armoredman
New member
They have little experience in the deep blue, I fear. Davy Jones will be happy to take them in.
As for the "laser rifle", does it come in the 40 watt range?
As for the "laser rifle", does it come in the 40 watt range?
Chinese laser gun - beginning of the end of the projectile era?
- Thread starter simonrichter
- Start date
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Not to divert but I wouldn't discount a country coming up to speed in naval warfare. The Japanese went from a non-modern tech society to a naval superpower fairly quickly.
As far as the 40 watt rifle, it will be carried by their armies of Lenovo terminators. Remember those terra cotta soldiers - this time they will be T-800s or later models.
As far as the 40 watt rifle, it will be carried by their armies of Lenovo terminators. Remember those terra cotta soldiers - this time they will be T-800s or later models.
Evan Thomas
Inactive
Very true. It's not like it's rocket science.Dr. Meyer said:
10,000 tons is the upper limit of a Washington Treaty cruiser. Of course, there were cheaters like the Germans and Japanese who underreported their tonnage. Our post Treaty Baltimore cruisers were heavier too at 14,000-17,000 (latter is full displacement).
That said, lasers would be about the only thing that can intercept a hypersonic missile that the Chinese and Russians have. I know we've got things that the public is not made aware of.
My big question is when will Harbor Freight sell the Chinese "distance measuring" or "levelling" tool?
That said, lasers would be about the only thing that can intercept a hypersonic missile that the Chinese and Russians have. I know we've got things that the public is not made aware of.
My big question is when will Harbor Freight sell the Chinese "distance measuring" or "levelling" tool?
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
We have a crash program to develop our own hypersonic missiles. From what I read, we sat on our butt with Harpoons as we didn't think there would be a credible threat at sea every again. We are buying Norwegian missiles now to upgrade our ships.
The problem with the hypersonics is that unless you manage to divert them, the mass of the projectile still keeps coming. That was a problem with the Kamikazes in WWII.
The problem with the hypersonics is that unless you manage to divert them, the mass of the projectile still keeps coming. That was a problem with the Kamikazes in WWII.
Its even worse with missiles, as they are faster, and don't rely on an onboard pilot to steer them into the target.
One of the little publicized details of the Gulf War(s) is that more people were injured/killed from the Scud missiles that the Patriot missiles SHOT DOWN than were killed or injured from the ones that weren't shot down.
Unless you turn the attacking missile into chaff, dangerous size pieces ARE going to land, somewhere. Not so much of a concern on the open sea, but a different matter over a city.
armoredman
New member
What goes up must come down...
Double Naught Spy
New member
I would be a whole lot more impressed with the Chinese claims if there was documentation.
Gee 00
didn't you see the article and the *picture*? Wasn't that documentation enough? Why wouldn't you believe them at face value?
Even once the Chinese operationalize an innovative weapon, their cycle time has historically been significantly longer than similar initiatives in the US.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
There was a story by Robert Heinlein years ago about the USA being complacent about Asian science and military prowess. An alliance of China and Japan invade and conquer the country. We were complacent in 1941, ya think? Japan couldn't have better planes and torpedos, be better naval night fighters. Luckily, we got in gear and our overwhelming industrial superiority and development carried the day.
In the book above, a secret lab survived and came up with weapons based on some new physics. We known the electro-magnetic spectrum but they came up with some new ones like gravito-electro. That enabled the development of force fields, transmutation rays and some political incorrect ray guns that would only target and kill Asians. They started a new church for the Lord Mota (get it) as the conquerors respected local religion. That gave the rebellion bases and the USA won.
Just saying. We don't want to be at the next Tsuhima like battle in the Taiwan straits.
In the book above, a secret lab survived and came up with weapons based on some new physics. We known the electro-magnetic spectrum but they came up with some new ones like gravito-electro. That enabled the development of force fields, transmutation rays and some political incorrect ray guns that would only target and kill Asians. They started a new church for the Lord Mota (get it) as the conquerors respected local religion. That gave the rebellion bases and the USA won.
Just saying. We don't want to be at the next Tsuhima like battle in the Taiwan straits.
Except today there is still significant animosity between China and Japan.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
There used to be considerable animosity between the USA and Great Britain. Also, both Japan and China have reasons not to like us. Last it was a story!
However, the only missiles that were shot down were ones that were expected to impact in a protected area anyway. There is no telling how much destruction and casualties they may have caused were they not destroyed in the air.
It is kind of like having the choice between being hit with an RPG or RPG fragments. I'll take the fragments every time.
Kinetic projectile weapons will never be replaced by energy weapons on a personal basis. No level of laser power can kill with a single shot or even a number of them. the very best that can be done would be to use a full, long duration beam and saw the opponent's body open.
Projectile weapons are the best ,most effective short range weapon possible. One cartridge weighs very little. A rifle and even up to a thousand rounds can be easily transported by a man, maybe two. Can a laser or other energy weapon be made that can discharge a thousand lethal attacks in a matter of minutes?
I have one more point to make. An energy weapon would require an enormous store of energy, and it would have to be able to discharge it almost instantly when the fire control button is activated. It would have to recycle rapidly. It would have to be portable and lightweight. A rifle can pour fire out in seconds, can any sort of energy weapon put several hundred shots into an area of cover in seconds, hoping to make a hit?
Alright. Now if you have a sniper position, what does that change?
A super heavy backpack battery can be used, a battery that can accomodate the needs of a high power energy weapon. Put a super, absolutely accurate rangefinder on it. Out a super, ultra accurate telescopic sight on it. You will have a weapon better than almost anything we have now. Trajectory, wind drift, distance, none of the handicaps common to projectile weapons matter anymore, none of them. If a target can be seen and ranged, the hit can be made anywhere out to the end of the earth.
Punching a hole in the guy won't help much. But what if there is a short burst, a second or so? What if the beam drifts a bit during that second? Set the thing up to make an eight inch slash at the range that the target is estimated at. If you have the necessary power, you could open a guy's chest up clear to the spine.
But with todays technology, there is no such thing. You can't have the power to carry, or the power to dumpe enough energy in the short time available.
A pound of powder releases a ton of energy We may never find a way to store and channel enough electricity to make a hand carried energy weapon function.
Projectile weapons are the best ,most effective short range weapon possible. One cartridge weighs very little. A rifle and even up to a thousand rounds can be easily transported by a man, maybe two. Can a laser or other energy weapon be made that can discharge a thousand lethal attacks in a matter of minutes?
I have one more point to make. An energy weapon would require an enormous store of energy, and it would have to be able to discharge it almost instantly when the fire control button is activated. It would have to recycle rapidly. It would have to be portable and lightweight. A rifle can pour fire out in seconds, can any sort of energy weapon put several hundred shots into an area of cover in seconds, hoping to make a hit?
Alright. Now if you have a sniper position, what does that change?
A super heavy backpack battery can be used, a battery that can accomodate the needs of a high power energy weapon. Put a super, absolutely accurate rangefinder on it. Out a super, ultra accurate telescopic sight on it. You will have a weapon better than almost anything we have now. Trajectory, wind drift, distance, none of the handicaps common to projectile weapons matter anymore, none of them. If a target can be seen and ranged, the hit can be made anywhere out to the end of the earth.
Punching a hole in the guy won't help much. But what if there is a short burst, a second or so? What if the beam drifts a bit during that second? Set the thing up to make an eight inch slash at the range that the target is estimated at. If you have the necessary power, you could open a guy's chest up clear to the spine.
But with todays technology, there is no such thing. You can't have the power to carry, or the power to dumpe enough energy in the short time available.
A pound of powder releases a ton of energy We may never find a way to store and channel enough electricity to make a hand carried energy weapon function.
Throughout history people have been looking at the existing tech of their time and making pronouncements about things that will "never" happen or "cannot be done". And, throughout history, they have been proven wrong eventually.
I remember hearing about a guy some hundred years or so ago, who wanted to close the US Patent Office, because, according to him, everything that could be invented had been.....
Kinetic energy weapons may not be replaced for a few centuries, or might be in the next 100 years if some currently unthought of breakthrough happens.
But "never" is too long a time for accurate prediction.
You are right, I should not say never. The one single thing that we will have to over come is finding a way to store and use god knows how many joules of energy in the situation of combat.Hunting with a laser will probably never be approve by any state, I would hope not, at least. as a personal defense weapon, it would totally reek. Again, how do we store enough energy to cause as much damage as a bullet will? Our current technology, as far as I can tell, doesn't even have a clue about it. The biggest personally transportable laser may be able to pop a hole through a roast, but sustaining anything but a burst is a wholly different thing.
A bullet works well, and the energy derived from powder is qhite efficiently turned into damage on impact. lasers, railguns, you can't ramp that electrical energy up high enough to make a practical and useful antipersonnel weapon except for motorized transport.
I've had a few MRI scans done. When those magnets would fire, my tungsten ring would wiggle.That's enormous amounts of power. It failed to strip the staples out of my head. If we have a liquid helium electromagnet that can't even tear a staple out of skin, will we be able to weaponize it?
when you approach some of the problems that we face in technology, there comes a level that you would require the use of magic.
A bullet works well, and the energy derived from powder is qhite efficiently turned into damage on impact. lasers, railguns, you can't ramp that electrical energy up high enough to make a practical and useful antipersonnel weapon except for motorized transport.
I've had a few MRI scans done. When those magnets would fire, my tungsten ring would wiggle.That's enormous amounts of power. It failed to strip the staples out of my head. If we have a liquid helium electromagnet that can't even tear a staple out of skin, will we be able to weaponize it?
when you approach some of the problems that we face in technology, there comes a level that you would require the use of magic.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
With the advances in technology in general and energy storage in particular, I'm not sure it will be all that long before such a weapon is at least possible, if a while after that before it's practical.
I heard a news story just today about a new lithium battery technology that is EASIER to build than current L-I batteries and recharges in seconds.
Just a few days earlier, I saw an article about the first steps being made in batteries that exhibit "quantum entanglement". Effectively, charging time is inversely proportional to how many batteries you build. If one will charge in an hour, two will in 30 minutes... build 10,000 and they recharge in under 1 second.
An iPhone X is literally 22 times faster than a Cray-2 Supercomputer from 1985. The Cray was the size of 2 refrigerators and had to be cooled with Flourinert.
Don't underestimate our advancements.
I heard a news story just today about a new lithium battery technology that is EASIER to build than current L-I batteries and recharges in seconds.
Just a few days earlier, I saw an article about the first steps being made in batteries that exhibit "quantum entanglement". Effectively, charging time is inversely proportional to how many batteries you build. If one will charge in an hour, two will in 30 minutes... build 10,000 and they recharge in under 1 second.
An iPhone X is literally 22 times faster than a Cray-2 Supercomputer from 1985. The Cray was the size of 2 refrigerators and had to be cooled with Flourinert.
Don't underestimate our advancements.
i guess let me put this in perspective. what quickly causes damage and/or death to the superbly complex systems that make up a living being? poison, electric shock, massive amounts of blunt trauma or tearing and tissue destruction, radiation of such horrible amounts that every nerve is immediately damaged beyond use, and others. electric shock may be the best weapon to use against a human being, we could crank the energy up hign enough to cook a man's brain, but a taser is limited in usefulness today and there are limited areas that you can extend that efficiency to. Laser? once again, a great idea, but we are going to have to improve it exponentially before it can be anything useful, and even if we manage to do so, we will still have the absolute need that it can be made either more effectively or more inexpensively than the other alternatives.
Can we send a company of men into the desert with lasers? You can very effectively arm and deploy that company of men with traditional weapons. will you ever be able to do so with energy weapons with a cost efficiency that will allow it to compete?
I don't see any way that it can ever happen. I wish that it could, but I don't believe that these are simple technological issues, they are fundamental issues of physics, anatomy, biology, cost, and the ability to miniaturize our current technology to workable sizes.
A few years back a company started selling the most powerful hand held laser ever. YOU COULD POP A BALLOON WITH IT! i I find it amazing that I could do that very thing in my front yard with a magnifying glass. The guy who reviewed it tested it by setting matches on fire, lighting cigarettes, burning ants, burning holes in cardboard.
Can we send a company of men into the desert with lasers? You can very effectively arm and deploy that company of men with traditional weapons. will you ever be able to do so with energy weapons with a cost efficiency that will allow it to compete?
I don't see any way that it can ever happen. I wish that it could, but I don't believe that these are simple technological issues, they are fundamental issues of physics, anatomy, biology, cost, and the ability to miniaturize our current technology to workable sizes.
A few years back a company started selling the most powerful hand held laser ever. YOU COULD POP A BALLOON WITH IT! i I find it amazing that I could do that very thing in my front yard with a magnifying glass. The guy who reviewed it tested it by setting matches on fire, lighting cigarettes, burning ants, burning holes in cardboard.
My guess is we are FAR closer to sending a company of ground drones armed with conventional weapons carrying far more ammo/far better optics/far better targeting without the need for food, water, protection from the elements beyond those needed by the pilot in Utah then we are likely to field an energy weapon system.
That being said I could envision small railgun type weapons used by said drones as they would be big enough/strong enough to carry a power source.
You will never eliminate the grunt on the ground but I suspect will go a long way towards making them more support personal.
I doubt you will see squads of men with laser/energy weapons in our time if ever.
I could see limited use of energy weapons to blind combatants and or sensor systems.