Self-Guided Bullet Can Hit Targets a Mile Away 421
New submitter jpwilliams writes "Gizmag reports that researchers at Sandia National Laboratories have tested a 10-centimeter bullet that can be fired from a smooth-bore rifle to hit a laser-marked target one mile away. The bullet 'includes an optical sensor in the nose to detect a laser beam on a target. The sensor sends information to guidance and control electronics that use an algorithm in an eight-bit central processing unit to command electromagnetic actuators. These actuators steer tiny fins that guide the bullet to the target.' Interestingly, accuracy improves with targets that are further away, because 'the bullet's motions settle the longer it is in flight.'"
Hmmmmm (Score:2, Funny)
Interesting. If you were looking for gun.nut and came to slashdot by mistake.
Re:Hmmmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Having said that, I can see from your
Re:Hmmmmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Dart Maybe? (Score:4)
Sounds more like a dart than a bullet.
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds more like a dart than a bullet.
The real trick is training the sharks to fire the rifles.
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds more like it is laser-guided than self-guided too.
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Informative)
No, laser guided implies that there are lasers on the bullet that are helping to measure its location wrt it's surroundings. Instead, the laser just paints a target; it guides itself to the target. Hence, self guided.
Laser Guidance [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06/spy-chips-guiding-cia-drone-strikes-locals-say/ [wired.com]
The going price was $122
Re:misnomer... (Score:4, Informative)
"I'm not claiming this is a target-guided bullet, I'm saying it's laser-guided bullet."
So, you're claiming that the laser spot isn't the target for the bullet? Now you're being silly, or trolling.
Of course the laser spot isn't the target for the bullet, who's trying to destroy a laser dot?! If you want to shoot someone standing in front of a wall and target them with a laser but they move out of the way before the bullet gets there the laser dot is going to be on the wall behind them, and you'll still hit the laser dot - because it is guiding the bullet - but did you hit the target? No, because the laser dot isn't the target, it's the guide!
This really isn't that difficult a concept to grasp, I can't see why you're having so much trouble with it so let me try this a different way:
If you are hiking with a guide what is that guide doing? He/she is 'guiding' you, and doing so not by moving you or positioning you, but by indicating where you need to go. Likewise the laser is indicating to the bullet where it needs to go, by definition it is guiding the bullet, if the laser weren't there the bullet would not know where to go because it has no guide, the bullet will go wherever the laser is pointing because the laser is the bullet's guide, if it were self-guided it wouldn't need a laser. Really it's not that hard.
If you still don't get it then explain to me what you think the purpose of the laser is.
Re:misnomer... (Score:5, Funny)
Of course the laser spot isn't the target for the bullet, who's trying to destroy a laser dot?!
Probably a cat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Interesting)
The training of a sniper is not just in shooting. The USMC Scout Sniper school has three areas of training. Marksmanship is the one that people most immediately associate with a sniper. Observation is the second area of training. Stalking is the third area. This laser guided bullet won't replace a sniper since all it does is replace the marksmanship factor of a sniper. That of course assumes that the system is no heavier than the equipment a scout-sniper team would already take with them and doesn't significantly increase their profile. Scout-snipers will still operate in 2 man teams behind enemy lines and such operatives are still going to have to be highly trained to accomplish the task and if anything, such a system would not want to be used by scout-snipers precisely because we wouldn't want that system to fall into enemy hands.
I don't believe this system is useful from a battlefield perspective. This seems more like a system the CIA would be interested in for usage in an urban environment.
Re:And who is holding the laser pointer? (Score:5, Insightful)
It requires the high tech 'sniper' skill of "setting up a tripod, pointing the laser at the target, and then taking your hands off". Seriously, a sniper's skill lies not in putting the crosshairs on the target, but in putting the crosshairs off the target... such that wind, bullet drop due to gravity, etc.. etc.. ends up putting the bullet where the amateur would put the crosshairs - and miss. But wind, gravity, etc... don't effect the laser, so an amateur can place the crosshair by eye.
Re: (Score:3)
Presumeably, if / when they get this perfected, the squad Sargent ( or whomever ) paints the bad guy with a computer controlled laser (the Navy version, of course, uses a shark) and the rest of the grunts pull the trigger on their AR-18 turbo rifles. The computer ( or shark )keeps track of the victim running away or getting into their tank. Then splat. $10,000 dollars down the drain. But we've used lasers. So it's cool.
Re:And who is holding the laser pointer? (Score:4, Insightful)
There is also another possibility. The laser needs direct line of sight, but the bullet following a ballistic path only needs to find a laser dot far enough out to have time to correct it's course. Stick a recon guy with a laser designator on the ridge of a hill, keep the rest of the squad on the far side of the hill and fire above the ridge line in the general direction of the enemy. Accurate indirect fire using infantry weapons from a position that the enemy could never hit (beyond a 1 in a billion lucky shot).
Re:And who is holding the laser pointer? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And who is holding the laser pointer? (Score:4, Interesting)
Sniping is mostly about knowing the relationships between a complex set of circumstances. You could train a monkey to use a scope to paint a target with a laser. You know you're on target because you can see the laser on the target.
Knowing you're on target to sent a dumb bullet into a target a mile away is many orders of magnitude more difficult.
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Funny)
In the gaming universe this is known as an "aim bot", and is routinely derided as a hack for no-skill n00bs.
It should be popular.
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Insightful)
World record is a mile and a half. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/sniper_kills_qaeda_from_mi_away_sTm0xFUmJNal3HgWlmEgRL [nypost.com]
5 miles? That's pushing the limits of physics just a little too much. It would take a shitload of luck to get a hit from that far away. Farthest I've personally seen done is just over a mile (1800m).
And as others have pointed out, it takes time and money to train a sniper. It also takes a *lot* of luck at the upper ends of distance. You have to account for ballistic trajectory, air resistance (which changes with the temperature), wind (which can change directions remarkably easily), moving targets, etc.. Even at the speeds a bullet travels at, it still takes a discernable amount of time to reach the target at that distance. Having something you can fire and forget, and let your spotter guide it to its target with a laser pointer is a huge improvement, IMO. And besides, it's not going to cost a million bucks a pop once it's in production. Development may have cost that, but nothing in the device is all that expensive to actually make.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Navy snipers can exceed 5 mile killing shots easily. You're doing it all wrong. We kick ass, and don't bother taking names.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SusumfLtYZM [youtube.com]
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:4, Funny)
That's a 5" Mk.45 gun, not a rifle, and it's not a sniper, it's an artillery shot. ;) That thing has a range well over 5 miles... more like 13nm according to wiki. :) The navy has guns with an operational range >20mi if you're willing to allow a bigger gun like a 12" or a 16"...
Of course, if you're going to allow the Navy to use big guns as "sniper" weapons, I'm going to allow the Army to use an excalibur round... 200+ mile range on that particular type of artillery. :P
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:4, Funny)
Air Force has got you both beat. Nuke it from orbit.
Re: (Score:3)
And, one thing that you did get wrong. That gun is indeed a "rifle". A non-rifled gun, or a smoothbore, might be good in some place, for some purposes. But, for the most part, that rifling is essential to a destroyer's mission. Of course, with "smart" ammunition, the rifling would probably be redundant.
Re: (Score:3)
Yea that is what I thought. .223 or a 5.56mm round. .30 cal is 7.62mm
An M-16 is a
Your typical
The cannon on the A-10 is 30mm.
This is 10 cm! that is 100mm!
The cannon on the the Tiger tank from WWII was only 88mm!
And guided shells are not even new
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M712_Copperhead [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-51_Shillelagh [wikipedia.org]
BTW Smooth bore rifle? That is a Jumbo Shrimp folks. You can not have a smooth bore rife!
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, it states 2,475m = 2.475 km = 1.5 miles. I know, we Americans tend to assume everything is measured in miles, but the rest of the world tends to disagree.
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Dart Maybe? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Lasers? Fired from a shark? (Score:2)
Of course, the laser (even IR) will give away the spotter's position. This is no sniper weapon. I wonder, then, what applications the technology does have.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, the laser (even IR) will give away the spotter's position. This is no sniper weapon. I wonder, then, what applications the technology does have.
So don't be all day about it - aim and fire and let the bullet do the rest of the work, that's what it's for.
Re:Lasers? Fired from a shark? (Score:5, Interesting)
So don't be all day about it - aim and fire and let the bullet do the rest of the work, that's what it's for.
The 'other side' already has someone with night-vision goggles scanning for muzzle flashes of sniper weapons. He will easily see the IR laser too. In fact, that laser will give him a short warning that a sniper is about to fire. At 1.5 kilometers range, a second's warning is enough to yell "down" so nobody's torso is in the same place that it was when the trigger was pulled.
Re: (Score:2)
nobody's torso is in the same place that it was when the trigger was pulled.
As long as the guy with the laser can keep the laser on you, that's not going to help a lot.
Re: (Score:3)
As long as the guy with the laser can keep the laser on you, that's not going to help a lot.
How about an LED decoy thrown to the side?
You do bring up an interesting point, though. Who is responsible for the kill, the guy pulling the trigger or the guy pressing the button on the laser?
Re:Lasers? Fired from a shark? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A guy I knew recently was showing off with a high-powered laser he picked up somewhere. It was pretty awesome -- he was lighting up mountaintops roughly a mile away. However, I was very surprised to see that there was a very clear, very distinct line from his laser to whatever target he was pointing it at. There
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, you can do exactly that. Most wouldn't bother fully concealing the muzzle flash, but a flash suppressor does the meaningful percentages of that job.
Re:Lasers? Fired from a shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
Application? How about an overhead drone carrying a payload thats roughly the same weight as now, except instead of blowing things up it just shoots you in the face. You dont have to carry a huge amount of munitions when 95% of the bullets will hit the target.
From now on, whenever you see a new military technology you should think about how it works with drones. For example, it probably isnt a coincidence that our new magnetic launch systems on carriers will allow lighter, more fragile aircraft (read, composite drones) to be launched. The official line is it does less damage to tradition aircraft, which it does. But the guys calling the shots on this stuff make war for a living, and the writing is on the wall as far as the future goes. "Lighter. Cheaper. Disposable"
Re:Lasers? Fired from a shark? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Hunting.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Lasers? Fired from a shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is absolutely a sniper weapon. It's just not a sniper weapon to be used against prepared military assets.
It'd do a fine job of assassinating unprepared civilian targets, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe no good in the traditional sniper role but if this weapon ever gets to the point where it has an effective range that's much greater than any small arms fire then it will have a new role all of its own. That role will be called "shoot the Taliban and laugh at the counter fire".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A) there doesn't need to be a human at the laser's position, it could be pointed by robot.
B) the laser doesn't need to be continuous. You could PWM it with a small duty cycle and a decreasing aperiodic frequency, at the sacrifice of accuracy.
Really? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Just remember to keep your head down at all times . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_recorded_sniper_kills
Of course, they weren't aiming at elephants . . .
Re: (Score:3)
A mile away is 5280 feet or 1760 yards. Even during WW2, German snipers were killing American soldiers from 1000 yards, and the world record sniper shot during war time is currently two human targets at 2707 yards.
Re: (Score:2)
But who would have thought that *snipers* of all people would have to worry about becoming obsolete due to new technology . . .
Next: a self-administering poison . . .
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
But who would have thought that *snipers* of all people would have to worry about becoming obsolete due to new technology . . .
Next: a self-administering poison . . .
hawk
I'm thinking along the lines of .. you can make a rifle that fires a 10 inche laser guided bullet. Um. Why not just make a laser rifle?
Easy solution (Score:2)
IR chaff - IR LED throwies are cheap compared to these bullets and will be brighter than any IR laser (that you can't actually feel as 'hot')
Re: (Score:2)
Your post whooshing over the head of all of the replies must make you feel a bit like Gen. Sedgwick right now!
Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)
I don't normally do this, but woosh [wikiquote.org]
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
No way, it's totally ridiculous to try to understand someone's post before you publicly call them a moron.
Sweet! (Score:4, Interesting)
Since soldiers will be using this, I can enable auto-aim without being called a noob.
Comment removed (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Where's the Tom Selleck slashdot icon when you need it
Thinking of Quigley Down Under, myself. See guy running away. Prop rifle on a rock. Fiddle with site. Look through it at guy still running away. Pull trigger. Guy still running .. still running .. then falls down.
Congratulations (Score:2)
Re:Congratulations (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations. You've invented the laser guided missile launcher.
*facepalm*
Nano-missile, thank you.
This is Slashdot, after all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, it's a ballistic missile since it doesn't carry it's own fuel. A laser guided ballistic missile launcher. Sounds cool!
10 CENTIMETERS NOT INCHES!!!! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:10 CENTIMETERS NOT INCHES!!!! (Score:5, Funny)
That's what she said..
Re:10 CENTIMETERS NOT INCHES!!!! (Score:5, Funny)
If everything went metric we wouldn't have these problems.
The bullet is 10cm not 10in.
Maybe a NASA engineer submitted the fine article?
Re: (Score:2)
The bullet is 10cm not 10in.
That's what she said.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's what goldaryn said ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but Aerosmith would not sound the same singing "Big Ten Centimeter".
Re: (Score:2)
If everything went metric we wouldn't have these problems.
The bullet is 10cm not 10in.
Well, that explains why we kept missing Mars when shooting at it...
Umm, 4 inches (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Good god no. It's 4 inches *long*, not wide. Caliber = diameter. From the picture it looks no more than .45 caliber (11.5mm).
If you are going to fire a 100mm shell at someone you don't need quite that pinpoint accuracy ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Farther (Score:3, Informative)
accuracy improves with targets that are further away,
Farther. Actual distance is farther. Metaphorical distance is further, like furthering one's goals. Thanks, I feel better now.
Re:Farther (Score:5, Informative)
Let me quote from Fowler (1926):
The fact is surely that hardly anyone uses the two words for different occasions; most people prefer one or the other for all purposes, and the preference of the majority is for further.
Re:Farther (Score:4, Funny)
High Tech (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
At last, our technology is starting to catch up to 1940s cartoons! I can't wait for my portable hole...
Yeah .. but just watch out for the Rabbit in drag.
Terminology (Score:5, Informative)
smooth-bore rifle
"Smooth-bore" and "rifle" are mutually-exclusive terms. Pick one.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
smooth-bore rifle
"Smooth-bore" and "rifle" are mutually-exclusive terms. Pick one.
Except in common usage, "rifle" has come to mean any type of long gun, whether or not the barrel has rifling. In any case, what other, easy to use term would you use for a modern long gun. Musket wouldn't apply, and those are the only other shoulder arms that use smooth bores. You are just being overly pedantic.
If this was a 10 INCH bullet! (Score:2)
Here's my deleted (censored?) submission (Score:2, Informative)
My story title was: The Future of War... and Assassination!
(I think it was the word Assassination that got the slashdot editors to remove it from the "recent" listings. It was on the "recent" listings one second at "yellow" and then *poof* gone! Do they think various government agaencies don't approve of such topics?). Anyway, here's what I wrote:
"From TFA: "This self-guided bullet can chase you down from over a mile away"
A long LONG time ago, I remember reading something that claimed that in every succe
Re:Here's my deleted (censored?) submission (Score:5, Interesting)
The perfect way to do war, would be to just assassinate each others leaders over and over again until at some point one side get's one, that thinks getting assassinated is not really worth whatever they started that war over. Then that side loses and the war is done.
Casualties should be about 5-10 politicians.
Smooth bore rifle? (Score:4, Interesting)
Isn't that an oxymoron?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Yes it is.
Re: (Score:2)
I just saw that episode (Score:4, Funny)
I've been watching season 4 of Chuck and just saw this episode. We have nothing to worry about, the CIA will have no problem recovering the bullets. Also the female CIA agent will develop a severe clothing allergy half-way through.
same as LGB (Score:2)
just less of a boom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser-guided_bomb [wikipedia.org]
Mother of god... (Score:2)
Very scary.
Full circle (Score:2)
Nice tech! I think I saw the same movie these guys did, Runaway [imdb.com] with wall climbing robotic killer spiders, and self guiding bullets from handguns, and Tom Selleck!
Damn I hate wall climbing robotic killer spiders... Those must be next :/
Well as long as they don't make a self guiding robotic Tom Selleck, I think we will be OK.
Not even really a bullet at all (Score:3)
It's not 10cm caliber. It's 10cm long. (Score:4, Interesting)
Many people have commented that 10cm is up there in artillery-shell caliber. This new bullet is 10cm long. The pictures show something that's in a typical small-arms caliber, probably 9mm or smaller. It will require a special gun that can chamber an unusually long cartridge, but not an artillery piece.
The real win with this thing will be hitting moving targets. No more estimating range and leading the target. Just keep pointed at it. Sighting and designator system that can lock onto a target already exist, and shrinking them down to rifle-scope size isn't all that hard. There's more video processing going on in any modern video camera or phone.
Re: (Score:2)
It it's smooth-bore, it's a musket, not a rifle...
Don't worry, the next version will have a flash pan.
Re: (Score:2)
Or naval rounds.
(is it jsut me or do the old battleships with rows of massive triple gun turrets simply look cooler than modern ones?)
Re: (Score:2)
Who said anything about people? That troublesome bear invading your neighborhood is also a likely target, especially if the animal control officer knows he won't have ANY collateral damage because every bullet hits every time.
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt the bullet can do more than steer a few degrees... it certainly couldn't look behind itself.
But I assume all the enemy would need is a bunch of very bright LED's on a board around the intended target and the projectile would get confused...
Re: (Score:3)
Ahh, that is why we have the laser guided grenade round too, for the wise arse who lights up all around his intended target with lasers...