>Make metal tube happed like this>Fill it with spicy shotgun loads+the matter coming from the back to lower recoil>Giant recoiless shotgun that can be reutilized(lowering cost)Considering that Claymores have a 150 meter kill range and is basicaly an explosive shotgun
>>62912655you've already posted this shit fucking thread before, and we told you the same fucking thingwhy do you keep doing this? do you have dementia? just give it a god damn rest
I have a better idea, a semi-automatic shotgun with a good reflex sight as a squad level anti-drone weapon. It would have to be using a new kind of shotgun shell which is rimless and has some manner of rounded nose, all to facilitate more robust shells which reliably feed from box magazines, and which can then also be easily double stacked. If we skip the expanding crimp that can also assist in ejection.The question then comes to projectiles, what would be ideal for fending off the common light drones we're seeing in current conflicts? Lead shot with a steel core for the sake of increased penetration? Just hardened lead shot? Go Gucci with expensive tungsten shot?P.S The Hague Convention can go and fuck itself.
>>62912655
>>62912655What if you miss or there’s more than one?
>>62912655Range is shit, you only get one shot, yet the weapon is huge and bulky. That's a valuable trade-off if you take out a high value threat like a tank. A single small drone? Not worth it.>>62912733>t would have to be using a new kind of shotgun shell which is rimless and has some manner of rounded noseYou mean like the RAS-12 that flopped hard a decade ago?>what would be ideal for fending off the common light drones we're seeing in current conflicts?Tungsten. Round shot has abysmal ballistics. It needs to be as dense as possible. That also helps with penetration, not that it matters with small drones that even a BB gun will wreck.>explosive shotwhy? Shot isn't big enough to contain a meaningful amount of explosive. Even if it was, all you're doing by filling it with something is reducing your already shitty range even farther.Round shot is terrible. Use prox fused shells, just like the classic AA gun but smaller, or a high RoF machine gun and walk rounds onto target like a mini-CIWS.
>>62912899That thing is a bad day maker
esl monkey thread, move along
None of you ever think of practicality. Lets just carry a fucking anti-drone rocket launcher, a shotgun, a rifle, ammunition for all three and all the gear on top of that.
>>62913188It's okay to discuss things even if they're totally silly, anon.
>>62913170>You mean like the RAS-12 that flopped hard a decade ago?Sure, but you need to keep in mind that the RAS-12 was aiming for commercial market sales and LEO sales, and trying to convince anyone that they need to buy shotgun shells which aren't of the conventional rimmed kind with plastic hulls, is not commercially realistic. What I'm talking about isn't whatever new take on a combat shotgun for infantry combat, I'm talking about a new kind of military squad level weapon which does not yet exist in any inventories or as military industrial product.>Round shot has abysmal ballistics.Yet round lead birdshot is actually working out as a countermeasure for drones in Ukraine right now, both sides are doing it with just regular commercial hunting shotguns and associated ammunition. Tungsten is an idea, but the question is if it's actually going to be necessary or not as to justify that expense.>>explosive shotREAD, NIGGER, READ. I was complaining about tungsten being expensive.>Use prox fused shells, just like the classic AA gun but smallerI don't think reinventing the XM25 is the best approach for this. A lighter gun obviously works for lighter drones (which for now, is mostly commercial hobby drones with bombs strapped to them). For larger and higher flying drones, we may need to look towards special AA sights on 5.56mm or outright 7.62mm support weapons, if not even a new type of SAM.
>>62914165>SureI was asking you if you had any new ideas for the shell or if you were just talking the same idea as the RAS.>What I'm talking about isn't whatever new take on a combat shotgun for infantry combatCool. Explain it.>Tungsten is an idea, but the question is if it's actually going to be necessary or notThere isn't some big mystery here, bird hunters have been using tungsten shot for years. Its ability to extend the lethal range of a shotgun is already well proven.>I was complaining about tungsten being expensive.And you think making tiny little hollow spheres full of explosives would be cheaper? And you're calling ME the nigger?>A lighter gun obviously works for lighter dronesSure, but we can make the same weight gun work even better if we can delay when the shell opens and dispenses its shot.> For larger and higher flying drones, we may need to look towards special AA sights on 5.56mm They are good against smaller/closer flying drones as well. Shotgun ammo is terribly space inefficient and has shit range. The faster we can get away from it the better.
>>62912669It has merit. A recoilless 66 or 84mm scattergun is worth the investment if it saves a squad or a vehicle. Make it reloadable or even disposable and load it with a mixed charge of 6-BB shot of steel and wolfram alloy. Add a cheap Holosun thermal sight.The real issue is detection.
>>62914221To add; Make it drop-in top loaded with Xbox YUGE cartridges, perhaps like an upside down 203 in a two or three man team and give the loader/spotter something that searches for the acoustic signature of electric motor driven propellers, combined with a wide FOV thermal.
>>62914221>6-BB shot of steelWhy do nogunz seem to think that steel shot is a good thing? I constantly see people suggesting it in these anti-drone threads, but anyone who has ever hunted with it knows it sucks ass compared to basic lead. Where does this come from? Is it people thinking that steel is harder than lead so it must be better, and completely missing the point that density is much more important?
>>62914231Hence the Tungsten alloy. Load all lead if you want, it is certainly the most cost effective option, but you are not appealing to an ordnance board and pissing off greenies. Plus it limits your potential for grift and need to invade.
>>62914242>Hence the Tungsten alloy.You recommended a "mixture". What was the point of having steel in there instead of it being just tungsten?>but you are not appealing to an ordnance board and pissing off greeniesI wasn't recommending lead. I was asking why people seem to think steel shot is a good thing. Please answer that question.Tungsten is the obvious answer as we've discussed time and time again. I'm just wondering why steel constantly makes its appearance in these discussions.
>>62914253Pure W is expensive. And fragile. Steel alloy makes it ship/drop safe. You can also charge for pure and adulter the mix. I wonder if the availability of tungsten and lithium will result in wars of conquest in the sem-near future.
>>62914231I meant mixed charge of shot sizes, not the composition of individual pellets.
>>62914277And by drop safe I mean; kick it out of the back of a C130 with a chute.There is a reason Tungsten rings are omnipresent amongst machinists and machine operators, besides the cool factor and resistance to scratches and imperviousness to patina. Fuck the poly/Si wearing faggots.We seem to be deluged in the details though.
>>62913170>Tungsten. Round shot has abysmal ballistics.I have wondered if flechete rounds would work for anti drone work, but i am not sure the benefit would be enough over shot, considering birdshot/light buckshot is easily available verywhere, and the spread of flechetes can also be kinda inconsistent over range
>>62914277>Pure W is expensiveYes, and? It's not expensive enough to be a problem.>FragileTungsten shot is typically alloyed with nickel and iron. And nevermind the fact that if it can withstand the G-forces of being fired from a barrel falling out the back of a truck is nothingburger.>There is a reason Tungsten rings are omnipresent amongst machinists and machine operatorsI am a machinist. I'm well aware of tungsten's properties.
>>62914363You just add an equatorial helix rib and control the production feed.
>>62912733Most drones are actually pretty fragile, being ultralight and made of plastic. I'd go with lead birdshot.
any "anti-drone" weapon that requires human input is flawed. anti drone defenses should be automated and if youre gonna do that you may as well use a laser
>>62914190>Explain it.Explain what? A shotgun which would better be able to deal with fending off light drones? It holds more shells, is faster and easier to reload, and faster and easier to shoot.>bird hunters have been using tungsten shot for yearsDid not actually know this.>And you think making tiny little hollow spheres full of explosives would be cheaper? I literally NEVER said this anywhere, the only one who said this was you, because you cannot read.>Shotgun ammo is terribly space inefficient and has shit range.It has enough range for light drones, clearly, and if tungsten shot can be budgetted for, that would help things. The reason a shotgun makes a lot of sense here is that you're literally dealing with a small flying target, just like when hunting birds, and you want a swing and a spread pattern to have better odds.Only in this situation the bird engages in evasive maneuvers, and is trying to kill you by dropping hand grenades on you or behaving like a baby cruise missile, so you and your squadmates' lives depend on you shooting the fucker down.>>62915609They are, but what we ARE going to see eventually is purpose made light drones designed to take grenades and such, which might be built to be more robust.
>>62912655My friend has a DJI mini 4 pro. It's amazing how small these things are and what they see, contrary to the guy they are observing.It takes like 10 seconds from takeoff until you can't hear or see that thing anymore. I know the kamikaze drones are larger but you won't be able to react in time to shoot it down. You won't hear and only barely see the grenade dropping drones. The only effective way to deal with them is jamming, which is what both sides do very effectively.
>What is the effective range of a 10 lbs. cannon firing grapeshot against personnel and at what rate does the pattern expand?A battery of British six 6 pounders firing a volley of case shot would be expected to cause 100–150 casualties at two hundred metres against massed infantry.In trials: A 12 pounder firing 41 ball heavy canister caused 12 % hits on a target representing a rank of men, at 800 m 10% hits were achieved/ A six pounder using heavy ball caused 10% hits at 600 m and none at 800 m. Using 112 ball light cannister the 12 pounder caused 18% hits at 400 m and 16% at 600 m, 9% at 700 m the maximum test range. The six pounder scored 18% hits at 400 m using 112 ball canister, 15% at 500 m, 7% at 600 m and 5 % at 700 mReferencesHughes B P (1997) , Firepower, Weapons Effectiveness on the Battlefield 1630–1850 p. 167Dawson A L. Dawson P L and Summerfield S (2007) Napoleonic Artillery p235
>>62917423Ok
Converting low pressure weapons like recoilless rifles and 40mm launchers to shotguns always sucks ass, the range is abysmal because you can't generate enough muzzle velocity
>>62917397Jamming would help, but I think that someone in the squad watching the skies is just going to become vital eventually.
Pointless. The issue with shooting down drones isn't that there aren't munitions that can do it but rather that the average soldier just doesn't have the accuracy and reaction time to do it. If you are out in the field for four weeks and you now have 5 - 15 seconds to shoot down an incoming drone that's coming from an awkward angle and you have a X seconds of reaction time the math isn't on your side. Anti-drone optics, shotguns, drone guns and so on give you a fighting chance as does just getting your entire squad to magdump on full auto but the main issue is just getting enough warning time and actual time on the trigger to shoot down a target flying at 100mph+ and you have no way of telling how close you are getting with your shots against the sky. Preferrably your anti-drone thing would be something like for example a rifle mounted grenade launcher with airbursting functionality but the harder part is getting them cost-efficient and functional against small drones.
>>62912655So you want a modern blunderbuss but with barely better range than a shotgun? Just run a 20-25mm guided flak launcher at that point, hell the xm25 could pull that off with better range, more efficient weight to ammo usage and programmable munitions. Will probably be beat by truck mounted lasers at the battalion level anyway.
>>62912655in most of these videos they don't notice the drone before it blows them up, solve that problem first.
>>62912655this actually exists but in slightly different formhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyshield
>>62912899>CG flechette canisterVery based.
>>62917739>blunderbuss>Thinks they were scatterguns12 yo detected.
>>62912655For FPV drones, a semi automatic sawn off with as large a spread as possible would probably be ideal. The thing is, you just need to hit it with a single shot or projectile, so saturating an area with a lot of small projectiles would be best for personal self defense against FPV drones.
>>62920230Why sawn off? You want velocity.
>>62920244No, you want something that spreads out as much as possible, to be used at close range. Shooting one down at a distance is just luck, unless you're lucky enough to catch one hovering in place.
>>62917979>they don't notice the drone before it blows them up, solve that problem first.This.Next, take your recruits out clay pigeon shooting during basic training.
>>62920303Barrel length has preciously little effect on your shot pattern, this is a very old misunderstanding which dates to a time before chokes as changeable devices were even a thing.In ye olden days, your typical double-barreled hunting shotgun would very often have the muzzles constricted to make an integrated choke (frequently, the barrels even had two different chokes to make it a true multipurpose gun). Thus, when people would saw off the barrels such hunting shotguns to make more handy coach guns for defense and fighting, that meant the choking was now removed (ergo cylinder bore), meaning the pattern gets wider.This gets attributed to the barrel length, but that aspect really has almost no effect at all, and you can actually install interchangeable chokes into short shotgun barrels and get a tight spread that way (in barrels which can take chokes anyway). Optionally, you could smith an old fashioned hunting shotgun which has that traditional integrated choke, just with short barrels.I believe it was either Small Arms Review or American Rifleman which did a magazine article to demonstrate this many years back. They registered a shotgun as an SBS and then would measure the spread they were getting as they were cutting the barrel down, one inch at a time, and the increase in spread was there, but VERY subtle. Pic unrelated.
>>62920303>Short barrels increase speedSo you're an ignorant faggot who has never used guns outside of vidya.
>>62920479*spread, fuckStill, you are a nofunz retard double-nigger and need to lurk.
OP is a retard but what about a HE-FRAG 84mm shell with a laser proximity fuse?
>>62912733Glorious return of the CAWS?
>>62920886Potentially, though I think we could maybe make a bearable double-stacked magazine if we squeeze the shell down to 16-Gauge (making up the difference in length).
