In recent years, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been actively promoting various new types of weapons, from so-called stealth aircraft, aircraft carriers, to the latest “urban warfare weapon” military robot dogs. However, what the CCP authorities dare not mention is that the Chinese company’s robot dogs actually originate from open-source technology in the United States. Experts point out that in a real battlefield environment, robot dogs have too many disadvantages, are flashy but not practical, and the US military has actually abandoned their use in combat, only utilizing them for simple auxiliary tasks.
On May 16, CCTV, the CCP’s state-owned television network, reported that during the “Golden Dragon 2024” joint military exercise held in Cambodia, China publicly displayed two types of robot dogs for the first time.
One is a lightweight reconnaissance robot dog weighing only 15 kilograms, capable of performing actions such as lying down, jumping, moving backward, and even shaking hands with soldiers. It is said that with the help of AI, it can autonomously find routes on the battlefield and “transmit information about on-site obstacles (such as barbed wire, discarded tires, and tire spikes).”
The other is a combat robot dog weighing 50 kilograms, equipped with a rifle on its back, primarily used to search and engage targets inside buildings, capable of carrying a load of 80 kilograms and remotely operated by a soldier.
CCTV stated in its video, “It can serve as a new member of our urban combat operations, replacing our (human) members for reconnaissance, identifying enemies, and striking targets.”
Mainland Chinese experts believe that the appearance of robot dogs in joint exercises with foreign military forces indicates that their development work has entered the final stages.
These two robot dogs both appear to be provided by the Chinese manufacturer Unitree, which bears a strong resemblance to Boston Dynamics’ “Spot” robot dog.
As early as 2015, Boston Dynamics developed a robot dog for the US military, and later in 2020, they launched the civilian version, Spot. Last year, Boston Dynamics’ competitor Ghost Robotics also showcased armed robot dogs. Currently, various units of the US military are using Ghost robot dogs, mainly for reconnaissance and security purposes.
In 2023, Xinhua News Agency, under the CCP, reported that the US Marine Corps tested an armed “robot dog” capable of operating in coordination with infantry units, which can launch rockets. The news specifically mentioned that the US military tested a “robot dog” named Unitree Go1, manufactured in China, available for purchase on e-commerce websites as a stock item.
Shu Xiaohuang, Deputy Research Fellow at the Institute for Military and Operational Concept Studies of the Taiwan Institute for National Defense and Security, told The Epoch Times that robot dogs can assist in carrying heavy loads, reducing the burden of carrying ammunition and weapons for soldiers. He said, “The robot dog developed by the CCP is a commercial system, with limited capabilities showcased. It is difficult to assess its capabilities, but at the very least, its cost must be very low. The US military tested the CCP-made Go1 for trial use in 2023, but the US military’s Ghost Robotics Q-UGV has more advanced features. Currently, many departments of the US military are using the non-military version of Q-UGV, and Boston Dynamics’ robot dogs have also started to be adopted.”
The CCP media hypes the domestically produced robot dogs, but what they dare not mention is that this technology is entirely derived from the US. The development of hardware components and control systems has always been the most crucial challenge in the development of “robot dogs.” In September 2018, MIT released all software code and hardware for the MIT Cheetah Mini, providing a complete technical solution, significantly lowering the barrier to entry into the quadruped robot field.
Mark, host of the Mark’s Time and Space military channel, said that robot dogs must have sensors, including optical sensors and touch sensors. They also need an AI algorithm system, and the technical threshold is not very high.
“Many of the robot dogs produced in China actually use NVIDIA’s AI algorithm chip from the United States, which should be of civilian-grade, not high-end AI technology.”
Mark stated that China’s robot dog technology originates from MIT’s open-source technology. MIT released basic robot dog programs in 2018, which were relatively primitive but achieved more advanced technology using only touch sensors, dismissing the need for optical sensors. Touch sensors can detect obstacles and enable actions like evasion, jumping, falling, and self-recovery.
He said that by 2022, MIT provided an evolved version of the open-source code, significantly improving the overall level compared to 2018. This enhancement included the ability to run on gravel roads, ice surfaces without slipping. With MIT opening all the technical codes, China’s robot dogs experienced an explosive development around 2023. Many companies, including those producing smartphones and cars, rushed to develop robot dogs since the codes were open-source, allowing anyone to engage in development.
Despite the CCP’s hype about robot dogs, in terms of defense capabilities, endurance, payload capacity, practicality, and maintenance, they do not quite meet the requirements of actual combat scenarios, making it challenging to be effective in real combat situations.
Mark analyzed that a critical weakness of robot dogs is their short battery life. They are easily detected and destroyed when deployed too close to enemy lines. Even when released from a distance, covering that distance can drain most of the power, leaving little energy for actual combat operations.
He continued by pointing out that while robot dogs can carry heavy loads, they are easily spotted on the ground. In combat environments, if they are hit by shrapnel or explosive devices, their repairability becomes a concern. Both the US and Russian militaries equip themselves with armored tank-like vehicles with tracks that are more robust, less affected by gunfire, and have lower failure rates on complex frontline terrains. In contrast, if a robot dog encounters issues that require advanced technical capabilities or numerous components, regular soldiers may struggle to address these problems and may have to abandon the robot dog if it malfunctions.
“Robot dogs can be armored; however, this increases weight, compromising their agility, and potentially limiting their endurance.”
Mark explained that current robot dogs require remote control and are not fully autonomous, making them susceptible to interference. In complex electromagnetic environments, controlling robot dogs becomes challenging. If robot dogs were entirely autonomous, with AI solely in control, there could be concerns about potential backfires if interfered with. These issues obscure the deployment of robot dogs onto the battlefield since they could become not just a liability but also a potential weapon for adversaries.
Compared to robot dogs, drones offer greater advantages, potentially overshadowing the role of robot dogs. Mark opined that drones have more significant advantages over robot dogs. While drones also have limited endurance, their primary advantage lies in their ability to fly in the air, outperforming robot dogs that navigate on the ground. Ground-based warfare environments are highly complex and challenging, featuring obstacles like trenches, swamps, vegetation, weather variations, dust, smoke, and more. Each location presents distinct environmental conditions and challenges, unlike controlled laboratory settings. This complexity is a crucial reason for the slow development of ground-based unmanned systems, with the US military exploring unmanned tanks, and Russia employing unmanned vehicles; however, their practical applications are severely limited in actual combat scenarios.
“Conversely, drones played a significant role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Drones, albeit with limited range, are advantageous due to their ability to swiftly and stealthily attack, similar to flying munitions. This rapid attack capability is where drones shine.”
Shu Xiaohuang mentioned that robot dogs are less commonly deployed than drones due to the multitude of challenges they present. Robot dogs generally serve as auxiliary assets tasked with battlefield missions, like carrying heavy loads, transporting weapons and ammunition, primarily focusing on autonomous walking, off-road capabilities, obstacle avoidance, and using AI technology if applicable. Their assistance to ground forces includes mine clearance, dealing with improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and other explosive threats. Even if a robot dog can carry weapons or launch rockets, it does not pose the same level of threat as loitering munitions. Ultimately, as they operate on the ground, they face limitations imposed by the terrain, much like human soldiers.
He added that at present, robot dogs are not as advanced or formidable as drones. They can carry out tasks like reconnaissance and targeted strikes, posing a profound threat to ground forces on the battlefield. However, there are speculations that a future characterized by unmanned warfare akin to Terminator scenarios may occur, with weapon-equipped robot dogs hinting at impending developments.
The CCP promotes robot dogs as “urban warfare weapons,” with a video circulating on Weibo in 2022 showing that the CCP had developed a robot dog capable of carrying rifles and deployable through drones.
Regarding whether robot dogs can become “urban warfare weapons,” Mark stated that the US and Israel have the most extensive experience in urban warfare, dealing with guerrilla forces and terrorists frequently. However, they have not adopted overly elaborate technologies like robot dogs. Simple tasks in urban warfare, such as door breaching, are tasks that robot dogs cannot perform.
“If they cannot breach doors, and individual soldiers possess wall-penetrating radar, robot dogs become redundant. While robot dogs can carry rifles and reach places unreachable by humans, drones can accomplish the same tasks. Israel and the US have specialized miniature drones for urban warfare, which are more convenient than robot dogs; these drones operate quietly and rapidly penetrate buildings in contrast to the audible movements of robot dogs on the ground.”
“In terms of practical urban warfare scenarios, progress is incremental, room by room. Robot dogs lack the ability to breach doors, coupled with limited endurance, requiring recharging or battery replacement after a short period. When deployed in actual combat settings, their impracticality becomes apparent, failing to provide the necessary utility. Using engines to extend battery life would create noise issues, compromising their concealment – one of the many shortcomings of robot dogs.”
“Although the US military has been testing robot dogs for years, they developed a robot dog called ‘BigDog’ in 2015, with over 50 sensors, excellent environmental sensing capabilities, and the ability to carry over 150 kilograms of weaponry or supplies. The BigDog could navigate autonomously along simple routes but required remote control.”
However, after testing the BigDog for some time, the US military eventually abandoned the robot dog, transitioning it to technological reserves due to several shortcomings. Primary issues included excessive noise and insufficient endurance to meet actual combat requirements.
“Of course, the US military did not completely halt robot dog development but instead relegated them to simple tasks such as base patrols and explosive disposal, effectively employing them as military base guard dogs.”
Mark emphasized that robot dogs are more of a promotional aspect in practice. The CCP’s military lacks significant combat experience, often indulging in gimmicky and extravagant projects to draw media attention or secure budget allocations from higher authorities.
“China’s approach is often chaotic, primarily to obtain government subsidies and funding sources. When China was in the midst of semiconductor development, tens of thousands of semiconductor companies emerged, only to collapse within a few years. However, they did profit from government subsidies. The rush to develop robot dogs this time is similar; it’s about competing for superior funding sources. The military is an excellent place to make money, whether robot dogs are useful or not becomes inconsequential.”
“Despite knowing the limited utility of such technology, the CCP leadership is content as long as they can surpass the US in propaganda, their primary objective. Even if the CCP’s top leaders are aware of these shortcomings, they won’t intervene. They aim to outshine the US in propaganda, which they value most. Robot dogs may just be a flash in the pan, like many other things the CCP has promoted in the past— they might not last long.”
As a summary, while the CCP continues to promote robot dogs as a cutting-edge urban warfare tool, the reality may differ. Robot dogs, despite their technological advancements, may not meet the practical demands of combat situations. As military strategies and technologies continue to evolve, it is essential to evaluate the practicality and efficacy of such innovations in actual combat scenarios.