The US plans to deploy 18 armed robots to Iraq this spring,
making them the first generation of robots to go to combat.
Although the robots have a memorable name: SWORDS (for Special
Weapons Observation Reconnaissance Detection Systems), they
aren't quite the cold-blooded androids of Star Wars or I,
Robot, yet.
Developed at a cost of $2m US, SWORDS are essentially modified
bomb disposal robots of the same type deployed in Northern
Ireland, Bosnia and Iraq, where they have been successfully
used to defuse roadside bombs or to detonate grenades. Its
developers say SWORDS not only allows soldiers to fire at
enemies without exposing themselves to return
fire, but also can make them more accurate.
Mounted on tracks, these 'androids' are equipped with night
vision glasses and zoom lenses and have a standard army-issue
automatic weapon that is capable of firing between 300 and
350 rounds a minute. How does it work? The firing is done
by a human soldier looking through a video camera.
"It's going to change the fundamental equation of war," says
John Pike, a respected security policy analyst. "First,
you had human beings without machines. Then you had human
beings with machines. And finally you have machines without
human beings."
Technically, we're not quite there yet, as we still need
a human hand to run a SWORD. Yet, while robots firing weapons
on their own may be a decade or more away, even today's remote-controlled
versions are changing the rules, pointing to the emerging
importance of virtual gaming skills for a soldier's training.
Are we there yet?
SWORDS, the first in a generation of robots to go to war,
are years ahead of the planned US Future Combat System
(FCS).
The FCS is a vision of a networked “system of systems” that
will include: robotic reconnaissance vehicles and sensors;
mobile robots; mobile command, control and communications
platforms; networked fires from futuristic ground and air
platforms; and advanced three-dimensional targeting systems
operating on land and in the air.
Take out the jargon: this means that the future of warfare
lies in surveillance and execution by machines, by sleight
of a human hand, until machines are intelligent enough to
make their own decisions. In the far future it is hoped that
the miniaturized robots will walk like humans, or hover like
some birds. Others may look like insects.
Gordon Johnson, of the US joint forces research centre, told
the New York Times: "The American military will have
these kinds of robots. It's not a question of 'if', it's
a question of 'when'."
One researcher, Jeff Grossman, said the intelligence of the
machines was increasing. "Now, maybe, we're a mammal.
We're trying to get to the level of a primate."
When researchers succeed, a number of troubling moral dilemmas
will have to be addressed.
As Bill Joy, who helped to found Sun Microsystems, states: “21st
century machines could become so powerful that they can spawn
whole new classes of accidents and abuses.”
From a military perspective, Swords have certain advantages
over soldiers: they are cheap, require no food, eliminate
the need for humans to be used for high-risk operations and
they can be packed away between campaigns.
But there are downsides: each robot has a top speed of 4mph
and can only operate for one to four hours before it needs
to refuel. These quite significant downsides are demonstrative
in how a large vision like Future Combat Systems, which was
initially slated for 2010, will inevitably run into technological
roadblocks.
Swords was a joint development process between the Army
and Foster-Miller, a robotics firm bought in November, 2004,
by QinetiQ Group PLC, which is a partnership between the
British Ministry of Defence and the Washington holding company
The Carlyle Group.
Do you have a comment or feedback on
this article? Email
us and let us know what you think.
|
