Anti-Drone Rifle

Hmm. Good luck getting that transmitter type certified. Or fighting the administrative fine from FCC for using it.
 
I would prefer a shotgun,doesn't have to be charged ,tuned or require much knowledge,just aim and shoot.
 
I agree with my namesake there. A 12 gauge will probably be equally effective.
 
frfly172 said:
I would prefer a shotgun,doesn't have to be charged ,tuned or require much knowledge,just aim and shoot.
Click to expand...

Point, don't aim.

:)
 
Last edited:
frfly172 said:
I would prefer a shotgun,doesn't have to be charged ,tuned or require much knowledge,just aim and shoot.
Click to expand...

A shotgun doesn't have the reported 400 meters stand-off distance, useful if the UAS is armed or loaded with explosives, as the article points out.

It's interesting to wonder what UAS this is targeted at - a typical quadcopter, a 50 kg flying wing, or what?
 
JB1842 said:
To me that's an old-wives tail. I always aim my shotguns. Technology in barrel design and ammo advancements have completely changed shotguns and how you shoot them.
Click to expand...

I should have added a smily.

As a rifle shooter when I'm shooting trap, if I aim I miss. All the instructions I've seen/heard talk about pointing and not aiming when shooting trap. Don't know about shooting slugs insteads of shot.
 
Don't feel bad Bob. I point as well :D Anothing intersting one is how many use one eye or both for shotgun?

I was going to suggest an M2. Just be careful of your backdrop about, what, maybe 5-10 miles away?
 
PilotRPI said:
I was going to suggest an M2. Just be careful of your backdrop about, what, maybe 5-10 miles away?
Click to expand...

Methinks that's the whole point of this weapon. Taking down the drones without any risk of collateral damage if you miss. Shotgun or rifle may do the trick, but you might just take down something you didn't intend to.
 
Bob Noel said:
I should have added a smily.

As a rifle shooter when I'm shooting trap, if I aim I miss. All the instructions I've seen/heard talk about pointing and not aiming when shooting trap. Don't know about shooting slugs insteads of shot.
Click to expand...

I must be weird, I aim when I shoot trap.
 
StinkBug said:
Methinks that's the whole point of this weapon. Taking down the drones without any risk of collateral damage if you miss. Shotgun or rifle may do the trick, but you might just take down something you didn't intend to.
Click to expand...


So the drone falling on someone isn't a problem, just if you hit something behind the drone. LOL. Got it. :)
 
jnmeade said:
A shotgun doesn't have the reported 400 meters stand-off distance, useful if the UAS is armed or loaded with explosives, as the article points out.

It's interesting to wonder what UAS this is targeted at - a typical quadcopter, a 50 kg flying wing, or what?
Click to expand...


This is a hump and bump weapon obviously dreamed up for an infantry grunt to neutralize a scout drone or down a threat in the field.

Pretty neat. I want one. :)

400 meters is a quarter mile, I'd have a hard time hitting a goose at 430 yards with a 3" magnum goose load. There would have to be some luck involved.
 
Let see drones carry high Voltage high capacity lithium Iion batteries. If you puncture the battery because it got shot out of the sky you could cause a fire.
 
Maxed-out said:
If you thought the rifle was interesting, you have to check this out. I would imagine the White House probably has a system like this or will have it in the very near future. Lately, it seems like UAV operators are drawn to the WH like moths to a flame. Makes you wonder what the collective IQ of this country is these days.

Detect, Track and Disrupt small and large drones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8aZ0zWX3SA

http://www.blighter.com/products/blighter-auds-anti-uav-defence-system.htm
Click to expand...


An acquaintance did the initial research on the same type of device aimed at crowd/human control. It's freaky. High RF as a detriment to humans. Supposedly doesn't feel too nice to be a target of the thing.
 
Maybe the effect of high RF output power on humans is why Blighter decided to not publicly disclose that value. Not sure.

Specification on the Directional RF Inhibitor:

* High gain quad-band antenna system
* Disruption/inhibition delivers operational effect
* Custom inhibition waveforms specific to the threat
* Covers GNSS frequencies
* Software defined intelligent RF inhibition
* Optimized disruption profiles
* RF output power: Details available upon request

If it's anything like standing in front of a jet on the ramp where the crew accidentally switches the radar to ON, I'll pass. The two undisputed health effects that can occur with exposure to high levels of RF energy are:

Heating of the human body
Electro-stimulation (RF shocks and burns)

No thank you. Still, a cool device. Reminds me of something I read about in a Popular Science mag many eons ago. It's all coming true.
 
Bob Noel said:
I should have added a smily.

As a rifle shooter when I'm shooting trap, if I aim I miss. All the instructions I've seen/heard talk about pointing and not aiming when shooting trap. Don't know about shooting slugs insteads of shot.
Click to expand...

Trap (or the bird hunting it's simulating) is a sort of a different matter. You're swinging the gun with the target so point is applicable.

Trying to hit a slowly moving (or stationary) target whether with a shotgun or an AK47 is an aiming exercise. Might lead them a bit but it's nothing like the swoop of a shotgun in the trap shooting exercise.
 
Depends on the range that you want to engage. Up to 300 yards, and in a hoover, a 5.56 with fragmenting bullets, so there is minmized risk of collateral. Not that I am advocating this type of activity. OK, NSA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top