Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

pilotonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 216 posts

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#21

Post by 0xbear »

microcolonel wrote: post #18
jjoonathan wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you add the cost of adapting the periscope HW/SW and organizing + performing a one-off small run of XBox controllers on a US-only supply chain with military markup at each level, I suspect those "XBox controllers" cost closer to $30k than $30.

Given that the 360 is no longer the current model, it's possible that they just took back the molds and swapped out a couple of the ICs. There's very little in a 360 controller to begin with. Even the wireless ones have only one complex/specialized IC[0], and it seems to have been designed by Microsoft themselves. About half of the semiconductor industry is headquartered in the United States, and about half of the wa…

You have only very vague understanding of how our government works. First, they will not contract this to some startup or anything, but instead the company that does the periscope will do it. Then there are reams of regulations to follow, an everything the contractor does will be the most expensive option available because they charge percentage of “cost”, and the higher the cost, the more money they make. I would be stunned if in the end this ends up being cheaper than just manufacturing the designs that already exist.

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#22

Post by ams6110 »

alexasmyths wrote: post #20
jedc wrote: post #17

Former submariner here. My thoughts echo those of a ex-submariner group I'm a part of -- it makes sense across the board. It's 1) a cost saving measure, 2) WAY easier to get replacements, and 3) WAAAYY easier to train new people to use it safely and efficiently.

+10. This should be done in many more places. Though with 'cost plus' contracts... providers are incented to create crazy new things for every problem. If there weren't moral questions around this - it would be amazing to see a NATO forces 'hackathon' where people create top gear/tech for soldiers with off-the-shelf components and software. I have a funny feeling that 'if they put their hearts to it' - there'd be no…

How many COTS parts does a SpaceX rocket use?

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#23

Post by microcolonel »

0xbear wrote: post #21
microcolonel wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that the 360 is no longer the current model, it's possible that they just took back the molds and swapped out a couple of the ICs. There's very little in a 360 controller to begin with. Even the wireless ones have only one complex/specialized IC[0], and it seems to have been designed by Microsoft themselves. About half of the semiconductor industry is headquartered in the United States, and about half of the wa…

You have only very vague understanding of how our government works. First, they will not contract this to some startup or anything, but instead the company that does the periscope will do it. Then there are reams of regulations to follow, an everything the contractor does will be the most expensive option available because they charge percentage of “cost”, and the higher the cost, the more money they make. I would be…

> First, they will not contract this to some startup or anything, but instead the company that does the periscope will do it.

Wouldn't they contract Microsoft to do it, since it's their own design? Even by DoD standards, Microsoft is not a "startup".

I know that there are 360 controllers used in the field already (not sure about Navy). Even if they have different standards, what you're describing probably couldn't be done anyway; the periscope controller company is probably not equipped to do the beautiful consumer goods injection moldings and precision joystick assembly (and calibration). If they tried to do this, it would likely end up costing more, and as diabolical as I think the military procurement contracting process is, I don't think they would do this specific thing unless it saved money or appeared to save money.

What exactly is stopping them from working with Microsoft (who they already contract with all the time!); at most having a U.S. PCB run, and a U.S. IC tapeout (IBM, Intel, ...), and calling it a day?

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#24

Post by ams6110 »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #14
flashman wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, now China's going to put malware into every Xbox controller on the off-chance it gets inserted into a USN submarine /s

This is something to worry about. USB hosts and devices identify themselves - malicious firmware embedded in the Xbox controller could check if it's connected to a real Xbox, compared to a Windows PC, or a submarine, and act (or misbehave) accordingly. And what is the plan in 20-30 years' time when the submarines are still in action but the controllers stopped being made? I get the feeling we'll see Navy personnel bi…

Make the periscope report to the controller that it's an Xbox.

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#25

Post by dba7dba »

South Korean Navy recently retrofitted their Type 209 and other submarines with digital camera based pericopes, replacing traditional periscopes.

When the South Korean Navy procurement office requested proposal from traditional periscope manufacturers, the quoted price was astronomical.

S Korean Navy said no thanks and had local manufacturers develop/test/manufacture a new digital camera based periscope at a FRACTION (like 10% ?) of the quoted price from traditional manufacturers.

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#27

Post by ghufran_syed »

alexasmyths wrote: post #20
jedc wrote: post #17

Former submariner here. My thoughts echo those of a ex-submariner group I'm a part of -- it makes sense across the board. It's 1) a cost saving measure, 2) WAY easier to get replacements, and 3) WAAAYY easier to train new people to use it safely and efficiently.

+10. This should be done in many more places. Though with 'cost plus' contracts... providers are incented to create crazy new things for every problem. If there weren't moral questions around this - it would be amazing to see a NATO forces 'hackathon' where people create top gear/tech for soldiers with off-the-shelf components and software. I have a funny feeling that 'if they put their hearts to it' - there'd be no…

"Hacking for Defense" is a step in this direction E.g http://hacking4defense.stanford.edu

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#28

Post by dba7dba »

ams6110 wrote: post #22
alexasmyths wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+10. This should be done in many more places. Though with 'cost plus' contracts... providers are incented to create crazy new things for every problem. If there weren't moral questions around this - it would be amazing to see a NATO forces 'hackathon' where people create top gear/tech for soldiers with off-the-shelf components and software. I have a funny feeling that 'if they put their hearts to it' - there'd be no…

How many COTS parts does a SpaceX rocket use?

I guess there's no way to know for outsiders, but I've heard SpaceX buys a lot from McMaster-Carr. Parts for rocket itself or other tools used to build/test rockets? I have no idea.

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#29

Post by 0xbear »

microcolonel wrote: post #23
0xbear wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have only very vague understanding of how our government works. First, they will not contract this to some startup or anything, but instead the company that does the periscope will do it. Then there are reams of regulations to follow, an everything the contractor does will be the most expensive option available because they charge percentage of “cost”, and the higher the cost, the more money they make. I would be…

> First, they will not contract this to some startup or anything, but instead the company that does the periscope will do it. Wouldn't they contract Microsoft to do it, since it's their own design? Even by DoD standards, Microsoft is not a "startup". I know that there are 360 controllers used in the field already (not sure about Navy). Even if they have different standards, what you're describing probably couldn't be…

The periscope company will just CNC it out of a solid block of titanium then.

Microsoft wouldn’t want their business. It’s a relatively small amount of money for very large amount of pain in the rear. And even if they did want DoDs business, DoD wouldn’t deal with them directly, instead they’d subcontract them through one of those giant contracting companies with “Federal” in their name.

Re: U.S. Navy to use Xbox 360 controllers to operate periscopes aboard submarines

#30

Post by microcolonel »

0xbear wrote: post #29
microcolonel wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, they will not contract this to some startup or anything, but instead the company that does the periscope will do it. Wouldn't they contract Microsoft to do it, since it's their own design? Even by DoD standards, Microsoft is not a "startup". I know that there are 360 controllers used in the field already (not sure about Navy). Even if they have different standards, what you're describing probably couldn't be…

The periscope company will just CNC it out of a solid block of titanium then. Microsoft wouldn’t want their business. It’s a relatively small amount of money for very large amount of pain in the rear. And even if they did want DoDs business, DoD wouldn’t deal with them directly, instead they’d subcontract them through one of those giant contracting companies with “Federal” in their name.

> DoD wouldn’t deal with them directly

Why wouldn't they deal with them directly? They already do!

I understand being cynical, but you have to admit you're making a satire of this system, no matter how ridiculous it is in reality.

Post reply on HN