Comments on: Getting Sideways at the DARPA Derby

By: Charles

Charles — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:23:06 +0000

The article seems to imply more convoys will make it through with robotic technology; but all it does is lower the body count when a convoy is stopped in the first place.
Much easier to test out robotic technology on logistics convoys than say, tanks. They’ll probably get a bunch of use stateside…we may have Transport Company (drone) with a bunch of mechanics and automated transports for a little while, until the whole force is ready for the technology.

By: Hooded Swan

Hooded Swan — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:43:25 +0000

Not going to get into the argument of manned vehicle vs remote controlled vs autonomous robot. If you want to get your supplies through to, putting them in a robotic vehicle doesn’t help. All it does is keep a driver alive when the bad guys stop the truck. And as other people have already mentioned, makes it more likely that the truck gets stopped in the 1st place.

By: 22lr

22lr — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 15:17:59 +0000

@ camp
LOL, I can drive my truck faster, with more firepower, safer, and deliver my passengers to there destination better than any robot could ever do. how is one of these going to stand up to a sand storm? How is one going to take a bullet? How is one going to respond when the truck in front gets hit, can the computer help a down soldier. No computer is going to run over and get a wounded soldier help.

By: pedestrian

pedestrian — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:15:27 +0000

>Once again were paying someone a boat load of money, just so they can tell us that a human in
>the driver seat is better. Honestly what chance are those high tech censers going to have once
>they get shot.
Here is another idiot who knows nothing. Well, its not your bussiness and you don’t need to know anyways. Only the terrorists will know at the time a terrible thing to target these, but at the time they know, they will be dead.

By: Camp

Camp — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 08:57:34 +0000

22lr,
This technology isn’t just for autonomous vehicles. It can also be used for enhancing humans “in the driver seat”, such as drivers who fall asleep or become impaired, or highlighting obstacles & choices to drivers via a HUD (ie. AI co-driver/co-pilot). But it’s greatest advantage will come when you have to recon an urban area or a route that may be too dangerous for people… or when you don’t have enough people. Not to mention there isn’t enough signal space (clear, crypt, or jammed) for everyones toys in the future… so autonomous has a place.
Greg,
I maybe wrong, but I think the lack of visibility is the greatest problem when trying to get sponsors. If the Universities pooled their resources & created a single entity to admin/promote these events, as well as creating a single place on the net where you can watch the “games”… they might have better success.

By: 22lr

22lr — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 02:43:24 +0000

Once again were paying someone a boat load of money, just so they can tell us that a human in the driver seat is better. Honestly what chance are those high tech censers going to have once they get shot. It will take maybe a single day for the enemy to learn that all you need to do is shoot the first one, and you just got a whole convoy of supplies. Maybe im exasperating a little but I hate the idea of robots driving combat convoys. We will spend a zillion dollars just to realize a human in the driver seat can do the job 50 times better.

By: Greg

Greg — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 01:45:11 +0000

Dan,
This sort of thing does happen is used quite a bit, just not at this level. Back at Michigan State when I was in school the engineering students ran competitions in mini-baja racing and solar cars with their own vehicles they designed and built. Things like that are done all the time between universities, but there aren’t that many groups out there with the ability to sponsor an all-out competition of the magnitude that DARPA is. And DARPA has been doing this type of thing annually since the original Space-X competition.

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 01:10:12 +0000

Camp,
I agree. I watched the event via the DARPA website on the day of the race … their coverage was mediocre at best.
Considering where this tech was in 2004 at the first race and where it is now, I’m surprised this sort of forum (open competition between universities) isn’t used more.

By: Camp

Camp — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:08:05 +0000

TG Daily has some video of the race.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34687/113/
I’m really surprised the military doesn’t promote this event more… It’s like NASCAR for geeks.
IMHO. The Army should host an Armed Combat Robot Shootout. It could consist of an obstacle course, a basic task test, a Hogans alley, and end with an all out death match. You could have divisions for remotely operated, semi-autonomous, & fully autonomous (team or single bots)(big, little, or small). It could take place in a old quarry, or at NTC. End the death match with a 155mm Fire For Effect, slap some Army recruitment logos, and broadcast it over the net.
Post a prize, date, and regulations… & people will compete. Maybe Military.Com could co-sponsor. :)

By: Tartan69

Tartan69 — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:26:21 +0000

BTW, more info here:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/technology_news/4229745.html