Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Military Robotics The Almighty Buck

$2 Million on the Table for DARPA Urban Challenge 88

coondoggie writes "The contestants: Thirty-five driverless vehicles. The goal: to navigate an intricate faux-urban environment quickly. The prize: $2 million for the fastest qualifying vehicle. 'The National Qualification Event will take place this weekend ... DARPA says its third-annual Urban Challenge program has the lofty goal of developing technology that will keep soldiers off the battlefield and out of harm's way. The Urban Challenge features autonomous ground vehicles maneuvering in a mock city environment, executing simulated military supply missions while merging into moving traffic, navigating traffic circles, negotiating busy intersections, and avoiding obstacles.'" I'll be cheering, as long as the creepy robot bear isn't participating.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

$2 Million on the Table for DARPA Urban Challenge

Comments Filter:
  • What about... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lifyre ( 960576 ) on Friday October 26, 2007 @05:08PM (#21134275)
    Caveat I haven't had a chance to read the entire challenge to see if it answers this question. I'm in Iraq I have better things to do, sort of...

    Does the vehicle have to be one piece? Specifically can it launch a UAV to provide a top down view of the street? This could be then used to avoid crowds (or head towards them), get around dead ends, and generally navigate the cities. The imagery we have is often horribly out of date and roads have moved, stopped existing, or new ones have popped up.

    I think having an eye in the sky dedicated to the vehicle could be a tremendous asset.
  • by markowen58 ( 917436 ) on Friday October 26, 2007 @05:34PM (#21134529)
    aside from the fact any stop signs and road markings may now be a crater. Do many soldiers get stuck in traffic in the middle of a war zone?

    Surely a better idea would be to train these vehicles to drive evasively once ambushed to stop supplies from not reaching the front line?

    I for one never saw a traffic report from baghdad during the war...
  • by Speefnarkle1982 ( 901875 ) on Friday October 26, 2007 @05:38PM (#21134571)
    I don't think this sort of technology will replace soldiers right out. However, it can be
    a great help in certain situations where you don't want to risk soldiers lives. EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) currently use robots to take out mines, IED's etc. These are different in the sense that they are remote controlled by well trained individuals.
    I see being able to negotiate urban obstacles in overly hostile environments to be a huge advantage especially if they are entirely autonomous. You can then send in robotic vehicles into riskier situations without the concern for loss of human life.

    However, the ability to plan and conduct such operations and being able to assess a real combat situation
    is well beyond current technology. Then you have the whole realm of tactics and strategy, better strategy can allow for huge gains in the battle field, but would we want to leave that to robots? Over-reliance on technology to do humans jobs is a bad thing, and this is definitely a good example of that. I really don't see us ever eliminating the need for "boots on the ground", only maybe enhancing their abilities on the battlefield.
  • by hackstraw ( 262471 ) on Friday October 26, 2007 @08:55PM (#21136023)
    Pshaw, I want my car to drive me home when I'm too drunk to drive myself!

    Think of all of the social changes that self driving cars would bring.

    No more police checkpoints. Kids with as much freedom as drunks, old people, and "normal" adults. No speeding tickets. Car chases in the movies will have to be set in the past, and eventually will look like westerns do today. Registration, insurance, and all that is the responsibility of the _driver_ today. Terrorists will no longer have to hijack trucks and stuff.

    Come to think of it, I would guess by then, going to work would require taking off your shoes, going though a metal detector, and all that prior to take off.

  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Saturday October 27, 2007 @02:18AM (#21137885) Homepage

    One of the major side effects of the DARPA Grand Challenge series is that the supporting hardware has become much better. You can now buy most of the major components off the shelf. GPS/INS/compass/odometer navigation units are a few thousand dollars, rugged, and work well. When the first Grand Challenge was announced, the off-the-shelf solution cost about $170K and required 4U of rackmount space, with air conditioning. CMU actually used that in the first round.

    LIDAR units have improved enormously in the last two years. Last time around, everybody just had single-beam line scanner LIDARs, usually from SICK, except for Team DAD, who built a multibeam scanner that worked but wasn't rugged enough. This time, the major players have multibeam LIDAR units from Velodyne or Ibeo. Velodyne's unit has 64 lasers on a spinning drum. Now you can image your entire environment in 3D at 5Hz.

    Controlling the vehicle is easier, too. There are now cars available with electrical power steering and brakes, and one can tap into those systems to drive. And there are at least three vendors selling gear for remote/autonomous driving of existing cars.

    So now it's almost entirely a software problem. You don't burn so much time and effort building sensor and actuator systems.

"Life begins when you can spend your spare time programming instead of watching television." -- Cal Keegan

Working...