Re: [SG2] APFCs in Stargrunt

Tony Christney wrote:

> Personally, I don't think that this is necessary. IFF as an integrated
> part of the future GI's dog tags (or subdermal implant) is more
> elegant, if a little dystopic, IMO. Specification of ACTIVE/INACTIVE
> could come into play for lower tech forces though.

Two years ago, I went to the AUSA convention here in DC.  One of the
projects they had there was a "smart dog tag" project, which included
the soldier's entire medical files and which could be read by a handheld
scanner.  Neato idea, probably will be implemented sometime in the next
ten or fifteen years.  But thinking on this, and considering various SF
I've read, I've decided what we'll likely see will be the subdermal
implants above, which will be storage units to hold Basic personal data
(Name, Rank, SSN), Medical Records, Classification held, Military
Personell Records Jacket, et al. One would implanted in the back of the
skull, another (emergency backup) elsewhere.  Shortrange IFF, required
to use most military equipment--if you pick up a radio, and you havn't
got one, it blanks out the frequencies automatically and zeros out the
crypto gear.  Try to get into a tank and start it, and it silently
alerts it's higher headquarters, and by the way, won't start.  So on and
so on.	Makes using captured equipment difficult in the extreme,
protects sensitive data (The divisional commander and his staff is dead,
your commandos power up the Divisional AI Mainframe. . . it asks for an
IFF reading anywhere in the vicinity, finds nothing, and formats the
hard drives), and oh-by-the-way, keeps your grunts from being shredded
by APFCs.  It only recieves and responds to IFF interrogations from
friendly equipment, not a continuous transmission, so your guys can't be
tracked by their little brain beacons.

What do ya'll think?

John M. Atkinson