When will we replace missiles/bullets?

[primusl0l]

How many decades or centuries do you think until we replace projectiles like bullets,missiles etc?

Guns still pretty much work the same way they did a few hundred years ago....only that they shoot much faster,further,accurate and deadlier.


What I am interested in is when will we completely have replaced them with some type of laser/energy/plasma weapons that range in size from a side-arm to a full battleships big guns that carry either an extreme amount of uses or even unlimited (powered by nuclear energy or something) that is safe and clean to use for humans so we don't give ourselves cancers by just being around these weapons for too long.


Do you think by the 2100+ that we'll have stopped using projectile based weapons for high powered plasma/laser type weapons ( I am talking a FULL fucking replacement...not just a new advanced laser-battleship, I am talking about a complete replacement from the smallest to the biggest weapons) ie When rockets/bullets will be phased out completely.

[Hyve]

Use of laser technology in warfare has been going on for years, the issue at the moment is that the energy consumption to make them deadly, at safe ranges is so huge it isn't worth it.

The moment we find or are able to harness energy more easily, more effectively and freely anywhere around the world, that is when it'll happen. I find a good site to check out is: http://www.futuretimeline.net/

It isn't some random predictions. These are international agencies & governments announcing what they predict based on current trends and opportunities.

[Aliessil]

It's hard to say how soon, since it depends on other factors. The main one is power - being able to generate / store enough power for an offensive laser, with capacity for multiple shots, while also being safe to use and not generating much heat. Being able to convert a battleship to full laser weaponry would be hard enough, but I reckon that'll come a long, long time before we can manage sidearms which don't use projectiles.

[Catta]

Pff if they had had bullets instead of lasers in Star Wars all the jedi would have been dead long ago...

[Holy]

If we could replaces nukes with something less devastating to the environment I would be all for it. Vaporizes humans, but leaves flora in-tact! WOO!

[kefkf]

I wouldn't hold my breath, we still got railguns to develop:

[Deleted]

At the moment, nothing beats a big bullet ripping through the body.

[Deleted]

Whenever whatever better, more deadly (and maybe even more ethical (if society ever develops enough to think that way about weaponry)) munitions are developed and become cost effective.

A quote from MGS3 always stuck with me, "Weapons technology is always 10 years ahead of standard-issue equipment.". I don't know how true it is, but it is certainly an interesting notion. Who knows what arms manufacturers have in the works.

[Deleted]

I find a good site to check out is: http://www.futuretimeline.net/

First glance i take on that website reads

"2090 Religion is fading from European culture
....
Medical advances are undermining religion as a whole, by greatly diminishing the fear of death, while developments in AI, robotics and biotechnology are beginning to trivialise the miracles on which many ancient religions are based. The increasing presence of androids in society - along with other forms of sentience - is adding a whole new dimension to the way humans view themselves and their place in the Universe. The ability to communicate with certain artifically enhanced animals (such as dolphins, monkeys and domestic pets) is also contributing to this trend."

That's some of the nuttiest, unbased, and simplistic theorycrafting i've ever read.

[Stir]

I don't think missile weapons will be replaced by laser or plasma any time soon, because missile weapons have a really important aspect that any other ranged weapon does not:
Large quantities of kinetic force.
And you just can't replace that with anything. Maybe sound, but kinetic force is not the only aspect of a bullet's deadliness. The wound caused by the object being propelled by the kinetic force is actual key. And even if, sound wouldn't carry too well.

Still; a weapon doing this effectively would be so awesome. Nature really does do it best. <3

[Nikkaszal]

The moment we find or are able to harness energy more easily, more effectively and freely anywhere around the world, that is when it'll happen. I find a good site to check out is: http://www.futuretimeline.net/

It isn't some random predictions. These are international agencies & governments announcing what they predict based on current trends and opportunities.

Regardless of its actual veracity, this is an extremely entertaining read (especially the "Beyond 10,000AD" part).

Cheers!

[Deleted]

simply put - never. its the most efficient type of weaponry, also the cheapest (if we're talking ranged only). Energy weapons consume horrible loads of energy and disperse by atmosphere and distance.

I haven't studied science since high school, but as I understand, railguns consume a lot of energy too, so they are inefficient as well. To the end of humanity we will fight with solid projectiles, propelled by chemical explosives.

[Skroe]

Replace Bullets? never. It's hard to beat the destructive effect of a bullet versus any kind of directed energy weapon. On top of that bullets are extremely inexpensive. Any equivalent directed energy weapon would be less economical. It's hard to beat 20-25 cents per shot.

ICBMs, again, never. The advantage of an ICBM is the ability for it to carry multiple warheads - often up 8-12 (though typically with 4-6 for treaty reasons) + decoys. ICBMs are also extremely scalabe. It's theoretically possible to put dozens of warheads on one launch vehicle.*

With Air to ground missiles, probably within the next 15 years, and mostly for precision strikes in highly populated urban areas when other means are too dangerous or too high a risk of collateral damage. It'll be a special event.

As for Air to Air combat, that is where you will see them replace Air to Air missiles, probably by 2030. In fact, the F-35 A/C (the Air Force and Navy versions) have a large empty compartment behind the fusalage that in the Marine's B model is occupied by the lift-fan. It was left intentionally empty with the hope of integrating a solid state laser for air to air, air to ground and point defense, by 2025. Their existence on tactical aircraft would basically eliminate the potency of air to air missiles as we know them (due to their point defense and death-as-soon-as-in-range capabilities). You'll see this sooner rather than later.

For Ship-based point defense, prototypes will be trialed starting in 2016 or so, and fleet wide deployment probably in the early 2020s. The US Navy is currently in a state of transition - a lot of the ships and subs of the late 1970s and 1980s are starting to reach the end of their operational lifetimes in order they were activated (so older is retiring sooner). It is about 2 or 3 years into a massive new shipbuilding efforts to replace whole classes of ships while expanding the navy. One of the things each of these new ships is trying to do, explicitly for the purpose of laser based weaponry, is have its engines produce a lot more power than is needed for propulsion / navigation / sensors / life support. Right now out Aegis Destroyers, the present and future backbone of the fleet do not do that - equipped with laser weaponry they'd have to move or shoot, but not both, which is incredibly dangerous. Their successors (of the same class) will be able to do this, and the next class of supercarriers, the Ford Class (the first two of which are under construction right now) produce far more energy than they need as well. Another ship that does this is the Littoral Combat Ship (the Navy's new "small" costal assault ship, equivalent to a corvette). The US Navy's existing cruisers and Aegis Destroyers cannot be retrofitted, so they'll have to be reassigned or retired before the transition is made fleet wide (which has to happen anyway - 30 years in the salt water just means these things wear out). *I think the important thing to take from this is that the US Navy has a very clear idea of what it is going to do early next decade, and is making the ships to support its future weapons now, rather than find out in 2020 that they cant use these weapons because of energy requirements.

[Deleted]

If we could replaces nukes with something less devastating to the environment I would be all for it. Vaporizes humans, but leaves flora in-tact! WOO!

Well, thermobaric weapons ("fuel-air bombs") vaporize everything in the area of effect, but do not leave any pollution. The power of largest of them is comparable to that of smallest nuclear weapons.

[Woebegone]

Do laser-guided homing bullets count?

http://dvice.com/archives/2012/01/laser-guided-ho.php

I know I know, it's not the same thing as completely replacing a bullet, but I thought this was both interesting and somewhat relevant.

EDIT: To answer the actual question, I think laser will remain as a guidance system for larger projectiles in the foreseeable future. Can't comment on the unforeseeable.

[haxartus]

There are "cleaner" nukes but they are more difficult to make.

[Deleted]

Once there are lasers powerful enough. And nobody can predict that consider the randomness of most modern inventions. They spawn from the most obscure research instances. A discovery in one field can completely change another.

That being said I'd wager at least 100 more years before it becomes viable in the least. In all honesty I'd say even longer considering the first issue is energy.

[Bjarne]

Pff if they had had bullets instead of lasers in Star Wars all the jedi would have been dead long ago...

I believe lasers travel faster than bullets, and lightsabers will just vaporize them

[Deleted]

I believe lasers travel faster than bullets, and lightsabers will just vaporize them

if there were actual lasers in SW, Jedi wouldn't be able to block them, because they travel faster than those glowing missiles they call "lasers" =))

[Woebegone]

if there were actual lasers in SW, Jedi wouldn't be able to block them, because they travel faster than those glowing missiles they call "lasers" =))

Yeah, real laser travels at the speed of light, in other words the moment you see it is the moment it hits you. Good luck doding or blocking that =P