Why don't firearms and military weapons get effected by

>>33797234
"Mature technology"
Advancements have brought firearms to a pretty standardized design, and most innovations are minor. No one is trying to reinvent the wheel anymore, as the wheel has been around for a while. They will probably remain mostly the same for the foreseeable future until some new tech allows something vastly different, like directed energy weapons being feasible for small arms, in which case the cycle will repeat again etc etc.

File: 1487864911169.png (68KB, 1193x473px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1193x473px

Look at this shit.

If battleships weren't neutered by treaties and all the funding given to carriers and aerospace, IMAGINE the insanely powerful floating fortresses we'd create.

>>33797264

>nobody is trying to reinvent the wheel

Yes they fucking are.

Look at Tweels. Better than tires in every way.

Never go flat, can be retreaded instead of being replaced, etc.

File: michelin_tweel_010.jpg (120KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1000x667px

>>33797309

Forgot pic.

Yes, reinventing the wheel is literally the future.

>>33797295
looks like you've never heard of diminishing returns

>>33797677

Looks like you haven't heard that exponential growth effects other markets. We can use composites, lightweight and strong alloys, welding so the extra weight of rivets is gone, etc.

You just can't deny that a modern battleship built and designed to the best of our abilities would be an incredibly powerful force that could probably even outrange aircraft carriers, and certainly benefit from stealth more than carriers.

File: al-brady-big-old-new-2s.jpg?format=1500w.jpg (316KB, 1500x848px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 1500x848px

Why don't we have Bolo tanks yet?

>>33797362
Literally just a fancy wheel

You've missed the point, congrats

>>33798601

Oh god I want that tank to exist so bad.

Its like land based naval artillery on tracks.


Drive over houses, launch 55 gallon drums filled with RDX at enemies 50 miles away, launch AP shells that blow through anything..

Even just a prototype would be amazing. It'd pay for itself eventually as a military museum exhibit.

>>33798617

A new and improved wheel better than its predecessors in every way.

I think you miss the point.

>>33797743
>modern battleship built and designed to the best of our abilities
you will come up with Zumwalt
Stealth + Active defence > Passive defense

>>33797234
Because the physics of containing an explosion only goes so far.

>>33797234
Railgun artillery and air-defense lasers are a start, I guess.

>>33797234
>>33797743
Listen up kiddo. You've been lied to by the media and the economists. Exponential growth is not a universal principle of... well, anything, really (it's quite obvious that nothing can grow to infinite value, no matter what it is.)

More specifically, it happens when and only when the only limiting factor on growth of a value is that value itself. Like population growth with constant birth rates and without a shortage of food, living space or any other commodity. Every couple has four children, so the population doubles every generation; that's exponential growth.

In the real world, prequisites are limited and growth diminuishes. Population is limited by food. The economy is limited by population and many other ressources. Scientific advancements are limited by the laws of physics. Microelectronics, for example, grew exponentially for a while; then they hit the brick wall of physics. If you think that just because a certain trend used to exhibit any property (like exponential growth, or even just growth at all), it will necessarily continue to do so, you're probably retarded. Every trend has underlying causes and any kind of growth will eventually approach a limit.

>>33797234
Exponential growth is a phase of development, not a rule that governs all of it.

Look at populations. They grow exponentially until they approach their limit, then they start to slow down before leveling off and staying there until another upset happens.

There are hard, physical boundaries to any given piece of technology. When we first break into a technology, such as cars or guns or computers, start out slow and middling before breaking out into sudden, seemingly endless and self-reinforcing growth. Then we start to hit limits. There's only so hot you can run an engine. There's only so light you can make a hand-held explosion holder. We approach these limits and slow down, eventually stagnating until the next big breakthrough comes. The last one in firearms was the self contained cartridge. The next one may be electromagnetically propelled projectiles. We've already dabbled in them, much in the way people dabbled in self contained cartridges for centuries before they became useful, but once we make a practical rail or coilgun there will be another explosion of arms development that will, ultimately, reach a point of stagnation like the last one.

>>33798722

Contractors are fucking over taxpayers with the zumwalt... Its 155mm guns propellant is like regular propellant but its $200 a pound!!

People are selling Americans shoddy outdated systems dressed up to look cool.

The zumwalts LRLAP was meant to be much cheaper than missiles and much longer ranged than artillery...

It failed there.

And it needs ARMOR and keel reinforcements kinda like the technology suspension bridges use. That way it can survive a torp hit under the keel, or a torp/missile hit.


Our warships need to tank hits better is all.

Even with our best countermeasures armor is always the last resort that keeps ships afloat and I'm the fight

>>33798769

Lots of my thought processes I don't understand.

ATM I've only allowed myself one child because I recognize future economic and food turmoil as financial institutions destroy farms.

I can have one more child and still have a her population growth of zero if I die.

I'm patiently waiting until I find or earn a lucky break that allows me the wealth to buy land, hopefully land that meets my needs.

>>33798721
Still just a fancy wheel. We have fancy guns. But projectile weapons powered by an explosion is already perfected other than minor fancy differences. We need to get compact rail guns and/or energy weapons.

>>33797743

Looks like you never heard of the fact that the only battleships following that projected line of development got sunk by a swarm of aircraft

File: 6a00d83451df4569e201a3fce9ba57970b.jpg (43KB, 986x625px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 986x625px

>>33797234
the opposing force is called best effort
.eg 68% of a sample takes the path of least resistance

>>33799076

True but standard chemically launched projectiles can go a lot further. There's room for development.

>>33799108

We went from the Wright Bros to the moon landing in a handful of decades. Battleship design didn't have time to catch up.

Literally all they did to counter aircraft was mount a lot of AA, they didn't change armor layout at all.

>>33799186
>We went from the Wright Bros to the moon landing in a handful of decades.
false equivalence

>>33799196

False equivalence?

Planes are small and quick to build. You could build a thousand planes with the resources you need to build ONE battleship.

And the power planes had wasn't known until WW2, and BBs built during WW2 didn't design armor to handle bombs.

Planes got ALL the funding.

BBs were just pushed to the side of the drawing board.

It is possible to build a battleships that can reach out over 1000 miles with its main batteries, and with scramjet/base bleed nuclear shells, you could dump shells on targets over 2000 miles away.

Secondary armaments using LRLAP could reach out 100 miles. Missiles could kill planes over 1K miles and reach into space to knock out enemy satellites, or EMP the fuck out of the enemy nation.

Stealth design could store heat emissions temporarily and make it look like a canoe on radar and a fishing trawler to IR satellites.

We could design it to take a torpedo under the keel with minimal damage.

Do you have any idea the technology we have now?!

We have wire so strong it can lift a semi truck.

We probably have technology that makes BBs, submarines, planes, and even nukes obsolete!!

We have insane tech available, dude.


Space elevator when? Let's just build a space battleship to patrol cargo routes so we can finally harvest asteroids and siphon rare resources from moons and planets. It can escort colonists Terra forming mars.

Preparing for that future beats waiting around until overpopulation forces us to murder our children and family.

Jesus Christ dude

>>33799339
thanks for the long list of bullshit but that has nothing to do with what i was talking about. the improvement of planes has nothing to do with the development of space travel.

>>33799345

Dude you're right, I went off on a tangent.

Sorry bout that.

I'm about to go to bed and allergy medicine is making me drowsy.

If anyone is interested I'll post tomorrow in afternoon of night

>>33797309
>>33797362
>>33798721
It's still just a wheel. A wheel is literally defined as a circular object fixed to an axle. The material has changed, but it's still by definition a wheel.

Guns are going to go through the same stages of constant improvements without drastic change until someone invents a better weapon than guns.

>>33799178
But they will still be chemically powered weapons. They will still be by definition firearms

>>33798769
>economists are lying to you
>uses economic arguments

>>33799345
>he improvement of planes has nothing to do with the development of space travel.

because flying doesnt have anything to do with flying

you dont even have aerospace without aviation, moron

you fucking cretin

>>33797362
Can't wait for dog shit or something to get in there and throw the rotation off balance

File: cmm.jpg (206KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1280x853px

>>33797234

Because modern firearms are more or less perfectly suited to fit the human body in terms of ergonomics and handling. If you want a significant jump in performance, you have to find a way to made humans bigger so that they can used larger guns effectively.

>>33798714
>55 gallon drums full of RDX
>not filling them with Bad Dragon cum lube
anon you are not thinking with the mind of a warrior

>>33797309
>Better than tires in every way.
Low-pressure tires are better for cross-country in sand or mud and avoiding settlement.

>>33797309
And they're uncomfortable as fuck, loud, and can't be used at over like 30 mph

>>33803198
>>33802504

A diamond in the rough is still a diamond.

>>33801833
Damnit /k/

>>33801810

I'm sure that's what they said about bolt actions when they were brand new.

>>33801773

....its not meant for maximum rpm. Like 700-1000.

It's for prolonged suppressing fire without needing to reload every 15 seconds.