How to shoot a target 500 yards away using Android goggles wirelessly connected to a rifle




I'm pretty sure that's a Canada Dry bottle. Why do you hate Canada so much TrackingPoint!?

I assume the actual use for the scope and goggles is so you can shoot in bad weather without taking off your eye protection.


Nice tech, albeit fairly primitive. The same can be achieved with gutted video glasses and a regular camera.

(Note: the same setup can be also used for shooting behind corners.)

Now, add some actuators for image (and gun) stabilization, and possibly target recognition/designation so the gun after pressing the trigger holds until the barrel is aimed in precise way; no more misses. Or the gun itself can be placed on a pan-tilt mount to eliminate the shaking from hands. With a built-in wind-speed sensing and ballistic computer. Possibly also with built-in way to track the bullet (optical via tracer? radar?), so in case of a miss a second shot is immediately and automatically fired with corrected parameters.

With the android setup, the ballistic computer can overlay data over the image, providing the targeting marker with wind and distance corrections. There's a post there, fairly new, that describes a homemade laser rangefinder that would be just what the doctor prescribed for such setup.


Fer cripes sakes, who the hell needs to do that? Put away your external penus and get a life.


Guns-are-bad hysterical comment storm in 3, 2, 1...


I dunno about the hysteria aspect, but I believe that a device that exists to destroy life is, by most definitions, bad.

Whether you view guns as a needless absurdity or as a necessary evil, they're still tools of death whose few redeeming qualities fail to outweigh the negative consequences of their existence.


Probably the same people that need homemade catapults, home built 3D printers, EL wire messenger bags, and basically any maker project. No one needs them. People still get a kick out of doing it. You can be anti-gun for good solid reasons, but don't feign stupidity or (worse) be willfully ignorant as to why people like to mess with such stuff. Is the exact same reason why anyone likes to screw around with anything.


That was not a manual shot, the shooter marked the target, then moved off target, pulled the trigger, moved back to his mark, and then the gun fired automatically. That's a $22,000 sight, on a rifle that will cost you at least $4000.


Ohhh! I stay corrected. Cool!

Still within reach of a dedicated hacker or a small group, too, but much more impressive than a "simple" CCTV with a wearable display.


If it destroys a life or a bottle depends on its operator. The device itself exists for acceleration of small chunks of material. A half brick can become part of a house, or, placed in a sock and swung around, a deadly weapon.

Positive, negative, eye of the beholder. Cool toys nevertheless.


Who the hell are you to tell other people what they need to do? There are plenty of things that aren't my thing, but I don't necessarily feel the need to judge other people for their hobbies. Who the hell needs to go fishing? sailing? who the hell need to watch sports?


uhm... Guns are bad.

  1. That wasnt hysteria, it was just my PTSD triggering. Totally different.


You think that EL wire messenger bags are the same thing as that rifle in the hands of that child-man? Get a grip.


It's my Goddess given right as a some dude on the internet.


You're kidding yourself if you believe the point of target shooting is to more effectively destroy bottles or cinderblocks.

Guns are missile weapons. They exist to kill. They do not exist to facilitate the destruction of mundane objects. Their purpose is inflicting death at range. They are designed specifically to end life. The fact that an operator can put a gun to uses other than the intended one is irrelevant.

After all, there are countless ways to break bottles at a distance. Any missile weapon will work, really, and there are countless far less dangerous missile weapons available for this purpose. Heck, most alternate options are substantially cheaper, too.

Yet oddly enough, you don't see nearly as many people taking up archery and the like as you do taking up shooting. Isn't that odd?

It literally costs nothing to chuck a rock or hurl an old hatchet from your garage or toolshed at a bottle, yet so very few people bother to take that sort of thing up as a hobby compared to target shooting. People instead go out of their way and spend vast amounts of money on attaining firearms. They must have really sturdy bottles.

Anything can be a weapon, but not everything is designed to be one. The fact that cooking knives can be used to kill doesn't change the fact that they are inherently designed for utility rather than combat. The fact that a firearm can be used to destroy a bottle doesn't change the fact that they are inherently designed for killing rather than sport.

This entire conversation started with a comment about guns being bad. They exist for the purpose of killing people. That's pretty bad. Yes, you can shoot bottles with them if you really want, but their intended and chief usage is killing people.

If guns magically ceased to exist tomorrow, it would be a lot harder to kill people. Bottles would still be just as easy to destroy, however. Net result? Human life is less vulnerable to the whims of the violent, emotional, distressed, confused, or misguided, and humanity's ability to shatter bottles is unchanged. That's what we call a "good" thing.

If guns were then magically brought back into existence the next day, people would be far easier to kill once again, and bottle destruction would again be unchanged. That's what we call a "bad" thing.


Yes, I do think it is exactly the same thing. I am pretty sure that that nerd making an Android gun is about as likely to murder someone as someone who makes an EL wire messenger bag.

They hyperbole around gun control is nauseating in its partisan stupidity. Every partisan idiot draws a line a thousand miles from sanity and demands people be on one side or the other. It is either a stupid gun nut who demands open carry at Disney World or an equally stupid anti-gun nut that wants to prevent people from target shooting at a range.

Here are some true statements. The US has a higher murder rate than many European nations in large part because it is awash with guns. Assault rifle bans are stupid because assault rifles are the least likely class of gun to kill someone. People who want to open carry in places where it isn't appropriate are assholes. People who flip out at people murdering bottles are assholes.

That guy in the video isn't your fucking enemy. If every person who touched a gun was like him, we wouldn't have people murdering each other with guns.

The epic stupidity partisan gun politics in the US (which is the only flavor of gun politics that there is) is revolting and nauseating. Thanks for contributing to it.


That sounds like just the trick for when I'm waist-deep in a high-stakes Shinjuku datasteal. Will it be compatible with my wired reflexes?


Guns are fine, it's gun-nuts that worry me.


I wouldn't count on it, choombata. It doesn't even support even a first-gen neural interface. What the point on shelling out the nuyen for first-rate chrome and then getting something that requires an external data cable and dedicated viewing apparatus with only the most rudimentary of features. If you're running black, you don't want to get zero'd by the corpses because the goggles cut down your arc of sight.


Can I assume that you are in favor of criminalizing the possession of hunting bows and replica swords? If not, please explain why.

It's so hard to have any kind of useful dialogue about gun control in America because the loudest voices on both sides are bloody lunatics. On one side you've got people who see nothing wrong with bringing fully automatic weapons to the Olive Garden, and on the other side you've got people who think that plinking cans for fun is the sign of a deranged and murderous mind. It's awfully frustrating for anyone who'd like to think rationally about the issue.