Latest US Military Insect Surveillance Drones

originally posted by: AnteBellum

Not at all claiming it to be real, there are some design issues I can even spot.
But as a leaked prototype to initiate funding or seed money, maybe.

If it were military, you wouldn't need 'leaks' to get funding, in fact, it would be totally detrimental.

The article in the OP from pressir also invokes the old 'RFID' bogeyman. You can't inject a microscopic tracking device. Well, not one that works, anyway. It's crap. If they're claiming the mosquito is real and that they know that's what it does...well, it proves they're lying their asses off. The other devices they cite as proof aren't mosquito sized by any stretch.

I haven't spoken to him, but sent an e-mail his way. . . waiting!

Always a good idea. I generally start there with stuff like this.

a reply to: Bedlam

If it were military, you wouldn't need 'leaks' to get funding, in fact, it would be totally detrimental.

But if you were the artist who made a cgi bug for someone, you could. It's recognition, simply that.
DARPA and the rest use random artist to do some work like this all the time. College grads usually from prestigious universities and the like, you'd be surprised!
It is always very specific and general though.
Actually, you can go to there website and send them an idea of your own also. They are always looking for new talent on the hundreds of active projects they have right now. The secret stuff stays with private contractors and filters down to the private sector, then down even more to general businesses. They have done it this way for years, under the guise for something else.

a reply to: AnteBellum
in the link for Steampunk insects by Russian artist Turi Savelich that i posted earlier, i noticed his name was spelled Yuri Savelich in the article. A person by the name of Yuri Savelich posted this picture here. Someone questioned him about it here. He seemed to had found the picture from a search engine. Then I found a different article here. I now think the OP image is the work of Johns Hopkins engineering student Tiras Lin.
"For military missions in particular, these MAVs must be able to fly successfully through complex urban environments, where there can be tight spaces and turbulent gusts of wind," said Tiras Lin, a Whiting School of Engineering undergraduate who has been conducting the high-speed video research

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Bedlam

But if you were the artist who made a cgi bug for someone, you could. It's recognition, simply that.
DARPA and the rest use random artist to do some work like this all the time. College grads usually from prestigious universities and the like, you'd be surprised!

I do engineering work for aerospace companies and TLA's - they don't go for a lot of artwork per se. Most of the presentations are pretty crude.

Actually, you can go to there website and send them an idea of your own also. They are always looking for new talent on the hundreds of active projects they have right now. The secret stuff stays with private contractors and filters down to the private sector, then down even more to general businesses. They have done it this way for years, under the guise for something else.

I've been at Edwards for over a year now working on three different projects. You're teaching your granny to suck eggs.

But, sadly, the original article is hogwash. The devices they're citing as evidence don't look or act anything like that, and you cannot in fact 'insert microscopic RFID tracking devices under the skin', for oh so many reasons. There actually aren't any implantable tracking devices, mosquito-snout-sized or no. And blood samples aren't generally a great source for DNA samples. Human red blood cells HAVE no DNA. And white blood cell nuclei are bizarre. It's a lot more useful to get somatic cell DNA, but what are they positing you'd DO with it if you had it? Mwa ha ha, we have your DNA? Now what.

a reply to: gmoneystunt

Thank you so much, I didn't realize the spelling was wrong. Copy/paste thing.
So if I remember correctly in another link I posted earlier(2nd) I read this had something to do with Johns Hopkins. Has the trail gone dead with Tiras Lin?

a reply to: Bedlam

But, sadly, the original article is hogwash. The devices they're citing as evidence don't look or act anything like that, and you cannot in fact 'insert microscopic RFID tracking devices under the skin', for oh so many reasons. There actually aren't any implantable tracking devices, mosquito-snout-sized or no. And blood samples aren't generally a great source for DNA samples. Human red blood cells HAVE no DNA. And white blood cell nuclei are bizarre. It's a lot more useful to get somatic cell DNA, but what are they positing you'd DO with it if you had it? Mwa ha ha, we have your DNA? Now what

They have implantable tracking devices, not as small as to inject through a needle, but in pill form and large stamp size plastic. The purchasable civilian tracking device isn't even as big as my car alarm button. I almost bought it for my kid instead of a phone at first, I'm still thinking of doing it so I can sew them in there backpacks, just in case! Pretty cheap too. If I can buy that, what makes you think the military hasn't a better, smaller one?

The DNA thing is retarded I know, the needle is too small, but then again I'm sure the USA would love Putins' blood samples right now for analyses. Military grade bio-warfare is the only practical purpose at the moment.
Also we haven't studied the mechanisms for swarm deployment yet. You know how a swarm of birds fly without bumping into one another, that has not effectively been programmed yet. So these buggers would have to be flown one by one, each with a human pilot, but they're working on that now too.

www.photosfan.com...

Heres the image posted in 2006. 6 years before the stories, this image has nothing to do with the story at all.

a reply to: SLAYER69

Flying it into an enemies stronghold for surveillance or carrying a small amount of C-4/high-tech high explosive and detonating it in an opposing Generals face?

Ha. You made me think there.
What if they had a swarm of them, (the individuals could fit through a crack) that regrouped once they gained access into the room... hell they could form themselves into a shaped charge and do serious damage.

originally posted by: AnteBellum

They have implantable tracking devices, not as small as to inject through a needle, but in pill form and large stamp size plastic. The purchasable civilian tracking device isn't even as big as my car alarm button. I almost bought it for my kid instead of a phone at first, I'm still thinking of doing it so I can sew them in there backpacks, just in case! Pretty cheap too. If I can buy that, what makes you think the military hasn't a better, smaller one?

Citation needed. Seriously, there aren't any. Links or data, and I'll show you why either they're not actually tracking devices, but some sort of scannable identification tag, or they're not implantable because they're radio devices.

The answer to 'why do I think the military hasn't a better, smaller one' is that there are sad physical limits to these sorts of things. If you really want, I can write you quite a lengthy dissertation on it, it's one of those things I work on. A few - you're conductive. You're a bag of electrolytes. As such you present a huge step change in impedance between your inside and your outside. That causes a huge loss in power for any radio emission. Another - the smaller the antenna and device, the higher the frequency has to be. The higher the frequency, the more the path loss in a dissipative media. The losses on the way out can be several hundred dB. Not counting what you lose as an impedance step. Even if you ignore this, the radiation efficiency of an antenna is dependent on its length somewhat matching the frequency of the transmission. Even a microwave antenna is going to be several cm long. Something that would fit in a mosquito sized injector would be so inefficient as to be non-functional, not even bringing in the other losses.

You just don't do implantable radio devices. The only ones I've ever seen are medical devices that are the size of hockey pucks and use the MICS band at 400MHz. And they are huge and very short ranged because of these issues.

The sorts of things you put in dogs aren't tracking devices. They're ID tags. They don't transmit. They have a range that's very limited, and that's because they aren't radio transmitters at all. They use near-field communications. You can't get more than a few cm out of them. And the reason why is yet another limit set by physics (actually, two of them).

The pill thing you're talking about isn't a tracking device. It's yet another near field device. You have to have an interrogator held right against the skin.

The DNA thing is retarded I know, the needle is too small, but then again I'm sure the USA would love Putins' blood samples right now for analyses. Military grade bio-warfare is the only practical purpose at the moment.

What advantage is conferred by having a DNA sample?

a reply to: Joneselius

I have serious doubts about this story.

a reply to: AnteBellum
Heres some extra info on him here. Tiras Lin's study included all his loves-graphics design, working in 3D. So the image could be a 3d graphic engineering model. The latest i found on him was an article from 12/12/13 here. I feel like i am trying to find out who created Skynet from Terminator. Now if we could just go back in time and stop him from designing this. LOL

a reply to: Bedlam

Then what does this do: (or is this a linguistic issue)
Link
Another Link

There are many advantages they even burn the presidents 'poop' when abroad!

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Bedlam

Then what does this do: (or is this a linguistic issue)
Link

It's a GSM cell phone that's been stripped down. There's no display, keyboard, microphone or speaker. But it's got the AGPS and you can dial it up and interrogate it for its location.

eta: Both links are GSM phone modules. Any time you see some device that purports to track someone by GPS, it's going to either be rubbish or a GSM phone that's stripped down. That includes GPS bracelets, Alzheimer's patient trackers and whatnot.

It's not the sort of thing you can stick inside someone.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Bedlam

There are many advantages they even burn the presidents 'poop' when abroad!

Name some. "If I have someone's DNA, I can then..." what?

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Bedlam

There are many advantages they even burn the presidents 'poop' when abroad!

Name some. "If I have someone's DNA, I can then..." what?

They could clone the President.
For what other reason would they need Obama's POOP?

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Bedlam

There are many advantages they even burn the presidents 'poop' when abroad!

Name some. "If I have someone's DNA, I can then..." what?

They could clone the President.
For what other reason would they need Obama's POOP?

They've already made use of Obama's poop. They named it "Obamacare".

What? It was begging for that punchline.

a reply to: Bedlam

They have implantable tracking devices, not as small as to inject through a needle, but in pill form and large stamp size plastic.

Tell me why it's impossible to stick this inside someone? Or place it on the scalp under the hair?
I mean, it's not like it's a pacemaker or anything like that.
They use pills with cameras now to go through your GI system, tracking and taking photos, instead of the old fashion way - much better improvement!

Citation needed. Seriously, there aren't any. Links or data, and I'll show you why either they're not actually tracking devices, but some sort of scannable identification tag, or they're not implantable because they're radio devices.

I don't care what you call them, they work, my neighbor has one for her child. It's a wonderful invention for a paranoid parent!
Really even a cell phone can be a tracking device now!

There are many advantages they even burn the presidents 'poop' when abroad!

I was unintentionally misleading by that answer. I was alluding to knowing personal things about people being important, not that DNA was the only mode to achieve it.

I would think the advantages are of a propaganda based attack.
When it was learned Bin Laden had kidney issues they used it to there advantage to try and find him.
If we knew Putin had certain ailments he wouldn't 'look' like the strong leader sitting shirtless wresting bears anymore.

Character Assassination falls into this category too but I'm sure given enough time they could come up with many nasty things to do depending on the type of info received.

Why are you deliberately trying to shoot down everything I say.
I was agreeing with you for most of the thread.
I'm just giving specific examples to working devices that exist everywhere now, it's 2014.

originally posted by: gmoneystunt
a reply to: AnteBellum
Heres some extra info on him here. Tiras Lin's study included all his loves-graphics design, working in 3D. So the image could be a 3d graphic engineering model. The latest i found on him was an article from 12/12/13 here. I feel like i am trying to find out who created Skynet from Terminator. Now if we could just go back in time and stop him from designing this. LOL

It was created by someone at

www.garmada.com...

For some 3D CGI competition and won 3rd place.

a reply to: hana1

And the winner is. . . You!

Photo was used as a deliberate attempt to gain credibility to a dry story, a hoax!

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Bedlam

Tell me why it's impossible to stick this inside someone? Or place it on the scalp under the hair?
I mean, it's not like it's a pacemaker or anything like that.
They use pills with cameras now to go through your GI system, tracking and taking photos, instead of the old fashion way - much better improvement!

Actually, a cell phone is a lot more complex than a pacemaker. Although let's start with that. A pacemaker's a pretty simplistic device. But it's bulky. Because it needs a battery. Since it's implanted, you can't readily change it or charge it, so it's big. And they communicate with their interrogator through near-field communications, not through radio.

We covered the top reasons why up thread -

1) antennas have to be a certain size to have any efficiency, and that size is relative to the wavelength. The higher the frequency, the shorter the antenna.

However, even at GSM frequencies, the antenna is not exactly trivial. It's the size of the phone. They just put the antenna inside the package these days. Got an iPhone? That metal band around the thing is the antenna, at least 2/3 of it is. You can't make a cell phone antenna 20 mils long because you want to.

That also crops up with the GPS antenna. Do you know how GPS works? You're receiving very small signals from satellites. The antenna's about the size of a big postage stamp. You don't get to make it the size of a flea, because the size is inextricably linked with the frequency.

So putting a cell phone inside someone requires pretty hefty antennas. Antennas you can't make fit through a mosquito snout, because physics.

2) signal loss because you're conductive

You lose a HUGE amount of radiated power any time you try to transmit from inside something conductive. And you lose that much trying to receive as well. So it's going to be impossible to pick up GPS signals inside your body. And close to impossible to pick up the incoming cell phone data you need to make the GPS go. Or to receive the command to send the location.

3) battery

GPS is calculation intensive, which requires non-trivial amounts of power. Running a GSM cell phone is a lot worse. You just can't belt out a few hundred mW of radio signal with a mosquito nose sized battery.

4) you can't miniaturize digital and analog mixed ICs that well

Ever looked at the inside of a cell phone? There's a number of ICs in there to make the magic go. Same with a GPS receiver. Add those together. It's pretty damned tough to shrink that much circuitry enough to fit through a mosquito nose. Most cell phones and GPS receivers try to split the RF and digital sections into separate parts - the technology you use for making digital chips is different from the one you use to make analog parts, and although you can sort of bastardize it to get it to work together for some types of parts, it's really tough to make good low noise RF sections when it's on the same die as a CPU. Not to mention that the part will also have to make 500mW of RF output on the same mosquito-nose sized die. What do you do with the heat?

It's a logical fallacy to say look what they did with this thing, therefore you can do whatever I imagine with the other. We used to call it the astronaut fallacy when I was a kid, because the statement went "If they can send men to the Moon, why can't they make (bad comparison)?" A pill camera is tough to do, but it's not the same issue set. BTW, pill cameras also use near-field communication to return their data, because you can't use radio, for the reasons I've stated.

I don't care what you call them, they work, my neighbor has one for her child. It's a wonderful invention for a paranoid parent!
Really even a cell phone can be a tracking device now!

It's a tracking device because it's a cell phone, not in spite of being one. They work, alright, but they work because they're a complete cell phone. And cell phones are trackable, because that's how the system works. In order to do the cell hand off, the towers have to have a pretty good idea of where you are, and AGPS just adds to that ability.

Why are you deliberately trying to shoot down everything I say.
I was agreeing with you for most of the thread.
I'm just giving specific examples to working devices that exist everywhere now, it's 2014.

My point is that the thing doesn't exist, and that the article from whence your facts come is also grossly inaccurate, and thus not a reliable source of information. It's not YOU, I'm sure you're a nice person, just that the info you're basing this on is wrong.