Unconventional / Theoretical Weapon Systems & Potential Applications - General

A gun that shoots ninjas that throw stars covered with napalm that are on FIRE shooting guns repeating the whole process FOREVER. Hell yea I'm creative

A gooey, acidic substance that is widespread and can be used quickly and efficiently. It should be strong enough to melt human flesh in a matter of seconds.

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;16754875]Railguns are already well on their way to being weaponized. Wikipedia Copy/paste: "On January 31, 2008 the US Navy tested a railgun; it fired a shell at 2,520 m/s with an energy of 10.64 MJ.[15] Its expected performance is over 5.8 km/s muzzle velocity, accurate enough to hit a 5 meter target over 250 nautical miles (370 km) away while shooting at 10 shots per minute. It is expected to be ready in 2020 to 2025.[1]" If they're right, it could fire a shell at about 17 times the speed of sound. That's REALLY fucking fast compared to ANYTHING of that mass we can fire. And the shell is like 90mm if I remember correctly. Ridiculous.[/QUOTE] Wow, Even at mach 4 anything with a worse aerodynamic than a needle will start to heat up really fast. I wonder what will happen to the projectile at that velocity & accelation

[QUOTE=DukeNukem3D;16755526]They HAVE TO, unless the fact that you cannot destroy infomation is wrong, because lets say a star goes into a black hole, all those atoms are energy, energy is not destroyed, only converted, and white holes spit out the goobled up energy as somthing new.[/QUOTE] Correct about the data part, however the data lost in a black hole is not destroyed. Since there are multipule universes, there will be a universe in which there are no black holes, in this the data steam is kept at 100%. The energy going into a black hole is possibly going out trough a white hole in another universe. [editline]06:16AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lol wut?;16799948][img]http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/15000/Suicide-Bomber--15424.jpg[/img] [editline]08:56PM[/editline] In WW2 Germans used to strap bombs to dog's[/QUOTE] isen't it counter-productive to strap it's wings in so it can't fly?

Rifles that use -stabilized- nitroglycerin instead of gunpowder, the bullet itself contains a small uranium disc with a plutonium ball that rams into the disc when it hits a solid target = handheld nukes for the WIN. So with a sniper rifle you can kill people, [nuke won't detonate, needs to hit something HARD] AND tanks [impacts with armour, explodes]. The blast will be massive but small enough to leave the sniper unharmed. Also would serve as a tactical bombing application, position a single sniper and then they can rain down nuclear hell. Oh, the barrel of the gun would be very thick to compensate the nitroglycerin's explosiveness.

USA has a plane that shoots lasers IRL.

[QUOTE=Lolerskins;16829987]Rifles that use -stabilized- nitroglycerin instead of gunpowder, the bullet itself contains a small uranium disc with a plutonium ball that rams into the disc when it hits a solid target = handheld nukes for the WIN. So with a sniper rifle you can kill people, [nuke won't detonate, needs to hit something HARD] AND tanks [impacts with armour, explodes]. The blast will be massive but small enough to leave the sniper unharmed. Also would serve as a tactical bombing application, position a single sniper and then they can rain down nuclear hell. Oh, the barrel of the gun would be very thick to compensate the nitroglycerin's explosiveness.[/QUOTE] You need at least 5 kg of plutonium to create a sustained nuclear reaction, and even then that's with perfect conditions - every shot would need to hit it's target at a perfect 90 degree angle and would need to be going extremely fast, and that's assuming you're firing in space with a frictionless weapon. Speaking of which, we should start investing in frictionless space guns.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16754575]I like the idea of railguns and kinetic bombardment.[/QUOTE] So do I. I like the idea of ludriculously overpowered rifles for infantry, like 30mm semi-auto rifle for CQC. If we could manage the recoil. Maybe exoskelecons, and they pave the way for even larger caliber weapons, like some 70mm howitzer? :ohdear: Also western Mechs! [editline]12:38PM[/editline] [QUOTE=lulzbocks;16763722]Artilllery that can fire projectiles from one country to another.[/QUOTE] I have one sitting in my backyard. It's a potato gun. I could shoot it from America to Mexico with no problem. Just get me close to the border.

On "Thats impossible" they showed a lazer beam that the goverment is working on that can shoot down missles. They had a video of the lazer that blasted a armed missle out of the air. They plan on having these mounted on every U.S ship by 2015

[QUOTE=Mad.Hatter;16834918]On "Thats impossible" they showed a lazer beam that the goverment is working on that can shoot down missles. They had a video of the lazer that blasted a armed missle out of the air. They plan on having these mounted on every U.S ship by 2015[/QUOTE] THEL's aren't really news. MTHEL's aren't even that interesting either.

Taser + Laser = Electrolaser! [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser[/url] Fires a laser to ionise the air and create a channel of plasma from the gun to the target. This acts as a highly conductive wire to send an electric current down.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;16834939]THEL's aren't really news. MTHEL's aren't even that interesting either.[/QUOTE] How is [url=http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=db9_1214256667]this[/url] not interesting?

[QUOTE=petieng;16836584]Taser + Laser = Electrolaser! [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser[/url] Fires a laser to ionise the air and create a channel of plasma from the gun to the target. This acts as a highly conductive wire to send an electric current down.[/QUOTE] Ion, plasma, electric, laser, It's like every sci-fi weapon in one :D [editline]03:01AM[/editline] [QUOTE=ZooYork;16836887]How is [url=http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=db9_1214256667]this[/url] not interesting?[/QUOTE] I find the ABL to be more interesting [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7761025.stm[/url] mostly because it is capable of shooting down ballistic missiles at 600km range moving at thousands of meters a second while moving at hundreds of miles an hour itself.

Creating Giant enemy crabs that will carry battle ships on it's back. [img]http://www.gameandplayer.net/images/inset/inset1_08_0123_mslug.jpg[/img] [editline]04:45AM[/editline] Satellite lasers too.

I was just thinking about a siege tank with AA capabilities. Not those megatanks with 3 artillery cannons.

High-Yeld Singularity Warheads.

Chainsaw nunchucks? Taser knife. Depleted uranium flail. Chainsaw lance. Jackhammer spear.

Nano-bots deployed by a bomb that go inside people and eat them from the inside.

[QUOTE=STREWTH_99;16787764]Mechs are theoretically possible but not with today's technology. The biggest problem they'd have is being able to balance themselves on two legs, especially at high speeds. You'd most likely have to have some serious gyroscopic balancing going on in there or else it would tip over when trying to step over something. If they figure out the solution to that problem, then mechs would come one step closer to reality. [img]http://files.nebulastation.net/madcat_03.jpg[/img] Imagine that thing irl. :smug:[/QUOTE] It'd be completely impractical against a modern tank anyway. Much better to create a vtol + tank hybrid which would solve all of the tanks weaknesses

There has to be [I]something[/I] that a mech can do that something else can't... something.

[QUOTE=luishi5000;16850624]There has to be [I]something[/I] that a mech can do that something else can't... something.[/QUOTE] Fall over?

Mind altering beam that turns men into total pussies.

Sharks with friggin' laser beams.

[QUOTE=Turrngait;16850630]Fall over?[/QUOTE] With some advanced computer systems that might be just as unlikely as a tank flipping over. Tanks have some pretty big disadvantages when it comes to the type of terrain they can move over, and if a true mech was made well I don't see any reason why it couldn't be very useful. [editline]05:31PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Turrngait;16850490]It'd be completely impractical against a modern tank anyway. Much better to create a vtol + tank hybrid which would solve all of the tanks weaknesses[/QUOTE] This would be awesome though. Not entirely practical in some situations though, considering how much you would have to strip down the tank part to make it light enough to be vtol, plus the amount of fuel that thing would need.

[QUOTE=Hivemind;16858747]With some advanced computer systems that might be just as unlikely as a tank flipping over. Tanks have some pretty big disadvantages when it comes to the type of terrain they can move over, and if a true mech was made well I don't see any reason why it couldn't be very useful.[/QUOTE] Shoot a Rocket in the mech leg. see it try get up. Laugh. ??? Profit.

[QUOTE=Feuver;16858854]Shoot a Rocket in the mech leg. see it try get up. Laugh. ??? Profit.[/QUOTE] If the mech leg wasn't busted (if it was then a tank would be busted in the same situation) then there's no reason why the mech would fall over, we're not talking about rigid legs that only move back and forth, it'd be able to compensate even before the rocket hit it, these things would have some very clever computer control systems.

It's still pretty easy to take down.

[QUOTE=Feuver;16858895]It's still pretty easy to take down.[/QUOTE] How is it any easier than a tank?

[QUOTE=Hivemind;16858908]How is it any easier than a tank?[/QUOTE] -It's taller, so it's a lot easier to hit. -A tank can be immobilized be taking out its tracks, but it will still be functional, while a mech with a destroyed leg will fall over (and damage itself too most probably). -A tank can have more armour since it can carry more, and while the tank can be compeltely covered, the mech will always have a weakspot on the legs. -A tank is faster than a mech.

[QUOTE=Hivemind;16858908]How is it any easier than a tank?[/QUOTE] It has big stubby appendages that it relies on for movement All you'd need is a steel cable and two jeeps and you could immobilise it See: Star Wars [QUOTE=XeniKuna;16754849]Directed sound tech, I know what your talking about though I can't seem to remember a specific name. Speaking of non-lethal tech there was a projected energy system a saw some time ago that only barely penetrated the skin and made it feel as though you were being plunged in boiling water. Completely harmless and extremely painful. One hell of a deterrence system, huh?[/QUOTE] To refer to a previous post, a small issue with this system is where one crosses the line of cruelty; it is designed only to be used for a 'few seconds', but how well will that sort of design parameter lie in a high pressure situation? Say it gets used for crowd control in middle eastern tension point of choice (let's go with the Gaza Strip for now) and a woman and child get cornered with it, and the operators happen to subject them to this 'being boiled alive' feeling for an extended period; what are the mental/physical ramifications of this?