SIG SAUER - Never Settle

Archive for April, 2011

Got an Idea to Defeat IEDs?

Wednesday, April 27th, 2011

The Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) is working to win the IED fight in a holistic way, using a balance of intelligence, training and technology. They have released a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) concerning two areas. The first is Dismounted Detection of Buried IEDs and the second, for Unmanned Ground Vehicle for Dismounts. if you have any technologies that you think can answer these areas, visit the JIEDDO BIDS portal. Submissions are due 23 May 2011.

Vuzix Develops Holographic Glasses

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

Under various programs Vuzix has long been working on the next generation of holographic goggles and glasses. Based on their patented Blade Optical system, the Vuzix Tactical Display Group will develop “Next Generation Display Technology” for the Joint Terminal Attack Contoller’s Battlefield Air Operations Kit under DARPA’s Persistent Close Air Support (PCAS) program. The holographic displays will join other enabling technologies; manned/unmanned airborne platforms, next generation graphical user interfaces, data links, digital guidance and control, and advanced targeting and visualization tools working together as a “system of systems” to digitally task a CAS platform from the ground as well as reduce collateral damage and potential fratricide to friendly forces.

Development of these devices is essential for the next leap of Soldier digitization to take place. Currently, Soldiers rely on a monocle view screen that, due to its close proximity to the eye looks larger than its true size. However, even the smallest screen blocks a portion of the Soldier’s vision and while he is looking at the screen it may mask a threat from his line of sight. This is what makes holographic eyewear so desirable. The Soldier continues to have an unobstructed, full field of view of the battle space but can augment his vision and reality perception by overlaying various types of data onto the scene. For example, an icon could float over the objective and point out enemy emplacements based on a feed from a drone overhead.

Vuzix already has a great deal of experience in Augmented Reality. We look forward to seeing additional functionality built in to similar systems.

To learn more visit www.vuzix.com.

Expeditionary Systems

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

There was a time that when you said, “Expeditionary” everyone thought you meant tents. Since the end of the cold war the US military has been increasingly transforming into an expeditionary force as we relinquish control of forward bases held since the end of World War II (or earlier) to host nations. In our current conflict we have had to literally build bases from the ground up, first with traditional tentage and as time went by with increasingly sophisticated shelter systems. Even the term “expeditionary” is relative. In this same period, the US military, Federal Agencies and Non-Governmental Organizations have been called upon to provide relief both home and abroad. Anymore, it’s something we do regularly. Consequently, industry is doing a great job of providing new shelter technologies leaving you with plenty of options. At Warrior Expo West you will have an opportunity to see several new systems in use.

Rapid Response Concepts will be displaying their Flat Pack shelters, setting up four shelters which connect to create a 20’ x 32’ open space. Not only can these shelters be reused, but they travel packed flat to save space and can be combined in various configurations.

Alaska Structures will also be displaying a 20’ x 32’ shelter; their Small Shelter System. They can be can be connected end-to-end, side-to-side or end-to-side to create multi-shelter complexes and is in use with the US Air Force as part of their Basic Expeditionary Airfield Resources (BEAR) program.

The Radome from HDT Expeditionary Systems is a satellite antenna shelter and has no metal parts to cause signal loss. The Radome can withstand 65mph winds and can be setup in less than 10 minutes.

www.adsinc.com

US Army Camo Improvement Effort Solicitation Mod One

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

The first modification of the solicitation (W911QY-11-R-0008) was issued yesterday. It changes the response date from 31-May-2011 01:00 PM EDT to 15-Jun-2011 01:00 PM EDT.

Rudy Project Tactical Eyewear

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

Rudy Project has updated their website to place all of their Tactical / Ballistic eyewear on one page. Rudy project is very well known in the cycling world for their optically perfect lenses and has been producing tactical models for the Italian military for several years. They are now available here in the US and have become very popular in shooting sports.

www.rudyprojectusa.com

WPRC Advocates for Operational Readiness and Warfighter Safety Initiative

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

Warrior Protection and Readiness Coalition (WPRC) membership visited Capitol Hill on April 6th and representatives met with over 100 members of Congress. While on Capitol Hill, WPRC members provided an overview of their business footprint and explained why it is critical that Congress and the DoD prioritize funding for the equipment and apparel that keep American Warfighters safe and combat effective. In addition to discussing policy and speaking from their own experiences, the WPRC membership was proud to share with Congress the results of new independent research findings by the Lexington Institute on the need for sustained funding and sustainable fielding of Warfighter protective equipment. The Lexington Institute’s “Dressing for Success: Equipping the 21st Century Warfighter Quickly and Efficiently” by Dr Daniel Goure can be found here:

www.lexingtoninstitute.org

Overall, this is a good document and provides a great history of funding challenges as well as the Rapid Equipping Force and Rapid Fielding Initiative. The Lexington Institute report urges the institutionalization of both the REF and RFI. In 2005 the REF became a permanent organization. With RFI, some may argue that this has already happened as we enter year 10 of this war.

What the document does not discuss is that RFI was initiated by GEN Schoomaker while he was Chief of Staff of the Army and was based on his experience in SOF. In fact, the program was led by COL Dave Anderson who had served in SOF as well and the initial issue was very much based on equipment already issued to SOF units such as cold weather gear. RFI is the best thing to every happen to the Soldier, at least in regard to his personal equipment. The intent of the program is to constantly upgrade the individual items as newer capabilities are introduced. It is absolutely essential that RFI remain a part of the Army.

The REF on the other hand is concerned with the entire gamut of warfighting capability rather than just Soldier Systems items. A lot of goodness has come from the program as well as a few flops but this is to be expected due to the nature of the beast. The “R” in REF is for Rapid and when you do things quickly sometimes things get overlooked. This however, is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The REF’s biggest weakness is that after nine years, there is still no way for industry to identify solutions for teh myriad challenges posed to the REF. Instead, the REF relies on a team of contractors to identify candidate technologies and this approach suffers from, “we don’t know what we don’t know.” The perfect answer to a problem might exist with company X but if the contractors at the REF don’t know about company X the solution will never see the light of day. This needs to be fixed and could be with increased BAAs as well as APBIs (yes, multiple) as well as an industry requirements portal that identifies requirements. Currently, vendors can submit technologies through the REF portal but good ideas are not solutions without a problem that needs fixing.

What is very important to understand is that Afghanistan in particular is a Soldier-centric environment, much more so than any where the US military has operated since Viet Nam. The military that I cut my teeth on in the 1980s faced a peer competitor and the anticipated operational environment was system-centric with concerns over Nuclear Biological and Chemical threats on the Northern German plain. Consequently, Soldier Systems development was concerned more with development of NBC gear than boots, armor, and uniforms. For example, the Battle Dress Overgarment or MOPP Suit had pockets more suited for use in a combat environment than the so-called Battle Dress Uniform which, was truthfully a caricature of a combat uniform intended for wear in garrison. When the BDU made its combat debut in Grenada it was deemed too hot for tropical use. So naturally, the Global War on Terror caught the US military flat footed when it came to Soldier Systems items. The military’s concern was with recapitalizing the expensive fleet of armored vehicles and aircraft designed 20 to 30 years earlier. Naturally, a lot of Soldier gear needed updating. The military did a great job with a lot of kit (clothing systems, MOLLE), a so-so job on others (Armor) and got it completely wrong in a few instances (UCP). None of this would have been possible without the “all-in” approach industry has taken.

Is there an inherent goodness to consolidating and formalizing funding for the Soldier-as-a-System? Absolutely. But there is an inherent danger as well and Dr Goure’s study fails to identify this course of action. Right now, funding comes from disparate sources and often as supplemental funding. This means it does not directly compete with other budget line items within the various departments. Additionally, members of Congress can more easily support these measures as stand-alones because they can champion the Soldier. As part of a larger budget the Soldier gets lost in the weeds. Furthermore, as part of a larger whole, the Soldier now has to compete with other capabilities for their piece of the pie. When the Army desperately needs new combat vehicles it is easy to decide that what the Soldier has is “good enough”.

Then, there is the final danger to a large budget line item for the Soldier and that is that the “Primes” will notice the dollar amount and desire it. Take any of the large, independent companies left in the Soldier Systems industry and they are like fleas when compared to the size and political capital that any one of the “Primes” can bring to bear. The traditional Soldier Systems companies simply can’t compete with that. And, if the “Soldier-as-a-System” were awarded to any one of these “Primes” expect mediocrity to rule the day. Don’t agree? Take a look at any one of the programs currently run by one of these companies; vehicles, aircraft, satellites. You name it. All we see is cost overruns and schedule delays. Want new technology insertion, like maybe a new type boot? Sure thing once you let a new contract for the upgrade. In the Soldier Systems industry we have enjoyed almost ten years of continuous competitive development. This means increased capability and lower prices. No other commodity that DoD purchases benefits from an environment like that. Give the whole kit and caboodle to one company (or team) and that goes away. Why would competitors continue to develop new products if there is no hope of seeking a contract award? Americans innovate and we do it for capitalist reasons. Take away an incentive to turn a buck and you stifle innovation.

The Government does need to do a better job of working with industry to mitigate the feast and famine cycle that has plagued our industry. It can be difficult for companies to keep the lights on when there is delay after delay in releasing contracts. Due to globalization, the corporate desire for profit, and the desire on the part of the consumer to pay big box prices, the American textile base has all but disappeared. Except for a very narrow niche market, the domestic textile industry exists solely to support the Department of Defense’s Berry amendment requirements. Consequently, they are a national resource and should be looked upon by the Government as such. They must be supported and perpetuated. Some might call this a jobs program but how is employing Americans to build something we need a “jobs program”?

The Lexington report highlights some great issues and the work of the WPRC on behalf of industry should be applauded. I agree with the recommendations and conclusions of the report but caution against creating an unwieldy process that stifles innovation and competition in the industrial base. Additionally, I harbor a great deal of concern over turning the Soldier into just another program.

But don’t take my concerns to mean that I disagree with the WPRC. I am convinced that the WPRC is committed to providing our service members with the best equipment available. However, there are problems in both industry as well as how the military deals with industry that must be addressed. Keep the good and get rid of the bad. The American Warfighter has never been so well equipped. We’re on a roll. Let’s keep it going.

www.warriorprotection.net

ARES Armor Combat XII Pack

Monday, April 25th, 2011

PredatorBDU is now offering the ARES Armor Combat XII Pack. Originally designed for a Marine Sniper Platoon, the Combat XII Pack offers a lightweight solution for short duration patrols. Despite being constructed of 1000D Cordura, it weighs in at a scant 25.9 ounces. It has special pockets along the top to hold six extra 5.56 magazines or four 7.62 NATO SASS magazines. Additionally, it features two GP pouches on the rear of the pack that are accessible from either side while the pack is worn facilitating “fighting off your buddy’s back”.

In interior is equally well laid out with the main compartment adequate to hold several field stripped MREs as well as either two 100 oz hydration reservoirs or a single reservoir and a 117G radio.

For lightweight loads (25 lbs and under) the Combat XII Pack features a unique direct to body armor wear system that allows the wearer’s arms full range of motion. For heavier loads, the Combat XII comes with shoulder straps so the pack can be worn by itself.

Available in A-TACS, MultiCam, OD, Black, Coyote for $135.99. Additionally, PredatorBDU exclusively offers matching A-TACS or MultiCam Webbing as an option for $15 more. Free Shipping in the Continental US, APO, FPO.

www.predatorbdu.com

Camo Design Contest Final Results

Monday, April 25th, 2011

After a week of voting we have a winner and it is pattern “Z” by William S with his aptly named Rocky Cliffs camo. He will receive a $500 gift card from our friends at GSS.

To see the details including the patterns simply (more…)