Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Brokor, May 17, 2010.
For your general consumption: YouTube - Texas Police Secretly Deploy Spy Drones
Maybe they'll arm them with anti-personnel missiles and we can all feel more security in our homeland?
Looks like a new target to shoot at if you are in the country and see one flying by!
Only after Skynet becomes self-aware.
These flying robots work great at killing villagers in the 'stans. Knocking out suburban houses and "Volunteer Fire Department meetings" will be easy pickins.
I wonder if a Barret .50 would take one down. "See Honey, I DO need one!"
Thought I would change my post. Seeing that my screen name is a bit too informative and although this is in fun, I shouldn't be commenting.
Why? They're only gonna surveil"terrorists"
You WANT to BE"SAFE" don't you?
One more nice piece of psuedo-military gear to capture...
I can see "search and rescue applications"; call me "paranoid" but I don't believe it will be limited to that.
Don't these usually fly at 15 - 20K ft? They could probably launch missiles from 5+ miles away(?) ... That's going to be hard to hit.
The UAV they used to kill those journalists a while back looked like it was flying around one or two thousand feet. A Barret could reach that. I just wonder how delicate they are.
35 pounds according to them, looks like a 6 to 8 ft wingspan. they also claim it can carry an additional 15 pounds. even with graphite, carbon fiber, kevlar, or whatever other exotic they can come up with, something that size and weight should be fragile enough for small arms to easily bring it down if you can only hit it. Hitting it will be the problem.
drones with video can be purchased in any radio control airplane magazine amazingly cheap.
as for shooting down a drone forget it.I used to work in a target drone factory that provide anti aircraft training for the army and marines.we would fly a bird past a armored column and they would cut loose with every weapon they had and we never got shot down unless it was a stinger missle.
Although I would agree with you that hitting one would be the difficult part, I have a problem with your example about the armored column for the following reason. During the Vietnam War someone came up with the fact that 50,000 rounds were being fired by the grunts and leathernecks for ever enemy KIA. Ultimately the result was the 3 round burst selector development vs full/semi auto. As an interim fix and experiment, a group of instructors would take an incountry squad and ask who their gomer pyle was. they would take gomer aside and talk to him privately for maybe 15 minutes. then they set up 2 e silhouette targets down range at about 200 meters. The squad minus gomer was instructed with one magazine, to lock, load, and take target A underfire. when they finished, gomer was instructed to fire as instructed on targer B. gomer fired only semi auto, and dropped to prone first. the squad on average got less that 5 hits total. almost all fired offhand and full auto. gomer almost always got 19 or 20 out of 20 in well under 60 seconds.
now that is all long winded, but my point is, technique and proper instruction has a lot to do with correcting very common mistakes in shooting and hitting your target. with regard to an aerial target most shooters have no proper training for it and most will fail to lead the target anyways close to far enough, and they will actually shoot behind the target. tracers help to point this out. probably no more than one shooter out of 100 even has a clue, but it can be done. JMHO of course.
Just for the record, I have shot down two jet powered aerial drones with a 3inch 50cal twin anti aircraft gun and a mark 63 handlebar radar ranging director. lead was roughly computed by an air driven gyro offset as I manually tracked the target. it was necessary to increase the lead in both cases with good old kentucky windage....lol I was shooting vt frag both times as the 3 inch was not considered as a true threat compared the the computer/radar controlled 5 inch 54 cal gun.
The greater majority of any aircraft structure is either empty space or light-weight foam composite. Even a .50BMG would have to hit something vital to down the bird - lots of aircraft returned in WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam War with plenty of bullet holes. They were taped up and sent out again next sortie.
I was just about ready to concede this to you, then decided to review the video again and then do some further research. This drone is one that has been deployed in Iraq since 2005 by the Marines. Here is a link to specs. Due to the compact size and weight difference between empty and fueled, and gasoline engine, I still think it is quite vulnerable to almost any bullet strike to the the fusilage. The camera itself in the nose seems to be about the only non vital to flight item, and still the control package would be up there is my guess. Shooting the damn thing down is possible. I don't think they expect anyone to actually hit this damn thing. below are links to the scan eagle drone.
Separate names with a comma.