Slashdot Mirror


US Navy Researchers Get Drones To Swarm On Target

coondoggie writes: The Office of Naval Research today said it had successfully demonstrated a system that lets small-unmanned aircraft swarm and act together over a particular target. The system, called Low-Cost UAV Swarming Technology (LOCUST) features a tube-based launcher that can send multiple drones into the air in rapid succession. The systems then use information sharing between the drones, allowing autonomous collaborative behavior in either defensive or offensive missions, the Navy said.

99 comments

  1. Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When can we launch it for Lakhvi?

  2. I'm officially scared shitless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, let's create a flying swarm of autonomous killing machines. What could possibly go wrong?

    1. Re:I'm officially scared shitless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We kill those rebel scum!

  3. LOCUST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Fantastic name!

    1. Re:LOCUST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wonder if there's a special department whos sole purpose is to think these up.

    2. Re:LOCUST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of them are done within the department responsible for the project, and have a contest to name it based on a rough description of the project. You'd be amazed how creative some people can be; ones you never expected it from.

  4. Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by sexconker · · Score: 1, Interesting

    That's LCUAVST, not LOCUST.

    1. Re:Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a joke...

    2. Re:Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Avoid link to clickbait filled, bloated news site: http://i.imgur.com/ivu7txP.gifv

      Unbloated link content:

      When keepers at a zoo decided they wanted to spy on their chimpanzees with a drone, there was one resourceful ape who decided he wasn't going to put up with any monkeying around.

      The clever chimp found a big stick and waited in a tree to ambush the intrusive flying eye.

      As it flew past, he expertly whacked it and sent it plummeting to the ground where other chimps in the enclosure gathered round to inspect the intruder.

      The drone was destroyed but not before it had managed to capture some amazing footage.

      And the zoo at the Royal Burgers' Zoo in Arnhem, Netherlands, posted the video on YouTube.

    3. Re:Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://imgur.com/xH4jiXN

    4. Re:Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If so the worst attempt at a joke evaaaaa

      LOw Cost Uav Swarming Technology - There, I made it easy for you!

    5. Re:Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      That's pretty cool. I take some issue with the "expertly" characterization of his swatting, though.

    6. Re:Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maria Hill: What does "S.H.I.E.L.D." stand for, Agent Ward?

      Agent Ward: Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement, and Logistics Division.

      Maria Hill: And what does that mean to you?

      Agent Ward: It means someone really wanted our initials to spell out "Shield".

    7. Re: Low Cost UAV Swarming Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You surely see that an an acronym containing another acronym is somewhat stretching things.

      Itherwise, I foresee a future where we only have one acronym that encompasses everything.

  5. Wait I think I saw this somewhere else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of carriers from Starcraft. Just without the Psy power source.

    Their next move will be to develop 3D printers on-board to replace them as they get shot down.

    1. Re:Wait I think I saw this somewhere else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see more something like the Ant-lions in HL2... I'm actually in the part where I have to clean up a combine installation with the help of my LOCUST drones ^M^M^M^M Antlions

    2. Re:Wait I think I saw this somewhere else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it looks closest to the Swarm killstreak in Call of Duty Black Ops 2. The UAVs even look identical.

    3. Re:Wait I think I saw this somewhere else... by gnupun · · Score: 1

      Perhaps but Starcraft is older than COD.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    4. Re:Wait I think I saw this somewhere else... by zlives · · Score: 1

      Robotech Missile Effect

  6. Another weapon for Skynet by dmaul99 · · Score: 0

    Yep, another deadly weapon to use for the AI system we eventually turn over everything to. We best begin to plot the Butlerian Jihad now.

    1. Re:Another weapon for Skynet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The rice must flow.

    2. Re:Another weapon for Skynet by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      What, no Skynet reference?

      The Beer Must Flow. Schmai-gunug be willing, steak for dinner sometime soon.

  7. Kill Decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read how well this plays out here.

    1. Re:Kill Decision by afranke · · Score: 1

      I did and that was my first thought too. Highly recommended.

  8. Chewie by MrKaos · · Score: 3, Funny

    I've got a bad feeling about this!

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  9. Smaller Is Better by JimSadler · · Score: 2

    Imagine a swarm of baseball size drones all seeking to fly into the air intake of enemy jet engines. One chunk of titanium rod inside the drone should make a real mess out of a spinning engine.

    1. Re:Smaller Is Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just use a missile? You know, the thing we already have, that can carry a massive amount of explosives compared to a drone. Is also way faster. Only requires one of them per target (if you aim well). Oh, and maybe most importantly, can hit whatever part of the plane and it will still fulfill its mission.

    2. Re:Smaller Is Better by jklovanc · · Score: 2

      The problem with conventional missiles is that if they miss, and they miss a lot, they are expended. A drone can hang around and attack the next aircraft coming by.

    3. Re:Smaller Is Better by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I think that if you are in a position to take out a fighter jet with a drone, you have options that are much simpler and surer.

    4. Re:Smaller Is Better by Nikker · · Score: 1

      You want a small drone that can fly about 50Mph to intercept a jet going 500Mph? Please fill us in on the details.

      --
      A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
    5. Re:Smaller Is Better by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      No, I want one of a thousand drones deployed as a wall in front of the aircraft to get sucked into the intake and break a couple of fins which will lead to catastrophic failure.

    6. Re:Smaller Is Better by Nikker · · Score: 1

      Those aircraft only look to be 100Lbs max. A jet coming at a wall of these things would push those drones around like the toys they are. Maybe out of sheer luck you could bring a jet down. If each had some sort of explosive that would be triggered by the jets wake it would be more likely but clouding the sky and hoping for the best doesn't really seem that likely.

      --
      A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
    7. Re:Smaller Is Better by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      I guess you remembered your Charlemagne: "Let my armies be the rocks and the trees and the birds in the sky..."

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    8. Re:Smaller Is Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want a small drone that can fly about 50Mph to intercept a jet going 500Mph? Please fill us in on the details.

      The drone merely need get sucked into the air in-take of the jet and mission accomplished. The US military should paint these drone black and yellow and call them wasps. Wasps are much more scary than locusts.

    9. Re:Smaller Is Better by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      titanium? just the baseball will take out the turbine of a jet engine. all you need to do is break one or two turbine vanes and the engine will destroy it's self.

      Jet engines are pretty darn flimsy in regards to objects entering the intake.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:Smaller Is Better by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Which would make flak guns way more effective. Start shooting flak that is nothing more than simple drones that look for large objects, get close to them and explode.

      Flak shells are already 50% there as they have the proximity fuse, all we need to do is add a system to let them steer themselves to big objects.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    11. Re:Smaller Is Better by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Motorcycles are faster than dogs, yet many people get injured by dogs intercepting a motorcycle.

      I am thinking you did not take physics and algebra classes to learn about trajectories and interception.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    12. Re:Smaller Is Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Motorcycles are faster than dogs, yet many people get injured by dogs intercepting a motorcycle.

      That only works if the dog was in front of the motorcycle in the first place. And the delta-v between a fighter and a helicopter style drone is vastly greater than a motorcycle versus a dog. Not to mention that the fighter can maneuver in 3 dimensions, instead of a plane. Hope you have a *lot* of drones.

      >I am thinking you did not take physics and algebra classes to learn about trajectories and interception.

      Aww, isn't that cute? He actually thinks he's well educated.

    13. Re:Smaller Is Better by avandesande · · Score: 1

      or 10 pounds of HX and a proximity sensor... just sayin'

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    14. Re:Smaller Is Better by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      To carry 10 pounds and a proximity fuse would require a 20 pound drone. That would make it large, easily seen and easily avoided.

    15. Re:Smaller Is Better by sjames · · Score: 1

      A commercial jet has an even bigger size/mass advantage over a goose, yet geese have been known to bring one down even while they presumably try not to collide.

    16. Re:Smaller Is Better by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      The question becomes how maneuverable one is, versus the other, as well as the question of speed.

      In fact, let's we have a rocket powered drone, that has its own guidance systems, and an explosive charge, that is trying to hit the jet, or come reasonably close to it and explode that charge, in order to destroy the jet. ...and now let me point out that these "Drones" have been in regular use by armies worldwide for over fifty years. They're called guided Surface to Air Missiles.

    17. Re:Smaller Is Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you suggesting the best way to step a person on a motorcycle is to have a dog try to attack them as they drive by?

    18. Re:Smaller Is Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point. BTW weren't The Matrix's squiddies shot out of a cannon like that in the second non-existent movie following the original?

    19. Re:Smaller Is Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.

      I want to mod you up based on the strength of that alone. :-)

      I won't though, because there's more than enough abuse of the mod system as it is, sorry. Besides, your post stands well on its own merit.

    20. Re:Smaller Is Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      while they presumably try not to collide

      I can totally imagine a goose which can fly at roughly 80km/h outmaneuvering a 747 flying at ~900km/h

    21. Re:Smaller Is Better by sjames · · Score: 1

      Geese have a much tighter turning radius than a commercial jet (which is also presumably not trying to catch the geese).

  10. We're all in the field of PR by recharged95 · · Score: 2, Informative

    “This level of autonomous swarming flight has never been done before,” said Mastroianni. “
    I beg to differ. Some groups I know of have been doing this (with vehicle to vehicle communication) since 2012.

    1. Re:We're all in the field of PR by jklovanc · · Score: 2

      Citation needed.

    2. Re:We're all in the field of PR by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      If he tells you he'll have to kill you. Unless he's referring to birds.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:We're all in the field of PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A) If you search the name of the principal investigator you'll probably see the respective grant id number is from the DoD(possibly from the same program)
      B) LMGTFY "swarm robotics" has been a thing for well over a decade. Zigbee, FM radio, IoT, etc. The CPUs got faster and the RF protocols have changed but the problem is an old one:

      The protocols and mesh networking algorithms struggle from similar problems to parallel computing. Principle among them is that conventional approaches to what is essentially a Traveling Salesman Problem are usually dealing with a (relatively) static cost function. The routing cost measurements with "high speed" swarm robotics need to happen at much faster frequencies to deal with the changing state of the network topology. Similarly, the thresholds for measuring "improvement" need to be modified to prevent approximation paralysis by analysis.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dijkstra%27s_algorithm
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch_and_bound
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruning_%28decision_trees%29
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_radio
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_theory
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorics

      Decentralized P2P routing is a similar problem and fortunately copyright laws have created a very nice carrot to invest in innovative solutions:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popcorn_Time

    4. Re:We're all in the field of PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://flyingmachinearena.org/. The shows people are doing with the technology are quite amazing to look at.

    5. Re: We're all in the field of PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct. It was clearly demonstrated near the end of the PBS documentary titled "rise of the drones" which can be seen on YouTube

    6. Re:We're all in the field of PR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A very simple Google search for swarm and robot will pop a horde of papers. Frankly, I've seen this research go back more than fifteen years. I'm too lazy to find the oldest source, but here's a bunch of different swarm papers:

      http://link.springer.com/artic...

      http://link.springer.com/chapt...

      http://link.springer.com/artic...

      https://dl.acm.org/citation.cf...

      Sometimes you can find things under the term cooperative control. There's entire books written about these algorithms:

      https://books.google.com/books...

      So, yes, the Navy's system is cool. It is not revolutionary. It's an application of existing methodology.

    7. Re:We're all in the field of PR by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      Theory is great but it does take effort to make it reality.

    8. Re:We're all in the field of PR by petervandervos · · Score: 1

      Example how to use swarming for a good cause. Sorry, part is in Dutch:
      http://fireswarm.nl/

    9. Re:We're all in the field of PR by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      This is not swarming. It is using drones flying pre-programmed paths to survey and area and search for a fire. There is no intelligence in the drones and no drone to drone communication.

    10. Re:We're all in the field of PR by petervandervos · · Score: 1

      That was only the test program to test the fire detection. The problem was that it is illegal to use autonomous drones in the Netherlands. The technology was ready.

    11. Re:We're all in the field of PR by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      can you reference where in the site it states that the project would use true swarming technology and not what I just described?

  11. Thanks by franciscoeduca · · Score: 0

    Thanks ;) ---------------- http://educa.net/

  12. Starcraft Carriers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I read this I got really bad flashbacks of Protoss players with a bazillion carriers attacking my base...

    Those carrier drones always did make really lovely swarming patterns as they blew the complete and utter smeg out of my beautifully crafted base ;_;

  13. You're so Punny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just know some god damned engineer somewhere is SO proud of that pun acronym.

  14. call a spade a spade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The military is great at that kind of thing... "a tube-based launcher"... you mean a gun?

    1. Re:call a spade a spade? by lurking_giant · · Score: 1

      Kinetic energy penetrator... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K...

  15. UN killer robot ban. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that respond what the US think about killer robots, they dont give a shit.

  16. Re:They should use these... by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Informative

    Idiot. Why do you fools keep buying into that nonsense? There is only one party in Washington, the money party. It shows two faces to make foolish morons like you think they have a choice.

  17. What about jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And how exactly do these swarms work if the intended target starts jamming GPS signals, large chunks of the RF spectrum and shines infrared spotlights towards the swarm? On paper most autonomous military vehicles just seem too fragile to work as intended in a real situation.

    1. Re:What about jamming by Needs2BeSaid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The military is way ahead of you: http://www.slashgear.com/darpa...

      --
      Some things need to be said...
    2. Re:What about jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And how exactly do these swarms work if the intended target starts jamming GPS signals, large chunks of the RF spectrum and shines infrared spotlights towards the swarm? On paper most autonomous military vehicles just seem too fragile to work as intended in a real situation.

      A jammer is a transmitter. Turning on a jammer on the battlefield is like putting up a giant neon sign that says "BOMB ME!" right over your head. Militaries even have special kinds of missiles available (so called anti-radiation missiles) that will lock on to anything transmitting, even in short bursts.

    3. Re:What about jamming by Velox_SwiftFox · · Score: 1

      They breed really, really quickly.

    4. Re:What about jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but a jammer can be pretty cheap, simple and physically separated from it's Command and Control infrastructure. Maneuvering your enemy into having to continually expend resources blowing up $1,000 jammers with $1,000,000 HARM missiles - asymmetric warfare at it's finest.

      Rumor has it that the Serbs did it in Kosovo with hacked microwave ovens a few years back.

  18. Kill Decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone read Daniel Suarez's Kill Decision (http://www.amazon.com/Kill-Decision-Daniel-Suarez-ebook/dp/B0073XV2W2/)?

  19. Why is the US Navy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is the US Navy developing lethal autonomous weapons that will ultimately be banned?

  20. Re: They should use these... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once that the treasonous gop gains the White House they work to drive the country into bankruptcy while permanently weakening the American middle class and making their wealthy bakers even wealthier

    Damn those rich bakers and their overpriced bread! I propose we set up a grassroots baking movement with open source bread and cakes recipes using our 3d printers. However, the Big Bread industry would probably make posession of unauthorised flour illegal so we would have to sell our goods on hidden Tor sites using bitcoin.

  21. Middle East = target? by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Of course, the example was shown in what looks like the Middle East. Imagine the fun to be had if they were shown circling the Bundy ranch?

  22. Re:Do the drones use Systemd? by Needs2BeSaid · · Score: 1

    I'd imagine that they are not using a publicly available operating system to run their weapons.

    --
    Some things need to be said...
  23. Re:They should use these... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee," "the only reason you are endorsing him is because he's black. Let's just be clear." -Clinton

    Keep it classy, Democrats.

  24. That's called a beacon by Overzeetop · · Score: 2

    There's nothing like a good, strong RF+IR signal to home in on for pinpoint accuracy.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  25. Bets are on! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bets are now on as to how long before these things are hacked, and the enemy can send them back to attack us!

    1. Re: Bets are on! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's part of the bigger plan. Now the adversaries signal can be "backtraced." Then we'll send in the missiles and ground based robots.

  26. Starcraft-Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *Carrier has arrived!*

  27. Was predicted in SF 20 years ago or so... by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

    I remember that an SF story a couple of decades ago predicted that cruise missiles and the computer technology to direct their swarming would make them inexpensive weapons of choice for some nations. Looks as if that time is upon us.

    "...officials note, having this capability will force adversaries to focus on UAV swarm response." I hope that we also have some focus onUAV swarm response; the 'swarm' of Kamikaze attacks on our fleet off Okinawa in WWII inflicted great damage even though we had AA shells with proximity fuzes, early warning radar, and fighter aircraft for interception.

    --
    Nate
  28. Embarassing use of tech by drewm19801927 · · Score: 0

    Stuff like this makes me embarassed to call myself an electrical engineer. If you tell someone you've worked in the field of robotics or UAV's, there's a decent chance they're going to think something along the lines of "oh, so you're the kind of person who builds machines that rain death from the sky." Doctors take a pledge not to kill people; I see no reason why we engineers shouldn't hold ourselves to the standard.

    1. Re:Embarassing use of tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boo Hoo. Why don't you go cry about it? The pacifists can build cell phones and the more blood thirsty engineers can get their thrills legitimately by playing mercenary for the arbiters of "right" vs. "wrong".

      Lololololol

    2. Re:Embarassing use of tech by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Doctors take a pledge not to kill people; I see no reason why we engineers shouldn't hold ourselves to the standard.

      The original job of engineers was to build and use siege engines. An engineer's version of the Hippocratic Oath would involve not-not-killing people.

  29. Applications by Translation+Error · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All the comments about killing machines aside, it sounds like these could be of great benefit in search & rescue and fire fighting.

    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
  30. God of Thunder! by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1
    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
  31. video showing swarm launch by Dr.+Tom · · Score: 1
  32. No one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? No one is mentioning SkyNet? Really?

  33. Kill Decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone who has read Kill Decision by Daniel Suarez is probably getting a wee bit worried about now...

  34. Buz Droids!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Navy just invented the Buzz Droid. Shoot'em in the eye R2!!

  35. that's the future. by sainame · · Score: 0

    I find very interesting silent drone , that's the future. http://www.educa.net/