Slashdot Mirror
A Computer-based Smart Rifle With Incredible Accuracy, Now On Sale
WheezyJoe writes "A story on NPR reports that the TrackingPoint rifle went on sale today, and can enable a 'novice' to hit a target 500 yards away on the first try. The rifle's scope features a sophisticated color graphics display (video). The shooter locks a laser on the target by pushing a small button by the trigger... But here's where it's different: You pull the trigger but the gun decides when to shoot. It fires only when the weapon has been pointed in exactly the right place, taking into account dozens of variables, including wind, shake and distance to the target. The rifle has a built-in laser range finder, a ballistics computer and a Wi-Fi transmitter to stream live video and audio to a nearby iPad. Every shot is recorded so it can be replayed, or posted to YouTube or Facebook."
Aimbotter
There are only 10 kinds of people in the world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.
On a gun that decides when it's time to fire, I hope there's a cancel button.
I also bet there's someone that gets this, pulls the trigger at a picture of someone they hate, and then leaves the gun lying around their house. It wouldn't work, not that it wouldn't be fun to try.
If you want aim assist, play a console FPS. Otherwise, what's the point? I enjoy shooting, but to me this is not shooting. To quote Ace from the movie adaptation of Starship Troopers: anyone can push a button. I have hunted, shot skeet, and done some target shooting: the fun, the adrenaline rush, comes from knowing you hit your target. My longest shot was about 175 yards with a .30-06, clean kill. While it might not be that far, I take pride in the fact that I took the shot. With technology like this, you aren't hitting the target, the computer is. To me it completely misses the point of shooting, whether target shooting or hunting (and for hunting it completely removes the sport aspect).
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
One hunter who doesn't want one is Chris Wilbratte. He says the TrackingPoint system undermines what he calls hunting's "fair chase."
Pussy.
>I hunt with a spear wile wearing a loin cloth.
Althow, a few dear have kikked me in the hed. Thair's no permament damage but I my nose bleeds when I pickj it.
A gun with an internet-connected onboard computer. Malware for it could be deadly.
Snipers use cover and concealment to hide their position. That's not really going to happen with a glowing video display and a spotter with a glowing iPad. Sounds like little more than an expensive toy.
If you want aim assist, play a console FPS. Otherwise, what's the point? I enjoy shooting, but to me this is not shooting.
The point is to actually hit what you are shooting at. While I enjoy the challenge of target shooting as well, the actual primary purpose of a firearm is to kill/injure. There is a reason guns have targeting/tracking systems when used in anger. Perhaps you have forgotten that a gun is a weapon?
With technology like this, you aren't hitting the target, the computer is.
Sometimes the point it just to hit the target and it doesn't matter who gets credit for the aiming.
This with Google Glass?
This was mentioned in Linux Format 2 months ago if you are interested in having a look. there is a little more information about how the identified target provides some safety, because if something job s between you and the intended target it won't fire as well as when you haven't lined up the shot. also the scope adjusts to view lower then the target after sighting so you lift up to account for droppage.
"This weapon will never be used in anger"
I bet every hot head, whose gone on a gun rampage has said that, and every dad whose kid gets hold of it.
Bah, that's nothing, I once killed a polar bear with a banana.
...will be very pleased with this. Now every "jerky" robot can be an efficient terminator.
How does it detect the wind at 100, 200, 300, and 400 yards? How does it detect the change in wind speed over that full distance? It is impossible. In fact, the best way to calibrate is to actually fire a bullet. But even then, you can't be assured that the wind didn't change for the next shot. I guess if you fire and adjust in rapid succession, you could hit a needle after multiple shots.
According to the previous article professional snipers (swat, hostage rescue, etc.) are interested, mainly because of the video record of exactly what the aim point was.
This weapon will never be used in anger by any entity authorized to use lethal force in anger:
You cannot possibly be that naive. That specific weapon may not be used in combat but the basic technology will without a doubt make its way to people who will use it to kill living beings, either human or animal. I'm not even making a moral judgement about that, it's just a clearly obvious fact.
snipers would never use this,
They might not use that particular system but I promise you snipers can and will use a targeting/tracking system should one be available that fits their mission parameters. I would be deeply shocked if such technology was not being very actively worked on by the military.
it is too expensive and is unnecessary for the average foot soldier, and too large and cumbersome to be used on anything other than a rifle that is stationary and supported, ie on a target range.
Technology can be miniaturized and will be. Furthermore if the technology is large and needs support, it isn't exactly hard to attach it to a vehicle. The military does it all the time.
This technology is clearly designed for target and hunting use only, which would completely negate the point of both activities.
The technology is designed to cause a bullet to hit a target more reliably. The nature of the target is irrelevant. Plus you are contradicting yourself. If it can be used for hunting then it is portable. It if is designed for hunting there is little difference between hunting animals and hunting humans beyond the fact that humans can (and will) shoot back.
While the computer will do a better job with regard to bullet drop and deflection due to wind (assuming the computer is given correct information about wind, that is), there's still the question of shake when it comes to "pulling the trigger" on the laser. To some degree, this is nothing more than a wee bit more automation than you get from using a computer to calculate what your sight adjustment should be. A wee bit.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
...outside of static target shooting, it doesn't appear to be of much use; and, for static target shooting it is only of value as an evaluation tool.
Loading...
The target audience (pun intended) is extreme gun geeks, psychopathic hunters and assassins. So who will be the first human victim?
Why is Snark Required?
How is this not an ad?
We already had an article about this, and all that has changed is that the rifle is on sale.
Excellent, high school massacres with 100% kill rate...
The FCS on a tank works mostly the same way.
The sight is mounted on a mirror that can pivot in two axis on good tanks, an one axis on an Abrams. The ballistic computer knows what ammunition is in the breach (a user input - by the loader on good tanks, by the gunner on an Abrams) and so knows the ballistic profile of the round being fired. A slew of other sensors measure crosswinds, barrel droop, and the like. The laser rangefinder provides range, and an angle encoder in the turret slip ring provides rate of turret rotation, which provides a measure of target relative motion.
Gunner tracks target and then lases to get range. The FCS then jumps the gun barrel in both elevation and rotation while the sight mirror jumps back in the other direction(s) to keep the sight picture unchanged. The gunner fires, and the round impacts where the ballistic solution says it should.
From the gunner's perspective, you lay on target, track for a second, then fire the laser and fire the gun in close succession ("lase and blaze") and the round "magically" flies out and hits the target - no matter if you are moving, the target is moving, or both. You can be driving along at 60 km/h and hit a target moving 60 km/h 2500m away on the first shot.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
... close to a school zone and we may have something.
I saw this in a movie and they used to frame some up in assassination
Isn't it interesting that of all things NPR could report on they would choose this?
How quickly the Tsarnaev brothers and their pressure cooker amputation IED have come to be ignored.
Pull quote from the NPR piece is from Democrat Chris Frandsen, "Where we have mental health issues, where we have children that are disassociated from society early on, when we have terrorists who have political cards to play, we have to restrict weapons that make them more efficient in terrorizing the population"
Really?
Seriously, NPR needs to stop being subsidized by the taxpayer if they are going to spend this much time and effort carrying water for the gun control lobby.
'I don't know what it's called. I just know the sound it makes, when it takes a man's life.' ~ Four Leaf Tayback
So DARPA had a system like this in 2010.
How hard would it be to cobble something up from iPhone bits? They already have iPhone scope adapters with ballistic computations in them.
In before the ban!
Rick B.
"With a replay button, it's even easier. one shot, and replay sends every other shot to the same location." Watch
I just read the thread about the drones over the New Jersey Turnpike, and then I saw this.
I'm going to head over to Mashable to see if there is a thread about a car with a sunroof.
Where this technology will really make a difference is remotely-fired platforms - drones and robotic gun mounts. The operator paints the target with the laser, hits a selector when the beam hits a good point, and commands the platform to fire. The computer figures out the rest. Fragile meat people aren't exposed to take the shot.
It's expensive now, but this is the introductory enthusiast version. The open source v3 equivalent will be have plans online using easily acquired inexpensive components and a 3d printer.
(As scary as this can be, part of me thinks this is awesome - but then I always play riggers in Shadowrun. ;) )
You're just jealous 'cuz the voices talk to *me*
No need for a professional anymore.
I can't imaging a countryside where a lot of the people have these being invaded very easily.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
That's what this is - a robot gun that follows your instructions to "shoot there, and don't miss."
Run.
What?
I said... Run.
The Jackal was a rather enjoyable movie, and this gun reminds me of it somewhat. Similarities: remote targeted gun. Differences: Everything else.
This gun is a terrorist's dream! The problems here are so obvious that hopefully this will be banned quickly.
Here are a couple easy to add features (make your own combo!):
Google glass support: shoot accurately from the hip, up your sleeve, or other quick/concealed locations.
Reaction wheels: some mechanical pointing assistance, so you only have to point it pretty close to the target, and it will do the rest
Automatic target acquisition: use face reconfiguration or detection to shoot everyone you don't like (good for general massacres, avoiding friendly fire, or computer assisted genocide)
Remote control: servos+tripod = easy remote kill system
Multiple targets: let the gun acquire several targets at once, and plan an efficient order to kill them
Doppler radar: send out a radar pulse immediately before firing, then correct based on accurate weather information. Great for long range.
Awesome use:
Gun that automatically shoots weapons out of attackers hands if possible, and otherwise goes for effective stopping but not killing shots. Use reaction wheels for fast accurate aiming assist.
Horrible use:
Thats easy, I'll let you come up with one.
Don't you know Linux is secure by default?
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!
Uh ... never mind.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Take a look at the demo video. The deer apparently got away, as when the sight gets back on it after the shot is taken, it is running away, looking uninjured.
22k USD ensures only spoiled rich Goth kids'll use them. That may not be a good thing. But online videos are about to get even more creepy.
-- Jimtown Kelly
Nobody but military buys a gun and says "I'm buying this to use it in anger". Yet thousands upon thousands of deaths later, men, woman and children are killed in anger.
Your response? Reclassify anger as a mental illness?
The gun is a killing machine, if it shot paint pellets or light beams or simulated on a computer, it would be about the aiming and shooting, but it doesn't it shoots lead and its about the killing.
I view the gun lobby as delusional. The only way to stop a good man with a gun on a bad day, is to take away his gun.
When self-aiming, auto-firing, always on target computer rifles are outlawed, only outlaws will have self-aiming, auto-firing, always on target computer rifles.
There are lots of countries where it is common for hunters to sell their game meat to (specialty) stores and restaurants. Just because wherever you live you can't buy game meat in a store, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
It is easy to shoot accurately, if you know how. Don't try to hold the rifle still. It is impossible. If you try to hold it still on a target, then it will move in a little circle around the point you are aiming at and you will never hit the bulls-eye. The more you try to hold it still, the worse the movement will get. The trick is to find the target direction and point slightly above it, then move the rifle down, down, down, sloooowly and when you move over the target, squeeze the trigger. I hope this tip will save some newb from embarassment at the rifle range...
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
For some people hunting is not sport but a way of acquiring food. For you it is a challenge. For others it is food on the table.
It is difficult for American obese to comprehend why Saudi gourmands might consider the right to bear pressure cookers to be a natural right.
The problem derives from the fundamental differences in their respective culinary theories. This affects their tastes, which are conditioned on eating within the framework of one of the two competing menus.
American obese are not gourmands. In American cooking, the individual does not derive their nutrition from being a chef, rather they derive their nutrition due to the grace of McDonalds who acts through the will of the reigning franchise. Americans are conditioned to believe that they are the consumers of the Big Mac, not their own chefs. If McDonalds decides that a person's value meal has no nutrition, then that is all the Big GulpTM, because there's is not to season wise, but there's is to order fries, and a side order of Burger King!
Saudi gourmands on the other hand fought a long, hot and sweaty battle with the kitchen against this very repression and formed a new menu on the basis that the menu derives its nutrition from the edible. That the nutrition belongs to the vegetables, not the salt content. Hence the idea that the vegetable is a member of the meal, not its dressing.
On this basis, Saudi are responsible for their own nutrition, especially from the kitchen. This necessitates their right to pressure cookers. Americans on the other hand, must never eat right, preferring another polite pastry to a disgusting display of self control - and why guns and even assault rifles must be kept in the hands of every food server and drive through attendant.
Finally, the argument that the weak sauce cannot overcome the strong meat, leads Americans to believe that the idea of self cheffing against a modern equipped kitchen is an absolute futility. Again, when American men are confronted by a strong veal or savory, they know the only reasonable response to a frappÃf© attempt is to 'gulp back and think of Big Mac'. They understand that subtle seasoning against a stronger flavoring is hopeless, and rightfully know their plaice.
Saudi men be packin heated stoves, and will pop a capsicum in with ginger and cloves if she be tryin reconstituted meat like that.
In conclusion: The Saudi were fine with rapeseed only Americans were offended by it.
By the way, it runs Linux. Very, very, VERY old news though.
Took long enough, I'd bet on this 2 years ago. Next step is heads up displays with high res video, letting soldiers mark their targets from cover in playback and firing around cover through such systems. Spray and pray is near over, hopefully thereafter collateral damage will be history as well.
The NRA (gun manufacturer logbbyists who don't give a fsck about an ammendment) will see this as a way of removing the need for the US military 'spray and pray' shooting technique, i.e. dramatically reduce the need for ammo and the incredible profits arising from those sales.
The ZF-1.
Call me when you can 3D print this...
If the code for this thing is written in C, you can now really shoot yourself in the foot (very accurately) :-) http://m5p.com/~pravn/foot.html
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Stop using her in your demo pics.
I had enough trauma when I was a kid
You could also use this system in a reverse situation. You light a target, and subsequently try to hit it by sending shoot orders via the trigger. When you get all parameters right (winds, elevation,... ), you score a point, no round is ever fired. Maybe this already exist for training, I am not literate in that matter. You could also shoot blank rounds, should you need to take recoil into account.
Stick that one on a 360deg swivel-platform and add a heat seeking sensor and add auto-targeting and you have something that you hope won't be placed on a roof overlooking a crowded market square. I guess the military already have similar constructs(?)
Does it come with face recognition software as well?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jVsQToSfag
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
How is this going to help when shooting at non-stationary targets?
Finally! That's what was missing from shooting sprees: Tweeting the kills.
As a English man who cannot really understand the arguments in favour of the 2nd Amendment can I ask a few questions to my gun loving cousins?
Where do you draw the line between what is and isn't a firearm?
Does the 2nd Amendment allow (in your mind at least) a citizen to have a rocket launcher or a laser gun?
What are you going to do when the technology of simple side arms develops to the point where you an take out a room full of people by pressing a trigger and letting you gun do all the aiming etc..?
Would genuinely like to hear from a pro gun NRA type.
... with hearts and flowers so two-year-old girls can prevent themselves from being shot by their five-year-old brothers. After all, if that two-year-old who was killed recently had had a gun for self-defense, the story would have turned out much "happier".
I'd wager that a true professional will use any available technology to maximize their efficiency. The only thing standing in the way is machismo. There was a time when professional chefs eschewed the use of food processors for preparing ingredients - they were fast enough without them. There was a time when pilots would never give up mechanically linked controls or allow a machine to fly their planes.
To be so short sighted that the data-human interface will never evolve beyond an ipad (a very inexpensive way to develop a technology interface), or that a custom scope wouldn't be fabricated at a cost 100x the current unit cost for specialty operations, is to ignore the past entirely.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
you don't even need to go to a school now. you can safely be .6 miles away
This is a horrible idea, so now instead of having students shooting up schools by coming through the front door, they can just sit on a hill and take out the teachers?
I'm going to hold out for the Aperture Science Sentry Turret version of these. What could possibly go wrong?
"This next test involves turrets. You remember them, right? They're the pale, spherical things that are full of bullets. Oh wait, that's you in five seconds. Good luck."
-GLaDOS
The NPR story was mainly concerned with individuals interested in restricting this weapon use to "military only" as in "non-civilian". Wonder why nobody finds this to be an issue?
As a English man who cannot really understand the arguments in favour of the 2nd Amendment can I ask a few questions to my gun loving cousins?
As someone raised in a commonwealth nation under British rule of law and now a U.S. citizen, I find it very sad that so many British people really don't understand the rudimentary basics of freedom. That you willingly accept your government restricting your rights to own or use various tools; that you accept constant monitoring; that you accept being restricted from saying WHATEVER comes into your head and feel that laws that could fine or imprison you for simply flapping your lips are acceptable; that you accept being penalized for simply going into an area of your city; it is all really quite incredible to me.
Where do you draw the line between what is and isn't a firearm?
Basically anything propelled by gun powder or made to look/function like a gun qualifies as a firearm in my book. But, the classification is utterly unimportant to me. I've never even given the matter a thought, prior to your question. It's like saying; where do you draw the line on what is and isn't an automobile? But, my lack of interest does not mean that the law doesn't very clearly define what does and does not constitute a firearm. Furthermore, the law does restrict private ownership and use of certain types/classes of firearms.
Does the 2nd Amendment allow (in your mind at least) a citizen to have a rocket launcher or a laser gun?
Sadly, no. I'm fairly certain that there are restrictions that prevent private citizens from owning, selling or using rocket launchers willy nilly. I do not agree with this law and I feel that it puts the citizenry at an unfair disadvantage. But it is the law of the land at this time. "Laser guns" don't largely exist in the sense that you are thinking, though there are development efforts underway. Very high powered lasers are perfectly legal, however there are restrictions on their sale/use. You can't buy a laser pointer beyond a certain milliwattage, you could take an eye out. But, you can buy a multiwatt(megawatt?) laser capable of slicing several inch thick steel like a hot knife through melted butter. They are used by numerous industries every day.
What are you going to do when the technology of simple side arms develops to the point where you an take out a room full of people by pressing a trigger and letting you gun do all the aiming etc..?
I'm going to marvel at the technology. I'm going to contemplate whether I really want one for myself and whether I feel the need for one, just in case. I'll probably not purchase one, but I will strongly favor the right for any free individual to own one. The technology already exists to cheaply and easily take out an entire room full of people just that easily. Furthermore, despite existing laws against the use of such weapons, the laws cannot prevent their "manufacture" or use as has been demonstrated in the past. A demented or determined individual can and will do that and there is no law or amount of restrictions that can prevent it. Look at 7/7/2005 or the IRA for your own examples of death and destruction that was already outlawed.
Contrary to what people seem to think or hope, laws cannot possibly provide physical security. It is NOT possible. Even if the manufacture of guns were globally outlawed and none existed, it would still be the case where guns were used to kill people.
To quote a line from the movie Unforgiven: "I don't want to get killed from lack of being able to shoot back"
Its like paying 2k for a race car simulator and only look at the on screen demo while waving the controller around. I'd rather shoot a flintlock than a computer-gun.
I may have to get one of those.....
I can easily see them being disallowed for hunting though....
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
A stand and a few servo motors. Why even have a human shooter with all their breathing and giggly muscles. Already broadcasts to your phone, just laser mark the target and let the gun do it's thing (that's essentially what's happening anyway.)
I've been wondering when something like this would become available. All the tech pieces to put it together have been around for quite some time. The scariest part about such a weapon is that there are only a couple of simple pieces to add to it to make it remotely controlled. Imagine how handy such a thing would be for an assassin. Set up the shot ahead of time, then make the kill at the appropriate time, in safety, perhaps even with an alibi.
This weapon is a security professional's nightmare.
Proverbs 21:19
Speaking as an outdoorsman that has come across far too many dead/wounded deer in the woods... If a hunter using this setup is much more likely to score a single fatal shot on game, killing it with as little suffering as possible, I hope this makes it to market as quick as possible.
Around here half the deer hunters don't bother going to the shooting range, and they're god-awful shots because of it. So they end up wounding whatever deer they shoot at, and the poor thing takes off and suffers for hours until it either bleeds to death or a coyote brings it down.
High end custom .308 with 6-24x scope & AAC suppressor: $5000
Magpul Dynamics Precision Rifle Class: $750
Travel, hotel, food, etc. for class: $500
500 rounds of match ammo: $350 (I handload)
Kestrel wind/temperature/pressure meter: $200
Total: $6800
And I can stack shots at 100y (my three-shot groups are under 0.5"), and hit a 10" steel plate at 1km all day long. And unlike the $17k rifle, I can observe the wind at a distance, and account for it. Oh, and the class is a load of fun!
The second amendment (since thats what the thread is labeled) is to protect us from the government.
The US government stomps out well-armed enemies all the time with near total impunity. Even the best possibly armed citizen is simply no match for the US Government, when nations of millions of people with trained militaries and every modern weapon are effectively defenseless.
Your best defense against The Big Evil Government is the fact that The Big Evil Government is you and a few hundred millions others like you, and has neither the means nor the will to wage war against its own self.
As long as you quit screeching about every inconvenience of modern society being tantamount to slavery, you'll be fine.
Guns are just property, and property will enslave you a lot more effectively than government tyranny. Property, and fear.
This has nothing to do with hunting. This makes everyone a sniper.
Some make the case that they prefer natural shooting, and I would too. But this is a good way to train a shooter. Considering wind speed, direction and a lot of variables. You can easily mod this to be used as "training wheels" for shooters. The army and police trainers could really benefit from this. I had to use the paper and bare sights training route... Wouldn't mind getting a better understanding of trajectories through this. Someone make a hacked firmware already... ;)
IMHO guns are tools. This is a tool that gets a job done quicker easier and more safely. Some people do like the recreational use of guns, and this isn't for that.
Greed is the root of all evil.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/09/tiny-drone-ethe
Casteism
Aha, the better to kill you with my deal.
(Old childs poem, slightly modified)
Seems like a highly unstable device that will shoot only when it's aligned correctly. I wonder how well the borderline cases like not found after so many seconds have been tested. I mean, if a novice cant get it to shoot, he will usually reverse the rifle and try to look down the barrel. OK
It sounds like a marketing speech. I seriously doubt that they know what is really involved in hitting a distant target.
The most likely result, of the system described, is to prevent the rifle from ever firing!