British Army gets drone-killing rifle sights

[slimmer13]

That could be true.
However the article mentions smaller ones that are being used...so....maybe it should be many drones...not most drones..?
Andy

I admittedly know nothing about drones, but a quick search says even the little commercially available DJIs have a max altitude of 20k feet. It seems like they could easily operate out of shotgun range for most applications that they are used for.

I could see a use for shotguns for those little killer drones that have an explosive charge attached to their body and are designed to crash into a target and explode.

 

[308n45]

Maybe we will see the return of the KAC Masterkey!

But with chokes, specialized ammo, etc. ...

Knight's Armament Company Masterkey - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Edit: Nevermind they have something called the M26-MASS that they started using sometime after I got out.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

I admittedly know nothing about drones, but a quick search says even the little commercially available DJIs have a max altitude of 20k feet. It seems like they could easily operate out of shotgun range for most applications that they are used for.

I could see a use for shotguns for those little killer drones that have an explosive charge attached to their body and are designed to crash into a target and explode.

I get it.some drones fly higher than shotgun range.

In any event...
My experiences in combat have proven to me at least...
A simple , basic and fast solution to what the problem is...is best.

Simple and basic does not mean batteries... computers and wires and the like attached to my rifle and sh!t.
Andy

 

[ma96782]

Hummmmm........so, with all those eyes needed/looking upwards (assuming only a squad in the operational area). Who's watching the flanks (and wherever/whatever else is happening)?

Not to mention, the usual shortage of manpower.

Aloha, Mark

PS....Nah....only look for it, when it's known to be in the area. Or someone observes or actually hears one.

 

[Unicykle]

Not real big on electronic devices but the bonus that I can see to it is these high-tech devices that aren't gonna work when you need them to, aren't gonna work when the enemy gets ahold of them either.

 

[ma96782]

Aloha, Mark

 

[Stomper]

I get it.some drones fly higher than shotgun range.

In any event...
My experiences in combat have proven to me at least...
A simple , basic and fast solution to what the problem is...is best.

Simple and basic does not mean batteries... computers and wires and the like attached to my rifle and sh!t.
Andy

Agreed, but how hard would it be to equip every platoon with a light-weight radio signal spectrum (ie 2.4GHz -5GHz)jamming unit running alongside the platoon RTO?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Agreed, but how hard would it be to equip every platoon with a light-weight radio signal spectrum (ie 2.4GHz -5GHz)jamming unit running alongside the platoon RTO?

I like the idea of some sort of signal / frequency jammer far better than a gizmo gadget gimmick rifle sight system.

Something else to consider with Infantry gear...

How well does it work / hold up under actual field conditions ?
Not just "test" conditions...
But as in actual field use / combat use.
Jumping outta planes , helicopters , the back of trucks...
Does it work or hold up after being dropped , banged around , in the wet , in the heat...even under water...
Can it still work after being out in the weather , slept with in the mud....being out under the worst conditions for months or even years...

Also just how much extra weight are you telling some poor Infantryman to slog around...?

Nope...
I like your idea of a jammer far better.
Andy

 

[Stomper]

I like the idea of some sort of signal / frequency jammer far better than a gizmo gadget gimmick rifle sight system.

Something else to consider with Infantry gear...

How well does it work / hold up under actual field conditions ?
Not just "test" conditions...
But as in actual field use / combat use.
Jumping outta planes , helicopters , the back of trucks...
Does it work or hold up after being dropped , banged around , in the wet , in the heat...even under water...
Can it still work after being out in the weather , slept with in the mud....being out under the worst conditions for months or even years...

Also just how much extra weight are you telling some poor Infantryman to slog around...?

Nope...
I like your idea of a jammer far better.
Andy

It wouldn't even have to be a "super high-powered" gizmo for the majority of concerns, just enough to deny 500 meters in all directions giving a 1Km diameter and 500m altitude in a semi-hemispherical area.


See? That's what I do…. I fix stuff and know things.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Drone killing rifle....
A-10 Thunderbolt II

That will take out the drone , the drone operators...the building they are in...any vehicles in the parking lot...the parking lot itself...
Andy

 

[Yarome]

Hummmmm........so, with all those eyes needed/looking upwards (assuming only a squad in the operational area). Who's watching the flanks (and wherever/whatever else is happening)?

Supposedly, the system is constantly scanning and alerts the user when a drone is detected. It's simply a matter of shifting aim to the target designation displaying in the scope.

I like the idea of some sort of signal / frequency jammer far better than a gizmo gadget gimmick rifle sight system.

I think the big issues with that is they are extremely power hungry, directionally focused, and only work within limited ranges... unless you're talking about those large truck mounted units.

For a field infantry unit it's not exactly ideal to advertise your position by dragging a track along on your 6. For a man portable device, the range of a rifle might also be greater. There is also the factor of someone having to drop their rifle and take the time to activate, target and use a man portable jammer.

The impression I get with the system they are proposing is to take advantage of simple target selection. Same rifle, same optic... and all a soldier has to do is tip their rifle up when alerted to the airborne threat... speed on target... then transition immediately back to ground based meat sacks.

If every serviceman has one... we're also talking redundancy options on a target where a jammer rifle/device may be only one or two per squad/platoon/whatever.

Personally, I can see a benefit, but I would also feel much better about having not only targeting optics but one or two of those disruptive jammers as well. They don't have to be mutually exclusive, right.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

The impression I get with the system they are proposing is to take advantage of simple target selection. Same rifle, same optic... and all a soldier has to do is tip their rifle up when alerted to the airborne threat... speed on target... then transition immediately back to ground based meat sacks.

I hear a salesman talking here....
Things like the above do not work like that combat.
Its easy to state it...not so easy to do.

Nope..
Not buying any BS rifle sight gizmo for my rifle.
Andy

 

[DirectDrive]

when alerted to the airborne threat

And therein lies the problem.
Some of those loitering, grenade-dropping drones are small and must be hard to see.

 

[Yarome]

I hear a salesman talking here....
Things like the above do not work like that combat.
Its easy to state it...not so easy to do.

Nope..
Not buying any BS rifle sight gizmo for my rifle.
Andy

Not trying to "sell" anything... just stating that the concept and capability has merit. Not it's use in combat in it's current form.

As an infantryman hunkered down in a 4 man squad with no immediate mechanized support.... having any capability of detecting and eliminating a threat that you would otherwise be unable to see or hear... until the grenade goes off... I get where their approach is coming from.

 

[Yarome]

And therein lies the problem.
Some of those loitering, grenade-dropping drones are small and must be hard to see.

Agreed. Augmenting sensors to detect and track something you can't normally see or hear... and putting you on target... even when you still can't see it with the naked eye? Kinda seems like a good idea on it's surface.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Not trying to "sell" anything... just stating that the concept and capability has merit. Not it's use in combat in it's current form.

As an infantryman hunkered down in a 4 man squad with no immediate mechanized support.... having any capability of detecting and eliminating a threat that you would otherwise be unable to see or hear... until the grenade goes off... I get where their approach is coming from.

Not saying that you are the salesman here...just that the idea sounded like a salesman speech.

And I know all about being an Infantryman...having been one....with 4 combat tours.
Andy

 

[Yarome]

Not saying that you are the salesman here...just that the idea sounded like a salesman speech.

And I know all about being an Infantryman...having been one....with 4 combat tours.
Andy

Gotcha. Yeah.... a lot of "fluff" in their pitch and who knows if they can deliver as advertised. There are bound to be hiccups in application.

I'm aware, but you have to admit the battlefield is changing and the proliferation of drones certainly doesn't seem to be slowing. I would be shocked if the US wasn't taking notice of their effectiveness and already has micro stealth and hardened versions with increased load capacities.

Most in use at the moment in the current conflict are modified commercial versions and "garage" builds.

It would be foolish to ignore that element and not get ahead of the detection and elimination curve at the infantryman level, IMHO. I'm not sure if a rifle mounted integrated optic is the answer, but it's an intriguing idea.

 

[Mark W.]

10ga 3.5" semi auto 28" barrel hot #4 shot should mess up anything within 100yards and any infantry dude shouldn't have any trouble shooting a properly designed gun.

 

[DunRanull]

I think the idea is that you hold the trigger back and then scan the area for the drone. When the sight crosses the drone the rifle fires. There are variations of this for other targets/sights.

Hmmm... What could possibly go wrong?

 

[DunRanull]

Gotcha. Yeah.... a lot of "fluff" in their pitch and who knows if they can deliver as advertised. There are bound to be hiccups in application.

I'm aware, but you have to admit the battlefield is changing and the proliferation of drones certainly doesn't seem to be slowing. I would be shocked if the US wasn't taking notice of their effectiveness and already has micro stealth and hardened versions with increased load capacities.

Most in use at the moment in the current conflict are modified commercial versions and "garage" builds.

It would be foolish to ignore that element and not get ahead of the detection and elimination curve at the infantryman level, IMHO. I'm not sure if a rifle mounted integrated optic is the answer, but it's an intriguing idea.

I doubt that many female infantrymen could handle a 10ga magnum... then again, a .410 or 28 ga might work...
Then again, anything that might work we've sent to the collapsing regime in the secessionist state of Ukraine.