New and Improved - SmarTruck II 329
jmoriarty writes "The Army's next generation SmarTruck is on display in Detroit. The original version of the SmarTruck was covered back in May, but the Army now admits that version was 'hardly ready for the real world'. Apparently the real world version needed interchangable nodules, and the absolute must-have for every Slashdotter's vehicle - a 'hacker in a box'."
heh (Score:4, Funny)
SmarTruck The Next Generation... (Score:3, Funny)
Thought we had a Star Trek parody here.
"Mr Data, when I said 'Fire at Will', I didn't mean for you to be so literal."
No no, not TNG (Score:2, Funny)
"SmarTruck II - The Wrath of Saddam"
Hmm, doesn't quite have the same ring as "Wrath of Khan"..
I wouldn't watch it anyway.. William Shatner parodying Bush might make my head explode.
Re:SmarTruck The Next Generation... (Score:2)
Thought we had a Star Trek parody here.
[treknerd] My treklore might be a bit fuzzy, but certain starships were designed this way - most starships from the retrofitted enterprise onward were designed with swappable bridge modules (which was basically an explanation as to why the Enterprise's bridge layout kept changing from movie to movie), but the most striking example of this was the nebula class - nacelles tucked right up under the saucer, shortened vertical engineering section and a huge mission definable pod mounted on its back. Survey mission? slide on a sensor pack. Goin' to war? Add some extra photon torpedo launchers and you're good to go.
They did something like this on DS9 with the runabouts as well, but that was because one episode had all three runabouts on screen at the same time and viewers needed to be able to visually tell the ships apart - one didn't have one, one glowed green and one glowed red (or something like that). Cute.
[/treknerd]
Triv
Re:SmarTruck The Next Generation... (Score:2)
In Star Trek 2, the Reliant was originaly going to be a Constitution class ship like the Enterprise. That would have been hard for the audience to watch, though, so they designed the Reliant without an engineering hull and a rollbar. Originally, though, the nacelles were going to point upwards like on the Enterprise, but when the design was handed in it was read upside-down. They liked the difference that it made having the nacelles hang from the ship. So they did one more re-design with those features in mind. Clever, eh?
That really waasn't the point of my joke, though. I wasn't commenting on the vehicle itself, just the wording in the article. It has 'SmarTruck', 'the', 'next', and 'generation' in the same line.
A great use... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:A great use... (Score:3, Funny)
Is it me... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't even get me started on the names of operations. "Infinite Justice", anybody? It sounds like something out of the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.
Re:Is it me... (Score:2, Funny)
But of course, the very coolest accessory, only seems to be available at your local army recruiter! Bring your dad in to the recruiters office and get the Ultimate Battle Pack for only $59.95!
I wonder if the Crusader comes with a submarine option, or a copter option?
- Tristan
Crusader? (Score:2, Informative)
1.) The Crusader is a smaller system then the current Paladin system that has been in use since around the 1950's. Yes we are talking the 1950's
2.) 1 Crusader can send out more rounds in one minute then a entire battery of Paladins. A battery usualy consists of 6 to 9 Paladins.
3.) The crew of a Crusader is 1/2 the size of the Paladin crew. Most of the system is using computers compared to Paladin which has 100% no computers. (this does not count fire direction control) The Crusader has proven to also be more accurate in shooting as well.
4.) The Secretary of the Army had recommeneded that we keep the system since people who deal with Field Artillery already have a prototype of the system running and are using it in the field. They are impressed with it, and it has been proven to be more reliable then the current systems we have in place. Rumsfield said no no no so they had to cancel the program. Total bullshit since Rumsfield has no clue on how field artillery works.
5.) A round from a aircraft, or a rocket that does equal amount of damage cost over $1K, a round from a Crusader costs under $100. Oh and these smart rounds we always hear about are also made for Field Artillery systems and are just as effective.
6.) To move a Paladin battery it would take like 10 C5 airplanes to deploy them. For the same firepower you can move 2 Crusaders on 1 C-5.
7.) A lighter model can be airdropped into combat, current we have no decent system in field artillery that can be dropped into combat. Oh and the Paladin weighs more then the Crusader.
Overall I have no clue why they dropped the Crusader. The project was running under budget, and within 10 years would have started saving billions of dollars on what we are currently using. Besides we already spent several millions to build the system.
A direct link so you can brush up on your bullshitting skillz
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/c
This comes from someone who use to be in the Field Artillery and also lives 10 miles from the Field Artiller Training School for the Army.
Re:Is it me... (Score:5, Funny)
I understand that the other names under consideration included:
Re:Is it me... (Score:2)
If this is an issue, maybe those people shouldn't be IN the reserves?
Sounds to me like you are pissed at finding out, after joining the reserves or National Guard, you might actually have to go to war. Maybe you should have thought about that before. The purpose of the reserves is not to just provide you with additional monthly income.
Re:Is it me... (Score:2, Informative)
How about we keep our army here in the US protecting and training like they are supposed to. and when we need forces somewhere else, we call up the reserves to perform the duty they were trained to do.
Re:Is it me... (Score:5, Interesting)
Speaking as an active duty soldier, I can tell you that you're full of crap. The "real fighting" is over with before the reserves and national guard are done palletizing their gear. 90% of the deployments that the AR and NG gets sent out on, are "peace-keeping missions" ie a show of force so that we maintain a presence in those countries, without having to lose our fighting force and momentum. you honestly think that the army chief of staff would rather send out a group of weekend warriors that has fired their weapons maybe 4 times in the past year than the several divisions of troops that are training on a constant basis? shinseki's dumb, but he's not that stupid.
and before you rear up on your high horse about the AR and NG being married with kids, you're going to have to realize that the vast majority of the regular army, is married with kids, too. in fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find an sergeant or captain or above that's *not* married.
back on topic, I have no idea what the hell they were thinking of when they built that thing. it's not like we couldn't retrofit the stuff we've already got.
Re:Is it me... (Score:2)
It seems the regular Army is ill-prepared to project power overseas quickly because they always have to wait for the reserves to get called up, assigned and shipped out.
Pepper Spray (Score:2)
CowboyNeil: Hey Taco... those terrorists are getting really close, should we open up fire with the machine guns?
CmdrTaco: Nah 'Neil, let's just use the pepper spray, it worked great on those purse-snatchers back home.
Um yeah... pepper spray is useful, but I can't see it being used in many military situations when a fully-automatic gets the job better and has much more range. Unless they're going for disabling the enemy instead of mortally wounding, but even in that case there are probably things much better than pepper spray, especially considering range.
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:4, Insightful)
The pepper spray bit in the article is just to make you feel Warm And Fuzzy because you know how much They Care.
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:4, Funny)
Non leathal weapons have some neet capabilites: you don't have to worry about firendly-fire. Just zap them all and sort them out at your leasure.
If someone looks suspicious - zap them first and ask questions later. No need to be coy, zap away!
Imagine this: A crowd of anti-american protesters starts protesting when we occupy France. With curent technology, you can do much if you don't want to be a murdurer. With with non-lethal weapons you could zap the whole crowd and process them one at a time - seperating common citiziens from the truly nasty McDonalds/Nike/Hollywood hating French terrorists.
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:2, Troll)
Consider urban warfare. You could be facing attack from soldiers and civillians. While your standard weapons are perfect for mowing down enemy soldiers, there are political implications to mowing down civilians. Unless of course you are Isreal killing Palastenian civillians, then it's just collateral damage. Ok, political bias aside, that's probably the reason for pepper spray.
Geez, at a million bucks a peice that is one overpriced truck.
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:2)
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:2)
Kintanon
hate to be a spoilsport... (Score:5, Interesting)
Part of my own personal research is talking to active or retired or semi recently quit members of various US "forces". I have heard some rather disturbing *things* along these lines. Very disturbing. Here's one just at random, a lot of training now revolves around indoctrination that US civilians have no constitutional "right" to bear arms. Another is training for manning roadblocks and for doing house to house searches in regards firearms confiscation.
The model states health emergency act is an eye opener as well. You can see/guess what's coming and it ain't nice. Forced... everything. Reading on "less than lethal" weaponry you can find out more, microwave beam weapons, sonic weapons, various gasses, etc, all designed for mass riot control, and to deflect any immediate criticism that it's only for "foreigners" overseas someplace in some war, these weapons are being provided to US police forces as well. Another clue is the intense militarization of US police forces, emphasizing military styled training and hiring ex military personnel over traditional policing and maintaining that police are civilians. Nowadays police refer to non police as "civilians", noting therefore they are "not". It's a mindset and series of occurrences that should be setting off a lot of alarm bells in people's minds now.
It's also a big clue why the army has started on adopting a lot more wheeled armor over tracked, much easier to use in cities and on roads. Yes, easier to transport as well, but still...
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:2)
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, but only if they're allowed to play Beavis screaming "Fire! Fire!" over a bullhorn while doing so.
That would be bitchin'!
Re:Pepper Spray (Score:2)
I mean if there is one thing that Europe excels at it is riots and how to control them. Not to say that it is a good thing though!
Wow! (Score:5, Insightful)
Humm, didn't we do this with the HEMTT series? The MTV series, hell even the old 2.5 ton series (complete with "modular" 5 ton wrecker for mobility to/from the motorpool), the list goes on.
Oh, just noticed from the article, they cost more. Wow, some innovation.
$400 Toilet Seat (Score:4, Insightful)
Over-exposed schoolgirl victim of high-tech bullying [xnewswire.com]
You must have really clever soldiers... (Score:5, Funny)
Hmm, reminds me of a story I heard regarding the much-maligned SA80 rifle over here in the UK.. apparently top brass invited over Mr Kalashnikov one day (designer of AK47 fame). Mr K. had a good look at the SA80 and turned to the generals and said "You must have really clever soldiers".
Re:$400 Toilet Seat (Score:5, Funny)
Looking at the thing and seeing no apparent armor added, I would venture a guess that the "low tech" method of defeating this thing would be to pump a couple of rounds into it with an AK-47.
Re:$400 Toilet Seat (Score:2)
I seriously think somebody had too much time and money and watched too much Discovery Channel...
Re:$400 Toilet Seat (Score:2)
Hmmm (Score:5, Funny)
I suppose this gives new meaning to the term "wardriving."
Re:Hmmm (Score:2, Funny)
I'm guessing the Army thought that term sounded too Ritzy.
Re:Hmmm (Score:2)
Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . . (Score:4, Funny)
. . .but a news conference featuring a marching color guard and a military band playing patriotic songs such as "God Bless America" to introduce a truck seems straight outta the Simpsons. Like an inanimate carbon rod getting a medal from the president or something.
No (Score:2)
Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . . (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . . (Score:2, Funny)
-Ben
Hmm. (Score:2)
The military said it has no plans to produce the truck any time soon
It's a publicity stunt, nothing more.
Is anyone else a little skeptical of the "read all e-mails sent near the truck" capability? Have they not heard of encryption?
Re:Hmm. (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe they are using van Eck (Tempest) phreaking. (Google it if you don't know what it is.)
If one could capture what was on someone else's monitor, a computer could OCR it easy enough. A computer could probably locate the signal, as well. This would provide for the possibility of an automatic capture system.
Also, since you generally don't type e-mail in encrypted form, it's irrelevent.
This is just speculation, mind you.
Re:Hmm. (Score:2)
Lets put it this way. If my army had to rely on this thing, I would be thinking of moving.
Oh wait I already did from Canada to Switzerland.
some of this sounds like fantasy. (Score:3, Insightful)
Excuse me? Why do you need a truck to monitor email? Wouldn't it be safer to monitor email from afar?
Re:some of this sounds like fantasy. (Score:2)
Have to Pay for CNN Video (Score:3, Informative)
What are they thinking?
Smartruck Site (Score:3, Informative)
More news photos... (Score:3, Informative)
(working link to Smartruck II page) http://www.smartruck2.com [smartruck2.com]
Holy Cow... (Score:2, Offtopic)
Does it have tilt steering?
Does anyone else feel a bit worried? (Score:4, Interesting)
Not every weapon is designed to fight Iraq. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Does anyone else feel a bit worried? (Score:2)
And not every military mission is in a desert. Just about every country on the planet have some land that is not desert.
And I think it is clear that this thing is designed to either operate in America or other countries similarly structured, not against any target the administration is likely to publicly attack (i.e. 'heathen desert living primitive terrorist types').
I think it is clear you have no clue as to the many, many types of missions that are carried out by the military (US and otherwise).
Urban assult vehicle - this included Bagdad (Score:2)
Remember, if we HAVE to go into Iraq|Afganistan|Bosnia|... we will be fighting in the cities. The last Gulf War was an anomaly - this time, Saddam will allow us to take all the sand we want. However, if we want to move into the cities, then we will pay dearly.
So, you want a vehicle designed to fight in a city. Any city - Bagdad, Prague, Paris, Wichita, it doesn't matter.
That said - some of the moves being made to prepare for citizen suppression scare the crap out of me. I expect that by the time I am ready to retire, we will be living in what Civilization calls a "Corporate Republic".
What's the point? (Score:4, Insightful)
To me this just seems up there with the color coding terror warning system; something to make it look like the people in charge are making us safer but without any real effect.
What role would this truck ever really play in the army? It seems to me that the curent Humvee is probably modular enough to perform any of the tasks that the SmarTruck is designed for.
Oh well, who really expects common sense from the government, if it's for the army of course its a good idea.
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
Come on - with this kind of power, the US Army can SPAM Iraq into submission ...
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
Re:What's the point? (Score:2)
Who knows? Has the senior Army leadership clued you into the plans they have for this? Light pickups and Blazers are very common in the military. Why not outfit them for tasks where they can be useful?
It seems to me that the curent Humvee is probably modular enough to perform any of the tasks that the SmarTruck is designed for.
Starting with a reliable platform (current pickup/SUV) brings a lot to the table. Parts availability, repairs, fix it anywhere.
The HUMVEE is a 30 year old design. Not perfect for many missions. Maybe, just maybe, a new (or additional) platform should be looked at. The only way to stay ahead is to keep trying new things.
mental masturbation? (Score:4, Interesting)
So, I at least think that its just more standard auto-show fluff.
--
Phil
Useful? (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, it's got some nice bells and whistles, but hand me an RPG or drive this over a mine and all it'll be good for in the future is roasting marshmallows. Wouldn't it make a hell of a lot more sense to mount this sort of electronic warfare gear onto Humvees or (better yet) APCs? Which vehicle would you rather have when even the Somali militia opens up on you, much less anyone with training?
The general quoted in the interview acknowledged that there was no mission in mind for the first generation SmarTruck. Well, that's the mission for this thing? A next-gen friendly casualty generator?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Useful? (Score:2)
It's an anti-terrorism device. It isn't INTENDED to be used in areas where your enemy has an RPG or has planted mines. It's intended use is places like New York City or Detroit or Los Angeles -- against ordinary citizens.
If that doesn't frighten you, I don't know what will.
Re:Useful? (Score:2)
Terrorists usually attack by:
1) Blowing themselves up
2) Blowing a truck up
3) Blowing a building up
Now as sad as these terrorists are, how exactly is this supposed to stop terrorists blowing things up?
Outside of that people have not been reduced to chaotic factors shown so often in movies.
Re:Useful? (Score:2)
Re:Useful? (Score:2)
Ultimate show of military might (Score:5, Funny)
The US military has discovered the destructive power of Slashdotting. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Only the Government..... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Only the Government..... (Score:2)
Whatever (Score:3, Informative)
I worked with the Army. I went to an exercize for a month, and I can tell you that they are the bigist peace of shit on wheels. Everywere the Army goes they break down. Insted of driving them in a convoy, they had to put them on a train, why? Becouse the commanders said they won't last the 12 hour drive. Everyone I talked to said they were shit.
Why? becouse the Army buys the cheapest part to run them, and the solderiers don't care about them. Like my father said, back in the day when the jeep was your life, you took are of it. Now when it breaks down, they get a replacement. Thats nice until you notice your motorpool is many miles away.
Besides the cool versions like this one, only the commanders get. Who don't drive them becouse they perfer ther nice Audi and Volvo rentacars. (Yes the commanders did ditch there tactical vechicals to drive around in new A8's)
It scares me a little about this Iraq situation. The Army people now days don't know anything. It's sad I think, and I hope they don't go into war, becouse there heads are so stuck up (we *did* kick ass in afganistan, _but_ with the help of the Birts and Canadians) I could go on more about why I feel this way. But I'll save my breath.
Remeber, Sadam is no dumb ass. The read dumbasses are the young officers who think they can kick anyones ass.
Needless to say I don't work for the Army anymoe for this reason.
Re:Whatever (Score:2)
Needless to say I don't work for the Army anymoe for this reason."
This guy is obviously an expert on "dumb" and "ass" having been one most of his life.
Re:Whatever (Score:2)
If you honestly think we're relying on the likes of Canada to protect our nation, you are absolutely insane.
Re:Whatever (Score:2)
PPCLI (Princess Patricias Canadian Light Infantry) was to be awarded a US Congressional Medal for its work in Afganistan, the first such honour since the PPCLI served in Korea. The JTF2 (Joint Task Force 2 - Canadian Commandos, comparing them to Navy Seals is comparing a Pit Bull to a German Shepard) were also given citations to their sniper squad for work done in southern Afganistan.
The US did not rely on it's friends, but it did get help. If you think you can go it alone, then you're absolutely insane.
Re:Whatever (Score:2)
Re:Whatever (Score:3, Informative)
while stationed in northern Saudi Arabia during the whole Desert Shield/Storm thing, we would take these things out into the desert and make jumps.
wow, we could hit a jump doing about 80 and be airborne for 3-4 seconds!
be careful when jumping these things though, it's real easy to hit your head on the inside middle turret handle when coming down for landing.
we basically tried to drive these things into the ground, but the worst case scenario was a broken axle on a single HUMVEE.
Re:Whatever (Score:4, Insightful)
They take a licking and keep on ticking. I've never had a problem with them -- oh yeah, but that's also because we take care of them.
It's honestly really too bad that the people you were around weren't doing their jobs. Don't fault the vehicle for the operator's negligence. The HMMWV is an amazing and versatile vehicle.
The Army people now days don't know anything.
I gotta believe this is nothing more than a troll... you obviously don't know what you're talking about.
But I'll save my breath.
Please, do.
Important questions unanswered: (Score:3, Funny)
damn slow connection... (Score:2)
This was supposed to be in parent... but I clicked by accident
Prior Art (Score:2, Interesting)
Civilians can buy something like this already (Score:2)
You can buy a sensor package and NBC protection. It becomes a problem when you mount the
It will set you back $500,000, but the cool thing is the quote from IBIS TEK "the average deer hunter in Pennsylvania could operate the system if he or she had a minimal amount of computer experience."
I guess that includes me
Damnit... now I want back in! (Score:2)
This would have been a fun project to work on, even if it is just someone's research idea that will never come to pass. It would have been damn fun to be the test driver or T.C. for this thing.
Gah! (Score:2)
This isn't going to stop them from wrapping it up in Iraq in 3 days, though.
Interior Features (Score:2, Funny)
The center console of the vehicle houses the rear view video display, joystick controls, driver GPS Display, mobile satellite phone, AM/FM/CD stereo system, and cellular phone mount.
What!?! No cupholder?
Coyote is Much Better (Score:3, Informative)
In any event, there is already a great vehicle system on the market: the Canadian Forces' Coyote [forces.gc.ca], part of their LAV [forces.gc.ca] platform of vehicles (insert gratuitious Canadian army jokes here). This system is so successful that it has been picked up the US Army under the Stryker [army.mil] name. Plus, it has the advantage of looking like it belongs on a battlefield and not some kid's sandbox.
Some specs for the Coyote:
Length: 6.39 m
Width: 2.50 m
Height: 2.69 m
Maximum speed: 100 km/hr
Range: 660 km
Weight: 14.4 t
Gradient: maximum 60%
Side slope: maximum 30%
Minimum turn diameter: 15.6 m
Trench crossing: 2.06 m
Fording
shallow: 1.3m
deep: 1.0m
3 configurations:
Command (51 vehicles)
Battlegroup (120 vehicles)
Brigade (32 vehicles)
Armament:
25-mm stabilized M242 chain gun
7.62-mm stabilized coaxial machine-gun
7.62-mm top-turret mounted machine- gun
76-mm smoke/fragmentation grenade launcher
Sights:
Daytime optical
Thermal Imagery (TI)
Generation III Image Intensification (II)
Surveillance System:
Battlefield
Surveillance Radar
Thermal Imager
Daylight camera
Laser Rangefinder
Winch: Front-mounted 6,800 kg dynamic pull
self-recovery winch
Engine: 275 hp Detroit Diesel 6V53T
Transmission: 5 forward gears, 1 reverse
Transfer case: 2 speed
Suspension: Independent Rear 4 wheels
torsion bar
Front 4 wheels strut
Wheels: 8 wheels (4 or 8 wheel drive)
Tires: Michelin XML
Brakes: Power (air)
Electrical system: 28 V
Batteries: 2 x 12 V automotive, 6 x 12V
auxiliary
Alternator: 300 A
I want to be a marketing consultant for the Army (Score:2)
Not yet. the future of military automotive (Score:2)
There's the COMBATT truck [gmmilitary.com] (a GMC pickup with a lift job and some armor). Rod Millen Racing [rodmillen.com] has built dune-buggy type vehicles for the military (they look like Somali technicals, but perform like Baja trucks.) There are other prototypes around.
GM has a military product line [gmmilitary.com], based on pickup or Suburban platforms. Except for the Rod Millen vehicles, all this stuff is for rear areas; if you have to follow tanks around, you need a HUMMV.
UAV (Score:2)
I wonder if they are referring to this thing [rctoys.com] which was supposedly licensed by the military. Slashdot covered [slashdot.org] it a while back.
jesus christ... cost? (Score:4, Interesting)
umm what the fuck? we went from a $500 40 hp, 4wd jeep that seemed to do a pretty damn good job of transporting 4 humans up a 40 degree incline with no problem. they are inherently simple, and weigh nothing. with today's design/production technology, they'd weigh less and cary more, and probably be stackable.
enter the 1980's. we get $100,000 hummers. they hold exactly the same number of people, don't accelerate any faster, and aren't any better at navigating the offroad. they also weigh two tons.
i like the idea of mass producing an F-250/350 for certian needs, like a portable rocket launcher, but you do not need 6-10 wheeled F-550's that cost 100,000 a piece. there's no reason the truck needs more than 200 hp, and there's no reason why you can't use slightly beefed up suspension parts for this sort of job out of the ford/chevy/dodge parts box to cut prices down to the 12,000-20,000 price range. i can understand the price inflating with a bed-mounted rocket launcher, but the initial cost of the chassis is unbelivably absurd. what ever happened tt back to basics?
Re:jesus christ... cost? (Score:2)
If you've ever seen a HUMVEE haul a duece and a half out of frame deep mud, you'd understand the difference.
Modularity. Designing in the ability to swap boxes for different missions adds cost and weight.
Finally...from the article:
The military said it has no plans to produce the truck any time soon, although Bran Ferren, a designer of SmarTruck II, said that if an order came through it could be put in production in a year.
Re:jesus christ... cost? (Score:4, Insightful)
Of those that enlist with this kind of thing in mind, 99.9% of them won't realize that they'll probably never see one in actual use; maybe in a motorpool, or maybe if they're not passing out in formation at a parade as a general drives past them in one, but that's about it.
If any intelligence gathering unit showed up with something like this, it would be RPG bait. Little kids would be told to roll grenades under it, and could you imagine getting it ready for inspection?! There would be a pissed off captain somewhere yelling,
"Sick Call!! The whole damn platoon!?!"
Field work is much more successful when they just (skunkworks local 151) rework several large delivery trucks, paint them up with the words, "Delivery" or "Plumbing" in the native language of the area, hire the local piraiah who can't get laid and doesn't have any friends and still lives at home playing video games or programming(holy shit, I just described 90% of slashdot!) to drive the damn thing, and spend the day driving around with electronic vacuum cleaners feeding hard-drives and tape recorders. Nobody would say a word, and the job would get done. The biggest retrofit would be to tear off the metallic top over the cargo area and setup an RF neutral one using fiberglass...no biggie, what, all of $2500 to $5000 per vehicle, and maybe all of $200 to the driver for as long as you need them, when you need them.
Crap...I'm probably screwing up posting this, I certainly hope nobody in the "Axis of Evil" is reading slashdot right now...
Cheers
Who else thinks that the bumpers looks cool ? (Score:2)
It Blends Right In! (Score:3, Funny)
Cool toy to waste taxmoney, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
With the Posse Comitatus Act still supposedly intact, why does the Army need a vehicle that is obviously aimed at use against a civilian populace?
Or is the Posse Comitatus Act, like our Bill of Rights and getting honest answers from administration officials, yet another casualty of the War on Terror?
Big Brother's Jeep (Score:2)
"In the cab of the truck are housed a 3-D mapping system and a communications system that Fuller described as "hacker in a box." It includes a computer program linked with surveillance equipment to monitor what people in the area around the vehicle are saying in e-mail. SmarTruckII could just sit and listen, send bogus e-mails to confuse an enemy, or, if it is not amused, kill the enemy communications system altogether."
I'm surprised not to see the typicial out-of-control, knee-jerk reaction from the slashdot crowd to this.
Re:Big Brother's Jeep (Score:3, Funny)
Don't get all excited! Sheesh! (Score:5, Insightful)
The military said it has no plans to produce the truck any time soon, although Bran Ferren, a designer of SmarTruck II, said that if an order came through it could be put in production in a year.
As I read it, after Sept. 11 some military command folks said--wow, that changes a lot.
They concluded the military might need some new ideas for lightweight vehicles and told some researches to play around with what they could come up with.
This isn't going to the battlefield--it's a prototype of a number of new ideas. And if one of those ideas can save an American soldiers life it's well worth it in U.S. Military (as well as Political) economics.
Soldiers are expensive to train (and thus lose) and its even more expensive to explain their death to the public.
Full Metal Challenge? (Score:2)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2)
"The prototype vehicle cost between $500,000 and $1 million"
For a chevy silvarado and some PC's and other equipment they probably could have stripped from a mothballed apache helicopter, and a estimated price gap of a half a million for its budget, yes its most definitly vapor.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2)
*it cost more a company more for there workers then there "base pay".
Re:What about troops and other costs? (Score:2)
Re:I saw this one (Score:2, Interesting)
And why wouldn't it be cost effective? It's considerably cheaper than the $4.3 million for an M1A1 Abrams Battle Tank [globalsecurity.org].
Re:What? There's no other urban areas in world? (Score:2)
I'm sure they could make it fit, those things can push through and over pretty much anything. And anyway, France still has alot of little white flags, used once, left over from WW2. (just kidding)