Canada's Next-Generation Military Smart Gun Unveiled

Zothecula writes Looking every bit like a weapon from a science fiction movie, the latest integrated assault rifle prototype being developed for the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) is packed with some very smart weapons technology. Along with the ability to fire new lightweight telescoped ammunition, and a secondary effects module that adds either a three-round 40 mm grenade launcher or a 12-gauge shotgun, there is also a NATO-standard power and data bus to allow the attachment of smart accessories, such as electro-optical sights and position sensors that connect to command and control networks.

Comments

Is there...?

[skam240]

Is there a spot for an mp3 player?

Re:Is there...?

[invictusvoyd]

No but there is an option to fit one instead of the magazine. Better have some death metal in there ...

Re:Is there...?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're looking for the Annihilator 2000.

Re:Is there...?

[davester666]

Good. Now we need to redesign the cockpit of the F-35 so that one of these rifles with MP3 player attached can be mounted in it so the pilots can listen to music as they taxi around.

Smart gun but ,

[invictusvoyd]

the real problem appears to be dumb politicians / world leaders . I wonder if anyone is workin on them .

Re:Smart gun but ,

[CauseBy]

That problem was solved 220 years ago. Since then the problem has been dumb voters. Democracy, as they say, is the government you deserve.

Re:Smart gun but ,

[Anonymous Coward]

>Implying votes matter

The people in office are the people your overlords want it office.

Re:Smart gun but ,

[Anonymous Coward]

A fashionably pseudo-cynical statement, but a shallow and empty one. The world is more complicated than you want to believe it is.

Re:Smart gun but ,

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you believe there is a better system than representative democracy? Is a dictatorship or tyrannical rule better than democracy?

Re:Smart gun but ,

[aliquis]

That problem was solved 220 years ago. Since then the problem has been dumb voters. Democracy, as they say, is the government you deserve.

One could argue it's not true for Sweden.

Currently we're ruled by an alternative which got less than 38% of the votes.

On the other hand about 49% (I think) of the other elected people voted for that to happen.

Re:Smart gun but ,

[ShanghaiBill]

The people in office are the people your overlords want it office.

They are also the people we voted for.

If the "overlords" didn't exist, who do you think would be running things in the libertarian and/or socialist utopia that you envision?

Re:Smart gun but ,

[aliquis]

Or well, it was budget votes and it's more like 40+% didn't voted for their own budget but rather let this one pass.

Re:Smart gun but ,

[antdude]

Ask the voters? :P

Re:Smart gun but ,

[Anonymous Coward]

the real problem appears to be dumb politicians / world leaders .

Yes, and it appears to be "extra scary looking" too, which will freak out US politicians to the south. That hypocrite Feinstein has probably already added it to her must ban from import list.

Re:Smart gun but ,

[Anonymous Coward]

With a correct dictator it could be, but finding a good person and that person being willing to be a dictator is really hard. Usually only assholes want to be dictators, the good guys don't make it for some reason, which makes the illusion that dictatorship is bad.

Re:Smart gun but ,

[david_thornley]

There were people who voted for Johnson for President in 1964 under the assumption that he wouldn't escalate the Vietnam War (Goldwater almost certainly would have). Voting is no protection when the candidates either lie about their intentions or change their minds once in office.

Ahh Canadians.

[Anonymous Coward]

Canadians will build this but be told to never fire it. It might as well be a dangerous-looking prop. Give them to some Americans, and there goes 1/4 of the world's population.

Xenomorphs

[DavenH]

Those critters from LV-426 better look out.

Re:Xenomorphs

[pr0t0]

I'd like to introduce you to a personal friend of mine. It's the M-41A pulse rifle, with over and under pump action grenade launcher.

Re:Xenomorphs

[Bodhammer]

[pulling out his pump-action shotgun]
Hicks: I like to keep this handy... for close encounters.
Frost: I heard *that.*

Re:Xenomorphs

[Anonymous Coward]

You've talk about the Conservatives right? Just checking.

Useless

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet this was not designed by a soldier. Try dragging all that high-tech through the mud and sand then see if it still works. Extra brownie points if the battery powering it all doesn't die before the owner of the weapon. Hint: The reason why the AK-47 is so successful is because it's SIMPLE and it can easily be repaired in the field.

Anybody remember the scene in 'Starship Troopers' where the weapon malfunctions in training?

Re:Useless

[BarbaraHudson]

Prototypes were tested in Afghanistan. They've done a lot of work to make it lighter than existing weaponry. Also, the article is wrong because it come with the 5.56mm rifle, 18mm shotgun, and 40mm grenade launcher at the same time, as you can see from the video. And can your AK-47 share targeting info with other shooters?

Re: Useless

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe in sharing and I keep what I kill.

Re:Useless

[ShanghaiBill]

I bet this was not designed by a soldier. Try dragging all that high-tech through the mud and sand then see if it still works.

That was my first thought, although I was a Marine, not a soldier. To a grunt, the most important characteristics in a weapon are:

1. Reliability
2. Weight
3. Maintenance

They are carrying these things for 16 or 18 hours per day, along with the ammunition. That is exhausting, and exhausted soldiers are not alert and make dumb mistakes that get people killed. When they finally stop the patrol, and go into a defensive position, they do not want to spend the next two hours disassembling and cleaning some complicated piece of equipment. Not every man needs a grenade launcher. One or two per squad is enough, and it is better if it is a separate weapon. I have never met a single grunt that believes replacing the M79 with the M203 was a good idea. Yet TFA compares this new weapon to the M203.

Re:Useless

[ShanghaiBill]

They've done a lot of work to make it lighter than existing weaponry.

No. TFA says it is lighter than a C7 + M203. So they made it lighter than two existing weapons strapped together. A C7 is basically a Canadian M16. I know from personal experience that an M16 + M203 is NOT a "light" combination, especially when you are also lugging 10kg of two different types of ammunition.

Re:Useless

[blue9steel]

Yeah, they really need to look into using smaller grenades. Those 40mm ones are nice but quite heavy, which is fine for vehicle mounted, crew served weapons and some specialists but not for your standard rifle. The 40mm x 46mm M381 has a 130m casualty radius with a weight of 230g. You'd need to do some testing, but I'm betting that a half size version 20mm x 23mm would be sufficient for most tasks. The original version has a volume of 57,776mm3 while the smaller one would have a volume of 7,222mm3 so you'd expect a casualty radius of around 16.25m with a weight of 28.75g or so. (minus some losses for size inefficiencies) Instead of a three pack of 40mm grenades weighing 690g you could carry a ten pack for only 287.5g Sure, they pack less punch, but you could fire several in a row to cover a bigger area as necessary. You'll lose range, but for a lot of tasks that would be an acceptable trade off. They'd be awesome for building clearing or ambushes.

Re:Useless

[ClickOnThis]

I was a Marine, not a soldier.

Don't take this the wrong way: what's the difference? A sincere question, not a snark.

I do understand that each of the branches of the US military has its own sense of pride in its mission and mandate, and wants to distinguish itself from others. How do Marines distinguish themselves from other military roles, particularly soldiers?

Please understand, I'm not trying to start a flame war here. I'm genuinely curious to hear about how Marines and soldiers see each other.

Re:Useless

[sunwukong]

I'm somewhat skeptical no one has tried this alternative. Hell they could sell it to police departments!

There must be some technical issue blocking it, e.g., the explosive power doesn't quite scale.

Re:Useless

[Anonymous Coward]

Marines just try to be special. They are soldiers as well, since it's a general word. Not all soldiers can call themselves marines, but marines are soldiers non the less.

Re:Useless

[Richard_at_work]

A scene from a shit film should not be brought up as an example of *anything* happening in reality.

Re:Useless

[FhnuZoag]

Is sharing targetting info useful enough to justify having to recharge your gun every X hours, and risk suffering a software crash every now and then? And what if your adversary intercepts all that valuable targetting info you are broadcasting, and now know exactly where all your guys are and where they are aiming?

Re:Useless

[BarbaraHudson]

It's not like this is powering a tv. And obviously data will be encrypted, same as tank computers share targeting and other info with each other on the field right now.

Re:Useless

[blue9steel]

You'd be surprised how resistant the military is to any sort of change. Both as a cultural issue (trying to preserve previous things that work) and as a logistics issue (five zillion different kinds of ammo are hard to keep re-supplied). Since it's not some fancy high technology thing you'd have a hard time getting much research money to study the problem and test out various smaller sizes to see what offered the best trade offs. Personally I think you could run up a variety of different smaller calibers and test them with a platoon or so of grunts for measly few million dollars. (ok, it's the government so maybe a few tens of millions)

Re:Useless

[blindseer]

Encrypting the data transmitted is nearly trivial. There are numerous encryption algorithms out there that can sufficiently prevent eavesdropping of the data. Techniques beyond mere encryption can further prevent jamming, false data being sent, and such that can be equal security issues.

What concerns me more is that these rifles will be sending out radio beacons of their location. Various techniques can be used to keep power output low, spread the data out so it doesn't stay on a single frequency, and otherwise diminish the radio beacon properties of a transmitter but that does not make it go away. A sneaky radio is hard. Someone with just a wideband radio receiver can detect if one comes close. This might be enough to trigger a mine.

I don't see recharging as much of an issue. The rifles will need to have ammo replenished, be cleaned, etc., adding the step of checking the batteries does not seem to be too much to ask.

Re:Useless

[BranMan]

I'm neither, so take this with a boulder of salt.
The difference between Soldiers and Marines is that the Soldier generally has a lot more support, and operated in larger numbers.

When the Army goes in, there is generally close air support, artillery support, logistics support, MPs, lots of infrastructure, lots of hardware, Engineer support, etc..

When Marines go in, they generally have a whole lot less, if any, of any of that (No implied slight to the Navy intended). Hence the credo "Every Marine is a rifleman" because it more often comes down to that when the stuff hits the fan (as compared to the Army). So each Marine has to be a lot more of a BAMF - sometimes that's all they have to work with.

Does that help?

Re:Useless

[ClickOnThis]

I'm neither, so take this with a boulder of salt.

Arguably that could make you more impartial.

I think your point is that Marines are involved earlier in a conflict, before other infrastructure has arrived. As are other special units, like Army Rangers and Navy Seals, with all due props to them and their respective training and qualifications.

Does that help?

If I understood you correctly, then yes, thanks.

Re:Useless

[Anonymous Coward]

The US military's small arms development is of course shifting towards the priorities you listed. The current "cutting edge" carbine used by SOF is the MK17 SCAR, which achieves the goals you listed. Apparently gains in reliability are difficult to achieve with lower weight.

One place weight loss is being successfully achieved is in the LMG/SAW department. The Marines are adopting the M27 to mostly replace the M249. It looks and acts like a M4, but has a different gas mechanism. It is less than half the weight of the gun it is replacing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M27_Infantry_Automatic_Rifle

The US has largely pioneered the tech used in Canada's gun. One example that is well along in active development is the LSAT LMG. It would also conceivably replace the M249, but in broader scope than the M27, including at the Army. It uses the same ammo technologies as TFA's gun, reducing ammo weight by up to half.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSAT_light_machine_gun

Now contrasting these new guns with the canned ones that had been planned in the US, it could be assumed that the ShanghaiBill's list matches the US military's. In other words, electronics are nice, and exciting from an engineer's perspective, but the move to caseless or telescoped ammo is probably the change in the pipeline that will catch the most props from soldiers.

Smart?

[mistr]

Does it come with optional voice synthesizer to negotiate peaceful solutions on behalf of the soldier?

Can it distinguish between a gun and a cell phone or a banana and optionally refuse to fire?

Re:Smart?

[g0bshiTe]

Oh hey there, I'm soory for shooting you eh!

Re:Smart?

[Ocker3]

What if he has a gun And a banana?

Re:Smart?

[Anonymous Coward]

What if he's just pleased to see you?

Re:Smart?

[blindseer]

I don't understand, just because the suspect is not holding a firearm does not mean they are incapable of killing an officer/soldier, nor does it mean that use of a firearm to stop the suspect is somehow illegal, unethical, or otherwise improper. Blunt objects, fists, and feet kill more people than handguns.

Also, what if the cell phone is the trigger to a bomb? Or a gun in disguise?

Here's another idea, if a person comes face to face to someone in uniform and pointing a rifle at them does not immediately empty their hands and put them where they can be seen perhaps, just maybe, that person deserves to get shot. If you want to be the one that wants to argue with the cop/soldier that it's only a banana then I'll be sure to send flowers to your funeral.

Smart gun equals

[CrimsonAvenger]

More things for the private soldier to break. And for those of you with no military experience, your average private can break ANYTHING....

Alternatively, as we found in WW2 and later wars, it means more things to throw away as useless weight that your private is not going to want to lug around on the off chance it might come in useful once a year or so....

Re:Smart gun equals

[Dutch Gun]

I'm going to guess the average private will appreciate being able to, say, accurately see and target things in the dark, or have a handy grenade launcher available. The reason a lot of this high-tech weaponry costs so much is (in what I'd guess is the order of importance):

a) Making it absolutely reliable under any field conditions
b) Making it "private-proof" (nearly unbreakable)
c) Making it as light as possible

Naturally, only time (and soldiers in the field) will tell whether they've succeeded, but given that they've been testing and refining the system for so long, and under actual combat conditions, I'm think it has a pretty good chance of actually being useful in the field.

Re:Smart gun equals

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm going to guess the average private will appreciate being able to, say, accurately see and target things in the dark, or have a handy grenade launcher available.

Really? The average private, with a grenade launcher and night vision? Do you read what you're typing?

Re:Smart gun equals

[Dutch Gun]

Really? The average private, with a grenade launcher and night vision? Do you read what you're typing?

Argue all you want with me, but it's the Canadian military that will be handing our these weapons to its infantrymen. Besides, I'd guess these weapons are probably simpler to handle in the field than your average 18th century flintlock musket. Those average soldiers will do just fine.

Re:Smart gun equals

[Anonymous Coward]

They will not. Grenade launcher is an optional secondary. It is clear that you did not RTFA, or have any knowledge of the military. There is no need for everyone to carry a grenade launcher; the real world is not a version of Quake. No soldier wants to carry more weight than they need.

problem with smart guns

[SchroedingersCat]

The main problem with smart guns is the same as with smart humans: intelligence deteriorates dramatically after lying in a swamp for few hours.

other undocumented feature sets

[nimbius]

The rifle is really pretty slick. Some of the other underdocumented features include:
1. voice recording of stephen harper espousing platitudes about patriotism and freedom, automatically activated when any american president declares a 'coalition' of anything.
2. tactical Rick Mercer video will automatically be deployed in the event of house of lords/house of commons dispute over military action or funding
3. much like the leafs general manager change, this weapon does not statistically improve the likelyhood of winning.
4. can equip with molson or Labatt, and in the event of an emergency can replace most domestic tap handles.
5. 3 fire modes, single, auto, and 'prorogue' designed to assist in saving political leadership from being packed up and shipped back to their strip mall constituency in alberta.
6. 40mm launcher can fire traditional incendiary and gas ordinances as well as store timbits.
7. Dissipated barrel heat is recycled to bake up to 2 butter tarts.

Re:other undocumented feature sets

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking awesome post. No doubt the slashshills will mod it into oblivion, but damn good post. The humour makes our fascist government easier to take.

Re:other undocumented feature sets

[c]

8. moving parts can be lubricated with either gun oil or maple syrup.
9. bayonet lug will accept a non-lethal Shawinigan Handshake module
10. Canadian flag on the butt to ensure that our troops aren't mistaken for Americans ... this stuff practically writes itself.

Re:other undocumented feature sets

[Anonymous Coward]

So... it won't help me get putine, eh?

Re:other undocumented feature sets

[ClickOnThis]

6. 40mm launcher can fire traditional incendiary and gas ordinances as well as store timbits.

Hm. But can it launch timbits? Now that would be "friendly fire."

Re:other undocumented feature sets

[ClickOnThis]

11. Optional Coffee Crisp ordinance, for spreading nonlethal goodwill.
12. Homo milk dispenser, for confusing the hell out of American colleagues.
13. Used bullet-casings redeemable for merchandise at any Canadian Tire.

Let me guess at the model number

[Fnord666]

This doesn't happen to be the ZF-1 does it?

Re:Let me guess at the model number

[Anonymous Coward]

First thing I posted in response to this when I saw it on FB the other day. I'm guessing it's a predecessor. It's missing the big red button, for one thing...

Re:Let me guess at the model number

[Anonymous Coward]

Well there is no need for the Ice Cube SystemTM since it comes from Canada.

Highly unlikely this will ever show up.

[Noishkel]

Not a member of the Canadian Forces nor am I even a resident of that nation. But I've several friends. The issue here is that most of the equipment that the Canadian military has is completely outdated and work out. Mostly because there is no political will to purchase replacement equipment. In times past the military has had serious issues keeping tired on their vehicles because everything is so old that they can't get replacement tires for them. They've slowly had to cannibalize their small fleet of jet fighters over the years because they can't get the government to authorize replacement air craft. Hell... in 2012 the crew of the HMCS Victoria made history for making their sub marine successfully fire. That's right... the sub is in such poor shape they've never been able to get it to WORK.

Of course I do realize that the entire reason for this new weapons system is to at least get better rifles into the hands of the soldiers up there. I just don't think it'll ever get through the politicized purchasing process.

Re:Highly unlikely this will ever show up.

[Anonymous Coward]

The CPC has made is a matter of policy to finally update the military's equipment, though it's still slow-going because of the aforementioned lack of political will. We've ordered F-35s and have started flying Globemasters. We've begun the design and soon will start construction on the replacements for multiple classes of naval vessel. We're replacing our naval helicopters. We're replacing some of our infantry fighting vehicles IIRC (but not our main battle tanks, and I don't know if those ever see deployment anyways). We have replaced several of our army helicopters. We have new APCs entering service soon. And those submarines are garbage, but they're still a great improvement over the zero submarines we had previously.

And that's just the big stuff I could recall off the top of my head. Wikipedia lists even more. The military budget cuts of the 90s and early 00s are in the past.

Re:Highly unlikely this will ever show up.

[FhnuZoag]

Of course I do realize that the entire reason for this new weapons system is to at least get better rifles into the hands of the soldiers up there. I just don't think it'll ever get through the politicized purchasing process.

The entire reason for this new weapons system is to secure lucrative contracts for its manufacturers. If they wanted better rifles into the hands of the soldiers they would be looking into affordable tried and tested weaponry instead of new high tech ones that will almost inevitably lead to decades of expensive 'teething problems'.

Just Wait

[turkeyfish]

Just wait until these get left behind in Iraq and Syria. Look out!

Is there a Polite Request launcher?

[sabbede]

Is it detachable? Which part makes apologies?

But will the guns

[fisted]

..be connected to the Internet of Things?

XM29

[cheesybagel]

It's basically the same idea behind the USA XM29 OICW prototype. Which got cancelled to be developed as two separate programs. Of which the rifle was cancelled and the grenade launcher lives as the XM25 CDTE. Which is probably to be cancelled too.

The South Koreans and the Chinese have something similar to this already in service. The Daewoo K-11 and the ZH-05.

Sounds perfect

[terrywirth5]

for breaking up peaceful protests.

Wait, Canada has a Military?

[rsilvergun]

Like, you mean like for war?

Re:Wait, Canada has a Military?

[Eloking]

Like, you mean like for war?

Does Canada know?

let me guess

[Anonymous Coward]

squirt gun? this is canada after all...

Re:let me guess

[Quasimodem]

This is the Ross 2.0 Rifle. The Ross I.0 was abandoned for any other weapon which the doughboys could lay their hands upon.

Looks Like A Tediore Weapon

[Anonymous Coward]

Will it explode when reloaded and thrown?

Judging

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm judging this weapon causes dread to the enemy.

Re:Judging

[PPH]

causes dread to the enemy.

AKA some poor m00se.

Bullpup configuration

[Eloking]

I like that they opted for a "Bullup" configuration (magazine located behind the trigger). It seem like the smart choice.