# Ferret Anti-sniper system



## kilekaldar (22 Jun 2005)

Sounds great if it works
any comments??




Canada deploys Ferret system to Afghanistan 
Sharon Hobson JDW Correspondent
Ottawa 

The Canadian Army has installed the Ferret small-arms detection system on its General Dynamics Land Systems - Canada Coyote 8 x 8 reconnaissance vehicles in Afghanistan. 

MacDonald Dettwiler & Associates (MDA) received the C$1.6 million (US$1.3 million) contract for 13 Ferret systems in February. 

Master warrant officer Dave Blanchard from the Directorate of Land Requirements, and a civilian technician from General Dynamics Land Systems, completed the installation in theatre in April. 

Although the Department of National Defence (DND) had originally planned to put the contract out to competition, it decided to sole-source because MDA "was the only company with a product that met the technical requirements and the required delivery date", says DND spokesperson Liz Hodges. 

The army had hoped to have the systems installed in time for its rotation of troops into theatre in August 2004 but the procurement was delayed due to negotiations between MDA and the government's purchasing arm, Public Works and Government Services Canada. 

The Ferret system was jointly developed by one of the military's research labs, Defence Research and Development Canada Valcartier, and the Halifax branch of MDA. 

It can be vehicle-mounted or situated as a static land-based system. It is able to detect small-arms fire by locating the source and providing bearing, range, elevation, trajectory and calibre of the projectile. 

An audio alarm alerts the occupants of the vehicle that they are being shot at and the system determines bullet miss-distance. 

The Ferret system also keeps a digital log of all small-arms fire events for who-shot-first post-analysis investigations. 

The army purchased the vehicle-mounted system and has installed it on 10 of the command and remote variants of the Coyote, and is keeping one system in theatre as a spare. 

A further two are being used for training in Canada. 

Blanchard said a 'needs' analysis may be done "but there's no plan at present to get a dismounted variant of the Ferret". 

He said the system "is designed to work in urban areas and in the open, and it should detect out to about 1 km" depending on the acoustics and weather conditions. 

Field-testing both in Canada and in Afghanistan showed that "it works the way it's supposed to". 

The army is, however, working with MDA "to adjust some of the algorithms and the warning system so that it becomes a faster reacting machine, because right now you have to analyse the hand-held terminal to see where the hostile fire's coming from", said Blanchard. 

"They're currently working on a voice warning system", which will change the audible tone warning to "a voice which will say warning, shot fired, 2 o'clock [for example], and there will be 12 cardinal points on there [the hand-held terminal]." 

Blanchard said the army also has "another connector that we want to hook up to the GPS, that will [translate the algorithm] ... and actually give you a 10-figure grid to know where the shooter came from".


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (22 Jun 2005)

What about echo, sound at night etc?


----------



## MdB (22 Jun 2005)

kilekaldar said:
			
		

> Sounds great if it works
> any comments??



I'm pretty sure it works if it's deployed. DRDC aren't a bunch of newbies.

Edited spelling.


----------



## Infanteer (22 Jun 2005)

I thought we were deploying Ferrets to Afghanistan, with George Wallace going over as SME.... ;D


----------



## Baloo (22 Jun 2005)

My question is, if the system was designed for urban and open areas, does that mean it would not be as effective when trying to pinpoint trajectories in mountainous areas, like much of Afghanistan ends up being? I realize that there won't be Coyotes in the mountains per se, but I wonder (along with CFL) about some of the limitations it might have. If the settings aren't ideal, what kind of range or feedback are you looking at?


----------



## pbi (22 Jun 2005)

I guess we'll develop answers to Baloo's questions as we go along, which is how it usually goes with new gear. Seems like a great idea to me, especially as AFV crews have a hell of a time acquiring SA fire over the noise in their headsets, engine sound, etc. And, as US Army experiences at NTC have shown, a couple of marksmen can quickly thin out uncautious "hatches up" crew commanders.

Cheers.


----------



## MdB (22 Jun 2005)

Here's the press release from Canadian Army Website News section:



> Ferret out the shooter
> Thursday, June 09, 2005
> 
> OTTAWA, Ontario â â€ Canadian soldiers deployed on operations will now have better situational awareness and protection with the introduction of the Small Arms Detection and Localization System (SADLS), commonly referred to as the Ferret.
> ...





> Using acoustics from the rifle's muzzle blast and shock wave [...] The system also determines near miss distance and the calibre of the projectile, including fire from suppressed weapons.



Well, I don't think the echo would be a problem since the mic is precise enough to litrally 'hear' the noise from the muzzle, even though it's a suppressed weapon. If it can identify the calibre when the bullet pass by, let's say 1 meters away, it's pretty damn precise and I don't think terrain, environmental or weather condition would change the performance as to hinder it totally.

Imagine this thing couple with a GPS, a comp, a secure comm system and an artillery battery. The gunners would acquire target position within seconds and would fire as soon as the gun is in position. Thus, even if the sniper isn't anymore in LOF after firing, the gunners could eliminate him anyway.


----------



## Vigilant (22 Jun 2005)

I was just thinking about what would happen if someone had a lucky shot and actually shot the Ferret?


----------



## TCBF (22 Jun 2005)

Then, the techs would have to replace whatever part was broken.

Tom


----------



## Vigilant (22 Jun 2005)

Think how funny it would be! What would it say if it got shot?

Also wondering if it is self-calibrating?


----------



## TCBF (22 Jun 2005)

"Think how funny it would be!" 

- Other than maybe water balloons, nothing is funny when it breaks.

Tom


----------



## alan_li_13 (23 Jun 2005)

> Think how funny it would be! What would it say if it got shot?



"Ouch"?  ;D


----------



## George Wallace (23 Jun 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I thought we were deploying Ferrets to Afghanistan, with George Wallace going over as SME.... ;D



Been a while since I've seen one of those little critters.   Cute.   I believe they are good a keeping other vermin away/in control.   Not too much of a SME on them though.   Perhaps TCBF has some time on........Tom?

My youngest brother asked me a few years back, when he was working for a small company in Collingwood that was developing the sensors and programs for cars to sense pot holes and rough roads and adjust the shocks accordingly, if the CF was interested in sensors to detect incoming small arms.   I figured that with systems like the Super Dart that they used to have in Gagetown and the various laser detection systems that it was doable, but that we would have to fit our vehicles with an array of antenna to create the fields that would detect those rounds and thereby be adding more to the 'clutter' on top of our vehicles.   

I would be interested in seeing this system.   Perhaps he had something to do with it, way back when.


----------



## TCBF (23 Jun 2005)

Ferret Scout Car?  Nope.  Half of our TQ3 went Ferret, our half - me and Jim Catterall( who just left this table ten minutes ago) went Lynx.  Four months after that, five guys from the Ferrets went to Gagetown to become Centurian drivers.

Clutter on the turret.  True, but it does look like something we could hang our socks on to dry after washing them in the Troop Leader's canteen cup.

Tom


----------



## STA Gunner (23 Jun 2005)

I've seen the Ferret system, and worked with a larger, similar system.  It is an excellent system, and echoes, shadow and ambient noise are all filtered out.

It will work in all matters of terrain, and for bonus, the SA fire does not have to be aimed at you.

I think it is a step in the right direction for our force protection.


----------



## Baloo (23 Jun 2005)

Sounds like a good piece of equipment.

My next question is, what happens where there are multiple targets, or I should say, engaging forces? Will the system be able to identify them each separately and independently, or is there a certain extent to which it would get muddled and bogged down in trying to establish co-ordinates?


----------



## KevinB (23 Jun 2005)

Why does this remind me of the counter battery radar we deployed to FYR - only to have it mortared on the runway after it was deplaned...


----------



## Lance Wiebe (23 Jun 2005)

We never called the Ferret a "system".

We always called it a "scout car".

Although the hubs were unique enough to be called a "system".  You see, the Ferret never had a differential.  Each hub had its own gear reduction system........oh, wait.  Never mind, I won't regale all of you about stories of when I drove a Ferret. 

Did I ever tell you guys how we used to train to locate incoming fire?


----------



## Marauder (23 Jun 2005)

> The Ferret system also keeps a digital log of all small-arms fire events for who-shot-first post-analysis investigations



Maybe the tinfoil lining my hat is not giving full coverage again, but all I can say to that little tidbit is "erg". One more thing to undermine the soldier confidence when he's out trying to smoke Haji and bring his section back at 100% effectiveness.

Other than that, hook that sumbitch up to the arty CP and let the good times roll.


----------



## civvy3840 (23 Jun 2005)

Sounds good. Will it get confused if you return fire and tell you were you're shots are going?


----------



## STA Gunner (23 Jun 2005)

Some things I know about the system (or at least the version we saw):

-It will not give you coordinates per se, but rather a bearing from which the shot was fired.  It will also give you calculated range and elevation to the point of origin. (Works best if they are shooting at you)

- the Ferret talked about here is completely different than the old Ferret Scout Car (I realise you know that, but I just had to add it)

- It won't be able to tell you where your round is impacting, but you should know that as it were.

- It is an acoustic system, so it will only tell you the near miss if the sound of bullet passing is audible.

I will try to dig up some more.


----------



## KevinB (23 Jun 2005)

I may be wrong - or they upgraded the system recently - but I think it uses the crack - thump (just with more precision than we used to with the C1A1 Human Ear...)  As such with a suppressor the muzzle blast will be non-existant so the thump will be gone - and only the Crack of the bullet passing (supersonic).

 Secondly - last time I looked we where no specifically worried about SA fire in Afghan, more IED's and Rocket fire.  This to me seems like another boondoggle like the Coyote in urban/mountainous areas...


----------



## Baloo (23 Jun 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Secondly - last time I looked we where no specifically worried about SA fire in Afghan, more IED's and Rocket fire.  This to me seems like another boondoggle like the Coyote in urban/mountainous areas...



Even untrained and irregular combatants such as the Taliban would be / are often wise enough to steer clear from an armoured column when only possessing SA firepower and lacking rocket propelled grenades or rockets. This would likely mean that the attacks faced by Canadian Forces personnel with SA would occur in the dismounted role, and largely take place in the mountains, where to my knowledge, Coyotes either cannot traverse, or have limited roles. This would mean the effect is negligible, when 7.62 rounds come flying, the armour is nowehere to be seen, and subsequently, the Ferret with them. Perhaps I am looking at this from the wrong perspective? Obviously someone with operational experience could argure this more effectively than I.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (23 Jun 2005)

"It can be vehicle-mounted or situated as a static land-based system."

So I guess if you set up an OP it would work although if they're shooting at you, you've failed.


----------



## Danjanou (23 Jun 2005)

> An audio alarm alerts the occupants of the vehicle that they are being shot at...



As opposed to the old fashioned method of hearing bullets whizz by   :

Seriously sounds like an interesting piece of kit. Hopefully those who designed it/will be suing it take a gander at the concerns being raised here.

Have to admit though when I saw the title I thought of the sout car too. I thinks there's a coupl on display at the main gate at Aldershot if we need them.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Jun 2005)

> An audio alarm alerts the occupants of the vehicle that they are being shot at...



Let's see now.....just like the audio alarm on the Laser detection system......multiple hits from laser or certain similar frequency light sources and the thing gets turned OFF.  SOP.  Back to Mk 1 eyeball and Mk 1A1 (probably is one) ears.


----------



## mainerjohnthomas (25 Jun 2005)

Now that puts the "scout" back in scout car.  It is hard for a mounted patrol to respond effectively to SA fire.  The pending upgrades to include 10 fig grid reference should have our arty friends drooling over realtime targeting data, and make a scout car a lot more dangerous than its on-board weaponry and mounted infantry alone.  Coupled with existing sensors for active targeting systems, it makes a mounted patrol a lot stronger scout, and a more useful escort vehicle.  The best part is it is a passive system, so no increase in signature for the vehicle.


----------



## muskrat89 (26 Jun 2005)

The Phoenix PD has had a gunshot detection system in use for a year or two. I wonder if it is the same type of system?

http://www.shotspotter.com/prod_le.htm


----------



## mainerjohnthomas (26 Jun 2005)

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> The Phoenix PD has had a gunshot setection system in use for a year or two. I wonder if it is the same type of system?
> 
> http://www.shotspotter.com/prod_le.htm


    If this is a similar system, then it argues that it can be deployed on soft skin vehicles, the ones more at risk for SA fire. A couple of G wagons with this on patrol, with a tasked mortar team in support could thin out the ranks beligerants in fairly short order.


----------



## MdB (27 Jun 2005)

Here's some bits of info. It'll broaden the discussion too.







> The Ottawa Citizen, 2005.06.27
> 
> Defence agency focuses on 'direct support' for troops: Hands-on equipment will become more common as the military's research wing now aims to meet the immediate needs of soldiers in the field, writes a journalist.
> 
> ...


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Aug 2005)

http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/2005731213213.asp

Sniper's are a real problem for patrols, so some type of warning system is critical for force protection.


----------



## AZA-02 (1 Aug 2005)

This sounds awsome, i have seen this in CSI  But like it said, sometimes it a good sniper and he hits on the first shot, so someone is going to have to die to find him. The system should detect the sound of a bullet being chambered ;D It sounds cool but will it work??? Anyone out there worked with it in training or on a mission?


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Aug 2005)

http://www.halifax.mda.ca/ferret/index.html

Go to the image gallery and click on the first pic. You get a good idea of what the system is about.


----------



## AZA-02 (1 Aug 2005)

I forgot to ask about silenced rifles, and if it can detect multiple targets at once?


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Aug 2005)

As its an accoustic system I doubt it can detect a suppressed rifle. As for multiple targets I dont know but I suspect that it has some capability to plot those.


----------



## MdB (1 Aug 2005)

Look here for already posted informations on the Ferret System: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/31945.0.html


----------



## Navalsnpr (1 Aug 2005)

Specs on the system are as follows:

http://www.halifax.mda.ca/ferret/specs.html

FERRET SPECIFICATIONS
 HEIGHT:
 52 cm

WIDTH:
 57 cm

DEPTH:
 47 cm

WEIGHT:
 8.2 Kg

OPERATING CONDITIONS:
 -40 º to +50 ºC, Rugged and Weather Proof

MATERIAL:
 Aluminium

 HEIGHT:
 16 cm

WIDTH:
 13 cm

DEPTH:
 18.5 cm

WEIGHT:
 3.3 Kg

CASE:
 sealed milled aluminium modular housing

OPERATING CONDITIONS:
 -40 º to +50 ºC, Rugged and Weather Proof

 HEIGHT:
 22.5 cm

WIDTH:
 12 cm

DEPTH:
 4.5 cm

DISPLAY:
 5.2 x 7.5 cm

WEIGHT:
 0.74 Kg

OPERATING CONDITIONS:
 -20 º to +70 ºC

 Rugged and sealed "Cycolac ABS case with black
silicon boot

 INTERFACE:
 22.5 cm

RECORD & LOG:

 Greater than 2000 acoustic events for post-analysis investigations

BOOT TIME:
 2.5 minutes

SHUTDOWN TIME:
 45 seconds

 Easily hardware/software upgradeable &
networked
  
 Uninterruptible Power Supply

 SHOOTER DETECTION RANGE
 Up to the effective range of the weapon

BULLET DETECTION RANGE:
 Up to 200 metre

RECOGNIZED AND CLASSIFICATION OF CALIBRES:
 Small arms from 5.56 to 12.5 mm (50 Cal)



RANGE ACCURACY:
 Better than  ± 10% within 250 M


 Better than  ± 30% greater than 250 M

BEARING ACCURACY:
  ± 0.2 - 2.0 Degrees

ELEVATION ACCURACY:
  ± 0.5 - 5.0 Degrees

RESPONSE TIME:
 Less than 1 second (bullet passage)

 2 Amps, 10 - 30 VDC


----------

