remember the invisible Aston Martin in bond?

[JS80]

linked from drudge

 

[Throckmorton]

It would only be invisible from one angle... but in a forest or something it would be good camo

 

[her209]

How does a tank see where its going then?

 

[destrekor]

that will be so cool. I read that on somewhere else today too. I've been hearing of that kind of tech, using lots of little cameras to display the the scene of one side on the other side so that it appears invisible. Now it's actually be applied and may be close to actually military use eh?
now to do that for soldiers, although the tech of the body suit would be incredibly expensive, and the cameras probably aren't small enough yet.

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
It would only be invisible from one angle... but in a forest or something it would be good camo

well technically, they can have the cameras on every angle to display on the opposite side, so it could theoretically work from any angle, but obviously there are going to be slight gaps and specific angles it wouldn't work on. but alas, most angles it should work.

 

[mfs378]

They can't project an image with the same dynamic range as the real scene. Also, it won't work from even most angles. If you can see the same panel from two different angles, then from at least one angle, the image will be incorrect.

 

[compnovice]

Nice!

But won't the lenses and projectors shatter pretty easily in the battlefield?

 

[PieIsAwesome]

Stank rush!

 

[AmberClad]

You'd think that if this were feasible in real world, non-stationary situations, DARPA would be the ones look into and researching it. Not just the British MoD. I guess what I'm saying is -- what's the catch?

 

[potato28]

:Q Pretty sweet... I want one!

 

[RESmonkey]

Metar Gero Sorid!

 

[bignateyk]

Originally posted by: AmberClad
You'd think that if this were feasible in real world, non-stationary situations, DARPA would be the ones look into and researching it. Not just the British MoD. I guess what I'm saying is -- what's the catch?

Do you actually think DARPA isn't funding a similar program?

 

[eLiu]

I couldn't stop thinking "Ministry of Magic" every time I read "Ministry of Defense"... lol.

 

[Greenman]

Rain and dust will play hell with the system, and at night a flashlight would make it stick out like a sore thumb. The other issue is IR signature, don't know about the rest of the world, but US tanks all have IR systems, they will see right through that camo, then shoot through it as well.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: destrekor
well technically, they can have the cameras on every angle to display on the opposite side, so it could theoretically work from any angle, but obviously there are going to be slight gaps and specific angles it wouldn't work on. but alas, most angles it should work.

You would detect it by parallax.

But it would be able to get a LOT closer to you before you realized it was there than a normal tank...almost certainly within range of its main gun.

Originally posted by: Greenman
Rain and dust will play hell with the system, and at night a flashlight would make it stick out like a sore thumb. The other issue is IR signature, don't know about the rest of the world, but US tanks all have IR systems, they will see right through that camo, then shoot through it as well.

Visual detection is still the primary way people tell what's out there. The IR system only looks at one direction at a time, whereas the infantry that are supporting your tank are looking all over the place. This isn't a magic bullet, but it is a big tactical advantage.

 

[StageLeft]

The timeline on this is rubbish. In the field in 5 years? Whoever said that should be thrown in front of a tank and run over. As mentioned above, the angling would be very difficult to deal with

 

[0roo0roo]

are they covering it with oled panels or something?

 

[Evadman]

Infrared always works. Good luck masking that.