Small Arms: What does the future hold?

[shiv]

OK - this thread may be a bit like earlier Design your own fighter/tank/ship" thread but I felt that would lead to "too much creative licence"

Let me first try and state what I am looking to discuss in this thread by going back a bit in history. Won't go too far back - but just to bows and arrows. Bows and arrows were the earliest "standoff weapon" that could be wielded by a single man and the history goes back 8-10,000 years. Amazing that a weapons lasted for 8000 years or more before it was replaced by a more effective individual weapon.

The first firearm according to Google came around 7-800 years ago. The first cartridges that made loading and firing easy came just about 150-200 years ago. The history of automatic and semiautomatic firearms goes back just about 150 years or so,

WW1 & WW 2 were fought with mainly breech loading firearms for soldiers. From the Vietnam war onwards - it was generally semi-automatic - mainly because automatic weapons could be fired off in the heat of battle exhausting all ammunition. However in the last 75 years or so the Kalashnikov has reached every corner on earth and by itself, in my view constitutes a revolution when it is in the hands of determined militias who are willing to lose men.

But fundamental paradigms have not changed. Firearms are largely mechanical, setting off a chemical reaction lading to a mechanical response - so there is virtually nothing electronic. The weights to be carried have not changed too much. The accuracy and range have not changed all that much in 100 years. And human vision also makes it difficult to hit anything beyond 200 meters.

Improvements have come in sighting - in the form of telescopic sights and night vision equipment. Red dot/laser targeting systems can be of use when a soldier can actually see an enemy - but when you have infiltrators crawling down a nullah at night -3-400 meters away taking cover behind rocks and terrain it becomes a cat and mouse game unless a different sort of tactic or weapons system is brought into play. The individual firearm has its limits. Of course armies do things like using grenade launchers, or heavier guns or RPGs, but I want to stick to small arms.

What does the future hold for this ancient system of burning chemical to create gas which accelerates a projectile effective against targets 3-400 meters away?

To what extent would it be feasible to make "smart rounds" that home in on an illuminated target. What kinds of sighting systems would help soldiers detect adversaries hiding behind rocks or trees?

Would it be feasible to employ special "sensor rounds' that just land in the vicinity of an adversary and pick up movements or body heat. Something like this was tried in Vietnam

I read long ago that the French had developed an air rifle for the military which went out of vogue when the current chemical gas propelled bullets came into vogue. Would it be possible for a future gun to be an air gun where only bullets are carried but propulsion is by rechargeable air/gas needing a pump or cylinders They could be much quieter and less likely to give away the position of the shooter.

What about radiation? Laser specifically.

Or could there be a future where soldiers (like pilots) carry only personal defence weapons but rely on some heavy firepower to make holes in an adversary? The classic idea in this regard is, of course the tank.

Could composites lead to very light firearms? But bullet ballistics would still need bullets with some mass. Smart bullets with fins and controls?

Electromagnetic guns?

Drones with small arms to help a platoon trying to get a man behind a rock?

Could men hiding in buildings be disorientated by sound or some other energy?

Ideas, information you have read or see would be welcome.

[ArmenT]

Interesting thread. Some of the recent developments in firearm technologies have been in:
1. Better bullets - While the trend has been to go for smaller bullets for the last 150 years or so, bullet designs have been changing to increase performance. For example, bullets were large musket balls in the 1850s, then we saw the invention of smaller conical minie balls, followed by pointed spitzer type bullets, boat tail bullets etc. While bullet sizes have gone down, the materials and design of bullets have also changed to produce larger wounds than their smaller sizes. Pure lead is not used for bullets any more, instead jacketed bullets (usually outer jacket of copper) are more common since they can better withstand higher pressures. The design of bullets has been changing too. Instead of solid bullets, we have hollow points, full metal jacket, steel tip, ballistic tip etc. The latest versions of 5.56x45 mm. ammunition is designed to fragment at lower velocities than the older NATO versions, thereby producing much more damage at longer ranges. Some recent designs include DRT's Terminal Shock, G2 RIP bullets, 458 SOCOM etc.

2. Better metallurgy - With better metallurgy, it is possible to manufacture stronger firearms than before. For instance, the standard of 9 mm. Luger ammunition dates back to about 1902 and .45 ACP is from 1911 or so. Due to improvements in metallurgy, many modern firearms can easily withstand higher pressures than generated by these cartridges, which has led to ammunition manufacturers making +P and +P+ grade ammunition. For instance, +P version of 9 mm. Luger ammo generates about 10% more pressure than ordinary standard luger ammo and +P+ version generates about 15% more pressure than +P version. Conversely, with better metallurgy, it is possible to use less metal to withstand the same pressures, therefore making a lighter firearm.

3. Targeting systems - Fiber optic sights,laser sights, day-glo and tritium sights, red-dot, night vision etc. are all recent improvements on the old manual iron sights. The latest improvements include relative cheap ballistic computers that make an ordinary individual capable of outshooting the best shooters in the world. In fact, there was a recent charity shooting competition where some guy's relatively untrained wife using a SureShot got a higher score than one of the best snipers in the US.

4. Improvements in manufacturing technologies leading to better accuracy - Back in the day, it was hard to get a rifle to shoot 10 MOA accuracy and people would spend thousands of dollars trying to customize their rifles for better accuracy and even more on buying custom loaded ammo for precision. Thanks to improvements in manufacturing technologies, anyone can walk into a sporting goods store and buy a Tikka T3 rifle (or a Savage or a Weatherby or a <insert brand name here>) off the shelf, that comes with an accuracy guarantee of 1 MOA or less out of the box, using bog-standard off-the-shelf ammunition, and all for about $550-600 or so.

There's a lot to be discussed on this topic, I'll post some more thoughts later. By the way, air guns for the military were used in the 18th century in Austria and have a very important role in US history as well. Will post about that in the next reply or so.

[Gyan]

Small arms technology moves slowly. USA is modernising its stocked WW2 M14 Grand as DMRs in 7.62x51 caliber category. The "in" assault rifle and LMG which has won major competitions in USA, France etc is HK416 and Indian desi MCIWS is similar design.

[Gyan]

The improvement is metallurgy and propellants mean that rifles are lighter and shorter. Hence carbine role can be done by 5.56x45 and assault rifle can again be 7.62x51

[shiv]

Re belt fed LMGs at platoon level, I personally feel that in the current environment our support weapons are inadequate. They were adequate till 80s but as time passed they have become increasingly inadequate and some studies by the army have pointed this out. But who cares....

When the standard assault rifle is single shot or burst capability a fully auto LMG with almost double the range offers a reasonable capability but in the current scenario it does not so more innovation is needed. The first thing is what calibre round...I would say 7.62 is better as the object is to get suppresive and cover fire. But then what happens to commonality with the standard assault rifle if that is 5.56 ? Maybe base the assult rifle on 7.62 as well and innovate on weight ?

Any way an ideal LMG should take the standard 30 round box max but also have 50 or 100 round magazine and also be capable of being belt fed. Weight should not be more than 4 -4.5 kgs, range 750 mt, HIGHLY RELIABLE and ACCURRATE.

Also a light weight Rocket launcher should be developed so that 1 can be carried at section level so that each platoon has 3-4 of them. I firmly believe that whoever has more firepower in initial engagement has a massive advantage...especially with pakis...they will run if you open first with overhwleming fire.

[shiv]

Any way an ideal LMG should take the standard 30 round box max but also have 50 or 100 round magazine and also be capable of being belt fed. Weight should not be more than 4 -4.5 kgs, range 750 mt, HIGHLY RELIABLE and ACCURRATE.

Is there any weapon that you know of that meets these specs?

[shiv]

Is there any weapon that you know of that meets these specs?

Stoner 63A is one such example, except for the weight bit in certain configurations. Then again, the Stoner design is from early 1960s, so modern technologies could improve the weight a bit more. The Belgian FN Minimi, the American M249 SAW and Israeli IMI Negev LMG also meet most of those requirements, except for weight.

There's also the Ares Defense Shrike, which also fires 5.56x45 mm. ammo and meets all the above requirements and comes in at around 3.5 kg. It is a more recent development and shares parts with the M16 platform, so you can use an existing M16 lower receiver and replace the upper receiver and barrel with a Shrike kit and be good to go. However, this is a newer development by Ares Defense who also make an improved version of the Stoner 63A design as well.

[shiv]

Shiv sir, the wt can be relaxed easily...even 6-6.5 kg will do.

[shiv]

Akshay Sir,

If a 7.62mm LMG is the preferred option then it has to be kept in mind that the replacement ie Bren also weighs a good 10 kgs or so. The closest option which is apparent is the NG7 LMG for a very good overall weight and firepower.

[shiv]

Akshay Sir,

If a 7.62mm LMG is the preferred option then it has to be kept in mind that the replacement ie Bren also weighs a good 10 kgs or so. The closest option which is apparent is the NG7 LMG for a very good overall weight and firepower.

That LMG, IIRC, is 9.6 kgs and quite a task carrying on patrols. At 10 Kgs, Bren is no better. At around 6 Kg the LMG becomes as heavy as the old 7.62 SLR which weighed around 5.6 Kgs (again from memory).

In short I would take an LMG between 7 to 8 Kgs happily as an improvement. Anything lesser would be "delight" and at around 4 Kgs it would be "Pure Pleasure". JMT.

[Akshay Kapoor]

Thought provoking. I'll pick up on some parameters we need in a good assault rifle. The first is stopping and killing capacity. There is a lot of discussion on 5.56 vs 7.62 ammunition. The former was supposed to be more deadly at closer ranges (sub 200 mts) so more stopping capacity because of fragmenting whereas it has lower penetration power. The latter has much more penetrating power so more useful in foliage but does not fragment (sometimes even in contact with bone). Can the two conflicting objects be brought closer - maybe a bit and here is what the equipment gurus like Armen and Vaibhav can comment on.

But the above stopping/vs penetration also depends on the weapon, muzzle velocity and barrel length. Clearly shorter barrel carbine type weapaons cannot be expected to have high penetration.

Next comes ACCURACY. I rate this very high and all Indian Armed Forces are very focused on accuracy in their DNA. I know have heard many old IAF pilots swearing by their gunnery practice and bemoaning the reduction of this in the younger generation. Longer ranges mean less accuracy ( parameter is grouping at x range) primary because longer ranges mean more ballistic trajectories. So even with great sights the laws of physics will reduce accuracy at longer ranges (say more than 200 mts). Longer barrels mean more accuracy.

Next is what range is required. For an assault rifle I would be satisfied with 400 mts largely because of the above (much beyond this it wont be accurate to have much use even in covering fire). AKs suffer from this problem.

Next is RELIABILITY ...I always put accuracy and reliability in caps. In combat I would take relaibility over an additional 100 mts in ranage (beyond 400 mts). But with fully auto weapons the high rate of fire means a lot of heating of the barrel and thats why in some LMGS and a lot of MMGS you are supllied with additional barrel. If technology can solve this issue it would be a big deal in my view. But its not only barrel, its breach also...AKM series makes a compromise between simplicity and reliability and accuracy.

Then ergonomics ....shall we go for bull pup as it is shorter with same barrel length as normal assault rifle and hence very useful in closed spaces ? But what are its drawbacks ? I don't know never having used one. One could be difficulty in magazine replacement. But for an Indian soldier ergonomics is not crucial apart from weight and relative ease of magazine change. Why because he is hardy and can be trained. In fact, in our scenario, I would prefer to be err on the side of low tech and intuitive rather than high tech and complex. Weight is important - Say 3.5-4 kgs as a target ?

Lastly full auto or not. I would prefer a full auto, and 3 shot bursts and single shot if at all possible. If not I would go for 2 shot bursts and auto. Why / Conserving ammo is very imp and a good auto with good training can help to calibrate number of bullets fired. Again reliability is crucial here. Maybe reduce rate of fire a bit ?

Magazine - more rounds it holds the better !

[Akshay Kapoor]

Vaibhav, NG7 indeed looks good. Any idea how much it costs and how much INSAS LMG costs ?

[Akshay Kapoor]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso ... 47_and_M16

Look especially at the penetration vs fragmentation , and accuracy differences above

[ArmenT]

-- delete (dup) --

[ArmenT]

Thought provoking. I'll pick up on some parameters we need in a good assault rifle. The first is stopping and killing capacity. There is a lot of discussion on 5.56 vs 7.62 ammunition. The former was supposed to be more deadly at closer ranges (sub 200 mts) so more stopping capacity because of fragmenting whereas it has lower penetration power. The latter has much more penetrating power so more useful in foliage but does not fragment (sometimes even in contact with bone). Can the two conflicting objects be brought closer - maybe a bit and here is what the equipment gurus like Armen and Vaibhav can comment on.

But the above stopping/vs penetration also depends on the weapon, muzzle velocity and barrel length. Clearly shorter barrel carbine type weapaons cannot be expected to have high penetration.

Wounding and lethality have a lot to do with bullet design. As I mentioned above in my first post in this thread, there have been some interesting developments in bullet designs in recent years. The ability to fragment creates wounds out of proportion with bullet diameter. Similarly, the balance of a bullet so that it tumbles and yaws upon hitting a target and causing it to create larger holes is another way to create larger damage. These two methods are used to get around the strict language of the Hague conventions.

There was an invention (interestingly, first manufactured in India) that made bullets that expanded upon hitting a target. First made in the Dum Dum arsenal of Kolkata and used against the tribes in NWFP, dum-dum bullets (a.k.a hollow points) are now banned for use in war (although they are perfectly legal to use by police forces and hunters!) I'm not certain that erm, "non-state actors", are entitled to protection by the Hague protocols, but I'm not a lawyer. Interestingly, the US is one country that didn't agree to the Hague convention protocols, but the US military still agreed to not use hollow points for many decades. There is talk in the US military of bringing back hollow points for handgun ammo though [1].

The M855 bullet that NATO uses doesn't fragment as easily as the M193 which was the original cartridge for the M16. In particular, it has trouble fragmenting at velocities below 2500 feet/sec. Now, when firing with a 20 inch long barrel like the M16 family, the bullet would generally travel with a much higher velocity coming out of the barrel and therefore, it would be travelling at greater than 2500 feet/sec for at least 200 meters or so. With the new M4 carbine, the barrel length is 14.5 inches, therefore the velocity of the bullet coming out of the muzzle is a bit slower than out of an M16 and it falls below 2500 feet/sec at a much closer distance. The US military therefore redesigned the M855 bullet to fragment at lower velocities and the new M855A1 ammunition was trialed in late 2010 and found more successful. The redesigned bullet has much better penetration capability as well as fragments at lower velocities and is slightly more accurate as well [2]. Only problem is that it is more expensive to produce.

One more interesting thing is this article by a military doctor, published in 2015 [3]

References:
[1] https://www.armytimes.com/story/militar ... /29886907/
[2] https://www.americanrifleman.org/articl ... cartridge/
[3] http://www.businessinsider.com/ak-47-wo ... m4-2015-12

[Gyan]

INSAS LMG would be around Rs. 50,000 all in price and roughly half if only marginal cost is considered.

[ArmenT]

INSAS LMG would be around Rs. 50,000 all in price and roughly half if only marginal cost is considered.

Source please

[rakall]

self deleted - post moved to small arms thread

[Akshay Kapoor]

Rkall, good points in your post but this post should be on the small arms thread. This is a pure r&d thread. Depressing to see the usual MOD ****** ups here.

[rakall]

Rkall, good points in your post but this post should be on the small arms thread. This is a pure r&d thread. Depressing to see the usual MOD ****** ups here.

Ok.. just saw the small arms thread is different.. Post moved there..

Well.. I wouldnt put this on MoD.. RM gave a clear solution.. It is a ****** from DGQA..