Shooting the $17,000 Linux-powered rifle

Discussion in 'Shooting, Hunting and Fishing' started by ObnoxiousJockGit, Apr 1, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Surely this is the future. How long until we see HUD style, computer automatically compensated rifles in the military? Would make a lot of sense; everyone could be a sharpshooter in the platoon, even shooting biffs. Maybe it would be useful for UGVs or even UAVs too.
  2. What happens to the scope when the on-board linux computer crashes?
    404 target not found.
    • Like Like x 4
  3. It's Linux, not Windows.
    • Like Like x 5
  4. Isnt everyone harping on about how unreliale and heavy gun X is. To add a computer to a gun is doing exactly what you don't want on a gun.
    Computers are the most annoying unreliable machines ever created and I dont think your average squadie could be bothered with them.
    Perhaps training soldiers to shoot well with the guns they already have would be a better place to start.
  5. You might need to read the whole article, they say that they aren't interested in a "paramilitary" use although have demo'ed to the FBI sharpshooters. At upto 19lb for the largest claibre, I don't think that anyone is going to want to lug one of the ******* around!
  6. I reckon the likes of the Phoebes HRT who, whilst they are fit phuqqers, have a not so physically demanding a role as some military snipers may find a use for such a gizmo. Police action, even FBI, sniping is not the same as military sniping its generally more static and shorter range, I recall something like 70 yards as the average law enforcement sniper target distance - shooting across the street basically.
  7. Yes, but other posters mentioned that this will be the future.
    The other thing is you still have to read the wind yourself, so you can have this $17,000 rifle with all the bells and whistles and still miss because you miss read the wind, where as the 60 year old down the road gets it bang on with his 1970 Remington 700.

    This rifle doesn't do anything that isn't already done, it just puts it all in one expensive heavy package, that if it breaks your screwed.
    At least with a normal Mildot scope, if your range finder craps out you can still range targets with your Mils.
    Its like a 3D tv, a great piece of technology that know one really wants or needs.
  8. Lee Harvey Oswald used one of these years ago and a linux driven bullet.
  9. 1) Stalking with that thing would be a real balls-ache.

    2) The delay between squeezing the trigger and the rifle firing would cause problems in a tactical situation. Some kind of manual over-ride would be necessary.

    3) The marksmanship principles would have to be re-written. Principle 3, "Sight allignment must be correct" would now read "Computer must be switched on." Principle 4, "The shot must be released and followed through without disturbing the position" would be amended to "The position must not be disturbed until the weapon has fired."

    4) Reading about kit like this really brings it home to me that I am now officially a relic from the bronze age.

  10. Helluva lot lighter that Barrett M82 and M107 and variants.
  11. This sounds like something that Stephen Hunter described in his novel 'I, Sniper'.

    (If you haven't read any of his books, I can recommend him).
  12. Completely useless comparison.
    To start the M82 and M107 are designed as anti vehicle weapons not anti personal, and they generally fire a 50cal round which is much much larger than 338 Lapua.

    This gun still weighs about 2lbs more than and Accuracy International AWSM with a scope which is not known for being light weight, but is near impossible to break, but its about 6lbs heavier than a Sako TRG42, which is probably the biggest competitor to the AWSM.

    Both of which are capable of about 3-5" groups at 1000 yards, and also come in 300 Winchester Magnum.
    I'd hope this thing gets at least the same accuracy as these two rifles.

    From the article:
    So therefor this is completely useless to anyone trying to use the rifle in a practical sense,
    about on par with these twats
    Rail Guns - Benchrest Rifle Match - YouTube
  13. Good god - why do they bother?

    Is the date of this report significant?