Nuclear test sites are hard things to keep secure. As nuclear test sites, they have to be big enough to contain the explosion and radiation of a detonating bomb; unfortunately, this makes them very hard to protect. The Nevada National Security Site, for example, is 1360 square miles. How can such a site be patrolled? The answer is simple: use automated guard robots.
Yes, automated guard robots. The army has started using what they call Mobile Detection Assessment Response Systems, or MDARS, as a form of security. The MDARS is essentially a small car with a camera attached to it. It has a diesel engine, and it can run for 16 hours on a full tank. It can reach speeds of 20 mph. The MDARS patrols the perimeter of the NNSS, and searches for intruders, or any evidence of tampering, such as broken fences or locks. One MDARS is currently deployed at the NNSS, and two more are being developed.
The MDARS is a patrol robot, not a security robot. While it does patrol the perimeter, it is unarmed; if it finds something wrong, it alerts actual guards back at the main base. There is a live video feed so the guards can see what the problem is if the MDARS finds something. In addition, it is not completely automated. The MDARS goes about its normal patrol routine by itself, but a guard remotely operates the MDARS if it finds anything. In addition to the aforementioned live video feed, the MDARS is equipped with a microphone and speaker. The guards can use the MDARS to interact with people they may find trespassing on the NNSS’s grounds.
Of course, this brings up one big question: why? Why would the army decide to have robots patrolling its nuclear test sites? The first answer is because that’s incredibly cool. However, since that’s not really a good reason, it’s also because MDARS are more cost effective. Yes, developing and building a robot costs a lot of money. However, the alternative is using a series of cameras, lights, towers, trenches, and motion detector cameras to guard a mainly empty strip of land. Using MDARS saves roughly $6 million in infrastructure costs, with an additional estimated $1 million saved annually on equipment maintenance and human paychecks.
This is still a long way away from using robots with sunglasses and Austrian accents to fight for us. However, it is one step closer. And what an awesome future that will be.
"New Robots Improve Security While Reducing Costs." National Nuclear Security Administration. 04 Oct. 2010. Web. 07 Oct. 2010.
Shachtman, Noah. "Video: Robots Now Guarding Nevada Nuke Site | Danger Room | Wired.com." Wired News. 04 Oct. 2010. Web. 07 Oct. 2010.
Dillow, Clay. "Video: Nevada Nuclear Site Hires Autonomous Robotic Sentries To Provide Security | Popular Science." Popular Science | New Technology, Science News, The Future Now. 05 Oct. 2010. Web. 07 Oct. 2010.
This is a very interesting concept. The growing interest in robots in our everyday lives is slowly becoming more of a reality than just a sci-fi fantasy. With the MDARS, we can successfully monitor our test sites and keep up a more efficient routine in our security measures. Moving from just the MDARS, this trend can be seen with nearly all of the state of the art technology being produced by our military. They have that saying in most advertisements for the US military "Un-manning the front lines", which is good because life is far more valuable than metal, glass, and silicon. The only issues I see with this goes back to the graph about the growth curve in our global population. While it is a touchy subject for many, if we separate ourselves and look at the big picture, we need flesh and bone on the front lines, in our factories, and more. These robots, while some are cost and labor efficient, are forbidding many to get the job they want, or for that matter, need. We have placed the decision of safety vs life quality (for US standards) before ourselves in this day and age. What is one to decide?
ReplyDelete