Of powered armor, mechs and feasibility.

[castlebravo]

I have to admit that would render most Powered armor useless, and would make a lot of mechs very scared of the footsloggers.

Well, actually not. That's because infantry wears armor today, even though it is ineffective to many weapons.

If power armor can be made considerably cheap (a few tens of thousands of dollars), and soldiers can be better protected with them than without, while being able to carry more and walk faster from longer distances, them I would imagine that all armies would give power armor as standard equipment.

If a conventional light infantry squad faces off against a PA'd squad, and both are capable of dealing damage to each other (let's say the LI squad is armed with Kords and Barrets, for instance), the squad that prevails will be the one that can avoid detection and remain hidden the longest. The human body can lay silent and hide behind rocks, grass and small irregularities on the ground. PA will be noisy and volumous, the exact opposite. Frankly, the only way I see PA working is in assaults to prepared positions, where the elements of camouflage (which are essential inna woods) are not a factor, and where resistance to fire is paramount.

A PA squad should have a considerable advantage over a light infantry squad. First off, they should be battle-linked, so points of contact should be visible to the whole unit. Secondly, the additional carrying capacity of the suits should allow you to incorporate things like acoustic ranging and millimeter wave radar on top of thermal imaging. Point being, the PA unit taking fire will be able to locate the source of that fire very quickly. PA are "heavy" infantry. They will be carrying bigger weapons, and more of then compared to light infantry.

Comparing light infantry against PA infantry is a little bit like comparing a motorcycle to a APC.

[Scorpion]

Link please?

Here it is! Currently it is only available for vehicles, but who knows what will happen in the future?

I see PA being used in the role of Light Tanks and Tankettes.
A squad of Heavy infantry escorting several squads of light infantry and acting as fire support. Likely armed with larger caliber grenade launchers, light auto canons, machine guns or other stuff you usually put on a Humvee. It could be especially useful in urban areas or mountains where you can't regular get vehicles through.

I can fly with that. It really is one feasible niche for powered armour.

[castlebravo]

I was more meaning bring it back into a more common role as a mainline weapon again. I was also unaware that the rounds to defeat such armor was still around. Thanks for pointing that out.

Unfortunately I don't think that's going to happen. The only way that's happening is if combat comes back out of the urban sprawl and out onto the plains and hills again and that's only going to happen when NATO, NATO allies, Russia, and China stop having overwhelming conventional warmaking capacities. Said urban sprawls aren't going to be very conducive to any kind of reasonable power armor that would require AP capacities anyhow.

Actually, as a result of the experience in Afghanistan, the limitations of the current 5.56mm ammo are becoming painfully obvious. As detailed in this little article by small arms expert Anthony G. Williams (you should really check out his site) right now, US and brittish patrols are being ambushed from a distance up to a Km on the Afghan plains by fighters using Dragunovs or even old Lee-Enfields. Since 5,56mm weapons are woefully inadequate at those distances, they are often forced to use Javelins to engage the Talibans. At 3000+ USD a pop, it ain't cheap. That's one of the reasons why the 6,5 Grendel and 6,8 SPC have atracted quite a following the last few years...

Ambushes at those ranges are woefully ineffective unless you have the bad luck to be in a kill box and the enemy has a PK MG or two. The purpose of the modern infantry weapon, more or less, is to suppress the enemy so that they can be killed with artillery. At 600 meters, assuming cover, it's rather difficult to kill people because both sides can pop up, fire a burst, and then pop back down before return fire impacts their area. The solution to this really isn't a heavier cartridge, it's things like 60mm mortars and the XM25, which can kill people behind cover at extended engagement ranges...or the 81mm and 120mm mortars and 155mm artillery back at the firebase. Otherwise, it's probably more effective to bring back the .308 GPMG and organize your squad around supporting the machine gun aka German WW2 Wehrmacht style.

The 5.56 CAN reach out and touch people at long ranges, especially if you are using 75 or 77 grain match rounds out of a 20 inch barrel. The problem is, the US has standardized on a 62 grain bullet out of a 14.5 inch barrel. Yes, you are going to be out ranged in this scenario by an SVD with a 22 to 24 inch barrel firing a 7.62x54mm or a Lee Enfield with a 25 inch barrel firing a .303 British round. Upgrading to a 6.5 Grendel or a 6.8 SPC won't fix this problem. Your other option here is take a couple of guys, make them designated squad marksmen and give them a scoped M14.

And this is all assuming foot patrols. Mounted patrols typically have a generous selection of MK19 and Ma Deuce's to choose from.

US doctrine works fine so long as you don't have political meddling keeping you from calling in artillery or air strikes (because, for instance, you are being ambushed from a Taliban village).

[Night_stalker]

yeah, that could work

[Shroom Man 777]

Very nice. I wonder if infantry can get something like that in their uniforms. Where does the waste heat of a tank go? Does it stay INSIDE the tank instead of radiating outwards?

[Iosef Cross]

I have to admit that would render most Powered armor useless, and would make a lot of mechs very scared of the footsloggers.

Well, actually not. That's because infantry wears armor today, even though it is ineffective to many weapons.

If power armor can be made considerably cheap (a few tens of thousands of dollars), and soldiers can be better protected with them than without, while being able to carry more and walk faster from longer distances, them I would imagine that all armies would give power armor as standard equipment.

I don't think most militaries will when places like the US can't even get rid of an outdated assault rifle due to cost constraints and the bottleneck of actually getting enough new weapons to fill its needs. It would be even worse trying to get powered armor for everybody. Difficulty wise it would be like getting each soldier his own vehicle.

That depends on the cost. But considering that if a power armor costs the price of a car (around 20 grand), them it would be feasible to have an fully equipped army with power armor. Of course, if a PA costs 200 grand, them only a few specialized soldiers would use them, if a PA costs 2 million, them it wouldn't be of military use because you could get a tank for this price.

[Purple]

That depends on the cost. But considering that if a power armor costs the price of a car (around 20 grand), them it would be feasible to have an fully equipped army with power armor. Of course, if a PA costs 200 grand, them only a few specialized soldiers would use them, if a PA costs 2 million, them it wouldn't be of military use because you could get a tank for this price.

I disagree there because the cost, while important is not the true bottle neck for the issue.
The true issue with PA is maintenance. There are going to be costs involved with keeping that soldier in the field and with PA these costs will multiply many fold. Think fuel and maintenance for a start. Because of this, there will always be missions where it is more cost effective to deploy light infantry who, in the worst case can live off the land and only need to be supplied with ammunition. Furthermore, deploying PA infantry on missions like policing (like in Iraq today) could even prove counterproductive since the local population will feel detached from the land mobile tanks surrounding them. (unless you can make some sort of powered armor that looks like a normal uniform )

Hence Heavy Powered Armor will newer replace light infantry.

[Shroom Man 777]

What happens when one million years in the future, soldiers are wearing armor that looks like BDU but the cloth is made out of nanoes that can turn rigid or act like artificial musculature that can drastically enhance user strength? And in the future, this is so cheap that everyone has this? And, in fact, in that future cybernetic genetic engineering and posthumanity and stuff has ensured that people's organ systems are branded consumer electronic products, with Kodak-manufactured eyeballs, General Electric nervous system, Microsoft brainware, and Ford Motors musculatory systems all built in Chinese factories in Space America? When every future human has the strength of a bear that has the strength of five bears, and their standard battle dress uniform amplifies that by a factor of five (hence a soldier in standard BDUs will have the approximate strength of twenty five bears), will this mean that powered armor has replaced light infantry? What if powered armor becomes light infantry?

[Xenophon13]

One thing- if you gave a mech a VR style control scheme (think avatar) It would have the advantage of being easy to pilot.

Other than that they are complete BS

[stormthebeaches]

I would just like to say that the thermal stealth thing is full of holes. It only works from one angle and requires a panel to be attached to the thing you are trying to hide. There is no way that will be able to be used on infantry and it is unlikely that it will even be used on vehicles any time soon.

[Sea Skimmer]

What happens when one million years in the future, soldiers are wearing armor that looks like BDU but the cloth is made out of nanoes that can turn rigid or act like artificial musculature that can drastically enhance user strength? And in the future, this is so cheap that everyone has this? And, in fact, in that future cybernetic genetic engineering and posthumanity and stuff has ensured that people's organ systems are branded consumer electronic products, with Kodak-manufactured eyeballs, General Electric nervous system, Microsoft brainware, and Ford Motors musculatory systems all built in Chinese factories in Space America? When every future human has the strength of a bear that has the strength of five bears, and their standard battle dress uniform amplifies that by a factor of five (hence a soldier in standard BDUs will have the approximate strength of twenty five bears), will this mean that powered armor has replaced light infantry? What if powered armor becomes light infantry?

The users would most likely cook to death.

I would just like to say that the thermal stealth thing is full of holes. It only works from one angle and requires a panel to be attached to the thing you are trying to hide. There is no way that will be able to be used on infantry and it is unlikely that it will even be used on vehicles any time soon.

Yeah its not very useful. But we do have mere paint at the moment which works very well for reducing IR signature. The thing about IR is most IR wavelengths are easily absorbed by the air, only two small IR wavelength windows (near infrared and far infrared) exist in which the heat can cover some real distance. So the anti IR paint works by turning those wavelengths into wavelengths which are absorbed. In the far future we may well be able to make clothing and facepaint that can do this with high efficiency.

[Night_stalker]

Yeah, vent the heat inside the enclosed metal suit. That sounds so safe.

[castlebravo]

I don't think most militaries will when places like the US can't even get rid of an outdated assault rifle due to cost constraints and the bottleneck of actually getting enough new weapons to fill its needs. It would be even worse trying to get powered armor for everybody. Difficulty wise it would be like getting each soldier his own vehicle.

That depends on the cost. But considering that if a power armor costs the price of a car (around 20 grand), them it would be feasible to have an fully equipped army with power armor. Of course, if a PA costs 200 grand, them only a few specialized soldiers would use them, if a PA costs 2 million, them it wouldn't be of military use because you could get a tank for this price.

A couple of notes.

The M16/M4 system is not outdated. It is one of the best platforms there is. There are some incremental "improvements" one could make (switching to a piston design as opposed to direct gas impingement, or upgrading to 6.5 or 6.8mm), but these may or may not be cost justified for the benefit.

Secondly, on cost of powered armor, no way are you going to get that for $20k. Dragon Skin armor runs $5k today. Weapon mounted thermal imaging costs $12k. 3rd generation infrared goggles cost $3.5k. You are going to be much closer to $200k or $2 million once it's all said and done (amortized research costs, all-aspect armor protection, compact & efficient power supply, movement sensors / actuators, electronic battlefiend integration, sensors, communication equipment, helmet / goggle HUD stuff).

[Norade]

A couple of notes.

The M16/M4 system is not outdated. It is one of the best platforms there is. There are some incremental "improvements" one could make (switching to a piston design as opposed to direct gas impingement, or upgrading to 6.5 or 6.8mm), but these may or may not be cost justified for the benefit.

Secondly, on cost of powered armor, no way are you going to get that for $20k. Dragon Skin armor runs $5k today. Weapon mounted thermal imaging costs $12k. 3rd generation infrared goggles cost $3.5k. You are going to be much closer to $200k or $2 million once it's all said and done (amortized research costs, all-aspect armor protection, compact & efficient power supply, movement sensors / actuators, electronic battlefiend integration, sensors, communication equipment, helmet / goggle HUD stuff).

Based on what I've heard in the Assault rifle XM25 threads on this board and what the Euros use it would seem that the M4/M16 is getting rather long in the tooth. Especially when compared to lighter more reliable bullpup designs.

On the cost of powered armor, I think it would settle somewhere in the hundreds of thousands of dollars range making it very specialized in use and likely not worth using.

[adam_grif]

Based on what I've heard in the Assault rifle XM25 threads on this board and what the Euros use it would seem that the M4/M16 is getting rather long in the tooth. Especially when compared to lighter more reliable bullpup designs.

Err, M16 is lighter than the AUG, SA80 and FAMAS and F2000.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Actually, as a result of the experience in Afghanistan, the limitations of the current 5.56mm ammo are becoming painfully obvious. As detailed in this little article by small arms expert Anthony G. Williams (you should really check out his site) right now, US and brittish patrols are being ambushed from a distance up to a Km on the Afghan plains by fighters using Dragunovs or even old Lee-Enfields. Since 5,56mm weapons are woefully inadequate at those distances, they are often forced to use Javelins to engage the Talibans. At 3000+ USD a pop, it ain't cheap. That's one of the reasons why the 6,5 Grendel and 6,8 SPC have atracted quite a following the last few years...

Eh, what? Afghanistan is hardly indicative of 4th Generation Warfare, primarily because Afghanistan's insurgency had been established decades before, whilst most arise anew as a reaction to outside invasion. Two, the emphasis in A-Stan isn't on service weapons, but an interim between infantryman and sniper, the designated marksman. In an SBCT you'll typically see only one rifleman in a fireteam as a designated marksmen, it's bringing the BR back to the battlefield, but it's not going to be at the fore because even then half of them are accurized M16s (SDM-R).

So what? Light infantry can have IR sensors as well, and no one uses IR in broad daylight. And even discounting that, the Israelis have just developed active camouflage in the IR spectrum!

Mind giving a source for that, it sounds interesting.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Based on what I've heard in the Assault rifle XM25 threads on this board and what the Euros use it would seem that the M4/M16 is getting rather long in the tooth. Especially when compared to lighter more reliable bullpup designs.

Err, M16 is lighter than the AUG, SA80 and FAMAS and F2000.

You mean those guns with full length barrels despite being 66% the total length and with built in optics and actual reliability?

An M16A2 weighs the same as a Steyr and the Steyr has the advantage of an optic as standard. FN2000 is 200g heavier with its huge standard sight as an M16A2 stock standard. FAMAS weighs the same as an M16A2 and it has a built in bipod.

M16 looses yet again

[Norade]

Based on what I've heard in the Assault rifle XM25 threads on this board and what the Euros use it would seem that the M4/M16 is getting rather long in the tooth. Especially when compared to lighter more reliable bullpup designs.

Err, M16 is lighter than the AUG, SA80 and FAMAS and F2000.

In some configurations the AUG is lighter than the M16. In standard configuration it is heavier, by a very slight amount, but also 22cm shorter with the same barrel length.

The SA80 is heavier in stock configuration but has a longer barrel and is shorter over all. the L22 configuration is slightly lighter (though still heavy), and is overall shorter with a longer barrel than the M4.

The VHS-D is lighter and shorter than the M16 with an 8mm shorter barrel. the VHS-K is just heavier, but shorter and with a longer barrel than the M4.

The QBZ-95 is lighter and shorter than the M16 in all configurations, but always has a shorter barrel. It is in all ways except total length worse than the M4.

The F2000 is marginally heavier than the M16 with a shorter barrel and an overall way shorter length. It is heavier, but much shorter than the M4 but with a longer barrel.

The TAR-21 is lighter, and shorter, but with a shorter barrel than the M16. the MTAR is ligher and smaller than even the M4 though with a shorter barrel, the CTAR is just heavier, with a longer barrel and shorter overall length.

The FAMAS is heavier, but far shorter again, though it does have a shorter barrel length. It has no version comparable to the M4.

The SAR-21 is heavier but shorter than the M16 with the same barrel length. The SAR-21 Light Weight Carbine is shorter overall and weighs the same, I have no source for barrel length though.

As JSF mentions the M16 is weighed naked and many other guns are weighed with built in optics. I would love to see these tests done again with an M16 with full optics and/or bipod and other features that are included in the designs mentioned above.

[The Yosemite Bear]

how about gyrojets?

yes, I know I just wanted to have a discussion of bolters in a powered armour thread.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Based on what I've heard in the Assault rifle XM25 threads on this board and what the Euros use it would seem that the M4/M16 is getting rather long in the tooth. Especially when compared to lighter more reliable bullpup designs.

Err, M16 is lighter than the AUG, SA80 and FAMAS and F2000.

In some configurations the AUG is lighter than the M16. In standard configuration it is heavier, by a very slight amount, but also 22cm shorter with the same barrel length.

The SA80 is heavier in stock configuration but has a longer barrel and is shorter over all. the L22 configuration is slightly lighter (though still heavy), and is overall shorter with a longer barrel than the M4.

The VHS-D is lighter and shorter than the M16 with an 8mm shorter barrel. the VHS-K is just heavier, but shorter and with a longer barrel than the M4.

The QBZ-95 is lighter and shorter than the M16 in all configurations, but always has a shorter barrel. It is in all ways except total length worse than the M4.

The F2000 is marginally heavier than the M16 with a shorter barrel and an overall way shorter length. It is heavier, but much shorter than the M4 but with a longer barrel.

The TAR-21 is lighter, and shorter, but with a shorter barrel than the M16. the MTAR is ligher and smaller than even the M4 though with a shorter barrel, the CTAR is just heavier, with a longer barrel and shorter overall length.

The FAMAS is heavier, but far shorter again, though it does have a shorter barrel length. It has no version comparable to the M4.

The SAR-21 is heavier but shorter than the M16 with the same barrel length. The SAR-21 Light Weight Carbine is shorter overall and weighs the same, I have no source for barrel length though.

As JSF mentions the M16 is weighed naked and many other guns are weighed with built in optics. I would love to see these tests done again with an M16 with full optics and/or bipod and other features that are included in the designs mentioned above.

All those guns are a shitload more reliable than the AR15 series too

[Raxmei]

One thing- if you gave a mech a VR style control scheme (think avatar) It would have the advantage of being easy to pilot.

Other than that they are complete BS

I think it would actually be very difficult to pilot. Very many points of articulation that don't quite match your muscle memory in addition to many systems that have no human analogue. Quick, rev up your engine and aim your wire-guided missile and prepare to run faster than you are physically capable of moving your legs. Even a close match uses most of your motor ability just to move around leaving little for operating the systems. All of this stuff is also usually loaded onto a single mech pilot. I expect that if VR control ever does come about it will most easily be adapted to conventional vehicles. Existing neural interfaces have been used to move cursors and type, it's a shorter gap from there to operating the simple controls of a vehicle than to controlling all of the parts of a walking machine. The walker does resemble something that you already know how to do but it requires much more commands to make work.

[Norade]

All those guns are a shitload more reliable than the AR15 series too

Of course, though STANAG Magazines on some of them sort of make somewhat of a moot point.

[adam_grif]

You mean those guns with full length barrels despite being 66% the total length and with built in optics and actual reliability?

Never disputed, dipshit. He they were lighter, which they mostly aren't for comparable barrel length. There's a difference between a minor correction and totally opposing somebody's viewpoints.

If you want to turn this into a Bullpup vs Conventional argument then just start a thread about it. But you may as well not even bother, since I think Bullpups are better anyway.

Of course, though STANAG Magazines on some of them sort of make somewhat of a moot point.

It's worth noting here that the SA80 spent the first 20 years of its life as an unworking piece of shit, and is only now reliable after every single unit underwent a 400 pound upgrade to deshitify them.

[Ritterin Sophia]

All those guns are a shitload more reliable than the AR15 series too

Do you happen to have the failure rate for them?

[Norade]

You mean those guns with full length barrels despite being 66% the total length and with built in optics and actual reliability?

Never disputed, dipshit. He they were lighter, which they mostly aren't for comparable barrel length. There's a difference between a minor correction and totally opposing somebody's viewpoints.

If you want to turn this into a Bullpup vs Conventional argument then just start a thread about it. But you may as well not even bother, since I think Bullpups are better anyway.

I did say that they were lighter and I was partly right, some would be lighter if they didn't come with optics and bipods and the like. However numbers for the M16 with similar options would be a pain in my ass to find. If you happen to have them I would be very interested in seeing them though, if only for completeness' sake.

Of course, though STANAG Magazines on some of them sort of make somewhat of a moot point.

It's worth noting here that the SA80 spent the first 20 years of its life as an unworking piece of shit, and is only now reliable after every single unit underwent a 400 pound upgrade to deshitify them.

I was going to mention the shitiness that is the SA80, but I rightly figured that you would already know about that. I only included it and its horrendous weight for completeness and even then I still missed some bullpup weapons.

All those guns are a shitload more reliable than the AR15 series too

Do you happen to have the failure rate for them?

I would also like to see numbers, but from the XM25 thread it seemed that the action on the M16 make it more likely to jam than other designs. I however am not sure which bullpup designs would share a similar system so I can't say one way or the other which would be better.