Projectile weapons

[Batman]

Mr Dod
It will always be much easier and much cheaper to use projectiles against armor. It is today and will remain so forever. That applies in any century or galaxy.

Prove it shit for brains. We have a canon example of Stormie armor withstanding KE/momentum way in excess of what any modern manportable weapon can produce.
You repeating your little mantra-which has already been proven wrong by MRDOD btw as Kevlar makes shitty bullets-doesn't make it true. PROVE IT FUCKFACE.

[MickeyMo]

Batman, I am not sure how you proved what stormtrooper armor is capable of, since its fictional. But there is no armor that exists now or ever can exist that cannot be penetrated by a projectile that is made of the same material. I am not sure what your disagreeing with. If we make our bullets out of whatever stormtrooper armor is made out of, than it will penetrate it. ANd the rebels could have done that. They didnt, because George Lucas didnt put it in the script. But if they had, they would have had a much cheaper and easier way of killing them.

[Batman]

Batman, I am not sure how you proved what stormtrooper armor is capable of, since its fictional. But there is no armor that exists now or ever can exist that cannot be penetrated by a projectile that is made of the same material. I am not sure what your disagreeing with. If we make our bullets out of whatever stormtrooper armor is made out of, than it will penetrate it. ANd the rebels could have done that. They didnt, because George Lucas didnt put it in the script. But if they had, they would have had a much cheaper and easier way of killing them.

Your either a troll or have a negative four-figure IQ.

[Stark]

What a moron.

Lets pretend there aren't tradeoffs on this theoretical weapon vs blasters (weight, recoil, ammunition, cost, maintenance and cover penetration/flexibilty come to mind straight away). Lets pretend, that like the Feddies, the Empire is just stupid to not make this weapon.

Then lets try and forget that all this is at the behest of someone so mind bogglingly stupid that they, out-of-hand, throw out canon events because they don't like them.

Where to now, guys?

Blasters have piles of ammo, which comes in small cartridges, which are easily manufactured/reloaded. They have flexibility to blow smoking holes in everything from people to doors to sandcrawlers. They are light, have little recoil, can easily be fired one-handed, and are physically small.

This guy wants to replace that with a weapon that fires extraordinarily high-velocity bits of plastic? Wouldn't it (say) be very long, require a pile of bracing (at least a stock), and have no target flexibility at all? It'd probably massively overpenetrate unarmoured people too, causing all kinds of problems. Being light, I imagine the projectile would have little persistence and be easily deflected in flight by light cover. Not being magic-blaster stuff it'd drop in gravity too. I'm not sure about ballistics, but isn't there a possibility that the rounds would have to be carefully manufactured to provide consistent accuracy?

I don't know why I'm saying this - there are plainly no shielded vehicles in SW, so whats the problem?

[MickeyMo]

Well, first of all by "Canon" I assume you mean official fiction as opposed to unofficial fiction. Its still fiction, either way. And its not about "throwing out" a "canon" event since these events never occured in the first place.

AS a result of that, it isnt a question of the stupidity of the Empire/Federation, since they dont exist. Its the writers who create these worlds, and in science fiction the laser-phaser-blaster-raygun is everpresent and has been for generations, with a few notable exceptions.

The problem is that you only need weapons for 4 types of the things: 1. people (and other living creatures), 2. vehicles (sea, air, space, land), 3. structures (buildings, space stations) and 4. infrastructure (roads, port facilities, etc). We already have the ability to destroy/kill/neutralize anything in any of these categories. And there will never be a time, in this or any other century or galaxy, when anything in any of those categories will be constructed from something a projectile couldnt destroy.

Lasers are already apart of real world arsenals, but so are projectiles, and that will remain so. The fictional alternatives, even if they were real, dont allow you to do anything you couldnt have already done with projectile weaponry.

[Batman]

I'll be. You're a troll with a 4-figure negative IQ.

[Duckie]

Well, first of all by "Canon" I assume you mean official fiction as opposed to unofficial fiction. Its still fiction, either way. And its not about "throwing out" a "canon" event since these events never occured in the first place.

Must people bludgeon you with suspension of disbelief yet again? If you do not accept that the entire debate is limited to opinion.

AS a result of that, it isnt a question of the stupidity of the Empire/Federation, since they dont exist. Its the writers who create these worlds, and in science fiction the laser-phaser-blaster-raygun is everpresent and has been for generations, with a few notable exceptions.

A nice literary mindset. Suspension of Disbelief states that we suppose the Empire and Federation do exist, so their intellectual competance for weapons development is in question.

The problem is that you only need weapons for 4 types of the things: 1. people (and other living creatures), 2. vehicles (sea, air, space, land), 3. structures (buildings, space stations) and 4. infrastructure (roads, port facilities, etc). We already have the ability to destroy/kill/neutralize anything in any of these categories. And there will never be a time, in this or any other century or galaxy, when anything in any of those categories will be constructed from something a projectile couldnt destroy.

Ignoring the fact that Han Solo's Heavy Blaster Pistol (a real life Mauser Machine Pistol of some sort with no ammo clip and a custom added scope) can blow chunks out of walls, the projectiles are canonically stated to need to be extraordinarily fast to kill Stormie body armor. That speed will also be recoil. Very bad recoil.

Lasers are already apart of real world arsenals, but so are projectiles, and that will remain so. The fictional alternatives, even if they were real, dont allow you to do anything you couldnt have already done with projectile weaponry.

First off, Blasters aren't lasers. They look like what you'd call a laser from the side, but if you can see them from there it already proves they aren't lasers. The other details are unnescessary unless you want to really argue that.

Prove they don't allow everything a projectile weapon could. Batman has already shown they are extremely useful.

Also, explain the lack of the projectile weapons in Star Wars except on backwater worlds, and even then they have to use high speed armor piercing bullets to kill.

[YT300000]

I dont know if you mean the real world or the bizarro world of fiction.

I am reminded of the debate on megaton yields. The Soviet Union detonated a 58 megaton warhead in 1961, and yet you have people who seem to think that its not believable that that the 24th Century has them. An odd view since the Earth of 2005 can design and build 500 megaton devices.....rather odd that people 400 years from now could not.

500 Megatons? Well, isn't it interesting then that the aforementioned Tsar Bomba was the most powerful munition ever constructed? Post proof or retract.

[MickeyMo]

Thats supposed to be 50 megs, not 500. One of a great many typos of some of my posts. Not that 500 couldnt be designed or built with todays capabilites. But it wont be since there is no necessity for it.

But the point was the absurdity of believing that 1960's Earth could make a 50 meg warhead and the 2260's or 2360's Earth wouldnt, couldnt or didnt on the basis of an "analysis" of the special effects in a fictional television show.

[Lord Revan]

Thats supposed to be 50 megs, not 500. One of a great many typos of some of my posts. Not that 500 couldnt be designed or built with todays capabilites. But it wont be since there is no necessity for it.

But the point was the absurdity of believing that 1960's Earth could make a 50 meg warhead and the 2260's or 2360's Earth wouldnt, couldnt or didnt on the basis of an "analysis" of the special effects in a fictional television show.

when talking about said show SOD analysis is only to get objective data (meaning not something you just pulled out of your ass), while it might possible for UFP to build 50+ MT weapons for they don't do that (after all we're not saying human can't build that kind of weapons in 2260's, we're just saying that the UFP doesn't build 50+ MT photon Torps.)

[MickeyMo]

Mr Dod

Yes, but the Federation and Empire are fictional. "They" didnt design anything. The writers did. I take what I see in these shows as the starting point for discussing the possibilities and non-possibilities that they suggest. The ex English and Fine Arts majors who write most of this material, even with some technical advice, are not the last word on science, tech or the military.

These are not documentaries, they are movies and fictional. As a result we dont have to explain why anything appears or doesnt appear in them except that, for whatever reason, thats what the writer wanted.

The problem, as i mentioned is that projectiles can already accomplish everything that directed energy weapons can, and at a tiny fraction the cost. As mentioned, there will never be a time when any form of armor would require anything other than a projectile. What is stated in any fictional novel, tv show or movie is never going to change that.

I mention lasers because they exist. I dont confuse them with blasters, which i know are supposed to be different. Lasers certainly have their place, and will in the future, but projectiles are easier and much cheaper for most puposes. They are line of sight, cannot hit targets over the horizon, and dont render the target any more dead.

[Gunhead]

Projectiles can hit targets over the horizon, are line of sight to a certain range.

Laser cannot engage targets over the horizon, are line of sight.

Just to clarify.

Now proof that projectile technology is going to remain as the only solution.
You're "because I say so" ain't gonna cut it.

-Gunhead

[Lord Revan]

Also there's thing at least in SW energy weapons had more ammo then projectile weapons ever could (DC-15 blaster rifle has ammo count of 500 shots and DC-17m modular rifle has ammo count of 200 for the battle rifle type and Phasers also seem very hight ammo count).

[Lone_Prodigy]

1.Lone, if you're trying to say that 24th Century science cannot duplicate what 20th century science can ALREADY do...than you are already defeated.

If WE can make 50 meg warheads, the 24th century can.

Burden of proof. Any evidence?

3. Ummm...your watching a MOVIE....you can "quantify" anything. Shields have no reality in Trek land, Wars land or any other land......puching a button and creating a magic bubble is Wank Tech.

Yes, we are watching a movie. You must be pretty brilliant to come to that conclusion! But that doesn't mean we can't measure the abilities.

It will always be much easier and much cheaper to use projectiles against armor. It is today and will remain so forever. That applies in any century or galaxy.

So, the carbine blasters that can disable apartment building-sized vehicles are suddenly weaker than a 5.56mm M-16 round?

Batman, I am not sure how you proved what stormtrooper armor is capable of, since its fictional.

So what? We can still quantify it.

But there is no armor that exists now or ever can exist that cannot be penetrated by a projectile that is made of the same material.

Again, like everyone else is saying, ever heard of Kevlar? Dipshit.

If we make our bullets out of whatever stormtrooper armor is made out of, than it will penetrate it. ANd the rebels could have done that. They didnt, because George Lucas didnt put it in the script. But if they had, they would have had a much cheaper and easier way of killing them.

No, we would need guns with more recoil than a man could withstand in order to penetrate. Blasters are widespread and cheap, powerful, have lots of ammo, and are small. It would be easier to use a 30mm cannon for the same purpose?

Well, first of all by "Canon" I assume you mean official fiction as opposed to unofficial fiction. Its still fiction, either way. And its not about "throwing out" a "canon" event since these events never occured in the first place.

IT DOES NOT MATTER THAT IT IS FICTIONAL. Holy shit, you are an idiot of the likes of.... wait a second... Darkstar, is that you? Hmmm... Wall of Ignorance.... check. Immature whining that it is not real when losing.... checks. Unsupported mantras to address points.... check. And your writing is too good to be Stewie.

The problem is that you only need weapons for 4 types of the things: 1. people (and other living creatures), 2. vehicles (sea, air, space, land), 3. structures (buildings, space stations) and 4. infrastructure (roads, port facilities, etc). We already have the ability to destroy/kill/neutralize anything in any of these categories. And there will never be a time, in this or any other century or galaxy, when anything in any of those categories will be constructed from something a projectile couldnt destroy.

Lasers are already apart of real world arsenals, but so are projectiles, and that will remain so. The fictional alternatives, even if they were real, dont allow you to do anything you couldnt have already done with projectile weaponry.

So, how again are M-249s supposed to penetrate Durasteel? And how will a .45 pistol suddenly have the firepower of a grenade launcher, while keeping dozens of rounds? Shut up, troll.

[Lord Revan]

While projectile weapons have their place in SW (they ain't that good though that you should dismiss Canon) energy weapon will be better for most jobs since of bigger ammo count and greayer flexibility (in SW threre's non-LOS energy weapons). Since projecitle weapons are used in backwater worlds or by police units. (to date the only military projectile weapon are the main gun of the AT-TE and different missile launchers(IIRC)).

[Star-Blighter]

Mr Dod

Yes, but the Federation and Empire are fictional. "They" didnt design anything. The writers did. I take what I see in these shows as the starting point for discussing the possibilities and non-possibilities that they suggest. The ex English and Fine Arts majors who write most of this material, even with some technical advice, are not the last word on science, tech or the military.

These are not documentaries, they are movies and fictional. As a result we dont have to explain why anything appears or doesnt appear in them except that, for whatever reason, thats what the writer wanted.

The problem, as i mentioned is that projectiles can already accomplish everything that directed energy weapons can, and at a tiny fraction the cost. As mentioned, there will never be a time when any form of armor would require anything other than a projectile. What is stated in any fictional novel, tv show or movie is never going to change that.

I mention lasers because they exist. I dont confuse them with blasters, which i know are supposed to be different. Lasers certainly have their place, and will in the future, but projectiles are easier and much cheaper for most puposes. They are line of sight, cannot hit targets over the horizon, and dont render the target any more dead.

If you don't want to discuss the effectiveness of fictional weapons or shielding/armor then why are you here?

The entire point of these forums is largely to use scientific methods to observe the effects of said weapons for the purpose of comparing them to real life TM as well as other sci-fi universes. It is ABSOLUTELY neccessary to suspend disbelief to draw rational conclusions.

If you are unwilling to acknowledge the effects that said weapons or shields WOULD have IF they existed because "there not real TM" , then you SHOULDN'T be here.

P.S. I'm not trying to be rude but those are the cold, hard, facts.

[VT-16]

Well, first of all by "Canon" I assume you mean official fiction as opposed to unofficial fiction. Its still fiction, either way. And its not about "throwing out" a "canon" event since these events never occured in the first place.

What are you doing on a discussion board on technical issues in sci-fi if you´re not going to use SoD?

SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF, MOTHERFUCKER. DO. YOU. SPEAK. IT?

[harbringer]

Mickeymo,

There is no real evidence that a standard firearm can penetrate ST armour. A clone trooper (who just as it happens wears visually different but essentially the same armour) survives an exploding verhicle hit by a very powerful explosive missile just a few meters away. Firearms are used in SW but seem to be as advanced as everything else in SW compared to anything in the ST universe.

As for suspension of disbelief if this is all fictional then you cannot prove me wrong on this point - Star Trek can never win. If you want to argue anything else or prove this wrong you have to measure something that means you have to as far as possible treat these things as real. And to treat them as real you have to know your looking at something reliable and thats where canon comes in. Try a)watching the movie and b) looking at the ICS. This is the minimum you need to know. If you can't be bothered to do any of this then you are as pointless and useless as tits on a bull.

[brianeyci]

MickeyMo,

Have you heard of the cannonball theory? It is a good explaination why the Federation does not use its torpedoes like mult-megaton warheads. They use their torpedoes like cannonballs, to penetrate shielding.

Just because the Federation can construct 50 megaton Tsar bomb, that does not mean it is any effective in space. No overpressure, no fireball, only radiation and you need a way to resist radiation since you're going through space anyway.

Cannonball torpedoes are obviously the best choice of weapon the Feds have against ST opponents, or they would use better. It is not illogical for the Feds to have a 0.1 KT torpedo if they use them like cannonballs to penetrate shields. All the evidence in Brandon Bray's analysis is consistent with Trek photons being used as cannonballs.

Brian

[MickeyMo]

If you don't want to discuss the effectiveness of fictional weapons or shielding/armor then why are you here?

I do want to. But its a matter of approaching it differently. What I see on the screen is a starting point for a discussion, a springboard. The FX scenes and dialogue are artifacts of a script, written by a screenwriter. The type, range and destructive effect of weapons is whatever the writer describes them as being when he writes the FX scenes and dialogue. The problem is that in a literary universe, saying its so, makes it so. Thats what happens when you have a Master of the Universe (MU), like Lucas, Whedon, Roddenberry, etc.

In the real world, its doesnt work like that. If a ships maximum speed is 30 knots, and we are 8,000 nm away from our destination, than it will take about 11 days to get there. A writer can say "yeah, but wouldnt it be cool if we could get there tonight, so that right in the middle of the battle, in the pale moonlight, they see us coming over the horizon!....and then....."

Yeah it would, except that that our top speed is still 30 knots and its still going to be 11 days. This isnt Trekland where you can fudge the Warp Speed and make it oodles faster than it was in some other episode. So how fast is Warp? As fast as the MU says it is.


But "If this were real...." then there is no MU.


What are you doing on a discussion board on technical issues in sci-fi if you´re not going to use SoD?

I do use SoD. I certainly do while I am watching and enjoying movies and TV shows. But the trouble comes when you say something like "If this was real (and SoD is still in effect!)....what sense can we make out of it?" Hmmmm. Thats an interesting premise, since if its real, then it ceases to be literature. As mentioned above what we see is not real and is only the product of the imagination of a writer. Warhead yield cannot be determined by watching an FX scene written by a screenwriter

But that doesnt mean we are totally lost. While it might be pointless to analyze FX and try to extrapolate from them, we can extrapolate from existing technology and capabilities. This leads to one of the rules that I adopted in discussing these matters:

Rule No. 2 "If we can do it, they can do it."

If modern Earth can do something, then the Empire/Federation can do it. An example of this rule would be Stormtrooper armor. Now we can't "prove" anything about it, since its fictional, but "if it were real..." we can at least establish some reasonable minimum. On the basis of the above rule, we can say that Stormtrooper armor is at least as good as the best composite body armor that we have. SInce such armor has known characteristics, we can use them as a baseline.

Now, the upper limit is harder to determine. We cant go by the say so of a novelist, since you can say anything you want in a novel, because thats MU land: "it IS so, because I SAY so". But at the very least we have a minimum.

There are many other considerations and points, and I could go on at length, but as this post is not really a "versus" post, its probably off-topic and irrelevent here. I answered because a few of you asked.

[harbringer]

Mickeymo,

You are the most interesting basket case I have seen in a while. Your "I don't agree that we should use anything other than real science" has become "We should use real life as the lower limit because they must have our technology". So which is it you going to use the special effects and scripts or not? if so you owe everybody here an apology for your blatent stupidity. As for your they must have our technology not really, they federation have recovered from a third or fourth world war and exist in a parralel dimension to boot, Star wars exists in a galaxy far far away and for all that seem to have much more in common with real life. After all if real life was the minimum then the enterprise would be a combined arms warship (it is a warship) with 100 AFV's as cargo and 5000 troops not women and children.

Don't ASSume anything since your only making an ASS of yourself.

[VT-16]

The problem is that in a literary universe, saying its so, makes it so. Thats what happens when you have a Master of the Universe (MU), like Lucas, Whedon, Roddenberry, etc.

Not nessesarily, if on-screen evidence shows something different then what the "Creators" says, their statements are irrellevant.

Yeah it would, except that that our top speed is still 30 knots and its still going to be 11 days.

No, if on-screen evidence shows otherwise, the statement in question is wrong.

But "If this were real...." then there is no MU.

On-screen evidence, combined with statements that don´t conflict with the on-screen evidence or have yet to be disproven by on-screen evidence, constitute the basis of what we use in discussing issues in fictional universes as if they were real universes.

But the trouble comes when you say something like "If this was real (and SoD is still in effect!)....what sense can we make out of it?" Hmmmm. Thats an interesting premise, since if its real, then it ceases to be literature.

No, it is treated as "real" not REAL. Certain phenomenon seen in the work that are impossible to reproduce in real life, yet contain some abilities relatable to values in our universe, will simply constitute a part of the fictional universe and we use SoD to treat it as a real phenomenon ("real" in the context of the fictional universe).

As mentioned above what we see is not real and is only the product of the imagination of a writer. Warhead yield cannot be determined by watching an FX scene written by a screenwriter

Yes it can. If there are some form of effects which have values relatable to our universe, we use this in the analysis.

But that doesnt mean we are totally lost.

No, the only one lost here is you.

While it might be pointless to analyze FX and try to extrapolate from them, we can extrapolate from existing technology and capabilities.

That is correct, that is what we do when the events in the fictional work produce effects with values relatable to our universe.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Jesus, Mick, learn how to God damn quote...

[Stark]

CHRIST, literature whores (canonophobes, whatever you want to call them) piss me off. 'Writers intent', 'oh noes, they change warp speed all the time! Don't look for patterns or rationalise, because the writers don't' and hey, lets not forget the great 'I don't know how to scientifically approach anything, so it must be impossible and everyone else is wrong' part. His 'rule 2' is so fucking funny I may split.

'Warhead yield cannot be determined by watching an FX scene written by a screenwriter' - Solid Fucking Gold. Nothing this... person has to say will ever contribute anything, since he doesn't understand science, or SoD, or how not to be a literalist fucktard.

The BEST part is of course where he never describes his own method of comparing this sort of thing. Its obviously superior to 'measuring things' or 'analysing data', so its probably 'gut feeling' or 'what I think the writer thinks'. Bah.

[MickeyMo]

Mickeymo,

You are the most interesting basket case I have seen in a while. Your "I don't agree that we should use anything other than real science" has become "We should use real life as the lower limit because they must have our technology". So which is it you going to use the special effects and scripts or not? if so you owe everybody here an apology for your blatent stupidity. As for your they must have our technology not really, they federation have recovered from a third or fourth world war and exist in a parralel dimension to boot, Star wars exists in a galaxy far far away and for all that seem to have much more in common with real life. After all if real life was the minimum then the enterprise would be a combined arms warship (it is a warship) with 100 AFV's as cargo and 5000 troops not women and children.

Don't ASSume anything since your only making an ASS of yourself.

No that means that at the very least their tech should be as good as ours. In the case of the Empire and Federation, their armor, for instance, should be far superior, but at the very least it isnt any worse. I saw a page where a stormtroopers armor seems to crack in ROTJ alot more easily than it should have. Do you know why?

1. Rule No. 1 "Artifacts of the film making process"

Its a movie. They arent real stormtroopers wearing real battle armor, they are actors and stuntmen wearing cheap-o costume armor. Naturally it will crack alot more easily. What is the alternative? To analyze the scene as if real, and come to what conclusion? That Roman blacksmiths could forge tougher armor than the materials scientists of the Galactic Empire?!?

"if it were real...."

2. Rule No.2 .....than their armor must be at least as good as ours.

These guidlines don't limit their tech to our level, it means that they cant be worse than ours, no matter what you see on that screen.