Armed Polite Society

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

R.I.P. Scout26

Author Topic: The Army is not interested in a device to reduce friendly fire deaths?  (Read 312 times)

Perd Hapley

  • Unfettered conversationalist - beep/bop/boop
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 56,430
  • I just realized I am not holding my microphone

Quote
...their powerful guns could shoot beyond the range of their high-tech targeting systems.

Isn't that true for all firearms?
This member used to have another name, and the name that this member used to have was fistful.

Fly320s

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,476
  • Formerly, Arthur, King of the Britons

Doesn't the Army already have IFF devices?

The problem with this new device is that it is a device.  Those things can be faked, copied, lost, stolen, jammed, etc. 
Islamic sex dolls.  Do they blow themselves up?

just Warren

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,019
  • My DJ name is Heavy Cream.

But everything we use is a device.

You, yourself, operate a device made up of 1000s of other devices any of which can fail for some reason which could lead to catastrophe. Yet you and all the rest of us get a tremendous amount of value out of it.

Therefore we don't let the idea of it failing stop us from using it.

So I find your stance puzzling.
Member in Good Standing of the Spontaneous Order of the Invisible Hand.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 26,763

I really hate stories like that sometimes.  I want a quick idea of what his trying to do.  I have to scroll through pages of backstory and find the details buried here and there between layers of backstory all through a long article. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

fifth_column

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,424

I really hate stories like that sometimes.  I want a quick idea of what his trying to do.  I have to scroll through pages of backstory and find the details buried here and there between layers of backstory all through a long article.

I agree. I only read the first quarter of the article so I have no idea what type of device he created but I know a lot about his personality.
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will... The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress. ― Frederick Douglass

No American citizen should be willing to accept a government that uses its power against its own people.  -  Catherine Engelbrecht

Phantom Warrior

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 924

A provocative strawman clickbait headline with no further information?  No clicks from me.

230RN

  • All right, who signed your release papers?
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 15,388

I had the same negative reaction.  Did not get very far into it, clicked out, then noted the date.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2021, 01:50:48 PM by 230RN »
The funny thing is, people don't get mad at me because I'm wrong.  They get mad at me because I'm right.

Pb

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,618

I was wondering if this would causes issues by broadcasting the location of troops, or allow enemies to spoof it for their own forces. 

T.O.M.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,015

I was wondering if this would causes issues by broadcasting the location of troops, or allow enemies to spoof it for their own forces.

A lifetime ago I was an 11A, an infantry  officer.  The last thing I would have wanted on my troops was a transmitting device.  Any signal can be intercepted, and tracked.  That's all kinds of bad.
No, I'm not mtnbkr.  ;)

a.k.a. "our resident Legal Smeagol."...thanks BryanP
"Anybody can give legal advice - but only licensed attorneys can sell it."...vaskidmark

AmbulanceDriver

  • Junior Rocketeer
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,818
Re: The Army is not interested in a device to reduce friendly fire deaths?
« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2021, 02:49:14 PM »

A lifetime ago I was an 11A, an infantry  officer.  The last thing I would have wanted on my troops was a transmitting device.  Any signal can be intercepted, and tracked.  That's all kinds of bad.

That was my first thought - even with encryption, etc on the actual signal, it's still a radio signal, so anyone with some DF equipment can triangulate a location.
Are you a cook, or a RIFLEMAN?  Find out at Appleseed!

http://www.appleseedinfo.org

"For some many people, attempting to process a logical line of thought brings up the blue screen of death." -Blakenzy

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 26,763
Re: The Army is not interested in a device to reduce friendly fire deaths?
« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2021, 03:16:15 PM »

That was my first thought - even with encryption, etc on the actual signal, it's still a radio signal, so anyone with some DF equipment can triangulate a location.
Or set up a homing system that could be mounted on a missile. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge