

GUN Linux: On the range with TrackingPoint’s new AR-15s - waffle_ss
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/08/gun-linux-on-the-range-with-trackingpoints-new-ar-15s/

======
dTal
I get that they couldn't resist the pun, but there's precious little about
Linux and nothing at all about GNU.

~~~
mikeash
If you'll look closely you'll see that they never mention GNU.

~~~
gamegoblin
OP was pointing out that the title, GUN Linux, is pretty clearly a play on GNU
Linux, and they don't mention GNU at all (as you say). I think OP was implying
the title was clever, but out of place.

------
danso
Mmmm...I don't read Ars constantly, so maybe the product discussed has been
written about much before and it's assumed in the OP that everyone knows what
a Linux-powered-rifle is...but I didn't...I kept waiting for a full
description of what a Linux OS meant for firearms and never really got one.
OK, it has something to do with the scopes and targeting... _and_? Is this the
first Linux-powered scope? What other software has traditionally been used? Is
there a command-line interface?

(half joking on that last question)

I did skim through the previous article on the gun:
[http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/03/bullseye-
from-1000-ya...](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/03/bullseye-
from-1000-yards-shooting-the-17000-linux-powered-rifle/)

My instinctive question was...if the software is for the scope, then why does
TrackingPoint have to be involved in the manufacturing of the carbine? To a
layperson, it would seem that a sophisticated scope could be recalibrated to
any version of the AR-15...but in reading the 2013 article linked above,
TrackingPoint feels that it must control every aspect and characteristic of
the shooting experience, including the ammunition (which it sells for $5-7 a
cartridge):

> _The PGF is able to function at range because the system is preprogrammed
> with the ballistic characteristics of not just the three types of rifles,
> but also of the ammunition. TrackingPoint has partnered with ammunition
> manufacturer Barnes Bullets to turn out ammunition with very specific
> characteristics, effectively selling both the razor and the razor blades.
> Our original coverage of TrackingPoint from CES drew lots of questions about
> reloading or hand loading—that is, assembling one 's own ammunition from
> casings and powder and bullets—so I brought this up with Bret Boyd while we
> were at the range._

 _" Gun people are very passionate, and if you're into reloading and hand
loading you're in the one percentile." We talked between shots, wearing
identical Peltor electronic ear protectors. "The problem with hand loading is
that you just have inconsistent results. Some people do it very good, and some
don't. What I really want to avoid is the situation where someone says, 'Look,
your gun doesn't work. I'm missing, and it's your fault.' And the real issue
is, well, you're missing because you screwed up the ammunition—you have it
loaded too hot and it's firing too high. But you're never going to believe
me!" He laughed. "I'm really not trying to make a ton of money on ammo, but I
want to control the outcome and I want people to have a good experience."_

To be geekish about this, it seems this gun system is more akin to the Apple
ecosystem than to Linux. What are the possibilities of "hacking" this
gun/scope ("hacking" in the non-black-hat sense)

~~~
doorhammer
I've read a lot of articles about the previous rifles in question and I think
the "Linux" part may as well be a stand in for "Computer Assisted/Augmented".
I've never gotten the impression that the part about Linux really matters
outside of that. There doesn't appear to be any kind of openness as far as the
ecosystem or the software goes. I think the gun is interesting outside of
that, but definitely a misleading title for people that have certain
expectations as far as the ethos of linux/open source goes.

Re: the ammunition, I think this approach would be interesting combined with
some form of learning algorithm that could adapt to different ammunition
(assuming it was different but reasonably consistent ammunition), but, if I
recall correctly, this all seemed to be very much "hard coded" into the rifles
software, based on the proprietary ammunition. Given the $20k price tag and
the possibility of expecting 1000 yard shots, the $5 - $7 a shot seems what
I'd expect (match grade .308 ammo can go for $1 - $3 anyway).

Still reading through this article; interested to see if the reliance on
proprietary ammunition holds on something that's not meant to give 1000 yard
shots to relative novices

~~~
gonzo
You're not shooting .308 match ammo at 1000 yards.

Well, not in a match in which you plan to be competitive, anyway.

NRA High Power, sure. Palma, certainly (the rules require an unmodified .223
or .308 case), but you're not shooting commercial "match" loads.

~~~
doorhammer
Yeah. I enjoy shooting, but I don't know a ton about competition shooting. I'm
just talking about the kind of stuff you'd find labeled as "match" in a store.
Any shooting I do is for kicks with a pistol at fifty feet.

I'm more interested in the application of learning algorithms and how useful
they would or wouldn't be in being able to get a somewhat optimum statistical
pattern out of them (optimum within the tolerances of the particular loads
quality). Basically, what's the maximum accuracy you could get out of standard
off-the-shelf ammo if your rifle could self-adjust, is a question I'd be
interested in looking into.

If you've got any particularly relevant links on the various types of
ammunition you'd use for competition, I'd be interested in reading them,
though.

