Lasers won’t make noise and aren’t moving a physical mass that would create sound as it passes by.

A laser that is powerful enough to hurt a human target (especially a human target with body armor) is going to be powerful enough that it'll be ionizing the air to some degree. It'll be like a lightning bolt, there'll be flashes of light and sharp cracking sounds. That's also ignoring the fact that the random bits of terrain that the laser is hitting will also be exploding. Someone under "suppressing fire" from a laser weapon would be quite aware of the fact.

148

Also whatever you're using to generate that much energy will make noise as well

17
- Yes, but it might be a power plant hundreds of kms away.
  
  9
The pure joy of putting a single joule of optical power into a sub nanosecond pulse.

For those not familiar with lasers, that's a GW of instantaneous power that you can focus down to a micron sized spot.

https://youtu.be/Z1Xky_ermd4?si=1Luz0fuzm4kcwIwc

All that said, the successful laser weapons right now seem to all be anti drone/aircraft and they are typically using tracked CW (not pulsed) lasers with heating over time to avoid atmospheric lensing. Lots of challenges to overcome in getting pulsed energy a long way through air.

11
- I was wondering if we'd see pulsed lasers in anti-drone warfare.... the power supply advantages aside, focusing on just the right point in time with the pulse seems hard.
  
  2

Suppressive fire is already an obselete doctrine. That's why the British army is replacing their machine guns with DMRs (Canadian military may be heading in the same direction).

Turns out turning a motherfuckers head into a fine red mist with a 7.62 tends to make everyone else around them really eager to seek cover. The threat of a well placed shot has a far better suppressing effect than the reality of a bunch of inaccurate fire.

75

What's with the credible takes?

Sir this is NCD

38
- May I propose a fully-automatic, belt-fed 7.62 sniper rifle as a noncredible happy medium?
  
  49
- Curious where you found a credible take.
  
  This "we're past machine guns now" thing has been tried multiple times before, including by the brits.
  
  our rifles will shoot better instead
  
  our rifles will shoot more instead
  
  I wonder what MG they'll get after this doesn't work
  
  9
I'd imagine a sniper is probably one of the most effective ways to suppress a group. They probably don't know where the shots are coming from, and don't know when it's safe to move again.

Having said that, I would imagine there are situations where traditional suppression is better. A hail of bullets against the side of an APC is probably terrifying even if none of them are getting through. It's going to be tough to get someone to open the hatch as the bullets are flying in. But, with designated marksmen only, you'd have to wait until the enemy tries to get out of the APC and then make a tough shot to hit them as they do.

12
So, basically what the USSR did ? (IIRC, machine gunners and sharpshooters carrying some semi auto scoped rifle were basically interchangeable in their doctrine, at least during WW2)

8
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_marksman_rifle for those who had no idea what the fuck a DMR was.

2
Turning the Brit's own standard of having officers walk instead of run into something like the end of Planet Terror.

1

I don't know, I'd probably at least duck if the fucking Macrowave started ionizing the piss out of the air near my face.

27

I am a simple man. I see styropyro and I upvote while he is still alive.

5
Yeah macrowave

1

You also wont be able to see them with the naked eye. Imagine you're on patrol and your buddy drops dead and there was no sound and no visible sign except the crackling from the fire that carved a hole in his chest. War is already scary enough tyvm. Everyone is going to have to wear white or reflective gear.

20

or reflective gear

It would be fun if the silver spandex of classic Sci-Fi turned out to be standard uniforms to counter laser fire.

8
Just like with snipers today, although i suspect that giant laser is not optimal weapon in high stakes hide and seek game

4
- If there's a constellation of them orbiting a few hundred kilometers up they'll be pretty optimal. Like fairly optimal. Sufficiently optimal.
  
  7
If they are wearing white, all the better to see them, and use a variety of guns on them. Besides, no white is perfect, even when clean, (which won't last long) so the laser would still chew them up.

2
- Also depends on the frequency of radiation used. Does it reflect infrared or microwaves? UV?
  
  3

Yeah, a large part of suppressive fire is that the enemy doesn’t want to be randomly wounded.

18

And ironically, some armies are moving away from it because they’ve realized that suppressive fire isn’t super effective in modern urban warfare. When you’re trying to “suppress” someone in a building, there’s a good chance that they can just relocate and continue firing before you have a chance to move up. Your suppressive fire is suddenly aiming at the wrong area and isn’t doing anything.

Instead, some armies (like the British armed forces) have started focusing on quality over quantity. Turns out, when every shot has a good chance to turn you to paste, you’re much more inclined to stay in cover. Even when you’re not being actively suppressed, knowing that they have a dozen scoped 7.62 rifles trained on your location means you’re hesitant to even peek your head out. They don’t need to burn through ammo to keep you suppressed, and the suppression is more effective. The occasional “hey we still have rifles aimed at you” warning shot is enough to keep them behind cover.

18
- How does this tactic work when counting for light machine guns?
  
  specifically a SAW or 240B. Which as I understand is the largest enemy casualty producing weapon carried by a U.S. army member.
  
  I don’t know if it really counts as suppressive fire or just overwhelming fire power at that point
  
  8

The purpose of suppressive fire is to force the enemy to keep their heads down, so that you can flank them or something. Unless what you're firing is harmless, it could be used to suppress.

16

You're telling me lasers don't go "pew pew pew"?!

14

You’re supposed to make the “pew pew pew” noises as you fire.

6
They'd have to install a manual Pew switch. Go quiet for infiltration, or turn up the speakers for indimidation factor.

4

If Star Wars has taught me anything, this is incorrect, well still be sitting at about a 35% hit rate.

12

We gotta make the guns make the PEW PEW PEW sounds

9

At very high power levels they would displace air via conduction heating.

9

Yeah but now we get to add cool sound effects to the guns

8

By international law, they have to play Darude's "Sandstorm."

Even close air support.

5
Sonic ring chime

2

If people were not aware of the suppressive fire, you'd be shooting it and watch people melt out of nowhere

7

I'm just sad that plasma weapons are essentially a no-go in an atmospheric environment...

5

plasma glows so it's visible from far away, why not check out this sick neutral particle beam that already works https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a26858944/pentagon-particle-beam-space-2023/

2

Meh. If I saw a bunch of people pointing shit at me and the smell of ozone that would work, probably indefinitely.

5

Time to fall back to suppressive drone strikes!

3

They sound like this "pew pew pewww"

2

who knows, maybe the charging makes a sound or something else, not the laser itself

1

Ominous hummmmmmm.

2
- You could mount a speaker in a big round case.
  
  2