Robot combat vehicles are becoming common features on the modern battlefield. From serving as mechanical mules and bomb disposal devices, unmanned ground vehicles have evolved into automated scouts, and gun and missile platforms that resemble miniature tanks.
But how will human operators control these vehicles? Typing commands into a laptop may be fine in a laboratory, but not in the middle of a firefight.
Hence, the U.S. Army wants to develop a system that allows crews of manned armor, such as tanks and troop carriers, to use plain-language voice commands to control robot vehicles.
“The system should interpret commands such as ‘move 300 meters east’ or ‘retreat to rally point’ and translate them into actionable, autonomous maneuvers,” according to an Army Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) solicitation.
Despite predictions that drones will make traditional tanks obsolete, the Army isn’t giving up on old-fashioned manned armored vehicles. But it does envision expensive main battle tanks – and their precious crews – being escorted by hordes of cheap and expendable unmanned combat vehicles.
Yet a tank crew in combat may not have time to issue elaborate commands to their robot consorts. “As vehicle crews are required to manage multiple tasks simultaneously—such as navigating complex environments, assessing real-time intelligence from multiple sensors and data feeds, engaging targets, and communicating with friendly forces—the cognitive burden can overwhelm any vehicle crew,” the Army said.
Thus, the Army is soliciting ideas for a voice-command system that enables humans to issue simple voice commands to robots that then autonomously execute them with a minimum of human intervention. “These commands-to-autonomous maneuver may include, but are not limited to, movement to known or unknown waypoints, tactical repositioning (e.g., fire-and-displace or ‘shoot-and-scoot’;), turret commands (e.g., traverse, elevate, slew-to-cue), and coordination with other vehicles during multi-vehicle operations,” the Army explained.
The SBIR lists six specific capabilities that a voice-command system should have:
Natural Language. The robots must respond to commands in natural language (the plain language that people use in everyday speech).
Autonomous Movement to Waypoints. “The system must be able to navigate to both pre-defined and dynamically specified locations on the battlefield with minimal crew input,” thus allowing manned vehicles to focus on their tasks while the robots maneuver autonomously.
Tactical Repositioning. The robot should be able to autonomously perform tactical maneuvers “such as fire-and-displace (shoot-and-scoot), where the vehicle automatically retreats to a safe position after engaging a target.”
Turret Commands. This includes “basic turret movements such as traverse, elevate, and slew-to-cue.”
Multi-Vehicle Coordination. The Army seems to be envisioning something similar to aerial drone swarms, where robot vehicles “operate in coordination with other units, maintaining formation and movement techniques (e.g., traveling overwatch, bounding overwatch).”
Autonomous navigation. “The Army wants a system that enables “reliable autonomous waypoint navigation in complex off-road terrain at speeds of up to 20 miles per hour,” including avoiding rocks, trees and ditches.
Interestingly, the SBIR only mentions requirements for movement and targeting. There is no mention of voice commands to fire weapons.
If this project is successful, the Army believes it could have multiple applications for the civilian market. These include voice command systems for smart homes and factories, as well as autonomous farming and mining.
In many ways, this resembles the voice command systems for self-driving cars. Or, even the voice recognition technology now found in regular cars, which allow drivers to operate controls hands-free.
A M1A2 SEPV3 Abrams Tank fires at multiple range targets during a range warfighter exercise, April 11, 2021, Fort Hood, Texas. The visit with foreign allies allows the U.S. Army to boost interoperability of staff members and warfighting capabilities with the M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams Tank. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Melissa N. Lessard)
The goal in all these cases is to allow humans to interact with machines as if those machines were human. Just look at the cockpit of an Apollo spacecraft or a Boeing 707 airliner, and the challenges of operating complex devices using manual controls becomes evident.
This suggests that the next frontier in unmanned armored vehicles won’t be the chassis or weapons. It’s making combat robots user-friendly.
About the Author: Michael Peck
Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Business Insider, Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.
