Kinetic weapons in fiction

I wonder why in many Video games and many other works of fiction kinetic weapons(other than Electromagnetic projectile weapons and possibly APDS and other high powered weaponry) are just for dealing with Unarmored flesh-and-blood targets?

[edit on 13/7/2010 by masonicon]

Why? Glamour.

Most people do not study physics, and so know nothing about ballistics.

Meteor Crater in Arizona is a monument to Kinetic Kill.

Originally posted by Chakotay
Why? Glamour.

Most people do not study physics, and so know nothing about ballistics.

Meteor Crater in Arizona is a monument to Kinetic Kill.

I'm only talking about small arms

reply to post by masonicon


If it is just small arms you are talking about then what else would they be used to deal with?

Small arms are designed for use against unarmoured flesh and blood targets.

reply to post by masonicon

in many Video games and many other works of fiction

kinetic weapons

are just for dealing with Unarmored flesh-and-blood targets?

There are plenty of counter examples.

Games
Starcraft - Marines do quite nicely against armored terran and protoss units
Eve Online - The Caldari favor missiles for ship-to-ship combat
Master of Orion 2 - Missile frigates are a favored early game tactic

Video/TV/Movies
The Last Starfighter - The meteor gun was used to destroy the starfighter base
The Matrix 2 - Zion's mechs use projectile weaponry on the machines

Animation
Bubblegum Crisis - Priss uses a needle gun on heavily armored targets
Marvel's Wolverine - Routinely uses his blades on armored targets
Macross/Madox 01/Gundam/etc - The entire mech genre is filled with missiles and standard projectile weaponry

Books
Moon is a Harsh Mistress - The moon colony uses rocks to bombard earth

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by masonicon

 

in many Video games and many other works of fiction

kinetic weapons

are just for dealing with Unarmored flesh-and-blood targets?

There are plenty of counter examples.

Games
Starcraft - Marines do quite nicely against armored terran and protoss units
Eve Online - The Caldari favor missiles for ship-to-ship combat
Master of Orion 2 - Missile frigates are a favored early game tactic

Video/TV/Movies
The Last Starfighter - The meteor gun was used to destroy the starfighter base
The Matrix 2 - Zion's mechs use projectile weaponry on the machines

Animation
Bubblegum Crisis - Priss uses a needle gun on heavily armored targets
Marvel's Wolverine - Routinely uses his blades on armored targets
Macross/Madox 01/Gundam/etc - The entire mech genre is filled with missiles and standard projectile weaponry

Books
Moon is a Harsh Mistress - The moon colony uses rocks to bombard earth

Yes! but the counter examples are so often restricted to Electromagnetic projectile weapons and anything other than gunpowder when it come to bullet's propellant

Most Video games and such with major targets (such as The last starfighter/ The matrix) Are futuristic settings, and as such have "better" ways to fire the ballistics. Smaller arms are only capable of hitting so hard, even when magnetically fired, for example, Halo. One of the best known recent ones as all should know. MAJOR advances to the weaponry, yet utterly ineffective against the ships, save for the wimpy banshee.The main problem is, ballistics only HIT so hard no matter how they are propelled, so they use alternative weaponry, such as plasma,lasers,antimatter.... get the idea? If you want more, Just ask mate, As My friends know, i'm a major nerd lol.

reply to post by OrionMaster


Technically "lasers" are particle weapons though right? Isn't that still kinetic?

reply to post by SymbolicLogic


A LASER would not be considered a kinetic weapon. LASER is an acronym for light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation. A standard laser does not impart a kenetic impart, a laser imparts thermal (IR, i.e. heat) energy on a target. A laser is primarily used to burn, in a similar category you also have the MASER (This amplifies microwaves instead of IR or other light) and the GRASER (Gamma Ray Amplification By Stimulated Emission of Radiation).

So in short no, a laser would not be a kenetic weapon.

reply to post by TexanEngineer


Are you aware of the mechanics of 'thermal energy'?

reply to post by SymbolicLogic


Quite familiar, but in terms of weponry Lasers fall under the category of Directed Energy Weapons. Kenetic weapons are considered to be "projectile" based (i.e. Bullets, Missiles, Rockets, even a Rail Gun could be considered a Kenetic weapon).

A projectile which does not contain an explosive charge or any other kind of charge is termed a kinetic projectile, kinetic energy weapon, kinetic energy warhead, kinetic warhead or kinetic penetrator. Typical kinetic energy weapons are blunt projectiles such as rocks and round shots, pointed ones such as arrows, and somewhat pointed ones such as bullets. Among projectiles which do not contain explosives are those launched from railguns, coilguns, and mass drivers, as well as kinetic energy penetrators. All of these weapons work by attaining a high muzzle velocity (hypervelocity), and collide with their target, converting their kinetic energy into destructive shock waves and heat.

en.wikipedia.org...

Plasma weaponry would really straddle the boundry between Kenetic and DEW, as damage from a plasma projectile would be both from thermal and kenetic energy.

I love this thread, I was totally think the MAC platforms in HALO.
I always wondered if there was a rifle version of a rail-gun, how big would it be and practical uses of it....
would be over kill on a flesh an blood target though.

I gotta say Texas, You Argue well, sorry I wasn't on for so long guys,been having computer issues lately.
And yeah I tend to count plasma in between, But MOSTLY it's an energy weapon not kinetic.

As for a Portable MAC gun like was mentioned..... that would be EXTREMELY difficult simply in terms of power, For example a minigun : Works beautifully when mounted on helicopters and various other mechanized transports, but has MAJOR issues trying to make portable. The highest of which is quite simple : The power required to spin the gun at the speed necassary to make it even HALf as powerful as the mounted versions would require (even with micronized components) about 20-30 pounds of backpack weight. That's not even counting the AMMO you would have to carry.

Just in case I was wrong, I asked an informant of mine in the army , This info is his and he stands by it.

This makes something like a rail gun or MAC cannon simply too heavy for anything short of of a spartan to use properly.... And if you want my opinions on THAt subject, please message me, don't want to put those out on possible search engines alerts...

rail guns exist the navy has been devloping them for years now i saw an early prototype in a lab punch through a pallet of phonebooks 16 years ago or more using a lexan slug wrapped in wire.

reply to post by masonicon


because something with enough kinetic energy to defeat armor can be difficult to carry?

Stay focused, stay alive.