BF Evo, future weapons

[Mac V]

Is the shotgun any good? I've seen that thing around, but was under the impression it wasn't too reliable...

 

[MaxSteiner]

Not to mention its use would be a contravention of the Geneva convention...

 

[Hiromoon]

How so Max? If you check under the discussion on the Pain Ray, you'll find the Geneva Convention and the Laws of War.

Silvereye, one hand holds one handle, the other handle acts like a loop, and if you look at the picture showing off the back, you'll see that it has padding. Also, from my experience with shields and blows, you don't feel much.

Mac V: The shotgun has been undergoing tests as not just a hand held weapon, but also as a weapon in the turret as shown, and as a weapon for a heliocopter.

 

[Mr Evil]

it is gonna have a hell of alot of feedback that sheild, the hand is the wrong angle to compensate for its weight, and have you ever been shot on the chest wearing a bulletproof jacket !! it friggin winds you. it gonna be like being hit by a lump hammer in the arm especialy with the weight compensation besing do of, evan the roman realised that 2k years ago !!!, and that man using looks nothing like wonderwoman lol.

 

[Hiromoon]

No, but I've been dinged by a blow strong enough to dent a curved piece of 12 gauge steel. And really, the hand isn't at the wrong angle, Evil.

 

[emperorpenguin]

what is the point of that shield? :?

 

[Hiromoon]

Close Quarters Battles mostly. Use either a carbine or a pistol with it for room entry.. it's smaller and more durable than a ballistic shield, meaning you can protect your center mass without being encumbered.

 

[MaxSteiner]

How so Hiro?
Because Shotguns are banned by the Geneva convention!
A simple google search will readily confirm this fact dude, just because the US doesn't feel the need to adhear to it doesnt stop them being banned...

Come to think of it there might be something under the Haugue as well.

Edit===> Actually to be entirly fair the US isn't actually a signatory is it?

 

[MaxSteiner]

Ok, I may actually have to withdraw that shotgun thing, since it seems, that only certain types of ammo are banned (To whit pretty much all of them) under the clause about willful mutilation, rather than the weapon itself.
Theres a couple of ways to get around it (like not actually declaring war or plating the buckshot) and it seems any country desperate enough to use them is going to find a way.

 

[Col_stone]

mineclearing. :roll:

 

[BuShips]

mineclearing. :roll:

Also works for mindclearing too! (ewww!) :roll:

 

[Hiromoon]

For the most part Military shotguns have been used for close quarters combat and security. In WW1 they used it to clean out trenches, hence the name Trench Sweeper.

Max, you're probably thinking of the Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III - On the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body, since commercial slugs have a tendency to deform.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/dec99-03.htm

Course, if the ammo Explodes, no chance ofi t flattening or expanding, yes?


And we did sign the Geneva Convention...

Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebSign?ReadForm&id=375&ps=P

 

[Larac]

And we did sign the Geneva Convention...

Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebSign?ReadForm&id=375&ps=P

Our Miitary in the US actually follows it for the most part, the goverment uses PMCs and CIA folk to break it now.

It is sad but true, we are becoming the what we used to fight.

IMHO

Lee

 

[Larac]

Gyrojet weapons.... true wave of the future or a novel fantasy weapon?

There was one tried by the US army in 1958,(I think, I'll find my book on it) and about every decade after that.

I saw on the Mil Channel a Sniper rifle that used one for tank killing.
ut looked really early Alpha.

Lee

 

[BuShips]

This one belongs over on the Victory at Sea: Evolution forum (wait, there is no VaS:Evo forum, heh), so here it stays. If MGP ever wanted some high-tech naval support at mach 7, here is a solution. Better yet, it should work with a 16" battleship gun (my very favorite weapon). :wink:

http://www.g2mil.com/Oct2001Letters.htm

I'm going to double-post this over on another topic regarding railgun thoughts by Soulmage. He should get a kick outta this. :shock:

 

[BuShips]

Mmm ok, my last post does belong here after all. It seems that the muzzle velocity of a tank gun tube is mach 5, just the speed necessary to light off a scramjet round for extended flight 8) .

 

[MaxSteiner]

It was their use in WW1 which brought to light the fact that they were approved for use actually , the Germans complained about there use but was overrulled.

There a part of one of the Geneva conventions about the willful mutilation/excessive injury of troops, I think most of the cooler shotgun shells are banned under that one.

 

[MaxSteiner]

Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebSign?ReadForm&id=375&ps=P

Ah what I was thinking of was the additional protocols of 1977 to the 1949 Geneva convention, which America didn't sign (The ones which extend the protection of the accords to guerrilla fighters, amongst other things):
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/470?OpenDocument

 

[Hiromoon]

Hmm...

Art 13. Discontinuance of protection of civilian medical units

1. The protection to which civilian medical units are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian function, acts harmful to the enemy. Protection may, however, cease only after a warning has been given setting, whenever appropriate, a reasonable time-limit, and after such warning has remained unheeded.

2. The following shall not be considered as acts harmful to the enemy:

(a) that the personnel of the unit are equipped with light individual weapons for their own defence or for that of the wounded and sick in their charge;
(b) that the unit is guarded by a picket or by sentries or by an escort;
(c) that small arms and ammunition taken from the wounded and sick, and not yet handed to the proper service, are found in the units;
(d) that members of the armed forces or other combatants are in the unit for medical reasons.

And even better.....and the Gurillas have to announce their use of Gurilla fighters..

Art 43. Armed forces

1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct or its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, inter alia, shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.

2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.

3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict.

And there is nothing concering weapons in these articles beyond:

Section I. Methods and Means of Warfare

Art 35. Basic rules

1. In any armed conflict, the right of the Parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited.

2. It is prohibited to employ weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.

3. It is prohibited to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment.


Art 36. New weapons

In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party.

A shotgun wouldn't fall under this....it's not made solely to cause pain and undo injury.

 

[BuShips]

Here is a very new article regarding the test of the 8MJ railgun projectile-

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2007/012007/01172007/251373/printer_friendly

The reader comments at the bottom are interesting as well. A 16" gun generates 495MJ of energy (if indeed true) :shock: .