Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Laser Imaging Drone To Hunt Out Unexploded Bombs In War-Torn Nations

Posted by samzenpus on from the mapping-safety dept.

An anonymous reader writes Aerial imaging firm Arch Aerial has discussed its hopes to deploy drones to map out mine fields and locations littered with unexploded bombs from historical warfare. CEO Ryan Baker suggested that his company wants to start the program in Laos, the world's most heavily bombed country. The 'octocopter' technology will work using a remote laser imaging platform called LIDAR to analyze fields and identify sites where UXO is likely to be uncovered. The sensor technology LIDAR is a crucial system in the design as it can easily see through vegetation and creates detailed maps of the terrain. Surveyors will be then be able to use the maps to look for topographical signs which suggest past bombing activity.

31 comments

  1. Well and good... but mines by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

    Finding the new bombs, etc. is well and good - and needed! But, there are still LOTS of issues with old mine fields still...

    Might it be better to work on some (slightly) ground penetrating radar of some sort that can search for impact craters as well as large hunks of metal a few inches under ground? Solve a few issues at once that way....

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    1. Re: Well and good... but mines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read this? They're starting in Laos - last major conflict in Laos was Vietnam war spillover. It's most heavily laden with mines; mines are what they're after. They're also looking for signs of discharged mines to help locate active ones.

      Is this a new type of trolling?

    2. Re:Well and good... but mines by PRMan · · Score: 2

      They already have their low-tech ways.

      A friend of mine said that in Afghanistan after the war with Russia, when they bought a new piece of land they would just let their sheep and goats graze all over it unattended for a few days. If one of them found a mine, they were dinner.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    3. Re: Well and good... but mines by Talderas · · Score: 3, Informative

      The US dropped 2,500,000 tons of bombs on Laos during Vietnam to try to deal with the NVA infiltration and supply of VC via Laos. They're searching for both mines and unexploded bombs.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    4. Re:Well and good... but mines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't sound like a very good method....
      You'll still have to go out and collect the pieces for dinner - you might end up contributing to the meal in an unintended manner.

  2. LiDAR solves for vegetation by spacepimp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Which class of laser are they using which can penetrate the canopy of a jungle? There are many sensors more appropriate for the searching: Ground penetrating radar. Multispectral or hyperspectral camera sensors to check the leaf patterns for varied chemicals. Also for the larger areas covered it seems like a fixed wing design might be more appropriate.

    1. Re:LiDAR solves for vegetation by bigpat · · Score: 1

      I was wondering what was meant by the incorrect statement: "The sensor technology LIDAR is a crucial system in the design as it can easily see through vegetation and creates detailed maps of the terrain" I think 'flying under the canopy to map the ground' is probably what they should have written. LIDAR itself doesn't penetrate or "see through" foliage, but could allow the operator to "see through" foliage simply because the robot was flying below it.

    2. Re:LiDAR solves for vegetation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't speak to jungles, but in local wooded areas in the US there are enough holes in the canopy to get some lidar data through the foliage. One certainly gets more with leaf off, but leaf on isn't a complete deal breaker.

    3. Re:LiDAR solves for vegetation by monkeyxpress · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this seems a bit weird. They are claiming the benefit of LiDAR is that it can penetrate vegetation, yet I can't really see how that works. The issue with high frequency EM is that it is easily absorbed/reflected by pretty much anything. I would have thought since they are just doing terrain mapping (as far as I can tell from the very vague article) that something like mm wave radar would be a better choice.

      It reminds me of the 'sting' operation a newspaper did on the occupy protesters, where they claimed that a thermal camera showed there was nobody inside their tents at night. Most people just assume thermal camera means x-ray vision. Some scientists tried to explain that a thin piece of material is just as capable of blocking IR light as visible light but most people have watched too much hollywood science to care about such factual information.

    4. Re: LiDAR solves for vegetation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Normal LIDAR has the ability to filter for 'first return' or 'last return' ehich will use the portion of reflected signal arriving a bit later. This removes reflections from above ground, leaving the model cleaner. However this assumes some gaps in the multi layers of vegetation. Open wooded areas lend themselves better to this then tropical jungle with its 3 or more layers of vegetation. This has been an issue with LIDAR from early days (at least as early as 2003).

    5. Re:LiDAR solves for vegetation by kwiecmmm · · Score: 1

      I can't speak to jungles, but in local wooded areas in the US there are enough holes in the canopy to get some lidar data through the foliage. One certainly gets more with leaf off, but leaf on isn't a complete deal breaker.

      Yes, but little wholes in the canopy are hardly enough to map the area and most likely not anywhere near enough to find more than a couple mines in areas that probably have at least hundreds of mines.

    6. Re:LiDAR solves for vegetation by spacepimp · · Score: 1

      The LiDAR I use for Drones and Construction/BIM are not capable of penetrating a canopy. Small holes in the canopy also are not enough. you need a fairly accurate measurement across the whole ground to find trenches and other ground anomalies.

    7. Re:LiDAR solves for vegetation by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative

      Which class of laser are they using which can penetrate the canopy of a jungle?

      The standard is 1064 nm infrared and 532 nm green (actually 1064nm doubled).
      The IR is absorbed by water, hence the inclusion of a 532nm wavelength laser.

      With a high enough pulse rate, you can penetrate multiple layers of canopy and get excellent resolution.

      Also for the larger areas covered it seems like a fixed wing design might be more appropriate.

      Fixed wing solutions are neither better nor worse than any other solution.
      Planes need a plane, an airfield, a mechanic, fuel, a pilot, and an operator for the LIDAR system.

      The benefit of using an octo-copter is that all you need is electricity to charge it.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  3. Tell me UXO search was done by air... by HBI · · Score: 1

    ...and I still wouldn't go anywhere near that ground. Too many pink mist incidents in places that have been subject to GROUND searches.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:Tell me UXO search was done by air... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Then you'll be pleased to learn that you won't be the one inspecting potential UXO, and instead they will use EOD personnel or specialized robots.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Tell me UXO search was done by air... by Rich0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...and I still wouldn't go anywhere near that ground. Too many pink mist incidents in places that have been subject to GROUND searches.

      I read a really good article on this ages ago that went into some of the challenges. The military is very efficient at clearing minefields for military use. The thing is, that just means clearing a narrow path of the really nasty stuff so that things like armored vehicles can drive through with an acceptable level of losses (by combat standards). If going via an unmined route will cause you 10k casualties, but clearing an alternate route through a minefield will only get 100 soldiers killed, then the minefield is preferable. The troops would be travelling defined routes, would probably have some level of protection (even on foot), and are just going to be there for a short time. Getting 95% of the mines near the path might be a completely acceptable level of success.

      Civilian demining is an entirely different ballpark. It isn't acceptable that only 100 kids die playing in a field, you can't just put up a sign that says "stay on this well-marked path" and ignore kids who deviate to go play in the grass, and people want to go back to normal life. 95% is no longer good enough.

      In order to be effective at all mines cannot be trivially avoidable, which means they're generally not reliably detectable.

    3. Re:Tell me UXO search was done by air... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...and I still wouldn't go anywhere near that ground. Too many pink mist incidents in places that have been subject to GROUND searches.

      It sounds like the target market is places where the problem is along the lines of "Hey, impoverished local government, you have a zillion acres of variously vegetated former combat zone and no idea where to even start sending in the deminers. Would you prefer to guess blindly or have a (relatively) cheap map with 'probably some bombing over here' marked where applicable?"

      Given how much of the world's UXO and especially ill-documented mines fall in places that are poor, somewhat weakly governed, and not necessarily equipped with even decent topographical maps for their entire area, there is probably a lot of room for solutions that can beat 'peasants finding them one limb at a time' as long as they don't cost too much.

      It's like healthcare: Sure, "Go to a first world teaching hospital with a superb reputation" isn't a bad idea; but for the almost-everyone who would find that advice irrelevant, there's a lot to be said for trying to take on the low hanging fruit, given that the alternative is basically nothing.

    4. Re:Tell me UXO search was done by air... by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      ...and I still wouldn't go anywhere near that ground. Too many pink mist incidents in places that have been subject to GROUND searches.

      It sounds like the target market is places where the problem is along the lines of "Hey, impoverished local government, you have a zillion acres of variously vegetated former combat zone and no idea where to even start sending in the deminers. Would you prefer to guess blindly or have a (relatively) cheap map with 'probably some bombing over here' marked where applicable?"

      Good point. In some of these countries a solution that cuts death rates from hundreds per year to dozens per year shouldn't be overlooked simply because it isn't the complete solution.

      Given how much of the world's UXO and especially ill-documented mines fall in places that are poor, somewhat weakly governed, and not necessarily equipped with even decent topographical maps for their entire area, there is probably a lot of room for solutions that can beat 'peasants finding them one limb at a time' as long as they don't cost too much.

      It's like healthcare: Sure, "Go to a first world teaching hospital with a superb reputation" isn't a bad idea; but for the almost-everyone who would find that advice irrelevant, there's a lot to be said for trying to take on the low hanging fruit, given that the alternative is basically nothing.

    5. Re:Tell me UXO search was done by air... by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Ugh, butchered the quoting. My reply was:

      Good point. In some of these countries a solution that cuts death rates from hundreds per year to dozens per year shouldn't be overlooked simply because it isn't the complete solution.

    6. Re:Tell me UXO search was done by air... by HBI · · Score: 1

      Most of the UXO cleared areas I have experience with are the "Stay on this path" variety. The place I work is filled with UXOs and most of the forest area is inaccessible and clearly marked so. One of my friends (a reserve O-5 in the Army) bowhunts around here, and relates that he has had several pink mist incidents with the local wildlife tripping a UXO. The guy has serious balls even hunting in those places.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    7. Re:Tell me UXO search was done by air... by HBI · · Score: 1

      I grant your point. I feel sorry for the people who are going to try to use the area after it's been "cleared", though.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  4. wtf? by HBI · · Score: 4, Interesting

    a. I didn't want to do the search myself. No one would want to.

    b. I work with actual EOD guys who like to blow shit up and defuse bombs. The man who taught me how to strip down the M9 Beretta was a EOD 1SG.

    c. The point is that aerial searches don't work - period. I could recount some of the incidents. Some I can't. One I can recount involved a vehicle checkpoint that was found to have huge UXOs virtually right underneath it.

    d. You didn't even read the initial comment or have reading comprehension problems.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  5. CHEMTRIALS! by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    easy peasy--
    simply spray herbicide from jets to defoliate the forest then the drones' LIDAR can easily find the military ordinance.
    What year is this?!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  6. LiDAR does not penetrate foliage. by kwiecmmm · · Score: 2

    A LiDAR sensor returns the data from any solid object it hits. This will not work, especially in dense jungle areas like LAOS. Is this just bad information (using something other than LiDAR) or just a stupid idea?

    1. Re:LiDAR does not penetrate foliage. by tomhath · · Score: 4, Informative

      Is this just bad information (using something other than LiDAR) or just a stupid idea?

      It's a fund raising pitch from a guy who sells aerial photography drones. He doesn't seem to have any relevant engineering training.

    2. Re:LiDAR does not penetrate foliage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup, he is just looking for areas that LOOK like combat zones for the most part.

      I suppose they are places where they forgot they were in a combat zone at some point but any drone or plane can look for craters. I still don't see how that implies MINES per se as they do since mining and shelling a spot serve different purposes.

      meh

      Any headline you read assume it is half as good/interesting/useful as it says....... or less....

  7. Take your meds greenwow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're being an asshole again

  8. Samzenpusally misleading title and summary. by denzacar · · Score: 2

    Particularly the summary.

    The shitty summary:
     

    Surveyors will be then be able to use the maps to look for topographical signs which suggest past bombing activity.

    The misleading article:
     

    Surveyors will be able to use the maps to look for topographical signs which suggest past bombing activity, surrounding trenches and bunkers for example.

    Not even close to "map out mine fields".
    More like "map out wide geographical area for possible military installations long reclaimed by jungle."

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Samzenpusally misleading title and summary. by HBI · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the clarification. Makes much more sense. UXOs are very hard to find.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    2. Re:Samzenpusally misleading title and summary. by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Well, here in Bosnia, we just wait for floods and then shoot the ones that float. From a boat. Safety first and all...

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens