It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

My ideal weapon

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Well folks I have been around various types of cilivian and military weaponry since 1981 (How did I ever become soooooo old?).

I have taken part in worldwide "Policing" actions and fought in full blown wars.

As a Police Officer I have carried firearms, knowing that if I were to ever use them I would be facing a full investigation and possible court action.

In recent years I have operated in the Middle East and "carried" in every role I have been deployed in.

Now I have a fair assortment of weapons available to me in my current post. I carry a G19 as a PPW, which I think is one of the best "shorts" around today. BUT when on the move, in a low profile vehicle I have identified what I am looking for in my ideal combat weapon

1/ A decent caliber that will take the bad guys down when I hit them.
2/ The round will need to have an AP capability to punch through body armour/vehicle armour.
3/ It has to be short enough to be usable in a saloon car.
4/ I want to be able to hit things out to at least 300M.
5/ I want a sighting system that allows me to hit a target when I need to, but also be able to take snap shots.
6/ It has to be well made, with no stoppage problems, even if I put down 2 or 3 mags withing a couple of minutes of each other, on full auto.
7/ The ability to take a large capacity mag e.g. CMG 100 rnd drum.

Now before you start shouting about M4's with short barrels or HK53's, Ive tried those and yes they are good weapons.

I want to hear YOUR thoughts on the IDEAL weapon.

BillyTheCat




posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 11:33 PM
link   
What would the ideal weapon be? All read done man, sorry.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
I like the MP5-10mm version, and the Steyr AUG. Either one of those, or the P-90. Yeah I've heard all the arguments about the P-90, but I just dig it. It's a neat little gun, lots of ammo, not a lot of kick to it....



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 12:57 AM
link   
And BillTheCat Said...

"I am looking for the ultimate weapon..."

Dunno about weapon but according to old man Tzu, the ultimate warrior is one who is so wise, so 'in control' of the battlefield through it's strategic resource allocation, that he doesn't need to fight. Because his enemy knows they are already beaten before the mode shift to confrontation can happen. And so refuse to take the field.

In such a vein:

A Precognitive Clairvoyant, able to scan time and space for 'incidents' like 9/11 and determine their effect upon human evolution and development such that, if there is ultimately more waste than gain in the action, he/she/it can warp the coming reality in such a way as to nullify the potential of aggression. Or at least turn it back upon it's instigator.

Would be my choice for the 'greatest warrior'.

OTOH, if your intent is to mean small arms alone, then you must answer your question with the variables implied.

1. 100 shots
2. 0-300m ranged capability
3. Ease of handling within a confined space
4. Controlled penetration up and including medium vehicle steel bodies
5. Total mechanical reliability
6. Large Caliber lethality in a legal round
7. Never Misses.

Too which I would add one more: 8. Single User Assurity. So that when some yahoo gophers out of a hole with an RPG pointed at your gas tank or blows your carcass 50yds through the air with an IED, _he_ cannot pick up your blaster pistol and have access to the same capabilities. Nor can the Russian/Chinese/European/Israeli agent he tries to sell the tech intelligence to.

That said, most of the above actually help you narrow down your target weapon definition rather handily.

I would say that 100 engagements onboard almost certainly denies the option of physical projectiles, even if you stack them or assume some kind of LP or EML replacement for conventional cartridges. Because you cannot put that many rounds on a weapon frame that is easily maneuverable in a tight space. Obviously, if there is no round exchange going on, then there is no 'action' of slide or bolt either so, the mechanical reliability of the piece will go up immensely with the removal of kinetic projectiles as well.

0-300m capability is going to be largely a function of how accurate the weapon is. This means that there can be no recoil which also argues against propellant-reaction based systems. Given changes in high glare to shadowed door lighting and the immense problems of parallax through arc of motion that is human position facing inherent to moving target engagement in a middle eastern 'motorized bodyguard' role; I would say that it is wise to remove the human visual cognitive system from target search/acquisition altogether and simply trade ammunition weight back towards weapon onboard sensors which independently breakout and characterize human silouhette contrasts or point-source (muzzle flash, RF sizzle or Q pulse) fires based targets.

Accuracy is also highly dependent upon being able to cue the weapon _area of effect_ to a specific part of the body which cannot be armored effectively. Hands, Head, Legs, Feet. This must occur independent of user aiming skill, which is is often compromised by stress and time factors on multiple engagements. i.e. you may only have time to pull the trigger once so you must be able to engage targets automatically from a point of instinctive 'designation' (the mind is actually trained to generate an electrical impulse relevant to each persons/objects threat status as the muzzle comes across, without having to align eye-to-post).

Such an ability will likely only come with a flexible muzzle/apeture aid which 'evens out' general aimpoint accuracies through an arc of +/-20` angle off the bore.

Such a decision to automate the gun physical tracking also helps with the engagement profile and the number of engagements onboard because, effectively, you are saying you want one pull of the trigger to hit every target in your immediate FOV but that _each firing impulse_ can be separate from that 'pickle consent'.

There are two ways to get there as far as I can see. One is to use retinal projection in a headband/glasses arrangement to place colored markers over all -potential- targets that the gun sees and then employ a secondary neural monitor to look for the P300 impulse which effectively turns select numbers of those markers 'from blue to red' in a fire control processor.

The user then verifying engagement by pulling the trigger so that the 'gun' fires at each target as the flex-muzzle comes to bear or the hand sweeps it across manually.

The alternative is to go with a narrow/wide angle muzzle capability in which the weapon acts 'phaser like', in spraying down all targets simultaneously. This is a wonderful idea. But one is reminded of the Russian Casio Watch. In which a backpack was necessary for the battery.

Such a smart gun is the hallmark of Cyber Punk Street Samurai and since you appear to like that kind of a deliberately dangerous lifestyle, it stands to reason that you would want the means to follow the method.

Lethality and Penetration is another issue. And perhaps the hardest to accomodate in a single mount, given it is relatively easy to kill a human being but can be incredibly tough to stop the action of a machine. Certainly within the confines of a personal carry weapon (and, short of powercell requirements, I see no reason to complicate mass:balance by making it a long gun).

The obvious choice is an 'over/under' selectable yield or bandwidth system. So that you can either use (say) an RF electronic wave device to disable a vehicle ignition. Or a high-charge capacitor mod to fry it's tires with a conventional heat blast.

All while (presumably) maintaining a constant illumination of it's windows or windshield so that, as soon as a gun comes out, a high density millimeter wave burns the gripping hand or trigger finger so that there is no 'gap' of engagement in which reaction times matter.

Again, assuming some kind of flex-muzzle and compensating aimpoint autofire capability so that you could hold multiple aimpoints. As well as 'speed of light = zero time of flight' inherent lack of ballistic error.

CONCLUSION:
The reality is that humans are pathetically poor shots due to a huge number of competing biometric and brain function disabilities. Sniping comes from a different center than point shooting CQB combat skills do. Switching modes has a definite lag time which is unavoidable as a function of wide-in, focussed-out point target engagement.

Similarly, the locking up of the arms and shoulders to hold a good, solid, sight picture on either a snap or post/optics basis interferes with balance when running and inhibits 'free wheel' quick engagements as the muscles must first be untensed, then quick-twitch reinitiated, then stabilized in motion and stopped on point to lock up again.

And the human body is simply weak. Which means that 'even if you do everything perfectly' and there is simply more of them than you, a single round can end it all to the extent that no training or 'toughness' available is sufficient to avoid dying at the random hands of some street urchin with a gun older than s/he is. You cannot carry enough personal protection nor generate sufficient individual mobility to avoid being IN the predictor zone for ambush between point A and B and this further argues against the notion that personal weapons are more than a symbol to cling to in the moments before 'somebody serious' blows you up with something you cannot see or fight back against.

I suppose there will always be a need to intimidate those 'shy predators' who /might not/ decide to pack-attack you, if you present a sufficiently mean war-face. But such psychology argues against small personal weapons. and indeed an individual response, when you obviously need to have the attrition-redundancy of counter threat inherent to having your own gang.

Even this simply invites them to be clever and ego-challenged in their sport-coup desire to kill you 'by any means fair, there are none foul'. Which brings us back to bushwhacking you like any other rabid animal, at a garage door opener's standoff that is inherent to assymetric warfighting.

Denying you the chance to show your dominance through a lifetimes acquisition of lethal firearm skills, the same way matchlocks and longbows ended era of the mounted cavalry charge. From a distance. With a utter Contempt Of Engagement with someone who thinks he's a better killer.

But isn't.


KPl.


LINK-
Wonder Toyz For Really Big Boyz.
news.yahoo.com.../ap/20050710/ap_on_sc/directed_energy_weapons

Them's As Are Humble And Walk Head Bowed, Can Sometimes Get Away With Their Lives If Not Lies. Them's As Are Invisible Can Flip The World The Bird...
projects.star.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp...

They Who Are Augmented Can Carry The Armor To Take A Hit. Or Move Through A Less Known Road And Not Be Shot.
64.233.179.104...:UvJGmTIehB4J:news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050607/lf_afp/afplifestylejapantechnologyrobotelderly_050607141415+Power



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 01:15 AM
link   
What a great post! Loved it!

Sadly I only speak English and Arabic, but I will get my intergalactic translator on to it right away!

BillyTheCat




 
0

log in

join