battlefield, namely limited-visibility enablers that are mounted to a Soldier’s weapon in addition to an array of night vision devices. Te technologies associated with these sys- tems are complex, and it is critical that PdM SMS make them as intuitive as possible for the Soldier to operate, especially in a high- stress combat environment.
For PdM SMS, the perfect opportunity to enlist the OSU’s HF/E Lab to gain engineering insight and optimize the user interface was during development of the Family of Weapon Sights (FWS) over the past few years. FWS is the next genera- tion of long-wave infrared thermal weapon sights that mount to a Soldier’s weapon. It enables the Soldier to recognize and engage the enemy in limited visibility and through obscurants, such as fog, smoke and haze.
FWS is the latest capability whereby PdM SMS leverages emerging technolo- gies and addresses the warfighter’s needs as represented by the Maneuver Center of Excellence.
Te FWS program is in the technology maturation risk reduction (TMRR) phase, approaching Milestone B. It includes three variants that use the latest thermal weapon sight technologies—including wireless chipsets, rapid target acquisition algorithms and the ability to mount in- line with the day view optic, so that the Soldier need not remove it—to enable the Soldier to acquire and engage the enemy faster and more decisively.
Troughout the TMRR phase from Milestone A to Milestone B, the FWS team conducted multiple Soldier touch-point events with early FWS-I prototypes, both on live-fire ranges and in the modeling and simulation environ- ment. While accumulating this feedback, PdM SMS quickly discovered that the non-optimized user interface did not
enable Soldiers to execute the key fea- ture of FWS-I—rapid target acquisition (RTA) of the enemy. For example, while on short-range marksmanship lanes, the Soldier would switch inadvertently into different modes that distracted, and at best delayed, rapid target engagement.
Enter Funk and his team of engineers. Funk incorporated FWS-I’s user inter- face challenge into a student project in his HF/E graduate course, culminating in a critical design review and FWS-I mock- up presentation to the PM’s FWS team.
OSU engineering graduate students Katie Morowsky, Sarah McCrea and Daniel Gilruth conducted task analysis of a Soldier using the FWS-I. Tey also conducted an exhaustive review of user interface research relevant to the design and a usability assessment. Teir sub- sequent recommendations to the FWS team included a menu structure that pre- vented obstruction of the display, and a redesigned, tethered remote that quickly enables RTA functionality.
Te next step for PdM SMS, having developed a 1-to-n list of interface design improvements based on OSU recom- mendations and Soldier input during testing, is to incorporate the changes into a prototype during FWS-I’s engineering and manufacturing development phase for Soldiers to validate or for the team to refine further.
CONCLUSION Te primary lesson learned from this effort is that academia can, and will, eco- nomically support
system development,
especially in the technology development phase, when the final design is not yet complete. Involving academia can add significant value in terms of inventive- ness and fresh insight, benefiting design and usability, without
adding to cost.
CPT(P) TOM BEYERL is the assistant PdM for maneuver targeting systems in the SPTD product office. He holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering from Norwich University.
ASC.ARMY.MIL 105
PM SSL’s user interface design is just one example of many disciplines in which academia can contribute to a program. In their continuous search for solutions to real- world problems, colleges and universities are an inherent source of knowledge. Whether the goal is to improve power consumption, explore the future of nanotechnology or develop more intuitive sensor interfaces and improved mechanical systems, identifying opportunities for civilian touch points is a valuable step in developing the best avail- able technology for the warfighter.
For more information on PEO Soldier, go to
https://peosoldier.army.mil. You can also follow PEO Soldier on social media: Facebook, at
www.facebook.com/ PEOSoldier; Twitter, @PEOSoldier; and YouTube at
www.youtube.com/user/ usarmypeosoldier.
COL MICHAEL E. SLOANE is the PM SSL. He holds an MBA from Webster Uni- versity, an M.S. in national resource strategy from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces and a B.S. in business administration from Columbus State University. He is Level III certified in program management and has completed the Defense Acquisition Uni- versity’s Senior Acquisition Course. He is a member of the U.S. Army Acquisition Corps.
MAJ TOBY BIRDSELL is the assistant PdM for FWS in the SMS product office. He holds an MBA from American Military University and a B.S. in economics from the United States Military Academy at West Point. He is Level II certified in program management.
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200
