Video: The awesomest killbot evah
posted at 4:35 pm on December 10, 2008 by Allahpundit
Utterly horrifying in the best possible way. Straight off the Lockheed Martin assembly line, this one’s not what it looks like: It’s designed for orbital engagement with incoming ICBMs, not “peekaboo” anti-personnel lightning strikes into Osama’s cave. Although we can dream, can’t we?
No, I’m not going to compare it to the droid Luke used during lightsaber training. That’s already been done.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I’m pretty sure that if I had one of those I could get my son to clean up his room.
Bad Penny on December 10, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Can I get one of these at Best Buy? Radio Shack? I bet it’s cheaper at Wal-Mart.
portlandon on December 10, 2008 at 4:41 PM
What the heck is that thing. It looks like it waista a lot of ammo.
saiga on December 10, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Its a kinetic warhead (no explosives) aka “kill vehicle” used on the SM-3 missile.
BobMbx on December 10, 2008 at 4:43 PM
Enjoy it now. When the robots take over, internet video will not be permitted.
justfinethanks on December 10, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Saiga you didn’t see any ammo.
Dr. Manhattan on December 10, 2008 at 4:47 PM
The real droids are already on the Space Station!
AeroSpear on December 10, 2008 at 4:47 PM
It looks way cooler in gravity, with the positioning rockets firing rapidly. Of course, an orbitial strike of an ICBM would look pretty cool too.
BadgerHawk on December 10, 2008 at 4:47 PM
Was that real?
rob verdi on December 10, 2008 at 4:48 PM
Between this and the “boring fembot” item today, can we surmise that AP is currently in a “Make War, Not Love” mode?
Karl on December 10, 2008 at 4:49 PM
There is a video out there somewhere of just that…..from the KVs point of view.
BobMbx on December 10, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Absolutely. Remember a few months ago…we shot down a failed satellite over the Pacific? This is what impacted the target.
BobMbx on December 10, 2008 at 4:52 PM
Let’s just buy 100,000 of these. We dont need an army anymore
lodge on December 10, 2008 at 4:52 PM
The only space video I’ve seen of this KV is the amazingly crappy CGI.
BadgerHawk on December 10, 2008 at 4:53 PM
The problem with high tech missile defense is that the technology to land a missile on target is both easier and cheaper than the technology to stop it. For example, the Serbs discovered that stealth aircraft could be seen momentarily by increasing the wave length of the radar transmissions. That is how they shot down one F-117. That technology costs nothing and can be used to defeat a technology that costs hundreds of billions.
keep the change on December 10, 2008 at 4:56 PM
Kill vehicle, what do they call it in Chicago?
the_nile on December 10, 2008 at 5:05 PM
A video showing the same thing has been out for quite a while (at least two years), but it was leaked a good while before it was declassified so every thing related to defense refused to comment on it and thus it didn’t get much coverage beyond it possibly being fake. I guess it is declassified now.
Blacksoda on December 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM
When I was a kid I dissected a bunch of roman candles and firecrackers and stuffed all the goodies in a toiletpaper tube. Lit it and ran. Pretty much did what you see here. Imagine what I could do with a multibillion budget and a staff of engineers!
/heehee
innominatus on December 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Wait. If it is designed to work from orbit. Why does it need to hover? Hmmm.
ronsfi on December 10, 2008 at 5:08 PM
Can it find Sarah Connor?
Jim62sch on December 10, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Ho Hum?
Hunt035 on December 10, 2008 at 5:17 PM
I remember when Reagan’s SDI project got defunded by the DAMocrats. There was a little video (like this one) where the engineers were creaming their jeans when a little diddy like this thing was able to hover for 3 seconds. And that was almost 16 years ago. Nows they’ve got the lil bubba to hover, slide left/right and forward/backward before fuel is expended. And this baby does all the decisions on where to move by itself now.
/impressed.
44Magnum on December 10, 2008 at 5:24 PM
I saw a demonstration video of this a long time ago–ten or twelve years.
Count to 10 on December 10, 2008 at 5:27 PM
saiga on December 10, 2008 at 4:41 PM
I don’t care how much ammo it wastes, its still awesome.
Ryan Gandy on December 10, 2008 at 5:28 PM
I nominate this for Best Post of the Day.
+1
Note: I think the dishes might get done too, and perhaps his laundry.
Geministorm on December 10, 2008 at 5:32 PM
“I will not weaponize space.”
I wonder if this little beauty counts?
/stupid question
RalphyBoy on December 10, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Ah. The perfect stocking stuffer.
pilamaye on December 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM
True on two counts; (1) the technology to have “hit-to-kill” anti-ballistic missiles is much more expensive than to design the ballistic missiles. Thus, with equal amounts of money, I can make more ballistic missiles than you can make anti-ballistic missiles. (2) Any number of technologies can overcome radar stealth vehicles, UWB radar for example, will return all of the wave lengths *except* the normal band for radar. Thus, using an UWB radar (see Time Domain Corp. in Huntsville, AL), a stealth vehicle can be detected 100% of the time.
Geministorm on December 10, 2008 at 5:38 PM
More insightful video of this MKV here.
This other video has the actual test footage sandwiched between some CGI eye candy of the MKV concept for those unfamiliar with the technology.
For the whiny critics of missile defense, THIS is how we will soon deal with ICBM countermeasures.
Cuffy Meigs on December 10, 2008 at 5:38 PM
Fembots in one thread. Warbots in another.
What’s going on, AP? Did KP take you off of her buddy list again?
BacaDog on December 10, 2008 at 5:41 PM
It’s amazing how balance used to be such an issue for droids, but now . . . Sky cars cometh?
P.S. You do know that Lockheed Martin does have a project called SkyNet. I’m not kidding.
MirCat on December 10, 2008 at 5:44 PM
Hovering against Earth’s gravity is equivalent to a constant rate of acceleration in space. It is also easy to test in the lab.
Right_of_Attila on December 10, 2008 at 5:46 PM
*drooling*
Hey there’s some biyatch I wanna kick outta my life, move her back where she came from. Would this sucker work? *snicker, holding remote control* >:-)
ProudPalinFan on December 10, 2008 at 5:47 PM
I like the counter measures part. Translation: counter measures, bah we’ll blow up the target, the counter measures, and it’s grandma just for the heck of it.
- The Cat
MirCat on December 10, 2008 at 5:47 PM
Warbots > Fembots
pseudonominus on December 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM
Also, if the thing tries to dodge muahaha. Plus this could have a variety of future aplications.
Dare I dream?
- The Cat
MirCat on December 10, 2008 at 5:54 PM
How else would you propose to test it’s ability to manuever and track a target?
Hollowpoint on December 10, 2008 at 5:56 PM
Exactly. Orbital tests ain’t cheap.
Cuffy Meigs on December 10, 2008 at 5:59 PM
This may shed some light on the topic…
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/MKV/index.html
knob on December 10, 2008 at 6:03 PM
That’s the best scarecrow I’ve seen in long time! :)
OldEnglish on December 10, 2008 at 6:13 PM
HA! With one of those I could keep the neighbors cats off of my property!
csdeven on December 10, 2008 at 6:23 PM
There was a little video (like this one) where the engineers were creaming their jeans when a little diddy like this thing was able to hover for 3 seconds. – 44 Mag
I remember that one, and this looks a lot like it. That one had the Soviets crapping THEIR jeans … or whatever they used to wear back then when jeans were illegal … some were saying that it was faked but that it also won the cold war for us!
Tony737 on December 10, 2008 at 6:55 PM
With one of those I could keep the neighbors cats off of my property! – C.S.
A B.B. gun will have the same effect! :-)
Tony737 on December 10, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Pretty effing awesome!
CP on December 10, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Every street has as ogre that hates cats. And Fred Thompson.
keep the change on December 10, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Here’s a link to the video of an actual intercept. There’s only about 3-4 seconds of video that starts at 2:10. It’s not CGI, it’s actual video from the KV as intercepts the target.
Cool.As.Hell
BobMbx on December 10, 2008 at 7:42 PM
I don’t know what that thing is, but it looks PISSED.
uncivilized on December 10, 2008 at 8:30 PM
I could have sworn I killed something like that in that PS3 game Resistance.
Cool! I hope it wakes up UBL one morning.
cabbageheat on December 10, 2008 at 9:04 PM
The SM3 kill vehicle “hover test” was very good. High stability of pointing and roll control, very good side movement when commanded, excellent pickup and orientation after falling into the test cell bungee cord “floor”.
***
This type of control system has been used in the past using high pressure nitrogen gas valving systems. Some hypergolic fuel valving / mixing designs were tested at White Sands 40 years ago–the fuel and oxidizer mixed and exploded along grooves in the side of the missile and blew it onto a new trajectory. From a few miles away the trajectory and smoke trail looked like a right angle the turn was so fast. The missile was going through the sky like a bat out of hell–with very high “G” control system checkout “turns” to put maximum stress on the airframe.
***
In space the kill vehicle would by moving at very high speed toward the intercept point. Slight firing of the control rockets would slightly change the trajectory until it hits the target. Only at the endgame would a lot of firing occur–like in the test video–as the last errors are taken out of the trajectory.
***
Similar “hit to kill” technology is used in the Patriot PAC-3 Missile also–it works very well. Raytheon and Lockheed-Martin do a lot of good work in this area.
***
John Bibb
rocketman on December 10, 2008 at 9:06 PM
Can we use it on the pirates? Could be pretty fun.
Sapwolf on December 10, 2008 at 10:12 PM
http://break.com/index/your-new-favorite-model-helicopter.html
pedestrian on December 10, 2008 at 11:03 PM
MANHACKS!
Reaps on December 11, 2008 at 7:47 AM
It looks like Chili night at the local diner!
grapeknutz on December 11, 2008 at 8:35 AM
:D
<– Worked on the PAC-3 and PACM. The “green suiters” (what us engineers called the army personnel) should be much happier with the PAC this time around. Only $3M + 18months to retrofit the PAC-2s to become PAC-3s, but they’ll knock anything China, North Korea, Iran, or Syria has out of the sky /lol
Geministorm on December 11, 2008 at 9:29 AM
Yeah, we need to let it out of its cage, and direct it to DC.
Vashta.Nerada on December 11, 2008 at 9:48 AM
I may be wrong, but I don’t think it was “shooting” anything. My impression was that those were short bursts from “maneuvering thrusters” (for lack of a better term) to keep it upright and properly balanced.
taznar on December 11, 2008 at 9:52 AM
I remember back when we were racing to be the first to demonstrate the ‘hit-to-kill’ tech successfully…ran the test out at White Sands (which is weird, because its in NM, but we all worked out of Fort Bliss in El Paso, TX during the tests). If I remember correctly, our competitor was first to the launch pad but missed several times and then we ran 8/10 (8 successful). Watching a missile traveling ~mach 5 and impacting another missile head on is a very testosterone-filled event (a big “HELL YAH!”)…good times.
Geministorm on December 11, 2008 at 10:13 AM
Wow! It’s got a good beat and I can dance to it.
I give it a 95.
Where’s the remix/smash-up/whatevah?
Timothy S. Carlson on December 11, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Any ideas on the fuel consumption rate of this sucka?
It looks like it just runs out and drops. Did they do a limited fuel load so it wouldn’t run amok for 1/2 hour and kill all of the techs, or was it end of test so just turn it off?
I like the netting around it – there must have been some spectacular lab accidents to warrant the protection :P
Timothy S. Carlson on December 11, 2008 at 11:48 AM
There is always a limited fuel load on an interceptor–one of the controlling software requirements is to not launch until the probability of a good intercept is high. Also–there is usually not time for a second shot due to the high incoming target velocity–shoot twice if you want to live! (This was also a U.S. Army infantry basic training rule long ago.) Maneuvering targets are a challenge also–unnecessary interceptor motion can run you out of fuel fast.
***
Running out of missile velocity or maneuvering fuel before intercept guarantees failure–and a destruct sequence. Review the Hiroshima and Nagasaki photos for more information on what real failure to intercept means. This is a terminal guidance system–it was never intended to be used a lot when the interceptor is a long way from the incoming TBM or ICBM.
***
John Bibb
rocketman on December 11, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Maybe they could test this at the next Academy Awards show.
mr. b on December 11, 2008 at 1:29 PM