Meet DARPA's Big Dog's brother, the Legged Squad Support System (LS3) - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Tolyzor;34632259]While I agree it would likely take more bullets, I don't think it would take 'large amounts'. All of the robot is important, and is built to be lightweight. If a bullet hits a hydraulic line or actuator or electronics, the robot is disabled, and if a bullet hits any of the chassis or a leg, again, it will probably cause mechanical failure. I think the only thing that would be slightly bullet resistant is the engine block, and even that is super lightweight (2 cylinder), I imagine it is an air cooled 2-stroke so there won't be a massive amount of steel there to stop a bullet. Mules are silent which makes them much, much more useful, at the moment.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure mules make a large amount of noise, what with the constant clopping, and neighing.

Most animals would also be terrified by gunfire and explosions. Plus feeding them, diseases etc. Animals are quite fragile too, when taking modern weapons into account.

They're pretty loud though, about as loud as an old vacuum cleaner, with there distinctive "pack of angry hornets" sound. The soldiers that would have this robot following them won't be sneaking up on anything.

Tolyzor's posted what I would say- the robot's not particularly more resilient than an animal is. Rounds would punch straight through the internals and trash it. The only resilience benefit it has over the animal is that it instead of dying, it can get back working after an overhaul if the troops bother to truck/chopper the corpse back to base. [sup][sub][I](It's worth noting that another trained mule would be magnitudes cheaper than the sophisticated robotics)[/I][/sub][/sup] [QUOTE=Zezibesh;34632343]Most animals would also be terrified by gunfire and explosions. Plus feeding them, diseases etc. Animals are quite fragile too, when taking modern weapons into account.[/QUOTE] War animals throughout history (even horses which are flighty and far more easily spooked than mules and donkeys) have been trained to generally keep their shit together in battle amongst flintlocks and cannon (or present-day riots!). When guns and explosions start going off though, would a noisy animal even matter? Mules aren't loud animals and you could shut them up completely if the squad needed to be silent. The robot is going to be hella noisy unless it's off. So far, the winning aspects of the robot that I can see is the ability for complete remote control from afar, letting it travel without a handler. Realistically though, the robot would never travel alone as it would most definitely be destroyed and looted for everything it has, if not completely stolen. [I]Goal[/I] load per bot does beat mules, but two could do the same job (plus possibly extra) with barely any more management.

Everytime I hear more about this shit it gets the imperial march playing in my head god help our future

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;34622481]I'm sure once it's not just a chassis with some motors slapped on there, and it gets a cover and some armor slapped on it won't be as noisy. If the thing is ever turned into a weapon, the sound of it might demoralize the enemy, like the sound of an M1 Abrahms rolling towards you.[/QUOTE] The M1 Abrams is called the Silent Death or something along those lines for a reason. It's a very quiet tank. Even though it has a jet engine, it makes little noise.

[QUOTE=joost1120;34634364]The M1 Abrams is called the Silent Death or something along those lines for a reason. It's a very quiet tank. Even though it has a jet engine, it makes little noise.[/QUOTE] Most of the newest generation of Tanks or IFV's are like that. You have to be pretty damn close to actually hear it

[QUOTE=Tolyzor;34624060]ftfy Hydraulic actuators require a big compressor. By far the most compact and energy efficient compressors are petrol engine driven, like the one in Bigdog. Bigdog's entire torso is rigid, and filled with the various hydraulic tanks, valve assemblies, compressors, fueltank, etc, needed for the hydraulic power system. I'm not sure Petman could stomach it.[/QUOTE] Who said they had to be human-sized? [img]http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/6366/ei658real20steel208.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Cone;34618669]You know, that's a really terrible design for a robot. It could fall down and if one leg gets shot off it can no longer move. Several legs is the way to go. You can still step over things as with two legs, but you've got more in case you need them. Just get this current design, add another pair of legs, and give it arms. That is the ultimate mammal.[/QUOTE] Yeah but it would move ungodly slow on 7 legs.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;34662416]Yeah but it would move ungodly slow on 7 legs.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't prevent it from targeting with maximum firepower.

[video=youtube;0SLEtVlU15Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SLEtVlU15Q&feature=related[/video]

reminds me of half life.

Late as fuck. My god, this thing is about 2 years old. I remember seeing it on the history channel WAY back. Anyways, this doesn't really look very useful. Why move equipment of fuel efficient, semi quite, trucks that can carry loads of equipment and troops when you can have this loud, obnoxious, scary, slow piece of shit that could be heard from miles away and only carries 100 lbs? GENIUS! If they make it quieter and more efficient, then it would be perfect. Right now though it's just a cool novelty.

[QUOTE=BananaFoam;34687501]Late as fuck. My god, this thing is about 2 years old. I remember seeing it on the history channel WAY back. Anyways, this doesn't really look very useful. Why move equipment of fuel efficient, semi quite, trucks that can carry loads of equipment and troops when you can have this loud, obnoxious, scary, slow piece of shit that could be heard from miles away and only carries 100 lbs? GENIUS! If they make it quieter and more efficient, then it would be perfect. Right now though it's just a cool novelty.[/QUOTE] Yeah, tbh I think we should just give patrols in Iraq a whole bunch of semi trailers and they can drive them around in the desert this is a smart idea [editline]14th February 2012[/editline] Back to base guys! *Honk honk*

[QUOTE=CheeseMan;34688041]Yeah, tbh I think we should just give patrols in Iraq a whole bunch of semi trailers and they can drive them around in the desert this is a smart idea [editline]14th February 2012[/editline] Back to base guys! *Honk honk*[/QUOTE] Even though military vehicles are far more efficient then semi's, that is still a misrepresentation. Even if a vehicle is loud as long as it can make up for it in speed, mobility, and carrying capacity it is fine. This thing only carries a few hundred pounds at most and it's slow as hell and cannot even transport soldiers. The only reason you would use this if for better movement across rough terrain, and even then it's outmatched by cheaper, easier to obtain animals such as mules. I know the point is to show the progress we are making to new robots of the future, but as of now it's pointless.

DARPA is the reason I play GMod.

[QUOTE=Griffster26;34687208][video=youtube;0SLEtVlU15Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SLEtVlU15Q&feature=related[/video][/QUOTE] Was he using a PS1 controller to control that machinegunner?

[QUOTE=Bishop;34863350]Was he using a PS1 controller to control that machinegunner?[/QUOTE] A lot of these things use game controllers because the technology is already there and it's usually a comfortable and easy to use design that people might already be familiar with

[QUOTE=BananaFoam;34688302]Even though military vehicles are far more efficient then semi's, that is still a misrepresentation. Even if a vehicle is loud as long as it can make up for it in speed, mobility, and carrying capacity it is fine. This thing only carries a few hundred pounds at most and it's slow as hell and cannot even transport soldiers. The only reason you would use this if for better movement across rough terrain, and even then it's outmatched by cheaper, easier to obtain animals such as mules. I know the point is to show the progress we are making to new robots of the future, but as of now it's pointless.[/QUOTE] Unless you are actually in the US military, I am not sure exactly what you are talking about. Most of our movement is mounted, on humvees and the like. I like how you say that "This thing only carries a few hundred pounds at most." That is a lot of weight that we don't have to carry. Unless you have actually gone on a 25 mile ruck march with about 60lbs of gear on your back, you don't have much knowledge on how tiring it is. If this thing can keep up (which I am very certain it does) then we have something to either carry the weight for us or extra carrying capacity. More rounds and barrells for the automatic rifleman or more water. Stuff like that. Noise really isn't an issue for dismounted infantry either, as they do not really make an effort to hide at all. You also are not taking into account that mules will require a lot of care and feeding, as well as trained handlers, and you also do not take into account what the mule will do when contact with the enemy is encountered. A machine does not need to be fed food (granted, it does need fuel, but definitely not as much as an animal if it is efficient), does not need to go to the latrine, does not complain, does not disobey commands, and are simple to operate. I am not really seeing how any of your arguments stack up.