Microsoft's Tweaked Army Goggles Worked Well in New Test, US Says (bloomberg.com) 26
Microsoft's improved combat goggles have passed their first round of intensive testing by soldiers, and the tech giant has been awarded an order for another batch to be used for a make-or-break combat evaluation in 2025, according to a US Army spokesman. From a report: The first 20 prototype IVAS 1.2 goggles were delivered in late July and assessed by two squads of solders in late August to check for improvements in reliability, low-light performance and how well they fit without repeats of the nausea and dizziness that halted the deployment of earlier versions. The devices, based on Microsoft's HoloLens "mixed reality" goggles, "demonstrated improvements in reliability, low light sensor performance, and form factor" in tests last month at Fort Drum, New York, and "soldier feedback was positive," spokesman David Patterson said in an email.
Paywall (Score:2)
FFS Slashdot, stop it!
Re:Paywall (Score:4, Informative)
here ya go
https://archive.ph/ut1o1 [archive.ph]
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you.
So... does it BSOD during combat? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot forced ads.
we changed that to an red screen! (Score:2)
we changed that to an red screen!
Can it hide reality? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Clippy (Score:3)
"It looks like you are about to die. Your VR account is overdue. If you'd like me to take evasive action, please supply your credit card number...
Re: (Score:2)
It'll be fine, just so long as the army only ever installs the even-numbered service packs. God help them though if they ever install an odd-numbered one.
As long as it can be used as a club (Score:2)
So... does it BSOD during combat? And does it nag to install updates and for a reboot?
As long as it can be used as a club while rebooting
Not so fast (Score:3)
Ok, key takeaway here is that the internal Army proponent, PEO Soldier, are the ones making this announcement. They are going to be as postiive as possible [army.mil], since their responsibility is to get it approved and fielded.
The ones who have to pass off on this, and who nixed it earlier, are the Army's Operational Test Command. The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation had a lot to say about the things, not much of it good [breakingdefense.com]. Some of the stuff in that report was pretty damning. The stuff about 'we'd be all dead if we were using this thing in combat' [futurism.com].
A direct quote from DOTE in 2022 was “In the ops demo, the infantry company was more successful accomplishing their operational missions with their current equipment than with IVAS 1.0,” and “Soldiers hit fewer targets and engaged targets more slowly with IVAS 1.0 than with their current equipment on the buddy team [live] fire range.”. In other words, ineffective.
This just means a new iteration of testing, with the same risks as earlier tests that did not succeed. It's mandated by law, and I get the impression that DOTE is still not thrilled with the device. Also, they talk about the new version (1.2) being heavier on the helmet, as the compute device is moving from the chest to there. Now, I don't know about you, but the idea of carrying more weight on my head doesn't sound overly appealing to me. That's the kind of thing that will show up in a future operational test.
I'd be shocked if this effort succeeded at the end of all this.
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying it will be a long while before we see Heinlein's powered suits [erau.edu] in operation.
Re: (Score:2)
It'll have to come from something different than this, I suspect.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed that in OT environments, the instructions aren't that. In non-OT environments, what you experienced is common. So the response to the program of record from the small-scale tests in August is to be expected.
Re: (Score:2)
Example: some moron CongressWeasel came up with the idea that as we neve
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, OT = operational test, DT = developmental test. I would classify the August event as a DT, whose results are pretty much irrelevant for the reason you cited above.
The ecotat story rings true with my experience. I've worked in the Army's communications electronics development for various programs of record for close on to 25 years. I also got deployed to Iraq in 07/08 as...technically a LNO for a custom sat package, but in reality I took the place of a 250N (networking) CW3. Spent a lot of time in K
Re: (Score:2)
Just wondering (Score:3)
How many of those lenses above the visor are IR emitters? Because any number greater than zero means they make a great way to build a sentry gun that shoots American soldiers in the face and leaves everyone else alone.
Re: Just wondering (Score:1)
All Army combat uniforms actually come with IR reflectors built-in, with a flap with velcro sewn on to cover them when not in use. Don't know how much use those lenses would be if they were also covered though.
your wish is my command... (Score:2)
Good guess. [futurism.com]
Hahaha (Score:2)
No doubt the Army will pay 10 times the cost of an Apple Vision Pro for a device 10 times less capable.
Who cares if they work, they looks awesome (Score:1)