Land Warrior Army Suits Simplified, Linux-ized 361
Dosco Jones writes 'The Army is drastically simplifying the makeup of its high-tech soldier ensemble, the Land Warrior, in an effort to make the system less prone to failures and easier to use,' National Defense reports. Defense Tech continues: 'After the last version of Land Warrior failed reliability tests earlier this year, the Army switched gears and decided to make the system less complex and modify the hardware to make it compatible with the new [and controversial] Stryker infantry vehicle. Changes include a more simplified data bus and a Linux-based operating system, as opposed to Windows. 'Evidence shows that Linux is more stable. We are moving in general to where the Army is going, to Linux-based OS', says the program's manager, Lt. Col. Dave Gallop."
Heh... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure they'll be hearing from Commander Gates about that one shortly...
Re:Heh... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure they'll be hearing from Commander Gates about that one shortly...
Never mind that, imagine Darl trying to get his $699 licence money:
Darl: "Oh yeah? You and whose army?"
Re:Heh... (Score:2)
Seems the Army's catching on. Darl McBride, consider that as a warning.
Somewhat true (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Heh... (Score:2)
I imagine Commander (or Darth?) Gates saying: "Alert my Star Destroyer to prepare for my arrival." :-)
zRe:Heh... (Score:4, Informative)
"Land Warrior [globalsecurity.org] Initial Capability" (LW-IC) was supposed to be the first step in a long process of networking soldiers together. Each fighter would get equipped with a small, 500 megahertz computer running Windows 2000, a radio, a customized rifle and a helmet-mounted display eyepiece. All of these would be linked together. And all that a soldier sees or says could be sent to each other or to headquarters.
and the findings were:
the system was deemed 'unreliable' and unlikely to survive the rigors of combat
Halo (Score:2, Funny)
Linux is all very well, but if you want auto-aim and stuff to really piss the opposition off, I'd go into battle with an X-box strapped on my back.
You can see the Pentagon news briefs; "we can't fight Al Qaeda because they haven't subscribed to X-box Live..."
Re:Heh... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Heh... (Score:2, Funny)
Commander Gates is forced into exile on the planet Thoth after Microsoft goes too far one day and puts out a mandatory Longhorn patch that causes the Elders of Zion's computers to crash right in the middle of a marathon session of Predator Pilot:Get the Sand Niggers.
Ballmer is installed as the new Head of MS after pleasing the Elders with a combination monkey/lap-dance.
Gates is forced to live a life of hardships and constant toil in the m
Scary,,, (Score:5, Funny)
Each fighter would get equipped with a small, 500 megahertz computer running Windows 2000...
"Although it has been much improved over earlier prototypes, the system was deemed 'unreliable' and unlikely to survive the rigors of combat," National Defense says.
The thought of Windows even being considered for such a mission critical application (i.e. keeping our boys alive) scares the bejeezus out of me... kinda brings a new meaning to "blue screen of death".
Re:Scary,,, (Score:5, Funny)
Clippy: "It looks like you are trying to press the trigger on your weapon, would you like some help?"
1. Learn how to reload you new high tech gun with a 20 minute walk-through.
2. Install new Patriot-skins on the hud of you display.
3. Get help on the installing the latest Friendly Fire buffer overflow.
4. Return home and shoot the person who made this sytem.
Re:Scary,,, (Score:2, Insightful)
What did you really expect? (Score:2, Insightful)
Like it or not, Windows does run lots of mission critical applications, the NT line always did. Maybe not as life-threateningly critical as this, but still. That they consider it is natural, and that the reject it shows that the system works!
How many other operating systems would be under consideration? Not
Re:What did you really expect? (Score:2)
Re:What did you really expect? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Scary,,, (Score:3, Funny)
It looks like you're trying to Flank the position. Would you like me to:
Re:Scary,,, (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Scary,,, (Score:3, Funny)
Jungle scene: Background battlefield noise, explosions, screams of pain;
In the bushes: Foreground beep, booting sounds, moan of anguish.
Wait a sec boys... hold the war! I gotta reboot...
Re:Scary,,, (Score:2)
Re:Scary,,, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Scary,,, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Scary,,, (Score:2)
you underestimate the Army (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: Scary,,, (Score:2)
> Pssst. Don't freak out on me now pal, but guess what OS our Aegis cruisers run?
And how often have they had to fire in combat since that decision?
Re:Scary,,, (Score:4, Interesting)
Linux, eh? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Linux, eh? (Score:2)
The cost of war just went up by $699
Personally, I'd love to see Darl try to collect from someone with next-gen battle gear and one of these [popularmechanics.com]...
I hear... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I hear... (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, I hear that Marines aren't afraid to die.
Sadly (Score:5, Interesting)
Sadly, we run Windows NT. We'd also never get expensive crap like a warrior suit... hell, my deuce-gear was first issued in 1964 according to the supply ticket.
Sure, we got the cool new camouflague that makes us look like the Waffen SS, but as far as cool crap like this, we have to wait 5 years for the Army to get tired of playing with it.
Re:Sadly (Score:2)
Yeah, I just noticed that. I was loitering around the Pentagon when a fellow came through in an odd camo, and I said "It's that scout from BF1942!"
PS. I later saw some of the simulation programs the DoD uses to test battleplans for the next decade. The Navy's ran on Linux, as did the MC and Army's. The Air Force used a Solaris program. The only Microsoft(tm) system in evidence was something that ran MySQL + PHP to tally up th
Re:Sadly (Score:2)
Re:Sadly (Score:3, Interesting)
That's the Air Force for ya'. They haven't made the M-16 since the mid 60's (M-16A1 has forward assist) and the AF hasn't gotten rid of theirs yet? Of course, PT testin
Re:Sadly (Score:3, Insightful)
Plus, it would be a waste of their advanced training to have them doing such mundane work.
The Marines are small (in number), but much more elite - they can afford to take only the best. If you eliminated the Army and wanted to expand the marines to compensate, the Marines would be diminished because they would no longer be able to be as selective and elite.
Re:I hear... (Score:3, Funny)
No, they'll use Gentoo. Those filthy beggars, they go from port to port.
Think what might have been... (Score:3, Funny)
Stryker? (Score:2)
Re:Stryker? (Score:5, Informative)
"In February 2002 the Army named its new interim armored vehicle after two soldiers who received the Medal of Honor. The Stryker is named in honor of Spc. 4 Robert F. Stryker, who received the Medal of Honor for his actions during the Vietnam War, and Pfc. Stuart S. Stryker, who received the award for his actions during World War II. Both men were killed in action. They were not related."
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/mohiib1.htm
"Rank and organization. Private First Class, U.S. Army, Company E, 513th Parachute Infantry, 17th Airborne Division. Place and date: Near Wesel, Germany, 24 March 1945. Entered service at: Portland, Oreg. Birth. Portland, Oreg. G.O. No.: 117, 11 December 1945. Citation. He was a platoon runner, when the unit assembled near Wesel, Germany after a descent east of the Rhine. Attacking along a railroad, Company E reached a point about 250 yards from a large building used as an enemy headquarters and manned by a powerful force of Germans with rifles, machineguns, and 4 field pieces. One platoon made a frontal assault but was pinned down by intense fire from the house after advancing only 50 yards. So badly stricken that it could not return the raking fire, the platoon was at the mercy of German machine gunners when Pfc. Stryker voluntarily left a place of comparative safety, and, armed with a carbine, ran to the head of the unit. In full view of the enemy and under constant fire, he exhorted the men to get to their feet and follow him. Inspired by his fearlessness, they rushed after him in a desperate charge through an increased hail of bullets. Twenty-five yards from the objective the heroic soldier was killed by the enemy fusillades. His gallant and wholly voluntary action in the face of overwhelming firepower, however, so encouraged his comrades and diverted the enemy's attention that other elements of the company were able to surround the house, capturing more than 200 hostile soldiers and much equipment, besides freeing 3 members of an American bomber crew held prisoner there. The intrepidity and unhesitating self-sacrifice of Pfc. Stryker were in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service."
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/mohviet2.htm
"Rank and organization: Specialist Fourth Class, U.S. Army, Company C, 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry, 1st Infantry Division. Place and date: Near Loc Ninh, Republic of Vietnam, 7 November 1967. Entered service at: Throop, N.Y. Born: 9 November 1944, Auburn, N.Y. Citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty. Sp4c. Stryker, U.S. Army, distinguished himself while serving with Company C. Sp4c. Stryker was serving as a grenadier in a multicompany reconnaissance in force near Loc Ninh. As his unit moved through the dense underbrush, it was suddenly met with a hail of rocket, automatic weapons and small arms fire from enemy forces concealed in fortified bunkers and in the surrounding trees. Reacting quickly, Sp4c. Stryker fired into the enemy positions with his grenade launcher. During the devastating exchange of fire, Sp4c. Stryker detected enemy elements attempting to encircle his company and isolate it from the main body of the friendly force. Undaunted by the enemy machinegun and small-arms fire, Sp4c. Stryker repeatedly fired grenades into the trees, killing enemy snipers and enabling his comrades to sever the attempted encirclement. As the battle continued, Sp4c. Stryker observed several wounded members of his squad in the killing zone of an enemy claymore mine. With complete disregard for his safety, he threw himself upon the mine as it was detonated. He was mortally wounded as his body absorbed the blast and shielded his comrades from the explosion. His unselfish actions were responsible for saving the lives of at least 6 of his fellow soldiers. Sp4c. Stryker's great personal bravery was in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflects great credit upon himself, his unit, and the U.S. Army."
Re:Stryker? (Score:2)
dunno.
theres one other stryker that is 'hard'..
http://www.jeff-stryker.com/
though, i havent seen his films but iirc he swings both ways.
Linux (Score:5, Funny)
"I can't, sir... There's no compatible driver for this missile launcher yet!"
Re:Linux (Score:2)
"It looks like you're about to die. Would you like to:"
Simplify, my butt! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Simplify, my butt! (Score:2)
Product Activation (Score:2, Funny)
You know what they say about army equipment... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You know what they say about army equipment... (Score:2, Informative)
If there is a product that is better than the others out there, or a specialized product that no one else makes the DoD can buy it outright, do a streamlined bid process or allocate money to commanders or even issue money to a soldier to make up for thier personal purchase.
Theres a file I found in July talking about what worked and didn't work in Iraq in the equipment the soldiers used, and they covered all sorts of things, from sniper scopes, to Talkabouts to Camelback w
Re:You know what they say about army equipment... (Score:5, Informative)
According to the Federal Acquisition Rules (FAR), the contract selection must go to those who provide "best value". "Least bid" is only appropriate when all other factors weight out equally. This assumes that the contracting office is following all the rules, or at least trying to.
Now, these factors we're talking about are all laid out in the publications soliciting industry input or proposals. Such things as previous contractor performance, technical approach, capabilities proposed vs requirements, the proposed contractor team composition, timelines, certifications like ISO 9000 are used as criteria, or a super- or sub-set of this list. Then the source selection team, which can be very small or very large, goes through each and every one of the proposals received and weighs them up according to criteria estabilished before hand. These criteria are weighed, such as TECHNICAL and TEAM SKILLS being twice as important as any of the rest. COST is one of the factors weighed, but it has been generally accepted that the only person who weights COST to be of equal or higher weight than the other factors combined is a complete idiot because history has show this to be the recipe for a complete catastrophe and waste of taxpayers' money.
Of course, requirements are the biggest thing in all proper acquisitions. If you don't match up to the requirements, or you can't get there in a series of upgrades or refinements, it doesn't matter how cheap you are. But the real catch is how the requirements are written. If, for example appropriate to this audience, they are written in such a way that only a particular operating system can match up, then only the proposals outlining a system built on that operating system can possibly make it past the first cut. This happens when the requirement writer can't separate his vision for HOW the thing should be built from WHAT it needs to DO. And let's face it: the requirement writer is almost certainly too close to the problem to be able to think of unique or elegant ways to solve the problem with the least resources required. He's more likely to be thinking, "I want a thing that does this, which should be like this thing I already have, only MORE SO." And if what you have is a Windows system, and that's all you know (or you're frightened by this Linux/*BSD/etc stuff), then you'll write the requirements to fit what you know.
This isn't to say that requirement writers are particularly bad or unqualified people. Some of them are truly excellent. Most just need some training in how to stay in their lanes.
No, the bad people are the ultraconservative, underinformed, technically no-longer-qualified information security people. They don't like anything that hasn't been previously approved by their organization. Anything new must jump through a hoops process that by the minimum timeline takes YEARS, and they'll change the process twice during your progress and require you to start over. They won't get involved in your acquisition process because they "haven't got time for that", but they have time to tell you to re-engineer the entire system after you spend four years building it because it doesn't fit in with some asinine security regulation that either didn't exist when you started, or is so outdated that it qualified for social security, and almost certainly isn't applicable to your system. You can't argue against them because that would be arguing against SECURITY, and you might as well be questioning the value of MOM and APPLE PIE in their eyes. Their simple word can cost a colonel his star, or a GS-15 his SES, so you've got to be backed up one that a) has a lot of balls; b) takes you seriously; and c) is convinced he should do the job right and the star will attend to itself; to have any chance.
And how did I come up with these wild revelations about contracting in the government? Well the first half is straight out of t
Land Warrior (Score:5, Insightful)
Land Warrior? I'd settle for a fucking infantry boot that wasn't the height of 1950's technology.
Re:Land Warrior (Score:2, Informative)
Thanks for the thought, though!
I got out in 2000, but I was still in the USMC (0311, grunt, qty. 1) when we switched from the old LPC (Leather Personnel Carrier) to the new boot. I didn't get to try the desert boot, but I really liked the ICB, the first version was a bit hot/heavy, but I have heard from buddies that it is better now.
Army cost inflation (Score:2)
so, if the army is going to use Linux... (Score:2)
Funny thing about government... (Score:3, Funny)
More stable? More stable?!? (Score:3, Funny)
Speech like that weakens Windows, which weakens the economy and cuts down on campaign contributions to GOP causes. W and the "Justice" Department will be having Gallop arrested as an obvious enemy combatant any second now.
More stable. Like that's so important. It hasn't mattered to Windows for years!
Pstt . . . "more reliable" (Score:5, Funny)
Nobody uses Linux for an other reason than its cost, which is actually more than Windows when you take in account its TCO cause windows has all those neat add ons that make life more productive, like clippy.
Linux geeks can make pointless stuff aswell. (Score:2)
Windows did have some advantages however ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Windows did have some advantages however ... (Score:2)
But Windows would fit in very well in another sense. As Tom Clancy put it, "Any ship can be a minesweeper. Once."
Re:Windows did have some advantages however ... (Score:2)
Did you know your last name was an adverb?
Interesting note (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll let other /.ers discuss the reliability of Linux over Windows, but an interesting note is that the original LW had 2 processors but the newer version has 1. The question is whether part of the reliability issues on 2 processors is due to Windows handling multiprocessors or simply the hassles of getting 2 processors to work together. The articles do not discuss in detail what really happened. Simplicity is however a good thing when it comes to reliability. It would be something if the stuck with a 2 processor design but made it work with Linux.
Re:Interesting note (Score:4, Interesting)
but heat buildup could be a real problem for reliablity.
I'd imagine passive cooling would be the order of the day too as even quiet fans, heat pumps, peltiers, or whatever would add another point of failure.
I'm just guessing but a less powerful (in every sense) set up might have made more sense for passively cooled mobile reliability.
Re:Interesting note (Score:2)
If only it were open source... (Score:2)
Then it's time to build the automated 20-oz paintball mortar. Let's see you wipe THAT off when no one's looking!
You Can See It Now (Score:5, Funny)
Landwarrior Full Description (Score:5, Informative)
When someones ass is on the line (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:When someones ass is on the line (Score:2)
Will RedHat be changing its logo now to ... (Score:2, Funny)
finally a chance for Linux ... (Score:2)
A bit more info (and pictures) of the Stryker (Score:5, Interesting)
And, of course:
Stryper info [stryper.com]
Somewhere in Washington.... (Score:3, Funny)
Shocked, Bill replies "Enough of this. Its time to begin Operation Rotanimret! Is everything in place?"
Steve: "Yes, the worms are ready. The submarines are still running WindowsCE, and the governator of Califorenia is backing us up."
Bill: "Excellent! Release the worm immediately. Something tells me this patch won't make it to the update servers any time soon." Bill says ending with an evil "Muhahahahaaa!"
Steve, now sweaty under the arms reads from an emergency plan: "We had better leave immediately to the bunker. Our estimates show that we will have total control over every windows PC in the world in under 4 hours. Beginning 2 hours from now, the distruction of non-windows pc's will begin."
Bill: Excelent. To the SUV then!
-- Bill and Steve are on the road heading to thier secret underground bunker ---
Bill: Do you remember where the bunker was?
Steve: Not exactly.. I never drive anywhere myself anymore. I'm pretty sure its in this direction though. I'll just ask the car... AutoPC show me a map to the secret underground bunker.
--BSOD--
Bill: Damn. At least this isn't a drive-by-wire SUV. We'd really be in trouble. Give it a second to reboot.
Bill: AutoPC show me a map to the underground bunker.
--Map displayed showing bunker is behind them--
Bill: Darn steve, we have to turn around. Its showing that we passed the bunker.
--Steve turns around and begins following the map--
Steve: Well, here we are. It must be under this penguin factory.
Bill: Wow.. good idea. Whoever hid the secret lair under a penguin factory needs to get a bonus if they survive the nuclear winter we are about to unleash.. in 20 minutes, we need to hurry! Pull in over there.
Steve: Ok. we're here. What the--- Bill, why is your face on the dashboard map?
Bill: Don't know.
AutoPC: Thank you for using AutoPC. This vehicle is being sacrificed to destroy the linux tyrany. Have a nice day!
Bill and Steve look at each other
--Car explodes outside the penguin factory--
[to be continued!]
[feel free to continue
Steve Ballmer Flies to Pentagon for Price Match (Score:2)
Steve Ballmer was allegedly overheard saying, "And if that doesn't work, I'll write them a check to use my !^$&$@ software. Give me that M-16 son, I want to put a bullet in the head of that penguin."
As usual... (Score:2)
It's called "overwhelming force."
Screw this (Score:3, Funny)
Why not QNX? (Score:2)
It was the error messages (Score:2)
What happened to the Kursk when it tried M$ (Score:2, Funny)
Some new information has come to light over the Kursk disaster. For those with short attention spans, the Kursk was the submarine that blew up and sank in the Artic Ocean killing all 118 on board. The Russians tried to blame the incident on a collision with an unidentified object. However, sonar tapes which recorded the blasts (a small one at first, then a much larger one two minutes later) cast doubt on these claims. A whistle blower within the Russian military has leak
The Military's History of OSes? (Score:2)
So back in the 80's when the military was getting all wizbang there were two general desktop options: Sun and MS. In the end it turned out that the MS boxes were cheaper in bulk and so primary development occured on them.
Fast forward to the present day and you have the current situation: a monolithic org
OK, what the stryker is all about (Score:5, Informative)
OK, pre-9/11, the Army embarked on a very controversial plan. Basically, they looked at all the wars that we have any realistic chance of being in. Then they looked at what we have to fight them.
The problem was this: we have oodles of heavy tanks, which pretty much kick all kinds of ass. But they can only win where they can be brought to bear. They're so heavy that they require massive transportation time and cost (not to mention a friendly port to set up in). Another problem is that while tracked vehicles can be heavier and go places that wheeled vehicles can't, they are very maintenance intensive. They need lots of fuel and spare parts, which requires still more ships or a massive airlift.
Bottom line: unless we're fighting on the Korean penninsula or in Europe, where were pre-positioned, it would take six months to fight a war anywhere, and that's assuming we had a friendly neighbor to give us a place to set up in.
The result was the Army transformation plan. The idea is that they would get phase out most of their heavy tank divisions, and replace them with smaller, modular formations called Brigade Combat Teams. The BCT's job would be this: assuming the Air Force can clear a drop zone, we ought to be able to put a brigade anywhere in the world, opposed or not, within 96 hours of the President saying so. Four brigades within 14 days, and more (I don't remember how many) within 90 days. That's even if we drop in the middle of a shooting enemy.
One way we could do this was to get a vehicle that could be a little less armed and armored, and could be a little less mobile, but MUST be air-transportable. That's the Stryker. Think of it (excuse the roleplaying reference) as an Omnimech: a vehicle that is designed to be reconfigurable to do lots of different missions. So there's a communications loadout, and a tank-killer loadout and an infantry-carrier loadout, and lots more.
Post 9/11 lessons have been mixed. On one hand, invincible tanks in Germany did us absolutely no good when we suddenly found ourselves at war in Afghanistan. On the other, when we had a year to move them to Iraq, our tanks did extremely well-- and as DefenseTech points out, absorbs fire that would have destroyed Strykers. The gripping hand is that long occupations like Iraq are better suited to Strykers, LAV's or armored Hummers than to heavy tanks and APC's.
So, like most things, one tech isn't necessarily better or worse than another. You use whatever best fits the situation you're in. On that basis, I like the Stryker. An all-Stryker Army? No. But it is a very valuable program.
Most American war plans in the 90's were built around the idea of a set-piece conflict with an adversary (like China, Iraq or North Korea) that while not exactly equal in technology was at least comparable. 9/11 proved that asymmetrical conflicts would also happen: conflicts where the enemy's main goal is to demoralize our political leadership because they can't defeat us militarily.
And in those cases, we can't count on someone granting us entry, we may need to move very fast, and it might be in some remote corner of the world, far from our forces.
Related to that is improved command and control. Many of our casualties in the Gulf War were friendly-fire, so the Army worked on reducing that, too. Vehicles can now see on a map where others in their unit are (just like in a first-person shooter like BF1942). The problem is that the equipment is still too heavy and battery-draining to be useful for infantry. Hopefully, a vehicle-run 'subnet' can help alleviate this. And running it w/ Linux will hopefully improve efficiency and reliability.
Overall, I think the Army's on the right track with this. I'd hate to lose our heavy tank divisions-- those come in mighty handy. But a less powerful force that can actually get to the battle is better than an invincible juggernaut that is stranded somewhere else.
Real military technology advance - forethought! (Score:2)
meaning that by the time they actually wanted to start building the and fielding them, they couldn't buy the PIII-500's that they had speced/tested any more.
this is a constant issue with military programs being built on COTS. For example - the DSP farms of XServes going on the subs are already obsolete - they could have used half as many G5's to do it.
If someone wanted to change the face of military program development, come
Re:Real military technology advance - forethought! (Score:2)
The bit that worries me about this, is that it means we will have planes flying overhead running chips that haven't had many years of testing before being cleared for flight .
Maybe they learned from the Navy's mistake (Score:3, Interesting)
Is this really *that* good? (Score:2)
If XFree86 crashes, your entire computer freezes up and you have to ssh into the box to X11 it (alt. reboot). This happens like once every 5 years. But still, it is quite some mess to get youself out of, especially when you're fighting a war.
Re:Is this really *that* good? (Score:5, Insightful)
Interesting choice of headline... (Score:4, Funny)
[note to mods: THIS IS FUNNY]
Defense budget! (Score:2)
With the money they've saved on software, the Air Force can probably buy another B1.
The Stryker (Score:2)
Spaceman Spiff (Score:3, Funny)
i think... (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows is the kind of OS where cramming in as many features as possible is more important than many other things. Hence, this system running Windows is likely hogging up cycles and draining battery performing tasks that aren't needed or even wanted in a battlefield.
But with Linux you can strip it down so that every cycle is a neccessary one. Plus the NSA has plenty of experience hardening the kernel per it's whimsy.
The Military has experience fielding unix in ground combat systems. It's been proven time and again in combat. A Linux solution (or an embedded linux solution) allows the Army to customize even the very low levels of the software in addition to the legendary reliability it enjoys in other systems.
Windows has neither of those things and frankly is not suited to an environment where taking time to patch the OS or troubleshoot could cost you your life.
But which distro? (Score:3, Funny)
Gentoo: they would have the best weapons platform imaginable, but it would be functional only 1 week every month, the rest of the time would be spent compiling
Debian: they would have the most stable / reliable system, however instead of being compatible with Stryker, it would only be compatible with a WW2 Sherman, as this is the only piece of machinery certified as stable
Red Hat: they would have a fine piece of equipment, until they tried upgrading, then realised they also needed to upgrade their helmets. Upon upgrading their helmets they would realise that the new helmets would not work with their rifles. Upon upgrading rifles they realise that the new rifles are a version too high for their computers.
LFS: Each soldier must get a university degree in computer science before being allowed near the equipment.
GNU / Hurd: Soldier: "FIRE" Computer: "I cannot until you say GNU/Fire" Soldier: "OK, GNU/Fire at the enemy behind the building" Computer: "I cannot until you GNU/say GNU/Fire at GNU/the GNU/enemy behind GNU/the GNU/building...GNU"
The most reliable weapon you will ever carry ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Guys, it ain't the OS. Environmental, maintenance, electronic, and embedded application issues are far more likely to cause problems. The OS issue may be a red herring. The article seems to indicate that the original Land Warrior dual CPU hardware was flaky and is being replaced by a piece of hardware from a different project with a single CPU, simplified bus, and is already running Linux. It's not clear if WinNT is really to blame. Recall the initial speculation regarding the Navy's USS Yorktown incident. Many gleefully blamed WinNT, eventually folks talked to the Chief Engineer on board at the time and the actual software developer and found out that it was not WinNT, it was a debug version of application software that was at fault.
Personally, I'd wager that Linux was simply a better fit (size, overhead) for the "other" embedded application. Or maybe the team was more experience with Unix than Windows. Switching the Land Warrior over to Linux to maintain commonality with other systems would justify the change as well.
So... what prevents a DDOS of soldiers? (Score:3, Interesting)
don't get me wrong, I love tech, but what prevents someone from DDOS's our soldiers?
This network performs intel in both directions. What prevents the soldiers from either having their signal blocked or worse, having their communication systems overwhelmed by data flooding and/or debilitating noise from their headsets?
[joke]Or worse yet... be distracted by streaming music and live porn video feeds..[/joke]
Re:Bad Image (Score:2, Interesting)
The US Armed Forces has been activley recruiting "pimply faced geeks with thick glasses" for....well since forever.
My personal favortive was seening them setup shop at DEFCON. The CIA and FBI were also on hand doing a little recriuting. I'm sure they were also there in a differnt capacity.
Re:Bad Image (Score:2)
Exactly! The Army would love to get an enlisted nerd to run their computers for $21,000/per year. That's less than 1/6 what Northrop or Raytheon would charge them for the same service.
They really need technical personnel... the DIs will find a way to squeeze wimps through phyiscal qualifications, since they won't really be entering combat. PT requirements are slipping downwards all the ti
Re:Support an ARMY? (Score:2)
Absolutely not! It's free, and it meets the OSI's Open Source Definition, which means that it must not restrict use by any individual or group. Just like a free/open license cannot have clauses like "must not be used for genocide"
The whole point is that we don't tell people what they can and can't use free software for.
Re:Support an ARMY? (Score:2)
It would probably be impossible to enforce anyway. If they put it in a weapon, it becomes a national security issue. How would you go about proving that your software was being used? They are hardly going to publish the source code (even if it is GPL).
GNU Land Warrior project. (Score:2)
It's already under way.
Or at least the first module (mine detection/clearing) has been a pet project of a number of hackers (starting with John Walker) for quite a few years now. (Since well before the late Princess Di got on the band wagon.)
Re:Open Source (Score:2)
The military will not have to release the source though. I don't believe that they would have any reason to distribute binaries for the system so they won't have to release any code.
Re:Stryker is a piece of crap (Score:2, Informative)
Because the development of Stryker was fairly quick, there was no requirment for it to have RPG resistant armor from the very beginning. It will eventually feature armor which can withstand RPGs which is in testing right now.
I think you're co
Re:The Message Is Clear (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Fuck This (Score:5, Funny)
Because as we all know, if the all of the world's militaries disappeared, why overnight, the whole world would live in harmony and peace. Especially if firearms were illegal everywhere. Then, no one would have any guns (because killers hate to break the law) or armies, and physically powerful gangs of merciless cutthroats with lots of sword and archery practice would definitely NOT roam the land pillaging and raping peaceful farmers and artisans. It's unthinkable, it's never happened. Why, before there were guns and armies, all people lived in a blessed Utopia free of disease, famine, rampaging predators and rival tribes trying to eat you. It was only when evil men created cities and armies to protect themselves (from God knows what! there was nothing to fear!) that life became to unbearably harsh and, GASP, *BABIES WERE KILLED*! Later, firearms were invented that allowed evil old ladies to actually protect themseleves from gangs of virile young criminals by, *HORROR*, SHOOTING THEM AND HURTING, OR EVEN KILLING THEM!
This madness must stop. I demand a return to good old days when there was no war, disease, guns, filthy capitalist pigs, or PVC packaging that's fucking impossible to open.