Weeks ago I posted about the first deployment of armed robots into urban combat in Iraq with the goal of actually replacing their human counterparts in the worst of situations. These modularly armed robots, dubbed SWORDS, represent both a tactical and technological paradigmatic shift for the US military. Tactical in that the Pentagon did not seem so keen on robot warriors not so long ago, and technological insofar as once the Pentagon, with the foresight of DARPA, suddenly discovered the value of robotic soldiers they began assigning generous budgets, contracts, and programs to move things along expeditiously. SWORDS was deployed around three months ago, maybe as long as six, and we are already seeing the platform “improved” upon. Naturally, with robotics technology the Pentagon would be remiss to not employ continuous improvement… and so we already have the next generation (pictured above and below) of semi-autonomous, modularly armed robotic soldiers ready for deployment.
Improvements on this military platform, from Foster-Miller, include enhanced friendly fire avoidance and more powerful weaponry. From the video, it also seems to have more fluid and precise motion coupled with improved speed. All of this to say, as we continue to discuss the state of robotics here on Schneiderism, we are consistently seeing the gravity of innovation move from research institutions and industry to the military. This compresses the improvement and advancement cycle for robotics technology, as the Pentagon controls significant budgets and resources to maximize any given technology. The upside is that we will see exponential developments in robotics, especially as it relates to autonomy, over the next few years. The downside is that these developments will be biased toward military aims for the foreseeable future. Honestly, it would be irresponsible to predict how this shift in innovation focus will play out, but I think it is safe to say that five years from now we will be looking at a dramatically different range of tactical options for the US military than we would have thought to be such an imminent reality seven years ago.
RSS Feed
December 29th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
[...] In the very near future, possibly as close as 2015, oil and gas drilling platforms at sea may be run by robots controlled and monitored remotely by humans safely ensconced somewhere on land. In a laboratory financed by Norsk Hydro, a simulated robotic drilling platform already exists to test systems and to prototype operations. Offshore oil and gas drilling is dangerous not only due to the confined space in which the heavy drilling equipment must operate, but also due to the variable weather conditions that can make human operation of these platforms problematic. And costly. Employing robotics to run the platforms will eliminate the risk to humans of running the platform, and also greatly reduce the cost associated with human operation. The insurance alone will be a tremendous savings. Additionally, robots will be much less susceptible to the extremes of weather and encounter fewer interruptions in operation. Though we’re still drilling for fossil fuels, this seems to be a much smarter and safer way to go about it. The utilization of robotics in an application such as this seems a logical extension of the technology, and a smart combination of automated robotic manufacturing with the use of remotely controlled robotics in high-danger scenarios such as urban warfare. [...]
December 30th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
[...] cohesive and longterm strategy as it relates to robotics, that the innovation pendulum has already begun to swing from research institutions and private industrial ventures to the military industrial complex. This [...]
January 26th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
In my opinion robots would be used first in war times to fight before they are used in the common house hold of citizens. As long as they could be controled and humans are not entirely taken out of the picture their should be no problem. War is in my opinion what caused the development of robotic technology. I do have a problem with the name killbot. It just does not fit the purpose of the machine. War machines purpose should be to do the job of an solider with an solider without putting the soilder in harms way.
January 27th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Thanks for the comment. Actually, until only recently the impetus behind advancements in robotics has been the domain of academic research institutions, such as that at MIT, and private projects such as seen by Honda and Toyota. With the advent of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan the Pentagon only began to toe dip into how and when robotics technology might make its way onto the battlefield. If you have read some of my other related posts, I point out that the Department of Defense very quickly saw success with what limited robotics platforms they had invested in, to the point now where the budgetary support for robotics research is now very heavily weighted with the military. I suspect that the military support for robotics will be tied to the duration of military operations in the Middle East and how the next U.S. President sets American policy abroad. Either way, the academically supported research is here to stay and will continue to provide the most significant advancements in the technology.