{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
由Ktan_Dantaktee编辑：
8/7/2014 4:36:21 AM
54
How come laser weapons are always shown as the weapon system of the future?
Why not magnetic weaponry? Wouldn't assault-rifle sized rail guns be far more devastating and effective in combat? The projectiles of magnetic weaponry are pretty close to being as fast as lasers, and are better at piercing armor; not to mention most magnetic rounds have a farther effective range than laser weaponry. Overall, magnetic weapons are better than laser weapons unless you have a highly advanced laser weapon that fires ridiculously powerful blasts; and without a compact power source capable of containing ludicrous amounts of energy, that ain't happening.
TL;DR: Magnetic weapons > Laser weapons
Thoughts? Opinions?
-
1 回复
-
2 回复
-
1 回复I am almost certain that I read about a US navy prototype railgun/coilgun which was able to accelerate a 2.7 kg mass up to a speed of 80 km( 50 mi) per second. That would do some damage. [spoiler]I could've misread the 50 miles, which may be 50 km or 30 miles per second[/spoiler]
-
5 回复To weaponize lasers takes a lot more power than we can pack into a gun. They aren't very practical either, since making a laser that would only penetrate armor and the person wearing it without over penetrating into the people behind the person would be nearly impossible. Plasma weaponry like in Halo is technically magnetic weaponry and would be much easier to control. Plasma is super-heated ionized gas, so it is affected by magnetic fields. It's why the plasma torpedoes on Covenant ships were so maneuverable, they would just change the magnetic field to direct it. It would take a lot of power, but considerably less than it would for lasers.
-
6 回复
-
1 回复
-
Um no. First off, man portable MWs (magnetic weapons) can reach nowhere near to speed of DEWs (directed energy weapons). Il be generous and say a man portable rail gun could reach velocities of MAYBE 0.01c, 1/100 the speed of light. The reason for this is, you would only have a 1m barrel available to propel the projectile, longer barrel = more acceleration. Second, there's the issue of ammunition and energy. The amount of energy required to propel a projectile up to a lethal velocity far exceeds the amount need to kill a man with pure radiation. So not only would you get less bang for your buck, you'd have to lug around heavy physical ammunition for your rail gun. 3) DEWs can put sustained fire on targets, whereas MWs can do semi auto at best. If you take a shot at an aircraft with an MW and miss, you have to rework the math and fire again, with a DEW all you have to do is correct for the difference and bring the beam onto the target. 4) safety. The amount of energy required to propel a projectile up to high velocities along a 1m barrel would not only melt the barrel, it would kill the operator and destroy any nearby electronics. 5) DEWs are not limited to optical lasers. Ever heard of a particle beam cannon/atom laser? It's basically a laser but instead of directing optical light at a target if fires a cohesive beam of ionized particles at light speed which does not dissociate with distance. Assuming the weapon was well designed, a PBW could theoretically have unlimited range.
-
So far the difference I know of between rail guns and lasers is the size. Lasers with a compacted energy source don't need to be to big to put out a lot of energy and also stand still whereas a rail gun shoots at varying speeds going up to breaking the speed of sound (I think the American military did a rail gun test that came close) where holding an object shooting at that speed would destroy your body. Which is why usually in science fiction rail guns are relegated to being on ships since the ships can take the recoil.
-
Depends I mean can you imagine the devastation a AR sized MACAR would cause? You hit you're target the ten behind through the building and the granny say on a bench. Laser weapons while cool are not as of yet an effective means for warfare battery life is a big negative (seriously) as they radiation,blindness and the possibility of it malfunctioning on the field and being unable to repair it that's an expensive toy to break. And odd as it sounds for a stealth mission one where remaining unseen and quiet a laser gun would be the worse thing ever I mean just look at Star Wars the whole trilogy is like a Xmas tree in space.
-
2 回复-They became a staple in stuff like Star Wars when we didn't know as much about the subject as now -Easier to animate -No recoil -Infinite Accuracy at Range -Although both require substantial amounts of power, lasers do not require a reload.
-
I think it'll end up like firefly . They'll probably be made but most people will probably keep using powder weapons . If you want an allegory I think it'll be like current day 3D Printers . They're great but they're not that practical for every day use
-
3 回复I always figured the end goal with laser weapons was a handheld weapon that doesn't need to be reloaded and eliminated the need for ballistics.
