Re: [GZG] Gzg-l Digest, Vol 35, Issue 10

On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:29 AM,  <gzg-l-request@mail.csua.berkeley.edu>
wrote:

>> When you run, you are moving up and down--and tiny variations in the
>> position of the muzzle translate into large deviations in the
position
>> of the bullet 100m downrange.
>>
>> You can run and fire with lots of weapons, but you aren't going to
hit
>> shit except by accident.

> He's talking future weapons, not contemporary. Take into consideration
the
> evolution of the tank. When it was first fielded, shooting while
moving
> accuracy was pretty dismal. Nowadays, shooting while moving is pretty
> realistic. Who's to say in 50-100 years hence infantrymen won't have
the
> same or similar technological capabilities? We're not trying to model
combat
> in 2020 here (well, okay, maybe some are :-D ).

Yup, in the far future, physics will change.  Yes, we will be able to
accurately stabilize hand-held weapons precisely the same way that
tank guns are stabilized.

You see, the way that tank armament is stabilized has nothing to do
with heavy equipment which moves the turret and the gun around.  It's
actually the technology fairies that magically improve things over
time.

Powered armor could have stabilization systems.  Anything else
(unpowered armor) definitionally means that you are relying on human
muscles to hold the weapon in place.  Stabilizing your arms is a
non-trivial exercise that will not magically become easier over the
passage of time.

Some days I despair.

> I say it's all relative. Gotta be open-minded about some stuff. :-) 
We have
> image-stabilized cameras, no? What's to say that that technology won't
some
> year be married with an HUD targeting system for infantry weapons?

You don't have to be so open-minded your frickin' brain falls out onto
the floor and oozes around for the rest of us to use as a kickball.

>From the Wikipedia article on image stabilization:

>An optical image stabilizer, often abbreviated OIS, IS, or OS, is a
mechanism used in a still camera or video camera that stabilizes the
recorded image by varying the optical path to the sensor. This
technology is implemented in the lens itself, or by moving the sensor as
the final element in the optical path.

Not applicable--weapons aren't receiving information they are sending
things (bullets, lasers, whatever) so there is no optical path to
sensor to move to compensate.

>In Nikon and Canon's implementation, it works by using a floating lens
element that is moved orthogonally to the optical axis of the lens using
electromagnets.[3]  Vibration is detected using two piezoelectric
angular velocity sensors (often called gyroscopic  sensors), one to
detect horizontal movement and the other to detect vertical movement.[4]

Same argument in reverse.  You'd have to have the barrel in a
self-powered mount which moves the weapon around.  Which means it's no
longer a hand-held weapon carried by unpowered armor.  This line of
thinking works fine for a weapon mounted on a powered armor suit.

>The sensor capturing the image can be moved in such a way as to
counteract the motion of the camera, a technology often referred to as
mechanical image stabilization. When the camera rotates, causing angular
error, gyroscopes encode information to the actuator that moves the
sensor.

See counter-argument to the optical image stabilizer, modified in the
obvious manner.

>Real digital image stabilization is used in some video cameras. This
technique shifts the electronic image from frame to frame of video,
enough to counteract the motion. It uses pixels outside the border of
the visible frame to provide a buffer for the motion. This technique
reduces distracting vibrations from videos or improves still image
quality by allowing one to increase the exposure time without blurring
the image. This technique does not affect the noise level of the image,
except in the extreme borders when the image is extrapolated.

If I need to explain why this concept doesn't apply to a rifle, you
don't need to be involved in this conversation.

John
-- 
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again.  We're looking for thousands of Persians."
--Vita Aureliani
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l