The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 23, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Military Science Fiction Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Guided sniper bullets. How far is it?
ilpars    6/14/2004 10:08:24 AM
Guided sniper bullets which can slightly change its course during flight to target.
If this technology founded even an inexperienced soldier can kill an enemy several kilometers away.
How far are we from this tech?
What kind of guidance does this weapon need?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4
doggtag    RE:Spike Missle   6/30/2004 5:06:00 AM
I'm still trying to find out the exact body diameter of the Spike, as I am also a proponent of the shrinking guidance and control elements being incorporated into future small-caliber guided ammunition. Any more tech info on it?.
 
Quote    Reply

Strangelove    RE:Spike Missle   7/3/2004 6:23:38 AM
the missle looks to be about 4" diameter in the picture at this website: link but i've had very bad luck lately re: posting bad links
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    RE:Spike Missle   7/3/2004 7:16:32 AM
the link works. I found some more data over on Rafael's website, but they don't list actual missile body specs, either. All in all, it vaguely appears to be a shrunk-down Javelin (economy sized?) I mentioned in a few other forums on here, the Russians have their gun-launched guided missile family (normally 125mm) down to prototype 85mm rounds (that was several months ago), and a couple of western defense contractors have been developing guidance and control "strap-on" kits for 2.75inch rockets. 40mm guided rounds were tested all the way back in 1986, and the smallest current production guided round I've found is the triple-cluster 35mm guided "darts" in the UK Starstreak HVM missile. But as we have been debating: if the US currently is developing 25mm (for OCSW) and 20mm (for OICW) programmable fuzed rounds, it certainly won't be too long (within 10 years should be easy, actually) before someone builds a guided round of that caliber, even if it must be a bit longer like a mini-missile or guided rocket as opposed to a shorter length "bullet"..
 
Quote    Reply

Strangelove    Guided missle, not guided bulled   7/3/2004 7:59:33 AM
The impulse in any gun / cannon is going to be very high. Although the OCSW family is doing well with acceleration hardening, and the USN is working on this, too, how much more range can we expect out of bullets? OTH, if guided, you could always launch them like small mortars and drive them into targets. In any event, I suspect a minimissle with a good targeting and guidence package, and even smaller and cheaper than Spike, will be deployed before smartrounds, though after the 20 & 25 mm fuzed rounds mentioned earlier. btw, any word on deployment for those?
 
Quote    Reply

shrike    guided bullets   9/18/2008 7:16:42 AM
guided bullets can hit their targets more accurately,
but not  necessarily at longer range unless they have sort of
sustained propulsion.
 
 since snipers position themselves within line of sight of the target,
 wouldn't it be better to use microwave-type weapons?
y'know the kind that can cook meat up to miles.
 

 
 
 
Quote    Reply

ker       9/18/2008 5:26:54 PM
Anti-tank guided missiles have been used against infantry.  Shrinking down the missile will be a cheaper and quicker to develop option.  Wire guided or radio guided weapons will work better than shrinking the electronics into a bullet wile hardening them against the G forces they under go in the tube.  The Copperhead was made to work but wasn't the best weapon for the job once it was available.
 
Building a UAV around a sniper rifle or light machine gun can also give the shooter the benefits of greater range w/o brake through in electronics. 
 
If you are married to the idea of firing a seeking or remote controlled round out of a tube, work with a lower velocity grenade launcher might be more promising than high power rifles.
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag       9/18/2008 8:37:16 PM

Building a UAV around a sniper rifle or light machine gun can also give the shooter the benefits of greater range w/o brake through in electronics. 

I'm all open to the suggestions of just how we're going to go about stabilizing a hovering UAV with enough stability to utilize a sniper weapon (rifle) at any useful range (a useful range where the noise, and sight, of the UAV is beyond the immediate detection of the target and any nearby personnel or sensors), with the accuracy to stay on the intended target and not be nudged off by the slightest crosswind affecting the UAV.
It gets even more difficult when the UAV is one that can't hover (must continue moving in forward flight to stay airborne, like all fixed wing UAVs), but instead finds itself needing a turret to utilize a sniping rifle or light-to-medium caliber shell-firing cannon (12.7-30mm).
But still, even a turret will need stabilization to keep the barrel's aim on the target.
 
After incorporating all that extra expense of turrets and stabilization systems into a UAV, we're further off cost-wise just using miniature precision missiles.
Defense firms already have controllable systems (steerable thru flight) down to as small as 22mm in diameter and about 16 inches long: three of these just such projectiles compose the kill mechanism (or warheads, in simpler terms) of the Starstreak HVM MANPADS missile, and this tech has been around since the 1990s.
 
Quote    Reply

ker       9/26/2008 5:47:04 PM

Building a UAV around a sniper rifle or light machine gun can also give the shooter the benefits of greater range w/o brake through in electronics. 



I'm all open to the suggestions of just how we're going to go about stabilizing a hovering UAV with enough stability to utilize a sniper weapon (rifle) at any useful range (a useful range where the noise, and sight, of the UAV is beyond the immediate detection of the target and any nearby personnel or sensors), with the accuracy to stay on the intended target and not be nudged off by the slightest crosswind affecting the UAV.

It gets even more difficult when the UAV is one that can't hover (must continue moving in forward flight to stay airborne, like all fixed wing UAVs), but instead finds itself needing a turret to utilize a sniping rifle or light-to-medium caliber shell-firing cannon (12.7-30mm).

But still, even a turret will need stabilization to keep the barrel's aim on the target.

 

After incorporating all that extra expense of turrets and stabilization systems into a UAV, we're further off cost-wise just using miniature precision missiles.

Defense firms already have controllable systems (steerable thru flight) down to as small as 22mm in diameter and about 16 inches long: three of these just such projectiles compose the kill mechanism (or warheads, in simpler terms) of the Starstreak HVM MANPADS missile, and this tech has been around since the 1990s.

Your right.  I had not thought about the Starstreak.  I would say that it is a missile and not a bullet.
 
With the UAV I was thinking about compromise solution.  Diversionary and supresive fire have their uses but as you imply they are not intercangable with prisision shooting.
 
Useful range-   If the enemy can see or hear the UAV comming it still causes them a problem.  Also enemy who are firing their own weapons at one threat may not see or hear the UAV even when it fires.  Just because you can't count on the enemy making mistakes dosn't mean you shouldn't give them the oportunitys.
 
Turret-   Fixed wing air craft with out turrets can fire on ground targets .  AC-47 fires to the side.  P-47 Thunderbolt fires to the front.  Other variations are posible.  The amount of power and weight the UAV needs to reach a given amount of accurace in a given wind condition dose make it hard for the UAV to be man portable.  Expesily if you need it to fire from stand off ranges.  When I said give the "shooter the benefits of greater range"  I meant that the man controling the UAV was farther away (and behind things) not that the UAV remained a 1000 meters or more from the target.
 
Quote    Reply

Gman992       4/28/2009 4:28:37 AM

Did you ever see Runaway? with Tom Selleck and Gene Simmons? Simmons had a heat-seeking bullet...
 
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F    NLOS Sniper?   8/11/2009 3:51:59 PM
Traditionally snipers are LOS, but why? It seems to me this is because the available sensor and long range kill technologies were LOS. With advanced sensors such as UAVs and/or unattended ground sensors, why shouldn't the role of a sniper be performed by a soldier using NLOS weapons? This would be roughtly analogous to the changes being conceived for the FCS MCS light tank.
 
NLOS sensors and weapons could dramatically increase the range at which snipers can detect and attack targets. This would allow a single sniper to cover a much larger area for operations such as those in an environment like Afghanistan. It would also allow massing sniper fires against multiple targets the same way artillery does--bringing to bear "every gun within range."
 
NLOS sensors and weapons would provide the sniper much greater security. The sniper could attack from positions beyond LOS, which would greatly increase the area the enemy would have to cover in order to find the sniper. Also such technologies would likely be immune to sniper detection technologies. Since the sniper wouldn't be within LOS range of the target they would likely have many more options for eggress from the target are, including vehicles.
 
I'm reminded of the concept of an artillery raid... choppering artillery to a location, attacking a target, and then withdrawing. Such an attack would now be possible for sniping.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

ker       8/12/2009 4:40:23 PM

Very interesting  Jeff_F_F .  Would it be looking at the same thing from a different angle to think about artillery that could hit the correct person in a group w/o harming the others.  Could a 155 shell function like a UAV with camera, controlled glide and a gun?   The flare could be replaced with a device that produced no light but generated heat to slow the decent of the device like a hot air balloon?
 
Quote    Reply

GLaw       8/14/2009 12:49:16 AM
I think that by the time we have guided sniper bullets beyond the range of sight, we will have tiny UAVs that can do the same kills.
 
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F       8/14/2009 11:52:12 AM

Another way of putting it, is a high powered rifle the ideal "sniper's" weapon? What about a precision-guided 60mm mortar or an NLOS missile like spike with fiber-optic TV guidance?
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy