British Army looks to make tanks, troops invisible

While not the first bunch to try and mesh invisibility with military equipment, the British Army is reportedly staying busy by "testing technology it claims makes tanks and troops invisible." Apparently, the (previously) uber-secret trials were conducted by the Royal Engineers and scientists from QinetiQ, and if eyewitness reports are to be believed, they were able to "make a vehicle seem to completely disappear." The illusion (read: we're no closer to actual invisibility cloaks) was reportedly created by utilizing "cameras and projectors to beam images captured from the surrounding landscape onto a specially-adapted tank coated with silicon to maximize their reflective qualities," and if things go as planned, these elusive machines could make their way onto the battlefield "within five years." 'Course, it's not like anyone will have visual proof of that, but we suppose that's just the nature of the beast.

[Via DailyMail]

[Bman @ Oct 31st 2007 6:54AM]

So you can't see them as well. That great. I guess the enemy will now have to use infrared viewers, and go for the tank like shape that has no heat around it.

[Blackstar @ Oct 31st 2007 11:24AM]

Great... so... what is going to camouflage the cameras and projectors? When the sun starts to go down, they have a projector that can project 'dusk'? O.o

[rv @ Oct 31st 2007 12:29PM]

Yes, what is the point of this? Thermal imaging can see these things, and we already have thermal imaging hooked up to military aircraft. Pointless...

[Mister Kay @ Oct 31st 2007 5:13PM]

I don't imagine that thermal imaging would be used a heck of a lot in the middle of the day in hot areas. This would effectively be like the cover of night in the day.

[Blackstar @ Oct 31st 2007 6:44PM]

Right... so lets hide under cover of afternoon in the biggest car in the county.

[Aaron @ Oct 31st 2007 6:56AM]

The next Battlefield game is going to be really difficult to play now :(

[Beamey @ Oct 31st 2007 4:52PM]

but why play battlefield when i can just hook up my phone to the projector and play doom on the side of a tank

[CB @ Oct 31st 2007 7:02AM]

Invisible to who exactly?
Slightly hard for people to spot is hardly the same as 'easily spotted by tank destroying missile', it's all a totally pointless arms race.
Where do they plan to use this equipment? 10,000 of them in Afghanistan would be of nofuckinusewhatsoever, the Taliban have their own cloaking device, it's called soldier one second, goat farmer the next.
After watching that Afghanistan Conmmando series, which has to be the ultimate fly-on-the-wall battlefield program it's rather obvious all ground troops are just bait so the airpower can go fishin.

[bombastinator @ Oct 31st 2007 4:22PM]

Myself I'm interested in the "beamed onto" bit.
"coated with silicon" is another funky one. Silicon is more or less glass. it can't be sheet silicon so it is probably glass beads. Kind of like a movie screen.

What I am suspecting what actually happened is they covered the tank with what is effectively movie screen paint and then did a slide show on it. In the day time of course because if they did it at night it would glow like a drive in movie.

To paraphrase a fine british actor: SCAM, SCAM, SCAM, SCAM, SCAM, SCAM!

[Rich @ Oct 31st 2007 7:03AM]

Yay, that should make it harder for the Americans to shoot them!

[Greg B @ Oct 31st 2007 10:16AM]

Not really, now we will have a an excuse for Friendly fire accidents.

[strider_mt2k @ Oct 31st 2007 7:15AM]

I think they're just setting up to try and take America back.

Don't think we haven't been watching, redcoats!

[Richard Walker @ Oct 31st 2007 8:58AM]

Why would they want it back?!?

[chris @ Oct 31st 2007 10:21AM]

i dont know if that picture is real or photoshopped but it looks badass!

[Fruition @ Oct 31st 2007 7:41AM]

"Somebody call for an exterminator?"
"Ghost reporting."

[UHF @ Oct 31st 2007 7:51AM]

Adam Hart-Davis did this several years ago on BBC's 'Science Shack' http://www.open2.net/scienceshack/invisible.html

They put a couple of panels from a stadium tv display on one side of a car and displayed the images from a camera on the other-side. It was reasonably good as long as you stayed parallel to it as it moved.

[Russ @ Oct 31st 2007 7:52AM]

maybe the british can develop another awesome technology, fumble the ball, and make some american companies very rich..

[Joe Maki @ Oct 31st 2007 7:59AM]

Don't they just have to target the poor sod running the projector :)

[blade417 @ Oct 31st 2007 8:21AM]

Blind to the eye, but the bullets still hurt...


GRENADE OUT!!....?? Where did they go??

BOOM!!!

Ohhh! There they are.

[Marky @ Oct 31st 2007 8:29AM]

Ah, the Daily Mail! That bastion of honest journalism! LOL!!

Surprised it doesn't have a reference to Diana or Asylum Seekers within it to make it really belivable! LOL!!

[strider_mt2k @ Oct 31st 2007 8:34AM]

It's a steady job, but he wants to be a paperback writer.

[Carbonize @ Oct 31st 2007 6:18PM]

Am I the only one that finds it funny someone insulting a newspapers integrity on iEngadget ?

[Carbonize @ Oct 31st 2007 6:19PM]

Am I the only one that finds it funny someone insulting a newspapers integrity on iEngadget ?

[joshuwack @ Oct 31st 2007 6:53PM]

Wouldn't you still HEAR the tank coming?

[bloqmayus @ Oct 31st 2007 8:34AM]

more weapons. nice. naaa, don't waste money on education. GUNS, and big fucking TANKS, THAT'S where you should spend money and time. yeah.

since you're breaking modern everything, why don't you put some artificial intelligence thing on the tank? aaah, you know you want to.

[Jon @ Oct 31st 2007 9:49AM]

Well considering that many if not most of the "cool" things you use on a daily basis came from military applications, why are you complaining? Oh, I know why...

[Darkest Daze @ Oct 31st 2007 8:42AM]

It would be more impressive if it had read:

"Apparently, the (previously) uber-secret trials were conducted on public British roads without being detected"

[Paul @ Oct 31st 2007 8:47AM]

So it uses projectors and is highly reflective.

2 thoughts:
1. It uses projectors - So basically if its getting dark outside then this thing is going to light up like a beacon since projectors are bascially a flashlight with a screen in front of them.
2. Its highly reflective - at night this thing will probably stick out like a sore thumb from just moonlight reflecting off of it.

I would make some snarky comment about how I am glad the US government is not working on it except for the fact that they tried to build a gay bomb.

/ We are so screwed.

[blade417 @ Oct 31st 2007 8:59AM]

I read the story about the gay bomb, I almost crapped myself laughing about that. It was frickin hilarious.

[mt @ Oct 31st 2007 9:07AM]

maybe just turn the projector off at night?

Darkness seems to be a reasonable way of making stuff invisible already...

[thesimulacra @ Oct 31st 2007 11:58AM]

To be fair, the "gay bomb" thing was a proposal made by one wacko, which the military laughed off just as much as any of us did. Absolutely no money was spent on it and no one in the military took it seriously (except the idiot proposing it).

[Paul @ Oct 31st 2007 1:36PM]

Hence my point #2, they say they made it out of highly reflective material so that the projectors will look convincing, if its highly reflective and you turn the projectors off, then wouldn't just moonlight, or starlight be enough to make this thing stick out like a sore thumb?

[Andy Fields @ Oct 31st 2007 9:07AM]

You are late NGadget. This article was reported yesterday here - www.armedforces-int.com/news/2007/10/30/british-army-trials-invisible-tank-technology.asp

[Andy Fields @ Oct 31st 2007 9:08AM]

You are late NGadget. This article was reported yesterday here - http://www.armedforces-int.com/news/2007/10/30/british-army-trials-invisible-tank-technology.asp (I meant to add the link in my last comment - Sorry!)

[blade417 @ Oct 31st 2007 12:48PM]

I don't think anyone cared about the link.

[RLS @ Oct 31st 2007 9:19AM]

Q already created this for James Bond, using a lovely Aston Martin Vanquish. Much more stylish than a tank, and probably just about as realistic as the British actually pulling this off (or over, depending on your use of English).

[Jacob Kennedy @ Oct 31st 2007 9:23AM]

I've seen trials of this with people. It works perfectly but the problem is that the projected image has to have the same point of view as the person you're trying to hide the object from. The perfect scenario is the target holding the camera and the projector... THAT's not going to happen. Any other angles will produce an 'off' image at best (think Predator) and at the worst make it stand out possibly more than regular camo.

Definitely worth trying but in my opinion more complete option is "Active Camouflage."
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=850
It uses cameras on the back side of a person/object to project what it sees on the front side - giving you the impression that you're looking right through something (or not seeing that something at all). I'm sure that it's a power hog and you still have the POV problem, but you don't have to force your enemy to hold the camera and projector...

[Jacob Kennedy @ Oct 31st 2007 10:31AM]

Oops, I meant that the enemy had to carry the projector (only - the camera would be on the other side of the object).

[Anonymous @ Nov 1st 2007 6:53PM]

so basically u confuse me waddya mean by..................oh fugetit IM JUST FRICKING CONFUSED tell it to me in a much more simpler way!!!

[Phillip @ Oct 31st 2007 9:45AM]

You know, I bet they've just developed a way to change the enemy's GPS so it won't show any little tank-shaped dots. I mean, after all, your average Briton with a GPS in his car ignores the river crossing because his GPS tells him it's not there, so why wouldn't it work in warfare?

[BTomazic @ Oct 31st 2007 9:54AM]

Is this thing like a Klingon Warbird? It has to come out of cloak to fire?

[Karan @ Oct 31st 2007 10:06AM]

Oh hey look, heat signature!

C'mon, Mechwarrior should've taught these guys something by now.

[michas_pi @ Oct 31st 2007 10:20AM]

Good luck making that muzzle flash invisible.

[Paul Aka Shibby @ Oct 31st 2007 10:38AM]

While something like this is cool, I don't see Britain ever using this. It's pretty much useless in practical terms. It could be defeated with a simile system of either heat seaking or a rader. We're stupid, but not that stupid.
No idea why we are even bothering the money on it.

[Rich @ Oct 31st 2007 10:46AM]

I assume it won't be used in combat situations, but instead be used for hiding tanks when they're parked. It should stop enemy aircraft from spotting and destroying them.

[Stan Winstone @ Oct 31st 2007 10:56AM]

Specifically it makes them invisible to George W. Bush in Iraq. "Why yessir, our troops and tanks are still in Iraq, you just can't see them, hip hip."

[Magallanes @ Oct 31st 2007 1:00PM]

-Make tanks and troops invisible
-How?.
-Paint it all white.(tips: think in the latest oil resource that UK can put their dirty hand over).

[Student Driver @ Oct 31st 2007 1:28PM]

Pfft...

They are already making them invisible: it's called "withdrawl."

[stefano @ Nov 1st 2007 11:09AM]

It looks like a great trick for magicians, but how are they going to make the invisible to thermal detection visors?

http://www.webyaa.com/category/technology

[Ryan @ Nov 2nd 2007 4:34PM]

I'll believe it when I see it.

;-)