Just off the top: All the electronics shit is gonna add weight, bulk, and power requirements.
It's gonna get dirty, fogs up, w/e.
It's gonna not work for one reason or another b/c it can't get a link, or it gets bashed against a humvee/wall. It doesn't get updated information, etc.
If the enemy picks it up it either shows them where to shoot your guys, or it involves some authentication system that will make it useless to guys in a gunfight anyway. (What happens if your guys accidentally switch headsets after lunch?)
It adds a bunch of extraneous bullshit in the form of information you don't need to be dealing with. Ever get lost while listening to the radio? Now raise your hand if the first thing you did was turn the music down. When shit is going south you need to REDUCE cognitive load. Pasting extra information into someone's field of view is likely to be unhelpful.
* Fixed a bug that occasionally caused friendly units to display as hostile ones.
* Corrected AR ammo counter to correctly match actual rounds in small arm.
* Adjusted networking code to ensure headsets remain synced with team leaders.
And hundreds of other potentially dangerous and hilarious patch notes...
Looking forward to everyone saying, "My life for AIUR!" while using these.
;)
I'll add one more: so much of what platoon leaders do now is teach about technology. There's only so many hours in the day for training, and (even back in 2013!) the load was starting to cause deficiency in basic combat tasks. We just didn't have the time between all the requirements to get everyone proficient in the myriad of sensor tech we ended up carrying. Plus, if it's possible to break something believe me a Private will figure out how to do it.
>What happens if your guys accidentally switch headsets after lunch?
This right here is a question I hope they're thinking about. In an actual fight, you may need to pick up gear off the ground. What happens if you can't, because "authentication"?
Aren't your radios already using cryptographic fills? What do you think the difference is?
Most people don't know how to use them and don't understand how to do a basic function check with them. It takes someone who has taken a class in receiving data with them and probably a patient Gunny who has been doing this stuff way too long.
Lol well why would we do that? Just inventing random problems at this point.
It's a legitimate question about the design principles that are being used here. Is the headset "dumb" and just shows the same HUD view for everyone, or is it custom to the soldier's position in the formation? We don't know, but it's a question to think about that has actual implications for how something like this could be used or even implemented.
On the other hand, maybe you're right. We're both British. What do we care if the US government spunks all this money up the wall? The only downside is if they sell it to the MOD before it's working.
At that time, did you feel like that tech was useful?
Most likely HQ so the brass can play command and conquer with the infantry and at a push on vehicles similar to the Helmets on the F-32.
(Is there even a firearm commonly used by a modern military today that still uses clips?)
For tanks etc. AR is very useful and is already implemented at least outside of the US, Elbit has a version of their F-35 helmet for tanks and armored vehicles and the Israelis seem to be happy with the situational awareness they gain.
I’ve seen modules that stream live navigation data, blue force tracking and video feeds. The only difference is that it’s a bulky external module which connected via a cable.
You also have small clip on modules for things like thermal imaging and video recording/streaming.
Other than that the PVS-21 is an AR headset the intensified image is projected on the lenses which allows the user to see through the headset just like any AR headset and it can display data from an external source.
https://www.steiner-defense.com/imaging-systems/cehud-confor...
Edit: It’s just not as sexy and tech loaded as the hololense but honestly I think the PVS-21 model is better the interface with the HMD is optical and the modules become smaller and more capable as technology advances.
It looks like what used to take an external box the size of a hand radio is now wireless has an OLED display and fits in the screw cap of the optical interface port.
Or imagine being able to look over a piece of ground and see the location of your people annotated through AR. Or driving a route and seeing your planned route annotated.
Yes please absolutely get this into my hands.
And now your patrol got delayed for some reason so now none of that crap is charged or working anyway. And your glasses or the controller got dislodged during a sprint to cover. Or you need to find the reset button for some reason.
You can have my set. It might be a valuable training tool though.
Thanks, I'll take it!
You can say the same as you have about any technology. Why lug around a big heavy rifle when you could carry sharpened sticks? I guarantee you people said exactly the same about the first radios, for example. Now you wouldn't even consider leaving the wire without a radio under any circumstances whatsoever.
Because the enemy doesn't use sticks, first of all.
>I guarantee you people said exactly the same about the first radios, for example.
They did not, because it represented a fundamental change in how ground warfare could be conducted and not everyone carried them (not everyone carries them today either, which is telling). Namely, coordinating accurate indirect fire.
>Now you wouldn't even consider leaving the wire without a radio under any circumstances whatsoever.
Because I want to be able to call in air-support and indirect. The difference with all these examples is that the technologies you are mentioning represented a game-changing way in how to enable infantry-support operations. It's not immediately clear to me that the same is true for a AR/VR helmet system used by infantry. It's possible that other branches could find uses for it in the same vein. Like the FSO using it to "see" the FLT and better coordinate indirect fire.
This doesn't prove anything and is 300% survivorship bias. There are thousands of tech innovations that were utter shit and we never hear about them. AR on the battlefield as describe above is a COD player wet dream and has no basis in reality.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a25644619...
> King estimates that the average soldier goes into action with a hefty 20 lbs of batteries.
I can only offer that I want to try it.
In general, it seems very unlikely that all of this will work coordinated in battlefield conditions. It would be like pulling off an AR MMORPG, except everyone is carrying their Xbox on their back and running around randomly
Where did I say it was?
Let the recce give me a 3d sketch map of the target area as they understand it and let me walk around in it. Better than them trying to describe it and me imagining it!
The question is how integral can you make this, without retraining everyone for it.
For this to be successful there needs to be a whole generation who is probably 16 or 14 right now, who are used to putting on these headsets and be habituated to moving around in a VR world - wait till they turn 18 and put them on the battlefield at 19.
I'd imagine this is already present in CAG or some other secret division, but we've always seen how it "should work" for friend-or-foe in the Terminator HUD clones[1].
[1] - https://blogs.windows.com/windowsdeveloper/2017/03/06/buildi...
To your concerns, I think they are very valid. Weight, as always, is a primary concern for the infantry. The Hololens2 is not a light system to just wear, let alone with a helmet. Additional issues like battery, signal, and other unforeseens are likely large concerns too.
That said, I think that the ability to quickly and seamlessly integrate all the data that is coming in may have some advantages. Giving warfighters a way to view all the data in real-time is a goal worth spending some money on. The recent Nagorno-Karabakh war has shown that the digital/cyber aspect of war has a likelihood of being a vital factor in future conflicts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_conflict
My scepticism lies in the fact that bulletproof vests, widely used across different countries, was not an invention of the overfunded military-industrial complex, but an ex marine who hacked it together in the back of his garage with a rusty fork.
[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iw3_4RGaDlSDXmeYkSYu-rQu...
I think the immediate use is for training. The Army is big on simulators for all MOS's because it saves resources, reduces training complexity, and reduces risk. Sims such as VBS3, EST, VCOT, UGT are mostly required these days for various purposes. This could even possibly function as a better MILES or replace the fleet of OPFOR vehicle analogues at NTC. So, potentially there is money to be saved while creating more realistic training.
Maybe in a few decades the software stack will be solid enough and the hardware miniaturized enough to use in combat. The similar success story might be the FA's venerable AFATDS, which has been around for decades and very reliably brings rounds on target.
Worst case, it ends up as extra weight for graded positions to carry in RS. ;)
If actually works that’s a bonus.
I think the long term goal is to have something like the XCOM 2 Specialist class.
You want to peek around a corner or under a door, drop a tiny robot. Operate it with a handheld joystick and get a camera feed into your headset while still maintaining your regular field of vision.
Final product won't necessarily take the form of the hololens. Might just be an attachment to whatever standard equipment they have, more like a Google glass.
I appreciate that they're offering "custom" units and could theoretically fix these issues. But it _sounds_ like it'll be more of a ruggidization and compliance realignment of existing hardware. Pure speculation of course.
Imagine Battlefield like HUD for the soldiers, green is friendly, red is adversary. Think of these as a part in an overall sensor fusion and information asymmetry in the field. There are larger initiatives around info fusion across the branches and the real-time access to those who need to know
Something can be a failed national health platform, or toys like this one.
Also, seems like a no-brainer for tankers.
I do not want to carry this shit on a patrol though.
Eventually, a Danger Room anywhere.