-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Is this cheating? Or lazy? Or insulting?
- Thread starter garandman
- Start date
It's a way for people with far more money than shooting skill to think they're going to head out and hunt animals at extended ranges when they have no business taking the shot to begin with.
It's... not for me. That's the bottom line. If I'm going to shooting I want to shoot because of the sense of accomplishment I feel when I do it well. If I absolutely had to hit something with a bullet (something I don't anticipate in my lifetime, but common for the military) I might consider this. If I were in a fight to the death I'd take every unfair advantage I could get.
an interesting concept that has some military applications i wonder how rugged it is i bet i could break one on a tour of afghan. Theres also another video of it in africa shooting plains game. As above not my cup of tea but interesting non the less.
TrackingPoint 2013 -- Extreme Distance Hunting - YouTube
TrackingPoint 2013 -- Extreme Distance Hunting - YouTube
Wonder how this type optic will come into play for those who can afford one for the long range tactical matches?
sent from RAZR Maxx HD using Tapatalk Pro
sent from RAZR Maxx HD using Tapatalk Pro
I love it when the self-styled traditionalists weigh in on this technology, and then in the next breath talk about their dialing their $4k S-B after acquiring a firing solution using a $2k rangefinder, $1000 PDA running $400 FFS software, and $400 bluetooth Kestrel weather meter.
Ha!! reminds of way back when I was worried that Boone & Crockett might disqualify my entry because i used a range finder to take a big Arizona whitetail buck. Makes me laugh now. I'm sure that over my years my friends and I talked about the day when all you had to do was point and shoot. Times change.
I like when he tagged the target he wasn't trying to on the left.. Opps my scope killed a civilian. I love shooting technology, but I just don't think this is it, yet.
In military applications it has tremendous value.
Consider it mounted on top of a .338 or .50. Imagine you are no longer shooting at personnel on the ground, but drones and aircraft. You have a weapon system now that can adjust for movement, angle, target speed, etc. Now a soldier on the ground can put well placed directed fire into the engine compartment of an attack helicopter, cockpit of low flying aircraft, or unmanned aerial vehicle with AP/Incendiary/Explosive rounds. And they can use that same system for ground based targets. This kind of thing can make a single soldier with a rifle very dangerous to aircraft whereas before small arms fire could largely be ignored in most cases as spray and pray.
Consider it mounted on top of a .338 or .50. Imagine you are no longer shooting at personnel on the ground, but drones and aircraft. You have a weapon system now that can adjust for movement, angle, target speed, etc. Now a soldier on the ground can put well placed directed fire into the engine compartment of an attack helicopter, cockpit of low flying aircraft, or unmanned aerial vehicle with AP/Incendiary/Explosive rounds. And they can use that same system for ground based targets. This kind of thing can make a single soldier with a rifle very dangerous to aircraft whereas before small arms fire could largely be ignored in most cases as spray and pray.
The Remington version is just geeks geeking out - it maxes out at 500 yards, which is kind of silly. The full version is going to make long range shooting a whole lot easier some day, and will redefine "sniper". I have no interest in it as a civilian.
I read a pretty indepth write up of this a little while back.. It has some very glaring limitations, but can make a hard shot as easy as playing a videogame. All it does it take the tools we use now, and automate it, nothing groundbreaking really.. And the shooter still has to manually estimate the wind theirselves before they input it into the scope, which is the hardest part anyways..
Ahh, not accounting for wind. I think I might be better served without this. Now, when they make a system that can account for wind, environmental and meterologic factors, then that would be something. It would definitely take all the fun out of it at that point though...
Respectfully,
J Woo
I test fired this system on a .338. It worked very well scoring 1st shot strikes at my target distance of 750 yds.
The part that I thought was ingenious is that once the target is acquired, you can basically hold the trigger down and wave the gun around until it aligns... ...then it releases the round.
The part that I thought was ingenious is that once the target is acquired, you can basically hold the trigger down and wave the gun around until it aligns... ...then it releases the round.
So technically "you" don't fire the rifle - the computer does.
a) not happening in any organized sport, even unlimited benchrest you have to pull the trigger
b) wait till ATF gets a whiff of it - technically it's a "spring gun"
P.S. Is there a video of the system shooting on paper - hitting unknown size plates once - just doesn't really quantify it, does it?
The hunt looks like what Bob and Chris Beck do every hunt on EOL, using a NF optic 300RUM and a 230g Berger Hybrid.
Armyjerry, i hear ya. EMP, its toast! It is cool!!! It would be fun to play with. Got to show my boy this video.
However; I love my MilRad/MilDot optics. A static reticle and math will never leave you hanging. I was at the range a couple hours ago and dialed back to 10x. My reticle read 2 stadia/.5 Mil with the diameter of the red bull. Yup... right on 100yds. Sometimes the simplest thing entertains me that much!
I had my 13 year old son range last week. He had the biggest smile on his face when his mental math was dead on with the simmons range finder.
However; I love my MilRad/MilDot optics. A static reticle and math will never leave you hanging. I was at the range a couple hours ago and dialed back to 10x. My reticle read 2 stadia/.5 Mil with the diameter of the red bull. Yup... right on 100yds. Sometimes the simplest thing entertains me that much!
I had my 13 year old son range last week. He had the biggest smile on his face when his mental math was dead on with the simmons range finder.
Holding the cross hair on target is the easy part. Wind calcs are the hard part, a art not a science.Also if the dummy behind the rifle can not properly manage recoil, especially on a big bore rifle that is required to take game at distance the shot almost certainly will be botched. Possibly wounding the animal. I see no real world app other than give incabable individuals false since of confidence to take unethical shots on game.
I figure it's only a matter of time before this does account for wind, and then it really is a point in shoot system requiring very little ballistics training. It is inevitable in a military application. I'm guessing one of these will cost less than it costs to properly train a sniper to shoot at long range. Not there yet, but it will be.
Is it just me but the first man in this video almost looks like the butt of the rifle is on his bicep..... Am I the only one seeing that?
It is inevitable that such a thing will lead to poor fundamentals. The old timers will roll in their graves.
Someday... If only someone could develop a portable, viable LIDAR type system for accurate wind gauging. I can figure the drop easily, but the proper wind call - that is the trick.
Respectfully,
J Woo
Don't like them one bit really. Can't wait to hear at the local gunshop where somebody was a "badass" and shot a deer/ or pig at 1100 yards when the shooter didn't do anything. There pocket book did all the work
I think somebody should bring one to the Hide Cup this year, then when the dude with more money than sense gets clowned by the country boy shooting a 308 we can all have a laugh at his expense!
There's no substitution for learning something the right way by getting a good hold of the basics. This is a gimmick for rich people to feel like they can hit the broad side of a barn. If you can't hit it without a $9000+ dollar rifle system and gizmo scope then you need to practice more, not spend more money on silly shit that does the hard part for you.
FYI the military will likely never go for this. The military hangs a pretty heavy value on marksmen and teaching people to shoot. I don't see them taking every clown on earth and making them a marksman by handing them thousands of dollars of gimmick to make up for their lack of talent.
There's no substitution for learning something the right way by getting a good hold of the basics. This is a gimmick for rich people to feel like they can hit the broad side of a barn. If you can't hit it without a $9000+ dollar rifle system and gizmo scope then you need to practice more, not spend more money on silly shit that does the hard part for you.
FYI the military will likely never go for this. The military hangs a pretty heavy value on marksmen and teaching people to shoot. I don't see them taking every clown on earth and making them a marksman by handing them thousands of dollars of gimmick to make up for their lack of talent.
Not if it's properly designed; meeting even automotive EMC requirements would make this incredibly robust.
Yes, cheating I suppose, but cool tech none the less. I reckon it will be the way of the future, for those who just want to shoot the easy way. Now all they need to do is shrink that scope to a more realistic size because at the moment it's pretty ridiculous.
Hey guys.... my son said this!!! In Halo 4, X-Box game....Master Chief. The so called master soldier, called out to save everybody. He is OLD SCHOOL! Its funny, because even in the game, they always turn to the old veteran to save their ass!
funny, even in a game, they just want an old school hero to pick up an old Savage 110 or Rem 700 30-06 and save the world. Screw Technology. LMAO!
funny, even in a game, they just want an old school hero to pick up an old Savage 110 or Rem 700 30-06 and save the world. Screw Technology. LMAO!
The remington version is just gehy. 500 yards. Really? I can have my mom ringing steel at 500 within 2 minutes of getting behind my rifle. Mostly due to a $10 app.
The thing I like about long range precision accuracy is acquiring the skill to hit targets myself.
Personally, I am all for high tech - with the caveat that it is viable. I would be okay with a scope and rifle system that ranged, meteorologically factored, wind estimated, and timed the shot. I would own one. But, I would still shoot "old school" at times for enjoyment. Just like I shoot my Shiloh Sharps...
Respectfully,
J Woo
Respectfully,
J Woo
I love the technology. But like most technology it will fail at some point and the person using it may have no idea how to accomplish the task on their own. There is nothing wrong with using a GPS (I have three) but if your life, or someone else's, is on the line it is a good idea to know how to use a map and compass. And that is where I cringe when viewing the video. This is a life and death instrument. Many people who buy it will do so because they can afford to do so and will think the idea of old school training is for less fortunate souls. Gear does not make the shooter, or the hiker, or the boater. The shooter in the video is handling the rifle like an absolute goofball. I have seen quite a few high-tech equipment failures that resulted in a search and rescue mission, or a recovery, simply because there was no back up to a downed high-tech device.
Is it cheating? Only if you use it when it's not allowed. A GPS is not allowed in an adventure race, but I do use one when hiking. And I have several more than memorable occasions where I personally participated in rescue missions of the incompetent.
My livelihood depends a high degree of competence with some cutting edge, and very expensive, technologies. The folks who know how to do things old school are always better than those who rely entirely on the tech. There are several reasons for this, but in the main it is simply because there will come a time when the tech will tell you something that is not true and you need to be able to do 2 things... recognize that there is an error, and know how to overcome the error. But I do love the technology itself.
Is it cheating? Only if you use it when it's not allowed. A GPS is not allowed in an adventure race, but I do use one when hiking. And I have several more than memorable occasions where I personally participated in rescue missions of the incompetent.
My livelihood depends a high degree of competence with some cutting edge, and very expensive, technologies. The folks who know how to do things old school are always better than those who rely entirely on the tech. There are several reasons for this, but in the main it is simply because there will come a time when the tech will tell you something that is not true and you need to be able to do 2 things... recognize that there is an error, and know how to overcome the error. But I do love the technology itself.
Also as a FYI, I believe the ar systems start at 10 grand, I think the guy doing the demo told my buddy as I was shooting the 338 it was 19,000 (Not 100% certain but that's what he said the guy told him)
Cool tech but no replacement for a foundation of marksmanship skills.
Looks like you need a titanium bipod to support it or a two bar for an Abrams tank.
Drop if from waist high on the ground a few times , add rain and dust then test it.
Looks like you need a titanium bipod to support it or a two bar for an Abrams tank.
Drop if from waist high on the ground a few times , add rain and dust then test it.
Yep, it's impossible for a piece of electronics to read the wind with more accuracy than humans. Oh, wait...
Doppler Lidar Systems - MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC
Just wait until this technology is incorporated into a rifle scope, or maybe just into a laser rangefinder. The collective freak-out by pseudo-traditionalists will be nearly unbearable.
This. What a lot of people fail to understand is that you being a human with experience on something doesn't mean your skills that you have honed over the years are some kind of magical power. Most of the time you just aren't able to explain things well enough to be able to get it down to a science to the point of being able to implement technology to do the same, but that also doesn't mean it isn't possible.
In terms of military application, this is clearly the future. As someone mentioned earlier, it goes down to whether it is cheaper to train a soldier to shoot or to just buy the equipment. Although, it obviously isn't at that point yet, but there is no doubt it will get there.
In terms of civilian applications, we enjoy shooting and this makes it too easy.
This is exactly what points out the problem. Let me begin with this scenario from a common occurrence in many of our lives: when the internet is down the work day is over. This happens all over the world all the time. The biggest warnings about reliance on technology are from those who know technology the best. The Navy still has missiles that use inertial guidance systems. In fact, it has recently resurrected its development of them. There are several reasons for this, but the main one being that more and more countries are able to knock out the satellites that provide for GPS. To a scary extent, if GPS satellites go down, much of the military goes down.
I am a high tech geek no doubt, it's what I do for a living, but I keep in mind what my mentor in college told me about how a human will always be able to defeat a computer simply because all they have to do is unplug it. As intelligent as I knew he was I thought he was just too old school. But now I know that his bit of wisdom is more true than I ever imagined. As part of my job now is to figure out ways of defeating or disrupting a technology, the scary truth is that if all you're trying to do is disrupt function, or to destroy some bit of tech, the answer is almost always something very low tech, old school, and relatively inexpensive. As frightening as that may be, what is even worse is that it is not too much more difficult to fool technology, which in my opinion is far more desirable than incapacitating it or the people using it. And the more removed it is from human judgement the easier it is to do. This is true for satellites, our credit card system (which relies on satellites), cell phones, and even ordinary appliances, and on and on...
I'm not bemoaning technology at all, I'm just saying that there is a good reason that we have billion dollar boats with $500 sextants on board. Of countless days at sea there is only once I had to break mine out (meaning not for practice) and it's because technology failed. No problem, that crazy Englishman with his babble about unplugging computers had long since made sure I was plenty proficient with this very old school instrument, and a pencil and paper. The fact of the matter is that it was the sextant that was used to verify that our instruments were wrong in the first place. So until some terrorist organization figures out a way to bend the curvature of the earth or relocate celestial bodies I will always be able to figure out where I'm headed. I think that there will be some among us that may even still be able to call wind.
Last edited:
