Plasma Weapons, Are they good?

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2002-12-01 02:49pm

So, most of sci-fi uses some sort of plasma weapon.
My question is:

Are they really any good?
Is it just a brain bug?

Comments.

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 02:50pm

Plasma weapons transfer heat and have a corrosive effect as atoms are ionized by the intense heat. If you think of your plasma as a packet of explosive gas then it has an explosive effect. Plasma in flamethrowers is also good for sterilization.

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2002-12-01 03:01pm

But the radiative effects should restrict it's range, more than other types of weapons.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2002-12-01 03:06pm

Plasma weapons arent very useful. Brain bugs, they are.

Theres two simple reasons. The first being that ionized gas tends to deionize when exposed to normal gas. The second is that containment of plasma would require fancy electromagnetics in a smell power package. The bulk of the damage is likely to be done by the bullet which generates the magnetics, because normal gas would STILL leak into the plasma and cause it to deionize. Whats more, the power that little thing would have to produce could be put to better use in a hot-bullet gun that would melt the bullet into molten metal. But even this isnt a good idea because inaccuracy would increase greatly. Plasma weapons are a brainbug. Phasers make more sense and gods know phasers are cow flop.

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 03:08pm

kojikun wrote:Plasma weapons arent very useful. Brain bugs, they are.

Theres two simple reasons. The first being that ionized gas tends to deionize when exposed to normal gas. The second is that containment of plasma would require fancy electromagnetics in a smell power package. The bulk of the damage is likely to be done by the bullet which generates the magnetics, because normal gas would STILL leak into the plasma and cause it to deionize. Whats more, the power that little thing would have to produce could be put to better use in a hot-bullet gun that would melt the bullet into molten metal. But even this isnt a good idea because inaccuracy would increase greatly. Plasma weapons are a brainbug. Phasers make more sense and gods know phasers are cow flop.

Ergo plasma weapons would be better flamethrowers than beam weapons.

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2002-12-01 03:09pm

I think plasma weapons are in right now while laser and particle weapons are out because they're more "futuristic." Right now, the US Air Force already has a working laser weapon. Granted, it takes a whole 747 to carry the thing: it's still moved lasers from the realm of sci-fi into the real world. The US military is looking into particle beams, too: the big trick is in targeting them. There's also research into sonic weapons intended for crowd control in situations like Somalia. How they compare in terms of potential power, I don't know: I doubt half the writers do either.

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 03:11pm

A theoretical system for lightning weapons is this:

Illuminate your target with an ion stream to positively charge him. Then release a negative charge, which should flow down the charge differential and head straight for Mr. Victim.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2002-12-01 03:34pm

ooh yes, lightning weapons are a good idea. but they aint plasma weapons

for a lightning weapon, the idea way to do it would be with an ionising laser and high voltage. this would work especially good on things like tanks, planes, and warships, as theyre made of metal and conduct electricity and electromagnetic interference with ease. The computer systems in them would die, fuel might explode, etc. Much deliciousness. The problem however would be getting an ionising laser to work on low power and not create a beam of rapidly diffusing cold plasma.

Perhaps using tesla coils to generate wide field EMI would work to an extent. hmm

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 03:37pm

kojikun wrote:ooh yes, lightning weapons are a good idea. but they aint plasma weapons

for a lightning weapon, the idea way to do it would be with an ionising laser and high voltage. this would work especially good on things like tanks, planes, and warships, as theyre made of metal and conduct electricity and electromagnetic interference with ease. The computer systems in them would die, fuel might explode, etc. Much deliciousness. The problem however would be getting an ionising laser to work on low power and not create a beam of rapidly diffusing cold plasma.

Perhaps using tesla coils to generate wide field EMI would work to an extent. hmm

In a small way they are. After all, the intense electrical current ionizes air along its path, creating much light and a shockwave effect.

And if you could paint an entire street of rioters and then fire the lightning pulse that would make for EXCELLENT crowd control. Second only to a flamethrower, IMO.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2002-12-01 03:38pm

BTW hope, the laser weapons that theyve NOT made popular knowledge are capable of fucking up airplanes and yet can fit on a humvee. I've seen demo pics (a friend works for the pentagon and does 3D work for their little displays and stuff). They have versions for 18 wheelers. Theyre immensely cool and I want one.

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2002-12-01 03:40pm

Umm, couldn't you shield something against plasma with a magnetic field? After all, thats what they use to direct the flow of plasma in reactors.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2002-12-01 03:41pm

the problem with HV laser guided electrical weapons is the possibility of arcing to unintended victims. Tho who cares, as long as you get to zap em, eh?

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2002-12-01 03:42pm

ex: yes, thats another problem with plasma weapons. Put 10 cent refridgerator magnets on the outside of your hummer and youre shielded. big problem.

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 03:42pm

Exonerate wrote:Umm, couldn't you shield something against plasma with a magnetic field? After all, thats what they use to direct the flow of plasma in reactors.

EXACTLY!

But you would need quite a good magnetic field generator to deflect the blast. And then there's the matter of fucking up all electronics within...

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2002-12-01 03:46pm

nah. ESB, big magnets are only needed for high energy high pressure plasma. A plasma bolt would be pathetically low pressure and energy. Besides, modern tanks are powered by things like jet engines (in some). the magnetics needed would be incredibly cheap and easy.

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 03:48pm

Still, I would like to use plasma as a flamethrower...

But good old napalm probably does it better.

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2002-12-01 03:54pm

You're a sucker for flamethrowers aren't you?

Well, napalm could be related in a way to flamethowers, only the delivery method is different...

OK, back to topic, in what way would the plasma be best delivered? Plasma balls or plasma stream?

Also, lightning weapons are a nice proposition...

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 04:08pm

Plasma stream. Short range extreme heat weapon. KILL THE FUCKERS DEAD!!!! BURN BABY BURN!!!!

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2002-12-01 04:12pm

Particle beams are great because their power is limited only by how much you have available to feed into it. The problem, as stated, is aiming them precisely. Neutron beams are even better because they go exactly where you aim them: the problem there is accelerating a particle that has essentially no charge. Seems to me that your limitation with plasma is going to be how good your magnetic bottling technology is, because that'll determine how far you can fire a bolt or beam. Torpedoes might make more sense, because the magnetic bottle will be built into the torpedo housing then. It's just the guess of an interested amateur: art was my major.

I see the weapon of the near future being railguns. We already know a lot about projectile weapons and their characteristics, so linear accelerators will be much easier to work the bugs out of. The trick (as with the laser weapons in development) will be miniturizing it to the point where it's feasable on the battlefield.

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 04:14pm

Railguns are probably the way to go. Imagine the kind of hell battleships with railguns can unleash on coastal targets...

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2002-12-01 04:21pm

Or put satellites into space, or use them to send asteroids to orbital refineries... there's a lot of good reasons to do the research. Too bad ol' Uncle Sam isn't that farsighted.

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 04:22pm

Actually, if we decided to mine the moon, we could use mass drivers to send the products back to Earth.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2002-12-01 04:22pm

Evil Sadistic Bastard wrote:Actually, if we decided to mine the moon, we could use mass drivers to send the products back to Earth.

Methinks someone has been playing a bit too much Angel Devoid.

If terrorists get there hands on it...

Evil Sadistic Bastard · Post by **Evil Sadistic Bastard** » 2002-12-01 04:27pm

Then we'd just ahve to retaliate by mass driving nuclear warheads back to the moon. Or mass driving a commando pod up there to kick righteous ass.

This sounds more and more like a game each time I think about it...

Neko_Oni · Post by **Neko_Oni** » 2002-12-01 04:31pm

Okay I read something scary on the US military site, some investigation into the use of energy weapon on the battlefield. It had a quote that went roughly "for a battlefield particle weapon not only would the direct effects be devastating, but the cyclotronic radiation could kill exposed personnel within 10m of the beam".