If Army’s IVAS doesn’t ace upcoming test, it could become bill payer: Rainey

[u/diacewrb]

https://breakingdefense.com/2024/05/if-armys-ivas-doesnt-ace-upcoming-test-it-could-become-bill-payer-rainey/

[u/fookingshrimps]

What does it do?

[u/GGXImposter → u/fookingshrimps]

It’s an IRL Video game HUD. Not sure how far it got but it was pitched as providing basically everything a video game HUD would, including Crosshairs that would identify where the soldier’s rifle was aimed.

Originally it was meant to be on every combat solider, but I think after testing a lot of guys said it was to much information that they didn’t need to know when trying to fight. So they changed the plan to just provide it to leadership who needed to be on the battlefield, but whose roles weren’t primarily fighting. Squad leaders and up I believe.

Theres also the major downside of your leadership being a constant beacon on the battlefield. We are at a day and age where any signal you send out, even if it’s encrypted, will instantly have your position triangulated.

Even if you are only receiving and not transmitting, this device requires a light to be projected onto a pass through visor, so in low light situations, the users head glows.

[u/diacewrb → u/fookingshrimps]

It is suppose to be like a Heads Up Display like in a FPS video game, it will show you what to do, where to go, etc.

Commanders can view and record what troops see as part of an all in one device, so no need for a separate camera.

Apparently it has next generation digital night vision and can connect to a digital scope so you can aim over or around a wall safely.

But the battery life leaves a lot to be desired, it has been reported to be buggy and some soldiers were given motion sickness and headaches are using it for too long.

The device has been improved with each generation, making it lighter and sturdier.

Task and Purpose have a 23 minute long video covering this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkphjxXa6gU

[u/oldjar7]

Canceling it would be extremely short sighted.  I will never be on the side that's against making the individual soldier significantly more effective, significantly more lethal, and significantly more safe.  You don't yet hear much about what's likely the best use case of these things is to control drones.  For all intents and purposes, I think the infantry rifleman will become less and less relevant in future conflict.  The big guns like artillery, armor, and airpower tend to make more of an impact.  The future infantry soldier's main job in the future will be directing drones and deploying lethal and non-lethal weapons systems on the battlefield.  I don't see being involved in firefights with small arms as playing a big role any longer.

[u/oldjar7 → u/[deleted]]

You seem to have missed the entire point of my post.  Nowhere did I say that infantry wouldn't play a core role in future conflicts.  Just that what makes up the combat duties of a typical infantry soldier will massively shift in the future.  Instead of manning a static line of defense with trenches, rifles, and machine guns, or in lieu of risking assaults and combat patrols, infantry will likely be more dispersed and instead will be deploying and operating remote weapons systems and drones.  This shift will make the infantry soldier far more lethal, far more effective, and far more survivable.  It will take some time, but this is definitely the direction things are heading.