Military Review

Shvabe holding presented a neutralizer for sniper optics

77
Shvabe holding presented a neutralizer for sniper optics

The Russian holding Shvabe, within the framework of the Army-2020 military-technical forum, presented the Sosna-N system for neutralizing sniper and observation optics at long distances.


As follows from the press release, the Sosna-N neutralizer is an improved version of the Sosna sniper and observation optics detector. The new system was created by specialists from the Polyus Research Institute named after MF Stelmakh on a proactive basis.

The new SOSNA-N device also detects optical devices aiming or observing an object. However, at the same time, if necessary, he also neutralizes them with the help of visual interference - special laser radiation

- says the description.

According to the general director of the Polyus Research Institute Yevgeny Kuznetsov, the effectiveness of countermeasures depends on the distance of the target, but in any case, the entire field of view of the optical device is completely illuminated by intense counter radiation.

The developers recommend the device to the military for setting visual interference with snipers, spotters, gunners of enemy anti-tank missile systems, etc.
Photos used:
https://shvabe.com/
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. marchcat
    marchcat 2 September 2020 13: 31 New
    +7
    On the battlefield, if of course it will be, an irreplaceable thing. good
    1. Lexus
      Lexus 2 September 2020 14: 58 New
      -31
      Интересно, откуда руки растут у "создателей". XXI век, всё-таки, на дворе. А тут уровень калдыря-энтузиаста из соседней квартиры, "холдинга", специализирующегося на самогоноварении и уничтожении полученного "продукта". Вот уж, "достойный" ориентир.request


      1. venik
        venik 2 September 2020 15: 39 New
        11
        Quote: lexus
        Интересно, откуда руки растут у "создателей".

        =========
        Hands grow where do you need! And the head too how it works!..... В отличие от некоторых "коментаторов"!
        1. Shurik70
          Shurik70 2 September 2020 20: 49 New
          +2
          If enemy sniper optics are detected, it is not difficult for the automatics to neutralize them by directing a laser beam at them.
          But it's still interesting how these optics are detected. It is also necessary to analyze the picture obtained from the camera lenses. Moreover, the picture is necessarily of a very high resolution from wide-angle cameras, then the study of all suspicious places with the help of a narrow-angle camera ... And all this in real time. How could a computer processing all of this fit into such a small box?
          Probably, the box contains only cameras - one wide-angle, several narrow-angle ones with different ranges of perceived spectra, a laser, and a couple of gyroscopes and attitude motors. And they put the computer separately, it can control this box and wire it.
          How much does the Software weigh in megabytes?
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 4 September 2020 12: 40 New
            +1
            Well, logically, the system should first look for IR lasers and other rangefinders. This is simpler, and there are more and more systems to help a sniper. Secondly, not a wide-angle lens, of course. Why waste resources on the fight against interference, which is more than enough from a large lens? It takes a few small lenses to create a multipicture to summarize. Due to the fact that the cameras are at least a little, but spaced along the plane, there is a good opportunity for measuring any parameters such as range.
            Modern computers are most of all similar to modern jeeps - cars in order to transport themselves, break their units with their own weight, in general, translate good into shit idle. If you do not use all sorts of browsers, ready-made DLL libraries, etc. etc., then the power of an ordinary household processor will be enough for any analyst behind the eyes and ears.
            The only thing that is radically bad about this device is the blinding of the sniper. For the burned out eyes there will be not just an answer, but a full-fledged retribution, and rightly so. Why is the angel done? What prevented you from attaching the most common target designation? Do armies lack large and small calibers?
            1. Shurik70
              Shurik70 4 September 2020 16: 17 New
              0
              Quote: Mikhail3
              the system should look for IR lasers and other rangefinders

              Это если система прицеливания "активная". А если снайпер под кустом с обычным "пассивным" оптическим прицелом? А ведь их как-то обнаруживают.
              During the war in Iraq, I remember that an American tank drove a shell into a hotel room, spotted the optics there (journalists were sitting there with cameras).
              At the expense of blinding - I do not agree. One blinded eye - much more humane than the alternative - fire a heavy machine gun at a suspicious location. After the laser, the enemy can also be interrogated. And if he escapes, he will think many times before risking a second eye. And if it is in a city full of civilians, then there is no alternative.
              1. Mikhail3
                Mikhail3 7 September 2020 09: 25 New
                0
                Придется отказаться от двух третей приборов, которыми оперируют снайперы, особенно "новой школы". Это уже немалый успех. Обнаруживают снайперов по набору параметров, снятых с видеоизображения. Насчет ослепления - спросите слепых.
      2. Hagen
        Hagen 2 September 2020 16: 23 New
        +4
        Quote: lexus
        Интересно, откуда руки растут у "создателей".

        Do you, excuse me, checkered, or go? Do you want a glamorous soap dish with Swarovski crystals? You need this for another resource ...
        1. Lexus
          Lexus 2 September 2020 16: 56 New
          -6
          Прежде, чем что-то мне советовать, освежите память, если она не "девичья".


          Вот к чему закономерно приводит внедрение наспех склеенных под бравурные возгласы и бросания чепчиков "топорных ноу-хау". Тяп-ляп, "и так сойдёт". Позорище!
          1. Hagen
            Hagen 2 September 2020 17: 21 New
            11
            Quote: lexus
            Прежде, чем что-то мне советовать, освежите память, если она не "девичья".

            Я просто задал вопрос. Какие советы, где вы их увидели? И зачем сравнивать мягкое с кислым? Вы считаете самописец наспех склеенным? Вы какое-то к ним отношение имеете? В Сосне, я так понимаю, вас форма не удовлетворила, так причем тут прибор, уроненный с 6000 метров? Я думаю, что когда у прибора появится заказчик, его сконфигурируют под установочное место. А сейчас просто продемонстрировали, что он есть и что-то может то, чего не могут другие. А чтобы обозвать прибор "позорищем", я думаю, вы должны были бы представить что-то более совершенное. Можете?
            1. Lexus
              Lexus 2 September 2020 18: 15 New
              +2
              You need this for another resource ...

              Это что было? Поздняк "задний" давать.

              The existing types of BUR PI are classified according to the following features:
              - special purpose:
              - emergency. Designed to establish the causes of drug abuse. All GA aircrafts are equipped with emergency RUR PI. According to modern requirements, this type of BUR PI must register at least 40 AP (altitude, speed, overloads, deflection angles of rudders, ailerons, etc.) and 60 RK (ACS on, Chassis extended, Flaps rejected, Fuel residual, etc.). etc.);
              The container with the storage device must ensure the safety of the flight record when it is exposed to shock loads up to 200g with a pulse duration of up to 10 ms, a temperature of 1000 ° C for 15 minutes, corrosive liquids (2 hours) and sea water (5 days). For this purpose, special means of protection and rescue PI are used - a high-strength, heat-resistant and heat-resistant container, buoyancy and devices for slowing down the falling speed;

              Это ещё СОВЕТСКИЕ требования к АБР. В соответствиями с нормативами ИКАО 1970 года!!! Современные твердотельные накопители в состоянии выдержать кратковременную перегрузку 1500g и более! А как, испытывающие при вылете из ствола свыше 50000g, "Экскалибуры" и "Краснополи" продолжают функционировать вплоть до подрыва БЧ? Если устройство соответствовало требованиям, то чтобы оно имело хотя бы теоретическую возможность разрушиться, самолёт должен был не падать, а, как минимум, на форсаже воткнуться в железобетон. Там ломаться больше нечему! Не корпусу же и компаунду, в конце концов, как в "нашем случае".

              I think that when the device has a customer

              При таком подходе - никогда. Если только навяжут кому по указиловке "сверху". Эргономика, функциональность, технологичность - слышали такое? "Встречают всегда по одёжке."(С).

              you should have imagined something more perfect

              Чего? Т.е. каждый гражданин в одном лице должен быть "и швец, и жнец", и врач, и учитель, и инженер, и конструктор, и программист, и академик... и president? Универсальный солдат, "всё в одном флаконе"? Как вы себе это представляете? Я СВОЮ работу выполняю, и ко мне нет никаких претензий! И за мои налоги, в том числе, и прочие "поборы" все эти "швабе" подпитываются государством, которое, если, "не дай бог" для чиновников, каждый индивидум станет самодостаточным, просто будет не нужным человеку. Неудивительно, что с таким "подходом" развал РФ приобретает характер неизбежности. Так кто враги получается? И неужели вас в методичке так явно к "свержению конституционного строя" призывают? Нет. Просто "авторы", по обыкновению, выдали "продукт", так же головой не думая. Спасибо, можете дальше не отвечать.
              1. orionvitt
                orionvitt 2 September 2020 19: 22 New
                0
                Quote: lexus
                Неудивительно, что с таким "подходом" развал РФ приобретает характер неизбежности.

                Are you dreaming? Oh well. laughing
              2. meandr51
                meandr51 2 September 2020 20: 00 New
                0
                This is just a Soviet recorder. He has a hole in the corner, possibly from a fragment of a rocket. In this case, the guarantee will be canceled from any recorder. In this case, the amount of g does not matter. The striking element pierced the body and the board. This also happens in tanks ...
                1. Lexus
                  Lexus 2 September 2020 21: 14 New
                  +5
                  This is just a Soviet recorder.

                  Тайвань уже в 80-е выпускал сегодняшние флешки, а СССР покупал их и потрошил для того, чтобы чипы "гражданского образца" засунуть в САРПП? Браво! good laughing

                  The striking element pierced the body and the board

                  Такое ощущение, что у некоторых комментаторов корпуса черепных коробок пробиты, а "содержимое" либо серьёзно повреждено, либо заменено на другую "субстанцию", генерировать мыслительные процессы не способную.
                  1. Quadro
                    Quadro 3 September 2020 02: 30 New
                    -1
                    Quote: lexus
                    This is just a Soviet recorder.

                    Тайвань уже в 80-е выпускал сегодняшние флешки, а СССР покупал их и потрошил для того, чтобы чипы "гражданского образца" засунуть в САРПП? Браво! good laughing

                    The striking element pierced the body and the board

                    Такое ощущение, что у некоторых комментаторов корпуса черепных коробок пробиты, а "содержимое" либо серьёзно повреждено, либо заменено на другую "субстанцию", генерировать мыслительные процессы не способную.

                    Yes, you yourself are bruised, like Tatra.
              3. Hagen
                Hagen 3 September 2020 06: 37 New
                +2
                Quote: lexus
                I do MY job, and there are no complaints against me!

                Выставьте свою работу сюда на обзор, уверен, претензии появятся, особенно от вам подобных. Да ваше утверждение не так дорого стоит. Мы тут все круче "вареного яйца". Написать о себе можно "с три короба", не приходя в сознание.
              4. sevryuk
                sevryuk 4 September 2020 10: 09 New
                0
                What's with the polymers? Why isn't Putin mentioned?
      3. Bykov.
        Bykov. 3 September 2020 04: 26 New
        +1
        Quote: lexus
        Интересно, откуда руки растут у "создателей". XXI век, всё-таки, на дворе. А тут уровень калдыря-энтузиаста из соседней квартиры, "холдинга", специализирующегося на самогоноварении и уничтожении полученного "продукта". Вот уж, "достойный" ориентир.request

        Kvadratish, prakish, gut !!!
    2. Prizr
      Prizr 4 September 2020 14: 45 New
      0
      It would be very useful in Donbass, where this is exactly what is happening in all its manifestations.
  2. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 2 September 2020 13: 40 New
    +1
    Doesn't burn your eyes? Apparently not. It just won't let you aim or watch. Humanely...
    1. novel66
      novel66 2 September 2020 13: 49 New
      -7
      smears the optics with dirt from a distance
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 2 September 2020 13: 58 New
        0
        Quote: novel xnumx
        smears the optics with dirt from a distance

        Модулированная (моргающая) подсветка высокой яркости. Также работает система на Т-90. "Штора" называется, кажется.
        1. Alexey Sommer
          Alexey Sommer 2 September 2020 16: 03 New
          -1
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          Также работает система на Т-90. "Штора"

          This is not how the curtain works.
          Don't write nonsense. Examine the materiel.
          1. Mountain shooter
            Mountain shooter 2 September 2020 16: 10 New
            +2
            Quote: Alexey Sommer
            This is not how the curtain works.
            Don't write nonsense. Examine the materiel

            This is how it works. Xenon lamp only in red and near infrared. With a modulator. If it worked without a filter, it would be impossible to look at the side of the tank through the optics. By the way, we tested it without a filter. It is with this result. It was developed at a nearby institute ... be a little more creative. And less aggressive.
    2. Piramidon
      Piramidon 2 September 2020 15: 15 New
      +9
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Doesn't burn your eyes?

      Reminded. laughing
  3. Rostislav
    Rostislav 2 September 2020 13: 47 New
    0
    It is not clear from the article - does the illumination prevent aiming / observing or, if necessary, disable (neutralize) the enemy's optics?
    Based on the name, this is the second, but it is hard to believe that it would be a very effective device.
    1. carstorm 11
      carstorm 11 2 September 2020 13: 51 New
      +1
      Новый прибор "СОСНА-Н" также обнаруживает оптические устройства, которые ведут прицеливание или наблюдение за объектом. Однако при этом, в случае необходимости, он еще и нейтрализует их с помощью визуальных помех – специальным лазерным излучением-что тут непонятно то?) ПОМЕХИ вполне конкретное слово)
      1. Rostislav
        Rostislav 2 September 2020 14: 10 New
        0
        Результат "нейтрализовать" [прибор наблюдения] и "создать помехи" [наблюдению] суть разные действия, что тут непонятно то?
        1. carstorm 11
          carstorm 11 2 September 2020 14: 16 New
          0
          neutralization is not destruction or damage) to neutralize means not to allow one to perform its functions. visual interference is one way. what is said and explained.
          1. Rostislav
            Rostislav 2 September 2020 14: 23 New
            0
            Вообще-то определение "нейтрализовать" подразумевает более серьезное воздействие, чем просто создать помехи для выполнения функции. Создать помехи не означает сделать невозможным выполнение задачи, тогда как понятие "нейтрализовать" несет именно эту смысловую нагрузку.
            Verbal battles are not important, the device would work normally and faster than them in the troops.
            1. Hagen
              Hagen 2 September 2020 16: 30 New
              -1
              Quote: Rostislav
              Вообще-то определение "нейтрализовать" подразумевает более серьезное воздействие

              A shock blow to the retina is possible with a temporary weakening of the functions of the latter. The use of blinding laser weapons is prohibited by international agreements (Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons (Additional Protocol) to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects). I do not think that the officially presented sample will cross the border of the ban. In any case, in peacetime.
      2. seregatara1969
        seregatara1969 2 September 2020 14: 34 New
        0
        How does binoculars neutralize? Will it close up with mud? Electronic surveillance equipment extinguishes - that's understandable
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 2 September 2020 13: 54 New
      +8
      Quote: Rostislav
      but it's hard to believe that it would be a very effective device.

      It turned out.
      And even under the USSR

      PAPV was called
    3. Senka naughty
      Senka naughty 2 September 2020 14: 03 New
      -1
      Quote: Rostislav
      It is not clear from the article - does the illumination prevent aiming / observing or, if necessary, disable (neutralize) the enemy's optics?
      Based on the name, this is the second, but it is hard to believe that it would be a very effective device.

      In passive mode, it detects the position of a sniper, observer, spotter. There is no way to destroy, they neutralize the work of optics with laser radiation.
      Cool system. But I suppose it will not be difficult to calculate it, and to deceive.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 2 September 2020 14: 07 New
        +2
        Quote: Senka Mad
        In passive mode, it detects the position of a sniper, observer, spotter.

        In active mode.
        Therefore, it can be quite easily detected
      2. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 2 September 2020 14: 08 New
        +2
        Spread a bag of glass around the position and let this system neutralize them.
        1. dzuar saubarag
          dzuar saubarag 2 September 2020 14: 16 New
          +5
          The refractive index of ordinary and optical glass is different. Therefore, the system will not react to ordinary glass.
          1. Avior
            Avior 2 September 2020 14: 23 New
            +2
            what about cheap glasses?
            1. Senka naughty
              Senka naughty 2 September 2020 14: 32 New
              0
              Quote: Avior
              what about cheap glasses?

              Да будет "глючить" как и любая электронная оптика.
              In general, a highly specialized toy, I doubt that it will hang in position like a lantern, scare away.
            2. Free wind
              Free wind 2 September 2020 15: 06 New
              +3
              Let's just say that now optical polycarbonate is widely used, it is lighter and stronger, in terms of optical properties it is almost like excellent glass. It snaps out rather when using laser rangefinders. Plus, the missile gunner will snatch out the laser beam. The rocket will not fly anywhere. Often the observer looks not directly through the optics, but through electronic screens, then the matrix will be blinded, to put it mildly. When a laser hits the eye, it is not good enough. And about the prohibition, well, maybe he saw enough of welding, maybe the scale got into the eye.
          2. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 2 September 2020 19: 28 New
            +1
            Substandard from the production of optical sights will be strewed. I suppose there is a lot of it for one full-fledged sight.
            1. sgapich
              sgapich 3 September 2020 23: 19 New
              0
              Quote: Aviator_
              Substandard from the production of optical sights will be strewed. I suppose there is a lot of it for one full-fledged sight.

              It all goes to Swarovski crystals. wassat
              1. Aviator_
                Aviator_ 4 September 2020 07: 32 New
                0
                Well, not all. Verka-Serduchka is picking up something.
  4. garri-lin
    garri-lin 2 September 2020 13: 51 New
    0
    More than 10 years ago something similar was presented. There was a pretty good video. The sights from the SVD were placed on tripods. And the apparatus burned the optics.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 2 September 2020 13: 56 New
      +1
      Quote: garri-lin
      More than 10 years ago something similar was presented.

      http://www.bnti.ru/index.asp?tbl=02.04.
      laughing
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 2 September 2020 14: 11 New
        +4
        I don't even remember. Something like that. There was essentially a box on a tripod. Outwardly similar to LTSU Malachite. Massive and heavy. I scanned the sector with a laser and, when detecting optics, hit with a high-intensity beam. He worked very quickly. The distance is less than a kilometer, but we worked on increasing the range. The trick was not detection but defeat. Journalists asked a lot of questions about photo and video cameras. They were afraid for safety.
    2. An64
      An64 2 September 2020 13: 59 New
      +4
      Quote: garri-lin
      And the apparatus burned the optics

      What is it like? Optics are transparent glass. How can radiation burn glass if this radiation passes through the optics without being delayed? And then what happens to the lens of the emitter?
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 2 September 2020 14: 01 New
        +1
        Quote: An64
        it is clear glass.

        Transparent?
        1. An64
          An64 2 September 2020 14: 03 New
          +4
          Quote: Spade
          Quote: An64
          it is clear glass.

          Transparent?

          Of course, once they look through it
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 2 September 2020 14: 05 New
            -1
            I heard that. that even the air is not completely transparent.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 2 September 2020 14: 32 New
              +1
              Are there any disadvantages to a schoolboy who has not studied physics yet? laughing
      2. garri-lin
        garri-lin 2 September 2020 14: 12 New
        0
        Alas, such secrets were not revealed.
      3. dzvero
        dzvero 2 September 2020 14: 25 New
        +3
        "Сжечь", конечно, слишком образно. Но за счет микронеоднородностей материала вполне возможно снизить параметры. Попробуйте прицелиться с мутными пятнышками где не надо...
    3. Senka naughty
      Senka naughty 2 September 2020 14: 06 New
      -5
      To burn anything, this system must be the size of a car. good Rollers are of course good.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 2 September 2020 14: 13 New
        0
        The distance is about a kilometer. The emphasis was on countering snipers. The shit was big.
  5. MARGADON
    MARGADON 2 September 2020 13: 56 New
    +1
    So, in response, a turn from a large-caliber armored personnel carrier, for example, and to the automatic mode of detection and use wassat
    1. Fibrizio
      Fibrizio 2 September 2020 14: 07 New
      -5
      Yeah, our soldier looked through binoculars, and he was blown off by a machine gun from his own armored personnel carrier.
      In general, it is interesting how things will be from the point of view of international law. If my memory serves me, we have ratified the conventions prohibiting blind people. So the question is.
      1. Senka naughty
        Senka naughty 2 September 2020 14: 10 New
        -1
        If a soldier looks through binoculars at his APC, then he is clearly at his laughing
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 2 September 2020 14: 11 New
        +3
        Quote: Fibrizio
        we have ratified the conventions against dazzling people. So the question is.

        No problem.
        Such can
        "Запрещение по настоящему Протоколу не охватывает ослепление как случайный или сопутствующий эффект правомерного применения лазерных систем в военных целях, включая использование лазерных систем против оптического оборудования"
      3. Rostislav
        Rostislav 2 September 2020 14: 30 New
        +6
        During hostilities, will you remember the convention that prohibits blinding the enemy?
        1. Fibrizio
          Fibrizio 2 September 2020 14: 35 New
          +1
          О ней вспоминают в мирное время и не принимают на вооружение неконвенционное оружие. Даже в "дикие времена" второй мировой стороны отравляющие вещества не применяли, понимая, что за этим последует их массовое использование всеми сторонами конфликта. Точно также никто в здравом уме не имеет на вооружении армий боеприпасы, создающие осколки невидимые рентгеном. За такое если проиграешь войну могут и повесить.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 2 September 2020 15: 07 New
            +1
            Quote: Fibrizio
            She is remembered in peacetime and is not adopted by non-conventional weapons.

            More precisely, they do not sign unfavorable conventions - after which they calmly produce an unconventional For others weapon smile
            1. zadorin1974
              zadorin1974 2 September 2020 16: 08 New
              +1
              This is also conventional. And further from the story, when the Koran was written, the roads were not mined.

          2. zadorin1974
            zadorin1974 2 September 2020 16: 02 New
            +3
            You Alexander tell this to the Lebanese after cluster shells with needle fillers, Serbs and Iraqis with white phosphorus and depleted uranium. The Vietnamese with pesticides and napalm. The list will turn out to be decent. But at the expense of WWII and chemistry, yes, many used, only modestly, without sweep.
            1. Fibrizio
              Fibrizio 2 September 2020 16: 07 New
              0
              Вы тоже сопоставляйте масштабы. Во всех перечисленных Вами случаях была "слабая сторона". Даже если бы они захотели - противопоставить им было нечего. А в случае конфликта крупных держав крайне важно не провоцировать оппонента на применение ядерного, бактериологического или химического оружия, а то как говорится "весь мир в труху" может получиться.
              А чем там белый человек гонял зулусов, зулусы рассказать не могут, тк не выдержали "бремени белого человека".
              It is also extremely important to adhere to the conventions regulating the situation of prisoners of war. These are all double-edged weapons. Both sides will suffer.
          3. Quadro
            Quadro 3 September 2020 02: 39 New
            -1
            Quote: Fibrizio
            О ней вспоминают в мирное время и не принимают на вооружение неконвенционное оружие. Даже в "дикие времена" второй мировой стороны отравляющие вещества не применяли, понимая, что за этим последует их массовое использование всеми сторонами конфликта. Точно также никто в здравом уме не имеет на вооружении армий боеприпасы, создающие осколки невидимые рентгеном. За такое если проиграешь войну могут и повесить.

            Maybe you don't need a lie? Chemical weapons were used in the WWII, but little, and then they completely abandoned due to poor efficiency, everyone already knew what it was and how to resist it. Dill use mortar mines with plastic splinters, and for some reason, no one from the United States or the EU is interested in this fact. And so someone who, and we observe conventions - to harm ourselves, we do not have such military capabilities as the NATO countries, there are simply more of them.
  6. tso1973
    tso1973 2 September 2020 14: 52 New
    0
    Был же комплекс "Сжатие"
  7. Sibguest
    Sibguest 2 September 2020 14: 52 New
    -2
    "Российский холдинг "Швабе"..."
    Может доживём (или уже наши дети), когда в российских новостях услышим (пример): "Российские автомобилестроительные заводы БМВ и Мерседес-Бенц досрочно выполнили годовой производственный план! С Новым Годом, товарищи!"
    1. Hagen
      Hagen 2 September 2020 16: 40 New
      -2
      Quote: Sibguest
      "Российские автомобилестроительные заводы БМВ и Мерседес-Бенц досрочно выполнили годовой производственный план!

      Tell me why? To leave early on New Year's weekend? Overfulfillment of the plan was usually obtained in the USSR either from a bad plan or from poor-quality assembly. Once I visited a former relative at the workplace in the assembly shop of a tractor plant. The main thing that struck was the hammering of the bolts with a sledgehammer. They said something about the end of the block, a burning plan, etc. recourse
  8. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 2 September 2020 15: 09 New
    +3
    They do not accidentally neutralize the eye of the sniper?
  9. synodontis
    synodontis 2 September 2020 17: 20 New
    0
    Reasoning from the couch. In front of the sight of a sniper rifle, you can put a simple thin glass with a mirror coating at 45 degrees. This will not greatly interfere with the sight, but it will be very difficult to catch the bunny from the sight
  10. Kerensky
    Kerensky 2 September 2020 18: 54 New
    +1
    А что там насчёт оптических осей? У снайпера ось проходит через зрачок, оптический прицел (центр линз) и упирается в цель (условно). У этого "волшебного фонаря" свои оптические оси, проходящие через центр линз на одной из граней...
    Shall I shoot this box from the side? wink
  11. yfast
    yfast 2 September 2020 20: 46 New
    0
    How does he find a sniper? Is the laser rangefinder picking up? And how does ordinary observation detect? Glare should not be on a normal scope.
  12. KSVK
    KSVK 2 September 2020 21: 26 New
    0
    As far as I remember, such devices have been around for a long time and have been working. At least any SSOs. About damage to optics by burning it is complete nonsense. But the damage to the retina is complete. Including irreversible. In cities where there are many cameras, it doesn't work very well. It's better in the field. There are also systems to counteract this thing. Moreover, they are often quite primitive in the form of cunning mesh blends. Well, in the active mode, it is elementary determined and neutralized.
    1. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 4 September 2020 10: 01 New
      0
      Интересно, есть оптические системы, где оптика не "соединена" напрямую с глазом? С электронным визиром.
  13. Polente the Wanderer
    Polente the Wanderer 3 September 2020 10: 51 New
    0
    Комментарий:"А компьютер отдельно ставят, он этой коробкой и по проводам управлять сможет."
    Can it really be so?
    Should we consider an individual as an object?
    How much does the camera and computer weigh then?
    Ведь бойцу или "объекту" надо будет таскать все приборы при себе.Стоимость этого прибора?
    If the object is a building, structure, then how will point optical observation be detected? By chance?
    Optical observation does not emit waves unless additional laser sighting is enabled.
    Optical observation is not radio waves.
  14. Incompetent
    Incompetent 4 September 2020 11: 10 New
    0
    but in any case, the entire field of view of the optical device is completely illuminated by intense counter-radiation
    and if the sniper is wearing anti-glare yellow glasses