FABULOUS - If looks could kill, this is the look. Never mind the London look, this female is dressed to kill and armed with a sting that beats a divorce hands down. Dino the DinoBot is preparing to dress for the ball - paintball. 

In use as border patrols for peacekeeping and deterrence, the concept of autonomous armored robotic infantry, inspired by fictional works like “Jimmy Watson’s Magic Dinobot,” presents a fascinating theoretical framework for enhancing peacekeeping and border control operations.

We will delve into the theoretical implications of such technology, considering its potential benefits, drawbacks, and ethical considerations.

Autonomous armored robotic infantry offer the potential for significant benefits, including reduced casualties and increased efficiency. 

POTENTIAL BENEFITS

1. Reduced Casualties: By replacing human soldiers with autonomous robots, the risk of casualties would be significantly reduced. These machines could operate in hazardous environments, such as minefields or areas of active combat, without endangering human lives.

2. Enhanced Efficiency: Autonomous robots could operate 24/7, without requiring rest or breaks. They could also be equipped with advanced sensors and decision-making algorithms, allowing them to respond quickly and effectively to threats.

3. Cost-Effective: As mentioned, autonomous armored robots could be designed to be disposable, making them a potentially cost-effective solution for warfare. The ability to replace damaged or destroyed units without significant financial loss could incentivise their use.

4. Deterrence: The deployment of autonomous armored robots could serve as a deterrent to potential aggressors. The knowledge that a nation possesses such advanced weaponry could make it less likely to be targeted in a conflict. Since, occupation would be almost impossible, provided sufficient units were deployed. Perhaps, coupled with better nuclear shelters, to ensure survival of sufficient number of civilians and military personnel, to make preemptive thermonuclear first-strikes of limited value to an aggressor.

5. Self Destruct: By incorporating a self-destruct function, the robots may be exploded if captured or attempts are made by unauthorized personnel to dismantle, etc.

The significant cost differential between tanks and robot infantry soldiers could have a profound impact on the future of military operations. While robots offer several advantages, including affordability, reduced risk, and tactical flexibility, their effectiveness will depend on a variety of factors. As technology continues to advance, it will be essential to carefully evaluate the costs and benefits of both tanks and robots to determine the optimal mix for future military forces.

POTENTIAL DRAWBACKS

1. Ethical Implications: The use of autonomous weapons raises significant ethical concerns. Questions about accountability, autonomy, and the potential for unintended consequences must be carefully addressed.

2. Technical Limitations: While advancements in robotics and artificial intelligence have been impressive, there are still technical challenges to overcome. Ensuring that autonomous robots can reliably distinguish between combatants and civilians, and that they can operate effectively in complex environments, remains a significant hurdle.

3. Security Risks: The potential for autonomous robots to fall into the wrong hands is a serious concern. If such systems were to be acquired by non-state actors or hostile governments, they could pose a significant threat to global security.

Thus, to be compliant with the Geneva Convention, human operators and controllers would need to be in the loop at all times. The main advantage being that a whole platoon unit might be replaced by a single human commander. With no risk to the person overseeing border security, or actual engagement of hostile forces.

ROCKET PROPELLED GRENADES (RPGs)

The RPG-7 ('Handheld Anti-Tank Grenade-launcher') is a portable, reusable, unguided, shoulder-launched, anti-tank, rocket launcher. The RPG-7 and its predecessor, the RPG-2, were designed by the Soviet Union, and are now manufactured by the Russian company Bazalt.

The ruggedness, simplicity, low cost, and effectiveness of the RPG-7 has made it the most widely used anti-armor weapon in the world. Currently around 40 countries use the weapon; it is manufactured in several variants by nine countries. It is popular with irregular and guerrilla forces.

The grenade is stabilized by two sets of fins that deploy in-flight: one large set on the stabilizer pipe to maintain direction and a smaller rear set to induce rotation. The grenade can fly up to 1,100 m (3,600 ft); the fuze sets the maximum range, usually 920 m (3,020 ft).

The RPG-7 can fire a variety of warheads for anti-armor (HEAT, PG-Protivotankovaya Granata) or anti-personnel (HE, OG-Oskolochnaya Granata) purposes, usually fitting with an impact (PIBD) and a 4.5 second fuze. Armor penetration is warhead dependent and ranges from 300–600 mm (12–24 in) of RHA; one warhead, the PG-7VR, is a 'tandem charge' device, used to defeat reactive armor with a single shot.

Ammunition for the RPG-7V2 consists of four main types:

PG-7VL [c.1977] – improved 93 mm (3.7 in) HEAT warhead effective against most vehicles and fortified targets.

PG-7VR [c.1988] – tandem charge warhead designed to penetrate up to 750 mm (30 in) rolled homogeneous armour equivalence of explosive reactive armor and the conventional armor underneath. It has a range of 200 m (660 ft).

JAVELIN MISSILES

The FGM-148 Javelin, or Advanced Anti-Tank Weapon System-Medium (AAWS-M), is an American-made man-portable anti-tank system in service since 1996 and continuously upgraded. It replaced the M47 Dragon anti-tank missile in US service. Its fire-and-forget design features automatic infrared guidance, allowing the user to seek cover immediately after launch, in contrast to wire-guided systems like the system used by the Dragon, which require a user to guide the weapon throughout the engagement. The Javelin's high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) warhead can defeat modern tanks by top-down attack, hitting them from above, where their armor is thinnest, and is useful against fortifications in a direct attack flight. The Javelin uses a tandem charge warhead to circumvent an enemy tank's explosive reactive armor (ERA), which would normally render HEAT warheads ineffective.

As of 2019, according to claims by the manufacturer, the Javelin had been used in around five thousand successful engagements. By August 2021, fifty thousand missiles had been delivered to customers.

The weapon made its combat debut in Iraq in 2003 and rose to prominence in the Russo-Ukrainian War, where it saw extensive usage by Ukrainian forces during the early stages of the 2022 Russian invasion.

HEXAPOD INFANTRY SOLDIER WITH JAVELIN & RPG UPGRADES

The concept of equipping autonomous armored robotic infantry with anti-tank weaponry, such as Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs) or Javelin missiles, presents an intriguing possibility for enhancing their capabilities and effectiveness in border control and peacekeeping operations. This theoretical exploration delves into the potential benefits and challenges associated with such an upgrade.

1. Enhanced Anti-Tank Capabilities: By arming autonomous robots with anti-tank weaponry, they would become a formidable threat to armored vehicles, such as main battle tanks. This could deter potential aggressors from deploying such costly and vulnerable equipment.

2. Asymmetric Warfare Advantage: Autonomous robots equipped with anti-tank weaponry could provide a significant advantage in asymmetric warfare scenarios, where a weaker force seeks to neutralize a more powerful opponent. The ability to target enemy armor from a distance and at a relatively low cost could tilt the balance of power in favor of the weaker side.

3. Increased Flexibility: The ability to switch between different weapon systems, such as machine guns, anti-personnel weapons, and anti-tank missiles, would make autonomous robots more versatile and adaptable to various combat scenarios.

Negatives revolve around current technical limitations and countermeasures. Ensuring that autonomous robots can accurately identify and target enemy armored vehicles, while avoiding civilian casualties, remains a significant technical challenge. The development of advanced sensors and decision-making algorithms will be essential to address this issue.

As autonomous robots become more capable, it is likely that adversaries will develop countermeasures to neutralize them. This could include electronic warfare techniques, physical interference, or even the deployment of their own autonomous robots. Leading to a stalemate. Which is of course the desired outcome.

THE COST FACTOR: ROBOTS VS TANKS

The cost differential between modern battle tanks and robotic infantry equipped with Javelin missiles is significant. As noted, tanks can cost between £4 and £9 million, while robots might be around £300,000, fully armed. This disparity could dramatically alter the military landscape, particularly in terms of procurement, deployment, and tactics.

POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS

Increased Affordability: The lower cost of robotic infantry could allow militaries to acquire larger numbers of these units, potentially saturating the battlefield. This could make it more difficult for enemy forces to counter.

Reduced Risk: Robots can operate in dangerous environments without putting human lives at risk. This could make them more attractive for missions in hostile or uncertain territories.

Tactical Flexibility: Robots can be deployed more quickly and easily than tanks, offering greater tactical flexibility. They can also be used in conjunction with tanks to create a more versatile and adaptable force.

Technological Advancements: As robotics and artificial intelligence continue to advance, the cost-effectiveness of robots could improve further. This could make them even more attractive as a military option.

POTENTIAL CHALLENGES FOR TANKS

Vulnerability: Tanks could become more vulnerable to attacks from swarms of cheaper, more agile robots.

Obsolescence: If robots prove to be more effective and cost-effective than tanks, they could eventually render tanks obsolete.

Maintenance Costs: Tanks require significant maintenance and upkeep. This could make them more expensive to operate over time.

The cost differential between tanks and robotic infantry is a significant factor that could shape the future of military operations. While tanks offer powerful firepower and protection, robots could provide a more affordable, flexible, and less risky alternative. As technology continues to evolve, it is likely that the balance between these two types of vehicles will shift.

OUCH - A black bulldog ant stings a human. You can see the venom making the skin red. It is no joke being stung by one of these insects, it can paralyze a man - apart from the excruciating pain.

In this article we look at (solid state) electronics as a means to simulate the sting of an ant, without going over to chemicals, needles and pumps - although that may also be an interesting topic at some point. Chemicals play an important part in all biological organisms, even humans, where the orgasm is natures reward for attempting to procreate, and a nice taste (a chemical reaction) is the reward for feeding the body.

We also take a glimpse at the booming sport of paintball marking. Using slightly modified gaming markers, we can target and mark an opponent. Apart from a high level of fun, this development might be useful in real life control situations, but not here and not today. This is just for sporting fun.

WARNING - Before building your own laser, please read up on how dangerous they can be. You can be blinded if you do not work safely. Never look into a laser beam. Do not shine a laser at any moving vehicle. Do not use a laser to play with pets. This information is posted here as an educational resource. If under 18, make sure your parents know what you are attempting.

DIY PCBs - An example of a laser driver circuit diagram without a potentiometer and a 4 ohm resistor. Lasers are now used as weapons on US Navy warships as part of their strategic development.

LASERS - The power of commercially available lasers is coming down in line with the popularity of cutting applications such as engraving. It won't be long before this 5.5 watt unit is available in 500 watts and then 5,000 watts power outputs. Experiments are planned using these and other units as to their potential for anti-piracy use on boats that are unmanned. It is better to have a weapon and not need it, than need a weapon and not have it.

TASERS - The X26 the model commonly used by police departments delivers a peak voltage of 1200 V to the body. They use barbs to establish a circuit, fired from the gun by compressed gas. The gun generates a series of 100-microsecond pulses at a rate of 19 per second. Each pulse carries 100 microcoulombs of charge, so the average current is 1.9 milliamperes, too force the muscles to contract without risking electrocution - so they say! Stun guns generate a high-voltage, low-amperage electrical charge. You may remember an experiment like this in school where you joined hands to complete a circuit.

A 20,000 - 150,000 volt charge combines with the electrical signals from a human brain to confuse it. At its most basic, this is all there is to incapacitating a person with a stun gun - you apply electricity to a person's muscles and nerves, and since there are muscles and nerves all over the body, it usually has some effect.

The Taser takes advantage of two natural protections against electrocution that arise from the difference between skeletal and cardiac muscle. The skeletal muscles are on the outer shell of the body; the heart is nestled farther inside. In your upper body, the skeletal muscles are arranged in bands surrounding your rib cage. Because of skeletal muscle fibers' natural inclination to conduct low-frequency electricity along their length, a larger current injected into such a muscle tends to follow the grain around the chest rather than the smaller current that penetrates toward the heart - that would of course be deadly. On the other hand, studies have shown that stun guns were used during about 30 percent of in-custody deaths in the United States.

The Taser is not considered to be a firearm in 44 US states where they can be carried lawfully. The Czech Republic encourages vulnerable persons to carry such devices for self protection. You can make your own stun device from a gas lighter or a camera flash - but these experiments are much more dangerous than the commercial product that you cannot purchase in many countries.

WASP STINGER - This is the sting of a wasp, with a venom droplet visible. The stingers of some wasps, such as those of the Polistes versicolor, contain relatively large amounts of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) in its venoms. The 5-HT in these venoms has been found to play at least two roles: one as a pain-producing agent and the other in the distribution and penetration of the paralyzing components to vulnerable sites in the offender. This helps in the rapid immobilization of the animal or of the certain body parts of the animal receiving the venom.

PAINTBALL - is a sport in which players compete, in teams or individually, to eliminate opponents by tagging them with capsules containing water-soluble dye and featuring a gelatin outer shell (referred to as paintballs) propelled from a device called a paintball marker (commonly referred to as a paintball gun). Paintballs are composed of a non-toxic, biodegradable, water-soluble polymer. The game is regularly played at a sporting level with organized competition involving major tournaments, professional teams, and players.

WARNING - Before experimenting with your own stun equipment, check out the law applicable to your area - it varies widely. There are many personal stun weapons available off the shelf on Amazon and Ebay. They cost around $20 dollars on average. We include this subject for general interest only. No way should you even consider making any kind of robot with stun features included - except perhaps as an insect repellent : )

CHEMICAL WARFARE - You don't have to sting to ward off an enemy, here an ant is waving a droplet of venom in the air as a threat of things to come. Ants also smear venom onto an enemy.

ANT STINGS

Most insects have some kind of self defence mechanism that is unpleasant to either their pursuers or their quarry. Ants are no exception, the bullet and jumper ants have one of the most potent stings imaginable. The bullet ant is said to be the most painful to humans. Many plants also have stings or barbs as a self defence mechanism. The evolution of the sting or bite as a hunting tool is interesting. Snakes bite with hollow fangs and inject venom. Ants use stings in combat to kill an adversary and when hunting for food, to paralyze whatever is on the menu.

If we map the stinger to an ant phylogeny (simplified from Brady et al 2006 using the program Mesquite 2.5) we see that all the early lineages have one. Of course, this is a sensible observation given that ants evolved from wasps. The Ur-Ant possessed a wasp like sting and the device is carried through to many extant species.

We can also see that many lineages have lost the sting. The loss is repeated in several recent groups, suggesting a strong trend towards sting-less ants. It is as if stingers are more burden than benefit.

While we do not know for certain why the stinger has become a liability among so many modern ants, the ecology of species with differing sting morphologies suggests that the loss of the sting is related to some significant changes in lifestyle over the course of ant evolution. As no one has yet done the work to properly test hypotheses of sting evolution, you may speculate about what you think is driving the emerging pattern. It is a fact though, that a feature that is not used, will recede and an evolutionary advantage will come to the fore. It is pointless for a creature to expend energy during its lifetime on something that is does not need. In humans, the coccyx is the vestigial tail that we no longer need to balance us as former tree dwellers.

Stephen James "Steve" Backshall (born 21 April 1973) is a BAFTA-winning English naturalist, writer and television presenter, best known for BBC TV's Deadly 60. His other BBC work includes being part of the expedition teams in Lost Land of the Tiger, Lost Land of the Volcano and Lost Land of the Jaguar, and he has worked for the National Geographic Channel and the Discovery Channel. He has published three novels for children and several non-fiction works.

The early-diverging ant lineages are nearly all predators. Most forage alone without the help of nest-mates, and their prey is not killed but paralyzed. The prey remains alive until consumed, so does not decompose a neat touch where refrigeration is human only territory. The catching and maintaining live prey is not unlike the strategy of predatory wasps that capture spiders or caterpillars for their young. Only ants are social and carry their quarry back to communal nests.

In general, then, what seems to favor a sting is either the need for foraging ants to paralyze prey - the ancestral state for the ants - or the need to defend against vertebrate enemies. Ants that do not require live prey, or ants whose lives involve a lot of fighting against other ants, have often arrived at more effective tools.

DRACULA - One example of a stinging species is the western dracula ant, Amblyopone oregonensis. This insect feeds on geophilomorph centipedes in the old growth forests of western North America. Their stinger is well-developed and is used primarily to inject a blend of paralyzing enzymes into the centipedes. The hapless myriapod is then fed to the voracious ant larvae.

EVOLUTION

Many modern ants have since moved away from this ancestral habit of solitary hunting. The more diverse lineages retrieve prey in groups and get much of their sustenance from hemipteran honeydew or scavenged detritus. It is in these lineages that the sting often is lost or reduced. Where present, the function usually switches from prey capture to defense, as in the wood ant that squirts formic acid to protect their nests.

The infamous Solenopsis fire ants display an intermediate condition. They retain a functional stinger primarily as a weapon against vertebrates.

Fire ants may also use their sting to subdue prey, much of what they eat is either plant-based (via hemipteran honeydew) or scavenged. Consequently they are not as dependent on the organ as more ancient ants like Amblyopone and Harpegnathos.

A stinger is not always so useful against ant competitors. In combat with other ants, fire ants may sting. But just as often they resort to waving volatiles about, or smearing venom, instead of trying to pierce the chitinous armor of their enemies.

A further step in stinger reduction is displayed in the Crematogaster acrobat ant. She does have a stinger, but unlike the fire ant’s it is thin, weak, and floppy. Instead of impaling her enemies, she uses her sting as a brush for smearing a toxic slurry.

Two of the largest subfamilies, the dolichoderinae and the formicinae, have dispensed with the sting altogether. Species in these groups tend to have large colonies, use group prey retrieval and are heavily subsidized by honeydew and nectar. Some predatory functions of the sting are replaced by concerted group action, as seen in the African weaver ants.

BULLET ANT - The pain caused by this insect's sting is purported to be greater than that of any other hymenopteran and is ranked as the most painful according to the Schmidt sting pain index, given a "4+" rating, above the tarantula hawk wasp and, according to some victims, equal to being shot, hence the name of the insect. It is described as causing: waves of burning, throbbing, all-consuming pain that continues unabated for up to 24 hours.

CANNIBALS - In one Forelius versus fire ant battle, the opposing sides maintained a standstill for the entire morning they were observed. The Forelius never penetrated deep enough into the fire ant nest to plunder any significant amounts of brood, but the fire ants also failed to repel their attackers. Although the long term evolutionary trend might seem to favor the airborne chemical warfare of Forelius, for 4 hours both weapons systems remained locked in an equilibrium. What an equivalent battle might look like in another 50 million years is anyone’s guess.

ANT VENOM

Ant venom is any of, or a mixture of, irritants and toxins inflicted by ants. Most ants spray or inject a venom. In the case of the subfamily Formicinae the main constituent of the spray is formic acid.

Some notable examples of stinging ants include Solenopsis (fire ants), Pachycondyla (ponerine ants), Myrmecia (bulldog ants), and Paraponera (bullet ants). In the case of fire ants, the venom consists of alkaloid and protein components. The stings cause a cutaneous condition caused by stinging (as distinct from biting) venomous ants. Particularly painful are stings from fire and bullet ants.

First aid for fire ant bites includes external treatments and oral medicines:

* External treatments: a topical steroid cream (hydrocortisone), or one containing aloe vera
* Oral medicines: antihistamines
* Applying zinc chloride or calamine lotion .

Severe allergic reactions can be caused by ant stings in particular and venomous stings in general, including severe chest pain, nausea, severe sweating, loss of breath, serious swelling, fever, dizziness, and slurred speech; they can be fatal if not treated.

SCORPION - Among arthropods, a sting is a sharp organ, often connected with a venom gland, adapted to inflict a wound by piercing, as with the caudal sting of a scorpion, seen above. 

WASPS - Yellow jacket or yellowjacket is the common name in North America for predatory wasps of the genera Vespula and Dolichovespula. Members of these genera are known simply as "wasps" in other English-speaking countries. Most of these are black and yellow like the Eastern yellowjacket Vespula maculifrons and the Saxon wasp Dolichovespula saxonica.

All females are capable of stinging. Despite the reservations of humans, yellow jackets are in fact important predators of pest insects. Wasps are bold and aggressive, and can sting repeatedly and painfully if provoked. It will mark aggressors, and will pursue them if agitated. A man in Sussex can attest to that having accidentally discovered a nest in a hedgerow, the wasps chased the poor chap some 50 yards waiting until he was inside his house, when they let fly a concentrated attack, getting into his jumper for strikes to his back and up his trousers for stings to the leg. He rushed to find a tennis racquet to fight off the swarm. All of the angry wasps had to be killed.

Curious, the chap investigated the nest the next day, standing farther away - this time armed with a badminton racquet. The wasps still spotted the intruder and gave chase, whereupon he darted inside smartly - closing the kitchen doors. Still a number of wasps made it inside. There followed a rapid swatting session when all the wasps were again killed - and yes, he was stung again, but only once this time, needing to remove his clothing to get the last of the attackers - and jump on the clothing - to be sure. Do not take any chances. On a third day, the chap went outside again with his racquet. While not 30 feet from the nest, the wasps gave chase, but this time he got inside and closed the kitchen doors before the wasps could catch up. They then buzzed the windows with both parties observing each other. The chap did not want to harm the wasps and gave that area of the garden a wide berth for a while - because a wasp is no match for a badminton player. During the first and second swarms the chap took out around 50 wasps - in the process devastating the nest. He regularly finds queen wasps in crevices in the timber building.

Wasps have lance-like stingers with small barbs and typically sting repeatedly. Only occasionally a stinger becomes lodged and pulls free of the wasp's body; the venom, like most bee and wasp venoms, is only dangerous to humans who are allergic or are stung many times.

STINGERS

A stinger, or sting, is a sharp organ found in various animals (typically arthropods) capable of injecting venom, usually by piercing the epidermis of another animal. Technically, a stinger is the part of an insect or animal that holds a sting, where a sting is the pointed organ. In common usage, stinger is a colloquialism for sting. A sting differs from other piercing structures in that it pierces by its own action and injects venom, as opposed to teeth, which pierce by the force of opposing jaws. Stinging hairs which actively inject venom on plants such as stinging nettles are also sometimes known as stings, but not stingers.

An insect bite or sting is a break in the skin or puncture caused by an insect and complicated by introduction of the insect's saliva, venom, or excretory products. Specific components of these substances are believed to give rise to an allergic reaction, which in turn produces skin lesions that may vary from a small itching wheal, or slightly elevated area of the skin; to large areas of inflamed skin covered by vesicles and crusted lesions.

Stinging insects produce a painful swelling of the skin, the severity of the lesion varying according to the location of the sting and the identity of the insect. Many species of bees and wasps have two poison glands, one gland secreting a toxin in which formic acid is one recognized constituent, and the other secreting an alkaline neurotoxin; acting independently, each toxin is rather mild, but when they are injected together through the sting, the combination has strong irritating properties. In a small number of cases the second occasion of a bee or wasp sting causes a severe allergic reaction known as anaphylaxis.

Hornets, some ants, centipedes, and scorpions also sting. Some insects leave their stinger in the wound. Multiple stings may give rise to severe systemic symptoms and in rare instances may even lead to death.

WIRED.COM 28 June 2007

iRobot Corporation — maker of bomb-handling and floor-sweeping machines — has teamed up with the shocketeers at Taser International "to develop new robots that can remotely engage, incapacitate and control dangerous suspects," according to a company statement. 

The idea is to equip a PackBot with a X26 stun gun, giving "SWAT, law enforcement and military" types "a new ability to control dangerous suspects while keeping personnel, the suspect and bystanders out of harm’s way."

For the last several years, robot-makers have been equipping their recon and bomb-disposal ‘bots with weapons — including rocket-launchers and machine guns. But the military has been reluctant to take any of the machines into battlezones. What one of ’em starts spazzing out, and accidentally shoots up a friendly squad? But, armed with a Taser, there wouldn’t be nearly as much risk. Although the potential for stun gun abuse or mayhem would be, uh, considerable. 

SMS 27 OCT 2015

In most sci-fi films the robots have been programmed so that they don't harm humans. The Guardian in Terminator 2, played by Arnold Schwarzenegger, is the perfect example of this, with his sole mission to protect Sarah Connor.

So far in real-life a lot of robots haven't been programmed not to harm humans. In fact, some of them are being designed to taze them in the balls.

Meet the TRAD robot, the robot created by Taser International so that police don't even have to be in the same room as the suspect as they shoot 50,000 volts through them.

Conveniently though, they do have a camera on them so they can see the look of pure terror on the suspects' faces as they: wonder what the hell that remote control car is doing, notice the robot seems to have both a taser and a thirst for human suffering, try to appease their metal overlord, and get shot with 50,000 volts of electricity. Fingers crossed they upload the video to YouTube.

At the moment, the robot is remote controlled and armed with a taser, but there are plans to automate it and arm it with a shotgun for military purposes. It's a sign the robot uprising when governments aren't just dreaming of fully-automated robot killing machines: They're budgeting for them. 

There are two main challenges for military robotics. The first, get them to navigate all kinds of terrain as well as humans do, and secondly, make them kill stuff when they get there. Perhaps the most important is to make them look as cool and intimidating as Arnie.

TALON - It's pretty much a gun on wheels. That above robot is called the Talon and is actually in use by the American army. Though it's more like a Dalek than a T-1000, it's still pretty intimidating to the enemy to be faced with an uncaring robot enemy that won't even take the time to flinch or look grim as it fires in your direction.

Unsurprisingly the idea of robot involvement in war is already garnering opposition from groups such as the International Committee for Robot Arms Control (ICRAC), founded by academics in the forefront of robotics, who know what machines are capable of. They argue that "machines should not be delegated with the decision to kill or use violent force". 

FLORA - In plants, the term "sting" is normally used as a verb, but occasionally used as a noun refer to urticating hairs, sharp-pointed hollow hairs seated on a gland which secretes an acrid fluid, as in species of Urtica (nettles). The points of these hairs are brittle and break off easily, leaving a sharp point through which the fluid is injected. On the other hand, the bristles of some cacti are recovered by retrorse barbs called glochids (like foxtail spikelets), which prevent bristles from falling once they sting.

This website is Copyright © 2024 Planet Earth Trust..

The design of Rough Terrain Robots featured on this website are subject to design copyright © with all rights reserved - unless stated otherwise.