Navy Eyes Unmanned Vehicles for Dangerous Missions
Textron Land and Marine System has successfully demonstrated its Custom Unmanned Surface Vessel, which it aims to sell to the US Navy to perform risky missions like minesweeping and approaching enemy sea vessels. (Source: Textron)
Seems like a natural move to beef up technology to support unmanned sea vehicles for risky missions just like the Air Force uses UAVs. I'm curious why there hasn't been much real work in this area up until now. Are there more limitations?
Beth, that is a good question. Considering mine sweeping, approach to hostile ships, etc. this seems like a natural for this type of technology. It also seems like it would be easier, since you are constrained in one dimension. There may be other issues, or it may just be that the need has not been percieved.
I wonder how many other areas this concept could be used in, Beth. So far there is the Air Force and UAVs, the Navy and water-based UOVs (unmanned ocean vehicles), nuclear remote robots, and mine-detecting/mine destroying robots. There must be unlimited opportunities for the next Steve Jobs who will find the next application. I hope I'm him...
Not only the technology of being un-manned-(remarkable enough); but another technology (not described in much detail): An anti-sinking feature that enables the boat to automatically shut off, right itself, and resume its course if it capsizes. That is amazing!How about commercializing that feature into mainstream yachting-?Bet the captain of the Costa Concordia (the sunken Italian cruise ship) would have liked that feature?!
The Coast Guard has had some self-righting boats for several years. The 47 foot motor life boats have been in service since 1997. This boat self-rights in 15 seconds with all equipment fully functional. The new 45 foot medium response boat that began entering service in 2008 is self-righting but is not designed for conditions as severe as the motor life boat.
The flotation systems are passive. The weight and flotation are distributed to have the boat turn uptight. (Many weighted keel sailboats will do this, too.) As for the other systems on the boat, I must defer to others.
That is is nice test in calm water. It's much more impressive if you have a crew on board in rough seas.
If you check the other videos, you will see some of the boat handling training in rough water with 4 or 5 crew members onboard. I recall a show on Discovery Channel or History Channel that showed a boat roll over and right itself in the rough conditions while doing training. The crew was 'strapped in' for their safety and survival.
I'm surprised that they appear to be aiming at full-sized versions of existing ships (39' in this case). The Air Force, on the other hand seems to be concentrating their efforts on drones that are substantially smaller than the manned version. Is there a reason for this?
The advantage I see here is that the Navy can complement their other efforts with these type of devices. For example, the current push is to get away from the massive battleship size and focus on the newer littoral combat ships, which allow action much closer to land and up smaller rivers. It seems that, properly scaled, these could enhance those capabilities in the same way the drones have done for the Air Force.
I believe in the Navy's mind the functionality and usefulness of the platform is going to depend heavily on what existing weapons packages it can deliver -- almost all of which are less-feasibly deployed on any platform which is significantly smaller. Any approach which reduces the procurement cycle time to achieve weapons on the water (WITHOUT locking us into an early-obsolescence cycle) has a positive design criteria satisfaction gradient -- and iterating toward smaller special purpose platforms is STILL feasible.
I'm still anticipating the RP-jetski with various alternative load packages of torpedo and drone launchers, and probably a range of warhead delivery options.
When you think of the DARPA Robotics Challenge, you may imagine complex humanoid contraptions made of metal and wires that move like a Terminator Series T-90. But what actually happened at the much-vaunted event was something just a bit different.
Traditional dev kits are based on a manufacturer’s microcontroller, radio module, or sensor device. The idea is to aid the design engineer in developing his or her own IoT prototype as quickly as possible. A not-so-traditional IoT development kit released by Bosch aims to simplify IoT prototyping even further.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.