Developing the technologies of the advanced rifle scope (ARS) and its advanced rifle scope bullets (ARS-B). Developing Toon-Town Bullets (smart bullets). Fire and forget tracking capabilities. Is it really possible to build such advanced technologies in small arm bullets? Isn’t this bordering on a combination of (a) nano-technology (b) coded radio transmission technologies(c) solid state electronics (d) chemistry under high-g (high gravity) conditions?

The underlying assumption is warfare will follow and explore every possibility until a successful niche is filled which serves us better than it may serve the enemy, keeping US forces one step or more ahead of its likely enemy.

Gaining a stand-off capability for the ground force fire-teams from 500 yards out to 1400 yards is a significant change in battle dynamics over current Army capabilities (I think – based on various non-classified reports on line).

The financial incentives of development. (Financial Incentives reflect demand for a product. The trick is to make certain the produce itself serves to create a real advantage and enhancement of capability for the ground forces). While it seems interesting to extend the dynamics of fire-team engagements out to 1400 yards from say 400 yards to 500 yards of today’s standards, it may be erroneous to assume 1400 yards is important when the enemy is willing to simply suffer higher casualties to engage US ground forces. Remember the old Mao quote, “what’s a billion lives?” when he confronted American Generals and their implied threat of ground invasion in China (a country most Americans harbor great affection and much admiration for by the way).

Adding a 28-pound (plus ammo) weapon to a fire team may at best prove only to be a study in theory and not practical. But let’s look just one level closer because developing Toon-Bullets (smart bullets – I prefer Toon Bullets for its implications of the madness of war and war’s polarizing effects on our thinking in general) for small arms, or the primary ground forces basic weapon, seems to be a real advancement that must be considered and should be pressed.

Some components of development that come to mind:

(a) nano-technology (b) coded radio transmission technologies(c) protected solid state electronics – fail safe even after high impulse electronic disruptive impulse waves caused from atomic blasts (d) chemistry under high-g (high gravity) conditions? Where do we stand on each of these elements of development.

We have the technologies, I think, to undertake the challenges of developing Toon Guns ( ARS and ARS-B’s). The key to the break through for the development of these Toon Weapons may be in realizing the combination is a double default protection. As our weapons are seized as contraband of winnings of war, they will eventually end up in the hands of our enemies. But what good is an advanced scope and all its bells and whistles with the corresponding ammo in great quantities?

What we need to do right now, is to test the abilities of a well trained fire-team against the abilities of an average Toon Rifle fire team using the same standoff abilities but one team with existing weaponry and the other team with Toon Rifle weaponry.

One of the aspects of experience is that experience and training usually can overcome the better weaponry. This is the old paradigm.

In order for technology to be worth investing in, it must break the old paradigm as for example when we move from F-16’s and F-18’s to the new F-22’s and F-35’s, the advantage shifts over to the new weapons even with better trained pilots flying the older equipment. The new technologies breaks the paradigm. The modest experienced pilot flying the F-22 will on average over take the better trained pilot flying the F-16 or F-18. When that shift is apparent through testing, you probably are looking at a technology worth investing in, if you can afford it.

A similar line of reasoning applies to development of Toon-Rifles. Does testing seem to indicate a break through of old paradigms?

Your thoughts?

“According to Operation Iraqi Freedom PEO Soldier Lessons Learned [LTC Jim Smith 15 May 2003] “The Barrett 50 cal Sniper Rifle may have been the most useful piece of equipment for the urban fight – especially for our light fighters. The XM107 was used to engage both vehicular and personnel targets out to 1400 meters. Soldiers not only appreciated the range and accuracy but also the target effect. Leaders and scouts viewed the effect of the 50 cal round as a combat multiplier due to the psychological impact on other combatants that viewed the destruction of the target.

“My spotter positively identified a target at 1400 meters carrying an RPG on a water tower. I engaged the target. The top half of the torso fell forward out of the tower and the lower portion remained in the tower.” 325th PIR Sniper

“There were other personal anecdotes of one round destroying two targets and another of the target “disintegrating.”

Back to my notions about Boot Camp training being extended to include a proficiency in using one’s primary weapon and extended training for everyone in using the M107 .50-cal snipper rifles. Default training would be of course using the current model M107, a beastly 28-pound weapon, one weapon issued per fire team, there for communal use. Last man to use it, carries it… your reward.

The Toon-town bullets, or Toon Bullets (smart bullets) do not currently exist in combination with sights needed to compliment the strategy of a communal weapon. Currently there are only a few thousand M107’s in use. The increase of a few thousand to tens of thousands would be a significant financial incentive for manufacturers to enter this realm. Toon-bullets (a name I prefer and will never be used officially by the Army because of its reflection upon the ability of higher command to always act wisely and thoughtfully, and issue wise directives …. another Toon-town mission… “Hand me the fricking Toon-Town Ted,” with her out-stretched slender, sweaty bare forearm, she orders without taking her eyes off the head movement she thought she saw. His first impulse was to reach down and kiss her arm — God she is amazing — but he thought better and struggled to place the beast in her hand, loaded and ready. “Safety is on, ready to fire, Sarge,” with a her helmet. …. you see the problems at all these various levels.. right?)

Back to Toon Bullet development. You see, the incentive here is enormous. The development company develops the bullet-scope combination. If that combination works for one level of small arms (even as the militarized .50 Cal is not in my mind small arms, it is nonetheless a small arm) it can be repeated in all small arm rifles. And then what have we created? Everyone is issued a Toon-Rifle. Markmanship awards? Hey just re-time you sync rate with shorter fusing and you get one round dead center and the other two fragged the target from head to toe in a typical three shot burst. Soon the bots will be on patrol and we’re all sitting in a room looking at screens. Where’s the fun in that? Or so the fear goes.

The 50-cal. appears to have the range needed to really alter the fire team engagement dynamics and rapidly change the perceived threat levels of our fire teams inside 1-mile.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/dec99-03.asp
Declaration III – On the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body , Laws of War :
Declaration on the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body; July 29, 1899

To be clear, there appears to be no lawful limitation on the Caliber size. Not many of us would consider the .50-cal weapon part of the small arms arsenal because of its heavier capabilities and heavier uses historically. A bullet that exploded with high explosive war head “might” be a violation of the Geneva Convention unless the bullet was designed to explode as a proximity device to saturate a target zone, for example. Also as long as the bullet is not the “primary weapon” of the foot soldier, but a community weapon of the fire-team, it would likely be lawful under Geneva Rules.

Designing the “warhead” for the smart bullet needs to focus on 1-man operations and quick-use capabilities. You can not afford to design the smart bullet to require dial-in fuses, with one man setting distance on a timing fuse. The fuse would have to be set automatically by information sent to the bullet through advanced scope technology.

It would be likely that the bullet would be designed to fire automatically within say 1 second after pulling the trigger on the rifle, as the scope made multiple light-speed sightings and electronic calculations, then electronically dial-in the fuse settings and operating parameters. Most likely the weapon would fire three rounds in sequence rather than one. First round going out is the kill round on direct hit with guided flight path and armor piercing. Second round and third round are high explosive going off in proximity of target.

Any round not receiving fusing instructions (because of a broken scope) defaults into a guided flight path and armor piercing.

Your thoughts?

Highlights/ lowlights- ANA friendly fire, medevac from rabid dog bite, ANA chicken rustling, ANA mad commander; sniper bullet- to- helmet (square on forehead), miraculous close shave.
Classic line: “get Tom down here, he’s been shot in the head”, “who’s been shot!!”, “calm down, he aint that bad, he’s still firing”

I agree w/ article; unfortunately the British media only go after politicians, the easy targets. Most of our MSM are ignorant of military matters, the higher- ups get a free pass. I’m glad our troops are still respected, despite the decision- makers.

What the Marines are doing now in Helmand is proper COIN and tribal engagement.

Leave it to the Marines.