December 3, 2010

Sniper detection systems continue to improve

Filed under: Military, Technology — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 09:30

Strategy Page looks at the continuing evolution of sniper detection devices:

The U.S. Army has ordered another 13,500 SWATS (Soldier Worn Acoustic Targeting Systems) sniper detectors. These 183 g (6.4 ounce) devices come in two pieces. One is the sensor, that is worn on the shoulder, while the controller, with small LCD display, is worn in front, where it can be quickly glanced at. SWATS calculates (from the of the sound weapon fired) direction of fire in a tenth of a second. SWATS has been very popular with troops, and costs about $5,000 each. SWATS can also be mounted on vehicles, and work when the vehicle is moving at speeds of 80 kilometers an hour or more.

Acoustic gunfire (sniper) detectors, which have been in the field for a decade, have had increasing success. Over 50,000 sniper detectors have been shipped to Iraq and Afghanistan, where they have been increasingly useful. Sniper detection systems provide directional information about where the snipers are. Several generations of these systems have showed up over the last decade. The usefulness of these anti-sniper systems has increased as the manufacturers have decreased the number of false alarms, and improved the user interface. There are other reasons for all this progress, including major advances in computing power, sensor quality and software development. One of the latest, and most useful, improvements is providing nearly instant, and easy to comprehend, location info on the sniper.


  1. […] Sniper detection systems continue to improve « Quotulatiousness […]

    Pingback by warrock sniper | Warrock Hacks — December 3, 2010 @ 10:38

  2. Do these units work individually or – as I suspect would be far more effective – are they networked? In principle, three units should be able to triangulate on a precise location…

    Comment by Flea — December 3, 2010 @ 12:55

  3. Networking them would make sense, but the implication from the original article is that they are stand-alone.

    Comment by Nicholas — December 3, 2010 @ 14:12

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress