Drones carrying shotguns, assault rifles, or light machine guns? Much like Sub drivers say the only real defense against a submarine is another submarine, perhaps the best defense against drones are drones.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Tuesday, June 03, 2025 - 06:25 pm: Edit

Hitting a quad copter with any kind of rifle would be impressive, even at 100 meters. Bullet trajectories are hard to judge when firing at things a lot higher or lower than the rifle. The drone is dancing and you’d have a 50% chance of passing though the drone while hitting nothing.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, June 03, 2025 - 08:02 pm: Edit

You would do better with some sort of Proximity detection for the rounds with a High Explosive charge.

World War 2 U.S. Navy had such options for the 5inch 38 Cal dual purpose guns, and the British had a similar capability of the 4 1/2 inch DP naval guns.

Given the degree of miniaturization possible today, it should be possible to fit it in a shotgun round.

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Tuesday, June 03, 2025 - 10:24 pm: Edit

I'd agree, JSW, except there are treaties banning the use of explosive bullets. IIRC, there's a minimum weight allowed for a "Shell" (which is okay if it's explosive) and twelve gage is below that weight.

Unless that treaty is amended (good luck on that), the idea of proximity fused twelve gage rounds will probably be shot down (pun intended).

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Tuesday, June 03, 2025 - 11:58 pm: Edit

The US military uses launched grenades down to 20 mm IIRC. That's about the same size as a slug from a ten-guage shotgun.

I doubt you'd be able to make proximity fused 'shot', but proximity fused 'slugs' should be legal and possible at a size small enough to fit in a personal firearm.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, June 04, 2025 - 12:07 am: Edit

The trick would be to invent a shotgun shell that leaves the barrel as one piece, flies a number of meters (preset at factory, only one option), then releases a dozen flechettes.

By Robert Russell Lender (Rusman) on Wednesday, June 04, 2025 - 12:31 am: Edit

---

Quote:

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, June 04, 2025 - 12:07 am: Edit

The trick would be to invent a shotgun shell that leaves the barrel as one piece, flies a number of meters (preset at factory, only one option), then releases a dozen flechettes.

---

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Wednesday, June 04, 2025 - 02:50 am: Edit

Surely the answer is a Canister Round (possibly termed a Beehive Round in some US Circles??) ?


Enough bits to go 100 metres and it produces a kill cone of say 10 metres?

(Yes, 'what goes up, will come down' - so collateral damage is an issue near friendly troops or civilians - so using in a Urban environnment is probably not good).

So - it's probbaly back to an Expensive Laser Type weapn (which doesn't breach any other 'Laws' - ability to blind humans for example!!)?

Back pack battery - and enough to do say 10-12 shots before needing to be re-charged??

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Wednesday, June 04, 2025 - 09:17 am: Edit

The 40 mm grenade launcher (M-203 or M-79) the US military uses, has a "Shotgun" and "Flechette" round.....'

By Randy Green (Hollywood750) on Thursday, June 05, 2025 - 02:06 pm: Edit

While doing some research on armed drones, I came across a Forbes article about Ukrainian and Russian "Interceptor" drones armed with a shotgun being used in the anti-drone role. Elsewhere are mentions of Israeli "sniper" drones.

Perhaps this sub-class (armed with direct fire weapons) of Interceptor drones should be called (looks around) (stage whisper) Swordfish drones... .. .

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 08:42 am: Edit

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said yesterday that Israel has “activated” some clans of Palestinians in Gaza that are opposed to Hamas.

As a reminder, Hamas started out as the Muslim Brotherhood...which Israel “activated” against the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Some people never learn.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 03:32 pm: Edit

And some people never had any ideas on how to fix things; they just complain that nobody else does either.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 07:06 pm: Edit

With all due respect: arming Problematic Force A to counter Problematic Force B is how we got the Taliban. Whatever my ideas may be regarding whatever ongoing geopolitical problems, I do know that there's an unfortunate pattern in that region of "let's push Bob into fighting Fred" while ignoring the threat that Bob may become our new problem.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 08:00 pm: Edit

Again, no alternative, no solution. Really, rejecting everything without offering any alternative is a cheap shot.

I don’t have a solution either, other than executing everyone over the age of five, which would work but would never be accepted, even by me.

In the end, Bibi will have to pick the least of 37 evils, and it won’t be acceptable to Jessica, but I will accept it.

The only solutions offered by non-Israelis , the default solution, is abandon Gaza and let Hamas get back to work killing Jews.

So come up with a solution, Lady Jessica, or stop blaming Israel for the lack of a solution you like, or by default you pick the default solution. No excuses! Name a solution, trust Bibi to pick the least bad, or you endorse the default. No excuses! No more cheap shots!

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 08:13 pm: Edit

OK, you want my solution (which I've left unoffered inasmuch as nobody really cares)? Continue to use the IDF to disarm Gaza (in this case, by shooting Palestinians bearing arms and conducting house-by-house, tent-by-tent searches to remove weapons, combined with the anti-tunnel methodologies the IDF has developed). Once Gaza is disarmed, put a peacekeeping force in place to keep order while overseeing humanitarian reconstruction of critical systems (water, power, shelter, food distribution). Once that is done, inform the populace that Israel will oversee free elections in Gaza in two years time so long as there is not yet another armed uprising.

Essentially, a strictly regimented and security-minded version of the Marshall Plan.

By MarkSHoyle (Bolo) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 08:26 pm: Edit

I say, build a nuclear power plant, dead center of Gaza... Dare them to blow it up....

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 08:57 pm: Edit

Disarming Gaza is kinda tricky. As a military engineer I can offer a workable plan as follows.

1. Take total control (done).

2. Start at the south end, clear a 1km wide (north to south) strip of land across the entire width.

3. Bulldoze everything to bare dirt. Haul the debris out into the Med and throw it in any random deep spot.

4. Note all exposed tunnel entrances. Explore and map all tunnels. Use technology to detect all unknown tunnels. Use fuel air explosive to collapse tunnels.

5. Repeat this one strip at a time going north. Could easily take a month per strip.

6. Leave the two or three km strips adjacent to Egypt bare dirt. In the next strip north, build a concrete wall along the south edge, then start "reconstruction" using funds from God Knows Where to allow the civilians to move in and live their lives. Leave every 5th strip bare dirt and don't allow people out of their canton without a full search.

7. Prevent any radical activities in mosques or schools.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, June 06, 2025 - 10:03 pm: Edit

Thanks for your plan, Jessica. You do know that a "free election in Gaza" will re-elect Hamas who will go back to killing Jews. Obviously you know this. Non-terrorists never win Palestinian elections.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Saturday, June 07, 2025 - 10:35 am: Edit

We'll have to agree to disagree, Steve; you've declared set values for variables which I do not believe are in fact set.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, June 07, 2025 - 10:48 am: Edit

I suggest you review Palestinian elections and you will see that you are wrong.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Saturday, June 07, 2025 - 11:43 am: Edit

The last election in Gaza was in 2006, with Hamas taking 45% to Fatah's 41%. That said, this isn't 2006.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, June 07, 2025 - 01:43 pm: Edit

2006 wasn't 1948, but it was the same result, and so it will be again. The term "Arab democracy" is a cruel joke.

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, June 07, 2025 - 04:16 pm: Edit

I think both sides could learn alot.... and they are nearly as bad as each other.

(Isreali New Settlments in the West Bank and the Syrian lands being stolen v the the Hamas issues etc).

I don't think due to the inbuilt hatred on both sides this can be resolved in our lifetime.

Therefore a new rule book is needed.

1) Jersusalem and all land within 5 miles of the the City Border is declared a Free City and no one owns it.

Some form of Neutral City Government controls it (best comparison is perhaps the Vatican I can think of - it's a seperate nation, but they are supported by Italy etc).

(Reason for this is there is so much cultural and religuous value in that area, that more than 2 cultures want it - and so no one should have it).

2) Both sides** get their money together - and offers to buy all the Gaza/West Bank v buy all of Israel.

Side A offers $$ Billion
Side B accepts or offers $$$ Billion
Side A accepts or offers $$$$ Billion
Side B and repeat....

The Side accepting the offer, gives up in perpetuity their lands and any rights to their lands - and goes and 'buy' a new Nation.

3) The new nation could be a new island built up from Sand Banks and Dredging (like South China seas - but on a muich bigger scale) etc in an agreed place - or an existing nation sells land to them (Western Australia, Brazil, Chila, US, Spain, Morocco** - every nation 500 miles or more away from the agreed centre of Gaza/Israel/West Bank caan agree to sell their land.

** It probably would make sense to agree where the new nation can be prior to starting bidding - what Nations would be happy to sell off a slice of land - for the right price, some nations would - how much is Florida or Tenerife worth for example??).

Winner - Pays up and controls Greater Isreal or Greater Palestine.

Side receiving the Cash - moves everyone out UNLESS the Winner is happy for them to stay.

(I can see the Winner wanting Medical Professionals for example to stay - but it's there choice).

Both sides then live in peace - as they are not even close to being neighbours.

** - Syrian areass/Golan Heights could be factored into the deal - but that would need more negotiations etc.

So if Israel wants to live in their Historical Lands - they use their wealth to achieve it.

If Greater Palestine wants to live there - they Saudi's and rest of the Middle East if used to achieve it.

Agreement covers what the leaving nation can take or destroy before they hand over the keys

(Personal Property is removed - Isreali's might destroy high tech buildings etc and all Military is taken too - so no Palestinian Nuclear Powerplans or Nuclear Weapons for them etc).

4) The moving nation temporarily lives in the US or Saudi Arabia while sufficent land/infrastucture is being built - and once a core area is available , people start moving there.


The area bought has to move out any peolpe who live there (or the moving in nation can give the same option for some existing inhabitants to stay).

Resolves the problem - and both sides should have a nation able to stand on it's own (and thats prohbably the issue for Gaza - what choices do they have at the momment??) and more importabtly live in peace.

Financially, there is enough money for one side to say 'yes' at some point?

By Mike Erickson (Mike_Erickson) on Saturday, June 07, 2025 - 07:37 pm: Edit

>> Some form of Neutral City Government controls it (best comparison is perhaps the Vatican I can think of - it's a seperate nation, but they are supported by Italy etc).

Wasn't this in a Tom Clancy book?

--Mike

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Saturday, June 07, 2025 - 08:18 pm: Edit

Mike: well before that, it was encompassed in U.N. Resolutions 181 and 194, both of which would have established Jerusalem as corpus separatum, an international city.

Res. 181 failed when the British pulled out of Jerusalem before it could be implemented (and after they had refused share the administration of Palestine with a proposed UN transition regime), leaving a vacuum that was filled by invading neighbors.

Res. 194 failed when everyone concerned - Israel, Palestinians, and Arab countries - gave it the finger.