Technology in 2028

limited drone technology other than dropping bombs

limited robot technology for field deployment

limited exo-suits too big to deploy realistically

stealth is at a level we can fool most machines

uhm im not sure much else at the moment, heading into class.

trebuchets, its the future i tell ya

The BUFF will still be flying

>2028

Kalashnikovs and wedding dresses.

Couldn't you just shoot 'em down with a shotgun like how my uncle protects his Freedom from the gubmint? Drones aren't terribly agile...for now.

Non-conventional weaponry against flesh and blood individuals might also be worth considering. Tacticool gun attachments meant to specialize members of a squad with a modular easily switched design. The box attached to the gun in pic related is a dazzler. A dazzler is a current device capable of instantaneously projecting a brief but ultrabright laser into a general area in order to blind the enemies momentarily. In the same tacticool spirit, you could have portable flechette launchers to destroy walls and whatever is using them as cover, gas operated repeating mini grenade launchers, taser/tranqgun attachments to capture live targets or smart bullets/bomb drones controlled remotely via an app in your smartphone.

>limited drone technology other than dropping bombs

See
youtube.com/watch?v=rcqjUHct6hw

now imagine half have warheads and 10% have radar.

Autonomous search and engagement is good enough for vehicles today and machine learning for targeting individuals (armed vs unarmed) is in the prototype stage. Pic related was the Cold War vehicle killer UAV of choice. It was canceled because robots make different kinds of mistakes than people, so a dumb drone overwatched by humans makes more sense outside total war (where nukes beat drones anyway).

>robots
Overrated for military use on the ground IMO. Ground ones are useful for breaching/EOD ops and fewer people on resupply convoys, that's about it. But resupply via flying drone instead of helicopter is good.

Pic related is 2015 tech. No space marine chainswords, just semi-powered spine, neck, and leg support that triples hard armor coverage and improves overall weight carried about 20% - so everyone can carry a rocket. The batteries last about 8 hours.

Yeah, you kinda can. Actually, birb shooters might have a good time against medium sized drones.
On the other hand that just tells them to come back with bigger guns

Blinding people by laser is currently against the rules of war, should you care to abide by those, but yeah, stuff like that seems pretty viable.
Especially smart munitions, for things like grenade launchers where the projectile is bigger.

Though I think flechettes are for the opposite (if anyone still uses them, they were a bit of a meme for a while), anti-personnel, not anti-materiel

pdf related is the open source US army toy testing list for this year.

For small arms - smart sights, programmable HE fuses, suppressors for everyone, and polymer CT ammo (saves about 30% on weight).

Stealth - the thing to know is that it's not an on/off thing. It's a sliding scale.

Not especially militarily relevant, I just love this pic

benning.army.mil/mcoe/cdid/AEWE/content/pdf/2018/Participating Technologies.pdf?22AUG2018
pdf related is the open source US army toy testing list for this year.

For small arms - smart sights, programmable HE fuses, suppressors for everyone, and polymer CT ammo (saves about 30% on weight).

Stealth - the thing to know is that it's not an on/off thing. It's a sliding scale.

Shooting drones with small arms is impractical at best, and doesn't scale. A dozen men going full auto on one manually piloted kamikaze drone (pic related, it's 00s tech and has a proximity fused warhead) they see coming might work half of the time. A dozen men vs two dozen kamikaze drones in a smart hivemind, not so much.

Military prototypes that are as public as these are mostly scams. But sure. In 10 years.

That's a very nice picture. Mind if I save it?

Derp, double posting.

Here's the 2017 one. benning.army.mil/mcoe/cdid/aewe/content/pdf/AEWE 2017 Participating Technologies.pdf?12AUG2016

It's cool. They're just so happy

Oh yeah, this new breed of airship was developed for Afghanistan - but the war was winding down (ahem), and it was too early in development for any proper attempts at deployment, so they sold it back to the civilian company and it's being worked on slowly but surely - by the mid 2020s there might be military interest again.

why the fuck would they want their surveillance drones to be shaped like mini copters? Spidertanks are the future motherfuckers.

>publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2014/mdn-dnd/D2-324-2013-eng.pdf

This is Crisis in Urlia, a plot Karl Schroeder wrote for the Canadian MOD set in 2030.

kschroeder.com/foresight-consulting/crisis-in-zefra/Crisis-in-Zefra-e.pdf

That's the prequel, written in 2005 about 2025.

>ghost in the shell
That's just too futuristic.
Upscale this:
youtu.be/yn3FWb-vQQ4
Maybe.
It rolls. Rolling is efficient transportation, where the surface allows for it.

Probably not too much change. We might be getting into the "next generation" of military tech by then, meaning there will be some weapons and vehicles that don't exist yet, but it should be along the same lines as recent developments, meaning basically greater use of computers and automation, and stealth technologies. We're likely to see stealth and drone technologies becoming prevalent on the ground or in the air, but we probably won't have android soldiers or powered armor or anything like that. Possibly some practical use of railguns. Though especially considering the asymmetrical nature of warfare which probably will persist for at least a few more decades, a lot of the technology encountered will be stuff that exists today. I mean, wars are being fought in the Middle East still with rifles from the WWI era. You could plausibly have post-Abrams tanks for example, but they wouldn't completely replace today's tanks, even in first-rate militaries.

HD camera drones with machine learning, facial recognition and good 3D maps. Input a target and they can hunt it down to the very ends of the earth. For urban warfare have it linked to something like a tracking point rifle-- the drone determines if the target is in the engagement zone, tells the rifle operator where and lines up the perfect shot.

You can even remove the rifleman and have an extra drone with a block of C4.

imfdb.org/
Just search for currently aired anime/movies/games.

Because quadcopters are cheap and effective. Need to look in the next field? A quadcopter is quick and easy. A spidertank is slow, expensive, and has less firepower than one dude with a radio.

>AI based drones will start to arrive. They will be able to take off, fly over the designated area, drop (or not drop) bombs depending of the orders giving on the base, and fly back without the need of human imput (tho a human will be overseen the entire mission in case any unpredictable case appears)
>most rifles will look like either FN SCARs or AK series. If you want something that look different even between models, only Bullpup configuration will be that much different among one another
>Though Tanks still hold a line like no other, you will see more and more IFVs, either tracked or wheeled taking dedicated support to troopes. These IFVs will use anything from 20mm autocannons all the way up to 120mm cannons (dont use 155mm in this scenario)
>Fireteams will have standardaccess to small drones that they can control on the field. They will be small and with little endurance, just enough to see the enemy. Nothing more than 15 minutes before needing a charge (they will be electric)
>Night vision googles will fuse with Infra Red ones. You will be able to see both shortwave lights and heat at the same time with your googles (this already exists)
>CMO based glasses showing data (similar to Google Glass) will be used to move fireteams.
>AI based "killing robots" will not be a thing because of "humanitary reasons", but human controled ones are totally OK
>the use of robotic mules to carry weight (and wounded soldiers) over great distances will ne a thing
>GPS signal drifting will be used by great powers to detour missiles from target
>you will see a shift from "aircraft carriers" to both smaller carriers and helicopter carriers carrying a expeditionary unit composed from 300 to 850 soldiers, depending on size
>faster, more advanced missiles, both short and long range
>more investiments in submarines, including diesel-electric with state of the art "air independent propulsion"

Posted here only what is reasonable and within reach

...

GAH Metal Gear!!

Scifi has a tendency to overestimate technology in the short-term and underestimate it on the long term.

>AI based "killing robots" will not be a thing because of "humanitary reasons", but human controled ones are totally OK

Not entirely due to humanitary reasons but legal reasons.

The amount of leap legal doctrine would have to take to regulate the rules that would govern machines that have self determination to take actions with the intention to infringe on right to life and bodily integrity is a very, very big one. I can not forsee such a thing happening in 30-40 years atleast , even if the technology permits it.

Funny you say that.
I dont play metal gear since the one that came out for Play Station 1, and even so, I never finished because after killing that sniper girl, the second CD would not load lol

True. Posted humanitrarian tehre to not have to explain all of this.

But you are correct.

Nah, the Chinese and Russians will just give their middle finger to all "muh humanity" nonsense.

>Though Tanks still hold a line like no other, you will see more and more IFVs
"holding a line" isn't really a concept post-ww2, the battlefield is too dispersed.

>you will see a shift from "aircraft carriers" to both smaller carriers and helicopter carriers

Maritime physics doesn't scale that way. Once you're committed to building a carrier, building it bigger costs little extra. But you're right about growth in LHD numbers.

>GPS signal drifting will be used by great powers to detour missiles from target
GPS jamming is simple late 90s tech. It's mostly useless against modern military GPS, due to differential correction, M-code, directional receivers, etc.

>>Though Tanks still hold a line like no other, you will see more and more IFVs, either tracked or wheeled taking dedicated support to troopes. These IFVs will use anything from 20mm autocannons all the way up to 120mm cannons (dont use 155mm in this scenario)

The experience in Ukraine seems to indicate the opposite. IFV just suck against modern precision-guided artillery and tanks are the only thing that survives. The tendency is towards heavier and heavier IVF and APC.

Within the next 11 years it's highly unlikely that you'll see anything that most people would refer to as AI having a substantial role in combat.

You'll see increasingly capable drones, but combat environments are too complex for drones to operate in completely autonomously for the foreseeable future. Ground combat in particular, airborne drones might see autonomy sooner.

>modern precision-guided artillery

Were they even used there?
Afaik artillery was used in large bombardments and not precision bombardment that was able to take out specific vehicles.

>"holding a line" isn't really a concept post-ww2, the battlefield is too dispersed.
I wasnt refering to "line of soldier" but as "line if exclusion" where anything that may pose a treat to the are your tanks are, will be blasted.

>Maritime physics doesn't scale that way. Once you're committed to building a carrier, building it bigger costs little extra.
Wrong.Excpet for US, anyone who wants new carriers will have to construct smaller ones.
Even US is having problems making the new fleet because despise the fact the new carriers are less than 50% bigger (not heavier) than the past generation, the price of aquisition is like 4 times more expensive.

Its a problem of economics, not physics. Smaller aircraft carriers would be more affordable than bigger ones.

>GPS jamming is simple late 90s tech.
Not jamming, drifting.
Russia just spoofed a GPS signal less than 2 weeks ago sending every vessel in the vicinity of their city to another place 100 miles away.
But missiles are ready to deal with this through INS and topografy recognition.
But GPS drifting is another thing. If yuo drift the signal ever so slightly that is within the missile margin or error, he will correct its path away from the original target, missing it. And this is hard as fuck to do because the margin of error of these new missiles is so small.

Not really. IFVs will see more and more usage as things like Humvees and MRAPs starts to get phased out (not in the 10 years period OP asked, tho).
Also, TOWs can destroy even heavy tanks because the top is always too unprotected, and there is a limit of weight these things can have.
New tanks will have to have a new layout (like the T-14 Armata) if they want to survive these missiles.

OP just wanted out of the cuff tech for his story.
Everything I posted is ready to use as in today.
They will not be deployed because of costs of aquisition and operation, but they are dooable still, so, within what OP asked from us.

Large bombardments and precision aren't mutually exclusive, user. Targeting individual vehicles in a park is a waste of time when a battery can crank off four dozen shots into the whole thing. And precision prevents wasted ammo from tray shots landing outside the target zone.

OP here, i do wanna say thanks, i am intently reading and learning.

True, due the geography, the Russians care less about precision artillery and more about saturating the whole area with explosives. Drone-guided large bombardments make them more deadly.

I was asking if they were used, not if it was probable or not.

No problem bro.
If you have a particular thing to ask, just do it.
I will try to be more specific as yu want.
But overall, in military terms, thats what we have for 10 years from now with today's tech. All of them ready to use (if the enter in mass production, of course).

I didnt post it anything related to spying because Im not sure if you wanted, but if want it, do tell.

>Having proclaimed the return of armor as a major and viable player on the future battlefield, we also need to add a severe caveat. Since the end of the Cold War, armies around the world have given increased emphasis to light Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV), which prioritizes mobility and fire-power over survivability. The evidence coming in from the Ukrainian conflict seriously questions the validity of that emphasis. The experience of the both sides in the Donbas highlights the vulnerability of these vehicles to the increased lethality of the artillery munitions as well as the proliferation of anti-tank weapons and medium-caliber (30mm) automatic cannons mounted on other light armored vehicles. But the big killer of IFVs is artillery sub-munitions and thermobaric warheads == when hit, these vehicle tend to suffer catastrophic damage, killing or severely burning everyone on board.

>The emergence of ERA and, especially, Active Protection Systems on modern MBTs has done much to reverse the trend of MBTs being vulnerable to infantry ATGMs. These systems, when fielded by the Russians, are able to drastically reduce the effect of early, single-warhead ATGMs. Tandem-warheads and top-attack systems, such as Javelin may prove more effective, however, these systems are conspicuously lacking in the Ukrainian arsenal.

>Both sides in the conflict have made extensive use of drones for tactical and strategic reconnaissance, leading to a further emphasis on camouflage, deception, and maneuver at night. Western militaries must assume that they will be fighting under constant, or at the least significant, drone surveillance, and train accordingly.

yes absolutely, I'm working on the spying aspects right now. the plan is to have some spying but I'm not sure if the players are up for that and would prefer more run n gun stuff.

i was looking into what we currently have in terms of recon. but i would love whatever you have!

> Smaller aircraft carriers would be more affordable than bigger ones

You're thinking about individual carriers; but nations are buying a total capacity of combat power and sortie generation. e.g. a big carrier might cost 50% more than a small one, but it launches double, triple, or quadruple the sorties.

>Not jamming, drifting.
Maybe it's cutting edge in Russia, so you feel the need to differentiate between noise and deception; but American definitions of jamming encompass primitive deception and "drifting" is seriously old school.

Look into arma 3, its set in 2030s.

You should consider what kind of troops are you using. Special forces etc might have all kinds of cool gear, a normal infantry company in a western conscription army still wont have a drone, maybe some anti-drone weaponry.

They MRAP's successor is more along Humvee lines (still fairly mine-resistant though), lighter vehicles like that are definitely going to stay in inventories, as things like the T15 Armata and the Namer are really expensive, and not good for lighter levels of combat or armies that have to go a long way - though they'll still see use and development

Homefront had some cool designs.

...

If you want spying, you should see what companies from Israel have to buy. And this is only what we know it.

Multispectographs to see if you got bugged by the enemy can be purchased by any civilian in america (if you have 20.000 dollars to spare).

So is not unthinkable to extrapolate this and think that military hardware can do the same as the civil version does, but on a bigger range or, if not, with a less cumbersome machine.

To get into cellphones and see its content like last GPS locations the users was, cryptographed files and erased files, read about " UFED Cellebrite Touch Ultimate"(cellebrite.com/en/products/ufed-ultimate/). For bugs, search and read a bit about "OSCOR™ Blue Spectrum Analyzer" (reiusa.net/rf-detection/oscor-blue-spectrum-analyzer/).

They are all, out of the shelf products that you can buy today.
Still, on the relm of the reality, but with futuristic vibe (futuristic as in, it exists, but ppl never heard of), read about Camero's "see though wall" technology. (camero-tech.com/xaver-products/xaver-800/). Its a radar using Ultra Wide Band to see objects inside a house/room from the outside. Ir works up to 40 yeards away from your POV.

All of these things can be aquired today as I said earlier, so you can use in your story as being somewhat common.

Will reply you next.

I like the IDF bro, but the Namer is a monstruosity that should not even be made in the first place.
The israelis expend all the money on armor, and then they put a fucking .50 cal as main armament. Fuck this.
That thinkg should have at least a Rheinmetall 30mm to blast towel heads from 2km away without putting the gunner at danger.

>You're thinking about individual carriers; but nations are buying a total capacity of combat power and sortie generation. e.g. a big carrier might cost 50% more than a small one, but it launches double, triple, or quadruple the sorties.
But you got this on the other way.
They are actually costing 4 times more, to carry 50% more inventory (I exagerating the numbers for comidic purposes, but they are more true than your values).

Also, these things are gargantuan in size and costs billions of dollars plus years of work to be ready.
This means they are far too valuable, and the lost of just one carrier would be terrible for the american military as a whole. Imagine the repercution of a carrier being sunk by one of these new Mach-7 capable missile. head would roll.
And since one of the most basic rules of war if that if you have an asset that is so important, than you can't afford to lose it, then you are ding wrong.

>Maybe it's cutting edge in Russia, so you feel the need to differentiate between noise and deception; but American definitions of jamming encompass primitive deception and "drifting" is seriously old school.
Never heard of the american tech putting drifting in the same basket.
If true, OP must keep this in mind when making his game.
I have no piece of information to give on this particular case.

To be fair, if he's in a Namer he's probably not in danger.
And it's just to support the squad anyway.

It really is a design that's very specific to Israel though, with that weight and cost - no army that's going far would want it.

All that said though, they are thinking about giving it a 30mm and making it an IFV, but the damn thing is expensive and heavy enough already

Prosthetics my dude! what does the future of cybernetic limbs look like!

In the military area, not bright.
General Dynamics was the biggest company in the west investing on prostethics, but even in 10 years from now, don't expect ppl using cyber implants.

Soldiers that lost limbs for example. GD made a few arms that could open and close its hand and thats pretty much it. And most startups can do this too.

Not knowing the general scale you are working with (didn't see it mentioned in the thread) or context (are we talking a specific Military force? SF? Location?) here are the key things I would suggest to keep it realistic without being too boring for most people, given that command and control, intel gathering, and direct logistical support is really the biggest areas where change will reflect.

If they are part of a Line Unit, assume that they don't have any bleeding edge tech and that their best stuff is 4-6 years behind. If they are fielding or testing something it might be 2-3. If they are SF or working attached to an Alphabet Agency they might having brand new technology. It will break.

This thread covers most of the things I'd touch on already, but I'll add a few things: individual troop status monitors are potential, especially if there is a ramp up in conflict in this ten year spread. Think Aliens with the vitals monitors and body cams. Helmet mounted information systems supported by Smartphone/Tablet style systems will be common as well. These will feed back through a central location in close proximity (vehicle, walking/tread/wheeled equipment carrier) and feed back to higher. This unit may be man portable if required.

Weapon platform changes will be in ammunition (Cased Telescopic or Ceramic) to cut down on weight. If exo suits are involved, expect 45-60 round Casket mags to also be popular, replacing 30 round box magazines. Standard combat load will increase proportional to weight. Someone mentioned the SCAR platform, if this is for US military, only SF or Direct Action units will have these. Assume they have adopted modular systems to allow for a more future feel without being out there on technology, so your marksman, automatic gunners, and grenadiers will all have equipment with interchangeable parts and the ability to adjust roles. This is mostly for the benefit of tabletop players in this context.

Additionally, if you are talking prosthetics and the military? Anyone needing something like that is probably not going out fighting. If you have a good excuse that they aren't med-boarded out then they're likely loggies or in a command realm. And even then if you want it for flavor in the story it is better to have someone returning as a contractor of some sort.

Not OP, but I am going to take advantage of this thread and ask anyway: armor. What does the future have in reserve for it, both body and vehicle?

For body, unless new composites are created, it will be pretty much what we have today.

The most original desing in personal bodyarmor was probably the dragonskin a few years back that was made of small, separate pieces that would work as one in distributing the stopping power once hit it. Also, because it was made of several small pieces, it would give more mobility to the soldier instead of todays bodyarmor that use a single piece of steal/titanum in the fron and the back.

But the project flopped hard so, for I would say that the only way to improving the armor protection in 10 years would be by having a breakthrough on carbon fiber and use this on the armor. But I doubt this will happen.

On the vehicle, the only thing that can be done would be using more powerfull explosives on the "sandwitch brick" or the reactive armors.
The more powerful the explosive, the better the chances of detouring the incomming projectile to a less ideal angle to prevent from passing though the chassi.
Using thicker plates also helps but would increasy the overall weight of the vehicle considerably.

This is what we have fro the next decate unfortunally. Not very cyberpunk-ish if you ask me.

>For body, unless new composites are created, it will be pretty much what we have today.
Carbon nanotubes?

They strenght depending of the angle the force is applied.

nanotubes are supper resistent when dealing with forces that goes in the same angle as the tubes. But apply force perpendicular to it, and the thing breaks like ceramic.

Personal armor: Most modern military entities don't use metal plates. Ceramic plates are the most popular (better effect for weight) and while Dragonskin was a neat idea using multiple layered plates, it didn't provide any additional mobility as they were still concentrated in a vest.

Currently the trend is soft armor vests (flexible, layered kevlar, rated for minor fragmentation and general pistol rounds) with hard armor inserts (ceramic plates). How these distribute varies. Circa 2009 I had two full plates front and back and two half plates on my sides. The whole vest was soft armor with soft neck, throat, groin, and armpit plates. Entities that need more mobility will often either drop all the armor (allows them to be less conspicuous) or will use plate carries which just have the hard armor, usually just the front and back plates.

For the future: Soft armor based on Non-Newtonian Fluids. It has been in development at various stages for over a decade. Basically by using less kevlar (high tensile strength fibers) and instead having gel layers which react to force by hardening. Hard armor will be improved ceramic plates, likely using various material layering techniques to get "more hits" as most are rated for a single impact and you don't always have time to swap out plates in a firefight. As mentioned dragonskin is a solid idea, as it meant that a single round had less damage to your overall defensive integrity. Though, I anticipate layered plates to continue to be pursued, I imagine it will be a single main plate with replaceable mini-plates that go on top. In theory the mini-plate takes the round and a secondary localized impact that would penetrate a modern single plate due to fracturing would instead hit the main plate.

>WH40k.jpg

What will happen to navies? I realize in this geopolitical situation it will probably not change much, but still.

Interesting. Is soft armor in this scenario going soft after having gone hard? I mean, imagine that I get an hit, do I need to change armor, basically?

>it sounds lewd, I know

I would say that the multi-layered personal vest is indeed a trend and will continue so for the enxt 10 years. So OP could use your information here.

As for non-newtonian fluid, I dont see it bein employed in large scale for at least 20 years since we dont have the necessary strenght needed to hold shrapnel and bullets with current ones.

What about lasers?

No, seriously. My understanding is that ships at least did use them in counter-aerospace trials. Probably not important for OP's question, unless he goes for a China vs US scenario or something but still.

Assuming this is referencing the concept of reactive-soft "liquid armor" it works like any other non-Newtonian fluid. You apply pressure and it becomes hard, you release pressure and it becomes soft again. Obviously, if you take a hit that part of your armor likely needs to be replaced instead of relied upon, as the best way to defeat armor is volume of fire.

But it wouldn't likely be designed to stay rigid for a long duration after the impact, and would likely only be rigid near the impact site.

I'd agree that 10 years is questionable for liquid armor. But given a game set 20 Minutes in the Future doesn't have to rely wholly on realistic expectation. Same reason giving everyone load-bearing exoskeletons is fine if you just concede that in 3-6 years the power issue was solved, you could make the same stretch here that a lab figured out something (ceramic impregnated gel, for example) that ends up being sufficient for suspension of disbelief.

High energy cost, most aerial mounted laser systems are used to "track" on a target to slowly burn through an outer casing causing catastrophic damage (anti-ICBM). A personal laser is less practical as targets are less predictable. If you are trying to put out high power you have to consider keeping a lens in working condition, air quality, as well as debris from parts of the target that explode due to the extreme energy application. So directed energy weapons is totally a question of application and scale, as those factors complete change the way that balances out.

Laser ADS on fucking everything. For those who don't know what that is, it's a laser system mounted on any variety of vehicle, powerful enough and fast enough to blast munitions out of the air. RPG's, mortars, missiles, and even planes can all be shot out of the sky.

Makes sense. My RPG mentality has problems considering modern (and not just modern) armor needing care, so to speak.

Are kevlar vest nowdays being replaced in combat situation, anyway? I mean, if a guy gets hit and doesn't need medical care, and he still needs to fight on, is the armor likely to need to be replaced?

High energy lasers are really difficult to operate because of costs involved.
Also, depending on the power output of the laser, it would take too much time to fry what you want (talking as a defensive system in here).
As a offensive system, only dazzlers shuld be considered since they are the only thing within our reach today and even they are banned by UN because they blind soldiers.

Funny enough, the biggest dazzler stockpiller on the planet is North Korea.

Agree with everything you say.
I just kept on the line OP originally asked for.

I think he wants to know what we have today, and he will be the one inventing these techs that are too far on the future as he writes down the game.

Much like aviation, naval procurement takes so long and costs so much that for the most part the only new toys to actually get deployed a decade hence are already in development. By then of course there will another round of cool stuff in the pipe but it will not be ready for use.

Stuff not already on the shopping list:
We might get railguns or even energy weapons (USN and RN are pretty serious about this one) replacing the Dual-purpose guns for major surface combatants just starting to get installed on active ships. Drones, both UAVs&UUVs for recon and attack. Quantum compasses for submarines. General systems and munitions upgrades for existing vessels.

Combat situations are frequently not a case of being a single engagement. Combat tempo is going to be, from a squad perspective about as follows:

Contact - Identify the threat or where incoming fire is originating.
Suppression - Fire to get them to keep their heads down and allow tactical advantage.
Advance - If the contact is near and the threat is imminent (see, grenade range), chuck grenades and all members assault on line.
Flank - If the contact is far (see, outside grenade range), split teams, second team flanks, shift fire, assaults through, first time assaults through.
Regroup - Following any contact, you establish security, see to wounded, refresh, check supplies (water, ammo, medical), call appropriate situations higher for additional directives (POW, wounded, Red/Black status on supplies, etc. - all depending on Operational Doctrine)
Continue to objective - Whatever was the previous goal (if it wasn't assaulting that position) or new goal from higher.
Rinse and Repeat until you get to rack out.

This will vary by military and circumstance. /k/ is full of doctrine memes about different military units. Some might take contact, make a tactical retreat and call in Arty support. King of Battle and all that. It depends on how you want to handle it.

I used to play a game when I was over seas with my RP group where we'd come up with a ridiculous central theme and build a military doctrine around it. My favorite was "All combat maneuvers are focused on tactical rolls" and "Every gun is a shotgun, no exceptions."

So, tl;dr, between individual firefights if the logistics are there to support it, you might swap armor parts (mounted infantry or other well supported units for example) but most likely it will be between missions (light infantry don't wanna carry no extra plates.) Hell, my vest was about 20kg fully loaded. I wouldn't want to carry a second and I got to ride everywhere.

I have to admit that when I saw lasers on ships I tought "cool, but are these powerful enough to destroy a missile before losing tracking?".

Not really thinking about personal weaponry. Shit is solidly scifi, even if my understanding is that is more a capacitor/battery problem.

>quantum compasses

I don't get how this would work, from wiki.

The part about substituing naval guns is interesting. Always tought it was more long-ranged, but makes sense.

Thanks.

Given this board this is totally true. I mostly brought it up because I know for a fact that it is one of those R&D things and so exists today, even if it isn't practical. At least I wasn't suggesting electrostatic-intercept armor. Though a SM I knew insisted it was the way to go.

Speaking of how long it takes, in any part of the military you have a shit ton of nerds. So, expect that whatever was near sci-fi or really popular with an age group will likely have folks trying to make it reality. Push stuff back 20-40 years and look at sci-fi tech and look at what is coming out in the modern era, in both commercial and military spheres.

Just as a curiosity not really related to military.
I remember reading somewhere that scientists wanted to create 3 super powerfull lasers a while ago.

They wuold have terajoules of energy each and all of them would be pointed in a particular region on space.

The thing they wanted to do was to fire these supoer powerful things to make a disturbance of somesorts to prove a theory.

These state of the arts lasers would sustain fire for just a fraction of a tenth of a second. This is what we are dealing with today.

If yuo want a sustained, constant fire, you will be acpped by the energy yuo can make on board of the ship/aircraft/tank the laser is on it.

And if scientists can make a laser so powerful and yet, can only fire for such brief period of time, I have no hope for militaristic applications in the near future.

theconversation.com/worlds-most-powerful-laser-is-2-000-trillion-watts-but-whats-it-for-45891

>always in mind this in a more than controled enviroment. This would never work in the current state as a easy to operate and rugged material needed in the battlefield.

11 years is not really enough time for wartech to advance that much(atleast not without a major world war to spur innovation).

Consider, for example, pic related is a picture from 2008, nine years ago, and it's not too different from the setup nowadays.

Whoops, forgot my file

I think it basically comes down to drones being more common everywhere.

Other than that, what has -really- changed since 2007? Not that much.

One thing I always wanted to know is how strong exoskeletons are going to be. I doubt they will be super-hero tier and let you lift hundreds of tons, but how much would be their limit? 300lbs? 500lbs? 1 ton maybe?

I think basically the idea is that they're there to substain longer marches, not really lifting anything you'd not lift yourself. Almost sure they don't make you jump higher, they could possibly make you sprint longer tough.

Exoskeletons, lasers, railguns. All very nascent technologies, which will take more than 10 years to mature into real practical use.

And personally, I don't see exoskeletons being worth the hassle. They'll likely be extremely expensive and not fully reliable for a good long while.

>09
Wonder what would be the killer app so to speak for exoskeletons. I'd say non-military use, mostly. THEN they would tentatively see use in combat.

Exoskeletons are already seeing some civil use in South Korea and Japan as aides in loading cargo in ships and helping in the clean-up of the nuclear reactor of Fukushima respectively. But yeah, military use is still a distant dream.

OK guys, gonna sleep.
See ya tomorrow if the thread is still up.

Good luck with your story OP. Hope you could take some piece of information of all this.

Yes, modern armor is very much one-shot affair (hue). Ceramic plates crack under pressure, so they literally start to fail when receiving a bullet. Kevlar vests don't crack per se, but you're ruining the weave. Some user once gave a good rule of thumb for modern body armor - every armor can take 3 rounds that its designed to stop (i.e. a bullet rifle will just go through soft kevlar vest like its nothing), and after that each next shot is 10% more likely to penetrate.

Oh, and let's not forget that even getting shot in armour HURTS (bruises, cracked ribs). So you might want to apply nonlethal damage of sorts instead of normal for when the armor does work.

also try this i suppose

Give Command and Conquer: Generals (the original, maybe not Zero Hour) a look if you aren't a total realism autist. The C&C: Rise of the Reds mod goes further into the future (2030s-2040s), but it still tries to be semi-plausible.
Pic is actually from C&C Generals 2. RIP

Might want to specify America in particular. GLA aren't exactly cutting edge.

Well this year there was a successful test firing of a laser weapon mounted on an Apache, so in ten years there could be lasers replacing machine guns on light vehicles, helicopters, and maybe even fighters.

>but are these powerful enough to destroy a missile before losing tracking?
Based on demos - yes. On a ship power is much less of an issue, and missiles have very thin skins. If it's a hit it's very likely a kill.

Are they fast enough to hit missiles?
Is a harder question, especially as the answer for the top of the line anti-ship missiles is much more variable and probably unknown - anything sea-skimming or hypersonic is likely to be very tricky

Generals was pretty cool.
And rip 2

>10 years
Same shit just add another Mk1.
The Marines at any rate wil probably be running around with suppressed M27s and have a drone attached to each squad. Probably have the automatic rifleman use the LSAT or whatever. Hopefully the SMAW Serpent comes out to,

Improvements in digital signal processing have probably rendered aircraft stealth a dead end at this point. The fact that your $billion fighter has the radar signature of a bumblebee doesn't protect you any more when a $1000 computer is smart enough to pick out which one of the millions of bumblebee-sized specks in the sky is doing eight hundred knots at 40,000 feet.

any time an unauthorized gunshot goes off, acoustic sensors pinpoint its location and a mortar shell drops on it. crossbows and blowguns make a big comeback.