VT Deer Hunter
Member
Anything computerized or electric in guns i hate. I do not at all trust it.
What will the next big advancement be?
- Thread starter zstephens13
- Start date
- Status
A sonar based sighting system, with a small lcd display, similar to what jet jockys use now. It would lock on give you and audio and visual signal, and you would pull the trigger. It's not difficult to make. But you would need to train with it and it would have to lock on 1 target so if someone stepped into the sight picture you would not accidentally shoot them. Down the road I an sure the military has plans for similat systems on automatic weapons, where it locks onto half a dozen targets, and the operator tracks them. once you fire it it would take out all of the targets that were programmed into it. Not hard to do at all. Just to add I would love a red dot on my carry, but they are too big now, as you said soon they will be sop.
Last edited:
Sam Cade
Member
Agreed.
Extrapolating outward there is no reason that small nigh-indestructible red dots (with battery life of decades) won't displace iron sights entirely.
mortablunt
Member
Caseless ammuntion, vehicle coilguns, hypersonic sniper rounds, and more lethal jacket designs.
Sam Cade
Member
We will probably never see hypersonic velocities achieved from small arms def' not using anything even remotely resembling current firearms.
Even if it was possible you still can't beat Newton.
If you figure minimum hypersonic velocity as around 5600 fps and launch a 55gr projectile from an 8lb rifle at that velocity you get enough recoil to physically damage the shooter.
There are also going to be lots of weird boundary effects going on that are going to play hell with accuracy....
Putting my Nostradamus hat on, In a military context, LOS long range engagement "sniping" will be be rendered mostly obsolete by the advent of laser guided/fused munitions deployed at the squad level.
Fiscal Year:2008
Title:Autonomous Target Engagement for Multiple Remote Weapon Stations
Award Amount:$69,999.00
Agency / Branch
OD / ARMY
There are many under development , I caught myself pasting too much but if you want to see just look this up on google,
multi-target tracking weapon
Title:Autonomous Target Engagement for Multiple Remote Weapon Stations
Award Amount:$69,999.00
Agency / Branch
OD / ARMYThere are many under development , I caught myself pasting too much but if you want to see just look this up on google,
multi-target tracking weapon
Sam Cade
Member
Sam Cade
Member
Soon, very very soon.
Right now the foot-print is only slightly larger than adjustable rear sights.
Attachments
Sam that was 3 years ago, google it if you want to see advances since then. The Navy has an assault craft that can target several 5-7 vessles moving at a high rate of speed it's not new, just getting more refined. If they can get it small enough to put in a usable pistol is another question but we have the technology. Just like video cameras that pick up the different objects in the room that are moving and highlights them, It's a matter of designating a laser to each target, that laser will follow that target only. Then the fire control will be the shooter, the target will emit a sount or light when you are on each one.It's similar to sonar or radar, when multiple planes are incoming or ships.
Strykervet
member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,610
Good luck trying to spur innovation on here. I tried to spark an honest discussion on light gas guns. I'd like to build a prototype, a single shot first. Go and look at how that turned out. The replies were very non-constructive. I gave up trying to talk to anyone about it on here and asked that it be closed. For this being "The High Road", it sure has some low thinking when it comes to real fresh ideas.
I think caseless would be nice, but that would hinder reloading and handloading. Rail guns and coil guns are cool, but we just can't make the power source small and light enough to shoulder fire. Particle beams and the like have similar problems, but they are doable. The B2 stealth bomber was actually designed to use a weapon like this, but I don't think it ever went very far. There were reports of energy weapons being used in the early days of Iraq, but who knows for sure.
My idea (not really my original idea, but I have the idea to make a shoulder fired version) is to use light gas. Hydrogen works best, but helium is safer and gives a close enough performance increase compared to hydrogen. How does three times the velocity of standard ammo sound? Two times should be quite easy. I'd like a 5000fps 7.62. Even if it were just a single shot, it would be cool. The design could be automated, but you gotta crawl before walking.
I don't want to waste my time trying to explain it again, if you are interested you can look up light gas guns on Wikipedia. There is the combustion light gas gun too, that one is already in the works. I've seen it fire on Discovery or History awhile back. Pretty cool.
NASA has one for testing meteor impacts. DARPA played around with it too I hear. Everytime I tried to discuss it here, I was told I can't do it because they only have them in large prototypes? Try as I might, I couldn't convince anyone on here that there is a difference between a small working prototype and the NASA experiement, and that I don't care what they are doing. I'm not testing meteor impacts and I'm not trying to create mega-weapons for Navy ships.
That is more endemic to America in general though, we have let government and corporations destroy innovation and new ideas. They've made it so expensive to do business, so many hoops to jump through, that I simply can't afford to both build it and play the games. Hard to make advancements in an environment like this. I can't even start an alarm company to get a firearms and firearms research business going, despite how much I know about both businesses. Why? Because existing business has paid for the current laws governing such, and they've hamstringed their competition. On top of the gear, I need to pay off the governement to the tune of several thousand per year. Ridiculous. I'd move to China where innovation and business seem to grow, but I just can't afford it and I like being an American, unlike Caterpillar, who seem to prosper.
Don't see any real advancements in any arena of technology until this changes, and I don't see it changing until Americans are mad enough to march on Washington and demand change. You usually don't see innovation come out of third world countries, and let's face it and be honest, that is where we are headed. When we compare all the biggies, like education, healthcare, etc., we fall in with places like Nigeria. This country doesn't have the great future I was promised. I have a ton of ideas, and they look good on paper, but that is as far as I can get it to go. Combine that with idea-killing individuals, the "it can't be done-ers", and it just can't be done. See how that works?
I guess I could give away my designs and drawings, let some greedbag decide if they can turn a buck, but I'd rather burn them. When and if I get the machinery I need, I'll do it myself and reap the benefits myself. It would be nice to have a partner, but that just doesn't look like it will happen.
Unless it is a copy or adaptation of the M4, 1911, or Glock, I just don't see it happening.
I think caseless would be nice, but that would hinder reloading and handloading. Rail guns and coil guns are cool, but we just can't make the power source small and light enough to shoulder fire. Particle beams and the like have similar problems, but they are doable. The B2 stealth bomber was actually designed to use a weapon like this, but I don't think it ever went very far. There were reports of energy weapons being used in the early days of Iraq, but who knows for sure.
My idea (not really my original idea, but I have the idea to make a shoulder fired version) is to use light gas. Hydrogen works best, but helium is safer and gives a close enough performance increase compared to hydrogen. How does three times the velocity of standard ammo sound? Two times should be quite easy. I'd like a 5000fps 7.62. Even if it were just a single shot, it would be cool. The design could be automated, but you gotta crawl before walking.
I don't want to waste my time trying to explain it again, if you are interested you can look up light gas guns on Wikipedia. There is the combustion light gas gun too, that one is already in the works. I've seen it fire on Discovery or History awhile back. Pretty cool.
NASA has one for testing meteor impacts. DARPA played around with it too I hear. Everytime I tried to discuss it here, I was told I can't do it because they only have them in large prototypes? Try as I might, I couldn't convince anyone on here that there is a difference between a small working prototype and the NASA experiement, and that I don't care what they are doing. I'm not testing meteor impacts and I'm not trying to create mega-weapons for Navy ships.
That is more endemic to America in general though, we have let government and corporations destroy innovation and new ideas. They've made it so expensive to do business, so many hoops to jump through, that I simply can't afford to both build it and play the games. Hard to make advancements in an environment like this. I can't even start an alarm company to get a firearms and firearms research business going, despite how much I know about both businesses. Why? Because existing business has paid for the current laws governing such, and they've hamstringed their competition. On top of the gear, I need to pay off the governement to the tune of several thousand per year. Ridiculous. I'd move to China where innovation and business seem to grow, but I just can't afford it and I like being an American, unlike Caterpillar, who seem to prosper.
Don't see any real advancements in any arena of technology until this changes, and I don't see it changing until Americans are mad enough to march on Washington and demand change. You usually don't see innovation come out of third world countries, and let's face it and be honest, that is where we are headed. When we compare all the biggies, like education, healthcare, etc., we fall in with places like Nigeria. This country doesn't have the great future I was promised. I have a ton of ideas, and they look good on paper, but that is as far as I can get it to go. Combine that with idea-killing individuals, the "it can't be done-ers", and it just can't be done. See how that works?
I guess I could give away my designs and drawings, let some greedbag decide if they can turn a buck, but I'd rather burn them. When and if I get the machinery I need, I'll do it myself and reap the benefits myself. It would be nice to have a partner, but that just doesn't look like it will happen.
Unless it is a copy or adaptation of the M4, 1911, or Glock, I just don't see it happening.
Strykervet
member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,610
I wouldn't either if it was made in China junk, and if it is made or sold here, you can bet that is where it would come from.
Good solid state electronics COULD be more reliable than mechanical methods. I've got some ideas here too. Like a HUD on a rifle that can plot the round's trajectory taking into account almost all of the variables save wind downrange. That could be figured too, but it wouldn't be reliable and wouldn't work in every case.
Strykervet
member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,610
My father designed guidance systems for ICBM's among other things. He was a radar expert, an engineer. Anyway, he designed a multiple target tracking system, either the one or similar to what the Phalanx does on a Navy ship. This was in the 80's. Also worked on multiple warhead re-entry vehicles, in particular, their guidance systems.Fiscal Year:2008
Title:Autonomous Target Engagement for Multiple Remote Weapon Stations
Award Amount:$69,999.00
Agency / Branch
There are many under development , I caught myself pasting too much but if you want to see just look this up on google,
multi-target tracking weapon
He did a lot of weapons designs, but they were big weapons, not the kind of things I'm interested in. He lost a lot of sleep over this stuff too, and finally quit.
Huntsville AL is where most of our weaponry is designed. The big weapons paradise. It was a Red Star target, along with New York, DC, and a few others. I grew up reading about this kind of stuff, talking about this kind of stuff (to a point). You'd be surprised at the stuff they spend tax dollars on.
Sam Cade
Member
Ahh, c'mon. It was a good thread, even if you didn't like what you learned.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=609880&highlight=light+gas
The smallest common LGGs used at universities can be powered by a 12ga shotgun shell and can easily throw projectiles at over 6 km/s. Tiny tiny projectiles under 3mm in dia....and they are like 20 feet long.
...and the length is necessary.
Ive attached an old paper about the construction and testing of a very small, very simple LGG of .20 bore capable of throwing a .2 gram projectile at 12,000 fps. You might be able to put the thing in the bed of a pickup truck.
Attachments
Sam Cade
Member
That would be relatively simple to do for elevation I would think. Laser rangefinder pings target, scope moves reticle to compensate based on the selected data set.
The hard part would be getting the emitter or reticle to move precisely enough.
toivo
Member
I had one, but that sucker ate batteries like you wouldn't believe.
To add to this: The next big thing in firearms will be a new energy source, either a more energetic chemical propellant, be it a constant-pressure powder or a compact high-yield electrical source that outstrips chemical propellants, which most likely will be a miniature fission/fusion reactor. After you get to that level, you can begin hurtling .2grain tungsten slugs at hyper-velocity projectiles and causing some rather grievous wounds as a result.
In the near term: Caseless ammunition, integration and miniaturization of optics. Do optics exist right now that integrate a ballistics computer with an aiming system? They do, but they are very large. Eventually tho, a 1-X magnifying scope with light amplification, laser ranging, and ballistic computation will be the size and weight of an ACOG, or perhaps even smaller. Not a revolution, but an incremental evolution of what's already out.
I also see that airburst munitions will make a sizable inroad on the military market. Right now the XM-25 has the ability to launch a 25mm grenade with similar accuracy to a service rifle out to 600 yards and defeat troops behind cover in an descent sized area. I recall someone mentioned that the amount of explosive in one 25mm grenade is enough to kill most anyone inside of a 15 yard diameter just from over-pressure alone, never mind any subsequent fragmentation. Being able to launch 6-10 of these in rapid succession with 2-6 MOA accuracy to 600 yards has a lot of appeal.
In the near term: Caseless ammunition, integration and miniaturization of optics. Do optics exist right now that integrate a ballistics computer with an aiming system? They do, but they are very large. Eventually tho, a 1-X magnifying scope with light amplification, laser ranging, and ballistic computation will be the size and weight of an ACOG, or perhaps even smaller. Not a revolution, but an incremental evolution of what's already out.
I also see that airburst munitions will make a sizable inroad on the military market. Right now the XM-25 has the ability to launch a 25mm grenade with similar accuracy to a service rifle out to 600 yards and defeat troops behind cover in an descent sized area. I recall someone mentioned that the amount of explosive in one 25mm grenade is enough to kill most anyone inside of a 15 yard diameter just from over-pressure alone, never mind any subsequent fragmentation. Being able to launch 6-10 of these in rapid succession with 2-6 MOA accuracy to 600 yards has a lot of appeal.
Sam, the problem with going smaller on a red dot is that if you go too small, you basically have a frame that blocks everything but the dot, and actually makes it just as hard to see as ironsights. My Ruger LCP will not be made better for its intended purpose (pocket carry) by the addition of a red dot.
Don't get me wrong, I love red dots. I'd have one on my shotgun if the thing didn't spiderweb crack after 6 shots (I should have probably paid more than $80 for a red dot + laser combo). Personally, I think if you don't need the zoom of a scope, a red dot is pretty much mandatory for an advantage in a shootout. With that said, I don't see it replacing ironsights completely.
Don't get me wrong, I love red dots. I'd have one on my shotgun if the thing didn't spiderweb crack after 6 shots (I should have probably paid more than $80 for a red dot + laser combo). Personally, I think if you don't need the zoom of a scope, a red dot is pretty much mandatory for an advantage in a shootout. With that said, I don't see it replacing ironsights completely.
Sam Cade
Member
If a dot is "just as hard to see as iron sights" or rather the lens only being the same height and width as a rear sight, it would still offer all of its advantages over irons.
Sure it would! Being able to acquire a sight picture in less than perfect lighting conditions and the advantage of a single aim point.
Provided of course that the bulk of the weapon isn't increased beyond your personal "this is too dang big" threshold.
Now we just need smaller sights.
I don't think lasers are realistic. You think of the movies where a guy gets hit and hes down. Its a beam of light. You would have to hold it on the target for a duration or you'll just draw a line on your target... maybe a sunburn, maybe 3rd degree burns, maybe it would maim them.
Either way, the only lasers I know of are used in ground based missile defense, and I think they've put one on 747, but the power required is so large that it would be impossible to have a handheld unit in the near future. I believe they use large amounts of chemicals to produce the reaction required for the energy output, its much more complicated than simply creating a giant overpowered version of a consumer laser pointer running off a giant battery.
If anything, I would wager the next generation of lasers would be available on armored vehicles... MAYBE on a humvee sized vehicle, but even that would be pushing it.
Either way, the only lasers I know of are used in ground based missile defense, and I think they've put one on 747, but the power required is so large that it would be impossible to have a handheld unit in the near future. I believe they use large amounts of chemicals to produce the reaction required for the energy output, its much more complicated than simply creating a giant overpowered version of a consumer laser pointer running off a giant battery.
If anything, I would wager the next generation of lasers would be available on armored vehicles... MAYBE on a humvee sized vehicle, but even that would be pushing it.
Deus Machina
Member
Lasers are already used to blast apart kidney stones and some large ones can near-instantly set things on fire. I can see them in use in the future, but with the already simple ease with which color-shifting, UV-reactive or -resistant, or simply reflective material is around, I very much doubt they'll actually replace small arms.
Ever wonder why Stormtroopers wore the white armor?
I'm another of the opinion that small red-dot sights can start to replace irons on some weapons altogether, even in the next couple years. Heck, if you design a gun for it, you could easily have a red dot no larger than the sight picture of the adjustable sights on most target pistols. You'd just have to integrate the projecting dot into the slide, and stow the battery in the grips or somewhere.
I'm also of the opinion that, eventually, caseless ammunition will become a viable replacement. The trick is to design a rim that either leaves with the projectile or burns up, but not if the powder doesn't burn. If not completely caseless, then just using a rimmed primer instead of a case. The inside from a material that absorbs heat, in a cup in a material that doesn't--thus, ejecting the tiny remnants could take plenty of the heat with it, and hence alleviate the current thermal problems with caseless ammunition.
And, yes, we're well on the way to completely using plastics for that.
Ever wonder why Stormtroopers wore the white armor?
I'm another of the opinion that small red-dot sights can start to replace irons on some weapons altogether, even in the next couple years. Heck, if you design a gun for it, you could easily have a red dot no larger than the sight picture of the adjustable sights on most target pistols. You'd just have to integrate the projecting dot into the slide, and stow the battery in the grips or somewhere.
I'm also of the opinion that, eventually, caseless ammunition will become a viable replacement. The trick is to design a rim that either leaves with the projectile or burns up, but not if the powder doesn't burn. If not completely caseless, then just using a rimmed primer instead of a case. The inside from a material that absorbs heat, in a cup in a material that doesn't--thus, ejecting the tiny remnants could take plenty of the heat with it, and hence alleviate the current thermal problems with caseless ammunition.
And, yes, we're well on the way to completely using plastics for that.
Sam Cade
Member
Lasers on the battlefield are a certainty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZEUS-HLONS_(HMMWV_Laser_Ordnance_Neutralization_System)
The JSF will probably be fitted with an Air-to-Air laser eventually.
Solid state lasers are advancing rapidly but as you noted its anybody's guess as to when/if power supplies get small enough to make use as an infantry weapon viable...
azmjs
member
On one hand, the thing about big advancements is that if we saw them coming, they wouldn't be big advancements.
The biggest advances are surprises.
On the other hand, a lot of technology is inspired by 'science fiction,' a lot of the people who go into science and engineering grow up enthralled by visions of the possible future, and it would be hard to list all the commonplace technologies of today that were not simulated or imagined in decades past.
I think that eventually we'll have caseless chemical-explosion based projectile weapons, that's about as far as he "gun" can go, and is really only a question of the state of material science.
After that, the logical place to advance is into non-chemical-explosion projectile weapons, probably fired magnetically. That might really only be a question of batteries. It's not difficult to imagine, if given a powerful enough battery, a magnetically driven projectile weapon that switches batteries the same way that contemporary guns switch magazines.
Such weapons would not be governable by current firearms laws. No fire, no firearm
It's also possible that new chemicals, elements, or processes could be discovered that are much much more efficient than gunpowder at turning from solid into gas. A low-weight projectile going 5000 feet per second could do a lot of damage, and if the cartridge could be the size of a 22 round, it would "change the game."
After that, "energy weapons."
Star Trek and Star Wars have inspired at least one generation of scientists and engineers to produce things like voice recognition, supercomputers, iPads, cell phones, etc etc. Why not 'phasers' and 'disruptors,' particle beams and antimatter bombs
The biggest advances are surprises.
On the other hand, a lot of technology is inspired by 'science fiction,' a lot of the people who go into science and engineering grow up enthralled by visions of the possible future, and it would be hard to list all the commonplace technologies of today that were not simulated or imagined in decades past.
I think that eventually we'll have caseless chemical-explosion based projectile weapons, that's about as far as he "gun" can go, and is really only a question of the state of material science.
After that, the logical place to advance is into non-chemical-explosion projectile weapons, probably fired magnetically. That might really only be a question of batteries. It's not difficult to imagine, if given a powerful enough battery, a magnetically driven projectile weapon that switches batteries the same way that contemporary guns switch magazines.
Such weapons would not be governable by current firearms laws. No fire, no firearm
It's also possible that new chemicals, elements, or processes could be discovered that are much much more efficient than gunpowder at turning from solid into gas. A low-weight projectile going 5000 feet per second could do a lot of damage, and if the cartridge could be the size of a 22 round, it would "change the game."
After that, "energy weapons."
Star Trek and Star Wars have inspired at least one generation of scientists and engineers to produce things like voice recognition, supercomputers, iPads, cell phones, etc etc. Why not 'phasers' and 'disruptors,' particle beams and antimatter bombs
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
