US Army using Xbox 360 controller in Future Combat Systems tests
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Feb 5th 2007 at 7:15PM }
The US Army recently conducted its first live-fire exercise using Future Combat Systems technologies and equipment, including what appears to be anti-sniper bot RedOwl. The assortment of robotics and unmanned vehicles are controlled, in part, by modified Xbox 360 controllers, which look to be wired into Cross-Com devices straight outta GRAW. What?! The military didn't budget for wireless controllers? That's, like, sooo last-gen...
But seriously, how far could FCS technology evolve? Will future American soldiers be judged by how fast they can work their thumbs? Will boot camp become a LAN lab? Will combat become as distant as an Xbox Live deathmatch?
[Thanks, Sgt Malcolm W. Thomas Jr.]
Gallery: US Army FCS
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Cody @ Feb 5th 2007 7:20PM
Maybe if Microsoft had gone with a common wireless standard rather than their own proprietary stuff, the military wouldn't have to use a wired controller.
Or maybe i'm just angry i'll have to get another wireless adapter for my pc, to use my wireless 360 controller with it.
Frowelishnu @ Feb 5th 2007 7:25PM
As a soldier and a gamer, I don't like it.
The further away you get from the kill the easier it is and the less likely you are to be at risk.
This makes the desicion to kill too "easy".
War should only be fought if the cause is great enough that you would kill a fellow human being.
This should be the hardest desicion one makes.
DaPistolPat @ Feb 5th 2007 7:27PM
FPS gamers WE WANT YOU for americas army
Nessuno @ Feb 5th 2007 7:30PM
The US military is very much aware of the synergy between gaming and its new weapons systems. In fact, when designing and implementing a new technology, like the F22 Raptor, young gamers are brought in to give suggestions in the layout and configuration of the interface to make it more intuitive to the soliders of the future.
AlexHeinz @ Feb 5th 2007 7:28PM
can it teabag?
Number One @ Feb 5th 2007 7:39PM
Pff... should have used a wiimote. Far more intuitive. And involving.
How is this news?!
Should have been
*Political Pawns* using Xbox 360 *Hand Cuffs* in *New Ways to Spread Terror, Fear and Chaos in the Middle East*
Ha!
Tom @ Feb 5th 2007 8:26PM
"Will combat become as distant as an Xbox Live deathmatch?"
Well, hopefully NOT, because unlike an Xbox Live deathmatch, REAL combat causes REAL death, and we shouldn't be so willing to distance ourselves from the consequences of our actions. What's at stake is our humanity.
ddpp33 @ Feb 5th 2007 7:54PM
Good Afternoon, the wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea but in space or on top of a really tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots and as you leave here today, your duty is clear. To build and maintain those robots. Thank You.
Nintendudster @ Feb 5th 2007 7:57PM
Is it just me, or does that robot look slightly like ROB?
So, let me get this straight, the US Army is using a 360 controller to operate ROB in order to take out possible snipers, creating further terrorism. That terrorism then incites more terrorists to go out snipe America, therefor making an even bigger demand for snipe stopping ROBs controlled by 360 controllers.
Well, the higher demand may upgrade the controllers to wireless. LOL
Staggs @ Feb 5th 2007 8:01PM
OMG RL HAX
Grindstone @ Feb 5th 2007 8:05PM
No, a wiimote doesn't have analog sticks and would be harder for an actual RC. Why didn't they use the sixaxis? Probably because it is not ergonomically designed, nor does it have rumble (ha!).
Anyway, this seems more like a marketing tool to me...
Kesh @ Feb 5th 2007 8:10PM
very interesting thought there Frowelishnu. but wouldn't you say the decision to go to war is where the moral judgements are made? Do soldiers such as yourself actually follow on-the-ground moral judgement rather than orders? If not then these devices are a good way to reduce the number of deaths that war brings to the US. Now you could argue that since most deaths in American wars occur on the side of the invaded, your idea of 'easy killing' might increase the number of dead overall.
Jscott @ Feb 5th 2007 8:17PM
Ahh its good to see are tax dollars going to good use. Researching, buying, and testing new ways to take human life. I feel good knowing are 430 billion dollars a year that is spent on are military is being spent wisely. I mean why cut that in half and spend it on bettering are lives by strengthening health care, education, and other things. I would defintly rather have another nucular weapon added to are arsenal then a park built by my house where my kids can play at.
Frowelishnu @ Feb 5th 2007 8:17PM
Hey Kesh,
Thanks for the feedback.
I do mean the first decision, not on the ground. If Congress and the President know that there will be "bloodless" victories (for us anyway), they may become trigger happy.
To bring it back to games - think about a game that let's you save anywhere, respawn instantly and with all your weapons (you'd just run and gun). But a game that punishes you for unwise choices makes you stop and think.
We should stop and think more often.
pete @ Feb 5th 2007 8:26PM
When I was working on this project about six months ago, we were using microsoft sidewinder joysticks to simulate the main controls of a tank. Pretty neat stuff, I got to write a joystiq driver.
dave @ Feb 5th 2007 9:11PM
On a related news, Bush is expected to send 10,000,000 of those to Iraq.
ddpp33 @ Feb 5th 2007 9:13PM
"War should only be fought if the cause is great enough that you would kill a fellow human being.
This should be the hardest desicion one makes."
The decision to go to war is not made by anyone who will actually do any of the killing. It's made by politicians and generals who will never set foot on the battlefield. The only decision the soldier makes is when he enlists.
Joseph Remy @ Feb 5th 2007 9:37PM
The Army (and the rest of the military in general) tries to economise the best they can. Why build a new control unit, when a suitable one like the xbox 360 controller exists? Not only is the controller familiar, they won't have to waste time and money designing a new controller when it could be spent on the rest of the project.
Another thing to note is the wired versus wireless. It looks like the controller goes to a pack on the soldier which communicates wirelessly to the robot. Not only does having a wired controller save on batteries, it simplifies the system, by only having one wireless system versus two, which cuts down on points of failure.
For ddpp33, every soldier has to make decisions, even with considering the legality of his or her commander's orders. It is the soldiers duty to not carry out unlawful orders, and to prevent violations against human rights, such as the murder of innocent civilians. Soldiers have to make decisions to determine whether or not the room they entered is filled with combatants or non-combatants (civilians, wounded, etc). If we did not, then we would be no better than the terrorists we are fighting. While the decision to go to war is made by others, the soldier makes decisions every moment in the battlefield.
Heres a little something on Lawful orders:
The military oath taken at the time of induction reads:
"I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God"
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809[890].ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.
Laythstag @ Feb 5th 2007 10:15PM
"Ender's Game" anyone?
murc @ Feb 6th 2007 1:22AM
J scott said:
"Ahh its good to see are tax dollars going to good use. Researching, buying, and testing new ways to take human life. I feel good knowing are 430 billion dollars a year that is spent on are military is being spent wisely. I mean why cut that in half and spend it on bettering are lives by strengthening health care, education, and other things. I would defintly rather have another nucular weapon added to are arsenal then a park built by my house where my kids can play at."
The dod's budget is indeed big...but is that not worth it? Do you not like freedom?
BTW, Whats cheaper, using a 360 controller to controll the robot...a controller that many service men are used to....ot spend tens of thousands of dollars to develop a new controller designed specifically just for this robot. *rolls eyes*
Your obviously a liberal nut job, who wants big government to control are lives (and us losing civil liberties in the process).
Having a park near your house has nothing to do the federal budget, it has to do with you local government.
Liraco @ Feb 5th 2007 10:23PM
I see no one's mentioned the gloves. Those probably don't make using the controller very efficient.
If this robot was merely for scouting that'd be awesome, but if they eventually are used for killing that'll suck. I agree that the decision to take another's life should be the hardest thing to do, separating you from the person and killing by proxy makes the decision weigh a lot less.
zig @ Feb 5th 2007 10:27PM
@ #18 - Remy
To you I say Hoo-ah! No one could have said it better. Its funny because I was just explaining this to a guy trying to dodge his IRR obligations.
I'm not so sure why everyone is so surprised, the military has been utilizing games for training exercises for years now. There is even a game-like simulation to calibrate your M16 (the name slips my mind at the moment though).
Bangbang... @ Feb 5th 2007 10:37PM
HUA!
Rubang B @ Feb 5th 2007 10:40PM
I think they should've used the Wii's Classic Controller attachment. Has anybody seen the movie Toys?
bazza @ Feb 5th 2007 11:07PM
I dont see any WASD!!!! They are doomed!!
Bazza @ Feb 5th 2007 11:08PM
FUBAR!!
Sgt Malcolm W. Thomas Jr. @ Feb 5th 2007 11:09PM
Just so it's clear, that's Sgt Malcolm Willis Thomas, United States Marine Corps B-D
NeoSkye @ Feb 5th 2007 11:13PM
I'm surprised no one pointed out the obvious about using the controller wirelessly. I doubt that controller commands would be encrypted, meaning that enemy ECM could probably easily hijack the bot by broadcasting with their own 360 controller near the soldier with the pack.
Killer @ Feb 5th 2007 11:23PM
Hey Jscott, what's with the politics? This is a Technology site, not a political agenda forum. Besides if you knew better, the military that you say is a waste of money has developed alot of things you take advantage of. For instance, Microwaves, GPS, and the big one the Internet, you would be surprised how much of that "...430 billion dollars a year that is spent..." is actually life saving. Many medicines are a cause of war. Besides, I think your number seems a bit lower on the cash per year. I mean if you look at those price tags of those planes and bombers we have, they're pretty high. The good thing is we spent that money on technology so we dont have any fighter/ bombers ever being shot down. I don't know about you I'll take a plane that keeps itself out of harms way instead of losing a pilot and a 60 million dollar or higher aircraft.
ttoo @ Feb 6th 2007 1:47PM
#18 Remy
You mentioned this device being used against terrorists
"...we would be no better than the terrorists we are fighting."
Now I'm operating on the assumption that this would be used in theaters of war like Iraq in which were not really fighting a terrorist force. (not to mention terrorism is just an idea) In Iraq our boys are fighting against people who are pissed off that we are there, mainly because we came unprovoked its things like Iraq that make terrorists ....case and point would be the Soviet Unions escapade into Afghan territory.
dawggpie @ Feb 6th 2007 12:03AM
Not RedOwl... SUGV
http://www.elpasotimes.com/search/ci_5139962
Stevo @ Feb 6th 2007 7:14AM
Do you think this will stop Americans shooting the wrong people at war?
Joseph Remy @ Feb 6th 2007 8:53AM
ttoo, Terrorists was probably bad wording on my part, since it seems that the difference between freedom fighters, and guerrilla/insurgent/terrorists, depends on whos side you're on. It probably would be better to say we'd be no better than the guys bombing the civilians in the town markets and mosques.
Jscott @ Feb 6th 2007 4:16PM
#30 you are officially an idiot who has no idea about the world. Sitting at home being spoon fed conservative propaganda from the media.
"The dod's budget is indeed big...but is that not worth it? Do you not like freedom?"
That comment alone proves everything i have said. Try doing research, and broadening your mind a little bit before you reply with typical American comments like that.
The united states spends 430 billion dollars every yeah on its military. Not including off budget spending in iraq. Do you know how much money that is? Can you comprehend?
The next country down is China which spends 70 billion. The united sates almost spends more then the rest of the world COMBINED on its military. And for what? The common uninformed, brainwashed response would be "to protect our freedom". Really i wasn't aware our freedom cost so much. The United Kingdom seems to be doing just fine in the freedom department. Same with France. How much does it cost them? UK is 45 billion, France is 40. Guess their freedom is pretty cheap compared to ours.
Can you give me a good answer as to why we need to spend so much more then any other nation, besides the typical American response?
Do you realize how much good could be done if we cut that in half? Maybe our education wouldn't be declining and we could actually keep up with other 1st world nations in terms of standardized test scores.
And by the way if the budget was cut in half more money would go to each state which would give local government more money.
Oh and one more thing, maybe you should look up the term Liberalism because your definition is almost exactly opposite of what it really is.
But i have ranted long enough, next time you decided to open your mouth about something like this try doing a little research first. Have fun in your brainwashed world. And God bless America.
Dennis @ Feb 11th 2007 5:53AM
there will always be human soldiers needed, remember that there are civilians living. and a robot cant take control of a city but it can help to save alot of soldiers and make combat easier.
MIke @ Oct 30th 2007 8:16PM
I think most of the people here obviously have no clue as to the price of freedom. Only 7% of our budget goes to the military, also when you compare the GDP of America to the UK the 45 Billion the UK spends on the military from thier 1.2 trillion GDP to the 430 billion we spend from out 13.6 Trillion Dallor GDP then you see the relation of spending. Also the Federal Governmen doesnt Pay for the majority of the cost of education, your local government pays around 60-80% of it. In my city of San Diego 62% of our budget goes to education added to the fact that we are in california which also has the highest ammount of money reserved for education, you would think that we would have the highest test scores in ammerica, yet we dont, we have the seccond to worst test scores in america. Why people ask??? Because liberal ideas of the status quo has crept into our schools and into the parrents of the region so that there is no incentive to do well in classes, its not the budget obviously, which is mostly waisted on the school system buracracy and not on the children. Also this whole thing of Against the war but for the troops is BS. I cant tell someone is a liberal after I tell them that I'm in the U.S. Military by the dirty look they give me. You spat on us before and where hammered for it, now you will just settle for dirty looks. Finnaly, for all of you who havent had to serve a term in Iraq, yes i would rather be back here at home, but when I go back I have no regrets you quickly learn to understand from the people you help every day that what you are doing is good, and also learn that your enemies are evil by the racist hatred rants they go on when they spew out thier propaganda over the web. Who are the ones committing mass Genocide in Darfur. It certainly isnt your friendly neighborhood Muslim is it?
Finnaly Technology like this is a positive thing, the ability to take life is still in the soldiers hands. Not only does it remove the soldier from risk but also civilians, being able to Identify targets before you shoot is a great improvement. If your under fire from multiple directions you dont have the time to think twice before you pull the trigger. Also consider the fact that we not only provide military aid to multiple countries but we also provide millions if not billions in financial aid to these countries. If we had it my way in which we closed our doors to all other countries except our greatest allies, the world would litterally go to hell.