I doubt it's for the battlefield. More likely for planning, where you'd have a briefing with several people around a tabletop projection of the ground scene and AR tanks and characters moving around.
FTA: “for use with troops in the field (as opposed to training).”
Not quite clear either way. You could still be right, but the implication seems to be otherwise.
Re:Magic Leap Review Part I
by darkerside on Monday October 01, 2018 @07:42AM
(#18111717)
Until they start faking results to the DoD, the analogy falls completely flat
Re:Magic Leap Review Part I
by bryanrasmussen on Monday October 01, 2018 @08:08AM
(#18111848)
I wonder what legal repercussions one would be open to for faking results to DoD.
Re:Magic Leap Review Part I
by UpshotKnothole on Monday October 01, 2018 @11:44AM
(#18113719)
If the F35 is an example, I’d say a trillion dollar, ten year contract?
Putting these toy lenses on soldiers can get people killed — both the fighters themselves as well as civilians are at risk from these digital goggles that block 86% of incoming light unless the AR graphics can do something really, really useful in the battlefield.