[Pontiac]

We live in an open source world in which product development timelines are compressed. You can get more results using what is at hand instead of proprietary parts and technologies.

Which is why one has to wonder about this;

The PackBot's destruction may have prevented the IED from claiming a soldier's life—as of 31 August, IEDs accounted for nearly half of the 3299 combat deaths reported by coalition forces. But the fact remains that a US $100 000 piece of machinery was done in by what was probably a few dollars' worth of explosives, most likely triggered using a modified cellphone, a garage-door opener, or even a toy's remote control.

When excellent remote control model cars are available for a thousand dollars or less and wireless digital cameras are out there for a few hundred dollars why are we paying $100K for a backpack robot to investigate a road side bomb?

Even if this robot has special capabilities a cheaper version could be sent in first.

No doubt this is a product of some industry in John Murtha’s district.

[goldstategop]

Its all about results. The most expensive approach is not necessarily the most cost-effective approach. Throwing money at a problem doesn't necessarily lead to the desired outcome. If you have a shoestring budget, you've got to do it better because you have to show that it brings more bangs for the bucks spent.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Secret Agent Man]

Why can’t they just send a high powered signal within the ranges of where these ied devices are and remotely trigger them to go off (if they are there)? Take all the RC freq’s and cell phone freqs and send a sweeping signal up and down the ranges and see if you can’t cause it to blow up?