Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 34839
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/04/07 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
4/7     

2004/11/11-12 [Reference/Military] UID:34839 Activity:moderate
11/11   As far as I know, a sniper's bullet is bigger than 1 cm, so it should
        be visible with, say, 40 GHz radar.  So it should be possible to have
        a radar scanner that tracks the bullet back and tells the exact location
        of the sniper, at least in theory.  This doesn't sound all that hard
        to me.  Why the hell don't we have such technology deployed in Iraq?
        is there a technical problem I'm missing here?
        \_ An interesting discussion about this:
           http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/archive/index.php/t-196.html
        \_ Sniper/Bullet Track radar has been around for awhile.  I'd guess
           it's not deployed in Fallujah for several reasons, but mainly the
           sensitivity/complexity of the equipment isn't very compatible with
           the conditions of a mobile assualt (too time consuming to set up,
           to much likelihood of rough handling).  Also, the urban environment
           is pretty claustrophobic and my not be conducive to effective radar
           system deployment.
           \_ Odd.  I'd assume that it is precisely in urban areas where
              snipers are the most dangerous.  It's probably relatively
              easy to hunt down a sniper in a wide open space.
              \_ Easy?  That really depends on teh terrain.  There are many
                 accounts of snipers doing terrible damage in open terrian
                 where there's no cover, etc.  Note: USEFUL != USABLE.
        \_ I saw something similar on Tactical to Practical on the
           History Channel two years ago. They already have a working
           implementation that uses the high speed camera to capture
           bullet traces, in real time. Why it's not deployed in
           Iraq, my guess is probably due to mass production/
           copy-right/law issues than the technical reason.
           \_ There are a number of systems, at least one of which uses
              multiple units to triangulate the shot's origin.  The problem
              with every single one of these is that they're (a) unwieldy,
              (b) fragile, and (c) require you to be looking at least in the
              general direction of where the bullet is coming from--not always
              practical in a combat situation.  -John
              \_ tell us about zhe Elite Churman Sniperscutze, John
                 \_ Difficult, yermom's playing with it.
2025/04/07 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
4/7     

You may also be interested in these entries...
2012/2/29-3/26 [Reference/Military] UID:54320 Activity:nil
2/29    "New Navy Railgun Tests Leading to Ship Superweapon by 2020"
        http://www.csua.org/u/vmd
        - Why are there fire and smoke when the bullet is propelled by EM
          force?
        - "The railgun could hit the same distant targets that Navy missiles
          strike today, he said."  Then what's the point of inventing this new
	...
2010/9/27-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Reference/Military] UID:53967 Activity:low
9/26    http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_16181812
        Men armed with assault weapons barely cause a stir at Mineta
        San Jose International Airport
        How the hell does this happen without someone calling
        the cops?
        \_ Ha! I'm totally asking the guards at work about this tomorrow.
	...
2009/4/5-13 [Reference/Military] UID:52803 Activity:kinda low
4/5     "Friends have said Poplawski was concerned about his weapons being
        seized during Barack Obama's presidency, and friends said he owned
        several handguns and an AK-47 assault rifle"
        Expect to see more of this from gun nuts.
        http://tinyurl.com/dxul6b (SF Gate)
        \_ Well, he was also a Neo-Nazi nut.
	...
Cache (8192 bytes)
www.worldaffairsboard.com/archive/index.php/t-196.html
Anti/Counter-Sniper systems: How effective in the field? bigross86 You got answers (mine) and a theory as to why the whole thing can't possi bly work right. TNP Anti-Sniper systems which detect, and pinpoint sniper fire have been in use for a while, especially with UN forces. But these systems are based on acoustic and heat signitures of the muzzle and bullet itself. What I wanted to know is cant, both these charecteristics can be eliminated with a silenced sniper rifle? With a sub-sonic bullet which doesnt create the "crack" of the bullet breaking the sonic barrier, not would the system be able to detect the muzzle flash because it would be hidden by the suppressor. Not to mention, the thought of just targetting the PILAR sensors themselves and rendering the whole system useless. A sniper can suppress an entire patrol or even a bunker or a defencive position. Now suppose to opposing forces in Iraq, Liberia Afganistan or any of the other hot-spots in the world start targetting th e PILAR sensors or getting their hands on suppressors and sub-sonic bullets for their rifles. Is it possible to detect sniper fire through some kind of radar, rather then acousitics? There better be, because the other side is gonna catch on sooner or later. com/contractors/surveillance/metravib/ bigross86 As for a sub-sonic bullet, technically it's possible, but it dramatically decreases the range of the bullet. Bullets have the same axiom as fight er pilots: "Speed is life" The faster the bullet is, that farther it wil l go. As for a flash suppressor, what it does is suppress the flash on the shoo ters side so as not to blind him. It's almost impossible to completely s uppress muzzle flash from the barrel. TNP But then again, with a silenced rifle you could afford to fire from a closer range as even at a couple of hundred meters, if the people your shooting at dont know where you are, your pretty much safe. As for the flash signiture, The Sound suppressor completely covers the muzzle and the flash is completely hidden. I wouldn't know too much about this, I think Sniper would know better than I do. Officer of Engineers The system relies on the sniper shooting first and relies on the sniper's stupidity to stay in place or come back to the same place to shoot agai n bigross86 Are sniper's ever that dumb? My snipers did quite a few groin shot s when they didn't have the sense to leave and never come back. If my snipers weren't around, the FIVE-OH was plenty good to at least pin the motherfuck down while an RRF get to him - if there's anything left. errr bigross86 Yeah, I'll take that as I don't wanna know... Well there were two parts to the question: #1 Can silenced sniper rifles with a subsonic bullet defeat this system. I personnally think that it can, but no one has actually confirmed it) #2 If so, then isnt there something better? I mean snipers can suppress a lot of troops, cause a lot of casualties. are going to get he job done, they need a better system. So isnt there any system (or atleast in development) which uses radar instead of acoustics to detect an incoming bullet and its firing location? I don't know what they are doing with i t, but I suspect that coupling it to a servo-operated 762 minigun, and using the radar to correct the aim, it would make sniping any unit equip ped with one a VERY hazardous endeavour. TNP US technology has, indeed, produced a radar that can track a high-power ed rifle bullet in flight, coupled to a computer that can pinpoint exact (within inches) point of origin, as well as point of impact, all while the bullet is in mid-trajectory. I don't know what they are doing with i t, but I suspect that coupling it to a servo-operated 762 minigun, and using the radar to correct the aim, it would make sniping any unit equip ped with one a VERY hazardous endeavour. any word on this in any journal/magazine/publication/online site? So the first thing i shoot is the gizmo, or the gomer operating it. All I know is t hat they have the radar/computer stuff worked out. The coupling to a min igun has been speculated on by certain individuals in the industry. Even with such a system, Snipers (particularly well trained ones like our buddy M21 here :) ) continue to represent a very real threat. What such a system does represent is a way to minimize the danger from self-procl aimed snipers of the 3rd world variety. M21Sniper See, what this counter is, and all defensive countermeasures are, is virt ual attrition in action. Let's take a typical mechanized(Bradley) squad(the only ones that will li kely to have such a big bulky system). Squad leader, M-4 Machine gunner, M-249 Grenadier, M-203 Grenadier, M-203 Anti tank gunner, AT-4/M-16A2 RTO/rifleman, M-16A2 and SINCGARS OK, so who's gonna pack this system outta this bunch? So, you have to add an attatched specailized unit for this anti-sniper gi zmo. They'll need transportation, weapons of their own, expensive traini ng to operate the gadget, and the gadget and mini-gun(if developed) AND minigun tripod assy(NOT a light item). Therefore, the presence of the sniper has ALREADY caused more attrition t o the potential adversaries forces/treasure than a standard rifleman wou ld do if he killed four tanks. Virtual attrition is best exemplified by land based IADS and naval fleet AAW/ASW vessels. Anything that detracts from your focus of (or funding for) killing the en emy/taking the objective, is virtual attrition at work. bigross86 Anything that means they're not shooting at you is good... TNP See, what this counter is, and all defensive countermeasures are, is virt ual attrition in action. Let's take a typical mechanized(Bradley) squad(the only ones that will li kely to have such a big bulky system). Squad leader, M-4 Machine gunner, M-249 Grenadier, M-203 Grenadier, M-203 Anti tank gunner, AT-4/M-16A2 RTO/rifleman, M-16A2 and SINCGARS OK, so who's gonna pack this system outta this bunch? So, you have to add an attatched specailized unit for this anti-sniper gi zmo. They'll need transportation, weapons of their own, expensive traini ng to operate the gadget, and the gadget and mini-gun(if developed) AND minigun tripod assy(NOT a light item). Therefore, the presence of the sniper has ALREADY caused more attrition t o the potential adversaries forces/treasure than a standard rifleman wou ld do if he killed four tanks. Virtual attrition is best exemplified by land based IADS and naval fleet AAW/ASW vessels. Anything that detracts from your focus of (or funding for) killing the en emy/taking the objective, is virtual attrition at work. Even the threat of the presence of enemy snipers in the theater of operation is enough to slow down the advance, while hiking up the costs. And even if this system becomes operational, and is mountedd on APCs/IFVs or bunkers, the sniper could still knowck off the sensor dome or the system making it useless... I guess snipers are going to remain a real threat well into the next century. M21Sniper I remember when the FLIR was to make snipers obsolete. Now, 20 plus years later, they have only served to make us better through improved training and enhanced tactics. i'd have a few hundred bucks to go blow at the nudi e bar. Where w ould you have to shoot to get the easiest "kill"? M21Sniper In a hover, inside 500 meters, you'd just shoot the pilot. In a hover, you could score a hit on the general vicinity of the engine c ompartment from probably 1000 meters. M21Sniper The real problem with the Kiowa's was that they could see you a lot farth er than you could see them. bigross86 Is there any way to avoid a Kiowa strafing you? bigross86 Have you ever tried taking a potshot at the Kiowa's dome? The best way to deal with a prowling 58 Delta was to lay low until it lef t The best way to hit helos is on the ground in the FARP. Get a team in a firing position with LOS to a FARP, and you could wipe ou t(more correctly tie down) a whole squadron of helos on the ground. bigross86 So instead of a sniper team send in a squad or platoon of infantry with M -203's and M-60's. M21Sniper No, cause a FARP has an armed security element. Standard infantry would face a pitched battle to take a FARP,...