Hear me out.....
Posted by the_LARP_consumes@reddit | ForgottenWeapons | View on Reddit | 43 comments
Either I had a stroke of genius, or I played too much battlefield 1. Could this be the future of infantry rifles?
JMHSrowing@reddit
There would be a lot of issues with such a thing.
Discounting even the clunky operation of such a system, drone shot in a 5.56mm can only ever be so effective. It’s a small cartridge with a small bore and a case which isn’t well optimized for a shot shell.
Honestly I think that airburst grenades (maybe rifle grenades but more likely underbarrel) are going to be the solution.
Quatermain@reddit
Jamming guns and getting the size down on lasers for short range use are a better solution.
JMHSrowing@reddit
I’m not so sure.
Jamming is only applicable to certain types of drones, and fiber optic drones are completely immune.
Lasers. . . I have my doubts it’s possible to really make an effective one on the scale for infantry. There’s been enough difficulty making ones to mount on vehicles.
Both of these would also have the issue of being pretty niche but bulky weapon systems. It’s even worse than the reason the XM25 wasn’t adopted in that it means a soldier can’t have another weapon which is quite the detriment to the squad.
If you’re going to give a soldier a big bulky niche weapon something like the XM25 is far better. There are proximity airburst 25mm shells and those would have a far wider range of targets
Quatermain@reddit
I think lasers are a little far fetched, at least for the moment, but are worth attempting to develop. When solid state batteries come around, it might become possible to have an emitter+power package with a few shots, or few seconds worth of firing, weigh in the 3-5lb range, with the battery in a backpack and the emitter as a rifle handguard type attachment.
As you said, airburst/range burst grenade weapons were a failure. To have them be a success against drones, you'd have to solve the lead-the-target problem rifles have, with a single, much slower, projectile and have a smart round that auto-detonates when it is close enough to the drone. The blast radius makes up some on the targeting front, but I'd suspect you have a 3-5m effective kill radius at best on a grenade delivery sized drone.
It would likely be possible to build a specific anti-drone round to limit collateral damage, but you probably reduce its effective range and effectiveness at the same time to do so.
So the targeting system would have to acquire the drone, figure out the lead, on something potentially moving erratically at 15-20m/s to fire a ~700fps slug with the trajectory of a thrown stone, and take the users reflex/fire time into account, to set the detonation timer.
With the projectile velocity and drop, speed of the drone, out past 200m you are going to have a very low hit rate even on drones flying in straight lines. I'd guess the projectile drop at 200m is around 10 feet and every 25m after that is a couple more feet, and by 300m its probably 5' plus and travel time to 300m is probably two seconds or more. Even with a 5m kill radius any little change in drone direction or velocity is going to result in a miss, and it may just miss because I have no idea what the MoA on an xm25 is. A ten inch circle at 200m won't matter much on the stationary target at 200m, but if you are trying to hit a little drone moving 40mph at 200m, its a bigger deal. Follow up shots will be fairly slow because of the recoil. You might be able to stack a few near-hits to bring one down. But, and there are some big buts.
You, the user, have to figure out if it is safe to fire before you pull the trigger, because there is a ~15m guaranteed injury zone around the blast, a good chance of serious injury at 50m, and potential to cause injury out to 200m within the detonation radius, based on the regular xm25 air detonation round. You aren't in cover, arcing the round behind the cover someone else is behind, a static distance away.
It's probably fine for guys in a trench on the front line but the system is going to be dangerous to the user and those near them inside of 100m, or anywhere within 100-200m of the detonation, since you are bursting projectiles up in the air instead of mostly in or behind cover. Which limits its effectiveness close in even if you are in a trench w/ only foes in front of you, and the slow velocity, high drop rate and speed of your target limits the distance you are likely to hit it at. So there is a very limited window of effectiveness as far as how close you can shoot a drone, and how far you can shoot a drone, even if you don't have to worry about collateral damage. There were all sorts of RoE during GWoT for discharge of underbarrel and thrown grenades for infantry to prevent collateral damage in urban and semi-urban environments.
Basically trying to defend yourself or anything that isn't on the front lines, popping off a grenade 10-40m off the ground may frequently cause more damage than good against little suicide drones. Urban environments, multiple squads on patrol behind the front lines, etc, who knows what you might hit, even if the drone is detected far enough away from you personally.
JMHSrowing@reddit
In the world of drones I think that the XM25 may not have failed, and indeed, the US Military is trying again with 30mm grenade launchers now from Barrett and FN that are currently being tested. Proximity fuses should be really helpful. Though, you are right they have a lot of limitations
Personally I don’t think that you’re getting a handheld laser to go out a few hundred meters any time soon. At least when one also has to take into account things like how say fog would
I presumed we were only talking about a frontline infantry carried weapon as that’s what the post is presumably about. Otherwise the solution I think is stationary and vehicle systems.
At those scales you actually could get a laser system (like the UK’s Dragonfire for example), far better and long range autocannons, and even small missiles.
Quatermain@reddit
If you have a firing line of xm25's with sci-fi good targeting systems and auto-detonation, firing only over beaten earth towards enemy emplacements they might work ok.
With the m855/drone shot selector on presumably a semi-standard issue infantry weapon, and how drones are often employed, flown 10-40km to circumvent actual front lines to semi-precision strike soft targets and instill terror, 10-20 miles from the actual front, I take the assignment to be to put a flexible anti-drone weapon in the hands of a squad, for whatever they may come up against.
I don't think a small laser will shoot >100m any time soon. But if the assignment is to knock a suicide drone or grenade dropper down, being able to safely do so, almost anywhere, within ~100m is probably fine, that is double what a shotgun can do and easier to hit with.
I haven't seen any demonstrations of the barrett or FN rounds, just "in development" or "sure we can do that". Even with a good prox sensor that can detect a mostly styrofoam drone and detonate reliably, getting close enough at any safe range to score a hit is extremely difficult with a low velocity, high drop projectile, vs something that small moving at 40mph.
I wouldn't be surprised if bringing down the little drones would be more reliable, and safer, using a shot cartridge in the launcher. Ideally, I guess you'd take a couple shots at it with a couple prox rounds on top of the magazine, then buckshot/bb rounds lower down. But you never know how close it might be.
And jamming is counterable, or always an arms race, but the ukranians are still making it work with fairly good success. There is a ukranian drone pilot that attributed about 1/3rd of their failed missions to russian jamming, and I dont think it is anywhere near as effective or wide spread as hand-held, broadband jammers could be. But, there can always be a question of if they will be effective.
Natural_Youth_5941@reddit
Pretty sure they’ve tried multiple tiers of anti drone shot in Ukraine and found that the future of anti drone technology is good ole 12g bird shot
Taguysy@reddit
From what I saw in tests and combat expirience of guys from Ukraine — bird shot often too weak to critically damage drone, when tungsten buckshot (3, 2, 1, 0, 00) work much more reliable, but still no further then 50 m.
magnuman307@reddit
Time to bring back Metal Storm
ARMAGELADON@reddit
I’d do steel birdshot at minimum. Tungsten turkey loads would be ideal if they weren’t so expensive
DeadHeadLibertarian@reddit
If it ain’t broke…
the_LARP_consumes@reddit (OP)
How many soldiers per section do you want to carry a shotgun? How much ranged performance do you want to sacrifice for an increase in anti-air capability?
DeepEb@reddit
Well one per unit or so. At least thats what they're doing over there. There have been experiments with anti drone ammo for your standart rifle but I'm not sure how successfull that is. But what I know is that many units choose to carry a shotgun. Often a double barrel one for availability and a quick follow up shot. You dont get to rack your pump action more than once anyway.
ass_eater_96@reddit
Are semis really that much more expensive?
IlyushinGoBrrr@reddit
An inertia-driven shotgun is a lot more simple in terms of constructions with rugged reliability.
A semi auto shotgun has a gas piston system and as we all know, more parts mean more cost. Even if you can find a cheap semi auto shotgun, I guarantee you there will be a pump action that is even cheaper.
Also, semi auto shotguns are pretty finicky when it comes to cycling different shotgun shell flavors. If I recall correctly, Beretta manufactures a semi auto shotgun that is over gassed to ensure it ALWAYS cycles and it has gas ports to ventilate the excess gas.
So to answer your question, yes, a semi shotgun is more expensive and requires a bit more maintenance and care.
Quatermain@reddit
Basically every AK and mil AR is overgassed, for the same reason. So not really an argument against it I dont think.
Also re: your other comment, you can manually run semi-autos if the need arises.
and since you can get 2-3 good shots off with a semi in the time it takes to run a pump the difference in cost arming your units with a good semi vs a $300 pump, especially if you are Ukraine where human power is vital fighting an enemy that out numbers you 10:1, the first time that 2nd shot keeps someone out of the hospital or morgue its paid for itself ten times over.
Not only by keeping as many experienced fighters on their feet and able to fight but cost to train and equip replacements.
JeebusDaves@reddit
The M4 proves that whole thesis bunk. Semi-auto is just as reliable as a coach gun.
Quatermain@reddit
1301's don't have the combat pedigree m4's do, but there are a fair number of drag it through the mud followed by hundreds of rounds without issue tests, everything from light birdshot loads to heavy 00/slug loads.
The cycle time is so much faster to begin with, and doesn't disrupt prepping for a followup shot like a pump. Pumping is literally the opposite of what you want to do with the forend to get ready.
Even if the auto system breaks down, you can still manually feed/load and fire, so its not really any different than being able to get one shot off with a pump, if it happens to stop auto feeding.
Reveley97@reddit
Is it reliable with bird shot or just combat loads?
JeebusDaves@reddit
Anything you feed it will be eaten happily.
IlyushinGoBrrr@reddit
Of course, I am not saying semi is any less reliable than pump action, but pump action always works because you manually load the shells. Very good semi shotgun out there with unmatched reliability which also means that it will be a bit more expensive to make it super reliable.
Sure, buying a semi or 2 as a civilian does not matter much, but arming several units with reliable, duty-grade shotguns? That price per unit is going to compound.
LXNDSHARK@reddit
Inertia-driven is a type of semi-auto shotgun. Are you thinking it refers to a pump-action?
ass_eater_96@reddit
I get the reliability of a double barrel or a pump action, but in my comfy armchair here, i would imagine just getting four loads of buckshot out quickly is worth the cost
IlyushinGoBrrr@reddit
I like your username lol.
Yes, a semi with very fast fire rate is certainly worth the cost, though I would imagine instead of buying several high quality semi shotguns and giving them to selected few designated shotgunner, I would imagine arming a lot of the soldiers with pump action is better.
That being said, a pump action requires more training than usual, so I can see semi shotgun being chosen.
Pump action offers unmatched reliability but requires more training time VS semi auto with comparable reliability but cost a bit more. There are compromises here.
Natural_Youth_5941@reddit
You ever shoot a cheap semi auto shotgun? They are jam factories
anonyym1@reddit
What unit? A "unit" can mean anything.
caffpanda@reddit
"Suck my unit!"
anonyym1@reddit
Where are you located??
caffpanda@reddit
Not a Tropic Thunder fan, I see.
Brown_Colibri_705@reddit
Lol guy is getting downvoted for a legitimate question. Peak r/ForgottenWeapons
garnett8@reddit
Use a rifled slug for range
WindstormMD@reddit
Not really, drones and tactics have already advanced to strike at speed from beyond shotgun engagement distances. It worked early in the conflict, but now it’s a hiding game unless you’re one of the lucky few rolling SMASH2000L optics: https://www.smart-shooter.com/gun/smash-3000/ which give the ability to engage at enough distance to react
Useless_Fox@reddit
Insane over engineering when you can get the same effect by just taping two mags together lol
AKMike99@reddit
You would still need to remove one mag to insert the other. The idea was that this allows the gunner to quickly switch to incendiary ammo rather than having to go through the process of a full reload. The Burton LMR was designed as an anti-airship LMG for plane observers, each fraction of a second is critical in aerial combat.
Useless_Fox@reddit
That's literally exactly the same thing as having two mags taped together
On the Burton you still need to disconnect the spent mag before you can push in the new one. Tape two AR-15 magazines together, and you just rotate your mag to get a fresh one in the gun.
CAD007@reddit
Lidar guided laser sentry guns.
ChornobylChili@reddit
The Morita from Starship troopers maybe lol
TheBerric@reddit
For shooting fast moving things in the air, i wouldnt want a rifle that has magazines obstructing my field of view
DaddyDano@reddit
This belongs on NCD
Melon-Pult-Commando@reddit
Too bad this weapon was conceptualized late when mounting MG's in airplanes were already a thing.
ChornobylChili@reddit
Put down the meth pipe
StarMajestic4404@reddit
No, not even close lol
AutoModerator@reddit
Understand the rules
Check the sidebar. It's full of resources to help you.
Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate.
No Spam. No Memes.
No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.