View Full Version : The NATO powered rail
Be interesting to see if this goes anywhere:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/wednesdaysessionvTorbjoern.pdf
Interesting.
Does that G36 shown have the mag dummy-corded to the pistol grip? That's an alternative to the dump pouch I certainly never would have thought up.
FromMyColdDeadHand
09-11-09, 12:31
Interesting.
Does that G36 shown have the mag dummy-corded to the pistol grip? That's an alternative to the dump pouch I certainly never would have thought up.
He has loose rounds in his dump pouch to reload the magazine.
Outlander Systems
09-11-09, 13:43
I don't like the idea of this. In theory, I do, but I can't see how this isn't going to cause an immense increase in cost. As well, if the power-platform goes down, all the widgets at the nose of the soldier's weapon are no longer capable of operation. To me, it seems like developing an ink pen that can write in zero G when a pencil/crayon can do it with no R&D costs.
On top of this, all the current issue items would have to be scrapped for proprietary accessories, that are unfielded. All this to accomplish, what, exactly? Reduce weight at the muzzle, and create a lower-profile accessory system?
It's simple:
Ditch the EOTech as the RDS, and replace it with the Aimpoint T-1.
Lose the Millennium weaponlights, and replace them with smaller systems. Lose the M3X and replace it with, something smaller.
Contract with Surefire to modify the Helmet light for weapon-based operation.
Why reinvent the wheel? The system puts component failure at risk, when off-the-shelf items are already available, with no R&D costs. Again, if the core goes down, all peripheral items would be worthless. At least with an independent/modular system, if one component fails, they don't all go down. It's like series vs. parallel circuits.
Just shrink the components and standardise a battery-type. Problem solved.
Conceptual Image from the Presentation:
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/2664/natorail.jpg
Look familiar? $150, no R&D required
http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/3536/e1b1.jpg
Pics of the system (By SMGLee):
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/dscn1009.jpg
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/dscn1011.jpg
As really "cool" as the idea is, my imagination isn't behaving powerfully enough to see this as a great idea.
"NATO is therefore looking to replace the batteries of individual sensors with a centralised power supply. Arvidsson said that Germany was considering locating a powerpack in the butt stock of the G 36 assault rifle. Other ideas include a battery in the pistol grip of a weapon. The use of smaller emergency batteries to replace the main power supply in the event of failure needs also to be examined."-From Jane's
So, we're going to replace individual components with a powered rail, to reduce weight, but will require emergency batteries to replace the main power supply in the event of a failure.
WTF, over?
I wanna slap someone. Shrink the components. Standardise batteries.
Now every rifleman must also be an electrical engineer in order to maintain the proper functioning of his weapon-system? I don't see this going well. As a person raised and reared by video-games growing up, loving Star Wars, and all sorts of sci-fi shenanigans, and as much as I want to think this is a really "cool" idea, I can't. Cool doesn't increase the lethality of combat soldiers.
Shrink the components and spend the difference on training.
John_Wayne777
09-11-09, 14:25
Be interesting to see if this goes anywhere:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/wednesdaysessionvTorbjoern.pdf
...seems to me that the situation posed in the first picture would be vastly improved if they were trying to mount stuff on a 416 instead of a G36.
...I'm just saying. ;)
As for the powered rail itself...I'm not an expert or a gunfighter or a technical wizzard...but it seems to me that relying on electrical contacts that are open to the air (and mud, and salt water, etc) is asking for problems.
Wouldn't we be better off trying to standardize the batteries used for the various accessories? We use cr123 for most of that stuff already, why not try to make everything run off that or is that harder than I think?
Outlander Systems
09-11-09, 14:46
Wouldn't we be better off trying to standardize the batteries used for the various accessories? We use cr123 for most of that stuff already, why not try to make everything run off that or is that harder than I think?
DING*DING*DING
SoDak will now be heading up NATO's project development team, since no one there's graduated from the University of Common Sense.
Thomas M-4
09-11-09, 15:36
The only realistic use for the powered rail that I can see for now. Is for big Army's Land Warrior system. If they can remove all of the Battery compartments for the Video, Thermal sight, IR laser and everything else I missed they could shrink the package down some more which it is in desperate need of.
Outlander Systems
09-11-09, 15:41
Force Multiplier or Force Inhibitor?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/83/Land_Warrior_060707.jpg/800px-Land_Warrior_060707.jpg
I didn't know the Army was STILL fooling around with the "21st Century" LW programme.
On a similar note; I can't find any reference to "Kill TV" on a cursory google search.
DING*DING*DING
SoDak will now be heading up NATO's project development team, since no one there's graduated from the University of Common Sense.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but I see that you already mentioned that. Sorry. Need to read these thread closer.
Failure2Stop
09-11-09, 16:12
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/83/Land_Warrior_060707.jpg/800px-Land_Warrior_060707.jpg
Yet more proof that the people that are driving the train have spent way too much time playing videogames and watching movies and not enough behind a gun.
Outlander Systems
09-11-09, 16:18
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but I see that you already mentioned that. Sorry. Need to read these thread closer.
Vocal inflection is hard to impart in text.
No sarcasm, whatsoever. I was applauding you for being on the same page;I was glad I wasn't the only one who thought simplification of existing systems was the better option.
Yet more proof that the people that are driving the train have spent way too much time playing videogames and watching movies and not enough behind a gun.
Yeah, but on my james bond game there was this gun similar to something from the OICW project and it rocked there. I mean with 30 rounds of 5.56, 6 grenades, and a thermal scope it did everything you needed. Heck bond didn't even get tired carrying it all day. Are you telling me that james bond games don't apply to real life?;)
Reduction of redundancy? Even I, a silly, measly civilian, can see this crap is going to break. Often.
Outlander Systems
09-11-09, 16:33
Treating the infantryman like a two-legged fighter plane is idiocy at best and insane at worst.
Every time I see some sort of sci-fi bullshit being peddled as "the next step" in warrior evolution I want to puke.
It's so simple.
Give soldiers a lightweight weapon with a illuminated optic, some sort of light, and better ergonomics. Most importantly, better ergonomics.
I've yet to handle anything shoulder-fired with ergonomics comparable to the M4 platform. Make this a NATO-standard, give Magpul a contract for the MOE handguards, and you've got a lightweight, modular system that requires no additional Research/Engineering/Development. Screw the RFP/Contract bullshit, and just get something off the shelf. Standardise battery types, issue lightweight/compact kit, and be done with it.
This is the same type of thinking that brought the Army ARPAT/UCP.
Vocal inflection is hard to impart in text.
No sarcasm, whatsoever. I was applauding you for being on the same page;I was glad I wasn't the only one who thought simplification of existing systems was the better option.
No problem. I just thought I was being that guy who was stating what was obvious to everyone else.
GhettoBlaster
09-12-09, 11:35
So if the rail's power supply takes a dump everything goes down?
R&D more efficent and smaller batteries, when you get a winner standardize it.
I just solved all of NATOs problems, I will take my payment in gold please.
Hyprlite2007
09-13-09, 02:07
Be interesting to see if this goes anywhere:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/wednesdaysessionvTorbjoern.pdf
I like how the Eotech is taped on the handle/improvised rail, I might try that next time I zero..
I've been talking about this as a concept for years. Except my solution doesn't have exposed contacts.
kaiservontexas
09-13-09, 10:11
I do not like the idea. I think it would complicate things when it goes down.
Bringing this thread back since I found this product. Kind of amazed someone is still pursuing this idea.
http://www.criticalsafetyequipment.com/reset_inc.html
I talked with the folks from RIPR when they came buy our booth at SHOT. They had a intergrated EoTec sight and light. I gave them a few comments on the product. It's interesting, but I would limit my comments to that. I'm not going to add them to inventory or put one on my personal rifle. If they keep push the tech maybe it will become something to revisit.
I would think a rail with support for something like magnetic induction (like your electric toothbrush or "magsafe" Apple computer) would work out. The current available with existing technology would be enough for most any accessory I can think of.
Yet more proof that the people that are driving the train have spent way too much time playing videogames and watching movies and not enough behind a gun.
How about just make them carry that gun around the range for a few minutes?
:D
Force Multiplier or Force Inhibitor?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/83/Land_Warrior_060707.jpg/800px-Land_Warrior_060707.jpg
I didn't know the Army was STILL fooling around with the "21st Century" LW programme.
On a similar note; I can't find any reference to "Kill TV" on a cursory google search.
huh...
not til it's small, light, cheap and redundant....
this ridiculous looking stuff does have to take place in prototype form first..
20 years ago red dot optics and weaponlights weren't nearly as commonplace. the technology and tactics have to meet at a practical place before it really takes off.
Quiet-Matt
04-05-10, 19:15
I've been talking about this as a concept for years. Except my solution doesn't have exposed contacts.
That's what I was thinking Rob. Those contact points are a problem waiting to happen.
Belmont31R
04-05-10, 20:06
Treating the infantryman like a two-legged fighter plane is idiocy at best and insane at worst.
Every time I see some sort of sci-fi bullshit being peddled as "the next step" in warrior evolution I want to puke.
It's so simple.
Give soldiers a lightweight weapon with a illuminated optic, some sort of light, and better ergonomics. Most importantly, better ergonomics.
I've yet to handle anything shoulder-fired with ergonomics comparable to the M4 platform. Make this a NATO-standard, give Magpul a contract for the MOE handguards, and you've got a lightweight, modular system that requires no additional Research/Engineering/Development. Screw the RFP/Contract bullshit, and just get something off the shelf. Standardise battery types, issue lightweight/compact kit, and be done with it.
This is the same type of thinking that brought the Army ARPAT/UCP.
Big Army thinking means if you reduce weight then the soldier can carry more.
Funny how looking at WW2 pictures you never see soldiers fighting with even 50lbs of gear on yet now over 100 is normal. Then we wonder why are troops want to stay close to the vehicles, and can't chase bad guys up mountains. Plus how many guys have ****ed up backs and knees after 1-2 deployments because of all the weight? I know I do. Wearing 70lbs of gear 12hrs a day mostly standing will do that.
Force Multiplier or Force Inhibitor?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/83/Land_Warrior_060707.jpg/800px-Land_Warrior_060707.jpg
I didn't know the Army was STILL fooling around with the "21st Century" LW programme.
On a similar note; I can't find any reference to "Kill TV" on a cursory google search.
forgive my ignorance, but what exactly am I looking at in that picture? besides PEQ device on top, and light/IRlight:confused: on left side? What type of aiming device (scope doesn't seem appropriate) is that?:D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.