Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science Technology

Better Sniper Detection 25

Posted by michael from the if-you-hear-the-crack,-you're-still-alive dept.
alanjstr writes: "Scientific American has a feature on detecting the location of a sniper based on sound and GPS. 'From [the] data, the model estimates the trajectory, caliber and speed of the bullet, the distance it traveled and the elevation of the sniper.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Better Sniper Detection More

Better Sniper Detection

Comments Filter:
  • But the .50 is only for use against equipment...

    Out of curiousity, is this just what it was designed for (and how it's deployed) or are the troops really trained not to use them on personnel? Obviously the rules would be bent during a time of war.

    I'm just wondering if they evision that the effects of a .50 caliber round on a person would be considered "overkill" Or maybe that the cost of a .50 caliber round is better spend destroying equipment than just a single soldier.

    I'm not well informed on military policy these days.

    As a side note, I was reading in a magazine about how anit-gun groups are trying to get .50 caliber rifles outlawed (to the dismay of sport shooters). Even though there are basically zero cases of a .50 caliber rifle being used for crime.

  • This could be like a real world aimbot. Feed all of that info into a scope on the friendly sniper's weapon to get the enemy sniper. Or hook it to something like a phalanx system that they use on the navy ships. Those things move pretty dang fast.
  • The .50 was developed as an anti-tank round initially, with a secondary consideration as a machine gun round. It's more a gentlemanly convention to not use them against personnel, and not one strictly held or written down. Certainly the FMJ ammunition which is the norm isn't prohibited by the Haque Convention.

    The .50 caliber sniper rifles are frequently billed as being useful in destroying aircraft.

    William
    --
    Lettering Art in Modern Use
  • (A strange thing to say on /., I know, but...) It seems to me like the US military is getting too reliant on neat technological toys. They might be workable in very low-intensity conflicts (which, yes, the military thinks will be more important than ever in the coming century), but I'd really like to know how they plan to keep all this stuff working in the face of the abuse of pitched battles, bad supply lines, etc.
  • Once, the location of the sniper has been determined, it's just a quick call to arty (artillery) or the local air base to bring a large amount of ordinance on the sniper location.

    Thus we get the market for cheap, robust but inaccurate firearms with timers or proximity switches which can be planted in locations you'd like your enemy to shell. :-)
    _O_

  • A sniper-detection device developed by
    BBN Technologies, part of Verizon, allows soldiers to track the trajectory...

    Huh? BBN -- a backbone ISP -- is in the military industrial R&D business? No, this can't be right...I've clearly had too much caffeine today...


    "Sweet creeping zombie Jesus!"
  • When is this going to be in our FPSs? Hit a key and bring up your handy sniper locator... of course it would only work when your buddy is lying on the floor beside you and your crouching behind some cover, hoping the sniper is in front of you and not behind, but still.
  • This sniper tracing is nice and fancy, but to find the sniper, he/she must have already fired off a shot. There's little sense in starting a lengthy trajectory analysis if the sniper's already done his job and packed his bags.

  • Optical and radar-based systems, which this one is not, pick up the bullet before it gets 50 feet out of the barrel (or the muzzle flash, using an infrared CCD camera). Since the speed of a bullet is about 2500 feet/sec., the target may have more than a second of warning to duck out of the way, depending on the range.

    In U.S. artillery, there is a system of radar hooked up to howitzers via RF. If an enemy fires a shot, we can have a round in the air going towards whoever shot at us before their round even lands. I've seen it, it works, it is cool. Hook this sniper detection system up with a miniaturized one of those with maybe 30mm cannons from networked Bradleys for return fire, and we have some dead snipers.

    BANG! rrrrrrrrrrr rrrr BANGBANGBANGBANGBANGBANGBANGBANG

  • An artillery round is only 120mm, 155mm, 8" or so in diameter and a couple to a few feet long. It has not much of a radar cross-section, and it emits no real heat signature although we do have "rocket-assisted projectile" rounds, but those only burn going up, not coming down (beautiful sight to see 100 of them going through the air though -- from behind, of course, otherwise not so pretty).

    At least on our side (others may have it), some rounds (copperhead) are also guided in the final phase of the trajectory, so you may have a small, fast, irregularly-moving target with no heat signature and only several seconds to hit it in. You're only going to hit it at the bottom of the trajectory, so it's going to land somewhere near where they wanted unless you can actually destroy it in flight (extremely difficult since we're talking about a heavy, hard, steel brick). An artillery barrage is often thousands of shells going anyway, try to hit all those.

    I think the current strategy is best -- an enemy howitzer will get off one round, and only one, instead of us just trying to pick off the next thousand they fire. You could probably try to protect one small very sensitive target though.

  • BBN was and probably still is a consulting firm which has tons of projects. It was orgianally an archtechural firm however with the advent of ARPA net they created the custom hardware/software to interface each mainframe node to each other. From there they grew into more internet related things. I think they ignored the personal computer which brought about a downfall. But they have almost always been in the military R&D area
  • a spitter? Could they find out where the other spitter was?

  • Zero cases? 50 cal Barret rifle's were used to shoot ATF agents at Waco. The same rifle has also been used effectively by IRA terrorists against British forces in Northern Ireland.
  • I thought I'd never see the day. If we already have an army of one, what are all those other people in the Army in there for?
  • Oh well, all that means is that we need to build a Real World Automated Sniper (tm). (Don't bother patenting it, I already beat you to it :-)). Maybe we could use the face recognition software they use in Tampa, FL... :-).

    There are a dozen useful applications I can think of right away: Assassination (In other news, Bush impersonator dies...), Intelligent Mine Field deployed by aircraft.. blows you away if you're not wearing the correct uniform. (Enforces proper dress code even in the heat of combat!), automated prison guard systems (fortress, anyone?), wearing a mask in a bank (Dear Customers: For your own safety please avoid obscuring your face with any object at all times. Remember, a running nose is always better than a bleeding head), ...
  • You can only combat (sic) what you can. However, in many situations, this would be useful. Think of it as another option, one beyond "hitting the deck and hoping they have packed their bags". A sniper normally has a single target, and this tool could be used by a multiple of defending persons.

    --
    McCarrum!

  • Sigh, artillery isn't so simple as getting coordinates and simple firing away. Artillery pieces aren't direct fire so they lob there ordance towards the target. The loaders (For artillery guns.) require charge loads then shells, so its not all that great to zap snipers with. On the other hand the use of counter snipers being fed this information, and using some of the heavy sniping rifles can be far more impressive and timely. By the way, most snipers shoot to wound as opposed to kill. Its far better to leave an incapacitated screaming man behind to drop your opponents morale and force several of his friends to make a decision as to either go get him or leave him behind. Killing an opponent tends to make soldiers mad, and with automatic weapons things get interesting.

  • Preventive Measures (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is more for preventive measures. A good sniper can pick off troops from over 500 yards away. At that distance, you cannot see individuals, much less shoot at them. However, if the system works, then the soldiers' computers will be able to pinpoint the sniper because of GPS.

    Once, the location of the sniper has been determined, it's just a quick call to arty (artillery) or the local air base to bring a large amount of ordinance on the sniper location. This should discourage snipers from continually sniping, especially since their peers aren't coming back from missions.
  • Optical and radar-based systems, which this one is not, pick up the bullet before it gets 50 feet out of the barrel (or the muzzle flash, using an infrared CCD camera). Since the speed of a bullet is about 2500 feet/sec., the target may have more than a second of warning to duck out of the way, depending on the range.

    Acoustic systems are obviously handicapped by the lower speed of sound ( 1000 ft/sec), but it may be possible to pick up the sound sooner if a sensor is closer to the shooter than the target is. Presumably that's the basis of this system.

  • The question is whether they can hit the round in the air. That would be something. I don't know much about military tech, but it seems like an artillery-interception system would be comparatively easy, given the systems that are being developed for missile interception. A ground-based laser would certainly be easier to build and deploy than a flying one.
  • But the .50 is only for use against equipment (so use it against stuff like canteens and web gear :/

    Also, the .50 doesn't have a terribly flat trajectory---when Walther was building the WA-2000, they actually considered creating new ammunition for it, to get the flattest possible trajectory, but decided that the .300 Winchester Magnum was good enough that wasn't necessary.

    1,000+ yards effective range...

    William

    --
    Lettering Art in Modern Use
  • That assumes you've got your radar/camera pointed in the right direction.
  • Well, that's if your sniper is in Day of the Jackal. If he's in Bosnia, for instance, he's picking off ordinary grunts and he's firing more than once. Don't you remember the snipers who used to fire into the streets of Sarajevo, just making life hell for regular people?
  • I realize you said _over_ 500 yards, but just to make your point even stronger:

    A good Marine, shooting with the iron sights on an M-16 should be able to pick off individuals at 500 yards.

    As a matter of fact we have to demonstrate that ability yearly to sustain our rifle qualification -- and you can certainly see individuals at 500 yards.

    A sniper, with a scope and a much more powerful rifle, should be able to do the same at much greater than 800 yards - especially if he (no female snipers YET) is using the .50 caliber Barret sniper rifle.
  • The BBN detector can purportedly track snipers at greater distances than other prototype systems. It also uses inexpensive microphones and simpler computers than other sniper detectors.

    All the more reason why this prototype system will never be chosen for mass production. Advanced (read "complicated, expensive") technology is almost always chosen over simpler, inexpensive designs in military contracting.

    Here's a picture [uspto.gov] of the device (requires some strange plugin) and Here's the description [164.195.100.11] of the device in question.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close