Its a deadly problem that has plagued U.S. forces in every conflict. And though military officials have been highlighting it for years, they still havent found a solution everyone can agree on.
Friendly fire accounts for enough U.S. and allied casualties that its a cause of grave concern among commanders in the field with ever-more lethal and precise weaponry sitting in the U.S. arsenal, mistaken targeting carries with it a deadly guarantee.
One company thats trying the lift the cloud of doubt has developed an innovative way to identify friendly forces in a fraction of a second.
Brought to you by the same folks who make the Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System — or MILES gear — used in field exercises, the new Optical Combat Identification System developed by Cubic Defense Systems presents a simple solution to a nagging problem.
A few years ago we got to thinking about other applications of laser technology and that led us to do research in other wavelengths unrelated to MILES, said Steve Sampson, VP in charge of advanced programs at Cubic Defense. The nature of warfare has changed and its required that out whole application of technology has had to refocus.
Cubic has developed and tested a system that works both on vehicles and, more importantly, can be placed within the gear of dismounted troops. The way it works on a dismounted Soldier is through a laser interrogator mounted on his rifle and smart reflector embedded in the target Soldiers gear. When a trooper targets a potential enemy, he presses a button that activates an eye-safe laser beam that shoots to a man-sized target as far as one kilometer away.
The smart reflectors mounted in the Soldiers equipment which are matchbook-sized devices placed to allow 360-degree coverage absorb the laser beam, remodulate it, and send back a signal that tells the shooter hes a friendly. The answer can be displayed in the Soldiers rifle sight.
And it all happens in less than a tenth of a second.
For years the Army focused on combat ID on the high-value, big armored platforms but were not having big armored tank battles in downtown Baghdad anymore; its dismounted, urban warfare, Sampson said. Only in the last few years has laser technology gotten to the point where we can field something that is practical in size, weight and power for a dismounted Soldier or Marine.
The man-portable OCIdS gear includes batteries that can run for thousands of interrogations on the gun-mounted laser and tens of thousands of replies on the reflector, which uses a watch battery-sized power supply, Sampson explained. Vehicle-mounted interrogators can send and receive the laser signal over several miles using much greater onboard power generation.
Engineers at Cubic are still working to refine the system, spending about $20 million since 2005 to test the new combat ID technology. Another round of Army field tests are scheduled for this summer. Though Sampson doesnt expect a formal Army requirement for a system like his until around 2009, Cubic hopes to offer the man-portable system for less than $2,000 per soldier and around $20,000 per vehicle.
Sampson also said the technology in his OCIdS gear can be adapted for long-range communications not just combat ID — but he was cagey about revealing the details.
What we are able to accomplish today, physically wasnt possible a few years ago, Sampson said.
{ 52 comments… read them below or add one }
Am I the only one who is, how shall I put this, dubious about this concept?
More gear strapped on webgear and rifles.
How many recievers/emitters does MILES need for that all important 360 coverage and is that 360 merely on one axis?
How well will it work in a sandy/dusty/muddy environment?
Don’t we teach target ID to our guys?
Lots of other questions pop up as well, I guess I could see the vehicle based system working but I am still not sold.
I had quite the same idea. A laser emitter on the rifle sends a coded signal, MILES-like (AGDUS-like) sensors receive them.
The info is passed down to a programmable intra-squad radio that sends a coded siggnal all-round to tell “I’m friendly”.
The sender#s personal radio receives the message, decodes it and gives audio signal.
I threw the idea away for thse reasons:
- it costs
- it weighs
- the receivers of MILES and AGDUS gear disturb the camouflage
- correct receiving and answering cannot be guaranteed, soldiers could be enticed to shoot although they wouldn’t without the gear
- connection between receivers and radio necessary
umhmmmmm…….and: Mortors? Artillery rounds? bombs? grenade launchers? aerial cannon? less accessorized allies?
phooie
What happens when enemy combatants figure out where the reflector is stored and loot them from our fallen? Would make for an “interesting” situation when the man with the AK is shooting at you but your IFF system says he’s friendly.
I’m having the same thoughts…When the insurgency in Iraq capture our troops, they then have access to the same technology that our troops do. So of course they are going to use it to pretend that they are friendlies. All it takes is a second’s hesitation by one of our troops, and they will be shot dead by the would be friendly. I don’t know if there can ever be a good enough system made, that can prevent troops from being killed by friendly fire. I sure am skeptical of the one these guys are trying to sell to the military. It would work well enough, until the enemy got a hold of some of the gadgets themselves. Then our guys would be killed a lot faster by the enemy.
The only way I can see this working is when the system has some sort of IFF codes that modulates thrue a period of time, so that the system cannot be used by the adversaries because the codes aren’t valid anymore.But I cannot see how the codes can be uploaded to the receivers. The only secure way to upload new IFF codes is by hardwiring the codes to the receivers. That’s no problem if you have an airplane on a base 150 miles away from the combatzone. It might be more difficult when you’re in a combatzone fighting for days long…
The only way I can see this working is when the system has some sort of IFF codes that modulates thrue a period of time, so that the system cannot be used by the adversaries because the codes aren’t valid anymore.But I cannot see how the codes can be uploaded to the receivers. The only secure way to upload new IFF codes is by hardwiring the codes to the receivers. That’s no problem if you have an airplane on a base 150 miles away from the combatzone. It might be more difficult when you’re in a combatzone fighting for days long…
The device does not mean they no longer have to rely on their own vision and instincts to identify the enemy.Some of you sound ridiculous;as if some jihadi with a turban is going to pick up the device and automatically blend in with the other troops in the field.Hey maybe we shouldn’t allow combat uniforms either;the terrorist’s might steal one off a dead soldier.
Exactly. It’s pretty much impossible to come up with a hack-proof system. Human judgment is fallible, but can’t be turned into an automatic free pass like electronics can.
Amongst the Brits, Canadians, and others, US soldiers have something of a trigger-happy rep: “Let God sort them out.” So would this system be used with allied troops? The concept is not even near half-baked yet, IMO.
what if the enemy gets there hands on a dead soldiers pack or weapon? then the enemy will recognized as a friendly and all hell could break lose they should have something like emmbeded under a soliers skin or skull and when the soldier dies the signal of the friendly/enemy gadget thing would die.
I would worry that someone figures out how to watch this. I mean if you are broadcasting light then it can be seen by something. Wouldn’t this often give away positions. Maybe that’s worth the cost of being able to shoot without worry of hitting your own guys.
Xander, in case you hadn’t noticed they have been picking up Iraqi Army and Police uniforms and ambushing our people as well has hauling off civilians to shoot or behead.
Alright,thats my point grandjester.You can’t rely on vision alone to identify those rare kind of threats.All the more reason to introduce this device.
Laser interrogation/response systems like this have been kicking around for a while. It was once known as CIDDS (Combat ID Dismounted Soldier),then ICIDS (Individual Combat ID System), then it was integrated in to the Land Warrior Combat ID system. I think it’s now one component of something called IBCSAS (the Integrated Battlespace Combat Situation Awareness System). Ruag has a similar system called SIMLAS (Soldier Integrated Multifunction Laser).
IIRC, there were reports of some of our units using a field expedient version on their way into Iraq, but I’m not sure on the details. Those might have been references to laser IR designators, and how they show up on NVG; anybody showing a beam source is presumed friendly.
Don’t know how practical any of it is. It seems in daylight, you’ve got eyes and scopes for IFF. At night, you have NVG, reflector tape, etc.
Anybody out there BTDT? If so, can you tell us if this stuff for real?
I wonder what what different now and then PURSIAN GULF WAR.i AM SO SURE NOW IT WILL END LIKE GULF WAR
I see this thing actually foiled by actual fog during war.
How long before these are the hottest item in the underground ?
They need to have an automatic self-destruct mechanism in the event of death, capture or loss.
The circuitry, even inactive, must never fall into the hands of the enemy.
Until these requirements are satisfied, if the head of someone in my sights goes goo, you’ll just have to accept that I thought they looked like a hostile . . . and that I thought they look better that way.
It’s on me, and always will be . . . even with any new assists.
The biggest problem I can see is if people start relying on the IFF system and not checking with their eyes. There are all kinds of things that can mean that the system could fail.
Therefore a failure to read a response would mean that soldiers would possibly call in heavy firepower – and is someone going to actually want to stand up in the middle of that to try to make sure the IFF thing is being properly identified!
Just tag the soldiers with cheap RFID tags. It’s not fancy as GPS devices, but a lo solution for mass production.
Implanted active RFIDs? You’ve still got the problem with a bandit cutting it out and pasting it to their clothes. Maybe some sort of trauma sensor or something. Or one of the paste-able types, still, but with a rotating key. Every time the men come back to base, they swipe the responder and it provides a different verification code. Even if a bad guy steals it, it’s only good for a day tops.
I completely agree we can’t make this a system to rely on, but the spectacular failure of human judgment suggests that it needs a backup every once in a while.
It sounds fantastic. However, I would worry about the enemy getting a hold of one of the lasers to read who the soldiers are. It would help them to find us. Every empire in history has had the best technology of the age and many times that became their weakness.
Has anyone kicked around the idea that the IFF is ‘keyed’ to the bio-identity of the soldier. There is a sensor on the uniform that is can sense the trooper’s identity and pulse and emits the go-code to the IFF gear to transmit a friendly signal. Course, this idea is half-baked too…
what if one of the opforce acquire one of these through fallen soldiers? just like one poster mentioned regarding the RFID being pasted to the enemy in order to trick the enemy?>
There is no way that an enemy soldier would slap one of these on himself for fear of it being a detonation device or some type of GPS system, that could reveal their location. Hopefully, this technology will remain secret and can be of some use….
please
this is war!, not surgery.
we’re warriors not doctors.
it’s much easier to just not have to shoot!
but lord help us if we do.
If you cannot identify your target, then your s— is weak. Fog or no fog and regardless of the level of technology, this has always been a problem in the history of warfare and likely to forever continue as such.
Why does it seem blue on blue is the main issue for american forces. I am an british soldier and i have never had a blue on blue incident that didnt involve the U.S. Why is this?
I have a lot of respect for the U.S. forces and have worked with them a lot.
Maybe a look at the training doctorin is the awnser not more TEC…….
When I was on the USS Providence and Deployed to the Tonkin Gulf I worked in CIC (Combat Information Center) we had IFF (Identification Friend or Foe). While this is an excellent step in saving our guys from friendly fire I can only wonder what took so long?
In war, shit happens.
Just don’t trust the army.
Semper Fi
My only question would have to be what happens if capture occurs and now the enemy has the identifier!
A better solution in my limited technical mind would be under the skin micro chip……….they already do it for dogs and cats, find a way to make it more powerful or able to be detected from a greater distance??????
Just a thought!
Other than that a great idea!
Put gps tracking chips on a trooper so that all can see them and you would know where a trooper is at all times. You could run like we do in video games where we see colored markers on the troopers showing friend from foe.
It would also stop this kidnapping of troopers, since we would know where they are taken by tracking them.
The techs used in tracking packages and it works just peachy.
The military needs to get with the times. They are still stuck in the 80′s-90′s.
Enemy will be making those things in the helmet very quickly.
Okay, put IFF on all the troops. So then your boys are gonna get lazy: they see somebody without an IFF and they’re just gonna open up. Well, what if buddy’s IFF breaks, or he loses it? What about civlians without IFF? – you just own them?
How about less pressure on killing bad guys from a long distance, more on basic, up-close soldiering – including negotiations.
Is there a possibility of taking that same technology and apply it in a two way street, meaning that when in the field and when in a possible friendly fire situation and a weapon has the “laser pointed” at another or comes into in a direct L.O.S. contact with a soldier, then the weapons laser id program recognizes that its a soldier and doesn’t allow the weapon to fire just for that instant or until theres a different target. ??? Just an idea to ponder even though probably already been thought of. Either way im a big fan of soldier/weapons safety & would support the idea as a good way to spend the tax dollars. :)
How is it possible that this device can distinguish combatant from noncombatant? I don’t think that is possible….
What happens if this gear is captured by the enemy? Can he (the enemy) then wear it and be idenitified as a freindly by our forces?
While there are obviously issues to be sorted out my point is this:
Why are we divulging our new technology to the world, particularly during a war? What ever happened to the idea of “secret weapons”? If we didn’t discuss this stuff, the bad guys wouldn’t know and we wouldn’t have to worry about them using it against us. At least, for a little while.
This may not be the ultimate solution to the porblem but let us keep our secrets, secret. At least for a week or two. What was the old World War II saying, “Loose lips, sink ships.”
Semper Fi
When will liberals like Carter realize that you can’t negotiate with terrorists. Also, all the soldiers I knew in my 20 years in the military didn’t want to let the enemy get close. Combat isn’t about fair play. it’s about killing the enemy, killing them as far away from you and your buddies as possible!
Even under the skin could pose a problem if the enemy knows about it. Which, they undoubtedly will given how well advertised our new tech is. It just means they’ll have to work a little harder to get to it than they would if it was on our troops gear.
Join the Canadians, its a rare thing for blue on blue in this military, we train to use our heads not our trigger fingers. Our boys stepped foot into Irac and our first casualties were from a yankee plane dropping 500 pounders on them. Train your boys proper and you will get the results.
Mostly if anyone is gonna wear this its gonna be anyone not in the Amerian Military cause if they are not shooting themselves up, they are shooting there alies up, so go ahead and build em for us to protect ourselves from them. Allot of good toys they have, but not much the brains to use em.
well Now the Canafians and the brits know about this tech. Ya think the bad guys know?
Fog of war my ass. I think the bad guys know about this tech by now. Believe me they grab one of our boys with that gear on and believe me they will know were comming for em and the welcome will be warm thats for sure. Even if its under the skin we all know they love cuttin things up and our people are no different than meat to them. Send one piece here, one piece there and we have ambushes all over the place. and when that second counts and you should have pulled that tigger it will be to late, Allot of our people will be pushing up daisies. That I garon-T
P.S.
over whelming force is the yankee way, your guys bunch up and keep sending em in. you get allot of dead, wounded and captured soldiers in the end. Thats why you get friendly fire and so on. Change the training get results.
But believe me in a rescue I wouldnt want anyone else but them yanks
ok i think all this tech will be our down fall we will become so reliant on tech and then a country who hates us and has the power like n korea or somehting will find a way to EMP us weather it be by a nuc or some other thing and we will be defensless, i am all for better tech but more along the lines of more efficent bullets or powder or lighter armor and such but not specil goggles to distract the warfighter more than dodging bullets or some type of thing that can be stolen and used against me
this spray the area with firepower is b.s.
i know the army and marines will not like this but
do what the nra and hunter safety teaches
KNOW WHAT YOU ARE SHOOTING AT
KNOW YOUR TARGET.
The whole idea is great……except for one little flaw.
Considering that we are dealing with insurgants here, there is nothing to prevent them from capturing or killing our men and using that same technology against us by wearing the soldier’s equipment.
Since the gear is not designed to terminate it’s function should the soldier die and it is attached to the gear itself, all an insurgent has to do is strip the gear from one of our troops and VIOLA, instant defense against enemy fire….for him.
There needs to be some kind of system where we can identify an enemy target, of any type, without that technology being able to be captured and used against us.
In WWII, the Germans captured a P-38. They left the original markings on it and sent it up after crippled bombers. The pilot would “act” as escort and then get behind them and finish the bombers off.
A lot of good men died because of that and I see the huge potential for a repeat of this kind of thing with this new system. Only it won’t be our bombers being shot down; it will be our soldiers and armor units coming under fire from what their system had identified as friendly targets.
I don’t want to argue with all these detractors of the proposed system, but there is a way to prevent compromise of the system. Much like the “smart guns” now being used by some police agencies, the soldier carried unit can be programed to go inert if removed from the person it is programed to. It is simple and can work with the addition of an RFID tag similar to the ones used in loss prevention.
Those arguing the “know your target” angle are right, but it is a whole different game when you have just had one of your team killed before your eyes and your are dodging incoming fire.
The comments made are all noteworthy. The concerns are:
1. Trooper ELSEC Signature
2. Equip. Compromise / Loss
3. Friend/Foe ID Surety
4. Total Combat Safeguards.
5. Combat Effectiveness and Fire Power
6. Real Time Tactical Application.
As one comment surfaced: Intelligence is taking the lessons of the past and applying them to new situations.
Electronics desensitize the realities of war; human casualties.
CUBIC / COMMANDERS please take note.
Well done
I was wondering if the only reason friendly fire has increased is because our ability and honesty have increased. Communications as advanced as it is maybe more accurately recording numbers. I believe it was easyer to make enemy kill claims years ago. Also, the terrain allows easyer monitoring of battle field conditions than a dense jungle would. I have met several men from different branches of service and all left me with an impression of being professional. Maybe because im older the impression is out of respect but for me but im sure thier doing the best they can. I wouldn’t want to be killed in friendly fire because the guy responcible would have to live with that mistake.
My father taught me to always be aware of everyones position while hunting,to stay were he put me and to check my target. Maybe the only problem the guys making the mistakes have is they didn’t have my father.
This item would help. If a obvious enemy combatant gets one and tries to use it, he’ll still get shot. if a bad guy puts on a captured or aquired friendly uniform, they’ve done that before. The item would “help” identify that the target “might be” friendly. At a couple hundred yards without optics positive ID can be damn hard in the best of conditions.If a bad guy gets one and puts it on his turban, our guys will still drop him. This device would just give the soldier/marine a heads up to take another look. FF casulties always have, and always will occur. Less often now than in the past, I’m sure. If it doesn’t weigh much, and is reliable, and congress would fund it without taking the money from other things, like bullets, OK. I was more afraid of Arty and Air putting HE on me by mistake than from small arms. Even those guys are a lot more accurate tha just a few years ago.
Interesting comments. Here are thoughts on several of them:
1. Training. Nothing here addresses the continuous need for well trained troops. The first best solution is to never attempt to shoot the wrong guy in the first place. But if all else fails, OCIDS can bail you out of a potentially fatal decision at the point of decision.
2. Other similar system exist. Similar – Yes. The same – No. Others have an RF component to the communications which can be detected on the battlefield and increase weight and power demands.
3. What if the bad guys get your equipment? Good question with multiple answers. Code of the day, biometrics, encyption, etc., all are possible, and different customers have different desires. So while this certianly will be addressed in production, the solutions will vary. Not really an appropriate topic for additional open discussion.
J-F Berger, I agree with you. Where’s the mental strength? where’s the mental training? what’s good about an F-117 if the pilot ain’t FULLY mentally prepared? What? rely on muscle? firepower? all that shit is useless if your DOME (brain) is lacking its intestinal fortitude. Write back. I don’t know how long I’ll be in the civilized world.