ITT - Developing tech you can't wait to see.

File: 1400596153102.jpg (93KB, 340x385px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 340x385px

>>35014521

Anyone? There's got to be some interest in this, right?

I don't want to be a bump fag so I'll only do it once with my 2nd choice, the pure sex that is/will be the SR-72.

>>35014521
Active camo

in the future oders will be given by large semi-inteligent neural nets, the meatbags receiving them wont have time to understand or question them they will just have to follow them or else be out manoeuvred by the enemys neural net giving orders

>>35015639
>drone
*yawn*

>>35015715
Enemy hackers access your neural net and effectively double their force while simultaneously eliminating yours.

>>35015809
thats not how any of this works

Combat space ships. USSC can't come soon enough

>Developing
Oh. I'm sure someone has a concept artbook somewhere.

>>35015818
>My make believe tech is immune to your real world tactics
Ok kid.

File: 1495759090833.gif (143KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 500x375px

>>35015826
>JUST LIKE IN MY ANIMUS XD
i bet youre a BB fag too, huh?
hang yourself autist

>>35015651
>Active camo

Already here.

http://canadafreepress.com/article/vindicated-talk-show-radios-true-patriot-tom-bauerle

>>35014521
For me it's
PAK DA

>>35015844
How can one person be so mad at literally nothing?

>>35015927
>i want something autistic that will never happen and wont stop bitching until it does
drink drain cleaner

>>35015962
Why are you so mean? What hurt you?

>>35016024
autists that wont stop shilling their shit ideas. now fuck off

>>35016050
I'm sorry.

>>35014521

Railguns in the field.

The laser shit really is going to change it all. The new one they just tested on an Apache was neat too.

>>35016082
>Railguns
>in combat
are you fucking brain dead? those things need a shit ton of power, the most youll see them on is on ships

>>35014521
>Once this is powerful enough and compact enough to mount on planes or vehicles it will quite literally mean the end for missile effectiveness.
Doubt that. Lasers are shit, and even if they reach a point where they're somewhat effective, countering them will not be difficult to implement.

File: Project Orion.png (492KB, 1200x1341px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1200x1341px

>>35015826
So what, like Project Orion?

>>35016096

Read my post again brainlet.

8 legged exploding robots, dog or cat size that run into buildings

>>35014521
>Puts mirrors on missiles
heh nuthin personell

>>35016227
Mirrors don't reflect a high enough percentage of light to not be violently ablated by a high energy laser.

>>35016328
Do I need to get the fucking ancient-ass "troll physics" pictures out to make it any more obvious that it's a meme you dip.

>>35016341
There are too many dumb people to assume it's a troll, and too many who simply haven't learned to be a jerk to those who didn't know.

File: foghorn.png (154KB, 450x327px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 450x327px

>>35016341
>just noticed this has a watermark

I have shamed my family by saving tainted memes.

Fixed I guess.

>>35015818
>nuh uh i have a force field that blocks your attack

File: F-35-Helmet-with-Symbology_1920x1080px.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

see through HMDs. They need to get a lot more compact and they need to have higher contrast. But once these are primetime we'll see some cool shit interacting with guns. The best parts will be aiming devices and combined vision overlays (like IR, FLIR, UV), and other things that are helpful while being non-intrusive.

>>35016328
>ablated
Vaporizing a missile takes a fuckload more energy than just ripping it to pieces with projectiles.
>>35016096
>those things need a shit ton of power
Far less power than a laser with any real lethality would take.

>>35016656
Why not just use a VR headset and cameras or synthetic vision?

>>35016668
Current VR headsets are way too low res. Maybe I'm just a video sperg but looking at one of those while flying would just give hella eyestrain.

Once they get to, like, 4k per eye (which really isn't that far fetched) it could work though.

File: 1492287905875.jpg (27KB, 578x331px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 578x331px

>>35016148
>>35016215
Never change /k/

>>35016663
>Vaporizing a missile takes a fuckload more energy than just ripping it to pieces with projectiles.

Quite. I'm not expecting lasers to be a significant counter-force to guided missiles until they're in the megawatt class.

File: IM SO EXCITED FOR THIS.jpg (12KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 320x180px

>all these tools of war
Wow how exciting our overlords can kill us in more advanced ways now! Neck yourself if you're hyped for muh next big thing from DARPA, I'll stick to caring about developments in small arms for the Everyman.

>>35016750
Advancements in war better technology for the Everyman you mongoloid. WW1 and 2 put us decades ahead in technology, more than the previous 200 years combined.

>>35014521
augmented reality huds that raytrace the ballistic trajectory of the bullet leaving your rifle so you can hip fire with perfect accuracy.

File: CNCRA2_Terror_Drones.jpg (43KB, 632x394px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 632x394px

>>35016215

File: lenovo_mixed_reality.jpg (27KB, 650x484px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 650x484px

>>35016668
soon

>>35016812
What about wind. You'd have to have a weather forecast with gps for it to be fully accurate at range.

>>35014521
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhmuYkpzA_o

>>35016839
you could make the same argument for traditional sighting methods.

>>35016850
This thread isn't about traditional tech is it? Im just saying if i can have gps weather on the desktop of my phone and you can have a HUD with real time arcs it's not a stretch to combine the two.

>>35015906
god damn, spoopy

>>35016799
War is a shitty innovator, mainly because government is a shitty innovator. Corporations have always invented far more with far less resources.

>>35014521
bipedal ai robot soldiers

>>35016986
Dont get your hopes up. We don't even have bipedal ai robots that can handle doorknobs or stairs

File: laughing skull virus id4.jpg (6KB, 161x161px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 161x161px

>>35015715
>>35015809
>>35015818

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adversarial_machine_learning

>>35016668
>VR headset
Input delay and resolution
>synthetic vision
What's this? I googled it and got flight control software

File: 2697_17_67-m79-grenade-launcher-sight.jpg (63KB, 949x615px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 949x615px

>>35016812
it's going to be god-tier with low velocity projectiles like 40mm

File: combined_vision.jpg (56KB, 630x220px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 630x220px

>>35017210

it refers to one of a number of sensor fusion techniques for overlaying data on the real world. synthetic vision would use a terrain database, while something like EFVS would use a thermal camera.

The F-35 helmet actually has a pod full of cameras on its belly, and the video from that can be piped to the helmet to allow the pilot to look 'through' the plane.

>>35016799
>Parroting the "war brings tech advancement" meme
>Insulting someones intelligence
I understand that you do not have the knowledge of neither history nor technology to understand just how much you're wrong, but still...

>>35017210
>Input delay
Bullshit, if it doesn't bother gamers it sure as shit isn't gonna bother pilots.
>and resolution
If Oculus had a DOD-tier budget I'm sure they could crank out a retina-display headset in fairly short order.
>What's this?
A rendered picture of the environment (usually from a topographic database, referenced against the aircraft's attitude and nav systems), as opposed to a sensed image (as with cameras, thermal sensors, SAR radar or the ol' Mark 1 Eyeball).

>>35017337
>Bullshit, if it doesn't bother gamers it sure as shit isn't gonna bother pilots.
I was talking about foot soldiers using HMDs though, not pilots. F35 helmet is just an example of the existing tech that needs advancement

>>35016483

>stupid enough to not differentiate between an obvious shitpost and a dumb comment

Proof again that /k/ is the most autistically stupid board on 4chan, including /r9k/.

>>35014521
Will be interesting for sure but all that will happen is that the missiles will either move faster or designed with random movements in their pathing to minimise laser effectiveness.

OR they'll just mass produce tonnes of shitty missiles that costs $10,000 tops with Tom Tom grade GPS trackers and use them en masse, negating any advantage a laser would have.

Quantity > quality when parity is reached. That's the rule of thumb.

>>35015728
Ahaha, is it actually being made a fucking drone? Jesus, that's lame

>>35014521
Advanced Prosthetics, conflict causes casualties, paves the way for the development of new tech, would be crqzy interesting, see->Bebionic3

>>35014521
>What upcoming military tech are you anxious to see in use?
AI controlled flying mini killer drones that target infantry:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nh-TaIlQMg

File: 12353453.jpg (679KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

679KB, 2000x1333px

>>35014521
>quite literally mean the end for missile effectiveness.
What if someone will mount energy cannon on missiles?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-electronics_High_Power_Microwave_Advanced_Missile_Project

>>35016668
Oculus Rift is equivalent of 4/20 vision. Blind fags are not allowed into military.
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/2rt9mn/what_resolution_would_an_hmd_need_to_give_you/

>>35016328
What if mirrors are effective enough so that the laser has to be a hundred times more powerful than initially thought?

>>35015927
He probably hates gliders too.

File: magneticplasma_source_f.jpg (54KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x281px

>>35015826

As if we haven't been jockying with the Ruskis and the Chinks through Sol since the 60's.

>if it can be built it probably has been

File: TOPJEJ.jpg (36KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x640px

>>35017608
>4/20 vision

>>35016341
Loads of people literally believe that mirrors would completely block or at least massively weaken combat lasers, its a common misconception that normalfags have.

File: gbp0BdV.jpg (106KB, 1131x707px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1131x707px

>>35014521
>What upcoming military tech are you anxious to see in use?

Complete automation.
Military stuff is interesting, people throwing up what used to be their organs on the street are not.

>>35017337
>If it doesn't bother gamers
It does

>>35018874
I hope that pic isn't related. Mechs will literally never happen.

>>35016799
>WW 2 put the US decades ahead in technology
Fixed it for you. And that was only because the war wasn't happening on their soil.

>>35019153
I've used a Vive before. There is no input delay.

>>35016082
>the new one they just tested on an Apache
WHAT

NO WAY

SOURCE

>>35014521
Railguns. US Army is already looking into making the Paladin a railgun platform and changing its mission to fire support and anti-air.


>>35016096
>those things need a shit ton of power, the most youll see them on is on ships

Power generation is not an issue. The current M109A7 generates more than enough power to supply the BAE Railgun, the problem is capacitance and the size of capacitors.

>>35017582
Until we get some really killer new batteries, this is highly impractical. These things have a flight time of about 4 minutes. The 5 inch propeller quads that are the most common nowadays start getting heavily bogged down if they go too much above 600 grams, and heavier duty 6 inch quads only go to about 750 grams.

>>35019178
I think it's based on Total Annihilation.

>>35016054
I don't think it's a silly idea, anon.

File: army laser tests.jpg (61KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 640x427px

>>35020042
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a27103/army-laser-apache-helicopter/

File: 1482307624537.jpg (986KB, 3819x1646px) Image search: [Google]

986KB, 3819x1646px

>>35015826

>Oh. I'm sure someone has a concept artbook somewhere.

i gotchu anon

File: serveimage.jpg (93KB, 1024x621px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1024x621px

>>35019178
Bipedal mechs definitely aren't feasible, but all-terrain spider tanks are on the table for the future

>>35020791
Batteries have poor energy to weight capability, and quadcopters are highly inefficient in terms of energy by design. If you can remove these two limitations by making small aircraft drones with conventional fuel powering them, you fix both issues. But then you basically end up with a retarded missile design.

File: Ace-Combat-7-Skies-Unknown_2017_01-26-17_003.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

moar amraams

>>35022054
I cant see that being faster or more reliable than a tank. And what is the context of having an arachnid tank battle that isn't more efficiently carried out by tanks? You going to have a tank battle in a tight canyon? Urban spiderman tank battle? Don't be stupid.

>>35022054
A smarter idea is working out a more efficient recoil system so you could mount a tank's main gun onto an attack helicopter. Imagine all the ordinance an attack helicopter has, and then at a massive gun hanging from it. It could be stabilised with reverse facing compressed air jets with tanks and compressors on board that release when the gun is fired.

File: 1462376484894.jpg (492KB, 630x928px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 630x928px

>>35016656

>>35014521
>HELLADS
Back to gun kills? Yes, please.

File: CONCERN.jpg (48KB, 1523x856px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1523x856px

>>35014521
>MARAUDER project
>US AFRL wants to create a coaxial plasma railgun
>No one has any faith in it, so all testing is unclassified
>Initial tests are done at Lawrence Livermore and Phillips Laboratory
>Tests are incredibly successful, the plasma weapon is performing better than anyone had expected
>Immediately classified, information on it complete cut off since classification. Not a single word about the project has been mentioned by the US Gov.

File: 94c1a022c5b28e9bd26ef99155dd0d1d.jpg (52KB, 736x736px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 736x736px

>>35016750

>bitching about tools of war
>on a /k/ thread

You lost, lil' nigga?

File: fastmover.jpg (57KB, 696x647px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 696x647px

>>35017356
ikr? at least this has a decent chance of being declassified in the near future

File: TopGunScreenCap00001.jpg (36KB, 650x366px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 650x366px

>>35022054

File: boom SST.png (550KB, 1077x630px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1077x630px

>>35014521
not necessarily /k/, but im still super hype to see the return of SSTs in civilian use. its supposed to be cost 10x more cost effective than Concorde and can actually do more than just trans Atlantic flights

cobalt bombs

>>35023281
>all weapons must be used in war
Really gets the noggin joggin

>>35023416
that probably won't have commercial viability

>>35023529
thats the fucking purpose of a weapon you goddamned mong
go back to >>>/pol/

>>35023537
it costs like, half of what Concorde did for flying and maintaining and can do more routes. id say it has a good chance

>>35023538
Might want to check out a dictionary sometime, you don't seem to understand the meaning of basic words.
>go back to /pol/
>I don't have an argument so go away

>>35023544
that doesn't matter if nobody wants to fly on it

>>35016978
You are a real mental midget. The DoD funds advanced research projects that corporations will not undertake on their own sheckel because hey are too high risk. DARPA expects 75% of the projects to fail, but that other 25% that don't are so groundbreaking it was worth it.

Breath in my fart, hold is deep, cherish the aroma

>>35023538
So the purpose of weapons is to use them in war? What about hunting? Or self defense? And that's not even getting into the realm of ethics; if someone cooks up a nuke that'll crack the earth, I don't care what the future you try to tell me, we shouldn't use it.

>>35023643
>The DoD funds projects corporations won't
Corporations provide the best product possible to consumers, if the people want what the DoD is cooking the market will provide it. Clearly whatever they're making either doesn't interest buyers or they've banned us peasants from even researching it, in which case it won't help us anyways. Basic economics, read a book once and maybe you'd understand.

>>35015826
Congress already allocated the funding and creation of the USSC under the Department of the Chair force for next year. Its only a matter of time.

>>35023609
well thats true with any plane isnt it? i think people with the cash will want to fly on it just for the novelty

>>35023713
>Corporations provide the best product possible to consumers

What is planned obsolescence, the post

>>35023834
and after the first one explodes?

>>35023839
There has never been undeniable proof of planned obsolescence documented anywhere, ever.

>>35023643
>The DoD funds advanced research projects that corporations will not undertake on their own sheckel because hey are too high risk. DARPA expects 75% of the projects to fail, but that other 25% that don't are so groundbreaking it was worth it.
Only a government would call 25% success a good thing worth funding, especially considering you have NO idea what else that funding could have been used for because that funding was wasted on trash fire projects.

>>35023899
The fact that you have to buy new shit in ~15 month intervals is the best evidence there is

>>35023929
What a loaded accusation. What "shit"? Am I buying a new car every 15 months? A new roll of toilet paper? A new pair of shoes?

>>35023961
Not a single part of your car has broken in over a year? How does it make sense from any manufacturers point of view to make a product that lasts for example, a decade, instead of making one that guarantees that the customer has to come back in ten times less than that?

>>35016215
Don't forget the mariachi music

>>35024027
>Not a single part of your car has broken in over a year?
Uh, nope. My car itself is 14 years old. Fill up the gas and replace common wear items (oil, wiper blades) when required is all I do. It's all stock and if I didn't live in a snowy state it wouldn't have rust either.
>How does it make sense from any manufacturers point of view to make a product that lasts for example, a decade, instead of making one that guarantees that the customer has to come back in ten times less than that?
What product are we talking about? Should a wall clock last a decade (for the record mine is 23 years old and bought for $8)? What about lightbulbs? Lightbulbs typically have an advertised lifespan in terms of hours, but what if the engineers created a lightbulb to last 100 years? That would be great, right? You'd never have to change it. But how much would that technology cost? Would that lightbulb be $5 like a typical one? I doubt it. The R&D, materials, and everything else that goes into the 100 year lightbulb might end up coming to a market price of hundreds of dollars! Nobody would buy it.

Anyway, be more specific.

>>35023878
well the only thing that would cause that is massive incompetence considering there have been many different working designs of super sonic transports out there

>>35022207
So essentially tiny guided missiles?

>>35016978
Tell me what you have innovated or created so far.

>>35024226
even if anon hadn't created anything, that isn't an argument against his point

>>35024119
the concorde had an insane amount of near misses during it's lifetime. the moment that a piece of rubber goes into an air intake, people will boycott your super sonic transport.

>>35024263
to be fair to the concorde though that was mainly a combination of lax safety protocols of the time and the fact that it was one of the first of its kind.

>>35017061

Daleks don't use stairs, they level the building.

>>35023839
Cronyism leads to monopolies which deliver mediocre products. This is the fault of government, not corporations.

>>35024400
Don't forget stifling regulations and bureaucracy that favor monopolies. More of a FDA thing, but still.

>>35024027
My car is 5 years old (at least) Ford Focus. Getting my money back actually, cause supposedly they got sued for something. They actually give me free soda and check ups on my car throughout these years too. Only thing that went haywire was one of the tires getting a load of nails in them and the oil going bad.

>>35019688
>And that was only because the war wasn't happening on their soil.

Wasn't on Brazil's either, but they didn't advance for shit without piggy backing.

US's industry was roaring, to the point where we actually could lend a hand rebuilding it over in Europe and Asia in exchange for relations and alliances. You can't deny US is a tech and industrial power house. Well you could, but you'd be called a retard for ignoring blatant obvious stuff.

>>35024529
Yea that's the DCT transmission (automatic) that they put in the Focus and Fiestas that weren't manual. The problem is not only that the DCTs were fragile in the beginning (as admitted by Ford, the main reason for the recall which was FIXED) but that people used them like normal torque converter automatics, which fries the clutches early especially in a dry clutch DCT like the PowerShift. Combine that with the fact that DCTs will never shift like a normal slushbox automatic and people get cranky.

That's Ford's fault for calling it an automatic instead of being specific.

File: IMG_0127.jpg (268KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1280x720px

Mechs. Not the anime kind where they are 10 stories tall. Maybe 2 stories or so and don't function like tanks and more like Infantry fighting vehicals. Kinda like in Titanfall and shit. The biggest caliber they use is like 40mm.

>>35024608
Admittedly, I doubt most people know or care to know what a dual clutch is. But yeah, misleading product.

>>35024616
What about spider mechs? Ya know, keep it low profile like a tank.

>>35024903
Maybe. The legs would allow the tank to manuver over debris better. But a human-like mech could have the ability to interact with its surroundings while a spider mech couldn't. Spider mech would be a good tank but a human-Mack would be a better IFV

>>35025030
Then why not just have a simple exoskeleton in that case? Hell, it could be simply ten feet tall and made of light-weight high strength materials.

>>35025030
Why not make a 6 legged spider mech with 2 arm attachments and now it can manipulate the environment? And why would you need environmental manipulation more precise than utter destruction in a battle?

>>35018874
Hello Skynet.

>>35015639
Would be interesting if there was an interchangeable cockpit where a pilot could manually control it from the inside and he wore a vr headset and used hand controllers to interact with virtual buttons etc.

When there's no battles to fight I'd be fun to take it for a ride

File: 20100831161134.png (87KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 640x480px

>>35014521
not developing tech but I want the b-1 r missile truck, nothing like having jsf and raptors linked with a b-1 spamming missiles

>>35016682
>>35017210
>>35017608

I think the military can probably put more money in developing higher resolution screens than what consumers can afford, and faster processing power too.

>>35014521
>missiles become innefective
>dogfighting becomes a thing again
MUH DIK

File: browning_m2hb-2.jpg (17KB, 650x200px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 650x200px

>>35025896
super high quality mockup there anon

>>35026094
How the fuck did that image get attached? I didn't do that.

>>35025752
It's manipulation isn't as much for combat a source it is navigating a city and allowing infantry to manipulate the environment on a larger scale like moving vehicals, opening light doors like garage doors, maneuvering into places that larger vehicals can't while still providing increased firepower, maybe lifting infantry to higher levels, and other applications. A spider tank with arms would just look stupid and would be complex to work. With a human-like mech, the driver is more familiar with how to work the mech and proform more precise interaction with its surroundings.

>>35025639
But with a mech, it has the ability to apply heavier armor and has the ability to be stronger than an exoskeleton. But each squad memeber or all memebers having an exoskeleton would be good too.

>>35023416
Oh man I am so fucking hype for this, I never got a chance to ride a Concorde so NASA's announcement about next generation supercruisers was a dream come true. On top of that, we'll probably see the next Blackbird developed from this tech, since NASA claims that they wont have a sonic boom which will allow them to fly super quiet.

>>35023537
Concorde remained commercially viable right up until it was shut down and these planes will be both cheaper to run and able to fly more routes, it will absolutely be commercially viable.

File: SmartSelectImage_2017-08-31-11-15-50.png (867KB, 985x1028px) Image search: [Google]

867KB, 985x1028px

>>35015639
Su 41

>>35023922
most restaurants fail. Most science experiments don't show results and arn't reported. most attempts at doing something new result in failure. that doesn't mean that markets don't eventually find efficient means of distributing resources and that doesn't mean that science in incapable of making profound discoveries.

the more interesting question is what our rate of success is compared to other countries.

>>35026752
>space travel
lolno

>>35026115
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQoRXhS7vlU

>>35023175
Marauder was a failure and you autists cling to it because some of test data was classified.

Power Armor

>>35025896

This got shelved because they're just going to make drone missile trucks slaved to F-35/22s.

>>35024388
Just like the Army.

two words
weaponized ants
>>35015826
why?
when it comes to space combat that shit is incredibly inneffeciant

>>35024588
well the war was perfect timing for us with the depression and all making for lots of unemployed people to put into factories

File: dtEPzlU[1].jpg (106KB, 500x567px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 500x567px

>>35014521

>>35023834
Right up to the moment hadji hijacks it and flies it into the Eiffel Tower.