Back to news

September 2, 2020 | International, Land, Other Defence

Army Wants Industry Input For Reliable Exoskeleton (Not Iron Man, Yet!)

By

SOCOM couldn't build a bulletproof Iron Man. But Army experiments with more modest lower-body exoskeletons have shown real-world potential to help overburdened foot troops.

WASHINGTON: Army Futures Command is drafting a formal requirement for a military exoskeleton and will seek feedback from manufacturers at a November industry day. The Army's top priority, officials told me: rapidly prototyping a system that helps the wearer “move faster, travel further, and carry heavier loads” – without breaking down in the heat of battle.

“Reliability is a huge issue that needs to be resolved,” said Ted Maciuba, deputy director of robotic requirements for Futures Command.

Now, don't expect a full-body bulletproof suit that can fly and access huge databases out of science fiction. “We are not going after the Starship Troopers/Iron Man system right off the bat,” said Rich Cofer, a former soldier who's now the Army's lead “capabilities developer” on the exoskeleton project. “We're not going to jump right in and expect Tony Stark... Expectation management is key.”

(That's a stark contrast to Special Operations Command's highly publicized TALOS program, which explicitly compared itself to Iron Man but produced nothing of the kind).

So instead of Iron Man, think Iron Leg. In a “soldier touchpoint” last December at Fort Drum, NY, Army soldiers from more than two dozen Military Occupational Specialties — ranging from infantry to supply — tried out various types of “lower-body exoskeletons,” including the Lockheed Martin ONYX that our own Paul McLeary tries out in this video. In essence, these are motorized knee braces and other wearable reinforcements for the legs that lighten the load on overburdened soldiers as they march for hours with heavy packs, manhandle artillery shells and such. The goal isn't to give the wearer superpowers, but to reduce fatigue and risk of injury.

During the Fort Drum trials, “there were significant increases in the effectiveness of soldiers,” Maciuba told me. “The soldiers were able to do more with the exoskeleton than they could without.”

That said, “we learned [that] there needs to be enough reliability engineered into our systems so that there is a very high probability they will not fail in use,” Maciuba continued. “It's one thing to be wearing a boot whose sole flips off. You can always take some 100-mile-an-hour tape and tape that back on your foot. It's another thing to be wearing an exoskeleton” that requires specialized training and tools to fix. So reliability will be a high priority when the Army speaks to potential vendors in mid-November.

By that point, Maciuba & co. expect to have a draft Abbreviated Capabilities Development Document for industry to review and offer comment on. (Army Futures Command officially gave them the go-ahead to write the ACDD on Aug. 14th; the exoskeleton project falls under the command's Soldier Lethality team, with input from PEO-Soldier acquisition officials, Natick Soldier Systems Center researchers, and capability managers for infantry, armored, and Stryker units). While unclassified, the document will be considered sensitive and only released to qualified contractors.

While the ACDD is formally considered a requirements document, Maciuba told me, it's not going to set rigid technical specs as would a traditional Army requirement. The technology is advancing way too fast to get that detailed at this early stage. Instead, he said, it will outline “desirable characteristics” but leave industry plenty of leeway to innovate on specific ways to achieve them – and the Army is open to revising those desires based on what industry says is actually achievable.

“We want industry to grade our work,” Maciuba said. The industry day – which will be held online unless there's some miraculous breakthrough with COVID-19 – will include both a general session open to all contractors and one-on-one meetings with specific contractors so they can discuss their technology without competitors listening. Afterwards, Maciuba, Cofer, & co. will compile the feedback from all the companies, revise the ACDD, and send it to Army leaders for approval.

The final Abbreviated Capabilities Development Document should be out by the end of 2021, Cofer estimated. The next step? Use a streamlined acquisition process known as Section 804, intended to field a working prototype within five years – that is, Maciuba cautioned, if the Army can find the funding.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/09/army-wants-industry-input-for-reliable-exoskeleton-not-iron-man-yet/

On the same subject

  • Lockheed set to integrate base kit for US Army’s combat vehicle protection system

    February 17, 2021 | International, Land

    Lockheed set to integrate base kit for US Army’s combat vehicle protection system

    By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — Under a recent contract award with a $30 million ceiling, Lockheed Martin will begin integrating and formally testing its open-architecture processor designed to control the U.S. Army's future combat vehicle protection system, the company announced Feb. 16. The Army is determining the specific plans and schedules for integration and testing of Lockheed's base kit for its Modular Active Protection System, or MAPS, that ties vehicle sensors and countermeasures into a common framework to detect, track and destroy rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank guided missiles aimed at combat vehicles. Lockheed is supporting those activities starting later this year through 2023, David Rohall, program manager for advanced ground vehicle systems at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, told Defense News. The Army has not yet finalized dates for the formal testing. Lockheed received an initial award of $1.5 million through an other transaction authority agreement following a competitive process in December 2020, but has since received $3 million of additional incremental funding, according to Rohall. As part of the contract, Lockheed will develop the MAPS base kit hardware and software; perform platform integration; and run on-vehicle, live-fire demonstrations over a 36-month period. Funding will be incrementally issued throughout the period of performance, Rohall said. The base kit consists of the MAPS open-architecture controller, application software, user interface, power management distribution system and a network switch, Rohall explained. The software identifies incoming threats and deploys the most suitable countermeasure to defeat them, he added. “In an Army lab test, one MAPS-enabled active protection system actually responded faster to threats than its standalone version, thanks to the higher network speeds and greater processor power the MAPS controller offers,” Rohall said. The Army is working with other industry partners to bring in sensors and countermeasures that are compliant with the MAPS architecture. Lockheed has been working with the Army on solutions for a future vehicle protection system since 2014. The service initally awarded the MAPS software project to Raytheon and the hardware effort to Lockheed. But in 2017, the service transferred the software development to Lockheed. The Army, Lockheed and other industry partners have been working to prepare sensors and countermeasures controlled by the MAPS base kit for lab and live-fire demonstrations, including soft-kill systems like Northrop Grumman's MEOS, BAE Systems' Raven and Ariel Photonics' CLOUD, as well as hard-kill systems including Artis Corporation's Iron Curtain and Elbit System's Iron Fist. Sensors include Northrop's PICS IR sensor and Iron Curtain's L3 Mustang, as well as several laser warning systems. Lockheed will work with the Army for integration and testing on the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the M1 Abrams tank, the Armored Multipurpose Vehicle and the Stryker combat vehicle ahead of a transition to the Vehicle Protection System program, Rohall said. “We continue to support development activities. We expect to be back in the field this year to support testing on multiple combat vehicles equipped with laser warning receivers that are new to the MAPS architecture,” Rohall said. The upcoming integration and testing is the last step for the base kit ahead of fielding the future Vehicle Protection System for ground combat vehicles. The effort will validate the Vehicle Protection System base kit capability for an initial production decision. The contract also covers developing capabilities beyond active protection, Lockheed said, to include underbelly blast protection. The Army has spent years developing a future Vehicle Protection System, and has had several attempts — one successful, others not — to field interim active protection systems onto current combat vehicles. The service has already fielded Rafael's Trophy active protection system on some Abrams tanks in Europe. The Army had also chosen IMI's Iron Fist for the Bradley but has struggled with technical issues and funding, and the program's future is delayed and uncertain. The service also had difficulty finding an interim candidate for its Stryker vehicle and hit a dead end with the effort in 2019. Iron Curtain was seen as the front-runner for Stryker, but due to system maturity, the service decided not proceed with its qualification efforts. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/02/16/lockheed-begins-integration-of-base-kit-for-us-armys-combat-vehicle-protection-system/

  • Londres prépare son chasseur face à l'avion franco-allemand

    July 16, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Londres prépare son chasseur face à l'avion franco-allemand

    FARNBOROUGH, Angleterre (Reuters) - Le ministre britannique de la Défense Gavin Williamson va dévoiler au salon aéronautique de Farnborough un nouveau projet d'avion de combat, avec un financement déjà prévu de deux milliards de livres (2,3 milliards d'euros), a-t-on appris lundi de source proche du dossier. L'appareil, qui remplacera à terme l'Eurofighter Typhoon, sera conçu et produit par BAE Systems , Rolls-Royce et Leonardo, a indiqué cette source. Ce projet britannique, à moins de neuf mois de la sortie prévue du pays de l'Union européenne, apparaît comme une concurrence au projet d'avion de la France et de l'Allemagne pour succéder à l'Eurofighter Typhoon, au Rafale et au Gripen du suédois Saab dans le cadre du programme FCAS. La Grande-Bretagne discute avec d'autres pays pour trouver des partenaires pour développer l'avion, a ajouté la source. La Suède est considérée comme le partenaire le plus probable, même si des pays comme la Corée du Sud, le Japon, la Turquie ou des pays du Golfe acheteurs d'armements comme l'Arabie saoudite, sont aussi des partenaires possibles. Le nouvel avion serait opérationnel d'ici 2035, prêt à remplacer en 2040 le Typhoon, développé dans les années 1980 par l'Allemagne, l'Espagne, la Grande-Bretagne et l'Italie. Le Grande-Bretagne n'a pas développé d'avion de combat seule depuis les années 1960. Elle a toutefois contribué à développer et à construire l'avion de combat le plus avancé de la flotte britannique, qui est le F-35 américain, sur lequel BAE Systems assure environ 15% du travail sur chaque appareil. (Sarah Young; Catherine Mallebay-Vacqueur et Cyril Altmeyer pour le service français, édité par Véronique Tison) https://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/londres-prepare-son-chasseur-face-a-l-avion-franco-allemand.N720259

  • Behind Europe’s ammo pledge to Ukraine, some manufacturers grow leery

    June 19, 2023 | International, Land

    Behind Europe’s ammo pledge to Ukraine, some manufacturers grow leery

    Companies are looking for more guidance from the EU as they balance the need for speedy production with hefty market intervention from Brussels.

All news