Are high energy electronic weapons like rail guns and lasers

>>7777904
We already have functioning laser weaponry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIxugT-QiEI

>>7777904
Chemical. Cheap, Lo-Tech mass production.

Science shouldn`t be used to make weapons

>>7777904
>the future of warfare
Not in the short term, but they have some useful support roles in the near future.

In the long term yes, because they can exceed the specs of chemical guns and rockets so when it comes to heavy weapons they'll be superior.

>>7777906
That's pretty cool. Should have guessed it wouldn't look like something out of a movie though. Just reminds me of someone lighting a match-head with a laser pointer.

>>7777904
>Are high energy electronic weapons like rail guns and lasers actually the future of warfare, or is that SciFi garbage?

Due to the fact those type of weapons vaporise the target / make things messy, they probably won't be used militarily due to "ethical" reasons.

Unless one gets into the hands of a dictator then well....

>>7778491
weapons have driven science since science existed

>>7778504

>he actually fell for the bait

>>7778503
those ethics are disposed quite easily, e.g. the vaporization of all German cities in WW2

>>7778510

>he actually fell for the bait of the bait

>>7778504
That`s a common misconcept

Weapons make people think about science,but people can think about science aiming for other porpuoses

Same thing with the space race it wasn`t the competition between USA and USSR the space race advenced science so much becouse a shitload of people was thinking about science to save their asses

>>7778527
Your reasoning skills are really fucking bad.

File: 1450412897090.png (482KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 500x500px

Hi tech weapons need an external power source to work, a source that can be removed or damaged.
Low tech weapons are based on chemical reactions which work under most conditions.

There will come more hi tech weapons, but gunpowder will always be around.

>>7778545

Why external and vulnerable? A chemical propellant is also ultimately just a "power source."

>>7778545
>>7778552
Yeah, there's no real reason why the power for your high tech weapon shouldn't come from a chemical reaction

>>7778504
This is a meme and wrong.

>>7777906
>We already have
What do you mean by "we", Peasant?

>>7777904
>Are high energy electronic weapons like rail guns and lasers actually the future of warfare,

Yes

>Will chemically propelled weapons remain superior?

For the time being

Just wait till we figure out a way to shoot plasma out from railguns. Sea battles of the future will be akin to something out of a sci fi movie.

>>7777904
Use fucking google already,

Navy Railgun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXF0n6aojSc

Navy Laser Weapon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIxugT-QiEI

>>7778527
>>7778594
Complete Morons.

>>7778503
It vaporize a point, it destroyed those munitions by detonating them and vaporizing the beam contact point of the casing.
I'm sure a weapon designed to be carried and implemented by your average infantryman would likely have a much smaller beam section and thus cause more exacting damage, immediately caulderized wounds that would thus be easier to treat and in turn be more ethical as long as they remain in the infrared or optical spectrum to prevent radiation poisoning of the target with something akin to a UV or Gamma laser

>>7778504
Science has driven weapons your buffoon

>>7778545
>chemical reaction
What is a battery for $5, Trebeck?

Lasers,,,,,,,,,,,,, mirrored surfaces, cotton (yes i said cotton) blankets, multifibre colours or same colur as the laser. Clouds, aerosols or just hoses with fine dispersal.

1st world Multi billion pound US weapon system... 3rd world countermeasures.

>>7779021
Did you read that on RT or something? No surface is a perfect reflector or absorber.

>>7779050
No, stack exchange.
>Will high power laser penetrate mirror?

up vote
13
down vote
favorite
2
Many nations are developing hi-energy laser weapon. My question is, what if target is coated with mirror like coating? Can laser (since laser is still light) penetrate mirror? If it can then how is it possible?

optics laser
shareciteimprove this question
edited Dec 21 '15 at 2:54

feetwet
208213
asked Jul 11 '13 at 7:34

user2174870
3371213
add a comment
1 Answer
active oldest votes
up vote
11
down vote
accepted
If you look at reflectances of common materials used to make mirrors with (for example, the topmost graph found on this wiki page), you'll see that not 100% of the light is reflected, especially at the shorter wavelengths.

I'm still looking for a somewhat better source for similar curves for household mirrors, but I know that the idea is roughly the same -- it's actually pretty difficult to make a mirror that reflects 100% of all incident light.

The light that does not get reflected gets either absorbed (mostly) or transmitted (usually only for very thin film mirrors). The portion that gets absorbed is transformed into heat, which is transferred into the mirror material.

7f you shine a short-wavelength, high-power laser beam directly onto a mirror with the intention of damaging the mirror, the power of the laser must be great enough to ensure that the portion of the light that gets absorbed is great enough to heat up the material sufficiently (and fast enough) to melt it. This makes most laser weapons only really effective on

surfaces with low reflectance (plastics, certain composites, human skin, etc.)
thin-walled structures (fuel tanks, etc.)
sensitive electronics (camera's, targeting systems, etc.)

>>7778922
>Gamma laser
If you can make a gamma laser there is a Nobel prize in Physics waiting for you.

>>7778930
$5 battery v $0.20 bullet
czechm80 atheists

>>7779174
what if you have to shoot 25 ppl?

Both have advantages. Chemical propellants offer far higher average/sustained power densities than any electrical equivalent, so in terms of raw firepower chemical propellants really can't be beat. But electrically-powered weapons have a number of niche applications where they excel (namely with lasers in situations where gunlaying of a projectile weapon would be much more complicated and innaccurate - for example, anti-missile systems - and debatably with railguns for armor-piercing and long-range gunnery).