Military R&D: Hits and MissesOctober 24, 2008

 

bomb robotThe Pentagon spends upwards of $75 billion each year on research, development, testing and evaluations, hoping that some projects will bear fruit but realizing that others will be duds. National Defense magazine put together a list of "greatest hits" and "unfortunate misses" among recent technologies.

Before looking at that list, it's important to have a little background on the military budget. The government allocated $623 billion for defense spending in 2008. Of this amount, $75 billion, or about 12%, was earmarked for research, development, testing and evaluations. According to the New Delhi-based Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis, U.S. military R&D spending outpaces the combined defense R&D budgets of countries like China, Russia, France, Israel and the United Kingdom. These countries spent a total of $17 billion in 2004.

Last November, before John Young was confirmed by the Senate as the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, he sent a memo to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates stressing the importance of increasing spending on military R&D to keep a technological edge as countries like China and India modernize their armies.

Let's take a look at what the military's budget has spawned over the years and what technology has come in handy on the battlefield and which projects were not ready for prime time:

Hits:

  • V-Hull Trucks, which deflect roadside explosives
  • Robots that detonate bombs
  • Arab-translation software for the iPod
  • Biometric sensors and data-mining systems that help identify bomb-builders in Iraq
  • Haptic technology, which allows the user to remotely feel the tactile sensation of touching or pushing something
  • Rover Video Receiver, which allows soldiers on the ground to see in real time the images of a battlefield that an aircraft's sensors are picking up
  • Miniature spy aircrafts, or drones, that are getting smaller and smaller (with some researchers expecting bug-sized ones to be hovering over battlefields in the future).

Misses:

  • Batteries, hydrogen fuel and other forms of energy designed for the battlefield — nothing seems to provide the required power
  • Robots with guns — although some think they are still the wave of the future
  • Spy satellites with radar — these couldn't survive the thermal and radiation exposure in space
  • Unmanned crafts controlled by mouse clicks and buttons rather than the ergonomic layout that pilots are used to.

You can read more about these hits and misses here.