back to article DARPA to build 'needle-in-haystack' detector goggles

Radical Pentagon boffins have decided to build super high-tech binoculars or goggles which would - according to the government specifications - be able to identify and pick out "a needle moving along the surface of a haystack". The planned technology has been dubbed Fine Detail Optical Surveillance (FDOS), and regular readers …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Happy

    Translation...

    find a bloke in a turban in a bloody great country....

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm still waiting for my X-Ray Specs

    On second thought, thinking about all the fatties in Stratford-u-Avon, I'll do without them.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Happy

    .. full of lots of other blokes

    (most of whom wear turbans)

  4. Kevin Reader
    Dead Vulture

    Error in Title!

    According to the text its a "Needle-on-Haystack" detector, they've left the harder "Needle-in-Haystack" detector to a later generation. Or Superman.

  5. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
    Terminator

    fitted

    to the flying drones?

    So they can find an elusive target and kill him?

    They are readying the things already so they can terminate John Conner after the machines take over

    Right time to change this posting to BBC style news reporting

    "Now children, listen very carefully. We're all Dooomed .. Doomed"

    Etc etc etc

  6. UnkaEd

    No one of consequence

    Could someone offer a short explanation of colloquialisms 1) crisps in a bottle and 2) guilty pig at a barbecue? Thanks

  7. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    In all seriousness...

    In all seriousness, reading the description of metamaterials (I don't know who came up with that name, it's not descriptive..), the ones that have a negative index of refraction allow for seemlingly physically impossible feats such as sub-wavelength resolution, and I think could be "aimed" and "focused" without moving parts (for RF use this is "beam forming" but I don't see why it wouldn't work at optical wavelengths.) It'll take some software to find the needle, but the actual optics are surprisingly possible.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Happy

    I've been thinking about building one of these for years..

    I've always wanted a little wearable HUD that would outline the targets for me. Just the thing for picking 'shrooms!

  9. Rogan Paneer

    Possibilities

    Just the thing to use when staring at goats ....

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Grenade

    are they for spotting...

    Brains in Americans?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      There's a specially hardended version coming to the UK

      It needs to be able to see through eight pints of Wife Beater.

  11. Ryan 7

    HAX!

    HE'S USING AN AIMBOT!

  12. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    I thnk it would be brilliant

    This would be a must-have gadget for scouts. Crawl to the top of the hill, whip out the electronoculars and do a slow left-right. Anything moving in the distance gets tagged on the internal screen. One press of a button and the "enocs" zoom in to allow for maximum ident ability. Press button again and normal scanning resumes. Once the sweep is finished, scout crawls back down, and signals that nothing is moving in the next sector.

    The squad resumes silent progression through the undergrowth . . .

    Such an equipment will obviously require optics that are beyond current abilities. And high-def CCDs coupled to movement-detecting software, along with the requisite 5 pound battery. But hey, I'd really like a working version myself !

  13. Richard P. Scott
    FAIL

    How many potential targets?

    Fine in a relatively barren area of Afghanistan were the terrain consists largely of static rocks, but will the image processor crash if used on a windy day in most of the rest of the world (millions of blades of grass/leaves blowing around!)

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Unhappy

    Trouble in Potomac River City

    "it is one of the many troubled, rather disturbing yet occasionally freakishly brilliant brainchildren of rogue US military boffin bureau DARPA."

    Yes, and the reason they are so often "troubled" is that, at sometime in their murky past, they illogically concluded that, as 90% of basic research projects "fail", so any of their agent-sponsors who were not experiencing at least 90% failure in reaching their project goals were not applying their funding properly. No kidding!

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like