ZOMBIE FORUMS

It's a stinking, shambling corpse grotesquely parodying life.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 3:41 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Armor/Wepaons of the Future
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2003 3:30 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
This is a thread to link various armor/weapons that you think will make its way into tommorrow's weapons systems. Oh, and link new weapon systems (ie, drones etc etc) you see too, thats cool.

Of course, since this is debate club, I expect a lot of debate on this stuff.


Lets see here...first item.

http://www.nature.com/nsu/021007/021007-13.html

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2003 3:44 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: The Murky depths of Northern Virginia
Hmm...I *think* I understand it, but i'll take the flak for possibly uninformed comments

This material is basically an even stroner...something? is this metal, plastic, what?

damn my tiredness!!! who want's to sum up the article and help the less informed?

_________________
BDM was here


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:09 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1349
It is the next genration carbon fiber material. It is carbon based materials, organic rather than synthetically derived. It is lighter, stronger, and more resilient than current carbon fiber products. It is high cost at present, and its propoerties make it sutable for use in varoius space-born/bound technolgy ventures (including spaceship/sattelite body components. The uses on the ground are nearly limitless as it can also be used in applications that currently use ceramic compounds (to include super-conductor technology...I have a relative that works in NASA, 1/2 of his conversations revolve around this stuff).
Possibly a replacement for kevlar and ceramics in body armour, to heat sinks in electronics, it has many possibilities.
Nice link MIB, not many poeple have a clue that this technology is being cultivated (at great expense in tax dollars too).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:53 pm 
Offline
Local

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2003 11:54 pm
Posts: 331
Location: Within range of cakewalk's wifi.
An interesting, if somewhat loosely related, article.

http://www.janes.com/defence/naval_forces/news/jni/jni031007_1_n.shtml


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2003 6:02 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... ush217.xml

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2003 7:23 am 
Offline
Native

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 903
Except a Death Star isn't very feasible if you're confined to one planet...

I don't see lasers being used as an offensive weapon any time soon, simply because bullets and missiles already do the job very well, thank you. But as antimissile defense systems, I can see lasers being very useful indeed, for replacing the CWIS and similar ship- and installation-based point-defense systems.

Oh, and this is another innovation, a way of mass-producing spider silk proteins using genetically-modified goats. Spider silk = teh r0xx0r in terms of strength and elasticity, and will make a bulletproof vest that is far superior to Kevlar.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:25 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2885
Location: San Antonio
OK, I will admit to being a military traditionalist, but I also have a great deal of military insight. Bearing in mind that politics can force any stupid thing into the hands of the military and expect them to use it (Patriot Missile, M-16A1, etc) The military is at (or past) the limit of high techness that it can get to without making the soldier far too cost-ineffective.

I think the only things that you might see are some good, light, polymer/kevlar body armor that breathes like Gore-Tex and will stop a bullet from a 5.56x45 or 7.62x39. Also I see future in better recoil suppression in rifles, making proper rifle calibers acceptable militarily again.

Remember though, people are cheap and disposable, if a move make a soldier twice as effective, it has to make him a) More effective than 2 or three more of him. and or B) Cost less than getting more of him.

Case in point: China, decision A: Move to AK/SKS variant over pointed stick (current standard issue weapon) Effectiveness increase = > 400%. Long term cost = minimal, less than feeding 4 more men. Decision = Yes

Decision B) Moving to decent rifle, Effectiveness difference = 15-30% Cost = For rettoling and re-equiping, more than mustering and poorly arming a bunch of people when you need them. Decision = NO!!!

_________________
We used to play for silver, Now we play for life.
One's for sport and one's for blood
At the point of a knife, Now the die is shaken
Now the die must fall,
There ain't a winner in this game
Who don't go home with all, Not with all...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2003 6:02 pm 
Offline
Native

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 903
While that may work for China, Clay, you must remember that the American populace has a very low tolerance for casualties. Even if increasing the survivability of soldiers via carbon nanotube/spidersilk armor is high in cost, it will likely still be done in preference to just "throwing more bodies at the problem."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 2003 11:11 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2885
Location: San Antonio
Remember I did specifically mention light armor.

What I was arguing against was the probable adoption of large idiotic, high tech combat systems like This. and worse.

_________________
We used to play for silver, Now we play for life.
One's for sport and one's for blood
At the point of a knife, Now the die is shaken
Now the die must fall,
There ain't a winner in this game
Who don't go home with all, Not with all...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:25 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 3730
Location: DELETED FOR SECURITY REASONS
More stuff on the laser systems:

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9605/02/israeli.anti.missiles/

-MiB

_________________
delenda est communism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 11:41 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2242
Location: http://the-expatriates.com/
note that when you talk about teh cost of a technology/weapons system, you're not talking about *real* money by any means at all, this is *contract* money that is really the government paying it's tax income back to the workers who gave it to them in t first place, generic 'defence' contracts are a good way of keeping up employment levels for fun and profit

not ealso along this line that when a nation, especially the USA claims it's spending x-billion$ on aid for a country, much of this flies straight back to teh pockets of the american peopela nd the government

the problems is *hassle* NATO likes to have a standard bullet caliber, a standard this that and the other, even within national armies the more standardised you can getth better, easy to supply and manufacture on mass etc, it's better to use something that you know works ok than gamble on the time and trouble it takes to implement something that *might* be better

blah blah blah

anyway, here's the link Hard Target Zylon body armour

it's actually been in production and for sale for less than 2 years, so you'll eb forgiven for not having seen it around much, compare it to standard high quality Kevlar for price and weight, the price is approx twice as much for about a third less weight and size, prehaps not economical but a lot better vest, and untill we train spiders to do somthing more than cause trouble i'll stick with stuff that actually exists, i mean 1.3kg to stop a burst of 9mm SMG sounds good to me... it'll be a while befor eyou can get something to stop a rifle round at that weight/size without plastics/ceramics tho[/url]

_________________
ollie.
---------------
now your tears are worth it


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:32 pm 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Mon May 13, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1294
Location: Middle of goddamn nowhere, Georgia
While I can't really comment on the body armor issue, having no experience with it, I can comment on that OICW piece of junk. It's already more than a pain in the ass to clean the M16A4 in the field without losing the small parts to the point that it won't jam for the next 200 rounds or so. I can only imagine it's even more of a pain in the ass for something that's actually two weapon systems put together, not to mention how fragile the computer is, and how long the batteries last for it. And given the US's tendency to adopt weapons that have lots and lots of small parts, it doesn't look promising.
The only US weapon with few disassembled parts is the M9 Beretta pistol, and they didn't even train us on those in basic. The M16A4, the SAW, and the M240B all had lots of parts, especially the machine guns. Horrible horrible pain in the ass to clean. I'd feel far more comfortable with my AK.

_________________
"My relationship with my SAW[M249 Squad Automatic Weapon] has lasted longer than my marriage did." -One of the guys in my platoon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:57 pm 
Offline
Native
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 7:12 pm
Posts: 731
Location: Central Coast, Colanirfia
Well, I might get shot, but speaking as a civilian and semi-educated quasi-jornalist:

I know that all these nifty weapon systems are pains for the grunts, but I can't help thinking that it'd really be nice if everyone used these toys, and the whole world would spend more time spending money on war games and less time on warring. I know that it'll be tough getting the miltary industrial complex back under control, so I'm hoping that the whole kit and kaboodle gets assimilated into the entertainment industry (and I think that assimilation is more likely anyway; have you seen TLC, The Discovery Channel, or Tech TV lately?).

Going back on topic; yeah, the toys are a joke, but gods they look cool.

_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 1:13 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2885
Location: San Antonio
This is what I like about Rupert, Old school attitude, crappy, disposable-soldier rifle. Who cares if it can hit shit past 250 yards, we have a bullethose that will probably go off even if abused by the soldiery.

Excuse the sarcasm Rupe, no offense meant, I sure like it better than one of those integrated weapons systems that will probably be the equivalent of a $30k doorstop under real battlefield conditions.

The fact is that I see every war/military matter from the Enlisted man's perspective, and I would not want ANY rifle that I wouldn't bet my life would go off. If I was in the infantry, the rifle I'd want is a shortened M1 Garand with an external magazine feed. Would it make any sense to outfit the whole infantry like that? NO! Still, the M16 is not a reliable, high-tolerance weapon and I think it needs to be replaced with one that is.

_________________
We used to play for silver, Now we play for life.
One's for sport and one's for blood
At the point of a knife, Now the die is shaken
Now the die must fall,
There ain't a winner in this game
Who don't go home with all, Not with all...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 10:08 am 
Offline
Addict

Joined: Mon May 13, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 1294
Location: Middle of goddamn nowhere, Georgia
Hee hee, no offense taken.
Accuracy past 250 yards really doesn't matter to me, mainly because I can't hit the 300 meter target with the M16A4 yet. With more practice perhaps, but I haven't been able to thusfar. I still managed 32/40 hits on qualification day, but I didn't fire at the 300's since I knew I couldn't hit them, so I saved the rounds for other targets.
As far as abuse by the soldiery goes, given some of the members of my old Basic platoon, we need something easier to maintain. I had an advantage that I knew how to clean weapons, so I had less jams than most, but many of them had downright filthy weapons, even after supposedly cleaning them. It doesn't take brains to be Infantry, I'm afraid to say. Given the technical nature of the OICW, I would honestly fear for my life if some unmentioned members of my Basic platoon were assigned those weapons and were in my squad.

_________________
"My relationship with my SAW[M249 Squad Automatic Weapon] has lasted longer than my marriage did." -One of the guys in my platoon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 11:58 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 5:00 pm
Posts: 2242
Location: http://the-expatriates.com/
ther eare few things worse than squeezing the trigger on a gun and not knowing if it will actually fir eor not, the safty catch is slightly loose on my shotgun and it's a hell of apain, basicly i have to do a check before each shot (as i kind of should anywya, but still) and even then it slips on if i'm firing high

but yeah, it's not like they just threw a random gun at the army and let them get on with it, they did actually do some harsh testing and the like before issuing it, it's just not all of the testing lessons were implimented for one reason or another, usually budget (not cost) reasons, but the idea was sound, there's a reason why Vietnam era NCOs tended to carry the test version production XM177 series guns, not the mass produced M16s

i really hope that OCIW is not goign to be issued on anything mor ethan squad level, it might look flashy but it's heavy, full of bits and etc as said above, you dont' put on your dress suit and shined shoes to go hiking in a swamp, just becasue it looks good on paper doesn't mean it will actually work, an M16 with a 203 will do it's job without the budget dent, re-training and general in the field trouble that this *will* cause

I'm waiting fo rthe SA80A2 to get it's full run of 40mm grenade launchers for th British army, owning HK suddenly means the army gets a bunch of new cool stuff, no need to carry around light mortars when you've got on strapped under every few guns in a squad

here's a thought, guns used to have a bunch of wood in them so that the soldiers would take more care/pride in them and keep them clean, if was reluctantly that the British army finally moved to full synthetics at the end of the 20th century, prehaps the last non-AK nation to do so, there's more psychology in weapons than you think

_________________
ollie.
---------------
now your tears are worth it


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:03 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: Not a hellish, Onionian future...
A board with a nail sticking out of it. That will be our futuristic weaponry. A board with a nail sticking out of it. And maybe a sock full of buckshot.

_________________
actor_au wrote:
Labrat's friends can't run away, as they are only the skins of the people he's drowned in his own semen, carefully stitched together and stuffed with cooking chocolate.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:48 am 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:46 pm
Posts: 1957
Location: In a cube-farm, growing emails.
While the nice shiny new weapons tech looks really cool, and its easy to 'sell' the public on an expensive weapon if you tell them it will save lives, in the end, your standard issue weapon should be something that is rugged and dependable. The only semi-modern example I can think of at the moment is the venerable AK-47, wich, it must be said, is a damned good gun.
Every squad should probably have somebody packing something that gives the squad a boost in short-range combat(grenade launcher, bazooka, ect), especially since modern fighting is starting to gravitate towards close-in battles(cityfights, ect)
As for body armor, I'm with ollie. I don't care what's in the pipeline, just give me the best thing you have that currently exists/works.

And LabRat? Scuttle back to Unrelated. Only contribute to Debate Club threads if you are serious.

_________________
I deal with idiots from around the world daily. Darwin is calling to me. 'Kill the unfit!' he tells me. 'KILL THEM!'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:47 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 4330
Location: Not a hellish, Onionian future...
Ok, but my (serious) prediction is that we blow ourselves back to the stoneage and for most of the survivors a pointy stick would be top of the line. Some might hold on to whatever was around before we nuked ourselves but it would take them several hundred years to breed enough people to go on a conquest-spree. Until then: Pointy stick.

My guess is military innovations now and after we splat ourselves will revolve around making weapons cheaper, easier to manufacture, and easier to deploy. Of course the more technologically advanced countries would hold onto as least some stuff that is going to be expensive as hell but godly in power but the majority of forces will be cheap and only moderatly effective. Its all cost to benifit ratio.

_________________
actor_au wrote:
Labrat's friends can't run away, as they are only the skins of the people he's drowned in his own semen, carefully stitched together and stuffed with cooking chocolate.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:54 pm 
Offline
Addict
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 6:38 pm
Posts: 3148
Location: Gay bar at the end of the universe
ollie wrote:
here's a thought, guns used to have a bunch of wood in them so that the soldiers would take more care/pride in them and keep them clean, if was reluctantly that the British army finally moved to full synthetics at the end of the 20th century, prehaps the last non-AK nation to do so, there's more psychology in weapons than you think
I thought it was so they could carve "I love the cock" on their buddy's rifle.

Anyway the future. I forsee that infantry will play a smaller and smaller role in conflicts with the exception of clearing buildings. Most likely we will see much more versatile vehicles. Bipedal is impractical, if there are ever any walking weapons platforms they will almost certainly be quadropedal. Sorry mecha fans.

I expect that we will likely start seeing alot more in the way of driverless vehicles as well, we already have planes but those can't do nearly the precision work of something firmly set on the ground (yet). Whether these will work on AI or by remote control I don't know, I would guess that for ground targets though remote controlling would be necessary.

Oh and by 2025 I expect that every armed force on Earth will be armed with a LART.*

Loser Attitude Readjustment Tool


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group