Unconventional / Theoretical Weapon Systems & Potential Applications
324 replies, posted
I think weapons will become living organisms.
Nanorobotics will probably be a pretty big (probably huge) thing, and not only for the military.
Offensive power will (or better, already has) surpassed defensive capability, so stealth and speed will be more important in the future, so we will be seeing a lot of camoflague, most probably dynamic camoflague suits that adapt to the enviroment (this will be helped a lot by nanotechnology).
Railguns (or any other kind of mass driver) will probably be put on larger stuff, maybe tanks, but I don't really see any mass driver based weapons being issued to infantry any time soon.
[editline]02:22PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;16759425]I actually think that maybe we should give Gyrojets another try, rocket propelled bullets for the win, make them armour piercing and high explosive for double win.[/QUOTE]
Would they be .75 cal by any chance?
A tentacle gun that rapes Japanese women
[QUOTE=Cowie1337;16774388]A tentacle gun that rapes Japanese women[/QUOTE]
they already have that dude
[QUOTE=acds;16774029]Nanorobotics will probably be a pretty big (probably huge) thing, and not only for the military.
Offensive power will (or better, already has) surpassed defensive capability, so stealth and speed will be more important in the future, so we will be seeing a lot of camoflague, most probably dynamic camoflague suits that adapt to the enviroment (this will be helped a lot by nanotechnology).
Railguns (or any other kind of mass driver) will probably be put on larger stuff, maybe tanks, but I don't really see any mass driver based weapons being issued to infantry any time soon.
[editline]02:22PM[/editline]
Would they be .75 cal by any chance?[/QUOTE]
Yep and then create a metal Storm variant that go up to 1.00
I had an idea for a device that causes a spark in a chamber filled with an explosive material, shooting a small object out of a barrel at high speeds.
So basically you just thought of a bullet then? Or the Flintlock.
Someone stole my idea!
Yeah you should sue them, oh, wait, they're a few centuries dead already.
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;16775134]Yeah you should sue them, oh, wait, they're a few centuries dead already.[/QUOTE]
He could invent the time machine, then go back and sue them.
Screw suing them, I'll shoot them with my patented invention.
[QUOTE=pwnpie08;16769728]"Biobomb"
A large scale explosive that destroys everything organic (people, animals, insects, plants etc.)
but leaves everything else untouched.
Something i remember from Artimes Fowl[/QUOTE]
Neutron bomb, old news bro.
What we need is an orbital battery of rail gun satellites controlled by CO's on the ground via some kind of touch screen interface. Extreme firepower available anywhere on the planet.
The gay bomb. Yes it was actually in developement by Us air force chemical weapon contracted companies. This bomb was desighned to sprey female hormoens over the area with such a intensity that In theory the enemies would throw down their weapons and love each other. Needless to say places like the United nations thought this idea was horrably degrading and a embarassment to the developement of Nonlethal weapons tech. There were of course even more rediculous idea's sprouted from this odd bomb which include but at not limited to, Bee hives and be hive hormone' attacks which would anger the bee's to sting enemy troops, Another weapon that would give the enemy horable breath based off of hormones, lastly and the most odd would be the one that would actually pass out the enemy again using hormones but in such a way that it would sexually over stimulate them and make them so tired they just fell asleep.
Honestly i wish i could just make this stuff up and it would be false but im not O_O.
Now that i think about it, this guy must have been a test subject for the bomb that sexually overstimulates.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4[/media]
[QUOTE=Fekel Die Juden;16775285]Neutron bomb, old news bro.
What we need is an orbital battery of rail gun satellites controlled by CO's on the ground via some kind of touch screen interface. Extreme firepower available anywhere on the planet.[/QUOTE]
Once again, this is not good for Public Relations with other countries, because they would live in fear of any attack at any time and the UN would go fucking insane. However, one or two satellites such as this wouldn'y be minded. The only problem is getting the pellet through our atmosphere at those speeds.
A good old Thompson firing .50 cal bullets would sure be nice!
[QUOTE=Fekel Die Juden;16775285]Neutron bomb, old news bro.
What we need is an orbital battery of rail gun satellites controlled by CO's on the ground via some kind of touch screen interface. Extreme firepower available anywhere on the planet.[/QUOTE]
You realize how hideously expensive that is, not to mention a God Rod would probably only be able to take out a City Block.
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;16775676]You realize how hideously expensive that is, not to mention a God Rod would probably only be able to take out a City Block.[/QUOTE]
I think Tungsten missiles are a bit more effective for that kinda thing, but I guess next post will prove me wrong.
[QUOTE=jiggu;16780767]I think Tungsten missiles are a bit more effective for that kinda thing, but I guess next post will prove me wrong.[/QUOTE]
Tungsten Missiles? You mean Orbital Tungsten missiles? That's what God Rods are. If not, can you explain what a Tungsten Missile is?
Energy density of God Rods ranges between 2 times and theoretical maximum of 8 times TNT, with typical number of 4-4.5 times TNT, corresponding to 6km/s reentry velocity.
In other words, it's about 2.5-3 times better than pure modern explosive, or 4 times better than conventional bomb, per ton of weight. It's not to mention that "godrod" doesn't really work as high explosive, and only deals damage through the material it touches. In military terms it is similar to lacking brisance. Specifically, it doesn't actually explode with gases, only throws material around. It's essentially throwing rocks into the ground, and, in both cases, most energy just goes into the ground.
That's for about $10 million per ton delivery cost.
So a 50 million dollar God Rod would probably destroy a building, not even a block. If it hits a street, it will blow a crater there, break windows around, shake somewhat, that's all - inherent AP capability doesn't favor city destruction.
Adding explosive would be very little improvement, and in fact only *reduce* damage done: the rod will be larger (due to low density) and more of it will just burn in the atmosphere.
Yes, these might be of use against bunkers (not too deep ones), HQ, ICBM silos. However, it's no difference whether you use a nuclear or non-nuclear weapon against such a target. Attacking deterrence assets is even worse than attacking with a nuke - it's a direct escalation demand. And nukes are still cheaper.
Have a man stand on the end of a jet and punch birds. And throw things at other jets.
Thermite bomb. With a high enough mass, virtually anything it would be dropped over would be destroyed.
lightsabers
A piece of thin metal with the edges flattened to a really fine point.
[QUOTE=cornndog;16785152]A piece of thin metal with the edges flattened to a really fine point.[/QUOTE]
A long thin peice of metal, falling from the sky at terminal volocity. That is the god rail system. Though i would rather go for Mech warriors rods of death from outspace concept. Which is, millions of Long pretty tick rebar rods expelled out of a satalite. The metal would become multen upon entering the atmosphere. Pretty much anything that it impacts after that is not only peirced, burned, and never going to live through it, But because of the extreme impact and heat its pretty much a vaporization. The air its self would become dangerous and most bunkers would fail to stop the metal in time.
[QUOTE=bravojr;16786623]A long thin peice of metal, falling from the sky at terminal volocity. That is the god rail system. Though i would rather go for Mech warriors rods of death from outspace concept. Which is, millions of Long pretty tick rebar rods expelled out of a satalite. The metal would become multen upon entering the atmosphere. Pretty much anything that it impacts after that is not only peirced, burned, and never going to live through it, But because of the extreme impact and heat its pretty much a vaporization. The air its self would become dangerous and most bunkers would fail to stop the metal in time.[/QUOTE]
Good luck on spending at least $100 million dollars (from satellite launch and payload launch) to fire something a $1 million dollar Bunker Buster can do.
Also, the International Community would scream bloody murder for having Orbitals.
[QUOTE=Biotoxsin;16784961]Thermite bomb. With a high enough mass, virtually anything it would be dropped over would be destroyed.[/QUOTE]
It's just a more powerful version of a napalm bomb, but doesn't stick on things as well, instead melting through it.
[img]http://fc07.deviantart.com/fs48/f/2009/169/b/a/MechWarrior_Mercs_Wallpaper_by_Mecha_Master.jpg[/img]
[img]http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/9/8528/57217.jpg[/img]
A man can dream.
[QUOTE=luishi5000;16787588][img]http://fc07.deviantart.com/fs48/f/2009/169/b/a/MechWarrior_Mercs_Wallpaper_by_Mecha_Master.jpg[/img]
[img]http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/9/8528/57217.jpg[/img]
A man can dream.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Mechs aren't exactly effective, vehicles with treads wielding the same weapons will do as good, if not better, they would also cost less and would be easier to maintain.
But, as Civilization IV said about mechs, "Generals still deny these accusations, on the mere basis that Mechs are fucking awesome."
[QUOTE=DukeNukem3D;16755695]Exoskeletons, while if hard enough can provide good armor, are goddamned ovens, flamthrower the suit and you got yourself some fried human :clint:[/QUOTE]
If the suit is properly insulated on the inside, then no, you don't.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
