death by robot; robo-soldier to be deployed

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
J

Jassi

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2004
3,296
0
0
What a waste, the only thing holding back people from waging war is casualties on their side. You take that out of the equation and we will have a bigger mess :(
 
halik

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
hahah those things are cool,
but at 4 mph i'd imagine the use is rather limited. An RPG would mess it up imo.
 
L

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,938
5
0
Originally posted by: halik
hahah those things are cool,
but at 4 mph i'd imagine the use is rather limited. An RPG would mess it up imo.
Click to expand...

An RPG would 'mess up' a soldier too. Nobody said these were invincible, and their uses are limited.
 
B

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
Originally posted by: Jassi
What a waste, the only thing holding back people from waging war is casualties on their side. You take that out of the equation and we will have a bigger mess :(
Click to expand...

Man if that's your outlook on life I feel sorry for you. Thats just terrible. You make it sound as if everyone in the world wants to kill each other and its a fear of death that holds everyone back.

These robots need to be turned on you and all others who think like you to eliminate your ways of thinking.
 
D

dderidex

Platinum Member
Mar 13, 2001
2,732
0
0
Originally posted by: Hardcore
Originally posted by: halik
hahah those things are cool,
but at 4 mph i'd imagine the use is rather limited. An RPG would mess it up imo.
Click to expand...

An RPG would 'mess up' a soldier too. Nobody said these were invincible, and their uses are limited.
Click to expand...

Indeed, a person's walking pace is only 2 mph. Given the load a soldier carries, I'd bet they aren't expected to do much more than that for long patrols. This robot can do 4mph in the same situation. That's not bad.

Granted, a soldier can *sprint* faster than this can move...but how long can that pace be maintained?
 
J

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: Blazin Trav
One grenade or RPG = goodbye $200 gs. Welcome to stupidland.
Click to expand...

well, two points on that. First off, one grenade or RPG = goodbye someone's LIFE normally. And if this thing is indeed smaller and more accurate, chances are much higher that the guy controlling it will be able to pick off the enemy before they can fire. I'm sure in the future they'll get more sophisticated sensors, and the article even touches on some form of threat identification system. Ultimately, they'll be pretty hard to knock out, and very likely to kill YOU before you can hit them. I'm sure a few will be taken out with some lucky shots, but you can say the same thing about the Apache, and that's a lot more than $200k

second,
The Talon had already proven itself to be pretty rugged. One was blown off the roof of a Humvee and into a nearby river by a roadside bomb in Iraq. Soldiers simply opened its shrapnel-pocked control unit and drove the robot out of the river, according to Quinn.
Click to expand...
 
S

SchrodingersDog

Banned
Nov 17, 2004
911
0
0
These things are great as long as you're the conquering heroes. It would sure demoralize an army to loose a few hundred men and you know the enemy just lost a few blenders on tracks. Also, they're nice because NONE of the people we'd be using them on would be able to scavenge the parts and use them against us, as they have been throughout history. They're cheap too, I though they'd cost much more.
 
R

Ronstang

Lifer
Jul 8, 2000
12,493
18
81
Originally posted by: Jassi
What a waste, the only thing holding back people from waging war is casualties on their side. You take that out of the equation and we will have a bigger mess :(
Click to expand...


Are you an idiot? This is a great thing since we, the US and maybe our allies, will be the only ones having this type of technology for a very long time. Killing terrorists with even less casualties then currently is even better. If you take any hope of winning out of the equation for belligerent whack jobs in this world the only result is less war or more dead crazies.
 
J

J0hnny

Platinum Member
Jul 2, 2002
2,366
0
0
Originally posted by: Ronstang
Originally posted by: Jassi
What a waste, the only thing holding back people from waging war is casualties on their side. You take that out of the equation and we will have a bigger mess :(
Click to expand...


Are you an idiot? This is a great thing since we, the US and maybe our allies, will be the only ones having this type of technology for a very long time. Killing terrorists with even less casualties then currently is even better. If you take any hope of winning out of the equation for belligerent whack jobs in this world the only result is less war or more dead crazies.
Click to expand...

Have you ever considered that these so called terrorists may just be "freedom fighters"?

Edit - I take it back. This comment does not belong here.

Technologically speaking... it's pretty damn cool and about time.
 
BeauJangles

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
I think it's a great step for the US military, but I have a few questions. First, 1 - 4 hrs? 1 hr is probably under constant motion, and 4 is probably under complete standstill. That isn't a lot of operating time. Secondly, the uses of this will be extremely limited IMO because they are very vulnerable from the back and sides (or wherever the camera isn't looking). You therefore need to use soldiers to cover its flanks or other robots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom