundred other things into account. Swarms of cheap robot airplanes, each armed with a single bomb or something - that sounds doable. Of course, we have those already.

Our "GPS"

[Anonymous Coward]

Given the strength of our european military complex and and unity we have shown so far in decisions involving the military PLUS the fact we have agreed upon a satellite system already seems to strengthen one interpretation:

It is not about shooting around throughout the world, but about plain civilian money-making:
- Make the farmer pay for a high-resolution navigation aid for his tractor (not jammed by some cowboys upon their liking)
- Squeeze even more money out of hauling companies (our Autobahns are getting quite crowded with trucks)
- $you_name_your_business_idea

Hey Americans! Got an idea for a high-reliable sat nav system? We could make you an offer!

Come on, you all know the "Idea, ..., Profit!" thing, don't be so upset. Your system is old, we make a more modern version. You can rent it, too!

And be assured, we will show the same navel-gazing in the next decades, you can easily remain the problem-solver and regime-fixer!

Other side of the (cheap robotic) "stick"

[Anonymous Coward]

How long before landmine manufacturers create "intercepting" mobile, robotic mines that stay dormant, hidden aside the path to avoid detection but run under your feet when they sense movement?

Or, antivehicle mines that wait for front anti-mine roller or dozer knife to pass, then roll between front and back wheels of a truck, or attack the tank caterpillars, or the bottom of the tank (probably the least armored side of the tank, beeing least exposed)?

Or, robotic RPG launcher that can be in ambush anywhere in vicinity of the road?

I'm not sure it will be easy to spot by its enemy brethen limited sensory capabilities. When talking anbout small, cheap, expendable, then attackers (those who initiate clashes) are in better position then defenders.

Overall, it seems that weaker, lo-intensity warfare (guerilla, terrorists, whatever) side gets more edge from robotic warfare then superarmies do. With landfills full of harvestable junk (old office equipment with steppers, cars full of servos), improvised "smart killing machines" are a sort of 21st century "molotov cocktail".

It may start to be so perhaps soon (right now, the war is mostly in parts of the world where combatants don't seem to care for their lives, but it may change) and would remain to be so until weapons' industry kicks in and starts to understand the change of landscape - present fat pay it rips of military should be thing of the past. Weaponry that is "expendable" must not be too pricey (after all, it is not like it has to sustain lives of the crew). Ideally, it should cost less in work hours (in terms of worker*TIME, not MONEY) then forementioned hypothetical "scrapyard challenge" autonomous (or RC) one-shot robots.

I suggest they make small universal mobile "eye, hand and shoulder" platform that could carry any personal weapon and establish "system of fire", cover with fire the movement of troops on the field, lay in ambush, ... it would be like multiplying your number of soldiers, only with less logistics, with less needed space for their transport, ... you get the picture.

Poor Thrun....

[michelsdoom]

That's really not fair!

I mean HE is the winner of the DARPA GC, so why could they have denied the participation?

When he is a German citizen (at least his car is German I believe) and the money that helped his team winning is coming from Volkswagen: Where is the problem?

I wonder why the journalist did not ask the organiser or the Chief Judge about it?
Would have been a good opportunity to clear things up, wouldn't it?

--Michel

Re:In Hammelburg? "I know nothing....!"

[Pedahzur]

Yes, it was. A real town, or at least used to be.