Hacker News Reader

Comment by LinuxBender | Hacker News Reader

None of the "on a dog" designs make sense to me. Robot tanks have always been able to maneuver over tougher obstacles and much harder to knock over and are significantly faster. Some tanks with the tall tracks can right-side themselves. Stability is important with aimed weapons. A tank can have a turret with multiple projectile devices and could fire any direction. A dog would fall over firing sideways. So why do we keep using the dog form?

View on HN

I'm no expert, but aren't rocket launchers recoilless?

As for why the dog form factor, I'm betting it'll be because a dog form factor makes for a much cheaper swarm than a tank form factor. Less mass to move about so a smaller power pack, too

Some rocket launchers are "recoilless". In particular, shoulder fired ones tend to be, so as to, you know, not knock people over. (LAW, AT4, etc)

I'd assume the "dog" designs have better movement in many terrains. Trying to drive through a forest, swamp, jungle, and plenty of other terrains is tricky to impossible while something with legs can easily go through it.

I'm not sure US marines need a "good reason" to strap a rocket launcher onto a robot dog, other than "because it's awesome."

An M72 is single use, so if the robot falls over after firing it that isn't the end of the world. It can probably right itself and get back on its feet, then return to base for another rocket.

Still, I share your skepticism of these robot dogs. They seem like a solution looking for a problem.

Smaller, lighter, traverses rough terrain better. How will your mini tank deal with stairs or rubble? Rocket launchers also don't have recoil.

Edit: Why would a robo dog necessarily fall over? They could take a wide stance and essentially become a tripod if they need stability.

Why would a robo dog necessarily fall over?

That's just what they do. Several Youtubers have fired guns off the robot dogs and even firing straight ahead can knock them over. Non autonomous tanks have navigated stairs just fine for the FBI and SWAT teams they do it all the time.

Tis one looks like it can right itself. The legs spin 360.

Note that large guns have more recoil than modern shoulder fired rockets. AT4 recoil is lower than e.g. a dmr rifle

> It's interesting to note that the Marines refer to the design tested last month as a "robotic goat" rather than the far more common robot dog description.

Maybe four legs provides better all-terrain capabilities at lower parts cost than a treaded vehicle?

It doesn't have a tail and carries a load. So "goat" is indeed the far better metaphor. Trust the marines to get it right.

Dogs can jump on and over taller obstacles than can a similarly sized tank.

The special forces ideal is small packages with large firepower. I can not imagine anything that better meets that definition than quadracopter scouts and robot dogs with missile launchers.

Falling over after the shot is irrelevant. Basic marksmanship training teaches recruits to pull the trigger until the shot going off surprises them. We only care about what happens next if we want a quick follow up shot, which is not possible with single shot rocket launchers.

I think perhaps the dog is accepted as a human companion so it avoids the whole robocop scenario where we’re having autonomous robots gunning down humans.

"Robo doggo! Get in the house and get to the second floor and provide armed over watch out of the west facing windows!"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com