But sure, if you are wondering how folks out in Yemen or Gaza managed to retaliate against their oppressors for so long, this is a textbook example of how and why. What’s being proposed is collection of technology we’ve had since at least the 1960s that’s slowly made its way into civilian circulation.
Also…
Khojayev’s just-launched prototype has no effectiveness track record
I mean, we’re seeing what “just-launched prototypes with no effective track record” have accomplished on the Ukraine-Russia front-lines and it’s a decidedly mixed bag.
I think a harder question to answer is “Who would be interested in putting one of these into practical use?” And that gets to the real value-add of a Stinger MANPAD. Namely, the humans willing and practiced enough to use it.
Also - and again, this cannot be overstated - the model above has no explosives installed. Idk how confident I’d be around one of these things if it was actually armed.
You don’t need explosives. It has a spot in the front for a camera. One of the new microcontrollers with AI accelerators can do face recognition extremely quickly. It would be possible to use it as an assassination tool.
Even if you changed nothing about the design, the speed and mass of the thing hitting a person in the face could kill.
The trick is to get the atomized propelant to “boom, explosive” at the target and not in your backpack.
Also, you probably want a “boom” sufficient to accomplish whatever demolition you’re planning, which - again - raises the stakes regarding what’s in your backpack.
There’s a classic little film called “The Wages of Fear” that explores the hazards of amateurs transporting high explosives over long distances.
I mean, spray the leftover fuel into the oxygen-filled head only on target? It wouldn’t stay atomized for long anyway. And for the boom, the shell needs only be strong enough. Wouldn’t that work?
Listen, if you’ve got the specs for military ordinance and want to say “We’ve done this a thousand times, it works fine” that’s one thing.
But it’s very much another to just wave your hands and announce “you know, the boom-boom juice goes here and the detonator goes there and it’ll probably do something.”
Notably absent… the explosives.
But sure, if you are wondering how folks out in Yemen or Gaza managed to retaliate against their oppressors for so long, this is a textbook example of how and why. What’s being proposed is collection of technology we’ve had since at least the 1960s that’s slowly made its way into civilian circulation.
Also…
I mean, we’re seeing what “just-launched prototypes with no effective track record” have accomplished on the Ukraine-Russia front-lines and it’s a decidedly mixed bag.
I think a harder question to answer is “Who would be interested in putting one of these into practical use?” And that gets to the real value-add of a Stinger MANPAD. Namely, the humans willing and practiced enough to use it.
Also - and again, this cannot be overstated - the model above has no explosives installed. Idk how confident I’d be around one of these things if it was actually armed.
You don’t need explosives. It has a spot in the front for a camera. One of the new microcontrollers with AI accelerators can do face recognition extremely quickly. It would be possible to use it as an assassination tool.
Even if you changed nothing about the design, the speed and mass of the thing hitting a person in the face could kill.
Plastic explosive triggered by electrodetonator is quite safe.
Oh, I know this one!
It’s not a MANPAD really.
The sensor package has no IR sensor (or radar unit) and no way to proximity fuse.
It has GPS, accelerometer and barometric pressure. It’s more like a rocket powered artillery shell than an anti-air weapon.
Or, given the lack of payload, it’s more like a high speed burrito delivery device.
See, now you’ve got my interest.
future Taco Bell vs future Del Taco during dinner rush:
Atomize* some propelant, boom, explosive.
* english choose the dumbest word for “zerstäuben”.
The trick is to get the atomized propelant to “boom, explosive” at the target and not in your backpack.
Also, you probably want a “boom” sufficient to accomplish whatever demolition you’re planning, which - again - raises the stakes regarding what’s in your backpack.
There’s a classic little film called “The Wages of Fear” that explores the hazards of amateurs transporting high explosives over long distances.
There are plenty of very safe HEs.
I mean, spray the leftover fuel into the oxygen-filled head only on target? It wouldn’t stay atomized for long anyway. And for the boom, the shell needs only be strong enough. Wouldn’t that work?
Sure, there’s more effective explosives.
Idk, you wanna find out?
Listen, if you’ve got the specs for military ordinance and want to say “We’ve done this a thousand times, it works fine” that’s one thing.
But it’s very much another to just wave your hands and announce “you know, the boom-boom juice goes here and the detonator goes there and it’ll probably do something.”