Slashdot Mirror


The US Army Is Rolling Out Superhuman Hearing to Soldiers (popularmechanics.com)

An anonymous reader writes: The U.S. Army has developed an all-in-one hearing system that not only boosts the hearing of troops in the field, it also acts to cut down the noise of battle. The system, known as Tactical Communication and Protective System (TCAPS), is currently rolling out to units in the field. TCAPS is $2,000 pair of earbuds designed to limit battlefield noise exposure, cutting off noise that reaches a set decibel threshold. The wearer can still hear gunshots and estimate their direction, but the noise is dampened to a non-damaging level thanks to microphones that detect the noise, and internals that use sound canceling technology to modify it for a wearer's ears. At the same time, the decibel cap allows TCAPS-equipped soldiers to hear the voices of others around him, including through radios and other communications equipment.

117 comments

  1. So... by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a pair of Bose QuietComfort 35, army edition?

    1. Re:So... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 2

      Or similar. There are several brands of form-fitted ear plugs that boost sounds below a certain dB threshold, and cut sounds above a certain dB threshold... $200-$400

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    2. Re:So... by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's retail, I assume, and per pair?

      So extrapolating based on hammers & toilet seats they'll set Uncle Sam back by 6 grand a set.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:So... by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 1

      Basically; we had these in the Marine Corps. They sucked. Army has more money, so maybe they'll be able to/willing to devote more money into the development and make them not suck.

      Still an extra piece of gear to keep track of and take care of and inventory and pack and carry...not worth it.

    4. Re:So... by plover · · Score: 1

      You could at least have read The Fine Summary above, which actually has "$2000 pair" as the first words of the link to The Fine Article. No extrapolation necessary.

      --
      John
    5. Re:So... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Actually you do need to extrapolate. Presumably that $2000/pair was the price for a evaluation lot, and if they bought a much larger batch the price would be lower. Of course, given military procurement practices that's not guaranteed.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    6. Re:So... by swb · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And something else that takes exotic batteries to run.

      You'd think you'd get a huge amount of the value out of a pair of fairly generic in-ear earplugs, which take no batteries and can get wet/lost/abused for little cost.

    7. Re:So... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yup, quick google search for "electronic ear plug"

      A buddy who spent 3 years in Afghanistan as a contractor (K9 handler) used 'em and bought a few extra sets for the soldiers he was serving with, very useful for both guard duty and house clearing. His biggest issue was keeping both the plugs and his ear holes clean - as you can imagine any little bit of grit or dirt makes them uncomfortable to wear.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    8. Re:So... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

      You could at least have read The Fine Summary above

      [looks at userID]

      Stop using grandpa's account, you little hooligan!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    9. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, hopefully it doesn't become just another reason to deny VA disability claims.

    10. Re:So... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      You could at least have read The Fine Summary above, which actually has "$2000 pair" as the first words of the link to The Fine Article. No extrapolation necessary.

      Figure cost-overruns and add 60% for lobbying costs and bribes. Maybe another 35-40% for hookers and blow and flying high-ranking government officials to the live demonstrations of the prototype in Bangkok, Amsterdam and Las Vegas, you'll get over $6000 per before you know it. Of course, they will be assembled in China to keep costs down though, so add another 25%.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    11. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already deny VA hearing claims. You MIGHT get a pair of hearing aids, but beyond that your SOL.

    12. Re:So... by mrr · · Score: 5, Funny

      Get outta here, youngsters.

    13. Re:So... by plover · · Score: 1

      I look at that in reverse. A pair of Bose noise canceling earbuds comes in at about $300 retail, so the total of lobbying, bribes, hookers, blow, and Congressional junkets must approach about $1700 per pair.

      Still not bad money if you can get it.

      --
      John
    14. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What would make you think they aren't using those now? We've had those in use for decades.

      Problem is they dampen all sound, while these only stop the sound you don't want.

    15. Re:So... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Except it also boosts the sound of quiet things, so you can hear far away.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re:So... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Your ID is UNDER 9000!!!

    17. Re:So... by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Maybe that includes a Camo finish.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    18. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was here before you and will still be there after you are gone. I am one of the userId-less ones. The number of my posts is like the grains of sand in the desert and the drops of water in the ocean.

      I am Anonymous Coward, troll of trolls. Look upon my posts, ye prolifics, and despair.

    19. Re:So... by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      Your ID is UNDER 9000!!!

      Under 9000 is nothing. His ID is under 1000!

    20. Re:So... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Yeah but there's no such thing as an "OVER 1000!" joke.

    21. Re:So... by JustOK · · Score: 1

      $1700??? amateur. needs at least one comma. and per ear.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    22. Re: So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Etymotic research has been making this for years now: HTTP://etymotic.com/consumer/hearing-protection/hd15.html
      I wouldn't be surprised if the government paid some asswipe to re-brand this product and sell it for 5x the going rate... maybe even kick back some of it to the purchasing dept?
      Etymotic is known as one of the most respected brands in hearing protection for professionals in the audio industry, and they also make high quality in-ear monitors for performers and engineers (they own Sensaphonics)

    23. Re:So... by jezwel · · Score: 1

      Anon no more, Ozymandias!

    24. Re:So... by jklovanc · · Score: 2

      The QC35 has the following issues.
      1. Are headphones that are incompatable with helmets.
      2. Not waterproof or rugedized in any way.
      3. Are Bluetooth and therefore easily jammed.
      4. There are no specs on how well they cancel very loud noises.

      The QC35 are just expensive noise cancelling headphones and nothing like the earbuds described.

    25. Re:So... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course not. 1024 is the real threshold. 1000 is the shibboleth of those vicious COBOL neanderthals.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    26. Re:So... by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      Yea, I've been thinking about buying some, there are two types, ones musicians use that always keep the db level low and range ones that really only work when there are loud sudden noises.

    27. Re:So... by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      When the batteries die they just become normal ear plugs.

    28. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How well do you think the $200-$400 ones handle rain, salt water, sand, extreme heat, extreme cold, and being tossed in the bottom of a sack with gear?

    29. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most such devices clamp the sound past certain levels, meaning you hear *nothing* (except the unamplified, muffled sounds through the plugs) while an over-limit sound is happening.

      What they say: "We've been ambushed! We are pinned down, and need an airstrike on these coordinates!"
      What you hear: "We____en am______d! _______pin_________nd nee_________ike ____ese co________"

      The good ones, that manage to *only* filter out the high db noises, while allowing the quieter stuff to still be amplified and heard, run in the $400 neighborhood for over-the-ear muffs that aren't ruggedized.

    30. Re:So... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Ever priced hearing aids? $2K/pair for something with similar features is quite reasonable.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    31. Re:So... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      If you mean "That's the common price", then I must accept your assertion. If you mean "That's a reasonable price in quantity", then I can't.

      If you had a shoe custom made to fit your foot, it would also be quite expensive. But when you buy them in a standard size, it costs a lot less. Presumably the army would be buying enough that they would be ordering standard sizes rather than doing custom fitting.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    32. Re:So... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Not sure if any of the plug types are like this but there are some very slim profile muff types that not only reduce the loud, but amplify the quiet. Very nice on a range so you can clearly hear range commands, etc. And handy when you are hunting, since you can preserve stereo hearing...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    33. Re:So... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sure they would buy in bulk, and they wouldn't have to do an audiology exam of every soldier and program the hearing devices specifically for them, and that would save money. On the other hand, my hearing aids aren't MIL-SPEC, and I don't know what the Army requirements are. They doubtless expect to use them in lots of situations where I'd expect mine to fail or be unmaintainable.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    34. Re:So... by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      Part of the cost for many military procurements stems from the requirement that components and assembly either be completely domestic or, at most, are sourced from allied nations.

      It is significantly harder for an adversary to taint your equipment if none of the parts have ever been within their territory.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    35. Re:So... by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      Might have to look into it.

  2. How about proper body armor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn those priorities...

    1. Re:How about proper body armor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know, right? It's like somebody thinks improved hearing protection and improved body armor aren't mutually exclusive or something! If only they'd had you around to set them straight!

    2. Re:How about proper body armor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn those priorities...

      Yeah, so much more important to go to war in the first place...

  3. I saw that 1960's Outer Limit's episode! by the_skywise · · Score: 1

    It's also how they send the mind control beams into the soldiers too!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  4. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What?

    1. Re:What? by halivar · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry. Without more context, we can't help you.

    2. Re:What? by plover · · Score: 2

      What?

      I'm sorry. Without more context, we can't help you.

      If you'd helped him by giving him a set of noise cancelling earbuds before he lost his hearing in combat, he probably wouldn't be asking this question today.

      --
      John
  5. Next News Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Weapon industry develops weapons that goes MEOW instead of BANG!

  6. As a parent... by myowntrueself · · Score: 4, Funny

    of a toddler, I would like to have a pair of these.

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    1. Re:As a parent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      of a toddler, I would like to have a pair of these.

      As a parent...

        of two toddlers and a newborn, I would like to have a vasectomy on my pair.

    2. Re:As a parent... by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      As your neighbor, so would I.

    3. Re:As a parent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy yourself a plain pair of "active" hearing protectors used for shooting sports. They are under $100.

    4. Re:As a parent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's stopping you?

    5. Re:As a parent... by Reaper9889 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should keep guns away from your toddler? Just saying ;)

    6. Re:As a parent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The good ones still run north of 150...

    7. Re:As a parent... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Get earplugs. These are comfortable, blend in so people don't notice you are wearing them, block some sound, but you can still hear conversations through them (and when the kids go to bed, you can take them out). I like my nephews but these earplugs save my sanity.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:As a parent... by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      Get a pair of reusable Surefire's and it'll work even better. They reduce sounds over 80db and mostly pass through things under that.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    9. Re:As a parent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of a toddler, I would like to have a pair of these.

      As a parent...

        of two toddlers and a newborn, I would like to have a vasectomy on my pair.

      I have a rusty knife I am donate to the cause. LOL Then again maybe you could buy your wife a pair of stillethos and let her step on your balls with the pointy end.

  7. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    say what?

  8. Nothing new by mr.gson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Noise canceling aside, military superhuman hearing devices have been around for a long time, and the old ones look cooler, too.

  9. an army of superhumans! by shadowrat · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hear they are also equipping the troops with other super human abilities. The technology uses advanced materials to protect the soldier's feet and lower leg from damaging temperatures and surfaces that would injure a normal human foot while still allowing the user to sense when they are standing on the ground. This advanced superhuman enhancement is definitely not just called boots.

    1. Re:an army of superhumans! by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the superhuman ability to launch projectiles at many times the rate and speed of a normal human.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re:an army of superhumans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Superhuman sight goes by the name of binoculars. And superhuman farting is known as rocket launchers. Superhuman running with the help of exoskeletons known as "cars" is also quite hot.

      I mean, all of this is superhuman advertising for which I have the working title "bullshitting".

    3. Re:an army of superhumans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >superhuman farting is known as rocket launchers
      Launchers have other uses than rocket jumping, you know.

      Inferior, marginal uses, but still.

  10. Can it hear the mosquito ring tone? by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

    I'm not interested and not impressed unless it can help soldiers do that. That could enable our soldiers to use the ringtone and not miss a call while enemy prisoners wonder how they knew they got a call since they didn't hear it vibrate.

  11. About time. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Informative

    So many friends came back with massive hearing damage. the M16A4 is loud as hell and every single vet comes back with horrible tinnitus at best and major hearing damage to DEAF at worst.

    we need to tell NATO to fuck themselves and issue supressors to all troops along with these hearing protection devices.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, without the suppressors those earbuds are actually useless. The decibel level of a firearm is loud enough you have to cover the ear (full size ear muffs) to prevent damage.

    2. Re:About time. by wcrowe · · Score: 1

      I was issued ear plugs back in the early 80's. Do they not do that any more?

      Additionally, I think suppressors eventually wear out, do they not?

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    3. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not true. Earbuds are extremely effective. Earbuds with Earmuffs over them are better, but earbuds by themselves are often better than just earmuffs.

    4. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Even with a suppressor, the 5.56 nato is still not hearing safe using m855 ball rounds. They're in the neighborhood of 140-150db, and the best supressors on the market only drop it by 30db.. one fire fight and the troops ears will ring for life.

    5. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      depends on the design, a work core or k baffle one wont wear out, but they'll become really dirty and less effective (clean them to fix), but the old wipe type ones that nobody produces any more definitely had round count limits.

    6. Re:About time. by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Earplugs have a NRR of around 30 decibels (or less, of course). Ear muffs have NRR of around 30 decibels (or less of course). In my experience, they're basically the same. If you wear them both, you don't get a 60 decibel NRR though, because at that point, bone conduction starts transferring a lot of (relative) energy to your ear drum.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This acoustic filter should probably joined with a visual equivalent, considering how where the world is going. It is a high time indeed for the soldiers come back with two functioning ears, assuming that British one ear protection..

    8. Re:About time. by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      It's also just not how sound pressure works. wearing overlapping 30NRR protection gives you a combined NRR of maybe 35 at most, and an NRR of 35 doesn't just reduce what you're hearing by 35 decibels.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    9. Re:About time. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I admit I don't entirely understand how sound pressure works, but having ear muffs and ear plugs will get you to the point that opening your mouth will cause a noticeable increase in (audible) volume.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    10. Re:About time. by Wile.E.Piyote · · Score: 0

      Tinnitus is a small price to pay for voluntarily murdering other people.

    11. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does your simplistic lie comfort you?

    12. Re:About time. by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      I was mostly pointing out that NRR isn't as simple as knocking that many decibels off what you were hearing. When it comes down to it there's just no real way to be safe from anything over a certain level.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    13. Re:About time. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      30 from the supressor and another 30 from the hearing protection IS effective. and that is what we need to be doing.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    14. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And to your dismay tinnitus is produced by scalding heads of women who went to the beauty parlour. Scalding the skull makes the brain emit a signal. Do not believe it, it has happened many times, armies go to war, the enemy comes home and takes the woman simply by not using a uniform. It is called a PYRRHIC VICTORY when the victor returns only to find there are no women left and the victory is worth nothing. Cheap countermilitary tech.

    15. Re:About time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was issued ear plugs back in the early 80's. Do they not do that any more?

      Ear plugs are very limited. In the laboratory, you can get perhaps 30 or so db of reduction, but it will inevitably be lower in the field. Worse, impulsive sound is intrinsically more damaging than continuous sound - the studies show 5-10db and it might be worse for military applications (nobody can really study sound at that high of levels on human test subjects, and even animals are problematic). That means with ear plugs you could be exposed to an explosion in the range 150-210 db and have your hearing protection reducing it only 20-25db, or even less.

      That's not enough. You might be in a slit trench, with a grenade throwing shrapnel over you but not hitting you, but still getting long term hearing damage.

      Unfortunately, hearing loss rates among children are up 30% today from the 1990s, and in addition to being really bad for society, this also calls into question the standards - the thresholds for hearing damage used in industrial situations might be way off, since damage seems to be happening at lower sound levels and durations.

      There's also a concern that environmental stress could make people more susceptible to damage. Can't think of much that's more stressful than combat.

      Anything they can afford to do that works better is going to be a good thing. Even if the electronics fail, the physical design should still provide some protection. The long term cost to society of a $2000 set of ear protection is nothing compared to the costs associated with long term hearing loss (medical and otherwise).

  12. I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... is it actually better than, say, (Native) American hearing? Or Amazonian Native hearing? Possibly not, us whiteys tend to have shitty hearing and growing up in cities isn't doing us any favours either. Then there's the earbuds just about everyone's sporting, that actually supply us with loud noise to drown out the outside world's loud noises. Plenty teenagers already walk around with tinnitus. Once you have it, no fancy device is going to make it go away.

    Even so, I'd like to try these. There's plenty noise here even if it isn't actually loud, it's annoying enough that I routinely wear (shoddy, cheap, scuffed) hearing protection and trying something else might be interesting. Though I wouldn't be able to stump up the price tag. All the more's the pity.

  13. hearing protection by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    So basically they are smart earplugs?

    Hopefully will cut down on the veterans with permanent hearing loss.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    1. Re:hearing protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully will cut down on the veterans with permanent hearing loss.

      The much cheaper solution is to give them blinds instead of real ammo. Cuts down all kinds of sick veterans. Only problem is: it cuts down the healthy veterans too.

      Maybe use drones?

    2. Re:hearing protection by The-Ixian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      enough with the "smart" crap... they are not smart, your phone isn't smart and neither is any other electronic device... seriously...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    3. Re:hearing protection by wcrowe · · Score: 2, Funny

      I agree. Everyone says my dog is "smart", but he still can't do laundry. He keeps mixing the colors with the whites and washing the delecates on warm. Bad dog! Bad!

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    4. Re:hearing protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about my smart car?

  14. Hm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real reason for this is so that soldiers can more clearly notice and listen to the words of Jesus when they abruptly appear out of thin air.

  15. Meanwhile... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..."the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimates that 47,725 veterans are homeless on any given night."

    Not to mention the general population of our citizens who are poor, unable to get needed medical treatment, services, etc.

    But that's cool that we'll give the ones that aren't broken yet shiny new things to make them more efficient.

  16. Uh... How is this new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Several countries' military have been using typical noise-cancelling hearing protection used in shooting sports and hunting for over a decade, if not more.

  17. How about knock off the bogus foreign wars? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    Let's skip the middle man and just give the money directly to defense contractors' cocaine dealers and mistresses?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  18. It is probably a compressor by xoxorr · · Score: 1

    Probably not noise cancelling since it needs much of the info in the environment to retain position info. More likely a compression algorithm that instead of looking like an upside down hockey stick (with input volume on x axis and output on y), it does a combination of adjustable upward compression on lower volumes and downward compression/brickwall limiting on higher volumes. This will attenuate loud events and boost background sound. Positional data would come from stereo mic pair, one on each ear, which would approximate the way ears do locational info.

  19. dampened? really? by drakaan · · Score: 1

    Is it official now? Have we given up on explaining that dampening something makes it wet? Dampened != Damped.

    --
    "Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
  20. Active headphones for shooters by mrr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have a $50 pair of "active headphones for shooters" that muffle gunshots, let me hear conversations, and even let me plug in my phone to listen to MP3s while I'm shooting. These sound like a slightly more advanced version of that (especially if they can indicate the direction of gunfire), but $2k?!?

    1. Re:Active headphones for shooters by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      These sound like a slightly more advanced version of that (especially if they can indicate the direction of gunfire), but $2k?!?

      Yeah, but these are olive drab. That makes the price go way up.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    2. Re:Active headphones for shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a $50 pair of "active headphones for shooters" that muffle gunshots, let me hear conversations, and even let me plug in my phone to listen to MP3s while I'm shooting. These sound like a slightly more advanced version of that (especially if they can indicate the direction of gunfire), but $2k?!?

      For a small run of custom electronic ear buds that need to be waterproof, pass at least a dozen certifications, and probably also includes some sort of service contract its not too surprising that they cost 2k.

    3. Re:Active headphones for shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps these are working also in the case of firing those heavier single-use anti-tank rockets, so that the person firing them receives only the micro fractures of the skull without permanent hearing loss. Which would be good.

    4. Re:Active headphones for shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most likely they're rugged-ized for field conditions, because the Army knows that giving these to Private Joe Snuffy means they need to work even after being taken care of as abysmally as he's likely to. That's not to say some contractors don't overcharge the crap out of the military (because they can), but some milspec stuff is more expensive because it has to be rated as milspec.

    5. Re:Active headphones for shooters by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      I always love the "I could buy one for less" comments. Sure I could buy a Saturday Night Special for less than a Glock but I would get better performance out of and be much more comfortable depending on the Glock.
      Here is a selection of ear buds that go up to $2,400. These also didn't have to go through the military approval process.

    6. Re:Active headphones for shooters by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      I've used active headphones with sound dampening on the target range for several years now. They are much better than earplugs or earmuffs, and I can dial up the volume to eavesdrop on every conversation within about 30 yards without loss of protective dampening. The microphones provide limited stereo: they are forward facing so sounds behind me are muffled.

      The high price of the Army earbuds can be justified partly by the cost of developing the miniaturization and better stereo (omnidirectional mics). Also, I hope that part of the high cost is that the contract stipulates sales only to the USA military since I see no reason to allow representatives of ISIS to pick up several dozen of these at a Walmart.

    7. Re:Active headphones for shooters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah?
      You can probably soon buy a chinese version of these from some e-store.

  21. That's some expensive factory-floor safety gear! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've got a container on the wall near the entrance to the factory floor that deposits a pair of ear plugs when you crank a handle. I had no idea those were $2K a pair! They're worth more to the company than I am. Damn.

  22. In other words by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    In other words, they're using noise-dampening hunting headphones, just like may hunters have been using for years.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:In other words by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Except they amplify sounds in some situations.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:In other words by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Except they amplify sounds in some situations.

      So do some of the hunter headphones, I think.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    3. Re:In other words by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      No.

      Active headphones do not fit under helmets. Since the mics on active headphones are forward-facing, they limit situational awareness to just what you happen to be looking at.

      But pooh-poohers just gotta pooh, eh?

  23. Re:dampened? really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What dictionary are you using that doesn't have a second definition for "Dampen"?

    Because it's wrong -- and your pedantry is ill-founded.

  24. Re:dampened? really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, it is official:

    dampen
    verb
    past tense: dampened; past participle: dampened
    1.
    make slightly wet.
    "the fine rain dampened her face"
    synonyms: moisten, damp, wet, dew, water; literarybedew
    "the rain dampened her face"
    2.
    make less strong or intense.
    "nothing could dampen her enthusiasm"
    synonyms: lessen, decrease, diminish, reduce, moderate, damp, put a damper on, throw cold water on, cool, discourage, disincentivize

  25. You paid for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    US is already how far in debt? Spy ears on soldiers seriously?

    People are starving and you pass out $2000 headphones for soldiers to fight cunt battles for CIA concocted foreign enemies as dickheads let foreigners move in and get your tax money.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrvMs3PlWcg

    Allll to Hell.

  26. The by JustOK · · Score: 2

    The enemy can now encrypt their communications BY TALKING VERY LOUDLY

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
    1. Re:The by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That kind of talking would have to be loud enough to damage the hearing of the listeners. I would not like to be in that room where that conversation is taking place.

  27. Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US military can now kill while jamming out to their favorite tunes and still hear the comm of their fellow hitmen.

    What an age we live in.

  28. Re:dampened? really? by jklovanc · · Score: 1

    You might want to read the actual dictionary definition.

    The creative energy that had made it the center of European literature before the war was dampened.

    I don't think creative energy can get wet/

  29. So... Just 3M Peletors then? by thatkid_2002 · · Score: 1

    I thought they were talking about some sort of cutting edge tech. Nope. Just active hearing pro. The Australian army has used 3M Peletors for years - I don't think they are issued to individuals, but the Q-Stores hold them for use on ranges and they're included (2 pair) in the newer Carl Gustuv 84mm recoiless rifle trunks too.

    Guys buy their own knock-offs from Amazon so that they don't have to use ear-plugs while doing fire and movement (as they're not usually handed out for this). I hate the plug style shown in the article - the last thing I want to do when living in the dirt is start shoving stuff in my ears. Ears, eyes and hands need to be treated well or you die, or are a burden to your team.

  30. Part of the deal by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    The problem with conventional foam style earplugs is that they muffle hearing when loud stuff isn't happening. So you have to remove them, and hopefully stick them in when a firefight starts.

    The idea with actives like this would be that you could stick them in when you're getting ready to leave the FOB, and remove them when you return.

    The expense might be providing more DBs of protection, last an extended period on a battery, or even that they're rated to not emit radiation that would allow others to track you if they know what to look for.

    It's probably also 'program cost', which includes testing, selection, customization, training, batteries, etc...

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re:Part of the deal by thatkid_2002 · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. I forgot to mention the points you bought up.

      Not being able to hear instruction is really frustrating in training too when you're not really sure what you're supposed to do.

      An advantage of the earplug style is that you could probably have your SPR and/or radio headset over the top of the earplug.

      It takes ages to get foam plugs into my ears (I have to roll them to get them small enough first, then use two hands to get them in) so under the pump I have no chance of using them.

      The amount of batteries (all AAA thankfully) you need already is ridiculous. You need one for your NAD, a number for your night vision, two or so for your night-weapon sight (if rank say you must have one of the bloody things), two for your SPR, two for headlamp (just in-case), plus any extra for backup and other devices. Batteries for Peltors on top of that... Yay.

  31. Do your headphones by wiredog · · Score: 1

    Reduce the volume of the Carl Gustav you're firing?

  32. This isn't exactly a new idea... by blunttrauma · · Score: 1

    Active ear muffs for shooters have been around for a long time, I bought my first pair in about 1998. With separate controls for each ear, you can tell the direction of sounds to some extent, not as good as bare ears, but not bad. There are a few options now under ~$50 retail, but the problem is they would not easily fit under a helmet.

    Ear bud based active protection is also available off the shelf, Etymotic, a hearing aid company, makes one with a NRR 40 with 5X amplification, GSP15 GunSportPro, that retails for $299. It shouldn't be that difficult to integrate it to a radio/mic system.

  33. Finally adopting older tech.. by MercTech · · Score: 1

    Reactive ear plugs have been around since the 1980s in a niche market for competitive target shooters. They react to sudden high decibel levels in a microsecond saving your ears from concussive sound. The pricier ones have a frequency notch filter that only allows human vice frequencies through.
        The price has reduced over the decades and I guess someone is budgeting for general issue of an item that is long overdue in the field.

    --
    NRRPT/RCT
  34. Re:dampened? really? by drakaan · · Score: 1

    That's an answer to my question that makes me very sad. Apparently, the misuse has become common enough in this context that it's now in the dictionary, so the answer to my question is "yes, we've given up".

    The article was talking about acoustic vibrations (sound). Lessening vibration is called damping. Dampening has connotations related to emotion that do not apply in the same way, but the words are similar enough and dampen misused enough that now it doesn't matter, apparently.

    Comparative graph for usage of "acoustic damping" and "acoustic dampening" since 1920

    Discussion of this topic.

    --
    "Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
  35. Prior art from the UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The British Army has been using the PIHP from Racal Acoustics for quite some time now. It was an urgent operational requirement for Afghanistan troops. The device neatly integrates with their personal role radios, can be turned off for use as passive ear defenders, and still allows radio comms when unpowered.

    They went as far as ordering individually moulded ear plugs for each soldier in theatre :-)