Well, the idea was worth a shot then - now that stabilization is easier, mayhaps a re-visit?
At least my ideas are sound, now to adjust the time-frame… 
There are a lot of problems with the physics of user lasers as a weapon.
Yeah, just ask the enemy.
Tripler
::rimshot::
What is power armor? Do you mean an exoskeleton to help with strength and stamina, or do you mean some kind of armor that can use a power source to better defend against projectiles.
I’m reviving this thread because the HUD/Trackingpoint technology some people were talking about is now hitting the market. The HUD sniper rifle is $22,500. It is supposed to calculate (for you) about 20 variables like range, wind, coriolis effect, humidity, etc.
You tag a target and the gun calculates the variables to determine if you are aiming at it in a such a way you will hit it. If you are, the sights turn red and the trigger guard is released.
It isn’t self aiming, but it is assisted aiming.
South Korea has a self aiming machine gun that can hit targets from 3km away.
I’m sure making these devices mobile will come up soon.
Very true. But I’m dubious that a caseless ammo which is both cost-effective and safe to handle can be made. (And in a sense, it would be as much going backward in design as going forward - the very first firearms made used loose black powder, after all. What’s that saying? “Everything old is new again”?)
Caseless ammo and biometric guns which will only fire for an authorized user are the only two really revolutionary technology changes I can foresee for small arms anytime soon. Like the bow and arrow that msmith573 mentioned earlier, small arms are a very mature technology.
I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if more bullpup style assault rifles crept in.
I suppose those rifles that are rigged to fire around corners are too mundane to include here.
They were billed as being useful in urban combat zones.
Does anyone else remember this?
Like the OICW? In its earlier iterations, it was a combination of a video-scoped rifle and a helmet-integrated HUD that could:
-
Identify and track human-shaped targets on the HUD a la Virtua Cop
-
Display the riflecam on your HUD so you can see around corners/from behind cover, exposing only your arm
-
Using a laser rangefinder, determine distance to enemy cover and program an explosive projectile to airburst right next to the cover (with its electronically timed fuse)
-
Switch riflecam vision modes to various zoom levels and thermal imaging
Eventually it was dumbed down to the XM29, which was an airbursting grenade launcher only. Then it was cancelled altogether.
I’m thinking that within two years, we’ll have remote control quadrocopters outfitted with a camera and something comparable to a handgun. It’s another case of “the tech already exists but the batteries suck”, but it seems quite useful to me.
Barrel pressure limits seem to be around 60 000 PSI for rifles. Is that limit pretty much a hard one?
Barrels, chambers and back-of-the-chamber-blocking-devices that can take more pressure mean you can afford a higher pressure spike which means you can attain the same velocity with a shorter barrel.
A big stumbling block when it comes to small arms technology is that the military is usually the impetus behind the advancement and today’s militaries seem to be pretty much content with the current assault rifles. Any significant change when it comes to internal, flight or terminal ballistics requires a caliber change and the bother this implies requires that the objective of improving small arms be a priority.
On the other hand, aiming devices advancements are popular among civilians and a lot of military personnel have some discretion over it. If a military wishes to upgrade its aiming devices, it’s a lot less of a bother than changing calibers.
I have this suspicion that the more militarily forces become reliant on remote-controlled devices, the more common jamming and hacking will become. I can see a future in which battlefields are so over-saturated with disruptive electromagnetism that forces will be forced to communicate with flags and bugles.
This is a good point. And it reminds me of the snickers I got from some of my squad when I’d tell them “Boots & Saddles, get busy!”
I also believe that bullpup designs should be creeping in. A barrel length that allows full powder expansion in a compact package.
Some years back I read an article about the Army evaluating several assault rifles looking for the next standard issue gun to replace the M-16. Their goal was to double the amount of hits as a ration of total rounds fired. Can’t recall who submitted entries, but none seemed particularly innovative. All simply doubled the rate of fire, one or two of them by actually putting two guns and two barrels into a single body, and the others by some other modifications to the works including things to reduce recoil and make the guns easier to keep on target.
At the time of the article, none of the nominee replacements performed impressively enough to put into general use.
I don’t suppose fire discipline and marksmanship is an option? :rolleyes:
Now they can “print” handguns, those and caseless ammo will make murder commonplace, never mind needing to be body searched before flying, in the future.
Of course not. More training doesn’t get them new toys. The toys have to be miraculous and do the work for the soldier.
The guns that can be printed are single shot pistols. You can make a zip gun out of pipe and have been able to do so for years with tools from Home Depot. I think the printed gun is overrated.
Give it time. Pistols used to be single shot muzzle loaders.
The real danger with printed guns is of course that they can’t be picked up by metal detectors.