Posted on 02/21/2009 6:56:52 AM PST by Flavius
The Rapid Equipping Force (REF) of the United States Army has purchased wearable sniper detector systems from QinetiQ Systems for soldiers stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Deployment of the SWATS Soldier-Wearable Acoustic Targeting Systems will begin immediately and should be complete later in 2009. QinetiQ will also provide training and field support for these new systems.
http://thefutureofthings.com/upload/items_icons/Army-Buys-Wearable-Sniper-D_large.jpg
(Excerpt) Read more at thefutureofthings.com ...
Good for the troops, bad for the second amendment.
With that kind of baseline, even knowing anything more than which quadrant he shot came from is going to be problematic. Your ear's have a longer baseline, and probably do a better job of localizing a shot.
Good post, good thread. BTTT!
Let do it the old fashion way. You take a prisoner, put him in a US uniform and send him out in front of a patrol. When he gets zapped, then you just solved two problems.
Given.
But the nature of the device implies that a shot has been made and the "survivors" are provided with a direction. If I am the target of the first shot then it will be unlikely that I would be concerned with the sniper location. If I am not the target of the first shot, then I would love to have that information to assist me in not being the target of the second.
As long as a sniper can remain hidden there is no contest, his only opponents are the elements and detection. Once detected, he competes against return fire.
“I don’t think that this effort will make much of a ripple in that pond, and if it saves one soldier’s life then its money well spent.”
Funny thing, that’s the excuse liberals use for all their pork barrel spending. Second, wanna save a tons of lives? Start using better politics and stop sending troops into harms way with dangerous ROE. Stop using troops for law enforcement purposes. Use them for war, all out war, and stop using them as an extension of weak willed foreign policy.
Troops already know which way the shot came from. Saddling them with another pound or two of nearly useless gear is just asking for more trouble.
What’s next, the “dirty weapons indicator” for a mere $100 that tells a troop when to clean their weapon because “if it saves just one life from a jammed weapon it is worth the cost”?
“Funny thing, that’s the excuse liberals use for all their pork barrel spending. Second, wanna save a tons of lives? Start using better politics and stop sending troops into harms way with dangerous ROE.”
It sounds like a good piece of equipment and now that it has reached the field it will only improve over time.
Keeping our soldiers vulnerable to enemy snipers to further your politics seems a little callous to me.
I recall that many of the snipers in Iraq pop up out of a vehicle in areas with heavy foot traffic, behind crowds of pedestrians, fire one round and high tail. If every Humvee and foot patrol came with pilotless aerial surveillance and the ground audio locator array can be integrated with overhead surveillance, the escape vehicle can be tracked and knocked out a few blocks away, on a less populated street.
It seems that our ability to deal with enemy snipers is greatly improving just in time, just as the enemy are starting to create a sniper capability.
I guess they are talking about the gadget on his shoulder. What is the gizmo on his helmet?
Oh booshwa!!!!!
You obviously have listened to Oprah et al too much.
Your silly remark is another "if it saves just one...." liberal slogan.
If the use of these devices means soldiers must carry more gear, I would wager it will cost lives in the long run. They are already burdened down with heavy, bulky gear that reduces their mobility and endurance.
When you hear "if it saves just one....", guard your wallet and grab some popcorn, 'cuz the unintended consequences of flighty reasoning is often great entertainment.
Just don't lay that kind of crap on our warriors.
And your combat experience is?
And your contribution to the current war effort has been what?
When I need advice from an ATC on what the combat load for an infantryman ought to be and what sniper countermeasures make sense for ground combat forces, I’ll certainly contact you.
i think on rather long range shots that the sound of the explosion can overtake the bullet’s accrued speed as the bullet slows markedly from muzzle to say 1200 yards plus.. I think most 7.62 drops below 1100 fps around 1200 yards
I’m sure someone here knows....this forum is like AR-15.com jr
anything less than 1100/ft per second bullet speed and sound catches up in due course
and what about sub sonic rounds?
“Keeping our soldiers vulnerable to enemy snipers to further your politics seems a little callous to me.”
I’m sorry, but that is just horsepoop to say that. Go wrap yourself in the flag someplace else. Practical solutions to real problems is one thing; cheating our soldiers by making them think this is protecting them is just profiting at their expense. Only an idiot would think this cheesy device is going to protect them from snipers. Have you served? Do you even know what a sniper is, how they operate, or how this will or will not protect them? Are you an engineer who understands this type of technology and how is it bogus at best? I have served and I am an engineer who understands what a waste this is.
Booshwa squared.
I don't have to have held ANY position in order to have an opinion, based on commonsense and published data.
There have been many articles about heavy combat loads in hot/high conditions. And every new technology is not always applicable to every task.
Does this enlighten you? I surely hope so...... if it saves just one idiot from embarassing himself.
“Funny thing, that’s the excuse liberals use for all their pork barrel spending. Second, wanna save a tons of lives? Start using better politics and stop sending troops into harms way with dangerous ROE. Stop using troops for law enforcement purposes. Use them for war, all out war, and stop using them as an extension of weak willed foreign policy.”
That is why I posted this “Keeping our soldiers vulnerable to enemy snipers to further your politics seems a little callous to me.” to you.
Yes I am an army vet and this less than one pound (total weight) device seems to be a workable idea that according to Strategypage was tested and found to work in Afghanistan.
You are certainly living up to the record recorded in your posts. You seem to take great pleasure in insulting and berating others without adding much to the debate.
As for my comment, no I didn’t get the notion from Oprah. Having to write letters to mothers and wives telling them that their sons/husbands weren’t come home helped form my opinion, though. Another thing that helped was having to pick up body parts so that loved ones got some comfort in being able to say that they had a body to bury.
Goodbye.
centurion I read some of your posts and saw this about you, it seems to me that you might know a little about carrying combat loads in hot climates.
"Many of the things I later did in Vietnam as an aero rifle platoon leader, long range recon platoon leader and rifle company commander were techniques developed by General Kinnard and his 11th Air Assault Division."
Thanks, if you have HBO, you might want to tune in to Taking Chance. Its not much, just about one little Marine PFC who was KIA - one little PFC doesn’t mean very much, does he. At least that’s what our friend Diogenes would say.
I was part of a team that did design just such a system, so your thoughts are right on the mark. Wasn't ready for prime time, unfortunately. What works in a lab and on a sterile range, doesn't necessarily work in the real world. That was the case here. Lots of tough software, hardware integration to do, but it will get done.
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.