Energy Weapons. Part Tres

[Star-Blighter]

Just a thought. Wouldn't an energy weapon be better against armor?

Not really. a conventional energy weapon such as a laser would rely on heating the target material and burning/melting armor off. We currently have rounds which can do a better job (HEAT and such) while packing a large amount of KE to hit the target with (which a laser cannot do).

The reason lasers are even being considered as a weapon system is do to them being effective against missles as a missle has no armor and it's electronics/guidence system can be fouled up by the instense heat.

Think about what that heat is going to do to the tank drivers, the onboard electronics, and any carried munitions/fuel. Lazers are worse because they're less efficent, not because a heat based attack = t3h su><0r.

Don't forget problems with beam spread and not flashfrying the user because the air 2 feet infront of you was rendered plasma, or fragility of the focusing array. But my point is that anything a modern laser can do (including thermal effects) a properly designed tank shell can do (hell, I think HEAT rounds fill the crew compartment with extremely hot shrapnel and gasses from the armor being ruptured)

[SWPIGWANG]

what about space?

you really can't beat c-velocity without all the hassle of building planetory sized railguns or 98% fueled rockets.....

what about maser of doom against aircraft.....uh......

[HyperionX]

We've established that energy weapons are pretty much impractical compared to guns, however...
Is it plausible that on another planet you could have a technological evolution different from ours that leads to energy weapons?

The only way realistic energy weapons could be used in place of kinetic weapons is if said planet has an extremely powerful and portable source power, i.e. cold fusion. Only with such an endless source of power could you even have meaningful energy weapons because the energy demands of DEW are so damn high.

[ClaysGhost]

Now I don't recall the exact numbers, but with projectile guns around 95% of the energy from the explosion is converted into velocity. That's pretty efficient IMO. Of course about half is spent on moving the gun but still.

More like 30%, comparable with most internal combustion engines, I expect. (I'm sure there was a better url somewhere, but I've lost it).

The only reason that inefficiency gets mentioned a lot in the context of lasers is because:

a) Some types of laser are really, really inefficient.

b) In these types of threads lasers usually get discussed as terawatt-level weapons of doom. Even 60% efficiency is very bad in such a context.

There is an interesting set of pages here on laser hand weapons for use against personnel, but they are still never going to be worthwhile as replacement tank guns.

[Gunhead]

Kinetic energy to bullet 29%

Kinetic energy to gases 19%

^--- I find this a bit odd. The explosion and escaping gasses is what gives a bullet it's velocity. Oh well.

I think I remember it now, the expanding bullet seals the barrel so tightly that almost no pressure can escape past it. When the bullet exits the barrel about 5% of the pressure is released sideways from the end of the barrel.
That's where I got the 95% from.

-Gunhead

[ClaysGhost]

I'm sorry, that last URL should have been this.