The Truth About The Rebelling Robots Of Iraq

Last Wednesday, we ran an analysis from the 2008 RoboBusiness Conference in Pittsburgh that included a comment from an Army Program Manager, Kevin Fahey, about the SWORDS armed unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) system. This program, which resulted in the first armed UGVs to be deployed—specifically, three were deployed in Iraq in June 2007—has been the subject of considerable online rumors, after reports surfaced that the program was in trouble. It’s a hot topic for tech bloggers and anyone interested in the future of military robots. Which is probably why our story traveled so fast online—and a big reason why we put SWORDS on the cover of Popular Mechanics earlier this year.

It might also explain why our story was taken so blatantly out of context. What began as a straightforward update about the state of the SWORDS system was repurposed and sensationalized as breaking news about the sudden withdrawal of those three armed robots deployed in Iraq—and as several breaking follow-up reports. Qinetiq, the UK-based company that owns SWORDS-maker Foster-Miller, is disturbed about coverage of our piece, particularly because it appears to be fueling the urban legend of a rogue SWORDS suddenly aiming at hapless humans. But it’s not Popular Mechanics that is stoking the fire.

Fahey’s comments about SWORDS, particularly his quoted statement that “the gun started moving when it was not intended to move” was not pulled from a sit-down interview with Popular Mechanics. PM’s requests for interviews to find out why SWORDS has never fired a shot at a hostile target, despite being in Iraq since last summer, have all been denied by Qinetiq and Foster-Miller. Fahey was answering a question following his keynote presentation at the RoboBusiness Conference, which other members of the press attended. When an audience member asked what happened to SWORDS, Fahey’s response was vague, and there was no indication of a timeline in his comments. So the unintended movement he mentioned could have occurred before or after the robot’s deployment in Iraq. Still, any answer regarding SWORDS is worth noting, which is why we were suddenly glad to be at an otherwise uneventful robotics conference in western Pennsylvania.

The other Fahey comment we quoted—“once you’ve done something that’s really bad, it can take 10 or 20 years to try it again”—appeared to be in the context of why he believes the military has treaded so lightly with armed ground robots. Let’s be clear: Fahey was not stating that a SWORDS unit made a blunder that it will take 10 or 20 years to recover from. If anything, Fahey was trying to express the exact opposite: The goal is to avoid an incident that could set military robotics back a decade or more.

Rather than rehashing the history of the SWORDS program and its apparent difficulties, we treated this story as a minor update to the ongoing saga of armed military ground bots. We said that SWORDS was “yanked,” and that the three robots were “pulled off the battlefield.” Without additional clarification, those sentences were picked up by bloggers looking for a more solid update, and the story took on a mutated life all its own.

Officially, the three SWORDS units deployed to Iraq are still there. While working on that cover story about armed UGVs for PM’s March issue, we spoke to sources about the decision not to use the weapons capabilities of those SWORDS units, but no one was willing to be quoted. This is a sensitive issue for the entire industry. When we stated that the robots were pulled off the battlefield, we were talking about their potential use as armed participants in firefights. Qinetiq had no comment about reports that SWORDS units were no longer intended to be used to engage the enemy, and Foster-Miller directed us to the Robotic Systems Joint Project Office. Duane Gotvald, deputy project manager at that office, sent this statement via e-mail:
The Special Weapons Observation Remote Direct-Action System (SWORDS) capability is in theater. The SWORDS robot represents a new technological concept currently in the developmental stage. Three robots have been built so far; and while there has been considerable interest in fielding the system, some technical issues still remain and SWORDS is not currently funded. The U.S. Army’s 3rd Infantry Division has used the robots for surveillance and peacekeeping/guard operations. The robot is armed with Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW), M249 Light Machine Gun, and has not yet been used with this weapon in combat.

The fact that SWORDS lost its funding after just three units were deployed is, to us, the definition of a program that was “yanked.” Some bloggers used our shorthand to drum up a new SWORDS-related event. In addition, we did not state that SWORDS had pointed a gun at anyone, but that’s how some commentators have recast the story. Every UGV maker we’ve spoken to has stressed the importance of having a “man in the loop” when dealing with armed robots. As Predator drones have proven, an unmanned vehicle is capable of friendly fire, but the decision to engage will always be made by a human operator.

When Qinetiq contacted us about the article, we asked for an official statement to post about the status of SWORDS. It’s essentially the same information that has been released previously about SWORDS, and recently posted by Danger Room, but here it is, in the company’s words:

• SWORDS is currently deployed in Iraq, and has been there uninterrupted for almost a year.
• There have been no instances of uncommanded or unexpected movements by SWORDS during this period, whether in-theatre or elsewhere. A few years ago during the robot’s development, there were three minor movement issues that were expected, identified and addressed during rigorous stateside testing—prior to the Army’s Safety Confirmation back in 2006. Here is what actually happened:
- One uncommanded movement was caused by a loose wire (result: redundant wiring on every circuit).
- One was caused by a solder break (result: double solder).
- The third, which may not even count, was a test of the robot sitting on a 45-degree incline in 90-degree heat to see how long it would last. After about two hours and 30 minutes, the motor started to overheat and shut down so it wouldn’t burn out. That caused SWORDS to start to slide backward down the incline. The operator stopped it.

Any comments made after this timeframe about setbacks related to the robotics industry were hypothetical—never in response to some nonexistent SWORDS incident after the Safety Confirmation.

Although others have used our story to generate a false online rumor about these armed UGVs, the nature of those “technical issues” that Gotvald mentioned in his statement, and that Qinetiq and Foster-Miller have yet to address directly, remains a mystery. Until someone can explain why SWORDS lost its funding, and what exactly it is—and isn’t—being used for in Iraq, the rumors are likely to continue. If this is the dawn of the era of robotic infantry, things are off to a decidedly rocky start. —Erik Sofge
UPDATE (April 15): We just received a statement from Robert Quinn, vice president of TALON Robot Operations for Foster-Miller, in response to our query concerning any withdrawal of funding for SWORDS—and whether the robot's weapons would be used in live combat against hostile targets:
There was no withdrawal of funds. The government funded three robots. In answer to the second part of your question, Foster-Miller cannot comment on operational tactics for obvious reasons.

Link.