Slashdot Mirror


Iron Man Is Another Step Closer To a Reality

arshadk writes with this excerpt from an article at CNN: "Inside a prosthetic shell of metal and hydraulics, Raytheon test engineer Rex Jameson is putting an XOS-2 exoskeleton through its paces. As the crowd watches, Jameson uses his robot hydraulic arm to shadowbox, break three inches of pine boards and toss around 72-pound ammunition cases like a bored contestant on the 'World's Strongest Man.' The suit moves as he moves and amplifies his strength 17-fold. ... Raytheon is seeking to develop the suits to help the US military carry supplies, and claims that one operator in an exoskeleton suit can do the work of two to three soldiers. If all goes as planned, the company hopes to see 'Iron Man' suits deployed in the field by 2015."

4 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Intended Use? by Linsaran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is not exactly new, they've been working on this for a while now. The only thing stopping them from putting armor plating on it and turning it into power armor is the battery life of the suit. Even with the most expensive batteries we can manufacture, there's a maximum opperational time of about 30 minutes on the XOS-2 when disconnected from an external power source. Needing to be plugged in to operate sort of limits their military applications to grunt work and MAYBE defensive deployments. Still if someone can work out the power issues, functional and deployable power armor is really only a manufacturing run away.

    --
    In a bit of shameless internet panhandling, I accept Litecoin Donations at Lbd2oH9QsthD1GfuUXPyka12YxvWJYnBVf
  2. Re:defense spending cuts should be happening by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's an old saying among military officers: 'amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.' Go ahead and use the money to buy more guns. Find out what happens when they run out of ammo. If the US armed forces can resupply two or three times faster than another military because of advances made in logistics (like this one), then that's a formidable real advantage.

    I'm glad the Pentagon has a broader perspective than yours. Modern armies, scratch that, ALL armies can only function on the back of efficient logistical support. The more efficient and effective that support, the more advantage that army has, even in the face of superior numbers or a harsh environment.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  3. Re:defense spending cuts should be happening by CraftyJack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you can deploy three or four fewer people to an airstrip someplace, and unload a bunch of emergency medical supplies in a fraction of the time, you're reducing costs, not adding to them.

    Color me skeptical. If you really are deploying fewer people, great. But I suspect that something like this has a serious logistics tail. If it takes three people to operate and support the thing, that's no good. If you have to wait two days to get it working again when it breaks down, you're back to square one - without the number of people you need to accomplish the task at hand.

  4. Re:Skynet by geekoid · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Iron Man, Iron Man
    Does whatever an iron can
    Presses pants really fine
    Keeps those pleats right in line
    Look out! Here comes the Iron Man"

    There is also a Tony Starch joke in here someplace.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect