Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

I came accross this yesterday and i was very interested since i want to do military robotics when i get out of college. The company is selling robots to the military made from off the shelf RC parts for $8,000. Their was also a armless one priced at $1,000. I figured i would pass this on and see if anyone else has heard of any other cool military robotics programs.
http://iedrobot.com/marcbot/marcbotindex.htm - the maker
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...5E1702,00.html
http://www.defenselink.mil/transform...ta012505a.html
http://warfightersolutions.com/ttps/marcbot.htm

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

Goverments and government entities always pay way too much for stuff. The people making this thing were even paid to develop it. To me, it seems like little more than a E-Maxx on Imex Jumbo Kong tires.

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

You may already know this, but irobot, makers of the Roomba also do goverment and research robotics.
http://www.irobot.com/governmentindustrial/

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

Those were my first thoughts too but its nice to see not everything the military buys costs $100,000+.

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

Something similar:

http://66.221.222.55/proddetail.asp?prod=Robot3&cat=19

By the way the MARCbot is probably an E-maxx chassis

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

http://www.defensereview.com/modules...rticle&sid=704
I swear this looks like a scary FIRST robot! Still to see a tiny robot carry a bazooka is absolutely awesome! :D

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

You’ve got to be kidding! $8k? The paperwork involved in buying one will cost that much. Of course they were paid to develop it! First and fortunately, at this time there’s not a huge commercial market out there for IED finding robots; so, the private sector isn’t likely to invest RD&E funds, when they could loose it all if they don’t win some potential government contract. Secondly, it would cost more for the government to develop one than to pay someone who’s willing and able. They have rules regulations and many levels of planning and then oversight aimed to protect the taxpayer’s money while in the hands of the govt. employees. The private sector doesn’t have that kind of overhead. Third is that government R & D is supposed to be doing the pie-in-the-sky kinds of things that the private sector just can’t afford, and to oversee and fund the commercial sector to do all the rest – it’s good for the economy! Finally, the government would have to contract the manufacture anyway, so why not the development? Each operation (as in Enduring Freedom or Desert Storm) presents a unique set of problems that the government RD&E centers have to address ASAP. Right now they’re busy building upgrade armor kits; it could be something else tomorrow; they can’t loose that functionality by converting even one design and machine shop into a robot factory.

I think the cheap robot idea is great! However, I don’t believe the claim: It is not intended for or to be used to physically touch, bump, modify, or attempt to disable suspected IEDs. If I were out there with an $8k robot, that’s exactly what I’d do with it - better the robot than my buddy goes kaboom!

On the other hand, I see a lot of short falls with the MARCBOT. The limited mobility and mono vision would require the soldier to be in close proximity. They don’t mention range, but I’d bet that the soldier would often have to keep line of sight contact with it, which makes him an easy target. Not only that, it looks to be unable to right itself; so the bad guy just sits back and plinks whomever it is that comes out to set it upright. Also, I fear that it gives the soldier a false sense of security. The terrorists don’t hang a big yellow “Caution – IED” signs on the things! So, some grunt thinks the area is cool and ends up in pieces.

All that, along with the fact that it’s too tall to inspect under vehicles, makes me think that the MARCBOT is good for exactly what they claim it isn’t – getting itself blown up.

I’d accept that! But if I were out there keeping America safe by keeping the bad guys busy over there, I’d also want to have me a $25k - $50k robot the sniff out explosives, interrogate the IR signature, climb stairs, work right-side-up and/or up-side-down, and check under the rocks that the evil dooers crawl out from.

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

Interesting stuff. While we were rushing to catch our flight home from Atlanta this year, we saw a gigantic group of military personnel awaiting a flight. Being the curious high-schoolers that we all are, we stopped to ask them where they were headed off to as they, amusingly enough, simultaneously stopped us to ask why on earth we were wearing safety-green shorts announcing "I Like Robots". We began chatting with a group of the men and found out that, not only were they headed to Iraq, a number of them also build, operate, and maintain/repair the robots used in seeking out explosives.

I wish that we could have had more time to talk to them, I'm sure they had more stories than they had time to share with us!

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

Mechanicalbrain PMed me for my opinion on the TALON:

I think the TALON would be very effective, when used the right way. But again, they look to be planning the wrong mission for it. Why would they want to add the weight, complexity (didn’t I read the word “adaptive?”), and loss of mobility – as in increased chance to get snagged – in order to camouflage a robot? Camouflage should be used on high-value targets – such as human beings and the things they ride in. The only exception is to put it on decoys, for obvious reasons.

Who the heck would want to be on the battlefield with a bunch of pistol packing robots running around? Imagine yourself out there with the enemy in front and a bazooka-toting robot behind you, with some former FIRST driver looking into a one square inch eyepiece trying to decide which is which. No thanks!

They do say that the bots are meant to keep soldiers out of harm’s way. So, I would hope that they wouldn’t try to deploy them side-by-side with the GIs. But I wouldn’t put it past them either! Even it they sent a few out in front of the troops, the combination of the fog of war, some twisty streets or trails, and a complete loss of spatial relation on a video screen are sure to make the operator think they’re heading north, when they’re really going south. “Oh! My bad! Maybe the GPS quit, got shot, or was jammed?”

In my opinion, the idea of trying to camouflage a robot or three and sneak them around is just plain stupid. We should want them to draw fire. We should send them in swarms, controlled from way far away, in order to shoot, shock, and awe the other guy into making himself obvious to a flock of Predators circling overhead.

I mean, think about it! We can build robots a whole lot faster than they can make insurgents. Why in the world would we want to conceal them?

Re: Military robots straight from the hobby store!
 

Well.... not ever being in the army i can only guess but it seems to me that you use camouflage to hide something valuable or crucial to a motion. I think if the army wanted decoys they would make them cheaper. Something like this is what you would deploy in a fire fight (all to familiar today) in which case it is invaluable. Also from looking at their designs of a suit control system i can only guess this is meant to be deployed by soldiers near deployment of the robot. Also i can't see the value of swarms of robots that are ineffective combatants being much good and if they are effective then you hit a price wall. Every robot Ive seen to date has been created to supplement troops and always close to site deployment not like miles and miles away. Military robots today generally fill one of these categories transports, mobile cover, weapon platforms, scouts, and point men. Frankly i wouldn't trust robots working by themselves due to the unstable forms of control you would have to use for control. I think one of the other uses for this robot is a sniper type role (from what i read the builder did some special designing to this purpose). I think we all know a robots camera can see at much better ranges than a human and its hand is much steadier, not to mention if its discovered its not some guy stuck on a roof somewhere. I don't know but the idea seems fine to me.