The issue is the signals those give off, can be used to target you. Don't need to decrypt it, just need to see it.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Wilcox, this is fucking ridiculous
- Thread starter Conqueror
- Start date
The issue is the signals those give off, can be used to target you. Don't need to decrypt it, just need to see it.
sounds like an opportunity for the market to fill a need and make some $$$ at the same time.
You thinking Busch beer is low class bro?
Well, you’re right. It is.
But the term is “bush league”.
However “Busch league” is funny as shit and pretty much means the same thing. In fact, it’s a perfect quote for under one’s username. I’m tempted…
All I can think of when I hear “bush league” is Judge Smalls and Rodney Dangerfield in Caddy Shack lol. I’m not even sure the term is spoken in that film, but the golf club’s name is Bushwood Country Club.
Just helping a brother out.
Last edited:
you don't do the whole cable, just the 90deg fischer-compatible connector. even use fischer parts and just mark up until you make a profit since they aren't making the damn things
Fischer sells them. They range in price from $25 to $100 depending on what you are ordering.
I looked through the parts catalogs and while they seem to have many things, I don’t see a 90 degree F/M minimax adapter in there anywhere
This was very well understood in the 1990s even, and specific orders to leave mobile devices back in the US were issued to us before we deployed. There was a well-known dust-up in 2018 that showed CIA and DoD outposts in Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon where people were wearing their Fitbits and allowed profiles to be built around their electronic signatures. This included their PT running routes, as well as traffic in and out of cities. It’s basic EMCON stuff that should never have happened and exposed serious incompetence with leadership and lack of training.
They effectively handed their travel profiles to foreign intelligence services and terrorists on a platter, with the Strava app linking everything to satellite imagery.
More specific to the precision long range/sniping signature management, the Israelis learned the hard way about using LRFs from urban hides when they set into position, started building their range cards, then had Milan anti-tank missiles dropped on them from extreme long range.
The obvious conclusion is that you need passive range determination capabilities, and mil relation formula won’t cut it past 400-450m unless the targets are much larger.
So I’m obv not a mil guy. If not using mils to estimate targets, then what are these passive ranging methods or devices?
Reading your target based on the size within your reticle/mildot. Longer the distance, smaller the size, difficult to get a precise distance without ranging it.
In 1st Group back in the 1990s, there was a guy in the Sniper Committee who was big on the use of a Theodolite for ELR with the .50 BMGs. Theodolites use registered optics against angular measurements to determine range exactly, down to seconds of arc, with resection.
They are/were common in surveying before total stations were adopted. There are a lot of laser-based systems in surveying now.
With a mechanical-optical Theodolite, you could have one as part of your spotting scope with an arc second window or other methods using basic existing optical systems present in a Sniper Team/Section.
It’s something I’ve been working on for years as part of a passive solutions set to avoid compromising EMCON. I’ve never been comfortable with the amount of IR spectrum emissions common to dismounts from LRFs and LAMs.
That’s pretty cool. I remember that term when researching fancier compasses for hiking.In 1st Group back in the 1990s, there was a guy in the Sniper Committee who was big on the use of a Theodolite for ELR with the .50 BMGs. Theodolites use registered optics against angular measurements to determine range exactly, down to seconds of arc, with resection.
They are/were common in surveying before total stations were adopted. There are a lot of laser-based systems in surveying now.
With a mechanical-optical Theodolite, you could have one as part of your spotting scope with an arc second window or other methods using basic existing optical systems present in a Sniper Team/Section.
It’s something I’ve been working on for years as part of a passive solutions set to avoid compromising EMCON. I’ve never been comfortable with the amount of IR spectrum emissions common to dismounts from LRFs and LAMs.
Now below is all armchair civvy quarterbacking. I’m just doing a thought experiment. One that doesn’t contain a new idea but it’s interesting to type out.
The thing is with something like that Russian Sosna-N anti-sniper robot system (in that vid I posted a bit further up), that thing might KO you just because of the optics of the theodolite. Even with ARDs, you get enough Sosna-N robots scanning (maybe on drones!) so they’ve got you on the angles, and if they train the AI software to recognize even the smallest silver of an ARD’d optic, you won’t be able to use thermal/NV, your riflescope, binos, nothing.
Sounds like we are rapidly approaching robot vs robot in a near peer or peer environment. The robot fight might be very short and then the losing side gets munched by the winner’s robots.
Yeesh.
You can have net-centric fire solutions if you don’t want to expose any objective lenses carried by dismounts, with synthetic Constantly Computed Point of Impact fire controls. It’s been done behind the scenes and in the open. There were some younger guys who showed their system off at SHOT at least 6 or 7 years ago. Accelerometers and other sensors combine to provide exact POI fire solutions, and can even be displayed in a visor.
But allowing a conflict to deteriorate rapidly into trench warfare is something the US doesn’t do. US Air Power would eviscerate the Russian VKS and Navy in a matter of days with extreme prejudice, and totally deny their ability to fly even within their own territory within range of whatever systems we wanted to employ.
Subsequently, Russian armor would be nothing but surface targets, as would any vessels on or below the surface in the seas. Even if we did let it deteriorate into conventional armor warfare, we have MCLCs for clearing minefields and obstacles, as well as precision munitions that target armor in unfair ways. That’s 30yr+ old technology.
Snipers are more effective in COIN and LIC where you don’t want collateral losses to civilians.
But allowing a conflict to deteriorate rapidly into trench warfare is something the US doesn’t do. US Air Power would eviscerate the Russian VKS and Navy in a matter of days with extreme prejudice, and totally deny their ability to fly even within their own territory within range of whatever systems we wanted to employ.
Subsequently, Russian armor would be nothing but surface targets, as would any vessels on or below the surface in the seas. Even if we did let it deteriorate into conventional armor warfare, we have MCLCs for clearing minefields and obstacles, as well as precision munitions that target armor in unfair ways. That’s 30yr+ old technology.
Snipers are more effective in COIN and LIC where you don’t want collateral losses to civilians.
Hey, I’m just talking out my butt. You are not.
Interesting ideas, man, although I’m going to spend the rest of the night looking up acronyms lol.
We’ve been insulating our critical systems for EMP ever since we did the atmospheric tests over the Pacific in 1957. During those tests, they had Radio stations in the Pacific experience the negative effects of EMP.
It’s not hard to insulate electronic systems for EMP, just requires incorporating it into the design and adds expenses to the systems.
Your error using Mil relation formula on man-sized targets gets large enough to equate to trajectory errors past about 450m, especially when taking partial exposures and variance in the size of heads and torsos into account.
It’s one thing to use it on E-types or Jaster targets with known and consistent measurements, and another to range the variability of people with Mil relation.
Another thing is that in the US, we use a really stupid Mil relation formula with an inches conversion that looks like a homework project. When I was training with the Finnish sniping community and saw how they did it, I was like, “Ohhhh....why didn’t I think of that."
They use TGT dimensions in mm/Mils read = range in meters. Way too easy.
So if a person’s torso is 45cm wide....
450mm/.8 mils = 563m
450mm/.9 mils = 500m
450mm/ 1 mil = 450m
I passed this on to guys who do Sniper School prep training for guys at Bragg and everyone so far who did the prep has aced the Range Estimation block and graduated. Other students really struggled using that dumb multi-function conversion formula that’s in all the US manuals.
With modern reticles trained dudes should be able to crush everything within supersonic range using Mil relation formula.
Reticles can’t account for variation in head or torso sizes though.
There is no way for the reticle to know what the actual dimensions of human body features are.
An 8” vs 10” head introduces error that will manifest in a ranging error.
Example:
I think the TGT’s head is 10” wide (254mm).
254mm / .5 mils read (with a reticle that can do .1 increments from a solid position) = 508m
But his head is really 8” or 203mm.
203mm / .5 mils = 406m
That’s an error of 102m in trajectory you would have dialed or held for.
No mil relation formula or reticle can help you with this. For my super-flat .260 Remington spitting a 130gr VLD at 2820fps, even up here at 6300ft elevation in thin air, I’m still looking at 3.2 mils drop for 508m and 2.3 mils drop for 406m.
That’s a trajectory error of .9 mils, or a miss well over his head with likely no register for 1st-round. My supersonic reach with that rifle is well past 1400yds.
With a theodolite feature, I can measure the exact location of that head within arc seconds and have an exact, known range to the TGT, without emitting in RF spectrum.
With a drone geolocation feature networked to precision fires, I can also have a 10-digit to the TGT.
With a drone geolocation feature networked to precision fires, I can also have a 10-digit to the TGT.
Ah yes, the Notorious D.E.A.N. I remember thinking “hmm, that’s interesting, but who’s going to jump the Theodolite rig?”
The average width of a military aged male’s head is 6”.
Average from crown of the head to clavicle is 12”.
You’d be hard pressed to find outliers with even a 10% variance let alone a 20% from your example.
But whatever, to hit UKD past 4 hundo you have to strap a $10k VHS cassette with wires hanging out of it on top of your rig, good job that’s super.
View attachment 8367196
Really Wilcox? A 20” long thick-ass cable with an 8” bend radius and no 90° plug because you didn’t ask Fischer to make one?
View attachment 8367200
You’re telling me not a single one of your beta testers upgraded from a Raptar and was like “yo, this new Ergocto cable is a dumpster fire?” I call bullshit.
Now to spend like $500 on the 12” cable it should have included instead.
Me right now:
Seems 99% of nv / thermal companies with mil contracts follow the HK motto of “because we hate you and you suck “
Meh if there’s a lefty around there’s a very good chance they are a good to great shooter.I feel bad for anyone left handed
Moreso with drones.
You’d think the wireless Raptar to hiss interface wouldn’t put off much signature but I bet homing drones could fly around till they find a signal than drop a nade on it
estimate weight of your [widget]? Looks hefty hefty hefty....so sized for applications described weight of Theolodite ~ ? (precision level needs to hold to 1500m too)
We have multiple systems in place now. They can not only determine position. But they can also determine height above ground (floor on a building, rooftop etc) and they do calculate the ballistic solution based on yours ve the enemies elevation difference (say from a vehicle to the 14th floor etc). They work for small arms, mortar fire control, tank fire control etc etc. Tank fire control we can target specific systems (like your optics) now to help further disable you.
I’d ask you if ARDs or irregular tape to obscure the shape would help but that doesn’t seem like something you should answer
That’s interesting, it didn’t appear on Fischer’s site when I looked and Wilcox directly said Fischer didn’t have one.
8-10” is more for side profile, and hair, helmets, or hats make it even more difficult.
Trying to resolve 6” with a mil reticle precisely is still going to result in errors.
Even if someone presents perfectly squared-off to the observer, you’re looking at:
5.5” = 140mm
6” = 152mm
6.5" = 165mm
140/ .5 mils = 280m
165/ .5 mils = 330m
That’s .4 mils of drop difference between those 2 estimations, for a super-flat .260 Rem at high altitude, not sea level.
140/ .3 mils = 467m
165/ .3 mils = 550m
That’s .9 mils of drop difference between those.
There’s a reason why you see LRFs on diving boards on top of scopes, but due to IR spectrum emission vulnerabilities, we need something new. We already know that mil relation does not work well on man-sized TGTs due to partial exposures and not knowing their exact anatomical measurements. Averages aren’t good enough to determine the range, just to estimate it. It’s another reason why we would always get as many measurements as possible from larger, consistent structures, vehicles, vehicle wheels, windows, rifles, poles, antennae, etc.
I’ve been using Mil relation formula since 1994. It has its place, but isn’t precise enough to cover your trajectory as the range increases. There are solutions to this problem that are as fast and precise as LRFs without emitting any IR signature. A mathematician or engineer can see a solution, but precious few of them have ever had to hump the equipment and weapons that come along with the job, so they will be prone to developing engineering solutions that aren’t integrated and soldier-friendly.
yes, I was referring earlier to using that and having it made with a receiving termination on the cable side. get a batch made, mark them up by whatever % is required to break even, resell as single packaged units
they don’t have a ‘ready to go’ off the shelf part that is a 90 degree adapter (though they really should tbh)
Edit: I think I found a guide on how to accomplish what you're talking about using both horizontal measurements relative to a known reference point and vertical measurements relative to level. Is this example what you're talking about?
Example:
Assume the following:
The baseline distance to known reference point (D1) is measured as 100 meters.
The horizontal angle (θ) measured from the reference point to the target is 45 degrees.
The vertical angle (α) measured from the horizontal plane (level) to the target is 30 degrees.
Calculate the horizontal distance (D2 or distance to target):
D2=100\sin(45)=100\0.7071≈141.42m
Calculate the true distance to tgt (D):
D=141.42\cos(30)=141.42\0.866≈163.38m
Original reply:
This piqued my interested. I'm curious, what specific optical-only theodolite system would you consider using? There are some pretty affordable and small form factor optical-only options out there. But the ones I've found generally use a 0.01 radian stadia separation, which basically just gives you a 10 mil reticle.. Next, you'd still need to have a well defined target size, right? Like the precise measuring stick used in surveying. This is the only distance measuring technique using an optical-only theodolite I found, but I only did a very quick google search.
My main reason for asking is that I'm unfamiliar with raning techniques using theodolites. I assume you may be talking about a different technique(s) like triangulation using two known-distance points and measuring the angles between each of two those and the target? Or maybe using the built in precision angle measurements in the theodolite's gimbal to measure the angles very precisely between to endpoints of a know length? I.e. a cinderblock, stop sign, etc?
I'd like to learn more about the technique you're referring to and how to actually employ it. Maybe this is a topic worthy of its own thread?
Last edited:
On a second note, what are the limits of the theodolite methods for small arms fire? For example, if you are getting arc second fidelity, that's still +/- 10-15 meters depending on your latitude. For my close to sea level M110 with 175gr FGMM at 900m that's somewhere around +/-0.5mil or ~13 inches. Still not bad at all, but push it out past the transonic range and it gets worse. How does that look with your 260? Or something line a 7PRC, etc.? Just trying to figure out the limits of this before I spend time and money building out this capability for myself! Thanks!
Their are much better passive methods, even ones that still optics like binos. However It will likely be 10 - 20 years before the public learns how they work and we move on to better technology. I have seen them in action, and they are wicked cool, easy enough to use a 5 year old can do it, and accurate to a meter. Pretty neat stuff, and they give off zero signature.
It is out there, but it will be more than a decade before we can say what we have moved on to.
It is out there, but it will be more than a decade before we can say what we have moved on to.
That type of stuff exists in industrial analysis as well. Things like calibrated cameras that can auto-focus and use the focal set-point to measure distance very accurately.
For $10,000 it would need to work from ESP and make me a fucking sammich.
Last edited:
Their is a restocking fee for that.
