Posted on 06/10/2025 9:58:39 PM PDT by McGruff
The U.S. Army is giving its soldiers a high-tech edge in the fight against drones, and it’s called SMASH.
During a live-fire training exercise on June 6 in Germany, a soldier with the 3rd Squadron, 2nd Cavalry Regiment used the SMASH 2000L smart scope mounted on an M4A1 rifle to target drones in the sky.
The SMASH 2000L, made by Israeli company Smart Shooter Ltd., is no ordinary sight. It uses cameras, sensors, and artificial intelligence to track targets and decides the perfect time to fire, according to reporting from Army Recognition.
Once a drone is locked in, the system controls the trigger and only fires when a hit is guaranteed.
The smart scope weighs about 2.5 pounds and fits onto standard-issue rifles. It has already been used by NATO partners and tested in combat zones.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Future drones will have a terminal evasive algorithm manifesting itself in rapid changes in direction even though the drone always knows precisely where it is in relation to the target.
If a drone is hovering stationary, I can see it being shot down. But if it is moving, I can’t picture it being targeted accurately. Kinda like when shooting pheasants, you have to lead the target.
“Future drones will have a terminal evasive algorithm manifesting itself in rapid changes in direction”
Sounds like hunting dove with a shotgun.
That’s what I was thinking.
That’s the way the headline reads. There was a time, now in the distant past, in which most reporters and editors were literate.
It’s a $13 million contract, not a per scope price.
I abandoned fox long ago, so just curious:
When did fox become the National Enquirer?
smh
On a $1,400 rifle? Ridiculous. Combine the shotgun add-on (similar to the M203) and train skeet-shooting technique.
But that doesn't enrich contractors nor provide kickbacks.
Is the system stabilzed? Is the trigger pull automated?
You select a static or moving target and the image processing identifies the target, tracks the target, ranges the target using lasers or other appropriate ranging systems.
The system then collects temperature and atmospheric data to calculate ballistic solution that calculates a digital DOPE for bullet drop, target motion, wind drift and Coriolis effects corrections for the shot.
The operator holds the reticle on the target and pulls the trigger. When the calculated bullet trajectory intercepts the point of aim on the target an solenoid system with very fast lock time connected to the trigger fires the weapon. Pretty slick
At present but future generations of drones will have evasive movements that will be far more erratic.
Slick indeed! But it might be pretty tricky to hold steady on an erratic target long enough to get a successful solution. I wonder if air burst rounds are supported?
There is some technique involved but once you a designated the point of aim on the target the imaging systems track the point of aim so as soon as you are on aim it shoots .
It can also act as part of closed loop control tracking system for a computerized servo controlled mount
There are 20K ifra-red scopes on 5-10K rifles, not too different. More specialized and complicated electronics on top of a simpler machine. If you don’t think it is going to be more expensive to make a computerized scope than an M4, you are wrong.
My attitude comes from being assigned to a 2nd Armored Div. company, mid 1980s, (”We Fight By Night”) where all the then-emerging night vision tech was tested in field conditions. Pretty cool until batteries failed unexpectedly or optics cracked, then it was back to ears open and one eye patch.
That made me appreciate the K.I.S.S. principle for life. The more we can rely on training and technique while minimizing over-dependence on technology the better.
1) So we are understanding eachother, are you a reformer? People who don’t believe in radar and AtA missiles on fighters and almost everything is volume with throwing out quality with quasi human wave tactics. All a proven failure. 2) Your experience was 40 years ago. You think things might have gotten better by then? There is no “over reliance on tech”. It is all just using modern tech. They are still trained to aim. The problem theses scopes are dealing with is tech itself, drones, so I am not sure if “shoot better” is an option. 3) On money, the enemy has 1000 soldiers. For the same cost, I have 500. 50 soldiers have problems with the kit, but the other 450 clobber the 1000 with much better accuracy partly from scopes. Oversimplification, but you get the idea. It is about chances of likelihood. Sometimes the military get it wrong but trying to blame everything on corruption and incompetence is unfair.
If by ‘Reformer’ you mean a person wishing to improve the overall system: yes. The entrenched scamming at taxpayers’ expense is obvious by how many high-ranking officers go on to be consultants and lobbyists for arms and munitions manufacturers - just like former politicians float to Big Pharma and other special interests.
By all means we should utilize the best technologies available but that must be dictated on the real needs of the armed forces and not the bottom lines of those who “get their cut”.
No offense, but unless you have solid proof on each particular acquisition and all the official background info that is really unfair. We might be overpaying for what we get, but considering the rest of the world is copying us, we are doing something right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.