Rebecca Farden Information Technology 101 Term Paper the US Military Uses Some of the Most Advanced Technologies Known to Man, O

Rebecca Farden

Information Technology 101

Term Paper

The US military uses some of the most advanced technologies known to man, one main segment being robotics. As this growing field of research is being developed, militaries around the world are beginning to use technologies that may change the way wars are fought. The trend we are currently seeing is an increase in unmanned weaponry, and decrease in actual human involvement in combat. Spending on research in this area is growing drastically and it is expected to continue. Thus far, robotics have been viewed as a positive development in their militaristic function, but as this field advances, growing concerns about their use and implications are arising.

Currently, robotics in the military are used in a variety of ways, and new developments are constantly surfacing. For example, the military uses pilotless planes to do surveillance, and unmanned aerial attacks called “drone” strikes (Hodge). These attacks have been frequently used in Iraq in

Pakistan in the past several years. Robotics have already proved to be very useful in other roles as well.

Deputy commanding general of the Army Maneuver Support Center Rebecca Johnson said “robots are useful for chemical detection and destruction; mine clearing, military police applications and intelligence” (Farrell). Robots that are controlled by soldiers allow for human control without risking a human life. BomBots are robots that are have been used in the middle east to detonate IEDs

(improvised explosive devices), keeping soldiers out of this very dangerous situation (Atwater). These uses of robots have been significant advances in the way warfare is carried out, but we are only scratching the surface of the possibilities of robotics in military operations.

Researchers are working to take robotics in the military to the next level though. Researchers at

UC Berkeley are working on a $50 million project developing an exoskeleton robot that soldiers could wear in combat, making them virtually superhuman. Headed by researcher Hamayoon Kazerooni, who hopes this technology could allow soldiers more protection while being able to use more advanced weapons while on foot (Weiss). The concern with this technology is that if the exoskeleton were to malfunction, the weight of the apparatus would be enough to crush the soldier. At the University of

Texas at Dallas, and Virginia Tech, new development of a jellyfish like robot called “Robojelly” will allow for surveillance of underwater situations and could be involved in ocean rescue (MacDiarmid).

This robot would use reusable energy leaving no waste and requiring no batteries to power it. The researchers working on this project are still working on perfecting the complex leg movements of the

Robojelly. This project required collaboration of nanotechnology, biology, and engineering to create this state of the art device.

Of course, this research comes at a price. ABI research estimates that 50-80 countries are developing robotic technologies to integrate into military operations. This makes the developing field of robotics a competitive and lucrative field. Current research puts spending on robots in military programs around $6 billion, and this number is not expected to decrease anytime in the distant future

(ABI). In a study by ABI research, estimates for the market of military robotics was expected to reach

$8 billion by 2016. Yet other estimates of spending on military robotics estimate a more drastic increase.

Journalist Nathan Hodge of the Wall Street Journal predicts spending on aerial vehicles alone will reach

$11.3 million by the end of the decade. Officials in the military and defense agencies of government are also encouraged by robotics research and are hopeful of its advancements. Defense Secretary Robert

Gates wants to increase the spending on development of Predators (unmanned aerial vehicles used by the Air Force and CIA that carry surveillance cameras and have missile firing capabilities) by 62 percent, an indication of the Pentagon's support of unmanned aerial vehicles (Farrell). Some organizations use funding in a different way, for example DARPA (Defense Advanced Research

Projects Agency) has, for a long while, been inspiring students and inventors throughout the nation to create new technologies in competitions with significant prize money. As of April 2012, DARPA has many projects underway and up to $32 million of prize money (Hoover).

Although this field is being strongly fueled by government, many people are concerned with the social implications of the involvement of robots in the military. It was not so long ago that the idea of robots in these roles were only seen in movies and TV shows. Now that these ideas are becoming more of a reality, other people and systems are being impacted. For example, training of soldiers who are required to operate robots is changing to adapt to the new technology. Also, the way the law is configured may need to be adjusted with the changing nature of warfare. Currently, if no troops are on the ground it is not considered waging war. This means military officials do not need Congress's approval to wage war if no humans are involved, which was the case in the US's recent involvement in

Libya (Mulrine). Although many people disagreed with this, lawyers from the Obama administration argued that no law was technically broken.

Another problem with this emerging field of robotics in the military is the risk of error.

Although the robotics currently used are extensively tested and perfected, there is always the possibility of a malfunction. In Pakistan, inaccurate drone strikes have resulted in a number of civilian deaths causing outrage among the public (Hodge). The possible error in precision of these attacks is still putting innocent people in danger. Another issue is the danger this puts soldiers in. Complications with technology could be risky for the soldiers, such as the exoskeleton being developed at UC Berkeley having the potential to crush the soldier who wore it. Creating completely error proof technology is always going to be problem for researchers.

This debatable issue is one that will likely become more prevalent in politics and social spheres robotics become more common. According to retired U.S Army general and QinetiQ (military robotics corporation) industry consultant John Riggs, “it is an irrefutable fact that armed UGV's (unmanned ground vehicles) give soldiers and Marines the protection of stand-off distance. More importantly, the armed UGV's buys them precious time to evaluate and respond to a potentially dangerous situation.”

The dangers that face potential victims of robotic operations that go wrong are certainly going to be an important part in the development of these technologies. Yet the future of robotics in the military appears to be a promising field of research with insurmountable opportunities.

References

"ABI Research: Military Robot Markets to Exceed $8 Billion in 2016." Manufacturing Close - Up

(2011). Trade & Industry. Web. 23 Apr. 2012.

Atwater, Kristin M. "Mobile Robots Neutralize Bombs for U.S. Military." Government Product News

45.5 (2006): 3-. Trade & Industry. Web. 23 Apr. 2012.

Farrell, Lawrence. "Robots Are Major Players In U.S. Military Strategy." National Defense 93.666

(2009). May 2009. Web. 20 Apr. 2012.

Hodge, Nathan. “Robots for land, sea and air battles.” Wall Street Journal (2011). ProQuest. 12 April

2012.

Hoover, Nicholas. "DARPA Challenge Seeks Robots to Drive into Disasters." Informationweek - Online

(2012). Trade & Industry. Web. 23 Apr. 2012.

MacDiarmid, Alan. "Nanotechnology; Jellyfish Robot Powered by Hydrogen and Nanotechnology."

Energy & Ecology (2012): 91.Trade & Industry. Web. 23 Apr. 2012.

Mulrine, Anna. "Unmanned Drone Attacks and Shape-Shifting Robots: Wars Remote-Control Future."

The Christian Science Monitor; Los Angeles Times; National Newspapers Core. Oct 22 2011.

Web. 14 Apr. 2012.

Riggs, John M. "In the U.S. Military, Cultural Resistance to Armed Robots." National Defense 93.667

(2009): 17-. ProQuest Research Library. Web. 23 Apr. 2012.

Weiss, Peter. "Dances with Robots." Science News 159.26 (2001): 407-08. JSTOR. Web. 10 Apr. 2012.