Future Soldier

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Future Force Warrior with SUGV

Future Soldier is a catchphrase under which the modernization programs for the infantry of selected NATO countries and their partners, which have organized in NATO Land Capability Group 1, run. The NATO LCG 1 acts as a hub for the exchange of information and ideas and sets standards to ensure interoperability . While individual countries give their modernization program a name - in France for example FÉLIN - the program is nameless at NATO level. It is often referred to as NATO Soldier Modernization , NATO Soldier Systems, or Future Soldier . The latter name refers to the Future Soldier exhibition and conference , which is held every two years by NATO and is used for the exchange of ideas between states and industry on this topic.

history

The beginnings

Although the style of combat in the navy and air force had changed dramatically in the last few decades, developments in the army, and especially in the infantry, practically stopped. While it makes a difference to a fighter pilot whether he is sitting in an F-86 Saber or an F-22 Raptor , differences in equipment in the infantry have little influence on the outcome of the battle. Only at the end of the 1980s did the NATO and ABCA countries (America, Britain, Canada, Australia) recognize that digitalization, as well as ever smaller computers and electromechanical devices , would also allow the infantry to use technological progress.

In 1984, at the British Army Equipment Exhibition in Aldershot , a draft of what the infantryman of the future might look like was presented for the first time: The soldier was to wear a full-face helmet with an integrated night vision device , camcorder , display and laser rangefinder . The combat suit should be made of breathable fabric, offer protection from the elements and NBC weapons and have an electric heater. The tall, thick boots should protect against small mines. A combination of machine gun and grenade launcher was planned as a weapon, and two rocket launchers were to be carried on the backpack. In 1990 the US Army started the SIPE (Soldier Integrated Protective Ensemble) project to equip infantrymen with microphones, headphones, communication systems, GPS and an HMD , which should display images from the weapon thermal imaging device and maps with their own position. The combat suit should be equipped with a carrying system and a micro-air conditioning system, which should blow cool air through a vest. The M16A2 should be equipped with a thermal imaging device, laser pointer and directional microphone.

Since other NATO countries identified similar problems and were also looking for possible solutions, it was decided to merge the activities: in 1994 14 NATO member countries signed a treaty, creating Land Group 3 / Working Group 3 (LG3 / WG3). According to the new approach, each item of equipment should no longer be viewed and optimized individually, but rather the soldier system as a whole.

As a NATO project

The experts of Working Group 3 agreed between 1991 and 1993 to optimize the following things in the Soldier system: C4I (Command, Control, Computers, Communications, Information), vulnerability, mobility, logistics and weapon effectiveness. Further conferences attempted to work out common goals and to exchange experiences and possible solutions. From 1992 to 1994 the NATO Industrial Advisory Group (NIAG) prepared a feasibility study for the modernization of the infantry (Pre-Feasibility Study Dismounted Soldier Modernization). Working Group 3 “Soldier Modernization” met from 1994 until October 2000. The biggest change took place in 2006 as part of the transformation , when Land Group 1 Dismounted Soldier Systems was founded. The previous division Land Group 3 Close Combat Infantry was dissolved, Topical Group 1, Small Arms Weapons and SG / 1 Ammunition Interchangeability were integrated into Land Group 1. Cannon weapons were relocated to Land Group 2. In this way, all questions about handguns were brought together in one group in order to be able to deal with the subject area more effectively.

The focus of NATO is on standardization, information exchange and basic research. In 1995 STANAG 2324 was introduced to create a uniform mounting rail. In October 2003, 2004 and 2005 tests on network-centric warfare were carried out in Italy, Germany and France , with the exchange of situations using digital maps. STANAG 4512 was published in 2004 to replace the outdated CRISAT standard. In 2009 the NATO Accessory Rail was introduced with the STANAG 4694, as the successor to the Picatinny rail. Land Group 1 is also striving to standardize plugs, and in 2010 the NATO Powered Rail was presented for this purpose. At first glance, indistinguishable from a STANAG 2324 or 4694 rail, the rail contains integrated cables in order to be able to transmit power and data, similar to a USB connector. Since all rails of a weapon are connected to each other and to a power source (or a computer), lasers, lamps, etc. no longer need their own power supply. The rails can then also accommodate mounting parts with switches to control functions of the weapon, attachments and combat suit. The system is currently (1/2013) not yet standardized. The aim is also to standardize the magazine , muzzle thread, flash hider and bayonet mount .

A mule for the contubernium ?

The NATO Research and Technology Organization also runs a number of workshops and research projects on typical problems and possible solutions . In 2001, for example, a workshop on the subject of Soldier Mobility was held, where innovative carrying systems and exoskeletons were discussed. The program is also being promoted at national level. So organized by Defense Research and Development Canada (DRDC) in 2009 different three-day workshops on the topics of weapons, energy, C4I and Human And Systems Integration . The workshops were attended by various experts from the defense industry and defense organizations. Questionnaires were handed out on the subjects of weapons and energy, on which the participants could select certain technologies and their probable series maturity which they considered promising. The findings are discussed in detail in the “Technologies” section.

A central problem here is the soldiers' payload: In ancient times, a Greek hoplite or a Roman legionnaire had to carry around 15 kg. Since the Crimean War this load has increased to around 30–40 kg. The reason was that before the 18th century, parts of the equipment of auxiliary troops and horses were transported with the train . This concept has been dropped since the 18th century; Soldiers should now carry their own equipment during the march. Modern infantry is therefore very heavily loaded during the march. Based on the experiences in Afghanistan, the proposal was made in 2003 to provide platoons and groups with unmanned ground systems that could follow their own soldiers and carry some of the equipment. Exoskeletons have also been recommended as a solution. The concept of the exoskeleton suit is accepted today and will find its way into the troops. The “mothership” or “mule” concept of loading a vehicle or robot with equipment and using it as a mobile replenishment base is currently being investigated by DARPA with the BigDog .

participating countries

The NATO Soldier Modernization Program is no longer limited to the 14 core countries that agreed to work together in 1994. 21 NATO countries are now full members of Land Capability Group 1, plus six partner countries and Australia. The NATO countries are Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Greece, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, USA, Finland, Ireland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Of the non-NATO countries, Australia, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Austria participate. Each of these countries has its own modernization program for the infantry. In Germany, for example, this is the infantryman of the future , in the USA the Land Warrior , in France the FÉLIN . Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Sweden started the Combat Equipment Dismounted Soldier System (CEDS) project under the umbrella of the European Defense Agency (EDA), which complements Land Capability Group 1. Austria and Romania joined later.

The approach of the individual countries is different: France and Germany deal with specific problems and look for solutions for them, so that a high innovation cycle is achieved, even with the acceptance of teething problems . In countries like Great Britain and Canada, paper is mainly produced without concrete systems flowing into the troops. The USA is a specialty, which fluctuates between megalomania and detailed improvements: on the one hand, money is invested in visionary concepts such as exoskeletons and invisibility , on the other hand, innovations regularly benefit the troops. The first components of the Land Warrior were tested before 1999. Since then, the system has been continuously improved, discontinued in 2007 and continued since 2008. In order to suggest leaps in development, new soldier systems such as Future Force Warrior , Ground Soldier System, Nett Warrior etc. are announced at irregular intervals , which are regularly discontinued or renamed after a short time. De facto , the Land Warrior is the only program of the US Army that is available in significant numbers and integration ( SUGV , Stryker ).

Due to the broad impact of the program, countries that are not included in the NATO program are also working on soldier systems, mostly with similar objectives.

method

Since the development of soldier systems is breaking new ground, a permanent evolution process is sought. In various conferences and workshops, problem areas are identified, and then tests and experiments are carried out to develop possible solutions. An example of this is the distribution of a soldier's payload, which should be as comfortable and energy-saving as possible. As a result, studies were evaluated on the maximum load and endurance for different carrying techniques (back, hips, head, etc.). The results are then incorporated into carrying systems for soldiers. The same approach is used for other problem areas. The list of things to optimize is practically endless, as is the list of possible solutions.

In order to have a benchmark for comparison, core skills are identified and these skill levels are assigned. This schematic procedure allows progress to be visualized well and further, planned improvements to be shown. This scale differs from country to country, the following was presented by the Australian Defense Science and Technology Organization (DSTO) at the Land Warfare Conference 2000 . The seven core skills are here, by definition:

  • Navigation - "go to the right place at the right time"
    • N1 - Perfect navigation system
    • N2 - Mostly reliable, fluctuates from day to day, hardly any prior knowledge required
    • N3 - Reliable when there is significant knowledge of the area
    • N4 - Requires good maps, landscape features, and terrain knowledge
  • Communication - "talk to the right people and be understood"
    • C1 - Perfect Secret Communication
    • C2 - Quality, high quality communication; requires advanced technology to detect and disrupt
    • C3 - Machine Skill with Low Capacity and Safety
    • C4 - Limited to the written and spoken word
Armored exoskeleton concept
  • Decision - “decide and act on good information before the enemy does”
    • DM1 - Practically omniscient
    • DM2 - Good presentation of manipulable information to help make an informed decision
    • DM3 - Limited machine-based, or other information display aids
    • DM4 - Only rudimentary information
  • Monitoring - "see and not be seen"
    • SV1 - Practically all-seeing
    • SV2 - The reconnaissance equipment could be defeated by camouflage or environmental conditions
    • SV3 - The reconnaissance equipment is likely to be defeated by camouflage or environmental conditions
    • SV4 - Camouflage or environmental conditions will mostly prevent detection
  • Battle - "kill and not be killed"
    • E1 - Guns always hit and can be fired from a safe position
    • E2 - weapons are reliable, good effect and hardly any restrictions on use.
    • E3 - weapon effectiveness depends heavily on environmental conditions
    • E4 weapons are of limited effectiveness and put the user at high risk
  • Personal movement - "move and be fit for action"
    • PM1 - Fast, precise movement without sacrificing combat strength
    • PM2 - Slight, short-term decline in fighting strength, which prevents some actions
    • PM3 - Most actions are worsened
    • PM4 - Movement is severely restricted
  • Protection - "act without being acted upon"
    • PR1 - practically invulnerable
    • PR2 - Only special systems will overcome protection
    • PR3 - Variable protection according to circumstances, many actions are unsafe
    • PR4 - The soldier is exposed to high dangers on the battlefield
  • Preservation of skills - "keep going and only stop on your terms"
    • SS1 - little need to return to base or pick up supplies
    • SS2 - Only special objects or actions cannot do without support
    • SS3 - limited ability to operate independently
    • SS4 - very limited ability to operate away from logistical support

The skill level "4" corresponds to a soldier from 1990. The skill level "3" was reached by various soldier systems of the first generation around 2005, the skill level "2" is expected to be reached around 2015 by soldier systems of the 2nd generation. The DSTO considers it unlikely that skill level "1" can be achieved in the near future, also because there are conflicting goals (e.g. PR1 with PM1).

Technologies

M4 with numerous attachments

The use of technologies in a soldier system always follows a certain scheme: First, the soldier is equipped with a series of devices that are intended to give him certain skills. The system is initially mostly based on COTS components and is not integrated. This results in a conglomeration of objects, energy requirements, data protocols and communication technologies, which together lead to bulky and heavy equipment. In the next step, operational experience is incorporated and these systems are integrated as far as possible into a single system. With modern carrying systems (e.g. IdZ-ES, Land Warrior), a high degree of integration has now been achieved. The weapon is particularly problematic, as integrated solutions such as the Daewoo K11 are not widely used.

Communication and energy

For communication, all soldiers are equipped with a headset that is connected to a computer that is located on the soldier's back. As input and output devices for operating the computer, small displays and switches on the combat suit that can be folded in front of the eye have proven themselves. With the IdZ-ES, the HMD can also be switched to be semi-transparent in order to superimpose maps or information (e.g. heading ) into the field of vision. Some soldier systems also use smartphone-sized displays on the chest, which can be folded down for viewing. In some cases, group leaders still carry hardened tablet computers with touch screens in order to avoid the mouse cinema during longer map viewing and to be able to better add tactical information to the map.

Land Warrior with the screen turned up on the helmet

The tactical map shows the position of all own units in real time, detected opponents are added manually ( blue force tracking and red force visualization ). Every soldier is equipped with a GPS to be able to determine his position and that of his comrades in open terrain. The challenge here is to guarantee a reliable position determination even without GPS support, especially in buildings, caves or forests. In addition to the tried and tested inertial navigation systems , odometry can also be used for this purpose, but this is complex: a pedometer attached to the soldier must determine during GPS reception which step size belongs to a certain signal strength. The pedometer is combined with a digital compass and three-axis acceleration sensors to form an application-specific integrated circuit . The advantage over inertial navigation here is that there is no random walk when standing . A combination of pedometer and inertial navigation system is currently being considered to solve the problem.

Due to the soldier's increasing demand for electricity for backpack computers and other systems, the number of batteries and accumulators carried per soldier has increased drastically to an intolerable level. For a 72-hour mission with the Land Warrior combat suit, an infantry company needs 5394 batteries with a total weight of 453 lbs, plus 1216 batteries with a mass of 986 lbs. The average soldier must carry 43 batteries with a total weight of 10 lbs. In order to avoid a weight catastrophe, countermeasures were introduced from 2010 onwards. In 2011, during Operation Enduring Freedom, various energy converters were tested, with a rollable PV ceiling , methanol and propane fuel cells and a mini diesel generator (1 kW) performing the best to charge the batteries. New chargers have been introduced that are 75% lighter and only have half of the charging stations. In addition, the Soldier Wearable Integrated Power System (SWIPES) was introduced: A conformal battery was integrated into the combat suit , which supplies power via a distributor AN / PRC-154, DAGR , smartphone and a USB port. The bottom line is that battery replenishment has been reduced by 25% and battery mass by 32%.

At the DRDC workshop in 2009, experts were asked for their opinion on which technologies should be increasingly addressed in the future. The areas of "standardization of plugs", " power management " and "electrotextiles" (power and data transmission through the textiles) were mentioned most frequently. Among the energy converters, multi-fuel fuel cells and better battery technology were mentioned most frequently. Nuclear and regenerative systems performed worst in terms of energy generation; the mechanical energy generation (with the exception of the hand crank) was clearly ahead here.

Camouflage and reconnaissance

Merged image from NIR and IIR

The camouflage of soldiers in the field against optical detection has already been solved satisfactorily. Only the US Army is currently looking for a new camouflage pattern to replace the Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP). Multicam is used here as a temporary solution . Certain terrains with varied cover also make adaptive camouflage appear desirable in order to adapt the camouflage pattern and color to the terrain. The solution approaches here concentrate on OLEDs (Germany, Canada, England) and TFTs (USA), or basic research. To camouflage against night vision devices that use near infrared (NIR), special fibers and particles are incorporated into the combat suits to suppress the reflections. The infrared camouflage is much more challenging due to the soldiers' waste heat. As a rule, metal fibers are incorporated into the suit and the fabric is woven more densely in order to avoid large, warm surfaces or to make them appear colder. Since this promotes heat build-up, microclimate cooling (MCC ) must be integrated into the suit. Theoretically, face masks can also reduce the IR signature, but due to the heat build-up, this is only recommended for cold regions.

Since the signature of modern combat suits in the near infrared (NIR) is practically indistinguishable from the environment, pure night vision devices are increasingly ineffective. Modern systems such as the AN / PSQ-20 ENVG of the US Army or the LUCIE IID IR of the IdZ-ES therefore merge NIR and imaging infrared (IIR) in one image in order to increase the contrast between people and their surroundings. Another advantage of these very expensive devices is that fog, dust, smoke and moonlight have less of an effect on the quality of vision. In pure IIR mode, the system can also be used to search for a destination during the day.

US soldiers with the XM1216 SUGV

In addition to binoculars with or without thermal imaging device, e-compass and laser rangefinder, weapon-mounted vision systems are available for target searching, location and identification. Only the FÉLIN has a day / night camera integrated into the helmet. Laser-based friend-foe systems will probably be used in the future to identify own units . The target is pinged with a laser (request) and sends a radio response with a transponder . Another challenge is to locate the enemy as quickly as possible when fire comes in. This is a problem especially with enemy snipers, as the combat distance and thus the hiding places are quite large. The solution was to use acoustic sensors for target location. Devices such as EARS from QinetiQ place a microphone array on the soldier's left shoulder, and a mini display can be mounted on the left wrist. In the event of fire, these devices output heading , elevation and distance via voice output . By using GPS, the position of the enemy shooter on the tactical map can be made visible to everyone. These systems are not yet integrated, so they work independently of the backpack computer.

States are still procuring small, unmanned systems for their soldiers to safely explore the surrounding area. As a rule, these are a mobile robot for urban environments or forests and a small aircraft for open terrain. The US Army is purchasing a PackBot version of IRobot for this purpose. This system is integrated, so it can be controlled with the soldier's helmet display . Other devices such as the RQ-20 Puma drone , which prevailed against the Honeywell RQ-16 , require an independent control station. In the long term, stationary sensors will also be used to obtain information for the troops, and detected targets will automatically be added to the tactical map. The remote battlefield sensor system was already used by special forces during the Vietnam War ; the unattended ground sensors continue this development.

Guns and fire support

One of the main problems of modern infantry combat is the insufficient armament of the soldiers. Or, as NATO noted in 2005, the armaments industry only produces infantry weapons that meet the requirements of the 20th century. The problem is well known and lies in the low hit rate of assault rifles in use. The hit rate of assault rifles over the combat range is roughly as follows:

  1. The self-precision of the weapon guarantees a hit rate of 100% up to 300 m. Then it slowly falls off.
  2. The hit rate at the shooting range is 100% up to about 100 m. This is followed by an S-shaped course, and a drop to zero in about 800 meters.
  3. Under stress, the hit rate runs according to a 1 / X function, and is almost zero at over 500 m.
Land Warrior with XM29

Since hits in combat are largely stochastic , an enormous amount of ammunition is required to kill an enemy. In Afghanistan, for example, it takes an average of 250,000 rounds to kill a Taliban. At shorter combat distances, the ammunition consumption is still enormous, so in Vietnam an average of 50,000 rounds were necessary for an opponent. In contrast to many computer games and B-movies , the future of infantry armament does not lie with the Gauss rifle , because the difficulty is not in killing the enemy, but in hitting him. To address the problem, a workshop was held by the DRDC in 2009. The experts were able to vote on which technologies they think should be addressed more intensively in the future. In the general questions, “target location and attack options” and “sensor fusion” achieved the greatest approval, followed by third place (out of 14) was friend-foe recognition . In terms of weapons technology, “Standardized Power Rail”, “Intelligent Energy Management”, “Autofire”, “Ballistic Computer for Snipers”, “Caseless Ammunition” and “Ammunition with Scalable Effect” achieved the best results. The item “guided ammunition” received the highest approval of all technologies available in the medium term. The weapons of the future will therefore be:

  • Assault rifles with an autofire function, as is already used in combat aircraft such as the Eurofighter Typhoon . The shot is released automatically when an opponent is in the predicted flight path of the projectile. This requires automatic target acquisition and tracking, as well as electronic triggering of the shot ( Automatic Target Cueing / Assisted Target Engagement, ATC / ATE ). Intelligent image processing can also identify individual body regions of the target. This makes it possible to program the weapon in such a way that it only delivers headshots or does not hit any vital areas of the body in the event of non-fatal attacks. In the future, this weapon will fire small, electronically ignited caseless ammunition to reduce weight and recoil. The hit rate and its progression over the range of an ATC / ATE rifle is only slightly below the weapon’s own precision.
  • Weapons with programmable ammunition , for example with small air-igniting grenades. In this way, targets behind cover and in buildings can also be fought. The explosion radius of the grenade also increases the hit rate, so precise aiming is unnecessary. With the XM29 , the K11 and the XM25 grenade launcher, there are already functioning systems in the caliber 20-25 mm. The XM29 was to be integrated into the Land Warrior system. Semi-automatic grenade launchers with 40 mm MV grenades , which are housed in one housing together with a personal defense weapon, are also conceivable . By integrating subsystems, these weapons are lighter than modified assault rifles. The Daewoo K11, for example, is lighter than an M16 assault rifle with a retrofitted M203 , thermal imaging device, laser range finder, ballistic computer and electronic compass, although the modified M16 / M203 cannot fire air-igniting grenades. At the moment (2013) only the Daewoo K11 is in series production.
FAMAS-FELIN with buttons on the front handle and video visor
  • The technology of guided ammunition is the 40mm grenades benefit. The aim here is to conduct the fire fight without line of sight to the enemy. For this purpose, the steering mechanism of an M982 Excalibur grenade for 40 mm ammunition is to be scaled down. In order to be able to work even when the enemy position is unclear, the 40 mm reconnaissance grenades are to be further developed: These are shot very steeply over a target area and deploy a parachute at the apex at the stern. The shooter can now observe the area via the camera built into the nose while the grenade slowly falls to the ground. In the modified version, a paraglider is attached to the stern and an explosive charge is also integrated. The destination can then be approached by video tracking.

At the moment, only existing assault rifles are modified in order to improve the soldier's awareness of the situation. For this purpose, thermal imaging devices and video visors are usually mounted on the weapon, and switches for controlling functions of the combat suit (e.g. push-to-talk buttons) are built in. In the long term, the power and data transfer through the weapon will be standardized. Another advantage here is that the weight of the batteries can be accommodated more cheaply in the weapon in order to improve the balance of the weapon. So worked Heckler & Koch at a G36 design with Powered Rail where the batteries are housed in the buttstock.

The integration of the infantry into the concept of Network-Centric Warfare only develops its full potential in cooperation with other units: With the help of equipment with an electronic compass, elevation protractor and laser rangefinder (e.g. Vector IV, RangIR, XM29 etc.) Laser targets are added to the tactical map and thus made visible to everyone. This quickly enables a coordinated approach within the group and with fire support.

Protection and Mobility

Modern protective clothing with vest, splinter protection collar and abdominal protection

Soldiers not only have to use the headset to communicate with their teammates and allied units during their operations, they should also be able to perceive ambient noise. The headset is therefore usually combined with an external microphone to create Communications and Hearing Protection Systems (C & HPSs) . Normal outside noises below a threshold value are allowed through and played back in headphones, excessively loud noises are blocked in order to prevent hearing damage. Such a system was planned for the Future Force Warrior , for example , and was later integrated into the Land Warrior. The problem is often underestimated, but in fiscal year 2009, approximately 570,000 veterans in the US were treated for hearing loss and 640,000 for tinnitus at state expenses, costing nearly $ 1.5 billion.

According to a study by the RAND Corporation from 2011, little progress can be expected in the future with classic body armor . All body armor today is based on ceramic inlays made of boron carbide or silicon carbide , which are either hot-pressed or sintered. In order to pass the drop test, the ceramics are fixed in composite material . Behind the ceramic layer is a layer of ballistic fibers that are supposed to absorb the energy of the projectile. This may relate aramids or UHMWPE question. In the absence of obvious opportunities for improvement, attempts are made to optimize the arrangement, thickness and load capacity. The body armor in the chest area offers protection against rifle ammunition (SK4 / Level IV), the abdomen protection can usually repel ammunition from (machine) pistols and fragments (SK1 / Level IIIA). In some cases, the extremities are also provided with protective equipment, but this reduces fitness disproportionately and changes the biomechanics . Most combat suits therefore only protect the torso; in addition to the helmet and splinter protection collar.

Tester with HULC on RDECOM

Since the body armor makes up a large part of the carrying weight at around 15 kg, and the computer on the back, batteries and communication equipment as well as spare ammunition are also carried on the body, the introduction of force into the body plays a major role. Modern systems therefore use special carrying frames with waist belts to distribute the load more comfortably. Since marching with full equipment in hot parts of the world drains your strength, the US Army requested a micro-air conditioning system in combat suit as early as 1990 in the SIPE project, which should blow cool air through a vest. The principle could be implemented for the first time with the IdZ-ES in order to avoid heat build-up. Air is blown through ducts into zones that generate particularly strong perspiration and heat in order to promote evaporation. In order to ensure the necessary hydration, whether with or without a micro-air conditioning, most combat suits are equipped with a hydration system.

In principle, a soldier's mobility can hardly be increased because it is physiologically limited. Only by reducing the weight of the equipment could a lasting improvement be achieved, but only at the expense of combat strength (armor, ammunition, etc.). NATO lists three ways to increase human performance ( human performance enhancement, HPE ): natural (training, nutrition), synthetic ( drugs ) and technical (e.g. exoskeletons). It is feared that other countries will research and use HPE technologies without being held up by ethical or health concerns. At a meeting of the NATO RTO in 2009 it was requested to keep an eye on new HPE technologies, but it was also mentioned that the developments must be made transparent for the public.

NATO's research focuses on the exoskeleton, especially for the lower extremities, in order to increase the carrying capacity of soldiers. The DARPA awarded to in 2000 at the Berkeley Robotics and Human Engineering Laboratory a research contract from which the Berkeley Lower Extremity Exoskeleton (Bleex) emerged. Lockheed Martin licensed the exoskeleton in 2009 and has since marketed it as the Human Universal Load Carrier (HULC). The system works hydraulically and is battery-operated; to reduce weight, the components are made of a titanium alloy. The range is still modest at 20 km at 4 km / h, but sprints at 10 mph (16 km / h) are possible and a maximum payload of 200 lbs (approx. 90 kg). The system weighs 20 kg without batteries. In the long term, the exoskeleton is to be powered by a fuel cell to enable 72-hour missions. In 2010, the French DGA awarded a two-million-dollar contract to the company RB3D to develop an exoskeleton for the troop . The system should be ready for series production in 2015.

In 2011, the NATO RTO also examined a so-called dermoskeleton to see whether it could increase the endurance of soldiers. This is a device that is attached to the upper and lower legs and supports the bending of the knee with a servo . The trials were promising, but more research is needed to get more accurate data.

Reception and simulation

Test person with video glasses and assault rifle in the Virtusphere

Although individual developments such as the Infantryman of the Future or Big Dog are now known to a broad public, the NATO Soldier Modernization Program behind them is comparatively unknown. The NATO program achieved its greatest popularity through various computer games, the developers of which mostly sought inspiration from the United States Army Soldier Systems Center and found Jean-Louis "Dutch" DeGay. At Natick Army Labs, among other things, he works in the field of optical camouflage on the dream of making soldiers invisible through nanotechnology (more precisely: metamaterial ). The vision then flowed into newer computer games in the Ghost Recon or Crysis series. Other developments such as Act of War: High Treason address individual systems such as Future Force Warrior , XM307 or XM109 , but otherwise have no relation to the military-industrial complex.

A positive side effect of the development of the first person shooter is the continuously improved graphics engine . Modern simulators for the infantry use these, for example to practice combat scenarios or to test new weapon functions or designs. The simulation environment ranges from the desktop PC to test the effects of a friend-foe identification, to CAVE for stationary battle simulations , to huge empty halls, where all participants can move around in a virtual environment with video glasses . In order to be able to simulate more extensive combat operations, the Mounted Warfare TestBed developed the Virtusphere. In it, a soldier with video glasses can walk as far as he wants, like in a hamster wheel .

The graphics engines used move with the times. For example, the put Defense Research and Development Canada , the graphics engines of Unreal Tournament 2004 , Unreal Tournament 3 , Virtual Battle Space 2 (military version of ArmA: Armed Assault ), ArmA 2 and Far Cry 2 a. The US Army uses the CryEngine 3 for this purpose .

Web links

Administrative:

Technologies:

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Department of Defense: LAND 125 Phase 3B Soldier Enhancement Version 2 - Survivability / Phase 3C Soldier Enhancement Version 2 - Lethality / Phase 4 Soldier Enhancement Version 3 , 2009
  2. ↑ a b The 21st Century Soldier, 2012
  3. ^ Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap / Weapons: Lethal and Non-lethal Workshop, 2009
  4. ↑ NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION / ORGANIZATION DU TRAITE DE L 'ATLANTIC NORD / AC / 225 Land Capability Group 1 Dismounted Soldier ( Memento of the original from September 14, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 935 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  5. ↑ a b Small Arms in NATO Transformation ( Memento of the original from October 13, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 2.3 MB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  6. ↑ Torbjoern Eld: Powered Rail , Presentation to Intl Infantry & Joint Service Small Arms System Symposium May 20, 2009 ( Memento of the original from September 24, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 396 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  7. ↑ Major Bruce Gilchrist: Interoperability and Integration of Dismounted Soldier System Weapon Systems , May 20, 2009 ( Memento of the original from July 19, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 900 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  8. ↑ a b PEO Soldier - PM Soldier Warrior Soldier Power to The Edge, February 13, 2012 ( Memento of the original from September 16, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 6.7 MB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / netzero.asu.edu
  9. ↑ Per G. Arvidsson: NATO Infantry Weapons Standardization , 2008 ( Memento of the original from December 1, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 1 MB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  10. ↑ a b c NATO / TRO: Soldier Mobility: Innovations in Load Carriage System Design and Evaluation , 2001 ( Memento of the original from March 11, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 9.6 MB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / ftp.rta.nato.int
  11. ↑ The Future Soldier's Load an the Mobility of the Nation (PDF; 470 kB)
  12. ↑ Adam Baddaley: Equipping the Dismounted Soldier , MILTECH 10/2010 (PDF; 10.5 MB)
  13. ↑ Soldier Modernization: NATO Soldier Systems Overview
  14. ^ The Endeavor for Soldier System Interoperability
  15. ↑ Soldier Modernization: EDA: Soldier Modernization Perspectives on 2015
  16. ↑ a b c Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap / Workshop 6: Human And Systems Integration (PDF; 7.8 MB)
  17. ↑ Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap / Workshop 4: C4I / Sensors (PDF; 8.5 MB)
  18. ↑ a b Neville J Curtis: Planning for the Next Generation of Soldier Modernization , October 2000  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 76 kB)@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.dsto.defence.gov.au  
  19. ↑ Rheinmetall: Infantryman of the Future - Extended System , January 26, 2009 (PDF; 3.1 MB)
  20. ↑ Dead Reckoning for Consumer Electronics , Mark Amundson, Honeywell (PDF; 102 kB)
  21. ↑ Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap / Workshop 2: Power / Energy and Sustainability , September 21-23, 2009 (PDF; 3.4 MB)
  22. ↑ Kent W. McKee and David W. Tack: ACTIVE CAMOUFLAGE FOR INFANTRY HEADWEAR APPLICATIONS , 2007
  23. ↑ THE MULTIFUNCTIONAL MATERIALS NEEDS OF THE FUTURE DISMOUNTED SOLDIER ( Memento of the original from May 23, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 351 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.army.forces.gc.ca
  24. ↑ Cold Protection by Face Mask , Prof. Hannu Anttonen and M.Sc. (Eng) Anita Valkama ( Memento of the original from February 24, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. ( MS Word ; 205 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / ftp.rta.nato.int
  25. ↑ Hardthöhen-Kurier: Thales Deutschland receives subcontract from Rheinmetall for "Gladius" equipment - night vision goggles and UHF radios for the "infantryman of the future" (IdZ 2)
  26. ↑ defense update: FELIN Infantry Combat Suite ( Memento of the original from July 23, 2005 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.defense-update.com
  27. ↑ Laser sensor technology for the 21st century soldier system , Jagdish P. Mathur; Wayne Antesberger; Nick Broline / SPIE 3394, Sensor Technology for Soldier Systems, 17 (August 27, 1998)
  28. ↑ QinetiQ: SWATS Shoulder-Worn Acoustic Targeting System  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 1.8 MB)@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.qinetiq-na.com  
  29. ↑ NATO RTO: NATO Future Weapons R&D ( Memento of the original from October 13, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 76 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  30. ↑ YouTube: Advanced Combat Rifle 1990 US Army Search for M16 Replacement
  31. ↑ The Independent: US forced to import bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed , September 25, 2005
  32. ↑ Weapons HQ: G22
  33. ↑ a b Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap / Workshop 3: Lethal and Non-Lethal Weapons Effects Toronto , November 24-26, 2009 (PDF; 6.8 MB)
  34. ↑ DRDC: S&T Support to the Canadian Small Arms Replacement Program , Indianapolis, May 23-26, 2011 ( Memento of the original from September 1, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 2.8 MB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  35. ↑ GlobalSecurity: XM29 Integrated Air Burst Weapon
  36. ↑ NATO RTO: Interoperability and Integration of Dismounted Soldier System Weapon Systems , Mr. Mark Richter, May 9, 2007 ( Memento of the original from July 19, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 13.1 MB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.dtic.mil
  37. ↑ Soldier Modernization: Warrior 21
  38. ↑ ARL: Effects of the Advanced Combat Helmet (ACH) and Selected Communication and Hearing Protection Systems (C & HPSs) on Speech Communication: Talk-Through Systems , April 2007 (PDF; 3.7 MB)
  39. ^ ARL: An Evaluation of Selected Communications Assemblies and Hearing Protection Systems: A Field Study Conducted for the Future Force Warrior Integrated Headgear Integrated Process Team , April 2005
  40. ↑ Soldier Modernization: TCAPS Prepares to Protect and Serve
  41. ^ MilitaryCME: Military Service and Hearing Loss: Prevention is Key , 2009
  42. ↑ EDGE : Lightening Body Armor , 2011 (PDF; 787 kB)
  43. ^ Leif Hasselquist, Carolyn K. Bensel, Brian Corner, Karen N. Gregorczyk, and Jeffrey M. Schiffman, “Understanding the Physiological, Biomechanical, and Performance Effects of Body Armor Use,” 26th Army Science Conference Proceedings, Orlando, Fla .: Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center, December 2008.
  44. ↑ Blücher Systems: INFANTERIST OF THE FUTURE - EXTENDED SYSTEM - (IDZ-ES)
  45. ↑ NATO RTO: Targeting Tomorrow's Challenges , January 2009 (PDF; 3.1 MB)
  46. ^ NATO RTO: Development of Micromachine Gas Turbines at Tohoku University
  47. ↑ Lockheed MArtin: HULC Exoskeletons Enhance Mobility and Increase Endurance ( Memento of the original from July 30, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.lockheedmartin.com
  48. ↑ WIRED: Combat Exoskeleton Marches Toward Afghanistan Deployment , 2012
  49. ↑ endgadget: RB3D develops Hercule robotic exoskeleton, boosts strength without P90X
  50. ↑ cetim: RB3D: Heracles to raise three million euros , 12/11/2012
  51. ↑ La présente l'DGA exosquelette Hercule nouvelle version
  52. ↑ Initial Evaluation of the Dermoskeleton Concept: Application of Biomechatronics and Artificial Intelligence to Address the Soldiers Overload Challenge ( Memento of the original from February 21, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. ( MS Word ; 433 kB) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / ftp.rta.nato.int
  53. ↑ VG24 / 7: US Army spending $ 57 million on military simulator using CryEngine 3