Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

abcnews.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 101 posts

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#71

Post by davidhollander »

A response to statements such as:

> it shouldn't be that damn hard to send some RC cars to Iraq to save lives

Actually, efficient resource allocation is usually a NP hard problem! It's very computationally complex, and the US Department of Defense is one the largest bureaucracies in the world. From that perspective, and depending on one's expected value for bureaucratic efficiency in relation to size, one could also argue that the efficiency of the DoD is surprisingly good.

What could possibly help the Department of Defense's resource allocation problems for such infantry equipment, and to open up the possibility for more off-the-shelf solutions, is to push acquisition demand down to the squad level as much as possible. You would more or less be giving squad commanders equipment purchasing credits to allocate independently of one another. This would simulate one the best tools currently available for resource allocation, markets.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#72

Post by samhoice »

RomP wrote: post #43
digikata wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At that point you'll have one. Now try to make it it work through extreme weather - hot, cold, pouring rain, etc. Now make it reliable to shock so you aren't fixing thing every 50 miles or so. Ok, write the reference manuals so that 18yr old mechanics how to install, maintain, replace them. You've got some sharp mechanics there, but you have a few dumb ones too. The manual will involve breaking things down to a painf…

Some of the things you're listing are must-haves (secure channel), but most are not. If increasing reliability and versatility makes the drone last 10 times longer and costs 10 times more -- it's not worth it in the long run: it's goal to trigger the first IED it can find, anyway. Even if it's not, it still would be cheaper and easier to buy 10 drones or make them modular enough so anybody with some X-Box experience…

Having lessened reliability is ok until the 2 that fail are the 2 you had in your truck as you're driving down a hostile road. Or if they won't work in the rain, that's ok until you have to go on patrol in the rain. Or if they won't work in harsh desert conditions... oh, wait.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#73

Post by Estragon »

bugsy wrote: post #62

This is an awesome success story and shows once again that given a chance (ie not explicitly banned or thwarted) can-do inventive american individuals will come up with great solutions that work well and save money and lives. I can't help but move past that and, knowing how corruption, waste and inefficiency work, predict that this device will be banned by higher ups for field use, requiring that devices that cost at…

I'm kind of wondering what would happen to an entrepreneur who started selling these kinds of devices direct to soldiers, through the mail.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#74

Post by Estragon »

jonaldomo wrote: post #40

PBS has a good documentary called remote control war. It is on netflix, it talks about similar current technologies and those under development. There is also a clip about hackerspaces developing similar devices later in the program.

The book Wired for War is also good.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#75

Post by sequoia »

rokhayakebe wrote: post #22
Iv wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, if you don't sell it for at least 1M$, you won't get any contract, it doesn't look serious enough. Terrestrial drones were being done during WWII, Russians were remote-controlling full-sized tanks in the 40s, these techs should be obvious by now. I have been working for a defense project about instrumenting some armored vehicles with video cameras and monitors. The project was more than 10 years old when I…

It seems like the truck used in this example costs around 300 usd. If I were a soldier, I think I would not wait for the government to commission a million dollar truck. I would get 3 of these for now.

That toy truck cost 300 fucking dollars??

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#76

Post by sequoia »

Estragon wrote: post #73
bugsy wrote: post #62

This is an awesome success story and shows once again that given a chance (ie not explicitly banned or thwarted) can-do inventive american individuals will come up with great solutions that work well and save money and lives. I can't help but move past that and, knowing how corruption, waste and inefficiency work, predict that this device will be banned by higher ups for field use, requiring that devices that cost at…

I'm kind of wondering what would happen to an entrepreneur who started selling these kinds of devices direct to soldiers, through the mail.

For some reason I imagine this story would end in court with a multimillion dollar lawsuit. Does anyone have the knowledge to spek to Estra's question, or know of an example of this? If it's legal I'm sure people are already doing it.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#77

Post by stcredzero »

digikata wrote: post #51
RomP wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the things you're listing are must-haves (secure channel), but most are not. If increasing reliability and versatility makes the drone last 10 times longer and costs 10 times more -- it's not worth it in the long run: it's goal to trigger the first IED it can find, anyway. Even if it's not, it still would be cheaper and easier to buy 10 drones or make them modular enough so anybody with some X-Box experience…

I'm no military historian, but there are terrible failure stories for products pushed out before they're ready to the frontlines too. Beauacracy is a waste, but some of those steps seen as wasteful in the DoD procurement process are "scar tissue" from where things went wrong either in the battlefield or, as often, protection against incapable, or worse, fraudulent contractors. You're right, my post wasn't a list of r…

some of those steps seen as wasteful in the DoD procurement process are "scar tissue" from where things went wrong either in the battlefield

This is precisely part of the mechanism that causes every military to be well prepared for the previous war but unprepared for the current one.

I propose greater emphasis actual feedback mechanisms based on experience in the field. These can be made to work on timescales of months or weeks. When bureaucracy comes into things, iteration timescales can stretch to years and change can become generational.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#78

Post by Perceval »

shabble wrote: post #49
rokhayakebe wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well who do you think writes software that controls missiles?

I can't remember the exact quote, or even the source, but it was along the lines of "For engineers, the biggest [moral] issue with weapons development is that it is fun ". You can build some really neat things when you have a military R&D budget behind you. The downside is of course that it actively or passively hurt people. And then there's the whole calculus-of-death/unintended consequence thing, where in theory, a…

> "For engineers, the biggest [moral] issue with weapons development is that it is fun".

This reminded me of a very similar quote from Edward Luttwak about the disconnect between students of war and the people who fight wars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vz1BpRf3Lc&feature=playe...

The entire interview is fascinating and worth the time. It's a bit dated (from 2007), but still has a number of really interesting tidbits throughout.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#79

Post by stcredzero »

blhack wrote: post #70
MiguelHudnandez wrote: post #66

So, I am excited about this, but there is a major problem with thinking that this could be scaled up without increasing the cost. What happens when we have hundreds of these things out there, and insurgents wise up to them? I can imagine the conversation: "Hey, check it out. Now we can get an X11 receiver and we can watch the video feed from all the nearby US troops' scout drones. Now we just wait for a drone to come…

So...what. The enemy can see where they placed their own bombs? This thing is going to be 100 meters or so (at most) away from a humvee with people in it. That was the same argument, by the way, for why it didn't matter that the drone feeds were non-encrypted. The enemy already knows where they are, they already know that the drone is there, the video feed gets them nothing.

they already know that the drone is there, the video feed gets them nothing

The video feed lets them know when and where we are looking.

Re: Hacker puts a video cam on an RC truck and saves the lives of 6 soldiers

#80

Post by stcredzero »

dhughes wrote: post #30

I'm surprised the reveres isn't true that small RC planes or land vehicles are not being used as unmanned bomb delivery devices by the Taliban. If this were to happen I'd guess Libyan rebels would do it since I see a lot of fabrication of weapons by them.

I'm surprised the reveres isn't true that small RC planes or land vehicles...

I just had an image of Paul Revere warning the Massachusetts countryside the British are Coming with an RC 4x4 with a speaker stuck on it.

Post reply on HN