Have we reached the pinnacle of self contained cartridge small arms?

[Eurodriver]

How many weapon systems are in current use that are based off designs 50+ years old? This can be extended to much more than just small arms (B52s, ships, heavy artillery, dumb munitions, etc) but strictly speaking - small arms in use around the world are relatively old.

Think about the rapid advancement of firearms from 1800-1900. We went from muskets to machine guns. From 1900 to 1950 we went from belt fed water cooled machine guns to automatic shoulder fired assault rifles...and since the 1950s? We've just improved on those original designs.

Examples :

AK platform - Fires a smaller cartridge and has synthetic furniture but is still nearly identical to the original AK47...which was almost a direct copy of the STG44...

AR platform - Fires the same cartridge and has gotten more modular since the 1950s and the operating system remains the same.

M249/M240 are loosely based on (or at least inspired by) the German MG34 platform.

M2 - Has this weapon changed at all since the 1930s?

Handguns - Still recoil operated like the 1911 a hundred years ago - just polymer frames and striker fired now.

If you get beyond the aesthetics just about every small arm (to include crew served weapons) can find a direct ancestor. Lacking are the laser guns of the future. We've been using the self contained cartridge now for over 150 years. 150 years before that the flintlock had just started becoming commonplace.

When and what will be the next great innovation in small arms and will any civilians get to use it?

[Moose-Knuckle]

Wait until rail gun technology is scaled down and we get energy weapons.

Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range anyone?

[Big A]

Wait until rail gun technology is scaled down and we get energy weapons.

Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range anyone?

"RESTRICTED MIL/LE ONLY"....

[MountainRaven]

How many weapon systems are in current use that are based off designs 50+ years old? This can be extended to much more than just small arms (B52s, ships, heavy artillery, dumb munitions, etc) but strictly speaking - small arms in use around the world are relatively old.

Think about the rapid advancement of firearms from 1800-1900. We went from muskets to machine guns. From 1900 to 1950 we went from belt fed water cooled machine guns to automatic shoulder fired assault rifles...and since the 1950s? We've just improved on those original designs.

Examples :

AK platform - Fires a smaller cartridge and has synthetic furniture but is still nearly identical to the original AK47...which was almost a direct copy of the STG44...

AR platform - Fires the same cartridge and has gotten more modular since the 1950s and the operating system remains the same.

M249/M240 are loosely based on (or at least inspired by) the German MG34 platform.

M2 - Has this weapon changed at all since the 1930s?

Handguns - Still recoil operated like the 1911 a hundred years ago - just polymer frames and striker fired now.

If you get beyond the aesthetics just about every small arm (to include crew served weapons) can find a direct ancestor. Lacking are the laser guns of the future. We've been using the self contained cartridge now for over 150 years. 150 years before that the flintlock had just started becoming commonplace.

When and what will be the next great innovation in small arms and will any civilians get to use it?

Couple things:

1-The AK-47 only resembles the StG-44 if you squint and are in bad light. Once you start to take them apart, the similarities completely end.
2-Striker-fired has been around a long time. I think JMB has some striker-fired pistol designs that are about a Century old, now. And the BHP was, in fact, originally going to be a striker-fired pistol. And then he died.

I wouldn't say we've reached the pinnacle, but we have definitely reached a plateau. And if we have reached the pinnacle of self-contained cartridge firearms, we have also pretty much reached the pinnacle of projectile weapons. The only place for projectile weapons to go is smaller cartridges with more efficient powders. Railguns, Gauss rifles, and the like might eventually become feasible, but those will probably be limited to an anti-materiel role.

We already have directed energy weapons, of course, but I doubt we'll see them replace projectile weapons any time soon. At least not for small arms.

[Leaveammoforme]

I would say the advancements are still coming by way of efficiency. From better powders to lathe turned projectiles to coatings/preps such as melonite. By way of systems we have things like Metal Storm. I believe most attention is being put towards concentrated 'beams'. Whether it be laser, microwave, plasma or old fashioned plain jane noise. Also the non-lethal field has grown leaps and bounds. It's not that projectile based systems have reached the pinnacle it's just that the JMB's, Maxim's, Eugene's & Mikhail's of our time are working on different projects.

[jpmuscle]

"RESTRICTED MIL/LE ONLY"....

Naturally, wouldn't want such weapons of war on the streets of America.

Wait.. Cough...hmmm

[TehLlama]

Nope. In the same way externally the ma deuce has gone basically unchanged, the CNC based machining and material science capability to make quick-change barrels, modular rails, weaponlights worthy of a HMG, and optics can still basically reinvent the platform without touching the hardware, the same will get applied elsewhere on those systems.

Materials science is always the bottleneck - we can't get the power density in batteries to run a 40W laser/rail accelerator system to make it a competitive/useful weight yet, but we know it's coming. Really advanced carbon composite stuff very likely will create some novel possibility in the near future, at least for receivers/furniture type systems, and integrally powered rails are going to show up soon enough for at least some small arms applications.

The caseless/telescoping case stuff is still another generation out before it's really prevalent, but a truly modular (take the motivation behind the Masada and don't let Bushhampster near it) platform in an intermediate caliber option is still a very real possibility. Couple this with some other dovetailed stuff (GenII-GenIII Reptar type stuff, but integrated into the sighting system (e.g. under a VCOG-Gen2) and a few otherwise unrelated design stuff starts to fit in. Caseless takes away a fair bit of the headaches with bullpups; if we're looking at integral optics packages then a good modular (McMillan bolt type) stock/cheekweld systems can fit and work well all built off good carbon fibre layups. A really modular system with that (rail type upper receiver section that can have modular magwell, bolt/carrier assembly, and barrel) all integrated in a 8lb package is pretty probable, whether anybody will fund it without a major international conflict looming is another.

[SteyrAUG]

I think we need to explore the combination of caseless ammunition and no ejection port just one more time. Cookoffs are so much fun.

[Chuck]

It's a balance of mass, diameter and velocity.
There is no beating physics.

A more effective cartridge is going to be more difficult to control.
Period.

[BoringGuy45]

Have we reached the pinnacle of firearm technology? Given that this question has been asked about every technology at every time in history where technology seemed to be in a plateau, I'd venture to guess that the answer is no. In the 1890s, it was widely believed that everything that could be invented was already invented. There's a lot of technology that I just don't think we can get our heads around, or is currently in existence but we're scoffing at, that may one day catapult small arm technology into the next phase of history.

The thing with firearm technology is that innovations are often met with very stiff and angry opposition. Anytime a new firearm technology comes out, the immediate and overwhelming consensus is: What we already have is just fine; it's gimmicky; it's the solution to a non-existent problem; any money you want to spend on this should go toward ammo and training classes; anyone who thinks this is a good product is probably a fat nerd living in his parents' basement playing Call of Duty all day and has no business using real firearms. Now, all this has been true in many, probably most cases, but it seems to be the knee jerk reaction by many in the gun community to just about everything. Look at the people who still won't touch a semi-auto pistol because, damn it, if a revolver was good enough for them when they were young, there's no reason why people today should carry anything else. How many old timers (or young guys wanting to be be old timers) think the military needs to go back to the M14 or even M1 Garand and start teaching better marksmanship to make those 8 shots count? I hear it every freakin' day. This is a very conservative community that, in many ways, really doesn't want any new advancements.

That said, new technology will come. It will either evolve slowly from current technology, or it will come out of nowhere and be a revolution that changes the gun world more than the introduction of the repeating firearms. We'll see.