Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Defense Tech Radio
Dissent Tech
Door Kickers
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Podcast
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Soldier Systems
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

Army's Greatest Inventions for 2006

ground-sensor.jpg

Researchers behind the Army's top 10 greatest inventions for 2006 were recognized recently at a ceremony in Arlington, Virginia. The Army's Greatest Inventions for 2006 are:

Blow Torch Counter Improvised Explosive Device System, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. This vehicle-mounted system detonates IEDs at safe stand-off distances, minimizing vehicle damage and Soldier injuries.

"It's fairly easy to operate, and it gives a sense of security to the Soldiers when they're on convoy duty," said Maj. Brian Hackenberg, who helped develop the system.

Integrated Robotic Explosive Detection System, U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center, Redstone Arsenal, Ala. Capable of crossing rugged terrain, this remotely operated system incorporates an explosive trace detector onto a robotic platform.

Plastic Shaped Charge Assembly for Remote Destruction of Buried IEDs, U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, Picatinny Arsenal, N.J. Remotely emplaced, the PSCA destroys known or suspected unexploded ordnance with higher accuracy than similar devices currently in use. Its low-fragmentation plastic housing eliminates collateral damage.

Humvee Crew Extraction D-ring, U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center, Redstone Arsenal, Ala. Combat locks on the up-armored Humvee provide security for Soldiers but often get so damaged the doors can't be opened. The D-ring provides solid anchor points for the hooks of a tow strap, chain or cable to pull open damaged doors.

"There was an issue of Soldiers getting trapped inside Humvees that had been damaged for whatever reason ... enemy fire or being flipped. Soldiers had problems getting the doors off these up-armored Humvees so we took their advice and created the D-ring," said Wesley D. Patterson, who is part of a Fast Assistance in Sciences Team that deploys to help Soldiers solve problems that can be resolved within six months.

M1114 Humvee Interim Fragment Kit 5, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. This kit was fielded as a ballistic improvement for the M1114 Humvee in April 2006. A prototype door solution with fabrication and mounting instructions was provided within one week with automotive testing and safety certification.

Remote Urban Monitoring System, U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center, Fort Belvoir, Va. RUMS hardware combines emerging technologies in Wireless Local Area Network technology, night-vision cameras and unattended ground sensors to eliminate false alarms. Tripped sensors transmit an alarm signal to the camera module and operator after video and audio from multiple camera modules confirm the unattended ground sensor's alarm signal.

Constant Hawk, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. Constant Hawk is a surveillance capability that uses an electro-optic payload to collect intelligence and identify areas that require increased surveillance by other assets.

OmniSense Unattended Ground Sensor System (pictured), U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md. OmniSense is an unattended ground sensor system used to detect and classify personnel and vehicles in perimeter defense.

EM113A2 Rapid Entry Vehicle, U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, Picatinny, N.J. The REV provides rapid entry, non-lethal crowd control and rescue-squad insertion capabilities into areas requiring non-lethal intervention. The vehicle increases Soldier survivability through improved situational awareness and the ability to move and fire from within an armored vehicle.

BuckEye System, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Miss. BuckEye uses a digital camera to produce geospatial information for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. It also produces high-resolution 3D urban mapping.

Chief Warrant Officer 4 Michael Harper said the BuckEye System has been instrumental in allowing a maneuver commander to rapidly map battle space through high-resolution imagery and to collect elevation data to give a 3D view.

"What it gives to Soldiers is added situational awareness they need to fight in an urban terrain," he said. "BuckEye has essentially mapped almost every major city in Iraq thus far."

(Gouge: DID)

-- Ward

Comments

Greetings,
Knowing this is a long-shot and it's likely that this is the wrong site, but I have an idea on how to save live's in the field of IED's. It's rather simple and no doubt inexpensive. Could you get back to me on where/how I can offer this concept to the US Military?
Thanks,
A. Williams

Posted by: alan at December 19, 2007 12:44 PM


Nestor:

According to open sources, Nestor Montero, MD is a plastic surgeon. Maybe that's a different guy. Or, you're moonlighting.

WADR, the original story is about technical innovations, the supposed subject matter of this site. Psyops is a different field; counter-terror is VERY different.

This isn't about "all [my] fancy technology", or "[my] strategy for destroying our enemy's leadership." I don't necessarily have one. If you do, and it involves tech, let's hear it.

Leaving "psychologically horrifying 'calling cards'" isn't tech; it's old hat. As for the rest of what you're talking about, if it's subliminal messaging, well, call me a skeptic, but that's usually the domain of the tinfoil hat brigade. Is there something new in that area that's for real?

WADR, if it is for real, it belongs on the SIPRNET, not here. If it's for real, you shouldn't have broken cover; you might compromise TTP.

If it's only partially true, a disinformation play, well, shit: there's gotta be better places to post stuff like that than DT. Unless it's part of a viral release. Even then, it's still part bullshit.

The last possibility is, it's just an idea, some spooky bullshit that might work, or might not. WADR, whatever the case, you need to throw your ideas up on a psyops site for peer review.

No offense, but let's try to keep the signal to noise ratio on this board over 1. Don't know about you, but I come here to learn.

I'm sorry if I offended you, but you're not talking about dispensing medicine, Doc. You're talking about delivering poison, and I honestly don't think this is the right time, place or manner to even describe delivery methods.

If you're for real, OK, inform and advance the debate. But, if there's any bullshit in the mix, you're running psyops on your own side. That's not cool.

Posted by: Demophilus at July 3, 2007 05:31 PM


Dear "Demophilus",
Your comments are appreciated. I will not forget.
The human brain implements strategy, and I work to afflict enemy strategists with sensory and cognitive dysfunctions that benefit our troops. Bullets and other expensive technologies have not rendered these same eilte strategists ineffective.
Have we significantly reduced our enemy's ability to formulate and implement their strategy, or recruit new jihadists? I think not!
Have we increased support for our troops in Congress, the media, or the public? Negative, again!
Have we captured Osama Bin Laden and/or his closest advisors?
Is Iran more or less involved in killing our troops? More involved.
I await accurate (un-doctored) data on the effectiveness of all your fancy technology in reducing enemy insurgent activity, and I am "all ears" to your strategy for destroying our enemy's leadership with minimal US casualties.
Sincerely,
Dr. M

Posted by: Nestor Montero, MD at June 29, 2007 04:48 AM


Richard:

Looks like the Army's ordering more M1117s:

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2007/06/usa-orders-369-more-m1117-asvs/index.php

Not for nothing, but what's your opinion on the old M113?

I mean, I realize it's got a checkered past, but then again, so many of us do.

There's a whole brouhaha over the 113 vs. Humvee vs. Stryker vs. Bradley, etc., etc. between various sites and blogs (for example, www.combatreform.com). AFAICS, the big argument against the 113 is it's not a Bradley, or a Stryker. Is it better than a Humvee?

Posted by: Demophilus at June 25, 2007 03:14 PM


there are some good photos of these devices here:
http://content.zdnet.com/2346-9595_22-91790-1.html

Posted by: Jimbo at June 24, 2007 08:36 AM


Sweet Jesus, Nestor -- what kind of doctor ARE you?

Sure hope you're not a pediatrician. Or, a proctologist.

Oncologist, maybe. Yeah, that works.

Posted by: Demophilus at June 22, 2007 12:57 PM


Leading technical achievements must come from our Psych-Ops community working hand-in-hand with our Special Operations soldiers. This will gain more needed strategic maneuvering room and safety than traditional technology can provide during this long-term conflict. Psych-Ops must be the poison in the tip of our spear. A small scratch inflicted upon our enemies will then prove debilitating (or worse).
Enemy leaders and their minions may be physically elusive, but their nose is constantly to the “wind” of current events. The modern “wind” of communication (inanimate objects, word of mouth, internet, text, graphical media, etc.) is voluntarily and involuntarily “inhaled” by our enemies immediately. This is certain. Therefore, harmful news and/or thoughts can be purposefully generated through specific physical actions and will invariably be ingested into the enemy’s thought processes like viruses entering the respiratory tract. Radial Islamists can be made to ingest the “smell” specific meaningful covert actions and enemies can be made to find the aroma of such actions frightening and/or disturbing.
Enemies can be weakened by techniques and actions that exact psychological pain (horror) and induce other subtle pathological ideations. Nightly strategic actions against certain individuals (low-ranking targets are sometimes more effective messages than high-ranking targets) in diverse geographical locations (multiple simultaneous events in diverse geographic locations adds great uncertainty and insecurity) inflict insecurity, insomnia and other pathological ideations on scales vast enough to affect the mental competence and physical effectiveness of our enemies. Furthermore, these actions need not always be lethal to the targets.
Prolonged uncertainty + insecurity + insomnia + pathological ideations in our enemies will eventually lead to fear that may potentially reduce current suicidal operations. Tangible bad news travels at the speed of light and can throw our adversaries off balance on a daily basis, especially if long-term sleep patterns are adversely affected. We have this capability.
Enemy soldiers, enemy leaders, radical Islamists, potential financiers, and/or active financiers cannot be allowed a single peaceful night of sleep. Ever. Keeping our living enemies disturbed is as important as killing them, and keeps them “short of breath” adapting to our strategies while we achieve victory.
Nocturnal actions against those who serve and finance radical Islam, within their homes, while they sleep, in diverse countries, will injure our enemy’s competence.
History shows that our enemies will maneuver around any technology we develop. However, our enemies cannot evade pathological ideas that we plant in their conscious and unconscious thoughts via the “wind” they sniff daily. We can do things at night that will exact a price of waking horror in enemy recruits, fighters, and leaders.
We are fighting radical Islamists willing to suicide themselves against our technology, and yet we must gain the offensive edge worldwide while achieving a strategic position several generations ahead of our adversaries. Our enemies must therefore react to our offensive actions, not visa versa. Unless we send a deterrent message to living enemy soldiers whenever we kill their comrades, we lose strategic room to “breath”.
In conclusion, we can infiltrate the enemy “mental network” by instilling thoughts and ideas that injure their ability to think and plan. We should act nightly. We should leave specific inanimate physical objects as psychologically horrifying “calling cards” when we act. And our actions should make front page in enemy media the morning after we strike.

Posted by: Nestor Montero, MD at June 21, 2007 10:22 PM


We have spent billions of dollars trying to defeat ieds. I was in youseffiah, Iraq and we hit ieds almost every day. The ieds were set off most of the time from behind the reeds. When we were ambushed it came from behind the reeds because we cant see what behind them. No one ever burned the reeds down or use pesticide on them. A cost effective way of lowering your exposure to ieds and rpgs and ambushes would be to burn the reeds down. Why we are not doing that I dont know. All the reeds do is provide cover for the terrorists. They would have much less places to launch there attacks from if the reeds were burned to the ground after using a herbacide to kill them.

Posted by: Forrest Langley at June 21, 2007 01:09 PM


The Blowtorch was a bloody failure, we drove around with those stupid things leading the convoy and it turns out they DID NOT work!! They were finally removed by the EWO. While I am on the subject of things that dont work, how about a replacement for the sorry excuse of a fighting vehicle HMMWV. It is horribly overladen with armor, so underpowered it's embarassing and the electrical system is taxed to the max. I do see Iraqi Army using the newer Mine Resistant Vehicles and loads of M1117's, must be nice.

Posted by: Richard Denham at June 20, 2007 09:27 AM


I just hope the soldiers on the ground actually get to benefit from this stuff. I read about all this great gear then turn on the TV and see a documentary about a patrol being surprised by 100 insurgents (patrol has just humvees and M16s - no overhead eye to show them where the bad guys are), a patrol that runs into an AQ training camp and finds they're out of radio range to base and can't call in for air support, a patrol that has half their weapons jam 5min into a firefight, and then on this blog, a soldier who has to refurbish a scavenged M14 (on his dime) because he was issued an unservicable M16!
Not to mention they can't get existing active protection systems because the DOD says the Raytheon system will be superior if it's ever ready...

Posted by: Mitch S. at June 19, 2007 08:39 PM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.