Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 12/4/2007 7:16:46 AM EDT
Let's discuss some ideas and their feasibility.
The proposals should be cutting edge, but not "magic" technology.

I'll start...An updated Spectre...we could call it the Wraith.
Upgrade the armament to gauss cannons/coil guns and directed energy weapons.
The military is very close to acheiving a battlefield deployable laser, so lets give it something to ride in.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:18:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/4/2007 7:20:03 AM EDT by RikWriter]
The Wraith? Does it beam enemy into itself then suck out their life force?

Seriously though, battlefield lasers are under development for defensive purposes, mostly---shooting down missiles, aircraft, etc...
We're still pretty fucking far away from a laser efficient enough that it does the job better than an explosive shell or bullet against hardened targets or personell.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:21:38 AM EDT
Future Weapons?

Do I have to whisper in this thread..?
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:23:32 AM EDT
I like the idea of a high intensity laser that's man-portable and shoulder fired (when the technology allows for them to be light enough).

No recoil, no external ballistics to think about, and as accurate as you are steady.

Of course, maybe bad guys would develop armor made of mirrors or prisms that could deflect or reflect the beam.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:26:25 AM EDT
Satellite mounted kinetic energy weapons. Basically orbiting tungsten telephone poles, with small engines and guidance system.
It would be some way of causing enormous damage to a single target in a very short amount of time, let's say 20-30 minutes. It would also be better than a non-nuclear ballistic missile, primarily because it would be less likely to trigger launch alerts in other countries, such as Russia or China.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:27:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ScrinMaster:
Satellite mounted kinetic energy weapons. Basically orbiting tungsten telephone poles, with small engines and guidance system.
It would be some way of causing enormous damage to a single target in a very short amount of time, let's say 20-30 minutes. It would also be better than a non-nuclear ballistic missile, primarily because it would be less likely to trigger launch alerts in other countries, such as Russia or China.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment


Flying Crowbars...I read a Jerry Pournelle article about the THOR system back in the 80s. Always thought it was a great idea.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:27:53 AM EDT
.50 revolvers for everyone baby!
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:28:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By macman37:
.50 revolvers for everyone baby!


Recoil assisted of course!
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:31:20 AM EDT
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:34:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:35:47 AM EDT
I don't believe it is too far fetched to think in the not so distant future we will have weapons that can automatically target people, disregard friendlies and automatically compensate for range with their optics. I know this already being done with crew served weapons like the ACSW:



I suspect we'll see such technology used in infantry shoulder fired weapons... first replacements for the M203, then it will move to rifles and rifle cartridges.

Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:37:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.

I read somewhere about nuclear cells that provide a steady flow of power (albeit very-very low voltage currently) that's being developed by battery makers like Duracell and Energizer. Once that's perfected, we'll have batteries that will run with a constant draw for years.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:38:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


Agreed.
However, could there be a use for powered exoskeletons for supply and armament jobs, like on ships or airfields?
That would give us practical experience with powered exoskeletons in the field, and possibly spur development of models more suited to combat.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:40:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:
The Wraith? Does it beam enemy into itself then suck out their life force?

Seriously though, battlefield lasers are under development for defensive purposes, mostly---shooting down missiles, aircraft, etc...
We're still pretty fucking far away from a laser efficient enough that it does the job better than an explosive shell or bullet against hardened targets or personell.


Marines to Pentagon: We need a freaky deaky airborne death ray, stat

There's that...what about the gauss cannons I suggested?
Workable?
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:42:05 AM EDT
I'd like a 155mm gatling gun...
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:45:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:
what about the gauss cannons I suggested?
Workable?


Not with present levela of technology. Maybe in a few years, if we can develop high temperature superconductors.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:46:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Towely:
I'd like a 155mm gatling gun...


Firing nuclear shells.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:47:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By swede1986:

Originally Posted By Towely:
I'd like a 155mm gatling gun...


Firing nuclear shells.


From orbit.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:47:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


We need to get on that -- our military can't be upgraded to "future awesome" without walking robots...!
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:47:44 AM EDT
Maybe advances in material sciences that would allow high brisance explosives as propellant, which would lighten loads and allow higher velocities as well.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:50:28 AM EDT

A laser-cannon version of the AC-130 gunship has begun flight testing, according to Air Force and Boeing Co. officials. The “low-power” flight tests began Oct. 10 and continue through the fall.

The flights over the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico involve evaluating how well the laser gunship’s target tracking system works. A low-power, solid-state lasers serves as the surrogate for a high-powered chemical laser still being developed.


The high-powered laser was fired for the first time on Sept. 21 in ground tests at Albuquerque, N.M., an achievement known as "first light," a Boeing statement said. The ground tests will continue through the fall.

In 2007, Boeing will install the high-powered laser in the C-130H and fire the laser at ground targets. The laser beam will be fired through a rotating turret mounted into an existing 50-inch-diameter hole in the C-130H's belly.

The advanced tactical laser is a Defense Department and U.S. Special Operations Command advanced concept technology demonstration program with Boeing as the main contractor. Central to the project is the Air Force Research Lab's Directed Energy Directorate and the 46th Test Wing at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., which provided the C-130H.

A $200 million test budget will carry the project through flight testing.




Airborne Tactical Laser (ATL)

The Airborne tactical Laser is a Special Operations Command (SOCOM) sponsored Advanced Concept Technology demonstration (ACTD) program, designed to demonstrate the use of high power tactical lasers from an airborne platform.

Under the program, a chemical oxygen-iodine laser (COIL) will be installed on a modified C-130H transport aircraft, simulating a future AC-130 laser equipped gunship. The airborne tactical laser will be able to destroy, damage or disable targets at tactical ranges with little to no collateral damage, supporting missions on the battlefield and in urban operations. The laser will be able to place a 10-centimeter-wide beam with enough energy to melt and slice through a metal target from a distance of 15 kilometers. ATL is expected to produce scaleable effects, meaning the weapon operator will be able to select the degree and nature of the damage done to a target by choosing a specific aimpoint and laser shot duration. For example, targeting the fuel tank of a vehicle could result in total destruction of the vehicle, while targeting a tire might result in the vehicle stopping without injury to the driver.

The program is led by Boeing, which is assisted by an industry team including L-3 Communications/Brashear, which made the laser turret, and HYTEC, Inc., which made various structural elements of the weapon system. Boeing began flight testing of a surrogate solid-state laser in October 2006. The aircraft uses a surrogate solid-state "low-power" surrogate laser for search and track of ground targets. The system utilizes the hardware designed for the high power chemical laser, which includes the beam director and optical control bench, controlling and directing the laser beam to its target; weapon system consoles, which will display high-resolution imagery and enable the tracking of targets; and sensors.

The high power chemical laser destined for the program was also tested for the first time on Sept 21st, the ground, generating the "first light" of the high-energy chemical laser in ground tests. By 2007, the high power module is scheduled to be installed on the aircraft and fire it in-flight at mission-representative ground targets to demonstrate the military utility of high energy-lasers. The test team will fire the laser through a rotating turret that extends through an existing 50-inch-diameter hole in the aircraft's belly. Future potential ATL platforms could be the C-130 and MV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:53:40 AM EDT
Weapons firing caseless ammunition.

Link Posted: 12/4/2007 7:54:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/4/2007 7:55:52 AM EDT by ghengiskhabb]
Take a C-130 gunship and stick a bunch of these pointing out the side. (It is a box of ground to ground missiles)



A C-5 with a JDAM conveyor belt.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 8:21:59 AM EDT
i think that the military should bring back and update an older weapon system for current use. the pack 75mm howitzer is a small, relatively light weight artillery piece that could be towed by a HMMWV and could be used for both indirect and direct fire. with modern technology i'm sure we could make the shells more accurate and lethal, and possibly even make laser-guided shells.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 8:40:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


Agreed.
However, could there be a use for powered exoskeletons for supply and armament jobs, like on ships or airfields?
That would give us practical experience with powered exoskeletons in the field, ad possibly spur development of models more suited to combat.


Like the power loaders from Aliens. Better than a forklift and way cooler looking.

I used to think the exoskeleton thing was a cool idea for combat soldiers... until I grew up. Then the reality of them set in. They're just way too impractical unless you make them completely resistant to small arms and things like RPGs and landmines. Otherwise you're just building a hi-tech metal coffin that only fits one person as opposed to several like a track vehicle.

If they gave more people common, off the shelf stuff like optics and trained them a hell of a lot more with their weapons than they did in the past and then worked on the logistics system for battlefield resupply things would probably go a little smoother than they did.

Beyond that I think we need to wait for a major technological/biological breakthrough to see anything really impressive.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 8:54:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


The weight of powered armor will also make it really easy to cornhole armored troops with covered, camouflaged pits along their route of advance.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 8:57:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By crurifragium:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


The weight of powered armor will also make it really easy to cornhole armored troops with covered, camouflaged pits along their route of advance.


Not if they have multispectral sensors that can see through the camouflage (thermal, millimeter wave radar, IR, visible light, all combined).
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 10:19:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/4/2007 10:20:58 AM EDT by Thuban]
For small arms, I think that the biggest improvements will come in the sights. Imagine…

* Fully digital scope with a 100 megapixel resolution.
*Zoom from 0.25x to 100x
* Built in automatic laser range finder.
* Reticle automatically range adjusts based on programmable ammunition type.
*Exclusive “homeboy” system compensates for a sideways hold of the weapon. Operator can still hit his target while retaining that unmistakable Liberian combat style.
* When in visible light mode, the scope automatically compensates for lighting conditions down to starlight levels.
* Thermal mode and near infrared modes for improved target acquisition in all conditions.
*Ground penetrating radar mode allows an active search of the area for tunnels or lets the operator see through walls.
*Personal IFF compatibility helps prevent annoying friendly fire incidents.
*Image recognition software constantly scans constantly scans all available modes for potential threats such as mines, booby traps, or camouflaged snipers and alerts the operator.
*Scope image can either be viewed from the rear of the scope as is traditional, exported to a viewer attached to the operators helmet.
*Video output allows the scope’s image to be exported and transmitted in real time.
*Video inputs allow the scope to also display GPS mapping data, photographs, or text instructions.
*Scope’s onboard memory card records 24 hours of data.
*DVD compatibility allows operator to view instructional zombie movies during downtime.
*Heavy duty backpack included so user can carry the 2,500 page instruction manual with him in the field.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 10:21:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/4/2007 10:23:04 AM EDT by TGMoore]

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


Agreed.
However, could there be a use for powered exoskeletons for supply and armament jobs, like on ships or airfields?
That would give us practical experience with powered exoskeletons in the field, and possibly spur development of models more suited to combat.


What can a powered exoskeleton do better then what a fork lift can do more cheaply?

It is a nice idea fellas but me thinks you have been watching Aliens too many times. There just isn't a need for a system like this.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 10:22:07 AM EDT
Rail guns. first on ships, then artillery, then tanks, then crew served weapons, then assault weapons.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 10:24:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TGMoore:

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


Agreed.
However, could there be a use for powered exoskeletons for supply and armament jobs, like on ships or airfields?
That would give us practical experience with powered exoskeletons in the field, and possibly spur development of models more suited to combat.


What can a powered exoskeleton do better then what a fork lift can do more cheaply?

It is a nice idea fellas but me thinks you have been watching Aliens too many times. There just isn't a need for a system like this.


Carry 300 pounds of gear and 200 pounds of weapons cross country at 20 mph with the same agility as a man on foot. In theory anyway.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 10:31:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/4/2007 10:33:12 AM EDT by BadShovelhead]
Were I king instead of working on new gear I'd work on a national set of balls that enabled the troops to go in to a war with the full might and power of the US behind them with no ambiguous bullshit and politicking. I make it a rule that if we sent troops in to harms way the military would make the rules and we'd just sit back here doing whatever we needed to do to make sure our troops kicked ass got the job over with and came home as soon as possible.

We have plenty of fancy gear.

If I had to make a piece of gear it would be something robust without pissy lil electronics in it that broke the first time a marine used it.

Or radios that could REALLY be depended on to talk to each other and the right to bitch slap the CommO publicly if he screwed up.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 10:35:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/4/2007 10:37:47 AM EDT by TGMoore]

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Originally Posted By TGMoore:

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


Agreed.
However, could there be a use for powered exoskeletons for supply and armament jobs, like on ships or airfields?
That would give us practical experience with powered exoskeletons in the field, and possibly spur development of models more suited to combat.


What can a powered exoskeleton do better then what a fork lift can do more cheaply?

It is a nice idea fellas but me thinks you have been watching Aliens too many times. There just isn't a need for a system like this.


Carry 300 pounds of gear and 200 pounds of weapons cross country at 20 mph with the same agility as a man on foot. In theory anyway.


With current battery technology that isn't feasible right now. I was specifically referring to the use of (presumably "tethered") exoskeleton system in ware houses, hangers, supply depots, etc. Its a cool idea to have a power loader but It just doesn't offer a drastic leap in performance over forks lifts. And that is assuming exoskeletons would give a performance boost over forklifts. I mean do we even need one? We seem to load our warplanes fast enough today.
Link Posted: 12/4/2007 10:48:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TGMoore:

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Originally Posted By TGMoore:

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:

Originally Posted By RikWriter:

Originally Posted By 21BoomCBTENGR:
Honestly i think the greatest improvement the military could use for infantry isn't a weapon. We could use a powered exo-skeleton way more. imagine if we could wear an armored suit that is impervious to small arms up to AP 30=06 rounds, but everywhere. Also, we could carry more and deadlier weapons, arm mounted MK-19 anyone? M240B on my shoulder?


I think we're going to have to come up with more efficient and powerful fuel cells before we develop usable powered armor.


Agreed.
However, could there be a use for powered exoskeletons for supply and armament jobs, like on ships or airfields?
That would give us practical experience with powered exoskeletons in the field, and possibly spur development of models more suited to combat.


What can a powered exoskeleton do better then what a fork lift can do more cheaply?

It is a nice idea fellas but me thinks you have been watching Aliens too many times. There just isn't a need for a system like this.


Carry 300 pounds of gear and 200 pounds of weapons cross country at 20 mph with the same agility as a man on foot. In theory anyway.


With current battery technology that isn't feasible right now. I was specifically referring to the use of (presumably "tethered") exoskeleton system in ware houses, hangers, supply depots, etc. Its a cool idea to have a power loader but It just doesn't offer a drastic leap in performance over forks lifts. And that is assuming exoskeletons would give a performance boost over forklifts. I mean do we even need one? We seem to load our warplanes fast enough today.


Actually if you'd ever seen our planes loaded with armaments it is a painfully slow process. We would be better off with an improved "jammer" no doubt, but a powered suit wouldn't do much good on aircraft where you only have a few feet of clearance under it. It might be nice for moving loose cargo around but for palletized stuff the forklift is still the right tool for the job, and will be for a long time. There are electric and CNG ones already.
Top Top