Review of Liandra's Weapon System
Charles J. Cohen
based fire control system as seen on Babylon 5: Legends of the
Rangers. I wanted to review it because gesture recognition based
systems ares my main area of study, and I am always excited to see
representations of gesture based systems television and films.
This review by its nature contains spoilers, but I will be avoiding
major plot points as much as I can.
Quick review: I believe that this Liandra's method of weapon control
is a well designed system to allow a person to actively target ships,
while ensuring appropriate system response (i.e. weapons firing) when
desired without false positives (i.e. a weapon firing when it is not
desired). There are some clear areas for enhancing the system, such
as adding higher level gesture commands, as well as voice.
Long review.
My Qualifications
So, who am I to be doing such a review? Human-Computer Interaction
(HCI), and specifically gesture recognition, are my area of expertise.
While I'm not *the* foremost expert in this area, I am well versed in
the field. My Ph.D. in gesture recognition (Electrical Engineering
Systems, minors in Artificial Intelligence and Robotics) is from the
University of Michigan in 1996 (thesis: Dynamical System
Representation, Generation, and Recognition of Basic Oscillatory
Motion Gestures, and Applications for the Control of Actuated
Mechanisms). Since then I've published a variety of papers in the
fields of gesture recognition, HCI, and machine vision [1], have been
interviewed by a small number of news publications [2], and have given
talks on this subject [3]. My company (Cybernet Systems) has produced
a very basic gesture/tracking software product called "Use Your Head"
[4], that allows a person to use their head motions as an additional
game device (which could be considered a precursor to the Liandra's
targeting system!). I've installed prototype gesture recognition
systems for NASA and the Army [5], and still have government funding
to continue this research.
Again, I'm not *the* authority in this area, but I like to consider my
an authority. Since I also love Science Fiction in general, and
Babylon 5 in specific, I decided it would be fun to review the
Liandra's system.
Overview of the Liandra's Fire Control System.
This overview is taken from my viewings of Babylon 5: Legends of the
Rangers. I will try to point out three things: What I know, what I
think I know, and what I don't know. That is, I'll try to keep
assumptions to a minimum, and if I can't, I will at least point out
what it is I'm assuming. I'd appreciate any feedback letting me know
what I got wrong.
What I know:
1. The weapon's control officer (WCO) is suspended in a full zero
gravity Virtual Reality (VR) environment.
2. The WCO has three degrees of rotational motion (roll, pitch, and
yaw) centered around her center of gravity. That is, she can
rotate herself to any orientation to view the combat environment as
desired.
3. The VR environment is similar to that found on the Minbari command
ships [6]. That is, a full 3D representation of the battle space,
with gestures used to focus attention on various aspects of the
battle environment, terrain, and assets.
4. Each of the WCO's extremities (hands and feet) are linked to
specific weapons on the Liandra.
5. Ship tracking and targeting is performed using an eye-tracking
system.
6. Multiple ships could be targeted off of the eye-tracking system.
7. A "fire" gesture consists of pumping a limb (arm or leg). There is
a limited vocabulary in the set of gesture commands. The direction
of fire is the direction of the gesture, matched up to the
eye-tracking software to determine the target. The ship's computer
actually aims/targets the weapons.
8. A list of possible targets from eye-tracking is kept, so that if
the WCO points at a ship behind her current viewing, that ship will
be attacked.
What I think I know:
1. The gravity isn't quite zero g because the WCO remains centered in
the VR environment. Therefore, some forces must be acting upon her
to keep her centered and not bumping into walls.
2. Although only one eye was shown to track ships, I believe that both
eyes were probably tracked to allow full three-dimensional target
acquisition (that is, both eyes would be needed to determine which
ship should be targeted when two ships are in the same
line-of-site, the near one or the far one).
3. Extra battle information was either being presented (drawn with
light) on to the WCO's eyes or on the VR screens directly, so she
saw more than what we saw. This information was probably targeting
information, status, etc.
4. It looks like the rate of fire of the Liandra's weapons were based
off of the speed the WCO could pump her limbs.
5. The system never misinterpreted a command. That is, a shot was
fired only when the WCO wanted it to fire, and it did not fire when
the WCO did not want it to fire. In other words, it is a very
robust system.
What I don't know:
1. I could not tell if voice recognition was used at all.
2. Can the WCO's firing commands be overridden from the bridge?
3. What happens if the ship is so damaged as to lose artificial
gravity?
4. Aside from firing gestures, are there other hand/body gestures
available to the WCO?
Discussion:
As stated in the Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5, this fire control system
is probably based on taking advantage of the Ranger's physical combat
training [7]. However, I think there is more to it than that.
What would a WCO want from a human-computer interface for a battle
system? I believe it is the following:
1. Quick identification of target(s) to fire at.
2. Full control of all weapons simultaneously.
3. Instant information, but only that which is desired (too much
information is just as bad as too little).
4. Ability to view the entire battle-space, with proper orientation and
perspective (that is, in a way we humans (and apparently Minbari)
can understand it).
It is my opinion that the VR/gesture system as portrayed in B5:LotR
achieves all the above desires, better than a keyboard, mouse, or
button interface could. Specifically:
1. Quick target identification. Without using eye-tracking and
gesture, to target a ship (among multiple targets), either a mouse
must be moved over the iconic representation, or multiple
keyboard/button commands must be given to cycle through to the
target. If touch screen capability is allowed (pointing at a
specific ship), then that is just an instantiation of the Liandra's
gesture system. The WCO simply looks at a target, and that target
is the one a weapon will fire at if the gesture command is given in
the target's direction. Multiple targets could be tracked this
way, even the huge number of space mines that were targeted and
destroyed (but see more below).
2. Full simultaneous weapon control. Each weapon was linked to the
WCO's limbs. For example - left cannon = left arm. With practice,
using the Liandra's ship board weapons would be just like using any
other hand held weapon in combat, which is what the Rangers excel
at. A question that arises is what if there are more than four
weapons on a ship - how are they controlled? (See Improvement's
below.)
3. Instant information. The VR environment probably provides more
information than just a camera view. Status of enemy
power/weapons, full location, various weapon ranges (for enemy,
friend, and the Liandra herself), etc., would all be available and
either drawn on the eye or displayed on the VR screen.
4. Full battle-space view. I think this my even be my favorite part of
the system. Current battlefield commanders have a difficult time
viewing a battle-space environment. Here, the WCO just has to rotate
her body/head and she can see everything, and still keep relative
orientations of friends and foes in view. Yes, she has to be in
excellent shape, but that is not unheard of in the military.
So, overall, I do find that this weapon interface is a viable one, and
has definite advantages over traditional computer input devices.
However, there is always room for improvements, which is my next
section.
Improvements and Issues:
First, a note: the improvements and issues I list have probably
already been thought of by the Babylon 5 staff, and just not shown due
to budget/time/plot considerations. Also, these are just my opinions,
and I could easily see other people (or weapon officers) disagreeing
with me. But then again, that is why we have discussion groups!
I am a firm believer that gestures will be an important input device
in the future. However, I do not believe that gestures are the "be all
and end all" in human-computer interaction devices. For example, I
would not use gestures to replace a computer mouse (which is great for
simple pointing, clicking, and pull-down menu operations) because,
well, we already have a device that works as well as a computer mouse
- the computer mouse itself!
So, while I think that gestures as shown works well as an input
device for the WCO, I think more is needed, and in this case, that
would be voice recognition. Now, I'm not talking about the Star Trek
type of voice recognition which can parse sentences and never make a
mistake. I'm referring to specific limited vocabulary of voice
commands (just like the limited vocabulary of gesture commands used)
to aid in controlling the "state" of the system. Here is where I think
voice recognition would be useful:
1. Change weapons. If there were multiple weapons on a ship, then
voice commands would allow the WCO to change weapon/limb
configurations instantaneously.
2. Change firing modes. From the movie, it seemed that one shot was
fired per pumping gesture. Therefore, to take out the dozens of
mines, the WCO had to flail around to keep firing at the closest
(or most dangerous) targets. Instead, a word could be used to set
up continuous firing.
3. Switch gestures. Instead of using the 'pumping' gesture to attack
the mines, instead each finger could be attached to the same or
different weapons. Then only faster finger flicks would be needed
to fire the weapon. This would probably lead to more false
positives, but when you want to all out fire, that usually isn't a
problem.
Voice commands, as well as meta-gesture commands to achieve the same
result as some voice commands, would add great utility to the
system. For #3 above, a different gesture could have been used to fire
a weapon repeated at the mines. Training would be needed, but not
much more than is probably required now.
Another issue is multiple WCOs to handle a larger number of weapons.
I wonder if bigger ships would require multiple officers, and how they
would interact. Maybe their relative orientation in the VR gravity
environment would correspond to the relative location of the weapon
banks.
I noticed gestures being used to control the VR environment. That is
fine, but care must be taken to only use *purposive* gestures. It
would be unfortunate if a random gesture (such as one used to change
the WCO's orientation) resulted in the system performing an unwanted
action. This is why, for example, fingers weren't used to control
weapons during normal combat operations.
Is such as system possible?
Yes! Well, okay, we don't have the anti-gravity yet. If you do, please
email me - we'll do lunch.
But the eye-tracking, body tracking, and gesture recognition systems
are not that far off from what was shown on B5:LotR.
Gesture recognition and body tracking is my area, so let me discuss
that first. The system we've developed at Cybernet can do full body
tracking in complex unstructured backgrounds. We can recognize hand
and body motions (not American Sign Language) - specifically the types
performed by the CWO of the Liandra! That is, repeatable hand/arm
motions, similar to those used by Army scouts, construction crane
operators, and the like. It is beyond the scope of this review to
explain the various mathematical methods of gesture recognition
(geometric, Hidden Markov Model, dynamic based, etc.). You can look
up my dissertation if you really want a full overview!
As a point of information, tracking is a much harder problem than
gesture recognition. Tracking needs to work in a variety of lighting
conditions, backgrounds, and targets (skin color, clothing, hair,
etc.). This problem is not yet completely solved, but it does get
better every year, to the point that products can be made now.
For those interested in gesture recognition (and associated tracking
software), head on over to the Gesture Recognition Home Page [8].
Some commercial body tracking devices are listed below. Many of these
are used by computer game developers to track athlete's movements for
their sports games. Note that all of these are 'tagged' trackers, that
is, something must be worn on the body for tracking to occur. For
Cybernet's gesture recognition system (and for other systems out
there), untagged systems are used and preferred, although they are much
less accurate.
Manufacturer Product Method Output
Cybernet Firefly IR Optical 3D position
Ascension MotionStar DC magnetic field 6DOF position and
orientation
Northern Opto Trak IR Optical 3D position
Digital Inc. 3020
Intersense IS-300 Inertial 3D 6DOF
Polhemus Ultra Trak AC magnetic field 6DOF
There are a small number of companies that produce eye-trackers. While
of course not on the level of fidelity as shown in Babylon 5
(specifically, in order to work the camera has to be extremely close
to the person's eye, which was not the case in B5:LotR!), these
eye-tracking systems are pretty robust. Companies include AmTech,
Applied Science Laboratories, Cybernet, DBA Systems, LC Technologies,
Microguide, NAC, SensoMotoric Instruments [9]. Methods used include
CCD Line Scan cameras, Infra-red oculography, and video imagining.
Precision for these systems is typically at around 0.5 degrees or
less, with a 40 degrees (though some have 80 degrees). The sampling
rate can be anywhere for 50 Hz to 1,000 Hz (with 50-60 Hz typical).
For the Liandra, I would imagine a large array of camera like devices
with an extremely high resolution, sampling at 1,000 Hz or more.
Conclusion:
I do think that this gesture based interactive fire control system for
the Liandra is not only a viable option for a battle environment, it
might even be optimal. Fast accurate targeting, robust weapon
control, full view of the environment, and instant information are all
part of this system. With the addition or showing of meta-control
using voice or other gestures, I think this system would be one that
would practical, even for the control of today's Uninhabited Combat
Aerial Vehicles.
Thank you for reading my article. Comments are always welcome. If you
wish to respond to me directly, please use my personal email of
cha...@umich.edu. The work address below should be used only for low
volume work related messages.
Charles J. Cohen, Ph.D.
Vice President, Research and Development
Cybernet Systems Corporation
cco...@cybernet.com
www.cybernet.com
Footnotes:
[1] Some of my papers and talks are:
Program Chair: Applied Imagery Pattern Recognition 2001 - Analysis and
Understanding of Time Varying Imaging. Cosmos Club, Washington, DC,
October 10-12, 2001.
Cohen, Charles J., Glenn Beach, and Gene Foulk. "A Basic Hand Gesture
Control System for PC Applications." Applied Imagery Pattern
Recognition 2001 - Analysis and Understanding of Time Varying
Imaging. Cosmos Club, Washington, DC, October 10-12, 2001.
Cohen, Charles J. "Gesture Recognition Interface for Controlling
Virtual Displays." Virtual Design Technology and Applications.
Somerset Inn, Troy, MI, 15 November 2000.
Cohen, Charles J., Glenn Beach, Doug Haanpaa, and Chuck Jacobus. "A
Real-Time Pose Determination and Reality Registration System." SPIE
AIPR'99 Conference. Washington, DC, 13-15 October 1999.
Cohen, Charles J., Glenn Beach, Brook Cavell, Gene Foulk, Jay
Obermark, and George Paul. "The Control of Self Service Machines
Using Gesture Recognition." SCI'99 and ISAS'99 Conference. Orlando,
FL, 31 July 1999 - 4 August 1999.
Beach, Glenn, Charles J. Cohen, Jeffrey Braun, and Gary Moody. "Eye
Tracking System for Use With Head Mounted Displays." IEEE SMC'98
Conference. San Diego, CA, 11-14 October 1998.
Cohen, Charles J., Glenn Beach, George Paul, Jay Obermark, and Gene
Foulk. "Issues Of Controlling Public Kiosks And Other Self Service
Machines Using Gesture Recognition." IEEE SMC'98 Conference. San
Diego. CA, 11-14 October 1998.
Conway, Lynn and Charles J. Cohen. "Video Mirroring and Iconic
Gestures: Enhancing Basic Videophones to Provide Visual Coaching and
Visual Control." IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, May 1998.
Obermark, Jay, Charles Jacobus, Charles Cohen, and Brian George.
"Building Terrain Maps and Virtual Worlds from Video Imagery."
AeroSense 1998. Orlando FL, 13-17 April 1998.
Conway, Lynn and Charles Cohen. "Apparatus and Method for Remote
Control Through the Visual Information Stream." U.S. Patent 5,652,849,
29 July 1997.
[2] For example: New York Times, 31 August 2000, buried on page D7:
"A Wave of the Hand May Soon Make a Computer Jump to Obey" by Anne
Eisenberg.
[3] Cohen, Charles J. "The Bleeding Edge: New Technologies, New Ways of
Learning." SchoolTech Expo. Chicago Hilton & Towers, Chicago, IL,
17-20 October 2001.
[4] http://www.gesturecentral.com/
[5] Our current Army project is with STRICOM to allow training of
their scouts in their Dismounted Infantry Semi-Automated Forces
(DISAF). See http://source.asset.com/orl/disaf/ for details of their
system.
[6] See the Babylon 5 episode "Shadow Dancing."
[7] http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/guide/117.html
[8] http://www.cybernet.com/~ccohen/
[9] This data is about a year old, so I can't guarantee if any of the
companies are still around. Well, except for ours.
The Nuclear Marine
"Charles J. Cohen" wrote:
>
> This article is a review of the Liandra's gesture and virtual reality
> based fire control system as seen on Babylon 5: Legends of the
> Rangers. I wanted to review it because gesture recognition based
> systems ares my main area of study, and I am always excited to see
> representations of gesture based systems television and films.
Snipped
How dare you end a perfectly irrational yelling match about the
Liandra's gun pod by presenting well researched data. You'll never make
it in a chat room :^D
You didn't mention I think about the problem of 360 degree view with a
120 degree perephrial vision. Can systems work more efficiently with
two persons.
>
> [9] This data is about a year old, so I can't guarantee if any of the
> companies are still around. Well, except for ours.
Got some bad news for you Charles, but don't worry, your boss will break
it to you tomorrow :^)
Nuke - The next best thing to VR.
Jms at B5
we take the pod to the next level, should there be a series, because we will
have more time to spend working out the details.
Glad to hear it's a viable approach. Thanks again.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2001 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)
Jake Patterson
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25...
Thank you for that informative writeup, it goes a long way to answering a
lot of the questions/issues that I have with that weapon system.
A few remain:
1) What happens when the ship is maneuvered in such a way as to bring the
firing arc of the weapons out of of range of the operator's chosen targets?
I would think that that would be a significant problem in the use of such a
system.
2) Also, firing rate seems to be limited by operator fatigue, and not by the
operating characteristics of the actual weapon hardware. It could be that
these two limitations are so close to each other that it doesn't matter.
3) There seems to be no way for the operator to select what systems on an
enemy ship to target specifically, such as weapons systems/engines.
I would think that it might be more efficient to have the operator merely
select and prioritize targets, while the computer would calculate an optimal
firing pattern based on that input.
I really only had a couple of gripes with it, that weapons system was one of
them. Myriam Sirois's acting performance was another, although that could be
attributed to Vejar's direction. Overall, it just didn't feel like a stand
alone movie, minor characters had their moments (esp Na'Feel in the engion
room) but were somewhat glossed over in general. What makes Tirk tick? I
have no idea after watching it, but I have hope that if it goes to a series
we will find out. It may lack a bit as a standalone movie, but it is exactly
right as a pilot for a possible series. Lets just hope we get a series!
And JMS, if you are reading this, overall I really liked it, I can't wait
for the series, thanks and keep up the good work!
NanSu Uyeda
effect. but as i am not as smart as i ought to be, i couldn't quite
figure out what she was supposed to be doing. yes, there are a lot of
very sharp guys on this board. i don't think they would attempt to tell
you whats what. you are the boss and whatever you say goes. just thanks
for bring us something new, that we can talk about forever, and ever and
EVER. nansu
Ken Weaverling
are criticizing this part of the film.....
Spoiler space below.....
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
This is in regards to the criticism of the screaming and exaggerated
"gestures."
All I have to say is this. Consider when you're in a tough deathmatch
in Quake 3. Your keyboard is digital, just a slight touch makes it
fire, jump, squat, etc... But when you're in the heat of the battle,
what is happening? You're pounding the crap out of the keyboard,
screaming, throwing your body around as if that's going to help you
move better, etc....
Now imagine someone in the heat of a battle in one of the VR zero G
worlds portrayed in the movie.
Case closed!
Now, when is this going to come out as a video game! :)
--
Ken Weaverling (ken @ weaverling.org) WHOIS: KJW http://www.weaverling.org/
NanSu Uyeda
your fans are out here and love you to death. this is a great project
for you. we all love you. whatever you come up with.
Matt Ion
"Jake Patterson" <jpat...@elk.uvm.edu> wrote in message
news:a2ie6f$7s15$1...@swen.emba.uvm.edu...
> Spoilers? I dunno, it's possible. You be the judge...
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 11
> 12
> 13
> 14
> 15
> 16
> 17
> 18
> 19
> 20
> 21
> 22
> 23
> 24
> 25...
>
> Thank you for that informative writeup, it goes a long way to answering a
> lot of the questions/issues that I have with that weapon system.
Seconded - a very nice job. Good for Joe to know, too, that this sort of
experise if available if needed.
> 1) What happens when the ship is maneuvered in such a way as to bring the
> firing arc of the weapons out of of range of the operator's chosen
targets?
> I would think that that would be a significant problem in the use of such
a
> system.
I would expect the available weapons to overlap enough to be able to cover
all 360 degrees on every axis, to begin with, and the control systems
intelligent enough to select the correct one to respond to to the WCO's
directions; ie. it would "know" that the target it outside the arc of one
gun, so it would automatically transfer targetting to the next gun along
that arc.
> 2) Also, firing rate seems to be limited by operator fatigue, and not by
the
> operating characteristics of the actual weapon hardware. It could be that
> these two limitations are so close to each other that it doesn't matter.
Operator fatigue is highly variable depending on the operator, that
operator's state of fitness, and the operator's programmed movements.
Someone questioned, in another thread, whether the normally
much-more-subdued Minbari would be so... "animated" in the control pod, or
whether they'd have a much more "dignified" action such as a simple
finger-pointing.
I would fully expect the system to be trainable to different operators and
their individual "styles" of combat. Sarah Cantrell may find her
high-energy dance works best for her; someone less energetic may program the
system to respond to less expressive movements.
> 3) There seems to be no way for the operator to select what systems on an
> enemy ship to target specifically, such as weapons systems/engines.
This fits into Charles' questions on macro-control; perhaps the use of voice
commands or other motions that we're not shown or aren't immediately aware
of.
Eddie_Gramham
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|Keep Going
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
This is the main complaint about the system (punching and kicking to fire
weapons) aside from it looking 'silly'* is that all those movements will
cause alot of fatigue on the wco which is a major disadvantage to
traditional methods (pushing buttons from a chair), granted, the Liandra is
not designed for huge battles, but the punching etc is unessesary. From
what I could tell the targeting is done by looking the aiming is done by the
computer . All the WOC does is pull the trigger. Sure you don`t want
accidental firing but there has got to be a differant method which would not
tatigue the WOC.
Also the punching method may limit the ships rate of fire.
Ponder this from from <http://www.scifi.com/b5rangers/inte...t_jms_1221.html
jms`s interview with Scifi:
-----------------------------------------------
Q: Tell us about how you came up with the unusual approach for the Liandra
weapons system, which is symbiotic with specialist Sarah Cantrell (Myriam
Sirois).
A: Sarah is the ship, in that respect: If she moves, it fires. She jumps
into the gunnery pod, and if she sees an incoming ship, she points at it,
and the ship fires. It's a much faster reaction period [than conventional
controls]. She's constantly getting sensory impulses from every part of the
ship.:
------------------------------------------------
Why didn`t they do this in the movie? She targets an enemy and the ship
fires. The only differance to her doing the firing is that the ship would
have to select which weapon to fire but with Minbari technology I don`t see
how this couldn`t be done.
Eddie
* I tend to think about function before looks, for example, when I see the
Excalibur I don`t first see a cool ship I see a ship with the bridge
sticking out crying to be shot at . Atleast in trek they have shields but
the Exacaliur does not one hit, and its gone.
Heidi Pilewski
Ken Weaverling wrote:
Not only that, recall that in martial arts, there is the use of some
sound (referred to as a Key or is it Qui?) when blocks and punches are
thrown. If Ranger training is akin to martial arts training (as it
appears to be), then I find it very likely this sort of thing would be
used and become second nature so that the Weapon's officer wouldn't
separate her vocalizations from her actions merely because she was in
the weapons environment.
> Case closed!
>
Heidi
Oliver Hauss
>
>
> Discussion:
>
> As stated in the Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5, this fire control system
> is probably based on taking advantage of the Ranger's physical combat
> training [7]. However, I think there is more to it than that.
>
> What would a WCO want from a human-computer interface for a battle
> system? I believe it is the following:
>
> 1. Quick identification of target(s) to fire at.
>
> 2. Full control of all weapons simultaneously.
>
> 3. Instant information, but only that which is desired (too much
> information is just as bad as too little).
>
> 4. Ability to view the entire battle-space, with proper orientation and
> perspective (that is, in a way we humans (and apparently Minbari)
> can understand it).
>
Here I think you are mistaken. The battle-space is not viewable in its
entirety, but rather only in one direction of view. This means that
the WO can be outflanked if she doesn't constantly change direction in
the pod. Given the ease with which high speed travel is possible in
space, especially with the technologies we have seen in the series,
not watching a certain direction even for five seconds can already
make you overlook a clear and present danger.
>
> 1. Quick target identification. Without using eye-tracking and
> gesture, to target a ship (among multiple targets), either a mouse
> must be moved over the iconic representation, or multiple
> keyboard/button commands must be given to cycle through to the
> target. If touch screen capability is allowed (pointing at a
> specific ship), then that is just an instantiation of the Liandra's
> gesture system. The WCO simply looks at a target, and that target
> is the one a weapon will fire at if the gesture command is given in
> the target's direction. Multiple targets could be tracked this
> way, even the huge number of space mines that were targeted and
> destroyed (but see more below).
>
That's a given, but not that different from eye-tracking already used
in today's military technology
> 2. Full simultaneous weapon control. Each weapon was linked to the
> WCO's limbs. For example - left cannon = left arm. With practice,
> using the Liandra's ship board weapons would be just like using any
> other hand held weapon in combat, which is what the Rangers excel
> at. A question that arises is what if there are more than four
> weapons on a ship - how are they controlled? (See Improvement's
> below.)
>
It would also be very awkward to fire four weapons at once. But one
major problem is recovery from firing. It takes quite a while to pull
back from a punch or kick, compared to a flick of the finger.
> 3. Instant information. The VR environment probably provides more
> information than just a camera view. Status of enemy
> power/weapons, full location, various weapon ranges (for enemy,
> friend, and the Liandra herself), etc., would all be available and
> either drawn on the eye or displayed on the VR screen.
>
That is possible totally independently of the weapon system seen. A
holographic display could provide the same, and more.
> 4. Full battle-space view. I think this my even be my favorite part of
> the system. Current battlefield commanders have a difficult time
> viewing a battle-space environment. Here, the WCO just has to rotate
> her body/head and she can see everything, and still keep relative
> orientations of friends and foes in view. Yes, she has to be in
> excellent shape, but that is not unheard of in the military.
>
Again, I think you are mistaken on this. "Just" having to rotate can
already have you being taken out in the meantime.
>
> So, overall, I do find that this weapon interface is a viable one, and
> has definite advantages over traditional computer input devices.
> However, there is always room for improvements, which is my next
> section.
>
The problem, I think, is that you compare with traditional computer
input devices, and not with what we have already seen in the series.
>
>
> Is such as system possible?
>
> Yes! Well, okay, we don't have the anti-gravity yet. If you do, please
> email me - we'll do lunch.
>
That's not the chief question at hand. The chief question is whether
it would be good, more, if it would be efficient at doing what it is
supposed to do. And here, one major weakness of your review is a major
point: You assume the WCO already in the pod, with the tracking system
up, at the beginning of the review. That is missing the critical point
that the WCO has to get into the pod and bring up the tracking system.
By the time that has happened, the Liandra can already be toast in
case of a surprise attack. Compare with the fate of the (expected)
Narn ship sent to Z'ha'dum. Now nobody expects the Spanish
Inquisition, or the Shadows for that matter, but a ship that is not
equipped to handle surprise situations that have to be met with armed
force is a disaster waiting to happen.
> Conclusion:
>
> I do think that this gesture based interactive fire control system for
> the Liandra is not only a viable option for a battle environment, it
> might even be optimal. Fast accurate targeting, robust weapon
> control, full view of the environment, and instant information are all
> part of this system. With the addition or showing of meta-control
> using voice or other gestures, I think this system would be one that
> would practical, even for the control of today's Uninhabited Combat
> Aerial Vehicles.
>
I think it is unable to cope with surprise situations, whether during
regular cruising, when it requires the weapons officer to jump into
the pod first, or with the officer in the pod, in which large parts of
the environment of the ship are outside her view, unless they are
projected into the eye, in which it would require quite a bit of brain
power to sort out what is where and there would be a great danger of
distraction and confusion. While we might still say that this latter
part can be sorted out, the first part is inherent in the system,
unless the WCO spends the entire trip in the pod.
The major problem I have with the system that it is outperformed by
technology we have already seen: A holographic display of the ship and
its environment can provide true full battle-space view, including any
and all directions around the ship. It can still provide an
orientation, e.g. by vectors, but it does not require the WCO to
change location. Indeed the whole bridge crew could profit from the
display while the WCO uses it for targeting. Through eyescanning
technology and triggers that have a quicker response time than punches
and kicks.
Oliver
WhereNTear
One thing that occured to me is that the weapon control system could
reduce friendly fire errors.
Some questions that I had were:
1 Is the ship essentially unarmed when the weapons officer is out of
the pod or is there a secondary targeting system? (Otherwise, why the
hell was she out of the pod when they came out of jump.)
2 So howcome the navigator doesn't get a wizzy display when he's
dodging around inside a comet?
Charles J. Cohen
> Liandra's gun pod by presenting well researched data. You'll never make
> it in a chat room :^D
Ooops. I'm sorry. I'll try not to let that happen again. :)
Actually, though I've been pleased with all the responses. This is a
fun topic to discuss.
> You didn't mention I think about the problem of 360 degree view with a
> 120 degree perephrial vision. Can systems work more efficiently with
> two persons.
Most visual interfaces have areas to show what is going on in other
areas. So, even though it wasn't in the show, she probably has other
displays letting her know what is going on outside her field of view.
Not enough resolution for targeting, and very low bandwidth on
information, but enough to warn her of events and help with her
battlespace view. Again, I'm only guessing, I haven't taken the time
to actually sit down and try to do a real design of the thing.
>> [9] This data is about a year old, so I can't guarantee if any of the
>> companies are still around. Well, except for ours.
> Got some bad news for you Charles, but don't worry, your boss will break
> it to you tomorrow :^)
Nah, I run all the projects, and see all the financials. We are at
least breaking even. Of course, I won't be getting a raise anytime
soon... - Charles
Charles J. Cohen
My pleasure! If you or anyone else has any questions, I'd be happy to
try to respond.
The only caveat is that I didn't design this system, nor have I sat
down and actually tried to put a good design down on paper. That
would be fun to do though.... - Charles
Charles J. Cohen
> in Quake 3. Your keyboard is digital, just a slight touch makes it
> fire, jump, squat, etc... But when you're in the heat of the battle,
> what is happening? You're pounding the crap out of the keyboard,
> screaming, throwing your body around as if that's going to help you
> move better, etc....
>
> Now imagine someone in the heat of a battle in one of the VR zero G
> worlds portrayed in the movie.
>
> Case closed!
>
> Now, when is this going to come out as a video game! :)
That is what gave us the idea for UseYourHead. When I play Quake (and
I don't much, not my type of game), I would literally dodge when
someone fired at me. With UseYourHead, if you leaned to one side,
your character would actually slide in that direction (or do whatever
keyboard command(s) you assigned that gesture to).
The product wasn't as good as I liked, though. The vision tracking
worked *much* better in our Linux operating environment than it did on
Windows.
- Charles
Jason E. Schaff
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
P
R
O
P
H
Y
L
A
X
I
S
E
N
G
A
G
E
D
"Charles J. Cohen" wrote: [in very small part]
>
>
> This review by its nature contains spoilers, but I will be avoiding
> major plot points as much as I can.
>
> What I know:
>
> 1. The weapon's control officer (WCO) is suspended in a full zero
> gravity Virtual Reality (VR) environment.
>
The suspended in zero gee part of the Liandra's weapons control pod strikes me
as one of the systems greatest potential problems (unless your objective is to
kill off WCOs at a vastly accelerated rate!). The basic problem is that the
Minbari artificial gravity control systems obviously have a finite ability to
dampen out impact impulse within the ship. (Witness Dulann (sp?) being thrown
across the bridge and injured by one of the snowflake ship weapons impacts.)
With the WCO suspended in the pod by the same sort of technology, every time the
ship takes a major hit she should be flung around and banged into the walls like
a ping-pong ball. Never mind that the impacts will totally throw off targeting
and firing sequences.
Your thorough overview of the issue is much appreciated, BTW.
Jason
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Jason E. Schaff
Remember always to laugh, for
such is the true sound of humanity.
-- unknown
---------------------------------------------------------
Andrew
news:aza38.1042$Ph2.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> Spoilers Below
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |Keep Going
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
<snip>
> Ponder this from from
<http://www.scifi.com/b5rangers/inte...t_jms_1221.html
> jms`s interview with Scifi:
> -----------------------------------------------
> Q: Tell us about how you came up with the unusual approach for the Liandra
> weapons system, which is symbiotic with specialist Sarah Cantrell (Myriam
> Sirois).
>
> A: Sarah is the ship, in that respect: If she moves, it fires. She jumps
> into the gunnery pod, and if she sees an incoming ship, she points at it,
> and the ship fires. It's a much faster reaction period [than conventional
> controls]. She's constantly getting sensory impulses from every part of
the
> ship.:
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Why didn`t they do this in the movie? She targets an enemy and the ship
> fires. The only differance to her doing the firing is that the ship would
> have to select which weapon to fire but with Minbari technology I don`t
see
> how this couldn`t be done.
That *is* what was done in the movie.
> * I tend to think about function before looks, for example, when I see the
> Excalibur I don`t first see a cool ship I see a ship with the bridge
> sticking out crying to be shot at . Atleast in trek they have shields but
> the Exacaliur does not one hit, and its gone.
Yeah, a little, but it's tucked under the upper fin--they'd have to be a
*real* good shot to hit it from a distance.
--
Andrew
===============
"We live for the one,
we die for the one.
But we *don't* die stupidly."
--Captain David Martel,
"To Live and Die in Starlight"
Eddie_Gramham
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |Keep Going
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
>
> <snip>
>
> > Ponder this from from
> <http://www.scifi.com/b5rangers/inte...t_jms_1221.html
> > jms`s interview with Scifi:
> > -----------------------------------------------
> > Q: Tell us about how you came up with the unusual approach for the
Liandra
> > weapons system, which is symbiotic with specialist Sarah Cantrell
(Myriam
> > Sirois).
> >
> > A: Sarah is the ship, in that respect: If she moves, it fires. She jumps
> > into the gunnery pod, and if she sees an incoming ship, she points at
it,
> > and the ship fires. It's a much faster reaction period [than
conventional
> > controls]. She's constantly getting sensory impulses from every part of
> the
> > ship.:
> > ------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Why didn`t they do this in the movie? She targets an enemy and the ship
would
> > have to select which weapon to fire but with Minbari technology I don`t
> see
> > how this couldn`t be done.
>
> That *is* what was done in the movie.
No, whats done in the movie is:
If she sees an incoming ship, she targets it via her eye, does a kick or
punch for each shot firing the weapon.
What I am saying is this:
If she sees an incoming ship, she targets it via her eye, tags it for
destruction and the ship fires.
1) Cut out most of the physical demands, allowing the WCO to fight for much
longer periods without getting tired.
2) Allow for quicker target acquisition. After tagging the first target you
can be tagging the next while the Liandra is firing away at the first. You
can even target an entire group while you are out of range and allow the
ship to auto fire on each as they come into range . Using this method you
could fire on several ships in a very shot amount of time.
3) During large furball battles it would give the WCO officer less to do an
as such not get as easily confused and disoriented
4) Allows the WCO to keep more of an eye out for more hostiles.
5) Does not tie the weapons rate of fire to the person and as such it can be
used to its fullest.
6) Less of a learning curve so if the WCO officer is injured others can take
their place and not have to worry about replicating special gestures.
Etc etc
Sorry for my last post, I hope this is more clearer
Eddie
Mac Breck
[ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew" <Arseni...@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: What about fatigue? ::: Spoilers for Rangers ::: (Re: Review of
Liandra's Weapon System)
> "Eddie_Gramham" <eddie_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:aza38.1042$Ph2.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> > Spoilers Below
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |Keep Going
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
>
> <snip>
> > * I tend to think about function before looks, for example, when I see
the
> > Excalibur I don`t first see a cool ship I see a ship with the bridge
> > sticking out crying to be shot at . Atleast in trek they have shields
but
> > the Exacaliur does not one hit, and its gone.
>
> Yeah, a little, but it's tucked under the upper fin--they'd have to be a
> *real* good shot to hit it from a distance.
Plus they have close-in interceptor fire, that the shot would have to get
past.
Mac Breck
------------------------
http://www.scifi.com/b5rangers/ http://www.b5lr.com/
Charles J. Cohen
> sound (referred to as a Key or is it Qui?) when blocks and punches are
> thrown. If Ranger training is akin to martial arts training (as it
> appears to be), then I find it very likely this sort of thing would be
> used and become second nature so that the Weapon's officer wouldn't
> separate her vocalizations from her actions merely because she was in
> the weapons environment.
Exactly.
That reminds me of something. Sound, btw, is another "display"
modality, and I'm sure sound would be used in the system to give more
information to the WCO. Heh, she would probably even hear the
explosions, or other sounds when weapons miss! - Charles
Jason Larke
>>>>> cha...@mynah.eecs.umich.edu (Charles J. Cohen) said:
CJC> Again, I'm not *the* authority in this area, but I like to
CJC> consider my an authority.
I know rather less, but....
CJC> 1. Quick identification of target(s) to fire at.
This shouldn't really be necessary. Assuming they use lightspeed
sensors but don't travel especially close to lightspeed
themselves, they should be able to detect targets, designate
them, and go through the firing process while letting a computer
determine the optimal moment to fire.
CJC> 3. Instant information, but only that which is desired (too
CJC> much information is just as bad as too little).
But rather less than would be useful, since it only seemed able
to show a 3d first person viewpoint. It would almost certainly be
easier to use other displays to gather combat information.
CJC> 4. Ability to view the entire battle-space, with proper
CJC> orientation and perspective (that is, in a way we humans
CJC> (and apparently Minbari) can understand it).
As I hinted above, I think this is a mis-feature. Humans and
Minbari don't have the natural sensors to keep up with a space
battle, and would probably want more computer assistance than
this system offers.
CJC> 1. Quick target identification.
A useful feature, but of course the eye-tracking approach could
be used for any display desired.
CJC> 2. Full simultaneous weapon control.
A good joystick or other hand controller could do this as well if
not better. I didn't like the gross movements required to trigger
weapons. Why expend the energy to punch something when a mouse
click would do just as well? Ask yourself how many punches you
can throw without fatigue, assuming you throw them as quickly as
possible, and how long it takes to throw that many. Do the same
experiment with mouse clicks. I actually tire a little quicker in
real time using mouse clicks, but I get off a much, much larger
number of shots. Of course, you can hold a mouse button down,
too, while holding a punch would require the human operator to
somehow track the target with her arm- a much more complicated option.
CJC> 3. Instant information.
A valid concern, but any synthetic display could do the same
thing. If you're saying that it's nice to have a display that
completely fills the eye, maximizing the "bandwidth" of the
display, I agree with you.
CJC> 4. Full battle-space view. I think this my even be my
CJC> favorite part of the system. Current battlefield commanders
CJC> have a difficult time viewing a battle-space
CJC> environment. Here, the WCO just has to rotate her body/head
CJC> and she can see everything, and still keep relative
CJC> orientations of friends and foes in view. Yes, she has to
CJC> be in excellent shape, but that is not unheard of in the
CJC> military.
Yeah, but it is less common in naval weapons systems officers
than, say, SEALs. :)
Based on my very limited experience with computer simulations of
combat, I find the first-person view approach to be useful only
as an option. It can be superior in gaging what an individual
unit can see or do given the circumstances on the battlefield,
but generally gives a command *less* information than a display
with variable scale, panning in all three dimensions, and
rotation on all 3 axis. If the display can be holographic, so
much the better.
If the enemy ships are 900,000 kilometers out, do you really want
to be sitting there trying to pick them out? Or do you want a
synthetic display that shows you the sphere you're in,
10,000,000km in diameter, and filters out background clutter?
CJC> So, while I think that gestures as shown works well as an
CJC> input device for the WCO, I think more is needed, and in
CJC> this case, that would be voice recognition.
Absolutely. Any command that cannot be linked to a button or
trivial sequence/combination of buttons/gestures would need to be
voice activated.
CJC> 1. Change weapons. If there were multiple weapons on a
CJC> ship, then voice commands would allow the WCO to change
CJC> weapon/limb configurations instantaneously.
Unless some of them are only used for very unusual circumstances,
I'd much prefer an interface that allowed simultaneous control of
all weapons.
CJC> Thank you for reading my article.
While I don't agree with a lot of what you're saying, I commend
you on the quality of your post.
--
Jason Larke- jla...@uu.net- http://www.nnaf.net/~jlarke Send mail for PGP key
I don't speak for UUNET or MCI Worldcom. I speak for Odin. And he's *pissed*.
Any sufficiently advanced weapon is indistinguishable from a practical joke.
"People change, and smile: but the agony abides."-T.S. Eliot, The Dry Salvages
Jason Larke
>>>>> <jpat...@elk.uvm.edu> said:
JP> 2) Also, firing rate seems to be limited by operator fatigue,
JP> and not by the operating characteristics of the actual weapon
JP> hardware. It could be that these two limitations are so
JP> close to each other that it doesn't matter.
Still, it's a bad design. An interface that would need to be
totally rethought due solely to an incremental improvement in the
devices controlles is not optimal.
Mike De Lucia
Joe,
With all respect to Mr. Cohen's expertise and with a nod to the fact
that I generally consider you to be all but infallible when it comes
to producing first-rate sci-fi, I want to weigh in on the topic of the
Liandra's weapons system, or the "flailing room" as I've come to think
of it.
I don't dispute that the technology is workable in the age and given
the level of advancement that we've been shown in the B5 universe to
date. I won't even argue that traditional fighter-jet controls or
anything that remotely resembles today's weapons systems will be
appropriate to space combat 200 years and hundreds of light-years
away.
My biggest issues with the system are that the large arm and leg
movements seem needlessly inefficient as compared to more refined
muscle-movements, and that it just looks embarrassing. The visual of
the WCO dancing about in her weapons system repeatedly distracted me
from the real action. Clearly, from the discussions in this and other
B5:LOTR groups I've visited, I'm not alone. As you prepare for the
series, I'd just ask that you take a long, hard look at the Liandra's
weapons system and decide whether the love it/hate it response was
what you were hoping for. If not, then I'd propose that some level of
redesign is probably in order.
As always, whether you agree with me or not, thanks for listening -
your participation in this group (and the ones before it) are pretty
unique and greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Mike
Chris Schumacher
>I am a firm believer that gestures will be an important input device
>in the future. However, I do not believe that gestures are the "be all
>and end all" in human-computer interaction devices. For example, I
>would not use gestures to replace a computer mouse (which is great for
>simple pointing, clicking, and pull-down menu operations) because,
>well, we already have a device that works as well as a computer mouse
>- the computer mouse itself!
Actually, they have already replaced the mouse--it's called a
trackball. It's faster and requires far less space than a mouse.
Unfortunately, they've never become as popular as they deserve.
-==Kensu==-
Yes, I know I'm being a smartass.
Charles J. Cohen
> weapons) aside from it looking 'silly'* is that all those movements will
> cause alot of fatigue on the wco which is a major disadvantage to
> traditional methods (pushing buttons from a chair), granted, the Liandra is
> not designed for huge battles, but the punching etc is unessesary.
I disagree. I do step aerobics for 50 minutes. People run 26 mile
marathons. Martial artists can fight for quite a long time. Isn't
there a day long bike race in France every year?
Yes, it is tiring, but it can be done. Besides, I don't think any
space battle lasted all day. Did the battle in "Shadow Dancing" last
less than an hour of combat time?
>From
> what I could tell the targeting is done by looking the aiming is done by the
> computer . All the WOC does is pull the trigger. Sure you don`t want
> accidental firing but there has got to be a differant method which would not
> tatigue the WOC.
Ah! This is an important point. The gesture isn't just telling the
ship to fire. It is doing three things: choosing a target, choosing
weapons, and firing. That is three things, and more than one button.
Let me expand on this, if I may.
How would you design a weapon control system using standard input
devices. First, you need a screen to display the environment. We
could just use our regular monitors, but then you'd need a method to
scroll around and get the full view. Also remember that this is in
three-dimensions, so adding screens to wrap around in a 2D circle
isn't going to cut it - you'd still have to have keys/buttons/mouse to
scroll up and down.
So now you are in a VR environment. How do you pick a target? A mouse
work (3D mouse?), but our standard 2D mouse makes it difficult. In
games like Black and White, and Homeworld, their 3D controls show how
difficult it is to zoom in and pick something.
Even just using a 2D screen is bad enough. I've seen the displays the
Air Force uses for their UCAVs - and they are a nightmare! Lots of
pulldowns, popups, blinking icons, lines, circles, and many other
artifacts. It is amazing they can fly the things - and the maps they
use are just surface maps!
So, the best thing to do is point at the screen, picking the target or
targets you are interested in. It would take a very long time to do
otherwise. Imagine you were at an Art gallery and you wanted to have
someone look at a picture, but you couldn't make any gestures (and
they could). "Look at that painting. The red one. No, to your
left. Up....yes, that's it!"
So if you are pointing at a target, now you are already doing what is
done the Liandra. Why not add gestures to that pointing so you can
fire weapons right away, instead of having to now choose different
buttons.
> Also the punching method may limit the ships rate of fire.
That is another interface issue that I talk about in other posts. But
I will add something here: the WCO could continue to pump, indicating
that the ship should fire at its maximum fire rate (not just one pump
per attack). My system does that. One circle gesture will fire a shot
in our Space Invader's demo, but a continuing circle gesture has it
continuously firing. This is just an example though, please don't
make a one-to-one correspondence between my demo and how it might work
on the Liandra.
Good comments. - Charles
Charles J. Cohen
> experise if available if needed.
Thanks! There are more better well known (much better known) people
out there than me though.
>> 1) What happens when the ship is maneuvered in such a way as to bring the
>> firing arc of the weapons out of of range of the operator's chosen
> targets?
>> I would think that that would be a significant problem in the use of such
> a
>> system.
>
> I would expect the available weapons to overlap enough to be able to cover
> all 360 degrees on every axis, to begin with, and the control systems
> intelligent enough to select the correct one to respond to to the WCO's
> directions; ie. it would "know" that the target it outside the arc of one
> gun, so it would automatically transfer targetting to the next gun along
> that arc.
Agreed. I love playing Star Fleet Command II. That gave has a very
complex interface. It is 2D, and there is information overload. It is
with experience that I know which weapon arcs are in range, and the
feedback helps me to figure out when I should fire. I can't imagine
playing SFC II in 3D without something like the Liandra system.
Of course, game designers are smart, and it will be fun to see what
they come up with!
>> 2) Also, firing rate seems to be limited by operator fatigue, and not by
> the
>> operating characteristics of the actual weapon hardware. It could be that
>> these two limitations are so close to each other that it doesn't matter.
>
> Operator fatigue is highly variable depending on the operator, that
> operator's state of fitness, and the operator's programmed movements.
> Someone questioned, in another thread, whether the normally
> much-more-subdued Minbari would be so... "animated" in the control pod, or
> whether they'd have a much more "dignified" action such as a simple
> finger-pointing.
They probably would. And again, I really don't think firing rate is
keyed directly off of the speed of the operator.
I'm sure they could explain this in the show, but I would have to have
known what would have been cut out of the story...
> I would fully expect the system to be trainable to different operators and
> their individual "styles" of combat. Sarah Cantrell may find her
> high-energy dance works best for her; someone less energetic may program the
> system to respond to less expressive movements.
>> 3) There seems to be no way for the operator to select what systems on an
>> enemy ship to target specifically, such as weapons systems/engines.
> This fits into Charles' questions on macro-control; perhaps the use of voice
> commands or other motions that we're not shown or aren't immediately aware
> of.
Exactly (to both of your paragraphs).
Good comments. - Charles
Paul McElligott
Just one question - What does the Liandra do when Sarah flips somebody the bird?
Charles J. Cohen
>> perspective (that is, in a way we humans (and apparently Minbari)
>> can understand it).
>
> Here I think you are mistaken. The battle-space is not viewable in its
> entirety, but rather only in one direction of view. This means that
> the WO can be outflanked if she doesn't constantly change direction in
> the pod. Given the ease with which high speed travel is possible in
> space, especially with the technologies we have seen in the series,
> not watching a certain direction even for five seconds can already
> make you overlook a clear and present danger.
Your concerns are just as valid for standard displays shown on other
space craft and SF television shows. Also, you are assuming that what
she sees on the screen is *only* a representation/visual of the
surrounding space (with ships and stuff in it). I would much rather
assume that other information, in a lower bandwidth form, is also
available to her visual inputs, to help her decide if she should
change orientation, fire a weapon behind her, or perform some other
activity.
> It would also be very awkward to fire four weapons at once. But one
> major problem is recovery from firing. It takes quite a while to pull
> back from a punch or kick, compared to a flick of the finger.
But if your weapon can't fire in that amount of time anyway, then
there isn't a problem. Now, I don't know the firing rates, so I
honestly couldn't tell you if performing the gesture is a limitation
or not. I would have to believe that if they were using that as an
interface, then it wouldn't be an issue.
And why is it awkward to fire four weapons at once? If you have
trained for it, it might not be.
>> 3. Instant information. The VR environment probably provides more
>> information than just a camera view. Status of enemy
>> power/weapons, full location, various weapon ranges (for enemy,
>> friend, and the Liandra herself), etc., would all be available and
>> either drawn on the eye or displayed on the VR screen.
> That is possible totally independently of the weapon system seen. A
> holographic display could provide the same, and more.
Ah, I think I understand. To me, the weapon system isn't just the
gesture part, it is the gesture/VR system combined! I tried to make
that clear in my original post, and apparently I didn't do a good
enough job.
However, if you look at my paragraph, I only talked about the VR
environment with regards to instant information. Your statement does
not contradict mine.
>> 4. Full battle-space view. I think this my even be my favorite part of
>> the system. Current battlefield commanders have a difficult time
>> viewing a battle-space environment. Here, the WCO just has to rotate
>> her body/head and she can see everything, and still keep relative
>> orientations of friends and foes in view. Yes, she has to be in
>> excellent shape, but that is not unheard of in the military.
> Again, I think you are mistaken on this. "Just" having to rotate can
> already have you being taken out in the meantime.
It would be the same if you were scrolling around with your mouse or
keyboard trying to change the orientation/view. My conjecture is that
using the full body would not only be just as fast, but you would have
a better sense of the battle environment and have a much better idea
of where everything is. I consistantly lost track of many of my
assets in the computer game Homeworld, which has one of the best 3D
space combat interfaces around.
>> So, overall, I do find that this weapon interface is a viable one, and
>> has definite advantages over traditional computer input devices.
>> However, there is always room for improvements, which is my next
>> section.
> The problem, I think, is that you compare with traditional computer
> input devices, and not with what we have already seen in the series.
I would love to hear you elaborate on this.
>> Is such as system possible?
>> Yes! Well, okay, we don't have the anti-gravity yet. If you do, please
>> email me - we'll do lunch.
> That's not the chief question at hand.
Heh...um...it was my post. I decided to also ask and answer the above
question because I thought people might be interested.
>The chief question is whether
> it would be good, more, if it would be efficient at doing what it is
> supposed to do.
I answered that too, with the previous parts of my post.
>And here, one major weakness of your review is a major
> point: You assume the WCO already in the pod, with the tracking system
> up, at the beginning of the review. That is missing the critical point
> that the WCO has to get into the pod and bring up the tracking system.
> By the time that has happened, the Liandra can already be toast in
> case of a surprise attack.
Um...doesn't it take time to warm up weapons? I don't think they
constantly go around armed for battle and ready to fire (to expensive
in fuel, energy, whatever). So, if you are caught without your
weapons charged, it doesn't matter if the WCO is in the pod or not.
(Besides, there are always backups. Of *course* the Liandra would have
a standard 2D combat system onboard, it just wouldn't be the prefered
interface.)
>Compare with the fate of the (expected)
> Narn ship sent to Z'ha'dum. Now nobody expects the Spanish
> Inquisition, or the Shadows for that matter, but a ship that is not
> equipped to handle surprise situations that have to be met with armed
> force is a disaster waiting to happen.
Could someone help me here? I am not even sure our own Navy ships go
around with all their guns loaded all the time. Actually, we have Navy
people visiting tomorrow, I'll ask them if there is time :)
> I think it is unable to cope with surprise situations, whether during
> regular cruising, when it requires the weapons officer to jump into
> the pod first, or with the officer in the pod, in which large parts of
> the environment of the ship are outside her view, unless they are
> projected into the eye, in which it would require quite a bit of brain
> power to sort out what is where and there would be a great danger of
> distraction and confusion. While we might still say that this latter
> part can be sorted out, the first part is inherent in the system,
> unless the WCO spends the entire trip in the pod.
> The major problem I have with the system that it is outperformed by
> technology we have already seen: A holographic display of the ship and
> its environment can provide true full battle-space view, including any
> and all directions around the ship. It can still provide an
> orientation, e.g. by vectors, but it does not require the WCO to
> change location. Indeed the whole bridge crew could profit from the
> display while the WCO uses it for targeting. Through eyescanning
> technology and triggers that have a quicker response time than punches
> and kicks.
Well, see the above and my other posts. I disagree. Also, having all
that information (and battle sounds, etc.) might distract the Captain
from making overall battle orders, or hearing communications from
other parts of the ship, etc.
It is a complex problem and system. At the very least, it has given
us a lot to talk about! I just don't think the system should be thrown
away out of hand.
Good comments to think about though. - Charles
Pelzo63
video games.....
i for one find it annoying when i see people do that. i got so sick of my
nephew lifting his controller 2 feet above his head everytime he told crash
bandicoot to jump that i fastened it to a table. as a HUGE video game player
myself*, i play best when i am motionless except for my fingers and eyeballs.
as for the screaming, well, i can understand that urge, since i also took
martial arts for several years, the urge to yell(kiyup) with every punch is
still very strong for me. ;-)
*in my younger days i won a blockbuster video game contest for western
pennsylvania, and a trip to the state finals.
...Chris
Jan
<<Just one question - What does the Liandra do when Sarah flips somebody the
bird?>>
Probably blinks its hi beams at the other guy.
Jan
J.D. Forinash
Charles J. Cohen <cha...@mynah.eecs.umich.edu> wrote:
>I do think that this gesture based interactive fire control system for
>the Liandra is not only a viable option for a battle environment, it
>might even be optimal. Fast accurate targeting, robust weapon
While I have no degrees that say I'm qualified to make such a decision,
I will offer my somewhat dissenting opinion. I'll agree that the system
is viable. I've seen enough of what folks are doing here at Tech in
gesture recognition to realize that yes, most of this stuff can already
be done. And we've seen the same CGI technique used as Minbari
information displays before. None of this is unreasonable.
On the other hand, imagine, for example, that you're not Rocky, punching
your targets, you're instead Wyatt Earp. In the time you can pull your
arm back and thrust it forward three times, how many times do you think
you can point a six-gun and pull the trigger, especially with the eyesight-
aided targetting? The time it takes to swing your arm a few degrees and
flick a trigger is notably shorter than the time it takes to bring in your
arm and then thrust it back outward, no?
Of course, it might just so happen that the recharge time on a Minbari gun
is approximately the same as the time it takes to haul off and hit someone.
And, of course, there's the added problem that putting on a Stetson and
drawing a pair of six-guns just isn't as cool looking nor does it imply
as much action as the kickboxing style version...
Oh, and my answer to more than four guns? (well, two in the Wyatt Earp-style
enclosure, it's tough to shoot with your feet...) More weapons officers...
-JDF
--
J.D. Forinash, BSCS '01 ,-.
fox...@cc.gatech.edu ( <
The more you learn, the better your luck gets. `-'
Ron Jarrell
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 11
> 12
> 13
> 14
> 15
> 16
> 17
> 18
> 19
> 20
> 21
> 22
> 23
> 24
> 25...
> Thank you for that informative writeup, it goes a long way to answering a
> lot of the questions/issues that I have with that weapon system.
> A few remain:
> 3) There seems to be no way for the operator to select what systems on an
> enemy ship to target specifically, such as weapons systems/engines.
Apparently there is - remember she specifically targetted one of the
hand ships engines at one point, with the same gesture. Either we
missed some subtlety of how she pointed or fired, or (more likely)
before we cut back to her, she gave one or more commands we didn't see
that "pre-targeted" the engines, then waited on an ok to do it.
Oliver Hauss
> Most visual interfaces have areas to show what is going on in other
> areas. So, even though it wasn't in the show, she probably has other
> displays letting her know what is going on outside her field of view.
> Not enough resolution for targeting, and very low bandwidth on
> information, but enough to warn her of events and help with her
> battlespace view. Again, I'm only guessing, I haven't taken the time
> to actually sit down and try to do a real design of the thing.
>
The problem is that knowing there is something and being able to react
to it are two different things. And if the additional display does not
allow her to target whatever is there, by the time she has brought it
within targeting area, it can be too late. In general, I don't think
it is very healthy in the long run (as in: over several battles) not
being able to target something that can target you... Eventually, your
luck is going to run out...
Oliver
Chris Schumacher
(Charles J. Cohen) wrote:
>
>Voice commands, as well as meta-gesture commands to achieve the same
>result as some voice commands, would add great utility to the
>system. For #3 above, a different gesture could have been used to fire
>a weapon repeated at the mines. Training would be needed, but not
>much more than is probably required now.
Actually, I think replacing all the kicking and punching with voice
commands completely would be a far better idea. The only thing that
the VR chamber is needed for conveying the information. In fact, I
don't think that anyone who had criticized the chamber thus far has
not said that it was a good idea, but very badly realized. And I don't
recall ANYONE complaining about this technology when it was first used
in Shadow Dancing* (in fact, it was mentioned by many that it made a
lot more sense than usual. * - Yes, I know it was first shown in
Points of Departure).
A system of her turning around, the computer tracking her eye
movements, the words "lock" "fire cannon" "fire missle" "deploy ECM"
et cetera would be far better than the crowd-pleasing fighting we saw
in the movie. Not to mention the fact that using the system for
evasive manuevers might actually work better than the computer doing
it.
I think none of us would be nearly as frustrated as we are if it was
simply a stupid idea. It's just that they had a GOOD idea, but screwed
the pooch.
-==Kensu==-
Dana Netherton
cha...@mynah.eecs.umich.edu (Charles J. Cohen) said ...
<snip>
> >And here, one major weakness of your review is a major
> > point: You assume the WCO already in the pod, with the tracking system
> > up, at the beginning of the review. That is missing the critical point
> > that the WCO has to get into the pod and bring up the tracking system.
> > By the time that has happened, the Liandra can already be toast in
> > case of a surprise attack.
>
> Um...doesn't it take time to warm up weapons? I don't think they
> constantly go around armed for battle and ready to fire (to expensive
> in fuel, energy, whatever). So, if you are caught without your
> weapons charged, it doesn't matter if the WCO is in the pod or not.
<snip>
> >Compare with the fate of the (expected)
> > Narn ship sent to Z'ha'dum. Now nobody expects the Spanish
> > Inquisition, or the Shadows for that matter, but a ship that is not
> > equipped to handle surprise situations that have to be met with armed
> > force is a disaster waiting to happen.
>
> Could someone help me here? I am not even sure our own Navy ships go
> around with all their guns loaded all the time. Actually, we have Navy
> people visiting tomorrow, I'll ask them if there is time :)
<snip>
1. On my 1970s-era fast attack submarine, we generally
carried at least one warshot torpedo loaded in a tube.
(Loading a torpedo takes time *and* is noisy ... ruins
stealth.)
2. The watch section in the Control Room was trained and
qualified to execute a "snap shot", if a hostile target
presented itself suddenly. (Three watch sections in the
ship, BTW.) If we had time, we would man Battle Stations,
and the Battle Stations panel operator would handle the
shot. But Battle Stations also takes time to man.
And, in submarines, hee hoo gets off the first well-aimed
shot is generally hee hoo lives to tell the tale.
IIRC, surface ships didn't always steam with SAMs on the
tracks of their missile launchers ... a missile sitting on a
track is exposed to salt spray, which corrodes them.
However, those ships with SAMs "pre-loaded" in canister
launchers might have been mechanically ready to launch
immediately.
And I can't speak to "guns", of course. I'll let those
sailors speak for themselves.
But limitations for these systems would be based on physical
problems, like corrosion. Not likely to be a problem for
energy weapons, eh? Make sure the power source is ready for
the surge, maybe cut in a cooling system, then ... flip a
switch!
*If* the operator is "standing by for your call".
Mind you, this "who handles it if the WCO isn't around"
question is endemic to tee-vee shows, which have a
relatively small cast of starring actors who must be
featured in scenes. The rotating shifts of shipboard watch
sections tend to get blurred and ignored on tee-vee shows.
(Do we seriously expect JMS to pay for two more actors in
speaking roles, just so we can see the 2nd & 3rd Section
WCOs jump into the hole a few times in a season? And if he
does that, why shouldn't he prevent our complaints by doing
the same for the helm ("Navigation"), for engineering, for
comms, etc etc etc? C'mon! :-) )
--
(Mr) Dana Netherton, LCDR, USNR (retired)
Juno address is a spam dump. To reach me, e-mail:
dana 1 netherton 2 net,
where "1" = at, and "2" = dot
Brian Smith
That was an excellent review of the weapons system and I'm glad
someone has done this kind of analysis. Many science fiction shows
just design their keyboards/data entry pads/computer interfaces in
general to "look cool" and don't seem to give consideration to what
you (and I !) do for our jobs: make a computer interface suited to
the tasks it will be used for.
George Johnsen (co-producer of B5 up to, IIRC, Season 4 ?) and I
exchanged a few emails about the control system of White Stars. I
noticed how the actors would randomly jab at the crystal spiky things
multiple times in order to do relatively simple things..."what's wrong
with a joystick and throttle ?" I sez :) George said to lighten up
and not worry about it so much ;) I pointed out that having it look
"real" and not just "cool and spiky" would draw people like me into
the show more.
Anyhow, the only thing I wanted to add to your fine analysis was the
question of having one person trying to cover a 360 degree field of
view inside a sphere using only their eyes. Actually it's more than
360, but my math fails me. 360 degrees on the Earth's surface just
means covering the whole horizon, but Ms. Cantrell has to cover the
areas above her head and below her feet too. During a battle she'd
need a neck made of rubber to allow her to be constantly looking
around watching for Bad Guys to punch into dust.
I would point out the similarity to what happens when you make a
commercial jet pilot move from the old hydraulic planes to a modern
fly-by-wire aircraft with a soundproof cockpit. You cut off his sense
of touch (he can't feel the yoke twitching in his hand, you cut off
his awareness of the plane's engines because he can't hear them. Now
he's forced to LOOK at a lot of instruments and dials if he wants to
know what state the plane is in. This caused more than one crash,
according to a documentary I saw about fly-by-wire planes called Black
Box, especially the Airbus 300 series. The pilots had only one
"channel" of information, their eyes, and couldn't possibly monitor
everything at once. They overlooked things and planes crashed. Sarah
could overlook an enemy behind her and the Liandra would be attacked.
Now to my actual point (still with me ?!) The VR weapons system should
use sound to alert the operator to the location of targets. The VR
system could use directional sound to give the operator information on
the target's location; visuals rely on the operator looking at the
target, but sound will always be heard, no matter which way the
operator is oriented. Friendly ships would be ignored. Bad Guys would
have a different pitch based on threat levels, distance from the ship
could be shown with an increasing amount of white noise.
Think about it: without having to even open her eyes, Sarah would
know how many enemies were there (within reason of course, too much
sound is useless !), how dangerous they were and how far away they
were.
I hope JMS reads this and considers incorporating some of it into the
show (yeah, it's gotta be a series ! How couldn't it be !?)
Brian Smith
I Live For The One...I aint' dying for anyone !
Carter
painful to watch. There has been some very insightful and well
researched discussion in this thread, but I believe the inevitable
conclusion of an honest analysis is that there is no way the system
presented would be fast enough for combat purposes.
I am not an expert in these systems. But I know a little about martial
arts. When I was studying karate, my instructor said something very
intersting to me in my sparring training:
You can't ever perfectly block a good jab. It's just too fast.
He had read studies where various formal karate moves were timed, and
an interesting lesson came out of them - whenever somebody is really
decked by a counterpunch, it is because they telegraphed their attack,
not becaue the defender had lighning fast reflexes. The relevant point
was this - the moves that were timed were in the 0.1-0.5 seconds
range. Slow as molasses in dogfighting terms.
In the Leandro, the weapons officer was throwing full force kicks to
fire weapons. This is a least one order of magnitude slower than the
kind of reaction times people can manage with joysticks. The earlier
poster's point about fatigue is absolutely correct.
So I hope this gets fixed, and that the show succeeds. If one were to
posit a more realistic line of weapons systems speculation, these
factors should be considered:
1. Muscles are slower than thoughts. Surely the technology for a
biofeedback/brainscan-based system exists in the B5 era.
2. Silicon is faster than grey matter. The only element that a human
brain might have over a computer would be to compose novel strategies
on the fly. However, the execution of any particular tool in a bag of
tricks will be far better done by computers than humans. Perhaps a
library of counter strategies could be selected by the weapons
operator in battle and queued up. Any dogfight between two different
races which didn't use computerized weapons control would greatly
favor the race with faster reaction times, and would necesitate the
slower races use computers or die.
3. The whole design concept of the weapons system being attached to
the ship is rooted in past approaches. I believe the best weapons bang
for the buck would be secured by largely autonomous escort drones
that:
a. Can pull outrageous G's that would kill a crew.
b. Aren't constrained by having to have a breathable atmosphere.
c. Can surround an opponent.
d. Can ram an opponent with no loss of life (on your side)
e. Can be flexibly reassigned to different ships.
I've heard rumours that there are heretics in the US Air Force who
argue quite compellingly for fighter drones. They point out that the
greatest constraint on Jet Fighters is that people can live inside.
They mention that a pilot in a cockpit is a very expensive piece of
equipment, and that several drones could be built for the price of
training one pilot. But that the "Fighter Jock" mentality is so
ingrained that these innovators have a tough row to hoe.
Now that I think about it, the original B5 demonstrated this idea with
the earth planetary defense satellites.
Best of luck to JMS and the crew of the new show.
-Carter Sanders
WRWhite963
>movements, the words "lock" "fire cannon" "fire missle" "deploy ECM"
>et cetera would be far better than the crowd-pleasing fighting we saw
>in the movie. Not to mention the fact that using the system for
>evasive manuevers might actually work better than the computer doing
Then again, you run into a bottleneck - issuing one command at a time (unless,
like those singers of Tuva, she can do two tones simultaneously;-)
My only wonderment is why they wouldn't have the monitoring of her extremities
require a bit less.... energy, on the part of the operator. Seems like they'd
be able to let her just point, rather than punch. Perhaps the adrenaline rush
helps the system somehow...
WRW
Oliver Hauss
>
> Your concerns are just as valid for standard displays shown on other
> space craft and SF television shows. Also, you are assuming that what
> she sees on the screen is *only* a representation/visual of the
> surrounding space (with ships and stuff in it). I would much rather
> assume that other information, in a lower bandwidth form, is also
> available to her visual inputs, to help her decide if she should
> change orientation, fire a weapon behind her, or perform some other
> activity.
>
It would however be much more efficient if she would not have to be
notified of things happening behind her, and turn around to react it,
but rather could react to threats at any position respective to the
ship.
>
> But if your weapon can't fire in that amount of time anyway, then
> there isn't a problem. Now, I don't know the firing rates, so I
> honestly couldn't tell you if performing the gesture is a limitation
> or not. I would have to believe that if they were using that as an
> interface, then it wouldn't be an issue.
>
That assumes that the same weapon is always keyed to the same
extremity. However, given that she can fire both forward and backward,
I would think that is unlikely. Rather, the computer probably picks
the weapon with the best angle to the target. As such, firing rate is
not an issue, since the computer would simply fire an available weapon
that can reach the target.
>
> >> 3. Instant information. The VR environment probably provides more
> >> information than just a camera view. Status of enemy
> >> power/weapons, full location, various weapon ranges (for enemy,
> >> friend, and the Liandra herself), etc., would all be available and
> >> either drawn on the eye or displayed on the VR screen.
>
> > That is possible totally independently of the weapon system seen. A
> > holographic display could provide the same, and more.
>
> Ah, I think I understand. To me, the weapon system isn't just the
> gesture part, it is the gesture/VR system combined! I tried to make
> that clear in my original post, and apparently I didn't do a good
> enough job.
>
> However, if you look at my paragraph, I only talked about the VR
> environment with regards to instant information. Your statement does
> not contradict mine.
My point is that the advantages you cite are not exclusive to the VR
environment. They can be achieved with totally different systems as
well.
> > Again, I think you are mistaken on this. "Just" having to rotate can
> > already have you being taken out in the meantime.
>
> It would be the same if you were scrolling around with your mouse or
> keyboard trying to change the orientation/view. My conjecture is that
> using the full body would not only be just as fast, but you would have
> a better sense of the battle environment and have a much better idea
> of where everything is. I consistantly lost track of many of my
> assets in the computer game Homeworld, which has one of the best 3D
> space combat interfaces around.
>
I am not familiar with Homeworld, but you should keep in mind that it
is a game. As such, the need to optimize the display, and your
familiarity with it is limited. Your life doesn't really depend on it
functioning in an efficient way. In fact, not giving you certain
information can simply be seen as part of the level of difficulty of
the game. I doubt a RL soldier would appreciate you making his life
difficult although it could be made easier with little effort. I took
a look at some screenshots and they seem to be lacking quite a bit of
information. Doesn't mean you couldn't include it. And even if it is a
3D environment, it is still displayed on a 2D screen.
>
> > The problem, I think, is that you compare with traditional computer
> > input devices, and not with what we have already seen in the series.
>
> I would love to hear you elaborate on this.
>
Your comparison to "Homeworld" is one example. "Homeworld" displays
the ships on a 2D screen. Judging by the screenshots, Homeworld does
NOT display a whole lot of information that might be useful and is
easily providable, like a vector for other ships indicating direction
of movement and speed re:whatever fixpoint makes most sense (nearby
jumpgate, planet etc..). Compare that to good old Frontier: Elite2,
which gives you for a targeted ship: Drive class, hull integrity,
shield strength, shield integrity, special equipment and distance. It
also gives you the ID of any object nearby. On a scanner display, it
gives you the bearing of all ships in the area re:yourself in all
three dimensions, as well as color-coded the tonnage of the other
ships. Games like Wing Commander give you color-coded the damage
status of other ships.
The fact that one game lets you down with information you need doesn't
mean it can't be provided. Additionally, Homeworld is a real-time RTS
game, not one that focuses on one individual ship and crewmember.
We have seen that holographic displays exist in the environment of the
series. They could provide position and speed of other ships relative
to your own and plenty of other information. If need be, information
could also be given only to the weapons officer. They allow you to see
what is in all directions, not just in the one you, personally, are
facing.
> >> Is such as system possible?
>
> >> Yes! Well, okay, we don't have the anti-gravity yet. If you do, please
> >> email me - we'll do lunch.
>
> > That's not the chief question at hand.
>
> Heh...um...it was my post. I decided to also ask and answer the above
> question because I thought people might be interested.
>
Well, if I look around, there is quite a bit of discussion on the
weapons system. People have problems suspending disbelief on it. That
can not just be addressed with the question of technical possibility,
but also needs to address feasibility and efficiency at fulfilling
what it is there for. A number of people know that eye-tracking is
possible, since it is already used in modern weapons technology.
> >And here, one major weakness of your review is a major
> > point: You assume the WCO already in the pod, with the tracking system
> > up, at the beginning of the review. That is missing the critical point
> > that the WCO has to get into the pod and bring up the tracking system.
> > By the time that has happened, the Liandra can already be toast in
> > case of a surprise attack.
>
> Um...doesn't it take time to warm up weapons? I don't think they
> constantly go around armed for battle and ready to fire (to expensive
> in fuel, energy, whatever). So, if you are caught without your
> weapons charged, it doesn't matter if the WCO is in the pod or not.
>
Depends entirely on the systems used and who one is talking about.
Theoretically, someone capable of non-rotational artificial gravity
likely doesn't have to worry about energy. In any way, the ships of
"The Hand" seemed perfectly able to fire right at the point of leaving
hyperspace.
> Could someone help me here? I am not even sure our own Navy ships go
> around with all their guns loaded all the time. Actually, we have Navy
> people visiting tomorrow, I'll ask them if there is time :)
>
Sorry, but US Navy ships rarely venture into totally uncharted
territory. As such, the chances they stumble on something surprising
aren't that great compared to a scout ship designed to go on the edge
and find out what's out there. If you're not equipped to deal with
nasty surprises, you're not equipped for the job.
>
> Well, see the above and my other posts. I disagree. Also, having all
> that information (and battle sounds, etc.) might distract the Captain
> from making overall battle orders, or hearing communications from
> other parts of the ship, etc.
>
Could you clarify what you mean with "battle sounds"? And information
not of use to the captain could be just as well projected into the
WCO's eye as in the weapons pod.
> It is a complex problem and system. At the very least, it has given
> us a lot to talk about! I just don't think the system should be thrown
> away out of hand.
>
> Good comments to think about though. - Charles
Hmpf, at work, so I better stop here...wish I could have done some
more research on the issue, but REAL research awaits...
Oliver
Andrew
Yeah, it is, and that does make more sense.
Eddie_Gramham
> I disagree. I do step aerobics for 50 minutes. People run 26 mile
> marathons. Martial artists can fight for quite a long time. Isn't
> there a day long bike race in France every year?
Maybe so, but its unessary. Plus aside from the step class most of those
people train for hours a day something that a person serving on a small ship
such as the Laindra will not be able to do.
> Yes, it is tiring, but it can be done. Besides, I don't think any
> space battle lasted all day. Did the battle in "Shadow Dancing" last
> less than an hour of combat time?
But you never know what will happen, you may for example find yourself
behind enemy lines and have to spend a day or two fighting your way out. I
just think the method is unessary, if their was no other way i`d agree with
you.
> Ah! This is an important point. The gesture isn't just telling the
> ship to fire. It is doing three things: choosing a target, choosing
> weapons, and firing. That is three things, and more than one button.
Choosing a target: At the very least the WCO could simply point it out. I`m
just saying they should get rid of the punching part.
Choosing weapons: Yeah, like I said the ship would have to handle the
choosing of a weapon, but with Minbari technology I don`t see how this could
be a problem. All the computer has to do is calculate which weapon would be
the best to fire based on the firing arc data.
Firing:- Again the ship could do this once the target has been choosen.
As above, you just point out the targets and the ship fires at it.
> > Also the punching method may limit the ships rate of fire.
>
> That is another interface issue that I talk about in other posts. But
> I will add something here: the WCO could continue to pump, indicating
> that the ship should fire at its maximum fire rate (not just one pump
> per attack). My system does that. One circle gesture will fire a shot
> in our Space Invader's demo, but a continuing circle gesture has it
> continuously firing. This is just an example though, please don't
> make a one-to-one correspondence between my demo and how it might work
> on the Liandra.
Yeah, that would work but its wasting time while you pumping for continuous
fire on that system you could be looking for other targets on mine.
Thanks for taking the time to reply
Eddie
Chuen Chan
news:20020123145844...@mb-cf.aol.com...
> My only wonderment is why they wouldn't have the monitoring of her
extremities
> require a bit less.... energy, on the part of the operator. Seems like
they'd
> be able to let her just point, rather than punch. Perhaps the adrenaline
rush
> helps the system somehow...
Maybe she deliberately set it that way. Imagine her on being introduced to
it for the first time during weapons training -
"I get to to do my job, stay in shape, and throw away all those Jane Fonda
videos as well, cool!"
*grin*
Chuen Chan c.c...@uq.NOSPAM.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------------
'You can prove anything you want by coldly logical reason - if you pick
the proper postulates... Postulates are based on assumption and adhered
to by faith. Nothing in the Universe can shake them.' I. Asimov
--
This transmission is for the intended addressee only and is confidential information. If you have received this transmission in error, please delete it and notify the sender. The contents of this e-mail are the opinion of the writer only and are not endorsed by the Mincom Group of companies unless expressly stated otherwise.
Charles J. Cohen
*Spoiler space, even though I don't think it is needed...okay, maybe
it is :) *
1
2
3
4
5
10
15
20
25
*done*
> Thank you for that informative writeup, it goes a long way to answering a
> lot of the questions/issues that I have with that weapon system.
Glad I could help.
> 1) What happens when the ship is maneuvered in such a way as to bring the
> firing arc of the weapons out of of range of the operator's chosen targets?
> I would think that that would be a significant problem in the use of such a
> system.
I would assume that the targeting computer would know which weapons
had which firing arcs (as would the WCO), and so would just fire the
ones that were in the arc. Yes, it is a tricky problem, but that is
what user interface design is for.
Btw, in a non-VR keyboard like interface, the same problem would remain.
> 2) Also, firing rate seems to be limited by operator fatigue, and not by the
> operating characteristics of the actual weapon hardware. It could be that
> these two limitations are so close to each other that it doesn't matter.
I think I discussed this earlier. It may have looked that way, but I
doubt that the rate of gesture corresponds to the rate of fire. With
respect to her firing at the mines, I prefer to think of her "pump all
my limbs at the same time gesture" to be mean that the computer should
fire at all the closets targets with minimal energy but with every
available weapon. This isn't the type of gesture *I* would use (I'd
use a simple voice command for that, leaving me to control some of the
bigger guns or something), but then again, I'm not a WCO, and personal
choice has a lot to do with User Interface design.
> 3) There seems to be no way for the operator to select what systems on an
> enemy ship to target specifically, such as weapons systems/engines.
>
> I would think that it might be more efficient to have the operator merely
> select and prioritize targets, while the computer would calculate an optimal
> firing pattern based on that input.
That is one solution.
Another would be to just increase the gesture types. How about this:
Gesture 1: Pump arm with closed fist = fire weapon normally.
Gesture 2: Pump arm with fingers spread wide = target engines.
Gesture 3: Pump arm with index finger pointed = target weapons.
Here is the key: the pump arm is the main gesture (word like command),
with the hand adding a 'suffix' to the command to further define
it. Without the arm pump, the hand gestures would be meaningless.
Given the machine vision system of the Liandra, such gestures would be
easily recognizable.
Also, the above is just one way of selective targeting. All of us
here could probably think of others.
> I really only had a couple of gripes with it, that weapons system was one of
> them. Myriam Sirois's acting performance was another, although that could be
> attributed to Vejar's direction. Overall, it just didn't feel like a stand
> alone movie, minor characters had their moments (esp Na'Feel in the engion
> room) but were somewhat glossed over in general. What makes Tirk tick? I
> have no idea after watching it, but I have hope that if it goes to a series
> we will find out. It may lack a bit as a standalone movie, but it is exactly
> right as a pilot for a possible series. Lets just hope we get a series!
I'm an engineer, not an actor. :) (Okay, I juggle and perform too, but
that isn't the same.)
Oh, as a point of info, if you look at the Feb. issue of Popular
Science, page 40 has a nice view of augmenting a display to show extra
information (all around information, not just what is in front of
you). Of course, the view is still 2D, but it is a nice example of
what the military wants.
- Charles
etj4 Eagle
> > I disagree. I do step aerobics for 50 minutes. People run 26 mile
> > marathons. Martial artists can fight for quite a long time. Isn't
> > there a day long bike race in France every year?
>
> Maybe so, but its unessary. Plus aside from the step class most of those
> people train for hours a day something that a person serving on a small ship
> such as the Laindra will not be able to do.
>
But again these are rangers who have been shown to be in high state of
physical fitness and preferring to get up and personal to fight (using
their pikes instead of PPG's). Also rember this ship and system were
built of Minbari use. We have no idea how quickly a Minbari might
tire. At least for me, Minbari have come across as having superior
physical strength and stamina.
no one of consequence
]WRWhite963 <wrwhi...@aol.com> wrote in message
]news:20020123145844...@mb-cf.aol.com...
]
]> My only wonderment is why they wouldn't have the monitoring of her
]extremities
]> require a bit less.... energy, on the part of the operator. Seems like
]they'd
]> be able to let her just point, rather than punch. Perhaps the adrenaline
]rush
]> helps the system somehow...
]
]Maybe she deliberately set it that way. Imagine her on being introduced to
]it for the first time during weapons training -
]
]"I get to to do my job, stay in shape, and throw away all those Jane Fonda
]videos as well, cool!"
Probably watched a bunch of Japanese sentai videos... oh wait, she never shouted the
weapon name when firing. ["LIANDRA PLASMA BOLT!"]
;-)
--
|Patrick Chester wol...@io.com |
|"...could you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?" |
|Wittier remarks always come to mind just after sending your article.|
WRWhite963
>they'd
>> be able to let her just point, rather than punch. Perhaps the adrenaline
>rush
>> helps the system somehow...
>
>Maybe she deliberately set it that way. Imagine her on being introduced to
>it for the first time during weapons training -
>
>"I get to to do my job, stay in shape, and throw away all those Jane Fonda
>videos as well, cool!"
>
>*grin*
>
>Chuen Chan
There's an image I didn't need: Jane Fonda in the 23rd Century.... Barbarella,
anyone?
WRW
Aisling Willow Grey
Charles,
Really great article! Thanks for taking the time to explain things.
Now...I know next to nothing about weapons tech, but something occurred
to me as I read that last bit I backquoted above.... You say that
personal choice has a lot to do with User Interface design. That
indicates to me that this system is a very poor choice for this
application. Rangers are, by their nature, generally involved in
dangerous situations of varying degree. So, there's a probability that
Sarah -- or any crew member -- might be injured, or killed at some point
during a mission. In the middle of a battle, even. A system like this
seems extremely fine-tuned to the individual's preferences of gesture,
so...how, in the middle of battle, could another crew member reasonably
be expected to take over the weapons console in the case of her
incapacitation?
To put it simply, isn't it more likely that someone else on the crew
might have the knowledge and acumen to operate a conventional, console
type system in a pinch, but might have trouble adjusting her
personally-attuned 'holosuite' to their own gestures in a situation
where time is of the essence, and seconds can win or lose the battle?
Aisling Grey
* * *
Proud driver of a Rangers-wrapped car:
http://www.fjordstone.com/gcar.html
And now new and improved wrapped car pictures at
http://www.fjordstone.com/gcar2.html
Joshua Wilhoyte
:> 1
:> 2
:> 3
:> 4
:> 5
:>
:>
:>
:>
:> 10
:>
:>
:>
:>
:> 15
:>
:>
:>
:>
:> 20
:>
:>
:>
:>
:> 25
: Now...I know next to nothing about weapons tech, but something occurred
: to me as I read that last bit I backquoted above.... You say that
: personal choice has a lot to do with User Interface design. That
: indicates to me that this system is a very poor choice for this
: application. Rangers are, by their nature, generally involved in
: dangerous situations of varying degree. So, there's a probability that
: Sarah -- or any crew member -- might be injured, or killed at some point
: during a mission. In the middle of a battle, even. A system like this
: seems extremely fine-tuned to the individual's preferences of gesture,
: so...how, in the middle of battle, could another crew member reasonably
: be expected to take over the weapons console in the case of her
: incapacitation?
: To put it simply, isn't it more likely that someone else on the crew
: might have the knowledge and acumen to operate a conventional, console
: type system in a pinch, but might have trouble adjusting her
: personally-attuned 'holosuite' to their own gestures in a situation
: where time is of the essence, and seconds can win or lose the battle?
If the gun chamber is set up so that the User Interface is personalized
(thus allowed Sarah to "punch" in order to fire while someone else might
simply point to fire) then it is very likely that the User Interface of
everyone else who is qualified to use the gunnery pod is stored in the
computer's memory. When Sarah gets in, the computer realizes that Sarah
will be the gunner today and sets up her personalized User Interface. If
someone else were to get in, and they had used the pod before, their
personal User Interface would be loaded. Anyone would doesn't have a User
Interface saved obviously hasn't been in a gunnery pod before and should
not be in there in a combat situation.
Also, none of the above rules out having a conventional 2D gunnery
station on the Bridge as a back-up.
--
cookies for josh
Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes,
They got those hopping legs and twitchy little noses.
And what's with all the carrots?
What do they need such good eye-sight for anyway?
Bunnies, bunnies, it must be BUNNIES!
Scott Royall
commands.
"Joshua Wilhoyte" <jos...@arches.uga.edu> wrote in message
news:a2uh1g$7bd$2...@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
John W. Kennedy
Hell, I work at the NJ Renaissance Kingdom (http://www.NJKingdom.com), a
renaissance faire with a fantasy-Arthurian theme. We have people (and
all of us are _amateurs_) who can do 30-40 broadsword fights a day
wearing 100 pounds of armor. Some of them can do standing back-flips
and no-handed cartwheels in armor.
--
John W. Kennedy
Read the remains of Shakespeare's lost play!
http://pws.prserv.net/jwkennedy/Double%20Falshood.txt
Eddie_Gramham
"etj4 Eagle" <etj4...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f386505e.02012...@posting.google.com...
basically is) especially if those controls are going to be used in an arena
where timing and concentration can mean the differance between life and
death. You want an interface to be as simple as possible but without
sacrificing functionality.
This method as presneted in LOTR has no advantages and many dis-advantages
(see my other post, archived below). Don`t get me wrong I can see how the
Minbari/Rangers would use such a uneffeciant system in favour of fighting
the battle with thier skills and strenghs (Afterall they would rather lose
rangers and military equipment than retreat from a battle where no gain can
be made in continuing).
I hope they can put aside thier traditions if the Rangers are ever going to
be a credible military force.
Eddie
----Old post
No, whats done in the movie is:
If she sees an incoming ship, she targets it via her eye, does a kick or
punch for each shot firing the weapon.
What I am saying is this:
If she sees an incoming ship, she targets it (via eye), tags it for
destruction (by simply pointing wiuth her arm) and the ship fires
automatically.
This method has many advantages over the old one:
1) Cut out most of the physical demands, allowing the WCO to fight for much
longer periods without getting tired.
2) Allow for quicker target acquisition. After tagging the first target you
can be tagging the next while the Liandra is firing away at the first. You
can even target an entire group while you are out of range and allow the
ship to auto fire on each as they come into range . Using this method you
could fire on several ships in a very shot amount of time.
3) During large furball battles it would give the WCO officer less to do and
as such not get as easily confused and disoriented.
4) Allows the WCO to keep more of an eye out for more hostiles.
5) Does not tie the weapons rate of fire to the person and as such it can be
used to its fullest.
6) Less of a learning curve so if the WCO officer is injured others can take
their place and not have to worry about replicating special gestures.
Etc etc
-------
Scott Royall
All of the discussion on the topic has been great, but one question appears
to have not been asked: Why have a WCO? Clearly the fire control system was
quite capable of discerning valid targets on its own, because gestures don't
convey much detail. The captain had already authorized weapon fire so what
was Sarah there for (beyond adding sex appeal)? I can see a WCO acting in an
oversight capacity, but that's not what she was doing.
"Charles J. Cohen" <cha...@mynah.eecs.umich.edu> wrote in message
news:slrna50k7t....@mynah.eecs.umich.edu...
MJB
Although I did have some problems with the weapons system,
see comments in-line below...
[ snippage ]
>
> ----Old post
> No, whats done in the movie is:
>
> If she sees an incoming ship, she targets it via her eye, does a kick or
> punch for each shot firing the weapon.
>
> What I am saying is this:
>
> If she sees an incoming ship, she targets it (via eye), tags it for
> destruction (by simply pointing wiuth her arm) and the ship fires
> automatically.
Who says that it doesn't work this way. Maybe she just LIKES to
use the more forceful method of firing. There's no explanation of
the weapons system -- everyone is just making assumptions based on
what was shown -- 1 person using the system in the way that she liked
to. I saw nothing that said she had to use lots of force to get the
weapon to fire.
In other words, that could be her style and it may work exactly as you
would like it to.
>
> This method has many advantages over the old one:
>
> 1) Cut out most of the physical demands, allowing the WCO to fight for
> much longer periods without getting tired.
Very true, and maybe if she feels like she may tire, she can
go into a more deliberate and less intense mode. She was never
in there long enough to really get winded.
> 2) Allow for quicker target acquisition. After tagging the first target
> you can be tagging the next while the Liandra is firing away at the
> first. You can even target an entire group while you are out of range
> and allow the ship to auto fire on each as they come into range . Using
> this method you could fire on several ships in a very shot amount of
> time.
> 3) During large furball battles it would give the WCO officer less
> to do and as such not get as easily confused and disoriented.
> 4) Allows the WCO to keep more of an eye out for more hostiles.
> 5) Does not tie the weapons rate of fire to the person and as such it can
> be used to its fullest.
> 6) Less of a learning curve so if the WCO officer is injured others can
> take their place and not have to worry about replicating special
> gestures. Etc etc
And it may do all of this. She never had more than a few targets in
any situation. The comet's targets all came from 1 direction -- the biggest
problem there was the whether the size of the rock/ice would overwhelm the
amount of firepower.
I think I'd like to see more episodes and get a better feel for this
type of system. I haven't seen enough to make a good judgement call.
IF one MUST use the system as she did in LotR, then I'd agree with
most all of your points !
Mike
Sean Bronzell
Charles J. Cohen <cha...@mynah.eecs.umich.edu> wrote in message
news:slrna50k7t....@mynah.eecs.umich.edu...
>
> it is :) *
>
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
>
>
>
>
> 10
>
>
>
>
> 15
>
>
>
>
> 20
>
>
>
>
> 25
>
> *done*
>
>
> doubt that the rate of gesture corresponds to the rate of fire. With
> respect to her firing at the mines, I prefer to think of her "pump all
> my limbs at the same time gesture" to be mean that the computer should
> fire at all the closets targets with minimal energy but with every
> available weapon. This isn't the type of gesture *I* would use (I'd
> use a simple voice command for that, leaving me to control some of the
> bigger guns or something), but then again, I'm not a WCO, and personal
> choice has a lot to do with User Interface design.
Which of course is suggestive of what we might see if a Minbari was acting
as WCO, or any other individual. Just as David gave Tenir a lesson with the
pike about using the right side, one could imagine Sarah giving or being
given a lesson in interface gestures. Or swapping and sharing techniques.
Just as we do with keyboards and mice and...see, that would be fun. And
something I would expect from JMS, as he does that kind of thing all the
time.
Sean
HrafnWif
I've missed the original post--weeks away from the net, and only just saw
someone's vcr tape of LotR.
Could you put up a link to your article again?
Thanks ever so
Jenn
kuku
> nephew lifting his controller 2 feet above his head everytime he told
crash
> bandicoot to jump that i fastened it to a table.
Respect! Though when my brother hammers the buttons of my keyboard, I feel
like fastening his arms to the table.
pluther
If it was tracking her eyes as well as precise hand motions, perhaps she
was just focused on the engines? It makes sense that the weapons target
(at least as well as they can) *exactly* where you're looking, rather than
just the overall object you're looking at...
-Pat
--
Pat Luther -- pluther at usa dot net -- http://www.cs.pdx.edu/~pluther
Turns out, it was a typo. It should read "The geek shall inherent the Earth"
kuku
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
Nice review =) Something that gave a lot to think about. ... And I think:
Why not just stick with the system seen on the large Minbari battle
cruisers? You have gravity = orientation = you don't get lost with
directions. And still have all around 3D 360 degree view.
And the view will be much more immence. Good for the show you know. When
someone's kicking and screaming in space, all your attentions turns away
from the nice view and effects.
Why not use simpler and logical moves? For example (just example):
- eyes - targeting
- left hand fingers - locking eye target for computer (each finger for
different priority)
- right hand fingers - manual trigger on eye target (each finger for
different weapon or combinations)
- computer - choosing the weapons, choosing the arcs, fireing at
designated targets
- head moves - countermesures
- pumping hands and legs, punching, kicking, voice commands - for changing
fireing modes, targeting modes etc.
- left teeth clicking, right teeth clicking - weapon safety on/off (to
avoid accidental fire) (double clicking for added safety)
- hej dudes! I can even move my ears! - for combos like: SHOOT ALL YOU GOT
to where I'm looking at and do it RIGHT NOW THIS INSTANCE.
(Head muscle movents which move ears often occure automaticly under panic.
You see shadow uncloaking, panic and shoot him hell out of this existance.)
My point being:
Doing ninja stuff is embarrassingly inefficient. Even such rediculous things
as moving your ears or clicking tooth can be much more usefull in ship to
ship combat than kicking. Response time for a kick is huge compared to a
trigger-like nudge of a finger. In suprising situations that little responce
time will make all the difference.
Regardless I think gesture recognition and VR are the BEST means to control
weapons and tactical situations.
Some sort of view-filtering would be good for droping out all useless junk
in space. Switching view modes would actually look cool. Remember Predator?
Also some sort of hud to point out useful info, such as:
- targets which are too far away to spot
- movement vectors
- enemy ship movment trails like in I-WAR (nice game, played it?)
- your own movement vector
- other stuff (obviously you can filter it out when not needed or there
are too much things confusing the view.)
Sounds are good. Many military systems use sounds as warnings etc.
Directional sounds are even better.
There's this great game out, I-WAR. Has lot's of good and realistic ideas
about managing a ship of about same size as Liandra. Maby just not very much
about the topic at hand, so I won't explane more. Would be usefull for the
producers to familiarise themselves with this piece of art.
Forever B5 fan, kuku
James Bell
"kuku" <voy...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3usdm$4o2$1...@news.kolumbus.fi...
Didn't I read that there was a B5 mod for I-War on the mods section of the
video game's website? Sorry, I can't recall the site's address. I'm sure
someone here can give it.
Jim
kuku
> On the other hand, imagine, for example, that you're not Rocky, punching
> your targets, you're instead Wyatt Earp. In the time you can pull your
> arm back and thrust it forward three times, how many times do you think
> you can point a six-gun and pull the trigger, especially with the
eyesight-
> aided targetting? The time it takes to swing your arm a few degrees and
> flick a trigger is notably shorter than the time it takes to bring in your
> arm and then thrust it back outward, no?
Reaction time is very good point. Cases where you have only 1/10 seconds to
target and fire are not impossible, instead even likely. In Quake,
Counterstrike or most other 2D or 3D shooters you allmost never have time to
punch your arm/leg. You'r dead before. Maby not exactly the same onbard a
big battleship, but in case of the little Liandra...
> Of course, it might just so happen that the recharge time on a Minbari gun
> is approximately the same as the time it takes to haul off and hit
someone.
> And, of course, there's the added problem that putting on a Stetson and
> drawing a pair of six-guns just isn't as cool looking nor does it imply
> as much action as the kickboxing style version...
Well I for one think Wyatt Earp style would look much better than Rocky
style. I nearly ejected my stomach contents when I saw her getting crazy and
hitting and kicking out magic fireballs.
> Oh, and my answer to more than four guns? (well, two in the Wyatt
Earp-style
> enclosure, it's tough to shoot with your feet...) More weapons officers...
Well maby there's better commands for feet...
Let the eyes do the targeting...
computer choosing the weapons and arcs...
fingers are good for triggers...
and pumping and kicking for changing fireing modes.
How's that?
Why should the captain be only one who gets beaten by command? Retreating
from battle and stuff... Let's pick little on the weapons officer and send
her to weeks trainging after concluding that her performance onboard Liandra
was unefficient. ...just for example...
moelawn
some spoiler space, both for L.O.T.R. and the Technomage trilogy):
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I wonder if the interface is supposed to comparable to how the operator of a
Shadow vessel feels when he or she is firing weapons. According to the
Technomage trilogy, the operator feels ecstacy and joy when speeding about
and firing weapons. Perhaps in their mind they are firing with the hands
and legs?
"kuku" <voy...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3uiff$dg7$1...@news.kolumbus.fi...
lor...@tala.mede.uic.edu
moelawn <moe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In reply to the thread about the weapons interface on the Liandra: (here is
>some spoiler space, both for L.O.T.R. and the Technomage trilogy):
>
>*
>
>*
>
>*
>
>*
>
>*
>
>*
>
>*
>
>*
>
>*
>I wonder if the interface is supposed to comparable to how the operator of a
>Shadow vessel feels when he or she is firing weapons. According to the
>Technomage trilogy, the operator feels ecstacy and joy when speeding about
>and firing weapons. Perhaps in their mind they are firing with the hands
>and legs?
a) I'm pretty sure that's a Jeanne Cavelosism
b) It's a scream. Read the Anna bits more closely.
-- Lorrie
David C.
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> I wonder if the interface is supposed to comparable to how the operator of a
> Shadow vessel feels when he or she is firing weapons. According to the
> Technomage trilogy, the operator feels ecstacy and joy when speeding about
> and firing weapons.
Read it again. Shadow vessels don't have a "vessel-operator"
relationship. The person is merged with the ship and the two are a
single entity.
As for what they feel, the ship feels joy when it destroys targets, and
when it obeys the eye. (Although it also feels conflicted when the eye
gives it a mission that doesn't involve destruction.)
> Perhaps in their mind they are firing with the hands and legs?
In the mind of a shadow vessel, there are no hands and legs. The vessel
has no recollection of having been a humanoid once upon a time.
Memories from the past are almost entirely obliterated. Which is why
Anna required so much mental retraining after she was extracted from the
vessel.
Note also the confusion and fear that went through Anna as they were
extracting her from the ship.
-- David
moelawn
<lor...@tala.mede.uic.edu> wrote "
> a)I'm pretty sure that's a Jeanne Cavelosism
> b) It's a scream. Read the Anna bits more closely."
Spoiler space, both for L.O.T.R. and the Technomage trilogy:
> >
> >*
> >
> >*
> >
> >*
> >
> >*
> >
> >*
> >
> >*
> >
> >*
> >
> >*
Yes I remember that the Shadow vessels would scream (at least in the minds
of telepaths within mind-shot - I guess even Shadow tech can't be used to
send ordinary soundwaves through a vacuum), but the idea that the operator
of a Shadow vessel feels joy when darting around and shooting at things made
sense to me. My kid seems to enjoy shooting at targets in Descent Freespace
and that new PS-2 with the fighters (but no screaming thankfully).
As a matter of fact, now I recall that the Liandra tactical operator (I
can't remember her name) also screamed, as I recall while she was clearing a
large number of mines, but the process did seem for her more like hard work
than ectasy.
I admit to a lack of precision (two different members of this group have
suggested that I re-read passages of the books). I read these books for
fun, usually when I'm tired or relaxing and sometimes while drinking a beer
or two. I am not a substance abuser (I even quit smoking ten years ago),
but at 45 I don't have as many live brain synapses as probably most of the
members of this group.
btw in case there is more discussion, and I do enjoy these discussions, I
have not yet read book three (that one and The Shadow Within are queued
behind some other books).
>
>
Charles J. Cohen
> Dono if ther's much spoilers, but just in case....
>
>
>
>
> S
>
>
>
>
> P
>
>
>
>
> O
>
>
>
>
> I
>
>
>
>
> L
>
>
>
>
> E
>
>
>
>
> R
>
>
>
>
> Nice review =) Something that gave a lot to think about. ... And I think:
Thanks!
> Why not use simpler and logical moves? For example (just example):
> - eyes - targeting
> - left hand fingers - locking eye target for computer (each finger for
> different priority)
Because pure finger flicking would cause a lot of false positivies,
where as an arm pump is a purposive motion.
On the other hand, as I stated in my review, if you had a meta
gesture/voice command that said "we need to fire all the time," then
you could toggle between normal arm gestures and the finger flicks for
rapid firing.
> - right hand fingers - manual trigger on eye target (each finger for
> different weapon or combinations)
> - computer - choosing the weapons, choosing the arcs, fireing at
> designated targets
> - head moves - countermesures
The head needs to be free to look around and help target.
> - pumping hands and legs, punching, kicking, voice commands - for changing
> fireing modes, targeting modes etc.
> - left teeth clicking, right teeth clicking - weapon safety on/off (to
> avoid accidental fire) (double clicking for added safety)
> - hej dudes! I can even move my ears! - for combos like: SHOOT ALL YOU GOT
> to where I'm looking at and do it RIGHT NOW THIS INSTANCE.
> (Head muscle movents which move ears often occure automaticly under panic.
> You see shadow uncloaking, panic and shoot him hell out of this existance.)
Well, remember, each WCO can specific which gestures she wants to be
coupled with specific commands/weapons/etc. It is all up to her.
> My point being:
> Doing ninja stuff is embarrassingly inefficient.
I disagree. Remember, a gesture isn't just firing a weapon, it is
doing three things: choosing a weapon, targeting a weapon, and
firing. Using a keyboard/mouse to do all three things takes quite a
bit of time, even in computer games. Military people are constantly
telling me that this is a problem.
For example, with the gesture system we are installing with the Army
(STRICOM), the gesture interface is far more efficient than the
keyboard mouse interface they were using to intiate the dismounted
warrior commands in their VR simulator.
>Even such rediculous things
> as moving your ears or clicking tooth can be much more usefull in ship to
> ship combat than kicking. Response time for a kick is huge compared to a
> trigger-like nudge of a finger. In suprising situations that little responce
> time will make all the difference.
> Regardless I think gesture recognition and VR are the BEST means to control
> weapons and tactical situations.
>
> Some sort of view-filtering would be good for droping out all useless junk
> in space. Switching view modes would actually look cool. Remember Predator?
>
> Also some sort of hud to point out useful info, such as:
> - targets which are too far away to spot
> - movement vectors
> - enemy ship movment trails like in I-WAR (nice game, played it?)
> - your own movement vector
> - other stuff (obviously you can filter it out when not needed or there
> are too much things confusing the view.)
Yup. That was one of the things I figured was there in the system, but
just not shown to us.
> Sounds are good. Many military systems use sounds as warnings etc.
> Directional sounds are even better.
Agreed.
- Charles
Charles J. Cohen
> target and fire are not impossible, instead even likely. In Quake,
> Counterstrike or most other 2D or 3D shooters you allmost never have time to
> punch your arm/leg. You'r dead before. Maby not exactly the same onbard a
> big battleship, but in case of the little Liandra...
Ah, but let's compare apples to apples. In Quake, you have to rotate
around and get the target in your crosshairs, and *then* click on the
mouse to fire. My conjecture is that the motion and clicking operation
takes just as long, if not longer, then moving your arm in that
direction to fire.
- Charles