Low tech still relevant today.... someday obsolete?
- Thread starter leadcounsel
- Start date
- Status
Snowdog
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,606
I really don't think it's possible to accurately predict the weapons of the not-too-near future without knowing of the monumental discoveries that will occur in the meantime.
I'm not particularly convinced that weapons of the future will even be something we would readily recognize as a weapon today and may completely circumvent the "here to there" projectile/beam route that we're currently familiar with. For example, the ability to manipulate gravity may prove quite useful as a weapon and who knows, perhaps future discoveries may enable that.
I try to keep an open mind to out of the box concepts if for nothing more than preventing cerebral stagnation (and hell, it's fun).
I believe there certainly will be enhanced forms of personal shielding available in the future and I believe rapid regeneration may also be on the table, working in tandem with the "ounce of prevention" philosophy of shielding.
I also strongly suspect that regardless how advance we may become, a ball of lead from a matchlock will always be considered quite hazardous until the end of (flesh & blood human-form) mankind.
I'm not particularly convinced that weapons of the future will even be something we would readily recognize as a weapon today and may completely circumvent the "here to there" projectile/beam route that we're currently familiar with. For example, the ability to manipulate gravity may prove quite useful as a weapon and who knows, perhaps future discoveries may enable that.
I try to keep an open mind to out of the box concepts if for nothing more than preventing cerebral stagnation (and hell, it's fun).
I believe there certainly will be enhanced forms of personal shielding available in the future and I believe rapid regeneration may also be on the table, working in tandem with the "ounce of prevention" philosophy of shielding.
I also strongly suspect that regardless how advance we may become, a ball of lead from a matchlock will always be considered quite hazardous until the end of (flesh & blood human-form) mankind.
Last edited:
Plan2Live
Member
Because this question has one foot planted firmly in the real of sci-fi or speculation, I'm presume you are suggesting we survive 2012 and/or Global Warming. Oh and to play off your screen name, assuming we surive attorneys. 
LibShooter
Member
Chemical fuels are a great way to store energy in a portable device. That's why we use them to go to space, the store and poke holes in our enemies from a distance.
I'm not sure lasers or directed energy will ever be suitable for hand held weapons. Just getting rid of the wasted heat could make them dangerous to the wielder.
Besides, any kind of personal force field armor would likely be more effective against radiation than kinetic energy. Gunpowder and lead will be around for a while.
I'm not sure lasers or directed energy will ever be suitable for hand held weapons. Just getting rid of the wasted heat could make them dangerous to the wielder.
Besides, any kind of personal force field armor would likely be more effective against radiation than kinetic energy. Gunpowder and lead will be around for a while.
armoredman
Member
SciFi isn't ALWAYS what to look at - Star Trek VI had a phaser fired at a pot of mashed potatoes that vaporized the metal pot but left the potatoes intact, yet Star Trek II had Captain Terrel shoot himself in the chest with his phaser and vaporize, when it should have just left him naked. 
Directed energy will have it's place, but precision placed metal will have a place until we develop a disruptor or force beam
Directed energy will have it's place, but precision placed metal will have a place until we develop a disruptor or force beam
If you could come up with a device that would interfere with the CNS at a distance (imagine a "Taser field generator" you could aim at an individual) then you might have something that would make slugs of metal traveling at high velocities obsolete. Until then you are just playing around the edges. Although I agree that we would be much farther along if you could market new select fire and suppressor/silencer designs to the entire world market sans severe government regulations.
Oh, and if IEDs can cause problems for armored vehicles, think what would happen to armored soldiers, even in high tech armor.
Oh, and if IEDs can cause problems for armored vehicles, think what would happen to armored soldiers, even in high tech armor.
armoredman
Member
There is a Taser shotgun slug on the market, no idea how well it works.
FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
Don't phase me bro!
Hamilton Felix
Member
I've seen video of the 12 gauge "cordless taser" round. I'm sure it will remain scarce, expensive and effectively "Big Brother Only" for some time yet. Even the police style "wired" taser requires a lot of money and a lot of paperwork for Joe Ordinary to have -- and practice is not going to be cheap. Ordinary mortals will have to settle for handheld "contact stunners" for now.
Soft body armor has improved a bit. And it's being built into decent clothing. I know that's not Sci-Fi shield technology, but it may be worth acquiring.
Until power supply/battery technology makes another leap, and maybe a few other things happen - like affordable room temperature superconductors, I don't see laser personal sidearms becoming common. I love the idea. How can one not love a weapon with speed-of-light velocity, negligible recoil and totally flat trajectory?
There have been some advances in projectile design - and some "vanished" as quickly (anyone recall the French "Arcane" ammo?) as they appeared. Many years ago, I had a friend who experimented with compressed wax paper bullets. He felt he could make a cartridge/projectile that would be lethal at 25 feet, but harmless at 125 feet. He wanted to make a PDW about the size of a pack of cigarettes, effective up close but no risk to more distant bystanders.
Every so often, we hear about caseless ammunition. (Seems to me the original 19th century Volcanic was an effort in that direction.) I'm not holding my breath until it's affordable and common. And many of us handload. Handloading caseless ammo might be a bit too high-tech for DIY.
I can see room for improvement in muzzle brake design. I'd like a nearly recoilless pistol. But with the ridiculous sound suppressor laws in the U.S. I'd expect any such gun to be horribly loud.
I supposed the trend toward tiny, light pistols in substantial calibers can be taken a little bit further, but we're about at the limit of human tolerance now. Sure, I want something the size of a Baby Browning .25 that hits like a .44 magnum, but I also want to be able to control it.
We still haven't seen a tiny cartridge that hits like a big one. The only way I can see to do that is VELOCITY. Materials and propellants limit what we can do. And the shooter still has to be able to control it. And it should not deafen him.
The new Kel Tec PMR-30 (improved Grendel) is a step in that direction, and it's an attempt to carry enough rounds that there's not much need to reload or carry spare magazines. But the .22 WMR in a 4.3" pistol barrel isn't all that super a stopper. I did consider one of these for a MIL who isn't a shooter -- give 'em a couple of years to achieve reliability, then buy MIL a "house gun" that she can simply pick up and go bang - 30 times.
I agree completely with the comments that our overregulation totalitarian society has stifled individual creativity. I hate to say it, but the next great advances in personal weapons technology are not likely to come from North America.
And as my Beloved Wife reminds me, knives don't run out of ammo, are very effective at contact distance, and they have a psychological effect. As she puts it, "You can see it in your opponent's eyes. A gun says, 'I'm going to kill you.' A knife says, 'it's going to hurt a lot while I kill you.'"
So I'll go on daydreaming about the "Noisy Cricket" from MIB, but in the immediate future I still see chemically powered cartridge pistols and fine steel knives as useful, regardless of how "low tech" they seem to some.
Soft body armor has improved a bit. And it's being built into decent clothing. I know that's not Sci-Fi shield technology, but it may be worth acquiring.
Until power supply/battery technology makes another leap, and maybe a few other things happen - like affordable room temperature superconductors, I don't see laser personal sidearms becoming common. I love the idea. How can one not love a weapon with speed-of-light velocity, negligible recoil and totally flat trajectory?
There have been some advances in projectile design - and some "vanished" as quickly (anyone recall the French "Arcane" ammo?) as they appeared. Many years ago, I had a friend who experimented with compressed wax paper bullets. He felt he could make a cartridge/projectile that would be lethal at 25 feet, but harmless at 125 feet. He wanted to make a PDW about the size of a pack of cigarettes, effective up close but no risk to more distant bystanders.
Every so often, we hear about caseless ammunition. (Seems to me the original 19th century Volcanic was an effort in that direction.) I'm not holding my breath until it's affordable and common. And many of us handload. Handloading caseless ammo might be a bit too high-tech for DIY.
I can see room for improvement in muzzle brake design. I'd like a nearly recoilless pistol. But with the ridiculous sound suppressor laws in the U.S. I'd expect any such gun to be horribly loud.
I supposed the trend toward tiny, light pistols in substantial calibers can be taken a little bit further, but we're about at the limit of human tolerance now. Sure, I want something the size of a Baby Browning .25 that hits like a .44 magnum, but I also want to be able to control it.
We still haven't seen a tiny cartridge that hits like a big one. The only way I can see to do that is VELOCITY. Materials and propellants limit what we can do. And the shooter still has to be able to control it. And it should not deafen him.
The new Kel Tec PMR-30 (improved Grendel) is a step in that direction, and it's an attempt to carry enough rounds that there's not much need to reload or carry spare magazines. But the .22 WMR in a 4.3" pistol barrel isn't all that super a stopper. I did consider one of these for a MIL who isn't a shooter -- give 'em a couple of years to achieve reliability, then buy MIL a "house gun" that she can simply pick up and go bang - 30 times.
I agree completely with the comments that our overregulation totalitarian society has stifled individual creativity. I hate to say it, but the next great advances in personal weapons technology are not likely to come from North America.
And as my Beloved Wife reminds me, knives don't run out of ammo, are very effective at contact distance, and they have a psychological effect. As she puts it, "You can see it in your opponent's eyes. A gun says, 'I'm going to kill you.' A knife says, 'it's going to hurt a lot while I kill you.'"
So I'll go on daydreaming about the "Noisy Cricket" from MIB, but in the immediate future I still see chemically powered cartridge pistols and fine steel knives as useful, regardless of how "low tech" they seem to some.
SimplyChad
Member
Goon may I steal that quote? I think I found my new signature.
armoredman
Member
Saw an older Taser M26 at a pawn shop last year for $300 or so. There are civilian models all over the place, blister pacs hanging on the racks at Sports Authority last time I looked.
Oops, I meant solar system and was thinking solar system when I was writing it. Somehow galaxy ended up written.
We have had the technology to go to the planets and other areas within the solar system for awhile, but the cost is prohibitive.
Last edited:
Oh, I should have realized that, especially since you were just talking about travel within the Solar System right above.
The word "galaxy" just stuck out so much to me that I got tunnel vision. Having read so many of your posts, I did find it rather difficult to believe you'd be THAT far off! Yes, I agree that we could travel anywhere within the Solar System if we wanted to badly enough, but the costs--in many different ways--are far too high for the return we'd likely get (even the Moon is highly questionable in today's economic climate). Cost is indeed important, but while it can often be an impediment to technological progress in a narrow sense, in a broader sense it is also a fundamental parameter of engineering--sometimes progress can actually be driven forward by the goal of reducing cost (not talking about cutting corners here), so it's not inherently bad in the grand scheme of things.
Last edited:
Cryogaijin
Member
With an Orion we could get just about anywhere in the solar system for fairly cheap. The problem is that we simply don't have the WILL to launch an Orion.
Hamilton Felix
Member
Would that be the "pistol" taser that uses a small charge to shoot the darts? If so, do you have any idea what a few practice rounds would cost? Does "older" still mean you can get reloads for it?
It was my impression that many jurisdictions ban or restrict them for ordinary mortals, but the cops have them. Also, I had the impression that the true TASER was serialized, documented and expensive. (I know there are small stunners of every sort all over the place.)
armoredman
Member
Yes, that was the same Taser we used to issue, and I have no idea how you would get replacement cartridges for it, Taser International is the only main supplier, IIRC.
telomerase
Member
Or even NERVA, if it were built with modern materials:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/walker2.html
JVaughn
Member
The problem with laser / phaser etc. technology is the ability to diable it. How many times has Picard told Obrien to disable phasers which are in transit with people in the transporter beam? Electromagnetic pulse technology, etc are also to be considered. You can't disable a powder and lead cartridge without touching it. I suspect they will never reach obsolete status, the knife still hasn't.
Jim Watson
Member
Come on, blindhari, at least spell Heinlein correctly.
A few years ago there was a description of a laser weapon of infantry rifle size and power circulated, with claims that it was feasible over a 25 year development horizon. One interesting point that somebody calculated out was that its gas dynamic laser with a rush of working fluid down the tube for every pulse would generate appreciable recoil. Think of it, a ray gun that kicks!
Lots of science fictional concepts discussed here, most run aground on the rocks of energy storage and waste heat dissipation. I recall one SF story that at least gave a nod to the latter, as the character stepped out of the matter transmitter with a laser pistol in each hand. So if confronted by two assailants or predators he could deal with them without having to wait for one emitter to cool down.
Then there was the heroine with her trusty Slichter handheld railgun. I did the math and this was one tough dame, with elk gun recoil from her purse pistol. Probably put runs in her stockings when she fired it prone.
A few years ago there was a description of a laser weapon of infantry rifle size and power circulated, with claims that it was feasible over a 25 year development horizon. One interesting point that somebody calculated out was that its gas dynamic laser with a rush of working fluid down the tube for every pulse would generate appreciable recoil. Think of it, a ray gun that kicks!
Lots of science fictional concepts discussed here, most run aground on the rocks of energy storage and waste heat dissipation. I recall one SF story that at least gave a nod to the latter, as the character stepped out of the matter transmitter with a laser pistol in each hand. So if confronted by two assailants or predators he could deal with them without having to wait for one emitter to cool down.
Then there was the heroine with her trusty Slichter handheld railgun. I did the math and this was one tough dame, with elk gun recoil from her purse pistol. Probably put runs in her stockings when she fired it prone.
Cryogaijin
Member
Yeah, a ton of authors tend to forget their basic newton: Equal and opposite reactions. Thus a rail/coil gun will have a similar recoil to a chemical rifle attaining similar energies. Yet they tend to give them energies 10-10000x as much.
I always chuckle when reading a SF story where the projectile "leaves the muzzle/barrel at 1/10th the speed of light"
Just think how much friction would be caused by that. Enough to melt the user's face off.
Which brings us to another issue with directed energy weapons: Bloom. While the beam expends most of its energy on the target, it also rapidly heats the air it is traveling through. As most of us know intimately, heated air has different optical properties, thus bloom actually bends the laser causing it.
Current mitigation techniques are to use microsecond pulses, or to have a self-correcting beam.
I always chuckle when reading a SF story where the projectile "leaves the muzzle/barrel at 1/10th the speed of light"
Just think how much friction would be caused by that. Enough to melt the user's face off.
Which brings us to another issue with directed energy weapons: Bloom. While the beam expends most of its energy on the target, it also rapidly heats the air it is traveling through. As most of us know intimately, heated air has different optical properties, thus bloom actually bends the laser causing it.
Current mitigation techniques are to use microsecond pulses, or to have a self-correcting beam.
evan price
Member
Nobody has yet found a way to make obsolete the lever and the inclined plane, the two most basic machines ever invented.
And, when all else including sci-fi whiz-bang gimmickry fails, you can still beat someone to death with a rock.
And, when all else including sci-fi whiz-bang gimmickry fails, you can still beat someone to death with a rock.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=422875
The above thread is about a fella in France that used a Black Powder gun to thwart a robbery. That is "low tech" but it worked just as well as the "high tech" stuff would have.
The above thread is about a fella in France that used a Black Powder gun to thwart a robbery. That is "low tech" but it worked just as well as the "high tech" stuff would have.
mortablunt
Member
If my guns didn't work because they were blocked, I'd use something heavy enough to made an impact. How about a pneumatic brick cannon?
- Status
