Not just warheads. They've got internal guidance systems and reaction drives. They're less humongous rail gun shots and more self guiding missiles with one hell of a kicker charge. That multiple light second range laser is going to keep missing until it gets far too close for it to matter.
Faith in Superior Firepower [Planetary Annihilation Multicross SI]
- Thread starter Faith
- Start date
Not just warheads. They've got internal guidance systems and reaction drives. They're less humongous rail gun shots and more self guiding missiles with one hell of a kicker charge. That multiple light second range laser is going to keep missing until it gets far too close for it to matter.
vyor
KITTY! \o/
If you can dodge then you can do something to them with lasers. Evaporating 50% of it is bound to break something and make it go somewhere it doesn't want to be.
Riddle78
Reality nibbler.
- Location
- CFB Middle of Nowhere on the Trans-Can
Lasers do not vaporise. They cut. If you tried to use lasers to intercept an incoming KKV of any reasonable antishipping mass,then you'll need an extremely wide-focus beam,going for nearly a solid minute. Anything less,and you're either cutting holes into the KKV,thus doing absolutely nothing to help yourself,or you're cutting it into pieces... Thus magnifying your issues,as a small cloud of small,relativistic projectiles are still travelling at very significant fractions of the speed of light,and will ruin your day regardless.
The only way to efficiently deal with a KKV is to not be there when the round impacts... Which is simply the biggest weakness of any kinetic weapon.
vyor
KITTY! \o/
So much wrong with what you are saying... Imma just grab something NASA said instead of debating you on that.
NASA's Plan to Deflect an Asteroid
Seriously, what do you think the heat does to make the fucking hole?
Riddle78
Reality nibbler.
- Location
- CFB Middle of Nowhere on the Trans-Can
It melts the matter,with a comparatively small fraction of the matter vaporising. And an asteroid is not a KKV. A KKV travels at speeds in excess of 5% lightspeed. An antishipping KKV will be large and dense,rendering lasers ineffective,without going into absurdity. With the energy you'd need to completely erase the KKV with a laser,you'd have been able to fire multiple KKV's at the offending KKV to deflect it,or halt it. Anything short of complete erasure will still doom the ship,as even small fragments moving at ~0.05C will impact with megaton force,and penetrate any armour that isn't in the realm of absurdity.
Lasers as point defence really only work when dodging isn't an option,as tracking munitions tend to move significantly slower.
Now,with Progenitor Hypertech,you'd be able to make your Laser of Hypermelt. But it'd be wasteful. You'd be much better served using that energy to create a Mother of All Mass Accelerators,or plasma cannons,or particle beams. Lasers,as weapons,suck,thanks to the amount of energy you need to put in being too great to justify the damage it puts out.
Lasers as point defence really only work when dodging isn't an option,as tracking munitions tend to move significantly slower.
Now,with Progenitor Hypertech,you'd be able to make your Laser of Hypermelt. But it'd be wasteful. You'd be much better served using that energy to create a Mother of All Mass Accelerators,or plasma cannons,or particle beams. Lasers,as weapons,suck,thanks to the amount of energy you need to put in being too great to justify the damage it puts out.
Glitchrr36
Slick's Short Company, CEO
- Location
- The Wastes
- Pronouns
- He/Him
This is why I'm using a pair 4km long railcannons as the coaxial spinals, and lasers as part of the dorsal series of fuck you weapons, along with strategic missile launchers and standard rail guns on my super ship I'll get around to in another six or seven chapters.
vyor
KITTY! \o/
Lasers are more efficient than KKVs for raw energy transfer. No over penetration and they are faster with a longer range.
Mandabar
Waifu of choice is Rem. Give that girl some hugs!
- Location
- Florida, USA [Yes. Florida *FacePalm*]
There's a reason why the last (and only) dreadnought of humankind has survived and terrorized a galactic empire for two thousand plus years. KKV's have their place, and there are lasers in this story IIRC.
Red One I love you. Best damn AI Warship. Continue your revenge~!
Avenge the fallen Humankind!
@Ovid You should take a look at that story and see if it meets your criteria for badass ships. The Last Angel is the first story, the sequel is being written as well as The Last Angel: Ascension.
Red One I love you. Best damn AI Warship. Continue your revenge~!
Avenge the fallen Humankind!
@Ovid You should take a look at that story and see if it meets your criteria for badass ships. The Last Angel is the first story, the sequel is being written as well as The Last Angel: Ascension.
Last edited:
Glitchrr36
Slick's Short Company, CEO
- Location
- The Wastes
- Pronouns
- He/Him
at normal tech levels, yeah, you have a point. At superscience progenitor bullshit, you can sling kkvs at speeds where the enemy gets seconds to get out of the way after detection, from the speed.
Glitchrr36
Slick's Short Company, CEO
- Location
- The Wastes
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I think it would qualify based on the CTHULHUGUN alone. That thing can fuck up stars for a short bit.
Mandabar
Waifu of choice is Rem. Give that girl some hugs!
- Location
- Florida, USA [Yes. Florida *FacePalm*]
Well yeah for far more than a short bit though. It's most powerful weapon is also it's power source. And a weakness. But yeah, destroying a whole solar system (and the pursuing gloating enemies) is just icing on the cake. Didn't want to detract from the KKV focus though.
Last edited:
Riddle78
Reality nibbler.
- Location
- CFB Middle of Nowhere on the Trans-Can
Really? Every single laser I find in reality suffers the same issue; Mammoth power in,tiny hole out. If the beam is sustained,it can only be sustained for a relatively short period of time before either the power supply fails,or the laser's own hardware fails. Compare that to a rifle; Twitch finger,explosion happens mere inches from your face,and a lead cone screams downrange at mach 2.1,literally turning the guy's head inside out.
Let's scale this up to antishipping weapons in space. Spoilering for the sake of scroll space.
Let's assume both ships are twelve kilometres long; One equipped with a ten kilometre long spinal railgun,the other with a laser emitter of the same length and configuration. For a laser to function as a weapon,the point of focus (PoF) must be as small as possible. If the beam strikes a target between the emitter an PoF,the weapon loses effectiveness,as the target is not at the focal point. The same is also true if the target is beyond the PoF. Furthermore,lasers diffuse; It's simply the nature of the beast. So,past a certain range,the laser simply can't do any damage at all. As such,lasers have a hard-capped maximum arbitrary range,determined by the emitter in question. Now,while I might not have any numbers,it is safe to assume that a ten kilometre long antishipping laser would require a large amount of power,as the beam would need to be intense enough to cut through dense,multilayered hulls,and potential reflective elements,which would further diminish the effectiveness of the beam. As the beam would need to be needle-thin in order to maintain intensity-on-target,such a weapon,as a pulsed beam,would only be effective at "sniping" critical components; Reactors,ammunition storage,life support,et cetera. As a sustained beam,the weapon becomes a frighteningly effective cutting tool,likely capable of cutting a similar ship in two with three or four kicks at the cat,assuming the target doesn't have an excess of reflective elements in the armour,with pauses between bursts to ensure that the emitter doesn't overheat and fail,or the power drain doesn't cripple other systems,if,for some reason,the ship's designers didn't equip the vessel with a robust enough power supply to feed such a weapon.
The railgun,comparatively,has a literally infinite range at which it can land a kill,no matter how infinitesimally small the odds. At any range beyond the weapon's muzzle,effectiveness isn't lost,while in space. The longer the rails,the higher the weapon's muzzle velocity; If you decide to kick reason to the curb,and go beyond the impossible,you could easily reach a muzzle velocity of 0.9999..C,though a ten kilometre long weapon would likely have a much more "reasonable" muzzle velocity of 0.05C. Now,while the round from a railgun would,by its very nature,lose accuracy at range quite quickly,it would still be able to kill anything the round strikes,be it a hundred kilometres a way,to fifty quintillion kilometres away. As for the victim ship,very little can offer specialised defence against a kinetic assault,so the only way that a similar ship would survive a direct,square hit from the railgun would be with extremely thick sloped and/or curved armour; Any other scenario would result in a gutted shipwreck,from the first shot alone. And,it'd be likely that the round would overpenetrate,and keep going,especially if it struck the side of the target. To power the weapon,you'd likely need far less power than what's needed on the laser dreadnought,thus freeing up resources for other systems,like a laser AMS,potential shielding technology,counterintelligence,and so on. Unless,of course,the shipwrights decided to stick on a tinkertoy generator,for whatever harebrained reason.
All of this said,yes,the laser will be more accurate than the railgun at all ranges. But the railgun would be able to kill at any range. With less power input,from my reckoning,based on what I've observed of real lasers.
The railgun,comparatively,has a literally infinite range at which it can land a kill,no matter how infinitesimally small the odds. At any range beyond the weapon's muzzle,effectiveness isn't lost,while in space. The longer the rails,the higher the weapon's muzzle velocity; If you decide to kick reason to the curb,and go beyond the impossible,you could easily reach a muzzle velocity of 0.9999..C,though a ten kilometre long weapon would likely have a much more "reasonable" muzzle velocity of 0.05C. Now,while the round from a railgun would,by its very nature,lose accuracy at range quite quickly,it would still be able to kill anything the round strikes,be it a hundred kilometres a way,to fifty quintillion kilometres away. As for the victim ship,very little can offer specialised defence against a kinetic assault,so the only way that a similar ship would survive a direct,square hit from the railgun would be with extremely thick sloped and/or curved armour; Any other scenario would result in a gutted shipwreck,from the first shot alone. And,it'd be likely that the round would overpenetrate,and keep going,especially if it struck the side of the target. To power the weapon,you'd likely need far less power than what's needed on the laser dreadnought,thus freeing up resources for other systems,like a laser AMS,potential shielding technology,counterintelligence,and so on. Unless,of course,the shipwrights decided to stick on a tinkertoy generator,for whatever harebrained reason.
All of this said,yes,the laser will be more accurate than the railgun at all ranges. But the railgun would be able to kill at any range. With less power input,from my reckoning,based on what I've observed of real lasers.
vyor
KITTY! \o/
Not a kkv and suffers very few drawbacks(still spinal mounted though).
...
No. Bad.
We assume that both sides have the same tech or this entire discussion is meaningless.
vyor
KITTY! \o/
You aren't accounting for the thermal effects. The metal rapidly expands because it was just vaporized(along with the air). You can also get more energy on target with a laser, even with the same reactor specs, because there is a lot of waste in a railgun(not just heat, but having to overcome the inertia of the round itself).
Riddle78
Reality nibbler.
- Location
- CFB Middle of Nowhere on the Trans-Can
My example was on spaceborne dreadnoughts; The environment is a zero gravity vacuum. Those factors largely don't even apply in such a scenario.
vyor
KITTY! \o/
Wasn't aware fucking inertia was gravity base-
Oh, wait, it isn't.
Riddle78
Reality nibbler.
- Location
- CFB Middle of Nowhere on the Trans-Can
I now see the root of the argument; You're arguing efficiency of the system,while I'm arguing the system's effectiveness as a weapon. While,yes,a laser's a more efficient system,it is a less effective weapon,as I explained before.
Faith
Some idea of what I'm doing.
- Location
- Land of Waves and Warmth
Now, now, gents. There's no need to get snippy. Obviously the answer to the question "Which is better, lasers or kinetics?" is "Who the fuck cares, mount both."
Besides, as far as the Faith Foundation is concerned, Style >>>>>>> Effectiveness, so even if that wasn't the most efficient answer, it'd still be the case.
Besides, as far as the Faith Foundation is concerned, Style >>>>>>> Effectiveness, so even if that wasn't the most efficient answer, it'd still be the case.
Lazurman
This is fine.
- Location
- Classified
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Yeah! Key thing to remember as a BESRMoW: Never forget to have fun. I, myself, will be trolling the shit out of a lot of people once I get out of the tutorial mission in my SI. With the way mechs like us wage war, we can afford to sacrifice a little bit of efficiency to eke out that little bit bigger dose of awesomeness.
Glitchrr36
Slick's Short Company, CEO
- Location
- The Wastes
- Pronouns
- He/Him
My first really powerful combat unit is a fucking Jaeger. As in the "how the piss does that stand up," real super robots that swing goddamn supertankers as baseball bats. And I stuck more dakka than I may have needed on it. And gave it pauldrons. If you don't go for at least a little rule of cool, you end up with T1 and T2 Aircraft with some vehicle support, and then the story is boring.
vyor
KITTY! \o/
It doesn't even take into account the massive heat waste of a railgun!
As opposed to the massive waste heat of a laser?
vyor
KITTY! \o/
Yes.
I would note that the waste heat they are referring to there is only for free electron lasers, not other forms.