The Most Important Future Military Technologies

wow, couldnt image you are a war crazy guy, weapon funs.

I think the best bet is robot fulfill with battlefield. Both sides fight by joystick.

small manless plane throw bomb, scout enemy situation and action. atomic, biochemical weapon. wow, a terrible picture.

I think I'd better escape to moon to drink "Guihua" wine brewed by WuGang, and to see our "Chang-e" dancing.

I am only war-crazy on the Sony play-station (and playing tabletop WH40K)

But most technology advancement was made during wars, which inventions slowly trickling back to the civilians.

I abhor war, but i find military technology fascinating.

I hope someone does not use the moon as a projectile then.

However, I hve to admit the advanced tech will serve war at first.

control theory is a good example. as well as atomic energy .I was told.

As matter of fact, there is no any distinct between advanced cililian tech and military tech. I think they are one body system.

I like that gun straight out of a online game.

But military tech & Civilian tech are not the same IMO, like automotive tech the components must adhere to higher specifications than the Civilian tech components, also military tech is more secretive than civilian tech, you do not want the opponent know that you have an advantage until it is too late

Last 50'S, Japanese's pingpong ball is the first in the world cup championship. but since 60"s, chinese is the first.

although this sport is invented by Britain gentlman.

electronic components have these level,

temperature arrange: civil: 0-60 ⁰C industry 0-85 ⁰C militry 0-120 ⁰C

suv can be used for militry.

The sooner war is relagated to a virtual environment, with the terrorists merely trying to crash the system, the better.

Ha that makes me think if either the bankers or terrorists were smarter they'd be blaming the other or taking credit for the current financial mess as appropriate .

As CN says fight it with joy sticks...but just don't bother with the hardware.

Blimey even medieval man had worked out it was cheaper and quicker sometimes to send out a 'champion' to try and end the conflict with one man to man contest...

Wasn't it Banockburn, where the guy rode out to settle it, only to have his head removed with one blow? Presumably, when asked how he got on he was still able to shrug .

Del

I've read in South Korea gamers are serving in army just as gamers.

doing what? playing tank battles?

Look over here

.

Plus their govt "... has even dropped the requirement of military service for those willing to work in the game industry, considering digital games key to the international export of Korean culture..."

Isn't it an irony?

No army in the world dont play millitry games on computer as their training subject.

haha, - - = +. certainly yes.

aeroplane simulator is not only use for fight plane pilot training, but in civil aviation trainning pilot.

Our china has several Boeing flight simulators for pilots training, very expensive, but still save expense than practice sites traning.

What is these games? W.o.W or Gaia. show me some pics if you hve time. Im layman, out of door to it.

But the civilian and militairy simulators differ somewhat

here is the info you requested!

gaia www.gaiaonline.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_Online

Gaia Online is an English-language, anime-themed social networking and forums- based website. Originally named "Go-Gaia.com

W.o.w = world of warcraft

www.worldofwarcraft.com/

World of Warcraft (commonly acronymed as WoW) is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_Warcraft

America's army

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_army

www.americasarmy.com/

all is slowly opened. but gaia pic is lovely.

I cannt play at all. give up.

thanks at the same.

To identify the most promising military technology, one must first identify the mission to be accomplished. Is the mission to expand "Lebensraum" as was the advertised goal of the Third Reich in its earlier days? Then technology leading to total depopulation with minimal physical damage (i.e., the old "proton bomb", or chemical warfare, with short-lived agents). If one's goal is to control a critical natural resource, as current world leaders have been accused of pursuing, then intimidation without actual physical damage or great loss of life would be the appropriate approach- psychological warfare, or a whole lot of fireworks off near the horizon. If one is primarily concerned with self-preservation, then one should focus on technologies that allow for early detection and elimination of beligerants, before they can locate your critical resources. Here, remote sensing and psychological techniques would seem most appropriate. If one is only concerned with world domination, then one should make sure that one's toys are more sophisticated than anyone else's. This means you go after such exotic things as DARPA seems to favor...

Please note. I do not personally condone ANY of these concepts...It has been many years since I've detected a need to go to war for any reason...

Well USA is continuously pushing the envelope to their top dog status

True, but not necessarily ALL of us... I'm a military veteran, but I do not condone warfare except when pushed into it with no other way to resolve a dispute.

Money will be the next weapon of the future.

You didn't add their economy to yours........which would've given their people something to look forward to. A lost opportunity courtesy current administration. Now they, India and China have signed a defence pact.

The Saudis have been building on both sides of that street.

otherwise the next weapons will probably be tectonic, meteorological, bioelectronic and just about anything else that'll trash the other guys' real estate.

On the battlefield the most important weapon is communication and targetting.

If fighting an enemy of equally close technical ability then the war would go to the airborne and satellite front. Any weapon that can effectively blind the opponent from communicating will be the weapon that wins the battle.

I ultimately agree with you here. When I said about the systems of devices and methods how ones might be applied, i've meant a communication issues as well. You're right.

Have you noticed, we're discussing here and there any aspects of plausible military technologies but no one mentioned the attitude of novaday's soldier or worrier if you like? Should one be courageous either?

Well maybe the next technology will be mind control of the soldier, or was there not allready a program like that Ultra-K or something.

Maybe and even definitely. I wouldn't be so excited to come across the tank controlled by operator with nerve's tic or the like.

Let cnpower does correct me: "To sit upon a river bank waiting calmly till a corpse of your enemy's getting passed by". It's the best strategy for any time.

I think a war will be remotely fought in the future.
i.e. with various "robotic" style controlled weapons. It follows:

The primary necessity (I think) will be the defence of the "controllers"
It will be necessary to defeat the opposing (robotic) controllers to win;
(a war) which mandates the defence of your own controllers imperative.

i.e if they cannot destroy your own controllers, however long the war
persists, you will win in the end. A futuristic "take the castle."

Similar to the fact that, no matter how strong or dispersed the Japanese
forces in WW ll, unless they occupied the US, they would not win.

Therefore it behoves us to look to our defence (of the realm in the UK)
first and foremost; and ask our leaders to ponder: if you dig a grave, dig two.

jt

Life is beautiful, let everyone enjoy it to the full.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. (for all)

In response to the original question....................So what will be the future of weaponry?

I hope it will be weapons we can actually use. Hey maybe we'll parachute in some librarians reading children's books to the bad guys so they'll fell bad about being of no use to humanity.

Seriously, even with all the Billions of dollars we spend on weapons we're still walking down streets with gun in hand and kicking in doors which makes us "bullet catchers". Police actions such as this don't require advanced weapons because you won't ever have political justification to use them. Now war on the other hand is is different story altogether. In times of war you kill as many bad guys as you can and blow up as much as you can as fast as you can so advanced weapons are useful but we haven't fought like we are "at war" since WW2 so even though the manufacturing of advanced weapons pay a large part of my income we don't really need that many of them because it looks like the politicians have too much sugar in their tanks to let us use them.

"Unleash the hounds" .............The warden......Cool Hand Luke

>Seriously, even with all the Billions of dollars we spend on weapons we're still walking >down streets with gun in hand and kicking in doors which makes us "bullet catchers". >Police actions such as this don't require advanced weapons because you won't ever >have political justification to use them

I disagree any improvement to the safety of the police or weapons that can harmless incapacitate the victim is a good thing