US Army Tests Super Strong Exoskeleton

Recommended Videos

RadiusXd

New member
Jun 2, 2010
743
0
0
i would like to see how the tech applies to water.
Imagine with me for a sec, armoured mech navy seals, with little water jets and its enclosed life support protecting from suffocation and nerve gas, moving silently in the water, without a sound, without a sight.
awsome
 

UberNoodle

New member
Apr 6, 2010
865
0
0
PurePareidolia said:
Good, good, now make it into power armour.
Khaiseri said:
CORRODED SIN said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
All the technology we have right now is because of the military.
And I am conscious of that. But what I'm against is that these companies are wasting a whole lot of money for making more ways on to how to kill people while getting a whole lot more richer than rather help the civilians. That is what has been bothering me about these military projects.
CORRODED SIN said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
All the technology we have right now is because of the military.
Have you looked up what the Japanese company Cyberdyne have made? Check out their prototypes for exosuits for industry and elderly mobility. It isn't military usage and very much for the common good.

http://www.cyberdyne.jp/english/
 

Blue Musician

New member
Mar 23, 2010
3,344
0
0
Frog_Girl said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
Why do you have an issue with the military producing thing for the men and women fighting in a war. Reguardless on how you feel about the war, don't you think these people should be equiped with the best technology they can get to do their job? I'm not trying to belittle you I'm just trying to understand why this is an issue.
I do not want to start flaming anyone either, but for me War should only be used as a last resort, when negotiations haven't gone well. Most wars go without negotiations actually. And that's the thing, military corporations waste a lot of money and resources and they get rich because they have done something to kill efficiently more people.
Killing a person is not good, not so many movies or games show the scars that the people have physically and psychologically, or haven't done a good job about it.

It may seem I am just paranoid or I am just an idiot, and yet I must say I did had thoughts like everyone in the past that has commented in this channel, but right now I live in Mexico, which is having an inner war between drug dealers and the military. They have already killed 22,000 persons, most of them minors and innocent. We have fear, fear of getting robbed and killed at the turn of the corner. Violence has grown a lot more bigger in the past 4 years, before that it wasn't like that. All the weapons and guns that the military and drug dealers use come from only one country:

The United States of America

That's why I am against military development, that's why I disagree with most of the comments, yet I respect the points of view of most people. War is not good, and military development isn't neither. They give scars, scars that are hard to get off and will stay for you forever, affecting every movement and thought you make. As this is the case with most of us in Mexico.
 

Blue Musician

New member
Mar 23, 2010
3,344
0
0
UberNoodle said:
PurePareidolia said:
Good, good, now make it into power armour.
Khaiseri said:
CORRODED SIN said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
All the technology we have right now is because of the military.
And I am conscious of that. But what I'm against is that these companies are wasting a whole lot of money for making more ways on to how to kill people while getting a whole lot more richer than rather help the civilians. That is what has been bothering me about these military projects.
CORRODED SIN said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
All the technology we have right now is because of the military.
Have you looked up what the Japanese company Cyberdyne have made? Check out their prototypes for exosuits for industry and elderly mobility. It isn't military usage and very much for the common good.

http://www.cyberdyne.jp/english/
What I am against is the military development. I already commented in this thread about why, just look in page 2 for a little more info. But thanks about that.
 

oranger

New member
May 27, 2008
704
0
0
Blah blah blah, old tech. The japanese have much better stuff going, a company called cyberdyne has a sweet suit made, they're probably working on mass production efficiency and a better power supply.

Other than that point, this sort of thing is basically the first steps into the next weapon cycle, where armor gets much stronger than small arms can produce...and BAM the sword reappears on the field!

edit: oops, somebody already mentioned cyberdyne
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Not G. Ivingname said:
Therumancer said:
Yeah, any kind of robocop or Crysis exoskeleton would just simply be to impratical/expensive if not out right impossible at the moment. We need more nimble troops more able in CQC for urban warfare, our tanks can take care of the desert warfare when the need arises. However, the HULC could indirectly make our troops more armed as exoskeletons are suppose to. Being able to put pretty much all the wieght of gear and extra ammo on the HULC, and since that could be thrown off at the drop of the hat, more body armor could be put on a soldier while still having well over a hundred pounds less our boys don't have to carry directly.
Well I don't think mobility is the issue with powered armor and such, it's just that the cost/benefit analysis of equipping infantry that way compared to building tanks and such makes it impractical.

I don't think the HULC would be practical as you describe it, since that's pretty much the same thing (a primitive combat exoskeleton).

Testing aside, where I think this will be useful is simply for logistics. Vehicles can require special tools and machines to re-arm and reload in some cases. Rather than having a forklift or whatever to move ordinance like missles, bombs, and weapon pods, you could just have a HULC or two which takes up less space. Looking at the thing you could fit it in a crate or storage compartment fairly easily.

Using something like this it could very easily mean that it could be very easy to set up combat air fields or whatever on the fly. You don't have to worry quite as much about how your going to get the trucks to move bombs around or whatever, if you can just ensure every helicopter has a HULC stored on it or whatever. In theory this means that if you have the weapons, and you have the vehicle, you can load it relatively quickly.

The glory of the "Rambo" schtick aside, real warfare is pretty much resolved in the end by war machines. Loading our infantry up with tons of body armor and heavier weapons is kind of pointless given the purpose of infantry, if we fight properly they probably shouldn't need those kinds of things (and anyone doing recon/special forces stuff is supposed to be covert, not carrying around 100 pounds of extra Kevlar and a minigun or whatever even if that was practical). This kind of system could be used as an ultra portable WALDO for supporting said war machines.

That is to say if ever implemented I'd imagine it would mostly be used by either maitnence workers or in a pinch perhaps pilots/drivers themselves.
 

oranger

New member
May 27, 2008
704
0
0
Also, really? all the tech we have is from the military (or military research)? what about the internet (CERN), just about anything using magnetism/electricity these days (Nikola Tesla), nucleic manipulation (Einstein), how about the vast amount of materials engineers who basically invented every polymer out there for civilian use first?
Bleh, most tech definitely does NOT come from military research.
Everything we own is based on the work of Tesla, Bell, Navier, and many other primarily non-military funded scientists.
 

swolf

New member
May 3, 2010
1,189
0
0
jonnosferatu said:
It's a nice step, but I can't help but feel as though just taking some time to revamp the army physical fitness programs to the point that soldiers are able to carry the loads themselves would be the first step here.
All right, I've got to respond to this. I'm former U.S. Army myself and the APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) does a good job of ensuring that soldiers are physically fit. (Here's a link: http://www.apft-standards.com/ ) To graduate BCT (Boot Camp), a soldier must have a minimum score of 50 in each event and to graduate AIT (Advanced Individual Training) a soldier must have a minimum score of 60 in each event. All right, so now that the info is out of the way, I'll move on to the facts of a soldier's load (the weight they carry). A "light load" is 40 lbs, a medium load can vary anywhere from 60 to over 100, and a "heavy load" is...well, I remember having to carry all my equipment, carry a "wounded" (it was a training scenario) on my back with a good majority of his gear. Also, there's the weight of the rifle, sidearm (pistol), LBE (Load Bearing Equipment), 2 canteens of water, and more. That's just a few of what soldiers must carry. Also, keep in mind that is over rough terrain with "catch" vines and over 100 degree temperatures. That is a LOT to ask from even the strongest of people. Also, I understand that it's quite difficult to fight under all that. I think that this is a good tool that will increase productivity and ease the tough life of a soldier.
Khaiseri said:
CORRODED SIN said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
All the technology we have right now is because of the military.
And I am conscious of that. But what I'm against is that these companies are wasting a whole lot of money for making more ways on to how to kill people while getting a whole lot more richer than rather help the civilians. That is what has been bothering me about these military projects.
Well, I feel it's smart of these companies. Since companies love profit, they get in to military tech because wars mean profit. I mean, peace is great but (being realistic with all the politics and stuff that causes war) it doesn't happen a lot. Also, one other thing, wouldn't you want to make sure the soldiers guarding your home have the best equipment that you can possibly supply them?
 

awol360

New member
May 11, 2010
34
0
0
You know, I look at this thing and think, "Run Forrest, RUUUUN!"
But seriously, you've invented a high tech heavy lifter system. I think I saw something similar on that show that Billy Mayes had
on a while back that helped you carry heavy loads like this. Of course it was no where nearly as awesome or high tech, but if you're trying to
sell it for $19.95 or wanted to wear body armor on the field that thing wouldn't be your first choice (the Billy Mayes pitch, not this thing).
 

RUINER ACTUAL

New member
Oct 29, 2009
1,835
0
0
UberNoodle said:
PurePareidolia said:
Good, good, now make it into power armour.
Khaiseri said:
CORRODED SIN said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
All the technology we have right now is because of the military.
And I am conscious of that. But what I'm against is that these companies are wasting a whole lot of money for making more ways on to how to kill people while getting a whole lot more richer than rather help the civilians. That is what has been bothering me about these military projects.
CORRODED SIN said:
Khaiseri said:
Am I the only one who is against all of these things made by the military? Yes, I can see it's uses for other things rather than the military, but that's the thing, it's prime use will be for that: soldiers.
All the technology we have right now is because of the military.
Have you looked up what the Japanese company Cyberdyne have made? Check out their prototypes for exosuits for industry and elderly mobility. It isn't military usage and very much for the common good.

http://www.cyberdyne.jp/english/
A. The exoskeleton is so soldiers can carry equipment in mountainous and rough terrains like those in Afgahnistan. Right now they use mules, horses, and helicopters to move supplies. It isn't combat armor, it's an assistant in moving things.

B. The military sector has more money.

C. Does that company Cyberdyne have any contracts with the government?