The main benefit I can think of for the military is the ability to approach zones that have anti drone equipment via the ground. Noise isn't really a concern since grenade drones fly too high and kamikaze drones rely on speed and unpredictability. Not sure how much better approach on wheels would be than just flying low, either.
The tradeoff is presumably higher cost and less reliability. Additionally, less ability to carry mass than if it just flew.
I can't imagine a way this would be too useful but obviously a lack of imagination isn't proof..
The obvious weakness are the wheels. Conventional infantry are already trained to hit armored vehicles in the wheels/drivetrain to remove their mobility. Hitting a wheel for this robot accomplishes the same for driving and flying (since the rotors are part of the wheels)
Although I don't think militaries would really rely on wheeled transportation much for drones, though perhaps reduced battery drain in the wheeled on-ground mode is a selling point for longevity in the field. It certainly has many other uses though.
The driving to walking transition is pretty darn cool. Using the propellers to lift itself up is pretty smart. But overall, this seems like an absolute reliability nightmare.
The good news is that when the battery dies, it has no moving parts!, keeping it simple.
EDIT:
What would be really neat ; putting little inflatable pontoons on those skids.
That thing is awesome, however, with the hard plastic wheels, and the way it scapes them back into forward wheels, I feel like this is a dead-in-the-water-flaw.
Imagine trying to scrape the wheels back into place on sand, or any other terrain obsticals that will prevent the pulling the wheels in.
Instead, it should move the pivot joint and allow for the wheels to be lifted up, gull-wing-style, then straightened and then placed down like feet, lift the body, then drive....
That thing will die in water without pontoons (the wheels/tyres maybe) -- and also not relying on scraping hard Big-Wheel stile plastice tyres along whatever surface.
It’s probably a one use disposable solution when something critical needs to be delivered somewhere, be it peaceful (medicines) of bellicose (explosives) or anything in between.
Unpopular opinion.
Sometimes I look at university projects like this and I struggle to differentiate what is really innovation vs what is just grownup kids having too much time and money at their disposal.
Haha, saying post docs have too much money is amusing!
They have time, because they accept lower remuneration for many years to work on things they are interested in.
All of this research has to get funding from somewhere. Presumably the funding bodies decided this was a potentially useful thing to fund.
So I'm not sure what your complaint is really. Are you unhappy because you personally don't see the value in some research? That it just looks too much fun to be "real" work?
Not all research is fund through grants. Additionally, not all grants are optimising for real world impact.
Not saying that this is bad.
I just wonder if those post docs were put in a business context with the same runway of money, but a more strict business outcome as success criteria, would focus their work on the same things in the academia.
I'm also realising, as I'm writing that this is a very well know objection to industry vs academia, and possibly my knowledge is limited enough that I'm most likely wrong :)
Neat. What I want to see are close-framed, 15 mm thin, 75 g max, 4 wire, ultra-quiet lift modules 20x20 cm to move through buildings at/below background noise levels. vcc, tach, control, and gnd. Toroidal designs show some promise in 3D-printed composites, perhaps of the "flower-Moebius" 5-7 large double blade design with a long chord.
Agreed, the headline is a bit misleading. It can fly, roll on 4 wheels, or roll on 2 wheels.
The latter is interesting, but doesn't constitute "walking", especially when the point of walking (as a preferred method of locomotion) is to be able to step over obstacles or onto platforms like stairs, which rolling on two wheels obviously can't accomplish.
> Joints on the wheel assemblies allow M4 to execute a walking motion. In M4's current iteration, the walking motion is mostly proof of concept. However, with anticipated advances, future M4 generations could possess the ability to effectively walk across broken terrain that a wheeled robot would struggle with.
Except that the provided demonstration isn't walking any more than using a Segway is walking.
I noticed the terrified terrapin at 0:40 in the video as much as anything else! Impressive idea though, being able to be multi-modal. It'll be interesting to see how quickly that is copied and made available to Joe Public.
Tricopter slash tricycle design may work better for swimming. The 'rear' wheel could have a controllable axis of rotation. That said, we have hundreds of years of propellers getting caught in seaweed. I don't like the chances of a lightweight drone resisting fouling, especially if it has a prop ring enclosure.
Drones are the future of warfare so you are a little late to complain about drones being used for warfare. The race is well under way.
“…used by both Russia and Ukraine for surveillance and for delivering bombs, goes for around US $2,000. You can get 55,000 of them for the price of a single F-35”
https://thenewpress.com/books/theory-of-drone is a neat read from the (not that much) earlier period where drone warfare was asymmetric, trying to contextualize it in the broader history of warfare.
It would have to be targeted to the kids with workaholic parents who neglect to spend time with their children, and thus need to spend big to demonstrate that they do, in fact, love their offspring.
The children in question would use the toy for 3 or 4 weeks, get bored of it, and move on.
