SSTRM HSI Report Nov 25, 2010 version

1. Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap
Workshop 6:
Soldier Human and Systems Integration
Gatineau, Québec, September 21-22, 2010
Volume 1. Report
Department of National Defence
Defence Research and Development Canada
Industry Canada
November 25, 2010

2. Acknowledgements
The Department of National Defence (DND), Defence Research and Development Canada
(DRDC), and Industry Canada (IC) would like to acknowledge the contributions and support
provided by the IC Special Events team that organized the Soldier Human and Systems
Integration workshop venue, logistics, and accommodations; the Human and Systems Integration
technical subcommittee and co-chairs and the Executive Steering Committee for sharing their
time and expertise; The Strategic Review Group (SRG) Inc., for facilitating the workshop; and the
participants from across Canada, the United States, and abroad, who contributed to making the
workshop a success. Special thanks to those who presented at the workshop, for sharing their
time, energy, and knowledge.
In addition, many thanks to the Canadian Forces Directorate of Armoured Vehicle Program
Management for providing a LAV 3 vehicle, to Mr. D. Palmer and Captain A. Dionne of the
Directorate of Land Requirements (DLR-5), the Canadian Forces rifle section from the Cameron
Highlanders of Ottawa, and the light armoured vehicle driver from the Régiment de Hull, who
provided an demonstration of the challenges associated with integrating human and systems
components of the soldier system in a combat situation.
Page ii of 123

3. Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................vii
Human and Systems Integration Workshop and the SSTRM..........................8
About the Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap....................................................8
Human and Systems Integration Workshop and the Roadmap ................................9
The Workshop Process...........................................................................................10
Introductory Presentation Abstracts.........................................................................11
Opening Remarks, Mr. T. Elliot, DG IC; Dr. D. Reding, DG DRDC Toronto; Mr.
L. Garland (TSC Industry Co-Chair).....................................................11
Workshop Program and TRM Background, Mr. G. Nimmo (IC)........................12
Workshop Process, Mr. P. Carr (Strategic Review Group Inc.)........................12
Soldier Systems TRM Update, LCol. M.A. Bodner (DRDC)..............................13
1. Exploring Operational Space: Key Deficiencies and Priorities.................14
Presentation Abstracts............................................................................................14
1.1 Future Soldier System Capability Areas: H&SI Requirements and
Challenges, Maj. J. Herbert (DLR5-6)...................................................14
1.2 Human and Systems Integration: Lethal and Non Lethal, Maj. B. Gilchrist
(DBRT 5-5)...........................................................................................15
Demonstration of Soldier Equipment/Usage by Mr. Douglas Palmer and Canadian
Forces Personnel.............................................................................................16
The Cast of Characters....................................................................................16
Instructions for Observing the Demonstration..................................................16
Introduction to the Demonstration....................................................................17
The Action—Close With and Destroy the Enemy.............................................18
The Plenary Debrief—Integration Issues Observed.........................................20
Chapter 2. Exploring Functional Space: Related H&SI Challenges.............24
Presentation Abstracts............................................................................................24
2.1 Introduction to Workshop Themes and Physical Ergonomics and Integration
Challenges, Mrs. L. Bossi (DRDC Toronto)..........................................24
2.2 Soldier Equipment/Vehicle/Communications Integration Requirements, Mr.
M. A. Rochon (DSSPM-10-4-4)............................................................26
Page iii of 123

4. 2.3 USMC Approach to Soldier Burden, Mr. D. Tack (Humansystems Inc. Rep.
USMC MERS Project)..........................................................................26
2.4 Luncheon Speaker: Dr. E. S. Redden (ARL), Advanced Interfaces for
Dismounted Warfighters.......................................................................27
2.5 Challenges of Soldier Protection Integration, Mr. S. Boyne
(DRDC Toronto)...................................................................................28
2.6 Requirements for Enhancing Soldier Perception, Situation Awareness and
Cognition, Mr. D. Tack (Humansystems Inc.).......................................29
2.7 Soldier System Integration Challenges and Issues: An Industry Perspective,
Mr. W. Downing (Industry Rep, TSC Speech)......................................30
2.8 ICee-Wiki Update, Mrs. M. Huard (IC-DND)...............................................31
Breakaway Session 1. Key Challenges for Human and Systems Integration Themes
32
Themes for Breakaway Session 1....................................................................32
Seating Plan for Breakaway Session 1............................................................34
Instructions for Breakaway Session 1..............................................................34
Plenary Report Back for Breakaway Session 1................................................35
Detailed Results of Breakaway Session 1........................................................38
Homework Instructions.....................................................................................38
3. Exploring Solution Space: Enabling Technologies, Processes and Tools
39
Stickies on the Wall Exercise..................................................................................40
Presentation Abstracts............................................................................................41
3.1 Challenges and Tools for Effective Soldier System Integration,
Mrs. L. Bossi (DRDC Toronto)..............................................................41
3.2. The Role of Biomechanics in Effective Soldier System Integration, Dr. J.
Stevenson (Queen's University)...........................................................42
3.3 Virtual Simulations for Soldiers: Concepts and Applications,
Dr. F. Bernier (DRDC Valcartier)..........................................................42
3.4 Decision Aids for Soldiers, Dr. D. Bryant and Dr. J. Hollands (DRDC
Toronto)................................................................................................43
3.5 Soldier-Vehicle Integration: A TTCP Approach, Dr. M. Ducharme (DRDC
Valcartier).............................................................................................44
Page iv of 123

5. Breakaway Session 2. System Optimization: Solutions, Enabling Technologies,
Processes and Tools........................................................................................45
Instructions for Breakaway Session 2..............................................................46
Plenary Report Back for Breakaway Session 2................................................48
Detailed Results of Breakaway Session 2........................................................52
4. Exploring R&D Space: Focus Areas and Potential Collaborations...........53
Luncheon Speaker..................................................................................................53
4.1 Luncheon Speaker: Overview of the Strategic Aerospace and Defence
Industrial Program (SADI), Mr. M. A. Blais (IC-ITO)..............................53
ICee Contest Winner Presentation Abstracts..........................................................54
4.2 Infantryman Communication Interface (ICI), Mr. A. Poirier, Rheinmetall
Defence................................................................................................54
4.3 Software Solutions for NVG ENVG Integration, Mr. G. Martin, Robotics and
Computer Vision System Integration ...................................................55
4.4 Human Performance Centered Engineering, Mr. J. Johnson, SantosHuman
55
4.5 Knee Stress Release Device (K-SRD™), Mr. M. Rittenhouse,
B-TEMIA...............................................................................................56
Breakaway Session 3: R&D Focus Areas and Potential Collaborations..................57
Instructions for Breakaway Session 3..............................................................57
Plenary Report Back from Breakaway Session 3.............................................59
Results of Breakaway
Session 3..............................................................................................59
5. Soldier Systems TRM Next Steps................................................................69
SSTRM Next Steps and Workshop Closure, LCol. M.A. Bodner (DRDC)................69
Developing the Roadmap........................................................................................70
Sharing Knowledge with the ICee Database and Wiki.............................................70
Page v of 123

6. Appendixes
A. Workshop Agenda..........................................................................................71
B. List of Participants.........................................................................................74
C. Breakaway Session 1 Participant Input: Key Challenges by Theme........78
D. Breakaway Session 2 Participant Input: System Optimization Solution:
Enabling Technologies, Processes and Tools........................................113
List of Figures
Figure 1. Soldier Human and Systems Integration Workshop and the
Soldier Systems TRM.....................................................................................9
Figure 2. The Workshop Process......................................................................10
Figure 3. The Human and Systems Integration Themes................................33
Figure 4. Breakaway Session 1 Plenary Report Back.....................................36
Figure 6. Technical-Functional Challenges Identified by Workshop
Participants
During Breakout Session 1.........................................................................38
Figure 5. Example of Technology Roadmap Brainstorming Sticky..............39
Figure 7. The Shift to a Horizontal View of Capability Optimization.............46
Figure 8. The Challenge List for Step 1 of Breakaway Session 2................47
Figure 9. The Table for Step 4 of Breakaway Session 2.................................47
Figure 10. Breakaway Session 2 Plenary Report Back—Potential Solutions
and Related Enabling Technologies..........................................................48
Figure 11. Sample Breakaway Session 3 Output Form..................................58
Page vi of 123

7. Executive Summary
This report describes the Soldier Human and Systems Integration Workshop held in
Gatineau, Québec, in September, 2010—the sixth in a series of workshops held as part
of the Soldier Systems Technology Roadmapping (SSTRM) initiative.
The Introduction, Human and Systems Integration Workshop and the SSTRM,
provides an overview of the roadmap, places the human and systems integration
workshop in the context of the roadmap, describes the workshop goal and process, and
includes abstracts of introductory presentations made at the workshop.
Chapter 1, Exploring Operational Space: Key Deficiencies and Priorities, provides
abstracts of workshop presentations focusing on the deficiencies and priorities
associated with human and systems integration and the Canadian soldier. It also
describes a demonstration presented by Canadian Forces personnel to illustrate those
deficiencies and priorities.
Chapter 2, Exploring Functional Space: Related H&SI Challenges, provides
presentation abstracts related to workshop themes and challenges. It also describes
breakaway session 1, a roundtable discussion during which workshop participants
refined their understanding of the challenges from the perspective of three workshop
themes.
Chapter 3, Exploring Solution Space: Enabling Technologies, Processes and
Tools, provides additional presentation abstracts and describes breakaway session 2,
during which workshop participants brainstormed on solutions to the challenges, and
related technologies for overall system optimization.
Chapter 4, Exploring R&D Space: Focus Areas and Potential Collaborations,
provides abstracts for the luncheon speaker and for ICee contest winner speakers. It
also describes breakaway session 3, during which workshop participants identified
collaborations for addressing solutions to integration and soldier systems needs.
Chapter 5, Soldier Systems Next Steps, describes the next phases in the SSTRM
process.
Appendixes provide the workshop agenda, a list of participants, and detailed participant
input from breakaway sessions 1 and 2.
Page vii of 123

8. Human and Systems Integration Workshop and
the SSTRM
The Soldier Human and Systems Integration Workshop was held in the Château Cartier
Hotel in Gatineau, Québec, September 21-22, 2010, as part of the development phase
of the Soldier Systems Technology Roadmapping (SSTRM) initiative.
About the Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap
The Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap project is a unique industry-government
collaboration that applies roadmapping principles and processes to develop a
comprehensive knowledge-sharing platform and identify emerging technology priorities
in support of the Canadian Forces Soldier Modernization Effort.
Participation in the Soldier Systems TRM is free and voluntary and open to Canadian
and international manufacturing, services, and technology-based companies of all sizes,
and to researchers and other experts from academia, government, and not-for-profit
research organizations from Canada and around the world.
The focus of the Soldier Systems TRM—the soldier system—is defined within NATO as
the integration of everything the soldier wears, carries and consumes for enhanced
individual and collective (small unit) capability within the national command and control
structure. It centers on the needs of the dismounted soldier, who is often away from the
supply network, and must be self-sufficient for up to 72 hours.
The overarching goal of the Soldier Systems TRM is to understand how today's
technology—and tomorrow's—might contribute to a superior soldier system that
increases capacities and operational effectiveness for the individual soldier in the five
NATO capability areas of Command, Control, Communications, Computers and
Intelligence (C4I); Survivability; Mobility; Lethality; and Sustainability.
The Soldier Systems TRM exercise is governed by an Executive Steering Committee
made up of government and industry representatives, and includes technical
subcommittees dedicated to each capability area.
For information about any aspect of the Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap project,
visit http://www.soldiersystems-systemesdusoldat.collaboration.gc.ca
Page 8 of 123

9. Human and Systems Integration Workshop and the Roadmap
Soldier Human and Systems Integration was the Figure 1. Soldier Human and
sixth workshop held as part of the development Systems Integration Workshop
phase of the Soldier Systems TRM. (Figure 1. and the Soldier Systems TRM
Soldier Human and Systems Integration Workshop
and the Soldier1.
Systems TRM).
Visioning & Future Capabilities
The goals of the workshop were to:
• identify/validate future soldier capability
2. requirements
Technical Workshop:
Power/Energy/Sustainability
• identify/validate related technical/functional
challenges
• 3. Technical Workshop:
identify/prioritize enabling/emerging
Weapons: Lethal & Non-Lethal areas and
technologies, R&D focus
collaboration opportunities.
Human and Systems Integration Theme
4a) 4b).
Areas
Technical Technical
Workshop: Workshop:
To help focus this effort, three human and systems
integration themes were identified:
5. Technical Workshop:
1. Physical Integration on the soldier.
Survivability/Sustainability/
Internal physical integration.
Mobility
2. Perceptual/Cognitive Integration on the
6. TechnicalInternal psychological integration.
soldier. Workshop:
Human & Systems Integration
3. System Architecture and Interoperability.
External integration.
DuringRoadmap the workshop, tables were labeled
parts of Integration
Capstone Report
with these themes, giving participants the
Information/feedback sessions
opportunity to sit at tables consistent with their
primary areas of expertise and interest.
Page 9 of 123

10. The Workshop Process
To achieve its goal, the workshop followed a carefully designed, four-step process
(Figure 2. The Workshop Process):
1. Explore operational space to define the problem
2. Explore functional space to identify challenges
3. Explore solution space to define potential solutions/technologies and system
optimization
4. Explore S&T and R&D space to identify potential collaborations to build solutions
This report summarizes the presentations and breakaway sessions associated with each
step in the process. It follows the structure of the workshop agenda (Appendix A.
Workshop Agenda).
Figure 2. The Workshop Process
Page 10 of 123

11. Introductory Presentation Abstracts
Note. Complete workshop presentations are provided in Volumes 2 and 3 of the
workshop documentation. The presentations are also available in the ICee tool on the
Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap web site: http://www.soldiersystems-
systemesdusoldat.collaboration.gc.ca and on the web site of the Strategic Review
Group: http://strategicreviewgroup.ca/
Opening Remarks, Mr. T. Elliot, DG IC; Dr. D. Reding, DG DRDC Toronto;
Mr. L. Garland (TSC Industry Co-Chair)
The workshop was opened, and participants welcomed, by Mr. Tim Elliot, Director
General, Industry Canada; Dr. Dale Reding, Director General, DRDC Toronto; and Mr.
Laurin Garland, of Vernac Ltd., Industry co-chair of the Human and Systems Integration
Technical Sub-committee of the Soldier System Technology Roadmap, representing
industry.
These speakers emphasized the importance of the Soldier Systems TRM as a vehicle
for promoting collaboration among the many stakeholders in the realm of the soldier
system, and welcomed and thanked those attending for their participation. Comments
included:
• A recognition by Mr. Elliot of the innovative nature of the Innovation and
Collaboration Exchange Environment (ICee), the first public-facing Wiki of the
Government of Canada
• The acknowledgement by Dr. Reding that the SSTRM is a way to support
Canada's soldier modernization effort by helping converge on future soldier
systems capability needs and the requisite supporting technologies, stimulate
and forecast technological developments, and provide the structure around which
planning and coordination of technical planning can take place
• The observation by Mr. Garland that the SSTRM is a true collaborative effort by
industry, government and academia that is rare, and that promises concrete
results
Page 11 of 123

12. Workshop Program and TRM Background, Mr. G. Nimmo (IC)
Defines and provides an
overview of the technology Development Phase Activities
roadmapping process. 09/10 10/11
05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04
2011
Describes other Canadian
roadmapping experiences.
Power/Energy (Vancouver)
Weapons Effects (Toronto)
C4I/Sensors (Montréal)
TRM Consolidation Workshop
Capstone Report & Action Plan
(Gatineau, Sept 21-22, 2010)
Human/Systems Integration
Visioning (Gatineau)
Kick-off (Ottawa)
Outlines the Soldier Systems
Close up Event
PPE (Ottawa)
TRM Project, including its
objectives and the roles of
industry/academia and
government. Describes the
overall TRM phases, including Launch Oct. 09 Web Collaboration Tool (ICee): Technologies & Capability database
the current Development Phase. 5
Outlines Development Phase
activities and schedule.
Workshop Process, Mr. P. Carr (Strategic Review Group Inc.)
Outlines the workshop
Functional Objective / Technical Challenge
(Where to Put the Bar and When?) objectives. Describes the
workshop process. Asserts that
Performance Parameter (e.g. Bandwidth) workshop success means
Perf. Excess ?
discussion, contribution,
Overall System Performance
s
r es
og
og
y
pr
eds
collaboration, creativity, interest
ol re Ne eeds ts)
Futu ier n uiremen
Te
ch
n
Fu
sold
ture ance req
rm
and curiosity.
(Perfo Real Gap
Perf.
Growth Presents a definition for
Current Gap functional objective/technical
Baseline challenge.
Today Cycle 1 Cycle 2… Cycle n Time
4
Page 12 of 123

13. Soldier Systems TRM Update, LCol. M.A. Bodner (DRDC)
Outlines army capability
concepts and land systems,
and refers to the future security
environment. Describes the
Canadian Soldier
Modernization Effort (Army of
Tomorrow, Army of the Future
concepts). Defines the soldier
system as everything that a
soldier wears, carries,
consumes, or otherwise uses to
optimize and sustain his tasks
and performance
(cognitive/physical/social) in all
operational environments. Explains the "system of systems" approach and challenges.
Provides highlights of earlier
workshops: Power & Energy;
Soldier Lethal and Non-Lethal
Weapons; C4I-Sensors; Soldier
Survivability, Sustainability,
Mobility. Outlines capability
trade-offs, and the hard
problem of balancing all
aspects of the soldier system to
generate a holistic solution that
maximizes soldier
effectiveness.
Page 13 of 123

14. 1. Exploring Operational Space: Key
Deficiencies and Priorities
This chapter provides abstracts of presentations that focused on Human and Systems
Integration deficiencies and challenges, and describes a demonstration presented by
Canadian Forces personnel to illustrate integration deficiencies and challenges.
Presentation Abstracts
1.1 Future Soldier System Capability Areas: H&SI Requirements and
Challenges, Maj. J. Herbert (DLR5-6)
Describes the tasks the
Canadian soldier is called on to
perform. Outlines the mission
of the Directorate of Land
Requirements (DLR).
Describes soldier system
requirements, the soldier of
today, the challenges
associated with meeting
capabilities. Describes the
ISSP Networked Soldier.
Presents a vision for soldier
system integration.
Emphasizes the need for
human testing of systems. Introduces the soldier demonstration that follows, using
Canadian Forces personnel to illustrate key integration challenges and human factors.
Page 14 of 123

15. 1.2 Human and Systems Integration: Lethal and Non Lethal, Maj. B.
Gilchrist (DBRT 5-5)
Provides an overview of lethal
and non-lethal weapons effects
future requirements related to
human factors and systems
integration. Explains why non-
lethal effects are needed, and
describes the "escalation of
force continuum capability gap."
Describes small arms in current
use, and outlines the SARP 2
project to modernize or replace
most small arms. Emphasizes
the need to reduce weight and
to provide power to the system.
Page 15 of 123

16. Demonstration of Soldier Equipment/Usage by Mr. Douglas
Palmer and Canadian Forces Personnel
A highlight of past Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap workshops has been a series
of demonstrations by Canadian Forces personnel illustrating the challenges associated
with performing combat missions using currently available equipment. At the Human and
Systems Integration Workshop, the demonstration involved a dismounted section in
partial battle gear exiting a LAV 3 armoured vehicle, performing a number of
manoeuvres, and returning to the vehicle.
The Cast of Characters
The demonstration was lead by Mr. D. Palmer of the Directorate of Land Requirements
(DLR 5) Soldier Systems Section, and a member of the Project Director Team for the
Integrated Soldier System Project. Mr. Palmer spent 42 years in the Canadian Forces,
most of them the Infantry.
The soldiers participating in the demonstration were:
• A rifle section from the Cameron Highlanders of Ottawa. Two of the soldiers have
seen service in Afghanistan
• A LAV 3 driver from Le Régiment de Hull, who has done a tour of duty in
Afghanistan
The vehicle used for the demonstration was a LAV 30140 provided by the Directorate of
Armored Vehicle Program Management. In addition to the soldiers used in the demo,
this vehicle normally has a commander and a gunner, which were not part of this demo.
Instructions for Observing the Demonstration
The workshop participants were asked to keep in mind two questions while observing
the demonstration:
1. Name one human/system integration issue that was not mentioned in the
demonstration.
2. Which integration issues or deficiencies do you think are the most important to
the soldier system?
Participants were told they would have an opportunity to provide their answers during a
plenary debriefing session following the demonstration.
Page 16 of 123

17. Introduction to the Demonstration
The demonstration was designed to provide the workshop audience with insights into the
human factors aspects of the soldier as a weapon platform within the dismounted
infantry.
Along with the associated presentations, it addressed the first part of the four-step
workshop process, exploring the operational space, and providing a capability recap and
demo to identify key deficiencies and priorities.
To prepare the audience for the demo, it was pointed out that they would see:
• Basic load and equipment configurations for four Canadian Forces roles:
Commander, C9 Gunner, M203 Gunner, and rifleman
• The soldiers would be divided into two four-man assault groups in an eight
person section
It was also pointed out what the audience would not see, and would need to remember:
• The weight, volume, and power demands of the rifle section when combat loaded
(for the demonstration, not all of the usual equipment was included)
• The demand for increased tactical-level individual and team performance in
complex terrain that is a result of a detailed understanding by the soldier of:
o What the commander wants to accomplish
o The situation that the soldier is being exposed to
o The ability to conduct target acquisition rapidly and accurately
• The fact that, while equipment is designed to accommodate 95% of the
population, the expectation is that 100% of the population will be required and
capable of deploying and using all weapons and equipment
Page 17 of 123

18. The Action—Close With and Destroy the Enemy
The infantry's role is to close with and destroy the enemy—a task that places individuals
in direct contact with the enemy, where close combat is likely.
To illustrate a typical infantry mission, the demonstration was divided into seven sub-
demos, with the action becoming more intense and dynamic over time.
Action 1—Vehicle dismount into extended line
In this part of the demo, the rear door of the armoured vehicle was lowered, and the
soldiers:
• Dismounted from the vehicle, orienting themselves toward the enemy (the vehicle
is always oriented with the enemy in front)
• Made appropriate observations of the surrounding area
• Took up fire positions, spacing to reduce casualties from enemy fire or IEDs
• Began verbal communication about, and coordination of, their mission
Action 2—Movement into single file to wood line
In this part of the demo, the soldiers oriented themselves toward a line of woods, where
the enemy was thought to be positioned. This illustrated:
• The type of all-round observation conducted by the soldiers on an ongoing basis
• The continued spacing to reduce casualties
• The ability to engage targets to either side of the soldiers
• Ongoing communication and coordination via verbal and hand signals
Action 3—Movement in extended line over open ground
The soldiers then moved toward the enemy position, illustrating how very exposed
soldiers are in this type of operation. In the process, they continued to demonstrate the
all-round observation, spacing, ability to engage on left or right, and communication and
coordination activities that began when they first left the vehicle.
Page 18 of 123

19. Action 4—Movement into the vehicle
Returning from the wood line, the soldiers demonstrated how they re-enter the vehicle,
continuing to engage in all-round observation, and handing off observation
responsibilities as they enter the vehicle one-by-one. Coordination and communication
continued as before.
Action 5—Dismount to assault line
The soldiers then exited the vehicle again, and demonstrated an alignment designed to
use firepower to the front of the vehicle and engage the enemy as a section, covering
ground and engaging in close combat.
Action 6—Room clearance
The soldiers split into two groups to demonstrate entering and clearing a room. The
rooms were represented by areas marked on the parking lot where the demonstration
occurred. This illustrated:
• The need for speed and good technique and tactics
• The areas of responsibilities of the different soldiers
• The need for continued communication and coordination
Action 7—Demonstration of individual roles
Finally, the soldiers made clear the different roles associated with the preceding actions:
• An eight person section, make up of Sergeant, Master Corporal, and six
corporals or privates
• Two assault groups of four persons (Sergeant and three corporals or privates)
• Within each assault group, a Commander, C9 Gunner, M203 Gunner, and
Rifleman
Interaction with observers
Following the demonstration, the soldiers made themselves available to answer
questions and explain various pieces of equipment to the workshop participants. The
vehicle was also available to examine.
Page 19 of 123

20. The Plenary Debrief—Integration Issues Observed
After viewing the demonstration and interacting with the soldiers and equipment, the
workshop participants returned to the meeting room to answer the questions they had
been given:
1. Name one human/system integration issue that was not mentioned in the
demonstration.
2. Which integration issues or deficiencies do you think are the most important to
the soldier system?
What follows is a summary of observations shared by participants during the debrief.
Observation 1. Communications integration and coordination
• Observed the need for communications integration and coordination among the
soldiers and between the soldiers and the vehicle
• The vehicle driver and soldiers use separate communications systems
Observation 2. Customization
• There was a lot of customization going on—soldiers customizing the kit they take
on operations
• The backpacks the soldiers were carrying were light relative to the kit actually
carried in battle, which would make it even more difficult to exit and enter a
vehicle
Observation 3. Situation awareness
• Having spoken to all eight soldiers about deficiencies, the comment about
situation awareness (SA) kept coming up
• The level of SA provided will need to be adjusted to minimize information
overload, and SA is not meant to be used during close-combat action
Observation 4. Low visibility for driver and commander
• Visibility for the driver and commander is limited
• It takes time to transition from darkness to bright sunlight or heavy fog
• Noted that there is a screen inside the vehicle to show what the driver sees
outside the vehicle
Page 20 of 123

21. Observation 5. Integration and compatibility of the equipment
• The communications system doesn't seem to fit well with the rest of the
equipment
• Additional ammunition is needed but can get in the way
• Best arrangement of equipment on the soldier is not trivial and is subject to
personal preferences
• Compatibility issues mainly raised for the gas mask which is not fully compatible
with the communications system (Putting on the mask means losing the
communications system, and resorting to hand signals)
Observation 6. Lack of communication/education
• Soldiers could be better informed about the equipment development/acquisition
process, i.e., explaining why decisions are made
• Need to better inform soldiers and get them more involved in feedback/decisions
about equipment
Observation 7. International considerations
• Canada rarely deploys as a single force, but is integrated with NATO and others
• What are the interoperability capabilities among different NATO forces? Different
equipment, different ammunition
Observation 8. The soldier as sensor
• The soldier is the main sensor system out there
• Integration of remote sensors, unmanned systems, would significantly reduce the
risk and lower the workload on the soldier
Observation 9. Soldiers vs. police and first responders
• The soldier kit doesn’t seem as much state-of-the-art as police and first
responders' kit
• Little things can make big differences—e.g., gloves that don't allow easy use of
equipment, a holster that is not optimal for operations, a load-carrying vest that
works
• Some of these minor deficiencies noted may be addressed easily and at low cost
• The equipment display didn’t appear to be as fully integrated as it could be
Page 21 of 123

22. Observation 10. Human thermoregulation issues
• Enhanced thermoregulation (heat/cold management) was raised as an important
issue, especially heat stroke prevention and cold management
Observation 11. The tactical vest
• Limitations of current vest for carrying more equipment
• Carrying 10 mags of ammunition in actual operations means less space for other
components
• Need the ability to snap equipment components into place
Observation 12. No knee or elbow protection
• The soldiers were not wearing knee and elbow protection
• It was raised that knee pads are part of the current kit, but were not worn during
the demo
• Need to have a solution that stays in place and permits the soldier the flexibility to
reach all equipment
Observation 13. More gear means less mobility
• The soldiers didn't wear everything they could possibly have in the demo—for
example, no night-vision binoculars, no illuminator (TAG IR) for night ops that
shows position
• Soldier equipment solutions are always adjusted to its mission. Close combat
night operations are the most demanding situations where more equipment is
needed
• Need to bear in mind that the more equipment a soldier carries the less mobile
the soldier becomes
Observation 14. Different sensors from different companies
• Part of the problem is that different sensors come from different companies, each
with their own IP, which limits full integration
• Need to define good interface standard
• Need to find ways enabling all the different sensors to work together
Observation 15. Accessibility of sensors
• Sensors are only good if the soldier can reach them and use them
• Optimal sensors location is critical
Page 22 of 123

23. Observation 16. Kudos for including a vehicle in the demonstration
• Kudos for including a vehicle in the demonstration, so that it was more realistic
• Vehicles are used well in support of the soldier—e.g., for power and other
functions—and need to be considered with the soldier system. They are not just
for loading and carrying, but provide support in many ways
• What additional ways could the vehicle be used to support the soldiers once they
had exited?
Conclusions Soldier Demo – Key Integration Challenges
Weight/volume
The feedback received from
Load carriage
the participants during the Mobility vs Protection
plenary session is coherent Power
with the integration challenges Consumption
identified by the Army: weight/ Nature
volume; power; Anthropometrics
anthropomentrics; soldier- Soldier – Vehicle Interoperability
vehicle interoperability; and Communications
target detection, Target Detect-Discriminate-Inform-Prosecute
discrimination, information,
and prosecution. In addition,
workshop participants went beyond these basic challenges to describe other points and
challenges during the plenary.
Page 23 of 123

24. Chapter 2. Exploring Functional Space: Related
H&SI Challenges
This chapter provides abstracts of workshop presentations that focused on Human and
Systems Integration challenges. It also describes Breakout Session 1. Key Challenges
for Human and Systems Integration Themes.
Presentation Abstracts
2.1 Introduction to Workshop Themes and Physical Ergonomics and
Integration Challenges, Mrs. L. Bossi (DRDC Toronto)
Defines the multidisciplinary field of Human and Systems Integration (HSI). Presents a
model for considering the soldier
as a system. Introduces the
workshop HSI themes:
• Physical Integration on
the soldier
• Perceptual/Cognitive
Integration on the soldier
• System Architecture and
Interoperability.
Outlines the physical
ergonomics and integration
challenges faced.
Page 24 of 123

25. Page 25 of 123

26. 2.2 Soldier Equipment/Vehicle/Communications Integration
Requirements, Mr. M. A. Rochon (DSSPM-10-4-4)
Provides an overview of the
Soldier Modernization Program
and integration requirements.
Describes key goals for C4I,
power, communications,
position generation, and battle
management. Describes
current and future solutions for
a rifleman personal network.
Emphasizes the need to
enhance all aspects of soldier
capabilities, reduce cognitive
load, minimize user
intervention, and minimize
weight and volume.
2.3 USMC Approach to Soldier Burden, Mr. D. Tack (Humansystems Inc.
Rep. USMC MERS Project)
Describes the Marine
Expeditionary Rifle Squad
(MERS) mission. Outlines MC-
LEAP, the Marine Corps Load
Effects Assessment Program.
Discusses the marine burden,
program aims, and the LEAP
data cloud, which includes
dimensions of weight, stiffness,
and bulk. Describes the "design
light" initiative. Provides
overview of sensor integration
and hearing protection.
Page 26 of 123

27. 2.4 Luncheon Speaker: Dr. E. S. Redden (ARL), Advanced Interfaces for
Dismounted Warfighters
Describes the ways that
displays are used. Provides
examples of advanced displays,
including multifunction displays
(MFDs). Describes displays
currently used, and lessons
learned from them.
Introduces helmet-mounted
displays, and potential problems
with them. Discusses fused
night-vision goggles, including
urban enhanced night vision
goggles (UENVG).
Discusses conformational displays, including flexible displays and tactile displays.
Introduces see-through displays, including augmented reality displays.
Notes that civilian technology offers examples to learn from and leverage. Concludes
that:
• the dismounted warfighter is the most difficult customer for displays
• as technology advances, today's failures may be tomorrow's successes
• displays should be chosen based on mission requirements, echelon level, and
environmental considerations
• human factors considerations and experimentation are critical for effective
display design
Page 27 of 123

28. 2.5 Challenges of Soldier Protection Integration, Mr. S. Boyne
(DRDC Toronto)
Provides an overview of the
challenges associated with
soldier equipment integration,
weapon integration, equipment
integration (including packs,
helmets, and other items), and
vehicle integration. Makes the
case for a modular approach to
integrating all elements of the
soldier system. Provides
example of a modular approach
to integrating protection and
sensors in the soldier helmet.
Page 28 of 123

29. 2.6 Requirements for Enhancing Soldier Perception, Situation
Awareness and Cognition, Mr. D. Tack (Humansystems Inc.)
Explains what situation
awareness is, and why it is
important. Provides a picture of
the anticipated future
battlespace, with net-enabled
weapons, netted fires, adaptive
dispersed operation, a
dismounted role, and night
operations.
Describes the forms that
situation awareness can take,
and how situation awareness
needs can vary.
Explains why human and
system integration is important
for situation awareness
systems. Describes ways to
enhance visual, auditory, and
tactual senses. Emphasizes that
effective situation aware is very
complex.
Page 29 of 123

30. 2.7 Soldier System Integration Challenges and Issues: An Industry
Perspective, Mr. W. Downing (Industry Rep, TSC Speech)
Provides an overview of the future
soldier. Describes challenges facing
the soldier, including rapidly changing
technologies, the need for integrated
systems, and the need to manage the
equipment lifecycle. Outlines the
needs, including integrated/modular
systems, power, information, weight
management, training, and life cycle
and supply chain management.
Proposes a development paradigm to
follow and proposed roles for industry
and the Government (Department of
National Defence).
Page 30 of 123

31. 2.8 ICee-Wiki Update, Mrs. M. Huard (IC-DND)
Describes the Innovation,
Collaboration and Exchange
Environment (ICee), a web-
based application for capturing,
organizing and sharing
information on future
capabilities, technologies,
projects, products and other
items relevant to the Canadian
Forces Modernization Effort
used to feed the Soldier
Systems Technology Roadmap.
Outlines recent enhancements.
Makes the case for exploring
and using the ICee to stay up to date with, and contribute to, the technology roadmap.
Notes that there are currently over 400 users of the ICee-Wiki.
Page 31 of 123

32. Breakaway Session 1. Key Challenges for Human and Systems
Integration Themes
The goal of the first breakaway session was to have workshop participants discuss their
understanding of key human and
systems integrations issues based on
the preceding presentations and on
their own areas of expertise, and to
provide oral and written feedback on
those discussions.
The breakout session addressed the
second of the four steps in the
workshop process: exploring functional
space and identifying related human
and systems integration functional and
technical challenges for internal,
physical/cognitive, and system
architecture and interoperability
(external integration).
Themes for Breakaway Session 1
To ensure that all areas of integration received attention, that participants were able to
focus on their areas of interest and expertise, and that each of the approximately twenty
tables had participants from different sectors, the participants were asked to follow a
seating plan and to focus on one of three themes that had been defined based on input
from the Human and Systems Integration Technical Sub-Committee:
1. Physical Integration on the soldier
2. Perceptual/Cognitive Integration on the soldier
3. System Architecture and Interoperability
For more detail about the scope of each theme, see Figure 3.
Page 32 of 123

33. Figure 3. The Human and Systems Integration Themes
Theme 1 – Physical Integration on the Soldier
• Soldier system Characterization (e.g., physical environment, task analyses, user
characteristics)
• Soldier Burden (physiology, load and volume/bulk, biomechanics)
• Usability/ergonomy
• Fit/form/Anthropometry
• Demographics
• Compatibility/Interfaces
• Display and Controls Hardware
• Tools and Processes
Theme 2—Perceptual/Cognitive Integration on the Soldier
• Soldier Burden (workload, information)
• Situation Awareness
• Soldier Interfaces to Enhance Perception and Cognition (from displays to
decision-making tools on soldier computers)
• Displays and Controls Software (GUI)
• Tools and Processes
• Usability
• Decision aids
Theme 3—System Architecture & Interoperability (External Integration)
• Integration/Interoperability with Other Platforms
o Vehicles
o Weapon Systems
o C4I Systems
o Autonomous Sensors (UXV)
• System Architecture
o Modularity/Configurability
o Adaptability
o Scalability
o Hardware Integration/Optimization
Page 33 of 123

34. Seating Plan for Breakaway Session 1
Each table in the room was
labelled with one of the three
themes that had been defined,
and participants were asked to
sit at a table with the theme of
their choice.
Participants were also asked to
follow the Table Seating Rules
outlined in the slide shown here.
Instructions for Breakaway Session 1
Participants were given the following question to discuss at each table:
What are the 5 most important functional challenges related to your Human and
Systems Integration theme? What's the problem? (You can express it as a
technical challenge too.)
1. E.g., Critical parameter (e.g., Balance, bandwidth)
2. What should it be (setting the bar for 2020 & 2025)?
They were asked to record their answers on flipcharts, and to follow these rules:
• Sit with people from other organizations
• Fill the tables
• Choose a leader and recorder
• Write clearly
• Focus on the questions
• Ask facilitators for clarifications, if necessary
Page 34 of 123

35. Plenary Report Back for Breakaway Session 1
When the participants had
completed the Breakaway
Session 1 task, a report back
(plenary) session was held to
give them the opportunity to
share their results verbally with
the other workshop participants.
The slide shown here provided
guidelines for the session.
What follows, in Figure 4,
Breakout Session 1 Plenary
Report Back, is a summary of
the points made during the
report back.
Page 35 of 123

36. Figure 4. Breakaway Session 1 Plenary Report Back
Theme 1—Physical Integration on the Soldier
(4 Tables Reporting)
1. Setting standards
• Setting standards is a complex process requiring coordination
• Interoperability is difficult when there is a proprietary mindset
2. Complexity and uncertainty of trade-offs
• Same issue, but key label is "Complexity and uncertainty of various trade-offs"
• Looked at performance vs. options—there must be a "sweet zone" where you want to
find yourself
• Could be balancing anything from cost, to system performance, to the complexity of the
system .
• No self-evident road to go down—it's a multi-dimensional problem based on complex
systems
• The challenge is to define overall system requirements precisely, to decide on overall
trade offs
3. Soldier burden
• One of the challenges is related the procurement process
• Technology is moving extremely quickly, and there is a need
for a more evolutionary approach to the acquisition
process
• Need to ensure an acquisition cycle that fits with rapidly
evolving technology
4. Encumbrance: a psychological tolerance to carrying load
• Challenge is resisting homeostatis—i.e., you could do all the
work you want to reduce the weight of items, but the
soldier will still load himself up with more stuff
• Need to encourage the soldier not to overload himself.
Theme 2—Perceptual/Cognitive Integration on the Soldier
(2 Tables Reporting)
1. Don't forget the "human" in human factors
• DND representatives at the table were treated as the
customers, and asked what their issues are
Page 36 of 123

37. Figure 4. Breakaway Session 1 Plenary Report Back
• The human must be in control of the information, because that
is the nature of who we are
• Anything we do moving forward should recognize we are
humans, and the system must adapt to the human rather
than the other way around
• Looking forward, in 25 years, imagine having a laser on a rifle
that enables you to laser anything in range; you push a
button and you are given all necessary information about
the target
2. Information overload
• The real issue is that soldiers today are getting too much
information, a lot of it contradictory, missing, or wrong, and
they are overwhelmed by data and unable to glean the
necessary information
• Need complete information, but not overloaded
• Situational awareness, eyes forward, moving ahead
• The soldier can't choose what information is delivered
Page 37 of 123

38. Figure 6. Technical-Functional Challenges Identified by Workshop Participants
During Breakout Session 1
Theme 1—Physical Integration
1. Improving system characterization (physical) 13. Improving socio/psychological readiness
2. Improving tools & processes (physical) 14. Enhancing/augmenting soldier perception
3. Reducing physical soldier burden
15. Reducing cognitive burden (information load)
(weight overload)
4. Improving physical usability 16. Improving situation awareness/understanding
5. Improving modularity/configurability 17. Improving decision making
6. Improving fit, form, anthropometry 18. Enhancing displays/GUI
7. Improving interfaces compatibility 19. Improving human computer interaction
8. Improving body-worn equipment/sensors
integration Theme 3—External Integration
9. Improving display/control hardware design 20. Improving integration with weapons
Theme 2—Psychological/Cognitive Integration 21. Improving integration with C4I systems
10. Improving system characterization (psychological) 22. Improving integration with combat vehicles
23. Improving integration with autonomous
11. Improving tools & processes (psychological)
vehicle/sensors
12. Reducing the effects of stressors 24. Enabling future capability growth
Detailed Results of Breakaway Session 1
Following the breakaway session, the flipcharts on which participants had written their
responses were collected and compiled. The results are provided in Appendix C,
Breakaway Session 1 Participant Input: Key Challenges by Theme.
Homework Instructions
Page 38 of 123

39. After Breakaway Session 1, before ending the first day of the workshop, participants
were given a homework assignment that would get them started working on potential
solutions to the challenges previously identified. That involved:
1. Getting 3 stickies from the facilitators.
2. Picking 3 of the challenges already discussed.
3. Filling in the blanks on the stickies to describe proposed solution, development
timeframe, related technologies, technology readiness level (TRL), and key
players in the area.
4. Bringing the stickies to Day 2 of the workshop.
Figure 5. Example of Technology Roadmap Brainstorming Sticky
To help participants fill in their 3 stickies, they were given this example of a completed sticky.
3. Exploring Solution Space: Enabling
Technologies, Processes and Tools
Page 39 of 123

40. This chapter describes the "stickies on the wall" exercise, which was conducted at the
start of the second day of the workshop. It also provides abstracts of the presentations
preceding the second breakaway session, and describes Breakaway Session 2: The
Technical Challenges
Stickies on the Wall Exercise
Between the first and second day of the workshop, the SSTRM team identified a list of
technical-functional challenges based on participant input during the first day.
Before the start of
the second day, staff
constructed a grid on
two walls of the
meeting room (as
shown here), with
the challenges listed
across the top, grouped by the three integration themes of physical,
psychological/cognitive, and system architecture and interoperability.
At the start of the second day, and during the first coffee break, workshop participants
copied the stickies they had filled in as homework, and posted them on the grid to be
used during the second breakaway session described later in this chapter.
Page 40 of 123

41. Presentation Abstracts
3.1 Challenges and Tools for Effective Soldier System Integration,
Mrs. L. Bossi (DRDC Toronto)
Describes the Human-System
Integration (HSI) process.
Outlines a process for ensuring
that HSI is considered in soldier
systems. Describes the Army
Combat Clothing and Equipment
Survey System (ACCESS) and
the 1997 Land Forces
Anthropometric Survey.
Introduces BoSS XXI Body
Scanning system, explains how
it works, and compares results
with the 1997 survey.
Outlines the way ahead,
including challenges associated
with clothed anthro for
workspace modelling and other
anthropometry challenges, such
as workspace modeling and
analysis, an Advanced Personal
Load Carriage System (APLCS),
biomechanical modeling tools,
an integrated performance
modelling environment, virtual
reality tools. Describes the key
challenge as developing a
measurement of effective soldier
system integration. Discussed "A Soldier's Day Multi-media Database," designed to
inform all stakeholders in R&D, materiel development, acquisition and life cycle
management about the actual Canadian soldier system.
Page 41 of 123

42. 3.2. The Role of Biomechanics in Effective Soldier System Integration, Dr.
J. Stevenson (Queen's University)
Defines and explains the
importance of biomechanics for
the soldier system. Describes
tools for measuring
biomechanics, including direct
and indirect internal forces,
effects at the human-object
interface, motion, line of sight,
and sound. Explains
ergonomics. Describes using
the military or Caesar (Civilian
American and European
Anthropometric Resource)
database to aid in design.
Discusses soldier system integration. Describes the ERG mission, objectives and
process.
3.3 Virtual Simulations for Soldiers: Concepts and Applications,
Dr. F. Bernier (DRDC Valcartier)
Defines immersive virtual simulation. Describes the Virtual Immersion Laboratory (VIL),
and the Gaming and Emerging
Technology Laboratory (GETL).
Outlines DRDC defence and
security activities. Describes
approaches to creating a
Stressful Virtual Environment
(SVE). Provides the example of
medic training in a combat
environment.
Page 42 of 123

43. 3.4 Decision Aids for Soldiers, Dr. D. Bryant and Dr. J. Hollands (DRDC
Toronto)
Defines combat identity (CID).
Explains decision support
concepts. Outlines IMMERSIVE
(Instrumented Military Modeling
Engine for Research using
Simulation and Virtual
Environments). Describes
immersive bots (robotic
compute controlled entities),
simulated rifle-mounted IFF.
Discusses testing done, and
resulting hit rates and false
alarm rates. Describes current
BFT (Blue Force Tracking)
systems and studies.
Page 43 of 123

44. 3.5 Soldier-Vehicle Integration: A TTCP Approach, Dr. M. Ducharme
(DRDC Valcartier)
Provides an overview of TTCP
(The Technical Cooperation
Program) Land TP-2. Discusses
land-systems integration, and
the system-of-systems
approach. Describes the vehicle
integration study, focusing on
the integrated soldier and
vehicle protection, and the
networked soldier and vehicle
integration. Describes the Land
Systems Integration Laboratory
(SIL), and the TP-2 vision in
development. The 3 TTCP
reports will be posted on the ICee too whenever the final versions are completed.
Page 44 of 123

45. Breakaway Session 2. System Optimization: Solutions, Enabling
Technologies, Processes and Tools
The second breakaway
session addressed the third
part of the four-step workshop
process: exploring the solution
space and identifying potential
solutions/technologies for
system optimization.
The goal of the session was to
brainstorm solutions and their
related technologies (S&T) for
an overall system optimization.
For the session, participants
were asked to change the lens
through which overall soldier system capability optimization was viewed—that is, to shift
the perspective from the vertical orientation to a horizontal view that integrated solutions
across silos (figure 7).
Page 45 of 123

46. Figure 7. The Shift to a Horizontal View of Capability Optimization
Instructions for Breakaway Session 2
The workshop participants were given the following instructions :
1. Review the challenge list (distributed on each table) (5 minutes)
(See Figure 8).
2. Share your proposed solutions (homework stickies) (15 to 20 minutes).
3. Identify 3 to 5 new potential horizontal solutions and related technologies.
4. Summarize your answers on the table provided
(See Figure 9).
Page 46 of 123

47. Figure 8. The Challenge List for Step 1 of Breakaway Session 2
Figure 9. The Table for Step 4 of Breakaway Session 2
Page 47 of 123

48. Plenary Report Back for Breakaway Session 2
When the participants had
completed the Breakaway
Session 2 task, a plenary
session was held to give them
an opportunity to share their
results verbally with the other
workshop participants. The slide
shown here provided guidelines
for the session.
What follows, in Figure 10, is a
summary of the points made
during the report back and later
collected from each table of
participants.
Figure 10. Breakaway Session 2 Plenary Report Back—Potential Solutions and Related
Enabling Technologies
Table 1
1. Wearable power.
• Use of newer technologies to allow recharge at the platoon
level
• Technical/functional challenges 8, 2, 5
2. Device proliferation
• How to militarize existing integrated consumer applications
• Technology challenges 3, 5, 16
3. Difficulty of gathering and applying field feedback.
• Need to get immediate small groups of soldiers returning
from deployment, specifically infantry, engineers,
medics, armoured and gunners
• Technology challenges 20, 21, and 22
Table 2
1. Reducing burden.
• Need to save weight and integrate with fibre optical and
other textile technology
• Technology challenges 3, 6, and 11
2. Sensor Integration
Page 48 of 123

49. Figure 10. Breakaway Session 2 Plenary Report Back—Potential Solutions and Related
Enabling Technologies
• Need standards for defining standards and minimum
interoperability requirements
Table 3
1. Improving body worn sensors integration
• Technology challenge 8
• The backbone of the system will have to be a "smart skin"
that will provide a physical backbone for connectivity
2. Reducing the effects of stressors
• Technology challenge 12
• The skin will have to provide environmental controls (e.g.,
for heat and cold)
3. Improving integration with C4I Systems
• Technology challenge 21
• The skin must be wired to a PAN (Personal Area Network)
Table 4
1. Improve modularity/configurability
• The vest becomes a modular system on which the soldier
can connect components
• The weapon is also modular, and components can connect
to it
2. Improve interface compatibility
• This becomes a mission-specific issue
• Software should use all available information and provide
details for each soldier and soldier group as to what
they need for the mission
• The vest and weapons must be modular enough to attach
what they need for the mission
Table 5
1. Need a mandated requirement for Human/Systems integration program
• Best way to address all integration needs
• HSI must be mandated as a key component of all projects
—cuts across all processes and programs
• It was done in the States, and can be done here
2. Multiple functional and technical challenges (physical)
Page 49 of 123

50. Figure 10. Breakaway Session 2 Plenary Report Back—Potential Solutions and Related
Enabling Technologies
• Cut across many challenges on the physical interface,
sensor integration and C4I integration
• Key is to use multi-functional materials and devices
3. Multiple functional and technical challenges (optimized Human/Machine interface)
• Need a common, tailored, optimized soldier system
human/machine interface
• Would enable cutting across an enormous number of
challenges
Table 6
1. Improving integration with everything
• Challenges 20-23--Define an integration process and
project management process that gets applied to all
design problems—an integration process
• Integration with weapons, C4I, vehicles, sensors, and so
on—a system of systems
• Integrating a text bed that includes actual soldiers in the
testing
• From a physiological and psychological perspective, the
soldier is not going to change noticeable over the next
100 years
• Define those boundaries, which are independent of
technology, as the start point for integration
2. Integrating HSI into the acquisition process
• Need to legislate human systems integration into the
acquisition process
• DRDC taking the lead to develop a Human/Systems
Integration lab where industry can come to get info and
try out solutions with real soldiers
Table 7
• Smart textiles
• Regroup as much as possible to think in terms of system of
systems
• Breathable textiles; drug-dispensing textiles; self-cleaning
textiles; conductive fibres; energy-harvesting textiles;
harvesting water textiles
• For C4I—smart visors
Table 8
• Battle space situational awareness
Page 50 of 123

51. Figure 10. Breakaway Session 2 Plenary Report Back—Potential Solutions and Related
Enabling Technologies
• Looked at challenges 7, 16, and 21, with a few others
thrown in
• Focus was on battle space, and situational awareness
between the top and front line
• Ability to use comms type system with filtering capability
dealing with audio, text, symbols
Table 9
1. Displays
• Challenges 4, 5 and 7: improving physical usability,
modularity, configurability and system compatibility—
all intertwined
• Looked at displays, and having only one display per soldier
2. User Interfaces
• Need to focus on user interfaces and basing them on
background knowledge of how commercial companies
use them.
• Must be high-impact—don't need all small improvements,
must be important
Table 10
1. Improving interface capability
• Important to be able to connect all components of system
with common power source
• Need unlimited connectivity
• Hope military will continue to describe needs
• Need to focus on connectors and standard for small, light-
weight connectors
2. Reducing physical burden
• Smart textiles in garments
• Integration of systems
3. Improving fit/form and anthropometry
• SkeletBone skin that does not lose user capabilities
Table 11
• Sensor integration
• Need to enable modularity—to make equipment from
different suppliers available
• Need an industry/government standards ecosystem that
would be responsible for defining standards and
Page 51 of 123

52. Figure 10. Breakaway Session 2 Plenary Report Back—Potential Solutions and Related
Enabling Technologies
minimum requirements
• Need to modify the procurement process –go through the
process, select a short list of vendors who come close,
and then choose a supplier
• Related to the procurement process, need to look at a
minimum threshold and some kind of point system
beyond that
Detailed Results of Breakaway Session 2
Following the breakaway session, the stickies and the completed tables were collected
and compiled. The results are provided in Appendix D, Breakaway Session 2 Participant
Input: System Optimization. Enabling Technologies, Processes and Tools.
Page 52 of 123

53. 4. Exploring R&D Space: Focus Areas and
Potential Collaborations
This chapter provides abstracts of the luncheon presentation and ICee contest winner
presentations that preceded the third breakaway session. It also describes Breakaway
Session 3: Focus Areas and Collaborations.
Luncheon Speaker
4.1 Luncheon Speaker: Overview of the Strategic Aerospace and
Defence Industrial Program (SADI), Mr. M. A. Blais (IC-ITO)
Provides an overview of the Industrial Technology O ffice - O ver view
Strategic Aerospace and
SADI Objectives
Defence Initiative (SADI), which
 Encourage strategic R&D that will result in innovation and
was launched in April 2007 as a excellence in new products and services;
replacement for Technology  Enhance the competitiveness of Canadian aerospace, defence,
Partnerships Canada (TPC). space and security c ompanies; and,
Describes SADI objectives,  Foster collaboration between research institutes, universities,
colleges, and the private sector.
eligibility requirements, proposal
assessment criteria, benefits
monitoring, and repayment
plans. Provides contact
information.
3
Page 53 of 123

54. ICee Contest Winner Presentation Abstracts
Following are abstracts of presentations made by workshop participants who won the
ICee contest associated with the Soldier Systems and Human Integration workshop.
These participants, or their organizations, posted relevant information on the ICee, were
entered in a draw as a results, and won the opportunity to present at the workshop.
4.2 Infantryman Communication Interface (ICI), Mr. A. Poirier,
Rheinmetall Defence
Describes the need for tailored
C4I solutions with a minimal set
of features to address specific
soldier missions. Outlines
design constraints. Proposes a
solution: the Soldier
Communication Interface (ICI),
which acts as an intelligent link
between the customer GPS and
radio to provide improved
soldier capabilities.
Describes the radio interface,
solution GPS interface, power
considerations, and system
integration and human factor considerations.
Page 54 of 123

55. 4.3 Software Solutions for NVG ENVG Integration, Mr. G. Martin,
Robotics and Computer Vision System Integration
Points out that no automation
system is more accurate than its
instrument. Describes problems
associated with image fusion
and night vision. Explains the
high-accuracy camera
calibration, software image
correction, and sub-pixel edge
analysis solution offered by
Robotics and Computer Vision
System Integration. Describes
calibration performance criteria,
and presents calibration results.
4.4 Human Performance Centered Engineering, Mr. J. Johnson,
SantosHuman
Describes the synthetic
environment created by
SantosHuman using soldier-
centered engineering. Explains
the human digital modeling used
to build a unique virtual human,
and the advantages of using the
virtual human in a variety of
testing situations. Describes
VTOS, the Virtual Try-Out
Space, its applications and
advantages for developing a
range of predictive capabilities to
help improve human
performance, provide crew safety, and evaluate designs.
Page 55 of 123

56. 4.5 Knee Stress Release Device (K-SRD™), Mr. M. Rittenhouse,
B-TEMIA
Provides a corporate overview
of B-TEMIA. Describes the
issue of overload bearing, and
the cost in terms of injury,
reduced operational efficiency,
and therapy and rehabilitation.
Introduces the knee stress
release device design to provide
active support to the lower
extremities, assists in gait
activities, and provides
additional power to the knee.
Describes performance
evaluation of the proof-of-
concept prototype, including video of outdoor trials.
Page 56 of 123

57. Breakaway Session 3: R&D Focus Areas and Potential
Collaborations
The third breakaway session
addressed the final stage in the
workshop process: exploring the
Research and Development space
and identifying R&D focus areas and
potential collaborations.
It's goal was to have participants
identify enabling technologies having
the potential to address the
challenges presented earlier,
describe the necessary R&D efforts
and identify the key players in the
domain.
Instructions for Breakaway Session 3
The workshop participants were given the following objective and instructions:
1. Select 2 or 3 most enabling technologies (S&T)
(right column on your summary sheet from session 2)
2. Explain briefly why you chose them
3. Describe the R&D efforts that should be pursued for each enabling
technology
4. Identify collaborators that could be involved in these R&D efforts
They were provided with output forms on which to organize their results for the
breakaway session (See Figure 11. Sample Breakaway Session 3 Output Form.)
Page 57 of 123

58. Figure 11. Sample Breakaway Session 3 Output Form
Page 58 of 123

59. Plenary Report Back from Breakaway Session 3
When the participants had
completed the Breakaway Session 3
task, a plenary session was held to
give them an opportunity to share
their results verbally with the other
workshop participants. The slide
shown here provided guidelines for
the session, which consisted of
describing the R&D areas of focus
and the collaborators identified.
Results of Breakaway
Session 3
The following tables describe horizontal, cross-cutting R&D efforts that participants at
the workshop suggested would contribute to human/system integration for the soldier.
Each of the following R&D focus area section includes:
• A description of the R & D Area
• The relevant R&D requirements
• Potential collaborators/experts in the domain that were identified
Page 59 of 123

60. R&D Focus Area 1. Smart Clothing/Uniform
Description System connectivity/intelligent textiles/conformal connectors/"intelligent skin"
project
Tables 21, 23, 18
Relevant R&D
• Ergonomics, "thermo mechanical, physiological properties"
• System architecture, technical specifications
• Integration with fabric, nanotechnologies, textile technologies
• Methods of transferring signal, data/interface/open architecture/local TCPIP/"nervous
systems"
• Adaptable connector and physical interface
• Advanced fibre optics for personal networks
• Self-sensing data/bus type and data format
• Flexible transport implementation
• location of connectors/wires
Potential Collaborators
Fabric • Vetra Electronics
• Foster Miller • Teraxion
• Intelligent Textiles • TR Labs
• Lincoln Textiles Wiring and connectors
• CTT Group • Tyco
• Corcan Textiles • Precision Interconnectors
Design (soft goods) • Raytheon
• Pacific Safety Products • Glenair
• Mustang Survival • Physical Optics Corporation
• Allen Vanguard Human factors, HSI:
Power supply/integrators/electronics • HUMANsystems,
• Rockwell Collins International • Shumac
• Rheinmetall • NRC
• Intel • Universities: Queens, Alberta, Carleton
• AMD • University of Alberta
• NRC
• Canadian Space Agency
Page 60 of 123

61. R&D Focus Area 2. Improved Situation Awareness
Description Information management and distribution for improved situational awareness
Tables 22
Relevant R&D
• Bandwidth management using PRR's
• Prioritizing, categorizing information
• Dynamic communications system
Potential Collaborators
• Communications Research Centre
• Communications Security Establishment
• General Dynamics
• Raytheon
• HUMANsystems Inc.
• Rheinmetall
• Northrop Grumman Mission Systems Europe
• Shumac
• LTi Software and Engineering
Page 61 of 123

62. R&D Focus Area 3. Smart Vest Concept
Description A modular vest with a better interface.
Tables 19
Relevant R&D
• Mechanical joints between rigid and flexible support (cloth)
• Adding sensors, radios, computers, displays, input devices, etc. into vest
• Centralized power sources/batteries
Potential Collaborators
Human Factors
• HUMANsystems Inc.
Protective materials, fabrics
• Pacific Safety Products Ltd.
• Lincoln Fabrics
• NRC - IAR, materials and analysis
• Intelligent Textiles
• Corcan textiles
• Allen Vanguard
Devices/integrators/battery companies
• Raytheon
Page 62 of 123

63. R&D Focus Area 4. Multifunctional materials
Description Materials that can perform a range of functions (e.g., power conduction,
communications, temperature control
Tables 6
Relevant R&D
"Disciplines to mash-up"
• Smart fabrics
• Low temperature semiconductor deposition
• Nanotechnology
• Ballistic materials science
Potential Collaborators
• Intelligent Textiles Ltd
• IPE Stuttgart
• MIT
• Carleton University
• NRC - IAR & IMI
• BAE Systems
• Allen Vanguard
• Armorworks Inc.
• Pacific Safety Products
Page 63 of 123

64. R&D Focus Area 5. A common, cross-platform, human/machine interface
Description A common, cross-platform, human/machine interface
Tables 6, 3
Relevant R&D
• Cognitive human factors - HMI design
• Display technology
• Displays for all tasks and environments
• Gaming engineers
• Defence system integrators
Potential Collaborators
• Universities: Waterloo, Toronto, Carleton
• Therefore Design
• Kent Displays
• Liteye Systems
• Philips
• EA Games
• Nintendo
• Advanced Human Factors Inc.
• HUMANsystems Inc.
• Rheinmetall
• Raytheon
• Corcan Textiles
• Vetronics (General Dynamics)
• WAMCO ?
• ASU
• Apple
• Dell
• Sony Panasonic
• Sharp
• Hunting gear designers
Page 64 of 123

65. R&D Focus Area 6. Anthropometric data collection
Description Anthropometric data collection capability—CAD tool
Tables 3
Relevant R&D
• Blue screen technology
• Automation of 3D CAD models (data capture and store)
• Defining "proper sample"
• Development of more detailed and capable models - feet vs. hands vs. head
• Biometrics - full range - behavioural task analysis
Potential Collaborators
• Human Santos
• Universities: Queen's, Toronto
Page 65 of 123