EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

Weapons of the Future

< Return to subforum
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 3:13 PM
Like any other field, military technology and equipment is constantly evolving. What kind of weapons will the militaries of the future be using?
Here are some of my concepts for the armies of 20 years from now:

1. Optical-Electronic Sensors
Light. Human telescopes can detect light which has traveled millions of light years to get here. Light travels faster than any other known particle. However, since WW2, radar and sonar have been the dominant methods of detecting enemy activity.
In the future, however, that may change. There may be "Optical-Electronic" sensors, which can detect light coming from up to 1000 miles away. That is, it can vastly increase the "visible range" in air-to-air warfare, along with other things. Automated systems will be able to lock into an enemy aircraft thousands of miles away by seeing thousands of miles out into the atmosphere and detect/lock onto objects which stand out from normal atmospheric terrain. Conventional stealth features on aircraft will mean nothing as long as they are visible to the human eye. I imagine that these systems will work to complement conventional radar.

2. "Silicon Dome"
Drones, planes, and missiles are usually shot down with missiles. But this can be prohibitively expensive, especially when you're up against large quantities of cheap drones/missiles. One solution to this is laser weapons, but these weapons have to be aimed at a fast-moving target continuously for several seconds. Furthermore, laser weapons are useless in certain weather conditions.
In the future, however, there may be a third way to shoot down missiles and drones: electronic defense systems. Missiles rely upon guidance systems and automated detonators. A strong jamming frequency in a certain area can interfere with the functions of aircraft which enter said area. The "Silicon Dome" would be able to sever the connection between remotely piloted UAVs and the ground-based pilots. It could prevent the detonators in missiles from activating, or interfere with their guidance systems (possibly even directing them to turn around and strike their launch coordinates). In a 5th generation aircraft like the F-35, which is filled with layer after layer of programming, the weapons could perhaps be prevented from firing once it entered the area protected by the "Silicon Dome".

3. Triangular Camouflage Pixilation
Pretty straightforward. Instead of square pixels, triangular pixels would be used instead. I honestly don't know why anyone hasn't tried this.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 3:29 PM
4. UUVs
In the future, it's likely that we will see military submarines (perhaps even submarines equipped with nuclear missiles) which are completely unmanned. Obviously, this means they won't have to provide oxygen for a crew or fit months worth of food and other necessities. As a result they will be able to devote more internal space to things like fuel. They will be able to tether themselves to the ocean floor or simply "sit" in a single spot of the ocean with most systems deactivated whenever not in use, allowing them to conserve fuel. They will either be solar powered or be resupplied with fuel from time to time by surface ships in friendly territory. The inherent difficulties involved in maintaining a remote connection to an underwater vehicle thousands of miles away means that these vehicles will be almost completely autonomous. They will simply receive "mission commands" from time to time.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 3:35 PM
5. Hyperloop
In the future, countries like China will have large underground networks of "hyperloop" tunnels (or a similar brand which uses the same technology) for the rapid transport of troops and supplies whenever control of the skies and access to functional roads/railroads is not guaranteed.
Crow
By Crow | Jul 31 2016 3:44 PM
All very sensible advancements.

A lot of newer technology and even regular society is becoming over reliant on technology though, which is why EMP's are starting to be considered weapons of mass destruction. With every new wave of offensive technology, a new technology is always invented to obsolete all the advances. I feel electronic pursuits should be tempered.

The hyperloop tunnel I do not understand though? Wouldn't that just be an underground transit used primarily for the military?

The ADB committee just changed its policy on 8/28/2016
No communication with admin. Ever.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 3:47 PM
Crow: Yes, but it'd be a heck of a lot faster than conventional railroads/subways. It'd be about as fast as a commercial jet, or perhaps even faster than that.
Crow
By Crow | Jul 31 2016 3:47 PM
Really there needs to be a technology to counter artillery or any other form of overhead fire.

The only tactic is counter-battery.

Hypothetically there could be a weapon systems that rapidly fires cheap flak to detonate shells midair, therefore reducing the number of casualties during artillery barrages. Actually, no one steal that idea. I could make money off that.
The ADB committee just changed its policy on 8/28/2016
No communication with admin. Ever.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 3:50 PM
6. Rapid Production through 3-D Printers
Straightforward. Destroyed tanks, aircraft, or ships could be restored and put back into commission within 48 hours.
Crow
By Crow | Jul 31 2016 3:51 PM
Dassault Papillon: Yeah, pretty sure bullet trains go relatively close to the speed of a commercial jet.

Also I think measurements need to be taken into account with that analogy. It seems like at a higher altitude you would have to travel less of a difference, since the earth is circular. Wait, thinking about it kind of damages my brain.
The ADB committee just changed its policy on 8/28/2016
No communication with admin. Ever.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 3:51 PM
Crow: Stopping artillery's a difficult beast. That's too many shots, and it isn't reliant on computer systems. Only lasers or sufficiently powerful guns with computer guidance and lock-on could stop artillery.
Crow
By Crow | Jul 31 2016 3:53 PM
Dassault Papillon: Okay, that wouldn't be 3-D printing. Just an entirely automated manufacturing process.

3-D printers copy data and produce a similar object with material.
The ADB committee just changed its policy on 8/28/2016
No communication with admin. Ever.
Crow
By Crow | Jul 31 2016 3:56 PM
Dassault Papillon: Lol, there is no practicality behind aiming at a specific artillery shell and destroy it before it lands.

That is the equivalent of shooting an arrow with another arrow on purpose.

You cannot completely obsolete artillery, but hypothetically if you were to detonate flak midair for a prolonged period of time during an artillery barrage, it could reduce the damage done during the artillery barrage.

It is the same tactic AA guns on ships would use to stop targeted anti-ship missiles from interceptors.

The ADB committee just changed its policy on 8/28/2016
No communication with admin. Ever.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 3:57 PM
I'll put Hyperloop into perspective: with it, you can travel from New York City to Los Angeles in 2 hours.
Crow
By Crow | Jul 31 2016 4:00 PM
Dassault Papillon: So a theoretical passenger/cargo train that could travel at warp speed.

Sounds plausible...
The ADB committee just changed its policy on 8/28/2016
No communication with admin. Ever.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 4:01 PM
Crow: The technology exists. It is being tested as we speak, and it'll likely see commercial use in big cities within 10 years or so.
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 31 2016 4:05 PM
To put this into even greater perspective, the Hyperloop would travel at roughly the same speed as an F-35, if not slightly faster.
Crow
By Crow | Jul 31 2016 4:06 PM
Dassault Papillon: I know.

The record for vehicle speed is something like 2400 mph.

That doesn't mean it is practical for actual use.
The ADB committee just changed its policy on 8/28/2016
No communication with admin. Ever.