Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mmaruda

Digital battlefield and futuretech

Recommended Posts

Crysis 3, if you count virtual future soldier programs.

I think you should differentiate between fantasy and future military technology

in any case, a future project is to create something fanciful.

I would like to try the most cutting-edge weapons and vehicles but without falling into the fantasy

Edited by PFC Magician

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't think of even a single Future Soldier program that involves cloaking, exoskeletons or even nanotechnology IIRC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Soldier

Obviously none of these is even remotely close to completion. Anyway - nanotech is probably already there with some nano-materials being used.

The US Army already has a working exoskeleton:

Cloaks are also possible:

As for the huge leaps in tech, noone sees theme because they are not leaps, it's constant evolution. 2 years ago netbooks were the cool mobile thing, now they are becoming obsolete with tablets around. Your average smart-phone has more processing power than the computers used when invading Iraq. I think a small tablet with a satellite map with marked objectives, friendly troop positions and network link to call in precision air-strikes should be standard equipment for a platoon commander in a couple of years. Just look at DCS:A-10C - you already have TAD, datalink and GPS guided ordnance, and this is not a very high tech plane when it comes to avionics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Future Soldier has no nanotech, no cloaking, no exoskeletons, etc. And pretty much nothing of Future Soldier has yet been issued. What has been issued is just a portion of it to a single unit. I'd say it's quite realistic to expect the entire program, if it's still alive, to not have been implemented until somewhere around 2035. So 2035 will probably be when nanotech, cloaking and exoskeletons reach the level at which Future Soldier currently is, i.e. wont be done for another 20 years. And yes, the A-10 is indeed a very high tech plane. A small tablet for all those things? You do realise that A, it's gonna be the first thing to snap in pieces out in the field, B, will be so high maintenance and widely issued that most will probably not work at any given time, and C, having a single one fall into enemy hands for just hours would cause high losses due to friendly fire and leaked intelligence before anyone would figure out the serial number of the tablet to be turned off, and it would thus never be something considered by any serious military.

I'm just gonna go ahead and say what I've said before when people have been going on about going sci-fi with Arma 3 because it's set in 2035: Look at how far infantry used technology has come during the last 20 years. It's practically nothing more than a few more radios, better helmets and vests, more NVGs, and rifle optics generally speaking. Why would technology increase pace several times over in the next -20 years?

Edited by scrim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A small tablet for all those things? You do realise that A, it's gonna be the first thing to snap in pieces out in the field, B, will be so high maintenance and widely issued that most will probably not work at any given time, and C, having a single one fall into enemy hands for just hours would cause high losses due to friendly fire and leaked intelligence before anyone would figure out the serial number of the tablet to be turned off, and it would thus never be something considered by any serious military.

Take a look at this: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/01/gun-mount-and-s/

As for breaking, you can get bullet proof cases for these things now. And with falling into enemy hands... Password protection? How about that thumb-print reader thing some laptops have today?

I don't want to advocate that we should have any space-age sci-fi stuff in Arma 3 but most of the tech I am talking about is already there. I also don't agree that infantry technology hasn't changed in the past 20 years. Those bullet proof vests, NVGs, thermal optics and better radios are a huge game changer and give significant results in terms of survivability, night-ops and situation awareness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh wow, someone made a range ap for a rifle! That totally means it'll be bought and issued by any military with any self respect, because putting an electronically powered thing on the rifle will be so much more reliable than a super old, boring piece of paper.

Yeah, passwords can't ever be found out. How effective will it be when say, someone forgets his password? Let's face it, unless it's going to be something that can be eaily hacked, it's gonna have to be a very long, advanced password which is changed frequently. Sooner or later someone will write the password on a piece of paper, and it'll fall into enemy hands along with the tablet.

I'm not saying infantry technology hasn't changed during the last 20 years. However, you're making it out to be much more than it really is. The vests weren't invented during the last 20 years, they were improved upon. NVGs were the same 20 years ago, today they're just more widely issued. Thermal optics aren't more widely issued to the infantry than 20 years ago. Radios have hardly been improved upon to any mentionable extent either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Augmented reality glasses can effectively replace some HUD functions. GPS, markers, IFF, rangefinding could become as gameplay mechanics rather than difficulty setting, while still allowing mission designer to disable some advanced functions if required by mission setting (jamming, limited batteries, EMP damage etc).

As long as things are made to be functional, not "cool and awesome", I'm in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh wow, someone made a range ap for a rifle! That totally means it'll be bought and issued by any military with any self respect, because putting an electronically powered thing on the rifle will be so much more reliable than a super old, boring piece of paper.

No it won't, but you can still use pen and paper, if it breaks. That does not mean however, those things are not used. Maybe they are not standard issue, but someone sells them and makes a profit. There are also sniper systems like the CheyTac M200 Intervention which utilises a ballistic computer and this one has been issued to Marines in Afghanistan and proved very efficient at ranges above 2000m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, someone sells them on the only market where they can make a profit, the civilian market.

And nope, the M200 isn't used by anyone else than the Turks, Poles and Jordanians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be quite negative for the sake of being negative. Over the last ten years, we now have pocket-sized hand-held computers more powerful than desktops a decade ago. If that keeps up as a consistent pace, your prized gaming computer will be equal to a widely sold headset in another ten years. We're talking another ten years after that point.

Flexible touch-screens are being perfected as we speak, which will allow roll-up computers, able to process as much information as a modern computer. Smart-glasses will be able to film in high-def and stream it to other headsets. They will be able to give readouts of current areas, likely give 3D maps and automated route planning on the shortest route. Throw in some extra features, and they could easily guide you away from areas that are held by an enemy. Unmanned drone strikes are becoming more and more common, and drone technology is increasing at an astonishing rate, making unmanned vehicles an extremely likely possibility for a variety of high-risk assignments such as minesweeping and recon tasks.

If every single NATO state decides NOT to use these advances in their military, I'll be extremely surprised. While you're being extremely negative and just saying they'll break or whatever, so what? If they break on you, you do without and play exactly as you are playing now. If a vehicle breaks, it is destroyed and the pilot/driver lives on to control another. If they don't break/get destroyed, you have a whole wealth of new information and possibilities at your fingertips that will make the game more enjoyable. And, just to stress the point, you could easily take them off if you don't like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, no, no. It's just to much nonsense right now to explain why you're crazy wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a fairly pessimistic view of the world by 2035 but still pretty realistic (aside from the fact we still use paper maps, wtf?). I don't think augumented reality, exoskeletons, cloaking vehicles, genetic modification, ETC tank cannons, or robotics are going to be a big part of future warfare in this timeframe, regardless if they are available (we already have thermal cloaking armor in testing but it is as expensive as hell). I think Bohemia just wanted to move the timeframe forward so we don't have yet another modern military FPS with Russians and terrorists in it, and thank god for that. I'm still a little disappointed this isn't a Ghost in the Shell/Deus Ex cyborg simulator, that wouldn't appeal to the ARMA crowd of course. :p

There is a good chance we'll have this body armor by 2035 which would pretty much make infantry weaponry (short of 14.5mm AMR's) obselete, so it is probably good they took a pessimistic view of the future.

Edited by Zak757

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? That would assume that body armour research makes one great leap after another, and small weapons research just comes to an abrupt halt for +20 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it would seem that after the add-on community tackles "classic" firearms, vehicles, etc. then post-modern technology might be the next best thing [though one can't assume a community such as Arma's will maintain organization in add-on development of course haha].

I agree; nano-technology, full wavelength visual concealment, full body exo-armor, walkers/ mecha, spaceships, deathstars, ion-cannons, etc. might be a little far-fetched for the story BI is going to tell. [Though the add-on community is one reason why I love this series.]

However, as this is a work of fiction, set in the future (something we have yet to see), we shouldn't assume one thing and based on that assumption cut a current-generation concept completely (as time/ money really isn't a factor for us forum users).

Go ahead pessimists, be negative, it may even be the wiser choice. But thermo-concelment, (some form of) combat capable autonomous robotics, laser technology, tactical battlefield computers, gun mounted cameras and so much more are on the way if not already present [to the degree we might see in-game]. So maybe BI might want to add some "future" tech, that's their choice. If you don't want to use it, don't include it in your scenario(s). I know I'd be interested in seeing such however [though it might just depend on the day/ how I'm feeling ha]. And hey, whatever BI leaves out modders might just find a way to throw in.

The time table in the editor goes from the mid-1900s to around 2050 right? So even further out concepts might find an add-on that within 2050 could be possible. Who knows [excluding those with a crystal ball].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scrim, some people, like yourself, are afraid of change, I see it everyday in the workplace. Unfortunately, those fears won't stop the inevitable transformation so at some point you will just have to accept that it's going to happen. There are too many amazing things happening in the world of technology and plenty of investment dollars in defence for huge changes not to occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scrim, some people, like yourself, are afraid of change, I see it everyday in the workplace. Unfortunately, those fears won't stop the inevitable transformation so at some point you will just have to accept that it's going to happen. There are too many amazing things happening in the world of technology and plenty of investment dollars in defence for huge changes not to occur.

Or he's in the military and he's seen that these changes are not widespread, and combat operations today are about the same as they were when you watch Black Hawk Down, on a battle 20 years ago. We just use less iron sights now. Streaming augmented reality glasses? Give me a break, we still use paper maps and DAGRs. And do you know why things won't change to exoskeletons and all this sci-fi stuff? Not because the advances in technology won't be made, but because they're simply not needed.

As said above, unmanned ground vehicles and UAS are the future, but in an infantry simulation, there really shouldn't be much change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to remember that its only 5 years or so that portable devices ( tablets smartsphones and such ) are mainstream....and look how they changed the world at least the civilian...your view its far too pessimistic/nostalgic...tablets and augmented reality would be surely part of future battlefield...the question is more when ? I would say from 2020 at least among special forces

Russian army is moving in that direction ...so US, Italy , Canada , france , England is only a matter of time and money http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Djh1pdaivg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scrim, some people, like yourself, are afraid of change, I see it everyday in the workplace. Unfortunately, those fears won't stop the inevitable transformation so at some point you will just have to accept that it's going to happen. There are too many amazing things happening in the world of technology and plenty of investment dollars in defence for huge changes not to occur.

Yeah, I'm afraid of change, let's say. Let's say in your flying car on the way to work up on moon colony #57. What, those things don't exist? But say, people back in the '50s and '60s thought we'd certainly have those things by now. And much more than 20 years have passed since, and huge technological advances have been made since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ scrim

Back in the 90's a little innovation called the Internet (you may have heard of it and used it a few times) went mainstream and began transforming the way the world communicates and shares ideas and innovation. Amazing new things are being created, implemented and enhanced everyday. Not all of them will be picked up by the military in 2035 but you can be certain that a lot of the best bits will.

---------- Post added at 10:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:35 PM ----------

http://news.sky.com/story/1047004/mini-drones-army-deploys-tiny-helicopters. £20M for 160 units, I.e. the military will hand over good coin for good innovation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Respond to Lauxman if you genuinely believe you have a case for something realistic, as opposed to turning Arma into a sci-fi series. It seems he's more bothered to push some sense into peoples' minds about this, as opposed to me, who's pretty much given up due to common sense not being common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the thing that is important to keep in mind is that as things are implemented by one military force, the opposing force will look to match or nullify the advantage in some way. So where if we see new tech implemented by one force we should expect to see a similar variation in opfor.

But I certainly don't want to see loss of core gameplay into a sci-fi shooter. I will never use any thermals in game just becoz it's like shooting fish in a barrel and I prefer a fairer fight so to speak.

At the same time, surely we can do a bit better with the tech in 2035.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for example as you may already have noticed ... opfor have micro-climate suits in game which reduces thermal signature... so it could be still challenging using thermals if this is implemented .

as for everything there is always a countermeasure , a workaround .

i don't ask for sci-fi coolness, i ask for actual realism based on current prototypes...its not my fault if BIS have put those futuristic gadgets in the game then make no really use for them

( as opfor suits and glasses )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet is huge in the military, but on the battlefield, name one way it changed things. Not in the planning of operations, but on the battlefield for an infantryman.

Tablets and handheld devices changed the civilian world, but name one way they've been featured on the battlefield. No, we still use handheld GPS that has advanced, but still retains the same features, along with simple maps. Especially if we're talking about battling with a fictional conventional military that no doubt by 2035 will have a strong cyberwarfare department? In that case, the battlefield advantage would go to the LOWER tech conventional military, not the conventional military that relies on their virtual reality technology.

The internet and tablets revolutionizing the civilian world have obviously been adopted by the military, but not on the actual battlefield. They make no difference to an infantryman. Again-go watch a video on Youtube of a firefight today, and then go watch Black Hawk Down. 20 years and, really, how different is a firefight?

The huge things that have changed are the surge of IEDs on the modern battlefield (surprisingly absent from ARMA) and unmanned vehicles. But you'll probably start asking for the robot from that one Gerard Butler movie with machine guns and hellfires on it because it was in an action movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lauxman, you are right, but the setting of the game is 2035, a lot of things can change up to that point. At the beginning of WWI Marshal Foch claimed aeroplanes are a neat innovation but are useless in combat. Now he is famous for that statement, because it was wrong. The main problem with today's military is that the tech as you said is not needed in certain cases, but that is because conflicts are asymmetrical nowadays. NATO goes up against guys with AKs and moustaches. Who knows what would change, if we had wars on equal terms. That said, BIS introduced the RAH-66 Comanche which never got into the military because there was no need for it, due to not going up against an enemy with equal tech level. I'm not saying we should have mechs and Master Chief armour in Arma, but some of the tech available today might be nice, even if it's just occasionally available if the mission designer chooses to. It makes more sense to have a tablet with a digital map or the glasses with streaming from team members cameras than that a railgun on a tank which BIS already announced. If it's change in gameplay people fear, they should not be concerned, since you can always play missions and campaigns that don't have that stuff - that is the beauty of Arma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×