RE: [HoE] Caseless ammo and modern weapons

["Heivilin, Jim" <banzai@missouri.edu>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Young [mailto:ecyoung@mediaone.net]
> Subject: [HoE] Caseless ammo and modern weapons
> 
<snip>
> Which brings me to my next topic, modern weapons. Why are all the weapons
> in HOE basically the same as current issue weapons? This is 100 years in
> the future and all of the weapons are using 1950's technology! Where are
<opinion on>
I don't think it so much an issue of there not *being* these sorts of
weapons as a cost-effectiveness issue.  Look at the development of tank
rounds.  What they have today is vastly better than what they had in 1938.
Primarily because the armor has developed as well so it takes a better round
to defeat that armor.  

Now with people ... since "armor" for people hasn't developed as quickly or
as much (not ignoring ballistic cloth vests/jackets) the standard chemically
propelled, jacketed slug will still do the job.  So while it's possible to
develop laser weapons and electronically enhanced "smart" personal weapons
and weapons of this sort, it is much more cost effective to give a 50 year
old technology rifle to a person who has had some training and some practice
and kill that technologically enhanced infantry soldier from a quarter mile
away.  
<opinion off>

<snip>
> By the way, for those of you who do not know, the purpose of the OICW
> project is to develop a rifle capable of firing conventional 5.56mm
> ammunition with a new breed of 20mm "smart" air-bursting grenades. A laser
<snip>
> 
A lot of the development material I've read doesn't point toward more
development in the weapon itself, but rather in the support systems.
Sights, integration between the weapon and other communications/imaging
systems on the users person, etc.  An article last year in the Army Times
(admittedly not the more highly technical of sources) discussed the
electronic infantryman.  He had a mapbox and a helmet with built in sight,
imaging etc.  Looked decidedly sci-fi.

Jim H.