Comment on Stingray M8 Assault rifle by DaltTT
And that statement is well - not quite true. Lightened musket (smoothbore muzzle-loading flintlock) was introduced as a main service arm for European armies' infantry in the middle of 17-th century. And then it maintained it's hold about 200 years with only slight modifications - such as introducing cap-lock mechanism instead of flintlock in early 19-th century), with the advent of breach loading rifles only in second half of 19-th century.
Hand-held plasma weapons of 31-st century are somewhat in their infancy - they still have low ammo capacity per standard battery and have overheating problems. However, that's the case for humans, for example, at least some other races have achieved more perfection with directed-energy weapons.
> Again, what happens if the armor moves so far ahead that the weapons can't even damage it, then what do you do?
Then there is weight issue - weight of the armour. Infantry power armour is available and is relatively widely uses, but power armor-infantry uses 12,7mm (.50 ) caliber automatic rifles as their main arm.
Then there is weight issue - weight of the armour. Infantry power armour is available and is relatively widely uses, but power armor-infantry uses 12,7mm (.50 ) caliber automatic rifles as their main arm.
I meant to say a thousand year actually, so my previous statement ruined my point. My point is you are ignoring the singularity, the exponential grownth of tech. It took thousands of years to get swords, a few thousand less to get guns, and less then a few hundred to get missiles. Semi and automatic weapons came into beeing in less then 50 or so years. In twenty years all of the computer tech for the Apollo mission was fit inside a Mac, and less then twenty years again that tech fits inside a phone.
And there is problem is "singularity" generally appliable. For example, it may take another 50 years to achieve commercially available fusion power, and we haven't got a slightest clue on how to make a warp drive besides generall mathematical model. And some things may never be available at all, like cold fusion - 'cause it is against the laws of physics.
The Era Astra universe have solved problems like FTL travel, cybernetic augmentation of human body, artificial intelligence or curing cancer - but it's quite comfortable with automatic rifles as an infantry's main arm.
The advances in weapons during those eras were made in the bayonet and loading speeds. It was still much faster in progress then almost no change in over a thousand years. Hell, Halo's weapons could be made right now if someone had the funding set aside.
Again, what happens if the armor moves so far ahead that the weapons can't even damage it, then what do you do?
Again, what happens if the armor moves so far ahead that the weapons can't even damage it, then what do you do?
> Again, what happens if the armor moves so far ahead that the weapons can't even damage it, then what do you do?
Then there is weight issue - weight of the armour. Infantry power armour is available and is relatively widely uses, but power armor-infantry uses 12,7mm (.50 ) caliber automatic rifles as their main arm.
Then there is weight issue - weight of the armour. Infantry power armour is available and is relatively widely uses, but power armor-infantry uses 12,7mm (.50 ) caliber automatic rifles as their main arm.
In the old days, HEAT was the best way to take out a tank. With the invention of composite armor and ERA, we're using SABOT rounds now. Anything less can't damage a tank from several angles.
What if some huge advance in bodyarmor is like that, what if .50 cal isn't enough?
What if some huge advance in bodyarmor is like that, what if .50 cal isn't enough?
SABOTs (APDS) rounds are generally a very old idea of kinetic energy penetrator. First AP (armour piercing) rounds for tank cannons vere kinetic energy, not HEAT rounds. HEAT's are remarkable for not needing to have great kinetic energy of the shell to penetrate armour - that's ideal for use in low-velocity launchers such as RPGs and recoilless rifles.
The issue of "armour vs. gun" is really old also. The problem is that to add more armour you need to add more weight to that armour - so it is possible to create an extra-heavy exoskeleton armour impervous to .50 cal, but than that platform would be heavy enough to mount 20 or 25mm autocannon.
The issue of "armour vs. gun" is really old also. The problem is that to add more armour you need to add more weight to that armour - so it is possible to create an extra-heavy exoskeleton armour impervous to .50 cal, but than that platform would be heavy enough to mount 20 or 25mm autocannon.
Modern Armor can stop at least one to three rifle rounds on average, the armor of Vietnam was heavier and vastly less effective. It's been less the. Half a century and we made huge gains in that regard.
It's only a matter of time before it gets lighter or it starts to hold back up to seven rounds or even ten.
It's only a matter of time before it gets lighter or it starts to hold back up to seven rounds or even ten.
View all replies