Quantcast

Pirates Beware: Soon Rifles That Kill from a Mile Away (TIME magazine article)

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by FourTeeFive, Apr 21, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kentucky Kernel

    Kentucky Kernel Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Messages:
    70
    Location:
    Ashland, KY
    I bet that they are trying to couple facial recognition technology with nanoscale guidance technology, or something similar. The brilliant folks who do DARPA-funded work are truly remarkable.

    KK
     
  2. Regular Joe

    Regular Joe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    73
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Whatever would the navy do without snipers? Well, when I was in, the USMC was part of the Dept. of the Navy. And then there are the SEALS. If the Navy didn't have snipers, we wouldn't have a military. Very sharp bunch around here............................
     
  3. #shooter

    #shooter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    606
    Location:
    Indiana
    Maybe its just me, but 30 yard pops at sea doesn't seem "easy."
     
  4. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    I don't know that improvements in weapon technology will do us any good while we have an esteemed leader who believes is peaceful resolution.

    Now if these new models could be reengineered to launch flowers... :D
     
  5. Cannonball888

    Cannonball888 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,172
    Location:
    Florida
    Maybe Fearless Leader could get a weapon developed to launch some bailout money to help them to change their wrongful ways.
     
  6. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Old Fuff: "Now if these new models could be reengineered to launch flowers..."

    Didn't the Japanese have such a system in development? Something about an "Okha" (Cherry Blossum)?

    The imp of the perverse now is putting impages into my head of a launching platform for cultivated tulip bulbs which enter the enemy's mouth at high speed and open explosively on contact with human saliva, thus blowing their jaws wide open, suffocating them and defeating their attack.
     
  7. runrabbitrun

    runrabbitrun member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Right here
    Ah yes. Kill em with kindness. lol
     
  8. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    Actually I expect that with the new vision of Peaceful Resolution, the monies used in the past to develop weapon systems and maintain military services will be directed toward much more important social programs and bail-outs for carefully selected candidates. Any misfortunate misunderstandings with foreign countries or pirates can be adjudicated through the United Nations. :rolleyes:
     
  9. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,756
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Really the problem isn't finding rifles that can kill from a mile away, its finding Rob Furlongs put behind them.

    Every time the media tells us how this gun or that gun can kill at over a mile or whatever, they never point out how EXTREMELY difficult it is for highly trained expert marksmen to pull off those shots.
     
  10. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Good point, Zundfolge. Under experimental conditions I've hit a man-sized target at 1,300 yards with the open iron elevated tangent sight of my Long Branch Enfield Number 4 Mark I*, using Mark VII Ball. That doesn't mean I'd issue that rifle as a 1,300 yard gun.
     
  11. jtuck

    jtuck Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    49
    Not to mention, how many rounds were fired in that experiment.

    (Not doubting your skill, just making a point)
     
  12. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    jtuck: "Not to mention, how many rounds were fired in that experiment."

    Believe it or not, on that particular occasion I hit the thing on the first shot -- a freak accident, I freely admit. Shooting of that kind, which I dearly love, is more akin to pioneer rocketry than to competitive marksmanship -- far more fails than wins. But MAN is it fun, in a ludicrous and impractical sort of way. It just shows what those old boomers can do, as a matter of ballistics, and I smile every time I elevate a tangent rear sight.
     
  13. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    The problem I see with the recent situation was not one of a lack of hardware, but a lack of decent tactics. When the captain jumped overboard, the Navy should have greased the pirate boat. No type of hardware is going to be useful if someone is asleep at the wheel, or otherwise fails to act when an opportunity presents itself.
     
  14. jtuck

    jtuck Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    49
    I love those days...alas they are far and few between for me.
     
  15. Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

    Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    13,146
    Well, there's not much more you can do to what's already been done with current firearms, to hit a target that is moving, due to waves or any other reason, other than:

    1. Guide the projectile to the target through the use of a guidance system, be it a "non-creation-of-energy method", such as ailerons or whatever, or with an energy system (side rocket of some sort to provide flight correction)
    2. In addition to #1, possibly also provide additional thrust to the projectile (which turns it from a "bullet" into a "missile bullet"), in order to have a straighter trajectory.

    I think they're talking here solely about #1, not #2, and I would stab a guess that it's a non-energy creation method, such as fins, ailerons or changing the placement of the center of gravity to provide correction during flight.

    The problem with such systems in conjunction with a GUN, as opposed to a conventional missile which accelerates relatively slowly when it's launched, is the relatively fragile and precise guidance components (battery, adjustable fins, etc.) surviving the incredible shock to the whole system created by the rapid acceleration of a bullet upon ignition. You have to make them small enough to fit into the projectile's size parameters (and still retain a decent BC), sturdy enough to survive the rapid acceleration launch from the cartridge with smokeless powder, and yet actually work to recognize the target and make adjustments to the target. No easy task.

    Gerald Bull, a genius engineer, could never overcome this problem of rapid acceleration when launching a satellite from a gun, combined with fragile components, even with a long long looooooong barrel and slow powder.

    In other words, I'll believe it when I see it work.
     
  16. Freelance Tax Collector

    Freelance Tax Collector Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    222
    I actually know someone working for an aerospace research department that claims to be working on a project just like that with a .338 Lapua rifle.

    Edit:

    Speak of the devil! There's a discussion and a link to an article in the "Flying sniper rifle" thread in the rifles section. Way to go SDL and USU!
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice