This was DIY so it is not reliable.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PRAjroxlJIBut if a big company like H&K made one, I bet it would be good.Make it very light, with carbon fiber parts, shotguns don't need very strong parts as people make their own shotguns with ordinary plumbing parts from hardware stores.And give a lot of bird shot to the soldier.
>>65240895Or just point some claymores at the sky with motion detectors. Probably gonna kill a shit ton of birds that way too but if my ring doorbell can spot the difference between an Amazon delivery driver and an opossum I’m guessing it can spot the difference between a drone and a pigeon. Also fuck pigeons if not.
>>65240895Anything short of saturating the air with a dark cloud of suspended carbon nanowires that will short circuit the motors and give you the worst kind of mesothelioma won't cut it I'm afraid
>>65240895If you are within firing range of a drone, you already fucked up. You fight drones with OTHER DRONES. How did we fight manned bombers? With manned fighters. Small and fast interceptor drones flying air patrols guided by larger loitering "AWACS" drones to detect and intercept enemy drones long before they get into range. Fighting drones from the ground is futile. The war math equation has changed. Drones are cheap and expendable. Commanders have no hesitation to send hundreds of drones with the expectation that only 5 will hit their targets. You shoot down 1, 9 will now home in on you. You shoot down the other 8 and 1 will relay your coordinates for a HIMARS or arty strike.
How about a 40mm hornets nest? 18 rounds of .22lr? If you had individual barrels in the shell I think you could get reasonable performance out of it. And go with a small standalone launcher that you could hand out.
>>65240895bird shot out of that length barrel doesn't have a very long effective range...even stuff like #4 out of a 20 inch barrel with a full choke will hit ducks/geese reliably at 60ish yards... and that's pushing it
>>65241315Retard
>>65241053You can't even shoot down an fpv reliably by dumping a cloud of pellets in the air, how are you going to hit it with OTHER DRONES
>>65241315the difference in velocity from a 20" barrel to a 36" barrel is very small. the difference from 10" to 20" is barely noticeable. we're look at a 200 FPS difference at most from that thing to a long barrel shotgun.
>>65241323Retard.
>>65241287Why not just use a 40mm shotgun round? Or even one of the old 40mm flechette rounds?
>>65240895I firmly believe the future being drone warfare was why the government illegally stole all the aa12 data and have developed a rimless 12 gauge. There cooking up something new and exciting
>>65241315How about something like this?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKlnMwuCZso
>>65240901at that point cant you just use a laser turret
>>65241053>Small and fast interceptor drones flying air patrols guided by larger loitering "AWACS" drones to detect and intercept enemy drones long before they get into range.Not a bad idea, fight them from above.>>65241325Jet powered rams, quads with nets and mini claymores, that kind of thing.
>>65241556See>>65241345Stupid noguns bitch. The difference is choke and shot.
>>65243767you can put a choke in a short barrel, retard
>>65243786No shit, retard. Thanks for agreeing.
>>65243791no problem, retard
Why not just whack them with a telescopic flyswatterim serious. the drone's payload wont do diddly if it explodes 10 meters from you.
>>65243822Are you pretending to be retarded?
>>65243825Do you want the drone to explode on your face or from some distance away?
>>65241325>You can't even shoot down a plane reliably by dumping a cloud of pellets in the air, how are you going to hit it with OTHER PLANESt. 1930s idiot.
there is no counter to drones, warfare is going to be like forever now.
>>65243837…What? Air to air combat was established in WW1 as soon as pilots began shooting at each other with sidearms, and then investment in aerial armament began immediately. That’s 16 years before your stupid ass comparison.This had really better be bait.
>>65243832You think anti-personnel HE laced with powdered aluminum is not going to wreck your day from 10 meters?
>>65240960>suspended carbon nanowires that will short circuit the motorsno they wont
>>65243859Good chances that most of the fragments will miss, and at 10 meters the shockwave is just a loud bang. Idk how much energy fragments lose at 10 meters, but I'd guess quite a lot since they're small and the lethal theoretical radius of a frag grenade is much smaller than the range of any firearm. So they might not even penetrate that much. Preferably I'd have kevlar all over, and multiple spare flyswatters.Modern problems require clown solutions.
>>65240901>>65240960>>65241812genuinely I think we are just going to get .22 quad guns or laser turrets on the back of Bigdogs in like 5 years.This will devastate some terrorist group going all in on the drone strat, and then the third worldists will move on to the next wunderwaffe that will destroy the Amero-golems.
>>65241345shotguns are not rifles. 200fps loss at the muzzle from a 1200fps round is substantial, not to mention the massive losses downrange.it's also a problem of shot spread/pattern. but this this thing does give you sheer volume of shotI'm a nationally ranked sporting clays shooter. sometimes at shoots there's a company with an RC drone they call the "gnat" that has impact sensitive explosives all over it and they charge for squads of 5 shooters to try to take it down. they make 3 passes at about 30 yards and it's going about 100mph. it's not easy. taking down one of those military drones would probably be a lot harder
>>65242692that would hands down be more effective. you can get rifle ammo range, mass, and velocity with the coverage of a shotgun. makes me think of those auto air defense mini guns
>>65243786>>65243791>>65243801chokes aren't an end-all for this problem.people tend to forget that shotguns don't fire a 2D wall of lead, but a 3D shot "string" or cloud. sure it flattens a bit over range, but you're shot cloud will have larger and larger gapsit's not even a question of shotgun performance to me...if they send multiple smaller, fast drones you probably won't spot them quick enough to deploy something like this effectively
>>65241345200fps translates to lethality at range, and pellets lose their effectiveness at distance QUICK. Even expensive tungesten #4 is good to ~100yds against something airborne.Either way though, shotguns aren't the answer to drones. They're too fast, too unpredictable, and tougher to down than a bird.>t. snow geese genocider
>>65241812the 40mm buckshot round is actually underwhelmingbecause 40mm use low pressure to lob the grenades (or else you'd get insane recoil and barrel thickness requirements) you can't pack too many pellets and the velocity is significantly lower than a proper shotgunyou'd use it while carrying a M79 to shoot people too close to arm a grenade, it's not useful for anything else
>>65244715It's essentially on par with a 12ga IIRC. Except heavier and bulkier and single shot. And 00 would make for terrible drone shot because of how the pattern opens at distance.
>>65243884An M67 is ~166 grams of HE.Ukies are packing up to and over 2kg of HE, shrapnel and fuze works on their smallest FPVs and as stated, lacing with powdered Al.A 1 kg HE weight airburst munition is almost 100% gucking you up at 10 meters, especially if you are exposed to denotate it midair
>>65244715>>65244729It is less than 12 gauge. Running the numbers it is on par or insignificantly less, KE wise, than 20 gauge buck.And I have to imagine the pattern is shit.
