L3 IBRS (Integrated Ballistic Reticle System) Fire Control System

L3-IBRS

L-3 had their IBRS (Integrated Ballistic Reticle System) fire control system on display at AUSA 2015. The IBRS is a scope with built in fire control computer and is designed to allow for consistent, accurate and fast sniping at long distances both at day and at night.

L3-IBRS.2

The IBRS integrates a variable power day optic (X4 to X22), LRF, projected reticle display, ballistic computer,digital compass, meteorological sensors and incline and cant sensors. It has a 2 km range (2187 yards). It has six hour battery life (full on mode) and 101 hours of standby battery life.

specs fcs

Night vision is achieved with L-3 IBRS is compatible with clip-on night vision devices. It supports a wide range of weapons up to .50 caliber. Up to 30 ballistic profiles for weapon/ammunition combinations can be stored in each unit,

Not stated in the official L-3 literature is that one advantage of a system like this is that it allows indivi
duals with lower levels of training to shoot with much higher speed and proficiency than their training would otherwise allow with a conventional scope, offsetting the cost of the unit with savings in training.

Thanks to Lionel for the photos and information.



Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


Advertisement

  • MacK

    Cant wait to see Generation 2 of this 😉

  • Dimitrios Lykissas

    I totally agree with the last paragraph, as this is the reasoning marketers will use to sell it to the GOV (buy this -> spend less on training -> achieve the same results faster and perhaps a little cheaper). That being said, it is never a good idea to substitute technology for training/skill.

    • Joshua

      and that’s the thing, it’s a crutch, it will make little to no improvement for a well trained rifleman, but a good difference for a poorly trained rifleman, so, are we going to admit that we don’t want to train our soldiers?

      • Chris

        Uh, yeah, no. Not even close. Rangefinding, environmental monitoring, and ballistic computation are all things that computers do faster and more accurately than any human, no matter how well trained.

        • Joshua

          really, because I do it constantly. because I do it constantly I have a firing solution before the rifle is to my shoulder, so how is this going to help me?

          • All the Raindrops

            At 2000 yards in places you’ve never been before, in hostile environments with extreme environmental ranges? Good on you.

          • gunsandrockets

            And the math for adjustment based on altitude, latitude, and direction of fire relative to the Earth’s spin? Yikes!

          • Joshua

            so you would deploy this for a sniper, that I have less problem with, tough quite honestly, a sniper should never have to take a quick shot so, it still is a fairly minor upgrade, at a bloody high premium

          • iksnilol

            A sniper might need to take a quick shot more often than you think.

    • gunsandrockets

      The U.S. Army seems to have had a fetish since WWII of trying to substitute technology for training infantry. That’s the origin of projects like the SPIW, the ACR and the OICW.

      • Alex Agius

        Makes good sense. Fact is if you have a volunteer army that is raised quickly (like in ww2) you don’t have the luxury of the extensive training you get in peacetime.

        • Julio

          The introduction of firearms as military weapons was largely driven by the fact that you could train an harquebusier in an afternoon whereas training an archer took a lifetime.

          • gunsandrockets

            That is the popular understanding but largely a myth, for why firearms supplanted the most popular missile weapons of the day.

            The rise of the firearm and the fall of the crossbow took place during the age of the ascendency of the professional military company. Those hard nosed characters preferred firearms for their increased killing power over crossbows, not because they were easier to train with. Those early matchlocks were incredibly fussy weapons with seemingly no advantage over the ancient missile weapons.

            The advantage that firearms have for training was not truly exploited until the rise of mass conscription under Napoleon, when the flintlock musket with bayonet was already a well established and perfected weapon system.

        • gunsandrockets

          Volunteer? I think you meant ‘conscript army that is raised quickly (like in WWII)’?

          And I think you are right. Never underestimate the hold WWII experience has over US Army practices and institutional culture.

          It explains why the Army had to relearn counter-insurgency fighting all over again despite the Vietnam experience.

          • Alex Agius

            I say volunteer as it wasn’t like the soviet union where they’d kill your family if you didn’t go, but yeah it was conscript. In a future war however it would in effect be volunteer as many people would rather go to jail than to war.

          • Aaron E

            The draft had a significant contribution to the numbers brought into the Armed Services, but there was still an incredibly large number of citizens that volunteered to serve.

            According to the WWII Museum:

            “61.2% of the military were drafted, leaving 38.8% as volunteers”. That’s roughly 6 million volunteers, of the 16 million that served.

      • DonDrapersAcidTrip

        Kids nowadays and them dod darn computah masheens!!

        Does anybody ever step back and realize, woah, I turned into the old obsolete man who the world has passed by, the kind of person I rightfully ignored when I was younger.

        • gunsandrockets

          That ain’t me. Technology appropriately applied is a war winner. The trick is appropriate application as opposed to obsession. Soldier proof optical sights for rifles — good! Fussy, overweight, over expensive, salvo-firing/explosive-projectile weapons instead of rifles — bad.

          I think this new sighting system is a great idea.

    • flyingburgers

      Yeah, we shouldn’t substitute motor vehicles for the skills of riding a horse. Cars break down, horses are far more reliable. And nobody in the Army today knows how to fight with a musket. This whole smokeless powder and rifle technology is a crutch. There’s absolutely no reason why we can’t take on modern adversaries with Revolutionary War technology. All we need is proper training and skill.

      • DonDrapersAcidTrip

        the mentality of half the commenters on every article about a gun or accessory that’s newer than a 1911 or vietnam style m16

  • Ron

    Once systems of this nature are perfected, they will bring the same capability we see in tanks gun sights to riflemen

    • Anonymoose

      Theoretically, anyway. They’ll still never replace good ol’ iron sights.

    • gunsandrockets

      Exactly right analogy.

      As the price of electronic devices has crashed due to moores law, what once we could only afford to equip front line tanks with, we can now equip infantry with. For example thermal imaging night vision devices.

      Another analogy to follow is warships and tanks. Active missile defenses will become as standard on tanks of the near future as they were on the warships of 30 years ago.

  • LCON

    more and more following the Tracking point lead.

  • Will P.

    This is awesome technology! But with that “short” a battery life I would like to see the zero reticle be a mil-dot or some other type of calculator reticle for WHEN the battery dies you have something to fall back on, that and so you can double check the the range etc., computers do glitch and fail. Always look to Murphy’s law when designing something for military use. Lol

    • Bal256

      No reason to worry about battery life when you have your trusty BATTERYCLIP by your side!

  • Anonymoose

  • LCON

    It’s mounted on a Sniper rifle, If you compare to the Scopes seen on other sniper rifles it is actually about the normal size. that Weapon pictured is the Barrett MRAD.

    • andrey kireev

      Where am I supposed to find a picture of soviet vietnam era sight on a Barrett MRAD ? lol

  • ABeiruty

    Who controls the turrets? I see them caped, but their correction values are displayed on the projected info. What about wind?

  • steve miller

    Time out mr Taliban fighter – my batteries ran out while I was getting ready to shoot you– technology is great but never beat your life on it

  • Roadrunner0

    This makes every trigger puller an instant master sniper except for the stealth and endurance and tactics..