South Korea builds autonomous border defense turret

[The Grim Squeaker]

South Korea's autonomous robot gun turrets: deadly from kilometers away
By Loz Blain

00:18 December 7, 2010
PIC


DoDAMM's Super aEgis 2: South Korea's autonomous robot gun turret

If there's one place you don't want to be caught wandering around right now, it's the demilitarized zone that separates North and South Korea. Especially since South Korean military hardware manufacturer DoDAMM used the recent Korea Robot World 2010 expo to display its new Super aEgis 2, an automated gun turret that can detect and lock onto human targets from kilometers away, day or night and in any weather conditions, and deliver some heavy firepower.

The border between North and South Korea is a pretty amazing strip of land. Around 2.5 miles (4 km) wide, it stretches the entire width of the Korean peninsula and it's recognized as the most heavily fortified border in the world. Over the last 60 years, as North and South Korea have faced off in an aggressive and frequently violated ceasefire, this Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) has been one of the deadliest places on Earth for humans. Step into the zone and there's hundreds of thousands of soldiers on either side ready to put a bullet in you just for being there.

As a fascinating aside, this has also made it one of the world's best-kept nature preserves - the complete absence of human interference leaving a more or less pristine habitat for all kinds of wildlife, endangered and otherwise.

The DMZ's history is full of incredible stories; the gigantic tunnels dug by North Korean incursion forces, the tragically doomed friendships between North and South Korean soldiers operating in the zone, the almost unbelievable defection of a South Korean farmer across the DMZ into North Korea. And perhaps this history will go on to include ice-cold robotic killers.

Through military eyes, the existence of a shoot-on-sight no-go zone several kilometers wide opens up options for some interesting high-tech hardware, like DoDaam's Super aEgis II, which we had a chance to look over in person at the Korea Robot World Expo 2010.

The Super aEgis 2 is an automated gun tower that can find and lock on to a human-sized target in pitch darkness at a distance of up to 1.36 miles (2.2 kilometers). It uses a 35x zoom CCD camera with 'enhancement feature' for bad weather, in conjunction with a dual FOV, autofocus Infra-Red sensor, to pick out targets.

Then it brings the pain, either with a standard 12.7mm caliber machine-gun, a 40mm automatic grenade launcher upgrade, or whatever other weapons system you want to bolt on to it, including surface-to-air missiles. A laser range finder helps to calibrate aim, and a gyroscopic stabilizer unit helps correct both the video system's aim and the direction of the guns after recoil pushes them off-target.


Each 140 kg (308.6 lb.) unit can be rigidly mounted or put on a moving vehicle, where the gyro stabilization would be a huge asset.
They can operate in fully autonomous mode, firing first and asking questions later, or they can be put into a manual mode for more human intervention. All machines communicate back to headquarters through a LAN cable or wireless network.

There's no word about whether the Super aEgis 2 has been deployed in the Korean DMZ in the wake of several recent incidents that threaten to push the peninsula into full-scale, potentially nuclear war, but Dodaam has been exporting units as far afield as the United Arab Emirates.

Awesome.
The only problem is that it's a mix of an Auto-Turret and a Missile Turret, not just one of either - But how can it fight off hordes of Zerg without a flamethrower attachment?

1) When you post something, *try*, please *try* to offer reasonable commentary. Opening with a joke is fine, but you must have something to say about the possible human rights issues and security issues stemming from use of a fully automated system.
2) It's not a "Starcraft" turret. It's just an autonomous turret. It's still awesome, but I'm changing your title.
--Lagmonster

[FSTargetDrone]

It detects a "human-sized target"... Can it distinguish between a human that is standing or crouched? Or prone? I wonder if there are any large mammals in the DMZ that could potentially set this off, or if the sensing devices are precise enough to see the difference.

[Mr Bean]

It detects a "human-sized target"... Can it distinguish between a human that is standing or crouched? Or prone? I wonder if there are any large mammals in the DMZ that could potentially set this off, or if the sensing devices are precise enough to see the difference.

Considering the amount of mines in the DMZ the number of large mammals in the area where these turrets will be used is quite few. Landmines tend to do that to wildlife considering how many are being used.

[Jaepheth]

At least it's more difficult to forget one of these is in the field only for it to kill some hapless farmer decades later. I approve of these even if they won't replace landmines entirely.

Now I guess it's up to N. Korea to develop EM Sappers for their spies.

[someone_else]

There's no word about whether the Super aEgis 2 has been deployed in the Korean DMZ

So why are they claiming otherwise in the title?

[FSTargetDrone]

Considering the amount of mines in the DMZ the number of large mammals in the area where these turrets will be used is quite few. Landmines tend to do that to wildlife considering how many are being used.

Does wildlife routinely set off landmines in the area?

[Mr Bean]

Considering the amount of mines in the DMZ the number of large mammals in the area where these turrets will be used is quite few. Landmines tend to do that to wildlife considering how many are being used.

Does wildlife routinely set off landmines in the area?

Not anymore they don't

Seriously however the DMZ is an interesting place, it's not coated with landmines but the mini-fortresses and such areas set back behind the DMZ are coated, to the point at which mutal fratricide is possible in some of the old land-mine fields because there are that many anti-tank mines mixed with anti-infantry mines. The new ones don't have that issue and the DMZ itself is clear of landmines (Minus any left-overs from the war any any NK sneaks in. The amount of walls and barriers and the like will ensure these gun turrets are being set off by animals.

More likely they will be in local groups of seven or sixteen each tied to a local bunker complex and turned off 23/6 and only turned on in case of war and left on. The bunker complexes the various dugouts and trench lines and fields on fields of mines are not designed to stop a North Korean attack but slow it the hell down. In fact last I remeber the defense lines were several miles deep, choked full of both real and fake bunker complexes and sometimes both, IE three bunkers close to each other and they randomly move in an man one of the three bunkers for a week or three and decoy up the other two to make them looked manned.

[Sea Skimmer]

Notice how this is model 2. They already designed one several years ago which was tested and totally rejected, I don’t see that changing. The autonomous modes will never be trusted, and if a human is in the loop at the time then that person should logically be at the same location as the weapon. That way they can reload and clear jams and fight close in attackers with grenades ect… At that point one might as well just use a stock remote weapons station on the top of a bunker or better yet a vehicle that can move to escape artillery fire. No need for wireless or other remote access. This also solves the problem of the person watching the camera getting bored and not paying attention; if they are still up on the front lines they have a lot less incentive to slack off.

Basically the idea is a bit overall elaborate for an anti infiltration mission, and not very credible for a hot war.

Now if they could get the cost real low, low enough that it wasn’t a serious budgetary issue they might have something, but odds favor this being a 100,000 dollar system. It’d also be more attractive if the North Koreans were still sniping across the border with considerable intensity as they did in the 1960s, but that hasn’t really been happening. Buying more handheld and thermal weapon sights seems like a better use of money, at least until the ROK builds up its stockpile of such devices to the point that everyone on the front lines has one.

[LaCroix]

Actually, I can see this thing in use in the DMZ.

It got a range of about 2km, and the DMZ is 4 km wide. So everything it shoots is halfway in the DMZ, which is a 'Do not enter' area, after all. Some farmer wandering about 2km into the DMZ is not really that big an issue, and if there were a minefield put there instead, it wouldn't change the outcome. And 100000$ for a mobile minefield doesn't sound bad to me - it covers more than 6 square kilometers - I can't imagine mining that area would be cheaper?

One source I found cited that in 1985, Germany paid about 500€ per anti-tank mine, and an other article cites anti personal mines to cost 2,5 to 25 € per piece.

Going with the cheapest mine, 100 000$ would only net you about 30000 Mines, spread over 6 million m² - about one per 200m².
And this system covers every spot multiple times. So I can't see how it would be less cost-efficient than mines.

Any facts why the Version 1 was rejected? I think it would have been more an issue of NOT detecting possible targets. It doesn't matter if that thing occasionally shoots a deer, it's more a problem if it doesn't shoot the sneaky enemy.

In my opinion, this thing is the removable version of a minefield, and depending on ammo capacity, it is far cheaper and more reliable in the job of securing an area than a minefield. Anything that puts mines out of commission is good in my book.

[Sea Skimmer]

The DMZ has lots of trees and lots of mountains; you wouldn’t be able to cover anything like the paper range, this is why North Koreans can still infiltrate in the first place. It also has authorized patrols of ROK and DPRK troops which you cannot just fire on at random. I think you don’t realize this. The DMZ does not allow fixed military installations but it is patrolled.

The ROK rejected the first one because it had reliability issues, it was too expensive and it had no provisions for IFF at all, and I think other reasons I don’t remember. They tested the thing on the DMZ for about one year. The government did think highly enough of it to keep giving them money, but not a lot. 500 Euros is an absurd cost for a conventional anti tank mine BTW, if that price is accurate its probably the price for one of the high end off route mines Germany built which use redundant 105mm HEAT shells propelled by a rocket and linked to a thermal sensor. But you aren’t allowed to lay mines in the DMZ so this is an irrelevant comparison.

I can see a point to an automatic sentry system that simply raises the alarm, but the weapon seems like an unnecessary complication. Motion sensing radar works well and in almost all weather, optics don’t.

[Zaune]

I can see one other niche advantage to this thing; no loss of combat-effectiveness if NBC weapons are deployed against its position.

[Ryan Thunder]

I can see a point to an automatic sentry system that simply raises the alarm, but the weapon seems like an unnecessary complication. Motion sensing radar works well and in almost all weather, optics don’t.

What if it were to raise the alarm and then the soldier on duty is responsible for identifying the target and authorizing the turret to attack?

[Sarevok]

So I take it sentry guns like those in Aliens movies are cool in concept. But they only have a tiny niche where they are useful in real world ?

[Mr Bean]

So I take it sentry guns like those in Aliens movies are cool in concept. But they only have a tiny niche where they are useful in real world ?

There are a variety of uses for automated gun turrets. Along a DMZ with a hostile country that you may go back to war with any month now is not the best place. On the battlefield of an actual war I can think of a dozen uses. But not in a sensitive area like the DMZ.

The cost issue holds them back from widespread usage at the moment. Along with the IFF issue.

[someone_else]

they can always be kept there dormant, and turned on only when needed.

[Mr Bean]

they can always be kept there dormant, and turned on only when needed.

Cost an IFF again. The turrets are so expensive that giving each soldier in a squad of four a 25mm autocannon in place of standard machine gun nests and 1,000 rounds would be cheaper than a single mg auto-turret with 10,000 rounds.

[xt828]

I can see one other niche advantage to this thing; no loss of combat-effectiveness if NBC weapons are deployed against its position.

I'm pretty sure a nuclear bomb would fuck it up rather badly.

[Phantasee]

A nuclear bomb would fuck a lot of things up rather badly. OTOH if the risk was radiation and fallout, it wouldn't be as adversely affected as a manned gun. Thanks for playing!