NEW Advanced Tech Rifle

So this rifle with all it's new Tech forces you to hit the target or it won't fire, you mark the exact spot you want to hit first, you keep the trigger pressed once aimed, and hover the sight on the target, it won't fire until it calculates a direct hit on the previously marked spot. Interesting tech, US Army is field testing.

NEW RIFLE





XactSystem

Too bad high tech toys often fail in real world combat .. learn how to shoot proper without the gadgets..

Life imitating art again?

Once the initial wave of "Holy #!" wore off, something else replaced my elation: I didn't feel I'd earned that bull's-eye because basically all I had to do was pull the trigger.

That's my biggest gripe about these new "never miss" weapons. No skill. Yeah, you can hit 300 yard head shots all day. But, take away the fancy toy and can you still do it? Get people used to relying on tech to do it for them and they won't develop the skills to do it when the toys fail.

originally posted by: Expat888
Too bad high tech toys often fail in real world combat .. learn how to shoot proper without the gadgets..

Exactly, give me my grandfathers Garande any day. My dad has it now, love that rifle.

Wicked cool OP. Thanks for sharing. I have my doubts about high tech firearms. Still a cool Video.

a reply to: Expat888

Yep, just got to lead them a bit.

It's true if you operate this gun for 5 years and then one day it fails and you have to depend on old fashioned skill shots.
Well your skill level will have dropped tremendously, the only way would to keep practicing with a old fashioned scope as well. It would be like a F-22 fighter pilot that has always engaged with missiles for 5 years and suddenly he has to use his guns in a up close dogfight.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

It is an expensive tech.

Funny thing, this tech was used by the Secret Service around 2000. It isn't new.....just new to the commercial world.

a reply to: Expat888

$18,000 for a rifle? Call me nostalgic but I would take a $500 AKM any day

All the enemy would have to do is wear a device or emit a signal that does not allow the machine to properly calculate them as a target. Collision averted. I see the military doing this to avoid ever being taken out by their own weapon systems.

I can hit a can at 300 yards with my open-sight Mosin Nagant.
They can keep all the fancy tech.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

My main query here, would be what use this item will be, in the event of combat taking place in an EMP struck area?

There are many things about this technology which are impressive, but until they develop a gun that cannot fire on an unarmed target, this will be just another "improvement" which increases the lethality of a weapon, without increasing the morality of its user.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Great video!

That is some cool gadgetry but, like the smart gun, I certainly wouldn't want to rely on this tech in a fire fight even if I got really good at using it. The 0.0001 time that it does malfunction out of 1,000 hours of use is certainly going to happen on my watch, so no thanks! Mr Murphy is never on my side.

This is simply the evolution of weaponry.

Start with swords, the guy with top notch training and years of practice won.

Archery took years before a person became really good.

Then muskets, well, lots less training.

Rifles, extended the accuracy and range and the training is a lot less.

These things, a days training and everyone is a good shot.

This is what it seems to always be about, get any baker or candle maker and turn them into a reasonable soldier in no time flat.

They will rue the day they started on this tech. It takes 14 year old boys from Yemen and puts them on par with someone with years of service. I know, there is more to it than shooting, but lets face it. At the end of the day it really is about killing the enemy.

That could take most COD armchair warriors and give them a good chance at some kills on the real battle front.

Oh and take lots of batteries.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

One emp and they all get sent home to mommy in a bodybag .. that is if the tech didnt already fail due climate ( monsoons .. sandstorms.. blizzards.. ) or the batts. die .. defective circuit boards .. system hacked ..

a reply to: Expat888

Agreed.

But then the US communication network, battle field tech, aircraft, Jdams, the whole lot can suffer the exact same problems.

All I am saying is that once the genie is out of the bottle it can't be put back and in some parts of the world, a one to one kill ratio is more than acceptable.

So it has always been. Innovation and new tech only gives one a few decades advantage at best.

P

originally posted by: Expat888
a reply to: pheonix358

One emp and they all get sent home to mommy in a bodybag .. that is if the tech didnt already fail due climate ( monsoons .. sandstorms.. blizzards.. ) or the batts. die .. defective circuit boards .. system hacked ..

And what happens when the EMP hits and the radios stop working? Do you still think we should have carrier pigeons too? Technology will always be vulnerable which is why we train for the "just in case" times.

I agree that we need to keep sharp but not at the expense of holding up progress. I would envisage that we would train as though we didn't have this kit and familiarise with them should the need arise. We are already doing this with many systems. Sort of 'out with the new, in with the old' way of training for contingency ops.

a reply to: PaddyInf
Thanks for stating the obvious finally paddy!
Threads like this are extremely frustrating to me. Ned ludd would be so proud of most of these guys. Even funnier is how off base they are.

a reply to: roguetechie
Youve obviously never been in combat and most likely havent even done time in the military .. or if you did you were a damn R.E.M.F .. otherwise youd know that the high tech # fails in combat .. did my time junior four tours in vietnam with s.o.g know from actual experience what a piece of # the xm177/m16 was and that high tech toys do FAIL in combat getting people killed. Its not neat.. clean and easy nor anything like theory or book learning when your out in the mud and blood getting shot at and seeing your friends and troops get killed because some damn eggheads high tech toy #ing failed at the wrong damn time and place.
Save your # for the wannabe's and armchair commando's those of us whove actually been there know better..

originally posted by: seabag
...I certainly wouldn't want to rely on this tech in a fire fight even if I got really good at using it. The 0.0001 time that it does malfunction out of 1,000 hours of use is certainly going to happen on my watch...

This. So much this.

And the thing will take yet ANOTHER specialty battery, different from all the other batteries you're packing already. Eventually you'll have a battery toter MOS, and war movies will show the battery toter taking a grenade hit and everyone going nuts "Save the BATTERIES MY GOD WE'RE DOOMED"

I remember when the neat little floating red dot scopes came out and were the hot thing, the first time the # ran out on me. The one thing you can say about tritium doped iron sights, they work no...matter...what. Even your nice rifle scope, you take the caps off and the #er is half full of water from last night's dunking. Yeah, that thing was supposed to be water proof and full of pressurized nitrogen. Whoops.

eta: that said, I do think there is a place for this sort of thing. And that place is in the wsa at the SF compound, where if events call for that sort of system, you could use it. An infantry soldier would be murdered using this in combat. Sorta like giving them SPAS combat-12s.