The end of gun-powder?

Question

With the successful designs of rail and coil-guns I can't help to think that this will be the end of the convential war we know it today.
What do you think?

With a gun that doesn't fire from gunpowder you get no..
Flash
Sound (minus the sonic boom)

No longer will firing give away your position.
Snipers could fire many, many shots without showing themselves.

Warfare will change, for the better? The worse?

Your thoughts.

It's only a matter of time until they design them in small scale. I've seen coil guns the size of pistols shoot through a car.

We are in the booming age of technology! The only thing that can stop that is us!
Think about that.

Answer 1

The answer is realtive. If YOUR soldiers hold the technology, it's a fantastic thing! If the terrorists hold the technology, it's a disaster.

Answer 2

Rail gun technology is a long way off. They can build them, but they're huge and require massive amounts of power. Not exactly sniper rifle portability just yet. But it won't represent a fundamental change even when it does arrive. It's still a projectile weapon. I think it'll likely have more impact with artillery than with the soldier's personal weapon. An artillery platform can be built to generate the power needed. And without separate charges, they can carry more ammunition, and can alter the firing velocity to better control where that shell goes.

Answer 3

The problem is size/weight. Gun powder is still and will be for a long time a better/lighter power source for small artillery and hand held weapons.

Answer 4

Maybe you can have the weapon & ammunition, but what about your power source? Depending on an electrically powered infantry weapon in a combat zone goes WAY beyond tempting Murphy.

Answer 5

Worse, of course. The one word I think of when I hear about these sophisticated weapons is "terrorism." Sad that we live in such morbid conditions to where this is the first impression.

Answer 6

worse