Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="aramis erak" data-source="post: 8551836" data-attributes="member: 6779310">With the exception of LRADs, which I don't recognize as a term...Torpedoes still require a weak spot in the hull (the tube), and are NOT recoilless, since they've a pressure wave to help them exit the tube.Deck torpedoes work well only when one is already pointed generally toward the enemy. And again, it's a projectile which has to be thrust out of the tube. Not recoilless.Torpedoes are low recoil.Rockets/missiles (same thing) do have very low recoil, but produce a prodigious amount of flame.  The needed thermal mass is bulky. (Not so much heavy, but bulky.) And, unlike cannon, the propellant can be cooked off by a laser...Lasers are not, at present, capable of the ranges of a 5" QF cannon (since many can exceed horizon - 11 miles came up on a quick google) No naval laser is going to exceed 5 miles - because the curvature of the sea has a limit of 3.1 miles or so.  And while they are almost entirely recoilless (meaninglessly low except in an orbital/n-space context), they're  going to require more mass per joule delivered to target than any cannon due to the need to use capacitance banks and major amounts of power generation. And feeding those capacitance banks needs a lot of energy at a roughly 30% efficiency; the capacitance to laser energy is also a similar rate... so about 9% efficiency from the generator, which is itself a 30-50% efficiency, so are' to to 3 to 4.5% of fuel efficiency into the laser... while we can get 30-50% or so with naval canon. (variety of factors I can't quantify.)Further, Lasers dissipate over airspace both due to beam divergence and atmospheric scattering. At sea, they add spray to the particulat impediment...So, canon are, largely, the most efficient use. Faster to rearm than missile systems. Easier to build, as efficient on fuel to joules of impact, can carry the same warheads... the drawback to guns is the strongback and can - not readily refittable.Missiles ae harder to rearm, more risk of cooking off in launcher, but slightly longer ranges... but slower speeds. Most naval cannon are supersonic or hypersonic; most missiles run transsonic to supersonic. Gun shell is a smaller target than a missile, but both can be hit by modern CIDS/CIWS defensive automated defense cannons.Defense turrets should be a mix of close in laser turrets (for sustainability) and very rapid fire small caliber autocannon (15 to 30mm hypersonic)Note that CIWS have a significant recoil - they stress their mounts. So they are a significant maintenance factor, and work best when attacked to a localized strongback affixed to major bulkheads,  if not to the casements part of the major turret cannon.</blockquote>

Verification