Re:It would be very helpful (Score 1)

GG Formatting... let's try that again...

Speaking strictly of optical camoflage... here's some of the military definitions of Why things are seen:

Shape - geometric man made shapes stand out in nature. The shape of an infantryman's helmet, or the angular lines of an armoured vehicle.

Shine - a surface that doesn't shine appropriately for it's surroundings... bad texture mapping :-D

Sillouette - the outline of the object being seen against a skyline or a solid color background (the side of a sand dune for example)

Shadow - Things that cast shadows on themselves, or cast shadows have a larger or more easily identifiable signature. Imagine a fighting trench/foxhole with overhead cover, and a firing slit in front. The shadow inside the firing trench helps make the trench visible.

Spacing - regularly spaced items stand out. Posts driven every 6 feet into the ground, or a line of advancing infantry for example.

Colour - Dark green camoflage against light terrain... like the Canadian Army in Afghanistan in their green battledress

Movement - Moving objects draw the eye.

A 'cloak suit' could help minimize or eliminate several of those factors. Color, Shape, Shine, Sillouette and Shadow to start, and would/could minimalize movement.

Now, there's obvious technical limitations that have already been mentioned (battery life, electronics breakdown, etc), but this could have fantastic applications for things like Satellite observation or vehicle mounted systems. Imagine a large, easily deployed fabric cover overtop of a battalion command post that then projects a false image of what's under the cover. Great way to hide things from Satellite or high flying recon birds, and it's not limited by manportable power. Vehicle mounted systems would also be able to work without the limitation of having to carry large power supplies.

As an ex-infantryman, I don't like the thought of soldiers having to hump extra kit into battle, however, if it's ruggedized, minaturized and made extremely reliable, it could be an important factor in keeping soldiers from being seen. I don't think any infantryman will discount it out of hand, but instead will only ditch the kit when it proves to be more hassle than it's worth.

ps. The Reality Dysfunction (by Peter F. Hamilton) has some great examples of 'sneak suits' in action.