Laser battles in space.
POSTED BY: Hjermsted
UPDATED: Monday, March 22, 2004 21:20
VIEWED: 21470
PAGE 4 of 9
What people often forget is that people who use lasers, blasters, ion weapons and whatnot tend to have energy shields (and "overpowered" reactors to power the gorram things).
While a solid projectile might bounce off an energy shield, an energy weapon would cause a disruption. Ideally, you'd hold any kinetic warheads in reserve until the shields are down and your target is bare-hulled.
Also, note the difference between lasers and plasma "blaster bolts" (as seen in Star Wars, B5, and Battlestar Galactica). They're slower than lasers, and, while they can't get inside a target and rattle around like bullets can, they do tend to be explosive. Which can be useful when it comes time to take out a target but leave it relatively intact for salvage.
The old "rescue the hostages by blasting the hell outta their ship" strategy. Only tends to work with ion or EMP weapons.
Also, as easy as it may be to make kinetic railgun ammo, charging up an energy weapon from your reactor is still easier when you're under fire and can't call time out to eat an asteroid.
But yeah, in the Firefly-verse, with no deflector shields, and what appear to be relatively weak generators, kinetic weapons are the way to go.
-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Also, incidentally...
No slug is more stealthy than a laser, which must actually strike you before you can detect it. No stealth coating, no nothing. It hits you, and you know its there.
No radar or sensing apparatus can detect it before impact.
--Anthony
What really matters is how stealthy the platform is. A big lumbering battleship armed with lasers can be avoided, but a small stealthy fighter craft can sneak in and deliver some less-stealthy slugs and ruin your day.
Stealth wins over firepower, just ask the crew of the General Belgrano.
The Firefly CCG Web Site:
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/Bllm119/firefly_ccg_web_site.htm
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Can you imagine the frustration at chasing an enemy ship, trying to pummel them with massdriver shells, and all they have to do to evade you is accelerate?
While agree that massdrivers may be useful Sci-Fi weaponry, I don't see them as inherently superior to lasers, most especially not in the area of ship-to-ship combat. I'd rather have a particle accelerator.
If you read my FanFics here you'll see I invented a warship which had Lasers, A Particle-Beam Weapon and a Railgun precisely because I see a use for all three (the warships an AI btw)
(All right it's a blatant plug. Read the Death or Glory/Wolf-Pack/Here be Dragons Series found in the Blue Sun Room)
In terms of sheer stopping power I don't think you can beat a kinetic energy weapon, but for fast moving targets that know it's coming beams have the edge (I have my fictional ship evading railgun fire by velocity/course changes as you say) however if you don't know it's coming a big metal ball is one hell of a surprise
Good debate by the way
...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wait wait wait... are we actually debating whether energy-based weapons are less desirable than munitions?
Really? Seriously?
Wow.
Allow me to bring up the question of payloads. Allow me to mention combat endurance. Allow me to point out point-defence applications. Need I go on?
Energy/laser-based systems are infinitely more sought-after than physical slug-throwers. Which is why the USN is developing it's first laser-cruiser.
Cheers
Carl
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
DELETED due to double post
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Stealth?
We know how stealthy Firefly ships are. Not very. Alliance cruisers are gleaming cities in space, and a powered down Firefly can't escape a sensor sweep.
The most stealthy craft yet seen in Firefly is the ship employed by Jubal Early, and even that ship, travelling in the wake of the Serenity's exhaust, is detected. Detected and dismissed.
In Firefly, ships were detectable BEYOND visual range. We are indeed speaking of detection at thousands of kilometers.
What we really lack to make this debate useful is the operating speed of spacecraft in the Firefly universe. Hell, we don't know what their propulsion method is, or even if they have FTL capability.
--Anthony
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BluebloodUK:
Wait wait wait... are we actually debating whether energy-based weapons are less desirable than munitions?
Really? Seriously?
Wow.
Allow me to bring up the question of payloads. Allow me to mention combat endurance. Allow me to point out point-defence applications. Need I go on?
Energy/laser-based systems are infinitely more sought-after than physical slug-throwers. Which is why the USN is developing it's first laser-cruiser.
THE USN is also experimenting with fitting Railguns to its ships as well. Kinetic Energy weapons are more shattering
Various Armies are working on Mass-Driver armed Tanks too
...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Stealth?
We know how stealthy Firefly ships are. Not very. Alliance cruisers are gleaming cities in space, and a powered down Firefly can't escape a sensor sweep.
I see Alliance Cruisers as being there to intimidate and would therefore be designed to be big and easily seen
They are a weapon of Terror not a Weapon of War (to coin a phrase many may recognise)
IIRC The Alliance (Fighter?) that fired at Serenity during The Message was not detected before it started shooting
...................................
Hurrah, hurrah, when things are at their worst
With cries of “Death or Glory” comes the mighty Twenty-First
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hotpoint:
THE USN is also experimenting with fitting Railguns to its ships as well. Kinetic Energy weapons are more shattering
Various Armies are working on Mass-Driver armed Tanks too
Yes. However, pure battleships were out-moded by the development of guided missile systems, because of their stealth factors inherent in a small, powerful warhead. The development of mounted naval lasers takes this step again - infinitely stealthier. Done correctly, comparatively damaging. Unimaginabley harder to avoid.
Apply this to 'space' batttles, and you can see why kinetic weapony may be mooted. If you were right, then battleships should be making a come-back around about... *glances at watch*....
Mass-Driver Tanks are being considered, its true, but this works in the case FOR laser weaponry; tanks are slow, and easier to nail with a 2kg slug travelling at MACH 4. Less energy-expensive to run compared to it's size.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, it's true that they didn't notice the Alliance (Fighter? Gunship?). But after Objects in Space, I'm inclined to blame Wash for that.
Especially since the Alliance fighter was amply detectable by simple visual observation. It wasn't even painted to blend with its surroundings.
I did like their use of missiles and EMP bomb weapons, though. Very nice.
--Anthony
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME