Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
Ah! Good info. thanks for that correction.
What do you think is the future of firearms?
- Thread starter TMiller556
- Start date
- Status
Ah! Good info. thanks for that correction.
we are not amused
Member
Metal Storm technology, and electrically fired cartridges.
Directed energy weapons, (lasers, particle beams, railguns and such) require a radically more powerful energy source than is currently possible. I estimate them to be very far future. Metal Storm technology is case-less ammunition, electrically fired. For a handgun it should be possible to design the barrel containing the charges to be rapidly replaced like a modern magazine.
In the near future, more optics and electronic sighting devices are the most likely. I doubt "self guiding" bullets will ever become practical.
Directed energy weapons, (lasers, particle beams, railguns and such) require a radically more powerful energy source than is currently possible. I estimate them to be very far future. Metal Storm technology is case-less ammunition, electrically fired. For a handgun it should be possible to design the barrel containing the charges to be rapidly replaced like a modern magazine.
In the near future, more optics and electronic sighting devices are the most likely. I doubt "self guiding" bullets will ever become practical.
justice06rr
Member
The only thing I can foresee are better and cheaper sighting systems, ammunition, lightweight designs, and possibly tracking/guided bullet systems.
Cased ammunition is already an efficient way to fire and store them. Anything that relies on electricity or power will not be reliable e.g. rail guns and plasma rifles/pistols.
Cased ammunition is already an efficient way to fire and store them. Anything that relies on electricity or power will not be reliable e.g. rail guns and plasma rifles/pistols.
theotherwaldo
Member
Improved sights/scopes integrated with weapon stabilization systems, recoil management systems, improved ergonomics.
A lube that actually works the way frog lube says it will?
Suppressors that work like the ones in Hollywood.
Different magazine designs that will allow for much higher capacity.
A series of revolvers and pistols that will be as modular as an AR.
A semi-auto shotgun fed from a box magazine that's reliable.
The GLOCK top break 10mm revolver.
A rifle and shotgun made by GLOCK.
Suppressors that work like the ones in Hollywood.
Different magazine designs that will allow for much higher capacity.
A series of revolvers and pistols that will be as modular as an AR.
A semi-auto shotgun fed from a box magazine that's reliable.
The GLOCK top break 10mm revolver.
A rifle and shotgun made by GLOCK.
energy weapons do exist. not just in labs. The biggest issue is power consumption and "does the laser packing pistolery want to carry 3 dor 4 50 pound batteries?
the funcitonal designs ive seen are low powered yes, but they all have the same design features we saw in early star trek and buck rogers.
metal storm isnt a great idea. i read an early popular science article on that concept and it was rather flawed. the barrel tube has 8 shots in it, the 2 or 3 closest tothe muzzle will be like a .380 in terms of ability and then the rest will be like a normal 9mm round.
the funcitonal designs ive seen are low powered yes, but they all have the same design features we saw in early star trek and buck rogers.
metal storm isnt a great idea. i read an early popular science article on that concept and it was rather flawed. the barrel tube has 8 shots in it, the 2 or 3 closest tothe muzzle will be like a .380 in terms of ability and then the rest will be like a normal 9mm round.
Remington's electrically fired ammo came and went quickly over two decades ago. The Voere case-less electrically fired ammunition was also a failure, almost a quarter century ago.
Remember the Gyrojet of fifty years ago? Those spin-stabilized rocket projectiles started out slow, built up velocity, and then petered out.
And before that there was the ungainly Dardick, which fired Trounds.
I'm old enough to remember all the hoopla that accompanied those things. I actually thought the Remington and Voere designs had promise, not that the traditionalist in me liked either one very much.
But not the Gyrojet. I thought that one, which showed up about the same time as turbine cars, came about only because of the rocket and missile craze. As for the Dardick--beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
What has been successful? Well, for starters, non-corrsive centerfire self contained metallic cartridges with smokeless propellants and advanced projectile designs!
More seriously, when I was a kid they didn't have good-looking, stable, and strong composite rifle stocks; great recoil management devices in shotguns; rangefinder scopes; laser sights in pocket guns; or very reliable affordable polymer pistols.
I think that further advances will probably be seen in materials and manufacturing methods.
BTW, I've limited my thoughts to small arms.
Remember the Gyrojet of fifty years ago? Those spin-stabilized rocket projectiles started out slow, built up velocity, and then petered out.
And before that there was the ungainly Dardick, which fired Trounds.
I'm old enough to remember all the hoopla that accompanied those things. I actually thought the Remington and Voere designs had promise, not that the traditionalist in me liked either one very much.
But not the Gyrojet. I thought that one, which showed up about the same time as turbine cars, came about only because of the rocket and missile craze. As for the Dardick--beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
What has been successful? Well, for starters, non-corrsive centerfire self contained metallic cartridges with smokeless propellants and advanced projectile designs!
More seriously, when I was a kid they didn't have good-looking, stable, and strong composite rifle stocks; great recoil management devices in shotguns; rangefinder scopes; laser sights in pocket guns; or very reliable affordable polymer pistols.
I think that further advances will probably be seen in materials and manufacturing methods.
BTW, I've limited my thoughts to small arms.
anothernewb
Member
I suppose on a real long shot some sort of recoil reducing reactive technology might be a heck of breakthrough.
Okay there's a power requirement - or one heck of a rethinking in managing escaping gasses from a fired round. but consider the theory for a second.
bullet weights, velocity, and energy are all a compromise in recoil. recovery, getting back on target, and Accuracy is generally the tradeoff.
Of course we can build monster handguns like the .500 - That much energy for self defense would be amazing - but no one would really carry one in a real world situation. so let's start with one of the current mainstays. 9mm.
it's more than possible to drive a 147 grain bullet well into the supersonic realm with forearm lifespan with the materials we have today, and it's proven that a 9mm can be made compact enough for a variety of carry purposes.
Common knowledge, a smaller and lighter gun is harder to manage.
now enter this theory. One could design a counter-accelerating mass in a handgun - a damper in effect. That theory is well known. The drawback there is some mass, and increased complexity. although adding another 147 grains + some hardware to a firearm isn't that excessive.
another possible method would be a magnetic damper of sorts This would be exceedingly simple mechanically, and could be easily tailored to multiple applications, and again is a proven tech - but there's a power requirement that would need an advancement in battery tech to make it pay off.
yet another possibility, one that I see as a definite possibility soon, is grip technology that yields better recoil handling. sort of a super-duper micro version of a limb saver.
but on the long end. imagine launching a 150gr bullet at 1300+ fps from something the size of a sig938 with the net effective recoil impulse of a 38 wadcutter. that would be a heck of an advancement. or on the other end. a .500 smith outfitted with a dampening device that tames it down to a stout .357 level for long range handgun hunting/targets.
Okay there's a power requirement - or one heck of a rethinking in managing escaping gasses from a fired round. but consider the theory for a second.
bullet weights, velocity, and energy are all a compromise in recoil. recovery, getting back on target, and Accuracy is generally the tradeoff.
Of course we can build monster handguns like the .500 - That much energy for self defense would be amazing - but no one would really carry one in a real world situation. so let's start with one of the current mainstays. 9mm.
it's more than possible to drive a 147 grain bullet well into the supersonic realm with forearm lifespan with the materials we have today, and it's proven that a 9mm can be made compact enough for a variety of carry purposes.
Common knowledge, a smaller and lighter gun is harder to manage.
now enter this theory. One could design a counter-accelerating mass in a handgun - a damper in effect. That theory is well known. The drawback there is some mass, and increased complexity. although adding another 147 grains + some hardware to a firearm isn't that excessive.
another possible method would be a magnetic damper of sorts This would be exceedingly simple mechanically, and could be easily tailored to multiple applications, and again is a proven tech - but there's a power requirement that would need an advancement in battery tech to make it pay off.
yet another possibility, one that I see as a definite possibility soon, is grip technology that yields better recoil handling. sort of a super-duper micro version of a limb saver.
but on the long end. imagine launching a 150gr bullet at 1300+ fps from something the size of a sig938 with the net effective recoil impulse of a 38 wadcutter. that would be a heck of an advancement. or on the other end. a .500 smith outfitted with a dampening device that tames it down to a stout .357 level for long range handgun hunting/targets.
1. If guided bullets can be shrunk in size, that would be a major breakthrough. There are 50 BMG prototypes.
2. For the legal end - guns with integral cameras that active when you draw or aim them. That might be good or bad for you.
2. For the legal end - guns with integral cameras that active when you draw or aim them. That might be good or bad for you.
Zach S
Member
I don't see anything "revolutionary" in the near or distant future as far as firearms go.
I do see advancement in accessories though.
I do see advancement in accessories though.
herkyguy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 1,409
Here's another one, how about a regression in technology for the future:
I recently picked up a Winchester 1873 in .357. 11 rounds, quick to fire a follow-up, and incredibly simple to operate. Why did I ever buy an AR??
Turns out the late eighteenth century was well ahead of its time.
I recently picked up a Winchester 1873 in .357. 11 rounds, quick to fire a follow-up, and incredibly simple to operate. Why did I ever buy an AR??
Turns out the late eighteenth century was well ahead of its time.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
I'm right there with you. I've owned 2 AR's, and gotten rid of 2 AR's. I just don't care about them.
I plan on picking up an 1873 in .357.
Metal Storm went out of business in 2012.
While I almost became an investor, the simple truth is that technology has far surpassed the need to shoot masses of projectiles at a target.
The idea is to shoot fewer projectiles, not more. Smarter aiming systems will help with this.
- Status
Similar threads
