I thought that the best way to handle the Trijicon CCAS and Tracking Point system might simply be to put them in an article together. Both of these optics have an integral rangefinder and an angle of incline measurement device. Additionally, the Tracking Point system also has humidity, temperature, weapon cant, and pressure sensors. It was not clear if Trijicon's product included these measurements in its calculations. Both scopes do quite a bit of calculating because the main feature of both is not automatic ranging alone, but a more compete target tracking. Both systems have the ability to mark a desired target even if it is in motion, and track it while it remains in the field of view. Using the relative motion of the target as well as the other above variables, these optics will both calculate and display the correct aim point.
Trijicon CCAS:
This is where the two systems depart and we will address the Trijicon system first. The first thing to mention about this nifty sight is that you can't have it. Trijicon has become the H&K of rifle scopes as of late. Whether it be the TANS night vision system from a little while back, its thermal weapon sights, or this Continuously Computed Aiming Solution; its pretty clear that civilians are not at the top of Trijicon's list of intended consumers. As for the scope itself, it is basically an ACOG that got fat, and heavy (at 72oz), around the middle from eating circuit boards. Internally, it has memory for several weapon / load profiles and, given the military only application, that is probably all it will ever need. In the advertising literature, Trijicon states, "The CCAS replaces the necessity for advanced marksmanship skills such as range estimation, windage adjustment and angle of fire adjustment." Insert joke, snarky comment, or statement of fact here. The user need only point the sight at the target and tag it either using a little button on the top or with a Surefire tape switch and the aim point is calculated, displayed, and continually updated. Still, it doesn't have a feature for calculating wind. The wind speed is estimated by the soldier and keyed into the computer using buttons on the top so, we might not want to replace what few marksmanship courses are still being taught with sensitivity training just yet.
Now for the speculation and commentary. I remember a few years back when the Army was doing the whole OICW thing. I have also followed the off again, on again Land Warrior program. The idea of supplying a soldier with more, as well as better, information is a simple, laudable, one, but has constantly proven to also be surprisingly heavy and cumbersome. At more than 2kg for a fixed 6x magnification optic, the CCAS is no exception to this. I expect that the CCAS will find itself, like much of the rest of the technology pioneered in the Land Warrior program, riding around on a Humvee where no doubt it will make the gunner, who really isn't all that concerned with first shot hits because he has a belt of ammo anyway, marginally more effective. To be truly groundbreaking, this technology does not need to integrate more data, such as computer tracking and lead calculation. It needs to be light enough for a soldier, who already has too much stuff to carry around, to be willing to mount it to his rifle. It needs to add the weight of a smart phone or no weight at all; not the weight of a waffle iron. I can't help but think that we must be going to the engineers and saying: give me an optic, helmet, etc. that does this that and the other thing. Naturally, we add things to the list each year to match the pace of technology. We should be going to the engineer and saying: you have 20oz, what can you give me in the way of an optic?
This is not that mall Ninja photo that you have seen on the web, though it does look a lot like it doesn't it? It is Sgt. Philip Morici showing off the Land Warrior individual soldier combat system in the Rayburn House Office Building in D.C. in 2007. The photo is by Gerry J Gilmore and is held in the Wikipedia commons. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Land_Warrior_060707.jpg)
Props to Sgt. Morici for holding that thing up - couldn't have been easy without a tripod.
Before I leave Trijicon, I would like to talk a little about last year's TARS. I know, I'm a year late. I ran out of time last year and simply didn't see it. Truthfully, I didn't miss much. More precisely, I missed too much. The TARS has too much price at $3.4k and too much weight at 47oz. That is almost 30% more mass than a USO 3.2-17x, by no means a light package in its own right. Aside from the boat anchor worthy weight, and the very high price tag, there is really not much to note about the TARS. It's not that the features are terrible, or even unusual. It has a ZS 10 mil per turn multi turn elevation knob that locks, a locking 10 mil per turn windage with no stops, illumination, and reticles to match the turrets. It can also be had in MOA/MOA. With either configuration you get nice, clear, Schott glass and U.S. quality construction. The thing is, there is no way to slice that feature set, price, and weight that makes it look appealing.
Unlike Trijicon, Tracking Point was a company that I had never heard of until right before Shot. That is when the Tracking Point media blitz reached my ears. These guys take their media quite seriously. The first I actually saw of them was not a post from some industry insider, but a link to a video of NBCNews.com's Wilson Rothman trying the system out. Boy did he look uncomfortable when that 300 win mag kicked him. The Tracking Point Shot Show presentation was every bit as elaborate as you would expect. They had a large booth with a computer simulation, swag, a prize drawing, and more staff than you could shake a stick at.
The Tracking Point video demo at Shot:
The basics of the Tracking Point system are that it does its darndest to control all variables in the equation. When I say this, I don't just mean range, humidity, temperature, altitude/pressure, cant, angle of incline, and target motion up to 10mph. These are just the things that the scope measures and calculates based on. Tracking Point is not just a scope, it is a complete system. This system also includes a rifle and ammunition. Before you even ask: no you can't use your rifle, and no they won't give you the load data for the ammo. You will at least be happy to know that the stuff included with the system is top notch. The barrels are Kreiger, the actions are Surgeon, and the stocks are McMillan or AI. The ammunition is loaded by Barnes (Ok I don't really know if the ammo is any good or not. I load my own and don't spend any time researching who's factory loads are better than whose). Really, you know that if you had any interest in the system, you would reverse engineer the ammo without much difficulty anyway.
So, you can see that they control quite a lot of variables. The most important variable that they control, and one that will probably surprise you, is the trigger pull. Sure, you have to pull the trigger, but that pull only gives the system the ok to actuate the firing mechanism. It won't fire unless the rifle actually thinks that you are on target. The system keeps track not only of the target and where you should aim, but also if you are actually aiming there. The rifle will fire only if the trigger is depressed and the rifle is aligned with the calculated aiming point.
Now for the caveats. First, you cannot hold for wind as the rifle won't think you are on target. You must key the windage value into the scope using buttons on the top because the rifle can't calculate it. Similarly, if you miss with your first shot, I don't see any way to easily and quickly correct for a second. You cannot fire when the rifle does not think that it is on target and, with the exception of wind, which can be easily changed; the rifle will presumably want the same aim point for follow up shots. Lastly, each model is only rated up to a specific range. 750 yards or 1k yards for the two 300 win mag models and 1,200 for the .338. They will not fire on targets longer than these ranges. They don't guess, they just refuse.
The different Tracking Point models at Shot:
Initially, when I saw these rifles I thought LE. I thought this because the companies control of virtually every aspect of the shot just screams limited liability on the part of the user. If my father-in-law is any indication, LE. folks have to spend a great deal of time thinking about and trying to limit liability. However, the difficulty of correcting follow up shots seems problematic, if not impossible, to overcome from an LE standpoint. How can you have a rifle that essentially does not allow you to fire a follow up shot in what, at that time would be, a most vital moment?
That brings me to the well heeled hunter with little experience. This hunter has already paid for a guide to point his ignorant self at the game (yes, I know I'm unfairly denigrating all those who use a guide, but I'm taking literary license, you have to go a little too far). It seems only a natural next step to buy a rifle that will shoot the game for you. You could have the guide shoot the game for you, but somehow I think that the hunter would prefer to be the one behind the gun even if he isn't actually the one shooting it. So, for $17.5k - $22.5k, you can have the gun that will, with the exception of the windage read, complete the loop. Be sure to ask your guide for his take on the windage before you key it in. All joking aside, the Tracking Point is a pretty cool system. I'm sure the first guy with a laser rangefinder got laughed at too: but most folks have one now, don't they?
Trijicon CCAS:
This is where the two systems depart and we will address the Trijicon system first. The first thing to mention about this nifty sight is that you can't have it. Trijicon has become the H&K of rifle scopes as of late. Whether it be the TANS night vision system from a little while back, its thermal weapon sights, or this Continuously Computed Aiming Solution; its pretty clear that civilians are not at the top of Trijicon's list of intended consumers. As for the scope itself, it is basically an ACOG that got fat, and heavy (at 72oz), around the middle from eating circuit boards. Internally, it has memory for several weapon / load profiles and, given the military only application, that is probably all it will ever need. In the advertising literature, Trijicon states, "The CCAS replaces the necessity for advanced marksmanship skills such as range estimation, windage adjustment and angle of fire adjustment." Insert joke, snarky comment, or statement of fact here. The user need only point the sight at the target and tag it either using a little button on the top or with a Surefire tape switch and the aim point is calculated, displayed, and continually updated. Still, it doesn't have a feature for calculating wind. The wind speed is estimated by the soldier and keyed into the computer using buttons on the top so, we might not want to replace what few marksmanship courses are still being taught with sensitivity training just yet.
Now for the speculation and commentary. I remember a few years back when the Army was doing the whole OICW thing. I have also followed the off again, on again Land Warrior program. The idea of supplying a soldier with more, as well as better, information is a simple, laudable, one, but has constantly proven to also be surprisingly heavy and cumbersome. At more than 2kg for a fixed 6x magnification optic, the CCAS is no exception to this. I expect that the CCAS will find itself, like much of the rest of the technology pioneered in the Land Warrior program, riding around on a Humvee where no doubt it will make the gunner, who really isn't all that concerned with first shot hits because he has a belt of ammo anyway, marginally more effective. To be truly groundbreaking, this technology does not need to integrate more data, such as computer tracking and lead calculation. It needs to be light enough for a soldier, who already has too much stuff to carry around, to be willing to mount it to his rifle. It needs to add the weight of a smart phone or no weight at all; not the weight of a waffle iron. I can't help but think that we must be going to the engineers and saying: give me an optic, helmet, etc. that does this that and the other thing. Naturally, we add things to the list each year to match the pace of technology. We should be going to the engineer and saying: you have 20oz, what can you give me in the way of an optic?
This is not that mall Ninja photo that you have seen on the web, though it does look a lot like it doesn't it? It is Sgt. Philip Morici showing off the Land Warrior individual soldier combat system in the Rayburn House Office Building in D.C. in 2007. The photo is by Gerry J Gilmore and is held in the Wikipedia commons. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Land_Warrior_060707.jpg)
Props to Sgt. Morici for holding that thing up - couldn't have been easy without a tripod.
Before I leave Trijicon, I would like to talk a little about last year's TARS. I know, I'm a year late. I ran out of time last year and simply didn't see it. Truthfully, I didn't miss much. More precisely, I missed too much. The TARS has too much price at $3.4k and too much weight at 47oz. That is almost 30% more mass than a USO 3.2-17x, by no means a light package in its own right. Aside from the boat anchor worthy weight, and the very high price tag, there is really not much to note about the TARS. It's not that the features are terrible, or even unusual. It has a ZS 10 mil per turn multi turn elevation knob that locks, a locking 10 mil per turn windage with no stops, illumination, and reticles to match the turrets. It can also be had in MOA/MOA. With either configuration you get nice, clear, Schott glass and U.S. quality construction. The thing is, there is no way to slice that feature set, price, and weight that makes it look appealing.
Unlike Trijicon, Tracking Point was a company that I had never heard of until right before Shot. That is when the Tracking Point media blitz reached my ears. These guys take their media quite seriously. The first I actually saw of them was not a post from some industry insider, but a link to a video of NBCNews.com's Wilson Rothman trying the system out. Boy did he look uncomfortable when that 300 win mag kicked him. The Tracking Point Shot Show presentation was every bit as elaborate as you would expect. They had a large booth with a computer simulation, swag, a prize drawing, and more staff than you could shake a stick at.
The Tracking Point video demo at Shot:
The basics of the Tracking Point system are that it does its darndest to control all variables in the equation. When I say this, I don't just mean range, humidity, temperature, altitude/pressure, cant, angle of incline, and target motion up to 10mph. These are just the things that the scope measures and calculates based on. Tracking Point is not just a scope, it is a complete system. This system also includes a rifle and ammunition. Before you even ask: no you can't use your rifle, and no they won't give you the load data for the ammo. You will at least be happy to know that the stuff included with the system is top notch. The barrels are Kreiger, the actions are Surgeon, and the stocks are McMillan or AI. The ammunition is loaded by Barnes (Ok I don't really know if the ammo is any good or not. I load my own and don't spend any time researching who's factory loads are better than whose). Really, you know that if you had any interest in the system, you would reverse engineer the ammo without much difficulty anyway.
So, you can see that they control quite a lot of variables. The most important variable that they control, and one that will probably surprise you, is the trigger pull. Sure, you have to pull the trigger, but that pull only gives the system the ok to actuate the firing mechanism. It won't fire unless the rifle actually thinks that you are on target. The system keeps track not only of the target and where you should aim, but also if you are actually aiming there. The rifle will fire only if the trigger is depressed and the rifle is aligned with the calculated aiming point.
Now for the caveats. First, you cannot hold for wind as the rifle won't think you are on target. You must key the windage value into the scope using buttons on the top because the rifle can't calculate it. Similarly, if you miss with your first shot, I don't see any way to easily and quickly correct for a second. You cannot fire when the rifle does not think that it is on target and, with the exception of wind, which can be easily changed; the rifle will presumably want the same aim point for follow up shots. Lastly, each model is only rated up to a specific range. 750 yards or 1k yards for the two 300 win mag models and 1,200 for the .338. They will not fire on targets longer than these ranges. They don't guess, they just refuse.
The different Tracking Point models at Shot:
Initially, when I saw these rifles I thought LE. I thought this because the companies control of virtually every aspect of the shot just screams limited liability on the part of the user. If my father-in-law is any indication, LE. folks have to spend a great deal of time thinking about and trying to limit liability. However, the difficulty of correcting follow up shots seems problematic, if not impossible, to overcome from an LE standpoint. How can you have a rifle that essentially does not allow you to fire a follow up shot in what, at that time would be, a most vital moment?
That brings me to the well heeled hunter with little experience. This hunter has already paid for a guide to point his ignorant self at the game (yes, I know I'm unfairly denigrating all those who use a guide, but I'm taking literary license, you have to go a little too far). It seems only a natural next step to buy a rifle that will shoot the game for you. You could have the guide shoot the game for you, but somehow I think that the hunter would prefer to be the one behind the gun even if he isn't actually the one shooting it. So, for $17.5k - $22.5k, you can have the gun that will, with the exception of the windage read, complete the loop. Be sure to ask your guide for his take on the windage before you key it in. All joking aside, the Tracking Point is a pretty cool system. I'm sure the first guy with a laser rangefinder got laughed at too: but most folks have one now, don't they?
