Power Armor or Personnal Shields (RAR!)

[Me2005]

Busting through the doorframe still takes time and struggle

...Except for someone wearing a suit that lets them military press a Camry. Who is also carrying a minigun. My (admittedly uninformed) entry strategy would be "start unloading in the direction of the door, bash door open with one hand while still unloading with the other, sweep entry with mini gun."

That should prevent people from hanging out in positions that are good to fire on me from.

...which can be a problem if someone is waiting for you with a weapon and time to line up a shot. Especially since not all buildings are lightly constructed American residential homes; even if your power armor can smash through two-by-fours, that doesn't mean it can easily smash through bricks.

Doors can be quite small in other parts of the world, but our soldiers can currently still clear them reasonably well now. If one was particularly small, I'd see two possible solutions:
1) Send in a shielded guy - possibly also carrying a ballistic shield - who can actually reliably take a hit from a higher-power weapon than the power armor guy can.
2) Design a weapon/tool the PA guy can carry that can blow a hole he and his friends can stomp through quickly.

Building-clearing and urban assault are about the best uses for these things IMO; you've got support nearby, you'll win in close-combat, and the heavy weapons they can carry can penetrate/demolish troublesome structures. For police work, they could probably just go unarmed and grab the perp. Shoot, replacing police cars with power armor might be a valid thing to do ubiquitously, if they're fast enough. They work in shifts that would be suitable to limited operation times, and could easily swing by their station to recharge if low.

[Borgholio]

For police work, they could probably just go unarmed and grab the perp

Yeah that way racist cops can kill unarmed black boys without wasting any ammo. I don't trust the professionalism or discipline of cops enough to let them use a powered armored exoskeleton...for ANY reason.

[Me2005]

For police work, they could probably just go unarmed and grab the perp

Yeah that way racist cops can kill unarmed black boys without wasting any ammo. I don't trust the professionalism or discipline of cops enough to let them use a powered armored exoskeleton...for ANY reason.

Didn't even think about it that way. But I do think it'd actually go a ways toward keeping apprehensions from going awry. If they're armored, it's reasonable to assume that weapons won't do squat against them, so the police are safe and don't need to have access to weapons, except in extreme situations (SWAT, basically). Then they don't need to draw when someone has a knife, or when someone is foolishly waving a gun around, or when some kid has a stick that *looks* like a gun. They could be retrained to just walk up to anyone who has a weapon and grab & cuff them for questioning. It'd be a cinch to put audit-cams on the suits too.

[Borgholio]

If the suits had automatic safeguards in them that sensed the amount of pressure and physically prevented cops from doing things like breaking bones, that might work. To be honest though, even if there are safeguards in place, I would feel uncomfortable anywhere near a suit of powered armor. I think the force shields would be better for cops. Allows them to remain looking human and thus more approachable, but some punk ass shooting a few rounds from a handgun would be deflected harmlessly.

[Me2005]

If the suits had automatic safeguards in them that sensed the amount of pressure and physically prevented cops from doing things like breaking bones, that might work. To be honest though, even if there are safeguards in place, I would feel uncomfortable anywhere near a suit of powered armor. I think the force shields would be better for cops. Allows them to remain looking human and thus more approachable, but some punk ass shooting a few rounds from a handgun would be deflected harmlessly.

I'd feel like them being more intimidating would be better as deterrant. Additionally, the problem is that cops are likely to be in very close proximity to danger, and many of the less-leathal options they use wouldn't be stopped by a shield (Pepper spray, taser). And there's nothing to say a sucker punch, knife, or bat wouldn't get through just fine; and those are the most likely dangers they face.

[Borgholio]

Cops being intimidating is one of the core reasons why people don't trust them. Gone are the days where people can approach a cop and be friendly because nowadays everybody feels like a suspect. Cops would be more effective if the community trusted them. Granted, powered armor would be more effective vs anything less than a gunshot, but it would also elevate police to the position of Judge Dredd in the eyes of many people. More intimidation is really a very bad idea and will only make things harder for them in the long run.

[bilateralrope]

Busting through the doorframe still takes time and struggle

...Except for someone wearing a suit that lets them military press a Camry. Who is also carrying a minigun. My (admittedly uninformed) entry strategy would be "start unloading in the direction of the door, bash door open with one hand while still unloading with the other, sweep entry with mini gun."

That should prevent people from hanging out in positions that are good to fire on me from.

So, if there is anyone inside who isn't a militant (say, because your intel was faulty), you'd still kill them ?

If you're going that far, why not just blow the entire house up from a safe distance ?

[Me2005]

So, if there is anyone inside who isn't a militant (say, because your intel was faulty), you'd still kill them ?

If you're going that far, why not just blow the entire house up from a safe distance ?

I was going to put some kind of disclaimer of some sort to that effect on the end of the original, but stopped short of doing it. You'd not automatically be killing everyone inside, just those near the doorway and behind any light-construction walls behind the doorway. There'd still be the opportunity to sweep from there.

Shoot though, don't the PA suits come with targeting suites? Would that include IR, allowing you to just see where the targets are to start with?

[Patroklos]

Do these suits come with all the fancy optics and heads up displays we see in scifi? Identifying unarmed noncombatants in the dark might be easire than harder.

[Borgholio]

Do these suits come with all the fancy optics and heads up displays we see in scifi? Identifying unarmed noncombatants in the dark might be easire than harder.

If it's something like you see in Iron Man or Robocop where you can pick out critical details like that...then that WOULD make a difference.

[InsaneTD]

No reason that couldn't or wouldn't, be put into a standard helmet.

[Patroklos]

You can only fit so much on top of the neck of a Mk1 human, and he can only support so much energy hungery batterys on his Mk1 human legs. Being encased in armor and a controlled atmopshere helps.

I do though think we are a bit behind on light infanty optics. I don't think it will be long before recording, night vision and perhaps pattern recognition imaging (to highlight movement in a field of view of certain shapes and characteristics) becomes standard in some sort of display. The rudimentary of all of this is available in most smart phones now for hudreds of dollars.

[Zixinus]

The answer is both. Power armor will require adjusting the infrastructure of armies but is the most long-term game changer. Power armor would be brought for only certain kinds of soldiers: ones who are directly shot or dropped into a battlezone that will either be lost or won in less than eight hours. Everyone else who is carrying a gun will have shields. Power-armored soldiers will be considered specialty troops: useful in certain type of engagements but not the general thing.

Power armor is more awesome but the 8 hour limit is really troublesome. Yeah, carrying more batteries for it might help but it only mitigates the problem. I am guessing the more weight it carries the more energy it drains before you run into the rocket-problem where you need more batteries to carry more batteries to carry enough batteries to last for a week. Which means you are bringing more soldiers than necessary just to carry more batteries. Then what do you do when half of your soldiers are out of batteries and you still the other half to be fully operational? Abandon those ridiculously-expensive suits? If you can have them picked up then you could have them transported there with less of a logistical nightmare.

For anything else, the eight hour limit becomes problematic and it would severely impact army infrastructure. Most soldiers are not fighting 24/7 but are either waiting to start fighting, searching for a fight or going towards possible fighting. The problem will be is that in that time the power armor is of little to no value. Sure they can carry more but so could a car.
A solution will be modified troop carriers that have power-armor ready for troops to get into them. Nothing going on while on patrol? Troops are sitting in the power-armor carrier, doing nothing particularly useful. Trouble? Troops get into power armor and start fighting. Power-armor-carriers will also dispense spare power cells as needed or recharge power cells, whichever is quicker and easier. So operation life can be expanded in mid-fight. But if they become untied from their vehicles or source of power, they are on a countdown on what they can do. Ironically the most useful thing they could be carrying is a shield-unit and an assault rifle, allowing the soldiers to still be able to fight without the suits.

But power-armored soldiers will not replace regular infantry soldiers. The logistics of it is just too complicated. For them shields would be useful: they can be simply turned off when not needed. You cannot do the same with the suits as they require power just to move. They would still be tied to power sources but less so: once the power runs out the soldiers become vulnerable but still able to fight. With power armor your soldiers is either out or enters the battlefield under-equipped (unless the power armor had a spare shield unit and an AR, in which case you got a shielded unit!).

The real question is how much different things will be once armies have adapted both designs. There will be shielded soldiers with power-armor units aiding them. Every squad will have an anti-armor rifle for no other purpose than fighting power armor. Power-armored soldiers will be carrying incredibly powerful weapons for no other purpose than fighting shielded soldiers. I wonder in this mad race which technology will be considered more significant.

[Borgholio]

If the 8 hour battery life limit is mostly set in stone, then it would be best to have infantry use shields but have power armor be air-dropped where they are needed. A cargo helo can drop several suits, or they can parachute in from higher-altitude cargo transports. Either way, they would be dropped in where trouble was expected so those 8 hours would be put to good use. Further air drops could bring replacement power cells or simply bring full replacement suits and pick up the old ones.

[Me2005]

In my mind the interesting thing is that shields are more protective in an engagement than power armor. Sure, power armor lets you carry heavy weaponry and gives you a targeting suite; but the absolute protection, which is much more important IMO, is in the shield. Add that to the greater endurance of a shield-carrying soldier and you've got a lock.

[Patroklos]

If the 8 hour battery life limit is mostly set in stone, then it would be best to have infantry use shields but have power armor be air-dropped where they are needed. A cargo helo can drop several suits, or they can parachute in from higher-altitude cargo transports. Either way, they would be dropped in where trouble was expected so those 8 hours would be put to good use. Further air drops could bring replacement power cells or simply bring full replacement suits and pick up the old ones.

We do this with tanks already. You get them close to the lines with prime movers or rail (when applicable) to make sure their fuel and maintenance hours are not wasted on road transits.

[Tribble]

If the shields can be used on vehicles as well as infantry then I would pick them over powered armour. IMO shielded infantry + tanks, aircraft, warships etc + would be a far greater game changer than powered armour alone.

Of course this is assuming a couple of things:

1. A shield can be scaled up in power (i.e. larger generators/emitters provide greater protection). If this is not the case its benefits would be of limited use for vehicles such as tanks, which already have armour which can repel fire from weapons like an AK-47. On the other hand, a shield could still provide valuable protection to non-armoured vehicles and the like. And of course it would be providing all-important protection to infantry.

2. The shield can be scaled up in size, or if not, overlapping shields can be used to cover the entire vehicle. If neither is the case then the shield is of a limited value to vehicles, though it could provide extra protection for critical areas. And it could still be used for things like drones.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

Power armor, I think, would be most useful for engineers. Instead of guns, carry an array of power tools; Jaws of Life and/or other heavy-duty cutters, welders, hydraulic lifters, maybe an air compressor to run pneumatics and such. For those situations where you'd really like to have a bulldozer on hand, but even a Bobcat won't fit.