how would they prevent something like an EMP from shutting down their guns

Logistics are the problem

if it's electric, all the enemy would have to do is localize electronic pulses to render them useless

You're trying to solve a logistics problem with a new design, that doesn't work

potentially, i mean you could cage off the little computer and make it with extra thick traces

military grade microcontrollers already exist

it wouldnt be some new alien thing

would the guns fire conventional ammo?

or would the electrical components replace the ammunition

They don't get new cartridges, because they've got existing stockpiles and systems designed around the existing systems

im talking mainly about conventional ammo

with electronics involved

The gun is a minor part of the system

paladin they are currently trying to adopt new ammunition

I'm just not sure that would be advantageous because it's adding another point of failure

They've been doing that for decades

ill agree the ammo is usually harder to make than the gun

if the electronic components were to replace the conventional ammo with a new type that was revolutionary, that would be a reason to adopt it

it tends to need to be extremely finely toleranced in its own right

could potentially help with that as well if it did have some kind of pressure reactive system

6.8 6.5, .300, 7mm, there's a new meme calibre that the army is *totally* going to adopt every week

for instance you can electronically detect stresses in metal

so you could potentially react to pressure purely off of strain on the bolt

then drive extraction off of that

mind you

afaik the cases are more the problem

than the same amount of powder in every cartridge

hence referencing the bolt

it's a variety of reasons

once the cartridge is coming out with the right force it could start letting the extraction go

so if its stuck then it would start extracting sooner

this is probably oversimplifying im just saying there are things you can do electronically you cant do mechanically

There are, but the question is do they matter

you can do fairly simple and robust things instead of over complicated whizbang bullshit that a lot of companies try to do

are those advantages worth the cost of implementing that

well it depends mainly on the cost of implementing it

that would be a major factor

and how long would the R&D process take

Which is high, regardless of what it is, because it requires redesigning the existing systems developed around the existing standards

R&D is not even the most significant cost

yeah but i mean past a certain point your argument against attempting innovation breaks down