[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / cafechan / doomer / fast / in / leftpol / sw / wmafsex ]

/k/ - Weapons

Salt raifus and raifu accessories
8chan Cup Finals - Saturday, January 19 at 08:00 p.m. GMT
Winner of the 65rd Attention-Hungry Games
/cure/ - Your obscure board for medical-tan appreciation

December 2018 - 8chan Transparency Report
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


There's no discharge in the war!

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

21d23c  No.636430

As things heat up, helicopters will be a problem. As they can provide very dangerous information to the enemy and be a shooting platform. Consider yourself to have no air support (Anything bigger than your off the shelf drone) and only things you can buy and an average man with some training can make to defeat this helicopter threat.

Reads:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_homing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-to-air_missile

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-aircraft_warfare

7cf9d4  No.636436

As long as helicopters are piloted by humans some wavelength of high watt laser will make it through whatever optics are shielding the pilots eyes. Hand them out like candy lasers are cheap.


8c8f63  No.636440

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636436

That will work.

Untill the pilots blind the windows and rely on outside cameras.

It also gives out the location of your guy


5b9356  No.636443

Moving at night with mylar insulated hooded camo ponchos?


8c8f63  No.636445

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636440

However, that last criticism might be fixed using vid related. This guy made an automatic laser pointer that shines into his eye, with readily avialable materials. Putting some higher grade nv cameras in 360 degree circle to search out any helicopters would be solution.


af518e  No.636447

File: b3dcf5af90dcb7d⋯.jpg (46.37 KB, 600x341, 600:341, Predator_Arnie_mud.jpg)

>>636443

Why not just cover yourself in mud?


8c8f63  No.636450

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636443

Sure, if you're moving at night. But you are not defeating the helicopter, you are just hiding from it's vision. (In the night)

But you will give the enemy free reign over the day. Also, the helicopter will still be able to us NV to find you. Keep this in mind.

I seek a solution to end the helicopter threat day AND night.

I am not trying to dissuade your idea, clothes to defeat thermal are very good and they are cheap as seen in this video.


c2441b  No.636451

>take out your 7,62 rifle

>take shots at the helicopter

Woah man so hard


c2441b  No.636455

File: 9622544cb4f9f94⋯.png (424.77 KB, 451x619, 451:619, 15500423922515278833144.png)

but I gotta admit, if they start flying on high altitudes it's gonna be a problem


a8857e  No.636456

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636451

You might be right that it is so simple, greek.

Can the helicopter just not change altitude and range to where your rifle won't be effective anymore?

Will his cameras still be effective if he is outside the range where your rifle is effective?


37a9f0  No.636458

File: 21cee9764fef629⋯.png (294.88 KB, 800x575, 32:23, ClipboardImage.png)

>>636430

can't you shoot flak at them?


a8857e  No.636460

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636456

>>636455

See vid related.

Around 20 minutes, the helicopter camera is fully zoomed in. I do not know how much that distance is, but it is surely more than 800m Effective firing range for the m14 . Unless the helicopter is hovering overhead, I do not think it will be enough. This is also a civilian helicopter, I presume the police carry higher grade cameras.

Read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward-looking_infrared


48ccc0  No.636462

>>636450

>Moving not defeating

I think that's honestly preferable, to make helicopters something you don't face off against.

Making them a non issue until their lack of fuel sources defeats them.


c2441b  No.636463

So, if we don't have access to anti-aircraft weapons, and the helicopter flies at altitudes too high for small arms to effectively hit, then the solution might be drones.

Ram them into the heli, or go full autism and turn them into explosives.


a8857e  No.636464

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636458

The average does not have the capability to produce something that shoots flak, I do not think atleast. Maybe a tube aiming at the helicopter, shooting various rockets with timed fuses for different altitudes could be used. Rocket candy is not hard to make.

>>636463

That is a good idea, but I assume the enemy would just immediately retaliate by using jammers. If you can make the drone autonomous to where it only relies on it's sensors to fly into the helicopter, you will solution to the jammer problem,


a8857e  No.636468

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636464

A turret with a gun mounted will also work.

If the unit is cheap enough, you can just pop it down somewhere to harass the enemy surveillance helicopters, and force either their infantry to move in to deal with it or use an expensive missile to take it out.

The military was unto this idea 70 years ago. Mimicking what they had should not be too hard.


a8857e  No.636469

File: 1a426b62361e3de⋯.jpg (363.18 KB, 1280x960, 4:3, 1280px-Skysweeper_3.jpg)

File: 5b3fb72b7c2140f⋯.jpg (46.79 KB, 480x360, 4:3, hqdefault.jpg)


c7d6bd  No.636470

>>636468

Just tie a dozen of them to a net, add explosives and send in the general direction of the enemy. If the net gets caught it'll take the drones with it and it all works even if some of them get shot down.


bc2271  No.636472

File: 878f629c6571dcd⋯.jpg (567.5 KB, 1247x821, 1247:821, e26_83488484.jpg)

>>636436

This is what everyone did during the Arab spring and the following rejection of Mr. Time person of the year Muslim brotherhood president in Egypt.


0968b5  No.636473

>>636443

Don't forget the car windows.


599c34  No.636477

Since a helicopter is subsonic, why can't you use acoustic homing?


12c67b  No.636478

>>636460

I remember this chase, I think the camera guy says hes at like 6 -7 miles away. News companies assist with chases like that so their equipment is similar to Police shit.


c99a9e  No.636480

>>636472

The laser light show was trying to get the chopper to crash on purpose?


7cf9d4  No.636482

Lol put tannerite on a Drone and fly it above the blades


95f8a8  No.636489

File: 45de1771e37e612⋯.png (117.81 KB, 1175x451, 1175:451, k - SAM.png)


487c5d  No.636494

You shoot them. HMGs can fire well up to 2000m, get anything remotely high cal and shoot it at them.

In the modern battlespace, helicopters have little combat role. Their role is primarily reserved for recon and rapid troop transport, the former of which is more of a thing reserved for conventional warfare, rather than the asymmetric warfare of today.

What the Canuck above posted is also somewhat relevant, as due to widespread hobbyist electronics anyone who put their mind to it could no doubt build a basic MANPADS. I think I remember reading something about ISIS building something of the sort when they were at their peak.


a8655c  No.636495

>>636489

Even if you couldn't cobble together an IR seeker (which is straightforward in concept if not in execution), what about massed "dumb" rockets with either a range or altitude-based fuse?


95f8a8  No.636511

>>636494

Jerry rigging AA sights onto any big boy round, think 8mm, .30-06 for example and it shouldn't be too much of a challenge especially if its slow moving Hell, 7.7 Arisaka's came with an AA sight on them. On the topic of MANPAD's as the cap I provided, it shouldn't be too hard to do them given a basic rocket launcher set up is less than 40 dollars of shit, I'd convert my bazooka over to something that theoretically heat seek but the 2" tube I'm using just dosen't afford me the lovely space needed.

>>636495

I wouldn't bother with a range/altitude fuse, I'd go for something a little more man controllable like a remote of some sort think a prepaid phone.


53ac6b  No.636515

File: ff5bc1615e21c47⋯.jpg (86.89 KB, 800x752, 50:47, laser leopard 4392.jpg)

File: 39432a2fc269bde⋯.jpg (702.6 KB, 836x1156, 209:289, laser leopard 432.jpg)

File: 22f37712a2f52db⋯.jpg (260.08 KB, 953x1280, 953:1280, laser leopard.jpg)

File: b7657d97edd639e⋯.jpg (168.94 KB, 1041x737, 1041:737, german laser leopard.jpg)


53ac6b  No.636517

File: 87f2558c927d37e⋯.jpg (586.63 KB, 1200x1803, 400:601, 1394157462806.jpg)

>>636515

Nevermind the filenames, I am a colossal faggot and as such I suck cocks.


87cdb7  No.636523

>>636463

>Ram them into the heli, or go full autism and turn them into explosives.

Maybe even attach a rocket to the drone to make it go further.


2e3052  No.636527

File: 322592d4db0f19e⋯.jpg (2.02 MB, 2250x1425, 30:19, Self-propelled_laser_syste….jpg)

>and only things you can buy and an average man with some training can make to defeat this helicopter threat.

Buy a huge fucking Rubin and mount it on pickup truck


f2e18c  No.636538

>>636480

The military got rid of him iirc. They had the support of the soldiers I believe m


d1d0f7  No.636539

>>636443

You'd overheat too fast. The best bet is having a long space blanket and plank walking around


d56ac3  No.636542

Just pick up a powerful rifle and shoot in the correct place or try to kill the pilot


cba577  No.636550

>>636430

You aren't going to shoot down a heli with basic small arms shit, at least not if it knows about you, since the moment it does, it picks up altitude to get out of range. If it was possible to down a heli with basic shit, you can bet sandniggers would have already figured it out and utilised it.

>laser pointer

Good luck actually hitting with it before the asshole in the cabin opens fire on your dumb, flashy ass. This shit is only effective when used by civilians who the pilots are forbidden from killing.

What you CAN do, however, is render the heli useless by entering a forest, at which point it's blind and can't do shit.


87cdb7  No.636556

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636550

You just need a really big laser pointer.


c2441b  No.636558

>>636550

>you can bet sandniggers would have already figured it out and utilised it

The Kurds have shot down multiple Turkish helicopters using just their PKPs


8f2150  No.636560

Just cap the supply lines of the enemy.


cba577  No.636563

>>636558

gonna need some source on that part, since as far as I know, Kurds use MANPADS to shoot down enemy helis. Then again, it's not as though it's impossible to shoot down a heli if it maintains low altitude, but for that the pilot must not know about you or be retarded, which is highly situational and is not going to help you in most cases.

>>636556

Such toys have minimal range when it comes to actually setting things on fire (else you could just phase out anti-air missiles entirely in favour of lasers – they'd shoot down any aircraft at the speed of light and no flares or maneuvering would help them) and just being more intensive doesn't help you that much – consider how small the heli is gonna be when high enough, and consider you'll be under fire.


a3c61f  No.636564

>>636550

> at which point it's blind

Yeah, unless it has FLIR, like every military, coast guard, police and news helicopter does


cba577  No.636569

>>636564

except FLIR does not actually penetrate heavy foliage, so unless you're making your escape in winter, the forest canopy is gonna hide you from it


e5e8d1  No.636585

>>636430

Garage made Fliegerfaust.


87cdb7  No.636596

>>636563

The only reason blinding lasers aren't used in warfare is because of international laws, but guerilla warfare is 'illegal' by default.


78f2d6  No.636599

You don't. You destroy or capture all refueling points (or better yet, destroy ways to bring in fuel) within operating distance.


b748c6  No.636600

>>636430

You have to break the helicopter into the different parts that give it the danger. Helicopter, pilot and logistics. If one of these is missing the helicopter itself will not be a threat. If you are not able to down enemy helicopters through AA you might focus your efforts on ambushing supply convois and forcing them to waste their remaining fuel in long flight missions.


bb28d3  No.636606

>>636460

Hey, he passed me before the news helicopter got there.

>>636478

The news heli was the only heli in range to see it, and it almost lost it. One of the police helicopters was out of range, trying to catch up, while the other ran out of fuel and had to RTB.

>>636569

Maybe in Czechlandia, Europe, but it sure as hell isn't thick enough in the hill country of Texas.


bc2271  No.636613

File: dc2c429c9c26419⋯.png (41.59 KB, 209x369, 209:369, Brightidea.PNG)

>>636558

You have to remember that Turks are barely human so this tactic might not be effective on other countries helicopters.

>>636596

While blinding weapons are banned via the Hague convention, no one who actually fights in wars has signed that piece of toilet paper. The real reason why they are not used is because they are expensive, delicate, take a lot of energy to use, and make you a giant glowing target for anyone who wasn't blinded by it. This is the same reason why blinding searchlight tanks used by the soviets in ww2 never worked out. Plus if you identify an enemy and can point a turret at them, it would be more useful to shoot them with a cannon than blind them with a laser. Also partisans are a war crime. Uniform guerrillas are not.


c2854c  No.636614

File: 4fd88a77e64f374⋯.pdf (1.61 MB, Bic Farrell-Backyard Rocke….pdf)

Video recognition has gotten good enough today that a dedicated autist could likely program a video-guided missile, one that is targeting the actual image of the helicopter rather than a signature. It wouldn't even have to be a large missile, just a rack of 3' rockets either pdfrelated or liquid fueled (amateur rocket forums have recipes).

>impossible to jam

>difficult to fool (Chaff is IR and radar deterrent)

>small, fast, difficult to dodge

>Difficult to see

>Not detectable by anti-missile Electronics.

>Death by a thousand bees

If anybody's good with either machine learning, or neural networks, or vector analysis programming

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPgqfnKG_T4

Vidrelated is the guy who build a squirrel-shooter with Python and some servos, you could use similar ideas to ID helos and launch and guide the missiles. Only thing is that it'd have to be on-board, which ups the cost but Raspberry Pi's and arduino's aren't expensive really. We're talking a small shaped charge on as the payload, maybe like a 16oz EPF on top of a 2-stage, each 3 engine stage using G79-0T or something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHNgRbmhbeI

Vidrelated is a good video of a single stage single engine G77 rocket.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOz-HTimVfs

Vidrelated is a multi-stage, engine-cluster rocket using 40n.s. engines (F's, probably).

>Raspberry Pi: $30

>6 G77's: $120

>Custom aluminum rocket body: $60

>controllable fins: $50

>Set of 4 arduino stepper motors: $15

Total per rocket: $

>Face of ZOG when you have effective anti-helo rockets: Priceless.


b8731d  No.636617

Just do what the IRA did and launch a propane tank full of RDX at it when it's at the landing pad. Way cheaper. Take down a couple of them and it'll get too expensive to keep up the effort.


c2854c  No.636618

File: 6784948daa5b5ac⋯.jpg (14.86 KB, 248x189, 248:189, 6784948daa5b5ac3b54c025d44….jpg)

>>636617

>>636614

lmfao two kinds of people.

But seriously if you could have video-guided rockets, you could have them planted in sleeper boxes around your AO activated by the sound of helicopters, aim at the sound, and launch.


bc2271  No.636619

>>636614

The Jap's MANPADS already work on machine vision to supplement its IR seeking to deal with countermeasures. Though liquid rocket fuel is a massive hassle and is NEVER cost effective to store and use on anything but a space rocket that needs variable thrust.


f2e18c  No.636622

The US is to big for helicopters. see this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Frein

1000 officers, 4 helicopters with thermal imaging, tracking dogs, Lenco BearCat's, etc. Who would win, 1 sneaky boi in the woods on the run or 1000 officers equipped with dogs, heli, and armored vehicles? All it takes is some woods lmao 45 days it took him. 45 days.


40f5ca  No.636631

File: f638ba017bfcca7⋯.png (2.06 MB, 864x1080, 4:5, ClipboardImage.png)

Shoot them when they're parked


40f5ca  No.636632

>>636614

programming a neural net to recognize a helicopter and programming it to link this recognition with the rocket's current position and correct its course are two insanely different things. Flight control is hard enough on Cessnas.


85f2f0  No.636636

>>636622

Rambo was a documentary?


da8b2d  No.636637

>>636632

I'm sure I'm grossly oversimplifying this, but with a sufficiently large relative velocity couldn't you just tell it to keep the target in the center of its field of vision?


87cdb7  No.636639

>>636632

A Cessna isn't programmed to crash. The basic missile guidance algorithm was solved decades ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_navigation


c2854c  No.636640

>>636632

Nah, assuming the camera is mounted properly you just have to get an X and Y change and get the flaps to adjust the rocket to center the previously established recognized helicopter in the camera. Whether you use neural nets or simple image recognition, once it's recognized then I'd think it's easy to code the flight path. The recognition is the hard part?

>inb4 you know nothing about coding

you'd be right, but if it can recognize what a helicopter is, and where it is on the screen, you could use that information to adjust flight I'd presume. Might have to be a decent resolution/framerate to do it but we're not trying to control a Cessna, we're going full suicide 1-shot 1-way 1-stop. You've got 2 axis of control on a rocket, shouldn't be too difficult logically, though the code might take a while to write.

>>636637

that's what I'm thinking, you just have to make sure it has sufficiently large relative velocity.


c2854c  No.636641

>>636640

Another issue I see is payload management, AH-64's and other military helicopters and even civilian choppers are rife with redundancies, so as long as you're just trying to scare it off (and they do get easily scared) you could just use a small EFP or even a reloaded 40mm HE round, but to get a guarantee on the target you'd have to upscale the whole thing.

But they scare easily so maybe I shouldn't worry about it.

sage for doublepost


40f5ca  No.636643

>>636640

Recognition is the easy part. Aerospace math is incredibly hard, especially for rockets. The control surfaces are small and have to be precisely shaped and calibrated. The rocket itself has to be perfectly balanced for the "model" the code is using as well. I'm sure it could be done, but like I and >>636617 said just shoot it when it's parked.

>you just have to get an X and Y change

You need either multiple rockets or precise canards to steer a rocket. Ideally both. I'm sure you could make a cheaper, effective missile along those lines, especially if it was designed as a guerilla helper not a 45,000 feet B52 interceptor, but there's no fucking way it's gonna cost $250


40f5ca  No.636645

>>636640

oh and as an aside there's infinitely more controls than 2 axis on rockets, there's pitch, roll, yaw, thrust, and a changing center of gravity every millisecond as fuel depletes. It's not "send X missile to Y place". How does the missile calculate what flight path to take by image recognition alone? It needs distance, size, and if it's tracking it needs to be able to acquire this info on it's own. It is so insanely mathematically complicated that unless you're an Uncle Terry level intellect or a PhD candidate at MIT/Stanford I wouldn't even recommend wasting your time trying, unless it's as an exercise to improve your aeronautical and technical knowledge which I would wholeheartedly encourage.


c2854c  No.636650

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636643

While I am in no way saying Aerospace math is easy, a number of model rocket clubs have developed automated ways to keep their rockets vertical, pointed towards "UP", I wonder how much more difficult it would be to code it to point at "Helicopter".

You are correct, it'd be easier to blow it up on the pad but that's not always an option.

>>636645

Well, again, we're not designing a rocket to go to space, just to keep the target in the center of the camera until it runs into it. Small enough rockets like those in the video can reach 2,000ft with simple wooden fins. It would need no more information than to keep the Helicopter centered in the camera's view, if the camera was zeroed properly.

And I may just be incredibly naive, I am willing to admit that, but it is as fun conversation.

Also, for kicks and giggles, here's a 2,000lbs of thrust sugar rocket that hit 28,000ft and the damned thing weighs 100lbs!


40f5ca  No.636652

>>636650

You're not understanding the main point. Ballistics keeps things with thrust in flight. That's not hard. Just shoot a bullet at a high angle. What's hard is to control something and changing its vector, sometimes hundreds of times a second. That's not a hyperbole for the potential amount of corrections a rocket might make just to stay stable let alone move its vector.

The jump between "go up" and "go towards helicopter" is the level difference between "go forwards" and "drive to McDonalds on 1st Ave in Detroit, then drive to Kansas City, then drive back but skip the tolls" for a car. Any servo can "step on the gas" so to speak. Guiding and launching are two utterly different things. There's a reason cruise missiles cost millions of dollars for an aluminum tube and a metal bell filled with hydrogen and explosives. (And it's not just the defense contractors being Israeli owned *cough cough*)


da8b2d  No.636655

>>636643

>The rocket itself has to be perfectly balanced for the "model" the code is using as well.

Yeah, that. Even if you're just using PID controllers for pitch/roll/yaw, you still need to calibrate the thing, which would require either trial-and-error by way of successive launches and recoveries or else suspending it by the center-of-mass in a wind tunnel. And if you're using canards for attitude control, won't the force scale with airspeed? Still, it wouldn't be unreasonable to get it "close enough for practical purposes".

>pitch, roll, yaw, thrust,

>thrust

On a solid fuel rocket?

>You need either multiple rockets or precise canards to steer a rocket.

Or thrust vectoring, if you want to be really high-tech. I've seen some ameteur attempts with deflector vanes in the exhaust stream, but I don't see where it has any utility (for the complexity) over some tail fins and servo motors.


3a42a2  No.636668

ok fuck rockets stick with the plan in >>636617


d6ae01  No.636719

if youre far enough away, what about strapping an rc setup to a rocket? nobody said they had to be completely automated, and a primitive TOW/R missile shouldnt be too hard to make. the only difficulty would be keeping it stable on its axis, though gyro stabilizers arent exactly unavailable. course, then youre down a couple hundred dollars worth of gear, but those idiots are down a few million.


d6ae01  No.636721

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

now this is a prototype, and they havent taken it any further that im aware of, but it could be done.


d6ae01  No.636726

>>636652

sage because im being a pedantic cunt, ballistics keep things with VELOCITY in flight, whether that velocity is currently being imparted via rocket, or has already been imparted like a bullet.


e90347  No.636737

>>636721

what that video shows is relatively simple and easy to program compared to a guided rocket, the actuators move the fins at a prescribed degree based off a single input from a sensor(per axis) that detects when its vertical.

it would be interesting to see if you could take that same rocket and program it to respond to a thermal camera(not cheap by the way), and the trial and error trying to tune the rocket would be crazy expensive because you wouldnt be recovering any of the rockets in your tests.

The most cost effective way would be to attack the choppers while they are parked like others have said

the more cost effective and probably easier to program would be to train a quadcopter to chase the helicopters heat signature until it crashes into it. that of course is if quadcopters can even fly that high, im not sure what their maximum altitude is capable of because remote control ones are limited to 1500ft or so. Once the first helicopter gets hit that they will know to fly higher than 10,000 feet when they see you launch a drone,


c7d6bd  No.636738

>>636737

>you could take that same rocket and program it to respond to a thermal camera(not cheap by the way

There's a module for arduino for like 40$


87cdb7  No.636741

>>636617

Defeat fighter jets by tying a drill bit to a party balloon and floating it over the runway.


93be86  No.636743

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636737

>train a quadcopter to chase the helicopters heat signature until it crashes into it.

>a quadcopter

Strelok pls.


c84227  No.636745

>>636737

i should have made it clear, i meant have that arduino set-up to keep the rocket steady on its axis, while still allowing control inputs so you can fly it into your target. then for testing, just have a simulated payload, and stick a parachute into it that you can pop once the fuel runs out for testing.


c7d6bd  No.636753

>>636743

these can't carry as much shit tho


93be86  No.636754

>>636753

How much C4 would one drone need to at least force a helicopter out of action by ramming into it and exploding?


16cabf  No.636755

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

You all seem to forgot the obvious answer.


c04e4f  No.636768

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636754

None.

All you'd need to do is fly the drone into the blades, or if you want to get creative have the drone carry a very long ribbon or net and come in above the copter to tangle shit up. There's only a slim possibility of it even doing anything, but any pilot with brain cells is going to fuck off real quick.


c04e4f  No.636769

But before you get any spicy ideas, here's an interesting story of a guy that lost sight of his drone, which ended up eventually impacting a blackhawk (which was fine, basically)

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/december/14/drone-far-beyond-sight-during-black-hawk-collision

>According to the drone pilot interview report published along with data logs on Dec. 13, NTSB lead investigator Bill English located Tantashov after examining a piece of one of the Phantom 4’s motor arms that the Army crew had found inside the helicopter. Manufacturer data marked on the fragment was traced to the owner’s DJI account, and English called Tantashov to confirm he had lost his Phantom 4, and to arrange an interview the following day in which he would explain exactly what happened to it.


6e5eaf  No.636776

>>636768

That would have zero effect. Modern helicopter blades can be shredded by machine gun fire and still work, cutting through a drone or bird would be simple.


ab3b95  No.636779

>>636776

True, helicopter blades are tough as all hell and aren't going to shatter easily.

You could, however, put a small explosive on the drone and it might scare them off. Helicopters are easily scared, even military ones but especially police and news choppers. Just the threat of a small drone-borne explosive might be enough to chase off some of them.

>>636755 (kek'd)

Based Hungarian shitposter.

>>636753

No, but they could be modefiled to carry a payload.


93be86  No.636782

>>636768

I don't think a small throwaway drone made out of styrofoam and plastic would do much to the blades of a modern day military helicopter.

Having it not explode could also lead to it leaving fairly recognizable traces of drone wreckage behind, whereas a small flying wing suicide drone loaded with a bit of C4 or some other explosive guided by a simple heatseeker would be more apt crash itself and occasionally its target with no survivors.

It'd also attract much less attention compared to a conventional MANPAD.


0086e5  No.636784

File: 59e64d3334e028c⋯.jpg (60.15 KB, 800x800, 1:1, bola.jpg)

A drone with a bola dangling under it.


394bf4  No.636791

File: 8777a86620ae096⋯.jpg (63.97 KB, 1200x675, 16:9, CskmQStVIAA6zeM.jpg)

Train geese to fly towards helicopters when they see them. It will be like when Cactus 1549 hit them birds and the engines went out.


c2441b  No.636793

File: e3a08df2e6bfea1⋯.webm (311.11 KB, 846x486, 47:27, 14.5mm.webm)

What about using webm related? Burgers can legally own these, right?

The average /k/ommando should be a good enough shooter to hit a helicopter at 800m with these.


ab3b95  No.636802

File: 11db0d7639b0db4⋯.jpg (419.31 KB, 1800x1205, 360:241, picrelated.jpg)

>>636793

>be me

>be in the Burgerstan United Militia

>Anti-air wing

>Marching in formation like picrelated.

>Equipped with old russian PTRS-41's

>Hear helichoppers inbound.

>tisagloriousdaytodie.jpg

>Command orders "Shoulder firelocks".

>Command orders "ready firelocks"

>command orders "Aim"

>4 AH-64's fly into view. 1,000m. Tough shot.

>"FIRE"

>Fussilade of 14.5mm rounds fly up at the bastards with a furious roar.

>Most miss

>Enough rounds connect to take out 1 and damage the other 3.

>Helicopter crashes to the ground to get raided and gutted by our fore-troops.

>The other 3 retreat.

>Another glorious victory.


40f5ca  No.636803

File: b5027db1acce7be⋯.jpg (344.36 KB, 1920x1080, 16:9, 1543190678551.jpg)

>>636793

If you have 12.7mm (50 BMG) Armor Piercing Incendiary you can just shoot the fuel cart while they gas up the bird. That'll douse the entire bird in fuel with the explosion, kill the pilots while they burn and kill some of the crew. No one will even wanna go NEAR a helicopter, let alone fly one after that.

>>636655

>>636726

You're getting closer, but yeah thrust vectoring is essentially out due to cost (unless you can improve on that? that'd either cut costs or increase accuracy for the same price) but solid fuel rockets either need to be aimed like bullets or artillery then lit (so they have a constant ballistic coefficient and predictable path) or they need to be able to target track. Target tracking is the hard part because your fixed fin rocket now needs to have servos, changing ballistic coefficients, changing air densities as it climbs, corrections for wind, etc. I'm sure the cost has dropped since the 80's to do it, but it's still insanely complicated. I'm sure if you had the right background you could spend $100,000 worth of time coding said guidance into the rocket, and then just copy and paste the firmware onto $2500 rockets, but the ability to do so is the hard part. If a guerilla movement is lucky enough to have a defense contractor with that knowledge among them, great! If not you'll be blast fueling crews and parked birds with a .50cal.

If you shoot out the engine and rotor connection that's the your best bet depending on how good a shot your team is. They won't let a bird with a shot out spindle go up. The fuel tanks are self-sealing too so don't bother with em. Engines and rotor spindles (top and rear)


6e5eaf  No.636807

>>636779

Actually just a simple paint package would do, it doesn't need to be a bomb. Most helicopters can't land on instruments only, covering the cockpit in paint is basically a death sentence, they have to autorotate down which means broken backs and months of repairs for the chopper.


be6e03  No.636809

File: 895ed04b414bd33⋯.jpg (81.24 KB, 1200x675, 16:9, post-2-0-83849300-14056489….jpg)

File: 3ef52aeaaa10430⋯.jpg (38.16 KB, 752x564, 4:3, Blackhawk.jpg)

File: 32e9dc364a07852⋯.jpg (40.17 KB, 547x681, 547:681, Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-657….jpg)

>>636803

Show us where to shoot it uncle strelok


adab17  No.636810

File: 95f0d2ce0b7ff73⋯.jpg (27.98 KB, 478x417, 478:417, 95f0d2ce0b7ff7322b0ce4a57c….jpg)

>>636802

The future of warfare unveiled!


c2441b  No.636813

File: 11c33e7d05bfcdf⋯.jpg (214.47 KB, 1200x675, 16:9, 895ed04b414bd337cb87873cab….jpg)


40f5ca  No.636814

File: 296295b9595f5a7⋯.png (1.21 MB, 1280x889, 1280:889, ClipboardImage.png)

File: a2d112db94dd0d7⋯.png (49.29 KB, 632x305, 632:305, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 4d09539c63a270f⋯.png (1.29 MB, 1929x1264, 1929:1264, ClipboardImage.png)

>>636809

If you have 5 shots put 3 in the engine and 2 into the transmission and rotor spindle. If you have 10 shots put 3 in the engine, 3 in the transmission/spindle and the rest into the IR tracking pod/sensor pod on top of the rotors. They engines on an Apache unbolt so it's a bitch of a job, but not totally impossible to replace. They can run on one engine too so wreck the engine and the transmission, then blind them by blowing the sensor pods apart. The sensor pods cost almost as much as the engine, but they detach for a quick swap. The transmission does not and will ground the bird.

Same with a Blackhawk, transmission first to ground it, then engines to increase the time and cost of repairs. Then expensive doohickys on the outside of the bird.

The easiest way is to just shoot the missiles if they're dumb enough to load them and arm them on the tarmac. Hellfires have their warhead just behind the first set of of fins. Wait for the fuel crew to start gassing the bird up, let em load the missiles, then shoot the missiles so the the fuel line ruptures and sprays gas all over the crew fueling and the pilots, if the initial explosion doesn't cack them all to begin with.

This info is, of course, for the purpose of KILLING INVADING CHINESE SOLDIERS WHO HAVE CAPTURED U.S. EQUIPMENT *COUGH COUGH COUGH* and I'm not just saying that as a disclaimer, U.S. crews usually AREN'T stupid enough to do any of the things I said above, they wouldn't re-arm it and gas it at the same time, or leave it lying around with missiles plugged into it.


6e5eaf  No.636815

File: c091db25a986965⋯.jpg (133.36 KB, 1200x675, 16:9, 895ed04b414bd337cb87873cab….jpg)

File: 8471920d00374b3⋯.jpg (68.46 KB, 752x564, 4:3, 3ef52aeaaa10430a9acbed9a18….jpg)


496620  No.636816

File: 3cb7e751bb131c8⋯.jpg (1.67 MB, 1790x2640, 179:264, AA-2_seeker[1].jpg)

>>636803

You're overcomplicating things. Is pic related capable of complex aerodynamic and ballistic calculations? Fuck no. But it was more than sufficient to regularly intercept everything from Hueys to Phantoms.


40f5ca  No.636818

File: 8407601efbe0179⋯.png (467.75 KB, 800x628, 200:157, ClipboardImage.png)

>>636816

Sidewinders and AA2's have complicated avionics and cost $85,000 each.


b464f7  No.636824

>>636818

$85,000 in govbucks equates to around $14.99


40f5ca  No.636826

>>636824

I have 0 argument against that. The components he linked, the servos in the rocket and the aluminum tube and fuel probably cost $2000 max. The expense comes from programming them to seek heat or the shape of helicopters. Maybe the heat sensor cost an extra $500 on top of that. But the point is getting cheap components to function in that way is institutionally expensive. Training someone in aerospace/mechanical/electrical engineering, fabrication, etc costs a shitload more than the missile itself. Look how much assholes who build websites charge, then scale it up by a billion by the time those guys have to jump through the technical (and legal, security clearances) hoops.


93be86  No.636831

>>636802

>wait for the US air forces to have fully transferred over to the F-35 as their main fighter aircraft

>go gorilla on US infrastructure

>???

>barely any F-35s can get airborne thanks to a lack of spare parts

>those that do crash with no survivors or become rebel IEDs while taxiing out of a hangar

>attempts to unmothball old surplus aircraft meant to be scrapped are unsuccessful due to lack of parts and engineers capable of maintaining them

>communications are a mess with rebels having constructed IFF spooks, as a result airplanes have to be ID'd WVR before US pilots are given authorization to fire

>Attack helicopters are regularly lost to paintball quadcopters, man-portable assault lasers, various bizarre LazyTown-esque contraptions and anti-air cavalry

>F-22s manage to inflict some losses on rebel forces but are retired within less than a year due to lack of spare parts and tooling

>Later on Rebels begin assaulting US convoys in remote areas with WW2 warbirds and Cessnas retrofitted for COIN purposes equipped with homemade rocket launchers and DIY napalm bombs

>the USAF are forced to use museum pieces themselves to defend their convoys as they're much easier to maintain, what with guided munitions becoming increasingly scarce due to the Chinese&European civil wars

>you might get the chance to shoot down a Yankee Sabre in your Confederate Corsair


d9eecc  No.636869

>>636826

>Institutionally expensive

True, which is why a grassroots 'fuck you' movement might be able to fund it. It might cost $1,000 per rocket (according to basic sugar-rocket costs plus avionics), so that's just raw materials. Add to that machining costs and assembling etc…. still, I'm interested in how difficult it actually is to guide a rocket in a self-aimed TGM-style movement. Will do more research.


b40978  No.636875

>>636737

>and the trial and error trying to tune the rocket would be crazy expensive because you wouldnt be recovering any of the rockets in your tests.

>take standard rocket design

>replace warhead with boilerplate and a 'chute of an equivalent mass.

>launch, pop chute, recover, put in a new motor and try again

>Once the first helicopter gets hit that they will know to fly higher than 10,000 feet when they see you launch a drone

Keeping them scared and at standoff distances is half the point, innit?


d9eecc  No.636879

File: 90fdec5b498c95d⋯.jpg (71.55 KB, 572x303, 572:303, doubt.jpg)

>>636875

Though admittedly, how the hell are you supposed to test a rocket that has the sole purpose of an heroing into helicopters? You could test the general arduino stabilization code, the rocket engine, and the actuators but the actual target code and testing the rocket's reaction to a moving target would have to be done on live helicopters. . . .

. . .

Anybody know a pilot?


647ca1  No.636883

>>636879

If enough people are serious about this, it wouldn't be too hard to find a pilot actually. Training a test pilot and buying a heli might be the cheapest part of this operation. Would large 1:4 scale models work too?

>>636606

>hill country of Texas.

Houston anon here. Run to east Texas and the more forested states like Louisiana or Arkansas. Anything east of 45 south of Dallas will give you the coverage you are looking for.

Back on topic though. Why not just build a short range wire guided MCLOS AA missile?


b40978  No.636884

>>636879

>Though admittedly, how the hell are you supposed to test a rocket that has the sole purpose of an heroing into helicopters?

For an IR seeker, road flare tied to a balloon or RC aircraft?

>>636883

>Would large 1:4 scale models work too?

That'd probably work.


40f5ca  No.636903

>>636883

garage TOW would probably be easier


01325d  No.636904

>>636879

Telemetry, synchronized to a video of the launch. You test it live. Also, reach out to foreign actors. At this point, Russia and China have an interest in these proceedings, they might have code to share.


87cdb7  No.636920

>>636879

The arduino doesn't know one video source from another, so you record the event in a videogame and tell the arduino that the recorded video is the real camera feed. If the real missile follows the same path as the virtual missile then you know it works.


b6248a  No.636961

>>636920

Record the event in a videogame, BF4 or something, and then watch for the missile to react to data… So you could verify the basics of the coding nicely that way, nice. Very clever. The actual ballistics would only be able to be tested in flight (directional changes in flight, and stabilization.). We might be coming up with a plan guys, guess I gotta start learning to code.


834ef7  No.637029

File: 6e8b1a14c6736b2⋯.png (4.8 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, Take Aim.png)

If you can't detect a heli, doesn't matter the counter-measures. It can detect you before you even know it is there. You won't be always on your anti-IR/heat/whatever cloths/gear. Your hypothetical surface-to-air missile isn't good for a thing if you don't know a heli is nearby, either.

What do you do?


db2e6e  No.637031

>>637029

Networking and forewarning.

Pilots prefer to fly below the clouds and navigate by landmarks when in "friendly" territory, and therefore travel along semi-predictable routes. If Billy-Jo lives along one of these routes, or better yet next to the airbase, he can spot a chopper, note its direction, and call the Redneck Militia fifteen minutes upstream so they can prepare an ambush.


37cdd9  No.637048

I suspect that a contemporary insurgency's best tools against airborne helicopters, barring foreign or captured MANPADS, are the antimateriel rifle and the hobby rocket. Both would require the target to me at low altitude, and moving fairly slowly. A team, or multiple separate teams, with three .50 BMG rifles could probably do enough damage with two shots a rifle to force the chopper to egress or land before detection. Unguided rockets would be next to useless for causing direct kills, but use a powerful enough motor and string along a length of 1/8 wire rope, kind of like a barrage balloon. It would need to be used en masse, with a dozen odd rockets fired at the correct bearing and the correct moment. Other payloads could also be useful, chaff, flares, bursting charge and light projectile load. I've seen designs for "insurgent anti aircraft weapons" that were basically just a chain coiled over a shaped charge in a shallow hole, no idea how well that could work in practice.

>>636631

This is the absolute best way to go though. Figure out the location and devise a plan to destroy or incapacitate its hardware or personnel. The IRA mortar strategy worked well enough on individual helipads in isolated locations. Back in the 60s during the Biafra War, the Nigerian air arm was quite well equipped with soviet fighters and bombers, while Biafra had WWII vintage Invaders, Mitchells, DC-4s, and a few new MFI-9 light utility aircraft, which were equipped with 12 SNEB rockets a piece. By avoiding an actual aerial engagement, flying low, blowing their loads, and getting the fuck out, a few volunteer and local pilots destroyed a number of expensive MiG-17 and Il-28 on the ground.

The name of the game for the insurgent is avoiding the enemy when he's stronger than you. If he's in a chopper, that is most certainly the case. Attempting to take it out is the last resort, unless you and/or your cell are in a relative position of power. First priority is hiding, which is a lot harder than it used to be. Crowds are probably a good bet, until the enemy decides it doesn't want any popular support to speak of. Outside of more urban areas you're pretty screwed if you have a chopper on you unless you can jump into a convenient hole or something similar. Prevent that from happening by not looking like a target. Especially don't carry around a hot rifle.


8e8c82  No.637049

>>636613

>barely

Giving the descendents of asians who raped and larped as persians who subsequently raped pontic greeks to spread islam the title of human doesn't sit right with me.


4090a3  No.637764

>>636961

>learning to code

What language are you planning to use?


672e87  No.637865

>>636430

Vid's down. Anyone got a mirror?


1673bb  No.637893

>>637764

>>636961

Here's a fun and easy free online machine learning course that uses Python. It's run by a bunch of diversity cucks but the library (of the same name as the website) makes image classification dead simple. You could definitely use it to classify screenshots of a helicopter taken programmatically from every possible angle and under every weather and daylight conditions using an fps game that allows for scripting. That sounds like a fun idea. But don't do anything r*cist with it obviously.

https://www.fast.ai/


f0d9c9  No.637968

Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>637865

It's this one, it's still up on youtube but here it's not working.

Very strange.


2e3052  No.638001

>>637968

Its funny that most of those arrests are caused by suspects behaving like retards and not playing it cool, instead resisting or refusing to cooperate with only leads police to suspect them more.

Second funny thing is that most of suspects are spics/nigs lol


45d67d  No.638079

>>636440

Piece of shit cops.

If your job is literally to repress your own population in the service of a clique of international elites, don't complain when the people fight back.

Little bitch.


4090a3  No.638081

File: 54d2b4d60efefd3⋯.jpg (40.41 KB, 649x599, 649:599, livens projector.jpg)

>>637893

Well I think Python is the way to go, Some guys were looking at OpenCV's resources and I think with about 6 months of studious work somebody could learn to program image recognition, I looked at fast.ai and I think there are some good resources there, thanks!

The trickiest part I think would be overcast vs Marine grey helicopters, of course without Infrared or Thermal you wouldn't be able to target at night at all. Maybe there should be an option for thermal as well, as sort of a backup. The advantage of image recognition of course is that you can't just launch a few flares. A decent Computer-vision based program could discriminate between smoke, clouds, and even payloads vs the actual helicopter.

To be quite honest, I think the only reason nobody's ever done this before is it's a niche market. Who wants a missile that ONLY targets one type of machine? What army would want to equip different missiles for different targets lol. Either that or we'll find out exactly why this is a retard-tier idea but that'll be far in the future.

I'm also thinking of a hidden launch system picrelated along oft-traveled helicopter routes and the damned thing just fires whenever an appropriate target comes along.


87cdb7  No.638095

File: b7823c82de26fda⋯.jpg (203.19 KB, 1087x725, 1087:725, Nitecore-TM10K-Flashlight-….jpg)

>>636961

To really save on physical testing you could make a ballistic model of the missile in Unreal Engine, import some target models from tactical FPS games and use simulated launches to develop most of the tracking software.

>>638081

>of course without Infrared or Thermal you wouldn't be able to target at night at all

Put some LEDs in the nose to illuminate the target.


4090a3  No.638099

>>638095

>led's

A nice thought, but if we're launching from more than 50ft away they're useless. The idea is to be able to launch a thousand feet out or more, and as it nears its target it recognizes the helicopter and adjusts course accordingly. This way you could launch farther out than most nigger-rigged weapons and it saves your men. Add a gps/compass guided stabilization system and you could theoretically launch a missile from a few miles away and it just hunts the helicopters, would be good if you knew generally where they were and you could set a course for intercept.

Would add a few components and another set of code for altitude and heading if no target presents itself but might be worth it.


87cdb7  No.638104

>>638099

Most of these high power flashlights claim beam distances exceeding 400m, and in this case you could probably overload the LEDs significantly because you have a high speed airflow for cooling and the electronics only need to last a few seconds anyway.


cba577  No.638115

>>637029

>What do you do?

The same thing sandniggers worldwide do to counter helis - live in a cave


4090a3  No.638120

>>638115

>>637029

see

>>638081

Basically you could just set booby-traps for Helos all over hostile territory. I'd say living in a cave is cowardice but here we are, on 8ch, which is basically a cave.


93be86  No.638624

Defeating Helicopters with homemade missiles is all fine and dandy, but what if the enemy acquires some intellect and decides to use COIN aircraft instead?


8fe0be  No.639828

>>636614

The relevant appendices are missing in that pdf.


aef00d  No.639876

>>638624

>obtain a rod of INCONEL on the free market

>attach rod to drone

>fly drone into turbine engine

>win

INCONEL is a super alloy consisting mostly of nickle and chromium. It is used in high temperature and extremely corrosive environments, especially inside of turbine engines.

It will tear through the first 50% of the engine like it's hot butter, leaving a completely disfunctional engine and loads of shrapnel causing further damage.


218d95  No.639881

File: 048977d94f2449f⋯.jpg (145.91 KB, 654x539, 654:539, 44.jpg)

>basement dwelling social outcasts shitposting on a mongolian anime drawing board created by a literal cripple, have managed to learn how to program cheap home-built missiles to recognize and attack military helicopters

Nothing less but magnificent. I can truly see it happening.


eb3af8  No.640166

File: ba39e084045eb03⋯.jpg (21.9 KB, 417x420, 139:140, violence2.jpg)

>>639881

Best timeline.

>>639876

I mean, hell, even a fucking bird hitting the engine can knock it out, you could just use a hardened steel and it'd probably do the trick. The trick is guiding it there.

>>639828

I decided to find it myself, and discovered two things:

1) It's still available to buy on Amazon lmfao.

2:) my new homepage: http://www.freepyroinfo.com/


d14159  No.640231

>>636784

Hmm. Black powder firearms are free to won where I come from. How much for replica of some black powder mountain howitzer? Just need chain ball or canister shot.


aef00d  No.640256

>>640166

Ideally you should use visual guidance to get it close to the helo (and if it employs jammers) switch to some sort of autonomous system for flying into the helo's path. To track the course of the helo most people would use cameras and some shit, but personally would prefer using acoustic means.

Slap a couple microphone on it, make the drone center the engine noise (you could possibly figure out the frequency of the turbines from a couple recordings) behind it and then have it slam the brakes.


e635fc  No.640284

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>636803

>Thrust vectoring

I mean, if an art student can figure it out… . (I think he was an art student at least, but I'm not watching the video again to double check, so don't quote me on that)

He doesn't even look that autistic


e635fc  No.640292

>>640284

Forgot to mention that you could either run two stages like he did for SRBM w/terminal guidance, or use a slower-than-normal burning candy rocket to extend the run time. I know that nothing about the rockets, but I would consider drilling the core part way through the candy, so that it goes from core-burning to end-burning (like a candle), assuming that's a thing, so you have high thrust to launch, followed by low thrust for coasting.


01267a  No.640323

>>640256

You misunderstand. It's all onboard, you can't jam a visually guided missile if it's receiving its instructions from a camera in the nosecone. It'd be a "Fire and forget" system.

using acoustic means is an interesting idea, most guided cars use that anyway. I'll look into that.


37cdd9  No.640331

File: 9ce13afd7074de9⋯.jpg (332.05 KB, 1280x960, 4:3, burd strike.jpg)

>>639876

With the price of inc 25 I sure as fuck wouldn't be chucking it at planes when it could be used for something it's actually good for. It absolutely would fuck up the compressor and turbine of a jet engine, but you still need to basically thread a needle from 10km away. Unless you are setting up right in front of a runway. I suspect that even much softer steel could be used to similar effect. Even if the target is harder, the impellers in an engine are all precisely balanced and tuned, and introducing a heavy, somewhat durable foreign body would not be good news. As the other guy said, a lump of meat and skinny little bones can do significant damage. A bit of steel, or even a fucking rock could cause total failure.

I'm mostly commenting to say that inconel and other high performance alloys are way too strategically important to just be used as projectiles. If you are making an actual rocket beyond the typical cheap Katyusha or Qassam pattern, that's where it shines. Suppressor baffles too.


aef00d  No.640393

File: 7823514a6130acc⋯.gif (83.01 KB, 640x478, 320:239, serveimage.gif)

File: 6db0d45e5b83869⋯.gif (5.07 KB, 620x245, 124:49, serveimage0.gif)

>>640292

You don't need any of that to adjust thrust in a solid fuel engine.

See pic related. The greater the surface area, the more fuel burns at the same time, the more thrust you produce.

It's a field of active research right now. Manned space rockets have a set G-force limit, so you don't want to use boosters that produce more thrust after you have already lost 90% of the weight of your rocket and turn your astronauts into squash. At the same time you want to use SRBs, because they are cheaper.

Many commercially available hobbyist rocket engines have their own unique thrust curve. Look it up and pick one that fits your purposes.

>>640331

>burd strike.jpg

At least it's only the compressor :^)

This got me an idea though. You know how birds fly in flocks?

Use a drone to release a shower of metal chips and cubes into the flightpath of the helicopter. It's like a shotgun, but your enemy is impaling himself on every individual piece of shot.


e635fc  No.640544

>>640393

>rocket motor shit

I was really just thinking of a multifin type thrust profile, but in a field expedient method that even a Strelok bumblefuck could handle with moderate reliability, but yes, that information is something that should be considered.

>release a shower of metal chips

Perhaps also attach a ribbon to said chips to keep them in the air longer and to make them more likely to get sucked in. Plus, I can't imagine it being very good for the engine to have the plastic burn and leave carbon deposits on the intake of the combustion chambers; probably not enough to kill the engine immediately, but it might ground the engine while it's being overhauled. The same could possibly be adhesive ribbons and/or long kevlar filaments with diamond grit in them, which would stick to or tangle up on the compressor blades and whip around fucking shit up. Depending on the materials used in the engine in question, chemical attacks may also be an option, such as by spraying mercury into the engine, which would weaken the metal blades while also being difficult to detect by a simple visual inspection, possibly making it necessary to replace all the blades just to get the engine back into service.

I also wonder how viable it would be to use a dust cloud of impact sensitive energetic compound, which may prove difficult to trap in a filter, and could also result in damages to other non-engine surfaces.

<Something something minecraft.


baf6a0  No.640668

>>637029

>It can detect you before you even know it is there.

Just as I can detect it before it knows I am there.

>You won't be always on your anti-IR/heat/whatever cloths/gear.

The heli will not always be in the air, pilot will have moments he isn't cautious enough, his instruments will not always work perfectly and I might just not be around the area.

>Your hypothetical surface-to-air missile isn't good for a thing if you don't know a heli is nearby, either.

His counter measures aren't going to work if I fired the missile already and his guns are of no use if he can not spot me.

A helicopter is still operated by a human and even though it brings a technological advantage againts insurgent forces it can only do so much with its technology. At the end it all comes down to considering the advantages and disadvantages of both sides. There are situations where helicopters wipe the floor with enemy ground forces just as there are situations where helicopters crash with no survivors.


3ccfe7  No.640766

>>640668

While you're not wrong, the fact remains that if an AH-64 is hunting you, actively, there is a very small chance that you'd win that encounter. The people here who suggest bombing/disabling on the runway are correct, as that is probably the easiest route to take. The guided missile/sugar rocket is mostly just for fun. AT rifles and runways are the most honest options.


aef00d  No.640770

File: 97ae939adb68325⋯.jpg (140.64 KB, 470x709, 470:709, Maple-seed.jpg)

File: 636fc9c45b3d962⋯.jpg (127.77 KB, 1752x1471, 1752:1471, BLU-43B_external.jpg)

File: a86161843d66ad3⋯.jpeg (793.01 KB, 2889x1893, 963:631, you could teach your chil….jpeg)

File: 2d7193de974869c⋯.jpeg (171.07 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, superior nippon engineeri….jpeg)

>>640544

You could go one step further and bend the metal chips/strips into a shape that makes them rotate due to air currents and generate lift. Spraypaint them either blue or black to make them less visible in day or night.

You could even go full autism and do some experiments with multiple different shapes (or tolerances of the same shape) to adjust vertical spread of the cloud, and add timed release mechanism to the drone to adjust horizontal spread.


535291  No.640788

>>640766

>there is a very small chance that you'd win that encounter.

Depends on the circumstances. If I know the enemy makes use of helicopters my imaginery insurgent force wouldn't run around the Steppe in broad daylight firing rainbow tracers. The helicopter does have huge advantages against infantry but even if it gets me then was all the effort worth it? How high has the kd ratio for a helicopter+pliot to be to make it worth it? A helicopter kills x amount of insurgents on average before it crashes and the pilot is dead or captive. How high has this number x to be to make it worth it? It takes time to build/maintain helicopters and train crews. Apart from the US no western country has the number of helicopters and pilots to sustain an air campaign against insurgents with AA who can make use of the woods and urban terrain in Europe. Then again the helicopter is effective in forcing an insurgent force to operate with all these concealment measures.


01ca02  No.640850

File: 5dfc8cace553116⋯.jpg (46.87 KB, 660x365, 132:73, big-gun-660x365.jpg)

you guys are really overthingking this.

all helicopters and made of sheet metal, have composite rotor blades, and are powered by turbine engines.

what armor a typical helicopter might have amounts to AR500 bucket seats for the crew, or an armored belly to prevent the dudes inside form getting their balls shot off. there's also special lenses over critical optics made of lab-grown sapphire so good luck knocking out the FLIR.

the few helicopters that are armored, almost all being attack helicopters who are deliberately designed for an environment where they will be shot at, are still only as armored as a typical fixed wing attacker, with an armored cockpit and maybe something to protect the control mechanisms.

all helicopters are very easy to shot down, in fact i'd argue they're easier, not only because their flight profile requires them to operate in the optimum engagement range for antiaircraft guns, but also that the mode by which they stay in the air relies on several systems operating against each other in perfect balance. any variables introduced, like, say, losing 1/4th of one of the rotor blades, can cause the thing to roll over and fall out of the sky.

Helicopters are only really useful as a military asset in situations where you've already established air superiority. otherwise it's like duck hunting.

speaking of:

how about an anti-helicopter punt gun?

a big mass of ball bearings striking all across a helicopter's area likely wouldn't be enough to disable things like weapons or even the crew, but it'll chew up the rotors, can get into the intakes and eat up the turbines, and cause massive structural holes that all need to be repaired before the thing can get back into the air assuming it makes it home.

it's easy enough to make a 2-bore shotgun with black powder and steel pipe. it's cheap, too, so you can design them as disposable assets to be fired remotely, like an anti-helicopter claymore mine. further, if helicopters are coming to you you can get a pretty good idea of where they're coming from, and where they might hover to observe you, and possible places they might land troops to assault you. knowing this you can establish entire fields of concealed punt guns to be activated by single observers at the right moment.

alternatively, you can just shoot them with a .50. i mean, it's not like it would be hard to find an M2 when the time comes you'd need one for this.


218d95  No.640851

File: 0509accb5f2b14d⋯.jpg (208.53 KB, 729x531, 81:59, ADIQ0001010e.jpg)

>>640850

>local /k/ommando with autism makes home-built punt gun with anti-aircraft capabilities, firing hundreds of steel balls each traveling at 5,000 feet per second


0968b5  No.640879

>>640850

>how about an anti-helicopter punt gun?

What would be the optimize size and material for the shot to get the best balance between number of projectiles and damage to the helicopter?

I can just imagine it.

>Gov identifies the woods they think Strelok's hideout is inna

>select a flat clearing to insert their team, and finally bring an end to the humiliation he has brought them

>as the helicopters descend over the clearing, the night is split with a blinding flash and a thunderous roar that drowns out even the rotors

>the enormous cloud of black powder smoke that suddenly filled the clearing begins to disperse, revealing the mangled remains of the helicopters and the teams inside them, shredded by a thousand 10mm steel balls from the array of punt guns set up around the clearing


37cdd9  No.640997

>>636617

The IRA campaign in some areas was effective enough that the British effectively ended any footmobile or motorized presence, in favor of strictly using helicopters. Which is much more expensive. Provided the insurgent force has the means to bring down choppers, this is a great boon.

Just wait for the next supply shipment to fly to the enemy FOB, and pop out xyz weapon. The enemy will either stay inside, maybe fire some mortars, and wallow in poor morale and hunger, or venture outside to recover the supplies that were brought down, or hunt the insurgent. The insurgency's forces could either bug out before the enemy has a chance, or prepare an ambush, at the risk of facing further air support.

Regardless, making an occupying force feel like it is they who are under siege is a propaganda coup.


e8a4c0  No.640998

>>640850

>Sapphire-made optics

My phone has those and it's cracked to shit after dropping it on a padded gym floor.


21bc16  No.641000

I think what you need to keep in mind about the optical-video tracking system that's been discussed is not simply tracking the target, which is easy, but identifying the target, which is fucking hard.

If you point a camera at a helicopter and tell the system "hit that thing" it's pretty straightforward. You'd need to get the aerodynamics down so you're not over- or under-controlling, but aside from that the actual program is quite simple.

But that's not a very practical method. More likely, what you'd need to do is point the missile so the target is in the field of view and have it be able to identify what the target is. And that's the kind of thing all the megacorps are still working on, for things like self-driving cars. That's why current Google captchas are so different from the traditional jumbled letters; it takes a lot to train a system to effectively make that kind of identification, and they have to offload the work to their users. Plus, if it were easy to make a system that could identify things like that effectively, that form of captcha would be useless in the first place since anyone they're trying to stop could just make his own.


22c76b  No.641029

>>636784

>make lead cast of truck nuts

>hang below drone from long chain

>teabag enemi helicopter


6cdb7d  No.641037

>>641000

It sounds easier to make it manually controlled. Its been disscussed, but an MCLOS/SCALOS missile with a trained operator would be very effective at taking down helos. You could do what the brits did and incorporate beam riding to make it incredibly effective.


87cdb7  No.641079

>>641000

The difference is that a self driving car needs to get it right 99.9% of the time while a homemade missile could settle for 60%


853afb  No.641081

File: c3c315ccaceef57⋯.webm (3.59 MB, 640x464, 40:29, Lupin III takes out a hel….webm)


a3946d  No.641116

>>641081

This is the best solution.


2a91cd  No.641165

File: 636bafaead6446c⋯.jpg (285.65 KB, 2100x2700, 7:9, car windows.jpg)

>>636430

would this work /k/?


853afb  No.641183

File: 8885c9ea605cc8a⋯.webm (11.31 MB, 640x480, 4:3, Lupin III takes out a hel….webm)

You could also do this if you've managed to steal a helicopter and Cristo Redentor.


5fa2f6  No.641430

>>641000 (checked)

>t. knows nothing

You're right in a way, of course, but keep in mind that you only need to distinguish between "sky" and the helicopter. There was a dude who made an AutoTurret for paintball that could tell human from the background, a dude who made the auto-water gun for miscreants near his house, and the guy who made the squirrel-shooting water gun. All 3 systems can discern their target from the surrounding background, it's not hard. Cars have a problem because they have no specific target, roads can look all kinds of weird. Helicopters have a very specific shape that can be programmed in. Rotors, main body, tail rotor/boom. Aim for the cockpit.

It can be done, and isn't too hard. This anon >>636614 pointed out the squirrel video, give it a watch. If a nerd can get Python to distinguish between a squirrel, trees, and a bird then training a program to discern between a helicopter and sky should be quite doable. The only tricky part would be if the helicopter dips below the horizon maybe?




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / cafechan / doomer / fast / in / leftpol / sw / wmafsex ]