"The sniper just got more deadly" Topic

Surprised no-one has mentioned this story yet.

link

can't be long until it's in use.

It literally brings new meaning to the term "one shot, one kill."

I did, just a couple of days ago in another thread, and someone else linked to it (It's the Sandia Lab's seeking bullet, isn't it?).

I think it's going to prove to be a failure personally.

Though, the later portion of the article says "Doesn't require LoS" that's total garbage. There's no way it can't require LoS. It's just a round that doesn't travel in a normal arc trajectory.

And public marketing? I can't see many recreational shooters doing anything buy buying a few just to try out for curiosity sake. Maybe professional hunters, but this is a military grade round and even if made available to civilians, it doesn't mean civilians will be able to, or want to make use of it.

Dueling, as a custom, does not exist if pistols are too capable. In Menlaus's great-grandfather's day, when a sniper in Austin could shoot a satellite-triangulated beam-guided bullet to Fort Worth and downa man's chimney and into his left ear, duelists within eyeshot of each other would have been certain to die. It was not the inaccuracy of the guns that revived the custom in this generation; it was the perfection of the defensive measures.
Menelaus was confident. He had a Krupp 5 MegAmp railgun with a 250 IQ that fired two pounds of smart shot and a nine-meter globe of effective counterfire. The main slug could dance and jink like a drop of mercury on a skillet.
-John C. Wright, Count to a Trillion

It looks for a laser illuminated target… Doesn't a laser require LoS? So you're shooting at some guy behind a hill, who has the laser on them for your bullet to do it's magic arc up and down into him?

And civilian market for this, really there is none. I think it's already illegal to hunt with laser sights in most places. And this round sounds like it will be too expensive for plinking. Pretty much making this bullet a one trick pony.

Much like the solar-powered flashlight without a battery (just shines only when it has sunlight to power its beam).

Or catching a bird by pouring salt on its tail.

: )

(It's the Sandia Lab's seeking bullet, isn't it?)

Yep!

There's no current weapon that could launch one of these. It needs a smoothbore barrel, and the bullet is 4" long(!).

If the bullet is so clever, you'd only need a shotgun to fire one…admittedly, a shotgun with a bigger bang and slightly strengthened barrel…but it could be knocked up in a workshop over a lunchtime.

The bullet doesn't require LOS because the weapon that it is fired from doesn't have to be the one that is illuminating the target.

The target could be illuminated by another soldier or system in a different location (who can see the target, a drone, or even by a satellite).

In the other thread, this is one of the things that I mentioned you wouldn't want to fire from a shoulder-fired weapon.

That doesn't mean that it couldn't be fired from a bipod or pintel mounted weapon.

Heck the firing trooper wouldn't need to carry the weapon at all….

Talk about a stand-off platform…

I can't really see this getting in to the hands of private individuals, between cost and nervy security establishments. As for hostage situations the fact that its accuracy increases with range suggests that it probably won't actually be that suitable for hostage situations, which typically occur in crowed urban environments with concomitantly short ranges. If you can get a laser beam on someone then you can probably just shoot them with a normal gun. As for military usage I would have thought cost and complexity would restrict its use. In terms of versatility I would have thought the large caliber air burst round would be of more practical use. For the moment it strikes me as technological curiosity that will probably sit on the shelf. After all weren't we supposed to using caseless rounds and plastic guns by now?

After all weren't we supposed to using caseless rounds and plastic guns by now?

Well, until West Germany had to foot the bill to get East Germany's military infrastructure back up to standards, they were in the initial deployment phase of the H&K G11 caseless rifle.

It's an interesting piece, I'm kinda waiting for that to come back around. The problem with the G11 is that it's a 4.7mm projectile, when the current tendency is for something bigger than 5.56mm to carry more energy.

If they could scale up the action to ~6.5mm or so, I'm pretty sure they'd have a winner.

I can see a utility, as (if it performs as implied) it could turn just about anyone into an accurate sniper. Put the laser on the target, fire— you won't miss. That's a lot bigger deal than it sounds, assuming it works. Keep in mind that in most cases the time differential between the moment of firing to the moment of impact with the target (or a miss) is measured in fractions of a second, and even the best shooters rarely put the shot exactly where they are aiming. This raises mediocre shooters to accurate shooters. Imagine an army of 1 shot, 1 kill soldiers, guaranteed. Every shot hits where it's intended to hit. Laser on target, BANG, down, next target. BANG. BANG. BANG… thatt's a general's dream and a security details' nightmare.

Assuming, of course, it actually works.

We are also forgetting the trend in military technology to make things smaller. So if they can make this bullet smaller and make it more like fire and forget weapons then we have a winner right there. This would have to the size of a 7.62mm round at the minimum to be of any practical use. As it is right now they'd have to invent a whole new rifle just to use it.

And you can't fight with an army of snipers. It's always about combined arms, you're still going to need some grunts to move in quick with rapid fire assault weapons to take and hold.

Yeah, been playing too much Battlefield 3 lately and seen teams with too many guys playing as recon, guess which team looses those fights?

Yeah … still a little disappointed that the G11 and whole caseless ammo concept has been put terminally on hold …

The caseless ammo concept hasn't been put on hold.

It's just changed a bit.

Current concepts separate the propellant into liquid or gas propellants and binary propellants at that (they mix and become violatile and an explosive at that point). The liquid or gaseous propellants produce a cleaner charge. One of the problems with the G11 was that it had to be cleaned often, as the powder charge often clogged the receiver.

With binary propellants, they want to be able to reduce their size/amount so that separate ammo, and propellant cartridges do not need to be loaded. Rather than having a separate propellant magazine or cartridge and aan ammo magazine, they would like to have one magazine that contained the propellant as well… There are problems with that way of thinking that are being challenged by other teams who think that a separate cartridge for the propellant is safer (and more cost-effective).

Good to know !! Being a former Infantryman, I see the advantages. Next to the "Mass-Driver" Rifles in the movie "Eraser" …

One of the questions that arises from the 'shooter doesnt' need a line of sight' claim is what is the window for target acquisition for the round?

How much time can it take to acquire? At 2400fps a target within 6 tenths of a mile (1 klick) is going to be behind the bullet if it takes more than 1 and a quarter seconds.

How far from the bullets original path can the bullet 'see' the designator? Does it have a 180 degree sensor or is it limited to 30, 60, 90, 120?

Does the bullet perform an initial search pattern of some sort? Or does it fly straight until it acquires?

I could see a lot of lost bullets. With several of these being fired at once I could see some target designator accidentally becoming a target as well – would imagine that they would all run pretty much the same frequency of laser.

ok guys
countermeasures
body armor made from small mirrors or what else would one use

How much time can it take to acquire? At 2400fps a target within 6 tenths of a mile (1 klick) is going to be behind the bullet if it takes more than 1 and a quarter seconds.

I'm guessing that the answer may in part lie in the statement about it being more 'accurate' at longer ranges.

Mirrors will not defeat a targeting laser.

In fact, a mirror is like an amplifier for a targeting laser, as it reflects even more of the light. All that would do is give the round an even clearer image of the target.

countermeasures
body armor made from small mirrors or what else would one use?

Smoke. If the laser can't reflect off you, the bullet goes from being addressed to your left nostril to being addressed "to whom it may concern"

Another possibility would be decoy beams, but I don't know enough about laser designators to say if those would work.