3 ms·

I've read a lot of articles about the previous rifles in question and I think the "Linux" part may as well be a stand in for "Computer Assisted/Augmented". I'v

I've read a lot of articles about the previous rifles in question and I think the "Linux" part may as well be a stand in for "Computer Assisted/Augmented". I've never gotten the impression that the part about Linux really matters outside of that. There doesn't appear to be any kind of openness as far as the ecosystem or the software goes. I think the gun is interesting outside of that, but definitely a misleading title for people that have certain expectations as far as the ethos of linux/open source goes. Re: the ammunition, I think this approach would be interesting combined with some form of learning algorithm that could adapt to different ammunition (assuming it was different but reasonably consistent ammunition), but, if I recall correctly, this all seemed to be very much "hard coded" into the rifles software, based on the proprietary ammunition. Given the $20k price tag and the possibility of expecting 1000 yard shots, the $5 - $7 a shot seems what I'd expect (match grade .308 ammo can go for $1 - $3 anyway). Still reading through this article; interested to see if the reliance on proprietary ammunition holds on something that's not meant to give 1000 yard shots to relative novices

doorhammer 12y ago
Looks like the AR's still require the same bespoke ammunition, but they're still aiming to accurately hit targets from 500 yards to 750 yards depending on the rifle/round used.
- gonzo 12y ago
  Anyone who shoots Palma or 1000 yd matches hand-loads anyway. Edit: ARs are used in NRA high power matches out to 600 yards. This rifle 'system' doesn't accomplish anything that a well-trained human can't accomplish.
  - fragmede 12y ago
    And muskets couldn't do anything a well-trained archer couldn't accomplish.
  - doorhammer 12y ago
    Just ran across this response. Forgot I even commented on this. That's sort of the point to me. Tech always gets cheaper, people usually don't. If you're wealthy enough to buy a $20,000 rifle for fun (I'm assuming the kind of person that can buy a $20,000 rifle probably doesn't need it) then the time spent to learn to consistently hit the shots might be worth more than the money you spend on the rifle. Other than that, "This x doesn't accomplish anything that a well-trained human can't accomplish" could have been and likely was said about almost any technology that's existed. In a similar somewhat less historically accurate vein, I'm reminded of John Henry.
gonzo 12y ago
You're not shooting .308 match ammo at 1000 yards. Well, not in a match in which you plan to be competitive, anyway. NRA High Power, sure. Palma, certainly (the rules require an unmodified .223 or .308 case), but you're not shooting commercial "match" loads.
- doorhammer 12y ago
  Yeah. I enjoy shooting, but I don't know a ton about competition shooting. I'm just talking about the kind of stuff you'd find labeled as "match" in a store. Any shooting I do is for kicks with a pistol at fifty feet. I'm more interested in the application of learning algorithms and how useful they would or wouldn't be in being able to get a somewhat optimum statistical pattern out of them (optimum within the tolerances of the particular loads quality). Basically, what's the maximum accuracy you could get out of standard off-the-shelf ammo if your rifle could self-adjust, is a question I'd be interested in looking into. If you've got any particularly relevant links on the various types of ammunition you'd use for competition, I'd be interested in reading them, though.
ASneakyFox 12y ago
I don't even get what the scope does.. dows it like aitomatically adjust for range?
- MrMember 12y ago
  The gun allows you to 'tag' a target through the scope. Once you've designated a target, the system dynamically adjusts the view so the reticule points at where the bullet will impact based on several factors (range, wind speed, humidity, temperature, the Coriolis effect if the shot is far enough). You then apply pressure to the trigger, and when the reticule passes over the target the gun fires. It's important to note that TrackingPoint isn't just the scope, it's the entire weapon system. Everything about the gun (right down to the ammunition used) needs to be 'known' to the system to make an accurate shot.

doorhammer 12y ago

Looks like the AR's still require the same bespoke ammunition, but they're still aiming to accurately hit targets from 500 yards to 750 yards depending on the rifle/round used.

gonzo 12y ago
Anyone who shoots Palma or 1000 yd matches hand-loads anyway. Edit: ARs are used in NRA high power matches out to 600 yards. This rifle 'system' doesn't accomplish anything that a well-trained human can't accomplish.
- fragmede 12y ago
  And muskets couldn't do anything a well-trained archer couldn't accomplish.
- doorhammer 12y ago
  Just ran across this response. Forgot I even commented on this. That's sort of the point to me. Tech always gets cheaper, people usually don't. If you're wealthy enough to buy a $20,000 rifle for fun (I'm assuming the kind of person that can buy a $20,000 rifle probably doesn't need it) then the time spent to learn to consistently hit the shots might be worth more than the money you spend on the rifle. Other than that, "This x doesn't accomplish anything that a well-trained human can't accomplish" could have been and likely was said about almost any technology that's existed. In a similar somewhat less historically accurate vein, I'm reminded of John Henry.

gonzo 12y ago

You're not shooting .308 match ammo at 1000 yards. Well, not in a match in which you plan to be competitive, anyway. NRA High Power, sure. Palma, certainly (the rules require an unmodified .223 or .308 case), but you're not shooting commercial "match" loads.

doorhammer 12y ago
Yeah. I enjoy shooting, but I don't know a ton about competition shooting. I'm just talking about the kind of stuff you'd find labeled as "match" in a store. Any shooting I do is for kicks with a pistol at fifty feet. I'm more interested in the application of learning algorithms and how useful they would or wouldn't be in being able to get a somewhat optimum statistical pattern out of them (optimum within the tolerances of the particular loads quality). Basically, what's the maximum accuracy you could get out of standard off-the-shelf ammo if your rifle could self-adjust, is a question I'd be interested in looking into. If you've got any particularly relevant links on the various types of ammunition you'd use for competition, I'd be interested in reading them, though.

ASneakyFox 12y ago

I don't even get what the scope does.. dows it like aitomatically adjust for range?

MrMember 12y ago
The gun allows you to 'tag' a target through the scope. Once you've designated a target, the system dynamically adjusts the view so the reticule points at where the bullet will impact based on several factors (range, wind speed, humidity, temperature, the Coriolis effect if the shot is far enough). You then apply pressure to the trigger, and when the reticule passes over the target the gun fires. It's important to note that TrackingPoint isn't just the scope, it's the entire weapon system. Everything about the gun (right down to the ammunition used) needs to be 'known' to the system to make an accurate shot.