First-party / Non-AI
Steel-Track Machine Context
Original Deere photo of an 850 P dozer. Useful equipment context—not confirmation that this is Curtis’s target model.
John Deere / Evidence before invention
Undercarriage,
In Focus.
Real Deere references. Curtis’s inspection problem. Four ways smart glasses could help a technician do the work.
Start with guided inspection and physical measurement capture. They connect most directly to Curtis’s recorded comments. Remote expertise and report handoff are adjacent ideas to validate—not requirements attributed to him.
Two tracks of work, not one approved project.
The earlier undercarriage proposal concerned simulator lesson content. The newer smart-glasses discussion concerns technical operations. Shared subject matter makes reuse plausible, but neither scope, funding nor a glasses platform is established by the sources reviewed. I2 · I3
01 / Internal first-party evidence
What Curtis Actually Asked About
These findings come from human Slack messages and timestamped meeting dialogue. Meeting transcripts are machine-transcribed records—not AI-authored source material; the recording remains the authority if wording matters.
AUG 13 · CUSTOMER DIALOGUE
Inspect. Measure. Decide What Needs Attention.
“evaluating the condition of your undercarriage what needs to be replaced?”
“Does it just need to be tightened?”
Curtis then explicitly mentions measuring wear on rollers. He also responds positively to inspection challenges with faults such as a loose undercarriage or missing sprocket tooth. This supports the problem; it does not specify glasses. I1 · 06:49–08:32
OCT 1 · HISTORICAL STATUS
The Earlier Content Proposal Was Held
Curtis confirms receipt of the undercarriage and wear-parts proposal, then says, “We’ll be holding off on that one for now.” Windows licensing was the higher priority. Jonathan describes the proposal as mostly new lesson content. I2 · 17:54–18:48
A dated statement about that proposal—not proof the newer glasses discussion is paused or funded.
OCT 15 · JONATHAN’S FIELD UPDATE
A New Operational Avenue
Jonathan reports that Curtis is seriously exploring more simulator content and technical operational software using smart glasses, potentially reaching another part of Deere. No specific maintenance workflow, headset or approved scope is named. I3
OCT 16 · CREATIVE-BRIEF HANDOFF
Supplement Jonathan—Don’t Replace Him
Greg asks Jonathan for the undercarriage information so he can work on the smart-glasses creative brief. This page gathers supporting evidence and testable ideas; Jonathan’s current firsthand account should determine the actual target. I4
02 / External manufacturer evidence
Why This Is a Useful Maintenance Problem
It Is a System of Wear Components
Deere identifies track shoes, links, rollers, bushings and different undercarriage configurations. Its brochure describes larger links, rollers and front idlers in Maximum Life systems. An inspection app must know the machine and fitted configuration—not apply one generic wear rule. E1 · E2 · pp. 2–7 · E3 · pp. 4, 7
Cleaning Makes Inspection Possible
For rubber-track equipment, Deere calls periodic cleaning an ideal time to inspect. It names cuts, punctures, tears, excessive wear, roller flat spots and oil leakage. These are useful photo-and-checklist categories for a CTL variant—not a universal steel-track checklist. E4 · p. 9
Tension Is Not “Tighter Is Better”
Deere’s rubber-track guidance states that excessive tightness can accelerate wear and looseness can cause de-tracking. A proposed workflow should retrieve the correct machine manual and record the measured condition before recommending an action. No universal sag value or adjustment procedure is supplied here. E4 · pp. 4, 9–10
Evidence Before a Repair Decision
Deere’s bushing comparison makes physical wear visible, while its selection guidance says soil conditions and application matter. The software opportunity is to organize observations, measurements and expert review—not infer remaining life from one photograph. E2 · pp. 3, 5
Source boundary: these are manufacturer webpages and dated brochures, not the model/serial-specific service procedure for a selected pilot. Deere’s marketing wear-life and cost claims are not projected smart-glasses savings.
03 / Original source gallery
Real Deere Pictures & Published Guidance
No generated imagery in this section. Click any image to inspect it, then follow its original manufacturer source. Photos and page renders retain source content; none were generatively enhanced.
First-party / Non-AI
Rubber Tracks Are a Different Case
Original Deere CTL undercarriage photo. Keep rubber-track procedures distinct from steel-track dozer and excavator procedures.
First-party / Non-AI
What Bushing Wear Looks Like
Actual page 5 of Deere’s DKASC2 brochure (Nov 2017). Its sand-test photographs compare standard and SC-2 bushings; this is historical product-test evidence, not a glasses result.
First-party / Non-AI
Deere’s Inspection Guidance
Actual page 9 of DKBRUBBER (Oct 2020). Covers rubber-track damage, roller/sprocket wear, leaks and inspection during cleaning. Not a steel-track service procedure.
04 / Four proposed experiences
Hands Free. Evidence in View.
AI-generated concept advertising. These four images illustrate possibilities, not Deere products or maintenance instructions. Optical effects dramatize the wearer’s experience; they are not physical holograms.
Concepts 1 and 2 are closest to the recorded inspection-and-measurement need. Concepts 3 and 4 explore the operational workflow around it. All four require discovery and validation.
Loading shared votes…
01 / AI concept
Know Where to Look
Turn the undercarriage into a guided inspection route.
The technician confirms machine identity and follows Deere-approved checkpoints for shoes, links, bushings, rollers, idlers and sprockets. Voice notes and photos stay attached to the inspected component.
Evidence, dependencies & pilot
Basis: Curtis explicitly described an undercarriage inspection lesson and evaluating wear (Aug 13, 08:02–08:32). Extending this to live glasses is a ForgeFX concept.
Needs: Start with model-specific illustrated prompts. Spatial highlighting requires compatible displays, tracking and field validation; the glasses do not diagnose unseen damage.
Test: Begin here: one machine family, one inspection route, photo-and-voice evidence capture.
ForgeMedia concept ↗02 / AI concept
Measure It. Capture It.
Keep both hands on the inspection—not on a clipboard.
The glasses show the approved measurement location and method while the technician uses a calibrated physical tool. Capture the spoken reading, units, tool ID and photo; require confirmation before comparing with the correct Deere wear limits.
Visual: removed roller on a bench. Tool geometry and measurement method are illustrative, not a service instruction.
Evidence, dependencies & pilot
Basis: Curtis specifically mentioned measuring wear on rollers (Aug 13, 08:19–08:32). Automatic measurement from a glance was not requested or established.
Needs: Deere-approved measuring method and limits, the correct model/serial range, calibrated tools and readable eyewear. No camera-only precision claim or invented tolerance.
Test: Test measurement completeness and transcription accuracy against a conventional inspection sheet.
ForgeMedia concept ↗03 / AI concept
Bring the Expert With You
Let a specialist see the exact concern without another site visit.
Share the technician’s view of a questionable bushing, roller or sprocket. A remote expert marks the image, asks for a second angle or measurement, and records a recommendation for human review.
Evidence, dependencies & pilot
Basis: A proposed operational extension of the inspection problem—not a confirmed Curtis requirement or a Deere-connected product.
Needs: Camera access, authorized video connection, privacy controls and a remote expert. Screen-space annotations can come first; persistent spatial marks need additional hardware and tracking.
Test: Compare time to a documented expert recommendation and the number of repeat information requests.
ForgeMedia concept ↗04 / AI concept
Leave With the Whole Story
Finish the inspection with evidence already organized.
Hands-free photos and dictated findings become a component-by-component draft report. Compare with prior inspections, flag missing measurements and hand a reviewed record to the service team.
Evidence, dependencies & pilot
Basis: A ForgeFX workflow hypothesis built on Deere’s component-specific wear context. A completed service record is a proposed outcome, not proof of existing integration.
Needs: Consistent component IDs, inspection history, secure storage and an approved export or service-system integration. A technician signs off; software does not independently release the machine to service.
Test: Measure report completeness and time from finishing the inspection to a reviewed service handoff.
ForgeMedia concept ↗Votes are shared and saved. One active vote per concept per browser; click the selected thumb to remove it. Browser identity is resettable, not authenticated one-person voting. These four have separate IDs; the earlier 16-concept board and its votes are preserved.
05 / Starter for Greg’s creative brief
A Small Pilot With a Clear Finish Line
Proposed pilot: guide one technician through one approved undercarriage inspection on one confirmed machine family, capturing observations and physical measurements into a reviewed record. Prove the workflow before attempting camera-based wear estimation or elaborate spatial overlays.
- 1 / Confirm the MachineIdentify model, serial range and fitted undercarriage. Load the matching approved reference.
- 2 / Guide and CaptureShow the next checkpoint; collect a photo, voice note and physical-tool measurement where required.
- 3 / Review UncertaintyAsk for missing evidence or bring in an authorized expert. Keep adjustment and replacement decisions with qualified personnel.
- 4 / Hand Off a RecordSave component IDs, readings, units and photos. Require human review before service-system export.
Hardware Reality
Camera/audio glasses may support capture and remote assistance without world-anchored visuals. Display prompts need a display; persistent highlights need spatial tracking. Validate daylight readability, PPE compatibility, battery life, connectivity, camera permissions and offline behavior before choosing hardware.
How to Judge the Pilot
Compare with today’s workflow: missed checkpoints, measurement/transcription errors, time spent documenting, repeat information requests and time to a reviewed report. Establish a baseline before promising savings.
What Jonathan and Curtis Can Pin Down
- Is the first use case technician training, live dealer service, customer inspection—or a combination?
- Which machine family and undercarriage configuration? Steel-track dozer/excavator or rubber-track CTL?
- Which approved inspection sheet, wear limits, tools and maintenance procedure should govern it?
- Who owns the receiving Deere team, the service record and the decision to adjust, replace or escalate?
- Which glasses are actually being considered, and what camera/display/SDK access is available?
- How does the newer operational opportunity relate to the earlier simulator proposal—if at all?
Safety boundary: concept research only. Do not use the imagery as a positioning, measurement, track-tension or repair procedure. Actual work requires the correct Deere manual, trained personnel, approved safe setup and tool/method validation. No automatic machine control or return-to-service authorization is proposed.
06 / Follow the evidence
Source Register
Source event dates are shown in UTC. Internal dialogue and external manufacturer publications are cited separately.
- I1Curtis’s direct inspection intent ↗
John Deere/FFX Program Meeting · Aug 13, 2026 · 06:49–09:22; key passage 08:02–08:32. Raw transcript sentences, not the AI meeting summary.
- I2Earlier proposal and its historical hold ↗
John Deere/FFX Program Meeting · Oct 1, 2026 · 17:54–18:48. Curtis acknowledged receipt and prioritized Windows licensing.
- I3New technical-operations opening ↗
Jonathan’s firsthand show-trip update · Oct 15, 2026. Describes serious exploration, not a selected application or approval.
- I4Creative-brief handoff ↗
Greg’s request for Jonathan’s undercarriage information · Oct 16, 2026. This page supplements that handoff.
- E1John Deere Undercarriages ↗
Current manufacturer page, retrieved Oct 16, 2026. Component overview, undercarriage variants and original equipment photos.
- E2John Deere Undercarriages · DKASC2 ↗
Manufacturer brochure · Nov 2017 · PDF pp. 2–7. Component and bushing background; dated marketing evidence, not current repair instructions.
- E3450 P-Tier Dozer · MD450PAU ↗
Manufacturer brochure · pp. 4 and 7. Specific undercarriage options and specifications; do not transfer its measurements to other machines.
- E4Compact Track Loader Rubber Tracks · DKBRUBBER ↗
Manufacturer brochure · Oct 2020 · pp. 4, 9–10 and 12. Inspection, track tension, cleaning and damage for rubber-track machines.
Research coverage and remaining gaps
Internal discovery searched Fireflies for “undercarriage,” “smart glasses” and “John Deere,” then inspected relevant dialogue in six selected meetings plus both linked Slack threads. Evidence above prioritizes Curtis’s direct comments and Jonathan/Greg’s firsthand messages; AI meeting summaries were not used as authority. Slack full-text search was unavailable to the bot token, so direct thread retrieval was used. This is targeted research, not an exhaustive archive audit.
External research prioritized Deere’s own website, manufacturer-hosted brochures and images linked by that website. The current undercarriage page was retrieved directly and its published component data inspected. The original photo bytes and brochure pages are retained with provenance. A legacy operator-manual URL could not be retrieved, so its search snippets and model-specific settings were excluded.
The signed/complete earlier proposal, current approval status, selected pilot model, exact inspection procedure, hardware choice and service-system API access were not established. These are discovery inputs—not blanks filled with assumptions.