Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/22/2004 3:54:26 PM EST
Why not some remote device? If trigger pull is a source of error, why not eliminate it.?

CW
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:55:40 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 3:56:07 PM EST by twonami]
Remote control triggers are more likely to fail?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:55:42 PM EST
HUH?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:57:02 PM EST
Because telepathy activated primers are hella expensive...
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:57:30 PM EST
What's the alternative?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:58:31 PM EST
Its proven and relieable. Remember, the target area, of a human at least, is about 15inx15in (torso -> heart and lungs). Not to mention how big the head is. Unless you are shooting very far away, you'll be close enough for a kill shot. The margin of error, then, wouldn't come into play.

Plus...sniper shoot many, MANY, MANY rounds. After awhile, with training, it shouldn't become a problem anymore.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 3:59:43 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:10:45 PM EST

Most sniping is done at 80 yards.


Wow, I had figured that it would be much further. Learn some thing every day.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:11:03 PM EST
That's actually a damn good question and one I've never thought about until now!

We've had remote switches around for cameras for years. This gives people the chance to shoot photographs of all sorts of stuff, even something like a lightning bolt. If they had to hold the camera in the traditional fashion and release the shutter by depressing the button, they'd really struggle with such shots. But the remote makes it easy.

If we can use a remote device with a camera, you'd think we could do the same for guns. We might need electronic ignition, but that is now in the works. Even if it's more expensive, it's not like snipers use a tremendous amount of ammo anyway, especially when compared to the usual infantry tools like M-16's and machine guns.

Heck, with modern technology, we could mount a gun to the top of a pole, the upper floor of a building or in a tree, slap a Beta mag in it and control it from a few hundred yards away if we chose to do so. Such a device would be cool to have in Iraq right now. You could set it up where you wanted it beforehand, and with the use of some cool gadgets, control it and take out lots of badguys without ever being in the danger zone.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:13:16 PM EST
Why? With good equipment and training, the reliable, nonelectronic trigger is not a limitation.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:14:16 PM EST
You mean like in the movie "Jackle" with Bruce Willis?

1. More complicated... more things can go wrong. Mr. Murphy

2. What fun is it to play "sniper/target shooter" by remote. (kinda like whatching porn, rather than getting real live pie)

Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:14:28 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:16:22 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:16:29 PM EST
Military snipers are trained never to engage from less than 300m.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:19:37 PM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Military snipers are trained never to engage from less than 300m.







You need to get some more sleep!...

You are talking out your ass!...
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:28:24 PM EST
Because snipers are also 'intel' gatherers. Remote trigger switches don't do that well.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:29:23 PM EST
Actually, what I had in mind was the mechanical or hydraulic remotes (I seem to remember something about a hydraulic trigger puller for bench rest setup) but without the need for the actual finger lever and associated hardware. Would the elimination of a trigger and the addition of a push/squeeze device significantly change stock design thinking?

CW
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:30:59 PM EST
what about a micro sized solenoid that plunges a firing pin in/out, kinda like a tattoo needle? i think i would prefer a more personal touch tho.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:32:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 5:01:38 PM EST by Adam_White]
Electric triggers are nothing new, and are available on many world-class free pistols. Even in the high precision world of international rifle competition, I am not aware of anyone using electric triggers (perhaps it is illegal? - I am too lazy to look this up right now). Personally, I think the biggest advantage is on an unsupported pistol - since the movement of your trigger finger is quite a stressfull thing that can alter your sight alignment - not so much so when you have a heavier, better supported rifle.

Once you have an electric trigger, going remote is easy - and in fact is illegal in international pistol. Again, I am not aware of it ever having been an issue with rifles.

Sniper rifles are not designed like free rifles - and have HEAVIER triggers than those designed for range use only. If they intentionally use a heavier trigger than possible, I doubt anyone is looking for a technological solution to this "problem" that doesn't seem to exist. Making the trigger too light or too sensitive on a rifle that will be dragged, dropped, and abused is just asking Murphy to ass rape you.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:33:54 PM EST
It might also be a disapline thing. If you take the skill and the thought out of the process then anyone can do it. However, when you are relying on them to make a good decision and take the life of an enemy you do not want to have any doubt that you are sending in the right person for the job.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:35:24 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 4:36:41 PM EST by LoginName]

Originally Posted By Aimless:
Remington had those Electronix rifles that had no moving parts, which would eliminate the mechanical action of the trigger for some supposed added accuracy, but no on bought them and I doubt the military would want to fart around with supplying the special ammo they needed.



I remember those. The electronic trigger mechanism and primers were designed to reduce locktime.

BTW, they were named EtronX.

(I've read two definitions of "locktime"... One: the time between the trigger is pulled and the bullet leaves the barrel. Two: the time between the firing pin strikes the primer and the bullet leaves the barrel).

popularmechanics.com/outdoors/firearms/2000/5/Remington_700_EtronX/

It seemed like a sensible and novel idea. Unfortuantly, it didn't catch on.

One could only imagine the outer limits of accuracy if the concept was applied to something like a McMillian, Dakota or Chandler rifle in .338 Lapua mag.

Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:37:07 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:39:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By R-32:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Military snipers are trained never to engage from less than 300m.







You need to get some more sleep!...

You are talking out your ass!...



Seriously, its in the handbook too, btw. The manual for snipers.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:39:30 PM EST
There are electronic triggers that can be adapted to rifles and shotguns, as well as some that are powered by a puff of air through a tube. (Developed for the handicapped). I never thought a sniper would need one, but if he did the triggers are available.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:41:30 PM EST

Originally Posted By Fat_McNasty:
HUH?



You dont read very well do you?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:44:44 PM EST
what about a release trigger, one that fires when it is released instead of pulled. I think those result in less gun movement than a standard pull to shoot
it'd need something to be able to release it without firing too though, incase you decided at the last minute not to fire
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:49:26 PM EST
I like pulling the trigger. I'm not a sniper, but I love that feel, even if my PSS does need some lightening.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:53:50 PM EST
Look at methods pro photographers use to reduce camera shake when firing the shutter.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:55:40 PM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By R-32:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Military snipers are trained never to engage from less than 300m.







You need to get some more sleep!...

You are talking out your ass!...



Seriously, its in the handbook too, btw. The manual for snipers.



If not, it should be! Can you imagine the life expectancy of a sniper team if you place them well inside the effective range of all the enemy's weapons? Can you imagine how long a two man sniper team would last when only 300 yards or less from any enemy force? They would be flanked, surrounded and charged (and overwhelmed) in a heartbeat. That's just common sense.

The only way I would employee snipers at that range is if they are operating with a larger unit, not just a scout/sniper pair seperate of the main element.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:57:34 PM EST
i think you have to earn the rank or name of a sniper? dont you?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 6:05:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By nonnieselman:
i think you have to earn the rank or name of a sniper? dont you?


Unless your an airsofter. Then it comes in the box with the gun.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 10:45:56 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 10:46:20 PM EST by Rem700PSS]

Originally Posted By Fat_McNasty:

Originally Posted By nonnieselman:
i think you have to earn the rank or name of a sniper? dont you?


Unless your an airsofter. Then it comes in the box with the gun.



Link Posted: 8/23/2004 12:35:11 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/23/2004 12:36:56 AM EST by PaDanby]
Think it through a little. Something on the rifle itself is an solution to a non-existant problem.

If it's to remotely fire a rifle, you need to get the rifle in place, and then hope your desired target wanders into the kill zone, and you sure as hell would prefer to get the rifle back rather than let the survivng pissed off bad guys get their hands on it. at least I sure as hell wouldn't want somebody that can't hit at 80 yds with an AK getting his mitts on a rifle that makes 500 yard shots relatively easy. Of course you could leave a second round in there that has C-4 instead of powder in it. Would sure discourage them from trying the next rifle they find.
Top Top