Slashdot Mirror


DARPA's Headless Robotic Mule Takes Load Off Warfighters

Hugh Pickens writes writes "If robots are ever really going to carry the equipment of US soldiers and Marines, they're going to have to act more like pack animals. Now Terri Moon Cronk reports that DARPA's semiautonomous Legged Squad Support System — also known as the LS3 — will carry 400 pounds of warfighter equipment and walk 20 miles at a time also acting as an auxiliary power source for troops to recharge batteries for radios and handheld devices while on patrol. 'It's about solving a real military problem: the incredible load of equipment our soldiers and Marines carry in Afghanistan today,' says Army Lt. Col. Joseph K. Hitt, program manager in DARPA's tactical technology office. The robot's sensors allow it to navigate around obstacles at night, maneuver in urban settings, respond to voice commands, and gauge distances and directions. The LS3 can also distinguish different forms of vegetation when walking through fields and around bushes and avoid logs and rocks with intelligent foot placement on rough terrain (video). The robot's squad leader can issue 10 basic commands to tell the robot to do such things as stop, sit, follow him tightly, follow him on the corridor, and go to specific coordinates. Darpa figures that it's illogical to make a soldier hand over her rucksack to a robotic beast of burden if she's then got to be preoccupied with 'joysticks and computer screens' to guide it forward. 'That adds to the cognitive burden of the soldier,' Hitt explains. 'We need to make sure that the robot also is smart, like a trained animal.'"

44 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. A Jingoistic Sentiment by resistant · · Score: 3, Funny

    Many of the the superstitious, ill-educated tribesmen that U.S. ground troops regularly encounter already think the Americans are witches. A headless donkey scampering along with supplies will really mess with the heads of the rag-heads. Maybe some of them will flee in terror instead of shooting at our soldiers. Really, what's not to like? You'll excuse me for a moment whilst I cackle in wicked laughter and stroke my black cat with the unnaturally intelligent glow in its eyes. ^_^

    --
    A truly excellent pizza parlor is a delight unto the heavens. Treasure the sauce and the toppings!
    1. Re:A Jingoistic Sentiment by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Many of the the superstitious, ill-educated tribesmen that U.S. ground troops regularly encounter already think the Americans are witches.

      Given that the US is about the most superstitious, ill-educated nation on the face of the Earth, that's a bit ripe. But then, of course, you famously don't do irony.

      --
      I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
    2. Re:A Jingoistic Sentiment by dywolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh look, another troll fishing for an insightful mod.

      Seriously. If we're so damn superstition and ill educated, why does everyone still come to our schools from around the world, particularly china and india? Why are we the country that gave the world computers, space flight, airplace, nuclear physics, .... you know what, theres too many things to list.

      Lets cut to the chase: You are a moron and a troll who has engaged his "must bash USA" autopilot and not worthy of any more of my time.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    3. Re:A Jingoistic Sentiment by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why are we the country that gave the world computers, space flight, airplace, nuclear physics, .... you know what, theres too many things to list.

      Notice how all those things are in the past? Not to mention that space flight was given to you by German scientists, nuclear physics was developed mostly by Europeans (I know it's popular to think that Einstein was American when he had his Annus Mirabilis, but he wasn't), and the Wright brothers were building on stuff that had been worked on by Europeans for about 200 years. The Wright brothers beat the rest of the world by a few years, tops. Nothing to really brag about.

      And people go to our graduate (and some undergraduate) schools because they are the best in the world. For now. In the meantime, a very large section of Americans poo-poos education, tries to cut its funding, and drags down the average education of America to an embarrassing level.

      That's why people bash the US education. But, just like the Republicans just before and after the 2012 election, keep telling yourself that people are just using the wrong metrics, and the outcome was biased and bought anyway, so it wasn't "real". The rest of the world will move just along.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  2. Re:The first war-bot... by DeTech · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Have you seen this platform? Most Harley's are quieter, most rock concerts are too. You could avoid this thing like a ghost avoids Mrs. Pacman after she swallows a power pellet.

  3. Beast of burden by micromoog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sounds like a very expensive donkey/mule replacement. Why not just use real animals?

    1. Re:Beast of burden by macraig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Two syllables: bul-lets.

    2. Re:Beast of burden by Saija · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also the live thing could be used as a meat source ...
      Hmmmmm donkey ribs....

      --
      Slashdot ya no es que lo era! ;)
    3. Re:Beast of burden by qubezz · · Score: 2

      One word: Smithore

    4. Re:Beast of burden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sure you can. You just can't turn them on afterwards.

    5. Re:Beast of burden by plaukas+pyragely · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I know it's pricey and not perfect, but some cons of a mule compared to this machine:

      • You can't chuck a mule into storage to wait until it's required
      • You can't ship a mule in a, say, container
      • You can't (at least easily) airdrop a mule
      • You can't temporary hide a mule for couple days in a forest or under snow
      • You cannot remotely controll a mule
      • Mules might have difficulties in staying calm when bullets and bombs start flying arround
      • In case of injury the whole mule must be replaced, no spares

      Disclaimer: neither military, nor mule specialist ... Based on very general understandment about military

    6. Re:Beast of burden by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      And now your armored mule cant carry anything. Try again.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    7. Re:Beast of burden by dywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not bullets. The real reason is two fold:
      -animals get tired
      -animals get scared

      robots do neither.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    8. Re:Beast of burden by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      "robots do neither."

      robots get tired. It will run out of power and gas... Just like an animal.

      Oh and animals can be trained to not get scared. The US army has done it for over 200 years.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    9. Re:Beast of burden by freezin+fat+guy · · Score: 2

      The real reason has nothing to do with logistics. Animals are not patentable.

    10. Re:Beast of burden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Soldiers get emotionally attached to animals, especially during war.

  4. Random questions by Ginger_Chris · · Score: 3, Informative

    How much can a donkey carry?
    How far can a donkey travel for before "recharging"?
    How quiet is a donkey? Would the donkey sounds draw as much unwanted attention?
    How much money would it cost to pick up a donkey in a local market and then feed it?

    1. Re:Random questions by DeTech · · Score: 3, Funny

      Quick! to the patent office, WAR DONKEY.

    2. Re:Random questions by Ryanrule · · Score: 2

      can you mass produce donkeys? airdrop them without giving a shit? strap bomps to them and send them at enemies as crazy self destruct drones?

    3. Re:Random questions by Ginger_Chris · · Score: 5, Funny

      1. Yes, you start with at least two donkeys of opposite sex...
      2. Depends on how much you like donkeys.
      3. Yes, but it would be a tad mean.

    4. Re:Random questions by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      How much can a donkey carry?

      Up to 250 pounds.

      How far can a donkey travel for before "recharging"?

      Pretty much all day. They should be given access to water every couple of hours.

      How quiet is a donkey? Would the donkey sounds draw as much unwanted attention?

      Not nearly as loud as the stupid Big Dog (the robot on which this thing was based).

      How much money would it cost to pick up a donkey in a local market and then feed it?

      Even in the US, donkeys cost anywhere between nothing and $1000. That's one hell of a lot cheaper than a complicated, high tech gizmo supplied by a single source vendor on contract to the military. Further, donkeys can make more donkeys. That's a trick that robotic gizmos have yet to figure out.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:Random questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      This comment was a lot funnier before I read the parent.

  5. One you forgot by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How many bullets can a donkey take (or even near misses) before all your equipment is leaving you at a rapid pace?

    Robots don't startle (or die) easy.

    An animal has common sense, which makes it a poor companion for military use without a ton of training and even then it's pretty vulnerable.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:One you forgot by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does the LS3 work after being shot up? Silly comparison.

      The kinds of animals that locals use can be used locally, by definition. It would make the US troops seem more human, and caring for actual animals may reduce the dehumanisation/PTSD of those troops after a decade+ at war.

      And troops can periodically donate animals to villages. Good for hearts'n'minds. (Particularly if the US breeding program selects only the most combat-trainable animals, leaving you with some excess each year, but also as the animal age too much for heavily loaded mountain patrols but are still okay for farm-work on flatter ground.)

      But, the key is that if there was a need for LS3, then the US would already be using pack animals. They aren't, so there probably isn't.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    2. Re:One you forgot by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But, the key is that if there was a need for LS3, then the US would already be using pack animals. They aren't, so there probably isn't.

      Don't think of it as a robotized donkey, think of it as a jeep that can move in really rought terrain. Also, there's obvious future benefits to supporting this kind of thing, since walking is far superior to wheels anywhere except roads - and nothing stops you from attaching wheels on the bottoms of a walking robot's feet.

      Just imagine it: a two-ton walking, climbing, rollerblading autonomous spider tank armed with lasers, capable of dodging rockets, never sleeping, never resting, tirelessly prowling the night looking for its intended targets... And just to go that extra mile, we could equip it with a glucose-burning fuel cell and have it suck its victims dry with its titanium mandibles. And if you do get a lucky hit, the thing will release a horde of flying robotized killer bees that attack everything in sight.

      The possibilities are endless.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  6. Well done DARPA! by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is perfect for me. I love sports, so long as I'm the one watching them and not playing them. I hate exercise. I love TV, eating and shopping, but carrying my purchases around the shopping center is hard work. Oh yeah I can use a push trolley, but they don't always go all the way out to the car park. And even if they do, how am I supposed to lift them into the trunk and get them out again? Do I look like Superman? So it's great to see DARPA producing technology with civilian applications, and just in time for Xmas! But I want it smaller, with speed stripes and a spoiler, so back to the drawing board I am afraid. But perhaps these civilian versions can pave the way for a later military version? America will be grateful. signed, Grateful taxpayer.

  7. So the Big Dog is deployed... by dbc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Boston Dynamics has been working on this (and posting YouTube videos) for years. That this exists isn't news. That it is finally deployed, OK, a little newsy, but nobody that follows robotics is unaware of Big Dog.

    BTW -- here is a hilarious spoof video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXI4WWhPn-U
    but search for 'big dog' and watch some of the real ones first. Then the spoof - it's a crack up.

  8. M.U.L.E. by Jookey · · Score: 4, Funny

    The competing agency FARPA is developing competitor to the LS3 technology. The name for this project is the Military Utility Logistics Engine. The stats are about the same except:
    MULE has a payload of only 200lbs
    MULE is quieter
    MULE is capable of in situ resource utilization simplifying logistics
    MULE is capable of doubling as a food source.
    MULE's per unit cost is .01% of LS3 technology.

    FARPA is also working on a more advanced project known as DONKEY, that will have self replicating abilities. Unfortunately this project is still in the early development stages.

    When asked about the cost discrepancy between the $5,000,000,000 LS3 project vs the much more cost effective $500 MULE project, Congressmen Porkbarrel, R, MA replied: "I'm sorry I cant hear you over the sound of all this bribe money"

    Here is a link to an early prototype of LS3:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en-GB&gl=NZ&v=VXJZVZFRFJc

    1. Re:M.U.L.E. by goodmanj · · Score: 2

      "Congressmen Porkbarrel, R, MA replied: "I'm sorry I cant hear you over the sound of all this bribe money""

      As a resident of Massachusetts, I'm insulted. Congressman Porkbarrel is a Democrat.

  9. Re:Forgive me for injecting some reason... by macraig · · Score: 2

    Cognition certainly is an inconvenient burden.

  10. Politically Correct is Incorrect in Summary by estitabarnak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Darpa figures that it's illogical to make a soldier hand over her rucksack to a robotic beast of burden if she's then got to be preoccupied with 'joysticks and computer screens' to guide it forward." (Emphasis mine.)

    I know that people love sounding politically correct by arbitrarily changing "he" to "she," but in this particular case, it's not only silly but probably wrong. We've been hearing a fair amount lately about how female soldiers aren't allowed in designated combat zones, such as in this piece http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=166303415 In other words, "she" is statistically unlikely compared to "he," here.

    It's a funny time when we start to trade in /actual/ correctness for political correctness.

    1. Re:Politically Correct is Incorrect in Summary by findoutmoretoday · · Score: 2

      When she enters her battle zone, shopping malls sales, she always needs a 'mule' to carry her bags and also as cash supply unit. Therefore "hand over her rucksack to a robotic beast of burden"

    2. Re:Politically Correct is Incorrect in Summary by slimdave · · Score: 2

      Also she'd have to hand the controls over to a male colleague if this thing needs to be backed into a tight parking spot.

    3. Re:Politically Correct is Incorrect in Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not a case of political correctness here. Part of the (largely unspoken) goal of this military project is to reduce the average mass of the soldier's gear and kit. Aside from all the obvious advantageous, it also serves to eliminate part of the physical disadvantages which most female troops have. This could eventually lead to more women in uniform and in combat positions.
      In other words, the reason for the use of 'she' is because they are thinking of women in particular when looking into battlefield applications.

  11. Re:Impractical by Ryanrule · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These new-fangled cars will never catch on. I could just ride my horse where I need to go.

  12. Re:Impractical by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Informative

    Donkeys have problems. They need constant food and water (who's going to carry that?) Donkeys need veterinary care. Donkeys freak out if anyone fires a weapon nearby (guns are really loud, in case you didn't know...and you probably don't). Donkeys are intentionally targeted by the enemy and must be protected. This robot has all the advantages of the Terminator. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until the batteries run out.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  13. All in the packing by Skywolfblue · · Score: 2

    It's the size of a horse, not as agile as a horse, not as intelligent as a horse, and about a million times more noisy then a horse.

    Donkey's can be frightened pretty easy yes, Horses if they're not trained, but War-Horses can handle extreme battle conditions pretty well.

    Food vs. Batteries is a pretty even trade off. The robot is screwed if an EMP goes off, Horses are going to starve if there isn't any grass. A horse can beat 20miles in a day. /cue "interesting factoid thinking about that made me look up: (The world record is some 160km in about 6 and a half hours)"

    The only really good reason I can think of is packing. You could probably stick this on the back of a Humvee, which isn't really possible with a horse.

  14. Re:Impractical by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

    Special Forces units have received training in handling horses and donkeys, because they turned out to be utterly necessary in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But Army or marine units do not have the same level of autonomy as the Special Forces, which means the military would rather give them a technical solution than a living and breathing one.

    Or, you can just use your special forces folks to train the grunts on horse and donkey handling. Somebody is going to have to be trained to use (and fix) robo mule.

    More importantly, it's hard to round up enough local donkeys/horses for a large number of soldiers and you certainly can't airdrop them from a plane.

    You BREED animals - that's how you make more of them. Happens pretty naturally. And you can do it in remarkably low tech circumstances. Instead of a complex of expensive buildings full of highly paid people, you can use a farm.

    And animals of all sorts have been air dropped.

    ASFAIK, The US Military no longer has any stables for training soldiers in handling horses or donkeys

    We still have farms, fields and oats. That, along with some vets and a couple of privates, is all that you really need.

    Horses for courses.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  15. Re:What advantage does it have over by Celeritas+5k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It has several advantages-- gasoline is more energy dense than the food you'd have to carry for a mule, it doesn't get tired, no animal rights issues that would surely result from bringing a mule into a combat zone, and I'm not sure how much your average mule can carry but I don't think it's 400 lbs. The biggest thing is that it's a basis to be improved upon. The next model will be lighter, more reliable, quieter, have more capacity, etc. Give it a few years and I wouldn't be surprised to see civilian applications as well.

  16. Re:Impractical by rvw · · Score: 2

    This robot has all the advantages of the Terminator. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until the batteries run out.

    It can be hacked. It will be hacked. We all know that. It's going to happen with the drones first. Whether it's the Iranians, some Russians in Iraq or Chinese in North Korea, it's just a matter of time.

  17. All you nay-sayers... by udoschuermann · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What all you nay-sayers forget is that this is only the very beginning of (debatable) usefulness. What comes out of this research over the next 10, 30 or 50 years, however, may prove surprising, and not just for how far this "mule" has come, but what other technologies it throws off along the way.

    --
    --Udo.
  18. Re:The first war-bot... by craigminah · · Score: 3, Informative

    Boston Dynamics made Big Dog a few years ago...probably the same thing with a different name (e.g. Boston Dynamics worked on it for DARPA) but it's pretty cool. I especially like the video where it's slipping on ice but never falls. http://www.bostondynamics.com/robot_bigdog.html

  19. Re:What advantage does it have over by Dekker3D · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'd say the biggest advantage is that this one listens to your commands. Normal mules are well-known for doing anything -but- listen.

  20. Re:wheels by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Informative

    Those legs work in more situations than wheels do.