Video: Revision Displays Next Gen Modular Helmet Systems

Revision HelmetRevision, a company best known for ballistic eyewear has expanded protection to the head, neck and face in the form of its new modular helmet system. Taking a standard Army helmet, and adding a ballistic visor and a mandible that offers 9mm protection, the system is intended for both mounted and dismounted soldiers, according to Brian Dowling, Revision’s Military Program Manager and Army special operations veteran.

It’s the culmination of a four-year research project at Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center called Helmet Electronics and Display System-Upgradeable Protection — better known as HEaDS-UP –that aims to provide a more fully integrated headgear system, making use of improved ballistic materials, non-ballistic impact liner materials and designs, see-through and projected heads-up display technologies, and better eye, face and hearing protection.

Revision is one of multiple companies developing these helmet systems for the Army to test. Soldiers have already started receiving prototypes to test in the field.

Revision displayed its system at the Association of the U.S. Army’s annual conference in Washington D.C. The HEaDS-UP on display featured integrated electronics in the helmet, a heads-up display powered by an Android smartphone, and a pneumatic liner system that meets the new 14-feet/second impact requirement to reduce traumatic brain injuries.

“You traditionally had helmets where people velcro-ed [or] duct-taped on components,” says Dowling. “The HEaDS-UP program has really taken head protection to the next step for Natick.”

A recent report found that 72 percent of all head injuries suffered by soldiers occurred to the face. Army leaders said it forced them to reconsider what equipment was provided to protect a soldiers’ face.

— By Ho Lin

32 Comments on "Video: Revision Displays Next Gen Modular Helmet Systems"

  1. that's all very nice but… how are they gonna keep the visor from getting fogged up…?

  2. Simple, it's revision. they know shit.

  3. The doesn't look like it would be hot at all, particularly in a desert environment. </sarcasm>

  4. So I guess we don't need peripheral vision anymore?

  5. ColdWarVet75 | October 23, 2013 at 4:09 pm |

    If it has hearing protection…doesn't that reduce you being able to hear?

  6. Shoot who ever came up with this Buck Rogers death trap.

  7. The IBA's had tons of attachments and do you know what happened? Everyone (combat arms) removed all but the basics. Hell, some units just used plate carriers. If I eat a hot one this will not help me. This will be good for gunners who have the highest risk of getting peppered from an IED. Now a better dick protector I'm all for…

  8. After you get the face shield splashed with muddy slush, what does that do for your vision? How often does the face plate need to be replaced because it is so scratched up you cannot see through it? How much does the thing weight. Whoever designed this has been reading too much military SF. Maybe OK of helicopter crewmembers, gunners, but no one else.

  9. So how do you get a proper cheek weld with your weapon?? Fogging, what's next, winshield wipers/sprayers?? I guess you have headphones inside the helmet for radios unles syou have a plug in.

  10. Somebody at Natick has been playing way too much Halo and been doing far too little patrolling…

  11. Can anybody hear any bad guys? Me neither!

  12. will this be adopted by usmc?

  13. that's not very COIN

  14. It seems like we are more interested In sleek sexy looking equipment and clothing than practical equipment. How about a better battle rifle with a practical night sight for all combat troops not just 11bs and 19ds? How about less weight on our backs. The Taliban run around in gowns and sandals and our troops have 80-100 plus lbs on their back. I'm all for safer vehicles but an mrap type vehicle isnt practical for everyone. It keeps our force on roads. We scrap the A10 thinking fighters and apaches will save us…..apaches yes but I swear every time we needed one they had to refuel (through no fault of their own) or were Winchester. They both have heavy limitations. A10..well enough said. How about 100 spectras or whatever the c130 gunship is called now. I was told 8 existed in the entire Air Force (this was 2003). You can't beat a c130 gunship covering you….. C130 gunship= game over for enemy. We have owned the skies for a very long time now. If the threat level changes put them In the hangar. Stingercj7 for president

  15. I like that its 9mm proof

  16. Damn, Mech Warrior!

  17. maybe they should put a gas mask on it also or a vent system because you will not be able to breathe communicate or move with agility as a soldier needs to do. the removable one will better for that capability alone. The reason they want it to be 9 mm proof is because the government knows that CIVILIANS have 9 mm capability with handguns at close range. say we vote no because our government does not allocate resources correctly.. they will end up n the hands of Muslim Brotherhood as long as Obama can give it to them.

  18. This system would be good for riot control, not combat operations. The combat soldier needs lighter gear while maintaining good protection, not having a futuristic look that makes it nearly impossible to even properly use their rifles.

    The infantry and special operations forces should be the only units getting new rifles and be the first units to be outfitted with new tactical gear. The problem has been with the leaders looking at upgrading the service as a whole, instead of selecting specific units to receive new weapons and gear based on the nature of their mission.

  19. What's up with all this high-speed gear? You can't give grunts anything expensive. They manage to break esapi plates just from PTing, and anything more expensive than that will just stay in their wall-lockers in favor of something less delicate, like a LWH.

  20. So…… how do you smoke the Marlboro in that thing?…..

  21. It is senseless to commend on something without the opportunity of testing the product like the Helmet. Especially
    1. Visual performance
    2. Temperature changes
    3. Internal fogging
    4. Verbal communication and maybe even other factors
    I am all for advancement but priority should be practical application. Let experienced Field Soldiers test it first.
    Bert Mueck

  22. I think it’s a great start, most of the comments here are just negative. There are technological and basic needs to overcome but it’s better than not innovating at all. Remember the Military always chooses the lowest bidder, lowest bidder = lowest innovation/technological stride. But who knows 15-20 years from now when another major conflict breaks or we start fighting aliens (… o.O) they’ll begin incorporating new stuff.

    Hearing: You could easily incorporate hearing tech to magnify certain sounds, do so in a manner that would dampen explosive and gunshots to be heard but not break your ear drum while magnifying other noises such as foot steps and say small talking/whispering. It’s sold on TV for the elderly already!

    Eyes: Incorporate Ballistic eye wear that is better in the sense that it’s actually bullet proof to a 9mm round, of course being actively treated with the de-fogging agents. Both are available in todays markets

    Comfort: Your a Soldier/Marine/Sailor/Airmen… Grow up or get out. Walmart will hire you as a greeter and you can wear all the comfortable clothes you want.

    Face Mask: It’s a hell of a good start, they should have different strengths… a gunner should have a stronger face mask because he/she is more exposed for periods of time then say a helicopter pilot. An Infantry man storming a building needs to be light on his feet and have a massive field of view as your in close quarters combat. That face mask may not be necessary or wanted at all which is why it detaches…

    Another factor that you have to take into account is it looks like this is being modified to be fitted with the ACH, it doesn’t look like a brand spankin new helmet so would you expect a massive upgrade? It’s all about cost in today’s wars. We’ll storm the beach when Congress has the funds for us to storm the beach, YA GET IT TROOP? Definitely a good leap forward though with it’s challenges it’s going to pose.

  23. I can see a full hazmat version that would seal around the whole head. Could protect against chemical hazards and still be battle ready.

  24. I am interested in seeing how this plays out. I know that Revision knows their stuff, I used their goggles during my time and they held up.

  25. I hope robots will be used instead of human beings in the next conflict for oil.

  26. Throw this on the ground and go with a patrol cap.

  27. That's a good thing you guys has and have to offers. keep your head up! :-)

  28. My husband works with a unit that had the opportunity to try out these helmets. He loved it and felt it was way more comfortable and secure than his normal ACH. He also said that the limited vision and ventilation (for both breathing and keeping the lenses from fogging up) issues raised in previous comments was not troublesome at all for him. Shouldering and firing his weapon were also not made more difficult. I think they're better looking than the ACH, anyways.

  29. What it needs is little A/C connected with that battery port. Prevent fogging. Total comfort. Wouldn't have to be vulnerable because you wouldn't want to take it off. Should also think about putting layers over the lens like they do in motocross, saving the actual protective lens as the last one and that way you don't scratch it up, I mean really once its hit its getting replace so until then, its going to be scratched and worn down and I for one know its annoying to see through a tattered lens, which means it will be removed or up most of the time if I can help it. Seriously within 5 minutes I can already see a couple more generations of this needing upgraded or just reviewed. Looks like Revision needs to revise their exploits.

  30. Anyone else realize the visor is wide enough for you to still see through you peripheral vision. I'm almost sure before they outfit this on troops there will be a design change that makes it less bulky while still retaining the features and maybe adding more. This is a professional company making these so they're not just going to make a half ass product, they know hearing is a problem along with weight, so they'll find a way to optimize them both.

  31. Sledge B. Hamma | June 8, 2014 at 3:23 pm |

    Dumb looking hemets. Just gimme an old ww2-vietnam era piss pot helmet, that's all that's needed, not this silly looking crap that will end up being made in China.

  32. Sledge B. Hamma | June 8, 2014 at 3:28 pm |

    The only way this thing will work is if you add a space man suit with built in Jet Paks with enough fuel for at least 1hour flight time and in flight refueling capability from a tanker.

Comments are closed.