Grenade-Style Wireless Camera For Combat

nk497 writes "A new wireless camera called the I-Ball is being developed to be shot into locations using a grenade launcher so troops can see what lies ahead. The I-Ball sends real-time, 360-degree video back to soldiers while it's flying through the air and when it lands."

Comments

overkill

[RemoWilliams84]

Why not just shoot the grenades in there. Then you'll know what lies ahead (bodies).

Re:overkill

[bev_tech_rob]

...or just add an explosive to it....will be able to see the surprise on their faces before they are blown to bits...

Re:overkill

[Shakrai]

Why not just shoot the grenades in there. Then you'll know what lies ahead (bodies).

Yeah but it might be good to know if those bodies are enemies, civilians or friendlies before you frag them ;)

My million dollar question: What's to stop your opponent from figuring out which frequencies this device transmits on and jamming it and/or targeting it with anti-radiation weapons?

Re:overkill

[Missing_dc]

Great placement of this comment, considering the FP.

Re:overkill

[moderatorrater]

Make it so that the explosives can be blown after you check the video. If there are a bunch of men with rifles, blow the grenade. If there are women and children, retrieve it.

Re:overkill

[KDR_11k]

Not necessarily, the hostiles might be some distance away from the opening you throw the thing through, just throwing a grenade tells them where you are and if you go in you'll have all rifles in the vincinity pointed at you already.

Re:overkill

[Thanshin]

The real problem will come when the first soldier holds a grenade to his face and while everybody says "cheeeese" blows his head off.

Re:overkill

[MightyYar]

What if it is women and or children with rifles?

I think chivalry dictates that you kill them last.

Re:overkill

[Kagura]

Considering that the enormous majority of incidents in Iraq are civilian militias performing attacks against ordinary citizens who belong to a different sect of Islam, rather than against US personnel, I'd say that the moderator was warranted in modding down your post.

Re:overkill

[AceM2]

Honestly, it doesn't even have to be American-centric. If you were Australian you wouldn't want Australians dying, if you were Russian you wouldn't want Russians dying, and so forth and so on. There are few countries which take as many precautions as we do. The problem is you only hear about the .0001% of times when something goes wrong.

Re:overkill

[maz2331]

Good idea if it helps to avoid blowing up non-combatants, and useful for knowing where to call in the 500 pound bomb if necessary.

As a general rule, it is always advisable to avoid barbequeing women and children who aren't involved in the fight if it's at all possible to do so. It's counterproductive and feeds the enemy's propaganda machine.

Re:overkill

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you learn anything from Titanic? Women and children first

Re:overkill

[kungfugleek]

Next week's headline: US Military invents a grenade with a "Surrender" button. Throw the grenade, and if the enemy wants to surrender, they can simply press the button and the grenade deactivates. Maybe it opens up and dispenses little handcuffs to all of them and a gps showing them where the nearest US POW camp is. That way, they can all cuff themselves and use the GPS to find the nearest surrendering station to check themselves in. Maybe it'll come with a little PDA so they can register their favorite meals and preferred accommodations and check off special needs like "wheelchair accessible", "wake-up call", and "preferred method of torture".

Re:overkill

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of that is because those other countries, excepting Russia, aren't actually lobbing large quantities of bombs into populated areas, which is the most reliable way of avoiding collateral damage, so don't write em off so fast. I am also going to bet that you pulled that figure out of a dark orifice. You do realize that every decimal point is a factor of ten, right? I don't think anyone seriously believes that only one out of every million attacks results in civilian causalities. One in a hundred would be more realistic. I don't have the time to poke around the pentagon site to find the real figure to refute this ill considered post.

Re:overkill

[AceM2]

Obviously the figure was an obvious exaggeration. If I had the exact number I would have referenced it. You obviously missed the point.

Re:overkill

[AceM2]

Oh, now I made a grammatical error. That must mean I'm a complete idiot!

Re:overkill

[jonaskoelker]

There are few countries which take as many precautions as we do.

Could that be because the countries which have the technology required to take the same precautions don't go to war as much?

Re:overkill

[CodeBuster]

Have you ever thrown hand grenades? The typical response of a target, providing that they detect the threat and there is time to act (which there will be if you are waiting for the video feed to be acquired so that you can check for the bad guys before detonating remotely), is to either get out of the way (jump into or behind cover or just run) OR pick up the grenade and throw it as far away as possible (preferably in the direction that it came from, although that is not always possible). It is therefore common practice for users to arm the grenade (pull the pin and flip the safety) prior to a delayed throw so as to allow the enemy as little time as possible to react (ideally the grenade lands close to or on the enemy and then immediately explodes with zero reaction time allowed). The other desirable features of modern hand grenades include cheapness, ruggedness, and reliability. Anything which lessens those or other essential features will likely NOT be looked upon favorably by the military.

Re:overkill

[amRadioHed]

The number of decimal points is extremely important in determining the validity of your point. The reality is that civilian deaths are far more common than you would have us believe.

Re:overkill

[AceM2]

I didn't want the conversation to get into one about what country is better than another. War is obviously a bad thing and life would be great if no one went to war. That being said... The things I'm talking about take no technology at all. I'm talking about the risk guys on the ground take every day to make sure they don't kill the wrong people. Meaning, strict rules of engagement, escalation of force milder than many police departments, clearing individual houses when we could drop bombs, using non-lethal means when possible, etc,. I wish the US wasn't at war, and I am not trying to justify civilian casualties. The point is most people in most countries don't want to see their own people getting killed under most any circumstances.

Re:overkill

[Cussin_IT]

The figure could be made up, but I suspect that the GGP didn't mean "percent of attacks made" but rather something more like "percent of bullets fired". One in a million bullets hitting a civilan sounds more likly than one in a million attacks resulting in civilian casualtys.

Of course the number is quite obviously made up, so it's all down to perception. Just my 2c worth.

Re:overkill

[CodeBuster]

One should never underestimate the ability of militias or irregular fighters to adapt and acquire advanced weapons or technology. For example, the Tamil Tigers Air Force have in recent years surprised and embarrassed the Sri Lankan government by acquiring and modifying several light aircraft for bombing missions. The regular Sri Lankan Air Force and Army, despite being equipped with relatively modern fighter jets and anti-aircraft artillery, have been unable to stop continuing attacks of jury rigged bombers run by a bush league air force.

Re:overkill

[AceM2]

You're missing the point as well. 5000 dead or 50000 dead or 5 dead. It doesn't change the argument. If you read, I was saying that most countries do not want their own people to die. Some countries take more precautions than others. You can argue about a decimal all you want if it makes you happy. Thanks for the comment.

Re:overkill

[Arthur Grumbine]

Perhaps those "similar weapons" you mentioned might have more relevance in this discussion than a $316,856 air-to-surface rocket used to strike "radar-equipped air defense systems".

Last time I checked, insurgents were extremely lacking in their air force, and did not have millions of dollars to spend destroying a dozen cameras (assuming the HARM could target a single wireless camera - which it couldn't). Additionally, since these cameras are being shot into the areas where the enemy forces are, I suspect that their desire to use an explosive device to rid themselves of these cameras might not be so great.

Please provide some links to these "similar weapons", though, and I will be happy to investigate...

"Being developed" = "Hey, I got an idea"

[jfengel]

From TFA:

âoeWe have overcome some significant technological challenges in developing the I-Ball technology,â said Paul Thompson of Dreampact. âoeAlthough it is in its early stages, we are very excited about the technology's potential to help our troops to be better prepared for battle.â

In other words, "We had an idea, and we've got no idea how to actually implement it, but if the MoD gives us a bunch of money we'll happily spend it."

Maybe the UK MoD is better than the US DoD about not funding projects just because some legislator is owed a favor, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Re:"Being developed" = "Hey, I got an idea"

[sckeener]

I'm sure the inventor got the idea after getting caught installing a wireless webcam in a girls gym room.

'what if I could just roll it into the bathroom? Maybe make it look like a softball or something. Oh...oh...and I need to be able to shoot it from far away so if they find it, I'm not caught.'

Re:"Being developed" = "Hey, I got an idea"

[houghi]

You do not need to shoot it far, just further then the restraining order allows you to get to.

Re:"Being developed" = "Hey, I got an idea"

[jonaskoelker]

Imagine the loss of human lives that might have occurred if he had been satisfied looking at tits on the internet.

Fathers, encourage your sons to find ways to take a peek at the girls in the gym room. Someone's life may depend on it. If nothing else, your future grandkid's ;)

Wish there was a photo

[thered2001]

It would be interesting to see what this thing looks like. It must be pretty rugged in order to survive the landing.

Now they really know you're coming...

[AceM2]

If the "bad guys" didn't already hear you coming in, they really know when that ball comes flying in the room! Seriously, it's going to take a minute to analyze the feed and on the ground we don't have that time luxury. While there might be a few isolated cases where it could be useful, I'm not sure what they are.

Re:Now they really know you're coming...

[capt.Hij]

I was assuming that infantry soldiers would use it after they shot up a building. It would be nice to see what damage you inflicted before going in. By that time the folks inside probably have a good idea that they have visitors. The article itself seemed jsut as focused on armor which you generally do not use to sneak up on anybody.

A no-deposit/no-return drone?

[erroneus]

I sure hope these things are less than $100... hell, less than $10 for that matter. I sure as hell don't think we need to waste that kind of money on stuff the enemy might take home as a souvenir.

"Why can't we all just get along?!" I'd rather see research and development dollars spent making war and conflict obsolete.

At the moment, most of the conflict where it is "the world" vs. the U.S.A., seems to be stemming from ridiculous policies that no one can fully explain. Why do we care about the "spread of communism"? Why do we care about "defending Israel"? There are a lot of humanitarian causes far more dire and we leave those tragedies alone with a clear conscience. Can someone tell me why we spend SO much money and so many human lives on "expanding democracy" and "defending Israel"?

Re:A no-deposit/no-return drone?

[schnikies79]

War and conflict will become obsolete when humans become obsolete.

Re:A no-deposit/no-return drone?

[LWATCDR]

The answer is simple but unpleasant. You try and stop the biggest threats to you. Iraq wasn't using the money it got from oil to make a better life for it's people. It was using it to get nukes and chemical weapons. Yes they really where before the first war. We found lots of nice and nasty stuff then.
Oil = money and money = weapons. The big lesson that most of the western world got from WWII was it is better to fight a little war then a big one.
That is why Nato went into Serbia with the US's help and the UK, US and other nations went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Is that lesson still valid? I don't know.
As too the US vs the world?
You have drank way to much koolaid.
Most of the world sure isn't fighting the US. While the press shakes a finger at the US the actual governments just shake their head in public and behind closed doors are probably glad that it is happening.
Yea you will get some venting on Slashdot about how evil the US is but those people are not in political power.

Re:A no-deposit/no-return drone?

[CorporateSuit]

I'd rather see research and development dollars spent making war and conflict obsolete.

Seeing an end to war is less likely than seeing an end to sex.

Re:A no-deposit/no-return drone?

[roystgnr]

While the press shakes a finger at the US the actual governments just shake their head in public and behind closed doors are probably glad that it is happening.
Yea you will get some venting on Slashdot about how evil the US is but those people are not in political power.

So as long as we've got US-friendly governments in place, there's no need to worry about popular opinion? Well, I suppose that strategy's never backfired horribly on us before...

Re:A no-deposit/no-return drone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Iraq wasn't using the money it got from oil to make a better life for it's people.

And the US gov't is doing a good job of using its money to make a better life for its people?

Give me a break. Iraq was no threat to the world. Saddam was content, after being spanked during Kuwait, to sit back and chill.

Re:A no-deposit/no-return drone?

[legirons]

I sure hope these things are less than $100... hell, less than $10 for that matter. I sure as hell don't think we need to waste that kind of money on stuff the enemy might take home as a souvenir.

From the army which are spending $25,000 per shot on their grenades? Dream on.

Pointless invention.

[iamapizza]

What, nobody uses Google Earth anymore?

But...

[isBandGeek()]

Does it run Linux?

Re:But...

[Endo13]

Forget that. I just want to know if it will blend.

screw warfare - how about BASEBALL

[petes_PoV]

If I was developing a hardened, spherical wireless camera, I'd have many more uses for it than killing people. The entertainment possibilities alone are immense. Hopefully we'll see this deployed on the field of play before the battlefield.

Re:screw warfare - how about BASEBALL

[Corpuscavernosa]

Wow yeah baseball would be good. Is it sad that the first thing I thought of was ladies locker rooms?

Re:screw warfare - how about BASEBALL

[Explodicle]

The problem with using one of these in a baseball is that it would have to retain a standard ball's size, weight, stiffness, and elasticity.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

same theme, better story:

[circletimessquare]

one-eyed san francisco artist looking for the tech that will allow her to put a webcam in her eye socket:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/11/15/2008-11-15_san_francisco_artist_looks_to_replace_lo.html

Re:same theme, better story:

[arthurpaliden]

I have been toying with the idea for a while. Not so much to have it wired into my brain but just connected via "bluetooth" or simillar method to a pocket recorder. Control would be by blinking. This would be the ultimate stealth camera. Battery life would probably suck though.

Re:same theme, better story:

[foobsr]

why would you need 360 degree view in your eye socket

Never heard of 'the inner eye' ??? Fits especially well for an artist.

CC.

Yes, but does it run Linux?

[davidwr]

Some old North Korean told me that in Soviet Russia, cameras grenade-launch YOU.

Mod "2005 called they want their memes back."

Re:Yes, but does it run Linux?

[oodaloop]

Mod "2005 called they want their memes back."

1976 called and Richard Dawkins wants his meme meme back.

Lemme get this straight...

[girlintraining]

The US government already has flying drones with millimeter radar capable of seeing inside a hardened bunker -- as in, it can see bodies and outlines some several feet through concrete and steel. Why not just use those? If you're close enough to throw a grenade toward the target, they're likely close enough to blow you away too, and if I'm taking a bullet in the butt risk, wouldn't it make sense to throw something that could kill them before they kill me?

"Holy Allah, they're throwing webcams at us! We must flee!"

Puh-leze.

Re:Lemme get this straight...

[oodaloop]

Uh, because UAVs are hideously expensive maybe? And because we don't have enough to support every squad in theater simultaneously? This would be much cheaper and easier to deploy than multi-million dollar UAVs that require extensive logistics to maintain.

Re:Lemme get this straight...

[Chyeld]

Sounds like someone talking out of their ass to me.

Tell you what, why don't you start up your own company and start selling these cheap UAV's you can make to the military. Get back to us when you become rich and famous, OK?

People make RF controlled planes all the time. People don't make UAV drones capable of being flown from the other side of the world for up to 24 hours at a stretch all the time.

When they can, call me. Better yet, call the Air Force.

Re:Lemme get this straight...

[maeka]

Not the ones with mm radar.

Re:Lemme get this straight...

[oodaloop]

Because our UAVs are FAR more than just a plane with a webcam on it. The one referenced above uses milimeter radar. Does your webcam do that? I'm more familiar with the Predator, and if you could see it in action, your mouth would water. Though it still doesn't do it justice, try this article:

http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=122

Re:Lemme get this straight...

[girlintraining]

So it will cost $7.5 million, will sometimes fly, and can be used by a marine? Sounds about right.

Re:Old news day on slashdot?

[WuphonsReach]

I watched a show about these on "future weapons" last year. they have been in production for over 3 years now.

I think it was even used on CSI:NY within the past few years as well. A tactical assault team tossed one into an apartment prior to entry.

Hostages, explosives on site...

[denzacar]

...sensitive equipment on site, element of surprise, recon mission...
The list is long.

Are you one of those guys that, when playing Counterstrike, chucks grenades inside killing all the hostages and then runs into the room spraying it with bullets, only to be knifed in the head once you run out of ammo?

Re:Hostages, explosives on site...

[RemoWilliams84]

Oh, so you know who I am. Whats your tag?

Commercial Applications

[PPH]

I see televised golf tournaments becoming much more interesting.

WTF is a bad guy?

[Kris Thalamus]

It really bothers me to hear an adult use the term "bad guy" to refer to a real person. It seems to be a recent American trend. Bad guys are characters found in silly action films and fairy tales.

Re:WTF is a bad guy?

[AceM2]

Hence the quotation marks. I'm sorry you have issues understanding what a bad guy is. It's a person (a "guy") who is bad. Do you need me to break it down further?

Re:WTF is a bad guy?

[Kris Thalamus]

Yes, I wouldn't mind if you did break it down further. I feel that terms like good and bad are usually poor ways of summing up the motives that lead to international conflict. Using stock heros and villains is intellectually lazy enough when writing fiction. People who accept a children's story grade narrative to assess political situations scare me.

Re:WTF is a bad guy?

[CodeBuster]

Don't tell me you don't understand what a "bad guy" is. I'm not going to sit here and argue about what the target actually is. To the fighter on the ground, the target is a bad guy. Why sit here and worry about terminology?

This is one reason, among many, why the American Military does NOT want a return to the draft. They do not want lefty intellectual types who are going to sit there in the middle of fire fight and agonize over whether or not to pull the trigger or, even worse, argue with their officers. In combat soldiers follow orders or they get themselves and their fellow soldiers killed, plain and simple. If someone can't or won't pull the trigger when ordered then they should do themselves and our soldiers a favor and not enlist in the military.

Re:WTF is a bad guy?

[Reziac]

And we have another word for soldiers who sit around over-analyzing such situations:

"Casualty."

Debate the appropriateness of this word, in light of the "bad guy" discussion above. ;)

Re:WTF is a bad guy?

[Kris Thalamus]

Why sit here and worry about terminology?

I'm alarmed by the trend of childish terms being used to discuss grave and complicated situations.

Re:WTF is a bad guy?

[Kris Thalamus]

They do not want lefty intellectual types who are going to sit there in the middle of fire fight and agonize over whether or not to pull the trigger...

You don't have to be a lefty to consider whether or not your target is a threat before pulling the trigger.

Re:WTF is a bad guy?

[Anonymous Coward]

:) You're wrong.

In Iraq, every time we kill innocents, we are fueling anti-American sentiments, effectively perpetuating a cycle of violence by tipping popular and individual sentiments in favor of insurgent groups. Petraeus himself is trying to minimize incidental casualties, and part of this effort is putting more decision power in the hands of lower level soldiers in the field who have the power to recognize targets.

Differentiating between "bad guys" and "good guys" is not only important morally, it is a vital part of our current anti-insurgence strategy.

Please, leave your knee-jerk anti-intellectualism at the door. Petraeus received a Ph.D. studying this stuff, and while he isn't a foot soldier, this kind of intellectual work is vital.

The beta had significant bugs

[mangu]

Why can't we all just get along?

This idea isn't new. It has been tried before, but didn't work as expected.

Re:Old news day on slashdot?

[CTalkobt]

*sigh*

6 digit UID's responding to trolls.... \

(Sorry - couldn't resist starting one of these threads... )

Easily countered

[blue l0g1c]

by tall grass.

Someone played too much ...

[Ihlosi]

Thief 2 - The Metal Age, I think.

Predator Drones have cameras

[alcmaeon]

and we still keep bombing the shit out of wedding parties, so why go to the extra expense of the camera?

Splinter Cell?

[Otto95]

I'm confused, hasn't Sam Fisher been using this for years? http://splintercell.wikia.com/wiki/Sticky_Camera

Re:Old news day on slashdot?

[mortonda]

And it seems these type of threads are always started newbs who think 6 digit uid's are old. ;)