Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The 'cat's eyes' laser that can help British troops pinpoint a sniper before he pulls the trigger
dailymail.co.uk ^ | January 12, 2009 | Mail Foreign Service

Posted on 01/13/2009 6:52:44 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY

Snipers or assassins could be spotted in their nests before even firing a shot thanks to laser surveillance technology to be unveiled in Britain.

European and U.S. companies are accelerating research into anti-sniper defences in response to threats in Afghanistan and Iraq and at home.

But most systems use acoustic or thermal sensors that depend on waiting for the first shot.

An alternative developed by the European aerospace group EADS aims to warn of attack and pinpoint the sniper before he pulls the trigger by bouncing light off his telescopic sight.

'It is the same principle as 'cat's eyes' in the middle of the road,' said Peter Talbot-Jones, research team leader at EADS Innovation Works at Newport in Wales.

'Cat's eyes' behave like the retina of a cat by reflecting light from a car's headlamps to illuminate lines on the road.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: banglist; catseye; oneshotonekill; snipers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-129 next last

1 posted on 01/13/2009 6:52:44 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Does anyone else get the feeling that these technical innovations in counter-insurgency warfare make the second amendment even more irrelevent than it already is when it comes to protecting against the government?


2 posted on 01/13/2009 6:57:26 PM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

You think the Second Amendment is irrelevant?


3 posted on 01/13/2009 7:00:00 PM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

“Does anyone else get the feeling that these technical innovations in counter-insurgency warfare make the second amendment even more irrelevent than it already is when it comes to protecting against the government?”

IMO it makes it even more important.


4 posted on 01/13/2009 7:00:12 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
What happens the first time they kill an 8 year old girl with a video camera...
5 posted on 01/13/2009 7:00:30 PM PST by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

Yep.....I was thinking the very same.


7 posted on 01/13/2009 7:03:41 PM PST by rightwingextremist1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

RElax.

These kinds of technologies end up being like radar guns for cops. First someone invents the radar gun. Then the radar detector. Then better radar. THen better detectors. Then instant on radar. THen...

They will never be king of the hill forever.


8 posted on 01/13/2009 7:04:03 PM PST by mamelukesabre (Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum (If you want peace prepare for war))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Iron Sights.


9 posted on 01/13/2009 7:05:08 PM PST by omega4179 (Bush Abandoned Ramos and Compean)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Bat Man

http://www.botachtactical.com/killflash1.html


10 posted on 01/13/2009 7:06:25 PM PST by omega4179 (Bush Abandoned Ramos and Compean)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

I’d think some type of polarized filter over the objective lens would defeat this pretty easily.


11 posted on 01/13/2009 7:08:17 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Not for something like crime-prevention, no. But for having the potential to rebel against a tyrannical government, yes. And whatever you say about every measure having a countermeasure, the government is always going to be way ahead of the curve compared to your average joe....


12 posted on 01/13/2009 7:11:46 PM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

bump


13 posted on 01/13/2009 7:13:04 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Bat Man

There are millions of armed citizens in my state of Michigan alone. There are probably similar numbers in the rest of the midwest states as well.


14 posted on 01/13/2009 7:15:31 PM PST by cripplecreek (The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

Since you are in the UK, you may not be aware of how heavily armed many parts of the US happen to be. Churchill said “We will fight them in the hills, in the fields, and on the landing grounds”. I suspect that the UK no longer has a serious ability to do that. The US can.


15 posted on 01/13/2009 7:20:33 PM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Do they have gear capable of taking down helicopter gunships, fighter-bombers and tanks, or just small arms?
The government also has technology that can detect the trajectory of home-made mortars and is getting better at detecting IEDs, and now detecting snipers before they can even fire a shot.
As the insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq have shown, you can’t hope to defeat a western military, the best you can hope to do is survive....


16 posted on 01/13/2009 7:34:03 PM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan
Do they have gear capable of taking down helicopter gunships, fighter-bombers and tanks, or just small arms?

We're talking about sheer numbers and even a 2 million man army with all it's technology will lose against a poorly armed army of 100 million or more.
17 posted on 01/13/2009 7:39:13 PM PST by cripplecreek (The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Also, huge numbers of our military would refuse to fight a war against their own citizens. I suspect that a lot of military equipment would fall under civilian control that way.

It really doesn’t matter. It’s just mental acrobatics at this point anyway.


18 posted on 01/13/2009 7:41:58 PM PST by cripplecreek (The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

You’re spot on. The members of the army have to live here, too. An army that tried to brutally suppress the US populace would find that their communities would turn on them. The result would be very unpleasant.


19 posted on 01/13/2009 7:45:03 PM PST by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Spot on.

Also, let's not kid ourselves -- if it really hits then fan, less than 100% of the US military will side with the tyrannical government. Robert E. Lee was offered command of Abraham Lincoln's army. Lee decided to fight for the other side. This pattern will repeat in some measure.

So, rebels in the US will have a 100 million man army, and some armored divisions, and some serious anti-aircraft capability, and some ...

20 posted on 01/13/2009 7:45:29 PM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-129 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson