Future thread

>>32443032
There will always, ALWAYS be a place for infantry. As long as there are boots on the ground, those boots will need rifles. Small arms aren't going away, even if they do change.

>>32443219
not only that, but you cannot invade or occupy an area without guys with guns in their hands coercing civs

>>32443226
Exactly. The modern battlefield may be decided in the air but I've never seen a jet occupy a city.

Man I just want a good system to attach my knives to my plate carrier.

File: active stabilization aimlock.jpg (167KB, 1123x842px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1123x842px

Yeah aim assistance will definitely be a thing. Main question is "how many decades will it take". The US mil is beginning very early prototyping of stabilized guns, with proof of concept designs just dropping an AR into a stabilizer and seeing if it actually works. I can't find the results now but it did work, it decreased time to first hit on target.

Also in the future I foresee augmented reality. We're lacking in the optics. We basically need the F35 helmet but in small goggle size. Then it can be connected to various systems and data sharing so that get helpful electronics that aren't distracting and don't block your vision (we don't need future soldier shit blocking your eye for no reason). Stuff like virtual lasers, so a squad leader can point without tracers, acoustic gunfire locator that will show bullet tracks in the air, trajectory arcs so you can see right where that 40mm will land, etc. Lots of simple things that would be clunky or distracting on their own but useful in a single heads up display.

I can't see aim assistance really taking off outside of specialist weapons, simply because it would make field maintenance of guns pretty fucking ridiculous.

C3 is what will really see improvements, stuff like augmented reality as >>32443360
mentioned, health readings being transmitted to COs, low-altitude micro UAVs attached to every infantry squad giving a birds-eye view of surroundings

>>32443441
Again the same could be said about semi autos at one time

>>32443032
>have computer in my stock
>hit the ground particularly hard
>suddenly my optics dont work
>call IT while under fire
>please hold

>>32443226
We convinced civs in Japan to quit without a single boot on the ground.

File: tmp_1443-PicsArt_10-09-12.45.35-2014363462.jpg (451KB, 2118x2475px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 2118x2475px

>>32443228
Last time someone tried, new york bitched for years

File: 4fe55dda449bd.jpg (292KB, 1364x768px)

292KB, 1364x768px

how about glasses that display a crosshair?

your gun has a camera and sensors that are synced up to your glasses. you see a crosshair wherever your barrel is pointed.

>>32444077

You'd have to have several cameras on your body pointing forward to be able to calculate the parallax there.

>>32444077
To be like a crosshair, it'll probably require a laser of some kind, such as IR laser. Difference between IR-Laser+NOD is that the sensor will be translating IR dot into icon for your glasses.

That comes with same drawbacks as IR Laser+NOD combo such as being unusable against any military with Night Vision Optics as they'll see a light show in the forest and just mortar the place.

It may be useful in CQC and with Cops though.

>>32443360
I imagine the pounds of machinery involved in that would make a soldier's arms tired

>>32444091
Just use an ir laser that strobes very fast at a specific frequency.

I have put alot of thought into it.

If it goes off to infinity (cant see the dot) a thin line will be displayed.

>>32444136

That already exists though, doesn't it? IR pointers that can be picked up by NVGs.

File: 1478741409277.gif (843KB, 500x260px) Image search: [Google]

843KB, 500x260px

>>32443032
>future of weaponry/warfare
Drones and robots. Guns and the infantryman have pretty much peaked out. We're still using guns from before we landed on the Moon.

>>32443653
>Have you tried turning it off and on again, Corporal?

>>32443360
Implementing AR in infantry equipment is something that is currently being worked on, the German military has it in their IDZ system, I would be surprised if the US military wasn't working on something similar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeMj07yKTzE
At 4:54 they start showing the AR component, althoug the rest is interesting as well.
Mind you, this is just a proof of concept video , nothing more. When they show the different scopes later on the soldiers don't even take off the lense covers.

>>32443360
Thank you for digging up old wounds about how badly Arma 3 misused its near future setting. I'm still bitter that when the only real player in the combined arms milsim field went for future tech, it was a way around licensing fees rather than actually adding to the experience.

>>32444091
>>32444103
>>32444136
>>32444144

Are you guys all retarded? Do you not know how to put two position sensors in a gun and one in the HUD?

File: 1448997809967.jpg (53KB, 552x800px)

53KB, 552x800px

>>32444544

Actually, I am retarded too. Good luck calculating ray termination there, i.e. figuring out where the next solid object is.

>IR Laser+NOD

This would do it, but it's an absolutely horrible solution against a technologically advanced enemy.

Pic related is for clearing out Gopniks from grandmother's basement, not combat against soldiers outside of Africa and best Korea.

>HUDs and aim assisted weapons become the norm
>Somebody beats the US to developing a functional quantum computer
>All your situational awareness and firearms are belong to us

>>32443654
>implying Pacific theatre didnt exist

kys, bud.

>>32444595

You don't understand how computers work, do you? If it's not on a network, you can't hack it without physically taking it apart.

>>32444436
>it was a way around licensing fees rather than actually adding to the experience.
What are you talking about?

>>32444786
Some firearms manufacturers are starting to want royalties for things. It's half the reason that every game is suddenly futuristic or using fake names for guns again.

>>32444818
But they literally got a real AR manufacturer to design their caseless ACR thing
And they're still using real firearms.

>>32444837
When the game launched you had a selection of dull made-up guns and maybe half a dozen no-name versions of real ones. With the Apex expansion and a few of the DLCs the situation has improved, though.
>But they literally got a real AR manufacturer to design their caseless ACR thing
I wasn't aware of that. Neat. I still want to know who dreamed up a world where 5.56 has been phased out for 6.5 30 years from now and the US has entirely phased out the AR platform, replaced the Humvee and Abrams completely, put a low RCS UH-60 variant into general front line use and swapped out virtually every piece of equipment for a functionally identical but slightly cooler looking one.

File: xrEngine 2016-12-22-20-32-50-110.jpg (255KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1200x675px

>>32444869
Being this autistic about a vanilla PC game and it's vanilla DLC. What the fuck dude?

>mods

>>32444921
Because it was shit to have to wait over a year after launch before any mods with real weapons taking advantage of A3's improvements were in a usable state. Mods add content and fix issues, they don't invalidate initial complaints.

>>32444869
>arma 3
>made-up guns

uh, except the MX everything is actually used but in different caliber or actually a prototype awaiting to be approved for wide use

i love tacticool shit, i dont understand why you all have fetishes for old wooden guns

>>32444869
>I still want to know who dreamed up a world where 5.56 has been phased out for 6.5 30 years from now and the US has entirely phased out the AR platform, replaced the Humvee and Abrams completely, put a low RCS UH-60 variant into general front line use and swapped out virtually every piece of equipment for a functionally identical but slightly cooler looking one.

I'm pretty sure the military industrial complex is dreaming about it right now.