Next generation of guns for civilians?

Given that Metallic Cartridges are often reloaded by civilians for all kinds of reasons, plus "exotic" firearms tend to be expensive along with the ammo for them... Aside from a few well heeled folks, Such technology will have a extremely hard time even entering the civilian market.

el Godfather

I am that sure some you who have an extensive collection must have thought about this where one day all the weapons we have today will be no more than antiques decorating our walls remembering the past. Such as swords, lances, daggers, old musket firearms etc.

Click to expand...

Perhaps but we still have knives, axes, hatchets, and even swords that are still effective and useful even after all these centuries. I think the same thing when I look at my current collection of "modern" firearms and then consider my black powder guns. While new technology will certainly surpass current firearm's designs it will never completely render them useless and ineffective.

Until electronic delivery systems (other than for government entities who can afford the latest whiz-bang technology), can be shown to be 100% reliable, sustainable and easily carried, then ammunition as we know it (or possibly caseless ammo), will continue to be around for some time to come.

When the Labelle dropped in 1886, it fundamentally changed the firearm world with its smokeless powder cartridge. Overnight, black powder firearms, whether cartridge firing or not, became obsolete and the world rushed to update and take advantage of the new technology. It would take that kind of innovation to make the current evolution of firearms obsolete. Black powder reigned supreme for hundreds of years as cartridges were developed. Cartridges allowed for repeating arms and smokeless powder allowed better performance at longer ranges and allowed repeating arms to be truly useful. I doubt there would be an innovation that used chemical propellants that would offer enough of an advantage to upend the firearms world. So until battery technology evolves to the level that makes a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range feasible, I'd say smokeless, cartridge firing weapons will be the norm.

I could see a switch to a liquid propellant at some point. However that technology might not make it to the civilian market.

Texas10mm said:

I could see a switch to a liquid propellant at some point. However that technology might not make it to the civilian market.

Click to expand...

The last part is very likely as Civilians may not take up the tech in the first place or Governments my quite simply ban new tech from Civilian use.

I think one area that should be researched more is eliminating traditional hammers and strikers and instead using electricity to ignite the primer. Remington developed a rifle called the EtronX but it didn't catch on.

The EtronX was a cool idea, but it didn't add enough value to justify the change. It reduced lock time to essentially nothing and allowed for a nearly infinitely adjustable trigger. But, it also requires batteries, that go dead, and have to be replaced. The ammo was available, even the electronic primers were available for reloading, but not enough demand for something like that.
I could see, and we're starting to see it now, is a leap forward in sighting technology. Properly calibrated optics that may actually allow for the full long range potential of smokeless powder firearms to be used. Have you ever seen the sights on old milsurp rifles? A lot of them have range markings out to 1500 or 2000 meters....with iron sights?. Granted, different objectives in military vs sporting arms, but you get the point. Modern optics may get to the point where a 1000yd shot is no longer simply the realm of the ultra elite shooters. Can you imagine a satellite wi-fi enabled scope, reading real time local weather conditions? Throw in a laser range finder, coordinating with integrated GPS and target acquisition software?

I agree with you on why the EtronX failed but with any new tech the first generation is never better than the current products except to early adopter types. New tech really doesn't become better than the old design until gen 2. That is why the manufacturer has to commit to investing the money to kept it alive until it becomes viable commercially. Even the largest firearms manufacturers aren't very financially secure and are unwilling to make the long term commitment to something new. They are more focused on what is easy to sell with the least amount of risk today. We need an entrepreneur like the type you see in the tech industry if firearms are ever going to get past our 125 year old designs.

MAKster said:

. Even the largest firearms manufacturers aren't very financially secure and are unwilling to make the long term commitment to something new. They are more focused on what is easy to sell with the least amount of risk today.

Click to expand...

And that's why McNamara should have never shut down Springfield. A national armory can invest in the R&D required for innovation where as private firms are very good at taking those designs and adapting them to mass production.

Unless we see a vast improvement in propellant--that would be at least a 50% change, reduced volume, reduced expense, increased efficiency--probably no real change until directed energy becomes available.

And, that latter is pretty much predicated on some massive change in availability of hand-held power supplies.

Anything else is just trying to eke another 1% or 2% improvement out of fairly mature technologies.

Cars still generally have four wheels, seat passengers in approximately the center and stick the propulsion at one end or the other. They still rely on the friction of the wheels against the pavement, and the energy for that is still chemically produced, remotely or within the engine (or both). Cars have not really changed in just over a century, the bits and bobs within them have, though. If you put Henry Ford in a Fusion, you'd have to explain why there's no clutch pedal, that the starter is on the dash, not the floor, and not that much else. It would probably take longer to explain the car radio and why it has a USB port, or why the car might need a "hot spot."

Much like if you handed my great grandfather an AR-15 you'd really only have to explain why it has no bolt handle--5 or 6 demonstration shots, and he'd be up to speed. Modern infantry tactics would take a bit longer, but that would be more down to commo and intel than anything else. (As a Marine he was passing familiar with small-unit operations, just with the 1903.

Starship Troopers took place sometime in the 23rd century, which places it between 2201-2300AD. Cartridge firearms were still the staple of small-arms weaponry even then, so I think we're good for a while.

MedWheeler said:

Starship Troopers took place sometime in the 23rd century, which places it between 2201-2300AD. Cartridge firearms were still the staple of small-arms weaponry even then, so I think we're good for a while.

Click to expand...

I might have the first one still....

My vote is compressed air

Armored farmer said:

My vote is compressed air

Click to expand...

We already have those. In fact been around well before breach-loading firearms were.

whm1974 said:

We already have those. In fact been around well before breach-loading firearms were.

Click to expand...

I know that.

There's a *lot* of power stored in a few grains of unstable nitrogen compounds. Batteries and/or condensers don't even come close.

bersaguy said:

When the Labelle dropped in 1886, it fundamentally changed the firearm world with its smokeless powder cartridge. Overnight, black powder firearms, whether cartridge firing or not, became obsolete and the world rushed to update and take advantage of the new technology. It would take that kind of innovation to make the current evolution of firearms obsolete. Black powder reigned supreme for hundreds of years as cartridges were developed. Cartridges allowed for repeating arms and smokeless powder allowed better performance at longer ranges and allowed repeating arms to be truly useful. I doubt there would be an innovation that used chemical propellants that would offer enough of an advantage to upend the firearms world. So until battery technology evolves to the level that makes a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range feasible, I'd say smokeless, cartridge firing weapons will be the norm.

Click to expand...

Hey, just what you see on the shelf.

Probably gauss weapons will be the next big thing. There are already private citizens making them and posting videos of their creations. The big hurdle seems to be power sources. Tesla and a few other manufacturers are working on some things that will probably revolutionize batteries in the near future and I am sure it won't take long for people to apply that tech to weapons.

Here are some videos

I think the changes in the next 50 years will look a lot like the changes of the last 50 years. Which is no changes in the physics and a little change in appearance, and materials.

Optics may be a different story.

computers today, have a hard disk, memory, and a CPU - the same fundamental components that they had when invented, and that has not changed. sometimes an invention is just what is needed, and possibly it could be improved upon, but fundamentally, it is still the same invention

possibly a lazer or some new invention, but the expense vs. benefit would make it prohibitive for centuries ..

bersaguy said:

So until battery technology evolves to the level that makes a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range feasible,.

Click to expand...

My plug in model is pretty good for home defense.....

I do not think guns as we know them now are going anywhere for a couple of hundred years. We can wish for science fiction all we want but reality gets in the way.
What do we have today that was predicted to be “normal” back 30, 40, 50 or more years ago?
We don’t have flying cars, laser guns, rocket packs, home nuclear reactors, robot workers, etc.
We do have smart phones and computers but that’s pretty unimpressive as compared to what everyone thought we would have by now.

No, I think guns will be around a long time.
I do think any new type small arms would be regulated by the government and banned from civilian use, as was mentioned, but hey, by that time the ultimate AR-15s and 1911s will be available. Haha. I do believe we will have some very cool optics and lighting systems.

One questions is, who's going to be around to shoot them? With the media and schools vilifying gun ownership and hunting, and the politicians ranting and passing more and more restrictive laws, I don't see many in succeeding generations becoming gun owners. The interest just won't be there.

Same with automobile drivers. When I was growing up, every kid nagged their parents to get their learner's permits ASAP. Now, kids in cities with Uber, Lyft, etc. seem to care less about driving, or even getting a license.

I'm thinking in one or two generations we could be like England. Hope I'm wrong, but that's what it's starting to look like to me.