Video: https://files.catbox.moe/2waf1b.mp4

Source: https://t.me/RBC_ua_news/70248

Translation:

🔥 In Ukraine, a kamikaze ground robot was created for the Armed Forces: how it is used by the military

Brave1 developers have created a new technology for the Ukrainian military - the ground-based kamikaze robot Ratel S. It allows you to hit enemy targets from a safe distance.

This kamikaze robot is capable of carrying anti-tank mines or a combat module at a speed of 24 km/h. In addition, it can travel a distance of 6 km and remotely blow up an enemy tank or dugout.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is this thing going to move through plants, mud, trenches, etc…?

      It may not need to if it just stays on roads. That, after all, is the primary method for vehicles to travel, which are its intended targets.

      Also, why build a ground kamikaze, if we already have quadrocopters?

      I can think of two reasons. Cost-per-kg-of-explosive delivered is much lower with this than quadcoopters, and loiter time. You could drive this thing with its huge explosive to a nice hiding spot miles away and leave it parked there for days. Your quadcopter loiter times is usually measured in minutes.

      So use your quadcopters for observation, then drive your closest ground based drone to the approaching tank or vehicle.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Traversing fields and roads to park on observed Russian tracks is the game.

      Aerial drives see the route Russians use, (and therefore think is safe), then this drives and mines it overnight

    • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Idk about this specifically but a decent monster truck RC car would probably handle some terrain beyond asphalt. Maybe. I think you would need a larger scale to stand a better chance of success.

      But yeah using quadcopters probably makes more sense.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Weight isn’t as much of a consideration for a ground based unit, so you can have a bigger boom. I don’t know if that’s really required, but it could be useful for clearing entrenched positions.

      For armor, the least armored location is usually (pretty much always, maybe with some weird exception) on the bottom. If you can drive under it, especially with a bigger explosive, even the most heavily armored vehicle is toast.

      That said, you do need to reach it which will be harder on the ground obviously. It will be interesting to see how useful it’ll be. If it’s cheaper or similarly priced to an airial drone, I’m sure it’ll come in handy. It’d be a cool bonus if it can deploy its payload and leave before detonating it and be recovered, but I’m assuming that isn’t an option.

  • The Pantser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Zerg rush incoming. Also there is no way this tech is not going to be used for terror once they get stolen or sold.

    • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s stopping it now? All you’d need is a RC chassis, some sort of explosive, and a basic AI (drive here, blow up)

    • idkwhatimdoing@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the scale of war, something purpose-built like this is helpful because it’s customized and standardized for exactly what they want it to do. But if it would really be that helpful for individual acts of terror, I think we’d have seen rudimentary versions by now. If terrorists haven’t been using RC cars or rovers already, I don’t think this is enough of a jump in tech to make them start.

    • aeronmelon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The sooner the battlefield is turned into nothing but a bunch of unmanned gizmos reenacting a GTA Online battle royale, the better.

    • bedrooms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe it’s still better than mining fields which would kill civilians in peace time afterwards.

      • tal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s possible that Ukraine is using Russian mines that they’ve removed from fields. If so, it’d be the opposite.

        • bedrooms@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Mines are cheap enough. Also, don’t they detonate the mines to clean them? Basically all mine clearance videos I’ve seen in my life detonated the mines.

          • tal@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Could be. I’ve seen video of someone in Vietnam clearing mines, and they just did it with a knife. Didn’t detonate the thing.

            I’d assume that anti-tank mines, unless they have anti-handling mechanisms designed to target people disarming them, probably won’t go off on a person.

  • tal@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Won’t show up on thermals, unlike a lot of other stuff in this conflict.

    • DarkenLM@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!

      Ngl, that would scare the life out of my soul, specially in the middle of the night.

    • MeshPotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not sure what’s scarier, a the sound of a little terror drone before an explosion. Or the silence, the feeling of security that there’s nothing on a recently cleared path and then seeing my mates vehicle blow up.