Slashdot Mirror


Military's Robotic Pack Mule Gets $32M Boost

coondoggie sends word that Boston Dynamics, maker of the BigDog robot we have been following for a while, has just been awarded a $32M DARPA contract to produce robotic "pack dogs" for the military. "What kind of robot will automatically follow a leader, carry 400 lbs. (182 kg) of military gear, walk 20 miles in all manner of weather, and go 24 hours without refueling? Well, we might soon find out as DARPA has awarded a $32 million contract to build its Legged Squad Support System (LS3) which uses sensors and a GPS to walk along with soldiers across all manner of terrain in any weather without pulling any muscles."

43 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. Fuck that... by Kratisto · · Score: 5, Funny

    Cast Tensor's Floating Disk!

    --
    Conscience is the inner voice which warns us that someone may be looking.
    1. Re:Fuck that... by MRe_nl · · Score: 2, Funny

      With the way the wars are going one might think "Tenser's Fortunes of War" (abj.6) would be more usefull, but the USmil seems to have a shocking shortage of serious spellcasters at hand.

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    2. Re:Fuck that... by pipedwho · · Score: 2, Funny

      Either that or they'd rather carry around a Portable Hole.

  2. Money well spent? by phy_si_kal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, the Afghans have mules, that cost nearly 0 and already pass where Humvee's stop. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2009/0504/p22s01-usmi.html

    1. Re:Money well spent? by TheKidWho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mules also happen to have their own logistics costs, are slower, less capable, and can not reach all the same terrains this robot can.

      Yes yes, we've all heard the joke, The Soviets used a pencil, NASA spent millions on inventing the space pen. (More of a myth actually, see: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/613/1)

    2. Re:Money well spent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But mules wouldn't line the pocketbooks of various surpanational military-industrial corporations with huge amounts of cash.

    3. Re:Money well spent? by Umuri · · Score: 2, Interesting

      i'll bite.

      Mule: Requires food, water, and has the potential to get scared in combat or make noise when it should be stealthy due to being surprised. Also surprisingly vulnerable to lead bullets.

      Robot: requires maintenance, can resist bullets, requires recharging, and does not tire.

      Lets be generous: Food, shelter, drugs, etc, to keep the mule healthy would be about equal to maintenance on the robot.
      I'm being generous here, any sufficiently mass produced and sufficiently hardened military hardware requires surprisingly little maintenance(compared to some commercial counterparts)

      Mule has a lower upfront cost, but lasts less time(old age, injuries, etc). However the robot, while being expensive, would drop in price as more are brought into service.

      Likewise, robots cost little to store when not in use, and are quite compact. Mule's require a lot of work.

      So yeah, local rented mules are great for our current situation, but in the long run (which is the military's main focus) and in other theaters of combat, the robot is a little more feasible.

      --
      You never realize how much manually made unmanaged "linked" lists suck, till you have src.link.link.link.link...
    4. Re:Money well spent? by jlowery · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, come on. Do you think the complexity of these robots won't lead to breakdowns and glitches? And how cheap is it to replace a robot vs. a mule? It would be cheaper to add bionics to the mule.

      --
      If you post it, they will read.
    5. Re:Money well spent? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Was reading about mules in the Italian campaign (1943-44). Compared to a legged vehicle, they suck.

      There is the food aspect, vets and language. Yes, an Afghani mule for example will need a mule skinner than can speak the mule's native language, Dari or Pashtun (that covers like 90% of Afghanistan's mules).

      And if your mules are killed or if you need more, its easier to airlift in some robots than to train or find more mules.

    6. Re:Money well spent? by TheKidWho · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but the robot will get much cheaper over time if they are being purchased and R&D costs are paid. I would much rather see robotics technology pushed forward then provide a handout to mule breeders.

    7. Re:Money well spent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yet somehow, against the most advanced technology at the time, a bunch of mule-riding tent dwellers have fucked up the British, the Soviet, the American and the NATO armies time and time again.

    8. Re:Money well spent? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

      Can you eat a robot?

    9. Re:Money well spent? by mlts · · Score: 2, Funny

      The civilian applications of this are tremendous too. SAR (search and rescue) support in areas where even motorcycle transport is dicey (Moab, etc), moving portable gear (generators if the mule can carry them) to a desolate area after a disaster. Additional help for hikers to carry stuff to and from a remote camp. A group of hunters can send a robot back to main camp to pick up another set of kegs, so the main partiers don't have to stumble down a trail at night.

    10. Re:Money well spent? by homunq · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mules run on partly celulosic biofuels, which they convert directly into mechanical energy at the point it's needed. They include advanced elastic shock-absorbers which actually return energy for the power stroke. They have autonomous capabilities and vision systems that put any robot to shame.

      Robotics is trying to imitate all of these aspects, and is probably making great strides. But if I want to carry something over a mountain pass, give me today's mule over the 8-years-from-now robotic mule any day. Wheels, propellors, jet engines, are a way to beat nature, because evolution isn't very good at those things. But four-legged travel has been optimized by nature (and slightly reoptimized by human breeding to carry burdens). You won't beat it with any foreseeable technology, and you won't make the unforeseeable come any faster with research in this area.

    11. Re:Money well spent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Protip: the mules had nothing to do with it.

    12. Re:Money well spent? by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Can you put a mule on standby?

      That's the default. Waking from standby is the trick.

    13. Re:Money well spent? by zippyspringboard · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah really, just add some kevlar body armor, a camera, blinders, and a remote controlled stick with a carrot on the end of it!

    14. Re:Money well spent? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mules are used as pack animals. The USMC and Special Forces use them too.

      As for "tent dwellers", have you seen Afghanistan? Someone called it a nation of Alamos, folks there live in cities, towns and compounds with walls think enough to stop artillery.

    15. Re:Money well spent? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Informative

      They did do in the British back in the 19th century, the Soviets took one to the chin, but their ultimate defeat was because of the broader failing of the Soviet Union and loss of the Cold War.

      They have not "fucked up" the Americans and NATO, its just a long process to nation build and fight a war.

    16. Re:Money well spent? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Informative

      Heinlein had a quote (from I think 'The Green Hills of Earth') that went "Horses can make other horses, that's a trick tractors haven't learned yet". Doesn't exactly work with mules (since horse + donkey = mule), but you get the idea.

      Manufacturing costs are a lot lower.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    17. Re:Money well spent? by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, but if a mule gets shot in the leg, you can't pull out a replacement part and fix it now can you?

    18. Re:Money well spent? by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Am I the only one would would like to hop on the thing like a pony and ride it to work every day?

      Plus, I could set it to "Terrorize H.R. Mode" and pick it up at the end of the day.

    19. Re:Money well spent? by gemada · · Score: 2, Funny

      yes but the mule-itary industrial complex will always get its way in the end.

    20. Re:Money well spent? by lena_10326 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You probably commute to work and do all your shopping in a car (or perhaps the bus/train/whatever) which is a type of mechanical mule. How come it is that you don't use a horse and buggy for doing all those tasks? The answer is the same for both cases.

      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    21. Re:Money well spent? by Thing+1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      [...] sounds like a pack of angry chainsaws [...]

      Thank you ever so much. I was just thinking, "It's been a while since I've rinsed nasally", and you helped with that -- except why did it have to be coffee? :)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    22. Re:Money well spent? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know schools are reducing what is taught about the Founders because a good chunk of them were slave owners and all were white, and thats just not what we teach anymore.

      As for the American Revolution using tactics similar to Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Hamas, etc. That just isn't true. There were very limited irregular forces used by both sides, the Loyalists did it a little more than the Colonists did, from what I've read.

      There was no murdering civilians who didn't side with the revolutionaries, no beheading, no suicide bombing, no Colonist went to London or occupied New York and blew up a British Army post or shot up a crowd of shoppers.

      Even the American Indian Wars were more conventional and "regular" than whats happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  3. Robotic mules? by Guido+del+Confuso · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, they should have no problem at all finding the mountain wampus now. I just hope the project doesn't get canceled when they run low on smithore.

  4. I would have expected the Brits to do that first.. by jameson · · Score: 2, Funny

    Anyway, if they get John Leeson to do the voice, I'm buying one.

  5. This is a weapons platform, not a pack mule. by d474 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they wanted mules, they'd use mules. Problem is, it's kind of hard to ask your mule to scout ahead 100m, scan territory, and post an "all clear" message back to your squad, while providing live video feeds and fire support (it may even deploy it's own microUAV during maneuvers). Old No. 7 isn't going to do that for you.

    --
    Authority questions you. Return the favor.
    1. Re:This is a weapons platform, not a pack mule. by Dynedain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, even as a pack mule, it's still useful.

      I'm sure that mules aren't very effective when encountering combat situations. Something that follows the leader and doesn't run away when under fire would be very useful.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  6. If I had NASA's resources... by Snufu · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd build some good robot ass too.

  7. Pfahhhh! by 2.7182 · · Score: 3, Funny

    A robotic mule? That's ridiculous. Use a real mule. Now a robot donkey, that's different. Could be real hand. Or a bionic burro. An android ass could be the ultimate.

  8. In the pipeline, and moving right along. by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    This has been in the pipeline for the last year, and in fact Boston Dynamics had already won the trade study contract for the Legged Squad Support System, the "LS3". This is the next phase, the contract to build prototypes, which will be field tested.

    This isn't a research program, as BigDog was. The program is now in DARPA's Tactical Technology Office, which builds prototypes of weapon systems. The next step is volume production and deployment.

    So far, DARPA isn't discussing armament. Since the USMC is involved in this program, someone is almost certainly looking at that option. It's attractive as a weapons platform. Since it already has full inertial and GPS sensors, a weaponized version could easily have a stabilized gun, like a tank, so it could fire on the move and hit targets. There's also the possibility of integrating the "automated mortar" developed a few years ago. The "automated mortar" concept is that someone up at the sharp end designates a target, the firing data goes back to the gun, and the gun duly clobbers the selected target. That's what mortar squads do now, but lugging the gear around ties up too many people and slows up the operation. The automated mortar was too heavy to lug around on foot, and mounted on a vehicle, it duplicated existing heavier weapons. The LS3 is just the right size to move that thing around.

    So there's the LS3, trailing the squad, when someone spots something that needs to be destroyed. They point something at the target, data goes back to the LS3, and the LS3 quickly launches a mortar round, which arcs over the squad and lands on the target. No more target.

    And yes, the annoying buzzing sound will go away. That was just the off the shelf powerplant used in the experimental version. The production version will use a small Diesel engine. (The U.S. military is all-Diesel. Gasoline tankers have no place on the modern battlefield.)

  9. Some personal experience... by IonOtter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Mules are quite intelligent.

    I've worked with pack horses, and horses can be incredibly stupid when they've got a pack on their back, but mules are very smart. They're sure-footed
    and can sense when the path ahead is too dangerous to travel, and if they don't wanna go, they just won't go.

    Mules are intelligent, which means the operator has to build a strong relationship with them, built upon mutual respect and trust. Not that I don't think our soldiers are capable of doing such a thing, but it's something you don't want them doing. Seeing your favorite mules getting blown to bits will be just as traumatic and harmful as seeing your buddies getting killed, maybe even worse, since people often build closer bonds with animals than they do with other humans.

    Also, one last thing is that when a mule is feeling cranky and wants to ruin your day, they won't just lash out like a stupid horse. Doc Waters warned us in class that they will target your belt-buckle and wait placidly until you're in range. No laid-back ears, no swishing tail, no sign of anger or aggression. You'll walk up and *KER-POW!*

    --
    [End Of Line]
  10. Re:And when it fails... by Faaln · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So are two GIs who collapse from fatigue after marching eight hours through sand carrying over a hundred pounds of kit each.

  11. fahrenheit 451 by betogm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is a prenunce of book Fahrenheit 451 robotic dog?!

  12. military vs helping people with disabilities by ecorona · · Score: 2

    Something this technology can eventually do is help people with disabilities eventually get around without having to use a wheelchair. It would give people with disabilities the freedom to use robotic legs to be more self-reliant. I'm talking climbing stairs, getting in and out of cars without $25,000 modifications, and traversing airports independently. If you think going through TSA is bad now, imagine what they do to you if you need to go through with a metal chair. The problem that many people don't realize is that people with disabilities don't earn enough money to create a market for these things because of widespread discrimination in the job market for people with disabilities. This is one case where capitalism severely fails. We have the technology to very significantly improve the lives of many people with disabilities. In particular, there is a car that people without appropriate upper body strength can drive, but the damned thing costs $127,000. Combine that price tag with widespread job discrimination in even extremely qualified people with disabilities, and we are simply just teasing an already disadvantaged minority of people.

  13. Re:And when it fails... by koan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Soldiers recover, and they are trained for the workout, machines break down and that dog is loud as fuck when it's running even with a muffler...no parts to repair = 400+ pounds of junk, stick with the human soldier.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  14. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  15. Re:And when it fails... by Tokerat · · Score: 2, Informative

    As far as loud, I'm reading in other comments that the engine they used in the video from 2 years ago is much louder and less powerful than what'll go into the final version.

    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  16. Re:And when it fails... by dissy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    stick with the human soldier.

    How bout we let that human soldier decide.

  17. The Luggage.... by philwebs · · Score: 2, Informative

    One of Sir Terry Pratchetts creations: The Luggage The Luggage is a large chest that follows Rincewind literally wherever he goes- even onto Roundworld, which Rincewind only visited virtually. It is made of sapient pearwood (a magical, intelligent plant which is nearly extinct, impervious to magic, and only grows in a few places outside the Agatean Empire, generally on sites of very old magic). It can produce hundreds of little legs protruding from its underside and can move very fast if the need arises. It has been described as "half suitcase, half homicidal maniac" Its function is to act as both a luggage carrier and bodyguard for its owner, against whom no threatening motion should be made. The Luggage is fiercely defensive of its owner, and is generally homicidal in nature, killing or eating several people and monsters and destroying various ships, walls, doors, geographic features, and other obstacles throughout the series. Its mouth contains "lots of big square teeth, white as sycamore, and a pulsating tongue, red as mahogany." The inside area of The Luggage does not appear to be constrained by its external dimensions, and contains many conveniences: even when it has just devoured a monster, the next time it opens the owner will find his underwear, neatly pressed and smelling slightly of lavender. One of the most notable features of The Luggage is its ability to follow its current owner anywhere, including such places as inside its owner's mind, off the edge of the Disc, Death's Domain, inside the Octavo, the Dungeon Dimensions, and even (literally) to Hell and back. Like all luggage, it's constantly getting lost and having to track its owner down. It has only one way of overcoming obstacles, and that is by simply ignoring them and smashing a hole through them — including a wall to a magic shop that had since relocated to another city by magical means.

  18. M.U.L.E. ? Old idea... by jayveekay · · Score: 2, Funny

    They had this way back in 1983 and all it took to run was a C64!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.U.L.E.