12/7    Hey military hardware people.  I liked the movie Aliens 2 a lot.
                                                         \_ Aliens, no 2
        It showed a lot of futuristic military gear that are really cool.
        Just how much is that stuff is in use today?  E.g., I like the guns
        with LED counter on the number of bullets lefts, the handheld motion
        sensor maps, the body armor with cameras in the helmets and links
        to a command post which monitors their vital signs, the automatic
        machine guns which fires based on motion, etc.  Seems like we can
        use a lot of that stuff.  Thanks.
        \_ Pancor Jackhammer.  And for all the naysaying luddites below,
           have a look at troop tactics over the years, and how they have
           adapted to technology over the years.  You may note that the
           individual soldier _is_ more valuable today (note also that we
           don't go for rolling curtains of artillery or human wave charges
           anymore?)  A lot of that is due to the ability to project force
           more precisely.  Today's army uses computers, lasers, satellites,
           smart munitions and strong air-ground coordination, where you
           people would probably have bearded thugs beating each other with
           clubs.  So yes, mr. OP we can and do use a lot of that stuff
           (although yes, the blinkenlights might be sort of a liability in
           battle.)  -John
           \_ The Jackhammer was a prototype fully auto shotgun. What does that
              have to do with the assault weapons in Aliens? As I recall, those
              were select fire, fired caseless ammo and had an integrated
              grenade launcher. P.S., I'm no gun nut, but a fully auto weapon
              with a 10 round magazine doesn't seem all that useful...
        \_ A transparent magazine works almost as well.  Lots of automatic
           guns have those now.
        \_ I think that in general, the idea of a lot of expensive stuff on
           each soldier works logically in the movie, where because it's a
           space ship there is a fixed supply of troops and each one is very
           valuable. Here on Earth, troops are a dime a dozen. Monitor their
           vital signs? I think the blood and screaming is a good monitor.
           Elite commando forces can use more stuff like that.
        \_ an LED counter on the side is going to get troops killed.  "Look
           for the red lights at night, Abdul, and shoot there!"
           That movie had a good moral -- if you don't use the technology
           right they'll still kill you.
        \_ I can also see motion sensor guns causing a lot of friendly
           ire deaths...
           \_ what kind of reasoning is that?  Any weapon can cause friendly
              fire.  With the automatic shoot-on-motion machine guns, you
              don't put them on your front gate where people come in and
              out.  You put it on the border between Iraq and Iran.  Shoot
              to kill any fucker that tries to get in.  Also between
              US and Mexico or Afghanistan and Pakistan.  Illegal immigration
              will stop after that goes in.  I guarantee you that.
              \_ Wouldn't they be easy to take out/avoid? They would stupidly
                 fire at any moving thing? Tumbleweed etc. I can imagine a lot
                 of wasted ammo. Then, they are fixed, open targets for someone
                 to shoot. Probably expensive with the optics/sensors/tracking.
                 Just overengineering for a problem that doesn't really exist.
                 \_ Couple an optical and IR sensor.  Shoot at every
                    warm-blooded moving thing.
                    \_ Would that work in deserts? Anyway, people could hide
                       behind thick shields and wave stuff around until the
                       ammo is gone. But how about this alternative? You have
                       the remote-control gun emplacements with fancy imaging
                       sensors. You have a room of counterstrike players. Then
                       you route the control of the guns to the players based
                       on motion detection, telemarketer style.
              \_ Even when only deployed in the right areas, I can still
                 imagine carelessness causing a lot of deaths.  Maybe computer
                 controlled gun turrets would make more sense.
                 \_ ...right, with deibold software on top of a windows os.
                    \_ If their field-of-fire is fixed at 120-degrees and they
                       are programmed to shoot everything, then they won't
                       kill friendlies unless they walk into the field-of-fire.
           \_ You could have friendly troops wearing specialized RFID chips
              and put a terrahertz-band transmitter on the gun and it would
              be a challenge-response system.
              \_ RFID isn't terahertz.
                 \_ I know.  You'd want something that can be better confined
                    to a beam.  You don't want the gun to set off every tag
                    around, just those its pointed towards.  Likewise, you
                    don't want peoples' tags signaling in every direction.
              \_ You should apply for an ARPA grant. Seriously.
                 \_ Maybe, but I'm reminded of the Matt Damon monologue from
                    "Good Will Hunting"
                    \_ Why?  It has nothing to do with you.
        \_ Strap on your headset and play the Counterstrike mod
           "Natural Selection".
        \_ I thought I saw a documentary on the future infantry man.
           They are doing research and testing on new technologies now.