This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 17-Sep by roguetechie
Latest 30/9/20 by RovingPedant
Latest 15-Sep by smg762
Latest 15-Sep by DavidPawley
Latest 14-Sep by gatnerd
Latest 10-Sep by QuintusO
Latest 8-Sep by Red7272
Latest 7-Sep by EwingGreg
Latest 6-Sep by gatnerd
Latest 6-Sep by stancrist
Latest 5-Sep by QuintusO
Latest 4-Sep by smg762
Latest 3-Sep by gatnerd
Latest 26-Aug by gatnerd
Latest 24-Aug by poliorcetes
Latest 24-Aug by smg762
Latest 22-Aug by Sten556
Latest 20-Aug by DavidPawley
Latest 18-Aug by QuintusO
Latest 18-Aug by smg762
That’s how maverick works (the non laser version anyway).
We are quickly reaching a point in electronics where there’s no reason you couldn’t turn anything LAW sized and up into a fire and forget weapon for less than $6,000, including reseller markup. What lags is not the technology so much, but expectations — things cost such and such because they always have, and if the manufacturers can incorporate measures to make it less expensive on their end then great! Additional margins. But it doesn’t get passed onto the customer (govt) save for whatever is necessary to ensure the bid is won.
Luckily for us both the javelin missiles themselves and the fcu are somewhere in the process of an upgrade that will drop the cost and weight of the fcu while making it capable of much longer observation and resolution range.
The javelin is still going to be better than this in some key ways, but at $75k a pop you can get two of these spikes for the price of one pike!
I know which of those two I'd rather have
Refleks said...We are quickly reaching a point in electronics where there’s no reason you couldn’t turn anything LAW sized and up into a fire and forget weapon for less than $6,000, including reseller markup.
Well, yes, but actually no.
At least if you want a weapon that is safe and reliable in all weathers and conditions.
You could make a system that works* for a low price but it would be a cheap system. You wouldn’t necessarily know what capabilities** you weren’t getting either.
* for a given value of “works”
** things like “functions in the rain”, “doesn’t accidentally go off when you are using your radio” or “doesn’t loop back onto operator”
I don't know much about realistic costs, but it does seem like a fair amount of work is going into lowering costs for sensors.
This method by DARPA looks like its trying to create a 'standardized' seeker that could be used across multiple platforms, increasing economy of scale and lowering costs.
BAE Systems tested the seeker during the first phase of DARPA’s Seeker Cost Transformation (SECTR) program. The SECTR seeker integrates with a wide range of weapon platforms that use munitions and can operate in day or night. It enables autonomous precision guidance via passive electro-optical and infrared sensors in environments where GPS navigation is unavailable or unreliable.
“Low-cost, precision munitions are critical to our customers, which is why we’ve developed a flexible seeker that radically lowers the cost typically associated with precision guidance,” said Mark Meisner, a chief scientist at BAE Systems. “The SECTR program is allowing us to deliver advanced sensing and navigation capabilities for munitions to warfighters faster.”
The seeker’s open architecture enables highly accurate, competitive, low-cost munitions to be capable of navigating and locating targets in limited-access and denied environments. It provides these munitions with quick-reaction capabilities while meeting stringent cost, size, weight, and power requirements. The open architecture also enables rapid seeker integration into current and new weapon systems.
"The javelin is still going to be better than this in some key ways, but at $75k a pop you can get two of these spikes for the price of one pike!"
Yes, the Javelin seems like the better dedicated Anti Tank system due to the further range and top attack profile.
But the low cost, low weight, and self contained nature of the Spike SR makes it a more versatile GPMM - General Purpose Mayhem Munition - for infantry.
Not ideal for modern tanks (although could defeat APS with salvo fire), but perfect for attacking IFV's/Lesser vehicles, anti-structure, long range anti personnel, and general destruction.
Seems like it would be the perfect 'resistance weapon' for somewhere like Taiwan or Cyprus that has a credible need of repelling / bleeding a superior invasion force.
Tanks would suffer from these in MOUT, where they can be attacked from above and/or rear.
In MOUT, dumb RPGs may suffice.
In MOUT, dumb RPGs may suffice.
Yup, about to say the same thing. Pz 3 is the best of it's kind.