- Futuristic Soldiers -

[Spoonius]

I think soldiers of the future are going to be unmanned vehicles and remote-guided machines, so technically the future soldier is the operator of the machines, miles and miles away from the actual deployment. Suffice to say, there has been significant development into the idea of 'robotic soldiers' controlled from afar, and we cannot deny that some of this has already been implemented in varying fashions.

Yeah, but don't forget that whilst modern day robotics can supplement troops in the field, they cannot replace them. Automated drones have their disadvantages too. I reckon that the future relationship between human soldiers and automated drones will be symbiotic, with both performing tasks that the other can't.

Honestly, in the near future. We're looking at Head Up Displays for ground forces. Digital I.D tags to cut down on friendly fire. Better weapons, like, all purpose rifles. Better armor systems for vehicles and troops.

You sound pretty knowledgable about this topic. Any more info on the armour you mentioned? And by "all purpose" weapons, do you mean modular attachments, or fully convertable rifles?

I honestly think there won't be a significant change. I think it will just be restricted to GPS goggles/headsets and robot pack mules.

Less than a hundred years ago, we were using trench-based doctrines to win wars. Now war is a completely different story: new enemies, new techniques and new regulations (such as female soldiers, racial equality, etc).

And GPS is a modern technology, in use today. How will it evolve?

Better communications are probably gonna be the biggest thing.

Any examples?

My future soldier would have one arm incased in metal, and it would amplify strength to the arm, making it able to hit an enemy to a great distance. The soldier his/her self would be traind to by incredably quick and have great agility. Using one arm to grab diffrent weapons, gernades, and kifes while jumping around.

So basicly, a SUPER NINJA WITH A ROBOT ARM!

I pray for your soul.

Communication in the military is actually top notch (Its the people USING the comm equipment that fail) and has always been top notch. I've personally used equipment that let me talk to someone in California while I was in Iraq. The equipment itself? A 4'x16'x20' green box and a 30 foot copper rod with some special paint on it (Civilians have equipment like this, but I've used both, and you can tell the difference. That, and this thing can hack into satellite channels! I don't even know how that's possible, but... How sweet is that!).

What kind of technology are you referring to? And how does it work?

As for the 'future soldier,' look up DARPAs concepts. Basically, the future soldier will have head to toe armor, heavy in the chest and head, light everywhere else. Mechanical legs will be attached to the soldier to provide weight support and increased dexterity; this will be a passive system, little to no power required. Each soldier will be linked to others with a self constructing wireless network (already exist), which will be bounced back by radiomen carrying HARRIS style radios. Each soldier will have a HUD, though I believe its functionality will be much less than you think to keep clutter down and focus up.

How will the exoskeletal systems be "passive"?

Great info though, thanks...

Personally, I hope that in the future we won't need any soldiers.

But we will.

There will always be those willing to use lethal force in order to get what they want. If there aren't any armed forces to stop them, then the world burns.

It's just a sad reality.

I'd like to some exoskeleton concepts come into use. Running with a heavy pack would be much easier when some motors are helping you along.

Exoskeletons are pretty much guaranteed.

I imagine you'll have emp bullets. You shoot it at the power armoured skally wag and he's now in his very own snug and warm tomb.

Don;t forget, if his armour's so heavy that in needs power, then it'll probably be able to deflect your bullet.

Just saying...

War will be fought over a game of MW2

In other words, by using child soldiers...

Hopefully, no supersoldier projects. As games have repeatedly shown us how stupid a messed up project gets...

There have already been supersoldier projects. I can't remember the name, but there was a US experiment that revolved around creating better, drug-enhanced soldiers. It was actually kind of mind-numbing to read, knowing that it wasn't just a story.

You do know we have cloaking devides now?

And shoulder mounted guided rockets isn't unrealistic, sicne we already have stuff like that, just a lot bigger then shit mounted. XD

We have cloaking devices that mask thermal, sonic and electronic signatures, but not the kind that shields something from view. Scientists have been able to wrap light around molecules and make them "invisible", but it'll be decades before this science is advanced enough to develop anything practical.

Also...You want this for your book, don't you? ;P

Yeah... lol. You're not the first to say that. Nice to see people paying attention though.

They had a photo on wikipedia i while back its sort of a mock up for the army but it sort of gives a idea looks alot like mastercheif but with big leg pumps

Im not very good at linking so i hope this works

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Army_powered_armor.jpg

Great photo, thanks.

 

[DefunctTheory]

As for the 'future soldier,' look up DARPAs concepts. Basically, the future soldier will have head to toe armor, heavy in the chest and head, light everywhere else. Mechanical legs will be attached to the soldier to provide weight support and increased dexterity; this will be a passive system, little to no power required. Each soldier will be linked to others with a self constructing wireless network (already exist), which will be bounced back by radiomen carrying HARRIS style radios. Each soldier will have a HUD, though I believe its functionality will be much less than you think to keep clutter down and focus up.

How will the exoskeletal systems be "passive"?

Great info though, thanks...

Passive in this sense refers to a system that boost a particular attribute. For a passive leg system, the robotic assist system would add strength to a soldiers legs, and would boost his leg speed through a system of springs, actuators, and such. It would be the soliders movements, only boosted.

An active system would do all the work, but be controlled. Imagine a system which reads your legs desire through either a spinal tap, or simple pressure plates around the legs. When the system reads a motion, it moves in that direction under its own power, with no assistance from the soldier other than commands.

Its the difference between helping your girlfriend play pool for the first time by guiding her hands, or drinking beer and screaming at her to do it right from across the room, if that makes sense.

 

[x434343]

This thread is over.

O hai Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 set 20 minutes into the future, how have you been?

 

[Spoonius]

As for the 'future soldier,' look up DARPAs concepts. Basically, the future soldier will have head to toe armor, heavy in the chest and head, light everywhere else. Mechanical legs will be attached to the soldier to provide weight support and increased dexterity; this will be a passive system, little to no power required. Each soldier will be linked to others with a self constructing wireless network (already exist), which will be bounced back by radiomen carrying HARRIS style radios. Each soldier will have a HUD, though I believe its functionality will be much less than you think to keep clutter down and focus up.

How will the exoskeletal systems be "passive"?

Great info though, thanks...

Passive in this sense refers to a system that boost a particular attribute. For a passive leg system, the robotic assist system would add strength to a soldiers legs, and would boost his leg speed through a system of springs, actuators, and such. It would be the soliders movements, only boosted.

An active system would do all the work, but be controlled. Imagine a system which reads your legs desire through either a spinal tap, or simple pressure plates around the legs. When the system reads a motion, it moves in that direction under its own power, with no assistance from the soldier other than commands.

Its the difference between helping your girlfriend play pool for the first time by guiding her hands, or drinking beer and screaming at her to do it right from across the room, if that makes sense.

Thanks for clarifying that.

Oh, and another thing, how will the exoskeletons function without a power supply? What scientific principles and technologies are they based around?

 

[DefunctTheory]

I think eventually we will have robots as soldiers, to spare humans from dying. But then we;ll crowd our countries and get fat. Terminators would fill this role, save for the part where they're controlled by some huge AI brain...

No, no, no. No SkyNet, please. That shit gives me nightmares...

Though, to be honest, the US army could use a few Liberty Primes...

Thanks for clarifying that.

Oh, and another thing, how will the exoskeletons function without a power supply? What scientific principles and technologies are they based around?

The ideal system for the average infantry would be nothing more than springs, levers, and such, and what little power they required would be generated by user movements. It would be used for troops on the move and in combat, not with soldiers who are in transit and are carrying packs (they have a system for this already, but its not in use and has fuel problems).

Obviously, ideal systems are hard to find. Most systems I've seen are powered by fuel cells (Easily exhausted), batteries (heavy), or small deisel generators (you can strap this on if you like). The idea is to get a system as small, light, and flexable as possible, and the biggest weight issue with such systems is POWER. Power is heavy.

DARPAs website has changed since I looked last: wish I could find the concept they had for a powerless running system. But its been a year, so they might have scraped the plans as nonsense and moved on to 1000 pound killbots for all I can tell.

 

[Go Fighting In The War Room]

This thread is over.

I thought that trailer was interesting, but the cloaking devices and shoulder-mounted guided rocket pods just seemed unrealistic, and there for the "cool" factor.

Also, it's just another USA vs. Commies premise. Boring.

What is it with Russia taking all the heat for all these fps games these days?

Well, we got bored of Nazis, so we went to terrorists. Now we're bored with terrorists, so we're going back to our good friends, Russia.

Plus, that trailer looks FONKIN AWESOME. Now there are three games I want in fall.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

For America and Europe? Unmanned robots sent into countries full of oil and people who don't have as much money to spend on robots as us.

Everyone else? Insurgents trying to blow up said robots.

 

[DefunctTheory]

For America and Europe? Unmanned robots sent into countries full of oil and people who don't have as much money to spend on robots as us.

Everyone else? Insurgents trying to blow up said robots.

Robots have been, for a while, viewed poorly by the Armed Forces outside of the narrow spectrum of roles they fulfill now. Robots have several weaknesses that are inherent that cannot be fixed. Primarily, choice making.

A fully unmanned drone cannot be trusted. No matter how advanced we program them, they cannot be expected to to function on a level equal to soldiers. Robots cannot path find as well as human beings, they cannot assess threats on the same level as human beings, and they cannot be trusted to fire upon targets without human interface. That last one alone is enough to relegate robots to support roles.

Overall, robots are too expensive, easily tricked, cumbersome, and much more fragile than you would think, in addition to being power hungry and lacking the range of a human beings endurance.

 

[Aur0ra145]

I think the Air Force is going to have a really odd split. We'll have F-22's and F-35's up flying. Additionally we'll have UAV's and the like. But I think we're going to start seeing some turbo prop attack aircraft in a ground support role. Furthermore, the old fashion FAC's I think will come back into existance. We'll expand the amount of airplanes we have and make them cheaper. We'll still have our air superiority stuff like the F-22, but seeing T-6 Texan II's bombing stuff shouldn't be to far away.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Like the master cheif. He had better bones and muscles because they expermiented oh him when he was little. He had that armour to which made him faster and stronger.

Master Chief is some of the softest sci-fi ever written. And while the idea of baby snatching may work in a fictional setting on a galactic level, I don't think any country capable of such a scientific leap as chemical modification of human after birth would swallow the government doing so.

Though it would be kinda cool.

I think the Air Force is going to have a really odd split. We'll have F-22's and F-35's up flying. Additionally we'll have UAV's and the like. But I think we're going to start seeing some turbo prop attack aircraft in a ground support role. Furthermore, the old fashion FAC's I think will come back into existance. We'll expand the amount of airplanes we have and make them cheaper. We'll still have our air superiority stuff like the F-22, but seeing T-6 Texan II's bombing stuff shouldn't be to far away.

Everything I've read has stated the Air Force is trying to DECREASE the number of aircraft types as much as possible. I admit I could be wrong, but thats what I remember.

 

[Spoonius]

I think eventually we will have robots as soldiers, to spare humans from dying. But then we;ll crowd our countries and get fat. Terminators would fill this role, save for the part where they're controlled by some huge AI brain...

No nation could ever possibly be stupid enough to entrust complete control of something as vital as an army to an AI. Maybe some elements could be entrusted to a VI (virtual intelligence), but please, have some faith in our race....

The ideal system for the average infantry would be nothing more than springs, levers, and such, and what little power they required would be generated by user movements. It would be used for troops on the move and in combat, not with soldiers who are in transit and are carrying packs (they have a system for this already, but its not in use and has fuel problems).

Obviously, ideal systems are hard to find. Most systems I've seen are powered by fuel cells (Easily exhausted), batteries (heavy), or small deisel generators (you can strap this on if you like). The idea is to get a system as small, light, and flexable as possible, and the biggest weight issue with such systems is POWER. Power is heavy.

Thanks for that.



Any ideas on how the issues regarding portable power might be solved?

For America and Europe? Unmanned robots sent into countries full of oil and people who don't have as much money to spend on robots as us.

Everyone else? Insurgents trying to blow up said robots.

Unfortunately, this is probably accurate... but remember, robots won't usurp human soldiers for a long time. See below...

Robots have been, for a while, viewed poorly by the Armed Forces outside of the narrow spectrum of roles they fulfill now. Robots have several weaknesses that are inherent that cannot be fixed. Primarily, choice making.

A fully unmanned drone cannot be trusted. No matter how advanced we program them, they cannot be expected to to function on a level equal to soldiers. Robots cannot path find as well as human beings, they cannot assess threats on the same level as human beings, and they cannot be trusted to fire upon targets without human interface. That last one alone is enough to relegate robots to support roles.

Overall, robots are too expensive, easily tricked, cumbersome, and much more fragile than you would think, in addition to being power hungry and lacking the range of a human beings endurance.

Damn right. Not to mention that they require constant maintainence and supervision.

 

[Kelethor]

War.... *I take a long, hard drag from my cigarette, let out a few rough coughs, and toss the cig to the ground* has changed.

It's no longer about nations, or ideologies. its about an endless series of proxy battles, fought by mercenaries and machines.

ID tagged soldiers carry ID tagged weapons, wear ID tagged gear.

War, in it's consumption of life, has become a well oiled machine.

all of it in the name of averting catastrophe of a nuclear war.

Yes friends, War...has changed.

Thats my vision of the future of warfare. a buncha kids running around who'v spent too much time playing CoD and now can't tell the difference, with an old guy in a mullet and a seventies porn mustache rolling around in an invisible track-suit snapping necks and breaking hearts, all the while ranting about nuclear missile shooting guns attached to the forearm's of giant robots.

 

[DefunctTheory]

The ideal system for the average infantry would be nothing more than springs, levers, and such, and what little power they required would be generated by user movements. It would be used for troops on the move and in combat, not with soldiers who are in transit and are carrying packs (they have a system for this already, but its not in use and has fuel problems).

Obviously, ideal systems are hard to find. Most systems I've seen are powered by fuel cells (Easily exhausted), batteries (heavy), or small deisel generators (you can strap this on if you like). The idea is to get a system as small, light, and flexable as possible, and the biggest weight issue with such systems is POWER. Power is heavy.

Thanks for that.



Any ideas on how the issues regarding portable power might be solved?

Honestly, no. And no one really does: we see this all the time in the civilian sector, where bulk, weight, and stability are secondary issues. In the military, these are extremely important, especially stability.

A common perception is that military hardware is crappy. Many vehicles, such as HMMVVs, tanks, and personal carriers can barely break 70 mph, fuel draw is massive, our radios and GPS units weigh quadruple the weight of civilian models, and our tents weigh in excess of thousands of pounds. This is not crappy design, its all sacrifice for one thing: durability. M1A2 tanks could break 80 mph with ease, but they have limiters on to preserve the transmission. We could put high performance gasoline engines in all our vehicles, but they'd explode when hit by light arms fire. Our GPS systems are bulky because they are accurate to about 5 meters or better when at optimal strength, something many civilian models can't even get close to, and can survive 20 story drops on to concrete.

The problem with powered armor is that you can't make these sacrifices for stability. If you apply the safeties used on other military equipment to power armor, they simply don't work: you'd have a system that can barely support itself, let alone aid a soldier. Fuel cells explode, diesel engines are too heavy and vibrate too much (in addition to fuel weight issues), and batteries are simply too damn heavy.

My guess? About 5 years before you see cost effective all battery cars, the military will have a fully functional battle chassis or passive soldier assist system. Until then, DARPAs just getting the mechanics ready for the power system. ANd while a working model could be produced (some have) you'll never see them in wide circulation because their power supplies simply don't last long enough to do anything.

 

[Spoonius]

Thats my vision of the future of warfare. a buncha kids running around who'v spent too much time playing CoD and now can't tell the difference, with an old guy in a mullet and a seventies porn mustache rolling around in an invisible track-suit snapping necks and breaking hearts, all the while ranting about nuclear missile shooting guns attached to the forearm's of giant robots.

Nah. Forget all that. Forget the War on Terror.

Start the War on Virginity!

 

[ClaptonKnophlerHendrix]

What is it with Russia taking all the heat for all these fps games these days?

Powerful, nuclear nation which still has elements of the dreaded communism, which looked at one stage like it could threaten the US's control of the world.

 

[Spoonius]

China's more of a threat than Russia though.

 

[Chester41585]

There's a strong chance that soldiers 20 or 30 years from now will be just like soldiers today. Except they'll be talking about Miley Cyrus' latest porn spread and the totally bullshit price of synth-tobacco.
And why their guns still don't work as promised.

 

[WINDOWCLEAN2]

Im quite partial to a Fallout 3 style scenrio Happening, But more realistic.

I recommend the Mortal Engines series of books for anyone interested in what could in theory be exactly how the world goes.