>M2 can be used to shootdown a cruise missileCould you use it to shoot down a JDAM?
>>64215764How many times are you gonna post that video? it was a missile, the M2 was just shooting at the same time.
>>64215778
>>64215764Erry now and then the universe and volume of fire smile upon the humble improvised aa gunner
>>64215778>Nooo not my heckin missiles wunderwaffee getting shoot down by flak nein nein nein
>>64215764Has any defense contractor tried to come up with a small radar guided aiming system that bolts up to a bog standard m2 yet?
>>64217733CROWS already has done this for 20 years
>>64217737It has radar that can track targets?
>>64217750NTA and idk about RADAR on CROWS, but CROWS is an example of the thing you're asking about. Basically it turns out that a "cheap integrated FCS and turret for a crew served weapon" is still a dozen times the cost of the crew served weapon.
>>64217805I looked it up and it didn't have any radar, just a fire control system that let's you designate/detect targets and track them, and then it provides ballistic compensation. I was thinking more along the lines of something even smaller than crows. Like just a radome, a computer, and a sight that tells you where to aim. And yeah I'm sure it would still be expensive.
>>64215764No, the bomb casing is too thick.
>>64217820Oh, that's different and you lucked out that I replied. I designed a system basically as you describe (less radar, more on that in a second) about 10 years ago. You are thinking slightly too small. The sensor and FCS solution don't need to be part of the package on the weapon mount, and shouldn't be. What you want is a distributed fires net, where the weapon assembly just has a sighting system that allows it to be fired on the provided solution in near real time, and then different FCSs can give it solutions without limiting it to the single sensor you would otherwise package it with. Ie the solution is a new kind of distributed real time fires net (the buzzword at the time was sensor-shooter fusion).The key things the weapon mount needs to be able to do are (in near real time) receive and display the firing solution relative to weapon bearing, provide its position to an FCS (not real time if static), mount to the weapon and retain zero.A ghetto solution is a rugged smartphone with a decent mount. Cost per unit is a few thousand at the ghetto level. The minimum componentry required on the weapon end for mobile/dynamic tasking is a mount, gyro, gps/ins, display, rx/tx, power, inputs. For static, omit gps/ins and tx.
>>64217936TldrIf you made AEGIS today from scratch, you could do it pretty cheap and portable, and use an open architecture that would let you integrate it on practically anything that shoots, and it would replace AFATDS as well.I'm not saying it's trivial, but it's exceptionally doable.
>>64217951>AFATDSukies have a literal phone app that does all that
>>64219680Not in near real time that can be used as a weapon sight. It's the AFATDS part of this, not the Aegis part that the other anon was asking about.
>>64219704>Not in near real timeyes in near real time and yes you can mount your phone onto a mortar barrel or whatever, plug in the necessary data about your tube, charge and projectile and bob's your uncle
can one volunteer specifically to camp on the outskirts of a city with a buddy and a technical?
>>64219742>can one volunteer specifically to camp on the outskirts of a city with a buddy and a technical?You can directly join air defence battalions.You might not get the exact MOS you want though.
>>64219750I just wanna do some armed camping. Shooting at incoming missiles while not really being a target yourself sounds fun.
>Take a good thermal camera>Point it at likely enemy aircraft approach>Attach laser range finder+speed finder becauze radar is a wunderwaffe and can be countered by ARM or jammed and sucks for bombs and drones which will shine at the background of the sun expecialy the fast moving ones>Make it emit a sound telling everyone to move to coverPut it on a 30mm autocannon and it should make for a decent point defense system.
>>64215764That cruise missile was shot down by something else while the m2 was firing on it. A cruise missile does like 280-300 meters per second at low altitude, and lets say a bullet flight time of 0.5 seconds means that you have to aim 140-150 meters in front of it. Achieving that with manual aiming is basically impossible meaning that barrage fire is the only "workable" solution.
>>64219835Its slower than a piston prop fighter and plenty of those were shot down with M2s in the second world war
>>64217820>a radome, a computer, and a sight that tells you where to aimWhy not just have it fucking aim and shoot at that point?
>>64219851>300 m/s>slower than a piston fighter>also, ignores the RELATIVE speedKys dipshit.
>>64219851300m/s is transonic speed, those hit by M2 weren't even close.
>>64219885kalibrs have a cruise speed of mach 0.8, thats 280m/s. lets say its flying at a very low altitude, so air resistance is higher and it has only mach 0.6 thats just 205m/s. doable with a heavy machine gun.
>>64219708Mate, that's not "near real time" in a conversation about electronics or computers (or anti-air targetting). In the context of everything about this conversation, "near real time" means close enough to real time that an end user can't normally tell the difference - it means being able to use a smartphone to shoot down a manouevring UAS or cruise missile based on a continuously updated track and firing solution generated by another machine that's hooked into a radar or IRST or similar.Again, it means AEGIS, not AFATDS.
>>64219972in the context of shooting down drones, >IRST is useless for search>radar must be airborne>lag and jamming will fucking kill your fancy network dead before the enemy even launches anything at you
retvrn
>>64220036>>IRST is useless for search?? it can see a jet exhaust from 80 miles away if the weather allows it and doesnt care about radar stealth. how is that useless?
>>64220075>it can see a jet exhaust from 80 miles awayin a pitifully small solid anglealso most drones don't have jet engines
>>64220053I'd DD that they come up for sale occasionally but mostly not in my country.OT airsoft 50s in a quad turret in the street.
>>64220036Ok buddy, thanks for your input. I'm glad you know so much and saved me all the time I invested actually doing this 10 years ago.
>>6422014410 years ago nobody was using kitbash wire-guided drones to kill tenksyou don't know what the fuck you're talking about, but you think you do
>>64220176Ok, thanks for your input buddy, glad you know so much about my work.
>>64215823And John Moses Browning smiles down from heaven.
>>64220144EE anon here, I understand you pal.That's wicked sick, but what happened to marketization?Did your product sell?
>>64220294I know enough about you after you suggested that you're going to use IRST to search for objects maybe half a meter on their longest side that are maybe 30 degrees above ambient in some points, flying below treetopsgood luck, faggot
>>64220396>you suggested that you're going to use IRST to search for objects maybe half a meter on their longest side that are maybe 30 degrees above ambient in some pointsI didn't.
>>64220053Honestly just stick a radar and a fire computer on one of these. Also 100% tracers just because.
>>64217918Depends on the ammo being used, the US has rounds that will absolutely go through a MK80 series’ casing all day
>>64219865I mean sure it could, my whole idea was for it to be very compact and lightweight
>>64223690>rounds that will absolutely go through a MK80 series’ casing all dayThey're only supposed to do it once, is this some batman thing where the round zips back and through the bomb casing like a .22 in a skull?
>>64223417Can we get alternating colors?
