Comments on: Cutting Through the Fog of War

By: mario coello

mario coello — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:40:29 +0000

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.

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:52:31 +0000

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.

By: S.. Kelley

S.. Kelley — Tue, 22 May 2007 08:06:04 +0000

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.

By: Alan D Hoffmann

Alan D Hoffmann — Mon, 21 May 2007 03:04:56 +0000

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.

By: PhilLeech

PhilLeech — Sun, 20 May 2007 11:09:29 +0000

Well done

By: Dogsoldier

Dogsoldier — Sat, 19 May 2007 19:53:14 +0000

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.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Sat, 19 May 2007 17:40:25 +0000

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.

By: C.M. Fowler

C.M. Fowler — Sat, 19 May 2007 15:14:26 +0000

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.

By: stanley baran

stanley baran — Sat, 19 May 2007 14:56:59 +0000

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.

By: Lamoureux

Lamoureux — Sat, 19 May 2007 02:53:06 +0000

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