"Intelligent" Trackingpoint Rifle

Yay or Nay

  • Y

    Votes: 6 42.9%

  • N

    Votes: 8 57.1%
  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .
From the two brief vids I have seen, it is an excellent ranging/drop compensating sight. It does not, as claimed, make anyone a great shooter. It does not appear to compensate for movement of the target, movement of the shooter, or environmental conditions. That it could make anyone a great shooter would depend on the gun being expertly zero'd and I would guess that the zero be verified at a variety of distances for the given conditions for the particular batch of ammo being used. Ammo does vary, even the same make and model, from batch to batch and if you are talking about making precision long range shots, then the variation may be significant when speaking in terms of making humane kills on animals or taking out enemy combatants.

It says it will provide information on windage corrections. Of course, windage corrections will involve knowing how to properly read the wind over the course of the bullet's flight. That takes quite a bit of skill to understand so that the information can be provided to the unit.

I don't see where the unit will compensate for angle. Maybe it has a digital level in and and so it will be great in the mountains, but I don't see that information anywhere.

In looking at the video here, it looks like the unit definitely does NOT take motion into account. At about 38 seconds, a 'target' is identified that looks like a hog and the shooter 'tags' the target with the red dot, squeezes and holds the trigger until the crosshairs cross the tag again for the rifle to fire. The only problem is that the tag was put on the shoulder of the hog and the hog moved and the tag mark covered the side of the belly forward of the rear leg. So the tag not only does not track the target that is tagged (but apparently tags a digital location in the FOV of the scope itself), but will not follow the moving target.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9df_1354237550&comments=1

The first video I saw said that the system was developed based on jet fighter technology. The aiming system for guns in jets will track their targets. This system does not.

I think the concept is very cool, but think the hype is overblown for what it can do. I think we are probably still several generations away from the rifle making anyone an expert shooter.

As for the concerns of this gun getting in the hands of the enemy, that was a concern in WWI with the BAR. As such, our Doughboys went to France without a fine weapon and were given Chauchat light machineguns instead. That initial decision cost a lot of American lives. Not giving our people better tools does not benefit them in doing their jobs.

Addition - If something has more insight into the unit and that it does more things than I understand it doesn't do, I would be interested in seeing the information. Thusfar, I simply have not seen information contrary to my evaluation. I have not seen the unit, spec sheet, etc. So I may be biased based on a lack of information.
 
Good post Spy.


I hadn't thought of motion, but still, even if the platform is only usable for stationary targets, and if it works for the purpose of stationary targets, I think it is a hell of a product, and i'd be interested.


"New kids these day with their auto scopes and ipads":D
 
Well, at $1000, it is a big, heavy, interesting ranging site. At an expected price of $15-20 (expected retail price), it is a big, heavy, significant investment for possibly buggy 1st gen technology ranging site with no track record.

Wait for Gen III. The nice thing about stationary target is that they are stationary.

BTW, in any of the vids you have seen, do they actually shot closeups of the POI or do they just shot things getting knocked over and blowup up (ala Red Jacket). In other words, do we know that the POI is actually in the little square dot or just somewhere near the dot? Just how much precision do you actually get for the money?
 
It's brand new tech, hardly ready to field, but it looks like a good start. If they could get target id and info from a remote source,this could really change things. Target acquisition is a skill, and some guys just can't pick up targets.
If your designated marksman could communicate target info in real time, you could really concentrate fires.
 
Forget the target moving, What happens when the wind changes? The guy in the video doesn't even mention it doping for the wind?
 
Forget the target moving, What happens when the wind changes? The guy in the video doesn't even mention it doping for the wind?
Click to expand...

A slight wind will not cause as much of a change from POA to POI as will a target that is moving if the scope cannot adjust for it.
 
By all accounts the shooting is the easy part of being a "sniper," which seems to be what this is being applied to in our discussion. Thinking more of a marksman making shots at a few hundred yards and this could be very effective.
Are soldiers more likely to hold the trigger down and let the sighting system send when they get a solution than send the round themselves? Shooting off target is still a major problem in combat units.

Imagine this mounted on an M2 in a crowded battlefield.

Where all US soldiers are wearing an IR/RFID/whatever identifier.

With just a little work this could be devastating, even if a human has to hold the trigger down.

This is just a prototype, of course Gen II and III will be better. Move the guts and bulk from the scope to the butt-stock is a good place to start.
 
Last edited:
Although I think this is the direction riflescopes are headed,,,and I applaud this company for trying something new,,,I would not buy this particular product.

First I absolutely hate the trigger concept,,,when I squeeze the trigger I want the rifle to go off unless I let up on the trigger, in other words I have complete trigger control...A system where you pull the trigger and wait for two electonic systems to line up and fire the rifle does not sound safe or practical to me.

Secondly I have the Burris Eliminator lazer rangefinder rifle scope, you program the scope for your load,,,for instance 308 Winchester, 168 grain bullet and then you put the scope on target, press a button on the scope and at the top of the reticle it tells you the range and on the vertical crosshair below the horizontal crosshair a red dot appears for hold over.

What the Burris Eliminator riflescope does not do and the scope in the video I am quessing does not do is estimate wind and windage hold to the left or right of target.

The Burris Eliminator lazer rangefinder riflescope and the scope in the video will not do a host of other things like tell what the temperature is, what the barometric pressure is, what the humidity is, what the altitude is, and all these things are very important. Go to the Hornady website and their ballistic calculator,,,make sure you use the advanced program,,,plug in your caliber, ballistic coeffienct, velocity, bullet weight, sight height the scope is above the bore, maximum range put in 1000 yards, zero range, leave the wind speed and shooting angle and altitude at zero, pressure at 29.53 and humidity at 78 but do change the temperature to 90 degrees and have the program run the calculations out to 1000 yards then run the same program with the same numbers except change the temperature to 10 degrees and compare the bullet drop between the two calculations at 1000 yards....These scopes have come a long ways but they still have a long ways to go.

No matter how advanced the rifles, the scopes, and the ammo,,,we are still throwing rocks at them,,,I can't wait for a light or particle based weapon that is not affected by gravity.
 
I like it!

Interesting solution. Looks like it fits any rifle using ~match grade ammo. I like it. For those naysayers that don't like advances in technology, feel free to stick with iron sights at 1000 yards. Oh you want a scope? So what's the different if it's a smart scope vs. just optics. Innovative and likely the wave of the future.

Will be interesting how this drop and windage calculator competes with laser guided projectiles. This should be fun to watch.
 
LOL, the problem isn't "technology," but the particular shortcomings of the technology being applied and in the way applied in this case, versus some of the claims of what the gun can accomplish with the sight.

No matter how advanced the rifles, the scopes, and the ammo,,,we are still throwing rocks at them,,,I can't wait for a light or particle based weapon that is not affected by gravity.
Click to expand...

You will never see this. Even light is affected by gravity as is time. At combat distances, light weapons would not be discernibly affected by gravity, but they are affected.
 
Why are we sure the scope does not adjust for movement relative to the scopes sensors? Jet targeting system certainly do and have for a long time. Given the advances in computer power over their lifetime I think you could probably cram it into that size of scope. Heck this thing is nearly as big and heavier than a few small desktops on the market.
 
I'm not sure what I would do with it.

I'd probably be better off spending the money on ammunition and practicing more.
 
Why are we sure the scope does not adjust for movement relative to the scopes sensors?
Click to expand...

Because I explained with the video I posted, you can see it failing to do so. (Post #4) Beyond that, so far there doesn't appear to be any other video proof to the contrary. Their own video shows the dot failing to actually track the target. It tracks a spot in the FOV just fine.

I think if it tracked moving targets, that sort of really cool aspect would have been highlighted in their videos. Instead, they shoot almost exclusively stationary objects and when they show an objec that can move, a pig, it does and the dot is placed on the shoulder, but before the shot is made, the pig moves and the dot is low on the side just forward of the hind leg, maybe a foot off from where it was placed.

Jet targeting system certainly do and have for a long time.
Click to expand...

Yep, and they have a lot of technology and gear that accomplishes the task. The IRST and optical packages are not exactly compact.

Keep in mind that jet fighter guns are not sniper weapons. They rely on firing rates that are often in the thousands of rounds per second and the rounds spray, resulting in increased chances of hitting the target. The systems are not geared to precise targeted with guns per se.
 
Last edited:
Spy,
I don't see anything in that video which precludes the feature from being present. The feature is not displayed, but it is not as if they tagged a moving target then missed.

I'm not 100% sure as to what the development history of fighter targeting systems has been, but I feel it is fairly safe to say they were in use by the early 90s. An Ipad bests almost all the supercomputers of that era, if not all. Maybe an iPhone.

I am not sure it is possible to have the function shown without limited ability to track a moving target as the sensors in the optic are also moving as is the rifle it is on. Compensating for movement on one ens is not all that different than compensating on the other.

Of course, it could use the guts of a Wii controller, but I doubt that is the system used. Even the latest versions would probably not be MOA accurate at 300 yards. Given how advanced facial recognition/license plate/etc software is I am sure it could be adapted to track a persons profile or the area around the tag without too much trouble.
 
The only reason they didn't miss is because the target didn't move much. They tagged one spot on the hog and it did not track the location. They claimed with the stationary targets that you pu the tag where you want the shot to go and that is where it will go, but that didn't happen with the pig after it moved. The shot did NOT hit where they tagged it.

So you saw nothing in the vid that precludes it tracks despite it not tracking. Okay, do you have ANY info that it does track moving targets? Right now, you are arguing from a position for which you don't have any information. You could argue it has a lot of things that don't exist equally well.
 
Spy,
That part of the video was so grainy on my monitor I didn't even make out it was a boar or that it was moving. I blew it up on my TV and watched.

Look at the tag movement relative to the movement of the scope and the items around the boar. Watch as the tag drops to the bottom of the boars belly then jumps back up.

IF the system works as I imagine, then this video does not contradict the scope having a true tracking function. The boar is more or less all the same color, especially in the shade. The scope simply can't tell the difference between the patch of brown fur over its heart and the brown fur leading back to its belly.

Does it work perfectly? No. It is first generation after all.

The scope may not even have the function, but I am not seeing anything in the video contradicting it, only that it doesn't work as well as it would in a video shown on ScyFy. I'll start saving up for Gen III while I keep my eye out for the scope being used on a paper target traversing a cable across the screen. Would be especially interesting to see a video with the tag leaving the field of view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top