← Home ← Back to /k/

Thread 64089300

94 posts 26 images /k/
Anonymous No.64089300 >>64089313 >>64089324 >>64089345 >>64089619 >>64089669 >>64089742 >>64090298 >>64090329 >>64091052 >>64092234 >>64092245 >>64092511 >>64093106 >>64093114 >>64094485 >>64094496 >>64094655 >>64094733 >>64097581 >>64098545
Mini CIWS on top of MBTs
Why not just miniaturize a CIWS and put it on top of an MBT for it to act as anti-drone point defense?

picrel is 5.56, but i think it can be done in 9mm.

yes, an APS system can in theory do it too, but 9mm or 556 bullets are cheaper than an explosive round.

pros:

>cheap ammo and barrel
>close range
>low collateral damage, you won't blow the allied infantry nearby up
>may act as a stopgap measure until we figure out lasers

cons:

>limited to about 50m~ range
>im not sure how pricey the targeting system would be, or if it's even possible to miniaturize it as of today
>maybe be too niche, currently, jammers seem to be getting so effective that FPV drones may disappear entirely in the next 10 years
Anonymous No.64089313 >>64090626 >>64091822
>>64089300 (OP)
You'd have better luck with timed 40mm.
When all is said and done, it's less expensive than throwing thousands of rounds at a single drone.
Anonymous No.64089315 >>64090626
the government fears the handheld .22 minigun
Anonymous No.64089324 >>64089345 >>64089455 >>64089523 >>64089577 >>64090348
>>64089300 (OP)
They're basically doing this already with the new Abrams (sticking a minigun on the roof for the loader). It sounds fucking badass, but the huge obvious catch is that you can't fire over the right side of the tank lest you completely shred the commander's MG. If you wanted to install an automated system like what you're talking about, you'd either have to clear the turret roof of everything else besides the CIWS turret/radar (and lose at least one perfectly good anti-personnel MG turret), or put the thing on an impractically tall and clumsy mount to ensure 360 degree coverage.

Also:
>jammers

Have you seen just how prolific fiber-optic drones have become in response to this?
Anonymous No.64089328 >>64089342 >>64092329 >>64093112
Remember when a CIWS locked onto a civilian airliner overhead

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ojatI-1B4aE
Anonymous No.64089342 >>64090298
>>64089328
And that is why the human aspect should always be present in a dangerous machine
Anonymous No.64089345
>>64089300 (OP)
I advocate for an automatic large bore (think 4 gauge) shotgun loaded with tungsten birdshot instead, choked such that it's effective up to ~250 yards. Connect it to the APS's radar and you have a drop-in solution.
>>64089324
My idea can be mounted on a CV-90-style mast next to the CROWS, but with a rotary cannon you'll have to deal with feeding and vibration problems.
Anonymous No.64089455
>>64089324
>Have you seen just how prolific fiber-optic drones have become in response to this?
NTA, but it wouldn't be too hard to equip vehicles with some kind of dazzlers. Considering how cheaply drones and their optics are built, an equally cheap laser system ought be capable of at least blinding them, temporarily or even permanently burning the out the optics. A (fairly) pocket-sized commercial laser pointer can easily fry a camera, should you have some reliable means of aiming and tracking. Place it on some sort of mast and you should be able of making drones useless at leisure. No need to put in all the effort to destroy them entirely, though a tank is a fairly plentiful power source.
Or this is how I understand it.
Anonymous No.64089476 >>64089480 >>64089522 >>64095078
So… active protection systsems are autonomous, up-to-360 degree coverage, radar actuated anti-material shotguns that can find, aim at, and shoot missiles going at the speed of sound, but we need a hand operated minigun for 40mph drones?
Anonymous No.64089480
>>64089476
Magazine depth is a bitch.
Anonymous No.64089522
>>64089476
can you read?

>Why not just miniaturize a CIWS and put it on top of an MBT
>Why not just miniaturize a CIWS
>CIWS
>Close In Weapon System
>System

anon, it's meant to be automated. the picture was meant to illustrate a mini-minigun
Anonymous No.64089523
>>64089324
making it manually aimed is retarded, it has to either replace CROWS or be its own turret. The last thing you want to do when you know drones are targeting your tank is to stick your entire torso out of a hatch
Anonymous No.64089577
>>64089324
If its just for drone coverage and fully automated you can make the mount for it just retract down. Either make it a crane arm or some kind of rising platform that can put your mini-CIWS right over the other turrets. Bonus is that now you have a sensor and gun that can peek over terrain cover and use it against ground targets.
Anonymous No.64089619
>>64089300 (OP)
We need some quad mounted American 180 drone deleters.
Anonymous No.64089669 >>64090788 >>64094783
>>64089300 (OP)

You might as well make it a gauge caliber and shoot buckshot from it.

Through the real pain of that systems going to be the tracking system. Your options are radar and visual (cameras). And radar is a good way of turning your cheap drone problem into a much more expensive ARM problem. Either for you or your new embedded (and very expensive) radar section.

Visual now means you need cameras on wide angles watching the sky around you for a bird sized object coming at you at somewhere between 50-200 km/h. So your system has to detect, track, rotate, fire, destroy in the span of around... 3-5 seconds. Oh and while its active your own side can't use drones around it unless you want to start implementing IFF. Oh and good flying lets you go around it.

Personally i would put 5 or so pods on the back of the MBT full of anti drone loitering munitions. and send them up when you get radioed that enemy drones are in the air.
Anonymous No.64089742
>>64089300 (OP)
so where are you exactly going to store all the ammo and the computers?
Anonymous No.64089831
>CROWS and detection equipment on roof
>Set to CIWS mode by default
>Flip switch down for manual aim and fire but system can override to shoot threats
>Flip switch down again for complete manual aim

What about this kind of system? No need for two machine guns on the roof if it works.
Anonymous No.64090298
>>64089300 (OP)
I'd be willing to see it tried. Keep it in 5.56mm, it has the same weight but far longer reach and will have far better effect on drones and any other potential airborne threats.

>>64089342
For that kind role, I agree.
Anonymous No.64090329
>>64089300 (OP)
This thing should be produced by tens of thousands per year and bolted on everything I don't know wtf MIC is doing
https://youtube.com/watch?v=W18JC1-Okj4
https://youtube.com/watch?v=WIIQuTU3RmE
Anonymous No.64090348
>>64089324
>They're basically doing this already with the new Abrams (sticking a minigun on the roof for the loader). It sounds fucking badass,
This is boomer insanity similar to old farts clutching cavalry pearls ok prior WWI (muh cold weapons charge!).
Complete delusions and detachment from reality.
Anonymous No.64090626 >>64092887 >>64096791
>>64089313
It’s not, since you’re not firing thousands per drone.
>>64089315
It’s in 5.56
Anonymous No.64090788
>>64089669
>You might as well make it a gauge caliber and shoot buckshot from it.
Fuck it, maybe the solution is a mounted, angle-able plate of ~100 12ga buckshot shells with a common trigger.
Radar detects incoming drone, plate just angles appropriately and discharges a wall of 1,000 double ought balls in it's general direction when it's ~50m out.
After firing, the spent plate is discarded and another one slots in for rearming.
Anonymous No.64091052
>>64089300 (OP)
The serious answer is that the kill chain math for it doesn't make sense. Rotary cannons are more than you need for some things and not enough for others. The real efforts using small arms caliber machine guns have a different looking threat model. Here's a summary of a M240 RWS approach:

pros:
>more shooters at the lowest levels
>relatively inexpensive, though not as much as you think because it depends on a modernized RWS

cons:
>limited to about 800m range
>collateral damage is an issue which has to be solved through sectors of fire, reducing effect vs highly maneuverable drones
>still bottlenecked in both cost and application by sensor cuing
>more shooters at the company/battalion level is the preferred meta

To reiterate: this is a regular GPMG hitting FPVs at 800 meters. That's the close range bracket. The medium is about 3km and the far range bracket is about 20-30km. 50m is APS territory.
Anonymous No.64091376 >>64092209 >>64092237
Stepping down to .22lr would let you carry triple the ammo of 5.56 or 9mm.
Anonymous No.64091822
>>64089313
>You'd have better luck with timed 40mm.
Why not timed 25mm from the OICW system? That would be fucking badass on top of a tank.
Anonymous No.64092209 >>64092237
>>64091376
22lr could operate at higher pressure with the same case capacity, it would be better to design some 22lr sized proprietary high pressure cartridge designed around a long spitzerized projectile. At least use a rimless cartridge like 25 if you must use something common.

Maybe use one of Bill Eichelberger's meme rounds.
Anonymous No.64092234
>>64089300 (OP)
You will be receiving the M2 Browning. It will be converted to a remote weapon station and act as your hard-kill anti-drone measure when controlled by AI.
Anonymous No.64092237
>>64091376
>>64092209
.17M2 FMJ
Anonymous No.64092245
>>64089300 (OP)
Why not a Gatling shotgun?
Anonymous No.64092329
>>64089328
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JY21vgDfbO0
Anonymous No.64092339 >>64092359 >>64094626 >>64097600
If you are going rimfire .17 is what you want, you could even make copper jacketed tungsten rounds. You could easily carry 15-20k rounds. The troops will want to use it for ground targets so there is a really cool way to do that. Since it already has motion tracking and range finding capabilities add that to any manual mode.

Imagine a sight like a aimpoint where you can adjust it to have a cone of fire from 0 degrees to 15-20 degrees. Basically you have a dial and at 0 degrees the sight picture is a fixed dot but when you dial it up the dot becomes a ring. When triggered the gun tracks and fires at anything moving in that ring. Besides being wonderful for suppression it would also make taking shots at passing drones that weren't directly targeting you much easier.
Anonymous No.64092359
>>64092339
That could also serve as a sentry gun with pattern recognition.
Anonymous No.64092511 >>64092930 >>64094632 >>64095096
>>64089300 (OP)
M230/30x113 is superior to everything suggested in this thread, and just barely small and light enough to be roof-mounted on the turret without taking up too much space or weight.
Anonymous No.64092887
>>64090626
5.56 is .22
Gotcha!
Anonymous No.64092930 >>64094454
>>64092511
Can't slew fast enough, not effective against small targets. The solution is a tungsten buckshot automatic shotgun mounted concentrically on top of the CROWS for height. This solution is more modular and better suited for smaller vehicles.
Anonymous No.64093106
>>64089300 (OP)
Why use either of those when you could do 12 gauge? Imagine a triple barrel 12 gauge Tiny CIWS. Worried about feed issues? Full brass. Also wouldn't hurt the civ market. Just a quick fart would be enough to put a wall of metal in the sky.
Anonymous No.64093112 >>64095556
>>64089328
it locks on to my big balls when i strut by
Anonymous No.64093114
>>64089300 (OP)
Can we please get belt fed shotguns? Please? with a feed chute.
Anonymous No.64094454 >>64094515 >>64095096
>>64092930
>what is trigonometry
Any gun can slew fast enough at realistic engagement ranges of 700 -1200 meters while under <50m a rotary gun cannot so you need an APS anyway. Shotgun and .22LR miniguns are one of those concepts which sound cool and make no sense the moment you actually do some engineering.
Anonymous No.64094476 >>64096930
1875 Remington straight to the dronads, like god intended
Anonymous No.64094485
>>64089300 (OP)
>arbitrarily decides this gun "doesn't blow nearby infantry up"
>fires short barrel 5.56
>does all his hindsight thinking in yellowtext
>thinks cheap minigun barrels exist, just because of "less metal to make it!" (its the entire process dumbass)

>even more yellowtext
leddit
Anonymous No.64094496
>>64089300 (OP)
>no redundant sensors
>only 6 barrels
>electrically driven = vulnerable to microwave weapons
The TRVE solution to drones is line warfare. 900 mobiks (free) with T*rkish lever-action .22 LR rifles (cheap) arranged three deep for a 300 man front. 1800 passive detectors (eyeballs) volley-firing 900 bullets per lever. Radar immune, ESM immune, drone immune. Forward to victory.
Anonymous No.64094500
i feel like that shit would overheat so fast because you'd want the barrel to be long. that way there's more material to dissipate heat, or you'd need an acting cooling solution. or long ass heatsinks extending from the barrel.
Anonymous No.64094515 >>64094536
>>64094454
A single-barrel chain shotgun wouldn't need to fire much faster than 75 rpm.
A dual-purpose CROWS can't deal with close-in threats as well and can easily be defeated by threats coming in from more than one direction.
Anonymous No.64094536 >>64094727
>>64094515
>not doing the math
It can deal with threats coming from more directions better because it has 5-12 more seconds to track and engage, unlike a weapon limited to point blank. It's also far cheaper and more reliable because you don't need super high end servos swinging the mass around for millisecond reactions. Here's a good starting point: https://www.warquants.com/p/capability-analysis-ai-machine-guns
Anonymous No.64094626 >>64094828
>>64092339
>rimfire .17
Anonymous No.64094632
>>64092511
>$1000 per round
Cots of intercept for starters
Anonymous No.64094655 >>64096081
>>64089300 (OP)
They should strap 4 Benelli M4s together and make them part of an AI controlled turret on top of the tank, acting as not only an anti-drone system but an anti-personnel one too.
Anonymous No.64094727 >>64095567
>>64094536
There's no reason not to have both systems. Drone ambushes are common in Ukraine, and despite US superiority in most relevant fields, they are still a very real threat.
Anonymous No.64094733 >>64096928
>>64089300 (OP)
The gun is the easy part. Any defense industry player could make a 9mm gatling gun that works, the problem is a small high scan speed radar that can pick out an FPV from a bird, or a piece of ground clutter, and a targeting system that is smart enough to not tard out and shoot something below horizon that just happened to momentarily have the same type of radar signature as a little FPV drone. And yes, it would need to be able to aim below horizon, because if it couldn't, the FPV operators would find out fast and would just skim the terrain when approaching the target.
Anonymous No.64094783
>>64089669
>Personally i would put 5 or so pods on the back of the MBT full of anti drone loitering munitions. and send them up when you get radioed that enemy drones are in the air.
I don't hate the idea in principle, but how many of those could you cram in and rapidly deploy from those pods? You'd have to be Johnny on the spot with your logistics support if it was just one per pod if you didn't want to rapidly deplete your stores.
Anonymous No.64094828
>>64094626
Already available and since a chaingun has powered extraction misfires are not a issue. 3000 fit in a single ammo can and FMJ is available.
Anonymous No.64095018 >>64095061 >>64095096
>ballistic weapons
The future is now old man
Anonymous No.64095061 >>64095069 >>64095070
>>64095018
But can it fry infantry?
Anonymous No.64095069
>>64095061
Probably suboptimally
Anonymous No.64095070
>>64095061
it can probably give you havana sickness
Anonymous No.64095078
>>64089476
My understanding is that the problem is more one of target identification. Objects moving at mach-damn are probably threats. But things moving slowly around you might be stuff like random animals or friendly infantry.
Anonymous No.64095096 >>64095184 >>64095261 >>64095567 >>64095764
>>64092511
>30mm
>for little suicide drones with an RPG-7 or a brick of C4 strapped on
Fucking why? That's fucking retarded for this purpose. Now if you wanted to add basic anti-helicopter and anti-low flying plane capabilities the M-230 would be great.
>>64094454
>700-1200 meters
What do you think this is going to be used on? MiG-17s turned into Kamikaze drones? The purpose is to stop pic fucking related. You are not going to see them that far out because they'll be below the fucking treeline. Best you can do is shoot down the recon drone guiding them but the flying bomb will still know roughly where you were.
Even just an AA-12 strapped to a CROWS turret slaved to an EOTS would beat the living piss out of wasting 30mm on a DJI or getting smacked because some retard thought he'd see the drones over a kilometer out. Basic APS with a lower trigger threshold would be better too.
>>64095018
Why not both? You cannot tell me you wouldn't like to see what a 1500 rounds per minute shotgun shooting 3" full brass buck and bird mixes would do to a drone... or a treeline full of bad guys who are panicking because it feels like their skin is on fire.
Anonymous No.64095184 >>64095218
>>64095096
>a 1500 rounds per minute shotgun
A .22 or .17 mini gun would be more practical and probably end up putting out more projectiles, shotgun ammo is bulky.
Anonymous No.64095218 >>64096760
>>64095184
How much mixed bird and buck can you fit in a single 3" shell? .22 and .17 assume it's super quick and accurate enough to do the job. Shotguns having a nice spread and a bunch of projectiles accounts for that. At 1500RPM you just fire off a burst of 3-6 shells and you've got a wall of metal. The biggest issue is the turret our gun is on being fast and accurate enough to do the job. I wager at the short distances this sort of system will be working at an area denial based method would be best rather than pinpoint accurate. Also would be better for engaging multiple threats because again, it doesn't need to be perfectly accurate. On top of that for ground uses it'd absolutely eviscerate foliage and other concealment.
Anonymous No.64095261 >>64095290 >>64095315
>>64095096
>M230
>Fucking why?
Prox fuse. XM1211 air burst and XM1223 programmable round.
For a tank, it's also something else to use against light armor and cover besides the main gun.
Anonymous No.64095290 >>64095787
>>64095261
>Prox fuse.
$1000 per round.

>it's also something else to use against light armor
Against light armor its okish but only upoto 1000m because 30x113mm has rainbow trajectory.

>and cover besides the main gun.
Just no. there is no good 30x113mm rounds to deal with cover.
Anonymous No.64095315 >>64095426 >>64095567 >>64095781
>>64095261
And absolutely useless for stopping a drone bomb that popped out of the treeline 30-40 yards away unless you got EXTREMELY lucky.
Anonymous No.64095426 >>64095544
>>64095315
>$1000 per round
That would be a substantial improvement.
>And absolutely useless for stopping a drone bomb that popped out of the treeline 30-40 yards away unless you got EXTREMELY lucky.
If you're going for that argument, what is the mean time to identify and kill those little Class I drones with a rotary gun or such?
Anonymous No.64095544
>>64095426
Probably depends on the detection method. The system I'd go with is a combination of EOTS and UFODAPs preloaded with data relating to drones, rockets, etc. Whatever it is it needs to see in a dome and have a system that rapidly IDs. Maybe some sort of AI integration for faster ID? Biggest reason I'd rely on a shotgun, even if it's just something like an modified AA-12 on a mount, is the thing can start firing before it's on target just dumping metal into the air. You don't have to be dead on to hit something with a shotgun and it's really hard to fly through dense lead or steel shot. Once it's on target the shotgun will win without question.

A smaller gun system is important because it's going to be easier for it to be aimed faster. An M-230 is not a light gun when you factor in all the gubbins it'd need. Ammo capacity could also be an issue. For the desired purpose it MUST be fast to swing around and get on target. This thing has to do two primary things. Shooting the drones before they can hit and making it so drone operators don't have time to line up a good hit. Idea is if it does hit it's less likely to be a bad hit because the drone is racing the gun. Coupled with some sort of microwave emitter with a suitably wide emission area could be especially effective.

Btw, I'm not saying we shouldn't put an M-230 on a tank, it's one of the reasons I really like the AbramsX. What I'm saying is for this specific purpose you need a different weapon better suited to the task. Personally I think that is an automatic shotgun, especially with a high fire rate.
Anonymous No.64095556
>>64093112
At least we know the GAYDAR works.
Anonymous No.64095567 >>64095670
>>64095096
Prox fuzes give safety. You're not spraying bullets downrange infinitely like 7.62.

>>64094727
There's no reason to slavrig a dramatically worse system to do what APS, existing RWSs, and DE already do.

>>64095315
A shotgun on a RWS isn't going to do that either.
Anonymous No.64095670 >>64095672 >>64095837
>>64095567
The safety that matters in this case is the crew's. Spraying shotgun shells isn't exactly in the same bracket as a regular minigun firing 5.56 or 7.62 into the void. The prox fuze idea is great, but for helicopters, larger drones like Shaheds, and other low flying aircraft... not this.

The shotgun can be mounted on a lighter faster mount slaved to detection systems similarly to how a regular CIWS does it. And again, even if the shotgun doesn't stop all impacts (it probably won't) it makes sure drone operators do not have the time to land a well chosen hit. No flying around the tank/vehicle/whatever figuring out where you'll do the most damage because the gun will get you. If they want to land a hit they have to rush which increases the chances of.

There's plenty of other options beyond some sort of shotgun turret but the 230 aint it homie. APS, microwave emitters, net guns, some sort of short fused directed frag grenades in some of the smoke launchers, your own interceptor drones flying patrols, and more. The 230 is just not suited for the job, at all. The closest you'll get is likely having good success taking out loitering munitions like lancets that usually buzz around higher searching for target. Again, the purpose here is the sneaky little quad rotor with a bomb on it.
Anonymous No.64095672
>>64095670
>If they want to land a hit they have to rush which increases the chances of
the hit being a survivable or even negligible one.
Anonymous No.64095764 >>64095816
>>64095096
>Fucking why? That's fucking retarded for this purpose.

Ideally you would want it to work against all drone threats and not just the shitty ones
Anonymous No.64095781 >>64095796 >>64095816
>>64095315
If they're only 30-40 yards away what value are theyeven getting out of using a drone? An RPG would be better and cheaper.
Anonymous No.64095787
>>64095290
>$1000 per round

The total price of the munitions are irrelevant, what matters is the price relative to how many funds you have a available.

If I have 1,000x the funding of your adversary it doesn't matter if you're spend twice as much to fight them as they are to fight you
Anonymous No.64095796
>>64095781
The operator isn't 30-40 yards away. The drone enters line of sight at 30-40 yards.
Anonymous No.64095816 >>64095840
>>64095764
Again, the 230 is probably going to be pretty effective against something like Lancets provided it's got good detection systems as well as definitely being effective against low flying aircraft. It's not going to be great for the little drones that typically try to ambush you.
>>64095781
You may want to reread that and think about it for a minute.
Anonymous No.64095837 >>64095935
>>64095670
>muh shotty
You're engaging in motivated reasoning. An actually-working shotgun with a fast mount for close range protection is called Trophy APS. Slinging a wobbly firearm around is a child's drawing level of gimmick.

Think about how detection (not to mention threat saturation) works in the kill chain.
Anonymous No.64095840 >>64095935
>>64095816
Like the M240, it reaches out to about 1 km against moving FPVs; matching the detection range of most passive sensors.
Anonymous No.64095935 >>64095947 >>64096023 >>64096057
>>64095837
For some reason I feel like you didn't read the whole post...
>There's plenty of other options
>literally the first one I mentioned was APS
Anyways what I'd want ideally for a shotgun turret is a purpose built triple barrel shotgun minigun thing with a high rate of fire. Maybe have a different choke on each barrel if we really want to get fancy. Full brass to try and cut down on jamming, 3" shells. A mix of bird and buck in each shell. EOTS with AI integration would probably be best for detection.
Because it's a gun it can also be uses against ground targets pretty effectively. Imagine getting suppressed by that or seeing your buddy get wasted by a burst.

You should have multiple weapons for the job (again, like APS, microwave emitters, etc) and should probably have multiple vehicles with their own systems, which could include one carrying a 230 for bigger farther targets.

>>64095840
It's very likely you're not going to see the FPV that's trying to get you at 1km away. You're probably not going to see it at 100m if the operator is competent. It's going to be close. That's a major part of the problem. The best you might do, again, is shoot down a small recon drone that is probably guiding the FPV. It's still coming and the operator still has a general idea of where you are and will undoubtedly still try to find you.
Anonymous No.64095947 >>64096057
>>64095935
Also the 240 suffers the same problem .22lr anon's plan does. An M-240 has to be much more precise. A shotgun can be effective without being perfectly on target.
Anonymous No.64096023
>>64095935
Tbh not a totally retarded idea, the benefit I'd see would be the obviously much cheaper ammo vs something using fused HE for airburst. In a vacuum I'd think it would work well against FPVs. The big problem I think would be that it'd lack the utility of those systems. The range being limited to the effective range of shot loads seems like it might be pretty easily exploited by doctrinal changes from drone pilots. ie. Sending in a bomber drone whenever they are detected and dropping HE on them from above their effective range before sending in cheaper FPVs. You might be able to stretch the range with late opening and more aerodynamic wads but who knows if it would be enough and if they weren't readily dialable and cheap they'd be pretty worthless. If you can't then you'd get in to the arithmatic of if the greater rate of lost units and more frequent gaps in protection from units going down outweighed the increased ammo cost of fused HE units.
Anonymous No.64096057 >>64097515
>>64095935
A CUAS radar will see it out to 6-10km away and passive camera arrays will see it out to 1-2km. Flying nap of the earth also blocks radio links, limiting FPV attacks to fiber optic.

The Mavic and Orlan class spotter drones are the main problem because they enable fires and saturation. The FPVs are mainly for picking off units after artillery has broken them.

>>64095947
>has to be
Already is. There's no point mounting a special shitty low-velocity weapon when a more precise standard one can successfully engage the same targets at 10-15x the range.
Anonymous No.64096081
>>64094655
>They should strap 4 Benelli M4s together and make them part of an AI controlled turret on top of the tank, acting as not only an anti-drone system but an anti-personnel one too.

And God help any ducks.
Anonymous No.64096760 >>64097515
>>64095218
You assume that you can get it to 1500 rpm with shotgun rounds and are ignoring ammo storage constraints. You cannot get to 1500 rpm with shotgun rounds and the ammo takes up a huge amount of space compared to .17M2.

To repeat this: 3000 rounds of .17M2 fit in a 5.56mm ammo can.
Anonymous No.64096791
>>64090626
>It’s not, since you’re not firing thousands per drone.
How much does a MBT cost? Not to mention training the crew?
Anonymous No.64096820
https://www.twz.com/land/minigun-equipped-m1-abrams-tank-being-tested-by-army
Anonymous No.64096928 >>64097866
>>64094733
Animals, people, and ground clutter don’t have a bunch of propellers at like 10k+ RPM. And how would you shoot something below the horizon with a direct fire weapon? How would you even detect it? Ground hugging drones can be forced to rise to attack with sideskirts + ERA with chains dangling below.
Anonymous No.64096930
>>64094476
based
Anonymous No.64097515 >>64097536 >>64097600
>>64096057
That little FPV IS going to be skimming the ground, probably trailing that fiber wire, because that's what they do. If the thing is flying high or otherwise easily spotted the target is already abandoned, disabled, or dead and the operator is deciding if it needs another one for good measure. It's point defense, not proper AA.

A potentially better option than both is a laser but that brings possible power issues when we're talking about something that needs to down a tiny drone that may already be on it's final approach at speed. Basically free to fire it though once you have that worked out and a range of "can I see it?". Also boring.

>>64096760
I am 100% sure it could be done even if you had to make modified shells or a nifty feeder system to do it. We're already talking about full brass which isn't exactly common so far as I've seen.
>ammo constraints
Would you knock it off with this? It's a total non-issue. High rate of fire doesn't mean you hold the button until it runs dry. In this case it's not even going to be a person manually firing it. The gun isn't going to need to blow through the whole ammo store to drop a drone. Your weapon is going to have to dump a lot more ammo to get the same results. The whole reason for using a shotgun is the spread makes it easier to hit something like a bird on the wing, a clay, or a brick of kaboom trying to give you a hug.

Think about how many pellets are in your average 3" 12 gauge shell. The shotgun minigun is going to put WAY more metal in the air in the same amount of time with less ammo spent. Pic related holds 15 pellets of 00 buck. 3 shells is 45 projectiles airborne, 6 is 90. How long does it take to fire two shells from each of the three barrels at 1500rpm? Now lets fill any extra space with birdshot for good measure. Heck, lets take out 5 pellets and fill the extra space with #3 shot. The air is now absolutely filled with a number of projectiles your .17 simply cannot match in the same amount of time.
Anonymous No.64097536
>>64097515
Another benefit of miniguns is the rate of fire isn't set in stone. Just because it goes up to 1500 when automatically doing tiny CIWS things doesn't mean it MUST fire that quickly all the time. Drop it down to 500 and you have a beautiful emergency bushwhacker that will still absolutely eviscerate anything downrange. For reference an AA-12 fires at around 300 which is already plenty scary.

The biggest thing is going to be ensuring the motors to aim it are lightning fast and the detection system is also fast while not driving the local bird population to extinction.
Anonymous No.64097581
>>64089300 (OP)
>anti-drone point defense?

Fuck the MBT, put it on drone mules for the infantry/mortar carriers-- that with observation gets you the killchains at this fucky nonsense trench warfare level in Ukraine.
Anonymous No.64097600 >>64097644
>>64097515
>High rate of fire doesn't mean you hold the button until it runs dry. In this case it's not even going to be a person manually firing it. The gun isn't going to need to blow through the whole ammo store to drop a drone. Your weapon is going to have to dump a lot more ammo to get the same results. The whole reason for using a shotgun is the spread makes it easier to hit something like a bird on the wing, a clay, or a brick of kaboom trying to give you a hug.

I already addressed this issue:

>>64092339
Anonymous No.64097644
>>64097600
It's a better idea than trying to rig up an M-230 for relatively super close point defense, I just do not think it'd beat a shotgun based weapon for the job (or a laser). If you actually need 15k-25k rounds that's also an issue. That is WAAAY more than you should be loading up in one weapon.

Not really a fan of your "ring" idea. Why not have an EOTS system that is basically an all seeing eye like an F-35's. Couple that with a targeting AI that can rapidly ID drones and other incoming threats and the air is clean. For ground fire just allow manual control like a CROWS and allow the commander to designate a "kill box" where anything that moves in that box gets shot. Instead of a "dial" the boss just taps his tablet then creates a box like he's cropping a photo. System should be able to keep that area boxed as you go until it's no longer visible or the commander "closes" it. Could even integrate a "tap to kill" feature where the gun will automatically fire a 3 round burst at whatever the commander taps on his tablet. Because the thing basically sees everything there's no flying outside your ring. If an FPV going to someone else flies in range it gets shot at just like one coming at you because the system should prioritize dealing with drone threats even over the kill box, tap to kill, and full manual control. If it overrides manual control it should immediately aim right where it was prior to that override though.
Anonymous No.64097866
>>64096928
>And how would you shoot something below the horizon with a direct fire weapon?
are you serious? you depress the weapon below horizontal you stupid fuck

>How would you even detect it?
That's my point genius, it's the HARD PART. You can't use radar, you would have a hell of a time using optics, the HOW is the PROBLEM you witless blob.

>Ground hugging drones can be forced to rise to attack with sideskirts + ERA with chains dangling below.
Great, now you have forced it to rise at the last possible second, at nearly point blank range, something which won't work because all it does is shorten the time the system has to engage and making it VERY susceptible to being overwhelmed by multiple targets. BAKA you have the abstract though capability of a shoe.
Anonymous No.64098545 >>64100038
>>64089300 (OP)
IS SO TINY
Anonymous No.64100038
>>64098545
Mini-gun