Department of Defense Gadget Show 183
blackp writes "DefenseLINK has an article about Force Protection Equipment Demonstration IV. This year they had over 2,600 gadget and equipment for defense and government agencies. The list includes kevlar suits, body heat camo, a RoBoCop Suit, even biometric identification. Some pictures are available, although somewhat limited. This show seems perfect for the geek with a big budget." Or the government with a big budget. Still, some neat things on display.
A Robocop Suit? (Score:5, Funny)
Fist Sport!
Re:A Robocop Suit? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A Robocop Suit? (Score:2, Interesting)
Even the (late eighties / early nineties?) Robocop TV show had its moments - look closely and you could see Subg
Re:A Robocop Suit? (Score:2, Interesting)
The original Robocop movie was a work of art, the others being toy commercials. So please, grow the FUCK up.
To follow on, the mid 90's TV series had one or two good moments, but was weighed down by the 'an
Well... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Well... (Score:2, Insightful)
Every time someone wants to get a news-op, they drag out how much it costs for something that you could buy at the local hardware store for much less.
Guess what? Your local hardware stores probably aren't ISO-900x compliant. Their suppliers probably aren't. If some unauthorized cheap toilet seat pinches a general's butt, no one will be able to track back the supply and manufacturing trail to 2002/03/01, the 3rd shift, line 2 of PlastiButtCo, employee Al Kali.
The price is expensive,
not quite robo cop (Score:4, Insightful)
Damn, I thought, a RoboCop suit already! Wow! Then I read:
Ugh... yeah. That's cool. Damn impressive even... but ROBOCOP?!? These guys obviously didn't watch the movie... :-)
Re:not quite robo cop (Score:5, Funny)
Kevlar Depends for when something goes BANG in a big way?
Nah. (Score:3, Funny)
It's for package management, a very important part of force protection.
We've got a long way to go before terminator or robocop [defenselink.mil]. Can't they at leaste put some plexiglass up infront of that camera?
Re:not quite robo cop (Score:1)
Bring out the trolls! (Score:1)
MATILDA (Score:2, Funny)
Re:MATILDA (Score:3, Funny)
Those 80's movies were ahead of it's time!!
Re:MATILDA (Score:2)
without enough polyglots, soldiers are in trouble (Score:5, Informative)
This year's one day seminar on Integrating Speech Technology in Language Learning has been cancelled [jiscmail.ac.uk]. The InSTIL seminar was all that had been left of what was once a funded U.S. research program to use speech recognition to help people learn [nsf.gov] to read [nsf.gov]. However, over the past few years the budget of the Interagency Educational Research Initiative has been slashed and the Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnership program has been ZEROED [jiscmail.ac.uk]. The IERI and LAAP programs were created to deal with DARPA funding deficencies [google.com], but DARPA has not taken up the slack for speech recognition in language instruction [jiscmail.ac.uk]. Fewer U.S. polyglots will have a far greater impact on intelligence-gathering efforts than bandaids like Project Babylon or any of the DARPA advanced speech recognition programs [darpa.mil] can possibly provide. Please join me in asking John Poindexter and his [jiscmail.ac.uk] advisory board [defenselink.mil] and NIST [jiscmail.ac.uk] to help get this vital funding back in the budget.
Also, the Linguistic Data Consortium sent their catalog update out yesterday. As usual, there are no new corpi of people attempting to read a language as they are acquiring it, at any age.
Re:Isn't that EXACTLY what you wanted?? (Score:1, Offtopic)
No, he thinks it shouldn't be much stronger than it needs to be, as it is now, and I hope it thinks that it shouldn't be wasting money trying to keep track of all your purchases at the neglect of building better systems to help all people learn additional languages.
Also perfect for the geek with a big government (Score:3, Funny)
Technology at its best (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Technology at its best (Score:2)
When it comes to weapons, remember our motto: "Peace, through superior firepower."
New? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:New? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want new exciting technologies, this is probably not the place to look.
That's not the point of the show... (Score:4, Informative)
To understand the purpose of the show, you need a little context about what happens at Quantico. It's the home to all Marine Corps doctrine, experimentation, and development. Yes, those may be done in other places, but the commands that control them are all in Quantico. It is also home to the FBI and DEA Academies. Many of the other services have similar setups around the D.C. area. So, Quantico is the ideal location for this sort of thing.
The show's purpose is to let the people who make R&D and purchasing decisions to see what's coming down the pipeline from various companies. Some are things that companies would like to see the military or law enforcement test (and eventually adopt) others are things that are in the military pipeline for deployment and are being showcased. The show let someone see a new product and decide that it is something they'd like to test. They can then acquire some, give them a whirl, and recommend the product if they like it. It also lets you see what's crap. I remeber a Tawainese company that was making a futuristic rifle and had it at the show. The thing looked freaking awesome, until you picked it up. It was heavy as hell & shoddily made ("Should the upper reciever be rattling on this thing?" "Ah yes - that is because our rifle is so flexible!").
In many ways it's very much like a computer trade show. You wander around & hear the sales pitch, try things out, and get lots of free crap. Except instead of getting a hard-on looking at IBM's newest server line, you get the hard-on playing with H&K's newest sidearm.
What? (Score:2)
You don't have kevlar undies yet? Huevos on teflon, it's all the rage.
Some fascinating new technology... (Score:3, Funny)
This [soimmature.com] one was invented catch white-collar criminals off-gaurd.
Very interesting stuff. Check it out!
Official Site (Score:5, Funny)
Check out the power point presentation:
Pigeons
Pigeons will be available on a first come first served basis in the Hangers.
Plastic sheeting will be available to vendors in the hanger areas.
Shooting of pigeons, even with non-lethal weapons, is not allowed.
and of course...
Marines at the FPED are not an on-site Labor Force. Attempting to use them as such is at your own risk
Military Humor and Pigeon Soup (Score:5, Funny)
Whew (Score:5, Informative)
Luckily they're just misusing the term to refer to a bomb squad blast armor that's also a biological/chemical suit. Nothing really new, just the combination of two old technologies.
Now, when they take that same suit, add in hydraulic strength multipliers and an advanced HUD, I'll be worried. Unless I get there first.
Re:Whew (Score:5, Funny)
OverclockedCop (Score:3, Funny)
That's not "RoBoCop", that's "OverclockedCop" -- they need a case-mod.
Just leave the case open.
Re:Whew (Score:2)
My sense tends towards the practical, and my humour, a bit dark. My immediate reaction was "They're wearing 40 lbs of sealed armour, they're facing something that may explode in their face, and they've got to be cautious and patient with it, but time is of the essence" My joke about Depends was relevant, I'd be facing a brown-trowsers event if was me.
A stalute to them
Unfair? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Unfair? (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no such thing as a fair fight.
Well, you missed Rule 2 also:
Don't bring a knife to a gunfight.
Well, maybe Rule 3 also:
If the enemy is in shooting range you are too.
(modified by asymetric Artillery advantages and close air support)
Well, Rule 4 too . . .
Always bring the knife ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Always, always, bring the knife! You are not limitted to one weapon. Check out modern grunts. Lightweight assault weapons with hundreds of rounds of ammo, body armor, night vision, etc. and they still carry a knife. Why? As explained to many a grunt: "it is the most reliable weapon you will carry, zero moving parts, zero electronics".
Re:Unfair? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Unfair? (Score:2)
And you assume that I don't know the other knife rule:
A knife is always loaded and needs no supressor.
And the "silent" rule:
Others do not always share your opinion that you are as silent as you think you are.
Those came after the elipses in my earlier post, silly.
And only a peace creep could be so smug. (Score:5, Insightful)
If ridiculous platitudes were all it took to keep the peace, we wouldn't have anything to worry about, I guess.
Are Murphy's Laws of Combat trite aphorisms? Sure. But that doesn't mean that they don't contain some important nuggets of truth.
For example, the statement that "there's no such thing as a fair fight" is paramount in U.S. warfighting doctrine and has been for some time. The only thing that a soldier, sailor, or airman cares about as much as accomplishing the mission is bringing himself and his unit home as intact as possible. War is by nature a risky business, but the fewer casualties that our soldiers and allied forces incur, the better.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think any sane individual wants to see civilians hurt, but soldiers in the opposing military knew what they were getting into when they decided to mess with Uncle. Besides, the faster and more efficiently we can decimate a country's military command-and-control structure, the faster we can restore peace and stability.
Re:And only a peace creep could be so smug. (Score:5, Interesting)
What the soldier, sailor, or airman cares about is irrelevent. They are training for war and of course they want the latest and greatest gadgets when they go into battle. But they are not the ones who decide military strategy nor State department strategy. We hope that those in the upper echelons of government have the insight and foresight to avert wars when at all possible. When these leaders are only focused in war waging instead of peace making we end up with a situation not unlike what we are faced with now, i.e. a world suspicious of the United States and its motives.
There was a great SNL skit back when Reagan was President where Reagan and his policy advisor were preparing for a meeting with the Russian premiew. The policy advisor role played as Gorby and asked the President, "With a fully functional missile defense shield, won't the USA be able to attack the USSR with impunity?" (paraphrased) The President just sat there with a puzzled look. It was pretty poignant. This is the biggest problem with a huge unbalance of power. The smaller states must ally amongst themselves *against* the larger power and be wary of even the slightest aggressive move on the large power's part. This is because they must either look out for their own safety or trust the larger power not to abuse its dominant position. Only one of those choices is a real option, and it doesn't bode well for either the dominant power or peace in general.
Re:And only a peace creep could be so smug. (Score:4, Flamebait)
Not to be excessively picayune, but the Soviets were quite a bit ahead of us in "missile defense shield" technology -- their sites at Dushanbe, Tashkent, and Sary Shagan were well documented. Asking us if an ABM system would be destabilizing brings to mind something about a pot and a kettle. I'm aware it was simply a humorous sketch, but a little background does change the slant significantly.
I agree with you entirely that the "grunt in the trenches" is not, nor should he be, the formulator of national-level policy. But he is the implementor of that policy; he is "the last argument of kings," if you will. The level of trust and confidence he has in his equipment and support elements has a direct bearing on his ability to carry out the mission, so the onus is on his superiors to outfit him with the best possible equipment available.
Cry me a river for the nations who are "wary" of the United States' power. It's been this way since the beginning of time: if one tribe of shaved apes gets an upper hand, it's going to use it. No amount of carping or snits about "destabilization" will change the fact that each of the pissants would be doing the exact same thing if their positions were reversed.
what we really need (Score:5, Funny)
"What about Kenny?"
*shrug* "That's life in the big city."
Re:what we really need (Score:2)
Pictures (Score:5, Funny)
"Some pictures are available, although somewhat limited..."
You could say that. There is one picture of a treaded robot/tank [defenselink.mil], a picture of a girl with a standard ATM-ish card reader [defenselink.mil] and finally, to really show off the state-of-the-art, a picture of a guy with a dog [defenselink.mil].
Re:Pictures (Score:2)
There's a jewelry-store chain in Las Vegas that uses those as timeclocks...a company for which I used to work sold them. The company that builds them [recogsys.com] even pitches their use for such a mundane role.
Re:Pictures (Score:2)
Re:Pictures (Score:2)
err, I mean.. uh...
my, look at the time, must be going...
Re:Pictures (Score:2)
That is indeed a hand scanner. We've got those at the entries to my apartment building, actually. They seem to work pretty well - though I really have no idea what it looks at. It's not palmprint, because it does the scanning on the top of your hand. Something to do with finger lengths or something.
They suck in certain ways though: For one, if you don't have a right hand you're screwed. This has actually been an issue here, there's some guy with his right forearm amputated. I duno what they came up
2,600 gadgets? (Score:5, Funny)
OT: Comment on your Sig. (Score:2)
Donate Pizza [pizzaidf.com]
Is this for real, or am I that gulible?
RoboCop (Score:3, Funny)
"It's an all-in-one," said Danny Crossman, product line manager for blast systems, explained. And another company representative, technical adviser Ray James, added, "It's the only bomb suit in the world that integrates adequate protection against a explosive device with biological and chemical protection." [/quote]
how can they call it a RoboCop suit with a clear conscience, given that this thing kicks absolutely NO ass?
RoboSufferer jacket... RoboMartyr overcoat maybe.
How dead do you want them. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How dead do you want them. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How dead do you want them. (Score:2)
But yes you allways want to have more power but more importantly better power with larger force multipliers and lower maitnence costs thats more and more versitile. It's not a question of how dead do you want them anymore politicians are driving to more and more surgical less collateral damage so they have less political fallout. Allways remember the military is the ultimate tool for diplomacy w
Re:How dead do you want them. (Score:5, Funny)
invade? (Score:2)
No we won't (Score:2, Funny)
Isn't it sad? (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh to live in a world where the prime driving force for innovation is a desire to improve living conditions, feed more people, educate the masses rather than killing them.
*sigh*
Re:Isn't it sad? (Score:5, Insightful)
See, humans come in all forms and shapes. Some are born power hungry. Some evil. Some both. Unless you are protected from them, you are the next victim.
The only difference between "pacifists" and "peace-loving people", and those who are "warmongering" and "hawkish", is that the latter are ready to protect themselves and their society from those who would attack it.
The former come in two categories - those who simply don't get the real world and think everyone else is 100% peaceful and harmless as a daisy, and those who aren't that naive, but are cynical enough to let the "hawkish" to protect them and their family while acting all nice and dovish and "better than the warmongers".
-DVK
That's not what I said... (Score:2, Insightful)
How about, let's say... 1/2 of their current budget is spent on some worthwhile things, like... feeding those who are starving, educating those who have n
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny how nobody ever brings up China or the Soviet Union in these discussions. Or Cuba, which doesn't even need a defense force. These nations routinely spent 40% or more of their entire economies on defense spending, and let their people starve as a result. Oh, but the U.S. spends 4%, and we need to cut it in order to nourish people who hate us. That's just peachy.
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
This is going off-topic now, but look at this -
[independent.co.uk]
WMD just a convenient excuse for war, admits Wolfowitz
And that's the same guy who came up with the "One Superpower" speech that almost got him fired. What about the American soldiers this guy sent away to be killed to fullfill his own hidden agendas? Don't Americans feel like they have been played for fools?
Also - [guardian.co.uk]
US finds evidence o
Defence budget as Percentage (Score:2)
Let's see what kind of percentage of the USA's total budget is spent on defence...
Budget:
revenues: $1.828 trillion
expenditures: $1.703 trillion, including capital expenditures of $NA (1999) (source) [cia.gov]
So, taking the previously mentioned $379 Billion... that's 22% of the State's total budget, including capital expenditures, spent on the defence force!
That's ridiculou
Re:Defence budget as Percentage (Score:2)
And still nobody says anything about China. It's not OK for the U.S., but OK for the Chinese to starve? How racist.
Re:Defence budget as Percentage (Score:2)
Grumble.
I'm not typing all that again... I'm supposed to be working.
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
And the U.S. is outspending the competition? GOOD. That's how you successfully defend yourself.
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
Re:That's not what I said... (Score:2)
About a zillion f*cked companies have proven that while spending a lot of money makes you look like you're growing, and fools people into buying your stock - - but only for a while.
The WAY that America spends it's defense dollar is simply insane. Allowing defense contractors to consolidate until there are one or two left, and simply alternating big contracts to make sure that two competitors remain in the feild does NOT guarantee that competition
You mean well, but are naive ... (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean well, but are naive. We can feed them now, but what about in the decades to come when these 'saved' people have children and so on. Or will the food come with strings attached that require population control and cultural changes? Or will it just be laced with contraceptives? Your proposed solution merely delays things; it sets the stage for an even greater human catastrophe in the not-so-distant future.
Get over the idea that throwing money at a problem will solve it. That's failed many times. Hunger will be with us until people's behaviors and attitudes change (zero or negative population growth in some 'western' nations). Or until people live under repressive regimes that force change (China).
But spending that much on Defence is ok? (Score:2)
I was only using the 'feeding' people as an example... I'm actually more for educating people moreso than feeding them really... as a more highly educated populous is more able to improve their own standard of living and are less likely to be violent to themselves or others.
Plus, you also forget that this kind of expenditure isn't a 'one off' thing... the US spends this EVERY year on their defence... now the US isn't the only coun
Too generous with "means well" (Score:2)
1. My safety and freedom is greatly enhanced by doing so.
2. Dual use technologies. Microwave ovens (WW II radar), the Internet (Cold War DARPA), etc. It's like the space program, it spurs practical basic science. Not every dollar of course, but enough that an honest evaluation has to factor this in.
3
Believing the propaganda (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry, I'm not trying to lash back at you or anything... but watching the US government try and say that Iraq is due to 9/11 is laughable to say the least... It's purely in the interest of the government trying to deflect important local social issue by focussing everyone's attention on an external war effort.
Afghanistan? Ok... directly because of 9/11, yes... but what did they go in there to do? Get Bin Laden... did they get him? Well... umm... maybe... or maybe
Things are far more complicated than you think. (Score:2)
Afghanistan and Iraq are results of 9/11 in that the attack forced the US into a more agressive posture. The basic idea being you take the war to the enemy, not
Re:Things are far more complicated than you think. (Score:2)
The thing that makes me saddest though is the whole 'Threat Level' stuff that is being pushed at the moment, with 'Elevated' being your current state. It's scarily reminiscent of
Re:Things are far more complicated than you think. (Score:2)
Re:Isn't it sad? (Score:2)
Take away all of our weapons and we'll still have our bare hands. If we want to hurt somebody bad enough we will.
Re:Isn't it sad? (Score:3, Insightful)
There are also "doves" who are willing and able to use force if sufficiently threatened. Likewise, there are "hawks" who will back down and run away if you stand up to them.
[Pacifists] come in two categories - those who simply don't get the real world and think everyone else is 100% peaceful
Re:Isn't it sad? (Score:2)
Re:Isn't it sad? (Score:2)
That classification did NOT include aggressors in the first place (going by bird terminology, those would be "vultures".i guess?
-DVK
Re:Isn't it sad? (Score:2)
-DVK
Waltzing Matilda (Score:5, Funny)
Couldn't they just mod an AIBO to do that job? Especially for the Bunker Buster job: Strap some C4 to it, "Woof! Woof! Time to die.. BOOM!" (Okay, I'm joking about the AIBO, but haven't we seen oodles of home robot Slashdot articles in the last couple of months that could probably do the job for less, and be controlled by a cell phone?)
Re:Waltzing Matilda (Score:2)
The artical you reference (link reproduced here [webtv.net] for ease of use) leaves a few things out. The Soviets trained their dogs by putting bits of food under tanks. The dogs would be released, and would find the food under the tank. The idea was that when you strapped bombs to them and released them in combat they'd run under the enemy tanks and blow them up.
Only problem was, the Soviets didn't have any German tanks to train them on. So they used their own tanks in some cases, and poor mockeries
Damn dogs (Score:2)
From the article:
"Not every force protection device was mechanical, computerized or high tech at Force Protection Equipment Demonstration IV at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va., in early May. Buddy Eanes with Ace, his bomb-sniffing dog, also took part in the demonstrations."
Damn! And I thought that having a dog that constantly sniffed at your crotch was inconvenient...
Who are they selling these to again? (Score:5, Funny)
Al Arellanes
Is he supplying terrorists with advanced weapons of mass sandbagging?
-Zipwow
Re:Who are they selling these to again? (Score:1)
Re:Who are they selling these to again? (Score:2)
Was there (Score:5, Informative)
The coolest technology was a compressed-air powered bullet for training. Police and military can use their service weapons to basically play paintball. It's nice because the feel of the weapon is exactly what it would be in real-life situations instead of them having to use a fake training weapon with different characteristics.
Re:Was there (Score:3, Interesting)
Like my brother, he was in a training maneuver where the officers said that they would come under fire from guys using blanks.
The fact that there are no such thing as "blank tracers" lent their feet wings and it was several hours before the brain dead @#$#! ossifers could find them all again..
Battlebots, anyone? (Score:2)
One Drawback... (Score:5, Funny)
They still call it that? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They still call it that? (Score:2)
Re:They still call it that? (Score:2)
I nominate the "Ministry of Love."
Re:They still call it that? (Score:2)
If we destroy all of our enemies, there's no need for defense at all. If they killed the 9/11 terrorists at the airport, you would probably call that defense, but when they killed like-minded people in Afg. that is offense? Still seems like defense to me. Not everything is black and white.
Re:They still call it that? (Score:2)
Re:They still call it that? (Score:2)
Never! If they did, they'd have to change all their other names, like The House of "Representatives", The Courts of "Justice" and the land of the "Free"! At least now that their language has developed as a series of antonyms of English we can know where we stand!
Advertising/Marketing and weapons... (Score:2, Funny)
The Stinger Family of Weapon Systems is combat-proven, fire-and-forget, lethal, lightweight, and multimission. That's the "Stinger Advantage."
I wonder if this trade show has booth babes...
Am I the only one... (Score:3, Insightful)
Witold
www.witold.org
Deus Ex Equipment (Score:2, Interesting)