/k/ - Weapons

for some reason I am under the impression there is a camo outfit that is basically just velcro or strapped sections that you pull down from the main body to switch their position and therfor the visible pattern.

kinda like when I am wearing a baseball cap and pull the bill up.

The future of camo is camo that you can see through, thus seeing whatever is behind the object you are looking at.

>>544779

Good thinking.

A good option for campaigns, but is it really feasible in transition areas, for example when crossing a wide clearing, to get to another eg. wooded area?

Still, do you know of anyone who sells double-sided flectarn fabric?

>>544790

A is clearly the skydiver model, as it assists her in slowing down.

>>544786

With cameras that detect the position of enemies, and with sufficient resolution, a system like this could paint one invisible. It would probably be possible to also accommodate for multiple viewers to some degree.

>>544790

A

>Air Force

B

>Navy

C

>Marines

D

>Army

>>544804

Coast Guard taking the photograph, obviously

>>544757

Interesting concept in the picture, but I feel like the Type 2 may be somewhat over-engineered. You'd probably get more mileage out of having your patterns on semi-stiff cables running up the shirt, rotating their visible side with a mechanism at the bottom. Think like those old billboards that change every few seconds, only round cables instead of solid triangular slats.

That said, I think it's still a little too complicated to rely on. I'd love it as a concept, but I don't see it being useful in the field. The pull-out camo sounds more realistic.

My concept for a multi-purpose camo setup (for civilian purposes) was to have my base outfit kind of Grey Man in good low-vis colors like tan, olive, and so on, then to carry camo shrouds (I think some folks call them "sniper veils"? Link related.) in pouches for quick camo. One or two reversible shrouds should serve you pretty well in most environments, I would think.

I still love this concept and would love to see it for its own sake.

https://www.varusteleka.com/en/product/sarma-tst-camouflage-cloak/57825

>>544769

This sounds interesting. I'd like to see it.

>>544889

>A bit too thick & stiff, wouldn't you think?

Possibly. Any cable that would transmit the torsion along its length will probably be pretty stiff, but it's less complicated than a sliding woven frame system, and probably less stiff by comparison.

>Reminder everyone used to wear solids.

The transition from solids to camo is a matter of choosing a new dye job for your fabric. Transition to an elaborate mechanical transforming camo is notably different, and likely far from practical. The closest thing to this concept I'm aware of in the real world is certain commercial hunting camo that changes color with temperature.

http://www.cabelas.com/category/Cabelas-ColorPhase/396159480.uts

>>544905

< likely far from practical

Well, if you mean that you don't think such a device could be made, i'd say that's absurd. Surely this is simpler than making a space shuttle.

And if you're saying it wouldn't be preferred, well, that's confusing. Camouflage is scientifically analyzed, and each is rated according to its performance in different environments. The primary challenge of making camouflage is making it general enough, while still offering good performance.

Perhaps, by "practical", you mean too expensive to be afforded by armies. This is of course speculation. Solids are MUCH cheaper than camouflage, by the way.

> temperature-activated color change

There is a poor match between temperature and environment. Too much overlap.

The basic idea is interesting, but I do not know if it can be engineered to only transition when a current runs through it (activated via a button). If so, it could do the trick.

The type of pattern they used it in, though, is cringe-worthy.

>>545093

>Perhaps, by "practical", you mean

By "practical", I mean that introducing prohibitive stiffness, a jillion moving parts, and similarly a jillion new points of failure into soldiers' clothing is bound to get scrapped as a bad idea.

The "swappable pattern attachments" or "pocket full of shrouds" approaches have a better shot at practicality, methinks. I still want to see the more complex thing developed, if only for the sake of how cool it would be. Hell, it may even have its own limited range of practical applications, like maybe hunting blinds or vehicle camo.

>There is a poor match between temperature and environment. Too much overlap.

I agree; it's just something that came to mind as a vaguely similar concept that's present in the real world, and a possible source of inspiration.

>if it can be engineered to only transition when a current runs through it

I don't doubt that such a feat can be accomplished, but I forsee problems in the field. The fabric getting damaged could break the circuit through sections of the garment, and moisture (such as rain, sweat, or blood) would likely have to be sealed out to keep it from interfering with the works, meaning the garment wouldn't wick moisture. Might work as a sort of poncho, I guess.

>>545098

< bound to get scrapped as a bad idea

Unless it works well. And if it weren't well-made, it wouldn't be a bad idea, it would be a poor implementation, which is not the same thing.

You're just arguing that space shuttles don't exist lulz.

>>545103

>Unless it works well.

Practicality involves more than just working well. It has to provide enough of an advantage over the alternatives to justify its disadvantages. A turbine-powered car works well, but it doesn't offer enough advantages to justify using it over an internal combustion engine. It's just a bad idea to implement that particular technology in that particular application.

>You're just arguing that space shuttles don't exist lulz.

Unironically; they actually shouldn't. They were a terrible waste of resources, as they cost orders of magnitude more than it would have cost to just fly all their missions with rockets, and we probably wouldn't have had those shuttle accidents. Maybe a few centuries from now the technology will catch up with the dream, but actually flying the space shuttle was a waste of resources and human life.

>>545109

>Here is an example, pic related, of a good idea, with an interesting, but completely incorrect (bad) implementation.

Only insofar as the good idea in question is "wouldn't it be neat if we had a flying machine", as opposed to the idea of a human-powered ornithopter. If you generalize an idea enough, I'm sure you could find a decent manifestation of it, but that doesn't make any of the other specific iterations of that idea good.

Yes, the idea of camouflage that can be changed to fit the environment is almost certainly a good one. That doesn't mean that the Type 2 system pictured above, or the alternative that I proposed to it, are practical. It would be just like pointing to a commercial airliner and saying that it's proof that a human-powered ornithopter is "practical". Your analogy supports my case.

None of this changes the fact that I'd like to see this technology developed. I'm just saying that the intended function of a technology isn't enough to make it practical.

Again:

Adaptive camouflage - potentially practical in some form for some applications.

The systems proposed above as material for a soldier's uniform - most likely far from practical.

>>545154

early ir always gets me hard

>>545166

Checked.

how does early shifting camouflage make you feel?

>>545167

>how does early shifting camouflage make you feel?

indifferent, though it could just be that fetish hasnt been awakened in me yet

>>545154

> proposed systems won't work

Never said that.

>proposed systems wouldn't be effective

Specifically addressed that in the post to which you are replying, so you should know I said nothing of the sort. "Effective" and "practical" are very different things. A rocket launcher is very effective at killing ground squirrels in a suburban yard, but you'd be hard-pressed to justify it as "practical".

You aren't shooting down anything that I've actually said.

>>545171

I proved it's effective. You've pointed out it could malfunction. So could pic related:

>>545154

Still effective. The user just has to not suck.

As an example, any sword will shatter, given enough strikes on a hard surface, to the flat side. According to you, swords could not therefore have been effective in battle.

"philosophy of use" is a nutzDeepInKeltec crutch.

>>545173

>According to you, swords could not therefore have been effective

I don't know how much clearer I can possibly be about the difference between "effective" and "practical". At no point have I said it wouldn't be effective. Hell, it most likely will be effective (if you can solve a couple of issues).

What I did say, and I really need you to follow me on this because it's important, is that the particular system mentioned earlier in this thread most likely wouldn't be practical.

Can you process that? Effective but not practical? Are you still struggling with the distinction? 'Cause I'm running out of ways to clarify what I'm saying.

Effective but not practical.

Not practical, but effective.

Effective yes. Practical no.

Please let me know where I lost you on this.

>>545175

OP is either 16 or autistic, I'm going with 16 from his grammar.

>>545175

This is /k/ not /we'reinthearmynow/.

>>545177

I don't get it.

>>545273

Hmmm, I hadn't thought about that stuff. There'd have to be more to it, though; having part of your camo pattern change every time you brush up against something would be a problem. You'd want to have some way of keeping it from shifting, and possibly a way of making it shift all at once, perhaps securing a transparent mesh layer on top of it in the same way that it's secured to the under-layer. That way you could shift the whole sheet by moving the mesh relative to the under-layer and thereby flipping all the scales. That'd be less stiff, but I'd imagine the expense of manufacturing it would be considerable, what with how complex the stitching on that would get.

>>544800

>>544779

This got me thinking that cloak might be useful. Wear one type on a uniform, with a dual sided cloak over top.

>>545330

Wouldn't a shifting camoflauge be preferable as long as it only shifts when you're moving? If it's stationary when you aren't moving, but shifts when you are, it won't "hide" you while moving, but it will make it very hard for anyone to actually lock in on your location for shooting purposes since it'd play tricks on the eyes.

>>544790

That’s a Skyrim mod right? Which mod is it? Asking for a friend. i think that’s a UNP Body and I have CBBE but there might be a patch mod

>>546436

Olive Drab and Cold War are 10/10 camokino

>>546530

>guess, continue guessing, spend tens of thousands of GMP and wait 60+ seconds for the camo drop to appear every single time you want camo change

Why even bother? Camo did next to nothing in that game.

>>546598

Just got into MGS last year, always thought it was dumb when I was younger because I played Splinter Cell and thought MGS was real stealth. I played a bunch of MGSV in November though the multiplayer is dead and none of my friends have it, so I only got like 50 hours in and then stopped playing. I did “finish” though but so many missions were too repetitive and felt like side missions with no plot progression for filler between the main missions.

>>546598

>game punished me with the bloody texture.

Also: I love games with moral dilemmas and story consequences for your choices. Games that have moral choices, not dilemmas, that are pure good or pure bad, and then punish you for making those choices are really dumb imo.

>well let’s make a good/bad meter and if the player does too much bad we’ll add Horns/scars/blood/pale, veiny skin/etc.

>if he goes good we’ll give him a halo/normal skin

Other than Fable, most games i’ve Played like that (SWTOR, KoTOR, Massive Feked, etc.) all just seem to give you some lotion so you get slightly glowing skin for going good and completely fuck your character up for going bad.

Would something with an E-ink like screen work? Obviously would have to be a foldable screen structure, but it could be changeable on the fly with a high degree of control.

>>546598

Or you could just wear the sneaking suit and just not stand in front of enemies.

>>539154

>>544779

Unrelated kind of but we used to have a family friend in the 7th SS Prinz Eugen. Great guy, he had some crazy stories.