2000 hrs in kerbal space program here, ya'll fags know nothing about orbit and less about the environment of space.
You assholes worrying about brass polluting orbit are fucking retarded. Everything in orbit below around 1,000 kilometers will come back to earth in less than 50 years; the oldest satellites in high orbit are just starting to come down. Things below 4-600 km fall back in less than 15. See: taingong & ISS decay rates.
The other thing; no human will *ever* be able to hit something in orbit outside of roughly 2 kilometers. Mostly because both parties are moving at around mach 20, usually in different directions, and that momentum is transfered to the projectile as well. Do you have any idea how far ahead you will have to lead a target goin mach 20?
The other thing you faggots don't know about: de-orbit maneuvers.
A 1% drop in speed will take you from a 500km orbit to 30km above the surface, burning up in the atmosphere. The recoil impulse from your weapon will need to be countered(if fired vaguely prograde) with either fuel or another shot. Recoilless rifles will fix this quite effectively, and in my opinion, will be much more accurate than gyrojets. Spin-stabilization is a time-honored concept in spacecraft going as far back as the Voyager probes, but gyrojets are essentially just unguided rockets. I think there is too much random-ness n the exhaust path for it to follow the same path 100% of the time. The other advantage about recoilless rifles is that the gas spends less time transferring heat to the barrel, therefore less heat management issues.
Another factor: Micrometeorites. All spacecraft are protected at least somewhat from micrometeorites. This means your low-mass, high-velocity projectiles(.223) are *already armored against on modern space equipment*.
One interesting fact about space rifles would be the normal rules on optimal barrel length no longer apply, as what determines that is the chamber pressure vs. atmospheric pressure. When the pressure behind the bullet(still in the barrel) is less than the atmospheric pressure, the bullet slows down. Space doesn't do that. In a non-recoilless design, the optimal barrel lenght is theoretically infinite; in a recoilles rifle, the optimal barrel length will depend on how long the gases remain in the barrel, propelling the projectile.
The first advance we need to see for space combat is an atmospheric re-entry suit. I'm expecting a fully hard suit for this, re-entry isn't easy. We could also see inflatable personal heat shields, rather than a suit coated in Starlite. There are a few ideas being tossed around, mostly involving infatable heat shields. Picrel, general electric's proposal in the '60s. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOOSE
One other thing, space cannons will happen first. Space telescopes like the Hubble are already self-contained spacecraft designed for highly precise aiming of the entire craft. The tech for a space cannon for anti-sat warfare is already all there, it would bew incredibly simple and relatively cheap to construct a space cannon.
All modern EVA suits have water cooling loops onboard already.
Attached: ClipboardImage.png (220x371
46.96 KB, 147.55K)