So, what's next in terms of personal-carry military innovation?

>>33754663
personal sonic or microwave weapons

mark my words

>>33754663
my guess is an armed drone you throw and control.

>>33754702
they've already made a small one you can throw that has a small effective explosive and camera

>>33754726
next you'll be telling me it's legal to shoulder a wrist brace

ever larger propellant loads and smaller projectiles to the point that you might as well be using a mini railgun

>>33754799
>>33754592

>>33754663
Railguns once we develop batteries with one or two order of magnitude more capacity per unit of volume of material

>>33754699

>t. already designed a toroid resonance cannon

>t. it weighs 62 lbs. and could only knock leaves off of trees or maybe loosen the bolts in a car

once battery tech improves it will be integrated rail/gauss gun tech. I designed a projectile triggered staging mechanism, and a self stabilizing projectile but we don't currently have rail/projectile materials reliable enough to withstand 18K degrees.

microwaves are easy to focus and deal with atmosphere/dust well, but are very inefficient to produce.

long time coming. stick to guns.

File: 120px-357SIG_ammo[1].jpg (4KB, 120x116px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 120x116px

Some incredibly expensive firearm chambered in a meme caliber they developed because the old one either lacked stopping power or over penetrated which they will use for a decade or so before switching back to what they had before.

File: 1467808877495accfbda4ec759a173de1a7145ba23.jpg (502KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 1000x1000px

>>33754663
I was always a VICTORIOUS MONGOOSE 1902A fan myself.

>>33754663
>Will we go with LAZORS or Railguns? Power armor?

Most likely just material innovations that make ammo more potent. Also design innovations.

Caseless is becoming more and more realistic as the latest caseless rounds are far less finky than those of say the G11.

Sonic/microwave weaponry will only remain plausible as non-lethal crowd control and riot suppression. Mostly by being painfully annoying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xhdie38VZI

>>33755601
I tried investigating building a railgun in my garage, and I came to the conclusion it simply isn't possible to achieve high power rifle speeds without spending $1000 on capacitors. What do you mean by battery tech?

A quick check on /nida/ shows some interesting stuff that's being worked on
Actively Stabilized Firearms
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016/armament/18314_Rice.pdf

Video-based Precision Ranging (VPR) small arms fire control system
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016/armament/18371_Bachrach.pdf

One-Way Visible (OWL), full day/night tracer
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016/armament/18298_Horch.pdf

6.5mm ammo >>33755621
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016/armament/18261_Grange.pdf

Telescoped rounds
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016/armament/18325_Phillips.pdf

>>33754663
If we do get laser guns before I die and they don't look like that then I will be severely pissed because what is the point if you can't defend yourself while looking like Flash Gordon

>>33756808
No, they'll look like rectangles, because that's scifi

>>33754663
>Lasers or Railguns
While battery technology has been steadily improving due to consumer demands (specifically for phones and electric cars) there's a long way to go before we reach the energy storage density of the low explosives we use in conventional firearms. It's unlikely anything like that will be seen in a man-portable package within our lifetimes.

>Power armor
Unless some miracle material is discovered soon an armored suit that can protect a man against both modern anti-personnel weapons and the weapons inevitably developed to counter it (Think modernized and down-scaled WW2 anti-tank guns), power armor is going to be heavy as fuck and need a lot of, as the name implies, power to help the wearer move around in it. You run into the same energy storage problems as mentioned above. On top of that, you'd also need to figure out how not to kill the wearer by heatstroke due to wearing a massive armored suit all day long.

Personally I predict that we're going to be seeing some kind of small anti-drone weaponry in the near future. As shown in Syria/Iraq and more practically in Ukraine drones are going to be a staple of the battlefield for both intelligence gathering and direct artillery spotting. They're a small and distant target so simply shooting at them with your standard issue rifle isn't a dependable counter.

I can see Raytheon unveiling a micro missile within the decade that can effectively eliminate drones by simply slamming into them, basically a tiny THAAD. Bonus points if they can make them launch out of the 40mm grenade launchers we already use.

File: FO02_NPC_Dornan_B.png (514KB, 803x414px) Image search: [Google]

514KB, 803x414px

>>33754663
>power armor
>non-existent

Don't have any? You expect me to believe that, maggot? The truth is YOU lost an expensive piece of army-issue equipment. That suit is going to come out of your pay, and you will remain in this mans army until you are *deep inhale* five hundred and ten years old, which is the number of years it will take for you to pay for a Mark II Powered Combat Armor you have lost! Report to the armory and have a new suit issued to you, then report back to me, private! Dismissed!

Focused radiation.

>>33757866
Nah, Isis style drones would be EWARed out of the air if they faced any competent, modern army.

US Army already uses very small military drones tactically however, and has for a long time. They are the only nation, that I know of, that uses said drones prolifically. Oh, of course they are hardened too.

Ultralight full body combat armor that has very very bullet resistant and polymer-based and standardized recoil mitigation systems

My guess is carry camera accessories like what cops have

What cops have now, we get in 5-10 years

>>33757960
Uhhh....like GoPros? Basically the same thing.

>>33757950
Well the idea is that if the opposing side also has hardened drones you cannot depend on EWARing them out of the sky. Say if China decided to get in on the drone game, and then chose to test them by allowing a few batches of them to find their way into the middle east like they did with their rockets.

File: 2012.0221.flexcam.jpg (40KB, 620x424px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 620x424px

>>33757978
probably something more like this. We aliens now

File: tumblr_inline_nt0vfexkpK1spsojg_540.jpg (67KB, 540x534px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 540x534px

>>33757900
underrated post. thanks for making me laugh like an idiot in the middle of college classes.

People don't like to hear it because it isn't sexy, but the biggest advances in warfighting are all going to be information based technology. Technology that aids detection, targeting, positioning and communication is where things have been for the last few decades. Lots of physical weapons tech is mature technology - its been pretty much worked out. The future is tech that speeds up the stages of the OODA loop.
Most of /k/ still wants to build powered armor, which is the technological equivalent of the Maginot line. What we'll probably see instead is a swarm of networked micro-drones mapping out urban areas and spotting hostile actors.

Examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyguXoum3rk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BzZEChZJfE

>>33758012
Their rockets have been in the ME for awhile via Pakistan.

It's old stuff.

If, say, Isis gets its hands on prototype Chinese drones and gets caught, thats international incident tier.

Hell, just Isis flying a drone in an ewar enviroment will tip off intelligence community's.

But you miss my point, the era of mini drones is already here. US Army has been using them for about a decade

>>33757900
THAT POWER ARMOR WASN'T YOURS TO LOSE

>>33758096
This, and it's why the rest of the world is so far behind the US.

It's not just a tank, a plane, it's a whole system. Only the US has a battlefield network that, when one tank spots a target, it's shown on every tank, plane, IFV, helicopter, drone station, Humvee, and some dismounts. It's distributed, modular, extremely hard to jam, extremely encrypted, with multiple transmission paths.

FBCB2 is a hell if a drug.

>>33758126
So why can't we kill every taliban with all that tech?

>>33758140
One, it's meant for conventional warfare.

Two, yes, you can spot troops and distribut in real time, but keeping eyes on troops, or single soldiers is very hard.

Three, conceivably the US could, but that would require a significant reduction in ROE.

Four, you know all of the above and are just trying to meme.

>>33754663
>Railgun

Forget about it, even Government already dropped it, demand too much energy and at actual pace a viable miniaturized battery would take 200 years.

Caseless maybe is the future...

But my bets is on intelligent personal ammo.

>>33757866
>I can see Raytheon unveiling a micro missile within the decade that can effectively eliminate drones by simply slamming into them, basically a tiny THAAD. Bonus points if they can make them launch out of the 40mm grenade launchers we already use.
Not a bad concept. I'll put money on a point-defense microwave that mounts on tanks. Purely designed for taking out light drones by fucking with their electronics. You can pump whatever juice you want into it if it's running of a tank's powerplant, it's capacitors can just hold their charge all day until needed.

It's not mission critical so it doesn't need to be armoured against more than small arms, it just goes up top. If OpFor is fielding tanks then you take it off because you don't need it in that theatre, it's just for when OpFor is IS style Aks, retail drones and homemade RPGs.

>>33757290

They'll be hexagons. In the future everything will be hexagons.

>>33758232
YOU ARE WRONG FAGGOT PENTAGONS ARE THE FUTURE I WILL LITERALLY FITE YOU OVER THIS.

You are scum your family is scum your non existent offspring is scum, everything in your life is shit, your guns, your hobby's, your life, your thoughts, your opinions, shit shit shit.

DIE

>>33758232
>>33758284
hello /scg/

>>33758096
agree

File: 010.png (10KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 640x400px

>>33754699
In theory, if you can make 185+ db handheld speaker concentrated and directional, you can technically kill a person with a shockwave.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnC6N5bUQoE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGoTWeCLrcI

>>33754871

>once we develop batteries with one or two order of magnitude more capacity per unit of volume of material

So never, then?

File: 102014_JET_Fusionreactor.jpg (1MB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1280px

>>33754871
>>33758484
Nuclear fusion maybe?

Good luck not being broken down to your base chemicals with a battery compact enough to carry that sort of power.

>>33758103
I think you missed my point. I'm not claiming that drones are a thing of the future, I was answering the OP by predicting that man portable drone killers will be the next major update to an average infantryman's kit.

Currently our options for eliminating drones are:
1. EWARing them if they are simple re-purposed commercial drones
2. Shooting them down with existing infantry weapons, something that is very difficult to do considering the size, speed, and distance of the target
3. Using existing anti-air missiles like the Patriot system, which has been done but is ludicrously cost inefficient.

I'm claiming that we're going to see a new generation of smaller mini MANPADS designed specifically to counter mini drones. As you already said they are here, and can be hardened against EWAR. Therefore a counter will need to be developed for their inevitable adoption by other nations hostile to the US.

>>33758126
>hard to jam

Anon see Iran drone drama.

>>33758551

I totally see miniaturized nuclear fission/fusion tech happening in the next century or so, but not on a man portable level.