“The impossible has been achieved,” cried Stanford University’s Sebastian Thrun, after the university’s customized Volkswagen crossed first. Students cheered, hoisting Thrun atop their shoulders.

Also finishing was a converted red Hummer named “H1ghlander” and a Humvee named “Standstorm” from Carnegie Mellon University. The Stanford robot dubbed “Stanley” overtook the top-seeded H1ghlander at the 102-mile mark of the 132-mile course.

“I’m on top of the world,” said Carnegie Mellon robotics professor William “Red” Whittaker, who said a mechanical glitch allowed Stanley to pass H1ghlander.

I hope someone got video of one robot passing another!

The Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, plans to award $2 million to the fastest vehicle to cover the race in less than 10 hours. The taxpayer-funded race was intended to spur innovation and development of robots that could be used on the battlefield without remote controls.

Last year’s much-hyped inaugural robot race ended without a winner when all the self-navigating vehicles broke down shortly after leaving the starting gate.

Carnegie Mellon’s Sandstorm chugged the farthest at 71/2 miles. Of the 23 robots that competed Saturday, 15 vehicles failed to navigate the entire 132-mile course, but most still managed to beat Sandstorm’s mileage last year.

Vehicles have to drive on rough, winding desert roads and dry lake beds filled with overhanging brush and man-made obstacles. The machines also must traverse a narrow 1.3-mile mountain pass with a steep drop-off and go through three tunnels designed to knock out their GPS signals.

The so-called Grand Challenge race is part of the Pentagon’s effort to cut the risk of casualties by fulfilling a congressional mandate to have a third of all military ground vehicles unmanned by 2015.

The military currently has a small fleet of autonomous ground vehicles stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the machines are remotely controlled by a soldier who usually rides in the same convoy. The Pentagon wants to eliminate the human factor and use self-thinking robotic vehicles to ferry supplies in war zones.

It’s astonishing to see what only 2 years of a competition like this can produce.



  1. Angel H. wong says:

    So… where are the guys from Cornell university? *listens to the sound of silence*

  2. Mad Richard says:

    I just watched “I Robot.” I think one of these robotic cars will be chasing me to give me a speeding ticket before you know it. M.R.

  3. John Schumann says:

    It really is amazing how far the technology has advanced even since last year.I’m deeply concerned about the budget deficit and am a big believer in getting a real good value for the dollar when buying things. I hope the govt. keeps an eye on price, and having competitions like this is a good way to have multiple bidders. I like the tech.

  4. SignOfZeta says:

    Cool stuff tech-wise, but the real reason this contest exists is that humans develop a sense of guilt after shooting some Iraqi kids face off, and robots don’t. In the not-so-distant future when human recruitment drops into the hundereds-range, the US will need robots like this for the next quagmire.

  5. Miguel Lopes says:

    How will insurance companies deal with robot drivers?

  6. Awake says:

    Went to the big robot show in San Jose yesterday. The state of robotics falls in three categories:
    a) The same industrial robotic arms that we have seen since the early eighties.
    b) Remote control cars from the size of teacups to the size of luggage.
    c) Toys that follow lines on the floor.
    All in all, the impression that I left with is that the robotics field, except for some industrial applications, is a hoax. For the consumer, the closest thing to a useful robot is basically a 5 year old remote controlled car called “Roomba”. Pathetic.
    So some cars drove without crashing. Wooppeee. We are as close to having autonomous cars as we are to having personal flying cars in our garages.
    And in terms of war-making… autonomous cars, unmanned armed airplanes, cruise missiles. Aren’t we making it too safe and easy to wage war? Maybe the risk to personnel is a good thing, making both sides think twice before taking action. If you are not risking anything, doesn’t it make it too easy to take badly thought out actions, with little concern for the consequences?

  7. John L says:

    Kick ass, so when are these robots racing to rwanda to give them food.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4647 access attempts in the last 7 days.