Energy Weapons VS Ballistic Weapons

[Nadaka]

Didn't they also prove that bumblebees can't fly with physics, too?

Mathematical formulas are neat and look great on paper, but they don't ALWAYS transfer to real life circumstances.

yep they proved that a fixed wing aircraft with the wing surface area to mass ratio of a bumble bee could not fly... Note that a bumble bee is not a fixed wing aircraft and its wings do not produce lift by the same means as fixed wing aircraft. A fixed wing aircraft produces lift by creating a low pressure zone ontop of the wing, a bumblebee produces lift by creating vortices on the air and pushing those vortices downwards (IIRC). So the proof was inherently flawed.

In this case, the mathematical formula's DO directly translate into real world applications. Its called the law of conservation of momentum. Note that the impulse of a bullet impact with its target is going to be equal or less than the impulse generated between the shooter and the bullet. No one gets knocked down by shooting a 9mm, 5.56mm NATO, 12 gauge or 7.62mm NATO unless they hold the gun in a way that it can damage the shooter. Since the impulse will be equal or less (due to air friction) with the target, they are not going to be knocked down sans damage.

 

[C. Baize]

Yeah.
In the 30s.
With faulty thinking.
It's not true anymore.

Just because one guy got knocked on his butt doesn't mean everyone does. Anecdotal is fun that way.

Faulty thinking... that's part of the point I'm making.
Not everything regarded as truth because it works on paper will remain truth.

I consider actual experience to be far more accurate than a mathematical formula for "why what happened to you didn't really happen to you 'cause I can mathematically prove that doesn't happen."

Experience > mathematical equations.

 

[JoelF]

For an example of a real life "high tech" balistic weapon, check out a company called Metal Storm (http://www.metalstorm.com/). They've got a machine gun which fires at a rate of 1,000,000 rounds per minute, using no moving parts. They electronically fire the rounds.

 

[hobgoblin]

the mythbuster setup only handled mass vs mass, it did not take into account getting your leg shot from under you (could maybe have you fall to your knees or similar).

hell, i had the air knocked out of me in school ones from a foam ball. i was unprepared for it and therefor more or less doubled over. i would expect a .45 to the vest could have a similar effect.

so while doing the hollywood never happens, people can still fall over from shock, pain and similar.

allso, on a later revisit of the myth they talked about actors in old westerns just falling over. sure, if you fall backwards into a window you may well go thru that window and so on. but thats about the same distance as falling down and back from a standing posision. your feet would still be where you where standing.

the flying myth may well have started not from hollywood, but from people being shot and then falling backwards as their balance failed based on the shock of the wound. just finding the body streched out may make people think he was pushed backwards a bit by the bullet or something like that...

 

[Plane Sailing]

So, what do you think, should ballistic based weaponry still be included for PL 6 and higher, for vehicles, hand held weapons, and starships?

Personally I think that ballistic weaponry should still be included for hand held and vehicles, but be of more limited importance for starships - because of ranges and time-in-flight issues. I could see ballistics for short range punch and for short range anti-missile defences, but not as main batteries.

I always like the model for energy weapons that David Drake uses in his 'hammers slammers' short stories - ammunition not powerpacks, but the ammunition discs are used to create an energy bolt.

Cheers

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

I've seen this arguement go round and round, but let's move onto sci-fi.

A magnetic accellerator weapon, using a chunk of ferrous coated (for launching) duranium alloy that weighs 8 ounces accellerated to .75 C.

That hits someone in armor, the armor withstands the blow.

He's still got a chance of being blown off his feet. Sure, it won't hurt him, only lead to armor degredation, but still batter around.

With the invention of hypervelocity slugs (IE: C+ Cannon) You'd still have ballistic weapons out there, even with ship to ship combat.

For example, wrap a lead slug around a small hyperdrive engine. The slug makes microjumps and phases in JUST as it hits. It's moving right around C, and got there quicker than laser beams.

Then you have the mixture of projectile and energy: IE: Torpedoes and Missiles.

They head out, then detonate, creating a directed energy lance (Think bomb pumped laser) that slices into the enemy ship.

I still hold to the ORIGINAL post of this thread: That a high tech military would not abandon ballistic weapons for solely energy weapons.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Another interesting concept that Traveller originally came up with (AFAIK) was the big ship Meson gun - the idea being that you accellerate an ultra-high energy meson to relativistic speeds and time it so that it decays inside the target vessel. No whizzy ray beams, just explosions occuring inside ships armour.

For example, wrap a lead slug around a small hyperdrive engine. The slug makes microjumps and phases in JUST as it hits. It's moving right around C, and got there quicker than laser beams.

Now I could see this in terms of a guided munition, but not a ballistic weapon - but that may be because I've got different expectations around the word. I'm thinking of ballistic weapons as those which are given an initial impetus and then travel to their target without terminal guidance or additional propulsion; add those qualities and I'd call them missiles or rockets - something other than plain ballistic.

Since most sci-fi has room-sized hyperdrives, that particular example is from a vastly higher tech level, enough so that the equivalent energy weapons might be 'point your gun at the target and it disappears' so some other virtually magical effect. At the very least I'd expect energy weapons to fire through hyperdrive lenses which cause them to arrive faster than the speed of light too.

Then again, if you are projecting destructive micro-black holes at one another, would you count that as ballistic or energy weapons

Cheers

 

[Strutinan]

<deleted>

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Any one see Star Trek: First contact? Where picard uses a holographic tommy gun to blow away two borg who had adapted to his phaser?
I think the federation should get the idea and start issuing projectile weapons to ships expected to encounter borg. Then again the borg might just start being kevlar plated.

No reason in outerspace away from the forces of gravity a bullet wouldn't be lethal. It would travel farther and not slow down much unlike on earth. But the kick of the weapon could be a problem in outerspace too.

There are a few projectile weapons (other than torpedos and such) used in some scifi settings. I can think of star craft off the top of my head.

In the real world I hardly doubt lasers will replace ballistic weaponry ever.

 

[Nadaka]

Faulty thinking... that's part of the point I'm making.
Not everything regarded as truth because it works on paper will remain truth.

I consider actual experience to be far more accurate than a mathematical formula for "why what happened to you didn't really happen to you 'cause I can mathematically prove that doesn't happen."

Experience > mathematical equations.

Its not faulty thinking. I proved that the REASON he stated for falling over is false. I did not claim he didnt or shouldn't have fallen over. I am just saying that the impulse of momentum is not the reason that this occured. THe reason one falls over when shot is a result of the damage: pain, system shock, muscle spasms, nerve damage in severely bruised tissue, having a hole where functional organs used to be, etc.