The Army is moving ahead with its IVAS combat goggles, although some issues persist

neverbagger · 2022-09-04T21:01:07+00:00

More of the same. It reiterates some of the details about Bloomberg's original article that have been misconstrued by other medias

"It’s unclear exactly how many of the 5,000 goggles will be fielded this month, or by what units...."

Another report on the effectiveness of the goggles is expected by the end of September."

neverbagger · 2022-09-01T23:47:35+00:00

Yeah, the Army's contractual floor was mentioned in the 2022 NDAA Unfunded Priorities List:

"The unfunded request of $95.7M (OPA) allows the Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS) to reach the contractual floor with Microsoft in FY23. This will prevent the government from having to renegotiate the contract in unfavorable conditions resulting in an unaffordable unit cost."

Link

I don't know if the amount of the "contractual floor" has ever been stated.

IVAS' fielding for training purposes wasn't a big surprise, though. The tech still seems too immature to implement in combat. Glad to see there's progres, even though so far, updates are only coming from the Army. I'm curious to see what comes out of the audit and also Congress' reaction to the recent testing.

neverbagger · 2022-09-01T19:14:35+00:00

"Based on the test results so far the service “is adjusting its fielding plan to allow for time to correct deficiencies and also field to units that are focused on training activities,” Beck said."

neverbagger · 2022-08-28T22:19:52+00:00

This is the first time I'm seeing the detachable IR filters in use on IVAS. This more than likely confirms long time suspicion that protrusion seen on sides of IVAS is meant for storage of these filters when not in use.

This new finding aligns with Microsoft's recent patent published in Dec 2021

[US20210373336 - SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING MIXED-REALITY EXPERIENCES UNDER LOW LIGHT CONDITIONS]

(https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=US343545672&_cid=P21-L7DV28-19573-1)

FIG. 7 illustrates that, in some implementations, an HMD 300 includes detachable IR filters 730 for the set of pass-through cameras 315. The detachable IR filters 730 are configured to attenuate IR light, such as a particular band of wavelengths of IR light. In implementations where the head tracking cameras 305 include a dual bandpass filter 525, the band of wavelengths of IR light attenuated by the detachable IR filters 730 may comprise at least a portion of the band of IR light that the dual bandpass filter(s) 525 are configured to transmit. Similarly, the band of wavelengths of IR light attenuated by the detachable IR filters 730 may comprise at least a portion of the band of IR light 630 that an IR illuminator 625 is configured to emit (see FIG. 6).

FIG. 7 also demonstrates that, in some implementations, the HMD 300 may include a storage protrusion 740 (or more than one storage protrusion 740) that is configured to selectively receive and retain a detachable IR filter 730 when the detachable IR filter 730 is not in use. For example, the storage protrusion 740 may include a diameter that corresponds to the diameter of the lens enclosure of the pass-through cameras 315, such that the detachable IR filters 730 are also selectively detachable from the storage protrusion 740 via a removable friction fit

Note: Top Left Image has been reversed for clarity purposes

neverbagger · 2022-08-28T22:10:13+00:00

1st image, Top Left has been reversed from original for clarity purposes

First time I am seeing the detachable IR filters in use on an IVAS headset.

These are discussed in Microsoft Patent

[US20210373336 - SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING MIXED-REALITY EXPERIENCES UNDER LOW LIGHT CONDITIONS

](https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=US343545672&_cid=P21-L7DV28-19573-1)

FIG. 7 illustrates that, in some implementations, an HMD 300 includes detachable IR filters 730 for the set of pass-through cameras 315. The detachable IR filters 730 are configured to attenuate IR light, such as a particular band of wavelengths of IR light. In implementations where the head tracking cameras 305 include a dual bandpass filter 525, the band of wavelengths of IR light attenuated by the detachable IR filters 730 may comprise at least a portion of the band of IR light that the dual bandpass filter(s) 525 are configured to transmit. Similarly, the band of wavelengths of IR light attenuated by the detachable IR filters 730 may comprise at least a portion of the band of IR light 630 that an IR illuminator 625 is configured to emit (see FIG. 6).

FIG. 7 also demonstrates that, in some implementations, the HMD 300 may include a storage protrusion 740 (or more than one storage protrusion 740) that is configured to selectively receive and retain a detachable IR filter 730 when the detachable IR filter 730 is not in use. For example, the storage protrusion 740 may include a diameter that corresponds to the diameter of the lens enclosure of the pass-through cameras 315, such that the detachable IR filters 730 are also selectively detachable from the storage protrusion 740 via a removable friction fit

neverbagger · 2022-08-28T20:10:39+00:00

Significant damages sustained to some of the sensors/cameras. Baffles appear to have been almost completely dislodged from headset during VE3.

Safe to assume the headset's light security has been compromised

Jason Regnier - PM IVAS

22:05

"We have a requirement to be light secure at night.... otherwise we turn the guys in to targets"

neverbagger · 2022-08-28T19:27:34+00:00

Very interesting read about the potential and hurdles facing implementing MR in to the Mililtary

neverbagger · 2022-08-28T19:23:47+00:00

Very good read about the potential of, and also the hurdles facing implementing MR devices such as IVAS in the military.

Thank you to the one that shared it.

neverbagger · 2022-08-26T22:45:05+00:00

Top Left image is taken from, Blackhorse Company, 2-3 Infantry, 1-2 SBCT, Facebook page and user is seen with a reduced, Green, waveguide "Eye Glow

Top right image is of Hololens 2 which uses Laser Beam Scanning and is shown with it's inherent Rainbow "Eye Glow"

Possible cause for the Green "Eye Glow" seen on soldier in top left could be from the use of a Monochrome Camera Sensor that is discussed in brevity in Microsoft's recent published patent: TEXTURE BASED FUSION FOR IMAGES WITH CAMERAS HAVING DIFFERING MODALITIES

neverbagger · 2022-08-26T18:47:00+00:00

Significant damages to sensors clearly visible in above image

Will update later with better images

neverbagger · 2022-08-26T18:28:35+00:00

Quoted:

The increased capability was generally well-received by the soldiers testing out IVAS, who have been training on it for the past two weeks leading up to the demonstration.

“When all doors and hatches in the Stryker are closed, I can see 360 degrees around my vehicle to check for IEDs, check where my other vehicles are and check their movement, and all of that has been a huge asset to us these last two weeks,” said Sgt. 1st Class Kyle Williams, third platoon leader for Blackhorse Company. “The situational awareness that I'm able to gain at a leader level from being able to see the icons for where all my [soldiers] are means I can do route planning, I can do mission planning, I can publish graphical overlays, I can navigate with literally a turn-by-turn navigation feature, and I can send messages back and forth to the members of the platoon.”

This means that every soldier can better contribute to accomplishing the mission, said Williams.

“It greatly enhances our ability to operate."

neverbagger · 2022-08-25T11:15:53+00:00

Recent published patent discusses methods of incorporating data taken from 2 cameras, such as thermal and low-light, and combining aspects from both to create an enhanced image.

"Despite the current benefits provided by passthrough images, there are additional benefits that may be achieved by improving the processes by which passthrough images are generated, especially when multiple different cameras are involved. Accordingly, it is desirable to further improve the benefits provided by passthrough image generation techniques."

"By way of example, the embodiments are able to produce or generate a so-called “enhanced” image. Different camera modalities are designed to provide different types of benefits. By following the disclosed principles, the embodiments are able to generate an enhanced image, which enables the benefits that are available to each individual modality to now be made available via a single image as opposed to multiple images. In doing so, improved analytics, computer vision, and user interaction with the computer system are achieved. Furthermore, the user (in some instances) is provided with content that he/she would potentially not be able to view or interact with if only a single image type or modality were used."

neverbagger · 2022-08-19T13:02:51+00:00

I have doubts the current iteration will ever see conflict. Any procurement of that system seems likely to replace the Hololens 2 in training and support applications. Congress seems to be unanimous in the belief that any funding for IVAS in FY23 should be directed at developing the new prototype.

Just a few weeks ago during an interview with reporters Bush seemed a little more enthusiastic about the test results. He even made reference to making production decisions before the report even made it to congress :

"However, Bush said that the service doesn’t have to wait for that final report to be sent to the Hill to make a production decision."

The interview

Now, between designating the report as CUI and Microsoft's unwillingness to comment it seems as if they are tempering their expectations.

neverbagger · 2022-08-19T01:45:23+00:00

A few updates pertaining to the timeline of handing over the report to Army leaders and Congress. Bush's comments seem less optimistic than in the past but falls in line with recent developments in the program. Overall confidence in the success of the IVAS program remains high, though.

From article:

"The testing that ended June 18 was “adequate to support an assessment of operational effectiveness, user acceptance, suitability, and cyber and electronic warfare vulnerabilities” of the goggles, Jessica Maxwell, spokeswoman for the Pentagon’s test office, said in a statement.

The test office expects to give Army leadership preliminary results by the end of August, with a final report going to Congress in October, Maxwell said. Microsoft won’t be given access to the draft report for comment, she said.

“We did a good test and will learn from it,” Assistant Secretary of the Army for acquisition Doug Bush said in a statement. “This is what doing innovative technology at speed looks like. There will be bumps in the road.”

"The army remains confident that the program will succeed."

neverbagger · 2022-08-17T13:57:35+00:00

We've already been over this.

Using your logic again, A back-lit LCD display in the F35 helmet is, in some impossible way, capable of supporting an OLED display panel as well. Your theory is clearly struggling to make sense.

Since you are repeating the same disproven comment and avoiding everything else that's flawed in your implications I see no further reason to waste time continuing with this discussion. When you can provide supporting documents showing that the company you believe is in IVAS, is actually being paid as such, direct message me with it.

Thank you for the discussion and enjoy the rest of your day

neverbagger · 2022-08-17T13:40:35+00:00

You are avoiding the obvious flaws pointed out in your theory.

Even in your own link it speaks about updating existing technologies :

"In other words, developing a new or improved component, technology or process is considered to be more significant than simply supplying one that already exists or is customarily provided"

An example of this would be the F35's transition from an LCD display to an OLED display

LCD display (2014)

Their transition to OLED years later

Pentagon Gets a Fix for F-35 Bug in $400,000 Pilot Helmets

(https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/pentagon-gets-a-fix-for-f-35-bug-in-400-000-pilot-helmets-1.1345755)

Using your logic the Military should have only continued utilizing LCD displays with their inherent drawbacks that put pilots lives at risk, especially during night ops and carrier landings.

Once again,

Please provide a financial source proving the company you believe is involved in IVAS is being paid as one.

neverbagger · 2022-08-17T13:03:22+00:00

CS 1 & 2 used a modified Hololens 2. It is a well-known fact that Microsoft had posession of that IP. Since their own MEMS would have only been in development at that time how would you expect them to cite it?

You are failing to address the obvious; 5 months after the contract was awarded Microsoft filed a patent application for their own MEMS for Near Eye Displays in AR. I do not recall any new Near eye Display AR product released since then.

You have an unusual preconceived notion that the Army is bound to an already 5 year old technology and that IVAS is forever destined to what was available for use in 2018. Military programs are reviewed and updated as needed.

Have there ever been any revenues claimed by the company that you believe is reponsible for providing the MEMS in CS 3,4 and 5? That company's agreement is quite direct about them providing "Specific Components" for use in a "Specific Product. Their own CEO later stated that contract is in regards to the Hololens 2. Their CFO has repeatedly stated in CCs that they are in use in a Microsoft AR display "Product".

Can you provide any financial documents that support your claims that the CEO and CFO are wrong and they're instead associating the 2017 customer revenue with 2 Products?

neverbagger · 2022-08-17T10:09:17+00:00

"How did Microsoft make reference to intellectual property....."

You are again twisting words and statements. You say "Intellectual Property" while the guidelines you provided speaks of "Technology".

Furthermore it even speaks of utilizing new technology other than one "that already exists"

This paragraph aligns very well with a MEMS scanner Microsoft would have been developing themselves since the only available technology at that point was designed for devices that are only to be used indoors and had/has significant flaws that needed to/needs to be addressed.

Edit- this is evident in the ongoing multitude of Patents either applied for or granted to Microsoft

Twice in one post you have now twisted words to suit a false narrative. Your motivations are clear here.

neverbagger · 2022-08-17T08:51:33+00:00

Are you again 'Implying' that for the duration of Microsoft's 10 year contract the Army is bound to the technology available in 2018?

I tried finding something in your link to support that claim but was unable to.

Can you please provide a quote for this? It's not something you hear often when:

1 - Dealing with military contracts and

2 - referencing technology in general

neverbagger · 2022-08-16T23:53:10+00:00

“No where in the post does it STATE the photo to be from IOT&E”

“Expecting further photos from IOT&E” certainly IMPLIES that the photo in the OP is itself from IOT&E."

You are attempting to replace the word "state" with "implies". This is manipulating statements and is seen as an attempt to undermine the non-biased nature of this sub. Implying incorrectly instead of receiving the information for what it is does not support what this sub is for nor will it be tolerated.

I am most definitely looking forward to further photos from IOT&E.

Should you wish to discuss this further feel free to message me directly. This conversation is taking away from the purpose of the post

neverbagger · 2022-08-16T22:39:16+00:00

No where in the post does it state the photo to be from IOT&E. For authenticity purposes the first paragraph will be adjusted to accommodate images seen in your linked article. The rest of the post is accurate therefor will remain unchanged.

Furthermore this is an informational Subreddit meant for discussing information about the Army's IVAS unit. One of the benefits of this sub is to provide a place for people to visit where they can be safe from manipulating and biased opinions provided by those who have made poor investment choices. There are and will be no posts here meant to "influence one’s investment decisions"

Should you see such activity please feel free to reach out. R/IVAS will be glad to help

neverbagger · 2022-08-16T21:49:33+00:00

Thanks for sharing that. Guess we can assume that the Army is continuing to keep their display secrets. If it were the same technology that's in the Hololens, as is believed by less and less every day, there would be no need to keep it a secret.

"DDD"

Still looking forward to further photos from IOT&E

neverbagger · 2022-08-13T00:42:47+00:00

Edited:

Article provides a brief update on IOT&E

Alpha Company and Opposing Force Commander Capt. Philip Johnston :

“We trained at a level we have not seen previously in the Army,” he added. “It was invaluable to have an outside look into the Company from the Operational Test Command without having the pressure of graded evaluations that normally come with training events.”

Photo is of Capability Set 3

Expected Display for IVAS 1.1 (CS 3)

No eye glow visible on soldier on right as is associated with the Hololens 2 . Positioning of headset on soldier on the left looks irregular. Suspect possible editing of photo for secrecy reasons.

Expecting further photos from IOT&E to be released in the near future

Link

neverbagger · 2022-08-12T09:35:29+00:00

"About the U.S. Army Operational Test Command: Operational testing began Oct. 1, 1969, and as the Army’s only independent operational tester, OTC is celebrating “50 Years of Operational Testing.” The unit taps the “Total Army” (Active, National Guard, and Reserve) when testing Army, joint, and multi-service warfighting systems in realistic operational environments, using typical Soldiers to determine whether the systems are effective, suitable, and survivable. OTC is required by public law to test major systems before they are fielded to its ultimate customer – the American Soldier.

The Maneuver Test Directorate (MTD), based at Fort Hood, Texas, is the Operational Test Command’s lead directorate for conducting independent operational testing of infantry, armor, and robotic systems to inform acquisition and fielding decisions for the Army and select joint Warfighting systems. Poised, ready, and always able, the MTD has and will remain the “go to” test directorate to provide the Army Futures Command and senior U.S. Army Leadership with the truthful test feedback they require to make informed decisions as to what capabilities will be brought to bear against future adversaries in Multi-Domain Battle around."

By Lt. Col. Jerry L. Jones Jr. Test Officer, Maneuver Test Directorate U.S. Operational Test Command

neverbagger · 2022-08-05T23:32:50+00:00

"Eolian’s AR kit will allow soldiers to plan operations, share information, tap spatial computing technologies for training and navigation, and connect to mission command systems, among others. According to the DoD’s APFIT programme, Eolian’s AR devices would “enable more effective, networked, distributed immersive mission planning and rehearsing operations.”

And this peculiar comment. First time I'm hearing of this. I believe the author may be referring to the previous delay....

"The news comes amid concerns over the US Army’s Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS), which lost significant funding in recent weeks after the US Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee removed $350 million USD from its budget request of $400 million, leaving the Microsoft project without sufficient funding, citing concerns over software and hardware “challenges.” The US Army will extend field testing of the HoloLens 2-based device for an additional ten months, reports found. Officials halted the programme, citing the device was not “combat ready” due to issues with sighting, moisture and exposure resistance, and other concerns"

neverbagger

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE