View Full Version : Have we reached the plateau of small arms tech/ability?
AnthonyCumia
03-09-16, 06:18
If no, what are we looking at next?
If not, would getting rid of infringements on the 2nd allow for more innovation?
If yes, when will we be really ability to have hand held energy weapons?
Auto-X Fil
03-09-16, 06:43
We have been in a plateau for nearly a century. A force armed with M1s and 1911s could fight fairly effectively today. That's ~75 years of moderate progress in terms of the weapon (bullet-pushing part) itself. If you tried to fight in 1940 with weapons from 1865, (like some Russian troops did), you'd be at a big disadvantage. Bump it up a little - the M1A adds the DBM, which was the last major innovation in small arms metal.
Give a modern soldier an M1 and 1911, plus modern optics and armor and comms. He's lugging more weight and needs to reload more often. But would a force so-equipped be at a massive disadvantage? No way.
Give a 1940 soldier an AR and M9, with WWII optics, armor, and comms. Does that force get crushed today? Yes. Do they overwhelm the opposing 1940 forces? No.
To be really cutting edge you need lasers and NVGs, which are certainly part of the small arms package. I expect that continues for a while.
Prediction: within 20 years, it will be common to have integrated scope/rangefinder/ballistic calculator optics. The military uses this for platform-mounted guns, and it's only a matter of time before it trickles down to small arms.
Imagine: Just put the crosshairs on the target and let the scope do all the work. You'd probably need to dial wind, but you'd literally input mph on the dial, and the dope would be calculated and the crosshairs moved accordingly. There would be auto-correct modes, for "close enough" work, and then a lockout mode where you hit a button to have the computer give you the best guess for elevation/wind correction, and then you can twiddle the dials or hold off to fine-tune and score a hit.
Military tech already allows shooting around corners. Soon the HD guys will be able to wear goggles connected wirelessly to their optic. You can view what's in front of you, and what's in front of your gun, on a dynamic HUD. Visible light, IR, and NV, all either switchable or computer-overlaid to give you the most information. That's a bit further off, especially the NV part, but IR/visible hybrid optics/goggles are inevitable.
AnthonyCumia
03-09-16, 06:53
We have been in a plateau for nearly a century. A force armed with M1s and 1911s could fight fairly effectively today. That's ~75 years of moderate progress in terms of the weapon (bullet-pushing part) itself. If you tried to fight in 1940 with weapons from 1865, (like some Russian troops did), you'd be at a big disadvantage. Bump it up a little - the M1A adds the DBM, which was the last major innovation in small arms metal.
Give a modern soldier an M1 and 1911, plus modern optics and armor and comms. He's lugging more weight and needs to reload more often. But would a force so-equipped be at a massive disadvantage? No way.
Give a 1940 soldier an AR and M9, with WWII optics, armor, and comms. Does that force get crushed today? Yes. Do they overwhelm the opposing 1940 forces? No.
To be really cutting edge you need lasers and NVGs, which are certainly part of the small arms package. I expect that continues for a while.
Prediction: within 20 years, it will be common to have integrated scope/rangefinder/ballistic calculator optics. The military uses this for platform-mounted guns, and it's only a matter of time before it trickles down to small arms.
Imagine: Just put the crosshairs on the target and let the scope do all the work. You'd probably need to dial wind, but you'd literally input mph on the dial, and the dope would be calculated and the crosshairs moved accordingly. There would be auto-correct modes, for "close enough" work, and then a lockout mode where you hit a button to have the computer give you the best guess for elevation/wind correction, and then you can twiddle the dials or hold off to fine-tune and score a hit.
Military tech already allows shooting around corners. Soon the HD guys will be able to wear goggles connected wirelessly to their optic. You can view what's in front of you, and what's in front of your gun, on a dynamic HUD. Visible light, IR, and NV, all either switchable or computer-overlaid to give you the most information. That's a bit further off, especially the NV part, but IR/visible hybrid optics/goggles are inevitable.
Link?
So cheaper Tracking Point tech? Cool!
I highly doubt you will ever see civilian owned man portable energy weapons.
AnthonyCumia
03-09-16, 07:46
I highly doubt you will ever see civilian owned man portable energy weapons.
Cost alone or will they try and declare it a "destructive device"?
Both. There are already large scale energy weapons in existence now being tested by both USN & USAF and the require a lot of energy to power them. Any company making these is going to want a return on investment so there going with the client that has unlimited funds, the U.S. government. By the time it gets to a man portable size our benevolent overlords will have deemed it "RESTRICTED: MIL/LE ONLY".
The government doesn't trust you enough to allow you to own a machine gun, you really think they're gonna let us have phased plasma rifles in the 40 watt range?
I think hand held rail guns are possible. Similar ballistics from electrical power instead of mechanical. We shall see.
AnthonyCumia
03-09-16, 08:03
Both. There are already large scale energy weapons in existence now being tested by both USN & USAF and the require a lot of energy to power them. Any company making these is going to want a return on investment so there going with the client that has unlimited funds, the U.S. government. By the time it gets to a man portable size our benevolent overlords will have deemed it "RESTRICTED: MIL/LE ONLY".
The government doesn't trust you enough to allow you to own a machine gun, you really think they're gonna let us have phased plasma rifles in the 40 watt range?
Because its not a firearm and the ATF can not do dick about it for the time being.
This is why we can not have cool things, the feds **** it up.
AnthonyCumia
03-09-16, 08:04
I think hand held rail guns are possible. Similar ballistics from electrical power instead of mechanical. We shall see.
Micro Thorium unit as a power source....That would be awesome, maybe projectiles that have a built in ram jet system from some extra power...
Because its not a firearm and the ATF can not do dick about it for the time being.
This is why we can not have cool things, the feds **** it up.
That merely takes the stroke of the Chief Executive's pen.
AnthonyCumia
03-09-16, 08:09
That merely takes the stroke of the Chief Executive's pen.
Could and EO reopen the Machine Gun Registry?
Could and EO reopen the Machine Gun Registry?
See Steyr's post, he is the most knowledgeable member of this forum when it comes to all that. And it seems the answer would be yes.
AnthonyCumia
03-09-16, 08:21
No, that requires the repeal of the 1986 FOPA therefore it has to be done via a bill. SteyrAUG had a thread about it not too long ago. If we could get rid of that and take away the "Sporter Clause" we'd be sitting pretty.
it never easy is it?
Auto-X Fil
03-09-16, 08:30
Link?
My bad - it was WWI when some Russian troops were given Berdan single-shots, which were only 40+ years old at the time. I can't find any sources indicating that Ivan used anything older than a Mosin in WWII as an issued weapon.
The point is, from 1840 until 1960, there was steady progress in the standard military arms. Many of these technologies were around in limited areas much earlier than their widespread military adoption, but over those 120 years there was constant change in the basic type of small arms operation.
Smoothbore flintlock muskets
Rifled cap lock muskets
Breech-loading single-shots
Early Repeaters
Smokeless bolt guns like Mausers and Mosins that are essentially modern tech
Semi-auto
Semi/full selectable with DBM
Lightweight select-fire guns with compact, mid-power rounds
Disregarding optics, nothing much has changed since the AR and AK. After 120 years of improvement in the basic operation of the weapon, due largely to modern design, manufacturing, metallurgy, etc., nothing much has changed in 50+ years.
What possible improvements could there be to the idea of spitting bullets? They already come out of the gun at rates too high to control, or to sustain with what a soldier can carry on them. Accuracy is better than the soldier can achieve under nearly all circumstances. We've maximized firepower vs weight. Things like caseless ammo and electronic ignition are monumental challenges with negligible benefits.
No, that requires the repeal of the 1986 FOPA therefore it has to be done via a bill. SteyrAUG had a thread about it not too long ago. If we could get rid of that and take away the "Sporter Clause" we'd be sitting pretty.
Actually you don't need to do anything to FOPA. If you strike the "sporter clause" it removes the basis for closing the domestic registry.
Actually you don't need to do anything to FOPA. If you strike the "sporter clause" it removes the basis for closing the domestic registry.
I knew you would know better than I. Thank you chiming in.
Outlander Systems
03-09-16, 14:12
Steyr is a scholar and a gentleman.
The problem with DEW is that the wound channel would be cauterized. You would have to hit CNS to make the juice worth the squeeze.
Shoulder-fired railguns would be a game-changer. Implementing a recoil-reducing system like the KRISS system would be a huge step forward in conventional weaponry, if the technology was refined a bit more.
Total recoil elimination on a pistol would be a massive game-changer as well.
I knew you would know better than I. Thank you chiming in.
Steyr is a scholar and a gentleman.
The problem with DEW is that the wound channel would be cauterized. You would have to hit CNS to make the juice worth the squeeze.
Shoulder-fired railguns would be a game-changer. Implementing a recoil-reducing system like the KRISS system would be a huge step forward in conventional weaponry, if the technology was refined a bit more.
Total recoil elimination on a pistol would be a massive game-changer as well.
Yes indeed.
I say we call the Portable Energy Weapons or PEWs for short. That way when they do arrive we can go PEW! PEW! PEW! :D
Steyr is a scholar and a gentleman.
The problem with DEW is that the wound channel would be cauterized. You would have to hit CNS to make the juice worth the squeeze.
Shoulder-fired railguns would be a game-changer. Implementing a recoil-reducing system like the KRISS system would be a huge step forward in conventional weaponry, if the technology was refined a bit more.
Total recoil elimination on a pistol would be a massive game-changer as well.
Not to mention reduced noise, and recoil from elimination of powder.
Yes indeed.
I say we call the Portable Energy Weapons or PEWs for short. That way when they do arrive we can go PEW! PEW! PEW! :D
OUTSTANDING WORK.
Really, as others have noted, we have not made significant improvements in about a century. Sighting systems aren't really the firearm. We have made dramatic improvements in accessories, but we are still using 100 year old concepts that we have simply hung cool new doodads from on cool new accessory rails.
Even systems like the SCAR and ACR are still the FNC and AR-18 but in a lighter candy shell with ambi features and neato accessory rails. The basic operating system is still about a half century old just like the most current versions of the M4.
At their heart, these are gas operated metallic cartridge weapon systems. We are constantly refining and fine tuning that idea but we haven't moved on to the next system.
We have experimented with ideas we hoped would be the next system, like caseless ammo but the advantages came with significant disadvantages. The G11 was an interesting idea but by removing the need for extracting the spent cartridge they ended up with "runaway" cyclic rates and excessive heat build up which quickly led to cookoffs. With no open ejection port and no airflow from the chamber as the spent cartridge is ejected, things warmed up dramatically.
Any kind of energy projected weapon is still a long way off. First you have to make sure you don't end up with a shoulder fired microwave oven which is as potentially dangerous to the shooter as the target. The necessary power source would be about as comforting as a nuclear powered car. I'm hardly an expert on these ideas but I can probably think of a dozen major obstacles that we are nowhere close to overcoming.
I just want my phased plasma rifle.
Promises were made to me as a kid.
Kinetic weapons are our mainstay but I think the future will lie in bionics, body armor, and optics.
Calibers may change. Part of me sees .357 sig as the caliber that "should have been" instead of .40.
I think more 6.5 stuff will come to provenance. Or should, anyway.
But...I think the big money is in automation and bionics. A lot more money is invested in soldiers now more than ever. A hundred reluctant conscripts with basic rifles vs a platoon of upgraded, uparmored professional soldiers with smart guns.
Technically caliber is irrelevant
OUTSTANDING WORK.
Really, as others have noted, we have not made significant improvements in about a century. Sighting systems aren't really the firearm. We have made dramatic improvements in accessories, but we are still using 100 year old concepts that we have simply hung cool new doodads from on cool new accessory rails.
Even systems like the SCAR and ACR are still the FNC and AR-18 but in a lighter candy shell with ambi features and neato accessory rails. The basic operating system is still about a half century old just like the most current versions of the M4.
At their heart, these are gas operated metallic cartridge weapon systems. We are constantly refining and fine tuning that idea but we haven't moved on to the next system.
We have experimented with ideas we hoped would be the next system, like caseless ammo but the advantages came with significant disadvantages. The G11 was an interesting idea but by removing the need for extracting the spent cartridge they ended up with "runaway" cyclic rates and excessive heat build up which quickly led to cookoffs. With no open ejection port and no airflow from the chamber as the spent cartridge is ejected, things warmed up dramatically.
Any kind of energy projected weapon is still a long way off. First you have to make sure you don't end up with a shoulder fired microwave oven which is as potentially dangerous to the shooter as the target. The necessary power source would be about as comforting as a nuclear powered car. I'm hardly an expert on these ideas but I can probably think of a dozen major obstacles that we are nowhere close to overcoming.
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2015/july/pages/directedenergyweaponswilltheyeverbeready.aspx
Here is a good article about what already exists.
I do have my doubts about ever seeing a "phaser" in my life time and if we did it would probably look like a cross between Blaine's GE M134 from Predator and the Proton Pack from Ghostbusters with the power source having to be worn on the operator's back. But who knows, technology advances so fast anymore that anything could be possible.
I just want my phased plasma rifle.
Promises were made to me as a kid.
Kinetic weapons are our mainstay but I think the future will lie in bionics, body armor, and optics.
Calibers may change. Part of me sees .357 sig as the caliber that "should have been" instead of .40.
I think more 6.5 stuff will come to provenance. Or should, anyway.
But...I think the big money is in automation and bionics. A lot more money is invested in soldiers now more than ever. A hundred reluctant conscripts with basic rifles vs a platoon of upgraded, uparmored professional soldiers with smart guns.
Technically caliber is irrelevant
Yep, not to mention .41 AE was pretty much already there but simply too soon.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.