The Land-warrior system

Bacara

Bacara

Active member
I'm interested in what soliders think about the new land warrior system, i think its a little clumsy and heavy, but i'm only 14 and am not a solider, so i have no valid opinon



Land Warrior integrates small arms with high-tech equipment enabling ground forces to deploy, fight and win on the battlefields of the 21st century. Land Warrior came about in 1991 when an Army study group recommended the service look at the soldier as a complete weapon system. The first priority in Land Warrior is lethality. The second is survivability and the third, command and control. The program will cost $2 billion when 45,000 sets of the equipment are fielded between 2001-2014. The Marine Corps, Air Force and many foreign countries are interested in the system
Based on recent advances in communications, sensors, and materials, the Land Warrior System integrates commercial, off-the-shelf technologies into a complete soldier system. For the first time, the soldier's equipment is being designed as if he is an individual, complete weapons platform. Each subsystem and component is designed to and for the soldier. The result: the first integrated soldier fighting system for the dismounted infantryman.

Land Warrior has several subsystems: the weapon, integrated helmet assembly, protective clothing and individual equipment, computer/radio, and software.
The Weapon Subsystem is built around the M-16/M-4 modular carbine. The weapon subsystem includes key electrical optical components such as the TWS, video camera, and the laser rangefinder/digital compass (LRF/DC). The LRF/DC provides the soldier with range and direction information. When coupled with his individual location from GPS, the soldier has accurate target location when calling for indirect fire and combat identification. This system will allow infantrymen to operate in all types of weather and at night. In conjunction with other components, a soldier can even shoot around corners without exposing himself to enemy fire.
The Integrated Helmet Assembly Subsystem (IHAS) uses advanced materials to provide ballistic protection at less weight than the current helmet shell. The integrated helmet assembly is lighter and more comfortable than today's helmet. The IHAS's helmet mounted computer and sensor display is the soldier's interface to the other subsystems and to the digital battlefield. Through the helmet mounted display, the soldier can view computer-generated graphical data, digital maps, intelligence information, troop locations and imagery from his weapon-mounted Thermal Weapon Sight (TWS) and video camera. This new capability allows the soldier to view around a corner, acquire a target, then fire the weapon without exposing himself, beyond his arms and hands, to the enemy. By scanning an area with his weapon's thermal sight, the soldier will be able to see an area's characteristics, including terrain and enemy positions, and will be able to see through obscurants. The thermal images will appear on a miniature helmet-mounted display. The Night Sensor Display will integrate a helmet mounted display with an image intensifier for access to his computer sensors as cited above. This will allow the soldier to maneuver and engage targets under cover of darkness.
The Protective Clothing and Individual Equipment Subsystem consists of a revolutionary backpack frame design based on state-of-the-art automotive racing technology which bends with the soldier's natural body movements. The cables are integrated into the frame as necessary for the soldier's computer/radio connections. The soldier can adjust his backpack frame to adjust the load distribution from his shoulders to his hips while on the move. A simple adjustment, yet it allows the soldier to manage and carry his combat load more effectively and with less fatigue. The new LW body armor, like the helmet, provides improved ballistic protection at a reduced weight. The Land Warrior body armor includes a modular upgrade plate to protect the soldier against the small arms threat. The protective clothing and individual equipment subsystem incorporates modular body armor and upgrade plates that can stop small-arms rounds fired point-blank.
The infantryman will attach the Computer/Radio Subsystem (CRS) to his load-bearing frame. Over this goes the rucksack for personal gear. The computer processor is fused with radios and a Global Positioning System locator. A hand grip wired to the pack and attached to the soldier's chest acts as a computer mouse and also allows the wearer to change screens, key on the radio, change frequencies and send digital information. The subsystem comes in two flavors: The leader version has two radios and a flat panel display/keyboard, and soldiers have one radio. With the equipment, leaders and soldiers can exchange information. Soldiers using their weapon-mounted camera, for example, can send videos to their leaders. In its GEN II version, the computer and radio will be combined and embedded in new web gear. The system will be built around a series of cards the size of credit cards, but slightly thicker.
The CRS is integrated into the backpack frame in two sections. The upper portion contains two radios the squad radio and the soldier radio). The squad radio is based on a repackaged commercial radio and will be fully compatible with SINCGARS SIP. The soldier radio is based on a repackaged handheld commercial radio made by Motorola. This gives the soldier the ability to communicate with others in his squad, greatly improving situation awareness and survivability through increased command and control.
The lower portion of the backpack contains the computer and the global positioning system (GPS) modules. Integration of the GPS and radio into the CRS eliminates separate displays, controls and cases, thereby saving weight and reducing power requirements. Menu driven displays are controlled by the soldier from his Remote Input Pointing Device. This device is located on the chest strap and is operated by the touch of a finger. Some functions are controlled with two buttons located near his trigger finger, allowing the soldier to maintain a firing position. Imbedded into the load carrying frame are the antennas for the GPS and soldier radio. The open architecture of the CRS allows direct insertion of future upgrades in both hardware and software.
The Land Warrior software subsystem addresses the soldier's core battlefield functions, display management, and mission equipment and supply. The software subsystem includes tactical and mission support modules, maps and tactical overlays, and the ability to capture and display video images. The system also contains a power management module. Land Warrior will be interoperable on the digital battlefield. Designers set up the system so it can be updated as technology improves. The modular architecture allows for direct insertion/replacement with technology upgrades. The software subsystem allows the soldier to tailor the display, menus and functional operation of his system to his own mission needs and preferences.

continued...
​
 
The prime contractor for the Land Warrior System is Raytheon Systems Company. Subcontractors include Motorola, Honeywell, Omega, GENTEX and Battelle.

The soldiers who will actually use Land Warrior have been consulted every step of the way. Prime contractor Raytheon worked with experts at the U.S. Army Infantry Center at Fort Benning, Ga., in designing the system. They have taken the system to the users to ensure the system is headed in the right direction. The rucksack has quick-release straps so an infantryman can just drop it if the need arises. One problem the Army must overcome before fielding is power. Current batteries last about 150 minutes with all systems running. Other batteries under development by the Army's Communications- Electronics Command may push the time up to 30 hours. Individual portable power packs, possibly with form-fitting batteries that would be less obtrusive when worn as part of the soldier fighting harness, are being considered. Another possibility is development of a "sleep" mode that would automatically put the equipment on standby when not in use to conserve battery energy.
In order to be accepted by the Army, the Land Warrior System must weigh less than 80 pounds (including the TWS). This weight was selected to represent the current load being carried by today's soldier. The current weight of the system in development is 86 pounds.
The Army plans to test the Land Warrior system with a platoon from the 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, Ky. Later, a battalion-sized test is planned. Nearly 5,000 Land Warrior systems will be fielded by the end of 1999. First Unit Equipped (first system in the hands of soldiers) is currently scheduled for between 2000 and 2001. The Army is currently planning on contracting for 34,000 systems plus spares. The total systems cost is estimated to be approximately $70,000 each in FY96 dollars.

LW will be followed by a more elaborate soldier system that's expected to be fielded in the year 2003 as part of the Generation II/21 CLW program. GEN II will be more compact, energy efficient, producible, affordable and survivable, and will be more easily integrated into the digitized battlefield.

thats it cite: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/land-warrior.htm
 
Looks like a real old article.
I'd rather see an experimental unit use this on several training operations... urban, desert, jungle, etc., put it through just about EVERY bad thing a soldier has to put up with and worse and see how it survives for at least a month and perhaps two without any kind of technical support and even a lack of battery re-supply.
And they'd have to whip the crap out of every other small unit type we have. The ultimate test would be to have a group of reservists with minimal infantry training to undergo a few weeks of familiarization training and them put them up against veteran infantry units.
If it can hack that, then I'll be sold.
 
Here is my thought and I am not in the Army, we try to make technological gadgets to solve training and tactical problems. We need a gadget to solve each possible problem next thing you know the troops are bogged down with so much crap they can't move.

There is a place in a Platoon for most of that gear just each and every soldier does not need every thing really the ARMY OF ONE was a stupid concept.

Maybe if the gear was spread through a fire team or squad, it would make more sense at least to me. Maybe the army should switch form squad to fire team tactics like the Marines. Just my humble opinion feel free to disagree every one else does.
 
Personally, I see it as just more crap that a soldier would have to carry around. They have enough stuff as it is, and this wouldnt help that at all. Troops carry as much weight on just a 5 block trip in Iraq as they would for a 5 day patrol in Vietnam. Some of the stuff is great of course, but alot seems to just be excess weight that most likely wouldnt be needed. Also, I stay away from alot of new technology cause it can really mess up and screw you. Some is great of course, but some isnt truely needed. I see this as more that is not needed, as a fire team can carry this stuff and not everyone needs to have it all.
 
hell, what they need to do is go back to the basics. Give the men what they need and not so much extra stuff. Humvees can carry the rest of the load in case it is needed. Though we still cant forget the lessons of Mogadishu at the same time and dont want men to be out of something important (nightvision in Mog). But is everything the troops consistantly carry vital?

I know that the Marine Corps is adding to the PFT. There is now part in which combat skills like running and shooting and then a long sprint in full combat gear, including packs. That should at least help prepare the men better, if not actually deal with the problem directly.
 
What you'll end up with is a bunch of guys processing out after 4 years because their bodies are falling apart at all the joints.
If they seriously want us to carry ALL that and do ALL that crap, we're going to need steroids. Yeah I know you die early if you take that stuff but heck, with the kind of health problems just hauling that crap everywhere brings about, I'd say you'll either die or you'll wish you were dead pretty early anyway.
 
The Army is trying to turn ground pounders into fighter planes like they did with the Tank, a human being is not a machine in the sense you can upgrade to a larger engine because you bogged the current one down with too much weight.

We americans want a gadget to solve every problem look at Billy Maze always selling some gadget, I would guess the Army has a bunch of Billys beating down the door to sell the latest and greates tactical device.

Training and more training is what we need not more crap to carry around that will just get tossed at the first oppertunity

I find myself agreeing with Mr Redneck that is unsettling to some extent.
 
I'm not sure it will be practical to load down everyone with all this stuff until it's further miniaturized or DARPA makes a reliable weight-bearing contraption, which doesn't seem likely any time in the near future.

Like istealfreefood says, it can still be very useful if only one of you has to carry it.
 
You know that this thing is gonna need batteries. And I have never needed a battery that was available or in stock when I requested one at supply/the armory/ comm.....etc ......etc.
 
I think it is all still in the planning stages, but will never make it on to the battle field. Why? Because it's too big and bulky. HOWEVER.....Look at computers today vs. computers in 1984. 30+ years makes a HUGE difference.....In another 15 years, I suspect we won't have half the boots on the ground, but we will be 2x as lethal. UAV's and such have come a LOOONG way in the last 10 years. I think the wars of the future will be fought with joysticks and a computer monitor.
 
Ex-Navy cobra said:
I think it is all still in the planning stages, but will never make it on to the battle field. Why? Because it's too big and bulky. HOWEVER.....Look at computers today vs. computers in 1984. 30+ years makes a HUGE difference.....In another 15 years, I suspect we won't have half the boots on the ground, but we will be 2x as lethal. UAV's and such have come a LOOONG way in the last 10 years. I think the wars of the future will be fought with joysticks and a computer monitor.
Click to expand...

yes but all of those UAV are connected by a connection of some sort, which makes them weak against viruses and hackers, which i bet the terrorists are trying to build a virus as we speak, and don't say the firewalls are impenterable, their not, i can guarantee you they aren't. You can hack anything with enough skill.
 
Bacara said:
yes but all of those UAV are connected by a connection of some sort, which makes them weak against viruses and hackers, which i bet the terrorists are trying to build a virus as we speak, and don't say the firewalls are impenterable, their not, i can guarantee you they aren't. You can hack anything with enough skill.
Click to expand...
You bring up a good point. There is never a substitute for boots on the ground. Trust me, I wasn't trying to say otherwise. I know that if there is a connection through the airwaves, there is a way to take advantage of it. But, I would like to think that these things have some sort of self destruct on them. I'm not sure because I have never dealt with them personally. (I was in an older military LOL) Now, with that being said, I also know that the Navy ships I was on had the Phalanx gun system on them. That gun system could saw down a UAV in a matter of a split second. I'm sure they have made advancements since then, and I'm sure that most military bases have fail safe measures to protect against UAV problems. As for the UAV's being used against us in the field...Well...It IS possible....I don't know how yet...but I'm sure it is.
 
Ex-Navy cobra said:
You bring up a good point. There is never a substitute for boots on the ground. Trust me, I wasn't trying to say otherwise. I know that if there is a connection through the airwaves, there is a way to take advantage of it. But, I would like to think that these things have some sort of self destruct on them. I'm not sure because I have never dealt with them personally. (I was in an older military LOL) Now, with that being said, I also know that the Navy ships I was on had the Phalanx gun system on them. That gun system could saw down a UAV in a matter of a split second. I'm sure they have made advancements since then, and I'm sure that most military bases have fail safe measures to protect against UAV problems. As for the UAV's being used against us in the field...Well...It IS possible....I don't know how yet...but I'm sure it is.
Click to expand...
\

and you only have infect on computer of any kind, then it can then dupicate itself, and send itself using that computer to send the virus to all the other computers in the network. Repeat until all the computers are infected and this can infect all the computers in the US military because they wont everyone to connected. This can effect tanks, aircraft, ships, IFVs and anything connected, shutting down our military in a matter of minutes, and being down for weeks. This is all just scenerio, and will probaly never happen but you never know.
 
Rubbish, what they want is powered exoskeleton which is still not out for decades, its a concept way ahead of available technologies.

Big yes to the new and improved Comms and HUD, i find the new weapon system as too fancifull since existing firearms do the job just fine, as for armor they should concentrate on spider silk and improving existing designs instead of piling dead weight on a already have grunt.
 
I just read an article the other day that said the system is being deployed in August to Iraq with a Stryker unit from Ft. Lewis. I hope I have my facts straight. I will Google for the news article and if I find it I will post it. My grandson just came in today from Ft. Lewis on his way to Iraq next month. I will ask him if he knows anything about it.

Now, having said that: I served as a MSE battalion maintenance officer when it was first deployed. it was highly useful if it was used properly. What I saw happening too often in the field (not combat) was higher command thought that their input while operations were being conducted was superior to the officers in the field that were in the middle of the action. Not all the time, but too often.
Another 2 concerns that I have are:
1. Many will think just because it is new it isn't any good. That has happened with many weapon systems in the past (think Billy Mitchell in aviation, the M-1 Garand, and others that old soldiers can recall). There will be kinks that have to be worked out if it is the right kind of concept for feet on the ground. Hopefully, the system will work right and be improved with the proper modifications that are found to be necesary by the troops in the field.
2. The weight is a major concern. Because if it is too heavy and the soldier wearing it feels himself in danger and the equipment is in the way - he will hit the quick release and dump it. Personally, I wouldn't blame him.

I am sure that if the gear stays deployed - it will become lighter in weight and battery life will significantly improve.

Since I truly believe technology can save lives and win battles, I will follow the developments of this system with interest.

Here is the url I referred to earlier in this post.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06/high-tech-brigade-heads-to-afghanistan-loaded-with-gagdets/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top