DARPA's Magic Bullets Change Course To Hit Moving Targets

I liked the simpler solution where you lock in a target on your scope, and just hold the trigger down when aiming at it. When perfectly aligned (and it adjusts for range/altitude/windspeed/direction etc), it fires on its own.
 
So, with the right bullets/gun, anyone can be a killer sniper.

Yea, this can't go wrong can it?
 
That's some impressive technology, although all of the linked articles were pretty sparse. Is it self-guided, i.e. optical/IR tracking? Or is it laser-guided, designated by the shooter? Or does the rifle track the trajectory of the bullet and send out control signals?

And then the bullet has to modify its trajectory while spinning at nearly 150,000 RPM (Is my math right?3000 fps, 15" for the twist which is about 1 twist for 1.25 feet, that's 2400 rps, times 60 is 144k RPM)
 
So, with the right bullets/gun, anyone can be a killer sniper.

Yea, this can't go wrong can it?

On the flip-side, why would we need to bother to train people how to shoot properly anymore...Either way this has the potential to be very bad.
 
That's some impressive technology, although all of the linked articles were pretty sparse. Is it self-guided, i.e. optical/IR tracking? Or is it laser-guided, designated by the shooter? Or does the rifle track the trajectory of the bullet and send out control signals?

And then the bullet has to modify its trajectory while spinning at nearly 150,000 RPM (Is my math right?3000 fps, 15" for the twist which is about 1 twist for 1.25 feet, that's 2400 rps, times 60 is 144k RPM)

Are you sure this is a rifled system, it could be smooth bore.
 
So, with the right bullets/gun, anyone can be a killer sniper.

Yea, this can't go wrong can it?

Anyone being anyone who can get their hands on such weaponry. I imagine they're not going to be selling this weapon system at Walmart.
 
Hard to tell in the video what we're looking at because their is nothing to scale against the target or the projectile ... so I find this hard to believe. "Bullets" don't home in on their target. The video could be some blurry animation someone put together. Now, if DARPA has managed to find someone who has invented small guided missiles, that's a different story.
 
On the flip-side, why would we need to bother to train people how to shoot properly anymore...Either way this has the potential to be very bad.

Well, shooting itself is only one of hundreds of skills a soldier must learn today. A sniper on the other hand has all that and more, plus the peerless art of long range shooting and they have to have the mental strength to handle the job.

Repeated Bullseyes at 100 yards is cool, at 300 yards you are starting to become consistent, at 500 you are showing some skill, at 1,000 yards and more a person has it all worked out. But that's against a target, not a living moving person. Killing someone at 1,000 yards is much tougher and living with yourself after is something else as well. Either a person is a psychopath and loves the killing, or just has no conscience, or they have the strong belief that what they are doing is right. I hate to bring up a movie on this but the way it was portrayed in American Sniper would be an example of the last type. It's one thing to do this once, or a few times, but if a guy can do this 20 or 50 times they have to fall into one of these three profiles I think.
 
Anyone being anyone who can get their hands on such weaponry. I imagine they're not going to be selling this weapon system at Walmart.

We didn't sell Stingers at Walmart either but someone's been shooting down American Aircraft with them haven't they?

The scenario is simple. Somewhere along the line someone will decide it's smart to give something like this to some untrained goat herder cause he is fighting someone we really don't like. Then it's too late to just take it back unless we build in a way to remotely disable it.
 
On the flip-side, why would we need to bother to train people how to shoot properly anymore...Either way this has the potential to be very bad.

The scenario is simple. Somewhere along the line someone will decide it's smart to give something like this to some untrained goat herder cause he is fighting someone we really don't like. Then it's too late to just take it back unless we build in a way to remotely disable it.

This is a great idea...to make a defense contractor billions.

"Hey Don...we sell a lot of bullets, but not much margin there."
"You're right Bob...let's make them smart then we can charge $100,000 per bullet!"
"Genious!"

It already costs $1MM per year per combat soldier in Afghanistan. Look for it to double.
 
While not rotating nearly as fast...JDAMs are guided while rotating during freefall.

All I am saying is that the article doesn't state it's a rifled system and there is no reason to assume it is. Rifling is a technique engineered to stabilize a projectile. But if a projectile can be stabilized by another means, particularly one that can be used to also adjust trajectory, then rifling is counterproductive.
 
Grahamkracka, I have been doing some more digging and although I have found nothing truely specific one way or the other, the text does sound more like this technology is a combination of targeting/guidance system and special ammunition designed for standard .50 Cal Sniper grade rifles.
 
So, with the right bullets/gun, anyone can be a killer sniper.

Yea, this can't go wrong can it?

It will be mil only. Not saying it can't find its way in to the wrong hands, but it won't be sold at your local walmart.
 
I liked the simpler solution where you lock in a target on your scope, and just hold the trigger down when aiming at it. When perfectly aligned (and it adjusts for range/altitude/windspeed/direction etc), it fires on its own.

I think the goal here is for moving targets that change direction. ^ is amazing for stationary targets...
 
Really only useful for killing high value targets. The cost would be too high for low value targets. So this will be used to kill the fuckheads starting the shit, rather than the "goatherder" as someone said. I have no problems killing the fuckheads (on BOTH sides) who start these wars.

While i do believe that wars are a necessary evil, the people in charge of starting them should be at least a little afraid, and face the same risks as the soldiers they send into battle.
 
Hard to tell in the video what we're looking at because their is nothing to scale against the target or the projectile ... so I find this hard to believe. "Bullets" don't home in on their target. The video could be some blurry animation someone put together. Now, if DARPA has managed to find someone who has invented small guided missiles, that's a different story.

Although true, I tend to believe it. Teledyne has been working on this for years. They have/had other videos out.
 
I wonder what tech they use for tracking, and how you make sure it doesn't lock on to the wrong person...
 
On the flip-side, why would we need to bother to train people how to shoot properly anymore...Either way this has the potential to be very bad.

Ah, memories...

zorg_zf_1.png
 
Grahamkracka, I have been doing some more digging and although I have found nothing truely specific one way or the other, the text does sound more like this technology is a combination of targeting/guidance system and special ammunition designed for standard .50 Cal Sniper grade rifles.

DARPA has been releasing public info on this for a few years, 2011 or something are that time... Your right these are geared for .50 cal sniping rifles like the Barrett M82 / M107.
I think the concept for the bullet is to allow the shooter an advantage of shooting in un favorable weather conditions & to help them with concealment for the shooter not giving away the location of the sniping team.
this is what bullet is suppose to look like.

http://www.darpa.mil/uploadedImages/Content/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Exacto/exacto projectile_full.jpg
 
DARPA has been releasing public info on this for a few years, 2011 or something are that time... Your right these are geared for .50 cal sniping rifles like the Barrett M82 / M107.
I think the concept for the bullet is to allow the shooter an advantage of shooting in un favorable weather conditions & to help them with concealment for the shooter not giving away the location of the sniping team.
this is what bullet is suppose to look like.

http://www.darpa.mil/uploadedImages/Content/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Exacto/exacto projectile_full.jpg

Oh if you want to know more about EXtreme ACcuracy Tasked Ordnance
look at the Gov site go to the bottom where you can see the current declassification info

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportu...e7a5e43262c87213570e480f892&tab=core&_cview=1
 
So, with the right bullets/gun, anyone can be a killer sniper.

Yea, this can't go wrong can it?

Huh, imagine that, the pro big brother, government can do no wrong individual doesn't like the idea of anyone being able to be a sniper.
 
Hard to tell in the video what we're looking at because their is nothing to scale against the target or the projectile ... so I find this hard to believe. "Bullets" don't home in on their target. The video could be some blurry animation someone put together. Now, if DARPA has managed to find someone who has invented small guided missiles, that's a different story.

They've had guided artillery about two decades now. Your forward op team has laser designators on target, and the gun bunnies send in a 105mm shell that steers toward the laser and hits without error. You get artillery strikes with airstrike precision this way.

I saw demonstrations of the prototype of this about 3 years ago. It's definitely real. What this new system is doing is just using a .50 cal projectile that's a scaled down version of the artillery system. You keep the beam on the target and the bullet steers toward it, and ironically, the farther away you are the greater your chance of hit since you have more time to recover from recoil and have longer to steer the bullet to target precisely. Alternatively you can have a separate shooter and spotter, with the spotter using the illuminator and the shooter just firing the rifle. You could even have the rifle on a motorized turret pod that tracks the beam and fires from a remote switch, so you could keep the shooter on optics and illuminator only and not even need to shoulder the rifle. No recoil, no disruption in sight picture, and you could be several meters away from the weapon... making it a lot harder for someone to accurately land return fire. The only downside is if someone can see the illuminator, but they need IR equipment for that, and by the time they realize they have a designator on them they have maybe enough time to soil their BDU's before they're trading war stories with their buddies in Valhalla.
 
Back
Top