Given the modest size of this flamethrower, the fuel capacity must be very limited, so you could deploy it against a single target, but it would have to return to base to refuel very soon.
In order to carry enough fuel to spend minutes functioning autonomously, you'd need a much larger reservoir, resulting in greater weight, requiring a larger 'dog'...
One assumes that a 'giant deluxe' version is in the works...
That's assuming it is a weapon. It isn't.
Why does anyone think this is a real story, product and company? Either this fake or it's an ad for weapons. Neither should be shared and neither is news. Yuck.
Aside from fear culture writ large, these things have very practical uses. Firebreaks, control burns that are hella less dangerous for the humans already putting themselves deep in harms way.
Here in the US at least, we have a lot of land that is prone to fires, so firebreaks and control burns are really important.
So the cute little robodog with the tiny flamethrower mounted on it is not remotely set up for weapons use. It has zero armoring, and if people are trying to fight it, it would be simple to disable.
I'm too lazy to research how many of those particular weapons were bought on credit and potentially paid off although that would be an interesting statistic.
But not too lazy to post wildly offtopic.
how long until it gets used in terrorist attacks?
I mean, no need for a suicide mission when you can remote control this thing.
What could possibly go wrong?
Robot flamethrowers have existed for a long, long time, and arson even longer.
The only thing different about this is the somewhat cute robodog. But if a person is nasty enough to want to kill others in this heinous way, the old standby molatov cocktail will suffice.
We probably don't see that too much because those who might use it know what is likely to happen if they do.
How much does public liability insurance for using one of these cost?
Most will be used by the forest service for controlled burns and fighting forest fires. Limited liability for controlled burns, and all bets are off in the event of forest fires.
The insurance risk will be for any used for entertainment. At least here in verdant Pennsylvania, we take our forests pretty seriously. If you are burning trash and it turns into a wildfire, you are going to jail. So this flame-spittin' doggobot is probably not going to be used too often for entertainment. At base, insurance will be hella expensive, and there is a fine line to be crossed that turns using it into a crime.
Yes. It's 9420 USD. Free shipping in US.
It's not particularly special. It's just a low end robot dog with a low end gasoline electric flamethrower attached on top.
Perhaps the emotional reaction to this is the so called "robot dog". Because civilian flamethrowers are and have been in use for a long time, largely used as firebreaks these days. The US has a lot of area prone to wildfires. In addition to fighting fires with firebreaks to limit their spread, we have a lot of controlled burns. The controlled burn is a weird but successful concept that since an area simply will burn at some point from natural causes, you do a controlled burn during a time when it is least likely to spread. clears the litter and even enriches the soil.
This flame throwing robot makes it hella safer on humans fighting fires or control burning. Monkin' about with a tank of gasoline on your back is kind of scary and dangerous.
The fact that it is freaking awesome is just a side effect to its utilitarian uses.
So early, is not time? Like early in the morning? I suppose you can have your personal definition, for me An early adopter is the first people to adopt something.
Early in the Precambrian could be hundreds of millions of years, I think the frame of reference matters. In the frame of reference of total EV adoption I would consider 3% early, though I'm sure it will speed up some over time.
That's a really awkward definition. Because it might take something niche, and since not more than say 3 percent of anyone might ever own it, anyone who ever does, will be an early adopter.
But okay, back to the early adopters with a little side trip. Let's take the Tesla Cybertruck. We can agree that those first owners are early adopters. We can agree those people who are getting them now will be pre-disposed to liking them. But ain't working out that way, at least in this case.That thing is a real turd.
Ill fitting body parts, the hood can chop your fingers off, sharp edges that can ribbon your legs, bad visibility all around, unreliable display - that's really bad, because everything is on the display. The dsboard is bare otherwise. The thing has already had a total recall, turns out the gas pedal has a cover that clips on, falls off, and lodges on the accelerator pedal. Really bad in a vehicle that can accelerate like an EV can. And the truck bed is mostly useless.
And these stainless steel panels - supposedly bulletproof, they are not, and the hurricane proof windows can be broken easily. The single large windshield wiper is largely worthless.
And the damn thing rusts while you watch. You are supposed to clean it off aftermost any drive, mud and water and insects will all stain it, Using "some" detergents will stain it, hot water will stain it. So if it rains, ya gotta get out and wipe it down, lest it stains.
So you have yourself a 100K fragile POS that is so ugly and stupid looking that people laugh at you. Too stupid looking for a Mad Max reboot. Perhaps Elon should cut down on the ketamine?
Electric Vehicles have been around long enough that Early adopters are measured in decades now?
Speaking for Canada, but I suspect the US is similar, "Electric vehicles accounted for 3.0% of light-duty vehicle registrations in 2022, up from 2.3% in 2021". So yes, I would still consider them early adopters. So early, is not time? Like early in the morning? I suppose you can have your personal definition, for me An early adopter is the first people to adopt something.
It was only after I switched to drinking only rainwater & pure-grain alcohol that I started to see it for what it really is.
My saving element was nude hot yoga, at least until it scared everyone else off.
T
And of course they have the best battery tech. Many European manufacturers, and Tesla, use Chinese LFP batteries because they are unbeatable. We really missed the boat, but it's even worse for Japanese companies who insist on using Japanese batteries.
We need to get on top of this, fast.
I wonder - is this anti-Chinese propaganda then? https://www.youtube.com/result... (compliation of burning Chines EV's)
I like EV's but there seems to be a disconnect between your claims of European Luxury level design, the best battery technology, and those burny things.
Why are you afraid of unitary communist electric cars?
Sounds almost like the Socialist Snow Plows the far right wants to get rid of.
Then let China sell cars in the US.
I didn't say they shouldn't. Maybe every American will suddenly want a Chinese EV instead of what they are driving now, but I'm doubtful.
I don't know if it is something actual or just propaganda, but on Youtube, there are a lot of Chinese EV's catching fire, with videos showing it.
The amount of energy stored in the batteries is pretty significant, and unless properly engineered, likes out of its container and gets burny. Just like say, the bad engineering on the old Ford Pinto that made it like to burn up.
My guess is that if the Chinese cars are going to be sold in the USA, they'll need to be heavily scrutinized and perhaps altered in order to pass our safety regulations.
And you know this how?
Because it is a common trait among early adopters.
You know this how? I hear people saying that EV owners suffer buyers remorse.
But then again, we hear many things that ain't necessarily so.
What is more, Electric Vehicles have been around long enough that Early adopters are measured in decades now? Using the new generation of EV's not the over century old ones.
Lol, why would they push their car to a charging station? Plug the thing in at home.
Well then they can't have their story. And draining the battery that far is the petrofuel equivalent of running out of gas, and blaming the manufacturer.
the product, fossil fuel cars, is obsolete...
I was singing a similar tune until this last winter, when a bunch of Teslas completely died due to the cold. People were pushing them down the street to get to charging stations. That showed me that fossil fuel vehicles are far from obsolete, and will continue to thrive until problems such as this are solved.
Isn't it weird how electrical vehicles are affected by cold, but petrofueld are completely unaffected by it?
Tents and gas flames https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Of course, you can always build a fire under it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
All sarcasm aside, gasoline and diesel engines also have problems in the cold. So if an EV does, it's because of the cold, not some inherent issue with EV's.
If people don't like EV's for some reason, that's fine. But just like the hand wringing when an EV catches fire, Petrofueld vehicles catch fire every day, and no one bats an eye. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... A lot of energy in batteries, and hella energy in petrofuels, and they get spunky every once in a while.P And a big part of the fix for both, rather than starting fires under the crankcase, is very similar in each case. Plug the thing in. In cold places like Alaska, parking meters have electrical outlets, battery and crankcase heaters, and you plug 'em in and keep them warm. An EV the same, you can even keep it topped off plugged into an outlet at home.
"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love." -- Albert Einstein
