Human Exoskeletons Getting Closer

ColdWetDog writes "It's not Sigourney Weaver tossing aliens about, but The Register has an interesting blurb about a real human-capable exoskeleton that looks pretty cool (Lockheed-Martin press release). Runs for three hours at 3 mph on internal batteries; max speed is 7 mph. Of course, no price is listed but I suppose if you have to ask you can't afford it. Team this up with a Big Dog and you've got the ultimate high-tech cross-country team. Bring your own batteries. Or just wait for your jetpack to arrive."

Comments

Yeah but the boot sequence is too complex.

[GrpA]

Seems you have to stand spread-eagle and shout "Power Extreme" to start it up :(

GrpA

Re:Yeah but the boot sequence is too complex.

[Anonymous Coward]

Offtopic? Someone never watched Centurions...

Speed

[Anonymous Coward]

Max speed is 10 not 7.

Re:Speed

[Lord Pillage]

Give it to Spinal Tap and they'll crank that thing to 11!

Re:Speed

[tomatensaft]

It's maximum 10 mph for short bursts, 7 mph for longer marches. This information is presented in this PDF file: http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/mfc/PC/MFC_HULC_Product_Card.pdf

Re:Speed

[JohhnyTHM]

Max speed is 10 not 7.

Until they make one that goes up to 11 I'm not interested.

Looks like there has finally been progress.

[Jane Q. Public]

Companies have been making exoskeletons ever since the "Hardiman" of the 1960s. While more modern versions have actually bordered on the practical (see the suit worn by Ripley in the movie Aliens... that is a real machine), they have always had to drag a power tether in order to do anything useful. Of course they did not show that part in the movie.

The decision to do away with arms, for now, was probably a good one. One can still carry heavy loads, which is the main point.

Re:Looks like there has finally been progress.

[timmarhy]

i have to agree. it's the knee's that give out first on an old solider. carrying 40kg's of gear isn't good for you at all, and i'm betting this kind of thing will be targeted at hilly terrian such as afganistan. i wonder how weird this would feel to walk with?

Re:Looks like there has finally been progress.

[Capt. Cooley]

FTFA: it uses a four pound lithium battery, not a power cord. So yeah, they WOULDN'T show that part in the movie. Also mentioned: it's capable of carrying more than the standard load of a soldier, so it could carry back-up batteries. If I were a soldier, I'd want this.

Re:Looks like there has finally been progress.

[fractoid]

FTFGPP: It was the suit from Aliens, and other historical ones, that had a hidden power cord in the movie. At least, that's how I read it.

Re:Looks like there has finally been progress.

[Jane Q. Public]

Yes, I was referring to the lifter that Ripley wore in the movie Aliens. The real "suits" of that type have power cords. I believe they also experimented with on-board generators, which of course tended to be loud and pumped out lots of exhaust.

Re:Looks like there has finally been progress.

[Nefarious Wheel]

Companies have been making exoskeletons ever since the "Hardiman" of the 1960...

As with so many innovations, Heinlein came up with it almost first -- Kimball Kinneson greased Helmuth in one in Smith's Galactic Patrol, but Heinlein's powered suit was more accurate and interesting. Mobile Infantry, powered suits. Read "Starship Troopers". The book, not the fun-but-not-faithful movie.

Although the shower scene was very cool...;)

Re:Looks like there has finally been progress.

[LordGlenn]

the autoloader from "Aliens" was a prop. Details are in the "Making of" mini-doc on the DVD. the "fact" that it was a real machine is a common net myth though.

Re:Looks like there has finally been progress.

[XeresRazor]

Except the suit from Aliens didn't actually work, it was just a big fiberglass structure suspended from a crane, with the body suspended the rest was light enough that it could be moved around just with muscle power.

Honda Walking Assist

[jeti]

The Honda Walking Assist device has a rather unique and elegant design:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2191712/honda_walking_assist/

Re:Honda Walking Assist

[hitchhacker]

The Honda Walking Assist device has a rather unique and elegant design:

Unique, sure.. but elegant? It looks like that guy has a robot stuck up his ass.

-metric

Re:Honda Walking Assist

[Jarik C-Bol]

i'd have to say that looks like the single most uncomfortable thing you could ever do to your balls, in terms of general transportation.

Why America sucks

[BadAnalogyGuy]

I don't hate America, I love it. I wish only the best things for this country.

But I hate articles like this, and I hate the truly American values it reveals.

Why is it that when Americans think of powered exoskeletons, the first thing they think of is soldiers? It's really sad that militaristic thinking has pervaded almost every facet of our society.

Compare that to Japan's take on exoskeletons. Over there, they think of how these things can be used in day-to-day activities to help people. It's a far cry from a fat-ass soldier lugging around a giant backpack and a gun.

I can only hope that the wisdom of the American people that was so on display when Obama was elected will bring an end to our fascination and worship of our military.

Re:Why America sucks

[BadAnalogyGuy]

No, I'm suggesting that in a time where much of the country has been stirred into anti-immigrant sentiment, anti-intellectual sentiment, an all or nothing mindset, a with us or against mindset, and a government with policies to match, that people were able to elect someone who speaks clearly in full sentences instead of jingos and soundbites, who has a background living in many different parts of this great country and experiences exceeding that of most Americans, and who is progressive thinking, inclusionist, and open-minded.

Maybe you think he's special because he's black. I don't know what that says about you. You can figure that out yourself.

But it says a lot about the American people at that one brief moment in time to have chosen someone so at odds with the general zeitgeist. I'm not talking about Obama as President here. I'm talking about the opportunity to change and grow as Americans. The article and video showing off this technology as a military tool leaves me less hopeful.

Re:Why America sucks

[Nailor]

I don't hate America, I love it. I wish only the best things for this country.

But I hate articles like this, and I hate the truly American values it reveals.

Why is it that when Americans think of powered exoskeletons, the first thing they think of is soldiers?

War and military industry just tend to do that: invent things to help you win the battles easier. It's always been like that.

War (even the one now in Iraq) is a quite good accelerator for military industry research and the industry creates a variety of products during a war. The bigger the war the bigger the influence on technology.

Even though it's bad that the things are developed for the military, the research eventually helps normal people: when the war ends, the military companies start selling licenses for the products or continue researching to create a product for consumer markets.

War so far has been a huge boost in techonology, if you think inventions like nuclear power, radar, V2 missiles, which later on lead to the Saturn V, medical breakthroughs (especially in first aid) etc.

Impact of the war on technology is just something you just can't deny.

Re:Why America sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

And in America it will be only obese people, just like they're the only one with little motorized carts. In the rest of the world requiring some type of machine just to 'walk' around would make people ashamed and commit seppuku.

Re:Why America sucks

[Fallen Seraph]

My question to you would be... why does the intent matter?

Though a tremendous portion of the American annual budget goes toward the Military-Industrial Complex, a tremendous amount also goes toward initiatives such as DARPA, which helps fund more applied research than almost anyone, and in support countless universities and research centers. We have commercial air travel today because the US military helped jump start the commercial aviation sector before World War 2 (The Luftwaffe alone had more planes the all the Allies combined, and we knew we'd need private commercial help manufacturing aircraft in those quantities). The internet itself exists because the US military was seeking a way to maintain communications in the event that a major city was destroyed with an atomic bomb, causing a disruption in telephone communications. We have atomic energy because of the Manhattan Project, we have mass-produced Penicillin because of World War 2, along with radar, jet propulsion, and the birth of rocketry. Even going back to the Revolutionary War, the US government invested heavily in mechanized manufacturing and research into interchangeable parts for firearms.

The fact is that the military is often willing to make investments into technologies that no one else is willing to even look at. Our investments in war have done terrible things. The destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, countless deaths in every war we've been in, etc. But many of these wars and conflicts would have taken place without the technology, and without the investments we've made into the military. The fact is that technology, in particular engineering, advances by leaps and bounds when war is at it's heels. Though we should never forget the cost at which it comes, it's important to realize that technology often has ripple effects and sometimes, like the internet, it becomes something wholly different than what was intended.

Re:Why America sucks

[timmarhy]

"Maybe you think he's special because he's black"

throwing the question back at me is high school debating tactics. but fyi, i don't care either way, i'm not american. take it from someone removed from your countries politics and hype - he hasn't really changed how your country is percieved around the world. it's going to take a lot more than a new figure head to change that.

Re:Why America sucks

[Elrond, Duke of URL]

I like to think it began with our deification of paramilitary groups like the police and firefighters after 9/11. Then with the rising body count in Iraq, people just became enamored with the military and military spending. Now, when new technology comes along, it isn't "wow, what can we do with this?", rather it is "wow, how can this help our troops?"

I hate to break it to you, but the military industrial complex predates 9/11 by a substantial amount of time.

You do have something of a point concerning the near-deification of police and firefighters following 9/11. It has become more than a little excessive. Firemen do deserve a lot of praise. Job or not, it takes some courage to run into a building like that to help people, but the praise has become rather over the top.

But... paramilitary? Where did that come from? I know several firemen, all very nice people. If I were to pick words that describe them as a group in general, they would be something like risk-takers, and maybe reckless. But paramilitary is way off the mark.

Re:Why America sucks

[KDR_11k]

That's why no power armor is complete without the prerequisite chainsaw sword.

Re:Why America sucks

[Renegade88]

Who's buying the new technology? I'm sure Lockheed will gladly make such an exoskeleton for peaceful purposes as soon as purchase orders from civilian entities come in. If the military is the only customer for the technology, you can't complain that Lockheed is marketing it with it's military applications.

And lay off the political shit, everyone's had enough of Obama the Chosen. Tell us how special he is after 3 years of service to the country, thanks.

Re:Why America sucks

[sledge_hmmer]

But it says a lot about the American people at that one brief moment in time to have chosen someone so at odds with the general zeitgeist.

I know you are BadAnalogyGuy, but I'll give this a try.

What you are trying to say is that America was used to Paris Hilton, and then at one brief moment in time chose to elect Angelina Jolie.

Re:Why America sucks

[dfenstrate]

he hasn't really changed how your country is percieved around the world. it's going to take a lot more than a new figure head to change that.

Hate to burst your bubble, but much of America only cares about the opinion of nations and people we respect.

That's a shorter list than you might think.

If I think your government and people are soft, effette, and shirk from the duty of free men everywhere, I'm not going to be particularly interested in what you think of me and my country.

This is especially true if I know your displeasure is a particularly common sort- that is, an impotent oral rage.

Energy density

[mcrbids]

Projects like this are always limited by a single factor: energy density.

Loads of heavy batteries that only seem to last an hour or so, or loud, smelly, fault-prone ICEs are par for the course. See, millions of years of evolution have resulted in bodies that are surprisingly efficient in a wide variety of circumstances and pack loads of energy into a very little weight. When your body truly runs out of energy in sustained exhaustion, it can even burn its own motor (muscle tissue) for a last bit of energy!

The problems are many and severe. It will be a while before exoskeletons are worth much.

Re:Energy density

[timmarhy]

no, but i can walk 25 miles in a day on a single plate of food without even having to go to extemes like burning muscle. pound for pound we convert food into energy far more efficently than any engine.

Re:Energy density

[feyhunde]

So you're saying we should make our exoskeletons outta meat?

Perhaps some sort of Meat creature we could ride into battle that could carry our armored bodies and heavy weapons?

Must resist

[dexmachina]

From TFA:

The user can hump 200lb with relative ease while marching in a HULC

So...many...jokes...

Exoskeletons will be of little value to soldiers

[Colin Smith]

The power requirements mean it will have to dissipate huge amounts of heat, generate lots of noise which means it'll essentially be carrying a "shoot me!" sign and individuals without any form of body power assist can already kill tanks, bring down helicopter gunships etc.

As a form of fork lift I can see some advantages in logistics, but not on the sharp end of a military.
 

Re:Why not just put wheels on the backpack?

[pushing-robot]

Why not just put wheels on the backpack? Then you could pull it at ground level no back problems, saves bazillions of dollars.

I can see the product slogan: Real American soldiers don't climb stairs—they level the building.

Why so shortsighted?

[Iamthecheese]

Am I the only person to see the uses? I want an air conditioner when I step outside. I want to not be limited to my own physical strength. I want to run without getting tired. I want to walk down to the hardware store... for 50 bricks and some fertilizer. I want to jump up onto my house's roof. I want a backup air supply just in case. And since I'm not limited by weight, why not a backup com system, a palmtop computer, a couple of extra batteries, a first aid kit, a change of clothing, and the other stuff people put in their cars and have to go back to their cars for. I want to lay aside concerns of endurance. I want to carry my six years old son about all day. I want to jack up my car by looking around for a sturdy piece of something, lifting that side of the car, and propping it up. I want to carry home six shopping bags without sweating. I want to carry heavy boxes sometimes. I want to wear a set of airbags that will tripple my chances of surviving most accidents. I want to punch through a wall, throw a big rock, run up to the top of a skyscraper. I want to hike to the top of Mount Fuju without stopping OR taking 6 months to get into shape. I want to take my dog out for a run at his speed. I want to climb mountains after learning how, not after an extensive weightlifting regime. I want to transplant a tree without heavy equipment. I want to fight a bear, catch a horse, hold down an aligator. I want to say a permanent goodbye to being physically inferior to any animal. I want to clean my house all day, play with my sons for hours, fix my roof, and mow the lawn without getting too tired. I want this suit!

Re:Why so shortsighted?

[gatkinso]

I suppose that you also want to view supernova explosions with something other than the ridiculous gelatinous orbs in your skull.

No thank you

[jlebrech]

I'm perfectly happy with my endoskeleton as it is thank you!!

Oh i can have both! didn't RTFA.

Re:Why Parent Sucks

[antirelic]

"a tremendous portion of the American annual budget goes toward the Military-Industrial Complex"

Ah yes, I know, this is slashdot, and I'm going to get modded troll/flaimbait, but just for your edification, our Federal government was created with a very limited amount of powers in mind, most of which were focused DIRECTLY at military affairs. I'm not sure why people whine and complain that the government spends tons of cash on defense but not on XYZ, when its the job of the government to spend money on defense.

For a list of enumerated powers (not the squishy interpreted ones), check out:

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8

I'm glad to see the government spend money on things it is SUPPOSE to... now if it would just cut out the shit that its not (like social security, Medicare, ponies, butterflies, and good will towards men).

*sigh* Iternet ! build to be bomb proof...

[Akardam]

The internet itself exists because the US military was seeking a way to maintain communications in the event that a major city was destroyed with an atomic bomb, causing a disruption in telephone communications.

Why, oh why do people keep trotting out this tired old myth?

The ARPANet wasn't created to survive a nuclear holocaust. Hey geniuses, it used common (though pricey and high speed) telco circuits - the same as carried telephone communications. They weren't hardened or anything like that. Explain to me how they'd stay put when everything else went kablooie?

The original purpose of the ARPANet was to allow resource sharing between research centers with computing resources that were being funded by and/or involved in defense level research. Even after the first dozen-odd IMPs (routers of their day, and amazingly only refrigerator sized, compared to the behemoths that they interconnected), they weren't even hardened.

Ironically, it would be over 20 years from the inception of the ARPANet that there would be a sufficiently large number of nodes and more imporantly links to give the Internet the level of robustness that might give it a reasonable chance of surviving an all out nuclear attack, the kind that people continually champion as its original raison d'être.

Anyone who's interested in learning more should really read the excellent book, _Where Wizards Stay Up Late_.