Helicopter killer?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
What do you guys think of the prospect of helicopter rifles. Similar to how anti-tank rifles appeared in ww1/ww2, do you think that a modern equivalent could function. Imagine a single soldier being able to put down a helicopter with one good shot.
Or, is this just putting to much stock into one idea?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkcqm2Vcngw
>>28861545
anything that provides a significant tactical advantage is a good fucking idea
>not knowing this
>2016
The ratio of economic cost/benefit for the rifle's deployer is attractive, but it seems as though it would very much be a right place/time thing.
Helos in a low hover would disappear in a battlespace where these were routinely employed.
>>28861545
Closest equivalent you are ever going to find would be 50cal machine guns. Depending on amount of ammo carried it's at minimum 3 guy job to move it around. MANPAD would be closest effective equivalent. Helicopters move rather fast, best way to hit one with unguided weapon is to fire at lot into general direction of it.
>>28861554
Somewhere, someone is aroused and pleasuring himself to this video and countless ones like it.
Wouldn't penetrate slav helis. 0/10
>>28861587
>>28861611
Id imagine something new chambered in between 20mm and 30mm. Not only that, but odds are it would need 2 people to set up. Combine that with virtually anyone being able to use one with the cost, then you have a new helo deterrent.
>>28861545
You'd only ever be able to hit a helo with a rifle if it were up close and hovering. At that point, why not use an RPG or proper MANPADs?
>>28861611
another idea that comes to mind would be to have a sort of high velocity shrapnel weapon that would fire a shitload of 50cal/20mm shots like birdshot.
WW1 armies literally employed this tactic to take down scout airplanes, but instead they used like 50 guys with bolt action rifles
>>28861659
You seem to underestimate how fucking hard it is to hit a moving helo, especially with a non-automatic weapon.
>>28861691
>Why not?
Cost.
>>28861704
How would this be simpler or more cost effective than an actual HMG or MANPADS?
>>28861726
MANPADS are pretty dirt cheap, and a weapon that can't actually hit its target reliably is a useless weapon, no matter how cheap.
>implying these wont just be used as "sniper" rifles like every other large cal rifle in middle east
>>28861545
>helicopter uses FLIR to spot you
>destroyed by 30mm from a mile away
Maybe a 60mm+ recoilless rifle with proximity fuzing and a sophisticated targeting sight. Anything else would be better off using automatic fire and tracers.
Helicopters have little to no armor you would be better off just dumping some 308 AP rounds at one untill you hit a flight control or the engine. Sorce- helicopter mechanic
>>28861691
>up close and hovering
>At that point, why not use . . . MANPADS?
Becuause if it's a complete waste of a perfectly good MANPADS.
>>28861853
And what stops the helicopter from shooting you first?
>>28861808
Hind here, why don't you make like a tree and fuck off.
>>28861912
Australia, guns, nope.
>>28861808
would a .308 acp even so extensive damage? The goal is extensive crippling damage to the engine, fuel tanks, or possibly causing the ammunition to ignite.
How about some kind of brain implants for birds that receive radio signals and you can make the birds fly into enemy aircraft engines/rotors?
And like the dudes on the ground can just call it in, and they'll scramble a large amount of birds to the area above the caller's signal location.
>>28861996
Seems impractical, but hey, hasn't stopped carrier pigeons being used to designate artillery coordinates
>>28861951
If you get a round through the engine case it will cause catastrophic dammage . As soon as you introduce anything foreign object into a turbine they pretty much instaexplode. About 15 years ago a 1/8 diameter locknut got dropped into the intake of one of the helicopters I work on . As soon as it enter the engine after start up it took out a compressor blade that compressor blade took out the next compressor blade and so on and so on
>>28861951
>.308 acp
so a FA colt AR10 pistol?
>>28862077
>>28861808
I'm going to go out on a limb and say the helicopters you work on are not military grade.
What is the M82A1?
>>28861545
Hitting a moving man is difficult.
Hitting a helicopter moving at 300 km/h and maneuvering in 3 dimensions is difficulter.
>>28862290
A rifle for taking out stationary equipment and aircraft on the ground.
>>28861554
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YraqQabax8A#=45s
>>28862247
Those are hueys you dumb fuck.
>>28861732
I think his idea is to cover more area, but really you could just get a smaller chambered MG with a higher rate of fire and get the same thing
>>28861803
This.
With modern technology, it's certainly possible. With a fancy computerized sight it could automatically generate a firing solution that would actually give you a chance to hit it.
But, as others have said, it's not ever going to be better than a MANPADS. MANPADS are lighter, cheaper, more likely to hit, and generally more effective than an AA rifle would ever be. The most important consideration is that it's unlikely a soldier would be able to carry an assault rifle in addition to one these due to the weight/size/shape. That means we would have to have personnel who's only role in combat is to shoot down helicopters, an unlikely event. With a MANPADS, an air defense soldier can fight with an assault rifle as a light rifleman and carry the launcher as an auxiliary weapon system.
hella cop killa
>>28861545
Don't the russians have a fucking mine that can take out low flying helicopters?
Yes they do http://sputniknews.com/video/20120713/174583453.html
>>28863109
>those are hueys
>>28863109
>muffled "it aint me" starts playing
>>28863703
...so it's an EFP that is aimed up?
Recoilless rifle are "helicopter rifles"
Attack helicopters generally have armored engine and cockpits. usually rated against HMG and 20-ish mm fragmentary rounds. Plus lots of redudnant systems, the ablity to fly on one operational engine or without oil for a limited time, etc.
All that said, helicopters are still fairly susceptible to ground fire and lots of missions are called off because they're taking so much ground fire that to continue flying would be very risky. It still takes them out of the fight, and can cause accidents later on, even if they don't immediately erupt in a fireball right then and there.
Utility and scout helicopters are generally much more lightly armored and more susceptible to damage.
To put things into perspective, we lost about as many Apaches in Iraq as we did M1 Abrams.
The Solothurn works pretty good against helicopters if you have one around.
source: Unintended Consequences
>>28863894
no this is a Huey
>>28861545
Helicopters have the advantage in sensors and range. You're probably not going to be ambushing them often enough to build a specialized weapon for it.
And even if you did figure out how to ambush helicopters, they'd just change their tactics anyway, as soon as you started having any success.
That said, I like big guns and I cannot lie. Got a chopper in range? Then, brother, let fly.
Which is pretty much how infantry handles helicopters these days anyway: Blaze away with machine guns or MANPADS to hold them off, and hope they don't snipe you before you see them or from too far away for you to stop them.
>>28861545
How to aim?
>>28861715
with a bullet diameter exceeding 20mm, you can start pushing very heavy bullets very, very quickly. picture a 90gram projectile haulin ass at 4200mps? Faster the bullet that can still damage the helo, easier it is to hit.
>>28865388
fps* holy fuck lmao with mps that shit would be railgun-tier
>>28861545
Helos arent really any easier to hit than planes.
You wanna shoot at an aircraft you use AAA.
>>28861951
>not using .45 ACP
>>28861691
Oh, you mean those RPG's and MANPADS with 10 round magazines of rockets that fly at 1,035 m/s and cost $10?
Metal Storm is the answer. this can get rid of virtually anything on land, sea or in the air.
>>28866453
I direct you to >>28861749
Just because it's cheaper doesn't always means it's any more effective or practical.
>>28866508
Well then, sir, I direct you to the two other fucking points I made.
>>28861878
what stops the helo from shooting the MANPADS first?
>>28866561
Are you serious?
Do you have any idea how hard it is to spot these two little fuckers from anywhere from 500 meatres to 3.5 kilometres away?
>>28864307
Basically.
>>28866485
Later, Alpha, later.
>>28866628
They look pretty fucking geared up for an aa team
>>28861545
Impressive.
The Russhians should deploy this in Ukraine and there would be nothing America could do about it.
>Barrett toyed with the idea of an anti-heli rifle. Dunno how successful it ended up being though.
>>28866751
I once shot down a helicopter with my Barret in cod
Deployable autonomous/rc 20mm cannon. Set it to kill everything in the air.
Wrap it in some shit to reduce ir emmisions
>>28866628
but a 2 man team with a rifle is easier to spot?
>>28866763
Took several hits for me to drop one in ARMA 3.
>>28866736
They're in MOPP 4 for a chem/bio/rad/nuc exercise, you fucking idiot. Like pretty much everyone anywhere remotely fucking dangerous in the actual suck, they would carry their masks, testing strips, and injectables at all fucking times on an actual op, while pants, boots, gloves, and tops would be back at fucking company or battalion. Do you even operate, nigger? How long you been outta So/k/, twenty minutes?
SHOW ME THE MATHEMATICAL EQUATION, THAT YOU FUCKIN' SOLVED, THAT PROVED TO YOU, THAT YOU SHOULD CYCLE THE EMPTY CARTRIDGES, BACK INTO THE FEED TRAY, 'CAUSE I FUCKIN' KNOW THAT WHEN YOU FIRE THE FUCKIN' CARTRIDGE, THAT IT DOESN'T COME BACK AS A LIVE ROUND. DID YOU JUST SOLVE OUR AMMUNITION CRISIS, MARINE?
Get the fuck out of here.
>>28866771
Spotter gets eyes on it from howeverthefuckfar away. Missileer takes it out with an ATGM. Or, you know, a helo takes it out with an ATGM, since what you're describing is basically an IFV that can't fucking move, minus the troops, minus the armour, and minus the secondary weapons, you fucking idiot.
>>28866779
No, they're the same (minus backblast... and scope glint if you wanna be a cunt). But there's a reason that nobody uses rifles for AA.
We teach automatic rifle fire at the platoon level for low-and-slow ships, whether fixed-wing or roto, as a last-ditch desperation measure, assuming the other guy is dumb enough to fucking hold still for it. Shit is done by the numbers as a unit on officer or NCO command. Other than that, we leave that shit to the fucking specialists. Line grunts are for killing other line grunts, not for fancy COD bullshit.
Even actual snipers generally have more important shit to do than shoot helos out of the sky, and if they spot one they're pretty much 100% likely to advise someone whose job it is to do so, rather than do it themselves and risk giving away their position - because snipers are expensive, and AA teams are less expensive. And hitting a fucking helo from fuckoff far away with a goddamn rifle basically means you're talking about sniper levels of expense, if not greater.
Why do you think they're trying so hard to develop a guided sniper rifle round? Because hard-to-hit shit is easier to hit with a guided munition. That's why we use guided munitinos against almost every moving target apart from individual soldiers, because doing otherwise is inviting failure. Sometimes we'll use e.g. AT4s/CGs or LAWs against light armour, if we have to, but best believe we prefer to engage that shit with a Javelin or whatever.
War is not about winning 100-99, it's about winning 100-0. Crushing walnuts with steamhammers.
>>28865388
and yet high projectile speed solves nothing about the fact that you need more than sub moa accuracy from the rifle and the shooter combined to have a somewhat remote chance at hitting a moving helicopter
now tell me, what is more practical and cost efficient
>training every soldier that carries a "helicopter rifle" to sharpshooter-tier accuracy
>buy a bunch of stingers that can be fired by everyone and be done with it
>>28864245
>it ain't me
the song is called Fortunate Son, anon
>>28861545
>Imagine a single soldier being able to put down a helicopter with one good shot.
one can only dream that one day such a technical feat may be possible....
>>28867021
At last, someone who shares my ire...
You could do it with the self guiding smart bullets people are working on. At that point though it is easier to scale the system up top what are MANPADS today. Why hit it with with a gre grams of metal when you can hit it with 2lbs of HE?
>>28861659
>Id imagine something new chambered in between 20mm and 30mm.
The Halo sniper happened 20 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denel_NTW-20
>>28866763
I did it with my M9 from last stand.
>>28867021
it's a meme you dip
>>28861545
>What do you guys think of the prospect of helicopter rifles.
We already have weapons capable of downing helicopters, including firearms. The .50 BMG machine guns we already use would be more suited to this task than most any other firearm.
>>28861659
>virtually anyone being able to use one
yeah because noone can punch a couple of buttons on a MANPAD but everyone can snipe a moving helicopter fucking 4 miles away
you highschool dropouts really need to leave /k/ alone with your mindnumbingly retarded "ideas", you're contributing nothing but bullshit assumptions based on complete and utter ignorance
>>28861587
sneak someone /a small team near to where the helicopters are based. team best not be anyone you like though.
>>28861704
should be easy to nigrig giant puntguns.placing them properly and presenting a juicy target might work.
>>28861545
>Imagine a single soldier being able to put down a helicopter with one good shot.
What is .50?
That things beautiful.
>>28861545
Have you been watching Dougram recently?
How much cheaper is a big rifle like that really going to be than MANPADs, considering how many more of them you'll need to field to actually hit a helicopter, and how much less damage it will actually do to the helicopter?
like if you need four or five of them to equal the amount of effective anti-helicopter defense as you'd get from one MANPAD, and they run a few thousand per rifle, and you need an extra three or four soliders to man them, you're going to be way behind on money. Sure, they can shoot other things with big rifles, but you would be much more effective against everything if you had, say, one fewer soldier and more specialized weapons for the others, say one MANPAD and two actual rocket launchers.
