Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DARPA's Robot Ship Slated For April Unveiling (nationaldefensemagazine.org)

Posted by BeauHD on from the spare-parts dept.

93 Escort Wagon writes: The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) plans to launch a 130-foot autonomous ship this year. The Anti-Submarine Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel will be the largest unmanned surface vehicle ever built at 130-feet long. It will be christened in April in Portland, Oregon, and then begin to demonstrate its long-range capabilities over 18 months in cooperation with the Office of Naval Research and the Space and Naval Systems Warfare Command.

My regards to Captain Dunsel.

44 comments

  1. Unmanned boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you find an unmanned boat in the middle of the ocean... can you keep it?

    1. Re: Unmanned boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that is an interesting question as it relates to the specific wording of salvage law.

    2. Re:Unmanned boat by kheldan · · Score: 1

      I was wondering something in a similar vein: How about pirates? What is there, if anything, about this robotic ship, that would prevent someone from boarding it and commandeering it?

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    3. Re:Unmanned boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A true autonomous ship would have no human control interface on board. No "wheel" for directional control and no levers for engine/prop/thruster control. On boarding, the first thing the pirates would need to do is install their own control system. Not impossible I suppose, but are your average pirates likely to be able to do that? Maybe Captain Jack Sparrow could do it?

    4. Re: Unmanned boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not at all, salvage is a court of equity, not technicality.

      Thus the question would be if the operator of the vessel needed your help.

      Odds are they'd say...no, fuck off.

    5. Re:Unmanned boat by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

      Not if it kills you the moment you touch it. And by "it" I mean the much larger integrated system it is part of.

    6. Re:Unmanned boat by kheldan · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt anyone would be so stupid as to build a vessel like that with zero manual controls, you're inviting disaster if you do.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  2. Coudn't Catch Some Fish First? by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

    Or maybe a robot ocean cleaner? How about a robot plastic plucker? A robot oil sucker? Nahh. Lets build a robot warbot!!!

    1. Re:Coudn't Catch Some Fish First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well since it is the DOD that is funding this, defense seems right. The NSF is more than welcome to do the same thing, for cleaning up plastic of whatever.

    2. Re:Coudn't Catch Some Fish First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of that has been done, this is just larger than all of those.

      Because size matters when it comes out of the barrel of a gun.

    3. Re:Coudn't Catch Some Fish First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Or maybe a robot ocean cleaner? How about a robot plastic plucker? A robot oil sucker? Nahh. Lets build a robot warbot!!!

      I'd say typical male jerk mentality, but that would be unfair to all female jerks I've met till this day.

  3. A Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "It will ... demonstrate its long-range capabilities over 18 months in cooperation with the Office of Naval Research and the Space and Naval Systems Warfare Command." After that it will renegotiate its cooperation.

  4. Who the heck is in charge of acronyms over there? by jpellino · · Score: 1

    They should be relieved of their duty immediately. I mean ASWCTUV? Please.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  5. Re:Who the heck is in charge of acronyms over ther by BeauHD · · Score: 1

    IKR?

  6. Re:Who the heck is in charge of acronyms over ther by BuckBundy · · Score: 1

    Another robot did it? ;-) May be the military wants to show that they are super efficient these days and they do not waste time on coming up with cute acronyms.

    --
    BookDetective.net - book search engine and ranker I donate my skills to.
  7. no. Reasonable reward if ship in real peril by raymorris · · Score: 4, Informative

    In short, no. The vessel is still the property of the owner, as is all flotsam and jetsom.

    A salvor IS entitled to reasonable compensation of the property is in "real peril". Reasonable is determined by imagining if the owner of the vessel and the salvor had time and opportunity to pre-negotiate a price for salvaging the vessel. The amount owed is roughly what they would have negotiated ahead of time, if they had the opportunity to do so, for rescuing the property. (Rescuing any people on board is separate law.)

    Additionally, history suggests it is unwise to mess with a vessel of the US Navy. :)

  8. 10 carrier strike groups (half the world's warship by raymorris · · Score: 1

    People have tried messing with the US Navy before. It has never worked out well.

  9. some countries may not mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bring it on by!

    Sincerely,

    Iran, China, and Russia.

    1. Re:some countries may not mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While thinking the us is really this incompetent surely is funny, they are not.
      All of those vehicles use navigational methods that invulnerable / infeasible to spoofing or jamming, not gps.
      You are an idiot, or a propaganda shill. While the us has employed both of those, they never were so obnoxious. Fuck off.

    2. Re:some countries may not mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet Iran really does have your drone. Reality seems to disagree with you.

    3. Re:some countries may not mind by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Yet Iran really does have your drone. Reality seems to disagree with you.

      The intriguing (and perhaps scary) question for me, with this ship, is whether or not this drone ship can fight back. One of its stated purposes is countering mines, which I'd think would require some sort of weaponry.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:some countries may not mind by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      One of its stated purposes is countering mines, which I'd think would require some sort of weaponry.

      I wouldn't count a wirecutter, an induction coil or a loudspeaker as weapons.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:some countries may not mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you didn't type that for no reason at all so, someone has to do it... Don't worry - I am already prepared to groan in advance.

      Alright, what's the loudspeaker for?

      KGIII (AC ATM)

  10. Wonderful by JimSadler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Keeping sailors and soldiers and airmen out of harms way, while providing national defense, is a blessing for all in the US. Yet it is also an example of how human employment will decrease and points to the need to change fundamentals of society and economics.

    1. Re:Wonderful by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Somebody has to build, fuel and maintain the boat - or build and maintain the robots that do those jobs.

      When the robots start building robots, then we're really screwed.

    2. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Somebody has to build, fuel and maintain the boat - or build and maintain the robots that do those jobs.

      When the robots start building robots, then we're really screwed.

      Those jobs already exist and are filled. Already people build boats, people fuel boats, people maintain boats, people try to build robots to do those jobs.

      As the original poster stated, this ship eliminates the jobs of the crew typically used to operate such a boat. In this case, that's dozens of people per boat.

  11. No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A weapon to surpass Metal Gear...

    1. Re:No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A weapon to surpass Metal Gear...

      Solid Snake: What's Metal Gear really designed for?
      Dr. Hal 'Otacon' Emmerich: It's a mobile TMD. It's designed to shoot down nuclear missiles - only for defensive purposes, of course.
      Solid Snake: Liar! I already know Metal Gear is nothing more than a nuclear-equipped, walking death-mobile!"

      Solidus Snake/George Sears: Jack, listen to me. We're all born with an expiration date. No one lasts forever. Life is nothing but a grace period - for turning our genetic material into the next generation. The data of life is transferred from parent to child. That's how it works. But we have no heirs, no legacy. Cloned from our father, with the ability to reproduce conveniently engineered out. What is our legacy if we cannot pass the torch? Proof of our existence - a mark of some sort. When the torch is passed on from parent to child... it extends beyond DNA; information is imparted as well. All I want is to be remembered. By other people, by history. The Patriots are trying to protect their power, their own interests, by controlling the digital flow of information. I want my memory, my existence to remain. Unlike an intron of history, I will be remembered as an exon. That will be my legacy, my mark on history. But the Patriots would deny us even that, I will triumph over the Patriots, and liberate us all. And we will become the "Sons of Liberty!"

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yBlgA4FzPY
      "Good day, how do?
      And I send a smile to you
      Don't waste, waste your breath
      And I won't waste my hate on you

      Ain't gonna waste my hate
      Ain't gonna waste my hate on you
      I think I'll keep it for myself

      Ain't gonna give no more
      Ain't got the time to help you score
      I think it's time you pleased yourself
      Yourself

      Good day, how do?
      And I send a smile to you
      Don't waste, don't waste your breath
      And I won't waste my hate on you

      Waste my hate on you"

      Hmmm... Metal Gear? :)

  12. asking to be undermined, cracked, and turned by sittingnut · · Score: 1

    these things must need lots of instructions from dozen or more of remote handlers. in addition they will depend on, lots of known ( and constantly available and updated) data about locations and conditions, and systems like gps, etc etc.
    these are weak points. and will certainly be exploited.
    more complex the drone/robot, easier it will be to undermine.

    1. Re:asking to be undermined, cracked, and turned by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Time to get serious about strong encryption for military Command and Control links... oh, wait....

  13. Up Your Game DARPA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Space X drone ship is 300 feet long. It's no submarine tracker, but it is most definitely an unmanned surface vessel.

    Up your game DARPA!

    P.S. By the way it really isn't that big of a deal. Everything from 28 foot recreational vessels to 1,200 foot cruise ships have autopilots that could operate unmanned.

  14. any unarmed ship can be a minesweeper by raymorris · · Score: 4, Funny

    > One of its stated purposes is countering mines, which I'd think would require some sort of weaponry.

    Any ship can be a minesweeper - once.

  15. Re:Who the heck is in charge of acronyms over ther by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The acronym (of sorts) is ACTUV; pronounced like "active". They cleverly drop off the "SW" and let the "A" do all the work.

  16. Clinton In Chief excepted by raymorris · · Score: 0

    The above statement does of course have an exception- when Clinton was Commander in Chief, anyone could of course attack US naval vessels at will. The response each time - not even a strongly worded email. Never before or since has the US Navy been a target one could attack without swift and sure consequences.

    1. Re:Clinton In Chief excepted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      At least the Cole was something of a surprise. On GWB's watch, known terrorists executed a known plan to carry out a known attack on a known target, and his administration did fuck-all to stop it.

    2. Re:Clinton In Chief excepted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was not aware that Clinton was president when the Liberty, the Stark, the Pueblo, the Panay, or even the Chesapeake–Leopard Affair.

      How nice to have such a long-lived leader.

  17. She was as tall as a 6 foot 3 inch tree... by WSOGMM · · Score: 1

    will be the largest unmanned surface vehicle ever built at 130-feet long

    Wow really? I bet it dwarfs all the other 130-feet long unmanned surface vehicles!!

  18. Apologies to Robocop... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ASWCTUV: [menacingly] Please put down your weapon. You have twenty seconds to comply.

    Fisherman 1: I think you'd better do what he says, ....

    [Fisherman 2 drops the fishing pole in the ocean . ASWCTUV advances, growling]

    ASWCTUV: You now have fifteen seconds to comply.

    [Fisherman 2 turns to Fisherman 1, who looks nervous]

    ASWCTUV: You are in direct violation of Penal Code 1.13, Section 9.

    [entire harbour of recreational boaters in full panic trying to stay out of the line of fire, especially Fisherman 2]

    ASWCTUV: You have five seconds to comply. ...

  19. Maintenance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No sailors onboard?
    What happens when a little oil tube erupts in the engine room?
    Or when some pump goes bad? Or "rats" gnaw on some electrical wiring?
    In the middle of nowhere?

  20. who? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    The military can’t continue to rely on big, monolithic weapons systems that take years to develop. It will never have them in time or in the numbers required to fight advanced adversaries, Walker said.

    who the hell is going to fight the US that is sufficiently advanced? serious question because globalization has resulted in making all the advanced countries economically intertwined.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  21. Here We Go Again: 16-years Ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Back in 1998 Windows NT crashed and the cruiser CG-48 Yorktown was left dead in the water.

    Navy called the pilot project a success in demonstrating that automation can reduce shipboard personnel, maintenance and having to deal with dock-side Unions, and that really pesky thingy ... OSHA ... Veteran's Administration Hospitals! Ha ha.

    https://gcn.com/Articles/1998/07/13/Software-glitches-leave-Navy-Smart-Ship-dead-in-the-water.aspx

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_%28CG-48%29

    With the Navy, the FUN never ends.

    Ha ha

  22. Re:Who the heck is in charge of acronyms over ther by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

    Their summary isn't much better:

    The Obama administration requested $2.973 billion for DARPA for fiscal year 2017, the same amount in its 2016 request, and $105 more than what was appropriated, said DARPA Director Arati Prabhakar.

    So that's what, one extra Pentagon-priced can opener in the budget for $105?

  23. Uplink to skynet? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Hey, too easy.

  24. Who Invented that ghastly thing? by tmjva · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking of the goat and the Thompson Harmonizer in front of the audience in Atlas Shrugged.

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT