Slashdot Mirror
Land Warrior Army Suits Simplified, Linux-ized
Dosco Jones writes 'The Army is drastically simplifying the makeup of its high-tech soldier ensemble, the Land Warrior, in an effort to make the system less prone to failures and easier to use,' National Defense reports. Defense Tech continues: 'After the last version of Land Warrior failed reliability tests earlier this year, the Army switched gears and decided to make the system less complex and modify the hardware to make it compatible with the new [and controversial] Stryker infantry vehicle. Changes include a more simplified data bus and a Linux-based operating system, as opposed to Windows. 'Evidence shows that Linux is more stable. We are moving in general to where the Army is going, to Linux-based OS', says the program's manager, Lt. Col. Dave Gallop."
Evidence shows that Linux is more stable
I'm sure they'll be hearing from Commander Gates about that one shortly...
-insert a witty something-
Each fighter would get equipped with a small, 500 megahertz computer running Windows 2000...
"Although it has been much improved over earlier prototypes, the system was deemed 'unreliable' and unlikely to survive the rigors of combat," National Defense says.
The thought of Windows even being considered for such a mission critical application (i.e. keeping our boys alive) scares the bejeezus out of me... kinda brings a new meaning to "blue screen of death".
The Marines are going to run FreeBSD, because linux just isn't tough enough.
"The enemy is approaching. Fire away!"
"I can't, sir... There's no compatible driver for this missile launcher yet!"
I recommend downgrading all versions of Soldier to the basic "naked man with stick" functionality which was immensely popular and robust for a good portion of the version history of Soldier. There'd be a lot less problems in the long run, as long as all users comply with the downgrade.
Freedom: "I won't!"
...it's all made by the lowest bidder. And by that criterion, Linux is the clear choice.
One thing that nobody's managed to explain to me is how your average 11 Bravo is expected to carry an extra fifty-odd pounds of electronics.
Land Warrior? I'd settle for a fucking infantry boot that wasn't the height of 1950's technology.
Sadly, we run Windows NT. We'd also never get expensive crap like a warrior suit... hell, my deuce-gear was first issued in 1964 according to the supply ticket.
Sure, we got the cool new camouflague that makes us look like the Waffen SS, but as far as cool crap like this, we have to wait 5 years for the Army to get tired of playing with it.
All's true that is mistrusted
"The minesweeper simulation did not seem to adequately train our engineers"
I'll let other /.ers discuss the reliability of Linux over Windows, but an interesting note is that the original LW had 2 processors but the newer version has 1. The question is whether part of the reliability issues on 2 processors is due to Windows handling multiprocessors or simply the hassles of getting 2 processors to work together. The articles do not discuss in detail what really happened. Simplicity is however a good thing when it comes to reliability. It would be something if the stuck with a 2 processor design but made it work with Linux.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
"You have loaded new ammo in your gun -- Please contact Microsoft for a new activation key."
BSD is designed. Linux is grown. C++ libs
The Military Analysis Network has a more complete description of the Landwarrior's various subsystems. Sounds like you would need a very stable OS to handle all the communications, geographic, thermal imaging, and directional software it must be running.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/gro und/iav.htm
"In February 2002 the Army named its new interim armored vehicle after two soldiers who received the Medal of Honor. The Stryker is named in honor of Spc. 4 Robert F. Stryker, who received the Medal of Honor for his actions during the Vietnam War, and Pfc. Stuart S. Stryker, who received the award for his actions during World War II. Both men were killed in action. They were not related."
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/mohiib1.htm
"Rank and organization. Private First Class, U.S. Army, Company E, 513th Parachute Infantry, 17th Airborne Division. Place and date: Near Wesel, Germany, 24 March 1945. Entered service at: Portland, Oreg. Birth. Portland, Oreg. G.O. No.: 117, 11 December 1945. Citation. He was a platoon runner, when the unit assembled near Wesel, Germany after a descent east of the Rhine. Attacking along a railroad, Company E reached a point about 250 yards from a large building used as an enemy headquarters and manned by a powerful force of Germans with rifles, machineguns, and 4 field pieces. One platoon made a frontal assault but was pinned down by intense fire from the house after advancing only 50 yards. So badly stricken that it could not return the raking fire, the platoon was at the mercy of German machine gunners when Pfc. Stryker voluntarily left a place of comparative safety, and, armed with a carbine, ran to the head of the unit. In full view of the enemy and under constant fire, he exhorted the men to get to their feet and follow him. Inspired by his fearlessness, they rushed after him in a desperate charge through an increased hail of bullets. Twenty-five yards from the objective the heroic soldier was killed by the enemy fusillades. His gallant and wholly voluntary action in the face of overwhelming firepower, however, so encouraged his comrades and diverted the enemy's attention that other elements of the company were able to surround the house, capturing more than 200 hostile soldiers and much equipment, besides freeing 3 members of an American bomber crew held prisoner there. The intrepidity and unhesitating self-sacrifice of Pfc. Stryker were in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service."
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/mohviet2.htm
"Rank and organization: Specialist Fourth Class, U.S. Army, Company C, 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry, 1st Infantry Division. Place and date: Near Loc Ninh, Republic of Vietnam, 7 November 1967. Entered service at: Throop, N.Y. Born: 9 November 1944, Auburn, N.Y. Citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty. Sp4c. Stryker, U.S. Army, distinguished himself while serving with Company C. Sp4c. Stryker was serving as a grenadier in a multicompany reconnaissance in force near Loc Ninh. As his unit moved through the dense underbrush, it was suddenly met with a hail of rocket, automatic weapons and small arms fire from enemy forces concealed in fortified bunkers and in the surrounding trees. Reacting quickly, Sp4c. Stryker fired into the enemy positions with his grenade launcher. During the devastating exchange of fire, Sp4c. Stryker detected enemy elements attempting to encircle his company and isolate it from the main body of the friendly force. Undaunted by the enemy machinegun and small-arms fire, Sp4c. Stryker repeatedly fired grenades into the trees, killing enemy snipers and enabling his comrades to sever the attempted encirclement. As the battle continued, Sp4c. Stryker observed several wounded members of his squad in the killing zone of an enemy claymore mine. With complete disregard for his safety, he threw himself upon the mine as it was detonated. He was mortally wounded as his body absorbed the blast and shielded his comrades from the explosion. His unselfish actions were responsible for saving the lives of at least 6 of his fellow soldiers. Sp4c. Stryker's great personal bravery was in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflects great credit upon himself, his unit, and the U.S. Army."
The army's been very good about its transformation plan. In case some /. readers haven't heard it in its full glory, here it is:
OK, pre-9/11, the Army embarked on a very controversial plan. Basically, they looked at all the wars that we have any realistic chance of being in. Then they looked at what we have to fight them.
The problem was this: we have oodles of heavy tanks, which pretty much kick all kinds of ass. But they can only win where they can be brought to bear. They're so heavy that they require massive transportation time and cost (not to mention a friendly port to set up in). Another problem is that while tracked vehicles can be heavier and go places that wheeled vehicles can't, they are very maintenance intensive. They need lots of fuel and spare parts, which requires still more ships or a massive airlift.
Bottom line: unless we're fighting on the Korean penninsula or in Europe, where were pre-positioned, it would take six months to fight a war anywhere, and that's assuming we had a friendly neighbor to give us a place to set up in.
The result was the Army transformation plan. The idea is that they would get phase out most of their heavy tank divisions, and replace them with smaller, modular formations called Brigade Combat Teams. The BCT's job would be this: assuming the Air Force can clear a drop zone, we ought to be able to put a brigade anywhere in the world, opposed or not, within 96 hours of the President saying so. Four brigades within 14 days, and more (I don't remember how many) within 90 days. That's even if we drop in the middle of a shooting enemy.
One way we could do this was to get a vehicle that could be a little less armed and armored, and could be a little less mobile, but MUST be air-transportable. That's the Stryker. Think of it (excuse the roleplaying reference) as an Omnimech: a vehicle that is designed to be reconfigurable to do lots of different missions. So there's a communications loadout, and a tank-killer loadout and an infantry-carrier loadout, and lots more.
Post 9/11 lessons have been mixed. On one hand, invincible tanks in Germany did us absolutely no good when we suddenly found ourselves at war in Afghanistan. On the other, when we had a year to move them to Iraq, our tanks did extremely well-- and as DefenseTech points out, absorbs fire that would have destroyed Strykers. The gripping hand is that long occupations like Iraq are better suited to Strykers, LAV's or armored Hummers than to heavy tanks and APC's.
So, like most things, one tech isn't necessarily better or worse than another. You use whatever best fits the situation you're in. On that basis, I like the Stryker. An all-Stryker Army? No. But it is a very valuable program.
Most American war plans in the 90's were built around the idea of a set-piece conflict with an adversary (like China, Iraq or North Korea) that while not exactly equal in technology was at least comparable. 9/11 proved that asymmetrical conflicts would also happen: conflicts where the enemy's main goal is to demoralize our political leadership because they can't defeat us militarily.
And in those cases, we can't count on someone granting us entry, we may need to move very fast, and it might be in some remote corner of the world, far from our forces.
Related to that is improved command and control. Many of our casualties in the Gulf War were friendly-fire, so the Army worked on reducing that, too. Vehicles can now see on a map where others in their unit are (just like in a first-person shooter like BF1942). The problem is that the equipment is still too heavy and battery-draining to be useful for infantry. Hopefully, a vehicle-run 'subnet' can help alleviate this. And running it w/ Linux will hopefully improve efficiency and reliability.
Overall, I think the Army's on the right track with this. I'd hate to lose our heavy tank divisions-- those come in mighty handy. But a less powerful force that can actually get to the battle is better than an invincible juggernaut that is stranded somewhere else.