Comments on: Ad: Discovery Channel’s FutureWeapons and the Secret World of Military Weaponry

By: Michael Sorgenfrei

Michael Sorgenfrei — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:03:08 +0000

On a recently broadcast episode of Weaponology, there was a story on the Barrett .50 semi-auto rifle. The host first held up the .223 round and said it was the primary cartridge for our military rifles (true enough if you are talking about the M-16). He then held up a cartridge he referred to as “.308″ and said it was the cartridge used in the AK-47! I was very surprised that an ex-Navy Seal would say such a thing. The AK-47 uses the 7.62X39 not the 7.62X51 (military cousin to the .308). Also, then he compared the semi-auto Barrett to a bolt-action sniper rifle saying that more rounds could be fired per minute. This is hardly a fair comparison. It would have been more appropriate to compare the Barrett to the sniper-modified M-14.
Michael

By: haz

haz — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 06:02:11 +0000

I recently saw a re-enactment of a firefight in Iraq during which a soldier miraculously endured at least two grenade blasts inside a small room. One of the blasts was from his own grenade which was tossed back at him. There are several reasonably low-tech solutions to this using a chip with a miniature sensor array to detect patterns of motion/rest, body-inductance, and/or sound (either from landing after tossed, bootsteps, or language). Based upon combinations of these interpretted by a fuzzy-logic algorithm, the grenade could detonate without the liability of extra-time left on the fuse.

By: Doretta K. Dover

Doretta K. Dover — Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:55:51 +0000

If FW can’t help me please direct me to the proper department. #1. There has got to be a way we can stop the IED’s in Iraq. #2. I have a great idea. We have polic robots which are used to detonate bombs. We use Sonar to detect metal submarines. Why not use a portable sonar unit attached to a robot to detect Ied’s in fake rocks beside the road or under the road. Then we can clear the area and detonate the Ied’s. #3 It is not rocket science, if I can figure this out.
Please get on this project to safeguard our soldiers both men & women. Thank you.
Sincerely
D.K.Dover

By: Doretta K. Dover

Doretta K. Dover — Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:53:49 +0000

By: Mabel Katz

Mabel Katz — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 07:09:35 +0000

In the last week or so I saw a FW program about a British weapons expert who had invented a simple but devastatingly effective anti tank weapon. The following week the news was full of accounts of American forces being targeted by such a device deployed by Iran. What???? Is our greed for money such that we develope arms, sells them to our enemies so they kill our own citizens and solders? The thought of it makes me sick. Put the arms makers on the front line. Let the greedy bastards get slaughtered with their own WMD’s.

By: me again

me again — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 10:55:12 +0000

“So it’s an ad. Deal with it.“
Yes, correct, it is an advertisement, which is how commercial ventures such as this make money. Unfortunately, in journalistic circles, it’s considered a faux pas to pass one off as an article.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 04:54:19 +0000

I have no problem with commercial ventures making money. So it’s an ad. Deal with it.

By: Haninah

Haninah — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:32:41 +0000

So this:
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002019.html
apparently doesn’t apply to pushing tv shows? Even tv shows, like “FutureWeapons,” that are basically infomercials for defense contractors’ pet projects? Have the overlords signed a new sponsorship deal?

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:32:04 +0000

So does Boeing get to write the next blog-post?

By: Me

Me — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 13:01:18 +0000

Geeeze, next time put the words “ADVERTISEMENT” next to your articles, won’t be so confusing.