So, a bunch of measurements and data input, only to end up missing 3 or 4 times and doing some Kentucky windage corrections based on observed bullet impact. Ok.
I love the part where he did all those calculations just to miss 4 times... at that point just zero to 2.1km and adjust. 1 minute engagement vs 4 minutes of failed math.
Pretty cool about 5-6 second flight time. In the future maybe the end of this century 2100 I could see energy weapons or rail gun type weapons shrunk down enough for infantry to carry and if so this could literally revolutionize warfare. Picture this if you could get a laser or energy projectile you might be able to fire at 5-50 km/s I know this is far fetched now but if you had a gun that could fire at those speeds it would be instantaneous at massive distances.
There are no energy or laser projectiles. Thats fundementally wrong, you could argue a particle could count as a projectile sure but the only technology we have to send a particle flying at a speed is a particle accelerator. They require extreme amounts of power, take an insane amount of space and the particle isnt likely going to travel straight without the acceleration chamber containing it. There has also been an instance of someone being hit in the head by that particle fired from a proton beam and surviving without any severe effects. As for light/laser we already have that, but the energy needed for it to actually do damage to something is very high and you need a lot of supporting technology to focus that light into a singular location. We can do that with for example laser cutters, but variably focusing the light to a far away location is difficult. Laser weapons exist but are mostly for anti air and anti munitions use. They are also countered by smoke or anything else obstructing the light. So simply drop a smoke grenade or have a reflective layer and it would render the weapon useless or less effective. The light would hit the smoke particles and reflect/bounce around reducing its focused area and diluting the concentration of light. Having it handheld would also require direct view of the target and a heavy battery pack. It would be way heavier than modern rifles and is counterproductive for the average soldier as it can't destroy cover, shoot through walls without first burning a hole through it. With modern weapons like the rifle in this video you can load the munitions with a payload that explodes on impact and destroys any cover and can spread bullet fragments around the impact area. Lots of soldiers get injured by fragments of bullets hitting the cover they're next to, even with normal munitions. You can't do that with a laser and keeping the laser active long enough to burn that hole would require a constant source of electricity. You'd basically need a miniature nuclear reactor to even get close which would pose its own challenges. Lasers aren't really affected by gravity either so you can't shoot over the horizon or any cover the enemy might hide behind and have the bullet still hit the intended target. So while it would be fancy, it would not in any way revolutionize warfare even if you did manage to build a rifle capable of shooting an "Energy projectile" or a laser capable of doing enough damage over a variable distance. Vehicle defense is plausible, exists and being actively researched but is still too big for anything other than a base installation or ship. If we have space wars lasers would be more useful, instant hit and theres little to no cover. No clouds and way easier to vent the heat of the weapon. Lasers produce a ton of heat that needs to be extracted or it would just melt itself which is another reason its not really viable for the average soldier.
Nice reply, I was throwing around obv a few weapon system that don’t exhist I guess I was more of the realm of rail guns as they are fielded on naval vessels. The only real laser practically is defensive anti missile defense systems however the government has alluded to being able to fit these on jets either were the targeting pods go or defensive ews anyway. The real application currently would be defense of hypersonic missiles having a pod that could heat up the hypersonic as it closes in melting a fin or scrambling the sensor enough for a miss or catastrophic failure idk. Thanks for the reply love throwing ideas around.
@@TheCraigHudson Yeah rail guns and laser missile defense is more viable, fitting anti munitions lasers on jets right now would likely be too heavy and impractical at this point with current technology limitations. The power required for the laser systems currently in use from what ive seen from publicly available information is too high for a military jet. An awacs could probably house it but we're way of from an f-35 or similar housing one. Not to mention it would be bulky and take lots of space. Most viable uses would be aircraft carriers, other ships and base installations. Using radar means you can lock on to the incoming target and have the laser need less detecting systems, only something that can improve accuracy once in line with the locked target. I work in industrial automation and electric systems so i don't think im the worst person to voice what i think :P
lol all of that just to miss bruh of course in real life you might get one shot then target flees but in arma you have a giant puff of dirt and usually people have the situational awareness of a worm so this is ridiculous to use that scope calculator even with ace3
4:14 is the actual shot.
thanks
Good of the targets to stand there all that time, while you sorted out your settings and blazed away at them!!!😂
belive it or not some jobs require sitting in one place for more then 3 minutes while gunshots happen 400 meters into the distance
@@JuneTheCapybara this is how you spell believe
“Sitting in one place”
In a cover. No one is going to stand in an open field when they are aware an enemy is trying to kill them.
Forced hold fire and Careless be like
Not gonna say it was terrible shooting... but this could certainly be refined.
Those 5minutes felt like 15
The direction of wind is 5 not 10
4 actually :D
@@The_Tank_Destroyer69420 that is true xd
@@Black-kn9gt :D
because your measuring the direction the wind is coming from not where it's blowing to?
@@bandrea610 that's correct
i shoot 3 km on iron sights of a pistol to a person inside jet
XD nice bro , i was inside that jet
@@jayanitilalshah6116 no i am the jet...
Its impossible bro jjdjdjsb
Battlefield yea? Lol
its true i was the jet
i expected that bot going prone to onetap you with a pistol
So, a bunch of measurements and data input, only to end up missing 3 or 4 times and doing some Kentucky windage corrections based on observed bullet impact. Ok.
Wind?
Do you ever wonder if the Taliban watch these videos?
I love the part where he did all those calculations just to miss 4 times... at that point just zero to 2.1km and adjust. 1 minute engagement vs 4 minutes of failed math.
Dude, he’s showing all the cool shit you can do, stop being a party pooper
Pretty cool about 5-6 second flight time. In the future maybe the end of this century 2100 I could see energy weapons or rail gun type weapons shrunk down enough for infantry to carry and if so this could literally revolutionize warfare. Picture this if you could get a laser or energy projectile you might be able to fire at 5-50 km/s I know this is far fetched now but if you had a gun that could fire at those speeds it would be instantaneous at massive distances.
There are no energy or laser projectiles. Thats fundementally wrong, you could argue a particle could count as a projectile sure but the only technology we have to send a particle flying at a speed is a particle accelerator. They require extreme amounts of power, take an insane amount of space and the particle isnt likely going to travel straight without the acceleration chamber containing it. There has also been an instance of someone being hit in the head by that particle fired from a proton beam and surviving without any severe effects.
As for light/laser we already have that, but the energy needed for it to actually do damage to something is very high and you need a lot of supporting technology to focus that light into a singular location. We can do that with for example laser cutters, but variably focusing the light to a far away location is difficult. Laser weapons exist but are mostly for anti air and anti munitions use. They are also countered by smoke or anything else obstructing the light. So simply drop a smoke grenade or have a reflective layer and it would render the weapon useless or less effective. The light would hit the smoke particles and reflect/bounce around reducing its focused area and diluting the concentration of light.
Having it handheld would also require direct view of the target and a heavy battery pack. It would be way heavier than modern rifles and is counterproductive for the average soldier as it can't destroy cover, shoot through walls without first burning a hole through it. With modern weapons like the rifle in this video you can load the munitions with a payload that explodes on impact and destroys any cover and can spread bullet fragments around the impact area. Lots of soldiers get injured by fragments of bullets hitting the cover they're next to, even with normal munitions. You can't do that with a laser and keeping the laser active long enough to burn that hole would require a constant source of electricity. You'd basically need a miniature nuclear reactor to even get close which would pose its own challenges.
Lasers aren't really affected by gravity either so you can't shoot over the horizon or any cover the enemy might hide behind and have the bullet still hit the intended target.
So while it would be fancy, it would not in any way revolutionize warfare even if you did manage to build a rifle capable of shooting an "Energy projectile" or a laser capable of doing enough damage over a variable distance. Vehicle defense is plausible, exists and being actively researched but is still too big for anything other than a base installation or ship.
If we have space wars lasers would be more useful, instant hit and theres little to no cover. No clouds and way easier to vent the heat of the weapon. Lasers produce a ton of heat that needs to be extracted or it would just melt itself which is another reason its not really viable for the average soldier.
Nice reply, I was throwing around obv a few weapon system that don’t exhist I guess I was more of the realm of rail guns as they are fielded on naval vessels. The only real laser practically is defensive anti missile defense systems however the government has alluded to being able to fit these on jets either were the targeting pods go or defensive ews anyway. The real application currently would be defense of hypersonic missiles having a pod that could heat up the hypersonic as it closes in melting a fin or scrambling the sensor enough for a miss or catastrophic failure idk. Thanks for the reply love throwing ideas around.
@@TheCraigHudson Yeah rail guns and laser missile defense is more viable, fitting anti munitions lasers on jets right now would likely be too heavy and impractical at this point with current technology limitations. The power required for the laser systems currently in use from what ive seen from publicly available information is too high for a military jet. An awacs could probably house it but we're way of from an f-35 or similar housing one. Not to mention it would be bulky and take lots of space.
Most viable uses would be aircraft carriers, other ships and base installations. Using radar means you can lock on to the incoming target and have the laser need less detecting systems, only something that can improve accuracy once in line with the locked target.
I work in industrial automation and electric systems so i don't think im the worst person to voice what i think :P
Wich scope is this?
You can use M85A41 name should have been like this, I don't remember exactly.
Nightstalker
So cool
You could have just increased the zeroing mate.
Need applied ballistic mods for kestrel or rangefinder xd.
This is some Call of Duty 4 shooting Zahkaev shit lol
Respect
INL that dude would have taken a bullet in the eye after all those failed attempts
tem que fazer um doutorado pra atirar
lol all of that just to miss bruh of course in real life you might get one shot then target flees but in arma you have a giant puff of dirt and usually people have the situational awareness of a worm so this is ridiculous to use that scope calculator even with ace3
All those calculations 😂😂😂
all that just to miss the first 4 shots lmao
taliban also watch youtube ?
It's cool even change all the stuff but really here to play a game not calculus and also get is a military SIM
The first
Nobody cares
@@youdontseeanoldmanhavinatw4904 I believe he was asking what the name of the first scope was, and I think it's a nightforce.
bro is the worst sniper ever