Spain's Not-So-Future Soldier

[Catalan]

The information is from a number of articles in Spanish printed in the last two issues of Fuerza Terretre and FAM, as well as from an article published in MilTech last year.

 

 

Spain’s future soldier program (COMFUT) is a ‘1st generation’ program, which means that it’s an immediate modernization that will be take effect on the Spanish Army. In the future, a COMFUT 2nd generation program might be started to standardize the Spanish soldier with the rest of NATO (in accordance with the future soldier programs in France and Italy, for example). Therefore, all technology being looked at for COMFUT 1st generation is technology that is realistic in the present-day and can be fielded currently. In essence, the theory is that COMFUT will make the infantryman a ‘weapon system’ in the way he or she can acquire and kill. The Spanish Ministry of Defense is not looking for some high tech battle suit, although new technologies will be integrated in order to increase the soldier’s ability to acquire, accurately target, communicate, camouflage one’s self, et cetera; the technology is at the service of the soldier, not vice versa. COMFUT 1st generation is looking at developing a system that is the best balance between systems, features, performance and ergonomics. The most important part is its modularity, which will allow upgrade programs in 2015, 2025, and so on and so forth – therefore, COMFUT will be worthwhile for many decades to come. Of course, the system will be interoperable with other European Union future soldier suits and the same with NATO.

 

The main contract has been given to EADS-CASA, but Indra will oversee much of the lethality program. This includes sensors to increase the accuracy of the Spanish G-36E and to make it easier for the soldier to aim and fire accurately at the target. Indra will also work on the communications system. Everything will be processed as information and displayed in the helmet mounted display (HMD) on the soldier’s helmet and on the weapon’s sight. All communications will be designed to be completely wireless.

 

The future soldier will most likely be given a brand new tactical armored vest and load carrying equipment (probably pending on the development of new armor materials), a new helmet, signature reducing suit, new eye protection, knee/elbow protection, cold weather suit, NBC gear and plastic gloves. Modularity will allow the suit to be changed based on the operating area of the soldier (i.e. Lebanon versus the Democratic Republic of the Congo). The ballistic vest will have two basic levels of protection: against 9x19mm PB and .40 S&W and against shrapnel moving at 650m/sec, and then rigid protection which offers protection against 7.62x39mm steel-core ammunition. The inserts/plates will be designed to decrease deformation of the plate to less than 40mm, to decrease trauma on the body of the target. The helmet is just a polyethylene helmet (like Kevlar), with an inner casing weighing 1kg, and it will be given a helmet-mounted display. In regards to signature reduction, the new suit can reduce the IR signature of the soldier by over 17%.

 

The interoperable hardware includes a PDA, and access to internet, modules, sensors, Bluetooth, UWB, et cetera. The system includes an IFF system that can tell a soldier where nearby friendly units are, to avoid fratricide. Intra and inter-squad level communications will be through MESH, which includes a one-hop addressing IP radio, with bandwidth sufficient for Rx/Tx (2Mbps) – allowing for real-time voice communications. Inter-squad communication is reserved for the squad leader and perhaps one of the fire team leaders.

 

Spain plans to have 36 prototypes by 2009 and to start production by 2010.

 

[Special-K]

Is polyethelene a new material for ballistic helmets? I know they use it in plates, and it is extremely light weight (definitly a plus for helmets). It's main drawbacks are cost, the fact that it is so heat sensitive, and that it can't stop AP rounds.

 

 

 

 

-K

[Xavier]

Is polyethelene a new material for ballistic helmets? I know they use it in plates, and it is extremely light weight (definitly a plus for helmets). It's main drawbacks are cost, the fact that it is so heat sensitive, and that it can't stop AP rounds.

-K

no helmet does, not even FMJ rifle rounds, they are only supposed to stop frags&pistol rounds

[pdoktar]

no helmet does, not even FMJ rifle rounds, they are only supposed to stop frags&pistol rounds

I heard that even if a helmet would stop a round, it would cause some neck injuries for the soldier anyhow as the bullets energy is transferred fully to the neck via helmet.

[Claudio_1]

I heard that even if a helmet would stop a round, it would cause some neck injuries for the soldier anyhow as the bullets energy is transferred fully to the neck via helmet.

 

Urban legend, partly because of Hollywood

 

In Hollywood movies you see people getting hit by pistol bullets/rifle bullets/buckshot and flying back a few meters all the time .

[KingSargent]

I heard that even if a helmet would stop a round, it would cause some neck injuries for the soldier anyhow as the bullets energy is transferred fully to the neck via helmet.

If it does, he has to be alive to feel the injury.

[Typhoid Maxx]

Heard that direct rifle round hits in WWI & WWII to steel helmets would kill without penetration (presumably due to trauma to the neck?); no idea of the validity nor how this transfers to assault rifle intermediate rounds and more malleable Kevlar…though my gut reaction is pretty bad, in that I would not trust the bucket to stop the round in the first place at any relevant speed.

[Claudio_1]

no helmet does, not even FMJ rifle rounds, they are only supposed to stop frags&pistol rounds

 

Actually, the Germans had a helmet in WW 1 that stopped rifle bullets. It was the regular helmet with a special armour plate. It was used by special assault/engineer troups. It was not liked much, far too heavy and far too front heavy.

 

If a rifle bullet, stopped by a helmet, would kill anyway (via the neck break myth) then why use such a helmet?

 

People do not fly back through the air when hit by bullets, do not believe Hollywood

[Claudio_1]

Here are some photos of a replica (I couldn't find anything else in a hurry)

 

replica of the German Sturmhelm

[Xavier]

Actually, the Germans had a helmet in WW 1 that stopped rifle bullets. It was the regular helmet with a special armour plate. It was used by special assault/engineer troups. It was not liked much, far too heavy and far too front heavy.

 

If a rifle bullet, stopped by a helmet, would kill anyway (via the neck break myth) then why use such a helmet?

 

People do not fly back through the air when hit by bullets, do not believe Hollywood

that plate is twice as heavy as a kevlar helmet alone! talk about front heavy...

 

PS apparently people do fly when kicked in the belly by Chuck Norris, at least in the movie I just saw, one with more holes and errors in it than grains of sand in the Sahara desert...

[KingSargent]

DIs used to fire M14s off their chins to assure recruits that recoil was not dangerous. That would be more of a danger of neck injury than a bullet strike to the helmet.

[Archie Pellagio]

DIs used to fire M14s off their chins to assure recruits that recoil was not dangerous. That would be more of a danger of neck injury than a bullet strike to the helmet.

 

Wouldn't it be equal?

[KingSargent]

Wouldn't it be equal?

No, because the bullet strike would have lost momentum with distance, and the chance of getting a straight-on 90 degree strike on a domed helmet is pretty slim. It would be close but not equal.

[DB]

No, because the bullet strike would have lost momentum with distance, and the chance of getting a straight-on 90 degree strike on a domed helmet is pretty slim. It would be close but not equal.

Plus the 30% or so momentum from the propellant - (estimate from Benjamin)

[Mistral]

I am sure everyone who was in the military has tried this .

 

When I was in we used a couple of steel helmets (the American ones, M1s?) and placed them on sticks 300m away. We then blasted away with our G3s. We had 5 hits on the helmets. Not once did they fall off the sticks and of the 5 hits 3 were through and through penetrations (both sides with a huge exit hole) one had penetrated but then went downwards and so did not hit the other side and 2 were glancing blows that did not penetrate. These last two made such a dent on the helmets that I am not sure anyone wearing them when when hit would not be injured in some way.

Edited February 17, 2008 by Mistral

[Sailor Lars]

that plate is twice as heavy as a kevlar helmet alone! talk about front heavy...

 

PS apparently people do fly when kicked in the belly by Chuck Norris, at least in the movie I just saw, one with more holes and errors in it than grains of sand in the Sahara desert...

 

pushing types of kicks do make people fly for a nice distance and you don't even need to be Chuck Norris to manage it

 

And on topic.. Anyone it makes me a wonder how well you can do wireless communication on individual soldier level, and how easy/hard it would be to scramble/mess up..

 

Other than that, first phases look good. There's never enough when it comes to building up the basics

[wallaby bob]

Actually, the Germans had a helmet in WW 1 that stopped rifle bullets. It was the regular helmet with a special armour plate. It was used by special assault/engineer troups. It was not liked much, far too heavy and far too front heavy.

 

If a rifle bullet, stopped by a helmet, would kill anyway (via the neck break myth) then why use such a helmet

 

CLAUDIO. The mass of such a helmet would by it's inertia slow down the movement of the helmet, in relation to the head/skull. If heavy enough the shock transmitted would be negligible.

KING SARGEANT. Avoiding death at the risk of becoming a quadreplegic might not be everyone's choice.

ALL. A simple momentum calculation is inadequate for estimating the damage done by any Force. Velocity plays an important, if not most important, part. In the consideration of recoil for a given Momentum. the value of the momentum does not change if the weight of a weapon is doubled/ tripled but the felt recoil undoubtedly does.

The more is better idea advanced by one poster certainly do not reflect the views, of the majority(?), of those who carry or have carried such a load. Mobility is sacrificed and mobility is a vital part of not becoming a target in the first instance.

As to whether soldier communication can be be conducted in a secure and reliable way at the level of the individual. The technical means are certainly available. Encryption and frequency-hopping or even spread-spectrum tansmission are, if not necessarily cheap, possible at minimum weight penalty. Whether the need exists at individuak level is another, entirely different , question WB

[George Newbill]

Actually modern helmets are a lot better than older helmets and modern bullets are a lot smaller.

 

We are now approaching helmets that stop assault rifle rounds.

[KingSargent]

The more is better idea advanced by one poster certainly do not reflect the views, of the majority(?), of those who carry or have carried such a load. Mobility is sacrificed and mobility is a vital part of not becoming a target in the first instance.

The heavy German WW1 helmet in question was intended for snipers and fixed post observers in trench warfare. Think "Pillbox for the Head." Movement was not an issue.

 

It was probably only put on to look out of cover.

[sunday]

The heavy German WW1 helmet in question was intended for snipers and fixed post observers in trench warfare. Think "Pillbox for the Head." Movement was not an issue.

 

It was probably only put on to look out of cover.

 

Didn't they also made a kind of breastplate for MG gunners, and a armored "mask" for snipers?

Edited February 18, 2008 by sunday

[Catalan]

Question: Can Spain even afford this? I've heard that the MoD and the Ministry of Industry and Tourism is having a hard time finding the money to pay for current modernization efforts (including the Leopard 2E - what Antonio Candil calls the most expensive Leopard - and F100 frigate program, not to mention the Eurofighter and the Tigre [i.e. the former is the most expensive program in the history of the Spanish military], and the BPE).

[sunday]

Question: Can Spain even afford this? I've heard that the MoD and the Ministry of Industry and Tourism is having a hard time finding the money to pay for current modernization efforts (including the Leopard 2E - what Antonio Candil calls the most expensive Leopard - and F100 frigate program, not to mention the Eurofighter and the Tigre [i.e. the former is the most expensive program in the history of the Spanish military], and the BPE).

 

Our GDP share spent in defense is one of the lowest in the EU, so I dare say yes. But don't expect to see this system in service before 2020...

[Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo]

Question: Can Spain even afford this? I've heard that the MoD and the Ministry of Industry and Tourism is having a hard time finding the money to pay for current modernization efforts (including the Leopard 2E - what Antonio Candil calls the most expensive Leopard - and F100 frigate program, not to mention the Eurofighter and the Tigre [i.e. the former is the most expensive program in the history of the Spanish military], and the BPE).

 

As I said on another tread, don`t take Candil too seriously.

 

Both the Leopardo and F-100 programs started years ago and thus a lot of its costs have been covered; there`s no problems with them although payments are spread into a loooong timeframe.

 

Besides Tiger the bigger sticker price program right now is the NH-90. Both should be already being delivered by 2010 out of the Albacete plant. Local production is expensive, buth that extra money creates local jobs and help preserve a core capability.

[Exel]

I find it hilarious that changing clothes to suit the environment is nowadays called 'modularity'.