The Cormorant -- just another robotic swimming spy drone for the Navy
By Paul Miller 
posted February 24th 2006 3:58PM
posted February 24th 2006 3:58PM
posted February 24th 2006 3:58PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
This will never work. Ever.
anyone else realize how much this looks like origami?
@1
just think of it as a bigger, reusable version of those SUBROC torpedos
this scares me...
maybe it's the only feature it has, the large open mouth that is coming to eat me...
an origami seagull....
Sounds like an efficient use of the ever-plentiful cash for the defence budget. This should put an end to the hundreds of Jets, bombers, and drone planes that get blown up every day for having to rely on runways, hangers and aircraft carriers while sitting helplessly awaiting imminent attack. Oh, wait . . .nevermind. Because it isn't an issue. This is an overpriced solution looking for a problem to solve. Seriously dumb. If the US DOD buys this hunk of overpriced technology, they realy are as dumb as their leader.
how cool... military has probably used this for years...
Aw, come on ... a small submarine-based drone is exactly the way to get eyes (or other less passive hardware) on a potential target. Like maybe a radical right-wing west-Asian theocracy ... . Oh, damn. This is Engadget, man, not the Washington Post blog. This is a seriously neat concept that will probably never come true but is fun to think about. Isn't that what happens here?
It does look like origami, though.
1. Glad to see we have an aeronautical engineer here to show why it will never work.
6. Glad to see we have a liberal who doesn't mind showing their lack of knowledge on what is happening in the world. Overpriced piece of junk, because you know the cost and how it performs, right?
Wow! The future is now! It ooks like something straight out of Star Wars. :)
I saw this on
gizmodo.com
and
vaporlife.blogspot.com
Bago- It is overly complicated, and that is why it will be expensive and probably not even work. Seriously, you thing shoving a jet in a missile tube, releasing it UNDER WATER, having it then expand it's wings, take off, fly to it's target, shoot, return, land ON WATER, submerge, and return to the missile tube is a simple sollution that is cheap and effective? Seriously?
I don't need an aeronautical engineering degree to know that this is ridled with complications. I don't see the shortcomings to the current solutions, or what problem this proposes to solve. Care to enlighten us?
Why the complicated solution. They should develop a drone that looks exactly like a beat-up Toyota truck. Load it up and send 'er in.
You could make one that looks like a 20 year old taxi or a donkey cart. Whatever. You get the idea. Work out the details and you can have the credit.
This is useless technology. Our national defense is far too dependant on offensive weapons that pummel useless third-world countries, instead of weapons and initiatives that actually protect Americans.
For instance, how about we design something that can protect the US-Mexico border before we spend cheeze on this toy?
no shortcomings to loss of life? This is a location deployed unit designed to replace several types of aircraft that cost hundreds of millions of dollars each due to aged design and requirements for pilot safety. I don't recall saying it was simple, but I do think it could be effective.
If you would rather sit on your laurels and assume nothing is going on in the rest of the world then go ahead, but don't come crying for help or asking why the government did nothing when another country comes looking to show us who is in charge.
how do you recover this underwater into a submarine as they claim? Good feelings and hookers given to DARPA guys?
It's been a long time since I saw the movie, but it reminds me of the flying things that the gov was working on in Terminator 3.
Seriously, when was the last time a jet got shot down? And what is wrong with a predator drone? Or designing more that take of from the ground and aricraft carriers. There si very little benefit to launching from a sub, and I don't see it every being practical.
It's not like the US doesn't have an Airbase in almost every country of the world now.
And I don't see where you get the idea that I assume nothing is going on. I just think there are better ways of speniding money than on somthing like this. Remember the Osprey? Ya. Same deal. Overley complex, and doesn't work. And do tell, which country is going to fight the US where this would come in handy? It's not the cold war anymore. Get over it.
#17,
That's what it reminds me of! Good call
There are no other countries that CAN come looking for us, although China will probably get there eventually. The threat to this country is from terrorists, not other countries. The technology of 9/11 was a dozen guys with boxcutters taking over some commercial airplanes. Tell me again how an origami cruise missile will help prevent THAT threat?
Is that Iran it's flying away from?
Where does this thing plan to land? Unless it's made out of kryptonite, hitting the water at 150mph will tear it apart. I think some pontoons or parachutes are in order.
When it comes to some sort of craft that fires missiles, flies and goes under water, I have to say that there's only one for me:
http://www.gatchaman.nl/images/phoenix.jpg
The only difference is that I trust Science Ninja Team Gatchaman--the US Government? Not so much these days...
Our only threat is terrorists? China, North Korea, yeah, they are probably up to nothing. Didn't realize this thing was supposed to prevent ALL attacks on the US.
You do realize that water covers >70% of the earth, meaning this could be launched almost literally anywhere in the world and the launch base couldn't just be attacked and destroyed like an air base because it is constantly moving. FYI The Iraqis shot down an F-18 Hornet and an A-10 Warthog with a surface-to-air missile.
As a last note, isn't this a gadget/tech blog? If you find nothing of worth in this example of technology, what are you doing here?
The Race to the Singularity is on
Is it's code name T-1
The design is different, but the concept is exactly like an unmanned version of the flying sub from Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.
http://www.vttbots.com/fs1_photos.html
I had a rubber band powered toy VBS sub I piloted in the bathtub as a toddler.
My guess is that the key to unlocking the riddle of this device is that it's designed to be shot out of missile tubes on nuclear submarines. Why not a predator drone instead? Probably belongs to the Air Force. Why not something that looks like an old Toyota truck? Army or Marines. This is a Navy budget device.
Your right Bango. I should not question anything. I should accept whatever is presented to me. Even if it is a stupid idea. Ya, it's a tech blog, and it is a cool idea for a James Bond movie. I'll admit that. it's cool. It's not like other stuff doesn't get criticised here all the time. I'm just saying it will be overpriced and overcomplicated and, well, I think the first poster summed it up the best. I'll leave it at that.
paraphrase:
"You are America's future, and in the future, the war will be fought by robots. It will be your job to build and maintain such robots." - military guy to Bart in graduation speech. Simpsons.
Conan is "yes," then "we" are no, ja?
www.salvosalvosalvo.com
So thats what all those seagulls around my house are...
Dude, I saw this like 10 years ago on Star Fox for the SNES
Dude ...this is an awesome idea for drones. To land them IN the water and recover them later is the best solution. First, the drones are out of reach to enemies. Second, engineering requirements are less because it is easier to land in water than land. Third, there are no time contraints in recovering the drones. They could easily be located with GPS.
er, maybe I'm ignorant about the terminology, but do "spy drones" *usually* do surgical missile strikes and leave smoking destruction in their wake?
Maybe I'm using an outdated definition of "spy"
The military have been retrofitting "spy" drones with missles to do surgical strke missions. So the answer is yes.
My kid works for Lockheed and they have a saying-
"What the mind can conceive, the hands can achieve."
Personally I say bring on the tech and spend the $$... Maybe in all the war toys there will be an application that can someday be used to make fish jump into my boat peacefully.
Anyone who says this is "impossible" obviously has no idea who the Skunk Works are or what kind of work they do.
As far as what kind of mission this thing does, it's clear that the idea is that it can be deployed anywhere that the US does not have a land base to spy on or surgical strike targets (AKA, most middle eastern hell holes).
Really though, when the sub-orbital plasma cannons come online this will really be obsolete.
Is no one else concerned that, one day, Google's network will become sentient, take over these drones, and destroy humanity in a series of precision strikes?
Either that, or hackers from China who figure out how to remotely activate them?
Not to be racist, since I'm Chinese... maybe Korean or something?
I for one think that DARPA isn't going far enough.
If they were to build, say a walking nuclear equipped battle vehicle, perhaps codenamed Metal Gear, they could launch these things from its nuclear missile launchers. How badass would that be?
This is one of those "what are we going to do with all those boomer subs now that the Soviet Union is gone?" projects.
Don't worry, the Air Force will want a version to drop out of B2 bombers and the Army will try and make a version small enough to be fired out of 155mm cannons, while the Marines will want one just big enough to put a sniper in...
I think I know where they got their aerodynamic model:
http://www.crazyabouttv.com/flyingnun.html
Orville and Wilbur Wright, through a series of interesting events, were flying for years before anyone believed them. Matter of fact, they tried to show their planes to the military and U.S. government for a long time but no one would give them the time of day. I think it's funny that so many here are stamping a brand of impossible on this project. I think it is perfectly possible. Crazier things happen all the time.
Slow news day? Old, but this is still cooler. Made a better cover too.
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviationspace/48c606f7578b6010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html
If the enemy has somebody like Cheney he'll just blast this flying thing out of the sky.
what's the difference between this and a cruise missle?
it has a interesting design.
Uh, so how does this help us in the middle east, where we do police actions in urban areas and get killed by IEDs and RPG-7s? Oh wait, it doesn't. Maybe they should spend the cash on armor for humvees instead. And with the billions of dollars left over, buy armor and gear for the Iraqi defense forces we're training to replace our troops there.
Seriously, naval things aren't a challenge for us. We rule the seas and the sky. We can already launch Predator drones that do the same thing, and I don't see anyone threatening our aircraft carriers.
If Skunkworks wants to make something robotic that will help with today's battlefield, not the cold war, let's see some T-1 Terminator style robots, not something to fight an amphibious battle against Soviet Russia with.
Heck, some IED detectors would be great too. But robotic amphibious assault and recon? Simply no relevance.
Cormorant nice design I should know I am the designer. George where is the money. Bonita Springs 2004 stolen from my den sold to DARPA. Two hockey bags of Euros should do. I am still waiting 4 years now.
Yes it will work! It is my design. I designed the Cormorant spy sub in Bonita Springs 2004. Bush administration stole my intellectual property and sold it to DARPA Where is my money George?