Our concern is that too much of the effort to digitalize the Soldier is headed in the wrong direction emanating from civilians with little or no input from the actual Soldiers in the field. We're concerned that the digital helps will:

a. Overload the Soldier with too much un-necessary information, a lot of it not verified/substantiated by LRSD/Scout dog/Recon units for "ground truth" filtered through Military Intelligence units to prevent the enemy from "spoofing" us with decoys.

b. By being overly complicated result in too much battery power needed when dismounted resulting in overburdening Soldier's loads with batteries and ruining mobility afoot even further

c. When mounted works only "buttoned up" losing natural sense "situational awareness"

The goal of this essay is to relay our informed, experienced opinion of what a reasonable "ballpark" concept of digitization would be to simplify, reduce expectations and build on existing physical sense situational awareness rather than try to replace it.

The following description of a more reasonable "Land warrior" system applies to both mounted and dismounted Soldiers/Paratroopers. Those that think there is such a thing as dismounted-only systems with no interface with AFV Soldiers are setting themselves up for a replay of Somalia where 18 men died because they didn't have any light AFV support, but were saved when light AFVs came and rescued them from enemy fire. Those that think a computer on the Soldier's back will stop bullets are high on digital crack and light infantry hubris. GOOD light infantry units have light AFVs in support of them--the 25th ID in Vietnam and the 82d Airborne Division until they had their M5551 Sheridan light tanks retired and not replaced. Light units have armored car HMMWVs that are long-overdue for intercom systems. Light units when they fight right fight Light/Heavy or Heavy/Light meaning they should interface with mounted Soldiers. If we are not developing systems to work together NOW in peacetime due to us/them hubris how will things be better when the bullets start to fly?

[Greek hybris]

First appeared 1884

: exaggerated pride or self-confidence

-- hu*bris*tic (adjective)

The drawing above shows a simplified Land Warrior system that realizes the U.S. Army fireteam is lead from the front by the team leader. The other 3 Soldiers don't need moving map displays because they are following the team leader who is land navigating and interpreting the OPORD's concepts into reality. All of the electro-optical devices the Soldiers carry are stand-alone and don't need a computer. Their helmets carry tiny GPS receivers that tell them their GPS map grid coordinate and their magnetic cardinal direction through their see-through hunter/killer eyepiece (think head-up display in a fighter aircraft) and a microphone radio. All weapons have gunshields to deflect enemy fire from their bodies to protect face, arms and hands and not wait for bullets to be stopped at chest with hard body armor alone. Their TV/FLIR/Starlight image intensifiers---if they have them on their weapons---can be piped into their hunter/killer eyepieces or radioed to the Leader or other team members. The Team Leader can radio a map image from his LMPU to the other team members as a "snap shot" not something that requires them to carry a computer to receive. The detachable chest-mounted computer is only needed by the leader who synthesizes data and makes the decisions for the small group. All have paper topo maps because the LMPU computer might break and the Leader needs a large paper map to see the situation better than trying to scroll up/down a tiny computer screen which is time consuming and narrow in focus.

1. Fight Mounted with the head out as much as possible

Combat experience shows its best to fight with your head out for as long as possible when mounted in a vehicle--this applies to the crew and dismounting infantry. The more eyes you have looking out, the less you mitigate against the inherent blindness being in a vehicle creates. Relying on a moving map display in one eye ruins the vision in that eye and should be avoided because one doesn't need a constant feed of this information, the actual events taking place are more important than the map. What this means is:

a. Situational awareness moving map/graphics displays must be outside the vehicle behind an external weapons gunshield and NOT primarily in the eyepiece of the Vehicle Commander's helmet. There should be a "low-tech" capability built into this display so a paper topographical map can be spread out and weather protected in event that moving map display download fills are not available.

b. A GPS grid coordinate and magnetic azimuth reading would be displayed over the external map.

c. If battle proceeds where external shrapnel/enemy plunging small arms fire requires the VC to "button up" he swings his helmet reticle up and uses map displays inside his vehicle and the vision periscopes for his awareness.

2. Helmet reticle: Tell me where I am and where I am facing

When fighting head out of a vehicle, we don't need or want the loss of an eye with a moving map display in the reticle--we have the entire mass of the vehicle roof/turret which to hold a display behind a gunshield. What we do need is a helmet reticle that regardless of where the VC faces says:

a. His GPS grid coordinate
b. Magnetic direction he is facing
c. An aiming reticle with mils for estimating range and adjusting indirect fire
d. An aiming point to slew the AFV's weaponry via target hand-off to the Gunner or weapons employment by himself
*e. Image intensifier image through that reticle for night
*f. FLIR image through that reticle to detect heat sources

The last two features if feasible by having the helmet intercom cord with a power and image cord integral would be nice but not if it means adding weight/complexity to the helmet. If too ambitious, then we should settle for a small image intensifier mono-goggle that attaches to the helmet that feeds through the see-through reticle or swings down over it and supercedes its aiming reticle.

The VC needs to know where he is at in relation to his map and where he is facing in relation to it via cardinal magnetic directions, and have the rest of his mental energy free to look at the actual tactical situation.

3. Dismounted on foot: free the leader's hands! But don't weigh down the men!

If the M113A3/4 Gavin, Ridgway or M2A3 Bradley Commander dismounts, or the dismount infantry inside depart, none of them should have to switch helmets beforehand. All that should take place is the umbellical cord connecting to the vehicle J-box is disconnected at the helmet stem. Helmets should by a flick of a lever go from ear sound muffling to open for sensory awareness on foot. Dismount infantry radio listening would be maintained by keeping one ear's muffling padding in the "down" position. There should be an external cord at the rear of our AFVs which an infantryman can hook up his helmet to in order to talk to the vehicle crew without having to emit radio waves radiation on a crowded and/or possibly jammed bandwidth.

The current dismounted infantry leader has his hands full trying to hold a paper map, shoot a lensatic compass for a magnetic heading, operate a hand-held GPS AND operate a squad intercom radio, give hand/arm signals and hold up a shoulder weapon. This is maddening, and the result is the unit has to pause and stop constantly (a risk and a tactical liability) so the leader can get his bearings. Its noisy and leads to confusion. The small-unit leader weighted down with separate items each requiring hand/arm manipulation doesn't have his eyes/mind focused enough on the actual tactical situation in his front.

We can solve this by a modest reticle in his helmet with GPS, magnetic heading and a mils reticle, which would not require much battery power. In contrast, trying to add a computer in order to digitalize operations orders, give a moving map display, e-mail and the like requires a microprocessor on his already overloaded back and more battery power than he can transport. Glancing down at a paper map covered in "low-tech" clear plastic is more than suitable for daytime and if the helmet image intensifier is up to the task of close-in sight, ok at night, too.

If there are no paper maps then a separate GPS/route planner/moving map display unit (Leader's Route/Mission Planner) should be used that attaches at the Soldier's chest so he can look down at it like a HALO/HAHO Military Free Fall Parachutist's altimeter. It slides over to under the arm when low-crawling (IMT). To make the weight of such a device worthwhile, it should analyze the route for biological energy/water costs, time and risks of enemy detection, realizing that a self-destruct zeroize lever must be incorporated to prevent enemy capture. If we want to digitalize OPORDs, send this data through this separate unit, held only by the leader not onto every Soldier's back. Think Science Officer Spock's "Tri-corder" from the old Star Trek TV series. Also notice that the moving map display is on the leader's LMPU not in his eyepiece unless he wants to pipe it into there and lose peripherial vision. The leader can do this, but since he only needs to glance down occassionally at a map why should we block his eye out all the time?

The individual Soldiers can pipe in TV/FLIR from their stand-alone weapons sights into their Hunter/Killer eyepieces, but not moving maps displays since they do not have computers (LMPUs). If its that vital for a leader to show a map display, have him radio an image into the individual Soldier's eyepiece like a snapshot---don't burden them with having to carry a computer themselves!