It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Laser Guns or Rail Gun

page: 11
0
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Railgun ampiture tempratures are not realy a problem, Tungsten is a mettal that can withstand immense tempratures, and even then, the current standard is a mix of alluminium and carbon, whitch is nearly heat proof, coated in a 50/50 mix of teflon and carbon. the allluninium can melt out, but innesia says that the force will continue in the direction that force is allready applyed, so it doesent matter is the alluminium turns into Super heated plasma, 'cause teh carbon will keep going till it hits somthing[s] of substancial size.

Pluss, plasma is like a ghost on a 4year old, the psycological effect on somone seeing at somthing that looks both dangoruss, high-tec, and impressive, where the aim is to kill someone.

PS dont mind my spelling, im only 14

[edit on 2-11-2004 by Kayaroyu]

[edit on 2-11-2004 by Kayaroyu]




posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 01:21 AM
link   
sorry about the dobble post , but the next bit wouldent fit:

what about for subs, i mean, tandard chemmical guns cant fire undewater, and a torpedo is liudecressly overpriced to just blow up, and theyve allready got nuclear reactors on those things, so power is no problem...[mmm... nuclear]



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kayaroyu
sorry about the dobble post , but the next bit wouldent fit:

what about for subs, i mean, tandard chemmical guns cant fire undewater, and a torpedo is liudecressly overpriced to just blow up, and theyve allready got nuclear reactors on those things, so power is no problem...[mmm... nuclear]

yeah i thought that as well, BUT its really detecting the ships to kill them.
and the fact if it wanted to shoot at a target close up it would need the whole ship to move or tilt.



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 03:18 PM
link   
But if it was a Laser, you can slap it on a turret, and change th angle, but then there is the problem of beam dispersion through water, but then agian, a railgun would be most effective aginsed things in a hostile enviroment, the appature would make a hole straight through, bulkheads and all



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kayaroyu
But if it was a Laser, you can slap it on a turret, and change th angle, but then there is the problem of beam dispersion through water, but then agian, a railgun would be most effective aginsed things in a hostile enviroment, the appature would make a hole straight through, bulkheads and all

gona not be a sneaky weapon though. ever boat in the water will hear you for kilo miles.



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 04:44 AM
link   
Not realy, with a laser, there would just be a line of bubbles from where the water has boiled, and is a railgun was used, then the low efficency of tranceference form water to air would hinder the abbility to carry the signal, but it would wreak havoc with Sonar

But then again, if you wana be sneaky, your not realy gona be blowwin stuff up in the first place

[edit on 3-11-2004 by Kayaroyu]



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kayaroyu
Not realy, with a laser, there would just be a line of bubbles from where the water has boiled, and is a railgun was used, then the low efficency of tranceference form water to air would hinder the abbility to carry the signal, but it would wreak havoc with Sonar

But then again, if you wana be sneaky, your not realy gona be blowwin stuff up in the first place

[edit on 3-11-2004 by Kayaroyu]

the laser wouldnt work in the water, the water distorts it. thats why britain cant be bombed by laser bombs BUT cant really use a laser defense weapons.
no i mean at least with a torpedo you have some stealth but with a rail gun you are going to probably kill the sonar guy on the other sub.



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Well, its a weapon, that can go THROUGH Aurmour, and only takes up a few meters Cubed, with ammo wuld be about 50cm cubed... as oposed to 3 meters for the tube, and another three per torpedo



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kayaroyu
Well, its a weapon, that can go THROUGH Aurmour, and only takes up a few meters Cubed, with ammo wuld be about 50cm cubed... as oposed to 3 meters for the tube, and another three per torpedo

lol it goes through armour alright.
imagine the exit hole.
i mean a 50cm cubed slug would cause some serios damage, and if it was exsplosive then it would add to the damage.



posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 01:09 AM
link   
And the good thing, SUbs allready got the power source!!



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 11:00 PM
link   
No point in reil guns, you can just use armor piersing bulets, or make balistic weapons more powerful.
About lasors..., sort of useless, plasma will make alot more sence for an energy weapon, its like flamethrower on super steroids, it vaporizes anything it touches



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 11:03 PM
link   
The British navy already uses rail guns as short range kinetic weapon.

[edit on 5-11-2004 by Pavel]



posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pavel
No point in reil guns, you can just use armor piersing bulets, or make balistic weapons more powerful.

uhh so your saying a shell with a 260+ mile range is bad?
i think your thinking of a small hand held rail gun pavel. we are talking about a rail gun with 6 m rails and can shoot things @ 4 km/s aka it will kill anything in its path.



posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I thought a rail gun only has a range of 60 KM. And plus the guidance system on that thing must be EXTREMELY accurate because you are talking about a bullet thats going 10 KM a second. A tiny tiny difference could mean a complete miss.



posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by COWlan
I thought a rail gun only has a range of 60 KM. And plus the guidance system on that thing must be EXTREMELY accurate because you are talking about a bullet thats going 10 KM a second. A tiny tiny difference could mean a complete miss.

whoah there, 10 km/s dude i dont think thats even possible with 8 metre rails.
the rail gun just needs to be aimed high enough or do what a ICBM does but it wouldnt be picked up by any systems since there is no burn stage.
it just goes up and down.
yeah VERY VERY acurate.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 03:22 PM
link   
First, from a long while back,


Oh, by the way there is no recoil on a rail gun, it works by using an electro-magnetic pulse to accelerate the slug

Well, for every action, an equal and opposite reaction. There will be a recoil on any projectile firing weapon, including a laser (light does have momentum, but not mass).

I would say that the only practical application for either a laser or a rail gun weapon would be on a ship (or a laser in space) or in use as base defence and anti-aircraft. I would expect the need for power to exceed what could be supplied from a tank. it would be extremely hard to move either of these weapons quickly; as far as I know they must be very large in order to be effective. It would be possible to shoot down, at a great distance, enemy aircraft, however, once the aircraft get too close to the weapon, the rail gun would have to move more quickly than is possible in order to hit the target, but then again, there already exists effective, close-range anti-aircraft options. If a rail gun could be aimed accurately enough, to hit the engine of a tank (at very nearly 100% of attempts), from a war ship, this would be an extremely effective weapon for any country. If the gun could be cooled rapidly, ammo supplied quickly (ammo for rail guns would be extremely cheap compared to what most people would think), and possibly 4 or 5 guns mounted on a set of 5 ships, an entire enemy fleet of tanks could be disabled with out visual contact or much death or civilian casualties. A rail gun would be the ultimate “smart” weapon.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 07:44 PM
link   
I think the railgun would have more use for artilery, and the laser would work for individual soldiers (if the battery could last). Either way the future looks good in terms of weaponry.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 07:53 PM
link   
as for the rail gun being the "ultimate smart weapon" it would depend entirely on people since you can't change trajectory during mid-flight. so calling it a "smart" weapon wouldn't make much sense... unless you wan't to call a howitzer "smart". i think a rail gun would be used for massive destruction more than to be pin-point accurate.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I would pick both you cant just have one you need both. railguns have their own uses(mass area destruction destruction of reinforced things etc etc etc) and lasers can be used for air defense,missile defense,air superiority etc. Si it really depends on your scenario.



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   
from Page 1,

Originally posted by muzz
If you had a laser like the main phaser on the Starship Enterprise, you might have a contest. Does anyone know if laser beams increase in size like any other beam of light. If I shoot a pinpoint from here is it going to be a foot wide in a mile withe half of the intensity? -Muzz


They reflect lazers off mirrors on the moon. Yes, the lazer will eventually expand and loose it's strength, but that would be over thousands of miles.


Originally posted by SiRiNOA laser in use would look pretty cool, but you cant beat the insane speed of a railgun projectile


Actually, the speed of light is faster.

[edit on 4/25/2006 by SwitchbladeNGC]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join