Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Join the club
Get full access to premium articles, exclusive features and a growing list of member rewards.
An account already exists for this email address, please log in.
Self-driving Ford F-250 truck with shotgun-equipped drone-killing turret tested by US Army — autonomous system designed to blast fast-moving drones at between 10 and 100 meters range
The U.S. Army tested an autonomous breaching vehicle with an onboard counter-UAS (C-UAS) turret during a live-fire exercise at Fort Bragg on August 18. As part of Project Sandhills 2.0, self-driving Ford F-250 trucks were put through their paces, some armed with computer-controlled drone-killing shotgun turrets.
Sandhills 2.0 builds on the original Sandhills project which spawned the Lancer UGV, built on the Polaris Ranger 1500 utility vehicle, which ended up being gifted to Ukraine. However, this new breaching solution adds C-UAS abilities to bolster their abilities to clear the way for human soldiers to advance. Breaching operations can be seriously compromised by a determined enemy using increasingly common FPV drone technology and this fact inspired the changes delivered in Sandhills 2.0.
The vehicle chosen for Sandhills 2.0 was a self‑driving Ford F‑250 truck, equipped with Forterra’s AutoDrive system. Ford’s readily available spares should make the F-250-based system easier to maintain and repair, reckons Forterra’s VP of defense. That is another important factor the designers weighed, for this latest iteration of a viable U.S. Army autonomous breaching vehicle.
Meanwhile, the Edda counter-unmanned aircraft system turret (built by Austin-based 9 Mothers) takes care of fast-moving drone threats of 7-inch diameter or larger, at ranges between 10 to 100m (33 to 328 feet). The source report notes that the turret weighs around 23kg (50 pounds).
Interestingly, the turret first detects incoming drones acoustically before an onboard visual tracking system locks on. This methodology prevents the F-250-based system from being easily detectable by advanced enemy drone sensors, suggests the source report. Finally the shotgun-armed Edda engages the enemy drone. According to 9 Mothers published data the Edda turret is an “ultra-fast, ultra-light, ultra-accurate motion platform — 5° in under 15 ms at 1.5 arcminute precision.” We would welcome some test data, though – like what percent of drones get destroyed in one shot, the maximum speed of drones that Edda can engage, or how many drones it can handle per minute.
Mark Tyson is a news editor at Tom's Hardware. He enjoys covering the full breadth of PC tech; from business and semiconductor design to products approaching the edge of reason.
so who wants to tell em?
blasting drones willynilly isnt always gonna be a good thing when they start making drones carry toxic stuff that is then scattered on the public populace when exploded?
so who wants to tell em?
blasting drones willynilly isnt always gonna be a good thing when they start making drones carry toxic stuff that is then scattered on the public populace when exploded?
We could tell them, but would they listen? I doubt they even care about that specific concern due to what their actions tell us.
so who wants to tell em?
blasting drones willynilly isnt always gonna be a good thing when they start making drones carry toxic stuff that is then scattered on the public populace when exploded?
Chemical weapons.
That has been a possibility for 100+ years.
People and armies generally don't do that for 'reasons'.
Chemical weapons.
That has been a possibility for 100+ years.
People and armies generally don't do that for 'reasons'.
The 1925 Geneva Protocol and 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention both made the use of chemical and biological weapons a war-crime.
Seeing as how the US likes to invade when WMD are involved, most countries don't use them.
The 1925 Geneva Protocol and 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention both made the use of chemical and biological weapons a war-crime.
Seeing as how the US likes to invade when WMD are involved, most countries don't use them.
Unlike nuclear bombs, where North Korea is safe from the US but Iran is not. The difference? One of them has nuclear weapons.
After the latest Epic Failure "non-war" forever war, I wouldn't be surprised if many countries want to go nuclear!
Unlike nuclear bombs, where North Korea is safe from the US but Iran is not. The difference? One of them has nuclear weapons.
After the latest Epic Failure "non-war" forever war, I wouldn't be surprised if many countries want to go nuclear!
Yeah. The old rules aren't really there any more. We are now living in a multi-polar world where wars are popping off left and right. Countries want to be protected so new alliances are forming outside of the normal spheres of influence. It's quite scary that nations are talking more about nukes instead of toning it down. What could go wrong? :(
The 1925 Geneva Protocol and 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention both made the use of chemical and biological weapons a war-crime.
Seeing as how the US likes to invade when WMD are involved, most countries don't use them.
So a land based truck drone that can carry a literal ton of ammo and can shoot more than drones.
A cheaper and more mobile version would be with an ATV. With different bullets for different applications.
A plausible use for local AI. Will probably come with the same flaws.
