Assault rifles

[Norade]

It also provides a good way to eliminate the weapon's functionality for the sake of plot: the battery died.

When you presumably tested before battle ultra long life battery dies it makes your force look stupid. If you'd instead said something like unexpectedly a wire broke that would make more sense and not make the people using this weapon seem handicapped.

[avianmosquito]

It also provides a good way to eliminate the weapon's functionality for the sake of plot: the battery died.

When you presumably tested before battle ultra long life battery dies it makes your force look stupid. If you'd instead said something like unexpectedly a wire broke that would make more sense and not make the people using this weapon seem handicapped.

When fighting a 2-3 day long battle, what might of seemed sufficient would often prove not. (Same with ammunition.) When out of the base for weeks, the battery just ain't gonna make it. (Maybe if you never use that energy-intensive sight.)

Finally, this isn't my idea, I hate electrically-fired weapons on principle, so don't rag on me.

[Swindle1984]

M43A1 Assault Rifle

"I'd like you to meet a personal friend of my mine...."

Sounds to me like a simplified Aliens gun. Lacking the slightly ridiculous 100 10mm round capacity and integrated grenade launcher and adding accessory rails. Not that that's a bad thing.

I was wondering about the battery? Where exactly is stored in the gun? And is it actually easily swappable? I was thinking it might be easier to build in an integrated rechargeable battery. Not possible to easy to swap but charged when ever a weapon is stored.

edit; Oops, a closer read reveals that article actual mentions that. If the batteries are that long lived do they really need to be easily swappable? Integrated battery = less holes for dust and dirt to get in. And are the power supplies for the scope and the gun interchangable? Can one in the most desperate of circumstance fire off a few round with the scope's power supply?

Yes, it was inspired by the Aliens gun (the M41A1). Well, more by a gun in a piece of sci-fi art I saw that resembled the Aliens gun with a red dot sight built in. I basically made a cross between the real-life G11 and the fictional M41A1. I even made a "practical" version and one with all the complicated bells and whistles that would add up into a functional nightmare but sound fantastic to a geek who didn't have to carry and maintain one daily. Guess which one is more popular on the civilian market?

Even though the battery can last for "thousands of rounds", it really does need to be easily swappable. You never know when you might be cut off from the logistics train and unable to swap out batteries during down time, and you really don't want to be stuck in a Rorke's Drift/Alamo situation with one battery flashing 11% power remaining and no spares. Being able to press a switch and pull out the battery and slap in a new one makes more sense than having to partially disassemble the gun to do it, and it's not really an issue with dust/dirt getting inside since the battery itself would seal the compartment fairly well and the battery compartment would only be exposed for a couple seconds. It's even less of a problem since, unlike the magazine well on a firearm, there are no moving parts to get fouled up, just the battery contacts.

And no, the power supply for the gun and scope aren't interchangable. The scope uses a much smaller, separate battery similar to those used in red dot sights today. As a side note, the optic sight on the rifle does NOT feature night vision; in my mind, the soldier will be wearing night vision gear and the sight will function as normal, though with the illumination switched to a much lower intensity. Which fits real life, where you would wear NVG and either use your sight as normal or use an IR laser for close range targeting. Night vision scopes fill specialized roles that most soldiers don't need, and I figure even in the future a sight featuring NV will be bulkier, heavier, more delicate, or at least more expensive than one without.

[Swindle1984]

Why not just dynamo link the trigger to provide power

That would result in a trigger pull that was heavy, inconsistent, and gritty. Kiss any sort of accuracy goodbye.

Presumably you have a mechanism for clearing jams.

It's mentioned in the article. If a round misfires, you can clear it by pulling on a handle that ejects the round from the chamber. If the magazine causes a malfunction (attempted doublefeed or lack of spring tension doesn't allow the round to chamber), you fix it the same way you do in a real rifle: Slap the bottom of the magazine to ensure it's properly seated, then pull the charging handle to clear it. If that doesn't work, remove the magazine and work the charging handle repeatedly. If there's STILL a jam, stick your knife, a stick, the cleaning rod, or something in there and poke the little bastards out of the way. Just like in real life, if your gun shits itself that bad in a combat situation, you better hope you've got cover and some buddies to lay down fire while you fix it. I'm in law enforcement, so if the gun goes tits up, I just transition to my sidearm; I guess soldiers who don't carry a sidearm really need to get it fixed or pick up somebody else's gun if one just happens to be lying around.

Can you work the bolt manually to chamber new rounds if your battery is dead? I know next to nothing about caseless ammunition, so please forgive me if this is a dumb question.

Yes, you can chamber rounds manually, but since the caseless rounds are electronically fired you're shit out of luck if the battery dies.

edit; Oops, a closer read reveals that article actual mentions that. If the batteries are that long lived do they really need to be easily swappable? Integrated battery = less holes for dust and dirt to get in. And are the power supplies for the scope and the gun interchangable? Can one in the most desperate of circumstance fire off a few round with the scope's power supply?

It also provides a good way to eliminate the weapon's functionality for the sake of plot: the battery died.

Indeed, but since anyone with half a brain would carry a spare battery to go with their several hundred rounds of ammunition, they'd more likely run out of ammo before they lost battery power. Unless, as mentioned in the 'article', you encounter extreme cold which shortens the battery life.

[Swindle1984]

It also provides a good way to eliminate the weapon's functionality for the sake of plot: the battery died.

When you presumably tested before battle ultra long life battery dies it makes your force look stupid. If you'd instead said something like unexpectedly a wire broke that would make more sense and not make the people using this weapon seem handicapped.

When fighting a 2-3 day long battle, what might of seemed sufficient would often prove not. (Same with ammunition.) When out of the base for weeks, the battery just ain't gonna make it. (Maybe if you never use that energy-intensive sight.)

Finally, this isn't my idea, I hate electrically-fired weapons on principle, so don't rag on me.

The sight, which uses its own battery that lasts for 200 hours of continuous operation, is "energy intensive"?

How often are troops cut off from resupply for weeks? Yes, it's still possible in a real, full-scale war, but if you're cut off from friendlies and resupply for that long I think you have more problems than just ammo/batteries for your gun.

As for fighting a 2-3 day long battle, that's a much more likely scenario. Which is why the battery is made to swap out easily and why any serious military would require soldiers to carry a minimum of one spare (two is one, one is none).

[Artemas]

what about having a lower charge battery in the mag itself? Way more convenient (you don't have to carry more than one type of thing). There might be connection issues though.

[Sea Skimmer]

If you had a battery in the magazine then you wouldn't be able to store the magazines very easily, since if they dont get used or checked constantly the battery may go dead. That would also just make for really expensive magazines, which also present a constant fire and ammunition explosion hazard. The only way an electrically primed rifle is going to work well is with a battery, or more likely two batteries so you have a built in backup, in the stock of the gun. A couple bolt action hunting rifles exist with electrical primers, the point is to reduce dead time in-between trigger pull and firing. No other rational reason exists for electrical priming in a small arm, and its not a very good reason.

[Swindle1984]

http://www.westernhunter.com/Pages/Vol0 ... show1.html

Article about Remington's short-lived EtronX rifle. Ammunition for them is nearly impossible to find (no idea how hard it would be to reload for them) and I've never seen one of the rifles for sale.

Other than that, the only electrically-primed firearms I know of in widespread use are anti-aircraft guns and guns mounted on fighter jets. I think the reason those are electrically-primed is to reduce the number of moving parts and because aircraft and fixed gun mounts tend to have more than just a battery to power them.

[Norade]

It also provides a good way to eliminate the weapon's functionality for the sake of plot: the battery died.

When you presumably tested before battle ultra long life battery dies it makes your force look stupid. If you'd instead said something like unexpectedly a wire broke that would make more sense and not make the people using this weapon seem handicapped.

When fighting a 2-3 day long battle, what might of seemed sufficient would often prove not. (Same with ammunition.) When out of the base for weeks, the battery just ain't gonna make it. (Maybe if you never use that energy-intensive sight.)

Finally, this isn't my idea, I hate electrically-fired weapons on principle, so don't rag on me.

The sight has its own batter IIRC, and if you have enough rounds on you to blast through 1,000 of them in a few days, it's likely you're carrying a spare battery.

You also hate a reliable new weapons system for now reason. You're like the gift that keeps on giving.

[Feil]

Can you work the bolt manually to chamber new rounds if your battery is dead? I know next to nothing about caseless ammunition, so please forgive me if this is a dumb question.

Yes, you can chamber rounds manually, but since the caseless rounds are electronically fired you're shit out of luck if the battery dies.

Ah, I understand, now. Thanks.

By the way, the statement about clearing jams was meant as part of that question, not as an independent observation.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Put a small dynamo on the side that u can crank if the batteries run dead.

[Starglider]

I don't understand all this paranoia about batteries dying. It's not as if normal ammo is completely reliable, the primers can fail, rounds can misfire/jam for no apparent reason, springs can break and render the mag or whole weapon useless. Shit happens and infantry tactics are (should be) designed with this in mind.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Can you work the bolt manually to chamber new rounds if your battery is dead? I know next to nothing about caseless ammunition, so please forgive me if this is a dumb question.

Yes, you can chamber rounds manually, but since the caseless rounds are electronically fired you're shit out of luck if the battery dies.

Ah, I understand, now. Thanks.

By the way, the statement about clearing jams was meant as part of that question, not as an independent observation.

it will still have an ejection port for clearing rounds dude

[Sea Skimmer]

I don't understand all this paranoia about batteries dying. It's not as if normal ammo is completely reliable, the primers can fail, rounds can misfire/jam for no apparent reason, springs can break and render the mag or whole weapon useless. Shit happens and infantry tactics are (should be) designed with this in mind.

The point is you are adding whole new means of failure, without really removing any existing one. Besides a dead battery you have the potential for corrosion or dirt or damage or worn connections causing a loss of connectivity in the wiring to make it work. What happens if the firing chamber gets wet? The normal solution to batteries going dead in ammunition which currently requires them is the use of thermal batteries. The electrolyte is solid at room temperature and activated by combustion which is triggered by an external power source, which can also provide a self test prior to use. You could put that in every magazine, but it'd be more then a little excessive for whatever trivial advantage in accuracy you might get from electrical firing. The main use of electrically fired small caliber ammo has been for machine guns firing through aircraft propellers for a reason. Its grand for synchronization, needless complication for much else.

[Beowulf]

Why not just dynamo link the trigger to provide power

That would result in a trigger pull that was heavy, inconsistent, and gritty. Kiss any sort of accuracy goodbye.

Actually, a better idea would be a dynamo type link to the bolt carrier. You pull on the charging handle, and you both charge the gun with electrical power, as well as charge it with a round. Every subsequent shot would also produce electrical power that can be siphoned off to do stuff. Thus, you don't actually need a very large battery. Actually, an ultracapacitor would probably be even better, since you don't have to worry about there being charge stored in the first place. Loading the weapon would provide enough power to run it. This also means that you don't have to worry about the battery going dead either.

[avianmosquito]

Why not just dynamo link the trigger to provide power

That would result in a trigger pull that was heavy, inconsistent, and gritty. Kiss any sort of accuracy goodbye.

Actually, a better idea would be a dynamo type link to the bolt carrier. You pull on the charging handle, and you both charge the gun with electrical power, as well as charge it with a round. Every subsequent shot would also produce electrical power that can be siphoned off to do stuff. Thus, you don't actually need a very large battery. Actually, an ultracapacitor would probably be even better, since you don't have to worry about there being charge stored in the first place. Loading the weapon would provide enough power to run it. This also means that you don't have to worry about the battery going dead either.

Those are all valid ideas, but they still each come with their own set of issues.

1. I'm not completely sure, but I don't think pulling the charging handle will provide enough energy to fire the weapon. Further, if the weapon is electrically cycled instead of just electrically fired, I just can't see it working.

2. Actually, with a capacitor you still need to worry about charge, and loading the weapon probably won't provide enough energy. (Again, I'm not sure.)

I don't understand all this paranoia about batteries dying. It's not as if normal ammo is completely reliable, the primers can fail, rounds can misfire/jam for no apparent reason, springs can break and render the mag or whole weapon useless. Shit happens and infantry tactics are (should be) designed with this in mind.

1. It's more likely you'll have to worry about it or the electronics it is attached to simply failing to function. A few weeks of moderate in a place hot and humid, and it'll never fire again. If a cell-phone, laptop and pocket calculator can all fail in two weeks under these conditions, an electrically fired rifle probably isn't a good idea.

2. Batteries store less and less energy as time goes on, so the rifle won't have a particularly long life expectancy with a permanent battery, and a temporary one compounds the first issue.

3. Using electrically fired wepaons doesn't fix any other reliability issues, at last none that come to mind right now, and adds a new means of failure and limits the lifespan of the rifle. It is, quite simply, not a good idea.

[avianmosquito]

I have to take a quick vote here, I'm completely torn.

I'm going to post a new thread soon, but I can't decide on the topic. Here are three options, which would you guys prefer?

1. Melee weapons: very simple, cheap weapons of more value in my universe than reality. Nonetheless, this is a category where there shouldn't be much flaming.

2. Primitive firearms: simply put: firearms you could make in a machine shop, that would therefore be very common in any setting where modern firearms have become rare. (Like what Africa and South America turn into during the mid 2020's in my universe.) Expect more flaming than in melee weapons, but still not too much.

3. Lasers: a form of energy weapon that I know a thing or two about, and can cite sources for my figures. Never the less, expect a lot of flaming in this kind of post.

[Purple]

I vote for #1.

I wonder how you plan to justify melee weapons in a world that has fire arms.

[avianmosquito]

I vote for #1.

I wonder how you plan to justify melee weapons in a world that has fire arms.

That's actually remarkably simple:
Growing military+failing industry=insufficient supply to meet the demand in regards to ammunition. Carrying a simple melee weapon, such as a bayonet, is no hinderence and could come in handy because you aren't going to be issued much ammunition. (Except for your pistol, there's no shortage of ammunition there, but that's more or less useless in a situation where everyone wears body armour and a helmet.) Further, it costs less to issue a decent bayonet than a single magazine of rifle ammunition, and you can simply replace their more basic combat knife with it, so why not?

EDIT: Also, certain melee weapons, such as knives and small axes, serve a utilitarian purpose, while others, such as batons, provide a less-lethal weapon in a circumstance where there will be no access to less-lethal ammunition.

[Coyote]

Batons are more of a crowd control/riot type thing. In a future where society is breaking down I could see that as one of many levels of escalated response for police or gendarmerie, but less so for troops on a battlefield facing other troops.

Bayonets are more for psychological purposes, although they can be helpful for herding POWs maybe. If you have front-line troops who took a town and need to do some crowd control immediately but do not have the above batons or other weapons, bayonets can help in a pinch. But again, mostly for intimidation. These days bayonets are really more useful as tools to cut open MRE bags and some have wire-cutters on their scabbards, making them "tools that happen to fit on the end of a rifle".

Anything else mentioned, like hatchets, would be regular hatchets primarily for cutting wood or used as breaching tools that are pressed into service as melee weapons because of [insert rationale], basically. A "combat" hatchet has another name: Tomahawk. Any hatchet can become a half-ass Tomahawk; but a good purpose-designed Tomahawk... makes kind of a crappy hatchet. And a hatchet is exactly what it would be more useful for, really. The scenarios where a Tomahawk would be handy would be extremely rare in a missile-weapon society.

Your call. You can have a general "weapons" thread.