Flame-throwing robot dog Thowflame Thermonator

29
Flame-throwing robot dog Thowflame Thermonator
The first version of the Thermonator complex based on Robot Go1, shown in 2023


The development of new technologies and classes of equipment is often accompanied by the creation of unusual and even strange products. Another example of this is the Thermonator robotic complex, recently presented by the American company Throwflame. It is based on a serial remote-controlled robot dog and is armed with a compact jet flamethrower. This sample looks like just another technical curiosity or advertising gimmick, but it is based on an interesting and promising concept.



Fiery new items


Last May, Throwflame (Cleveland, Ohio), a company that develops and produces flamethrowers, introduced its new product called ARC. The jet flamethrower had some interesting features and was proposed for use in a variety of fields, from agriculture to the entertainment industry. Subsequently, by way of advertising, the development company demonstrated various options for using the ARC product.

At the beginning of June, they announced a new development based on ARC - a robotic complex called Thermonator. This RTK was made by installing a flamethrower on a platform in the form of a remote-controlled robot dog of the Go1 type from the Chinese company Unitree Robotics. It was reported that such an RTK is being prepared for production, and shipments to customers will begin in the 3rd quarter of this year. However, it was not possible to meet the promised deadlines, and the product’s release to the market was delayed by six months.


Manual ARC flamethrower

The official announcement of the Termonator as a finished product available for order took place only on April 12, 2024. At the same time, the possible reasons for the delay became clear: the complex was moved to a new base. Now the basis of the flamethrower RTK is the Go2 product from the same Unitree company. There may have been other technical or organizational reasons.

One way or another, the RTK with a flamethrower is included in the product catalog and is offered to customers. The Thermonator costs $9420. It is curious that the basic Go2 robot, depending on the configuration, costs at least three times less ($1600-2800). This pricing raises questions.

Like the ARC hand flamethrower, the Thermonator complex can be used to solve a variety of problems. A flamethrower on a self-propelled chassis can be used in agriculture to control weeds, in forest protection to combat fires, to clear snow and ice, etc. The entertainment sector has not been forgotten either.


New variant of "Termonator" based on Go2

Technical features


The Go2 robot dog was used as a moving chassis for the Termonator RTK. This is a four-legged walker with a technical vision system based on a video camera and lidar, with advanced automatic control, capable of working independently or carrying any payload. Remote control is provided, and the operator gives only the most general commands, and direct control of the paw supports is carried out automatically.

Go2 has a typical “robodog” architecture. The main devices and assemblies are placed in an oblong body. It is also proposed to install additional devices on it. Four legs are movably attached to the body on the sides. Each such device has several electric motors that provide the necessary movements in several planes.

The design of the robot and its chassis allows movement forward, backward and sideways, and turns in any direction. The “dog” can jump or climb obstacles up to 160 mm high. While standing or in motion, the robot can take different poses or literally “dance”, either under the direct control of the operator or according to a preset program.


In a standing position, the robot is 700 mm long, 310 mm wide and 400 mm high. Weight including battery – approx. 15 kg. The payload is 8 kg or 10 kg in overload with a reduction in other characteristics. The battery charge lasts for 1,5-2 hours of active work with movement and maneuvering.

The Thermonator RTK uses a slightly modified ARC product. This is a compact device in a tubular housing with a length of approx. 350 mm, accommodating fuel supply means, ignition system and battery. Using a hose, the device is connected to the fire mixture tank. In the case of the Termonator, the flamethrower itself and the tank for it are placed one after the other on a common base.

The ARC flamethrower uses liquid fuel - gasoline or its mixtures with other components. The jet is released by an electric pump. The fire nozzle of the flamethrower is equipped with electrodes of a plasma ignition system. The flamethrower has limited characteristics. Thus, the mixture ejection range does not exceed 30 feet (approx. 9 m). The number of “shots” per tank refill is not specified.


Flame throwing process

To search for a target and aim, the operator uses the robot dog’s standard heading camera. In addition, the “combat module” with a flamethrower is equipped with a laser target designator and a flashlight. The development company demonstrated the use of these products in the dark and in smoky conditions.

Interesting concept


The Throwflame company positions its Thermonator RTK as a real tool for solving practical problems. It is proposed to be used in various areas where it is necessary to burn certain objects, and also requires the ability to deliver a flamethrower to the place of work. However, there is every reason to believe that the complex will not find widespread use in its proposed role. Most likely, such products will be used solely for entertainment purposes. Of course, if potential buyers consider it advisable to purchase a not-so-cheap robot solely for fun.

However, the greatest interest in the Termonator project is not the technical aspects and not the commercial prospects. It is worth paying attention to the concept underlying it. The Trouflame company showed the fundamental possibility of equipping a robot dog with a compact flamethrower, even with limited technical and firing characteristics.


Such ideas are not new. In recent years, against the backdrop of the emergence of a number of commercial “robotic dogs,” various organizations from a number of countries have proposed several combat RTKs on a four-legged basis. Using various brackets and other devices, small arms are mounted on robots. weapon and grenade launchers of various models. Now, within the framework of this concept, a jet flamethrower has been used.

The concept of a robot dog with a weapon has several obvious advantages related to the characteristics of the platform used. A walker with automatic control has a fairly high maneuverability, and in some situations it is superior in mobility, mobility and maneuverability to wheeled and tracked chassis. At the same time, the resulting RTK has limited dimensions and weight, but is capable of carrying a fairly large payload. For example, Unitree Go2, with its own weight of 15 kg, carries up to 8-10 kg of cargo.

The robot dog simplifies the process of searching for targets and aiming combat equipment. The machine gun / grenade launcher / flamethrower is installed as a forward weapon, which allows aiming using a standard nose camera and by moving the entire robot. This eliminates the need for separate optical means and weapon control drives.


Operation of RTK in the dark. A laser pointer is used

However, four-legged RTKs with weapons have a number of obvious disadvantages. First of all, this is the excessive complexity of the design and high cost. A tracked or wheeled platform of similar dimensions with the same load capacity will be much simpler and cheaper to manufacture and operate. Advantages of this kind can offset the lag in cross-country ability and mobility, and also justify the use of a full-fledged combat module.

In addition, there is the experience factor. RTKs on traditional chassis with combat modules of a standard appearance have been developed for quite a long time, and the industry has gained extensive experience in this area. Fighting “robotic dogs” are still a rare phenomenon and are not popular among developers. Experience in this area is still limited, which negatively affects the pace of its development.

Advertising and Experience


What future awaits RTK Thermonator is still unknown. However, we can already say that this product was able to solve two important problems. It showed the fundamental possibility of installing a jet flamethrower on a robot dog, and also attracted public attention to the development company. Perhaps, after such advertising, Trowflame will be able to increase sales of its main products and even find customers for a flamethrower robotic complex.

It can be assumed that the ideas of the Termonator project will nevertheless be developed and will be implemented in the form of new products from different companies. This work will contribute to the further development of the entire field of four-legged combat robots, and, perhaps, someday will lead to the emergence of a real combat-ready RTK and its adoption. But so far we are talking only about interesting experiments without obvious practical prospects.
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    April 26 2024 04: 35
    An elderly couple's intimate playtime goes completely wrong when they accidentally burn down their home with a 75-year-old flamethrower
    . laughing This is never a joke! In the USA, it turns out that flamethrowers are not prohibited for sale or possession in most states. However, our forest protection departments use backpack wick-drip devices AZ, but calling them a flamethrower would not do. laughing
    1. 0
      April 26 2024 07: 59
      There are several thousand of these for the assault...
      1. +4
        April 26 2024 19: 59
        What "Civilian". The adepts downvoted the unparalleled bullet, stupid bayonet, well done. Keep the plus. Moreover, I will add. For those who, after the start of the SVO, as aptly noted on the site (I read it today), disappeared. Because they have nothing to say. So, similar ones will run to the position in a flock and others will fly in a flock. But these guys will squeal about electronic warfare. Only droids (these are the ones that walk on the surface), drones (these are the ones that fly) with artificial intelligence. Try to jam them with this electronic warfare.
        From personal: The first shell. And on the roof where this electronic warfare was located. The cable was broken. And a high-budget operator that has no analogues. He turned into an infantryman with a machine gun. Just like my boys. And without any problems we were fired at by a drone alone. And by a buzzer that was under the clouds of others. soldier
        1. +1
          April 27 2024 06: 59
          Since 2009, I haven’t been able to get through to you about UAVs, about drones, about the fact that we have everything to create such robots... because what’s happening at the Northern Military District is a personal tragedy for me (((but I don’t give up, I’m trying to convey that There is still time to work out the backlog, that the moment will soon pass when operators control drones, that there will be tens of thousands of them, that they will work autonomously in a network without external target designation and general control. That it is necessary to develop a “friend or foe” system for drones to launch production. Networked air defense of androns from clouds of antidrones....all technologies have been around for a long time.
  2. 9PA
    +5
    April 26 2024 06: 05
    They are getting further and further away from us, and we are squeezing the USSR out and squeezing it out
  3. -3
    April 26 2024 06: 49
    This “dog” has difficulty moving on rough terrain. Loss of support for two “paws” and the robot collapses. And a jet-type flamethrower is not capable of hitting armored vehicles and a bunker garrison. The Americans made the robot not for war, but to suppress armed unrest: there are ordinary people with small arms in ordinary ones. houses and on the streets.
    1. 0
      April 26 2024 09: 33
      Quote: Yuras_Belarus
      and to suppress armed unrest

      And also for the sluggish civil war, terrorist attacks, and other whims of maniacs from the “American Dream”.
    2. 0
      April 26 2024 10: 31
      Quote: Yuras_Belarus
      . And a jet-type flamethrower is not capable of hitting armored vehicles and a bunker garrison.



      The idea of ​​the platform as a weapon carrier: you can attach anything, up to
      volumetric detonating ammunition.
    3. +1
      April 26 2024 10: 45
      Quote: Yuras_Belarus
      This “dog” has difficulty moving on rough terrain. Loss of support for two “paws” and the robot collapses.

      Today, tomorrow they will “teach” her to run on one leg, and they will even put a damn dog on her back, just pay money.
    4. +3
      April 26 2024 11: 34
      This dog runs and stays on its feet no worse than a real one. Check out YouTube. She won't fall anywhere.
    5. 0
      April 26 2024 12: 06
      Quote: Yuras_Belarus
      This "dog" has difficulty moving on rough terrain

      Yes, you are right...right so far! But some time will pass and “something else” will turn out! Now there are “discussions”: is it possible to use ground-based remote control platforms as weapons (even if the term “RTK” is used!) ... It is possible, but very limited in function and “scale” (quantity)! That is, “modern” ground-based drones will not make a difference even in the near future! RTK platforms will only make a “furor”, as UAVs do now, when “robo-dogs” come close to the mobility, maneuverability, “maneuverability”, and reaction speed of real animals ! Moreover, like UAVs now, “robo-dogs”, “robo-cougars” can be in “kamikaze” versions, or “repeatable” (carriers of dropped ammunition)! Then you will get a very effective weapon!
      PS Now options are being offered for “saving” tanks by strengthening the tank “roof” against “roof-piercing” ammunition! What if a “robotic dog” with cumulative ammunition rushes under the bottom of the tank, as was the case during the Second World War, but now at a new “historical turn”?!
      1. 0
        April 26 2024 17: 37
        if a “robotic dog” darts under the bottom of the tank
        The armored vehicles will have to be hung with chains to the ground so that nothing can get through.
        1. 0
          April 26 2024 18: 01
          Quote: Bolt Cutter
          Armored vehicles will have to be hung with chains to the ground so that nothing can get through

          The consolation for tankers is “so-so”! Apparently you haven’t seen how a dog can get through the bars of a fence!
          1. 0
            April 26 2024 18: 03
            how can a dog get through?
            A real dog made from meat. Aluminum is still not so crafty due to its design.
            1. 0
              April 26 2024 18: 13
              Quote: Bolt Cutter
              Aluminum is still not so sneaky...

              This is now...aluminum and not sneaky! But what will happen next! wink (research is already underway on controlled changes in the structure and phase state of materials! Yes )
              1. 0
                April 26 2024 18: 15
                what will happen next!
                Electric current can be supplied to the circuit. You can always come up with something.
    6. 0
      April 26 2024 17: 34
      they made a robot not for war, but for suppressing armed unrest
      For fallen grass in agriculture, actually.
  4. 0
    April 26 2024 09: 00
    He would need a 5.56 or 5.45 mm machine gun.
  5. -2
    April 26 2024 09: 30
    Is this a flamethrower walker on FREE SALE?
    A nation of some kind of demons. Humanity? No, we haven't heard.
  6. +1
    April 26 2024 10: 07
    Hype for the sake of hype. They might as well have attached a paintball drive to a robotic dog. But they attached a flamethrower for entertainment.

    As far as I remember, in the USA jet flamethrowers are not prohibited for civilians and can be used without restrictions while maintaining safety - i.e. in closed areas, etc.
  7. +5
    April 26 2024 10: 28
    The Thermonator costs $9420. It is curious that the basic Go2 robot, depending on the configuration, costs at least three times less ($1600-2800). This pricing raises questions

    Perhaps marketing + more powerful drives, more durable materials, improved sensors and a number of deep additions to the design in terms of strength and balancing.

    What can we say here - one of the options for the “infantry of the future”. While this may cause hihi-haha, but the infantry of the future is not a fact that “strong men with exes a la “Fallout””, it could be such compact, passable robots, widely focused on the use of man-made objects (doors, stairs, city narrow spaces) and with modular weapons.
    With the support of larger machines that relieve their sensors, provide target designation, provide network centricity, and so on. And the “dogs” (not the fact that they are exactly like that) are light and mobile infantry. Not for direct assaults - but for more delicate methods.
    They will, of course, not be armed with a flamethrower - this flamethrower, one might say, is a toy.
    The product has a number of advantages over wheeled-tracked platforms - the aforementioned greater ease of penetration into human-oriented spaces and movement there (where it can, for example, a dog); when modified, the product will be able to rise quite easily if it falls on its side. It can be quite squat in the “ambush” position, which is more difficult to achieve from “folding” tracked vehicles without expanding its front projection and deteriorating alignment.

    Of course, this concept also has disadvantages - at the moment, it takes a lot of servos to implement and the final product can be quite noisy (inferior to wheeled options, for example). In case of progress in the direction of so-called “synthetic muscles” the situation may radically change .

    We should follow such projects with considerable attention. These are no longer just toys - they are potential...
    1. 0
      April 26 2024 14: 05
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      The product has a number of advantages over wheeled-tracked platforms - the aforementioned greater ease of penetration into human-oriented spaces and movement there; when modified, the product will be able to rise quite easily if it falls on its side.

      It’s been a long time since there have been “wheeled-tracked” products with similar capabilities!
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      can be quite squat in the “ambush” position, which is more difficult to achieve from “folding” tracked vehicles without expanding its front projection and deteriorating alignment.

      But what about hydropneumatic suspension with changes in ground clearance for “wheel-tracked” mechanisms?
      1. +3
        April 26 2024 14: 31
        I have seen various tricks that you are talking about - certain solutions, including through duplication of tracks on retractable elements, allowing you to overcome stairs, some kind of retractable manipulators for opening doors, etc. The dog-like design makes all this stupidly simpler because, in principle, without any special tricks it will penetrate into the same places where a large dog can penetrate. In the case of another platform, there will be more significant tricks that complicate the design or impose certain restrictions on it - it will be effective in some situations, but not in others.

        One of the advantages of "dogs" is also their more difficult to detect track - the wheel track or track track is more noticeable than the "traces" of the paws. This may not be such a significant factor - but when we are talking about a number of areas such as forests or rough terrain - this can be a factor influencing detection by means.
        I've seen cars that are quite serviceable that change the ground clearance - but they are potentially wider "at the shoulders" than a pawl or will inevitably have some problems with tipping over on one side in some terrain or in urban areas. I’m not saying that the “dog” solution is 100% optimal, but how much do wheel-tracked structures suffer (and what is the result) and how much do “dogs” suffer and what is the result. These are two big differences, despite the fact that servos are a solution for walking equipment.

        UUV ambush vehicles can be either wheeled or tracked, and there may even be advantages due to a number of factors (at the moment). But in the attack, all these little “goliaths” with weapons will be inferior to the “dogs” because the latter’s potential is just beginning to develop.
        A dog can basically jump from a standstill - with wheeled vehicles you need a run and this is a greater risk, with tracked vehicles it is even more difficult. dog can structurally train to get out of recesses; with wheeled and tracked vehicles this is much more difficult.
        The same support paw, by default, is an analogue of the manipulator in different situations - and for equipment such a paw must be attached separately.

        But of course, time will tell hi
    2. +1
      April 26 2024 14: 33
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart

      The product has a number of advantages over wheeled-tracked platforms - the aforementioned greater ease of penetration into human-oriented spaces and movement there (where it can, for example, a dog); when modified, the product will be able to rise quite easily if it falls on its side.

      It’s interesting how this dog’s lidars perceive thick grass or snow 30-40 cm deep. Here maybe their Achilles heel.
      1. +2
        April 26 2024 14: 37
        Good point! Perhaps, in principle, developers will follow the path of “whiskers” or their equivalent to determine the qualities of obstacles in terms of passability and complement the visual assessment of their typing. This is not such a difficult solution, many species in nature rely less on the eyes and more on touching, sniffing and analyzing texture - and we learn from nature by creating mechanical systems.
        As for deep snow, yes, here it will be inferior to the “tracked” ones, but in the mountains, for example, it will outperform. Of course, this is still far from being a van derwaffe, but the tank at one time seemed far from an ideal design..
        1. +1
          April 26 2024 14: 56
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          Perhaps, in principle, developers will follow the path of “whiskers” or their equivalent to determine the qualities of obstacles in terms of passability and complement the visual assessment of their typing.
          As for deep snow, yes, here it will be inferior to the “tracked” ones, but in the mountains, for example, it will outperform.

          Mustache - unlikely. They're for the dark. With a thermal imaging camera there is no need for them. Rather, they will teach the robotic AI using samples of obstacles, in terms of their permeability. This requires the development of an algorithm for behavior in the event of a discrepancy between the nature of movement and lidar data. Snow poses a problem not only in terms of cross-country ability, but also in terms of the difference between lidar data on the supporting surface and the real situation. So they will be taught to wade and knead mud. But here we need fine adjustment of the movement algorithm to the external conditions. This is how the operator knows what snow, water, and thick grass are. He can order you to move forward, but the operator will not manually correct the dog’s step. This should be done automatically.
  8. -1
    April 26 2024 14: 40
    I am sure such systems will not be developed. Why bother with one large, expensive device when you can have hundreds, if not thousands, of small ones with a single control for this price. When each swarm device will hit a separate target.
  9. 0
    April 26 2024 19: 40
    It’s more likely that someone in the USA saw our robotic dog from Aliexpress and decided to attach their own flamethrower instead of an anti-tank system, in general, such an idea as for me, when there are UAVs, which are much more versatile.
  10. 0
    April 27 2024 17: 13
    Well, you can’t call it a normal flamethrower... But if you adapt the LPO-50, it will be interesting...