Russian company Neiry has tested pigeons as biodrones in Moscow, using neural implants and electronics to enhance their flight capabilities for various monitoring tasks.
It would effect their range because they would either need heavy equipment, like a fuckin star link dish strapped to their backs, or heavy radio equipment of some kind or something. Even if the “brain chip” is microscopic, you still need it to be able to send and receive a signal I would think, unless they intend to just operate it when it happens to be near a WiFi signal or something I guess?
Cruise missiles often use pre-programmed guidance systems, or total automation with just set of GPS waypoints to reach. That’s a pretty sensible appropriate because the nature of the device is as a long range weapon that often ventures far into enemy territory. If you needed to stay in constant communication, radio jamming would become a serious liability. I’d imagine this is very similar in its design goals, so they’d likely use a similar approach.
At any rate, I don’t expect the guidance to be the hard part, GPS navigation is not that hard to implement. (or GLONASS, in this particular case)
Also… If the US were doing this, they actually could use star link. Star link direct to cell phone connectivity is actually in beta right now and it works. If the pigeon could carry a striped down iPhone (it doesn’t need a screen, speaker, microphone, etc), then it could actually carry a communications device that could be in constant contact. I wouldn’t recommend Russia try that on starlink though.
Sure, fine. At no point was I making any argument for or against this technology. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t, maybe it’s a waste of time.
The only argument I’m making here is that there’s nothing far fetched about a pigeon flying over a kilometer, that’s totally normal. I’m pretty confident in this because I have first hand evidence that birds are actually really good at flying, and sometimes they fly very long distances.
I have no idea, controlling an animal’s brain is obviously the hard part too believe. But I don’t see how that affects their range.
It would effect their range because they would either need heavy equipment, like a fuckin star link dish strapped to their backs, or heavy radio equipment of some kind or something. Even if the “brain chip” is microscopic, you still need it to be able to send and receive a signal I would think, unless they intend to just operate it when it happens to be near a WiFi signal or something I guess?
Or just preprogram the commands before installing and let it run autonomously.
Cruise missiles often use pre-programmed guidance systems, or total automation with just set of GPS waypoints to reach. That’s a pretty sensible appropriate because the nature of the device is as a long range weapon that often ventures far into enemy territory. If you needed to stay in constant communication, radio jamming would become a serious liability. I’d imagine this is very similar in its design goals, so they’d likely use a similar approach.
At any rate, I don’t expect the guidance to be the hard part, GPS navigation is not that hard to implement. (or GLONASS, in this particular case)
Also… If the US were doing this, they actually could use star link. Star link direct to cell phone connectivity is actually in beta right now and it works. If the pigeon could carry a striped down iPhone (it doesn’t need a screen, speaker, microphone, etc), then it could actually carry a communications device that could be in constant contact. I wouldn’t recommend Russia try that on starlink though.
Or you could I dunno, use a drone? What benefit is there to use a pigeon for any of this? The issue isn’t the payload it’s the platform.
Sure, fine. At no point was I making any argument for or against this technology. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t, maybe it’s a waste of time.
The only argument I’m making here is that there’s nothing far fetched about a pigeon flying over a kilometer, that’s totally normal. I’m pretty confident in this because I have first hand evidence that birds are actually really good at flying, and sometimes they fly very long distances.
So no benefit for using a pigeon.
Did you read my comment? My entire point was essentially that I don’t care. I’m not weighing in on that.
Happy we agree there’s no material benefit to using live animals to do an imperfect job of what cheap drones are already doing.
That’s not what I said, before or after my edit.
Haha, your username is ironic, you’re not even honest to yourself!