Energy Weapons VS Ballistic Weapons

[Jack of Shadows]

I've been doing a lot of pondering on this subject myself for a little homebrew project of my own. If my high school knowledge of physics holds up there are, at the basic level, three types of weapons:

1. Matter Projectors - bullets, slugs, flechettes, etc...
2. Particle Projectors - electrons, neutrons, protons, plasma, etc... (really just very small matter projectors)
3. Wave Form Projectors - laser, maser, sonic, etc...

After the basics things get complicated because one can become or carry another. Or be mixed together. Then theirs the weird ones like gravity weapons where we don't even know enough to be able to place them in a group.

In reference to the Sten novels I also highly recommend the Matador novels by Steve Perry. Some very interesting weapons and toys in that series too.

Hmmm.... I just had a really twisted thought. If you could fire particles could you not also project molecules? Fire a molecular stream of Cynide into your opponent. Or an atomic stream of Sodium? Ick, that would be messy.

Jack

 

[Andur]

Krieg, here is one non-scientific fun site that "debunks" the AK-47 magazine myth with photos. Next we'll hear about how strapping dynamite to one's body will help versus a RPG hit...

http://www.theboxotruth.com/

1/2" of steel won't stop a .50 cal round, will stop most lesser rounds, but that is hardly wearable (20.42 lbs per sq. ft.), and one will still get a nasty contusion, better than dead though.

As for the 9" x 9" and 12" x 12" insertable formed ceramic plates, I guess if to be "bulletproof" in two square feet or less of one's total body's area is a comfort... Worth the money spent even if it saves one life though.

Best defense the U.S. has versus its current enemy's rifles is the fact they can't shoot worth a crap.

 

[Falkus]

I've been doing a lot of pondering on this subject myself for a little homebrew project of my own. If my high school knowledge of physics holds up there are, at the basic level, three types of weapons:

That's assuming we don't discover any new things about physics in the future.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Anyway back to the original topic about Energy and Ballistic weapons.. I was wondering if you developed an energy weapon such as a laser what would be it's range? Would it some how self end, because if not you technically be able to shoot at any distance and it would not stop.

Depends on how tightly focused it is and what the medium it's fired in is.

At some point, a laser will diffuse to near uselessness. I personally have no idea how far that would have to be.

Also, in a vacuum, a directed energy weapon can go an infinite distance, so long as it doesn't hit anything. it may diffuse to uselessness, and it's certainly going to be absurdly difficult to aim at anything from interstellar distances, but hey. IIRC, GURPS 3e Vehicles 2e had a multiplier for being out of atmosphere for beam weapons.

Personally, I'm fond of railgun or gravgun rounds that can correct their courses mid-flight...something between cannon rounds and missiles.

Brad

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Hmmm.... I just had a really twisted thought. If you could fire particles could you not also project molecules? Fire a molecular stream of Cynide into your opponent. Or an atomic stream of Sodium? Ick, that would be messy.

That'd be a bit more difficult, I think.

In John Birmingham's novel, Weapons of Choice, which, as an aside, is a really good alternate history novel (and first of a series), there's mention of research being done on teleportation. Part of the purpose is the idea that you could teleport things into enemy soldiers to kill them. I'm not precisely sure how this was supposed to be more effective than shooting them, but hey.

Brad

 

[Falkus]

Part of the purpose is the idea that you could teleport things into enemy soldiers to kill them. I'm not precisely sure how this was supposed to be more effective than shooting them, but hey.

Teleportation is sort of an ultimate weapon. It would be liking a nation having the United States' nuclear arsenal, and no other nation in the world having any nuclear weapons. Because, essentially, teleportation gives you a viable first strike ability. You can teleport nuclear bombs to their targets instaneously and destroy the enemy's ability to launch back at you. If you have good enough computers and deteciton systems, any missiles that do get off can be eliminated by teleporting something to them in mid air, or teleporting them somewhere harmless.

 

[Krieg]

Krieg, here is one non-scientific fun site that "debunks" the AK-47 magazine myth with photos. Next we'll hear about how strapping dynamite to one's body will help versus a RPG hit...

*shrug* I have personally pulled magazine festooned load bearing gear off of an enemy combatant that had stopped no less than three M855 rounds....although he did suffer some lacerations caused by spalling.

Anecdotal?

Certainly.

But I'm pretty confident it's far more relevant that "fun" experiments carried out under controlled condtions that have little in common with a tactical environment.

1/2" of steel won't stop a .50 cal round, will stop most lesser rounds, but that is hardly wearable (20.42 lbs per sq. ft.), and one will still get a nasty contusion, better than dead though.

Any possible contusion depends entirely on the surface area of rigid armor. Soft armor deforms upon impact which is what causes contusions, that is not the case with hard armor.

As for the 9" x 9" and 12" x 12" insertable formed ceramic plates, I guess if to be "bulletproof" in two square feet or less of one's total body's area is a comfort... Worth the money spent even if it saves one life though.

Well then I guess that we're pretty darn lucky that the primary kill zone on a human (ie the thoracic cavity) is roughly two square feet or less aren't we?

You might want to look into the percentage of fatal casualties in the most recent middle east conflict that have been caused by firearms as compared to those of previous conflicts of a similar nature (removing both artillery & explosive devices from the equation to keep it apples to apples). Those numbers are staggering lower, and can be directly attributed to the use of improved body armor on the part of western combatants.

Best defense the U.S. has versus its current enemy's rifles is the fact they can't shoot worth a crap.

.. what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make.

 

[yoippari]

I'm a little suprised that with high tech weapons being discussed that no one has brought up this thing yet.

Give it a few years and this technology might be made into personel sized weapons. When compareing this thing to an e-web or other mounted anti personel energy weapon I think I would take this thing. Variable speed makes onboard starship use safer (for all parties involved) It would also make a great ship mounted weapon, with some scifi modification of course.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

Krieg, here is one non-scientific fun site that "debunks" the AK-47 magazine myth with photos. Next we'll hear about how strapping dynamite to one's body will help versus a RPG hit...

http://www.theboxotruth.com/

You know, I see this all the time, "This site debunks XXXXX" but frankly, the sterile laboratory != battlefield conditions.

I've seen men go down, the magazine deformed and shrapnel wounds from the round shattering, still alive.

1/2" of steel won't stop a .50 cal round, will stop most lesser rounds, but that is hardly wearable (20.42 lbs per sq. ft.), and one will still get a nasty contusion, better than dead though.

Believe me, if you gave me a choice between a gunshot wound and carrying a 40 lb steel plate, I'd drop the gear to carry the plate.

A .50 caliber round is not the death sentence it once was. There have been documented BATTLEFIELD cases of people surviving a hit that 20 years ago would have turned thier torso into hydrostatic shock jelly. A rather famous photo from early in 2003 showed a British tanker whose kevlar helmet was hit 3-4 times by .51 Cal Soviet heavy machine gun, who survived, and was smiling. It chewed up the helmet, gave him whiplash, and knocked him silly.

30 years ago, his head would have turned into a canoe.

As for the 9" x 9" and 12" x 12" insertable formed ceramic plates, I guess if to be "bulletproof" in two square feet or less of one's total body's area is a comfort... Worth the money spent even if it saves one life though.

Take a look at the stastics.

The majority of deaths (I think it sits in the 80% bracket) are due to IED's, NOT torso shots, which now result in cracked ribs at worst, wind knocked out of you at best. The Center for Army Lessons Learned had a large breakdown that while the amount of wounded soldiers is far more than to be expected, the amount of kills thus far is equal to a bad MONTH in Vietnam.

Best defense the U.S. has versus its current enemy's rifles is the fact they can't shoot worth a crap.

My wife is alive due to a Desert Storm Era kevlar vest. My brother is alive due to a Interceptor Vest. I'm alive due to a Desert Storm Era kevlar vest and helmet.

The vests and helmets have saved a LOT of lives. CALL, DARPA, and DoDMC facts, figures and documentation back it up.

--------------------------

As for laser weapons never stopping, that's not true in atmosphere. Attenuation and diffusion, as well as atmospheric contaminates, do lower the power of the beam. An energy wavelength tight enough to cause damage would also rapidly lose power as it would be unable to as easily overcome objects.

 

[Derren]

You all forget the advantages energy weapons have over conventional ones, mainly accuracy.

Laser who really travel at light speed are much easier to aim than slug throwers who are affected by the density of the air and gravity (which are constantly changing variables in a sci-fi setting). And depending on the energy source a continous fire is possible.

Also the development of conventional guns is nearly at the end. There aren't any big inventions left in the field except the conversion to gauss weapons or micro rockets and even now some good defenses exist against bullets which stop them completly or reduce a hit to a minor wound. Yes, knockback is nice at close range but gunfights happen mostly at long rage where knockback is a minor factor because of the reduced power of the bullet and because you can't take as many advantages by knocking the enemy over than at close range.

Guns only stay effective as long as the enemy doesn't has access to defensive equipment which is superior than the guns. If that happens you have invent a bullet to penetrate this defenses and, if that is not possible, switch to a different weapon.

My guess for the future is mainly micro explosive rounds/rockets and either energy or gauss whatever proves easier to do.
What about sonic weapons? Sci-Fi dram or really an option?