Killjoy911 t1_j5ygpu5 wrote
I feel like this would just be another unnecessary piece of heavy gear to haul around, that needs to be charged and maintained. That’s nearly impossible to do… example: see Iraq/Afghanistan.
robplumm t1_j5yhrb3 wrote
My neck hurts just looking at that pic
Just lugging the little PVS-14s around for a few hours were a PITA on the neck...that thing looks horrendous.
Notice the end said it'd be going to non-light infantry in the future lol.
Killjoy911 t1_j5yi621 wrote
Ya the PVS-14s/31s were and still are annoying as hell. You can counterbalance them all you want. But moving around with a huge weight on the front of your helmet is annoying as shit, team Wendy or not.
FullM3TaLJacK3T t1_j5ym4uz wrote
Yea I remember this.
As a conscript soldier, we weren't issued with counterweights, so after 10 mins of running, jumping and simply moving, the NVGs were at nose level. I couldn't see shit.
robplumm t1_j5ymmq5 wrote
That was the other part...had to strap the helmet down tighter...so jaw ended up hurting.
We owned the night and all...but man it hurt like hell... lol
JaL3J t1_j5z1twc wrote
This. Using NVG correctly is a skillset. So many issues with alignment or fogging up if just given to people without training.
DigitalGraphyte t1_j5yzi62 wrote
Hell, as a volunteer Marine in the 2010's, we weren't given counterweights for them.
PizzaCatLover t1_j617ugr wrote
> PITA in the neck
Was it a pain in the neck though
chicknfly t1_j61k04k wrote
Better PITA in the neck than PITN in somewhere else
Omegalazarus t1_j5z473g wrote
Yeah i started mounting my pvs14 behind my dot on my rifle.
[deleted] t1_j5zui4v wrote
[deleted]
DarthBuzzard t1_j5zyoe3 wrote
Google Glass is completely unrelated technology to AR. That was a 2D HUD - the equivalent of a smartwatch for your face.
There are very few attempts so far that get close to a pair of sunglasses with AR, and those that do have severe limitations. Snap's AR spectacles only has a 30 minute battery life, Vuzix Shield is only monochrome, and Nreal Light is tethered. All of these have a tiny field of view, and the only known way to achieve a large field of view with AR thus far is a much larger/bulkier device.
Seriously, if you think this is bulky, look at what a very wide FoV AR device looks like: https://www.roadtovr.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/leap-motion-projet-northstar-3.jpg
Killjoy911 t1_j6033bw wrote
We’ll see my theory is…… that whoever develops this shit plays to much call of duty. Media puts out this image of a futuristic soldier with jet packs and 3d hologlasses… and Fuckin millennium falcons (joking of course) and the engineers that design this have never been in a conflict. The closest they get is watching fury with the lights off and surround sound. They don’t realize that for most cases.. the less shit you can carry the better, especially when you’re on foot. Your maneuverability increases, your SA (situational awareness) increases and you are able to operate at an op tempo that’s higher for a longer period of time. Then on top of that, they try and get it to integrate with gear that’s already fielded.. old battery technology.. etc to save money… I could go on and on…
Max-Phallus t1_j60xhw0 wrote
It's more likely the military were interested in the tech so invested in checking it out.
universaladaptoid t1_j68xj0c wrote
The engineers aren't developing this in isolation and trying to get soldiers to use them - The DoD likely put out an RFP with specific requirements that they're looking for, and there are obviously clear limitations with how technology can be developed. The DoD and other agencies solicit a ton of proposals and contracts aimed at solving what they seem to be problems, and many of them are unusable due to practical considerations like you've highlighted.
CHANROBI t1_j62en8w wrote
Google glass has nothing to do with nvg tech
[deleted] t1_j5zya0q wrote
[deleted]
Killjoy911 t1_j60242m wrote
Ya it’s like our RND department is technologically stunted.
getspun97 t1_j61icv8 wrote
Nah it's only the people who are making the decisions
Lexsteel11 t1_j61ernz wrote
Yeah I saw an interview with one of the seals from the bin Laden raid and he got asked about the new crazy looking 4-tube NV goggles and he said normal is like looking through 2 toilet paper tubes in a gunfight and now it’s like having 4, so still not great haha
TarantinoFan23 t1_j61uowi wrote
Just need a com. Someone else can look at shit.
DionysiusRedivivus t1_j6234h4 wrote
You’re missing the point of the Military-industrial complex. To spend copious tax dollars on civilian infrastructure would be socialism! We must support our tech corporations! And if not financially, then physically by wearing heavy NODs that are inefficient.
See also, Catch-22 and Milo Minderbinder’s M&M Enterprises. You must eat the cotton for the good of the syndicate!
[deleted] t1_j62guvw wrote
[removed]
Shimmer_Games t1_j627ajg wrote
1984 vibes
ICatchx22I t1_j62br90 wrote
But everybody gets a share!
DionysiusRedivivus t1_j6354bq wrote
“But his parents are wealthy! They don’t need a share!” - Yossarian “Then they will understand.” - Milo
aleks9797 t1_j624wjj wrote
Too many decision makers, forget the people they make decisions for. It's really annoying. At some point, the decision makers are just a waste of money and time and it would be better of getting rid of them completely
Mitthrawnuruo t1_j6098iv wrote
What it comes down to is the army is not willing to pay for what this technology really costs.
F-35 Helmet. 400,000 dollars. Each. Custom built for the individual.
Killjoy911 t1_j609jyn wrote
Oh don’t I know it, they’re still putting one engine on these airplanes… how many have crashed for various reasons so far? Ask me how many new robots I have gotten in the last 6 years?
slowslownotbad t1_j638yms wrote
5 class-A’s, mostly older models. I don’t think the military minds writing off a couple old F-35s, the first production runs were kinda shit.
SGTBookWorm t1_j6gb7lh wrote
there was also that one Japanese crash, due to the pilot being disoriented
slowslownotbad t1_j6gbcq0 wrote
Oh yeah, that’ll getcha
soggybiscuit93 t1_j67kadw wrote
>how many have crashed for various reasons so far?
How much the F-35 has crashed during development and early deployment is actually very low compared to previous planes like the F-15
r2k-in-the-vortex t1_j604xyv wrote
Depends on what it does and how well it does it. The point is to share situational awareness between the unit and maybe UAV oversight too. Imagine every enemy pointed out by big red arrow and every friendly pointed out in blue. If it works well, that's an incredible force multiplier.
I can definitely see it being well worth any inconvenience and more once the technology is mature.
Killjoy911 t1_j605fwl wrote
There’s other ways to do this though, hell the BFT was suppose to be a battlefield datalink and they couldn’t even get that right most the time.
r2k-in-the-vortex t1_j606k3v wrote
Well, it sort of is BFT++ but for individual fighter in whatever ditch he is. Can they get it right or not or how many iterations it might take, that I don't know, but the potential is obvious.
Killjoy911 t1_j607ska wrote
I’m not passed saying it has potential. But it can’t be near as bulky and it has to have an easy UI. I can’t be sitting here practically writing code to place a marker on my virtual map.
r2k-in-the-vortex t1_j609m2p wrote
True enough on usability, it has to reduce the cognitive demands on a trooper, not increase them. The bulk though... if it works well, it's important enough to sacrifice something else from the kit to make up the weight. Can't beat knowing where you are being shot at from.
Killjoy911 t1_j60a4qn wrote
Ya, but in order to know where you’re being shot from you have to have another piece of equipment for that, it’s not like this system can do that by itself. How much more shit can we possibly put on a helmet, without providing a neck brace. And what piece of gear can we sacrifice? Side plates lol?
r2k-in-the-vortex t1_j60cqch wrote
Thing has a cable going down to the vest doesn't it? That's where everything else is. Only the optical package is on the helmet
TheJohnnyFuzz t1_j61kb00 wrote
Yes the mature piece is still another generation away. I’ve been a HoloLens developer for a while- they are not outdoor friendly as they aren’t bright enough, not average consumer friendly, and ideally you pop in use it for what you need a few minutes and hop out-this setup looks more attached to the helmet and less pull down and up. Ergonomically the HoloLens 2 is actually pretty good and on the hard hat version its not bad either. They are a fantastic use case for assembly/manufacturing and industrial use cases with controlled environments. Next generation optics are needed and they’ve got to get brighter before I see them out in the field.
M_Mich t1_j63juj0 wrote
in an assembly plant, i could see it being supported by an overhead arm that takes the weight, similar to how Disney quest had cables on their helmets to offset the weight.
ILoveThisPlace t1_j62j1ah wrote
Yeah, this is it. It's also the basis for future weapon control. I'm surprised the US didn't keep pursuing it.
taichi22 t1_j63f6tm wrote
I suspect the technology being “mature” will involve exoskeletons, tbf.
Korith_Eaglecry t1_j617f3p wrote
As someone that hated all the shit I had to hump in Iraq. This stuff would be at the top of the list to accidentally fall into a shit filled canal.
I'd be shocked if these things didn't fog up the moment an infantryman had to bound 50 meters.
UnfeignedShip t1_j646dbt wrote
No they didn't, the issue was, if you're not used to VR, you could get motion sick. I've used it a lot and think it's a great training and briefing tool, but not everyone needs one.
Killjoy911 t1_j61a5qi wrote
This exactly!
MrFoxManBoy t1_j612mqm wrote
You’d be lucky if you could even get batteries during Iraq/Afghanastan. I used to work with the AR/MR/VR teams that were laid off. Even though I was in the military, they wouldn’t listen to me when I told them tech like Hololens would never work in the field. And here we are 6 years later. But I was just a dirty contractor so what do I know?
M_Mich t1_j63jibu wrote
you say it wouldn’t work, but as long as the contract gets approved, they’ll keep working on it. :)
slowslownotbad t1_j6398d6 wrote
There is stuff that could work, but it has to be small and simple. And the UI has to be tailored to the mission.
For instance, smart watches are good. They’re even pretty durable and reliable these days. The smartwatch team should do AR, and if they say the tech isn’t there, they’re probably right.
Speaking of smart watches, if I was gonna do military AR, that would be my first product. Sunglasses with the time on them. Even if it’s just an analog hour/minute hand, I think people would find a use.
NewDad907 t1_j62ib3k wrote
A Google Glass-like device with a small lumbar battery pack might work.
I’m a nobody and I can come up with better ideas. Why aren’t people paying me for my ideas? It’s a constant brainstorming session here upstairs.
DarthBuzzard t1_j630ou0 wrote
> A Google Glass-like device with a small lumbar battery pack might work.
Well that has nothing to do with AR tech, so it would be performing a different function at that point.
shaggy9c t1_j635ucq wrote
How is that not AR tech?
DarthBuzzard t1_j638inu wrote
Google Glass is a 2D HUD. It's as if you were to take a smartwatch and put it on your face - that's the limit of the functionality you can provide.
AR deals with actually overlaying information into the real world.
shaggy9c t1_j63ejfb wrote
Really? Last time i checked (quite some time ago) it was anything that augments reality . Even 2D HUD
DarthBuzzard t1_j63fktb wrote
Other than Google, I've never heard of anyone in the AR industry try to classify Glass as AR.
The usecases, the tech, the hurdles that have to be crossed are just fundamentally different. It's a bit like a calculator versus a computer. They might technically both be calculators, but a computer is exponentially more complex with entirely different usecases (and at a greater magnitude).
shaggy9c t1_j63unew wrote
Apple and also the HoloLens or how it was called that was forgotten few years ago
DarthBuzzard t1_j63wtco wrote
HoloLens is actual AR, and Apple only ever calls ARKit-related features AR, which is true - that's mobile AR.
TheDebateMatters t1_j64qesp wrote
Is your name Brian?
sesor33 t1_j5z090i wrote
The goal would be to condense it into the visor of a helmet, having an IRL HUD would be extremely useful for navigation, aim, comms, etc.
Killjoy911 t1_j5zol0c wrote
See the problem for me is not the hud system. I agree with you, a hud with locations and directions and all that would be great. It’s the hardware behind it. Shit it probably uses those block singars batteries (2590’s), you feel me. Charging this shit and getting it to glasses that are as thin as m frames, with an easy to use interface…. Not going to happen. People have been watching and playing too many video games.. last deployments I had it was always the simplest shit that worked the best… not this fancy bullshit.
Doggleganger t1_j628250 wrote
Also, you know this shit is gonna blue screen when you need it most. Then you tear it off and it's flopping around behind you, still attached to the battery pack that's strapped on somewhere.
Killjoy911 t1_j62dyzj wrote
Exactly, next thing you know they’re sitting in the back of the ________ (insert MRAP of choice) collecting Fucking dust and taking up space.
Edit: but they have a serial number so of course they have to get inventoried.
qqqzzzeee t1_j62zjns wrote
Well, with batteries you could run a cable from the hypothetical glasses to the battery that hangs on the hip/back or whatever.
NewDad907 t1_j62i5fm wrote
Hell. Google Glass would probably work better.
Sol33t303 t1_j631m3u wrote
Fighter pilots already essentially already have this and it works great for them.
braiinfried t1_j5zld5j wrote
Don’t forget the rule that tech will always fail when you need it most. The last thing you want is this shit going out mid firefight
Killjoy911 t1_j5zotvm wrote
Yup….. exactly, or fail from soldiers using it once and throwing it in the equipment locker and not using it enough to be proficient.
FinalF137 t1_j611lzc wrote
Yeah but imagine if they were able to overlay sensor data on the display showing where radio signals were emanating from then the soldiers would know there's possibly a cell phone, person or remote bomb there.
Mirage2k t1_j61a4rl wrote
Why do you need every soldier carrying and powering the detection-classification-perception system for that, when you can have one such system in the platoon, as needed, from which the track can be transmitted (aka. told) to you when and only when the guy who actually knows how to use it well determines it useful to give you this information.
Like soldiers don't have a hundred other things to carry and think about to fulfill their own specialized roles?
schonkat t1_j62klei wrote
Look at a mobil phone from 20 years ago and compare to what we have now. The size, weight, capability changes. What's important is to have the core concept fine tuned and to keep the development going forward.
pasta4u t1_j63xeq1 wrote
It's new tech as it advances it will get lighter and need to be charged less often. The longer the tech coexists with other technology the more it will get integrated
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments