My theory about guns in Firefly

POSTED BY: Ringwraith
UPDATED: Thursday, January 2, 2003 01:21
VIEWED: 41138
PAGE 8 of 15

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE

REXRAYGUN

Wednesday, October 9, 2002 5:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ptrope:
It's unfortunate that they put the VO on the show, at least as it's worded.

I'd imagine the VO going away shortly, much as it did with Buffy. That is, of course, hoping that the show stays on the air, and I sure hope it does.

Rex!

SADGEEZER

Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by loonytoon:
Sadgeezer, have you ever SEEN what a 12 guage will do to an animal? You would be mighty surprised! With materiels that will probably be invented within 100 years, I could devise shotgun ammo that could kill a human out to 1500 yards. How much more performance do you need?

I've never shot an animal with a shotgun, but I've been clay pigeon shooting pleanty of times. I've never said that shotguns aren't districtive, Quite the opposite! Firing a shotgun on a spaceship would be crazy! You've not only kill whatever you would be aiming at, but the ricochet would probably kill you too and damage most of the instruments in the room.

In 500 years I would think that the projectile weapons of today would be obsolete because they used too many resources and required things like gunpowder and metal and worse still, that they would be iniscriminate in what they distroyed.

It's my guess that an energy weapon would be easier to produce, cheaper and could be used in a whole range of ways from demolition to entertainment. But it doesn't have to be laser weapons, they could use all sorts of energy - all of which would be easier to use better in terms of firepower and discrimination.

If I were to face you in a duel with a Star Trek phaser and you had a pump action shotgun, you would loose. You wouldn't be so much damaged as 'gone'.

Again, my point is, if people have the technology to fly around in spaceships as advanced as Firefly they would be able to use weapons which were more effective than shotguns and six-shooters. More importantly, they would have the determination to do so.

SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly

SADGEEZER

Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:25 PM

Ok, don't take my word for it, read what CNN say about the latest plans for laser weapons on US millitary aricraft.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/09/25/laser.weapon/index.html

Or Janes Defence Weekly.

http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/jdw/jdw020809_1_n.shtml

SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly

LOONYTOON

Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:38 PM

#1 question: If I where to face in a dual as you described, why would I automatically lose with the shotgun? At close range, the phaser has no advantage. You still have to hit me, which is just as hard, actually harder, with a phaser. The disintegration thing with phasers is scientifically impossible. If I was hit in the shoulder, and the beam had enough energy to vaporize the rest of my body, it would emit enough heat that it would encinerate the firers hand, at the least.

Collateral damage: Shotguns don`t ricochet as much as you think they do, and energy weapons would be worse, for several reasons. A energy weapon works from the transfer of energy and heat. Energy can be redirected by certain surfaces, such as a mirror. Put a mirror in the hot sun for an hour, and it is not nearly as hot as anything else, as it rediects the energy. Energy follows the path of least resistance. Give it somewhere else to go, and you are fine. Heat is emitted, which in most ideas, is what does the damage. Heat cannot be harnessed %100, there for bleed-off heat will damage anything heat sensetive, and electronics are quite sensitive.
EMP would be produced on the scale of wiping all electronics in the room, so it won`t destroy the instument like a shotgun, but it will wipe all memory, so its pretty damn useless. It would be much easier to shield against projectiles than energy.

In an atmoshere, a energy weapon would give away your position better than a neon sign!

As for resources, you are assuming energy is free. It takes quite a bit of energy to produce power, there is more than just flipping the light switch. Frontier planets would find it much easier to produce gunpowder than electricity.

And in the future, the shotgun would have no realistic range limitations compare to a energy weapon, and can deliver explosive and other exotic payloads.

LOONYTOON

Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:46 PM

Plus you are assuming science will advance at the same rate for 500 years. science advances in bursts, then people will go with very meager improvements for a while. New technology is quickly reaching a plataeu(sp), we will not keep learning new tech every day. Technology can only be advanced so far, befor you get the law of diminishing returns, where it would be faster and more ecomical to use the old tech, than develop new. Say you find a new world that it would take 40 years to get to, than spend 39 years figuring out tech to make the trip one year. You probably have been better off just using the old tech.

THEGN

Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
It's my guess that an energy weapon would be easier to produce, cheaper and could be used in a whole range of ways from demolition to entertainment. But it doesn't have to be laser weapons, they could use all sorts of energy - all of which would be easier to use better in terms of firepower and discrimination.

Well, your guess would be wrong then.

DEW are not easier to produce, and they are definitely not cheaper. Even at extreme power levels they are not as destructive as conventional explosives on warheads. They are not easier to use; they require a tremendous amount of energy to fire, a tremendous amount of energy to cool and computer circuitry to aim. Some of them require some very rare and expensive materials. Even many of the common materials used in them must be refined to extreme levels purity. Things like yttrium barium copper oxide-coated wire to make superconducting high temperature wire or conduction coils and 100+ kV generators just to power the thing. And when you're done firing it, you've got 50% or more of the energy from the blast still onboard, which must be dissapated as exhaust or you blow yourself up just firing it. Klystrons that could easily shatter and render your weapony useless. These kind of weapons use quantum effects that only manifest themselves at extremely tight tolerances. Tolerances that must be maintained during combat situations or your weapons stop functioning. And these are just some of the reasons why DEW are still on the drawing board and firearms have been around for 500 years. It is kind of bordering on ridiculous to claim that DEW are easier and cheaper to produce. History alone suggests that is absolutely not true.

In the absence of dilithium crystals, directed energy weapons will not likely replace firearms. I can't help but think that your only motivation behind this is to mold this show into Star Trek. And I really think that part of the attraction of this show is that it is not Star Trek.

Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
If I were to face you in a duel with a Star Trek phaser and you had a pump action shotgun, you would loose. You wouldn't be so much damaged as 'gone'.

Except that a Star Trek phasers operates on some kind of magical technology that has never even been explained, and a shotgun is a real device. I could just as easily rewrite this statement thusly:

"If I were to face you in a duel with Zeus's Magical Lightening Bolt and you had a pump action shotgun, you would loose. You wouldn't be so much damaged as 'gone'. "

and it would continue to make as much sense. So you see in this regard, you are comparing apples to potatoes, magical potatoes even.

EDIT: I think I realize where you were going with this statement now, but I'm going to keep my original response, because it's funny.

Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
Again, my point is, if people have the technology to fly around in spaceships as advanced as Firefly they would be able to use weapons which were more effective than shotguns and six-shooters. More importantly, they would have the determination to do so.

Maybe, maybe not. A great deal of that might depend on whether they have that kind of money; and in the end, the trade off is not that great, because firearms are still extremely destructive, and they would be even more destructive in space. Why spend all that extra resources on fancy weapons that have their own disadvantages, when you can get cheap and effective firearms? So I question whether they really would have that determination. You use the tools that are most effective for the least cost. If all your interested in is self-defense or killing someone, then a shotgun will do that as well as some huge DEW for a 100th the cost.

And it really is a very big assumption that DEW will ever be compact enough to hold in your hands. They really are very large devices and they require an enormous energy.

Not that I don't enjoy your idea

SADGEEZER

Thursday, October 10, 2002 10:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Thegn:
Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
If I were to face you in a duel with a Star Trek phaser and you had a pump action shotgun, you would loose. You wouldn't be so much damaged as 'gone'.
Except that a Star Trek phasers operates on some kind of magical technology that has never even been explained, and a shotgun is a real device. I could just as easily rewrite this statement thusly:

"If I were to face you in a duel with Zeus's Magical Lightening Bolt and you had a pump action shotgun, you would loose. You wouldn't be so much damaged as 'gone'. "

Ha ha, but not before I had fallen to my knees and prayed for forgiveness oh mighty one.

Quote:
Originally posted by Thegn:
..and it would continue to make as much sense. So you see in this regard, you are comparing apples to potatoes, magical potatoes even.

Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
....And it really is a very big assumption that DEW will ever be compact enough to hold in your hands. They really are very large devices and they require an enormous energy.

I honestly dissagree and have been very surprised to find that I'm in the minority (not that that's a bad thing. It was just a bit of a shock). There has been some news recently about how governments such as the US have plans to place laser weapons on millitary aircraft in the near future (i.e. like 5-10 years).

Quote:
Originally posted by Thegn:
Not that I don't enjoy your ideas. I do, as a matter fact, and I also like Star Trek and all their magical technology. But I just don't think you can make a case that science fictions has to always go that route. If old technology works, people continue to use it, especially in situations where money is scarce.

Thanks for that, I was beginning to feel like an antagonistic git! Though I personally don't like Star Trek (except the original) being a big Babylon 5 fan. I find that the tech in Star Trek is over the top and too full of technobabble.

I'm not sure I would agree with your last sentence though, but it's food for thought.

SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly

THEGN

Thursday, October 10, 2002 11:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
I honestly dissagree and have been very surprised to find that I'm in the minority (not that that's a bad thing. It was just a bit of a shock). There has been some news recently about how governments such as the US have plans to place laser weapons on millitary aircraft in the near future (i.e. like 5-10 years).

Yes, this is true, but one of the problems they are having with them is making them powerful enough, but still small enough to fit on a fighter jet. They still aren't there yet, but I think they have refined it close to the AF standards.

Now think about this. Let's use as an example the F15 Eagle. A fighterjet that would benefit from this technology, plus the F15 is a big plane; 64 ft long, 34 tons, and has a payload of 25000 lbs. That's bigger then almost anything before it. Now think that the developers are having trouble building directed energy weapons small enough to fit on the F15, and you'll understand what I mean when I say these things are big.

They're big and they're expensive. Only countries like the US could aford such a thing. They do have a lot of advantages that make them worth the cost, if you can aford them. But they won't replace firearms today, and I don't think there's any reason at the moment, beyond mere optimism, to assume they will replace them in the future.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
Thanks for that, I was beginning to feel like an antagonistic git! Though I personally don't like Star Trek (except the original) being a big Babylon 5 fan. I find that the tech in Star Trek is over the top and too full of technobabble.

Nah. Nothing wrong with being opinionated.

I actually do like Star Trek. The technology is a little magical, but if you assume a closed system, in which you postulate only Star Trek laws of physics, then it all seems to fall together, usually.

-----------
In the Dark Ages, Romano-Celtic Britannia was over-run by Viking-like cultures collectively called the Anglo-Saxons. They were led by warlords called Drytinns, and the greatest warriors among them were the Thegns.

REXRAYGUN

Sunday, October 20, 2002 5:18 AM

Jaynesville opened up some new info on this thread, at least to me. Stitch's shotgun made a strange whining sound when the pump action was worked. Nothing like a shotgun I've heard, but maybe some of you might have speculations?

Just my dos pesos,

Rex!

WIZARDOFAUS

Sunday, October 20, 2002 6:29 AM

'Scuse me, mates, but could I add something to this debate. This show hasn't aired where I live yet(it may never, shudder) but from what information I've gleaned from around this site it seems they do have energy weps, but they mount them on their spaceships
rather than carry handheld versions of them.

Not that I know that much about this, or anything in particular.

Does this crack you up as much as it cracks me up?

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE