Advice required.

Doris, you are an expert.
I was thinking outdoor range.
Indoor than things could be different.
Most TV remote control is done by IR light that blinks at 40000 times per second. The transmitters and receivers are very common and low cost. (the parts to make them)
So "down range" there are many IR transmitters. (infer red light)
Normally the receivers have a very wide field of view. If the receiver was back inside a tube it could only see light from a very limited direction.
------------
Another thought:
On my shotgun I have a light source that spreads light out in about the same pattern as the spread on the gun. For night hunting; when light hits the target then shot will hit the target. The light could be converted to invisibale light. I think this is backwards but the gun/target could know if the gun was pointed in about the right direction.

is this for a particular firearm, or do you want to retrofit this on any firearm that's brought to the range? if it's for a particular model firearm, you will need the advice of a gunsmith. if it's a retrofit on any and all firearms, you are going to have some difficulty getting something that works with any firearm. the problem is when you start modifying the safety features of a firearm, you need to know what the possible side effects are.

here's what i would recommend:
1) find a competent gunsmith with design experience
2) find a hardware engineer to design the electronics (one who is a firearms enthusiast is a plus)

you might want to consider the following approach:
two sensors, the first would be a longwave infrared sensor (one that can detect body heat), and the second a visible light sensor. the visible sensor would detect a single color LED, and the LED would be driven at 1 khz or so. the firing line, and everything behind it would be painted a color that absorbs the wavelength the LED emits.

the mechanism should block the firing pin in the firearm. it should be a failsafe, and only energize the solenoid if the IR sensor doesn't detect body heat in front of it, and the visible sensor detects the 1khz modulation of the LED. the solenoid should block the firing pin when de-energized, so if the batteries go dead, the firearm will not fire. there should be an LED that lights up when the solenoid is energized. the safety mechanism should be function checked every time before and after the firearm is used.

most firearms have no wasted space inside, so this project might require a purpose designed firearm.

the safety system must not degrade or interfere with the ergonomics of the firearm

i've owned many different types of firearms, and being an engineer, i like to study how each unique mechanism works. one thing i can tell you, is there's very little or no wasted space inside firearm mechanisms. there are also a lot of existing safety features in firearm mechanisms, that if you try to alter them, can be a safety hazard. other than the obvious fact that bullets come out the small end, there are other safety concerns. the chamber in a firearm operates at pressures of 50,000 pounds per square inch, and the bolt needs to remain closed while that pressure exists. rifles have a safety feature that won't allow the firing pin to move until the bolt is completely closed and locked. the tolerances on some of the parts are very tight, and if they are out of spec, even a couple of thousanths of an inch, can be a safety hazard. what may sometimes appear to be empty space inside a firearm, is often where the bolt and bolt carrier move through during the firing cycle.

i still maintain that the most crucial safety feature of all is between the shooter's ears.

Hi Ron. Your idea of a tv remote sounds good.
My email address is

I’d like to make personal contact with you so we can exchange info by phone so please make contact with intentions of talking on the phone.
Kr Kev

Mod edit... Email removed Use PM's to exchange emails.

unclejed613 said:

i still maintain that the most crucial safety feature of all is between the shooter's ears.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is also the most likely one to make a mistake when it is in a rush, nervous, tired, distracted, hungry, sick, medicated, ... I hope you are done, we all understand training is important, but, unfortunately, the only way to achieve a level of safety beyond what is possible with training is to go beyond training.

Put a tether on them.
Handguns would require a shorter tether.

Doris said:

I’m looking to design a small lightweight device capable of being installed into a gun or rifle but/stock that deactivates a solenoid to prevent firing unless the transmitter /receiver are pointed in the forward direction. “Not a laser target finder”

Click to expand...

Starting with just that it will be a challenge. Different guns use different design safeties. Many common guns also use multiple safety settings. Just as a single example take the Colt Series 70 MK IV .45 ACP verse a Colt Series 80 MK IV gun (1911 frame guns). Each gun has multiple safeties including a manual safety (thumb) a half cock notch (hammer) and a grip safety (back strap). Even withing any given family of guns, such as the 1911 again for an example. Not all manufactures of series 80 clones use the trigger to release the firing pin block. Some use the grip safety. When it’s the grip safety it is often called a Swartz Safety. Here are two hammers, both very common but yet different.

I am only using a single version of a gun to illustrate that the 1911 is a very popular gun, literally millions out there and depending on variation you do not engage or disengage the automatic safety features the same way mechanically and with the added restraints of space I see no way to make it happen. There are countless safety features on hundreds of guns on the current market all using different mechanics to control the safety.

So even if you control the system being active when the gun is pointed down range The mechanics will depend on the actual gun along with, as we see, differences in the same model gun to gun.

You can't make a gun foolproof because fools are very ingenious people.

Ron

And what shooting gallery has the customers use the galleries guns? Would every customer have to buy or rent a gun that has this"safety" on it? That wouldn't fly around here. But don't know where 'Doris' is located.

Certainly, the mechanical integration is going to be the hardest part - but really that's out of the hands of anyone here. Presumably Doris, as the owner of the ranges, has a plan in mind. Personally I can't imagine anything that could retro-fit reliably onto any old gun, so my assumption has to be that they're thinking about the ranges own firearms.

From an earlier post we've got to assume that Doris is located in the EU, as (s)he states a turnover in Euros.

Interestingly, I also would have assumed that everyone going to a shooting gallery would want to hire a gun, presuming that they wouldn't own one... but this just highlights the differences in culture between the US and Europe!

Ron's (first) idea in #21 was my first thought too, strangely. Nice and simple, but has the disadvantage that the light sources will be getting shot at all the time...

tomizett said:

the light sources will be getting shot at all the time

Click to expand...

The light sources are at roof and floor while the targets are in the center, they will probably survive. But then some people "can not hit the side of a barn."
----------------
The X,Y,Z compass idea does not need something near the target. You can set the gun to only fire with in 6 degrees of North and with in 25 degrees of level. There are several different ways to do a 3x compass . I have used two. The active part is in that black square in the center of the picture. This type is used in cars. They are strong. I see some advantages to having a device that will work on any range with out adding "stuff" to the range.

--------------
I am having problems seeing the "disable" the gun mechanical part.
Again, think about just making a loud sound when the safety of off and the gun points the wrong direction. "Imbarrass the shooter"
-------------

Reloadron said:

You can't make a gun foolproof because fools are very ingenious people.

Click to expand...

I resembol that.
The 2019 models of "fools" will be out soon. New and improved.
------
My sun just walked by and dropped two new idea. Back after I research more. He is smart!

Number one Sun's first idea:
He is thinking about this type of indoor range.
Sensors are mounted in the "shooter's cage".
The gun must be extending through the shooters cage to work. As soon as the gun is pulled back it will not work.
I can see many different way to do this.

Number one Sun's second idea:
Gun Ring Safety
There is a idea where you must have a special ring on your finger or the gun will not fire. This way a stolen gun will not fire. (the gun and ring has an ID)
This idea is banned by the NRA. They don't want it.
I don't know how it works. But we can learn by looking at the patens. The question is how do they disable the gun!
The thought for this project is to have what ever is in the ring placed around the shooters cage. The gun must be inside that square to work.
There are many different ways to do this. I am thinking about post #30. Something is mounded under the shooters table so the gun must be over the table or it will not work. (over table and facing the right direction)

I spent the day doing paper work for the 15 of the month. Tird and going to bed. I see my spell checker died. lol

Doris said:

FYI I don’t own a gun but I do own 5 indoor ranges that own in excess of 300 and a turnover around 17 mill euros per annum. I’m looking for added safety!

Click to expand...

Doris said:

FYI I don’t own a gun but I do own 5 indoor ranges that own in excess of 300 and a turnover around 17 mill euros per annum. I’m looking for added safety!

Click to expand...

17M Euro turnover?

Just pay someone to do it then..I can recommend some consultants who do bespoke design and development

ronsimpson said:

The light sources are at roof and floor while the targets are in the center, they will probably survive.

Click to expand...

Of course - I was being slightly lighthearted with my comment. But being cheap and simple to make will be an advantage should some get damaged.

ronsimpson said:

Again, think about just making a loud sound when the safety of off and the gun points the wrong direction. "Imbarrass the shooter"

Click to expand...

I like this idea too - it's an original bit of thinking, assuming that we're not trying to make it completely foolproof, just add an extra layer of safety.

dontknowreally said:

17M Euro turnover?

Just pay someone to do it then..I can recommend some consultants who do bespoke design and development

Click to expand...

Any good range has a Range Officer on duty whenever the range is open. Commonly called a Range Safety Officer.

Making a smart gun is nothing new and the NRA does not oppose the developing and marketing of a "Smart Gun" which is simply a gun which requires the shooter to be wearing a ring or watch (transmitting device) to enable the gun to be fired. Much like a Smart Phone, Tablet or Laptop may require a fingerprint or retinal scan to use the device. What the NRA opposes is legislation mandating smart guns, forcing all new gun sales to be smart guns and possible confiscation of existing guns. That is what the NRA opposes which I also oppose. No problem at all with the smart gun. A good application would be law enforcement officers. Depending on what one reads approximately 8% to 10% of law enforcement officers who die of gunshot wounds are shot and killed with their own gun. That alone would be reason for a smart gun.

With a smart gun in mind each gun model manufactured would be unique unto the model number. The ring, watch or choice of transmitting could likely be fairly common but the mechanics of all guns are different. Revolver single or double action, semi-automatic, striker or hammer fired, rifle, shotgun and the list goes on and on. This is not as simple as making a "Dumb Gun" suddenly a "Smart Gun" like doing a simple retro fit or modification to an existing gun. Once you take a few guns apart and I mean field strip down to the last little spring they get fairly complex.

Here is an example of what S&W (Smith & Wesson) is doing on their new revolvers using a key system which could likely and easily be converted to smart gun technology but this could never be a retro fit add on to any revolver I am familiar with the guts of.

The only way I can see any of this apply to an actual firing range would be you could only shoot a rented range gun. Like most shooters I go to the indoor range and outdoor range to shoot my guns. I am not going to be competing in a rifle or pistol match with a rented gun. Things do not work this way. While I do not oppose smart guns and neither does the NRA I do not support them being mandatory, that is the deal breaker.

We don't really need smart guns what we need is smart people.

Ron

Reloadron said:

the NRA does not oppose the developing and marketing of a "Smart Gun"

Click to expand...

In this world full of fake news it is hard to know anything. The internet is full of stories of the NRA apposing smart guns.
There are news stories showing the US as the only country where you can't sale a smart gun.
Stories of gun stores getting death threats over smart guns.

A New Jersey law: Passed more than a decade ago, the law requires that once smart guns are sold anywhere in the country, only those smart guns could be sold in New Jersey three years later.

Click to expand...

Reloadron said:

Any good range has a Range Officer on duty whenever the range is open. Commonly called a Range Safety Officer.

Making a smart gun is nothing new and the NRA does not oppose the developing and marketing of a "Smart Gun" which is simply a gun which requires the shooter to be wearing a ring or watch (transmitting device) to enable the gun to be fired. Much like a Smart Phone, Tablet or Laptop may require a fingerprint or retinal scan to use the device. What the NRA opposes is legislation mandating smart guns, forcing all new gun sales to be smart guns and possible confiscation of existing guns. That is what the NRA opposes which I also oppose. No problem at all with the smart gun.

With a smart gun in mind each gun model manufactured would be unique unto the model number. The ring, watch or choice of transmitting could likely be fairly common but the mechanics of all guns are different. Revolver single or double action, semi-automatic, striker or hammer fired, rifle, shotgun and the list goes on and on. This is not as simple as making a "Dumb Gun" suddenly a "Smart Gun" like doing a simple retro fit or modification to an existing gun. Once you take a few guns apart and I mean field strip down to the last little spring they get fairly complex.

Here is an example of what S&W (Smith & Wesson) is doing on their new revolvers using a key system which could likely and easily be converted to smart gun technology but this could never be a retro fit add on to any revolver I am familiar with the guts of.

The only way I can see any of this apply to an actual firing range would be you could only shoot a rented range gun. Like most shooters I go to the indoor range and outdoor range to shoot my guns. I am not going to be competing in a rifle or pistol match with a rented gun. Things do not work this way. While I do not oppose smart guns and neither does the NRA I do not support them being mandatory, that is the deal breaker.

We don't really need smart guns what we need is smart people.

Ron

Click to expand...

That view of Smart Guns is true of the NRA's public statement about smart guns. However, read up on the boycott of S&W for working on the development of a smart gun. Who arranged that boycott? The NRA and NSSF appear to believe in the "slippery slope" in that, once a smart gun exists, someone may make a law to require it, so don't make it.

Also, I like your thoughts that smart people should own guns. What minimum iQ do you recommend?

Yeah, and the only smart guns are only in trial but legislation is already in the works for what amounts to additional gun control measures. The amazing part is only the legal gun owner will be effected. Again, the NRA does not opposing smart guns. They oppose how such legislation will be written, That is the problem and again truly tried and tested smart guns are not here yet or ready for a prime time review. The criminal element is not going to magically turn in their guns or register to own a gun.Politics aside most of the hype is from people who have little to no understanding of current or older firearms in general. Existing laws are more than adequate but are not being followed. You cannot simply send an existing gun to gun school and expect a smart to to graduate. Back to NRA opposition;

"It’s bad that the general public — including the majority of casual gun owners — are so confused about guns that they don’t know how much they don’t know. But what’s worse, at least if you’re a gun person, is that lawmakers and activists who know less than nothing about guns often find themselves in a position to confidently enshrine their technological ignorance into law.
This, then, is what the NRA is terrified of: that lawmakers who don’t even know how to begin to evaluate the impact of the smallest, most random-seeming feature of a given firearm on that firearm’s effectiveness and functionality for different types of users with different training backgrounds under different circumstances will get into the business of gun design.
And they’re right to be afraid, because it has happened before"

When going fishing you don't use the same lure and bait regardless of where you are. You choose your fishing gear for specific fishing components. When playing a round of golf you do not use the same club every time you hit the ball. Guns are the same and I may use 2 or 3 rifles with different loads.

Politics aside and what is proposed is impossible for just about all existing guns. This is why we only see newly designed prototypes

Ron

gophert said:

Also, I like your thoughts that smart people should own guns. What minimum iQ do you recommend?

Click to expand...

Well Gopher, I gave this some thought, I really don't need to consider a high IQ any average IQ is fine as long as they don't demonstrate as being criminally insane, Just for Example: Homer Simpson buys a gun.

Ron