Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Dragonfly or Insect Spy? Scientists at Work on Robobugs
Vanessa Alarcon saw them while working at an antiwar rally in Lafayette Square last month.
"I heard someone say, 'Oh my god, look at those,' " the college senior from New York recalled. "I look up and I'm like, 'What the hell is that?' They looked kind of like dragonflies or little helicopters. But I mean, those are not insects."
Out in the crowd, Bernard Crane saw them, too.
"I'd never seen anything like it in my life," the Washington lawyer said. "They were large for dragonflies. I thought, 'Is that mechanical, or is that alive?' "
That is just one of the questions hovering over a handful of similar sightings at political events in Washington and New York. Some suspect the insectlike drones are high-tech surveillance tools, perhaps deployed by the Department of Homeland Security.
Others think they are, well, dragonflies -- an ancient order of insects that even biologists concede look about as robotic as a living creature can look.
No agency admits to having deployed insect-size spy drones. But a number of U.S. government and private entities acknowledge they are trying. Some federally funded teams are even growing live insects with computer chips in them, with the goal of mounting spyware on their bodies and controlling their flight muscles remotely.
The robobugs could follow suspects, guide missiles to targets or navigate the crannies of collapsed buildings to find survivors.
The technical challenges of creating robotic insects are daunting, and most experts doubt that fully working models exist yet.
"If you find something, let me know," said Gary Anderson of the Defense Department's Rapid Reaction Technology Office.
But the CIA secretly developed a simple dragonfly snooper as long ago as the 1970s. And given recent advances, even skeptics say there is always a chance that some agency has quietly managed to make something operational.
"America can be pretty sneaky," said Tom Ehrhard, a retired Air Force colonel and expert in unmanned aerial vehicles who is now at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a nonprofit Washington-based research institute.
Robotic fliers have been used by the military since World War II, but in the past decade their numbers and level of sophistication have increased enormously. Defense Department documents describe nearly 100 different models in use today, some as tiny as birds, and some the size of small planes.
All told, the nation's fleet of flying robots logged more than 160,000 flight hours last year -- a more than fourfold increase since 2003. A recent report by the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College warned that if traffic rules are not clarified soon, the glut of unmanned vehicles "could render military airspace chaotic and potentially dangerous."
But getting from bird size to bug size is not a simple matter of making everything smaller.
"You can't make a conventional robot of metal and ball bearings and just shrink the design down," said Ronald Fearing, a roboticist at the University of California at Berkeley. For one thing, the rules of aerodynamics change at very tiny scales and require wings that flap in precise ways -- a huge engineering challenge.
Only recently have scientists come to understand how insects fly -- a biomechanical feat that, despite the evidence before scientists' eyes, was for decades deemed "theoretically impossible." Just last month, researchers at Cornell University published a physics paper clarifying how dragonflies adjust the relative motions of their front and rear wings to save energy while hovering.
That kind of finding is important to roboticists because flapping fliers tend to be energy hogs, and batteries are heavy.
The CIA was among the earliest to tackle the problem. The "insectothopter," developed by the agency's Office of Research and Development 30 years ago, looked just like a dragonfly and contained a tiny gasoline engine to make the four wings flap. It flew but was ultimately declared a failure because it could not handle crosswinds.
Agency spokesman George Little said he could not talk about what the CIA may have done since then. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service also declined to discuss the topic.
Only the FBI offered a declarative denial. "We don't have anything like that," a spokesman said.
The Defense Department is trying, though.
In one approach, researchers funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) are inserting computer chips into moth pupae -- the intermediate stage between a caterpillar and a flying adult -- and hatching them into healthy "cyborg moths."
The Hybrid Insect Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems project aims to create literal shutterbugs -- camera-toting insects whose nerves have grown into their internal silicon chip so that wranglers can control their activities. DARPA researchers are also raising cyborg beetles with power for various instruments to be generated by their muscles.
"You might recall that Gandalf the friendly wizard in the recent classic 'Lord of the Rings' used a moth to call in air support," DARPA program manager Amit Lal said at a symposium in August. Today, he said, "this science fiction vision is within the realm of reality."
A DARPA spokeswoman denied a reporter's request to interview Lal or others on the project.
The cyborg insect project has its share of doubters.
"I'll be seriously dead before that program deploys," said vice admiral Joe Dyer, former commander of the Naval Air Systems Command, now at iRobot in Burlington, Mass., which makes household and military robots.
By contrast, fully mechanical micro-fliers are advancing quickly.
Researchers at the California Institute of Technology have made a "microbat ornithopter" that flies freely and fits in the palm of one's hand. A Vanderbilt University team has made a similar device.
With their sail-like wings, neither of those would be mistaken for insects. In July, however, a Harvard University team got a truly fly-like robot airborne, its synthetic wings buzzing at 120 beats per second.
"It showed that we can manufacture the articulated, high-speed structures that you need to re-create the complex wing motions that insects produce," said team leader Robert Wood.
The fly's vanishingly thin materials were machined with lasers, then folded into three-dimensional form "like a micro-origami," he said. Alternating electric fields make the wings flap. The whole thing weighs just 65 milligrams, or a little more than the plastic head of a push pin.
Still, it can fly only while attached to a threadlike tether that supplies power, evidence that significant hurdles remain.
In August, at the International Symposium on Flying Insects and Robots, held in Switzerland, Japanese researchers introduced radio-controlled fliers with four-inch wingspans that resemble hawk moths. Those who watch them fly, its creator wrote in the program, "feel something of 'living souls.' "
Others, taking a tip from the CIA, are making fliers that run on chemical fuels instead of batteries. The "entomopter," in early stages of development at the Georgia Institute of Technology and resembling a toy plane more than a bug, converts liquid fuel into a hot gas, which powers four flapping wings and ancillary equipment.
"You can get more energy out of a drop of gasoline than out of a battery the size of a drop of gasoline," said team leader Robert Michelson.
Even if the technical hurdles are overcome, insect-size fliers will always be risky investments.
"They can get eaten by a bird, they can get caught in a spider web," said Fearing of Berkeley. "No matter how smart you are -- you can put a Pentium in there -- if a bird comes at you at 30 miles per hour there's nothing you can do about it."
Protesters might even nab one with a net -- one of many reasons why Ehrhard, the former Air Force colonel, and other experts said they doubted that the hovering bugs spotted in Washington were spies.
So what was seen by Crane, Alarcon and a handful of others at the D.C. march -- and as far back as 2004, during the Republican National Convention in New York, when one observant but perhaps paranoid peace-march participant described on the Web "a jet-black dragonfly hovering about 10 feet off the ground, precisely in the middle of 7th avenue . . . watching us"?
They probably saw dragonflies, said Jerry Louton, an entomologist at the National Museum of Natural History. Washington is home to some large, spectacularly adorned dragonflies that "can knock your socks off," he said.
At the same time, he added, some details do not make sense. Three people at the D.C. event independently described a row of spheres, the size of small berries, attached along the tails of the big dragonflies -- an accoutrement that Louton could not explain. And all reported seeing at least three maneuvering in unison.
"Dragonflies never fly in a pack," he said.
Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the Partnership for Civil Justice said her group is investigating witness reports and has filed Freedom of Information Act requests with several federal agencies. If such devices are being used to spy on political activists, she said, "it would be a significant violation of people's civil rights."
For many roboticists still struggling to get off the ground, however, that concern -- and their technology's potential role -- seems superfluous.
"I don't want people to get paranoid, but what can I say?" Fearing said. "Cellphone cameras are already everywhere. It's not that much different."
© 2007 Washington Post



20 Comments so far
Show AllI'd think an agent with a pair of binoculars across the street, or a paid informant amongst the protestors themselves, would get quite a bit more information than miniature optics from an incredibly expensive piece of machinery that wouldn't be able to fly against a breeze, and could be reduced back to silicon with a 50 cent fly-swatter. One wonders, also, what a simple squirt gun or can of insect repellent would do (the sort used against yellowjackets, with a long spray range).
This is interesting sci-fi and rumor-mongering anyway... But methinks the rules of physics and basic bang-for-buck would kick in.
There are reasons to be concerned, and reasons not to. I put this into the latter category.
Do these robots sting yet?
What sane human would work on these things?
Good Lord! Mini-cameras on the wing?
Take big heavy flyswatters and use 'em! Capture a bunch and reproduce them. Then send them into Bush & Cheney's offices to do a little reconnaissance.
Just what we need. No I doubt they'll be used on us. Our kids will have to deal with such things, eventually. Figure on a hummingbird that will likely look like one too. Cheerful future we bequeath our own huh?
Whatfools: What sane person would work on this? The same kind of "sane" person who invented shrapnel that is undetectable with x-rays, how to use DU in bombs, how to make undetectable landmines, how to make phosphorous bombs, how to make other WMDs for Uncle Sam.
Paul,
Nano technology is already here, it's not sci-fi, and is developing very rapidly. Hopefully it will enhance our world but, as usual, some idiots want to use it for devious reasons.
We will look back at the cops in your face with a camera, as the good old days.
The freakshows endless
Just get a can of glue spray, and that will finish it! I love to spray it on cob webs, where the spider is caught in its own trap!
All you guys with the cans of Raid, if you detect it, then it's not spying, is it?
I think that by the time this becomes commonplace, we'll have been immersed in the more conventional ways of surveilance: sateliites, informants, cameras, warrantless wiretaps, etc, etc,... all contracted out to friends of the politicos. A whole new industry blossoms. The craziness continues unabated.
Local police will not be using these things unless they get quite cheap (my municipal PD cannot even afford decibel readers to enforce a local noise ordinance). If they get cheap, they'll be available to civilians, even as toys.
Then some enterprising 21st century Michael Moore will fly one of these babies into corporate boardrooms, into rooms where political shenanigans are planned, etc. and turn the tables: spying on the ueber-elite.
But I think this is all fiction for the most part anyway. The energy required to fly anything that small, for any reasonable distance, power a wireless video camera, etc. is not there. This is just something else to get paranoid about, or to dream about, or to get a lot of government funding, whatever your inclination.
Remember -- SDI got a lot of funding too, and it didn't really produce much in the way of deliverables either.
"But I think this is all fiction for the most part anyway."
Sorry, Paul, but I have to disagree. While I think your point about paranoia is on, I wouldn't go as far as dismissing what's out there. If you can imagine it, they're either working on it or have it.
Remember when RFID's were a thing of Sci-fi? Don't look now!
This is actually pretty old stuff.
As an aviator, computer student, and avid science reader, I took some interest in this subject. Thirty years ago, as the article points out, the aerodynamic wing surface area and rpm of the common bumble bee was calculated by aerodynamists at NASA's dryden/langley research centers, using the aspect ratio, reynolds number, camber of the flying surface against the drag and weight of the bumblebee. The conclusion was it cannot fly! Not even close. We always laughed about that. Several times as we took bets, right before take off, about what speed a yellowjacket would blow off the windshield wiper on the 727. 45kts, 50kts and 75 kts were the bets on one occasion. The damn bug hung on until 110 kts! right at rotate speed. We couldn't believe it.
The mathematical laws of aerodynamics do not apply the same for small bugs because they have more surface area per mass than larger forms do. This makes them perfect spy platforms, and "Scientific American" has had a number of articles over the years about nano-size biochips that have controlled insect appendages. Battery power is always a problem with autonomous robots, but hey, that's what microscopic plutonium RTG's are for! (smaller versions of the Cassini spacecraft power plant RTG)
So if spook agencies are that adamant that it's impossible, chances are, it's being tested out on some poor unsuspecting American citizen who wonders why there's always a big black moth in his office. Solution? SPLAT! But then there's those darn ants that keep sneaking into his computer......
Power is not a problem for guys who dipp their bullets in DU:
Plutonium-238, Pu-240 and Pu-242 emit neutrons as a few of their nuclei spontaneously fission, albeit at a low rate. They and PU-239 also decay, emitting alpha particles and heat. The decay heat of Pu-238 (0.56 W/g) enables its use as an electricity source in the radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) of some cardiac pacemakers, space satellites, navigation beacons, etc. Plutonium has powered 24 US space vehicles and enabled the Voyager spacecraft to send back pictures of distant planets. These spacecraft have operated for 20 years and may continue for another 20. The Cassini spacecraft carries three generators providing 870 watts power as it orbits aroound Saturn.
Source:
http://www.uic.com.au/nip18.htm
So it is fair to say that shotgun dick always has Plutonium close to his heart! And what keeps old Darth Vader ticking is only a few molecules of the stuff, so a trace amount would do in a housefly (poor phucking birds!)
The above is all just science fiction for entertainment purposes only!!
pac "don't trust a D.C. bug" plyer
This administration truly bugs me!!!
pacplyer - good comments. I wondered about the power source weight also, thanks.
I suspect that those observant witnesses at the 2004 RNC or the DC rally were correct. Protesters would make excellent test subjects.
I think I remember reading an article about 1.25 years ago about military scientific research into counterinsurgency methods using small insect spies with small explosives or beacons. The article was not some wacko scifi source.
This article says, Dragonflies never fly in a pack. I sure disagree with that statement. I have dragonflies where I live and I can't wait for them to hatch out every year. When I mow the yard, really it's the deer's playground, the dragonflies are out by the thousands following me and picking the insects, mosquitoes mainly, even off my arms. The way nature does it of course, the mosquitoes hatch first, then the dragonflies come shortly after to eat them. The way the dragonflies jaws are, they can't hurt a person's skin, plus they are very beautiful. City and urban people may not know much about dragonflies because many of the wetland areas are sprayed with chemicals to kill the mosquitoes.
I don't doubt that some idiots are messing with them. I have also read of experiments using sea life. Such a lack of respect for nature is the biggest problem we face today.
For god's sake, next time anyone THINKS of starting an urban legend with a claim of being "bugged" (in the literal sense), take a squirt gun, bug net, or can of insect repellent, and disable one of these things. Take a hundred close-up digital photos, perform a little dissection, send the photos various blogs, slashdot, Rolling Stone, etc. and then we have reason to believe it's more than miniature UFO sightings or bad beer the night before.
The other meme I find interesting is the old cops vs. protestors wedge (working poor vs. working poor). I'd like to see "the majority of America vs. the crooked class". What if law enforcement were tipped off about a shady politician and decided to fly one of them into a closed-door energy meeting to see what sort of dealings transpire? Or the "janitor" simply left an ordinary/stationary bug in place the night before? These things are cheap enough, a few hundred bucks -- anyone can buy them on the internet.
All technology is a double-edged sword, it all cuts both ways. That's why America will never quite get its shot at Empire.
Paul, here's some more of my creative (fiction) writing:
Since it's a hijacked biological insect we're hypothesizing about, and since the electronic components are on nano-chips (one-billionth of an millimeter across) no camera that you or I could buy could take a picture of it, much less find the needle in a haystack. It is that incredibly small. You'd need a million dollar electron microscope to do that and several years to search the vast body of the bug's nervous system. That's what's so beautiful about this approach to target tracking. It has unassailable built in plausible deniability.
The only way to verify this theory that I know, would be to use a radiation dosimeter and have the film analyzed for plutonium signature. But guess who would be way ahead of us on those lab results? Yep. No way a film badge company is going to be permitted to release a finding like this. I wore these radiation film dosimeters for twenty years, and never once was a positive result ever announced for one of 50,000 employees who routinely worked around and transported radioactive cargos. However, a shipper once accidentally damaged the top of a drum of nuke waste with a forklift (which popped the seal) and the receiving company representative did a reading with a Gieger Counter (it pegged out) and he dropped his scanner and took off running the other way. Scores of employees were handling and working around this thing, but, surprise, nobody's film badge was emailed as hot. In fact they said no one was exposed at all.
This is why I am opposed to all nuclear power. Corps and gov are not trustworthy custodians of public safety.
When I read about the American Airlines incident of radiation poisoning my blood ran cold. Recall the poisoned Russian critic of Putkin who died? I ride those 757/767's all the time. The trail of detectable contamination was all through the plane in question. Radioactive footprints! Do you think American Airlines did anything to alert all the people on the days of operable flights after this event that they were exposed?
I hate all big companies. I hate all big government. They are by their very monopolistic, socialistic natures: in contempt of the individual and of his personal freedom. And the individual's freedom to vote is the most important American right we have to restore by instisting on paper only ballots.
Most Individuals do not want an Iranian Attack. Most big businesses do. As do most bankers, defense contractors, munitions makers and wall street. Which means most CEO's do.
Know your enemy.
Quote: "The technical challenges of creating robotic insects are daunting, and most experts doubt that fully working models exist yet.
"If you find something, let me know," said Gary Anderson of the Defense Department's Rapid Reaction Technology Office."
NOW, that has a hint of saying the opposite of what he knows; imo. He might be speaking truthfully, but such people are not be be trusted, their words are not but [rarely] trustworthy as far as a sane public is concerned, etc.
Have you heard of the 'hornet' flying robot that the govt of Israel is working on, like for hunting down Palestinian resistance, f.e.? About the size of a hornet, and I don't recall what stage the R&D (research & development) has reached, but read about this in some articles at www.globalresearch.ca last year. People wanting to read those articles can surely find them by going to the GR homepage and doing a search of the site using 'hornet' for keyword. Doing a websearch using the keywords of 'hornet' and 'Israel', possibly adding 'robot' or 'flying robot', should turn up more articles.
Now, if they can get that 'hornet' to work, then maybe the same sick inventors will add a stinger for injecting tiny amounts of very potent or powerful poisons, f.e., too.
The articles I read on that spoke of the flying robot being for tracking resistance fighters through buildings and tunnels, so wind would not be an impediment in such places; but the flying robot must first get to these places, before entering them, and ... let's hope there's a constant wind in that area.
Well, carry a flyswatter with a long handle with ya.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall when _________ (fill in the blank)
Sorry,
Fell off my soapbox and got sidetracked there for a minute. More fiction follows:
The only way to dectect a theoraretical miniture RTG would be to use nuclear medicine techniques which are used for DNA gene radiation "tagging". I would imagine that would be very expensive and difficult. I'm not sure it could be done since that science knows the exact chromosome to start the search at, and we are talking about billions and billions of potential fly nueron cells where the chip could be attached. The only hope would be that the signature of the trace plutoium would be great enough that it could be dectected by a full bug bodyscan.
The best advice I can give about bugs is: Always assume you are being bugged. Microsoft windows has more bugs than a baitstore; that is to say, more "backdoors", unpublished portals and unprotected paths to your hard drive than you can believe. It would be a small matter to make your built in microphone hot, or a keyboard cam hot without your knowledge.
The upside is, I believe America is perfectly safe from any diabolical boogieman that the gov wants to stop. They can and do scan any cellphone or computer hard drive that they desire in the name of national security.
The downside is, there is no longer any personal privacy and this can be abused by fanatics of party, to destroy the diversity of opinion that always has been one of the greatest strengths of America.
pac "Tom Clancy" plyer