Sci-fi Weapons, Vehicles and Equipment

Imagine a tank is under attack and has to choose between activating the APS and killing it's escorts or don't activate it and get destroyed. Recipe for drama right there.

I think that was the plot of an episode of SDF Macross. If they activated their full shield, they'd crush the people gathered under the ship trying to get aboard, if they didn't activate it, their point defenses would get overwhelmed and the ship would be destroyed (promptly landing the wreckage on the people below).

Yeah, I remember that episode. Of course, "can't use weapon X because an ally is in the way" is a classic plot element (may even be a trope here somewhere).

Reality is for those who lack imagination.

Bel: No it is not irrelevant you are just not paying attention again. Why Top down attack provides comparatively better performance against hard kill APS systems has absolutely zero to do with the passive armor scheme. Angelus was commenting on the fact that top down attack is apparently more effective. It is about what the APS system can cover and has been noted twice for you now most modern systems in use have poor vertical coverage and that it is starting to change. I also noted that not all top down attack has that advantage by pointing out some weapons have to pass closer to the tank to work meaning the fall into the protected space of the APS.

For anti-cluster cluster munitions how dangerous it is depends on how it is deployed and what kind of interceptor you have. Intercepting cluster munitions a system that fires vertically would obviously better and the further out they can intercept the munitions the better especially for any systems that can make a stand off type attack. Getting the counter munition further away from what it is protecting when it makes the counter does a fair bit to reduce collateral. If your using a warhead that sprays fragments everywhere that will be a problem. If you use directed fragmentation you have a lot less to worry about. You could also use proximity based blast like Iron Fist and simply not have to worry about your systems weapons reaching out all that far. While pieces of the cluster munitions and remains of your counter projectiles will be falling back down on your stuff, chances are pretty good it is a lot better then the active cluster munitions doing the same.

edited 18th Feb '16 4:58:24 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Who watches the watchmen?

I was definitely imagining the munitions being in a series of vertical launch cells, ala the Tor/SA-15 Gauntlet. The idea of directed frag did belatedly occur to me, though what you mentioned is extremely useful nonetheless! Do you think that such a system could also perform acceptable anti-personnel work?

Locking you up on radar since '09

So the entire argument for top down attacks being effective against APS is...risk of the interceptor landing on the tank?

Bel: No the argument is that some of the currently in use APS systems with hard kill interceptors have a limited arc of coverage that can't cover the higher angles of attack of some top down attack munitions. However there are currently two that have higher angles of coverage and that might now also include the new Russian APS called "Afghanit" However it is so very new details are scarce so we can't say for sure. To add it some of the top down attack missiles are not firing stand off projectiles but use HEAT type warheads and have to pass within a couple feet of the top of the tank which takes their flight path through the zones covered by current gen APS. Which is why Angelus was also mentioning the EFP warheads because most of the ones in use fire at the target from 30-50m away. The few examples of ATGM's that use EFP warheads in top down attack are in the group that have to pass closer to attack partly because they are not packing the larger EFP warheads though in theory they could.

The second bit was for the anti-cluster munition system firing its own counter cluster munition flanker mentioned.

edited 18th Feb '16 5:00:06 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Who watches the watchmen?

So, Halo has introduced a concept of Vacuum enhanced nuclear weapons to get around the whole idea of nukes in space are largely useless without a direct hit.

Any sort of plausibility to this?

New Survey coming this weekend!

Yes in a sense. Nukes in space are pretty much single use plasma/radiological weapons. You're not using shock force to topple a ship in space, you're boiling it away and irradiating everyone inside to death.

There are ways to improve a nuke's performance in space. Most commonly, the nuclear shaped charge.

"Allah may guide their bullets, but Jesus helps those who aim down the sights."

There have been a few mention of similar systems in thread. Like shaped nuclear charges which concentrate more energy over a given area and someone mentioned Casaba Howitzer.

edited 19th Feb '16 7:05:58 AM by TuefelHundenIV

Who watches the watchmen?

Casaba Howitzers.

The Nuclear shaped charges AKA Casaba Howitzers were a realization brought by the Orion Drive Project, when at one point someone realized if you narrow down the pusher plate you get a nuclear blowtorch instead of nuclear driven propulsion.

Essentially, Nukes in space have limited range compared to planetside use due to the lack of atmosphere to absorb all the photons and neutrons thus converting them into heat, in space you'd have the neutrons, the photons and all ionizing radiation from Alpha to Gamma radiation being generated and scattering in an spherical pattern, unless you use the Casaba Howitzer, which focuses most of the blast in a single direction, but usually most of the immediate damage from a nuclear warhead in space would fall within the initial blast sphere and some distance within a few hundreds of meters next to the blast point. Though most of the damage would come in the form of thermal and ionizing radiation and neutron's discharge as mentioned above.

A direct hit would certainly vaporize a good chuck of the space craft and send the rest flying at ridiculous speeds, within the immediate blast radius or just a few hundred meters short of it any space craft would suffer catastrophic damage and certainly be left as a smoldering and radioactive wreck, a bit further outside the blast radius the space craft would be coated with a decent amount of radiation and have the exposed surface heated, most space crafts made to handle deep space would deal with the radiation normally and the extra head may contribute to to reduce the operational heat tolerance of the space craft, and further outside the blast radius it would be no more damaging than being exposed to sun rays and cosmic radiation.

edited 19th Feb '16 6:26:02 AM by AngelusNox

Inter arma enim silent leges

There are also bomb pumped X-ray lasers, in case you want to snipe the next planet over. Very powerful but you don't want it onboard when you set it off.

Actually, could you use nuclear bombs as as a replacement for flak?

You also lose a lot of your bomb's power with a pumped laser. Energy efficiency is abysmal.

Reality is for those who lack imagination.

Hello, amateur writer and world builder here with only a very basic understanding of weapons, I need help (if it isn't any trouble) working on my "armory".

First off, I cans decide if I should go the Kinetic Weapons are just better route or the Plasma Gun one.

Ya, I'm weird like that...

^ I do both in a world building project of mine. (World building an FPS video game.) Kinetics and plasma and beam weapons (among others) all coexist and they all have various advantages and disadvantages against each other.

"Allah may guide their bullets, but Jesus helps those who aim down the sights."

Kenetic really are the better option.

• You can use gravity to slingshot them into positions normally unreachable via a straight line of fire.
• You can load them with a variety of different types of specialty ammunition.
• There is not much that can resit having another thing violently enter the part of space time it is already in.

The main benefits of energy on the other hand are just the logistics of not having to carry around the slugs that mass drivers need, but they also create there own issues of heat and energy management.

I guess if you REALLY need endurance energy weapons are the better option, so for things like Star Trek they work well.

But if you can reload and resupply often, like in say Star Wars, you really should stick to slugs.

edited 19th Feb '16 2:53:23 PM by Imca

Wow first off thanks for the rapid replies.

@Major Tom: I hope your FPS game takes off. But I want to stick closer to the used future atmosphere I want to set.

@IMCA: That was very informative and all, but I was talking about hand helds, not ship mounted Mass Drivers.

Of course it probably would be helpful to put my writing's tech level into perspective, lol.

It's closer to the "hard" end of the Mohs scale of sci fi hardness No death rays, no teleportation, no instant space travel. Think more Alien than Star Trek

Ya, I'm weird like that...

Even still on the ground, those apply on every thing down to the scale of a towed gun.

Energy artillery is a very bad idea because it requires line of sight, where as a slug thrower can be fired over the horizon, or behind cover.

As for hand held, there it really depends on what the power generation of your setting is like.

See, this is why you guys are the weapons experts, not me.

As for power levels, think "10 years after a planet-wide war that left the western seaboard out to Mississippi a nuclear wasteland and left the human (more often called "Terries" ) population at around 5 million. And it was only Humany's acceptance into the greater Orion communities that they were able to survive".

Ya, I'm weird like that...

The original Halo game (or maybe the second?) would like to disagree with you there. The plasma mortar tanks were hella badass.

There's more to energy than just lasers, after all, so energy artillery in general is completely plausible and practical for a setting, even for indirect fire weapons. More so than standard slugs, in many cases. Some sort of sci-fi defense akin to THEL would be able to easily shoot down traditional artillery and even rail weaponry, but a giant murderous ball of plasma wouldn't be affected the same way.

For handheld energy weapons the biggest hurdle is the energy source for the weapon. This is where a lot of Hand Wavium typically comes into to play to explain where the power comes from in a compact personal weapon. Some settings may have things like back pack generators for a power supply.

If you are talking kinetic based small arms vs plasma based small arms it depends on how hand wavy the verse is. The harder it is the less viable the plasma weapons are. However lasers might work better. The problem with plasma is once it is released from containment or any sort of magnetic field keeping it together it tends to rapidly disperse and cool. That and plasma can have a range of temperatures depending on the source. The best solution I have seen for that is to generate the plasma at the target which is done either by some sort of physical projectile or some other process that makes plasma at the target.

Kinetic weapons are far simpler in many regards and unless you are talking man portable rail guns don't require high power to operate. However the trade off is things like recoil forces and ammo weight are a much bigger concern in kinetic weapons. The more powerful the cartridge the more recoil it has and also the heavier the ammo tends to be. Also the better armor protection gets the more velocity you tend to need out of your kinetic ammo or the more you need specialized ammo to counter it.

For that fictional world you need to decide how readily available weapons and armor are. If the world in general is pretty shit tastic and resources are tight. You take what you can get or what is easy to manufacture and works.

edited 19th Feb '16 5:26:42 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Who watches the watchmen?

^ In most universes that use plasma weapons, they rarely work well at anything beyond submachinegun range. Hell in Halo the plasma weaponry is explicitly rated at sub-200 meters for their infantry stuff. It takes overkill calibers to reach the kind of ranges that kinetic or otherwise non-plasma stuff can do on a much smaller weapon. (For example, the plasma mortar on the Wraith in Halo is 38cm in caliber and has about the same range as the 90mm APCBC-HE ammunition on the Scorpion.)

"Allah may guide their bullets, but Jesus helps those who aim down the sights."

Eh, the verse is not too hand wavy. I am really trying to avoid a "it works because SCIENCE!" Explanation.

Also, I am loving all the Halo talk here. :)

Also, how "shit tastic" the world is depends on where you are from and who you are. The main character, for example, has only something comparable to a chainmail bikini because that's all she can afford.

edited 19th Feb '16 6:31:47 PM by Troperfrom95

Ya, I'm weird like that...

If you are going real feel some form of advanced firearm probably is the best bet.

Who watches the watchmen?

Thank you. :)

Ya, I'm weird like that...