New and Improved - SmarTruck II

jmoriarty writes "The Army's next generation SmarTruck is on display in Detroit. The original version of the SmarTruck was covered back in May, but the Army now admits that version was 'hardly ready for the real world'. Apparently the real world version needed interchangable nodules, and the absolute must-have for every Slashdotter's vehicle - a 'hacker in a box'."

Comments

heh

[kin_korn_karn]

but can bill murray drive it back from eastern europe?

Re:heh

[Anonymous Coward]

I had the same thought. This is a joke as far as military vehicles are concerned.

Re:heh

[d3vpsaux]

only with Harold Ramis and John Candy, and we all know that that's impossible nowadays

blargh.... choking... on... Stripes.... reference...

Re:heh

[JonWan]

You'll have to make that Iraq... There is no eastern block anymore.

Re:heh

[grumpygrodyguy]

I had the same thought. This is a joke as far as military vehicles are concerned.

It's not a joke, it's just good marketing:

1) All the rich republican assholes driving thier 30gallon/mile SUVS need more oil.

2) Bush has many ties with the oil industry, many of whom are prompting him to leverage Irag out of its oil.

3) Oh ya, Bush wants the american people to say "A-OK George" when he bombs the shit out of Iraq for more oil.

Now that the army's got it's own SUV, America can fuel up right after dust-off. Symbolism at it's finest. Ary Fleisher, Cheney, Rumsfield and friends are having a field day with this one.

Re:heh

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you need to join the protest.

BTW, your "logic" smacks of satire, you know, since we could just lift the sanctions to lower oil prices, quit spending so much money protecting the Kurds in the north of Iraq. Little things like that.

Re:heh

[neocon]

So how seriously are we supposed to take your analysis of Ari Fleischer and Don Rumsfeld when you can't even be bothered to find out how to spell their names right?

That aside, your proposal makes about zero sense -- as another poster has already mentioned, if the goal was cheap oil, there are a lot of cheaper and easier ways to get there from here, such as lifting the current sanctions on Iraqi oil exports.

Of course, since our goal isn't oil, it's preventing a madman from attacking us with WMD (or providing WMD to others to attack us with), that's not what we're doing.

Re:heh

[Timmeh]

So if WMDs are the issue why aren't we invading North Korea post haste? North Korea with a long, sordid history of selling all kinds of arms to anyone willing to buy? North Korea who is currently trying to restart their nuclear program?

Re:heh

[neocon]

A couple of reasons spring immediately to mind:

• North Korea is immensely dependent on us for food aid and heating oil, which means we have a lot of leverage we don't directly have in Iraq
• North Korea already has at least a few nukes, and better missile technology to use with them, which means that we have to be more careful -- this is exactly the type of situation we hope to avoid in Iraq, if it's not already too late.
• A decade of broken promises and ignored UN resolutions on the part of Iraq show that it is extremely unlikely that a diplomatic solution will do any good -- and we're still giving it a chance.
• Not every international problem needs to be solved the same way -- you guys like to claim that us Conservatives are the ones who see the same answer to every problem, so how do you not see this?

Despite all of these, if North Korea becomes the same level of threat to us as Iraq now is, have no fear that we will act. It has not yet done so, however.

Re:heh

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, since our goal isn't oil, it's preventing a madman from attacking us with WMD (or providing WMD to others to attack us with), that's not what we're doing.

Oh?

Re:heh

[neocon]

First off, let's repeat the obvious: if our goal was to get oil from Iraq, we would need only to lift the UN sanctions to do so. That we have not done so demonstrates that this is not our goal.

Second, no serious scientist still believes that we will `run out' of oil anytime soon. Many oil fields have been discovered since Hubbert's time, and many existing fields have been shown to have higher capacity than previously believed. More to the point, new discoveries, such as the possibility of extracting oil from tar shoals have greatly increased estimates of the Earth's oil supply.

Are their good reasons (mostly geopolitical) to move away from oil? Sure. Do your chicken-little claims and black-helicopter conspiracy theories make any sense? Sorry, no.

SmarTruck The Next Generation...

[Anonvmous Coward]

"The Army's next generation SmarTruck is on display in Detroit..."

Thought we had a Star Trek parody here.

"Mr Data, when I said 'Fire at Will', I didn't mean for you to be so literal."

Re:SmarTruck The Next Generation...

[Triv]

Apparently the real world version needed interchangable nodules...

Thought we had a Star Trek parody here.

[treknerd] My treklore might be a bit fuzzy, but certain starships were designed this way - most starships from the retrofitted enterprise onward were designed with swappable bridge modules (which was basically an explanation as to why the Enterprise's bridge layout kept changing from movie to movie), but the most striking example of this was the nebula class - nacelles tucked right up under the saucer, shortened vertical engineering section and a huge mission definable pod mounted on its back. Survey mission? slide on a sensor pack. Goin' to war? Add some extra photon torpedo launchers and you're good to go.

They did something like this on DS9 with the runabouts as well, but that was because one episode had all three runabouts on screen at the same time and viewers needed to be able to visually tell the ships apart - one didn't have one, one glowed green and one glowed red (or something like that). Cute.

[/treknerd]

Triv

Re:SmarTruck The Next Generation...

[Anonvmous Coward]

Yeah you're right. You're also right about their motivation. They needed to have a reason why a.) The bridge that was on the top of the ship and b.) why bridges of various ships look so drastically different. They needed them to be different for the audience to know what they're watching.

In Star Trek 2, the Reliant was originaly going to be a Constitution class ship like the Enterprise. That would have been hard for the audience to watch, though, so they designed the Reliant without an engineering hull and a rollbar. Originally, though, the nacelles were going to point upwards like on the Enterprise, but when the design was handed in it was read upside-down. They liked the difference that it made having the nacelles hang from the ship. So they did one more re-design with those features in mind. Clever, eh?

That really waasn't the point of my joke, though. I wasn't commenting on the vehicle itself, just the wording in the article. It has 'SmarTruck', 'the', 'next', and 'generation' in the same line. :)

Re:SmarTruck The Next Generation...

[Triv]

Moderators: this is a trek rant and I'm posting at 1 not 2. Don't bother modding me down, it's not worth it.

That really wasn't the point of my joke, though.

I know. It just reminded me. :)

On the design of the reliant: There was a fan publication that had imagined movie-era ship designs (TacResFleet review, I think?). One of the most innovative designs they had was the Thruxton Class light cruiser: the basic idea was to reduce the profile of the z-axis and thereby reduce the profile, making it harder to hit from the side. There was a minimal secondary hull with the nacells mounted along its length (like the constitution class if the nacelle struts had no z-axis depth, if you can imagine that.)

The truly innovative thing was the placement of the mega-phaser cannon. On the Reliant they were mounted on the rollbar making it quite difficult to hit anthing coming at them from below (which unintentionally mirrors Khan's 2-dimentional thinking). On the Thruxton they were mounted on the nacelles, offering a close to 360-degree phaser arc. Neat.

Neat! There's a page on it here.

Triv

Re:SmarTruck The Next Generation...

[ISPpfy]

"here" must have been slashdotted. Too bad.

A great use...

[AltImage]

If I had one of these I would drive through Iraq shouting "All Your Base Are Mine" over the bullhorn.

Re:A great use...

[Anonymous Coward]

If I had one of these I would drive through Iraq shouting "All Your Base Are Mine" over the bullhorn.

Try "All Your Oil Are Mine", it's a bit more fitting...

Re:A great use...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you grammar incorrect is. Read Zig:

If I had one of these I would drive through Iraq shouting "All Your Base Are Belong To Us" over the bullhorn.

Re:A great use...

[PW2]

A more effective thing to shout would be to take what you said and switch it around a little, "Mines are all around your base."

Re:A great use...

[racas]

Of course, it would have properly been "All Your Base Are Belong To Us" But it might be better: "All Your Base Are Belong To U.S."

Hmmm...

[Tananda Trollop]

Sounds like an early contender for the 2003 Vaporware Awards

Re:Hmmm...

[rhost89]

Acctually, someones pockets were lined with this project. More fleecing of Americans hard earned tax dollars.

"The prototype vehicle cost between $500,000 and $1 million"

For a chevy silvarado and some PC's and other equipment they probably could have stripped from a mothballed apache helicopter, and a estimated price gap of a half a million for its budget, yes its most definitly vapor.

Re:Hmmm...

[geekoid]

please take some business economic classes before spouting off like that. if you have 4 people, each maing 50,000 a year involved in this project, that would be 400,000* dollars right there.

*it cost more a company more for there workers then there "base pay".

Re:Hmmm...

[Mikeytsi]

Please take some english classes, or buy a spell-checker, before spouting off about someone else's intelligence.

Re:Hmmm...

[technix4beos]

Last time I checked, 50,000/yr * 4 == 200,000/yr. and not 400,000.

Re:Hmmm...

[Minna Kirai]

And just like he said (marked with an *), corporations spend a big percentage of an employee's wages in other costs to support him: giving him tools, a desk, a roof and heat/AC. Plus administrative support, and a little left over for corporate profit... and if not doubling the price, it's climbing upwards.

Re:domestic vs. foreign

[Anonymous Coward]

We wouldn't want a non-american truck as the basis for our all-american attack vehicle.

Is it me...

[altairmaine]

...or is the military run by 7-year-old boys? In third grade, I too would have been very excited about a truck with missile launchers and a huge artillery system termed "Crusader".

Don't even get me started on the names of operations. "Infinite Justice", anybody? It sounds like something out of the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.

Re:Is it me...

[Master Bait]

I think the Army would do a lot better and a lot cheaper if they had farmed out the job to the people at Monster Garage. But then it wouldn't be so much fun for them, I suppose.

Personally, I think the regular army is full of cowardly, fat-assed pussys. Everytime something dangerous comes up, such as the war with Afghanistan and the ever-pending war with Iraq, the Army calls up reserves and National Guard to do the real fighting. There are 1.4 million people in the regular armed forces, but when they need a force of 20,000 on the ground in Afghanistan, they call up the reserves. Most of the people in the reserves and National Guard are married with kids, etc. What's up with that?

Re:Is it me...

[kruczkowski]

You are right. The military is run by kids who think they can kick anyones ass.

Re:Is it me...

[bluprint]

...are married with kids, etc

If this is an issue, maybe those people shouldn't be IN the reserves?

Sounds to me like you are pissed at finding out, after joining the reserves or National Guard, you might actually have to go to war. Maybe you should have thought about that before. The purpose of the reserves is not to just provide you with additional monthly income.

Re:Is it me...

[KUHurdler]

You were the same kid I killed in "Risk" every time I've played you. All the land you capture you leave ONE person on... then I go through and kill you all in one turn.

How about we keep our army here in the US protecting and training like they are supposed to. and when we need forces somewhere else, we call up the reserves to perform the duty they were trained to do.

Re:Is it me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats because most of the active army is a "fighting force" where the National Guard\Reserves have taken over a lot of the support roles. So anytime a force is deployed the National Guard\Reserves have to be activated to support them.

Re:Is it me...

[Anonymous Coward]

But... But... Why *else* would someone join the Reserves?

Re:Is it me...

[Bo'Bob'O]

Hey, maybe this is built with the same principal as America's Army. See, next they'll start a TV series with Hulk Hulgen driving the thing around and stoping international bad guys. Then, they'll introduce a whole line of toys, with 'modulus' you can buy to add on to it.
But of course, the very coolest accessory, only seems to be available at your local army recruiter! Bring your dad in to the recruiters office and get the Ultimate Battle Pack for only $59.95!
I wonder if the Crusader comes with a submarine option, or a copter option?

- Tristan

Re:Is it me...

[(startx)]

you're either joking, or fucking retarded and know absolutely nothing about how the army actually works, dumbass.

Re:Is it me...

[bobdehnhardt]

Don't even get me started on the names of operations. "Infinite Justice", anybody?

I understand that the other names under consideration included:

• Operation Boot Up Your Ass
  
• Operation Get 'Em, Ray
  
• Operation Dessert Storm
  
• Operation Whatever Dick Said
  
• Operation Hey, You Can't Do That!
  
• Operation Okay, Now We're Really Pissed
  
• Operation Forget About The Economy
  

Re:Is it me...

[Master Bait]

That's what the Army is supposed to be, but I see so much evidence to the contrary -- especially how many reservists went overseas while the regular Army yokels stayed home playing with trucks and pushing paper.

It seems the regular Army is ill-prepared to project power overseas quickly because they always have to wait for the reserves to get called up, assigned and shipped out.

Re:Is it me...

[The Evil Couch]

Personally, I think the regular army is full of cowardly, fat-assed pussys. Everytime something dangerous comes up, such as the war with Afghanistan and the ever-pending war with Iraq, the Army calls up reserves and National Guard to do the real fighting. There are 1.4 million people in the regular armed forces, but when they need a force of 20,000 on the ground in Afghanistan, they call up the reserves. Most of the people in the reserves and National Guard are married with kids, etc. What's up with that?

Speaking as an active duty soldier, I can tell you that you're full of crap. The "real fighting" is over with before the reserves and national guard are done palletizing their gear. 90% of the deployments that the AR and NG gets sent out on, are "peace-keeping missions" ie a show of force so that we maintain a presence in those countries, without having to lose our fighting force and momentum. you honestly think that the army chief of staff would rather send out a group of weekend warriors that has fired their weapons maybe 4 times in the past year than the several divisions of troops that are training on a constant basis? shinseki's dumb, but he's not that stupid.

and before you rear up on your high horse about the AR and NG being married with kids, you're going to have to realize that the vast majority of the regular army, is married with kids, too. in fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find an sergeant or captain or above that's *not* married.

back on topic, I have no idea what the hell they were thinking of when they built that thing. it's not like we couldn't retrofit the stuff we've already got.

Re:Is it me...

[Master Bait]

I agree with you, but I see how keeping a standing 1.4 million Armed forces out of the battlefield is a waste of money when the political agenda calls for oversea's projection of power.

So then you agree that the regular Army is a club of fat-assed cowardly pussies?

Re:Is it me...

[miltimj]

How about we keep our army here in the US protecting and training like they are supposed to. and when we need forces somewhere else, we call up the reserves to perform the duty they were trained to do.

Okay, so to summarize: 1) Active duty army is protecting the US by being in the states 2) Active army is training 3) Reserves/NG is training 4) ...but reserves should go do the dirty work abroad as opposed to active duty, which is trained ten times more than the reserves...

That makes zero sense.

50,000 people out of 1.4 million active is hardly leaving one person on each territory.

Re:Is it me...

[Mikeytsi]

Actually, the army is not supposed to be "protecting and training". The protecting part is supposed to be handled by the militia.

Re:Is it me...

[miltimj]

Heh, I have to agree, with a few corrections (IMO, of course)..

I agree that the "real fighting" is over by the time they send in the Reserves/NG. However, maybe it's just my (ARNG) unit, but we've been evaluated alongside active duty units and were more superior (though I'm in a Signal unit, so most of it is due to many soldiers having full-time civilian technical jobs).

Thanks for jumping on the pathetic "married with kids" argument -- as if the regular army soldiers aren't "married with kids"! It reminds me of a quote from the lame movie "Speed" where the big guy says "I got kids", and another guy says, "yeah? well I'm single, so does that make me expendable?!?"

I also wonder why they didn't just dump this on the back of the HMMWV as yet another configuration.

Oh, and regarding the "7-year old boys" (parent post)... that's where the Army is now marketing with its "Army of One" campaign.. Coolness factor so it makes it seem more adventurous and fun to be in the Army.

Re:Is it me...

[Red Warrior]

Most of the active army is NOT a "fighting force", If you mean the guys who go out and fight. Over 44% of all the Army's combat divisions are in the National Guard. That's not even counting the reserves.
The reason that the National Guard is called out all the time is that the active force doesn't have enough combat arms types. Ok, not without having the active folks deployed non-stop.
This was done on purpose, and was part of that whole "peace dividend" /shrink the military movement.
This was done with the full knowledge that the guard would have to be called up more in the future. Whether this was a good idea is left as an exercise for the reader.

Re:Is it me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Although seriously, are they wrong? I have the feeling that any single opponent would lose against the US Army. Now, a colliation against the US is a different matter.

Re:Is it me...

[glesga_kiss]

He. Reminds me of the sceens in Starship Troopers where the kids get shown the guns and other equipment and are encouraged to sign up.

A strong military presence in civilian life has always been a strong element in negative-utopia books and films. It symbolises brain-washing and propaganda, and the desire to have a massive army.

Personally, I think "America's Army" is a bad idea. It's kind of like using "Saving Private Ryan" as a recruitment. How many times do you get fragged in an evenings play of the game? Then you realise you only have one life in reality, so the last thing you want to do it join the military!

Re:Is it me...

[Nehemiah S.]

Wouldn't it be great if you if you were to drive to your nearest military installation and say that to someone's face? That would at least prove that YOU weren't a "cowardly pussy".

Actually, because the army teaches discipline and self-respect, you would probably just get laughed at by anyone in uniform. But drop by your local bowling alley or neighborhood bar and I guarantee that there will be a dozen or so army alumni present who would love to make you regret the fact that you exercised the freedom of speech that their sacrifices bought you.

Anyway your ideas on saving money are duly noted. Keep up the brilliant strategic thinking, please. It provides a source of mirth for those fat-assed cowardly people who actually have to make life or death decisions in order to keep you free.

Re:Is it me...

[anarchima]

Well let's see. You're a professional soldier (can I call it that?). That means that you've _chosen_ to be a soldier? That means you've chosen a life dominated by the use of aggression to solve problems throughout the world? I honestly don't feel sorry for your wife or children. Call me cruel, but you know what you're getting into, and so did she. If it is so that this was your choice (unlike some people that do it just to get free education -- I can sympathise a bit with these guys), you shouldn't expect everyone to feel sorry for ya. Perhaps you don't, but it seems like your reply implies this.

"My $0.02"

Re:Is it me...

[Nehemiah S.]

There are only 480,000 active duty soldiers (i don't know where dumbass got 1.4 million). There are 55,000 permanently stationed in Germany, and about 70,000 permanently stationed in Korea. So 1 in 4 of our active duty force is already accounted for, and basically immobile unless absolutely threated by all-out conflict elsewhere.

References available from www.army.mil if you look for 5 minutes or so. Also everything you want to know about US military doctrine, which it might be good to learn something about before you post criticism in public (else you look quite silly to everyone but slashdot moderators).

Re:Is it me...

[jrg]

If it is so that this was your choice (unlike some people that do it just to get free education -- I can sympathise a bit with these guys), you shouldn't expect everyone to feel sorry for ya.

ummm, excuse me, but there is no draft anymore, so everyone who joins the military does so voluntarily and with full knowledge of the potential consequences (unless they are truly dumbfucks). and i have no sympathy whatsoever for the people who join the military just to get a free ride in terms of schooling. i mean, come on! it's the frelling military! what the hell do you think it's purpose is? to hand out free educations? i think not.

james

Re:Is it me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is example of what I meant about the Natioanl Guard providing support units

http://www.airforcefamily.com/ang.html

"ANG men and women provide 80 percent of the Air Force's combat communication units and 74 percent of the engineering installation capability. Other mission support units contribute 49 percent of the total Air Force civil engineering forces, 68 percent of air control, and 100 percent of the aircraft control and warning forces."

Re:Is it me...

[DuckDuckBOOM!]

Don't even get me started on the names of operations. "Infinite Justice", anybody? It sounds like something out of the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.

Good point. They should have called it "For Great Justice."

Re:Is it me...

[Nehemiah S.]

Dude, smoke another joint and relax. There is no need to sound quite so self-righteous, even if you are right. Doubly so since your best argument is a straw man.

Anyway don't feel sorry for the "free education" guys- that is at best a misnomer (i.e. the academy is a $250,000 education, shoved up your ass a penny at a time) and at worst stupid. Everyone who signs up for a service academy knows that they could die for thir country, and those who do it for the free education either don't make it through their plebe year (because they discover how expensive the free education really is) or realize that there are more deeply gratifying motives than personal greed somewhere along the line.

Anyway what you leave out in your diatribe is the people who genuinely want to protect the country they love. When this requires aggression, then aggression is exercised (although force is a much better term to use since aggression is at best a loaded term and also quite inaccurate as a depiction of what motivates the average soldier). Anyway the use of force is quite rare; usually the nation's interests can be served through diplomacy, which only works if the diplomat has either a big stick or a few hundred cruise missiles to back up his words.

Re:Is it me...

[The Evil Couch]

I agree that the "real fighting" is over by the time they send in the Reserves/NG. However, maybe it's just my (ARNG) unit, but we've been evaluated alongside active duty units and were more superior (though I'm in a Signal unit, so most of it is due to many soldiers having full-time civilian technical jobs).

That's a good point that having a technicial civilian job (with an actual IT budget) would naturally make someone in the Signal Corps more proficient. I was thinking of it from an Infantry perspective, because that's what I am. While there are many jobs that can be replicated and done better in the civilian sector, there's no where else to get the type and frequency of training that the Infantry requires other than to go out to the field and lay waste to an objective or practice your patrols.

having an ammo budget that is simply unheard of in the Reserves/NG, I'd say that any line company can out perform their AR/NG counter part. It's simply a matter of training.

Though, I gotta tip my patrol cap to you guys. part time or not, you guys are soldiers and that makes you all right by me. especially if you're kicking the crap out of other units in evals. :D

Re:Is it me...

[anarchima]

I'm not sure I'd call my previous post a "diatribe". If you look up that word in the dictionary, you might find that it means "A bitter, abusive denunciation". My post was neither of those two. It was not bitter, but rather a response to some typical military lines that hit us in the face all the time, whether it be in the media or "real life". It was not abusive - at least, that was not its intent - but rather a truthful declaration of views, that were somewhat well-justified (as far as an Internet forum allows, I suppose). You might say it was a denuncation. In this case it would only be a denunciation of some quite poor logic.

I don't believe the use of aggression (or "force" as you like to call it) should be applied in such unjust ways as we've seen in recent years. However, I realise that this would be _far_ too long of a debate to be held properly on Slashdot, so I will refrain from going on to any length. As to your somewhat idealistic view that "usually the nation's interests can be served through diplomacy", I have but one thing to say: look at the Middle East. What chances are being offered to the inspections in progress? Hardly any. Yes, yes, I realise that the official line is, "We're waiting for the UN report". Come on. Let's get real here. But, I fear we've already trodden past the "Offtopic" line ;)

After having posted the first comment in this thread I realised that the Army employee in question was involved in the technology department (as far as I could tell). Thus, I can't accuse him of being a field soldier. That would be wrong and harsh. However, my belief still holds true to the "average soldier".

Re:Is it me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, can can call them Professional Soldiers. Their profession is to beg so adept at backing up what our (constitutionaly mandated) civilian leaders decide, that they need to be aggressive. Just like cops are supposed to be peacekeepers, the military strives to be so good at what they do that no one wants to mess with them. They do this to protect our freedoms, like the freedom to criticize them.

And don't even TRY to give me that crap about feeling sorry for those who signed up for tuition benefits. When you sign, you sign up for the occupation - with the full knowledge that you may need to go into harms way. It's their choice.

Re:Is it me...

[Anonymous Coward]

"That means you've chosen a life dominated by the use of aggression to solve problems throughout the world?"

"Call me cruel, but you know what you're getting into,"

"My $0.02"

These people join the armed forces to fight for your freedom. You spit back in their face and tell them they're the problem?
You don't deserve the protection they give you.
Get out of my country.

Re:Is it me...

[Grizzlysmit]

...or is the military run by 7-year-old boys? In third grade, I too would have been very excited about a truck with missile launchers and a huge artillery system termed "Crusader". Don't even get me started on the names of operations. "Infinite Justice", anybody? It sounds like something out of the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.

That's because it is, they get all there stuff from kid's toon stuff.

Minor technical oversight

[Rassleholic]

the absolute must-have for every Slashdotter's vehicle - a 'hacker in a box'."

The only problem they had was where to put the box so the airholes wouldn't be blocked. Those airholes also needed to be large enough to insert a feeding tube for the hacker.

Pepper Spray

[phorm]

which the military brass now acknowledges was eye-catching with a pop-up pepper spray

CowboyNeil: Hey Taco... those terrorists are getting really close, should we open up fire with the machine guns?
CmdrTaco: Nah 'Neil, let's just use the pepper spray, it worked great on those purse-snatchers back home.

Um yeah... pepper spray is useful, but I can't see it being used in many military situations when a fully-automatic gets the job better and has much more range. Unless they're going for disabling the enemy instead of mortally wounding, but even in that case there are probably things much better than pepper spray, especially considering range.

Re:Pepper Spray

[Pravada]

I bet the pepper spray was conceived with Mogadishu in mind - i.e. civilians getting the way of operations.

Re:Pepper Spray

[elixx]

Insert a chemical or biological agent of your choice into a base substance of similar consitency and you have yourself a bringer of mass death on wheels.
The pepper spray bit in the article is just to make you feel Warm And Fuzzy because you know how much They Care.

Re:Pepper Spray

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they have like a firefighter type pepper spray dispenser that can fire gallons and gallons of pepper spray hundreds of feet? *shrug*

Re:Pepper Spray

[GMontag]

I would prefer to shoot gallons and gallons of fire hundreds of yards, but that's just me. See my other response on this article for a more pointed criticism of this vehicle.

Re:Pepper Spray

[zulux]

Um yeah... pepper spray is useful, but I can't see it being used in many military situations when a fully-automatic gets the job better and has much more range. Unless they're going for disabling the enemy instead of mortally wounding, but even in that case there are probably things much better than pepper spray, especially considering range.


Non leathal weapons have some neet capabilites: you don't have to worry about firendly-fire. Just zap them all and sort them out at your leasure.

If someone looks suspicious - zap them first and ask questions later. No need to be coy, zap away!

Imagine this: A crowd of anti-american protesters starts protesting when we occupy France. With curent technology, you can do much if you don't want to be a murdurer. With with non-lethal weapons you could zap the whole crowd and process them one at a time - seperating common citiziens from the truly nasty McDonalds/Nike/Hollywood hating French terrorists.

Re:Pepper Spray

[sweetooth]

Pepper spray is probably more usefull against civillians than against terrorists/soldiers. I also wouldn't be surprised if that was the intent. Its probably for use against any non combatant that irritates you and you would get in trouble for killing.

Consider urban warfare. You could be facing attack from soldiers and civillians. While your standard weapons are perfect for mowing down enemy soldiers, there are political implications to mowing down civilians. Unless of course you are Isreal killing Palastenian civillians, then it's just collateral damage. Ok, political bias aside, that's probably the reason for pepper spray.

Geez, at a million bucks a peice that is one overpriced truck.

Re:Pepper Spray

[Tassach]

The military has a lot of interest in non-lethal weapons. There are a lot of situations where lethal force isn't a viable option, and situations where (as you note) you want to disable and capture, not kill, the opposition. Actually pepper spray is one of the more effective non-lethal chemical agents, particuarly in high concentrations and when combined with other disabling agents (tear gas).

Re:Pepper Spray

[MImeKillEr]

I would prefer to shoot gallons and gallons of fire hundreds of yards, but that's just me.

Yeah, but only if they're allowed to play Beavis screaming "Fire! Fire!" over a bullhorn while doing so.

That would be bitchin'!

Re:Pepper Spray

[ReTay]

"Um yeah... pepper spray is useful, but I can't see it being used in many military situations when a fully-automatic "

How about riots in the United States?
Or even better, a few of these with tear gas spraying out all side could have cleared streets
to rescue downed helicopters. Especially when the government wants to try to avoid creating martyrs. Just think less than lethal force.
Also as long as the base truck can keep up you just have to make the new wiz bang weapon to fit the box and your off.

Re:Pepper Spray

[JonWan]

Non leathal weapons have some neet capabilites: you don't have to worry about firendly-fire. Just zap them all and sort them out at your leasure.

It won't work that way there is always someone that will die from non-lethal weapons. Rubber bullits, CS gas, the stuff the Russians used in that theater a while back. Someone will get hit in the wrong place or have a bad reaction.

Imagine this: A crowd of anti-american protesters starts protesting when we occupy France.

The Unites States might a war mongering imperialist nation, but why in the hell would we want France?

Re:Pepper Spray

[SerpentMage]

[sarcasm]That is why you have water spray down trucks used throughout the rest of world whenever there are riots[/sarcasm]

I mean if there is one thing that Europe excels at it is riots and how to control them. Not to say that it is a good thing though!

Re:Pepper Spray

[RFC959]

There are a lot of situations where lethal force isn't a viable option...

Which makes me wonder why we're sending the military... Oh, that's right, I forgot - the military isn't for fighting wars anymore, it's the general purpose tool of foreign policy. Peacekeeping, humanitarian operations, enforcing UN resolutions, nation-building - anything but fighting wars, 'cause that's just so last century.

Re:Pepper Spray

[geekoid]

Military grade pepper spray is a lot different then what you get from the store.

Re:Pepper Spray

[Anonymous Coward]

The Unites States might a war mongering imperialist nation, but why in the hell would we want France?

We wouldn't want France, we just hate the Revolting French(TM). But who doesn't?

Re:Pepper Spray

[Kintanon]

I've never understood the faith people have in pepper spray. At least, not since I was working security for a widespread Panic concert and a biker did a cool trick with one of the security guards pepper spray... He grabbed the pepper spray and sprayed it into his mouth, then chased it with a beer and belched.... You shoulda seen the security guards eyes...

Kintanon

Re:Pepper Spray

[Tassach]

A country's armed forces have ALWAYS been a tool of foreign policy, all the way back to the dawn of recorded history. The legions of Rome in both the Empire and the Republic spent *far* more time building roads, policing the populace of client states, and so forth then they ever spend fighting.

Re:Pepper Spray

[Anonymous Coward]

Geez, at a million bucks a peice that is one overpriced truck

one million for the prototype, not necessarily how much it'd cost to mass produce.

Re:Pepper Spray

[mOdQuArK!]

I could see doing that, as long as you don't breathe it or get it in your eyes. If it's just refined pepper/mustard juice, then it wouldn't be any more annoying to your throat/stomach than drinking tabasco (and chasing it with the beer probably kept it from sitting around too long on unexposed flesh, then diluted it in the stomach).

Re:Pepper Spray

[Tassach]

Not all pepper sprays are created equal. The active ingredient in Pepper spray is capsaicin, which occurs naturally in peppers. The cheap-ass crap normally peddled to civilians has a fairly low concentration of capsaicin (often 1%) and is typically delivered in a water or mineral oil base -- both of which are natural antidotes to the effects of capsaicin. The good stuff that the military gets is mixed with CS or CN tear gas and has very high concentrations (10% - 25%) of capsaicin. This combination of agents is highly effective - each agent enhances the effect of the other.

Wow!

[GMontag]

This is deceptively like taking a standard flatbed truck, with no fancy cab interior, providing an easy way to link the cab to the bed (oh, like say a data and power cable or 2), then tossing on/in any old modular box for the mission...

Humm, didn't we do this with the HEMTT series? The MTV series, hell even the old 2.5 ton series (complete with "modular" 5 ton wrecker for mobility to/from the motorpool), the list goes on.

Oh, just noticed from the article, they cost more. Wow, some innovation.

Re:Wow!

[Pyrosz]

Not to mention that in taking a standard flatbed truck they ignored the truck that was specially designed for the military (one of many), the Hummer! Instead of taking a bullet resistant, offroad capable, already have tons of them trucks they pick some piece of crap civilian vehicle that wont last 2 weeks in combat. Way to waste tax dollars. Hosers.

Re:Wow!

[badnews_bear]

and a cheap land mine could still take it out...

Re:Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

a cheap land mine could still take it out

No ethical countries manufacture landmines any more...

I saw this one

[rczyzewski]

I saw this article this morning. I would probably laugh if I saw it coming over a sand dune. Now a tank, that would be intimidating. I pictured it driving around New Jersey or LA looking to combat gangs and parking violations. I don't see how this could be a cost effective weapon if produced in mass. Perhaps a speciality vehicle (like a few dozen).

Re:I saw this one

[rherbert]

I doubt you would laugh if you thought of the US military as your enemy, because you'd likely be dead or captive soon.

And why wouldn't it be cost effective? It's considerably cheaper than the $4.3 million for an M1A1 Abrams Battle Tank.

Re:I saw this one

[rczyzewski]

It just reminds me of the GI Joe toys I had as a child. Obviously it would be deadly. I just wonder what those in the military who would drive it think too.
As for cost effective, consider the billions+ it takes to design, manufacture, deploy, train on, repair, and upgrade. I'm from the US and am always amazed on the stuff the military comes up with and funds (Discovery Channel, History Channel, TechTV, etc). Obviously cheaper than a tank, but I'd still be more scared of the tank.
No matter how kick ass this thing is, I'll always think of Stripes and GI Joe when I see this.

Re:I saw this one

[$$$$$exyGal]

I went to a basic training graduation of a friend of mine about a year ago, and I did consider laughing at the young (they look sooo young) men that were going to protect our country. They looked so young, fragile and inexperienced. What makes the difference in actual battle, however, is the training they received, and the technology in their hands. In most cases, those two things will overcome any determined enemy.

$400 Toilet Seat

[core plexus]

I'd love to see a list of the components they used for this thing. I'm guessing, having been in the Army, that it's way overbuilt, and when it gets to the field, the troops will hate it. And, it won't be long before someone figures out a low-tch way to defeat the "gee-whiz" factor, just as happened in Bosnia. (See Fooling High-Tech with kerosene lanters, aluminum foil, and other household items).

Over-exposed schoolgirl victim of high-tech bullying

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[Skyshadow]

And, it won't be long before someone figures out a low-tch way to defeat the "gee-whiz" factor, just as happened in Bosnia.

Looking at the thing and seeing no apparent armor added, I would venture a guess that the "low tech" method of defeating this thing would be to pump a couple of rounds into it with an AK-47.

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[SerpentMage]

What I am wondering about is why they did not even use a Hummer as a basis. A chevy? Come on people who was designing this thing?

I seriously think somebody had too much time and money and watched too much Discovery Channel...

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[geekoid]

the hummer has a diferent mission, and is disgned for such. I would wager the hummer would have to be changed to much.

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

IIRC, there is a variant of the hummer set up for ambulance duty, whether it was produced or not I don't know. However, it had a flat bed that would be capable of handling the nodules and would certainly be a better chassis than a *snicker* quad-cab chevy...

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[PeterChenoweth]

Technically, a Hummer *is* a Chevy, since GM now owns Hummer.

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[miltimj]

There's at least a dozen variations of the HMMWV, and the ambulance is definitely one of them. Heck, I've been in one.

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[Chanc_Gorkon]

GM OWNS AM General. The new H2 from Hummer is based on a combo of the Suburban and Tahoe Chassis. Much more behaved on the road, but not much. The specs on the H2 for ground clearance are also not exactly correct. Most of them are underrated and it can do more then advertised. It also starts out at around 49,000 versus 100,000 for the H1 which is still being made. I may be able to attain a H2 some point in my life. The H1 costs more then my house!

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

Technically, a Jeep is a Chrysler too. Jeep still has their own cadre of crack smoking engineers, however. Likewise, Hummer is pretty distinct from GM in the engineering dept, except for that aberration known as the H2. That thing is the placenta of Hummers, since it only popped out because of the H1 Hummer.

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[kevincal]

1 nappy rag... 5c 1 old wine bottle... 10c 1 liter of gasoline... 15c watching that thing maneuver with a windshield covered in a Molotov cocktail... priceless.

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[Anonymous Coward]

Your chances of acquiring shiny, new material goods would improve if you learned the difference between 'then' and 'than'. Also:

"Much more behaved on the road, but not much."

WTF?

Re:$400 Toilet Seat

[Anonymous Coward]

This thing is designed for the job, it is the urban conflict vehicle, and it is capable of thigns the hummer is not, and find a chevy with an honest to god 'laser cannon' on it.

It will most likely be made in small quantities and used in urban seetings (According to recent Popular Science, it will be equipped with smokescreens, 'dazzler' highbeams, oil slicks and tack despensers, and enough reinforced ceramic and kevlar armor to take any thing an urban force would throw at it, as well as a joystick operated moveable 'Laser Cannon' that they did not go into great detail about)

There would be no point using a vehicle like this in open desert and the like, the existing vehicles operate perfectly, however, vehicles like this one will be perfect for small special forces operations in confined urban settings, which as i beleive is the purpose anyway.... so what is the point of this rant? dunno.....

Hmmm

[Anixamander]

Apparently the real world version needed interchangable nodules, and the absolute must-have for every Slashdotter's vehicle - a 'hacker in a box'."

I suppose this gives new meaning to the term "wardriving."

Re:Hmmm

[Anixamander]

Upon further review, and not to be overly pedantic here, but I think the proper term should be "Cracker in a Box."

I'm guessing the Army thought that term sounded too Ritzy.

Re:Hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no, no ... the correct term is GNU/Cracker in a Box."

-- rms

Re:Hmmm

[Angry White Guy]

Naw, this is the new, ethnically friendly military. Cracker is a banned word.

Re:Hmmm

[HawkinsD]

What planet can they possibly be thinking of operating this on?

In the cab of the truck are housed ...a communications system that Fuller described as "hacker in a box." It includes a computer program linked with surveillance equipment to monitor what people in the area around the vehicle are saying in e-mail. SmarTruckII could just sit and listen, send bogus e-mails to confuse an enemy, or, if it is not amused, kill the enemy communications system altogether.

Perhaps e-mail messages give off small amounts of radiation that we don't know about, so that you can home in on them with special missiles.

Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[Farley Mullet]

. . .but a news conference featuring a marching color guard and a military band playing patriotic songs such as "God Bless America" to introduce a truck seems straight outta the Simpsons. Like an inanimate carbon rod getting a medal from the president or something.

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[los furtive]

Careful, the truck might hear you!

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it has a red ball on top of its antenna so you can find it quicker in the parking lot?

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[binner1]

All I could think was: "Hey, G.I. Joe had vehicles like this in the 80's!!"

-Ben

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[Hee Hee Hee]

Aw, take off! Eh?

By the way, do you have any PARTICULAR carbon rods in mind? I'm on the President's Inanimate Object Recognition Committee and we're looking for nominees.

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

Have you ever seen the episode with the Canyonero SUV? It's pretty much like that.

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[ChuckMaster]

speaking of carbon rods, the democratic party is seeking one to run against bush in 2004. Personally, I'd take the inanimate carbon rod over Leiberman.

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

To me it just seems weird to see things like this. It's one thing to have a powerful military and be proud of it, but it's another thing entirely to parade the military around with patriotic songs and public-relations events. It reminds me of the Soviets towing their ICBMs through Red Square in front of thousands of cheering comrades on May Day.

CNN recently had a program called "WarBirds", where they spent an hour talking about how wonderful the U.S. Air Force is. They've had several programs like this lately. Fox News Channel can hardly go for a couple of hours without running something like "War Stories with Oliver North" or some other similar program.

What's next? Navy SEALs goose-stepping down Pennsylvania Avenue while the President, dressed in fatigues, looks on from the White House balcony?

Maybe I'm overreacting, but the rising level of sheer militarism coming from the U.S. government (and, by extension, the media) is worrisome.

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

No, Dude, it's not just you.

Maybe if we all flew a Gadsden Flag they'd get the message.

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[IHateEverybody]

Does it has a red ball on top of its antenna so you can find it quicker in the parking lot?

Not mention where's the fuzzy dice? The dice! The dice!

Re:Maybe It's Just That I'm A Canadian. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

An anonymous carbon rod...hmmm...OH like vonRumsfeld!?

Hmm.

[cascino]

From the article:
The military said it has no plans to produce the truck any time soon
It's a publicity stunt, nothing more.
Is anyone else a little skeptical of the "read all e-mails sent near the truck" capability? Have they not heard of encryption?

Re:Hmm.

[Kymermosst]

Is anyone else a little skeptical of the "read all e-mails sent near the truck" capability? Have they not heard of encryption?

Maybe they are using van Eck (Tempest) phreaking. (Google it if you don't know what it is.)

If one could capture what was on someone else's monitor, a computer could OCR it easy enough. A computer could probably locate the signal, as well. This would provide for the possibility of an automatic capture system.

Also, since you generally don't type e-mail in encrypted form, it's irrelevent.

This is just speculation, mind you.

Re:Hmm.

[SerpentMage]

A publicity stunt? Ok, But to prove what? How to beat the Discovery channel Monster garage crew?

Lets put it this way. If my army had to rely on this thing, I would be thinking of moving.

Oh wait I already did from Canada to Switzerland. ;)

Smarrrr

[TheCrimsonUnbeliever]

The word Smar cracks me up - I can imagine a zombie: "Smarrrrrrrrrr Smarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr" etc

Re:Smarrrr

[TheAlmightyQ]

Homer: I am so smart, I am so smart, SMRT, I mean SMART

Re:Smarrrr

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can moderate down innoccent Simpsons quotes at will. There is a pestilence upon this land, nothing is sacred.

some of this sounds like fantasy.

[joshsisk]

It includes a computer program linked with surveillance equipment to monitor what people in the area around the vehicle are saying in e-mail

Excuse me? Why do you need a truck to monitor email? Wouldn't it be safer to monitor email from afar?

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[_ph1ux_]

ah... but it can also send email. didnt you read the article?

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[joshsisk]

ah... but it can also send email. didnt you read the article?

Uh, first, please note that the text that I quoted was _from_ the article. Thus, it should be relatively obvious that I read it.

Secondly, again - wouldn't it be safer to send the fake email from some secure location far away? You don't need to park next to a terrorist hideout to compromise their email system. In fact, it would probably be much more difficult to do it from the smart truck than an well-equipped and staffed office somewhere.

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[_ph1ux_]

sarcasm ( P ) Pronunciation Key (särkzm)
n.
A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
The use of sarcasm.

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[addaon]

I wonder if this refers to tempest, which requires physical proximity... any thoughts?

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[joshsisk]

And your comment fit into the definition of sarcasm how, exactly? I mean, it wasn't exactly "cutting".

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[lvdrproject]

If you need him to post the definition for "sarcasm" to get it, you've already lost the race, guy. As for whether or not it was sarcasm, thesaurus.com tells me that "mockery", "wisecrack", and "satire" are all synonyms. I'm afraid that's twice you lose. If you need me to post the definitions for any of the above words, you lose (2 + number of definitions required to post) times. Keep on truckin'!

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[joshsisk]

"Lose"? What is this, some kind of game now? If it is a game, I guess I'm doing okay, since I racked up several "points", assumming karma is points.

Also, considering the fact that I don't see any "+1, Funny" moderations by the above post, that means that apparently no one else thought it was very funny either.

Re:some of this sounds like fantasy.

[lvdrproject]

I wasn't laughing either.

yet another example

[Anonymous Coward]

But it can track down and zap the enemy in so many ways.

"Zapping" things must be part of the President's strategery.

moron vehicular defaults

[Anonymous Coward]

does it come with a payper liesense? can i tune in anything besides va.msn.net, ticker: (VAST)?

keep pouring on the hot buttured FUDge robbIE tell 'em about the payper.

smart? car? my .asp

Have to Pay for CNN Video

[notestein]

The most stunning thing I learned reading this article is that you now have to pay to watch CNN video clips.

What are they thinking?

Re:Have to Pay for CNN Video

[Anonymous Coward]

Ted Turner needs more money so he can pay the 1,000,000,000 US to the UN he promised...

Re:Have to Pay for CNN Video

[IronicCheese]

they're thinking they're a Television Network. ;)

Re:Have to Pay for CNN Video

[kevincal]

The most stunning thing I learned is an Ayn Rand follower not wanting to pay for something that costs something... There is no free lunch... (just read atlas shrugged) -k

Smartruck Site

[bkruiser]

http://www.smartruck2.com/

Does anyone else feel a bit worried?

[Valar]

I mean, it is obvious this thing wasn't really intended for a desert. I mean, the hacker in a box thing, and all the modifications to fight off crowds. We already had one story recently about drones being used over US air, and we all know about Tempest and Carnivore. I think it is clear that this thing is designed to either operate in America or other countries similarly structured, not against any target the administration is likely to publicly attack (i.e. 'heathen desert living primitive terrorist types').

Re:Does anyone else feel a bit worried?

[grosh]

I think it is clear that this thing is designed to either operate in America or other countries similarly structured

Then why didn't they mention the other modules it must come with?

"That pizza delivery truck has been parked across the street for two weeks." -M.S.

Re:Does anyone else feel a bit worried?

[glesga_kiss]

That pizza delivery truck has been parked across the street for two weeks." -M.S.

Yeah, the "Fowers By Irene" one was drawing too much attention...

Re:Does anyone else feel a bit worried?

[YrWrstNtmr]

I mean, it is obvious this thing wasn't really intended for a desert.

And not every military mission is in a desert. Just about every country on the planet have some land that is not desert.

And I think it is clear that this thing is designed to either operate in America or other countries similarly structured, not against any target the administration is likely to publicly attack (i.e. 'heathen desert living primitive terrorist types').

I think it is clear you have no clue as to the many, many types of missions that are carried out by the military (US and otherwise).

Re:Does anyone else feel a bit worried?

[petsounds]

Yeah, that's the first thing that came to my mind as well. It's based on an off-the-line civilian vehicle. There's no way this thing is heading for a heavy combat zone. This thing is obviously made for DARPA's Orwellian Information Awareness Office and to be used in civilian areas. And if you think 'Orwellian' is a strong term, check out the list of their example technologies, which include, "Story telling, change detection, and truth maintenance" which fits right in with the truck's ability to tap into local network streams and alter packets as they see fit.

Black helicopters are so '90s! Black trucks are the choice of the New Generation.

Re:Does anyone else feel a bit worried?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's Right

I do not believe that the military will use this vehicle as a total replacement. It will most likely be made in small quantities and used in urban seetings (According to recent Popular Science, it will be equipped with smokescreens, 'dazzler' highbeams, oil slicks and tack despensers, as well as a joystick operated moveable 'Laser Cannon' that they did not go into great detail about)

There would be no point using a vehicle like this in open desert and the like, the existing vehicles operate perfectly, however, vehicles like this one will be perfect for small special forces operations in confined urban settings, which as i beleive is the purpose anyway.... so what is the point of this rant? dunno.....

What's the point?

[mike_mgo]

To me this just seems up there with the color coding terror warning system; something to make it look like the people in charge are making us safer but without any real effect.

What role would this truck ever really play in the army? It seems to me that the curent Humvee is probably modular enough to perform any of the tasks that the SmarTruck is designed for.

Oh well, who really expects common sense from the government, if it's for the army of course its a good idea.

Re:What's the point?

[glesga_kiss]

The point is simple. Building it made lots of money for a few companies that have "links" with people in the military who make decissions on these things...

Re:What's the point?

[nucal]

Cab houses 3-D mapping system and communication system dubbed 'hacker in a box' that could monitor e-mail in area, send e-mail or destroy enemy communication system.

Come on - with this kind of power, the US Army can SPAM Iraq into submission ...

Re:What's the point?

[sweetooth]

How? It's not like Saddam is reading his email to begin with.

Re:What's the point?

[YrWrstNtmr]

What role would this truck ever really play in the army?

Who knows? Has the senior Army leadership clued you into the plans they have for this? Light pickups and Blazers are very common in the military. Why not outfit them for tasks where they can be useful?

It seems to me that the curent Humvee is probably modular enough to perform any of the tasks that the SmarTruck is designed for.

Starting with a reliable platform (current pickup/SUV) brings a lot to the table. Parts availability, repairs, fix it anywhere.
The HUMVEE is a 30 year old design. Not perfect for many missions. Maybe, just maybe, a new (or additional) platform should be looked at. The only way to stay ahead is to keep trying new things.

Re:What's the point?

[JonWan]

How about we just /. their server ?

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Parts availability, repairs, fix it anywhere

Yeah, I'm thinking there's a lot of GM dealers out in the middle some god-foresaken desert or jungle. You know, the places this will be deployed?

> The only way to stay ahead is to keep trying new things.

Its probably a better idea to not to show off being a bonehead. But since they're trying to attract dupes^H^H^H^H^Hkids who thought those GI Joe toys were sooooo cool, its probably appropriate.

Re:What's the point?

[ipjohnson]

First off isn't the HUMVEE a GM product? Not to mention I'm sure the army has no problem coming up parts for the Hummers. Also are you sure its 30 years old I thought it was newer than that.

Re:What's the point?

[YrWrstNtmr]

Yes it is. But a design based on a current SUV/pickup might be easier to get parts/repairs for out in the boonies.
Oops...its only about 20 years old. Went into design in 1983.

Re:What's the point?

[_ph1ux_]

"To me this just seems up there with the color coding terror warning system; something to make it look like the people in charge are making us safer but without any real effect"

This is something I have thought a lot about and discussed at length.

It's a theory I call Bureaucracy of Mediocrity. It goes something like this - feel free to add or debunk, as you like

Short Version:

The government is full of useless mediocre people who continually pass laws and do activities that serve no real purpose other than to make themselves appear to be accomplishing something.

Long Version:

Basically there has been a very large influx of mediocre people who have been given, and sought out, jobs within the government system.

There are several reasons for this. First it started as a "sensitive exercise" in which the government was required to consider all sorts of people for the positions they offered. This means that the government needed to hire in people who were not necessarily the best qualified for the positions. I am not going to go into affirmative action or anything like that right now - but it's pretty evident that there are many government workers that are driftwood. People who work there - but don't actually work.

Anyway, the point is that now we have a large bureaucratic system filled with people of mediocre quality who are just trying to look like they are doing something, trying to make themselves feel like they are important.

A perfect example of this is the back patting "atta-boy" behavior of senators and other congress critters after the September 11 terrorist attacks. They held a ceremony and talked about the heroics of each other and the mayor of New York. The mayor of New York - rudy guilliani - was in now way a "hero"... he was just doing his job. He didn't do any extraordinary thing. He didn't personally rescue someone from crisis while at personal risk.

These people just want it to look as though they are doing something important and accomplishing something in their work.

The other major behavior of people in government positions is to hide behind bureaucracy. The more difficult and convoluted they make any process - the less likely they would actually have to do any work. It really is this simple - people are lazy, and many government workers are just milking the system and doing "gestures of accomplishment" where they do something which is utterly meaningless so as to look as though they are actually doing something.

Anyway - you get the point. But its this mentality and lack of any true thoughtful work that gives us such lame things like the color coded terror warning.

What the fuck is a high state of alert anyway. There is no such thing. If you are alert - you are alert. If you're missing things, then you obviously are not alert. There are not different stages of alert. (And I am not referring to the alertness of a personal individual - I am talking about the alertness of a systems, group or body - such as a nation)

Re:What's the point?

[vrt3]

Actually it kinda reminds me of the way the A-Team used to rebuild their van in every episode.

Re:What's the point?

[psych031337]

Humvee a 30yo design? Do you have any references for that? I think the first Humvees were built around 1982 or 1981. So took them another 10 years to get from blueprint to prototype? And I thought the german army was a bunch of lazy bastards...

mental masturbation?

[ldspartan]

Sounds and looks like designers having fun with themselves. Lines like 'we wanted to make something which would make people know that we mean business' lead me to believe that this is not a deployable vehicle. Even if it was, why use a commercial pick-up platform? The military has several wheeled, all-terrain platforms that are suitable to this job (armored personel carriers spring to mind).

So, I at least think that its just more standard auto-show fluff.

--
Phil

Useful?

[Skyshadow]

Okay, who else wouldn't want to drive one of these things into a combat zone?

Look, it's got some nice bells and whistles, but hand me an RPG or drive this over a mine and all it'll be good for in the future is roasting marshmallows. Wouldn't it make a hell of a lot more sense to mount this sort of electronic warfare gear onto Humvees or (better yet) APCs? Which vehicle would you rather have when even the Somali militia opens up on you, much less anyone with training?

The general quoted in the interview acknowledged that there was no mission in mind for the first generation SmarTruck. Well, that's the mission for this thing? A next-gen friendly casualty generator?

Re:Useful?

[Surak]

Look, it's got some nice bells and whistles, but hand me an RPG or drive this over a mine and all it'll be good for in the future is roasting marshmallows.

It's an anti-terrorism device. It isn't INTENDED to be used in areas where your enemy has an RPG or has planted mines. It's intended use is places like New York City or Detroit or Los Angeles -- against ordinary citizens.

If that doesn't frighten you, I don't know what will.

Re:Useful?

[Anonymous Coward]

You miss the point entirely. Most military spending is more about fat government contracts for the defense industry. That's why we gleefully buy missiles and anti-missile defense systems we know don't work.

Re:Useful?

[SerpentMage]

Ok, fine, but I think somebody has been watching too much RoboCop!

Terrorists usually attack by:
1) Blowing themselves up
2) Blowing a truck up
3) Blowing a building up

Now as sad as these terrorists are, how exactly is this supposed to stop terrorists blowing things up?

Outside of that people have not been reduced to chaotic factors shown so often in movies.

Re:Useful?

[geekoid]

all ground vehicals, including tanks, are just targets. Tanks look great moving across a flat desert, towards an ill-equipt foe, but that same senerio with any country near are technology level of the US would end very badly for the tanks.

Re:Useful?

[ipjohnson]

ACtually I was watching the history channel (or discovery can't remember) and they parked a Hummer over a land mine and detonated it and the cabin stayed pretty much in tacket. They where saying it was designed to take a pretty big hit to the cabin and still protect its passengers. Now as for the rest of the vehicle it was shredded but the dummies inside weren't to bad.

Re:Useful?

[Zemran]

I would rather convert one into a camper van and go touring :) I think it would turn some heads :)

Re:Useful?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they wanted to save the $30,000 that the Silverado is less than the Humvee...

heh.. out of $1 mil...

Re:Useful?

[BurntHombre]

Ah, Slashdot...where every poster is an expert on military, politics, law, religion, science and legos.

Do you think it's possible that there may be some people involved in this project, perhaps even a majority, who know a helluva lot more about the military equipment than you? Or that they have in fact considered that this vehicle is not ideal for a RPG- or mine-laden environments?

Re:Useful?

[torpor]

You idiot.

A terrorist is someone who kills by doing something that is *not* usual.

Saying a terrorist is 'usually' something is completely misunderstanding the nature of the problem.

This truck is scarey. It's an urban-assault vehicle intended for use in Western Democracies.

There is no other battlefield for it.

Re:Useful?

[SerpentMage]

Me idiot??? Na ja...

Sept 11 was an exception to the rule of terrorists. If you look at Eta, IRA, Isalamic Radicals, and other groups they either resort to kidnappings, isolated murders or bombs. Why bombs? Because bombs are effective, simple to implement and can be done in a split second without damage control. A bomb has a huge element of surprise, without requiring much external intervention.

So please next time take a look at what terrorists have done!

Re:Useful?

[Anonymous Coward]

So what you're saying is that so long as we don't take this baby anyplace a war is happening, we'll be golden....

Re:Useful?

[Minna Kirai]

Probably just an Anti-Personell mine. AP mines have a pale fraction of the power in an anti-tank mine (which are too large for most humans to carry).
Pieces of HMMVW would rain a kilometer away if it parked on an AT.

(Still, it is important for light, infantry-mobility vehicles to have some survivablity too)

Re:Useful?

[Minna Kirai]

Yes, but a vehicle with high mobility and lots of supressive firepower (an M60 on the back) will be less likely to find an RPG targeting it at all.

The new truck looks like strictly behind-the-lines support (either C&C, ELINT/COMINT, or launching a handful of smart missiles at BVR targets).

come on Larry!

[muyuubyou]

Hey Larry Wall, time to upgrade that crappy

You must have really clever soldiers...

[fantomas]

Hmm, reminds me of a story I heard regarding the much-maligned SA80 rifle over here in the UK.. apparently top brass invited over Mr Kalashnikov one day (designer of AK47 fame). Mr K. had a good look at the SA80 and turned to the generals and said "You must have really clever soldiers".

Ultimate show of military might

[dr_dank]

SmarTruckII could just sit and listen, send bogus e-mails to confuse an enemy, or, if it is not amused, kill the enemy communications system altogether.

The US military has discovered the destructive power of Slashdotting. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Re:Ultimate show of military might

[kliment]

True.
Step one: sit and hit reload until a new article appears
Step two: spam the message board without even reading the article with bogus posts
Step three: Realise you have no idea what veryone else is talking about and go read the article, /. ing the server off the face of the earth
Indeed, the Army researchers have been reading /.

Lets get it over with ....

[mustangdavis]

Imagine a beowulf cluster in the back of one of these ...


In Soviet Russia, the truck out smarts you ...

1) Build truck, 2) ????, 3) Profit!

Take a bunch of these over to N. Korea and tell them "all your base belong to us"

So lets sum it up ...


Imagine the SmarTruck II beowulf cluster in Soviet Russia where all there base belong to us. Profit!


Move on ....

What is a Smar?

[Mononoke]

And why would I want one on my Truck?

This reminds me

[kaoshin]

I live in memphis TN, and it goes without saying that we have a lot of folks who drive trucks, but this one took the prize. I was driving to taco bell and I passed by a truck that had been modded so much it didn't resemble a truck anymore. It had steel plates over the windows with small rectangular holes to look through, a steel battering ram, steel plates welded to the body and the tires had spikes on it. I wonder how long before that thing got empounded?

Nice for Chevy's Ad guys...

[alwayslurking]

Based on a Silverado, so they could get a whole campaign using some of that cool night-vision footage the military releases.

$1m for something a $15k Stinger would trash seems a lot though.

Re:Nice for Chevy's Ad guys...

[Minna Kirai]

Um, Stingers are anti-air weapons, ok? This truck doesn't fly (yet).

(Sure, a Stinger has enough power to destroy it. But so would a $2k LAW)

Only the Government.....

[MadBurner]

Only our goverment would be willing to drive into battle in a Chevy.

Re:Only the Government.....

[los furtive]

The old Canadian Forces 5/4 ton was a Chevy.

Whatever

[kruczkowski]

Remeber when the HUMVE came out? everyone thought it was the best thing in the world.

I worked with the Army. I went to an exercize for a month, and I can tell you that they are the bigist peace of shit on wheels. Everywere the Army goes they break down. Insted of driving them in a convoy, they had to put them on a train, why? Becouse the commanders said they won't last the 12 hour drive. Everyone I talked to said they were shit.

Why? becouse the Army buys the cheapest part to run them, and the solderiers don't care about them. Like my father said, back in the day when the jeep was your life, you took are of it. Now when it breaks down, they get a replacement. Thats nice until you notice your motorpool is many miles away.

Besides the cool versions like this one, only the commanders get. Who don't drive them becouse they perfer ther nice Audi and Volvo rentacars. (Yes the commanders did ditch there tactical vechicals to drive around in new A8's)

It scares me a little about this Iraq situation. The Army people now days don't know anything. It's sad I think, and I hope they don't go into war, becouse there heads are so stuck up (we *did* kick ass in afganistan, _but_ with the help of the Birts and Canadians) I could go on more about why I feel this way. But I'll save my breath.

Remeber, Sadam is no dumb ass. The read dumbasses are the young officers who think they can kick anyones ass.

Needless to say I don't work for the Army anymoe for this reason.

Re:Whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

Remeber when the HUMVE [sic.] came out? everyone [sic.] thought it was the best thing in the world.

I worked with the Army. I went to an exercize [sic.] for a month, and I can tell you that they are the bigist [sic.] peace [sic.] of shit on wheels. Everywere the Army goes they break down. Insted of driving them in a convoy, they had to put them on a train, why? [sic.] Becouse [sic.] the commanders said they won't [sic.] last the 12 hour drive. Everyone I talked to said they were shit.

Why? becouse [sic.] the Army buys the cheapest part [sic.] to run them, and the solderiers [sic.] don't care about them. Like my father said, back in the day when the jeep [sic.] was your life, you took are [sic.] of it. Now when it breaks down, they get a replacement. Thats [sic.] nice until you notice your motorpool is many miles away.

Besides the cool versions like this one, only the commanders get.[sic.] Who don't [sic.] drive them becouse [sic.] they perfer [sic.] ther [sic.] nice Audi and Volvo rentacars. (Yes the commanders did ditch there [sic.] tactical vechicals [sic.] to drive around in new A8's)

It scares me a little about this Iraq situation. The Army people now days don't know anything [sic.]. It's sad I think, and I hope they don't go into war, becouse [sic.] there [sic.] heads are so stuck up (we *did* kick ass in afganistan [sic.], _but_ with the help of the Birts [sic.] and Canadians) I could go on more about why I feel this way. But I'll save my breath.

Remeber, Sadam [sic.] is no dumb ass. The read [sic.] dumbasses are the young officers who think they can kick anyones [sic.] ass.

Needless to say I don't work for the Army anymoe [sic.] for this reason.

Oh reeeeally? My guess is that the Army just wised up and fired everyone who didn't have at least a 5th grade education. Sheesh...

Re:Whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you insinuating the reaosn we kicked ass in Afghanistan was b/c of the British and Candians and not our troops on the ground, or our UAV and other monitoring techniques? Are you insinuating that the Iraqis could in anyway compete with the entire US armed services? Where were you 10 years ago when we beat the crap out of Saddam the first time? Maybe the problem with the Army is people like you who simply bash it without giving factual accounts and just spout rhetoric. (Like i just did). And we all know what ARMY stands for: Arent Ready for Marines Yet.

Re:Whatever

[LordYUK]

"Remeber, Sadam is no dumb ass. The read dumbasses are the young officers who think they can kick anyones ass.

Needless to say I don't work for the Army anymoe for this reason."

This guy is obviously an expert on "dumb" and "ass" having been one most of his life.

Re:Whatever

[ksw2]

It scares me a little about this Iraq situation. The Army people now days don't know anything. It's sad I think, and I hope they don't go into war, becouse there heads are so stuck up (we *did* kick ass in afganistan, _but_ with the help of the Birts and Canadians) I could go on more about why I feel this way. But I'll save my breath.

This is quite possibly the most uninformed statement I've ever read on Slashdot. And... surprise! It's got a score of 5.

If you honestly think we're relying on the likes of Canada to protect our nation, you are absolutely insane.

Re:Whatever

[rherbert]

Ahh, I was wondering how we managed to kick ass in Afghanistan. It was because the Canadians helped us! +5 Informative!

Re:Whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

>Are you insinuating that the Iraqis could in anyway compete with the entire US armed services? Where were you 10 years ago when we beat the crap out of Saddam the first time?

Ideologically, I guess we were in the same place as 30-40 years ago, when the vietnamese beat the crap out of the entire US armed forces... And no, I'm not insinuating anything.

Re:Whatever

[Dr Caleb]

And your response was quite uninformed as well. ..with the help of the Brits and Canadians.. was the key there.

PPCLI (Princess Patricias Canadian Light Infantry) was to be awarded a US Congressional Medal for its work in Afganistan, the first such honour since the PPCLI served in Korea. The JTF2 (Joint Task Force 2 - Canadian Commandos, comparing them to Navy Seals is comparing a Pit Bull to a German Shepard) were also given citations to their sniper squad for work done in southern Afganistan.

The US did not rely on it's friends, but it did get help. If you think you can go it alone, then you're absolutely insane.

Re:Whatever

[Fapestniegd]

I was *in* the Army and for the most part, I agree with everything above. However If you have a crafty supply seargent running the parts section of the motor pool this can be circumvented. We had awesome parts from high performance glow-plugs to tires. Our HMMWVs could bark the tires (Not easily done in a full time 4W drive vehicle) And they almost never broke down. So if you had the right man for the job (someone willing to put in the extra hours to find the right part numbers and requisition them) HMMWVs rock! Like everything else in the Army, It's all about the people.

Re:Whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

Remeber, Sadam is no dumb ass. The read dumbasses are the young officers who think they can kick anyones ass.

Maybe you aren't old enough to remeber a little thing called Desert Storm. Where We Americans chased Saddam's Bitch-Ass Republican Guard all the way to Iran.

Re:Whatever

[gol64738]

are you kidding? i've found the HUMVEE to be an extremely reliable vehicle!
while stationed in northern Saudi Arabia during the whole Desert Shield/Storm thing, we would take these things out into the desert and make jumps.

wow, we could hit a jump doing about 80 and be airborne for 3-4 seconds!

be careful when jumping these things though, it's real easy to hit your head on the inside middle turret handle when coming down for landing.

we basically tried to drive these things into the ground, but the worst case scenario was a broken axle on a single HUMVEE.

Re:Whatever

[miltimj]

From my experience, HMMWVs rock. I've driven over everything with them, including small trees and boulders. Four-wheel independent suspension and eight-feet wide, baby.

They take a licking and keep on ticking. I've never had a problem with them -- oh yeah, but that's also because we take care of them.

It's honestly really too bad that the people you were around weren't doing their jobs. Don't fault the vehicle for the operator's negligence. The HMMWV is an amazing and versatile vehicle.

The Army people now days don't know anything.

I gotta believe this is nothing more than a troll... you obviously don't know what you're talking about.

But I'll save my breath.

Please, do.

Re:Whatever

[infolib]

(we *did* kick ass in afganistan, _but_ with the help of the Birts and Canadians)

I don't know much about the Afghani war, but I think you forget to mention the Northern Alliance. After all they had been fighting the Taleban for years and were the ones who did most of the (dangerous) groundwork. The Taleban would have lasted a lot longer without an experienced up-and-running enemy ready to channel US support.

You should also mention how many Taleban supporting warlords were probably pretty easily bought off during the conflict. After all, their odds got a lot worse when the US joined the conflict.

Re:Whatever

[EvilBudMan]

--I worked with the Army. I went to an exercize for a month, and I can tell you that they are the bigist peace of shit on wheels. Everywere the Army goes they break down. Insted of driving them in a convoy, they had to put them on a train, why? Becouse the commanders said they won't last the 12 hour drive. Everyone I talked to said they were shit.--

Bullshit.

I happen to know someone that owns one of these, and there is nowhere hardly it can't go. They last a very long time. The only problem is size. Sometimes they are too wide to make it through wooded areas. The Army really need something like a jeep for this.

Re:Whatever

[ksw2]

The US did not rely on it's friends, but it did get help. If you think you can go it alone, then you're absolutely insane.

As a former member of special operations (in the US), this point is not lost on me. To the contrary, I thought it was rather obvious. However, the orignal poster was attempting to make the case that the United States Army is in shambles, and wouldn't be anything without relying on "foreign aid". This, as you now, is bullshit... (and probably reflects the views of someone who was !honorably discharged.)

Re:Whatever

[Minna Kirai]

(we *did* kick ass in afganistan, _but_ with the help of the Birts and Canadians)

With the help of the Afghans, really ("Northern Alliance" they called them). They supplied the men on the ground, 99.99% of the force, and 100% of the people who got shot (until 2 months had gone by, and anything resembling a "war" was already done)

The US put up some bomber pilots, and occasional SOF spotters.

We only viewed the war as easy because it wasn't our guys charging on horseback to get chewed up by AA fire.

Important questions unanswered:

[Hayzeus]

Like how much for leather? Is there a towing option? You'd think CNN might dig a little deeper...

No

[Synn]

I'm an American and it's tacky as hell.

damn slow connection...

[muyuubyou]

1977 Honda Accord

This was supposed to be in parent... but I clicked by accident

What about troops and other costs?

[RichMan]

Given the "high tech" tag and very different payloads of the truck I can see the need for a different crew for the truck for each payload.

Payloads/Crew list
1) ground to air missiles
2) ground to ground missles
3) urban warefare combat, heavy machine guns
4) urban warefare support, troop carrier/munitions
5) urban warefare intelligence, Night/heat vision, radio snoop
6) terrorisim intelligence
7) chemical hazmat sensor
8) nuclear hazmat sensor

In this example set we are looking at 8 different payloads. Most likely close to 8 different specialist crews as well. The cost savings are only one vehicle platform but that means that 2 payloads and 2 crews cannot be deployed at once. So by saving the cost on the vehicle the additional crews and payloads are idled.

Also the warefare variants probably have a need for armor while the intelligence variants do not. So the vehicle base is a compromise between the different mission options.

Re:What about troops and other costs?

[Tassach]

You are assuming that they will have one chassis and multiple payload modules. This is the wrong idea. They will probably have more chassis units than payload modules; that way, if the truck goes tango-uniform, you rip off the payload module and stick it on a replacement chassis and send the broken chassis back to the depot for servicing. This also means you only have to keep one set of spare parts, tools, service manuals, etc on hand to repair the damn things, instead of having to duplicate everything 8 times over.

Re:What about troops and other costs?

[Minna Kirai]

The trucks wouldn't be reconfigured very often, crews would be assigned to the same vehicle for long periods. Not many will be idled.

The cost savings comes from using the same replacement parts (and mechanic training) to keep all 8 of those configurations maintained.

(The same principle is at work in the JSF, which comes in different AF/Navy/Marines configurations, but on the same airframe)

Prior Art

[RDW]

Of course, a superior Top Secret heavy-duty vehicle with interchangeable mission 'nodules' has already been developed.

Re:Prior Art

[CSG_SurferDude]

Oh geez, that wasted 45 minutes of my work day....

Somebody mod the parent up for providing us with that link to the pods in Thunderbirds... (www.tvcentury21.com)

Civilians can buy something like this already

[bubblegoose]

There's a company in PA called IBIS TEK that modifies a GM SUV and it is legal to buy in the U.S.

You can buy a sensor package and NBC protection. It becomes a problem when you mount the .50-caliber M2 machine gun or a MK-19, 40-mm grenade launcher, which hides inside the cargo area.

It will set you back $500,000, but the cool thing is the quote from IBIS TEK "the average deer hunter in Pennsylvania could operate the system if he or she had a minimal amount of computer experience."
I guess that includes me :-)

Re:Civilians can buy something like this already

[Anonymous Coward]

But if the oppritunity should arise they couldnt.

According to specs, the thing has a thumb print scan instead of a key, and that includes all on board systems.

So much for a $750,000 joy ride with a kevlar coated laser cannon platform... unless you go cut off a soldiers thumb, and how patriotic would that be.

Is anyone else scared by this?

[mrhandstand]

This is a vehicle designed for URBAN combat and survellience. Monitoring email? Sounds like TEMPEST stuff. This vehicle would be used against new threats...like domestic terrorism hmmmm? Do you want the US military performing survellience on home soil? THINK about this people instead of making kiddie toy jokes...

Damn.

Re:Is anyone else scared by this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, that's about the worst case of paranoia I've ever seen. Oh wait, this is Slashdot. It's standard response.

Carry on.

No no, not TNG

[schon]

This is obviously a movie parody (note the roman numerals in the title..)

"SmarTruck II - The Wrath of Saddam"

Hmm, doesn't quite have the same ring as "Wrath of Khan"..

I wouldn't watch it anyway.. William Shatner parodying Bush might make my head explode.

Re:No no, not TNG

[pulse2600]

I wouldn't watch it anyway.. William Shatner parodying Bush might make my head explode.

I could just imagine the dialogue...

"My dear Americans....we need...to...do...something...about...those...folks !"

"Spock, the evidoers...must...be...stopped!"

"Where...did...my...dog...Barney...run...off to?"

Re:No no, not TNG

[Anonymous Coward]

Why... does... everyone think... I... killed... my... wife?
It's... not... my fault she... drownd.
Surely... any of you... would... have... left her... in... the... pool... while you... called... 9... 1... 1...
Perhaps... a TV producer... will... let me... host... a reprise... of Rescue... 9... 11.

Re:No no, not TNG

[lvdrproject]

No need for Shatner to get involved. Haven't you ever heard one of Bush's speeches? He talks like that all the time.

I had one of those...

[Anonymous Coward]

... when I played Dune 2.

It was called a "devastator" and instilled fear in my enemies at the very sight of it!

Artaxerxes

Engineering

[Cranx]

I wasn't aware the U.S. Army was in the business of engineering and building combat systems. This was really something the Army itself designed and engineered, all by itself?

That crew must REALLY be a box of loose screws...I wouldn't worry about THIS project ever getting enough funding to actually deploy any of these anywhere except at car shows.

Damnit... now I want back in!

[Kymermosst]

I just got my Honorable discharge a month ago.

This would have been a fun project to work on, even if it is just someone's research idea that will never come to pass. It would have been damn fun to be the test driver or T.C. for this thing.

Re:fuck you, dumbass

[Anonvmous Coward]

"fuck you, dumbass...stupid ass shit, mod this down please"

Show me your joke that was funnier. Bet you can't.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Gah!

[TerryAtWork]

More US technomilitary fetish.

This isn't going to stop them from wrapping it up in Iraq in 3 days, though.

Re:Gah!

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't going to stop them from wrapping it up in Iraq in 3 days, though.

Eh? It may have been omited from the news, but we have in fact been bombing Iraq most days for the past 10 years.

A bit longer than "3 days". Oh, I get it, you mean conventional war, not terrorism.

Interior Features

[bmcphall]

According to the Smart Truck IIhomepage:

The center console of the vehicle houses the rear view video display, joystick controls, driver GPS Display, mobile satellite phone, AM/FM/CD stereo system, and cellular phone mount.

What!?! No cupholder?

Coyote is Much Better

[Lev13than]

The SmartTruck looks like something Mattel invented... Why they decided to put it on a truck cab instead of a modified Hummer is beyond me.

In any event, there is already a great vehicle system on the market: the Canadian Forces' Coyote, part of their LAV platform of vehicles (insert gratuitious Canadian army jokes here). This system is so successful that it has been picked up the US Army under the Stryker name. Plus, it has the advantage of looking like it belongs on a battlefield and not some kid's sandbox.

Some specs for the Coyote:
Length: 6.39 m
Width: 2.50 m
Height: 2.69 m
Maximum speed: 100 km/hr
Range: 660 km
Weight: 14.4 t
Gradient: maximum 60%
Side slope: maximum 30%
Minimum turn diameter: 15.6 m
Trench crossing: 2.06 m
Fording
shallow: 1.3m
deep: 1.0m
3 configurations:
Command (51 vehicles)
Battlegroup (120 vehicles)
Brigade (32 vehicles)
Armament:
25-mm stabilized M242 chain gun
7.62-mm stabilized coaxial machine-gun
7.62-mm top-turret mounted machine- gun
76-mm smoke/fragmentation grenade launcher
Sights:
Daytime optical
Thermal Imagery (TI)
Generation III Image Intensification (II)
Surveillance System:
Battlefield
Surveillance Radar
Thermal Imager
Daylight camera
Laser Rangefinder

Winch: Front-mounted 6,800 kg dynamic pull
self-recovery winch
Engine: 275 hp Detroit Diesel 6V53T
Transmission: 5 forward gears, 1 reverse
Transfer case: 2 speed
Suspension: Independent Rear 4 wheels
torsion bar
Front 4 wheels strut
Wheels: 8 wheels (4 or 8 wheel drive)
Tires: Michelin XML
Brakes: Power (air)
Electrical system: 28 V
Batteries: 2 x 12 V automotive, 6 x 12V
auxiliary
Alternator: 300 A

Re:Coyote is Much Better

[modecx]

So, basically it's a Soccer mom's dream vehicle? :D

Whatever, indeed.

[Anonymous Coward]

So, lets see.. you 'worked with' the Army for a month, and that qualifies you to make baseless claims like they 'don't know anything'?

Heh.

Not every weapon is designed to fight Iraq.

[MyNameIsFred]

One of the big issues facing the U.S. military is it doesn't have a clue where the next battle will be. Three years ago would anybody have predicted that we would go to war in Afghanistan? Consequently, the military has to have a capability to fight anywhere, and certainly having a capability to fight in an urban environment makes sense. And for those following the news, the military's big concern in Iraq is not desert fighting, but urban warfare. Why do you think the Marines and the Army have been training heavily in their urban warfare training centers. I'm not saying the military should buy this thing, but I am glad that they're thinking about what to do and how to do it. The alternative being, "if something happens, I sure hope we have the right weapons..."

Re:Not every weapon is designed to fight Iraq.

[smack_attack]

Inform yourself: The Enron-Cheney-Taliban Connection

Re:Not every weapon is designed to fight Iraq.

[miltimj]

Three years ago would anybody have predicted that we would go to war in Afghanistan?

Three years ago, I was sitting in a military science class where my professor (Lieutenant Colonel and Green Beret/Special Forces) said, "you're going to go to training for regular land warfare, but remember this... this guy is the one we'll really be fighting". He put up a couple of quotes of Osama Bin Laden (who I had never heard of at the time). I couldn't believe that someone believed what he did and what he said, and figured that maybe my prof was overreacting. ...until later that year.

Re:Not every weapon is designed to fight Iraq.

[kliment]

Shh! Don't tell darpa, they'll label him as a terrorist for knowing about an impending attack and have him cricified

I want to be a marketing consultant for the Army

[Sebbo]

Hey, that's a really smar idea!

Desktop R/C Mini-Rovers

[cavegrub]

Actually, I think that this is every Slashdotter's vehicle...well, according to ThinkGeek.

Not yet. the future of military automotive

[Animats]

The Army has been looking for commercial alternatives to the HUMMV. There are prototypes, but nothing that's gone into volume production.

There's the COMBATT truck (a GMC pickup with a lift job and some armor). Rod Millen Racing has built dune-buggy type vehicles for the military (they look like Somali technicals, but perform like Baja trucks.) There are other prototypes around.

GM has a military product line, based on pickup or Suburban platforms. Except for the Rod Millen vehicles, all this stuff is for rear areas; if you have to follow tanks around, you need a HUMMV.

It all makes sense now

[Anonymous Coward]

The name 'SmarTruck' is a combination of the words 'smart' and 'truck'! They share the letter 't'! Very clever.

#include <trousers.h>

More news photos...

[TheSHAD0W]

http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news?p=smartru ck&c=news_photos

(working link to Smartruck II page) http://www.smartruck2.com

Re:Why was this rejected?

[Anonymous Coward]

My apologies, however the stoies I'd seen hadn't been published until today. But of course, I wouldn't condone a dupe...

UAV

[quitcherbitchen]

In another twist, the vehicle can house an unmanned dronelike small aircraft that can hover over a nearby area and send live video back to the vehicle.

I wonder if they are referring to this thing which was supposedly licensed by the military. Slashdot covered it a while back.

jesus christ... cost?

[Hadlock]

i'll try not to be a troll here, i'm really trying.

umm what the fuck? we went from a $500 40 hp, 4wd jeep that seemed to do a pretty damn good job of transporting 4 humans up a 40 degree incline with no problem. they are inherently simple, and weigh nothing. with today's design/production technology, they'd weigh less and cary more, and probably be stackable.

enter the 1980's. we get $100,000 hummers. they hold exactly the same number of people, don't accelerate any faster, and aren't any better at navigating the offroad. they also weigh two tons.

i like the idea of mass producing an F-250/350 for certian needs, like a portable rocket launcher, but you do not need 6-10 wheeled F-550's that cost 100,000 a piece. there's no reason the truck needs more than 200 hp, and there's no reason why you can't use slightly beefed up suspension parts for this sort of job out of the ford/chevy/dodge parts box to cut prices down to the 12,000-20,000 price range. i can understand the price inflating with a bed-mounted rocket launcher, but the initial cost of the chassis is unbelivably absurd. what ever happened tt back to basics?

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[YrWrstNtmr]

Transporting 4 humans is no longer the mission. Drone launch, intel, crowd control, riot supression...all this takes equipment. Equipment is heavy. More horsepower needed to haul it.
If you've ever seen a HUMVEE haul a duece and a half out of frame deep mud, you'd understand the difference.

Modularity. Designing in the ability to swap boxes for different missions adds cost and weight.

Finally...from the article:
The military said it has no plans to produce the truck any time soon, although Bran Ferren, a designer of SmarTruck II, said that if an order came through it could be put in production in a year.

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hummers outclass jeeps in probably every category, except for maybe weight and cost. I have driven both, in training and in a combat theater (Iraq). IMO, jeeps are toys compared to hummers.

In addition to the other poster's points, lets not forget about run-flat tires, gound clearance, low COG, center-mounted disc brakes, a reasonable cargo capacity, and ability to armor it against small arms fire.

Hummers are also used for combat support, such as MP's/scouts. An MP hummer with a team of MP's can very quickly depoy _alot_ of firepower to a remote battle. Think MK-19's, SAW's, M-16's, 9mm's, dragons, etc.

Oh, yeah, and I've seen hummers drive over land mines, and the only dammage was a totally toasted front bumper, punctured tire, and some hood damage. The vehicle, and the crew (uninjured), were able to continue the mission. I don't think you would be able to say the same about a jeep.

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[GooberToo]

there's no reason the truck needs more than 200 hp

Bzzz. That's just plain wrong.

They need 300+ hp for good reason. First, they carry heavy equipment and people. Secondly, some of the terrain these things may need to run in may be at high elevation. If they need to run at 10,000-15,000+ feet, that alone will considerably effect available hp. Then, plan on some wear and tear. Add an the scotching heat or other such horrible environments where the airfilter is resticting air flow. Now, allow for minor par failure (stuck lifter or valve, etc), you're no where near 300hp.

After it's all said and done, if you allow for realistic use, wear/tear and operating conditions, the surplus hp is needed. ZERO question about it. Period.

I'd sure hate to be a soldier stuck in a crappy vehicle that you under-designed. Doomed from the start to say the least.

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[Cranst0n]

"they also weigh two tons."

One of the problems with the 1/4ton Jeep is trying to navigate it in High Winds or across a creek that has flooded with a high current. a two ton vehicle does not have as many problems in these circumstances.

"there's no reason the truck needs more than 200 hp"

Besides having to move more weight (not just chasis, but also configuration variables), Altitude and ground conditions can necessitate more horsepower. I know plenty of Jeep owners who have put 350s under the hood because of the type of off roading they do (Mud, sand, high altitude, combination of all the above plus more). The higher the horse, the more torque (in most cases) therefore the more power than can go into the drivetrains and axles to get unstuck or plow through adverse conditions.

Cost really can't be compared properly unless you inflate the 1940's dollar value to presnt day.

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[demo9orgon]

Hey, you noticed all the GoldBricking and showmanship. That's what this is really about. It might also go that extra-mile when high-school kids are herded into an auditorium to watch recruitment videos made using it. All the shop-doodz might get wood and talk about making their own war-buggy, and the chess-headz would probably cookup stats for it so they could play with one in an RPG game or try to draw one for a extra-credit in their cad class, and all the welfare kids would probably be hoping for a scholarship so they wouldn't have to join up to get into college and eat.

Of those that enlist with this kind of thing in mind, 99.9% of them won't realize that they'll probably never see one in actual use; maybe in a motorpool, or maybe if they're not passing out in formation at a parade as a general drives past them in one, but that's about it.

If any intelligence gathering unit showed up with something like this, it would be RPG bait. Little kids would be told to roll grenades under it, and could you imagine getting it ready for inspection?! There would be a pissed off captain somewhere yelling,
"Sick Call!! The whole damn platoon!?!"

Field work is much more successful when they just (skunkworks local 151) rework several large delivery trucks, paint them up with the words, "Delivery" or "Plumbing" in the native language of the area, hire the local piraiah who can't get laid and doesn't have any friends and still lives at home playing video games or programming(holy shit, I just described 90% of slashdot!) to drive the damn thing, and spend the day driving around with electronic vacuum cleaners feeding hard-drives and tape recorders. Nobody would say a word, and the job would get done. The biggest retrofit would be to tear off the metallic top over the cargo area and setup an RF neutral one using fiberglass...no biggie, what, all of $2500 to $5000 per vehicle, and maybe all of $200 to the driver for as long as you need them, when you need them.

Crap...I'm probably screwing up posting this, I certainly hope nobody in the "Axis of Evil" is reading slashdot right now...

Cheers

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[Hadlock]

i'd wager that $500 translates into somthing like 5,000-15,000 per vehicle, at the most.

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[Hadlock]

interesting points you bring up. they could probably even put in 1/4" steel plating on the lower half of the walls in the "box" for "armor" and beef up the shocks or somthing. delivery/repair trucks usually sport a chevy 350 already, with plenty of hp

Re:jesus christ... cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, a HUMVEE costs the Army about $20,000. Only the civilian HUMMER cost $100,000 and only recently at that.

Who else thinks that the bumpers looks cool ?

[forged]

Now if only the army would release these as spares, I'd be on the list to get them with the floodlights ;)

What? There's no other urban areas in world?

[sideshow]

What if we fight France of somebody next time? Think that M1 Abrams is going to fit through all those streets in Nice?

Theme song?

[Anonymous Coward]

Na na na na na na na na SmarTruck, SmarTruck, Batplane... I mean SmarTruck... Krrzzt Over

Er... how much?

[Kaemaril]

The prototype vehicle cost between $500,000 and $1 million, Fuller said, although she said it is tough to estimate precisely because it involved partnerships with several firms.

That's quite a margin of error they've got there...

It Blends Right In!

[1stflight]

Oh no that thing doesn't stand out in the slightest! I'm sure it's camoflauge works great... in a Mad Max world.

This is very clearly a recruiting 'vehicle'

[loac]

By the looks of it, I would say that the designers were told to build a truck that targeted to 18 year old boys right out of high school and wondering waht to do with their lives. The Army is simply dangling this toy out there and saying, "Look, join the Army and you can cruise around in this big bad vehicle!"

Re:What? There's no other urban areas in world?

[Mr.Phil]

What if we fight France of somebody next time? Think that M1 Abrams is going to fit through all those streets in Nice?

I'm sure they could make it fit, those things can push through and over pretty much anything. And anyway, France still has alot of little white flags, used once, left over from WW2. (just kidding)

Cool toy to waste taxmoney, but...

[intnsred]

I thought the U.S. Army was part of the Department of "Defense"[sic]. As such shouldn't the Army's goal be to defend the US from foreign enemies?

With the Posse Comitatus Act still supposedly intact, why does the Army need a vehicle that is obviously aimed at use against a civilian populace?

Or is the Posse Comitatus Act, like our Bill of Rights and getting honest answers from administration officials, yet another casualty of the War on Terror?

Big Brother's Jeep

[ChaosMt]

Did anyone actually *read* this article?!?!!! It's supposedly designed to intercept (spy) on local email, spoof email (propaganda) and last destroy communications.

"In the cab of the truck are housed a 3-D mapping system and a communications system that Fuller described as "hacker in a box." It includes a computer program linked with surveillance equipment to monitor what people in the area around the vehicle are saying in e-mail. SmarTruckII could just sit and listen, send bogus e-mails to confuse an enemy, or, if it is not amused, kill the enemy communications system altogether."

I'm surprised not to see the typicial out-of-control, knee-jerk reaction from the slashdot crowd to this.

Re:Big Brother's Jeep

[Gothmolly]

Because you CAN'T just wirelessly "snoop" on emails. This is a press release, written for technical PHBs, and apparently, Slashdotters named ChaosMt. For Chrissake, the guy used the words "if it is not amused". Its obviously just marketing spin.

Don't get all excited! Sheesh!

[aengblom]

The prototype vehicle cost between $500,000 and $1 million, Fuller said, although she said it is tough to estimate precisely because it involved partnerships with several firms.

The military said it has no plans to produce the truck any time soon, although Bran Ferren, a designer of SmarTruck II, said that if an order came through it could be put in production in a year.

As I read it, after Sept. 11 some military command folks said--wow, that changes a lot.

They concluded the military might need some new ideas for lightweight vehicles and told some researches to play around with what they could come up with.

This isn't going to the battlefield--it's a prototype of a number of new ideas. And if one of those ideas can save an American soldiers life it's well worth it in U.S. Military (as well as Political) economics.

Soldiers are expensive to train (and thus lose) and its even more expensive to explain their death to the public.

GM

[bkruiser]

Where is the Camo? - the stealth anything? Put me in a big reflective surface vehicle in the middle of a battle - NOT - is the V in the grill for anything other than promoting the Escalade? I have no doubt that they will scrap all hummers for more nodules on the back of this rig, and a big nod from GM... next year... the BrainRig3.5 from Ford, it is an Excursion/Halftrack with sun roof and short range nuclear weapons, a refueling station for personal jetpacks/Flame throwers.

hate to be a spoilsport...

[zogger]

..hate to be a spoilsport but a huge amount of the latest military training and equipment developed and deployed is intended for domestic use. This is an involved topic not readily addressed in a few posts, but doing some research it becomes *fairly* apparent.

Part of my own personal research is talking to active or retired or semi recently quit members of various US "forces". I have heard some rather disturbing *things* along these lines. Very disturbing. Here's one just at random, a lot of training now revolves around indoctrination that US civilians have no constitutional "right" to bear arms. Another is training for manning roadblocks and for doing house to house searches in regards firearms confiscation.

The model states health emergency act is an eye opener as well. You can see/guess what's coming and it ain't nice. Forced... everything. Reading on "less than lethal" weaponry you can find out more, microwave beam weapons, sonic weapons, various gasses, etc, all designed for mass riot control, and to deflect any immediate criticism that it's only for "foreigners" overseas someplace in some war, these weapons are being provided to US police forces as well. Another clue is the intense militarization of US police forces, emphasizing military styled training and hiring ex military personnel over traditional policing and maintaining that police are civilians. Nowadays police refer to non police as "civilians", noting therefore they are "not". It's a mindset and series of occurrences that should be setting off a lot of alarm bells in people's minds now.

It's also a big clue why the army has started on adopting a lot more wheeled armor over tracked, much easier to use in cities and on roads. Yes, easier to transport as well, but still...

Re:hate to be a spoilsport...

[Anonymous Coward]

I know IT guys that refer to cutomers as civilians... In many cases, the term 'civilians' has taken on the meaning of 'anyone that doesn't know how stuff is really happening, but must be protected and is ultimately the billpayer.;

Re:hate to be a spoilsport...

[zazas_mmmm]

It's also a big clue why the army has started on adopting a lot more wheeled armor over tracked, much easier to use in cities and on roads. Yes, easier to transport as well, but still...

Not to insinuate that you're paranoid, but shouldn't our military's weapons fit the terrain that most wars are being fought these days? Urban terror/guerilla warfare is very common these days (see Chechnya, Israel, etc.). I would be more inclined to believe that this is the motivating factor for the military developing more wheeled armor vehicles.

You can keep waiting for the military to take over American cities, but my suspicion is that martial law is still a ways off.

Re:hate to be a spoilsport...

[Anonymous Coward]

Another is training for manning roadblocks and for doing house to house searches in regards firearms confiscation

Yes, because we'll never do anything like this in another country, like Afghanistan.

Dumbass. Are you seriously trying to imply that an overwhelmingly Southern Republican Military is going to come get your guns?

What the fuck ever.

Urban assult vehicle - this included Bagdad

[wowbagger]

This is an Urban Assult Vehicle, but that does not necessarily mean they are planning a raid on New York.

Remember, if we HAVE to go into Iraq|Afganistan|Bosnia|... we will be fighting in the cities. The last Gulf War was an anomaly - this time, Saddam will allow us to take all the sand we want. However, if we want to move into the cities, then we will pay dearly.

So, you want a vehicle designed to fight in a city. Any city - Bagdad, Prague, Paris, Wichita, it doesn't matter.

That said - some of the moves being made to prepare for citizen suppression scare the crap out of me. I expect that by the time I am ready to retire, we will be living in what Civilization calls a "Corporate Republic".

Re:Urban assult vehicle - this included Bagdad

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

This thing would be worse than useless in a city war. If you think that it could navigate rubble strewn streets, collapsed building debris, and intentional barricades then you are sorely wrong. This thing will suck in the open, but it will be a deathtrap in town.

Full Metal Challenge?

[docbrown42]

Damn, that truck looks like one of the entries on FMC.

Crusader?

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously you know nothing about military equipment, especialy field artillery.

1.) The Crusader is a smaller system then the current Paladin system that has been in use since around the 1950's. Yes we are talking the 1950's

2.) 1 Crusader can send out more rounds in one minute then a entire battery of Paladins. A battery usualy consists of 6 to 9 Paladins.

3.) The crew of a Crusader is 1/2 the size of the Paladin crew. Most of the system is using computers compared to Paladin which has 100% no computers. (this does not count fire direction control) The Crusader has proven to also be more accurate in shooting as well.

4.) The Secretary of the Army had recommeneded that we keep the system since people who deal with Field Artillery already have a prototype of the system running and are using it in the field. They are impressed with it, and it has been proven to be more reliable then the current systems we have in place. Rumsfield said no no no so they had to cancel the program. Total bullshit since Rumsfield has no clue on how field artillery works.

5.) A round from a aircraft, or a rocket that does equal amount of damage cost over $1K, a round from a Crusader costs under $100. Oh and these smart rounds we always hear about are also made for Field Artillery systems and are just as effective.

6.) To move a Paladin battery it would take like 10 C5 airplanes to deploy them. For the same firepower you can move 2 Crusaders on 1 C-5.

7.) A lighter model can be airdropped into combat, current we have no decent system in field artillery that can be dropped into combat. Oh and the Paladin weighs more then the Crusader.

Overall I have no clue why they dropped the Crusader. The project was running under budget, and within 10 years would have started saving billions of dollars on what we are currently using. Besides we already spent several millions to build the system.

A direct link so you can brush up on your bullshitting skillz
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/cr usader/

This comes from someone who use to be in the Field Artillery and also lives 10 miles from the Field Artiller Training School for the Army.

Re:Crusader?

[glesga_kiss]

Overall I have no clue why they dropped the Crusader. The project was running under budget

I think you answered your own question. There is a huge amount of corruption in military spending. The arms companies wouldn't have been profiting much from the old system.

Re:Crusader?

[Captain Nitpick]

1.) The Crusader is a smaller system then the current Paladin system that has been in use since around the 1950's. Yes we are talking the 1950's

A Paladin weighs approx. 32 tons. The Crusader started out at 60 tons, and was reduced to 40 because they realized they could only carry one on a C-5. The single biggest criticism of the Crusader was that it was too damn heavy.

The Paladin also received a major redesign in 1979.

3.) The crew of a Crusader is 1/2 the size of the Paladin crew. Most of the system is using computers compared to Paladin which has 100% no computers. (this does not count fire direction control) The Crusader has proven to also be more accurate in shooting as well.

A Crusader has a 3 man crew in the artillery vehicle, and a 3 man crew in the resupply vehicle. A Paladin has a 4 man crew. 4/2 = 6?

5.) A round from a aircraft, or a rocket that does equal amount of damage cost over $1K, a round from a Crusader costs under $100. Oh and these smart rounds we always hear about are also made for Field Artillery systems and are just as effective.

This doesn't support your argument, as rounds for any artillery unit are going to be cheap.

Aircraft can also be where they are needed in minutes. Takes a long time to move artillery.

2.) 1 Crusader can send out more rounds in one minute then a entire battery of Paladins. A battery usualy consists of 6 to 9 Paladins.

6.) To move a Paladin battery it would take like 10 C5 airplanes to deploy them. For the same firepower you can move 2 Crusaders on 1 C-5.

Man, you're really smoking the cheap stuff. 6 to 9 Paladins on "like 10" C-5s.

7.) A lighter model can be airdropped into combat, current we have no decent system in field artillery that can be dropped into combat. Oh and the Paladin weighs more then the Crusader.

I can find no references on this, but given that it's a 40 ton two-vehicle artillery unit, I'm calling bullshit.

I've already established that the Crusader is heavier.

The project was running under budget, and within 10 years would have started saving billions of dollars on what we are currently using.

The budget to deliver the prototype was $1.7 billion.

Besides we already spent several millions to build the system.

"We already spent a bazillion dollars on this!" is not a sound decision making strategy.

A direct link so you can brush up on your bullshitting skillz http://www.army-technology.com/projects/crusader/

Read your own damn link, much of what I'm throwing at you is coming from there.

Re:Crusader?

[Minna Kirai]

There's so much wrong here, I won't go through it all. Just the first complete error/lie:

1.) The Crusader is a smaller system then the current Paladin system that has been in use since around the 1950's. Yes we are talking the 1950's

First, the word is has no place after "Crusader", which is a purely hypothetical machine that has never even been prototyped. (A non-drivable gun doesn't count)

Second (as it says on the page you link), the Crusader was initially planned for 60t, although the designers slimmed it down to 38t once it was clear they were going to be cancelled. But the Paladin is 32t! Which one is "smaller" again?

Most of the strongest objections to the Crusader system were made towards the 60t proposal(it looks a lot more reasonable if you believe that it could get down to 38. But that's such a drastic change, I'd hardly call it the same system). Such a massive platform would have dismal, dismal ground mobility. It can't cross a river, bridges would rarely hold it. Fuel consumption like 10 gallons per mile for both the gun and the ammo-hauler would require 5 fueltime trucks just to keep it in gas.

Logistically it would never make sense, even the smaller version is barely worth it. It's like this: do you use a constant stream of large, slow, vulnerable propeller aircraft to land Crusaders, munitions, and fuel 30 miles short of the target, so they can scatter shells around a position the target was reportedly located 10 minutes ago?

Or just use a constant stream of F-18s to carry iron bombs directly ontop of the enemy, allowing each pilot to eyeball the target before unloading on it? There's no real need to use a whole separate system to for the last leg of the "power projection" journey.

Artillery can only be deployed if you have secure ground adjacent to the enemy. To secure that ground, you've either got to drive in from friendly terrain (a long trip, if there even is any friendly country nearby), or use strong air-power to secure the LZ. And if you've got strong air-power, you may as well use it to prosecute the rest of the enemy targets while the ground-forces are unpacking. And the way US air-power is shaping up, by the time the artillery has fully set up, they won't have any targets left.

direction control) The Crusader has proven to also be more accurate in shooting as well.

The limiting factor in US military firing isn't accuracy of shooting, it's accuracy of targeting Yes, it would be way cool if a Ranger could sight on a hostile tank column, squeeze a button on his OICW and instantly upload imagery and coordinates to a Crusader that launches a MLSI (Multiple-Launch Single Impact) barrage that lands 20 seconds later.

But that means 2 expensive ground assets, which while prehaps very tough, can't fly and are thus vulnerable to counterattack and slow to redeploy against new targets. More realistically, we'd just have a UAV that flys for 72 hours at a stretch call in a flight of F-35s from offshore to detonate a single AGM on each tank.

Sure, there are situations were you'd value the standoff ability of the Crusader- that they, unlike a plane, can hold position near the enemy for weeks on end and instantly start firing if the targets begin advancing. But the low chance of the US ever getting into a situation like that, the inflexible deployablity of heavy artillery, and the cost of developing yet another unproven high-tech system

This comes from someone who use to be in the Field Artillery and also lives 10 miles from the Field Artiller Training School for the Army.

Good of you to reveal your bias. Having invested your military career in artillery, you don't want to percieve it as a waste. Thus you'll optimistically assume that your training was worthwhile, and there will be a place for artillery on the future battlefield. Projects which reinforce this view you support- others can be ignored.

Cavalrymen felt the same way in 1915- they mostly got machine-gunned.
Artillery crews in 2015 will be luckier- they'll mostly just get bored.

Stingers? $15k?

[Anonymous Coward]

In SOVIET RUSSIA you can get a stinger for $50 :)

Couldnt resist that one.

LA traffic solution

[Anonymous Coward]

'click' there is slow asian driver doing 45mph on fast lane. permit for removal of object.
'click' ok permission granted
beep-beep-beep (crosshair locating)
buzzz (trigger button pressed),
ZABOOOOM.
'click' object destructed
'click' report back to base.

Re:$400 Toilet Seat for $500000 turd

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

Sorry, I forgot to put this title on my post.

Conspriacy theories

[MyNameIsFred]

The only problem I have with government conspiracies is that I've seen the federal bureaucracy in action, up close and personal. If anyone can live through such an experience and still believe in complex conspiracies I'll be amazed. Not to say that conspiracies aren't good reading.

BTW, I prefer the Sam Adams slogan that used to be on the beer bottle -- Brewer, Patriot.

Re:Conspriacy theories

[smack_attack]

Decisions are never made by bureaucracy; and I doubt 500 federal workers were crammed into a meeting between Chevron, Enron and the Taliban. The difference between conspiracy theory and conspiracy fact in this case is that the facts are in plain view, they are just ignored by the major media outlets. You can whisper that Clinton handed technology over to North Korea (which is true) and the news will be the lead story, but try yelling about Afghanistan president Karzai's ties to UNOCAL and to the Bush oil team and you will only find the facts in independent media.

The game is not about just lying, it's about lying and denouncing the truth as conspiracy, leftist propoganda and an agenda of the peaceniks.

Big media is nothing more than a weapon of mass distrAction.

Re:Conspriacy theories

[smack_attack]

Here's another conspiracy or whatever you want to call it dealing with the Afghan-big-Oil connection.

It will never fly

[ivrcti]

The first principle I learned when leading troops in the field is KISS: Keep It Simple Stupid. You can never overestimate what will go wrong or how badly equipment suffers under real world combat conditions (or how benheaded troops can be after 48 hours without sleep). The best piece of equipment is a simple one that is designed for one specific task (i.e. a K-Bar knife). When they get as complex as this truck, they almost never work after you leave the pavement. This whole project serves only 2 purposes. 1) Give some Army general something to put down on his next report card and 2) continue giving our tax dollars to defense contractors.

Re:... cost?

[miltimj]

The key with the HMMWVs is configuration. They're much more useful than little jeeps.

they hold exactly the same number of people, don't accelerate any faster, and aren't any better at navigating the offroad

Not really -- HMMWVs have a 10-passenger configuration. We have a configuration in my unit that basically is a mobile cell phone antenna on the back of a HMMWV, and it tops out at about 55 mph down a hill. Very, very heavy, but important equipment to keep the military communicating.

They have pickups and blazers, but they just can't do the job. (and are actually the replacement for jeeps, not the HMMWV).

Re:Humvee V. Jeep

[Cranst0n]

If they used the same antimine. armoring on a Jeep it could probably handle driving over a land mine(FYI you can get replacement body parts for the Jeep that are kevlar through a number of catalogs).

The biggest problem with the Humvees that I have is the width. At 8 ft wide, it makes it harder to get through smaller area (i.e. Forests, tight canyons etc...).

One of the main reasons they wanted to get away from Jeeps was back in the 70's they were more prone to rollover when they tried to go to a coiled spring suspension.

As far as ground clearance goes, you cna easily get more ground clearance on a Jeep with a lift kit and larger tires (more than enough for off road conditions).

One area that I feel the Humvee does have an advantage over the old military Jeeps is in cargo space. This is due to the Humvee being larger in size. Just remember that the length of it can create departure angle problems in the right circumstances (i.e. sharp peaks and valleys). I have personally seen this problem when off roading and watching Cherokees, pickups, and longer SUVs get caught in said situations.

Also, the independant suspension that the Humvee uses is fantastic.

Run Flat tires are available for any vehicle now adays.

Now don't get me wrong I think that the Humvee is a great vehicle, but there are advantages to both.

Still playing catch-up to German vehicle designs

[Ashurbanipal]

It looks like the old-school Mercedes Unimog, only at higher cost, less manueverability, less ground clearance, less flexibility, and crappy fuel economy... A 1968 Mog with a 6-cylinder diesel engine can pull a 16-ton howitzer.

On the other hand, it might be competitive with the new reconstituted Unimog.

in this instance....

[zogger]

...in this instance I was being polite and non vulgar. the actual term used by the "officers" is "F*****g civvies" said as one word. It's a sort of different mindset, but it helps ya get a good handle on what's going on.

I'll tell ya just one of my sources for info, one that really affected me. I have a relative, young guy, entered the army as a career. Half way through to a pension,10 years, his last posting was as a trainer at west point. He quit, even after they offered him a pretty substantial re-upping bonus. His reason was he didn't want anything to do with going to war on the US civilian population. Literally going to war is how he phrased it. I mean he was that blatant and open about it, it was quite clear. He is and was pretty non-political, typical young guy interests of cars, girls, sports, etc. What he was seeing and hearing (and being ordered to teach others in his training) was enough for him to chuck out a career and pension, etc and go back to civilian life cold and just look for any other job.

Just a FWIW

"...interchangable nodules..."

[DuckDuckBOOM!]

Ewww - reminds me of an ex-girlfriend.

didnt is see

[Anonymous Coward]

a swiss watch that did the same stuff here on /. last week?

on the other hand does it have a new revolutionary AI and can it transform?

"Special Sauce" Spray

[TheConfusedOne]

I had misread that final part there and it was much funnier:
Separating common citizens from French terrorists by bombarding them with McDonalds...

Though I suppose if used often enough on a person a Big Mac no longer is non-lethal.

Actually

[billoo]

Hmm, reminds me of a story I heard regarding the much-maligned SA80 rifle over here in the UK.. apparently top brass invited over Mr Kalashnikov one day (designer of AK47 fame). Mr K. had a good look at the SA80 and turned to the generals and said "You must have really clever soldiers".

Actually Mr K said "In Soviet Russia, Guns fire themselves"

And what's the extra cost of supplying that?

[Spamalamadingdong]

All that excess horsepower has to be fed. It needs fuel, which has to come in via the supply lines. Every one of these gas-sucking monsters adds to the non-fighting mass of supply clerks, drivers and ships required to actually get the fighting part of the army to its engagements.

Which is why the lack of a diesel-hybrid drivetrain for this so-called SmartTruck makes it one of the dumbest things to come down the pike in a long time. Burning less fuel cuts down on the supply chain bulk and cost, and then you get added benefits of less noise and heat (lower observability) and possible stealth modes when running on the traction battery alone (slow, but you don't sneak around in a hurry) make all kinds of tactics possible. Yet this has been ignored.

Re:And what's the extra cost of supplying that?

[GooberToo]

Compared to the 4-12 m/g you get from a hummer, this thing should be great.

As for stealth, well, if you really need stealth, that's why they have soldiers with feet. AFAIK, that's the only official "stealth" activities that is part of our fighting doctrine. Everything else is "low profile", "low visability", etc.

Besides, as I read the article, this is not part of a forward fighting force. This, in turn, further removes demand on the supply line. This vehicle is supposed to be a support* vehicle as is.

Support = rear guard, scouting, patrol, chemical & biological detection, etc. Doesn't really appear to be targeting primary attack vehicle or even APC type stuff. It's basically a multifunction service/patrol vehicle.

well.. no, it's not

[zogger]

--umm, martial law is already here, it's codified in under various Emergency Powers Act provisions, several of which we are currently "running" under. Check the federal register and google.. Peruse the patriot act and even more some of the provisions under the model states health emergencies act. for starters those are some good places to look for clues.

All the airports are now federal enclaves with an uberdirector assigned to each airport, and a combo of federalised security and military present 24/7. Police forces across the nation are receiving federal funding, federal direction and pure military hardware and training. Uniformed military personnel are already manning "courtesy" checkpoints on highways across the US in conjunction with alleged "civilian" police-granted, not on a huge scale yet but it's been happening. There are several up and running "civilian" prisons on military bases. Many of the so called "closed" military bases are in fact openly maintained as "open for some sort of business" with no apparent purpose that is publically released. Just breaking on drudge right now, a federal court has issued a ruling that the military/executive branch can declare whomever they see fit as an "enemy combatant", thereby removing any so called bill of rights protections if said indidvidual happens to be from the US. Just another one of them pesky clues, one of thousands.

There's just so much actual information out there now, it would be extremely hard to point at any one single url or whatever for me to make these points. It's complex but the gestalt is-look around, do independent research from as many positions and directions as possible, both in "real world" personal contacts and cyberworld research, take all the thousands of smaller pieces and make a big picture out of them, add 2+2, you can see what's coming. Closest historical and relevant parallel I can make is we are roughly the same point germany was around 1935 or so. The difference is that now psyops is much more sophisticated and pervasive and extensive, and that actual sureveillance/command/control technology is generations beyond anything available back then.

My bottom line- to anyone, not being personal now- is, if you ain't concerned and a touch scared, you ain't paying enough attention, or, you really don't want to.

"Paranoia" is an irrational fear of what isn't there. Recognizing a verifiable potential threat based on observable and redundant data is "just that".

Re:well.. no, it's not

[Anonymous Coward]

Police forces across the nation are receiving federal funding

They're also brainwashing us in our schools! School districts receive federal funding as well!!

You seriously need to cut back on the dope, it's makin you way too paranoid.

Prior art!

[ian stevens]

Put a black car and a black helicopter in that van, and you'd have the truck from The Highwayman TV series. Now if they could only get Jacko to drive it, the USA would be all set.

ian.

Nice, but...

[sporadek]

...how many cupholders do I get for that $500K? I only saw two in the picture.

hummer replacement anyone???

[kraksmoka]

oh my! i want one! why'd they have to wait until after X-mass to let this thing outta the bag???

on a more serious note

i would be surprised if this thing doesn't find its way into a few allies hands over the next few years. i don't think that Colombians will really care about checking guerilla emails, but a big truck with a standard, easy to repair engine that could roll thru mountainous jungle terrain faster than a tank. they're making a x-mass list too i'm sure.

good job army, good propaganda, good toy idea.

did i mention that i want one???

I worked on this vehicle

[streak]

My company is the one that the govt. contracted to build this vehicle.
Yes, I did work on it.
Yes it is very impressive.

If you have any questions, reply to this.

The truck is the cheapest part..

[xixax]

Chev Silevrado: $35,000 (max rrp)
SmarTurckII: $750,000 (est.)

$715,000 buys a ot of spare Silverados to make up for the lack of modularity. I know it's not quite as simple as that, but I suspect that they are "solving" a problem that doesn't really exist.

Xix.

Re:The truck is the cheapest part..

[Anonymous Coward]

In this case,it buys one and change, as they are $500,000 per.

Maybe I miseed your point?

Some Spyware

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a vehicle designed for URBAN combat and survellience. Monitoring email? Sounds like TEMPEST [eskimo.com] stuff. This vehicle would be used against new threats...like domestic terrorism hmmmm? Do you want the US military performing survellience on home soil? THINK about this people instead of making kiddie toy jokes...

Damn.

Hey buddy, with its hyperluminous 'Dazzler' headlights and rotating laser cannon you might notice it parked outside your house.

Sold to civilians?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. There IS a market for this, actually...

Rap stars! Schwartzenegger! More rap stars!
They've probably thought about it, look at the chromed bumpers and "stereo CD player" (wtf? Stereo player in an Army vehicle? Yeah, right, just to make sure the troops inside don't hear what's surrounding them).

Well... I decided the Hummer was too small and slim for me. So I'm gonna want that.

Retrofitting is for COMMIES!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Retrofitting is EXACTLY what the BUSHCO. doesn't want. How else are they going to justify all your money they put into new "technology" to safeguard your constitution...

Oh yeah... The Army doesn't defend the constitution, and neither does Bush. I always thought that the Army would be sick of the Mercenary work you do around the world for the corporatists.

Save America! Don't save Iraq!

yep

[zogger]

yep...and no

Information I have is that a huge amount of psych profiling is going on inside the government, both the alleged "civil" branches and the military. Those that would "play ball" with any edicts-ANY edicts-will remain inside CONUS. Ones that are still useful waging war overseas will BE overseas once it starts to "get hairy". Backup forces for internal use will come from some of the newer NATO member states,primarily the old warsaw pact nations, and perhaps some other places, notably mexico.

Humans are humans. In the 20th century the amount of people killed by their own governments is way more than people killed by foreign governments in warfare, ie, nation invading another nation. Every one of those goons taking part in the demonization and persecution of their own people was "someone's father, son, brother, uncle", etc, but they all just "followed orders" when it got down to it. It happened. It's just data.

Obviously not "everyone" would go along with it, but "enough" would. I know too many people now in both the military and in the police(ex now of course) who have quit and gotten out for these and some other reasons, their basic reasons are "they don't like what they are seeing". The older guys are more than a bit concerned over how things have changed. I can't really recreate from memory all the conversations I have had, but that's really it in simple fashion.

YMMV of course, but these are some of the reasons I write as I do, I have to, by what my research and personal anecdotals are leading me towards as analysis. If it was different I would state as such, and write differently. I don't enjoy stating such, but I think it is important enough to take the time to do so when the occassion presents itself.

couple of urls for anyone's perusal, first is to some articles from aid & abet, a publication by and for police, guard and active duty, all of whom recognize the dangers I am speaking of, and have themselves gone out on a limb to comment about what they know:
http://www.uhuh.com/guns/aid-abet/aa-index. htm

another good resource from alex jone's infowars.com site
http://infowars.com/videos.html#takeover

think of it more as a wakeup call than an indictment, as forewarned is forearmed, my purpose isn't to "dis" anyone

one reply for AC, thank you for comments and you are welcome

here ya go

[zogger]

enjoy

one reply for an AC

thank you and you are welcome for the comments

BTW,I don't do drugs or drink. Data is data, deal with it if you choose to, or ignore it. Your call, not mine.

Police, hell. How about the USPS?

[Anonymous Coward]

The USPS has given veterans preferential hiring status for years. My guess is that they are really training "sleeper" super-soldiers for nighttime genocide missions (either that or they'll jsut use those incapacitationg weapons initially and conduct a second sweep to tattoo the barcode on our asses and prod us onto cattle cars). What other organization in the US do you think can go door-to-door covering every single residence in the US in a matter of HOURS? The occasional "freak" shooting as a post office is probably due to bad reactions to the severe indoctrinization programs. Most of them become hard as steel, while a couple wig out here and there. Watch out for the midnight package you'll be getting courtesy of the USPS. I only know this because I refuse to remove my tin-foil hat.

wow, that was funny

[zogger]

--tell ya what mr funny troll, why don't you tell your theory to the surviving relatives of the people who wound up here. Or perhaps, some of these folks survivors might interest you. Too far away to find them? Then maybe some of the survivors from this area might be more convenient to find. Maybe you live closer to the midwest, this might be of interest.

Despotism starts slow. A war with another country they can "believe in". anything closer to home just 'can't happen". People just "can't believe they would do that"

History shows "they do"

Anything else is just a little too hard to comprehend for most people. "Bad stuff" is only on TV, it doesn't really exist. There's a term used, I didn't invent it but it's accurate for this phenomenon, it's called "cognitive dissonance".

When I was a younger man, I watched 5 cops stomp another young man to death. His "crime" was exercising his first amendment in public, definetly non violently, as I was right there, maybe 10 yards away, watched the whole deal go down. It never even made it to the newspaper, no one was ever charged. No pictures exist, cameras on the scene got confiscated.

They were laughing as they did it

I won't forget

one reply for an AC, thanks for the comments and you are welcome

Re:here ya go - proof look at most ed majors

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice article When I was in college (not that long ago) there were 2 classes of people in the education major - the ones who wanted to be there, and the ones who failed everywhere else. This explained alot of what happened to me in K-12.

welcome

[zogger]

---you are welcome. Glad someone read it. If you can ever catch her being interviewed live it's worth it. Rense.com *might* have her in their audio archives, but last time I looked his archives were still in the messed up stage of being moved and hosted at a different place, but it might be worth a search on his site. Also if you explore the links off that original page I linked to you can find some more info, pity the book isn't completely available for download though.

Re:My word.

[Anonymous Coward]

"What do they teach in schools these days, anyway?"

Socialism 101 and PC

(this has to be said)

[jago25_98]

I'd like to place an order via the usual route

Yours,

Hussien

A nice rap video accessory

[jpop32]

Anyone wanna take a bet, how long will it take before you see one of these in a rap video?

Last Post!

[alpg]

A sad spectacle. If they be inhabited, what a scope for misery and folly.
If they be not inhabited, what a waste of space.
-- Thomas Carlyle, looking at the stars

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...