Autonomous sniper system combines Xbox 360 controller, .338 rifle for deadly drone action

You know how it is -- we're frightened and appalled by the thought of unmanned killing machines, but if they must exist we really, really want to play with one. The US Army's latest nightmarish deathcopter / awesome tech toy is a little something called the Autonomous Rotorcraft Sniper System (ARSS). Essentially a .338-caliber rifle mounted to the bottom of a Vigilante unmanned helicopter (though it could eventually be made to work on a Predator drone, for instance), this bad boy utilizes a modified Xbox 360 game controller for targeting while the vehicle itself stays put courtesy of its autopilot functions. Never again will your favorite sniper need to leave the comfort of his barracks! Airborne testing begins in July, with autonomy to come soon after that and a possible robot apocalypse estimated for Q4 2011.

[Erb @ Apr 17th 2009 10:27AM]

BOOM HEADSHOT.

The world will eventually belong to the best video gamers... I've been preparing for this my entire life.

[jptech @ Apr 17th 2009 11:10AM]

you're absolutely right, n00b!

I'm gonna pwn the world!

[soobin27 @ Apr 17th 2009 11:38AM]

LOL you too?!

I bet they're already looking into developing aimbots though....

[Wwhat @ Apr 17th 2009 11:45AM]

Typical camper remark to say his 'skills' help this aimbot, tisk tisk.

[Erb @ Apr 17th 2009 11:49AM]

I bet they will also give them the ability to wall hackz :(
Now you won't even see them coming.

[Doug @ Apr 17th 2009 5:13PM]

Good luck getting headshots with your 360 controller.. I'm going to pwnagate your fac3 with my keyboard/mouse..

[Jon Acheson @ Apr 17th 2009 10:30AM]

This isn't unmanned (i.e. autonomous), it's remote-controlled. HUGE difference.

[Matt @ Apr 17th 2009 10:31AM]

You're an idiot. All UAVs (UNMANNED aerial vehicles) are remotely piloted at least part of the time.

[Biz Q Nightly @ Apr 17th 2009 10:33AM]

Then why did the Army name it the "Autonomous Rotorcraft Sniper System"?

[Tonicboy @ Apr 17th 2009 10:35AM]

@Matt

Don't call the kettle black. There certainly are autonomous UAV's.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/26/mit-profs-create-autonomous-uavs/
http://www.ida.liu.se/~patdo/auttek/index.html

[Matt @ Apr 17th 2009 10:59AM]

@Tonicboy

Yeah I retract my statement until I get caffeine this morning.

[Wwhat @ Apr 17th 2009 11:50AM]

The army named it autonomous so they have 'plausible deniability' probably.

[V35_Pilot @ Apr 17th 2009 10:31AM]

This is the first of many flying machine prototypes for that secretive company known as Cyberdine Systems. Skynet becomes self-aware.

[toonces @ Apr 17th 2009 10:32AM]

3 kills in a row lets you call in uav

[OSUpwnsUM @ Apr 17th 2009 12:57PM]

LOL

[Guy @ Apr 17th 2009 10:33AM]

This sure beats the Wii's Motion Plus addon.

[Templarian @ Apr 17th 2009 10:34AM]

What happens when they start making small jets. I've always thought an RC war would be awesome. Modify the rules of war to limit the size of rc robots.

Then let privately owned companies, and individuals participate. Japans legion on Asimo's stand no chance.

[barry99705 @ Apr 17th 2009 12:29PM]

You mean like these?

http://rcjetmodels.com/index.php?_a=viewCat&catId=49

[Tonicboy @ Apr 17th 2009 10:35AM]

Autonomous my ARSS.

[superhobo @ Apr 17th 2009 10:39AM]

Why do people think stuff like this is a good idea?

[dwakley @ Apr 17th 2009 10:49AM]

Because it can save lives.

[superhobo @ Apr 17th 2009 10:50AM]

Remote controlled ought to be good enough for anyone.

[Bellzebub @ Apr 17th 2009 11:09AM]

"dwakley @ Apr 17th 2009 10:49AM

Because it can save lives."

Was that supposed to be ironic?

[Wwhat @ Apr 17th 2009 11:51AM]

Good q., some people are actually serious when they say such things, 'saving lives' indeed.. way to switch off the old brain without being hit even.

[slyd3z @ Apr 17th 2009 12:13PM]

Perhaps specifically, save the lives of our combatants, while taking the lives of enemies. Thus, giving John Q. Soldier better odds of not coming home to Mrs. Soldier in a flag-draped box.

[vdex34 @ Apr 17th 2009 2:07PM]

yeah but the point is somebody(probably innocent bystanders) will be killed by these. At least since its "autonomous" our Army will be able to avoid international law and rules of engagement.

[Draaaainage! @ Apr 17th 2009 5:09PM]

Last time I checked real snipers didn't just go around whacking people willy-nilly like the mafia. Snipers have generally a very limited number of targets (1 or 2) and they are deployed to MINIMIZE collateral damage and unintentional casualties. I can't imagine that who ever is piloting this is going to be pretending they are playing Serious Sam, and it will in fact perform the same function (strategic strikes) as a in-the-flesh sniper would be.

[Wwhat @ Apr 17th 2009 9:11PM]

The real enemy is always your own government, remember that simple rule.

[Wwhat @ Apr 17th 2009 9:16PM]

@Draaaainage
Reality isn't like the movies and most snipers aren't working for the mob, snipers in afghanistan and iraq andsoforth kill people left and right and just guess if they are the enemy, and anyway once they are shot they are automatically labeled enemy or simply a 'threat', which in places were people all carry guns is easy.

[Lucas @ Apr 17th 2009 10:39AM]

They also have these that are used to "park" on a building or cliff so they do not have to hover. They can sit on a building for a lot longer period and just wait until its time.

Although with the use of XBox controllers I may be worried that the new "snipers" may get the munchies while waiting.

[whiskey @ Apr 17th 2009 10:41AM]

I see the evil geniuses rising, can't seem to find the cool heroes (super spy, international contractor, not even a platypus or a panda on a fedora hat) to stop them though... Which is you know, kinda worrying...

[Marco Torres @ Apr 17th 2009 10:52AM]

PS3 and Wii controllers around the world now live in fear!

[OSUpwnsUM @ Apr 17th 2009 12:57PM]

This will never work until they build a remote controlled sac for tea-bagging terrorists. Then our entire military will be made up of pale skinned, socially awkward 12 year olds.

[James @ Apr 17th 2009 10:54AM]

Acutally according to the ancient Mayans, the apocolypse will occur Q1 2012. So you are close.

[mocax @ Apr 17th 2009 10:55AM]

it'll pwn all when they install aimbot on it.....

[Nelagster @ Apr 17th 2009 10:58AM]

M-M-M-M-MONSTER KILL!!!

[Someone is here @ Apr 17th 2009 1:40PM]

LOOOL! I remember CS! Wow, I want to play right now!

[Bradford @ Apr 17th 2009 8:53PM]

I think that's originally from quake

[Timoh @ Apr 20th 2009 5:54PM]

Unreal Tournament

[Brent @ Apr 17th 2009 11:04AM]

The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea.
They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall
mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by
small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is
clear: To build and maintain those robots. Thank you.

[Wwhat @ Apr 17th 2009 11:59AM]

Wars of the future will be the same as now, brainless morons killing everything that moves in 3rd world countries with embedded 'journalists' that lie their asses off.
And I think robots won't make it since the reality is that there are just a large number of people in every generation that want to personally kill people and that's why wars are started and why they join the army, not to sit in an office tabulating reports from robots, where's the 'fun' in that?

Now to use robots to intimidate your own population into submission in a way a actual human might be hesitant to do.. that's another story, this robot will probably be tested during some G20 summit to scare (and perhaps 'autonomously' shoot some) protesters.

[eggothewaffle @ Apr 17th 2009 11:15AM]

Should have used a mouse and keyboard for first person shooting.

[Xlar @ Apr 17th 2009 11:33AM]

Agreed the Xbox 360 controller is an interesting choice... I'm thinking that Microsoft gave them some kind of deal on it.

[maveric101 @ Apr 17th 2009 5:55PM]

except they probably used windows for the boxes, making the the 360 controller a natural choice, since it's supported well within windows (and it's more compact than a mouse/keyboard).

[Caz @ Apr 17th 2009 11:19AM]

Laughing my Autonomous Rotorcraft Sniper System off !

(or maybe not)

[captainmercury1 @ Apr 17th 2009 11:32AM]

What's the range of an Xbox 360 controller? How succeptible is it to RF interference? Seems like you'd need something more military-grade to control a weapon that can kill bad guys (or good ones with a glitch).

[Someone is here @ Apr 17th 2009 1:42PM]

RTFA! (Read the Freakin Article)

"utilizes a modified Xbox 360 game contoller"

Are you dumb or just wanted to comment? You must be a PS# FanBoy/Girl

Seriously, I think the US Army thought of that before making the sketches!

[captainmercury1 @ Apr 17th 2009 11:30PM]

(For Someone is here): Well, of COURSE the controller is MODIFIED, you moron. Nobody expects you could control something like this with a stock controller. It just doesn't say in what WAY it was modified, nor does the article address range, or my opinion on using military grade stuff instead of kid's toys to kill people. I think YOU just wanted to post a smartass comment without half thinking about the issues I raised.

Range is an important factor in something like this, because you probably want your sniper a good distance away from the bad guys, not having to sit 30 feet or so from them. I don't know what the range is on a 360 controller, but I'd wager it's not far enough to reliably operate a killing weapon in a real combat situation.

By the way, I own a 360 with HDMI, not a PS3.

[Alex @ Apr 19th 2009 10:12PM]

I'd imagine that is a controller connected to a computer controlling it from miles away, not just the range of a standard 360 controller.

[Carl @ Apr 17th 2009 11:38AM]

"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down
That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun
-- Tom Lehrer

OK, so I'm confused. Why is an autonomous killing machine more frightening and appalling than existing weapons? Is it because no human is involved in the final choice of target? If so, I think we crossed that line a long time ago, as soon as killing somebody no longer required meeting them face to face. Here's a short list of weapons systems that, to a greater or lesser extent, blur the distinction between an autonomous kill and a conscious decision.

- Landmines, obviously. Their major effect is to kill civilians long after the conflict is over.
- Unexploded ordinance. Ditto.
- Booby traps including IEDs, if they aren't remote controlled.
- Chemical weapons. The person launching them knows roughly where they'll go, but not exactly.
- Artillery or bombs with less than perfect accuracy
- Artillery or bombs directed against civilian/industrial targets.

Is a ballistic missile that follows a pre-defined trajectory morally different from a cruise missile that adjusts its own course in-flight? Are both OK because a human pushed the initial button? If so, is an interceptor missile that launches automatically based on a detected threat and the absence of an IFF signal morally different? Are you good with it if a human has to OK the launch? How about if it launches by default unless a human countermands it?

To me, the distinction between pressing a button to launch a missile, not knowing for sure what's at the end of its trajectory, and pressing a button to launch a UAV, not knowing for sure who it might shoot, is moot. Both are equally appalling and frightening.