It's quite difficult to make guns - portable ones, anyway - convincingly hi-tech. Sure, you can add a laser sight, you can attach all kinds of crazy lights and optics, you can even have a boresight camera and helmet heads-up display for shooting round corners without sticking your neck out*. But at the end of the day it will …
..was, as I recall a 12 gage, that used a large revolver-style drum. I only ever saw the specs and don't know if it was ever manufactured, but the basic idea was that you could load different sections of the drum with different shot and mix-and-match your firepower. e.g. load two solid shot for taking out the door, and birdshot for non-lethal AP purposes when within the building. Simply rotate the drum to get the right type of shot under the hammer.
Stolen Tank Killer
So, fires shaped armour piercing rounds does it? Don't want to be the squaddy toting one then. Makes you prime target for the bad guys so's they can half inch your shooter + ammo don't it?
Remember all that kit the Yanks gave the Iraqi 'army' round Falluja that turned up in the hands of the 'freedom fighters'? Uncle Sam he don't think too good.
With the damage to the bore done in cleaning, use and corrosion how long before the army is less armful than armless?
I remember reading that a battleship for all it's expensive metalurgy, was due of a refit if the guns had ben used 300 or so many times.
That just brings us to the reason her majesty's army stuck with .303s for so many decades:
The ammunition weighed enough to cripple you as it was. Carrying an (IIRC) 18 lb rifle was a doddle compared to the ration of lead issued with it.
Talking of preparation; why can you not use brackets to explain (inline) esoteric details that seem to you best covered at the end of the essay? It's not ballistics (IMO the most challenging branch of rocket science.)
If it's done right...
If the electronics systems in the weapon are done right, it would make it impossible to hack the ammunition since the communication between the weapon and ammo is done via electrical contacts inside the barrel before firing, including any form of wireless technology would break the $25 price point easily and is just asking to be hacked.
In regards to the weapon and ammo being stolen by enemy forces a number of techniques can be taken to limit the weapons usefulness. There is a patent held by Microsoft I believe, that uses the human body itself as an electrical communications conductor meant to relay information between devices worn by a person. Embed an authorization chip under the legitimate user's skin that communicates with the firing mechanism in the weapon when it's being held. If the chip is cooled below body temperature (soldier dies, chip cut out, etc) the authorization codes are randomized and will no longer activate the weapon. To prevent the weapon being hacked, cover all the electrical systems with potting compound and if tampering is detected, explode a small charge placed inside the potting, destroying the vital electronic systems, rendering the weapon an expensive lump of scrap. As a backup protection method also code in a device timeout, if a mission is meant to last 24hrs, program a 48hr timeout. If the weapon is not reset back at base before the timeout, the electrical system protection detonates rendering the weapon useless.
The big trick is to use absolutely no wireless communication in either the weapon or ammunition and to provide multiple layers of contingency in securing the weapon from falling into the wrong hands.
*Hangs up the lab coat, switches off the lights and goes home.
re : Guns, beautiful guns
This kinda reminded me about this:
Full auto shotgun, with single shot ability, able to fire a viraty of munitions all based around a standard(shape) 12Bore cartridge.
Blue on blue? Surely to Americans anyone foreign is red? No such thing as blue on blue.
RE: If it's done right...
The last part sounds like DRM to me,... but isn't DRM meant to cripple to supposed user? :)
"a true 'leap ahead' in lethality".
No mention of accountability?..
Judge Dredd's Lawgiver automatically stuck a microscopic fragment of the shooter's DNA to each projectile as it was chambered in order that the shooter may be identified. (pretty sure that was in the comics as well as the movie though no idea how it works through those gloves).
Wonder if US.mil will implement the idea of being able to prove who fired what at who and when?
RE: 'Bike Cannon!' 'BUDDA BUDDA'
I always preferred "Eat lead, sucker. bidi-bidi-bidi" from a surprisingly feisty Twiki.
Better training just about killed the OICW
Originally, the whole OICW "combined rifle" idea came about from one simple fact - the average US footslogger couldn't shoot for toffee! 1980s analysis had shown the average GI was shooting off over 1000 rounds per actual kill on the battlefield with the standard M16-A1, so the US government started talking about an M16 replacement, and some twit decided on the idea of a smart round (initially in 20mm) to ensure they got closer to a one-shot-per-kill optimum, thinking that technology could solve all problems. Cough *pork-barrel* cough!
Anyway, the US Army weren't too keen on the initial offering - the rediculously heavy Heckler & Koch XM-29 - which was basically an G-36 with a 20mm grenade-launcher and some elctronics strapped on top. Early on, the requirement was added that the soldier using the kit be able to split off the rifle and use it alone, which threatened Colt with the US Army taking up the G-36 wholesale to replace their M16s, and Colt had enough lobbying power to throw a spanner in the works there. In the background, the Army started some better marksmenship training, revised their battle drills, and noted the greater accuracy of the new SS109 bullet in the heavier-barrelled M16-A2 rifle, especially when fitted with optics rather than just iron sights. They also re-introduced the idea of dedicated marksmen for longer range engagment (with the M16-A4) for each rifle section. The result was much increased efficiency in shots-per-kill.
So by the time H&K had got even half-way to the requirements, the US Army was happily showing off improved kill ratios from the first Gulf War and involvement in UN "peace-keeping" ops like Somalia, which undermined the argument that one smart 20mm round would be more cost-efficient. Colt had happilly proven the horses-for-courses adaptability of the basic M4/M16, even capable of firing the old 7.62mm NATO round, and if the 6.8mm SPC round ever gets adopted it's likely to be with a modified M4/M16 rifle. So nobody was interested in the G-36 anymore. They were also quite happy with the 40mm grenade fired by the M203 adaption that fitted the M16-A2 and didn't take kindly to the idea of the 40mm being taken away. With it already looking ludicrously expensive and unlikely to hit weight requirements (soldiers in the hot and dry environment of Somalia cursed the relatively light M16-A2 as too heavy!), cue the death of the XM-29.
Desperate to save something from the fiasco, the politicians (not the US Army) started looking at making the 20mm grenade launcher into a separate weapon to replace the M203, hence the upsizing to 25mm and the XM-25. This ran into such opposition from the 40mm brigade they have switched to pushing it as a smart-rifle-cum-shotgun rather than the M203 killer they intended. The M320 has now been accepted as the M203 replacement, the US Army being happily wedded to the idea of the 40mm grenade. Meanwhile the Marines are pushing for the M32 revolver GL (which uses the existing 40mm ammo) to suppliment M203s. And the M26 clip-on auto-shotgun for the M16/M4 fulfills the small shotgun requirment not covered by several models of commercial shotguns already in use by US forces. So there is even less chance of the XM-25/29 being bought in any numbers if at all. The only reason I can see that anyone would continue the project would be for research purposes with an aim of using the fuses with future 40mm launchers, though the Mk 47 Striker seems to have already got there.
" "shoot the Brit in the back" game. "
Well, tell them to stop running away!
Or making significantly greater progress in the face of the enemy?
As someone else mentioned, it's the latest US 'digital' multipurpose camoflage. Designed by computer as the best pattern for disrupting the PBI's outline against a variety of backgrounds, it is available in all the normal cammo colors (except, of course, black - but could you tell anyway??).
Most hacked off are the Marines since they wasted a whole pile of dead presidents on copyrighting their MARPAT ('MARine PATtern') BDUs only to have the other arms go and get something better... poor jarheads. Almost gotta feel sorry for them :-)
I'll have the one in the Digital Urban Cammo, please.
Re: @Hacker's Challenge
This is not even 90'es tech. Without all the high-tech gadgetry this used to be standard on most of the large artillery as far back as the 19th century. All that has happened here is that someone has made it small enough and has managed to hook up the rangefinder electronics straight to it. Neat engineering, but nothing particularly revolutionary.
However this also means that it will end up being used as artillery - you fire a couple of rounds first and then adjust the fuse time so you get it to blow up where you want it. Much less surprise and much more rounds wasted to score a successful hit.
Programmable ammunition demo
Similar ammunition is in use already, albeit at larger calibres.
The Bofors CV90 combat vehicle is demonstrated with 40mm smart ammo. The 3P fuse demonstration starts half-way through.
The use of explosive ammunition under 400g is forbidden by the Declaration of St Petersburg (1868).
Lots of possibilities, can I have a job?
25mm is huge at 45nM feature sizes.
An offset 2 axis accelerometer would only need the initial velocity in frame to enhance the accuracy on target (the rate of change of spin from rifling, and tumbling, provides information on the air resistance. Initial velocity is from acceleration down the barrel plus the velocity vector in frame).
Since the thing isn't all that smart, most of the processing would be done outside the round, and just download tables. Different tables for flat trajectory vs. a large arc for instance. The local intelligence would compare measurements to the predigested algorithm tables.
If orientation is accurate enough, the old fashioned garrote bullet might be workable (one desires the split in the horizontal plane)-- splits apart with a nano filament between the two halves at range, if the garrote doesn't do it, the contact explosive in the two halves will when they wrap the target, if not that the remains are time fuzed to catch the chickens prone on the ground.
With a bit of computation legerdemain, one could use a shaped charge to actually shoot around corners rather than just spread shrapnel in a globe.
The possibilities for destroying fleshies are endless.
@If it works
If the chip is cooled below body temperature (soldier dies, chip cut out, etc) the authorization codes are randomized and will no longer activate the weapon.
So a soldier hidding in some mud or sludge etc... where his temp drops rather heavily would suddenly be unable to fire off stuff...
How about having it rely on heart rate etc...
Do you even know what "wack" means?
Do yourselves a favor and hire an Ebonics Consultant if you're going to try to sound groovy.
...it's another gun to kill and maim other people with. Wow. How inspired. What incredible beings we are. How we never learn. Yet we keep getting these reports of the tragic loss of life on the news, our troops and their civilians, and most of us don't seem to think that is so cool...
I hear Zyklon B is AMAZING stuff, you can kill loads of people real quick with that, and it's pretty cheap too... IEDs work well also, again, very cheap and easy to use, plus the enemy has no idea where they are, brilliant eh!? ....
What a f*cking waste of time and effort. We may as well just get on with the nuclear holocaust, because all this pissing around with incremental improvements in killing power is just time wasting...c'mon, with a nuclear bomb, it doesn't matter how many corners you stand around. Isn't that brilliant?!...
And worse still people actually bother to write about this kind of `development`.
They (Gov't) mostly spend OUR money and effort on developing this shit so they can conquer piss poor third world nations. Fucking disgraceful.
I thought we were in the middle of some kind of economic slump? Obviously not if they can afford to keep wasting money on shit like this. War was more fun when it was up close and personal, you know, with blades, clubs and maces. They do the same thing, just a lot cheaper, and gives the bearer more of a `hands on` experience of death and suffering in all it's glory.
What's the point;
... of a new, better, gun?
The US are *still* going to lose against any bunch of 3-world tribespeople they decide to pick a fight with. Those people can pop out babies for longer than we can produce USD 25 bullets to shoot them with and they clearly don't mind dying so much as we do!
The Brits of the past were way smarter: They got the tribals to fight each other; that's what these people *do* after all (when they are not actively scoping for a bit of bum or looting the next village).
Haha, was wondering the same thing... that's hillarious...
I think he meant `dope`, if that's the kind of lingo he fancies using, however actually `wack` is probably more appropriate to describe this diabolical waste of time effort and money. It's a gun, whoopy f*ck. Haven't we got enough ways to murder and maim yet? I thought those nuclear warheads were supposed to be the shit, and you can hide round as many corners as you like, it won't help! Biological weapons are even BETTER no? If by BETTER you mean can KILL MORE people FASTER. IEDs (brilliant, because the enemy can't even see them before it's too late! Like mines really, but when our enemy uses them, we call them IEDs because it sounds more `terroristy`...heh... Biological weapons, Zyklon B and many others are all really effective too, in varying scenarios. What a wonderful world. Will they never learn? Maybe we should invest some money in building bridges and collaborating on engineering projects to further our collective future on this planet, and possibly others. I know, stupid idea, let's just kill each other, we KNOW we can do that.
The outlook wasn't brilliant for the Mudville Nine that day;
I thought that American soldiers were so good at baseball that they didn't need grenade launchers.
I wonder if Games Workshop is going to sue them. That thing works just like the standard-issue Adeptus Astartes (Space Marines) bolter.
Mine's the power armor in Space Wolf Blue.
re: I'm all for it
"governments would consider it too expensive to declare war on abstract concepts"
Personally, I can't wait for the first declaration of war against Heidegger's notion of fundamental ontology.
Mine's the one embroidered with existential angst...
the similarities are terrifying
... the judge, jury and executioner all in one - it's just like 21st century Britain (not great).
Now then, it other news; the size zero-challenged individuals of our society are complaining because people are calling them "fat"... and I recall that classic one-liner... "where's ma belly-wheel". I'd be tempted also to add something about how words hurt but sticks and stones just bounce off - but I'd better not.
Can you shoot clay pigeons with it?
Tool of choice for boring corporate days,.
A bit like shooting those chemical drums in Doom.
"$25 a shot "
Chris Rock reckons ANYONE should be able to get a gun. Cheap.
Ammo should be heavily controlled and cost $10,000.
The idea is that if you DO shoot someone, they must REALLY have deserved it.
re: No mention of accountability?..
I don't know if they spelled it out in the movie, but it would work because the lawgiver could ONLY be shot by the accepted owner. Store the DNA profile in the gun. No need to get another lump from the host.