Electronic Trigger for Sniper Rifles

pathology_doc said:
Negligent discharge waiting to happen.
Click to expand...
Negligent discharge is user error, finger on the trigger when not intending to shoot.
Accidental discharge is when the user's finger is not on the trigger and it goes bang anyways.

=====

I'm not sure I see the point for an electronic trigger that doesn't include the TrackPoint aiming software. With that setup, you lock the target in the scope and then pull the trigger. Gun goes off when the point of aim lines back up with the locked point of impact, unless you take your finger off the trigger before it goes bang.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Negligent discharge is user error, finger on the trigger when not intending to shoot.
Accidental discharge is when the user's finger is not on the trigger and it goes bang anyways.

=====

I'm not sure I see the point for an electronic trigger that doesn't include the TrackPoint aiming software. With that setup, you lock the target in the scope and then pull the trigger. Gun goes off when the point of aim lines back up with the locked point of impact, unless you take your finger off the trigger before it goes bang.
Click to expand...
The physical pull of a trigger impacts on accuracy in long-range shooting, that's why they're instructed to squeeze the trigger steadily.
 
Forest Green said:
The physical pull of a trigger impacts on accuracy in long-range shooting, that's why they're instructed to squeeze the trigger steadily.
Click to expand...
Lock time as well. That is, the length of time between the trigger releasing the sear and the firing pin impacting the primer. But the MDT thing in the video looks (and sounds) like just making the sear release electronically-actuated and still using the normal bolt and firing pin, which is honestly closer to an old-school set trigger than a truly electronic one.

Electrically-fired primers have been a thing on heavy weapons for years, but back around 2005, Remington actually did release a fully electrically-fired rifle called the Remington 700 EtronX. That reduced lock time to the microsecond range (regular rifles are usually 2-8 milliseconds) by completely replacing the firing pin assembly with a non-moving conductive rod. A 9-volt battery in the stock charged up a capacitor connected to the trigger switch, pull the trigger and the capacitor discharges 150 volts down the firing "pin" that's in contact with the primer, firing the rifle. The primers work on heat instead of impact - the priming compound has a conductor (or more properly, I think, a resistor) blended in that heats the mixture to ignition.

tb_0005BOFAA-de.jpg

Never really caught on, the EtronX cost a good thousand dollars more than a regular 700, they were only offered in .220 Swift, .22-250 and .243 Winchester, and had a "key" that had to be inserted in the grip to fire. The tech worked but there was really no actual market for it at the time, and needing proprietary ammo and/or primers would really limit the appeal then and now (anyone into that level of precision shooting is going to be loading their own).

Voere of Austria also made/make the VEC-91, which pairs the fully electronic trigger with a unique caseless cartridge, but that didn't really go anywhere either.
 
Forest Green said:
The physical pull of a trigger impacts on accuracy in long-range shooting, that's why they're instructed to squeeze the trigger steadily.
Click to expand...
Because the rifle moves slightly as you squeeze the trigger, as your heart beats, etc ad nauseam.

TrackingPoint knows this and fires when the barrel is pointed where the shooter told the computer to hit.
 
But a simple electronic trigger would probably be cheaper than a computerised solution. I mean you could just use guided bullets if cost is no issue.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Negligent discharge is user error, finger on the trigger when not intending to shoot.
Accidental discharge is when the user's finger is not on the trigger and it goes bang anyways.

=====

I'm not sure I see the point for an electronic trigger that doesn't include the TrackPoint aiming software. With that setup, you lock the target in the scope and then pull the trigger. Gun goes off when the point of aim lines back up with the locked point of impact, unless you take your finger off the trigger before it goes bang.
Click to expand...
I'd forgotten about that thing. Has a ballistic computer in the sight:

arstechnica.com

$17,000 Linux-powered rifle brings “auto-aim” to the real world

Austin-based startup makes “Precision Guided Firearms” sporting a lot of tech.
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com
 
Forest Green said:
But a simple electronic trigger would probably be cheaper than a computerised solution. I mean you could just use guided bullets if cost is no issue.
Click to expand...
Or you make a mechanical set trigger.

Unless the electronics are adding something that is basically only do-able by electronics, I don't like adding electronics to firearms.
 
I recall reading about a police sniper system where multiple snipers could aim, and press the trigger when ready, but a higher up leader could press a button to fire them all simultaneously. Might have applications when you need to take down multiple bad guys at the same time.
 
perttime said:
I recall reading about a police sniper system where multiple snipers could aim, and press the trigger when ready, but a higher up leader could press a button to fire them all simultaneously. Might have applications when you need to take down multiple bad guys at the same time.
Click to expand...
That may actually be the best use for an electronic trigger...
 
Scott Kenny said:
Or you make a mechanical set trigger.

Unless the electronics are adding something that is basically only do-able by electronics, I don't like adding electronics to firearms.
Click to expand...

The obvious reasoning is that an electric solenoid would almost certainly be more reliable than a mechanical trigger, last longer, and take more abuse. At least, that is if aviation electric solenoid versus ground mount spade gripped/butterfly triggered machine guns have anything to say about it. Not only would it would also eliminate some of the more notorious and frustrating failures of conventional triggers, such as hammer spring failures, it would probably be cheaper over the course of production of a firearm.

The downside is that you have to replace (tens? hundreds of?) billions of dollars worth of infrastructure and stockpiled ammunition. That's it. Which is why the relative unreliability of mechanical triggers to electronic triggers is accepted as being less important than the absolute reliability of a firearm in a soldier's hands. Well that, and GI Joe would probably be the type of individual to cause sporadic lithium-ion cell combustion in his hand after trying to dig a dead cell out of the grip with a bayonet.

From a pure firearms engineering standpoint, electronic triggers are completely superior.
 
Last edited:
Kat Tsun said:
The obvious reasoning is that an electric solenoid would almost certainly be more reliable than a mechanical trigger, last longer, and take more abuse. At least, that is if aviation electric solenoid versus ground mount spade gripped/butterfly triggered machine guns have anything to say about it. Not only would it would also eliminate some of the more notorious and frustrating failures of conventional triggers, such as hammer spring failures, it would probably be cheaper over the course of production of a firearm.

The downside is that you have to replace (tens? hundreds of?) billions of dollars worth of infrastructure and stockpiled ammunition. That's it. Which is why the relative unreliability of mechanical triggers to electronic triggers is accepted as being less important than the absolute reliability of a firearm in a soldier's hands.
Click to expand...
If you're using a solenoid to drive the firing pin, that may be more reliable than a mechanical spring, and in any event could still use mechanically primed ammunition.

I've never had a hammerspring fail on a firearm before. And from watching channels like Anvil Gunsmithing, you apparently have a lot of warning of a weakening spring before it goes into terminal failure.
 
Scott Kenny said:
If you're using a solenoid to drive the firing pin,
Click to expand...

There is no firing pin in the ideal electronic firing trigger. The most reliable aviation guns use electronic primers designed to be ignited by a spark between two contact points. The M61 Vulcan comes to mind immediately.

If you add a firing pin you're just making an electro-mechanical solution which can be powered by vectronics. This isn't bad, it lets you hook the gun up to a power supply, but it isn't going to be more reliable than a conventional mechanical trigger, and it typically may be less. The protracted development of the T25 series machine guns, which became the M3 guns, from the 1930's is instructional here.

Scott Kenny said:
And from watching channels like Anvil Gunsmithing, you apparently have a lot of warning of a weakening spring before it goes into terminal failure.
Click to expand...

Quite a few firearms, such as the RPG-7, can suffer hammer spring failures with no indication or warning. Trigger pull remains consistent throughout, with the exception that the hammer does not drop and ignite the kicker charge. Can be rather frustrating when you're trying to kill someone with it.

It's not common, as evidenced by the fact that everyone and their grandmother the world over still has an RPG-7 in their backyard, but it's not super rare either. An electronic primer system would eliminate this point of failure. You may need to scrape the contact pad now and again, perhaps.
 
Electrically primed small arms ammunition hasn't been particularly successful. The only examples I know of were the Remington E-TronX from the late 1990s. Too much infrastructural inertia with mechanically primed ammunition.

Though I will admit to a bit of a surprise that the 6.8x51mm XM7 and XM250 didn't go with electronic primers with everything else electronic they were trying to do.

And in all honesty, any nation trying to keep military arms out of the hands of their civilians would probably be tempted by electrically primed small arms.
 
The other thing that's severely limiting about electronic triggers is that, if I'm remembering properly, the BATFE prohibits using electronic triggers on anything semiautomatic, classifying them as "readily convertible" to full-auto. Which...ergh, they're not wrong, it would be easy enough (though I'm currently braindead and blanking on exactly how), but at the same time any idiot with a hacksaw and some scrap metal can make a Lightning Link that'll achieve the same effect.
 
Ravinoff said:
The other thing that's severely limiting about electronic triggers is that, if I'm remembering properly, the BATFE prohibits using electronic triggers on anything semiautomatic, classifying them as "readily convertible" to full-auto. Which...ergh, they're not wrong, it would be easy enough (though I'm currently braindead and blanking on exactly how), but at the same time any idiot with a hacksaw and some scrap metal can make a Lightning Link that'll achieve the same effect.
Click to expand...
With electric primers like the E-TronX, the limit is how fast that capacitor recharges. If it takes 1/4 second for the capacitor to charge, that's slower than most people can shoot semi-auto.

Edit: you can also design the ignitor circuit so that the capacitor will not recharge until the trigger is released.
 
www.thefirearmblog.com

THE FUTURE IS HERE: LASER FIRING PIN Ignition System of Voere X3 Rifle -

Austrian firearms manufacturer Voere has developed a laser ignition system for their X3 precision rifle. The system consists of a replacement bolt, which has an integral laser instead of the firing pin assembly. The system works with any conventional ammunition with the primer changed to a...
www.thefirearmblog.com www.thefirearmblog.com
 
Mr.T said:
www.thefirearmblog.com

THE FUTURE IS HERE: LASER FIRING PIN Ignition System of Voere X3 Rifle -

Austrian firearms manufacturer Voere has developed a laser ignition system for their X3 precision rifle. The system consists of a replacement bolt, which has an integral laser instead of the firing pin assembly. The system works with any conventional ammunition with the primer changed to a...
www.thefirearmblog.com www.thefirearmblog.com
Click to expand...
I can see that getting popular for the Precision Rifle Competition folks. They're the ones chasing every possible advantage to reduce their group size. And the Voere X3 is already guaranteed to shoot 1/8MOA without the laser primer. That's a 1" group at 800 yards.

That performance doesn't come cheap, however. The base rifle is on the order of $6k. Then you need a scope, which should set you back as much as the rifle. Leupold need not apply, this is Zeiss, Schmidt&Bender, or IOR turf.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I can see that getting popular for the Precision Rifle Competition folks. They're the ones chasing every possible advantage to reduce their group size. And the Voere X3 is already guaranteed to shoot 1/8MOA without the laser primer. That's a 1" group at 800 yards.

That performance doesn't come cheap, however. The base rifle is on the order of $6k. Then you need a scope, which should set you back as much as the rifle. Leupold need not apply, this is Zeiss, Schmidt&Bender, or IOR turf.
Click to expand...
Actually folks mistake the point of electronic triggers , these will appear in small arms for use with FCS-enabled scopes and will add shoot counting and maintenace logs and unauthorised use and person lockout (LE more than military) which militaries actually want.

Laser or electricity initated priming is at present limited more by the ammo manufacturers and primers than anything else , there is no market for it , but once a miltary customer wants 100mio + rounds and is willing to pay for R&D it will become common
 
Mr.T said:
Actually folks mistake the point of electronic triggers , these will appear in small arms for use with FCS-enabled scopes and will add shoot counting and maintenace logs and unauthorised use and person lockout (LE more than military) which militaries actually want.
Click to expand...
Smart triggers that only unlock for the authorized users have a significant issue in military or LE circles:

If the smart trigger systems fails, you will have dead troops/cops. So the system has to fail to "gun goes bang". But at that point, an unauthorized user just needs to pull the batteries or whatever to disable to the smart trigger system.


Mr.T said:
Laser or electricity initated priming is at present limited more by the ammo manufacturers and primers than anything else , there is no market for it , but once a miltary customer wants 100mio + rounds and is willing to pay for R&D it will become common
Click to expand...
I can see electric primers or laser primers being good for caseless ammo (assuming primers burn up completely), as well as for precision rifle competition.
 
Those fears have been around for decades but at one point these triggers will be deemed reliable enough, on the other hand, how many cops are shot with their own guns, how many soldiers by terrorists they are training in xyz country

Sure you could hack and modify the trigger , but its not something that could be done in the field much less in the heat of the moment .


The benefits far outweigh the risks , and military and LE are actualy asking for these features . Fire control being the main for military and access and logging for LE.
 
Mr.T said:
Those fears have been around for decades but at one point these triggers will be deemed reliable enough, on the other hand, how many cops are shot with their own guns, how many soldiers by terrorists they are training in xyz country

Sure you could hack and modify the trigger , but its not something that could be done in the field much less in the heat of the moment .


The benefits far outweigh the risks , and military and LE are actualy asking for these features . Fire control being the main for military and access and logging for LE.
Click to expand...
Do you shoot recreationally? I can field strip an AR type in under a minute. I can detail strip a 1911 in under 3 minutes, completely disassembling the pistol to component parts.

In the field it's trivial to have access to the trigger system to be able to break the smart systems. But yes, it's unlikely to be doable in the heat of the moment.

It just means that any stolen firearm can be assumed to have a broken smart trigger within the day it was stolen. Or less.
 
I cannot see valid case for electronic triggers on 'legacy' weapons such as hand-guns, carbines and assault rifles. IIRC, cars and devices with finger-print and similar biometric security have a very nasty knack of finding exasperating failure modes. For a gun, that would get you killed.

A true 'sniper' weapon, though, is a totally different animal. As I understand it, they tend to have 'parallel' supply chains, to ensure repeatability. Moving the electronic trigger off the weapon would remove yet-another human factor such as phasing heart-beat, breathing etc etc.

Analogy: I worked in our QA/QC labs, was the 'go-to' guy if you needed to weigh out a scant few milligrams of a test-standard. Not because I was exceptionally steady-handed, far from it. But, I'd fitted a micro-spatula with a small, stiff plastic T-connector as handle. Result was 4~~5 times steadier, better balanced and much more controllable than the bare implement...
 
Scott Kenny said:
Do you shoot recreationally? I can field strip an AR type in under a minute. I can detail strip a 1911 in under 3 minutes, completely disassembling the pistol to component parts.

In the field it's trivial to have access to the trigger system to be able to break the smart systems. But yes, it's unlikely to be doable in the heat of the moment.

It just means that any stolen firearm can be assumed to have a broken smart trigger within the day it was stolen. Or less.
Click to expand...
I shoot competitively and do dabble firearms design and sniping gear design professionally. At present finishing up a subcompact 300BLK integrally suppressed carbine for a mil customer,100% own design.

As i do have lots of interaction with military SF units and with optics manufacturers and am seeing lots of electronics being added to optics, the electronic trigger is definitely next step up . Its might not be today or in next 3 years but in 10 years i reckon there will be lots of them around.

Again misconceptions abound , electronic trigger is in many ways still 100% mechanical trigger and if one wanted a ''manual override'' is doable .

A with real FCS , you basically squeeze the trigger and the solenoid will only give way once FCS gives command, after it establishes a firing solution with near 100% hit rate , yes first use will be in sniper rifles ,but DMR and assault rifles will not be far behind as will the grenade launchers

Miltary has relied on electronics in all facets for past 40years , a SF sniper pair carries cca 150k$ worth of gear on the pair and most of that is electronics. You can dabble all youw want about how it going to fail , but without it you are severely reduced in capabilty.
Cars ,planes ,space craft ...........rely on electronics near 100% ,no one in their right mind is skipping electronic for fear of them might fail.
 
Mr.T said:
I shoot competitively and do dabble firearms design and sniping gear design professionally. At present finishing up a subcompact 300BLK integrally suppressed carbine for a mil customer,100% own design.

As i do have lots of interaction with military SF units and with optics manufacturers and am seeing lots of electronics being added to optics, the electronic trigger is definitely next step up . Its might not be today or in next 3 years but in 10 years i reckon there will be lots of them around.

Again misconceptions abound , electronic trigger is in many ways still 100% mechanical trigger and if one wanted a ''manual override'' is doable .

A with real FCS , you basically squeeze the trigger and the solenoid will only give way once FCS gives command, after it establishes a firing solution with near 100% hit rate , yes first use will be in sniper rifles ,but DMR and assault rifles will not be far behind as will the grenade launchers

Miltary has relied on electronics in all facets for past 40years , a SF sniper pair carries cca 150k$ worth of gear on the pair and most of that is electronics. You can dabble all youw want about how it going to fail , but without it you are severely reduced in capabilty.
Cars ,planes ,space craft ...........rely on electronics near 100% ,no one in their right mind is skipping electronic for fear of them might fail.
Click to expand...
What I'm getting at is the designed failure mode, some product liability pain, and how that means the weapons won't be secure 5 minutes after they're stolen.

The users of a smart gun require it to be "fail deadly", so that if the smart trigger fails the weapon will still go bang. The people really pushing for smart triggers want the gun to "fail safe" so that if the smart trigger fails the weapon will NOT go bang. Which version gets used in a weapon changes who gets sued when the smart trigger fails ("when" because we all know that the smart trigger will fail at some point).

Just imagine the lawsuit when a cop is killed in the line of duty because their smart gun didn't fire.

A related example is the 1911 Series 80 firing pin safety. It was added to improve drop safety, but when it failed it left you with no evidence that the gun would not go off without a test firing. And this led to Series 80 delete kits being very popular, as well as most companies selling 1911s to make Series 70 pistols without the firing pin safety.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom