There is always room for innovation. Weapons have always been one of the most reactionary, change-resilient aspects of human endeavor, often with hilariously lop-sided results when ancient generals refused to adapt newer weapons and tactics.
Wheel tech has been more or less the same for millenia. Sometimes you just nail the idea on the first go around and all that's needed are minor improvements
>Wheel tech has been more or less the same for millenia
I'm so happy that you said that, I use the wheel IRL (consulting) as an example of something that pretty much remained unchanged for ~7000 years.
And then 1972 rolls around and someone comes up with a completely new kind of wheel that had never been done before.
That's what I figured you meant, though I don't really think it's that much of a game changer. For starters it contains an internal transmission so It's a bit of a stretch to call it a "wheel". It's also only been used in niche applications, it's not like it's replaced what we use on ordinary cars, buses, railroads, etc.
Wheel tech has been more or less the same for millenia. Sometimes you just nail the idea on the first go around and all that's needed are minor improvements
They improved over time. At first "railways" were rows of flat boards on the ground that wooden carts were pulled along, there was nothing to keep the carts on the "rails". The next development was angular L-shaped profile metal rails, these were placed in opposite directions, one was like _I and the other I_. With that the rails were more durable than and the vertical sections kept the carts on the track. When the steam locomotive came that was replaced with the modern style of "I beam" track where the flanges are on the wheels instead of the track itself.
You can only go far in advancements before you reach the limitations of what is available to you. Smokeless powder was the biggest single advancement in munitions and opened up a door that lead to extremely rapid advancement in small arms but the problem now is we've reached the end of smokeless powders capabilities and no ones came up with anything better for ballistic arms except for rail guns.
>anything better for ballistic arms except for rail guns.
technically they aren't better until the performance is able to be put into production. the potential has been demonstrated but electromagnetic propulsion is not better than double base propellant from a pressurized chamber currently
Oh yeah, railgun technology is a long way from being serviceable. The prototypes we have are really something though, I'm sure you have seen the Forgotten Weapons vids amongst others. Raiguns are the future of ballistic arms, the battery technology just has to advance enough to give enough power to a handheld device to make it worth a frick. If I had to guess we're all going to be long gone before we see a country actually adopt a railgun as their service rifle but one can dream.
People tried tons of new ideas, mostly in the 19th century but also well into modern times too. There were all different kinds of rifling profiles: Henry, Whitworth, Lancaster oval-bore, ratchet, polygonal, and others. People experimented with different barrel lengths, squeeze-bores, multiple projectiles, etc. Tons of different mechanisms for self-loading guns have been made. There has been an absolute shitload of experimentation that's been done, it's just that we know what ideas suck now so we don't make those anymore.
Little change? >autistically long list of changes, omitted
They look kinda the same because the basic concept is the same: hot gases propels a piston (projectile)
To replace existing tech, it has to not only be better tech, but better enough to offer advantages that justify completely new production lines and offset economy of scale advantages.
In the last decade we developed artillery shells that can be guided by satellites to hit a truck-sized target on the first shot from 20 miles away. A hundred years ago they were still figuring out how to make the shells explode reliably when they hit the ground.
Military industrial complex would rather spend their money on other things, we could probably have had caseless smmo by now if they could justify the development and implementation
We are no longer in the innovation period like we used to where a single innovation was a massive leap.
Now we hop stone to stone throughout the refinement era of machining. Guns may not have seen much change externally but the process to make them has gotten so much better that it's unreal how well made some guns are.
This can be applied to many things, the zoomer era is the era of refinement.
>but the process to make them has gotten so much better that it's unreal how well made some guns are.
I would argue the real proof of better gun production is that you can currently buy highly reliable guns for just a couple/few hundred bucks. That's the amazing part. If you want to talk about how well made guns are I'd argue the 19th century presentations stuff is heads and shoulders above today's workmanship, it was just so expensive you couldn't afford it unless you were royalty.
Because there's little to change. Skilled shooters can already put shots on target as fast as they can pull the trigger, so what more do you want? Any further advancement will come from electronic targeting systems and/or caseless ammo, but there's not a lot of progress to be made in small arms.
No it hasn’t. The assault rifles of 1976 have frick all in common with the muskets of 1776. The advancement in cannon tech is even greater: compare a modern naval cannon (e.g. otobreda 127/96, ak-130) to a cannon from the age of sail. They’re worlds apart
I'm not OP, but I'd say they have more in common than you might otherwise think. At their core they're still a rifled metal tube firing a metal bullet. Yeah yeah we've made them shoot faster, more accurately, etc, but we haven't moved away from that rifled tube with a cartridge of gunpowder. there's hardly any fundamental difference between picrel and a modern cartridge.
Anytime someone tries to innovate a bunch of homosexuals come around and start saying gay things like "War Crimes", and "The Hague Convention", or "You can't have explosive ammunition weighing less than 400g".
I've got a few unique projects I'm working on but they're nothing revolutionary
care to share some? Im no engineer, and I have no real formal education when it comes to fire arms or military expierence (so the typical /k poster). I engage my inner-autist to think of designs in my AffrontTo3rdAngle drawing. I would share most of my ideas or discuss it within groups of likeminded people, but the odd change that the one designs within my drawing could be stolen from me scares me. but, Im a lazy moronic schizoautist and can never bring these weapons into construction with my monkey brain. So, who cares if someone steals it, as long as it is made im happy
I intend on patenting one of the designs once I get the money so I can't share that one although I assure you it isn't anything revolutionary, just a more refined version of something that existed for less than a decade.
One of my other ideas is a fully 3d printed Welrod. I've made 3 assemblies in Creo of how they will look and function, unfortunately because of the laws in my state I could actually build/test the designs so it'll be many years until anything comes of it.
eventually you hit a limit on what material science/manufacturing capability/the laws of physics allow so you have to put your research points into other things before you can make more changes
Depends on your section of firearms.
Artillery has changed massively. The kinds of heat treatments and pressure treatments done on big guns and autocannons are totally different to anything they were doing a century ago, let alone before.
the only option for us is to scale up, but due to gun laws we're limited to 50 cal
i really think the only way for gun manufacturing to evolve is if civilians could become interested in larger private guns and automatics, if they did we could have machine gun cannons by now or something cool but it cant happen
there isn't much else that can be done with >explosion make rock go fast
incremental improvements are all we can do until energy weapons become viable.
ETC is really the only somewhat soonish innovation I could see IE injecting more energy than chemical bonds could hold giving more power to the reaction from than just gunpowder could manage but not absurdly complex or high energy like rail or coil guns.
ETC fits in standard gunpowder weapons just a plasma chemical instead of a combustion reaction still the same explosion to shove bullet idea.
we figured it out
There is always room for innovation. Weapons have always been one of the most reactionary, change-resilient aspects of human endeavor, often with hilariously lop-sided results when ancient generals refused to adapt newer weapons and tactics.
>Wheel tech has been more or less the same for millenia
I'm so happy that you said that, I use the wheel IRL (consulting) as an example of something that pretty much remained unchanged for ~7000 years.
And then 1972 rolls around and someone comes up with a completely new kind of wheel that had never been done before.
>And then 1972 rolls around and someone comes up with a completely new kind of wheel that had never been done before.
Which is?
rollie suitcases were patented in 1972
I would argue that it reflects more of an advancement in pavement technology than wheel innovation. It's hard to roll a suitcase on cobblestone.
There was no wheel innovation involved with the roller suitcase. Casters had existed long before, he just added them on luggage. Picrel is from 1505.
FRICK i forgot the pic and then had to do some shit 🙁 I wish I was dead lol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecanum_wheel
That's what I figured you meant, though I don't really think it's that much of a game changer. For starters it contains an internal transmission so It's a bit of a stretch to call it a "wheel". It's also only been used in niche applications, it's not like it's replaced what we use on ordinary cars, buses, railroads, etc.
Wheel tech has been more or less the same for millenia. Sometimes you just nail the idea on the first go around and all that's needed are minor improvements
What about tracks?
They improved over time. At first "railways" were rows of flat boards on the ground that wooden carts were pulled along, there was nothing to keep the carts on the "rails". The next development was angular L-shaped profile metal rails, these were placed in opposite directions, one was like _I and the other I_. With that the rails were more durable than and the vertical sections kept the carts on the track. When the steam locomotive came that was replaced with the modern style of "I beam" track where the flanges are on the wheels instead of the track itself.
>Wheel tech has been more or less the same for millenia.
BALLBEARINGS
We could do better
You can only go far in advancements before you reach the limitations of what is available to you. Smokeless powder was the biggest single advancement in munitions and opened up a door that lead to extremely rapid advancement in small arms but the problem now is we've reached the end of smokeless powders capabilities and no ones came up with anything better for ballistic arms except for rail guns.
>anything better for ballistic arms except for rail guns.
technically they aren't better until the performance is able to be put into production. the potential has been demonstrated but electromagnetic propulsion is not better than double base propellant from a pressurized chamber currently
Oh yeah, railgun technology is a long way from being serviceable. The prototypes we have are really something though, I'm sure you have seen the Forgotten Weapons vids amongst others. Raiguns are the future of ballistic arms, the battery technology just has to advance enough to give enough power to a handheld device to make it worth a frick. If I had to guess we're all going to be long gone before we see a country actually adopt a railgun as their service rifle but one can dream.
People tried tons of new ideas, mostly in the 19th century but also well into modern times too. There were all different kinds of rifling profiles: Henry, Whitworth, Lancaster oval-bore, ratchet, polygonal, and others. People experimented with different barrel lengths, squeeze-bores, multiple projectiles, etc. Tons of different mechanisms for self-loading guns have been made. There has been an absolute shitload of experimentation that's been done, it's just that we know what ideas suck now so we don't make those anymore.
guns are not rocket surgery
Unless you're talking about a gyrojet
Little change?
>autistically long list of changes, omitted
They look kinda the same because the basic concept is the same: hot gases propels a piston (projectile)
never change a running system
There is not much left to improve and coil guns are still too weak and heavy
To replace existing tech, it has to not only be better tech, but better enough to offer advantages that justify completely new production lines and offset economy of scale advantages.
DEI hiring policies
In the last decade we developed artillery shells that can be guided by satellites to hit a truck-sized target on the first shot from 20 miles away. A hundred years ago they were still figuring out how to make the shells explode reliably when they hit the ground.
Military industrial complex would rather spend their money on other things, we could probably have had caseless smmo by now if they could justify the development and implementation
Guns themselves haven't changed much but I feel like there have been significant gains in optics. When's the red dot first invented anyway?
They've been solved
We are no longer in the innovation period like we used to where a single innovation was a massive leap.
Now we hop stone to stone throughout the refinement era of machining. Guns may not have seen much change externally but the process to make them has gotten so much better that it's unreal how well made some guns are.
This can be applied to many things, the zoomer era is the era of refinement.
>but the process to make them has gotten so much better that it's unreal how well made some guns are.
I would argue the real proof of better gun production is that you can currently buy highly reliable guns for just a couple/few hundred bucks. That's the amazing part. If you want to talk about how well made guns are I'd argue the 19th century presentations stuff is heads and shoulders above today's workmanship, it was just so expensive you couldn't afford it unless you were royalty.
Because there's little to change. Skilled shooters can already put shots on target as fast as they can pull the trigger, so what more do you want? Any further advancement will come from electronic targeting systems and/or caseless ammo, but there's not a lot of progress to be made in small arms.
No it hasn’t. The assault rifles of 1976 have frick all in common with the muskets of 1776. The advancement in cannon tech is even greater: compare a modern naval cannon (e.g. otobreda 127/96, ak-130) to a cannon from the age of sail. They’re worlds apart
I'm not OP, but I'd say they have more in common than you might otherwise think. At their core they're still a rifled metal tube firing a metal bullet. Yeah yeah we've made them shoot faster, more accurately, etc, but we haven't moved away from that rifled tube with a cartridge of gunpowder. there's hardly any fundamental difference between picrel and a modern cartridge.
Are you actually moronic or just pretending?
Their performance has clearly improved, but how they fundamentally work hasn't really changed.
Except that the barrels were often not rifled back then and black powder isn’t used nowadays
Even this extremely reductionist comparison ifails
the ability of the gun already exceeds the ability of the shooter
Anytime someone tries to innovate a bunch of homosexuals come around and start saying gay things like "War Crimes", and "The Hague Convention", or "You can't have explosive ammunition weighing less than 400g".
I've got a few unique projects I'm working on but they're nothing revolutionary
care to share some? Im no engineer, and I have no real formal education when it comes to fire arms or military expierence (so the typical /k poster). I engage my inner-autist to think of designs in my AffrontTo3rdAngle drawing. I would share most of my ideas or discuss it within groups of likeminded people, but the odd change that the one designs within my drawing could be stolen from me scares me. but, Im a lazy moronic schizoautist and can never bring these weapons into construction with my monkey brain. So, who cares if someone steals it, as long as it is made im happy
I intend on patenting one of the designs once I get the money so I can't share that one although I assure you it isn't anything revolutionary, just a more refined version of something that existed for less than a decade.
One of my other ideas is a fully 3d printed Welrod. I've made 3 assemblies in Creo of how they will look and function, unfortunately because of the laws in my state I could actually build/test the designs so it'll be many years until anything comes of it.
*can't actually build/test
eventually you hit a limit on what material science/manufacturing capability/the laws of physics allow so you have to put your research points into other things before you can make more changes
Boomers
Depends on your section of firearms.
Artillery has changed massively. The kinds of heat treatments and pressure treatments done on big guns and autocannons are totally different to anything they were doing a century ago, let alone before.
the only option for us is to scale up, but due to gun laws we're limited to 50 cal
i really think the only way for gun manufacturing to evolve is if civilians could become interested in larger private guns and automatics, if they did we could have machine gun cannons by now or something cool but it cant happen
there isn't much else that can be done with
>explosion make rock go fast
incremental improvements are all we can do until energy weapons become viable.
Because for some reason the eggheads in charge are afraid of caseless ammunition and revolvers that will one day fire it
The DoD won't answer my calls, my laser rifle prototype is gathering dust...
>gun tech has been the same for centuries
No it hasn't, you nimrod
ETC is really the only somewhat soonish innovation I could see IE injecting more energy than chemical bonds could hold giving more power to the reaction from than just gunpowder could manage but not absurdly complex or high energy like rail or coil guns.
ETC fits in standard gunpowder weapons just a plasma chemical instead of a combustion reaction still the same explosion to shove bullet idea.
Wanting change for the sake of change is a female trait