Coming soon: Robots with Guns

Unmanned military systems (aka robots) have been used on the ground in Iraq to search buildings and dispose of explosives since the beginning of the war. Now Foster-Miller's TALON robots are being adapted for a new purpose—to serve as a weapons-firing robot army that can be on the move night and day. Able to carry four 66-mm rockets, or six 40-mm grenades, as well as a M240 or M249 machine gun, the new TALON robots are intended to protect vehicles and patrol rough terrain, firing via remote control. By April 2005, the first batch of armed Talons are scheduled for deployment in Iraq, as part of the Army's Stryker Brigade.  No doubt they will be amazingly popular with the troups, for whom going out on patrol and accompanying convoys has been a perilous exercise.

[Jeremy @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

How soon before they connect these to Xbox live? I'm somehow reminded of the movie Toys with actor Robin Williams...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105629/

[Slaven @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

If these robots don't win hearts and minds of Iraqi people nothing will...

[Tony @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Old news, saw these in action on history channel on "Guts and Bolts"

America dosen't make panzy bipedal lovable robots, we make killing machines to take over the world, yay.

[Chris @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

I suppose these are also going to be impossible to jam? Impossible to spoof the controller signal? There are so many potential problems with a weapons platform like this, I don't even know where to begin.

[Chris @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Can we hook these up to the internet? www.blowawayaterrorist.com...yes? maybe?

[Rick @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Man, I'd love to get a hold of one of these and let them loose in one of the Red States, Indiana, Kentucky, Florida, whatever. Just to see the blood running red through those states would be awesome.

[David @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

One word, Terminator. We are on a slippery slope to the beginning of the war with maching, especially on days I miss my medication.

[Andrew @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Apart from the issues of jamming control signals mentioned above, what about power? How long does one of these cute little robots shoot ammo for before it runs out of juice? A soldier can be deployed for days, I imagine these robots don't last for more than a few hours at most. If Foster-Miller came across some amazing battery technology, can I have it in my laptop sometime soon?

Last but not least, how hard can it be for the enemy to sneak up on one of these? Hey, let's put more free weapons in the hands of the enemy... Until we can create robots intelligent enough to protect and power/recharge themselves in the field, the era of robotic warfare has not arrived yet.

[Matt @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THis is the scariest thing next to Nukes. Who's to say someone can't reap controll of these war machines and turn them against who ever they like. I don't even want to think about AI bugs or some sort of mother brain computer controling these. How come stem-cell research is banned in the US but we can make remote controlled death machines? Terminator is right that's the first thing I thought of. Is there any petition against this around? What's the best way to get my congressman involed??? Didn't anyone see Futureamma last night on adult swim???

[Thomas @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Ahhh, get off it!
Grab yourself an Electro_magnetic Puls SMASHER! And roll with the times. Pretty sure throught all the movies and crap we seen we'll be in a good enough place to deal..
Be fun anyway!

[Jay @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

It is a bit funny to me that the U.S. military has a small air force of unmanned aerial vehicles, many of which operate autonomously, and some of which are armed with weapons, and nobody cries "end of the world!" But, as soon as you put the things on the ground, all of a sudden its a major issue worthy of a doomsday novel. Give me a break. The first thing that the military asked Foster-Miller when they saw the first prototype was "So what happens if the enemy captures this thing?" The second question was "How hard is it to hack the control link and take over?" Don't forget that the people building stuff like this are pretty adept at what they do, and many of them read Engadget just like you. They're just normal geeks who happen to get work from the DoD. If this stuff can save the lives of our soldiers, I'm all for it.

[Distressed Motorist @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

"Hello, onStar...."

[aeo @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

We all thought it was silly that the enemy in Iraq War v1.0 were surrenduring to the unmanned surveillance aircraft. Now THIS is something to surrender to.

[James @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

SPELLCHECK ALERT ENGADGET.. Troops, not Troups. lol

[Chris @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

seems a bit more johnny 5 than terminator to me.

[koan @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

As the song goes: "Remember to kick it over; no one will guide you, Armagideon Time".

Or are these friendly guys self-righting?

[Ken Zemach @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

As a guy who just got back from 19 months in Afghanistan and Iraq supporting at least 10 different robotic platforms, I can categorically say that weapons on ground based robots is the stupidest idea on the planet. Scenario: 1. Marines roll into Falujia (again) and send a robot with a machine gun down the street "to protect soldiers." 2. Man in window down street starts video taping. 3. Man sends 8 year old boy (or girl) down to beat the crap out of the robot with a baseball bat. We end up with either: 4a. Soldier decides not to gun down 8 year old boy, and boy destroys $500k robot and then man comes down and takes machine gun or 4b. Soldier guns down boy with robot, video to air on Al Jazeera at 6pm.

A lethally armed, expensive robotic platform with secure military communications equipment that can be disabled by a 70 year old woman who walks up to it and drapes a bedsheet over the camera (and then beats the crap out of it) is so ridiculous it makes me want to cry.

And to all those of you non-military guys and gals: not all soldiers think arming robots is a good idea. It's the dumb asses sitting behind a desk in the US that think it's a good idea. A complete and monumental waste of your tax dollars, I assure you.

[Paul @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

What's to stop someone from sneaking up on the thing and tipping it over? Or perhaps the enemy picking it up and using it themselves?

[Tony @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

I thought they had heat vision or something like that so putting a drape over the cam would not really effect it.
Person shooting gun or robot shooting gun: i think the the robot would be more accurate since it is on a steady platform and no muscles shaking(factors include human error)

Still robots will never replace the person in war, but could be useful in open areas.

Little kids die all the time over there due to U.S. stuff and the censors are doing a decent job at preventing the public from seeing it.

[nojetlag @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Wow another chapter in the tradition of brave US soldiers. We see plenty of their brave stuff in Iraq, killing tons of people with missiles and GPS bombs. Real heros fighting for the american empire. Get the same weapons and fight like men not like kids behind a computer screen if you have to oppress the whole world.

[Ken Zemach @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Couple-o-comments:

The Talon does not have thermal as its primary sensor; want that? Add $20,000, and face losing a controlled thermal optic, NOT something you want in enemy hands, if you lose the bot. Same with the Packbot. I have personally controlled a robot with a weapons system, and it is absolutely crap in terms of your ability to quickly and accurately aim it in comparison to your own hand control; the responsiveness is just not there. There was lots of ducking for cover when you'd accidentally knoch the joystick and it'd spin 360 degrees....

[Dangertron @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Well, nojetlag, I guess you're not in the armed forces.

I'm sure theres plenty of servicemen and women who'd like to 'discuss' your comments with you. Show some respect, dammit.

[juepucta @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Pheh! G.I.Joe was truly ahead of its time. From 1983:

http://www.yojoe.com/vehicles/83/pacrats/flamethrower.shtml

http://www.yojoe.com/vehicles/83/pacrats/missilelauncher.shtml

http://www.yojoe.com/vehicles/83/pacrats/machinegun.shtml

G.

[siennalizard @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Oh dear. Asimov would be less than impressed...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics

[ebp2k2 @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

you guys are all making assumptions that these bots will be sent in alone... imo these bots will be used by soldiers on the ground, perhaps to draw out enemy, clear a room, and laying down cover fire... if some kid approached it with a drape, i'm sure there will be a marine nearby telling him to back off.

[Joe @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

"not all soldiers think arming robots is a good idea. It's the dumb asses sitting behind a desk in the US that think it's a good idea"


Yes, the same dumb asses that make decisions everyday regarding the welfare of our country - the same dumb asses we as a people enable them, either directly or indirectly, to make decisions for us. Get off your high horse.

[SFC Platt @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

I am the person who came up with the Idea of the SWORDS. The people who are in the negative on this idea are wrong. The person who says the negative about optics and says we need thermal dosnt know squat. We have great night vision on board this system. This system is not the 100% solution. For those in the negative, I ask you this, when was the last time you went into urban combat? when have you stood guard in an exposed position? When was the last time you did an assault on a building at night? enough said!

[Ken Zemach @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

SFC Platt: With all due respect it was just a few months ago that I was in Afghanistan taking a building, then searching villages, then in Iraq doing a night raid, doing IED sweeps along the roadsides of Sadr City. I've crawled literally miles in the underground quanat tunnels underneath Afgh. So right back acha, when's the last time you watched the guy next to you burn to death?

But that's not my point. My point was that I spent that 19 months over there supporting all sorts of robotic platforms, including the illustrious Talon. Yes, the same Talon that the set sent in the Spring had all the arms break, and the gripper problems, and no one at F-M would respond to the EOD requests from the Afgh EOD guys for spare parts, and the fleet of which was generally only 30% fully operational when I was in Iraq in the Spring.... because they just kept breaking. How do I know this? Because I lived all of 100 yards from the main repair center for them.

I have no issue with the need for robots for aerial recon. I have no issue with robots for EOD applications. I have no issue with robots for IED inspection. I know this, cause I've done it. And I do think the Talon is a fine EOD robot, constant repairs required aside. But I do have an issue with weapons on UGVs, period, from an operational standpoint. That's all.

[fcgoost @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

Ik vind het niet normaal hur! GVD! Slelletje schijtamerikanen. Gna Gna.

[SFC Platt @ Dec 19th 2005 2:50AM]

I am not going into why you didnt have a CLS package in place in OEF. If you are who you say you are you can reach me at the ARDEC.