What Should a Soldier See?

The promise of a head-mounted system for the dismounted soldier sounds straightforward: take the operational picture that once appeared on a command screen, tablet, or handheld device and place it directly in front of the soldier’s eyes, where information from drones, sensors, and other forces can be aligned with the physical environment.

The challenge begins when that idea has to become something a soldier can actually wear for hours while moving through heat, darkness, and hostile terrain without being weighed down, distracted, or exposed by the system itself. A display may provide a clear image but generate too much heat, introduce enough latency to cause discomfort, or emit light that an adversary using night-vision equipment could detect.

In an interview, Ernie Basic, Senior Director of Research and Development at Elbit America, explains that these are not secondary engineering details but factors that determine whether a sophisticated system will actually serve the person wearing it.

What differentiates Elbit America’s expertise in head-mounted systems?

“I like to think of us as an enterprise,” Basic says. “When we deal with this type of technology, it is not just one individual piece of the company. It is a global enterprise.”

He points to two areas of expertise that are now coming together. On one side are the advanced optics, displays, and sensor-integration capabilities developed for fighter aircraft, including fourth- and fifth-generation platforms. On the other are the night-vision systems Elbit America already supplies to ground forces in large quantities.

“We are taking what we have already deployed to fighter pilots, and now we are bringing that type of technology down to the individual soldier,” he says. “We have already learned the importance of human factors. When you are putting something on somebody’s head, it better meet many requirements, and it better be comfortable.”

Basic describes the move from the cockpit to the ground not as a sudden entry into a new technological field but as a natural progression. Elbit America has already spent decades learning how to place information in front of an operator’s eyes, integrate sophisticated sensors and optics, and design equipment around the limits of the human body. Just as important, however, is the ability to move beyond prototypes and scale up. “If you are looking to equip the U.S. Army, you better be able to deliver tens of thousands of these things,” Basic says. “That is not something that you stand up overnight.”

Elbit America’s night-vision operations already deliver thousands of systems each month, he adds, providing the production capacity needed to complement the company’s experience in sophisticated aviation displays. That combination of advanced optical technology on one side and demonstrated manufacturing scale on the other is what Basic believes places Elbit America in a particularly strong position.

What does this capability give a soldier on the battlefield?

“Fighter pilots got it first because air forces could afford it,” Basic says. Early versions of the technology were so expensive that they could be justified only on selected platforms and high-value assets. As the components have evolved and become more affordable, those capabilities have gradually moved closer to the individual warfighter.

“At the soldier level, you are essentially providing the full operational picture,” he says. “You are not only seeing what is in front of you. You can leverage a feed coming from a drone or from other assets. You can start seeing what is going on behind a house or another structure, cue a squad to a different location, and continuously update them.”

Ground forces have already adopted networked tablets, smartphones, and digital C4I systems, but the head-mounted display changes the relationship between the soldier and the information. “You can see something and overlay additional information on it,” Basic says. “You can pinpoint a threat by aligning what you are seeing with your own eyes and what the sensors are detecting.”

Elbit America’s most visible effort in this field is supported by an approximately $120 million contract for the U.S. Army. Yet Basic is careful not to describe it as a single product created for a single program. The broader ambition is to develop a family of systems whose sensors, processing power, and overall configuration can be adapted to the customer, mission, and available budget.

Solutions Between the Extremes

A simplified extended-reality configuration, for example, could help maintenance personnel working on an aircraft or ground vehicle by placing instructions directly over the equipment in front of them. Such a system would not require the most expensive sensors or the greatest processing power. At the other end of the spectrum, special operations forces may require premium sensors, advanced night-vision modes, and more complex sensor fusion.

Soldier Borne Mission Command, Basic says, sits somewhere between those extremes. It provides substantial sensing and processing capabilities while remaining affordable in the quantities required by a large military organization. 

“One of the key aspects of Soldier Borne Mission Command is the price per system,” Basic said.” That was direct input we received from the customer."

That cost requirement shapes the engineering from the outset. According to Basic, the company has invested tens of millions of dollars in the broader family of technologies, including work to mature critical components related to size, weight, power, and thermal management. Moving a display from an aircraft to a soldier is not simply a matter of making it smaller. Inside an aircraft, the system is supported by the platform around it, with access to power, cooling, and space. A soldier must carry the system and its batteries, often while operating in extreme heat.

"You have to be very intentional about how much power and heat you are placing around a soldier’s head," Basic says. "When soldiers are operating in hot weather, the last thing you want is something radiating heat onto their heads."
The optics must also blend digital imagery with the soldier’s natural vision without noticeable delay. Even a small amount of latency between head movement and the displayed image can cause discomfort or motion sickness.

 
Light management creates a different kind of risk: the display must remain visible to the wearer, but its illumination cannot be allowed to reveal the soldier’s location at night. "It is great if it works," Basic says. "But if you let everybody know where you are, you have just become a giant target."

What has been the most difficult part of the development process?

"Any time you take something that works in an airplane and costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, then say it needs to cost a fraction of that and be fully supported on a soldier’s head, you have a complex problem," Basic says.
Human factors, Basic says, are therefore inseparable from the technical design. "We are very focused on what the soldier needs," he says. "We are building it for a warfighter who will operate in all kinds of conditions. Frankly, that is where we have invested most of our effort and funding."

The danger of overload is not only physical. Once a system can receive information from numerous sensors, platforms, and networks, the temptation is to display everything, turning an abundance of information into another burden for the soldier. Here again, Basic says, Elbit America’s experience with fighter pilots has provided a clear lesson.

How do you decide which information should appear in front of the soldier?

"It has got to be crisp, and it has got to be limited. The more information you put up there, the more complicated it becomes. We have been very intentional about what appears in front of them."

"You do more processing in the background and present only what is critical rather than everything that comes through," he says.

The system is being designed for growth, allowing new algorithms and AI capabilities to perform more of the preprocessing before information reaches the warfighter. Yet deciding what should actually be displayed remains a deeply human process involving engineers, operational users, and human-factors specialists who may arrive with very different opinions.

"You can get 50 people in a room, and then you have to come up with one answer instead of 50 different opinions," Basic says. "We have conducted this type of human-factors engagement before to decide what actually gets displayed."
What excites Basic most about the project, he says, is the possibility of bringing capabilities once reserved for advanced platforms to individual soldiers, particularly those operating closest to the front. "I am confident it is going to enhance their survivability and lethality," he says. "Ultimately, when things go sideways, I want the good guys to come home."