"Could" they?<p>Sure - some <i>could</i><p>But they're <i>probably</i> not - overall - the best tool for the job (the mine-clearing flail that mounts to the front of an M1 Abrams is <i>far</i> more cost (and time) effective (at least on major routes)<p>A robot's <i>probably</i> better than a well-trained soldier in most situations - if a robot gets blown up, it's only a dollar figure, not a dollar figure, time to train, grief among the unit, informing family and friends, etc<p>The question will really come down to "why 'defuse' vs 'detonate'?"<p>And then, once the "why" has been answered, are the follow-ons - how soon, how "accurately", how many, etc
Assume that some of their models could, for some types of mines, in some deployments and environments.<p>But that is <i>very different</i> from saying "a Boston Dynamics robot dog is a reasonable primary tool to use in defusing mines".
>Robot dogs are taking over the US military<p>>“What you’re seeing is a growing array of sensors and effectors as these robot dogs take on more and more roles,” Singer said. “The legs are agnostic to what they’re carrying, whether it’s a soldier’s backpack, a chemical weapons sensor, or a .50 caliber machine gun.”<p><a href="https://taskandpurpose.com/tech-tactics/robot-dogs/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://taskandpurpose.com/tech-tactics/robot-dogs/</a>