DARPA Open-Sources Military Vehicle Design

Velcroman1 writes "The army's secretive technology division has been collecting dozens of ideas for the design of its in-the-works rescue vehicle via a social-media contest — relying solely on the power of the crowd to get the next big thing built. Local Motors of Chandler, Ariz., is running the competition, officially known as the Experimental Crowd-derived Combat-support Vehicle (XC2V) Design Challenge, through March 10. It's not so different from when multiple users edit a page on Wikipedia, Local Motors CEO John Rogers said. 'Effectively, we want to co-create all aspects of a vehicle,' Rogers explained. 'The Wikipedia method of co-creation is really not far off from the way we talk about it.'"

Comments

MIC

[Nidi62]

And yet somehow it will still get built by the same contractors the military already uses, have huge cost overruns, weigh too much, and be unable to fully fulfill the mission for which it was originally designed. The problem with our military-industrial complex isn't in the design stage. Historically we've had brilliant designers. The issues arise in the politics involved with defense acquisitions. Our procurement and testing system is notoriously corrupt. Preference is always given to the same big companies. If a new design/weapon/technology threatens some general's(or congressman's) pet project, it is dropped. Start looking outside the usually suspects for stuff like this, not designing. Make defense contracts actually be real bid contracts, and keep them adhered to the contract.

Re:MIC

[Anonymous Psychopath]

If you're talking about the military, you have no idea what you're talking about, and you clearly haven't looked at the equipment which the US military currently owns.

Like standard issue M-4s using 5.56 ammunition, with an effective range of roughly 300 yards being used in Afghanistan, where average engagements take place at ranges of 400 yards and up(And the documented reluctance of DoD to go to much more capable calibers such as 6.5mm, and the massive amount iof time it took for SCARs and ACRs to even get into the hands of troops)? Or planning to use F-35s in close air support missions, when a small, inexpensive turboprop plane is both more efficient and much cheaper? MRAPs for Iraq that have virtually no other use than in Iraq-style conflicts? The whole Littoral Combat Ship fiasco, with the munitions packages not even close to being workable? The KC-X mess? Do I have to go on?

There are also successes, such as the M1 Abrams and the M25 rifle (just off the top of my head). It's disingenuous to claim that the military is unable to deliver any workable combat systems to the troops. It is accurate to say that they don't do so consistently.

Re:MIC

[Nidi62]

You suggest that a new single-role fleet should be stood up instead of using a multi-role aircraft, then bitch about a single-role vehicle being procured for a specific theater.

The A-10 is one of the best aircraft ever made, and it was a single-purpose fleet. And small turboprop CAS vehicles can me used in any COIN operation. Many of these planes are even modular: they can carry weapons and they can carry observation and surveillance packages. And about a multi-role fleet: being able to do a lot of stuff ok means you can't do anything good.

Re:MIC

[adamchou]

Like standard issue M-4s using 5.56 ammunition, with an effective range of roughly 300 yards being used in Afghanistan

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. First off, the Army standard issue weapon is the M16A2. Some Army units and most marine units carry the M4. On top of that, none of the military rifles are ranged in yards. They're all ranged in meters. In fact, the Marines are required to qualify in their rifle at targets up to 500m away. And for the biggest mistake of them all:
Describe the ranges for the M16/A2 Rifle.
Maximum Range - 3,600 meters
Max Effective Range for a Point Target - 550 meters
Max Effective Range for an Area Target - 800 meters
Describe the ranges for the M4 Rifle.
Maximum Range - 3,600 meters
Max Effective Range for a Point Target - 500 meters
Max Effective Range for an Area Target - 600 meters
References: http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m16a2/m16a2-study-guide.shtml
http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m4/m4-study-guide.shtml

Overly constrained design space

[Bookwyrm]

I looked at the contest, and thought that the design constraints they are putting on the entries are pretty tight. If I recall/interpret things correctly, the vehicle must be designed to use the given frame, the given engine/drive system, and also, the driver position cannot be changed.

That puts a kind of serious limitation on just how creative you can get. If you could at least move the driver around, you could try for some interesting arrangements or variations, but if the driver has to be in the one standard spot, and the wheel position is already determined, and the frame... they are going to get an awful lot of designs which are just variations on a theme, I suspect.

Re:Overly constrained design space

[icebike]

There are plenty of reasons to dictate certain thing, wheels location for stability and transportability (bridge widths, RORO lash points) and be recoverable with current equipment., frames for strength, and driver position for consistency in convoys if nothing else. Engines as well, because somebody has to have training and spare parts and interchangeability is a good thing.

Right now is a pretty good time to be designing this sort of thing because we have a lot of guys with in-theater experience, and we JUST finished making what was a Jeep replacement into an armored vehicle at great expense in terms of money and lives. We've got guys in combat zones with widely differing terrain.

If we can guard against making the perfect vehicle for desert environments, (and thereby building an army perfectly suited to fighting the LAST war) we should be ok.

Re:Overly constrained design space

[crow_t_robot]

In every RFP that you see these days for vehicles it is stipulated that the vehicle must conform to federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) which places a massive constraint around the design in one line item. I find it hard to disagree because all of these vehicles do have to drive on regular roads and highways next to civilians without endangering them because it doesn't have marker/stop/turn lights configured properly or the driver is in some prone driving position which limits his peripheral view for changing lanes.

You keep using that word...

[Lemming42]

Open Source != Crowd Source

So they should have called the program ...

[PPH]

... Pimp My Humvee.

Pimp My Humvee was a 2004 *reality* show ...

[perpenso]

... Pimp My Humvee.

Pimp My Humvee was a 2004'ish *reality* show in Iraq.

"And Rocco's Humvee is, today, equipped--with "Gypsy racks"--steel-plated cages around the gunner--and other add-on, improvised hardware, known as "hillbilly armor." "It's Mel Gibson 'Road Warrior' stuff," says Capt. John Pinter, the battalion's maintenance officer. "We're not shooting for pretty over here." This is the ugly reality that National Guard Spc. Thomas Wilson was apparently trying to convey to Donald Rumsfeld in Kuwait last week ... Wilson asked Rumsfeld: "Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?""
http://www.newsweek.com/2004/12/19/hillbilly-armor.html

Re:MIC or why our bullets don't work in Afghan

[WillAffleckUW]

once again Nidi62 is correct. Seriously, don't try to tell ex-mil like us that the MIC works, when we worked within the system.

I've had colleagues I worked with and soldiers I trained bite it in Afghanistan and my son's uncle is there right now.

And it's clusterfvck city, if you know what I mean, only used to justify out of control weapons programs we can't afford and never could.

Re:New slogan...

[c0lo]

We're still using your taxes, why not take your ideas as well?

But WHAT specialization?

[SmallFurryCreature]

What is this vehicle supposed to do?

If it is for the Afghan war, then the US is using the wrong tactics. America keeps thinking in bases and convoys between them. They conquer a bit of ground, build some good will, then retreat to their bases, give the enemy time to do his work, then do it all over again.

The war needs feet on the ground, soldiers out in the field, every village a few soldiers so the enemy has now where to move to. That is risky for the individual soldier because he doesn't have a full base behind him and even riskier for the good will because there is NOTHING like meeting an American to get a deep seated hatred for them but it has been proven to work in the past.

Simply put, if you put a very small unit in each village and along important roads and crossings, you remove the capability for the enemy to move unseen and plants bombs. No bombs means you can have your convoys moving on your schedule, not that of the enemy and your soldiers can concentrate on fighting, not on when the truck they are in will blow up.

But it requires a total attitude change. No more bits of the USA imported into Afghanistan but soldiers mixing with the locals and living with the locals.

You don't need all that advanced gear for that. An ordinary jeep to make travel easy and to haul supplies and a small fortification. A constant air screen overhead so any attackers can be quickly responded to in force and voila, hearts and minds can be won without the enemy coming in every night to undo your work during the day.

It is the cop on the beat vs the high tech chopper that doesn't fly at night.

But you can't win a big defence contract with that, or make the bling at the pentagon at peace time.

Look at the docu Restrepo for a total failure in strategy and tactics. The soldiers comment on it themselves, they sit in their bases and the enemy has full freedom of movement everywhere else. No patrols don't help. You need to be out there ALL the time. Especially if your patrols are so easily spotted. The enemy can't subvert the locals if you are with the locals, you can then do it all every hour of the day by showing that you are... actually that seems to be the biggest problem. WATCH Restrepo again, through the eyes of a native. Winning you over yet?

No? Then that is the real problem and no fancy gadget will help.

Re:Hoo Yah!

[mjwx]

Is that a beer keg strapped to the front bumper?

Uh, no sir, it's a tactical beverage dispenser. MK II