Realistic wanked out swords/close range weapons in sci-fi.

[Ford Prefect]

What about power armour's little brother, armoured suit, a suit of relatively light composites that are heavier then normal soldier's protection gear but still offer improved protection?

I think 'somewhat heavier body armour' isn't exactly much of an advance in terms of infantry equipment. While it's what people are aiming for (I guess), it's not exactly revolutionary; the materials science involved might be, but 'putting protection on a soldier' isn't exactly out there or anything.

[MJ12 Commando]

You are basically saying third world shitholes will never have the money to afford anything but the most basic arms. I can't object to that, but there's no reason why the "basic" level has to stay the same forever. Eventually the rest of the world will get more advanced, whether you like it or not. Depending on your economy to be always strong enough to afford these wonder weapons is not good defense policy when the American economy is going into the shitter.

The US economy still isn't horrible. But the basic level is practically going to stay the same forever-these wonder weapons cost a lot not because of price gouging but because they take more advanced production and fabrication to build correctly.

I thought they did have that weapon, at least according to Bush and some of the other "advanced" weapons that are trickling into Iraq from the news. Are all those news reports bullshit?

Regardless, the development of military weapons is not linear. Fourth generation can annihilate first generation, but if we keep going down the line the tenth generation won't do the same to the fifth generation, for example. At some point the cost and complexity is too enormous and mathematics will come into play. Superior numbers of slightly inferior equipment will eventually defeat technologically superior equipment. At some point diminishing returns kicks in.

Actually we're seeing the OPPOSITE trend. As you go up higher in technology the next generation is far superior to the original. The problem is it also costs a hell of a lot more. Obviously diminishing returns does kick in, but in most cases we're done with the whole fighting human waves thing. In most combat situations we're in now (IOW, Urban), human waves are pretty useless.

The last time they were tried against modern forces, they lost what? 25 men to every one they killed, and that was pretty much a balls-up fiasco for the latter caused by a series of errors? :p

Who says Metal Storm is a threat? My point of Metal Storm was about technology proliferation, you know, the whole point of my post, which you should know about the China fiasco. Who says it's even possible to stop firepower to the point it's worth it? That was the question I was asking, which wasn't very clear so I apologize.

Given the attitudes in many western countries, if power armor reduces casualties by even 20% I think it'd be worth it to the public and Congress.

Man, I thought we were working under the assumption that power armor would have absurd penalties in weight and freedom of movement.

I am not one of those people who believes that you should make a one man tank. I am one of those people who believes power armor should be infantry first, and thus protect against weapons designed to be anti-INFANTRY, like assault rifles and full sized battle/sniper rifles.

The insurgents or whoever the US military is fighting will use different weapons. This isn't like Star Trek where the Federation is stuck using phasers on the Borg. If it really is the way you imagine it... tell me, be honest, you know more about weapons than me: how much money and innovation would it take to penetrate one of your Golden Boys powered armor? Just how do you imagine these guys getting used?

Quite a bit. Most weapons that might be able to stop a suit of powered armor with any half-decent ballistic protection are incredibly hard to deploy.

The Barret M82, for example, is nearly as tall as a lot of people, and weighs almost 30 pounds. You are not hiding one of those easily, and you can't fire it on the run nor can you easily aim it in close quarters.

You may have a point if technology is so advanced like the F-22 that nobody else stands a chance, but do you really think powered armor would get to that point? What part of a combined arms team would power armor replace or enhance, and why not just demolish the house or try not to engage in house-to-house fighting instead? And if you got another idea other than clearing houses or maybe bombs (but why not use bomb robot) I'm listening.

It's an excellent way to clear houses, and if you have enough suits, they can reduce casualties for patrols in extremely high risk areas. They also add an additional intimidation factor and force insurgents to start packing extremely heavy weapons that are very unwieldy, further adding to the combat advantage that unpowered armor has. Finally, I would think that it'd improve the morale of those assigned to these extremely dangerous duties.

Making a lot of weapons less risky and the only weapons that are dangerous either suicide bombers or RPGs and other heavy weaponry would also probably reduce civilian casualties-you don't need to worry as much about any guy with an AK, so you have a bit more time to think before firing.

[Sea Skimmer]

Well robotics has civilian applications to start with. It's not like power armor would be a military endeavour only unless it was developed with the kind of devotion and dedication a Manhattan Project was. It will likely be civilians who develop the technology, and it will probably be adapted to military purposes, not the other way around. It will be slow, gradual development.

As it stands they are several generations behind and many of those nations are getting poorer, so I stand by my assertion that much of the world will always use 1940s technology. Hell as it is many places would have even worse weapons if not for the Soviets shipping literally millions of AKs and RPGs to third world shitholes.

I thought they did have that weapon, at least according to Bush and some of the other "advanced" weapons that are trickling into Iraq from the news. Are all those news reports bullshit?

All claims of the RPG-29 pretty much came from a single M1A2 being knocked out by a flank shot, and it’s considered immensely more likely that the hit was from a modern RPG-7 round. Those warheads are considerable more powerful then the older ones, but still not nearly on the same line as the RPG-29 which is fundamentally a much larger weapon.

Iraq in any case started out with a war more powerful arsenal of weapons lying around then is typical of third world countries. Saddam did build the forth largest Army in the world after all and spent at least 100 billion on armaments. War torn Somalia had a much smaller scale and sophistication of weaponry available in contrast.

Who says Metal Storm is a threat? My point of Metal Storm was about technology proliferation, you know, the whole point of my post, which you should know about the China fiasco. Who says it's even possible to stop firepower to the point it's worth it? That was the question I was asking, which wasn't very clear so I apologize.

Well then that question is meaningless, because the answer utterly depends on the details. Clearly attempting to build a power suit that can withstand a 21,000lb MOAB landing on it is not going to be cost effective or practical for example, while at the whole other end of the spectrum a steel helmet is clearly worth paying for even though its only guaranteed to stop small fragments.

Man, I thought we were working under the assumption that power armor would have absurd penalties in weight and freedom of movement.

Penalties yes, absurd ones no, if that was the case we just wouldn't buy it. By absurd penalties for the guy covered head to toe in modern body armor I mean he would literally not be able to walk.

The insurgents or whoever the US military is fighting will use different weapons. This isn't like Star Trek where the Federation is stuck using phasers on the Borg. If it really is the way you imagine it... tell me, be honest, you know more about weapons than me: how much money and innovation would it take to penetrate one of your Golden Boys powered armor? Just how do you imagine these guys getting used?

You don’t need any innovation at all; we already have conventional weapons which will destroy anything short of the deepest bunkers. That doesn’t make all armor protection useless, and simply finding a way to defeat a given piece of armor isn’t the end all of things. The point is you’ve forced your enemy to employ heavier less mobile weapons which are easier for you to counter, and which now require must greater accuracy to be effective.

Virtually all the weapons people have proposed as being surefire power armor counters must be crew served to be mobile and effective. That includes IEDs, RPGs and .50cal rifles. I would not advocate in favor of power armor that is proof against less then an M-14 or SVD rifle firing AP rounds, and those are about as strong as standard issue military rifles come.

You could make more powerful ones, but at this point you’ve already lost selective fire capability and any notion of being light or compact. I’m sure militaries could and would developed new intermediate caliber cartridges besides new rifles, ones between 7.62 and 12.7mm like the .338cal Laputa Magunm, but these are going to be firmly sniper weapons. Something a well trained user needs to lie down and fire.

You may have a point if technology is so advanced like the F-22 that nobody else stands a chance, but do you really think powered armor would get to that point?

Nope, not that level of dominance, but it would be a new capability that would be combine with many others to upgrade the effectiveness of your overall combat force.

What part of a combined arms team would power armor replace or enhance, and why not just demolish the house or try not to engage in house-to-house fighting instead?

Just like we bomb every single house we ever take fire from or want to enter in the Iraqi cities we simply avoid? No, that doesn't work in limited war. I do believe I’ve already said that I think the suits have only limited value in a conventional mechanized war since the firepower standards are simply much higher, but that also means an opponent must like you maintain a much larger logistics apparatus to keep them fighting.

And if you got another idea other than clearing houses or maybe bombs (but why not use bomb robot) I'm listening.

I wouldn’t have any illusions about my power armor suits overwhelming all opposition either, they’d have big rifle grenades, and if and when that fails and a laser designator and radio to deal with heavy opposition.

I probably wouldn’t use them for clearing inside houses actually; I’d have them out providing over watch protection, a job which naturally makes you highly vulnerable. I would not have powered armor and conventional infantry work closely together within a squad (something I’ve noticed in more then one anime), because the powered armor presents too much risk of accidental injury to friendly troops, from mistaken moves and from enemy gunfire ricocheting off them! The mixing would most likely come at the company level, with the suits making up one infantry platoon or maybe part of the weapons platoon.

[brianeyci]

After further thought about the "technology advances" comments I made and the rebuttals Skimmer and Commando made, I've decided it was stupid to appeal to economics and not to science. You guys are right: shitholes will never get past basic weapons just like destitute nations will never manufacture implosion type nuclear weapons. They can't even manage a gun type without a fizzle. And it's not even the fact they're a shithole: scientific expertise can't be bought and takes generations to cultivate in the right environment. Even snipers who can take out powered armor will not be common, because sniping is a trained skill just like science and if you have X millions does not guarantee even 1 sniper.

Powered armor sure is an improvement over hiring hapless locals to serve as perimeter meat shields in case of suicide bombers. They'd just need a powerful weapon to shoot into engine blocks and disable cars. Even in a conventional war they could have uses against an inferior opponent.