Army Gives Robo Jeeps a Go

jamesl writes with an excerpt from Defense Tech, which says the U.S. Army is sending "four [of] Lockheed's Squad Mission Support System (SMSS) robot jeeps to Afghanistan where they'll haul supplies for troops. The trucks are being sent there as part of a test program to see just how useful robot cargo trucks can be. The 11-foot long trucks can carry a half a ton of supplies for up to 125 miles after being delivered to the field in a CH-47 or CH-53 helo."

Comments

Re:How expensive are they?

[Baloroth]

The real question is not so much is it better now, as will it be better later. The answer to the latter is almost definitely yes. The army is one of the few organizations that has the budget and will to exercise forethought for the future. And that helps develop technology. So while robots may not be effective now, thanks to the efforts of the military they might be 20 years from now. Which is why they spend so much money developing them now.

Re:it's a rolling supply for the enemy!

[Bryansix]

You know the Afghani Soldiers are on our side right? Just checkin'

Re:How expensive are they?

[MichaelSmith]

I don't know how much one of these costs but if it saves two soldiers it can have a huge ROI.

Only if that means they have a smaller army instead of giving that soldier some other task to perform.

In the short term the drivers would do other work. In the long term the army would adjust its recruitment around the ability to use more automation.

Re:it's a rolling supply for the enemy!

[adamchou]

This thing isn't meant to be go on solo missions, especially since its only carrying half a ton. You definitely can't resupply an OP with just 1000 pounds of equipment. In fact, the article even says

Besides the obvious benefit of reducing the load carried by an infantryman (giving him more mobility and energy) the little trucks could be the first step toward reducing the number of humans needed to ressuply bases.

The benefit is reducing the load. Its primary mission is not at all to resupply bases.

Re:I can already see how to improve it

[couchslug]

"In all seriousness, I don't see where the "follow me" mode would be more useful than a HMMWV or a light APC. "

It isn't. An M-113 derivative, the Lynx, can fit in a CH-47 and bring armored protection and a cannon to the fight. We got rid of them years ago because of light infantry narcissism where tracks are considered to be for "mech pussies". An improved version with the engine in front (the Lynx has it in back though M-113s have them up front) could fit more easily, carry more troops UNDER ARMOR, and carry plenty of supplies externally.

The turf wars between Light Infantry Narcissists and Treadheads led to the elimination of light and medium tracked armored vehicles, and modern Global Love Enforcement missions have a preference for wheeled armored trucks like Stryker. (They are comfortable, and compared to an ancient tracked fleet that is not modernized because most of the Army would rather not have it, no wonder the passengers prefer them.)

That's why the Sheridan is gone with no replacement and the AGS got cancelled. Real men don't want tank support or to admit tanks and AFVs are necessary or useful.

The reduced ground pressure and vastly better off-road performance of tracked systems are why many foreign forces retain them.

Wheeled vehicle ground pressure is quite high, restricting wheeled trucks to roads where they are canalized into a predictable path of travel then killed by mines and command-detonated mines (now called IEDs as if the idea is fucking modern, yay for buzzwords!).

Robo Jeeps are Go?

[hey!]

So they've been assigned a Thunderbird 2 pod number?

Re:I think they might work out...

[aztracker1]

The U.S. government, emphatically the military, doesn't need to license jack... the military contractor providing the jeeps on the other hand...

Re:How expensive are they?

[foniksonik]

You don't get to pick where you get deployed. People join the military for all kinds of reasons. Only the very top career military professionals have any input on what how or why. Even then it is our President and/or Congress who make these decisions.

I am absolutely certain that there is someone somewhere who is suffering as a result of you doing your job as requested by your employer. If you are self employed then it's probably you suffering. It may not be taking lives directly but there is always a "have not" to balance your "have".

Re:How expensive are they?

[thrich81]

Shut up with the war criminal talk; it devalues the label when it actually happens. In a democracy, which the US is, the citiziens are ultimately responsible for the actions of their government and its military forces. So if you don't like those actions then try to change enough minds of the voters to change the national policies. If you can't do that and just can't stand the situation then you are just SOL (a term I picked up during my time on active duty); or you can renounce your citizenship and get out. But retaining US citizenship and calling my military acquantances "valid targets" is dangerously close to treason; if it could be proved that your talk led directly to a military casualty, I don't think the 1st Amendment would or should protect you.

Re:it's a rolling supply for the enemy!

[qxcv]

Is there anybody here that can RTFA? Oh well, the two main reasons I can think of (off the top of my head) are:

1. 1. One less person with their hands on the steering wheel = one more person with their hands on a gun
2. 2. If the vehicle hits an anti-vehicle mine, only the vehicle will be destroyed. If somebody is at the wheel, OTOH, the driver will be destroyed too

It may only be of limited utility (on foot patrols, etc) but, as mentioned above, a single life saved is a massive ROI both psychologically and financially.

Re:it's a rolling supply for the enemy!

[LynnwoodRooster]

Take your 10 truck, 50 man supply convoy. Eliminate the 10 drivers, and increase the security detachment by 5. I just reduced manpower by 10%, and upped security by 12%. Lower costs, more secure - seems like a win-win all around.