Slashdot Mirror


Military Tech for Daily Life

PreacherTom writes "It is nothing new to see technology from military and governmental endeavors change daily life profoundly. One only has to look at the fruits of the space program (from computers to microwave ovens to Tang). New military gear is on the horizon that promises to do the same, including biosensors, bandages that clot blood using soundwaves, and the ubiquitous Swiss Army Pen."

21 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Informative

    The obvious examples are the internet, GPS devices, super-glue, etc... (Incidentally, speaking of super-glue, it works very well for what the military originally had in mind for it, which is closing wounds: next time you have a bad cut, try it, it works wonders.)

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by jd · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes yes yes, but what have the Romans ever done for us?

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by presentt · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, I think the parent poster is correct. I heard it was first used to close wounds in Vietnam, but was developed for other reasons. See cyanoacrylate, the compound in most super glues.

      --
      I decided to stop stealing cynical quotes to use as a signature line.
    3. Re:Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by twiddlingbits · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Super Glue has the same ingredients are "Tissue Glue" they use after surgery instead of external stitches to close the skin. Using Tissue glue seems to help minimize the scars. I've also used it on my dogs to glue a wound together (small wound) and save a trip to the vet for stitches. Just using SuperGlue out of the tube could be risky as it may not be sterile and you could get a nasty infection, thats the only downside. The glue that is used to attach artifical fingernails is the same as SuperGlue so if you have some of that, it IS Sterile.

    4. Re:Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by humuhumunukunukuapu' · · Score: 4, Informative
      --
      i saw the baby, and the baby looked at me
    5. Re:Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by suv4x4 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It hurted like pain

      Nice, another gem from the "don't post while still sleeping department"

    6. Re:Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by kfg · · Score: 4, Informative

      The obvious examples are. . .

      Are often wrong, at least when attributed to the space program. Take Tang, for instance. I was born before Sputnik, but I drank Tang as a child. It is the product of General Foods, invented by the same man who brought us Cool Whip and Pop Rocks (died, 2004). The motivation for inventing all of these was purely civilian profit.

      Other things that didn't come out of the space program, Velcro (invented by a Frenchman picking burrs off his dog, circa 1940) and Teflon (invented at Dupont in 1938 while researching refrigeration units).

      Electronic computers got a kick in the pants from the Manhatten Project (not the space program), but this came mainly in the form of money and a deadline for machines already in development for use in civilian business (it's IBM, afterall).

      Gunpowder, invented for toys (like rockets). High explosives, invented for civilian tunneling/mining operations.

      For the most part (there are exceptions) the military takes preexisting civilian technology and spurs its development a bit by adding funding and pressure. We'd still have the stuff without it, it would just take a little longer for the market to provide the capital. They actually refused funding for the development of the automobile and airplane. Even guns have mostly been developed purely in the private sector in the hopes of selling them to the military at some later date. Napoleon and Thomas Jefferson were big players in providing actual government funding to spur the development of existing gun technologies, creating the market for inventing on speculation.

      Overall, prizes are often the most effective means the military uses to spur development. Civilians will spend their entire lives inventing to collect a prize of lower value than they simply could have made working in an office somewhere; without all the capital outlay - but inventors aren't that sort of person, are they?

      The military/space program is a good customer, but only rarely do anything directly and it's even rarer for them to prompt the discovery of something we wouldn't have gotten in time anyway.

      Maybe the microwave oven (invented by accident while working on radar) - maybe.

      They have certainly provided a good practicum for accelerated development of treatments/surguries of catastrophic injuries though; ya gotta hand it to the military for that.

      KFG

    7. Re:Military-tech always trickles down to civilians by Fred_A · · Score: 4, Informative
      Velcro (invented by a Frenchman picking burrs off his dog, circa 1940)
      A Swiss actually, although the industrial design was indeed made with a French weaver. Did you know that Velcro stood for velours et crochets (velvet and hooks) ?
      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
  2. QuikClot by GigsVT · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You can get some of that military technology today, and it's not vaporware... Quikclot powder, comes in a packet designed to be large enough to quickly stop the bleeding from a severed femoral artery.

    Useful stuff, stops bleeding very quickly. Expensive as hell though.

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    1. Re:QuikClot by twiddlingbits · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not that expensive compared with bleeding out. I'd gladly pay a few 100 bucks to live but fortunately it's not that expensive. Check out the prices on QuickClot at: http://www.z-medica.com/ordering/ordering.asp

    2. Re:QuikClot by crowbarsarefornerdyg · · Score: 4, Informative

      My EMS agency allowed us a trial run of the QuikClot, and you're right. It's amazing, especially on oozing wounds. The other device to come from the military is the Asherman Chest Seal, which is a one way valve with a large sticky surface for sucking chest wounds.

      --
      "Slapping lipstick on a pig does NOT make it Natalie Portman. Paris Hilton, maybe, but not Portman." - UncleTogie
  3. I need these by Martin+Blank · · Score: 4, Funny

    I need all of these.

    I'll tie my smartshirt (worn under the bodysuit made of liquid body armor) into the HUD on the powered exoskeleton, which I can use to assist a long and high launch of my micro spy planes as I wait for resupply by my GT Max Mini Helicopter. When I have picked out my target, I'll glide in (again wearing liquid body armor) using my Gryphon flying wing, pick off the guards using my Cornershot rifle, rescue the hostage using my Swiss Army Pen, slap an ultrasonic bandage over his wounds, and then...

    Erm...

    OK, I'm out of gadgets. Someone wanna find me a personal rocket pack capable of carrying two?

    --
    You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  4. Microwave ovens are from WWII radar by iliketrash · · Score: 5, Informative

    "One only has to look at the fruits of the space program (from computers to microwave ovens to Tang)."

    Presumably the author refers the the tube in a microwave oven called a magnetron. If so, then this was developed in World War II for use in radars. Incidentally, the invention of the transistor was a direct follow-on to WWII efforts to build crystal detectors. See the book, "The Invention that Changed the World" by Robert Buderi, a history of the development and aftermath of the invention of radar. It is said that the atomic bomb ended the war but radar won the war.

  5. Bullet-Resistant vests: by Upaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Man, I hope this trickles down (Affordably) to the masses. Anything that hardens on impact would be great for those of us that attend protests. Its not so much the bullets and stabbing that worries me, but the savage beatings that we recieve. Though having protection is good when some rookie decides to fire rubber bullets into the crowd. Hasn't happened to me yet, but with how peacful protesters are being treated, its only a matter of time.

    --
    3 degrees of separation from Vladimir Putin
  6. Re:which raises the question... by Guinness+Pig · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Okay, let's not get carried away with paranoia about what the military is capable of. Do you really think they need to create something to send concentrated ultrasonic waves to cause a lethal blood clot? What, are you expecting Corollas with big ass woofers blaring Ludacris to make an appearance on the battlefield? They don't need to make blood clots to kill people. Perfectly mundane things like bullets, missiles and various projectile explosives work perfectly fine to mess up someone's day. I spent six years in the military, and you give them far too much credit. They ain't that clever.

  7. What about my lawn? by st0rmshad0w · · Score: 4, Funny

    What about something to keep those damn kids off my lawn?

  8. part of this program already cut- landwarrior by docinthemachine · · Score: 5, Informative

    Several of these technologies are part of the FCS (future combat system) including the soldier of the future - Landwarrior program. However the government has just cut this program. You can read more about it -- and all of the future medical devices lost in the shuffle-- here: http://docinthemachine.com/2006/12/08/army-axing-h igh-tech-soldier-of-tomorrow-medtech-losses-predic ted/

  9. Re:which raises the question... by dingDaShan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Our secret blood clot weapon has been slowly invading other countries. A few years back they just opened one in China. I'm lovin it

  10. the good side of military spending by 2ms · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The good side of military spending is that, other than during times of war, the fraction of the money that goes to the military for having troops around and building few hundred tanks every once in a while is tiny compared to the amount of money that goes toward science, research, technology. For every troop that is getting paid to be on base, the military is probably putting food on the tables of 30 researchers or engineers to develop new technologies. For example, lets say the military gets a new model of tank. Well, the cost of actual steel, plastic, computer chips, etc that constitute the tanks that are produced themselves are really nothing compared to the amount of money that went into advancing technologies and employing engineers. A B2 bomber costs a couple billion because incredible science and technology had to be realized in order to make the plane possible. Like 20 of them or something were ever to be actually made. That price doesn't reflect the sum of the physical components and labor of assembling them, but rather, the price tag reflects the amount of engineering and science work that had to be done to realize the level of technology necessary for the existence of such a plane.

    The bright side of military spending is that most of that money basically goes to putting food on the tables of tens of thousands of engineers in our country. With labor costs so high and manufacturing going to everywhere in the world other than our own country, technology is our stock-in-trade. As it turns out, the structure of the govt sponsoring military technology programs with a long-term and unified approach in contrast to the much more duplicative and reactive, smaller investments for shorter-term results, approach seen in the development of technology only in the hands of individual companies reacting to market pressures method, has been very fruitful indeed.

    1. Re:the good side of military spending by 2short · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "For every troop that is getting paid to be on base, the military is probably putting food on the tables of 30 researchers or engineers to develop new technologies"

      Active troop strength is something like 1.5 million, so by your estimate that's 45 million researchers bettering the world on the militaries dime. Almost 1 in 6 Americans are military funded scientists! Wow, I had no idea.

      You'll forgive me if I take the rest of your rosy assesment with a little grain of salt?

  11. Re:which raises the question... by KillerBob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I draw your attention to the big yellow arrow on rocket launchers that you point at the enemy?

    We get some pretty cool toys in the army, but it's all designed so that you can use it when you're being shot at after having had 15 minutes of sleep in the last week. Just because it's designed for idiots doesn't mean that the folks designing it are idiots. Actually, they're pretty brilliant, IMO... why bother developing a super-expensive way to kill somebody that centralizes your killing power in one spot when a 5.56x45 FMJ round costs less than $0.30 and kills them just as dead? When the bad guys develop armour that can safely protect them from everything we use on the battlefield, you'll start seeing new ways of killing people being developed. Until then, it's a waste of money.

    --
    If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb