The idea is to use GPS aimed artillery shells modified to make a relatively sft landing and carrying emergency survival equipment, communications gear and food.
Throughout isolated/mountainous areas you spot these guns with rescue shells, an you could delivery a pack within seconds to within 50 or a hundred yards (?) of any point in maybe a 15-30 mile radius.
You could also make the landed shells call attention to themselves with a siren, smoke, flare, whatever. If you want to spend the bucks, you could even pepper a whole aread with packs, if there was an ongoing search for a missing person or party.
This all sounds feasible and useful.
Is this occurring anywhere in the real world at this time? Linkies would be appreciated as my google-fu on “GPS-guided ballistic artillery survival packs” is coming up short.
I just thought of it today, and a similar search came up blank. I have never heard of this application before my own brain popped it out, as I was following the latest story of an Everest survivor not getting help.
Can’t say if this would work in the “death zone”, at least not a parachute landing version, as it would be too easily swept away in the high winds.
I wonder if this could be modified with a different payload. A chute, smoke flares, and survival gear.
Besides, everyone has spare 155mm howitzers around.
That’s a good question, and I don’t know. It would be better to be in the shell nose, I think, as it would seem that onboard guidance would offer a quicker reaction to local winds and other things that might lead it off course.
Trouble is, I know there are iron bombs and missiles with GPS guidance, and I know there are artillery shells with laser guidance, but I’m not sure there are GPS-nosed artillery shells. If there aren’t I’m sure there will be soon.
I did have a parachute in mind, but it probably wouldn’t be a good choice in a lot of circumstances, and a lot of mountainous locations, with high winds. So now I’m thinking of a harder impact with the nose digging in or maybe crumpling and fusing with the soil or rock under it. There would have to be some balance struck on what gear could survive how many gs of impact. And some way, like legs that spring out, to keep it from rolling away down the hill should it not stick.
Well, yeah, maybe. I guess that would vary by terrain. It’s the kind of thing that could be stationed at ranger stations, observatories, rather isolated places that have some staff availble to learn how to handle the things.
They could also be trucked in – though that kind of kills the primary benefit of really fast delivery. Still you might be able to say, support crews of forest fire fighters by firing in emergency supplies. Just so long as the damn shells don’t start new fires. :rolleyes:
It seems to me that if anyone had a locating unit on them that uses GPS, (I’m thinking of those emergency transponders used in General Aviation and such), would make an easy “target” for shelling some supplies into an area. At least until a rescue party could be organized.
Getting supplies to stranded people if you know where they are is rarely a useful thing. What you want to do is get them out of there or get them medical attention and get them out of there. And the wilderness is vast, much bigger then the range of guns. A chopper would make much more sense. And if you can chopper to them, that’s all you need.
In bad weather, 100’ isn’t necessarily close enough, especially in very rough terrain. Dropping shells on avalanche or landslide prone terrain is also a very bad idea.
My main concern is what are you delivering to them? What survival gear? If you know where they are you should be getting them out of there, not delivering them gear.
I tend to agree. Most often, the challenge of search & rescue is principally the search - once you’ve found someone it’s usually no terrible problem to go get them and bring them to safety.
I agree that a person high on Everest is an exception. But those “supply shells” are going to be of questionable value in such a case: Can you plant them within arms reach (while not hitting the person)? If not, she may not be able to make use of them.
And it would be challenging to make all the stuff survive a trip in an artillery shell - especially such things as radios.
Well, sometimes solutions are hatched out of crazy ideas.
But I can’t see it happening.
I really doubt that you could put much of anything in a 155mm shell that would help with survival. Especially if it also had to have a parachute for a soft landing or was other modified for a soft landing (can that even be done?)
If you know where stranded people are. You go get them. Shooting at them is probably a bad idea, though it would save a long walk.
And I will parrot what Xema said. The tough part is finding them.
So you are saying we arm the wilderness with cannons at the ready? Considering the amount of nefarious and/or illegal activity already occurring on public lands and you want to post more guns there?
The problem we were having with some of the GPS-guided munitions was due to battery life or, rather, the lack thereof. Maintaining that necessity out in the wilderness would present a problem on several levels… logistics, vandalism, expense, etc. I like the idea, just got some hurdles to crash through first.
Hey, this is the 21st Century. Wherever you go, you can be hit with a smart bomb. Or missile, or artillery shell.
I had this thought reading things about the climbers who have been passed by and left to die on the routes up Everest. I thought something like this would be ideal to deliver emergency supplies to someone up in the death zone. Places where helicopters can’t get to, or there based so far away that the delay is life threatening.
Which of course makes a parachute soft-landing a non-starter; in winds like up near the peak, I don’t think it’s possible to do a chute drop accurately enough.
Still, a small oxygen bottle and maybe some chemical heat pads might save a lot of lives if delivered fast and accurately enough.
Or, another variant idea is that a shell be fitted out as a search tool, with sensors like cameras and thermal imagers. You fire it into the search area, it maps the terrain on the way. Maybe looks for IR, whatever, I’m not sure what the most efficient sensor would be for a flight. This kind of mission would be good to hang on a parachute and drift down, while emitting a siren and a smoke trail, which continues for a long time to try and lure the lost person to come to it. Then you have to put in some kind of communications device so they can phone home.
I agree with several of you, that it would be hard to prove a system like this more cost efficient than helicopter rescue. Probably impossible, in all but very limited circumstances.
Cell phones, sat phone, GPS coordinates - once the location is known by the suitable authorities/first responders, if some sort of provisions are envisioned I’m thinking an air-drop is the way to go, assuming they can’t make a pickup, or land safely. (Helicopters don’t like too much of an angle for a landing site so sometimes the pilot will hover instead.) People have a knack for getting injured or lost in some pretty wacked out terrain.
So what happens when somebody gets into trouble, the ptb fire off a shell which causes an avalanche that kills the poor slob that is trapped, or the shell goes a bit off course and hits and kills another hiker that is not in trouble?
Next problem, a 155mm shell is not all that big. What a little over 7" in diameter? I don’t know how long they are, do we have any cannon cockers in the house? I am guessing after you allow for guidance and a parachute, you might wind up with a cargo cylinder that is about 6.5" in diameter by maybe 6 or 7 inches long. Not going to be sending much supplies that way.
I’m also thinking that it’s fine and dandy to give equipment to some guy stranded on a mountain, but lost children or people suffering from hypothermia, dehydration, or altitude sickness might not be able to help themselves with it. There’s no harm in trying, but a lot of hypothermia victims start to peal their clothes off rather than put on the parka you offer them.
Sirens, smoke, or flare?.. Hm, well I know I’ve been confused by the direction sounds travel, I don’t thik a flare would be a good idea in a forrest, but maybe on an artic peak that would work. Smoke may be a bit problematic with a dense tree canopy, but that might work.
I kind of think that the sheer volume of the resources required would make it cost prohibitive to pepper an area.
I assume you’re joking but no, you can’t. The wilderness is really, really big in places.
Nah, in the death zone those folks are too out of it to help themselves. If you don’t put the oxygen mask on their face and then put it back on several times when the knock it off it won’t do any good. Chemical heat pads won’t do anything either. These people are dying, they don’t need supplies they need to GO DOWN. If it’s more then 20’ from them they’re not going to get it, and no one is going to allow you to fire artillery shells where people are climbing.
Again, not much use if you don’t know where they are. If you do, it’s much more useful to send a chopper up there. You can’t have dozens and dozens of artillery pieces scattered about the woods, you’d have to bring them in every time, and then blow potentially lethal shells into unknown terrain. It’s a non-starter, sorry.
Wouldn’t unmanned drones be better to deliver an aid package?. Better able to reach tricky areas to ballistic shots, greater range, softer landing, maybe reusable, could signal back to base. Just a thought.
Is this a new idea of yours that you are floating here? that’s pretty cool.
