18 Comments on "DARPA Develops Infantry Helmet Heads Up Display"

  1. Geeze! I bet Google glass would have been cheaper, and it wouldn't have mattered as much if you lunched it during a mission – easy to replace! Oh Well!!

  2. Pete Sheppard | May 21, 2014 at 7:39 pm | Reply

    More gadgets to go FUTZ, more weight, more distraction, all for a some whiz kid's nice-to-have brainstrorm.

  3. Seems bulky, isn't the final product, right?

    like how the guy is wearing a BFG LMAC

  4. OK they tried this 10 years ago they found it to disorient the solder than it ever helped. We need less computer crap on foot solders keep it simple for them.

  5. Google glass can't do what this system does. This is real augmented reality not marketing hype.

  6. More shit for a FNG to screw up!

  7. This coupled with the exo skeleton and your right up there with the "Mech Warriors!"

  8. Live video footage looking through the display and through an NVG.
    http://youtu.be/zqHjAHWSlsM

  9. Is it worth more to carry than a ham sandwich?

  10. Making communications smaller, lighter, better is always a good thing. The challenge remains – light signature. For the human eye to see these screens and displays they have to be illuminated. That creates a detectable signature the enemy will use to locate and destroy the source. The only way to fix that is to put a seal on an eyepiece on a tube…no more "heads up" and all the issues from the legacy research reemerge. I have used small screens embedded in glasses and linked to thermal imagers and they work in special circumstances – darkness is not one of them. It has also been pointed out – troops will have this in pieces in a matter of moments in a non-lab environment. DARPA should keep looking, but have genuine, current field experts who can help them narrow the application to an appropriate audience.

  11. Do some of you people even listen to yourselves?

    Every single piece of equipment a war fighter carries has been the result of constant evolution and change.
    I know as well as you do that there are always introductory problems, the M-16 is a perfect example. But after modifications proved in combat, armorers have been able to develop the most useful and widely copied firearm variant since the venerable AK-47.

    Change is the only constant. Embrace it and live to fight another day. Shun it and you can retire quietly, telling war stories of long ago.

  12. I am all for improving an infantryman's gear, giving him more protection and improving his ability to see what is going on around him. But I am a 92 year-old combat-wounded ex-infantryman (W.W.II) who is bemused by the way things have changed. And will continue to change. Always keep one step ahead of the bad guys.

  13. T jesse RLTW | May 28, 2014 at 12:53 pm | Reply

    And who is going to carry the battery and the replacement for this monster. There are alot of cool video game toys out there but until we can resolve the power issues it will never survive in front line operations. Stick to your video games until then.

  14. Can immediately see problems. As some pointed out the battery issue, it seems the soldier must wear this across his chest?? this will interfere and cost lives when a soldier must hit the prone position during combat. Another is the added weight, aren't our soldiers carrying enough now? One other problem, your best shots are taken with BOTH eyes on target..how can this be done with one eye covered by a display screen? Yes, I am for anything that can safely and effectively give the soldier more information during a fight but this to has it's limits. Head's up displays for pilots? WONDERFUL For Tankers? TREMENDOUS For Arty? Bet your ass….for grunts? Not if it takes away from accuracy of the shot or from their basic safety and performance. The enemy is THAT way….go kill them.

  15. So what happens when a patrol is wiped out, no survivors, and a few of these are captured intact by the enemy?

    How much RF beaconing do these things transmit? How much do they need to receive to work? Heavy encryption is expected, of course.

  16. Garry Bowman | May 30, 2014 at 12:02 pm | Reply

    Anything that offers added security to our soldiers should always be welcomed upfront. Loaded with innovative features, the helmet is surely going a long way. The feature I liked the most is that the information from the drones can also be fed into the display, this is something amazing. But the price charged per unit is somehow very disappointing.

  17. Think about the radioman in WWII calling for artillery support and getting orders etc.
    One man in the squad with an operational version of this technology having real time information and able to give precise data back to the support people i.e. artillery, air support, medevac. This tech can be a true help, well worth the weight a trouper has to carry.

  18. What the hell, wouldn't Liteye Systems, LE-720 be much smaller, no extra box, low power, see-through and probably at a fraction of the cost, and already fielded with US and UK military. Why is Darpa spending money on this junk.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*