A Proposal For DARPA
Why should an infantryman always have to carry his ammunition? A soldier could be equipped with a modified rifle that forwards target coordinates to an artillery battery that would automatically fire on the target. The targeting and firing decisions would be made solely by the infantryman with the pull of a trigger.
The advantages to such a system would be significant. Each soldier would have a practically inexhaustible supply of ammunition that he doesn’t have to carry. And since the projectile is not launched from the soldier’s location, a single well-placed soldier could do incredible damage to the enemy without giving up his position.
Obviously this would not be the best weapon for all situations. Line-of-sight is often the best way to shoot. There are obvious problems with using such a system in close combat or indoors. And there are many cases where an artillery shell would be overkill. The soldier’s rifle would still need to shoot bullets.
The problems with artillery have always been accurate targeting, and on-time delivery. This system would address both problems. The forward soldier could provide precise target information, and the automatic pull-of-the-trigger firing would speed delivery.
Moving targets can’t wait on the arrival of an off-site artillery shell, but if this system were used to target a laser weapon, delay wouldn’t be a problem. Actually, such a system could be used to target any kind of long-distance weapon. Perhaps the soldier could even choose from a menu of options.
Comments
The menu is an good idea. Sometimes you need only a grenade capable of taking out one or two enemy soldiers. Other times you want to take out a tank or an entire building. Just set the dial to the appropriate setting, point, and shoot.
The next step is to move the soldier himself behind the lines, and have the infantryman pointing the laser target be a robot. It will be a while before we have a robot as versatile as your typical 19-year-old GI, or one that can march 100 miles on a couple of MREs. But we'll get there.
Posted by: Phil Bowermaster
|
November 10, 2004 12:01 PM
Our guys use a variant of the system already, call it a proof of concept. Your gadget is a good idea -- after all, I've suggested it myself before :-) -- but there's a problem:
Heading.
Position can be done with Special Relativity. Heading gets you into General, and it's not clear that the tensor can be solved. "Which direction is it pointed" is a much, much harder problem than people who haven't tried to solve it think. East, West, North, South is relatively simple given broad enough definitions. "Keep the orphanage out of the blast radius at 1 km" is really, really tough. Even elevation, the angle above the horizon, is tougher than it seems. Ask a surveyor about the "geoid." "Which way is straight down?" is not an easy question!
Regards,
Ric Locke
Posted by: Ric Locke
|
November 11, 2004 11:14 PM