Originally posted by mdiinican
With the technology currently available, it really wouldn't work out. Solid state lasers are approaching the power needed for weaponization, but aren't quite there yet, and can't at all match the power of something like a tank's gun. Currently, they're set to replace the kind of ~20mm gun used for shooting at aircraft.

Railguns and coilguns still have unsolved problems that prevent them from being used in service; mostly with rail erosion for railguns, and stresses for the coilguns. Additionally, they require rather a lot of power. I doubt that any railgun we could build that would fit in a tank could match the performance and fire rate of the tank's normal cannon.

No electrically powered weapon we could currently make could come anywhere close to the performance of a simple rifle today. The cooling and power issues, among others, are too great for us to currently overcome. Additionally, there would surely be reliability issues.

We're almost to the point of fielding deadly EM weaponry, but not quite. First will be naval artillery, and anti-missile weaponry. Later we might see tank-scale weapons.

Originally posted by masonicon

Originally posted by mdiinican
With the technology currently available, it really wouldn't work out. Solid state lasers are approaching the power needed for weaponization, but aren't quite there yet, and can't at all match the power of something like a tank's gun. Currently, they're set to replace the kind of ~20mm gun used for shooting at aircraft.

Railguns and coilguns still have unsolved problems that prevent them from being used in service; mostly with rail erosion for railguns, and stresses for the coilguns. Additionally, they require rather a lot of power. I doubt that any railgun we could build that would fit in a tank could match the performance and fire rate of the tank's normal cannon.

No electrically powered weapon we could currently make could come anywhere close to the performance of a simple rifle today. The cooling and power issues, among others, are too great for us to currently overcome. Additionally, there would surely be reliability issues.

We're almost to the point of fielding deadly EM weaponry, but not quite. First will be naval artillery, and anti-missile weaponry. Later we might see tank-scale weapons.

This is Different story if we have Free Energy like Cold Fusion and Zero Point Energy

Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer

Originally posted by masonicon

Originally posted by mdiinican
With the technology currently available, it really wouldn't work out. Solid state lasers are approaching the power needed for weaponization, but aren't quite there yet, and can't at all match the power of something like a tank's gun. Currently, they're set to replace the kind of ~20mm gun used for shooting at aircraft.

Railguns and coilguns still have unsolved problems that prevent them from being used in service; mostly with rail erosion for railguns, and stresses for the coilguns. Additionally, they require rather a lot of power. I doubt that any railgun we could build that would fit in a tank could match the performance and fire rate of the tank's normal cannon.

No electrically powered weapon we could currently make could come anywhere close to the performance of a simple rifle today. The cooling and power issues, among others, are too great for us to currently overcome. Additionally, there would surely be reliability issues.

We're almost to the point of fielding deadly EM weaponry, but not quite. First will be naval artillery, and anti-missile weaponry. Later we might see tank-scale weapons.

This is Different story if we have Free Energy like Cold Fusion and Zero Point Energy

Not necessarily. As noted, power is only part of the issue. Assuming that we could make cold fusion or zero point energy work at all doesn't mean the power issue for rail guns or directed-energy weapons is solved. The cold fusion technology / zero-point energy / pressurized handwavium power plant needs to not only work, but be physically compact enough, inexpensive enough, and safe enough to be used on the battlefield. (Note that even though we've had nuclear fission power for sixty years. nuclear tanks and aircraft are, shall we say, somewhat scarce. This is why). Once you have an exotic power source that meets all those requirements, you have to make sure that there's an increase in weapon performance that's commensurate with the increase in complexity and/or price it brings. If there isn't, the new weapon probably won't see wide use.

Even if the power issue goes away, most rail guns, coil guns, and energy weapons still have other problems...physical stress, limited life, and cooling spring to mind as near-universal ones.

Originally posted by masonicon
Just because Profit Hungry Capitalists finds Petroleum the most profitable source of energy, they keeps all kind of source of energy other than fossil fuels from being inexpensive.

Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer

Originally posted by masonicon

Originally posted by mdiinican
With the technology currently available, it really wouldn't work out. Solid state lasers are approaching the power needed for weaponization, but aren't quite there yet, and can't at all match the power of something like a tank's gun. Currently, they're set to replace the kind of ~20mm gun used for shooting at aircraft.

Railguns and coilguns still have unsolved problems that prevent them from being used in service; mostly with rail erosion for railguns, and stresses for the coilguns. Additionally, they require rather a lot of power. I doubt that any railgun we could build that would fit in a tank could match the performance and fire rate of the tank's normal cannon.

No electrically powered weapon we could currently make could come anywhere close to the performance of a simple rifle today. The cooling and power issues, among others, are too great for us to currently overcome. Additionally, there would surely be reliability issues.

We're almost to the point of fielding deadly EM weaponry, but not quite. First will be naval artillery, and anti-missile weaponry. Later we might see tank-scale weapons.

This is Different story if we have Free Energy like Cold Fusion and Zero Point Energy

Not necessarily. As noted, power is only part of the issue. Assuming that we could make cold fusion or zero point energy work at all doesn't mean the power issue for rail guns or directed-energy weapons is solved. The cold fusion technology / zero-point energy / pressurized handwavium power plant needs to not only work, but be physically compact enough, inexpensive enough, and safe enough to be used on the battlefield. (Note that even though we've had nuclear fission power for sixty years. nuclear tanks and aircraft are, shall we say, somewhat scarce. This is why). Once you have an exotic power source that meets all those requirements, you have to make sure that there's an increase in weapon performance that's commensurate with the increase in complexity and/or price it brings. If there isn't, the new weapon probably won't see wide use.

Even if the power issue goes away, most rail guns, coil guns, and energy weapons still have other problems...physical stress, limited life, and cooling spring to mind as near-universal ones.

Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer

Originally posted by masonicon

Originally posted by mdiinican
With the technology currently available, it really wouldn't work out. Solid state lasers are approaching the power needed for weaponization, but aren't quite there yet, and can't at all match the power of something like a tank's gun. Currently, they're set to replace the kind of ~20mm gun used for shooting at aircraft.

Railguns and coilguns still have unsolved problems that prevent them from being used in service; mostly with rail erosion for railguns, and stresses for the coilguns. Additionally, they require rather a lot of power. I doubt that any railgun we could build that would fit in a tank could match the performance and fire rate of the tank's normal cannon.

No electrically powered weapon we could currently make could come anywhere close to the performance of a simple rifle today. The cooling and power issues, among others, are too great for us to currently overcome. Additionally, there would surely be reliability issues.

We're almost to the point of fielding deadly EM weaponry, but not quite. First will be naval artillery, and anti-missile weaponry. Later we might see tank-scale weapons.

This is Different story if we have Free Energy like Cold Fusion and Zero Point Energy

Not necessarily. As noted, power is only part of the issue. Assuming that we could make cold fusion or zero point energy work at all doesn't mean the power issue for rail guns or directed-energy weapons is solved. The cold fusion technology / zero-point energy / pressurized handwavium power plant needs to not only work, but be physically compact enough, inexpensive enough, and safe enough to be used on the battlefield. (Note that even though we've had nuclear fission power for sixty years. nuclear tanks and aircraft are, shall we say, somewhat scarce. This is why). Once you have an exotic power source that meets all those requirements, you have to make sure that there's an increase in weapon performance that's commensurate with the increase in complexity and/or price it brings. If there isn't, the new weapon probably won't see wide use.

Even if the power issue goes away, most rail guns, coil guns, and energy weapons still have other problems...physical stress, limited life, and cooling spring to mind as near-universal ones.