• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Rifle Scopes When Will Rifle Optics Catch Up With iTech?

H

Harvey

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Oct 14, 2013
62
3
The Right Coast of Amerika
Given the awesome power of cheap modern microprocessors, it seems every man woman and child on the planet now has an iPhone or an iPad. And this power is being integrated into most all of our every-day miniaturized machines and robotics to do amazing things. But wouldn't it be nice if the optics folks would partner with iTech R&D to produce optics that would do a few things for the rifleman, military or civilian. Wouldn't it be swell if we had access to a scope that:

  • Used the load, rifle and local conditions data from the integral iSnipe app, along with data from the integral laser rangefinder (of course), and instantaneously pushed the reticles down and over to suit the shot.
  • Or on the higher recoil hunting rifles (animals or men) with high variable magnification scopes, instantaneously pushed the magnification down to its lowest setting after a shot. Give a guy the largest field of view to find the follow-up shot, while automatically zooming back in.
  • Or adjusted for ambient light, no light, and (of course) took pictures and videos.
Far fetched? If you ask me, I'm surprised the military hasn't been all over this. Maybe they are. The unit sales in civilian markets may not support it, but anyone willing to drop a couple thou on a Night Force or Zavorski scope would likely upgrade without batting an eye. It seems the technology of tiny impact-resistant batteries, motors and switches already exists, along with technique for the human-touch over-rides. So what's next in modern optics?

FWIW, I missed out a few years back in getting a trademark for the word iWatch. Apple finally got around to it just this past June. Rats. But if someone wanted to roll the dice, they should go ahead and get copyrights to the name iScope.

Or maybe it's a bad idea and makes it all too easy. Just like the kids today have it too easy, as they all have iMachines that do their math, spelling ... and their thinking. Maybe it's a bad idea to loose the basics by having a scope that does the thinking and doing. Because within a generation the true 'rifleman' may no longer exist.
 
Harvey said:
Given the awesome power of cheap modern microprocessors, it seems every man woman and child on the planet now has an iPhone or an iPad. And this power is being integrated into most all of our every-day miniaturized machines and robotics to do amazing things. But wouldn't it be nice if the optics folks would partner with iTech R&D to produce optics that would do a few things for the rifleman, military or civilian. Wouldn't it be swell if we had access to a scope that:

  • Used the load, rifle and local conditions data from the integral iSnipe app, along with data from the integral laser rangefinder (of course), and instantaneously pushed the reticles down and over to suit the shot.
  • Or on the higher recoil hunting rifles (animals or men) with high variable magnification scopes, instantaneously pushed the magnification down to its lowest setting after a shot. Give a guy the largest field of view to find the follow-up shot, while automatically zooming back in.
  • Or adjusted for ambient light, no light, and (of course) took pictures and videos.
Far fetched? If you ask me, I'm surprised the military hasn't been all over this. Maybe they are. The unit sales in civilian markets may not support it, but anyone willing to drop a couple thou on a Night Force or Zavorski scope would likely upgrade without batting an eye. It seems the technology of tiny impact-resistant batteries, motors and switches already exists, along with technique for the human-touch over-rides. So what's next in modern optics?

FWIW, I missed out a few years back in getting a trademark for the word iWatch. Apple finally got around to it just this past June. Rats. But if someone wanted to roll the dice, they should go ahead and get copyrights to the name iScope.

Or maybe it's a bad idea and makes it all too easy. Just like the kids today have it too easy, as they all have iMachines that do their math, spelling ... and their thinking. Maybe it's a bad idea to loose the basics by having a scope that does the thinking and doing. Because within a generation the true 'rifleman' may no longer exist.
Click to expand...

My zavorsrki came with idope
 
Last edited:
Harvey said:
Given the awesome power of cheap modern microprocessors, it seems every man woman and child on the planet now has an iPhone or an iPad. And this power is being integrated into most all of our every-day miniaturized machines and robotics to do amazing things. But wouldn't it be nice if the optics folks would partner with iTech R&D to produce optics that would do a few things for the rifleman, military or civilian. Wouldn't it be swell if we had access to a scope that:

  • Used the load, rifle and local conditions data from the integral iSnipe app, along with data from the integral laser rangefinder (of course), and instantaneously pushed the reticles down and over to suit the shot.
  • Or on the higher recoil hunting rifles (animals or men) with high variable magnification scopes, instantaneously pushed the magnification down to its lowest setting after a shot. Give a guy the largest field of view to find the follow-up shot, while automatically zooming back in.
  • Or adjusted for ambient light, no light, and (of course) took pictures and videos.
Far fetched? If you ask me, I'm surprised the military hasn't been all over this. Maybe they are. The unit sales in civilian markets may not support it, but anyone willing to drop a couple thou on a Night Force or Zavorski scope would likely upgrade without batting an eye. It seems the technology of tiny impact-resistant batteries, motors and switches already exists, along with technique for the human-touch over-rides. So what's next in modern optics?

FWIW, I missed out a few years back in getting a trademark for the word iWatch. Apple finally got around to it just this past June. Rats. But if someone wanted to roll the dice, they should go ahead and get copyrights to the name iScope.

Or maybe it's a bad idea and makes it all too easy. Just like the kids today have it too easy, as they all have iMachines that do their math, spelling ... and their thinking. Maybe it's a bad idea to loose the basics by having a scope that does the thinking and doing. Because within a generation the true 'rifleman' may no longer exist.
Click to expand...

Far fetched? Very.
What kind of experience do you have with long range shooting? I would guess you have limited experience because you would know that most of the software programs out there ("apps") are only theoretical and should only be used as a guide. Any long time sniper or competitor will tell you that his handwritten data book is his bible for shooting long range.

There are so many variables in shooting long range that the ideas you propose are unfeasible. That is why the military has not picked it up.

But hey, go for it. Try to propose some of these ideas yourself to the an optics manufacturer and see what happens. It would be interesting.
 
It is neat to wonder and explore, but having been in the tech world for a while, one thing is certain; technology will fail you. Convenience is nice, but it is too easy to become dependent on such things. Dont get me wrong, It is very rare that I will trek out into the forrest without my GPS, but I also have an old school map and compass to get my butt out of there.

As for optics, all those ideas would be convenient, one EMP or dead battery and it will all be iTrash.
 
I say some of this is not far fetched. Several years there was an ITT NV scope that was wireless connected to a computer screen for police use. The idea was that the CO could actually see what the shooter was viewing and make the shot call. No idea if the scope is still in use. Some of the ideas are far fetched. Some are similar to the BORIS I think. What happened to that one?
 
That would be taking all the fun and challenge out of it. What kind of gratification would you get from making that 1st round hit at 800 yards with a challenging wind. I just recently went to a lr class and we couldn't use rangefinders,wind meters, or ballistic apps. It really felt like more of an accomplishment to hit targets by measuring the distance with your reticle and making a wind call just from looking at mirage and the grass and trees blowing than from using a ballistics app.
 
Watches and cell phones do not and are not in the same category as firearms. You need to stop applying solutions from other sectors incorrectly.

Every single aspect of shooting a weapon revolves around 1 single thing, the person pulling the trigger. Taking that brain power, self thought, out of the equation is foolish. All the points you have listed are complete bull shit. Equipment should support the shooter of small arms, not the other way around.

You didn't miss out on anything with the iwatch, either you are full of shit or completely lazy and fucked yourself out of what ever grandiose ideas you think you had. I'll be shooting my Zavorski and Night Schwarz, later.
 
I think modern computers are more than capable of doing this. I think the primary issues would be weight and reliability as well as cost. I've thought the same thing. You'd need electric motors in the scope to work the mechanical aspects those and the laser range finder would add considerable bulk and weight to a rifle scope. Additionally all of these things would add additional reliability factors. Any of those things could break in the field and having the ability to mechanically adjust would be necessary.

That being said I think these things are on the way. There's no human mind that can process this number of variables as quickly and accurately as a computer. There are no records you can keep on paper that can't be stored and more quickly accessed via a good computer database. If you look at things like trackingpoint and the guidance systems already being used by missiles and artillery I think the kind of thing you're talking about is on it's way.
 
He's not crazy and probably not far off. These things will likely exist at some time. Maybe not all in the same targeting device and maybe not all of them will pan out, but to think that they will not be explored and or used in some capacity is to be naive and close-minded. Sure, there are roadblocks and surely technology isn't always the answer or at least not always the right answer, but to dismiss these ideas outright is simply burying one's head in the sand.

Some of you sound like the sharpshooter from 1776 with his long flintlock Kentucky squirrel rifle who would scoff at the mere notion that a cartridge could be used in a rifle. Or that an accurate barrel could be made that was less than 36" long. That would take the need for marksmanship out of the equation. Besides, there's no way to contain the explosion... Just kidding of course, but don't miss the point.

Or take the comment that every aspect of marksmanship revolves around the nut behind the trigger. True statement there, but not a reason to stop looking for a better / different way to do things. Otherwise, why is there a continuing stream of improved barrels, actions, weapons, systems, scopes, gear, support devices flowing through the very pages of the Hide, being purchased by most here, in the pursuit of that next minor advantage.

Progress will continue, whether or not you personally view it as progress.
 
Someone makes a scope that does this, the package is $25K last I seen. I only seen it shooting to 1000 yards, that is kids stuff. It still can not predict the wind down range. That is the hardest to predict and takes the most practice. I use an app. Applied ballistics or Shooter. Both very similar. I stopped using a data book a while ago. Changing one little thing only takes a quick run through a chrony and ready to go again. Maybe a quick zero check. Because of this I do better with the app as long as my battery isn't dead! For backup I print a table out for the area I shoot and tape in to the stock also. That gets me close out to 800yards. Recoil is a killer on electronics. So is the environment. Go kick your I phone a few times and set out in the rain, does it still work? Now what does it cost to make it handle these things? We can't just print money like the government so it does need to be affordable.
 
So you want some fairy ass scope that takes all the fun out of LR shooting so you just pull the trigger? If you're going to go retard you might aswell go full retard and make a gun that shoots itself so you can sit back with your buddies drinking coffee and talk about dicks. Or just go the next step and make an unmanned transport vehicle so that it brings itself to go shoot and you can sit at home in front of the bigscreen.

I could almost see something like this for military application but for civilian use it would only make you look like a lazy fuck who can't shoot.
 
They are getting very close to what your asking for and in some case they are there. Tracking Point is on its way from what I have seen is doing a good job of it. www.tracking-point.com


ELCAN Digital Hunter started off strong but the project do not really take off. Here is video we did on the ELCAN Digital Hunter.
IOR Spartan Evaluation - YouTube

Mike @ CSTACTICAL
 
My, my. I still find it stunning how a few folks can get so personal and derogatory behind the anonymity of the internet. If you re-read the OP, tho, I do think I preempted most of your cut-downs satisfactorily. Try again.

In any event, the exponential advances in high-tech are influencing almost every aspect of our lives, and there is no reason there will not be advances in precision optics.

You see, the OP comes from a guy, as a kid, suffering woefully thru rote multiplication tables, and then manipulating a sliderule (his slip stick) throughout most of his higher education. This OP, coming from a guy that thought punching a tray full of Fortran cards was the pinnacle of computer technology. This, coming from a guy that spent several hundred dollars marveling at the first 4-function calculator, and then paid several thousand dollars for one of the first mobile phones as big as a suitcase. This, coming from a guy that watched in awe as Al Gore invented the internet. This, coming from a guy that now sees every new electronic gadget become obsolete in 18 months. This OP, coming from a pessimistic guy wondering if today's young adults are still capable of counting change without a gadget. Yes, good or bad, we've come a long way.

And if you compare the optics today to those fifty years ago, we've come a long way. A very long way.

So the intent of the OP is to posit, not my sanity or experience in long range shooting, but the next advancements in optics. Will iTech be incorporated into the next generation of shooting glass? No question. The intent of the OP was to have a conversation as to HOW it will be incorporated, not IF. The OP addresses the undeniable human-factors of shooting, and the dangers that iTech might place on the traditions of the true 'old school' rifleman. With the inevitability of iTech in precision optics, how might it best be incorporated?
 
Well, I think when the Kestrel, Shooter app, and Vectronix are combined it will be a lot more feasible.
 
An error has occurred. To continue:

Press Enter to return to shooting, or

Press CTRL+ALT+DEL to restart your scope. If you do this,
you will lose any unsaved trajectory information.

Error: 0E : 016F : BFF9B3D4


Press any button to continue _
 
The day automated shooting becomes the norm, and tracking point isn't the norm yet.... Is the day I leave shooting to take up a different hobby. Maybe something like golf. Oh God forbid.....
 
123Nick said:
they are working on it One Shot XG
Click to expand...

Wow. Sounds like the military IS moving into the jet age. Thanks for the link, Nick.


One Shot XG

Military snipers may only get one chance to hit their target. The One Shot program seeks to enable snipers to accurately hit targets with the first round, under crosswind conditions, day or night, at the maximum effective range of the weapon.

Military snipers may only get one chance to hit their target. The One Shot program seeks to enable snipers to accurately hit targets with the first round, under crosswind conditions, day or night, at the maximum effective range of the weapon.

To achieve this, the One Shot system provides a measured profile of downrange crosswind and range to target. This information is then used to compensate the bullet trajectory to offset crosswind effects and range-related bullet deviations, substantially increasing the probability of first-shot hit.

One Shot XG Phase represents the next-generation of the One Shot system. In previous phases, the program has conducted two development cycles through numerous field tests, government field test verifications and demonstrations to military services. The program completed Phase 2E in spring 2013 to reduce system size, weight and power and extend the engagement range. The Phase 2E system will mount on a conventional spotting scope. Because of interest expressed by services, One Shot XG was initiated to create a significantly smaller “field-ready system” that can be “clipped-on” directly to the weapon, eliminating the need for a spotter/observer in future sniper operations.

This next-generation One Shot envisions a compact observation, measurement, and ballistic calculation system mountable on either the weapon or spotting scope. The system developed will measure all relevant physical phenomena that influence the ballistic trajectory and rapidly calculate and display the offset aim point and confidence metric in the shooter’s riflescope. The system will provide the ability to see the aim point on the target in either day or night to enable rapid target identification, weapon alignment, measurement of range to target and the crosswind profile. The XG system seeks to exploit new technologies to operate over a range of visibilities, atmospheric turbulence, scintillation and environmental conditions.

One Shot XG Phase 2 began in March 2013 and is expected to be complete in Spring 2014. If successful, One Shot XG would lead to limited rate production with the military services taking on the requirement and acquisition role for future procurement.
Click to expand...

Over time, this stuff will get smaller and smaller.
 
I think all the guys who are getting angry about this are missing the point. Even more than shooting I love cars. It used to be that a good driver with a manual transmission was better in every objective category than an automatic. Those days are over. I still drive a stick because I enjoy it, and you can still shot the way you shoot now, or use bows and arrows or spears if you want to. Technology has always taken the skill and challenges necessary to complete a task and reduced them. It's the purpose of technology.

In competition or in combat those with the most resources will always use technology to gain an advantage when they can. Do you think pilots are happy about drones? Just think how pissed archers and crossbowmen became when rifles took over. The fact remains that technology marches forward. I for one shoot for the satisfaction of skill. I really have no practical use for firearms, but I enjoy doing something difficult, something that most others can't do, well.
 
I'm a fairly low-level IT nerd by day, but I'll bet I'm not the only one. So do any other nerds know if there exists today a communications protocol that would support subscription and/or broadcast on a firearm size lan? Say for example an optic accepts firearm data that conforms to version 1.0 of firearmxml, therefore if it gets data on distance to target (from some other component on the rifle it knows nothing about) it displays it in a HUD. Could also be handy for rounds remaining in a mag, environmental data, etc. The important thing is that the protocol is standardized and open, therefore manufacturers code to an established protocol, and components can be swapped out over time as the technology improves.
 
Good stuff, Stinky. Sounds like you would have been a big help rolling out ObamaCare.

But you're right. The technology exists, and is a matter of putting it together intelligently. I imagine al Queda wishes they were as far along as our military, because in war, it often seems like the side with the best toys wins.
 
i will only buy into this if it has a facebook app, and a "closest starbucks locator" device so that i can sit and drink a triple soy mocha latte no foam extra soy bean bean purple smoothie while reading the 'hide from my phone that is 1/2 mile away.
 
A few things. I don't think anyone is getting "angry", don't flatter yourself. There is already a scope in the works that performs advanced functions, it auto fires the rifle once the reticle is on the correct point. Again, firearms are not cars, they are not computers, they are not iphones, therefor the solutions need to be specific to firearms.

You first must identify specific problems before a solution can be engineered. You have "solutions", but no problems identified, ass backwards. A good idea applied in the wrong realm is actually a terrible idea.
 
The problem is marksmanship is a skill that requires training and practice to maintain and transferring data for a ballistic solution from a variety of sources takes time and skill and training. If you could throw those variables out of the mix every soldier would be capable of making hits on enemy targets from as far as his rifle would reach. This would decrease the need for highly specialized marksmanship training and expensive practice ammunition and likely result in greater accuracy as a unit.
 
There does not need to be an identified "problem" as a reason to improve upon anything, be it a better mousetrap or a smart phone. To put it another way, not every improvement is developed in answer to a problem. Otherwise, we might well still be living in caves using sticks and rocks. That seemed to work fine for your very distant ancestors.

The OP was offering up ideas (A strange and dangerous concept, I'll agree) in an (apparently vain) effort to do some inter-web (sic) brainstorming. Instead he's being met with responses from "flat-worlders" and derision. Hardly an atmosphere conducive to advanced thinking and invention.

As was said before, these ideas will be explored further, even beyond the current "advanced intelligence scopes". Will they become commonplace or be accepted by consumers of such things? That remains to be seen, but it will happen nonetheless.

EDIT: Good problem definition Randoman. Now, on to the solutions...:)
 
lash said:
There does not need to be an identified "problem" as a reason to improve upon anything, be it a better mousetrap or a smart phone. To put it another way, not every improvement is developed in answer to a problem. Otherwise, we might well still be living in caves using sticks and rocks. That seemed to work fine for your very distant ancestors.

The OP was offering up ideas (A strange and dangerous concept, I'll agree) in an (apparently vain) effort to do some inter-web (sic) brainstorming. Instead he's being met with responses from "flat-worlders" and derision. Hardly an atmosphere conducive to advanced thinking and invention.

As was said before, these ideas will be explored further, even beyond the current "advanced intelligence scopes". Will they become commonplace or be accepted by consumers of such things? That remains to be seen, but it will happen nonetheless.

EDIT: Good problem definition Randoman. Now, on to the solutions...:)
Click to expand...

No, there really does need to be a problem, also called a need at time. The term "necessity is the mother of invention" was not misguided wisdom. Every modern advancement known has been a result of this. People don't just stumble on break throughs fucking around in the garage on sunday afternoons while cleaning the oil under the harley, wam bam the world becomes a better place. Direction and focus are required for any advancement.
 
If I were a betting man, I'd bet that these concepts will come to pass. As previously mentioned, the biggest problem at the moment is measuring wind downrange. I can think of two ways to deal with it off the top of my head.

First, sense with wind somehow. There may already be sensors that can do that, but if there are I'm not aware of them. My level of awareness doesn't mean much though. Just a few months ago we learned about the newly developed sensors than can find a magnified optic pointing at them by pinging the surrounding area with a laser and processing the reflected light. Mind you, this is not lab technology but deployable technology. Who knows what we don't know?

Second, do it the same way it's done with artillery (I think). Track the first shot with radar and see how it diverges from the predicted path. Correct and get a second round hit.

The technology may not exist to do either option today in a man-portable package, but I suspect that not only is it coming, folks are already working on it.
 
stinkyDrunk said:
I'm a fairly low-level IT nerd by day, but I'll bet I'm not the only one. So do any other nerds know if there exists today a communications protocol that would support subscription and/or broadcast on a firearm size lan? Say for example an optic accepts firearm data that conforms to version 1.0 of firearmxml, therefore if it gets data on distance to target (from some other component on the rifle it knows nothing about) it displays it in a HUD. Could also be handy for rounds remaining in a mag, environmental data, etc. The important thing is that the protocol is standardized and open, therefore manufacturers code to an established protocol, and components can be swapped out over time as the technology improves.
Click to expand...

That technically exist in several protocols. But they are not commonly utilized in data network architecture. What you are suggesting is something similar to an APRS network that is utilized in amateur radio.
 
phreakmode said:
No, there really does need to be a problem, also called a need at time. The term "necessity is the mother of invention" was not misguided wisdom. Every modern advancement known has been a result of this. People don't just stumble on break throughs fucking around in the garage on sunday afternoons while cleaning the oil under the harley, wam bam the world becomes a better place. Direction and focus are required for any advancement.
Click to expand...

That's certainly not always the case. I believe that the adhesive used in Post It notes was invented when working on something else. The application actually was the result of finding a use for the new product.
 
phreakmode said:
No, there really does need to be a problem, also called a need at time. The term "necessity is the mother of invention" was not misguided wisdom. Every modern advancement known has been a result of this. People don't just stumble on break throughs fucking around in the garage on sunday afternoons while cleaning the oil under the harley, wam bam the world becomes a better place. Direction and focus are required for any advancement.
Click to expand...
With all respect phreak, the necessity - the problem - is pretty clear: military or civilian, how does one place a shot on target in the least amount of time or with the least expenditure of resources.

Would a "machine" take all the fun out it? Sure. No debate. But if you ask me, the world should fear the army of divisions using the natural progression of 'OneShot XG' technology.
 
Last edited:
Harvey said:
With all respect phreak, the necessity - the problem - is pretty clear: military or civilian, how does one place a shot on target in the least amount of time or with the least expenditure of resources.

Would a "machine" take all the fun out it? Sure. No debate. But if you ask me, the world should fear the army comprised of divisions using the natural progression of 'OneShot XG' technology.
Click to expand...

fair enough :)

MJY65 said:
That's certainly not always the case. I believe that the adhesive used in Post It notes was invented when working on something else. The application actually was the result of finding a use for the new product.
Click to expand...

It was applied to an actual need, the end result was not random. Again, people do not just come up with meaningful ideas, they have to be appropriately applied or they are in fact worthless. Most of those "as seen on tv" products are "great ideas", but very few people in there right mind buy that shit because it often serves no real purpose nor mitigates an actual necessity.
 
Don't forget strain gauges built into the barrel to be used as an integral chronograph and a properly Bluetoothed Kestrel built into the stock for atmospherics :)
 
I'm neither a physicist nor an engineer ....

But telescopes use lasers to sense atmospheric distortion and adjust the mirror's shape in real time. They work, and they work very well. It doesn't seem that far-fetched to me to think that at some point, a laser rangefinder might be invented that also measures air movement (wind) at various ranges.

That would be as useful a field and training tool as a Kestrel.

Reading wind is hard for me. I would sacrifice a goat to have a device that could tell me, accurately, what the wind was actually doing at various ranges after I made my estimate. I bet I'd get better in a hurry with that kind of feedback.


Ultimately, rifles are tools, not fashion accessories. If you could have a scope with an integrated rangefinder, ballistic calculator, wind measurer, night vision, thermal, and topped off with a reticle mover ... why not? If you just want to shoot unaided for the fun or challenge of it, fine, turn the features off. Or take the scope off completely and shoot irons. I don't understand the contempt in this thread.
 
gasdoc09 said:
I'm neither a physicist nor an engineer ....

But telescopes use lasers to sense atmospheric distortion and adjust the mirror's shape in real time. They work, and they work very well. It doesn't seem that far-fetched to me to think that at some point, a laser rangefinder might be invented that also measures air movement (wind) at various ranges.

That would be as useful a field and training tool as a Kestrel.

Reading wind is hard for me. I would sacrifice a goat to have a device that could tell me, accurately, what the wind was actually doing at various ranges after I made my estimate. I bet I'd get better in a hurry with that kind of feedback.


Ultimately, rifles are tools, not fashion accessories. If you could have a scope with an integrated rangefinder, ballistic calculator, wind measurer, night vision, thermal, and topped off with a reticle mover ... why not? If you just want to shoot unaided for the fun or challenge of it, fine, turn the features off. Or take the scope off completely and shoot irons. I don't understand the contempt in this thread.
Click to expand...

Telescopes manage to have those things and they work. But they also add weight and expense. Remember that some people actually have to walk or run long distances with their gear and as such weight is a major consideration. Also comes the expense factor. If you are a government entity then expense is not such a big consideration. But if you are just an avid shooter that has to find balance between keeping food on the table and the gear you purchase then all of sudden money matters. Now this is not to say that it couldn't be done, rather it is to say that at present it couldn't be done and still keep the optics weight and price down to reasonable levels. On the other hand a system such as the one the OP described could be done now at a fairly resonable price but it would not be a one box and done package. Rather it would consist of numerous pieces of kit that would work well on a range but not so well for combat applications.
 
the contempt is quite easily understandable.
First off as pointed out, technology will always fail at some point, just take a look at you're wonderful smartphones, that dies from a drop of water, or being dropped, software issues, cheap chinese made crap. You're battery runs out or what not.
Take that into the equation with equipment that has to be dependable enough to stake you're life and possibly you're team mates life on it and it's quite self explainatory.

Second it takes any skill out of the equation when it comes to shooting, especially at range.
I'm sure they can make robots that hits baseballs further and more accurately then humans, so why don't they just substitute human players?
Same concept really.

Wind reading ,range estimation, and accounting for other variables takes time and practise to learn. Just as with any other skill.
At least in my opinion that's what makes it rewarding to be able to hit a target at range.

Lastly, are you sure it's a good idea to let such products be available to everyone in the world?
Meaning whoever can take they're rifle mate it with a scope, and shoot someone from a 1000 yards, and walk away unpunished.

Just my opinion on the subject.
 
Longshot38 said:
Telescopes manage to have those things and they work. But they also add weight and expense. Remember that some people actually have to walk or run long distances with their gear and as such weight is a major consideration. Also comes the expense factor. If you are a government entity then expense is not such a big consideration. But if you are just an avid shooter that has to find balance between keeping food on the table and the gear you purchase then all of sudden money matters. Now this is not to say that it couldn't be done, rather it is to say that at present it couldn't be done and still keep the optics weight and price down to reasonable levels. On the other hand a system such as the one the OP described could be done now at a fairly resonable price but it would not be a one box and done package. Rather it would consistbeen of numerous pieces of kit that would work well on a range but not so well for combat applications.
Click to expand...
A reasonable perspective, Longshot. In fact in the OP I had doubts that the private sector could support or justify a sizable R&D effort, but suggested that our military could.

Kindly revisit post #20 and you'll see (to my surprise) that our military is already investing in the future of rifle scopes. It seems a future that will indeed meld optics with iTech. It is a progression as natural as rifling in the old smooth bore or placing the first tube over iron sights.

To us old folks, change is always hard. But regardless, change it will.
 
I think there are a few inconsistancies in your opinions.

Powermac said:
the contempt is quite easily understandable.
First off as pointed out, technology will always fail at some point, just take a look at you're wonderful smartphones, that dies from a drop of water, or being dropped, software issues, cheap chinese made crap. You're battery runs out or what not.
Take that into the equation with equipment that has to be dependable enough to stake you're life and possibly you're team mates life on it and it's quite self explainatory.

Really? Is that why fly by wire jets have never really been adopted as replacements for good old piston powered fighters?

Second it takes any skill out of the equation when it comes to shooting, especially at range.
I'm sure they can make robots that hits baseballs further and more accurately then humans, so why don't they just substitute human players?
Same concept really.

So are we talking about the entertainment value of shooting, or life and death as you stated in your first paragraph?

Wind reading ,range estimation, and accounting for other variables takes time and practise to learn. Just as with any other skill.
At least in my opinion that's what makes it rewarding to be able to hit a target at range.

Again, hobby vs serious usage.

Lastly, are you sure it's a good idea to let such products be available to everyone in the world?
Meaning whoever can take they're rifle mate it with a scope, and shoot someone from a 1000 yards, and walk away unpunished.

I'd be careful with that one. The antis would love to latch on to it and start banning ANY rifle that can shoot long distances. We just fought a battle over magazine capacity, let's not get them started on effective range.

Just my opinion on the subject.
Click to expand...
 
MJY65 said:
Really? I don't live where I can shoot 1000 yards, so I always assumed there was some skill involved.
Click to expand...

There is some sarcasm in my previous statement. But really, 1000 yards isn't that hard given 3 shoots on a calm day ;)
In reallity I would bet that after doing a basic class of long range shooting many can hit 1000 yards at the end of the day.
 
Just another article about the One Shot XG, from GIZMODO 01/18/13. If anyone can find a more recent update, please share. Fascinating stuff ...."with DARPA's new One Shot XG scope system, any ol' Killroy will be able to accurately fire an M24 up to a mile".

DARPA's Super Sniper Scope Is the World's Deadliest Range-Finder


Snipers are among the most valuable assets a military can deploy in battle and have become a pillar of modern US counterinsurgency tactics. While mile-and-a-half-long shots are possible, they're not all that common. But with DARPA's new One Shot XG scope system, any ol' Killroy will be able to accurately fire an M24 up to a mile.

Due to the covert nature of their missions, sniper teams typically have just a single opportunity to engage a target—so accuracy is paramount. Hence the "one shot, one kill" mantra. Sniper cells operate as two-man teams—the sniper himself and a spotter, who is responsible for monitoring weather conditions that might affect the shot and calculating shot corrections. Problem is, the farther away the target is, the greater the number and intensity of these deviations will be. And all these corrections will need to be calculated like five seconds ago or else that one shot will fail.

"The No. 1 error among our snipers is not being able to accurately measure downrange cross wind profile between the shooter and the target," Steve Sampson, vice president of Advanced Programs for Cubic Defense Applications, said in a press statement. That's why DARPA awarded a $6 million contract to the Cubic Corporation in 2007 to develop the One Shot XG.

This rail mounted system incorporates a laser rangefinder that measures the speed of downfield crosswinds, distance to the target, atmospheric conditions, and other variables. It then calculates any necessary corrections and displays ballistic aim point offsets in the rifle's scope. Shooters simply need to line up their sights with what the system is displaying and boom: head shot.

While field testing likely won't begin until the end of 2013, preliminary tests have illsutrated the system's promise. Shooters employing the One Shot improved their first hit probability by 400 percent and reduced the number of shots they had to take to get that first hit by 230 percent—all while spending 35-percent less time lining up the shots. In other words, this single innovation has the potential to make our snipers four times as deadly, 2.3 times more efficient, and a third quicker.

The entire system weighs 1.4 kg and operates equally well day or night, and it can even be used by a solo sniper. That's not to say that spotters are no longer needed—far from it, spotters perform a host of other vital duties while the sniper's staring down his sights—but the inclusion of a One Shot will make these teams even more efficient and reduce the need to deploy regular infantry.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sako man
Element Theos the new turret king...kinda?
Replies
17
Views
1K
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
W
Hunting scopes, 6x42, 8x56, vs. variable
Replies
3
Views
371
Woodlanddude
Woodlanddude
WestCoastLongRange
Make it to a Mile, May 5, Woodland CA
Replies
0
Views
179
WestCoastLongRange
WestCoastLongRange
Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes March FFP 1.5-15x42 MPVO Review and Comparison (w/ Nightforce and Athlon)
Replies
220
Views
15K
steve123
S
R
Optics WTS/WTT USO SN-3 3.2-17x mil/mil Price dropped again
Replies
23
Views
2K
RyanV
R
Top Bottom
Back