21 ms·
EXACTO demonstrates first-ever guided .50-caliber bullets
- pyrocat 12y agoCountdown to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jVsQToSfag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jVsQToSfag
- haptiK 12y agoROFL /thread Seriously though. How do they plan to designate the target for this round?
- ArikBe 12y agoI believe that targets are marked using a laser.
- ricardobeat 12y agoIf you can aim the laser, you can aim the weapon. This would certainly involve computer vision, makes it even more scary.
- singlow 12y agoI think the idea is to automatically compensate for wind or other factors that would otherwise take the bullet on a path that is not on target. I think the part where they aim away from the target is just for demonstration.
- sitkack 12y agoYou can hit stuff that moves after the bullet is fired. It doesn't require computer vision.
- wmeredith 12y agoA laser is unaffected by things like gravity, recoil, wind, dust particles, drag, etc... Also, if it's a line of site issue. The sniper could be out of the line of site and as long as the laser operator can put light on target, it still gets hit (theoretically).
- jloughry 12y agoA laser is affected by temperature differences in the air (think about the mirage seen over a hot road surface) and even by gravity; a laser beam drops over distance like a bullet or a baseball, only it travels so fast that the effect is unnoticeable over earth-scale distances. The effect of a temperature inversion, though, can be significant; it's possible that military laser designators use diverse wavelengths to avoid or compensate for it.
- wmeredith 12y agoYes, yes, your technically correct (the best kind of correct?) but compared to a bullet arching through the air, it's minimal.
- jloughry 12y agoAfter thinking about it more, I realised you're absolutely right. It doesn't matter if the laser designator beam takes a knuckleball path through the intervening air; if the laser dot is on target---classical optics are time-reversible---the shooter will see it on target. The effect of those same air density variations on the bullet is similarly irrelevant [1], because the bullet continually aims for the laser dot. It works by negative feedback, like a servo; all the error terms in the middle cancel out. Neat! [1] The refraction of a laser by air density variations is bound to be different from the ballistic effects of those same density variations on a bullet passing through them. But it doesn't matter, because the corrections are applied continually along the trajectory, not at the source.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- bane 12y agoSome(body|thing) else can aim the laser and now you can hit out of sight targets.
- percept 12y agoI thought they were marked by the incumbent powers that be!
- sschalk 12y agoAnyone seen Aliens? Anyone say M56 Smart Gun? http://alienanthology.wikia.com/wiki/M56_Smart_Gun#Target_Tracking http://alienanthology.wikia.com/wiki/M56_Smart_Gun#Target_Tr... "When powered up, the gun begins tracking targets via its infrared tracker mounted above the barrel. The tracker consists of a 256 x 256 element platinum-silicide focal plane array cooled to 770 degrees K by a tiny cryogenic gas cooler working on the Stirling principle. This system monitors a 30 degree cone in front of the gun and transmits high-resolution thermal images in the 8-10 um range to a miniature video display in the operator's eyepiece." Thats all available technology - right now.
- pmontra 12y agoThe replay button of The Fifth Element trumps that, but it's not available yet http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7wOX2WqbXE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7wOX2WqbXE
- cromwellian 12y agoBah, 1984 called and Tom Selleck and Gene Simmons want their self-guided bullets back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA6ybohAVq8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA6ybohAVq8
- cromwellian 12y agoThis is being voted down, why? The entire subject of _Runaway_ is self guiding bullets and killer drones, and it came out in 1984.
- buckbova 12y agoThis is exactly what popped in my head when I read this headline. The camera angle from the bullet is pretty hilarious, with people diving out of the way and what not.
- joshvm 12y agoI imagined the final scene from Wanted (2008) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QADr4hVKs3Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QADr4hVKs3Y
- callmeed 12y agoCan't decide if this will be mounted on the robots that take over ... or we will need them to fight the robots
- Zelphyr 12y agoInitially you'll only be able to use them with a Zorg ZF-1 pod weapons system.
- hawkharris 12y agoRealizing that the United States' military capabilities are good enough, DARPA employees have turned their attention to replicating scenes from video game boss battles.
- ENGNR 12y agoConsidering the robots can use radar to see the bullet, calculate the reverse trajectory and have their own laser guided bullets heading towards you before it even hits... I imagine humans will only be fighting robots in person for a brief slice of history.
- ArikBe 12y agoThe video and program page[1] don't reveal anything about how this works. I remember watching a documentary a few years ago on Discovery channel where this project was discussed. The bullet was essentially divided into a front and back portion, which could twist independently. The twisting then allows for corrections in the air. There's another design by Sandia labs where the bullets has little "fins" (like a missile)[2], however judging by the render provided on the DARPA page[3] it's not the bullet by Sandia. Either way we now have IRL aimbot. [1] http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Extreme_Accuracy_Tasked_Ordnance_%28EXACTO%29.aspx http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Extreme_Accuracy_... [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmAzAmYv364 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmAzAmYv364 [3] http://www.darpa.mil/uploadedImages/Content/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Exacto/exacto%20projectile_full.jpg http://www.darpa.mil/uploadedImages/Content/Our_Work/TTO/Pro...
- fractalsea 12y agoThat may explain how the target corrects its trajectory towards the actual target, but how does the bullet determine what the "actual target" is in the first place? I would imagine this would be simple in test cases, but in the real world, what about a hostile target may differentiate it from a friendly ally that is nearby?
- trevyn 12y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_guidance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_guidance
- wiml 12y agoLaser designator, I think.
- ArikBe 12y agoI commented below that it's marked by laser, but the counterargument was that if you can aim a laser you can aim a rifle. Let me rephrase: the goal of this system is to correct for deviations from the actual target which occur in the air. Because of wind, temperature, rotation of the earth (when taking really long shots) and other factors a marksman might have to adjust his or her aim and actually aim off-target to get the bullet on target. However, using this system you would just keep the crosshairs on target and the bullet will correct itself in the air to hit that target. I think that aiming the rifle in a different spot is only done for test purposes. I can't imagine why you would want to create a system that automatically determines the target instead of letting a trained marksman determine the target and help that marksman.
- ultimoo 12y agoI wonder what is the technology behind this? Does the bullet have a small GPS module along with small motors that change the form of the bullet so that it can be guided by the rifle over radio frequency? What about the radio waves being interrupted or jammed etc. Or is it something more ground-breakingly advanced?
- thefreeman 12y agoI have absolutely no idea. But it seems like these would be moving far too fast, and the maneuvering far too precise, for GPS tracking to be used.
- seany 12y agoBetween 880-930meters/sec. I would think that a gps would have a hard time fitting inside a typical 50bmg bullet anyway. They only weigh about 45grams.
- RyJones 12y agothere is a lot of wasted space in a 50 BMG cartridge - you could easily make the bullet much longer without using up needed powder capacity. As long as you make it the same mass, you should be OK to fire it in guns currently chambered in 50 BMG. If you need to trivially prove this, pick up a loaded round and shake it. You can hear the powder jostling around in there. Why is there wasted space? As powders become more efficient, you need less powder to get the same result. Consider the age of the round - there's been a lot of development in powders in the interim.
- seany 12y agoLooks like something around 40-60gr worth of powder space depending on bullet and desired COAL. (I don't have any of my reloading manuals near by so that's based off wikipedia/handloads.com info)
- 12y ago
- ErikRogneby 12y agoI wonder what each bullet will cost once production starts? I sometimes think about the origins of the second amendment and if it's intent was to empower citizens against a potentially oppressive government then it has failed. US military technology might as well be black magic. What can a "well regulated militia" do against smart bullets, M1 Abrams, Apache helicopters, etc? Thank goodness we are kept fat and happy.
- noblethrasher 12y agoWe should probably be more worried about the non-lethal weapons that can be used to effect control and compliance — like the mobility denial and active denial systems. At least firehoses, dogs, and guns have a chance of illiciting sympathy from onlookers (e.g. the international community). Protesters on a big slip-n-slide will probably just end up on /r/funny.
- oftenwrong 12y agoEspecially because "non-lethal" is a misnomer. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Victoria_Snelgrove https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Victoria_Snelgrove and all of the people killed by tasers.
- jMyles 12y agofourth?
- lifeisstillgood 12y agoI always assumed that was an argument for havin militias that have Apache helicopters and high explosives.
- thecoffman 12y agoI believe you mean "second." Additionally, vastly superior technology doesn't necessarily outweigh other factors. It certainly makes a huge difference but history is littered with counterexamples.
- 12y ago
- jhprks 12y agomake ones for 9mm and .45!!!
- NoMoreNicksLeft 12y agoHow did Tom Selleck defeat these things?
- tomcam 12y agoBy being barely smarter than Gene Simmons. Michael Crichton directed IIRC.
- bane 12y agoNow get your targets and guidance from an overhead drone and shoot at people you can't even see!
- RyJones 12y agoor arm the drone.
- anemitz 12y agoHere is a decent overview of the different approaches to the problem ranging from consumer (TrackingPoint) to military (DARPA/Sandia): http://www.army-technology.com/features/featurelock-and-launch-future-elite-marksmanship-sniper/ http://www.army-technology.com/features/featurelock-and-laun... The TrackingPoint system is pretty awesome especially since it's tech which is available today and has some pretty neat applications such aiming through another device: http://www.military.com/video/guns/rifles/trackingpoint-shotview-no-look-shot/3656239752001/ http://www.military.com/video/guns/rifles/trackingpoint-shot...
- joshvm 12y agoThat system is impressive. The website has a slightly more explanatory video - I wasn't quite sure what I'd seen from the DARPA link. So basically the gun has a LIDAR for range, IMU for gun attitude and a Linux computer inside. You tag your target and it will use some kind of machine vision algo to track it even if it moves. You hold down the trigger and it will automatically fire when you put the gun in the right place. It's not truly guided like the parent, so if it's a windy day you're still likely to miss, but under calm conditions you can pretty much guarantee a perfect shot. http://tracking-point.com/ http://tracking-point.com/
- ChuckMcM 12y agoFascinating, I thought it was the finned bullet but this doesn't seem to be that. There was an interesting, if somewhat forgettable, movie staring Tom Selleck called 'Runaway' which posited "tracker" bullets and use the of quad copters for remote surveillance. I expect the next step will be fabrics that fluoresce in the visible spectrum when hit by IR or UV laser light to help warn people they are being 'designated.'
- finishingmove 12y agoAnother thing for killing. Just what the world needed.
- keehun 12y agoThis is what I initially thought, but there is always a flip-side. Unless, humans agreed to complete cessation of violence (intentional or not), which to my knowledge has never lasted more than a week in recorded history (of wars), someone will always try to kill someone else. Although I don't support the Military Industry, I think projects like this have the potential to get less people killed in battle.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- iandanforth 12y agoI imagine you pair this with a Tracking Point (http://tracking-point.com/ http://tracking-point.com/) rifle and you'll get some impressive performance. Thinking through how this would work .. would the sniper's spotter also become the painter? Or would it take a team of three Sniper+Spotter+Painter to combine these two technologies?
- edwhitesell 12y agoYou could probably use the Spotter as the Painter in the scenarios where there's s Sniper and a Spotter (e.g. SEALs don't use Spotters, whereas Army SF does). However, having a Spotter in a different location than the Sniper (or Sniper + Spotter team) leads to other interesting capabilities. Things like, "I have the target marked, based on your current GPS position, just aim to the West."
- melvinmt 12y agoI wonder if there are any startups in weapon technology.
- gamegoblin 12y agoAFAIK Boston Dynamics was a decently small company that produces cool military tech. (Now bought by Google). Also, there was a small company that had a show on the Discovery Channel for ~2 seasons called Howe & Howe Tech that produced a cool lightweight continuous track vehicle.
- edwhitesell 12y agoThey actually produced a number of tracked vehicles and I see some new information after visiting their site too. Thanks for the reminder! http://www.howeandhowe.com/ http://www.howeandhowe.com/
- bootload 12y ago> startups in weapon technology Metal Storm: old but interesting. Mike O'Dwyer conceived of an idea for "a rapid-fire gun prototype ... can fire up to 1,000,000 rounds per minute, or 16,000 rounds per second." [0] to give extra fire-power for Special Forces soldiers. More details can be read here: http://www.abc.net.au/austory/transcripts/s167329.htm http://www.abc.net.au/austory/transcripts/s167329.htm cf: [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Mike_O%27Dwyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Mike_O%27Dwyer
- EGreg 12y ago"by compensating for weather, wind, target movement and other factors that could impede successful hits." Translation: those poor suckers who try running sideways will still get hit with these new bullets.
- elinchrome 12y agoIt's sad how much effort and talent is directed toward killing.
- dm2 12y agoThis rifle by TrackingPoint takes another approach but seems similarly effective, the main thing that it doesn't account for is wind changes. I think you basically hold down the trigger and it fires when it thinks it'll hit the target. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVLmf_CBHKM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVLmf_CBHKM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBC8IFWC1P0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBC8IFWC1P0 "Vice - The Rifle That Aims Itself" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mZB6NtCx38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mZB6NtCx38 Moving targets https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA_ndsi5wnA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA_ndsi5wnA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xleHVuj2uGQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xleHVuj2uGQ