CMU First To Qualify For DARPA Grand Challenge 210
Anonymous Coward writes "As of 18:00 March 9th, Carnegie Mellon's Red Team is the only entry to successfully complete DARPA's Grand Challenge Qualification Inspection and Demonstration (QID) before the main event on March 13th. The NY Times has this article detailing this first step towards winning the Grand Challenge."
Mars Rovers (Score:2, Interesting)
I read that the operator says "go from here to here" and the onboard 'AI' chooses the best route in a 3d visualisation - is this software open-source, and could it be used in this challenge? I can't see any major differences, other than the relative lack of parked cars on Mars (2 pathfinders and a beagle, iirc)
Should DARPA have emailed NASA before starting this?
i'd be more impressed if (Score:4, Interesting)
its impressive when you build a mega$ robot, but a minimal robot that manages to finish is way cooler
Where the pictures at? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Cost to PRIZE ratio. (Score:2, Interesting)
How is this impressive? (Score:4, Interesting)
Seeing as DARPA wants to turn this technology into a military robotic transport, I don't know how valuable it's going to be if it has to be pre-programmed with terabytes of data just to move. What about if they invade somewhere they don't have good maps of? Somewhere with a dynamic landscape (desert, rocks etc)?
I'm all for innovation, but exploiting poorly-worded rules just to win for winning's sake is an empty victory at best.
Re:Mars Rovers (Score:2, Interesting)
Red Team is the least impressive in some respects (Score:5, Interesting)
All competitors are given the actual route as a series of GPS waypoints a few hours prior to the race. Red Team is going to send those waypoints back to CMU, have the big iron there figure out the best course based on all the map data, and then download that course to the robot prior to the start. In a way this is cool, but it seems like they are using a loophole. A much more interesting problem would be to navigate a course that you know nothing about other than the waypoints.
The other teams are using techniques that require more onboard intelligence and route finding. The most interesting vehicle is from Cal. They have a motorcycle. Even though I went to Stanford I am rooting for the Cal motorcycle to do well since they have the most unique vehicle. Hopefully the team of Stanford alums (already dropped out) can come back next year and beat them.
picture comparison (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Cool (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Interesting, but ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure it is. Logistics are a *huge* problem for the military, especially one that moves as fast as America's. Remember in Gulf War II that some of the most public incidents of American losses involved supply convoys, not front-line forces.
With this sort of technology, supply-lines become more like conveyor belts than masses of convoys. They elminate the need to teams of humans to transport fuel, water, ammunition, etc. to the front lines. This increases the pool of human resources available to the military for other jobs, while eliminating the worry of casualities inflicted by enemy interdiction missions.
Sure, automatic tanks will logically be a followup, but I think the military's mid-term goal is automating the logistics.
Surprised a bit by this... (Score:2, Interesting)
AW&ST February 23rd... (Score:4, Interesting)
The reason was because the loading and unloading areas could be secured but not the highways in between.
Check out the February 23rd Issue.
myke
Re:Cost to PRIZE ratio. (Score:2, Interesting)
The result is that CMU stopped dragging their feet, which accomplishes the main goal of DARPA $1 million challenge.
Re:AW&ST February 23rd... (Score:3, Interesting)
I would agree - I would expect a mix of C-17s, C-130s, CH-47s and CH-53s rather than using just C-5s.
Just doing a Google search on the C-5, it is rated (from http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-5.htm) as having a "Fully Loaded" takeoff distance of 12,200 ft with a "Fully Loaded" landing distance of 4,900 ft. Maybe the strategy is to land a full aircraft and take off in a nearly empty one.
Even in this case, I would think a fully loaded C-5 (anywhere from 770,000 lbs to 840,000 lbs (same source)) would break up the pavement of any modest runway almost from the first landing.
Regardless, the point is that the military recognizes the dangers of sending loaded trucks along potentially unsecured routes and is looking for a way to keep drivers out of harm's way.
myke
Forged message (Score:3, Interesting)
I will pay $100 for the name and address of the person responsible for that posting.
John Nagle
nagle@overbot.com