Predator w/Sniper Rifle 2

[Dav1936531]

Ok, from the previous thread, it sounds like the sniper rifle on the Predator
idea won't work. Too inaccurate from long range, and to dangerous to pull the
Predator in range for a more accurate shot.

Also, someone mentioned that a laser might work due to its accuracy, however,
blinding and maiming lasers are against the law.

I do not believe that it is, however, against the law to shoot lasers at enemy
equipment (correct me if this is in error).

So, if we could develope a laser that could detonate an RPG warhead from a
distance, we might have a good solution.

Three or four jihadis standing there, two with AK's and one with an RPG, laser
lines up on the RPG warhead, fires, explodes the warhead,
and......STEEEERIKE.....all three jihadis are out of commision.

Now, the jihadis seem to carry RPG warheads in one of three ways. 1) They have
one chucked up in the launcher which they are toting either over their shoulder
or have on a shoulder sling. 2) They have the extra warheads in a little
backpack with the explosive part of the warhead sticking up right behind their
head (this will certainly make a mess should it "accidently" go off in that
position). And 3) they wear them slung like pirates with a saber by sticking
them in a belt around their waists.

I also saw pics out of Afghanistan of Taliban riding in the backs of Toyota
pickups wherein they had clusters of RPG rockets tied in bundles (which were
pointed warhead up) right behind the truck's cab.

In all modes, the warheads are exposed to a direct shot by laser.

If such a system could be developed and fielded on a UAV, and loiter missions
could destroy 10-15 RPG launchers per mission, this might be a valuable system.
Dave

[John Keeney]

"Dav1936531" > wrote in message
...
> Ok, from the previous thread, it sounds like the sniper rifle on the
Predator
> idea won't work. Too inaccurate from long range, and to dangerous to pull
the
> Predator in range for a more accurate shot.
>
> Also, someone mentioned that a laser might work due to its accuracy,
however,
> blinding and maiming lasers are against the law.
>
> I do not believe that it is, however, against the law to shoot lasers at
enemy
> equipment (correct me if this is in error).
>
> So, if we could develope a laser that could detonate an RPG warhead from a
> distance, we might have a good solution.

If you've got that kind of power coming out of your laser you've
probably exceded "maiming" levels and can just take head shots.
Center of mass shots with lasers might not be a good idea: no
shock effect as a bullet dumps energy into the surrounding tissue
and woulds are self carterising. Does any body know of existing
studies showing the reaction of sournding flesh to the thermal shock?

> If such a system could be developed and fielded on a UAV, and loiter
missions
> could destroy 10-15 RPG launchers per mission, this might be a valuable
system.

I think you are asking for too target rich and enviroment.

[Eric Moore]

There has been some talk of mounting a 40mm weapon on a Dragonfly UAV.
See:

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&newsId=20040225005539&newsLang=en&beanID=202776713&viewID=news_view

But I'm not sure if this will ever make it past the concept stage.

Does this sound like a practical idea?

[phil hunt]

On 20 May 2004 22:05:54 -0700, Eric Moore > wrote:
>There has been some talk of mounting a 40mm weapon on a Dragonfly UAV.
> See:
>
>http://home.businesswire.com/portal/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&newsId=20040225005539&newsLang=en&beanID=202776713&viewID=news_view
>
>But I'm not sure if this will ever make it past the concept stage.
>
>Does this sound like a practical idea?

Sounds practical to me.

A place where Metal Storm might be useful is as part of an anti-ship
missile firing 40 mm or 80 mm shells. These might have a range of
2-5 km, which would outrange CIWS being used against the AShM
(though they wouldn't outrange anti-missile missiles, except for
short range ones).

Another idea would be for a UAV to drop large numbers of small
guided bombs -- something like the 81 mm and 120 mm guided mortar
shells that currently exist -- onto a target.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)

[Eric Moore]

(phil hunt) wrote in message >...
> On 20 May 2004 22:05:54 -0700, Eric Moore > wrote:
> >There has been some talk of mounting a 40mm weapon on a Dragonfly UAV.
> > See:
> >
> >http://home.businesswire.com/portal/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&newsId=20040225005539&newsLang=en&beanID=202776713&viewID=news_view
> >
> >But I'm not sure if this will ever make it past the concept stage.
> >
> >Does this sound like a practical idea?
>
> Sounds practical to me.
>
> A place where Metal Storm might be useful is as part of an anti-ship
> missile firing 40 mm or 80 mm shells. These might have a range of
> 2-5 km, which would outrange CIWS being used against the AShM
> (though they wouldn't outrange anti-missile missiles, except for
> short range ones).
>
> Another idea would be for a UAV to drop large numbers of small
> guided bombs -- something like the 81 mm and 120 mm guided mortar
> shells that currently exist -- onto a target.


There's already a weapon like that, it's called "Viper Strike". See:

http://www.defense-update.com/directory/viper-strike.htm

[phil hunt]

On 21 May 2004 22:38:40 -0700, Eric Moore > wrote:
>> Another idea would be for a UAV to drop large numbers of small
>> guided bombs -- something like the 81 mm and 120 mm guided mortar
>> shells that currently exist -- onto a target.
>
> There's already a weapon like that, it's called "Viper Strike". See:
>
>http://www.defense-update.com/directory/viper-strike.htm

It's similar, though different in terms of its intended usage. Viper
Strike uses a single human-controlled projectile designed for
attacking specific targets in urban areas.

What I had in mind would use largish numbers of warheads (about
10-100), which would be autonomously guided (the bomblets would have
IR or radar homing), to be used against armoured columns.

It would probably also be useful against ships; the UAV could fly
fast (Mach 2 or more) and high (20 km), which would put it out of
trhe range of many SAMs. The bomblets would be too numerous for SAMs
to intercept them, and CIWS usually can't fire directly upwards. In
any case the small size and high terminal velocity of the bomblets
would make it hard for CIWS to catch them all.

Considerations such as this suggest to me that any naval or land SAM
system must to be useful include a missile capable of intercepting
the very highest aircraft.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)

[Peter Kemp]

On Sat, 22 May 2004 14:17:15 +0100, (phil hunt)
wrote:

>On 21 May 2004 22:38:40 -0700, Eric Moore > wrote:
>>> Another idea would be for a UAV to drop large numbers of small
>>> guided bombs -- something like the 81 mm and 120 mm guided mortar
>>> shells that currently exist -- onto a target.
>>
>> There's already a weapon like that, it's called "Viper Strike". See:
>>
>>http://www.defense-update.com/directory/viper-strike.htm
>
>It's similar, though different in terms of its intended usage. Viper
>Strike uses a single human-controlled projectile designed for
>attacking specific targets in urban areas.
>
>What I had in mind would use largish numbers of warheads (about
>10-100), which would be autonomously guided (the bomblets would have
>IR or radar homing), to be used against armoured columns.

WHile Viper Strike is laser guided, it's a derivative of BAT which is
Acoustic/IIR, and was designed for use against armoured columns, so
reinstating the Acoustic/IIR homing head and you problem is
solved....well, except for the rather high performance UAV with a
large payload.

Peter Kemp

[WaltBJ]

Peter Kemp > wrote in message >...
> On Sat, 22 May 2004 14:17:15 +0100, (phil hunt)
> wrote:
SNIP:
Anti-missile laser on a B2 painted 'smoke' orbiting at 40,000? Since
it would be shooting down the range would be equivalent to about 3
miles of sea-level air and the beam would be effective - don't know
how narrow it would be but certainly enough to cook an armed man. Dead
is dead; the cause of death is irrelevant as long as there is no
'collateral damage'.
Walt BJ