View Thread
 Print Thread
i know you hate EMP but...
nicholasneko
well okies.. i know most..*coughtalcough* hates the idea of EMP weapons due to shielding and what not. but people keep bringing them up as a way to shut down a ship, and i was thinking.. well wait.. if its supost to be system/personel shock, from blasts and what not.. why not a shock wave type weapon. something to the effect of a space flashbang. maybe oh i dunno. a compacted plasma ball like weapon that suddenly expands when released from its magnetic containment, causeing low damage but a large push like shock wave that hits the ships around the blast.. i'm sure against larger ships it wouldn't do more then a normal missle. but what about against small craft? like fighters and corvettes? something like this could be useful for disrupting flights. i know they recover from shock quickly but for some of the larger ships that are not immune to bomber attack this might make a nice weapon to delay till help arives or a way for the cap ship to get to a more defendable location.. just my 2 cents.. please don't hurt me ^.^
 
RagingBlueWind
the emp shockwave itself would have little effect due to shielding like you said (and from what i understand about EMP waves, its a form of radiation so you would have physical impact from it, as in getting knocked around by the shockwave)... but from the way you keep talking about system/personell shock, it seems to me like you're defining shock as a physical shock. in that case, we have nukes and rail guns and all sorts of nice weapons that will do that.
 
nicholasneko
i did not say use EMP.. everyone seems against EMP.. i was making the point of a similar effect. or in simple terms. droping the little blue bar down.. and i know all weapons lower that, causing a shock effect. but i'm talking about a weapon.. missle? that is devoted to doing just that. causing a large shock to a fighter sized ship and knocking the pilot around. as i stated. like a space flash bang.
 
RagingBlueWind
right but really the only way to make that little blue bar go down really is to wack the ship up until stuff starts to break. and we already have weapons for that. a space flash bang would just be a nuke.

EDIT: wouldn't it be more efficent to just blow the fighter up anyways? i mean if you have a weapon that can hit it with blast that will stun it? why not just blow it up with an even bigger blast?
Edited by RagingBlueWind on 08-10-2005 22:38
 
nicholasneko
but but... ok apparently i'm missing what i said.. as i noted.. all weapons lower that blue bar.. i'm talking something useful to large slow ships or as an addition to escorts, a weapon that doesn't really damage. and more or less for use against fighters as it would do no more to a larger ship then current missles already do.. and i was thinking more of a plasma based missle but i guess a nuke would work, tho i'm trying to be cheap. plasma requires energy, nuke requires basic fisionable materials. and i diddn't really think it was breaking stuff but the system shock to people and computers... like putting a metal bowl on someones head and hitting it with a hammer.. or spinning them around quickly then letting them walk around. even for systems. if i'm in a fighter and i go into a spin the systems not used to get out of said spin are now completely useless.


EDIT: and to your edit.. because i would rather disable a squad of fighters so i can get away or hit them with other things.. then just blow up one.
Edited by nicholasneko on 08-10-2005 22:43
 
RagingBlueWind
systems in fighters are designed for high velocity movement. i mean even look at todays fighters. if one stalls and starts spiraling towards the ground, does it suffer total system failure? i mean the only real way to lower the blue bar is to deal enough physical damage that actual components get damaged. you're not going to system shock computers just by making it spin and if you have a weapon that has enough force to knock out a pilot simply through the blunt force of a shockwave, your going to end up damaging it anyways. people are incredibly resilent, especially when you put them in light armor space suits. the only time you see people pass out in car crashes is when they hit the windshield or steering wheel and by then the car is all smashed up. likewise, pilots only pass out in planes from lack of oxygen or high g-force.

but i dont think that even matters anymore cause like i said why not just blow them up? why would u rather disable a squad of fighters chasing you if you could just blow them up. then they can never chase you again!
 
CIWS
As with anything it's a matter of effectiveness really. A powerful enough EMP will overload and destroy even hardened electronics.. of course considering the stuff being thrown around in the battlespace now you'd almost certainly be better off just whacking the target with a big nuke instead.

[QUOTE]plasma requires energy, nuke requires basic fisionable materials[/QUOTE]

Thing is that they aren't using nuclear warheads, but rather fusion warheads (I'm assuming they're pure fusion weapons, or at least Thermonuclear in nature).. which means they run on the same 'cheaper than dirt' elements fusion reactors do.
If the fireball can't be seen from orbit you obviously aren't trying hard enough.

There is no 'overkill' only 'open fire' and 'I need to reload'. -Schlock Mercenary
 
nicholasneko
ugh just.. never mind.. i was trying to make a NON emp way to disable groups of fighters or corvettes thus making it easy for other weapons systems to take them out quickly.
 
nicholasneko
and to the fusion.. you FUSION hydrogen in a reactor. like how a sun makes power and heat.. you FISSION an unstable heavy element to make a weapon, thus nukes do NOT use cheap materials.

EDIT: the problem with a fusion weapon is that it would take more material to make an equal blast as well as all you really have is a reactor on a missle. and thus.. a plasma bomb at best.

EDIT AGAIN: and to that point. fussion while making energy, also makes other material.. thus useing hydrogen you get helium as a biproduct amng other low level elements. where as fisioning, your blowing the atoms appart into energy in an attempt to turn as much of that material as you can into energy.
Edited by nicholasneko on 08-10-2005 23:29
 
Admiral666
If your worrying about fighters...why not multiple fast-moving and fast-tracking missiles, tipped with a small nuclear warhead?Small enoguh that the ship that fired the missiles would not be affected at all, while still completely destroying the fighters. And, i guess is you mad the shipyard nothing but launchers for said missiles,it could hurt any type of ship....and this has nothing to do with that little...blue bar thingy that i still dont understand.
"With all this power at its disposal,there is no question that the Beast Mothership is currently the most dangerous vessel in the Galaxy.It is not just a starship. It is a plague come for us all."-Somtaaw Fleet Intelligence.
[i]
"We are the Borg
 
CIWS

Quote

nicholasneko wrote:
and to the fusion.. you FUSION hydrogen in a reactor. like how a sun makes power and heat.. you FISSION an unstable heavy element to make a weapon, thus nukes do NOT use cheap materials.[QUOTE]

Fusion produces a greater amount of energy. And I hate to tell you this but we use primitive fusion weapons in modern times, that's what the term thermonuclear weapon describes (and you'll notice all our really big bombs were thermonukes). We're just not very good at it so we have to use a small fission nuke to kick-start things.

[QUOTE]EDIT: the problem with a fusion weapon is that it would take more material to make an equal blast as well as all you really have is a reactor on a missle. and thus.. a plasma bomb at best.


Not really. Deuterium fusion yields almost 7 times the energy per unit of mass as U-235 fission assuming equal efficiency.

Quote

EDIT AGAIN: and to that point. fussion while making energy, also makes other material.. thus useing hydrogen you get helium as a biproduct amng other low level elements. where as fisioning, your blowing the atoms appart into energy in an attempt to turn as much of that material as you can into energy.


You get a nice burst of energy when you fuse atoms as well, that would be why stars do all that radiating we love so much.
If the fireball can't be seen from orbit you obviously aren't trying hard enough.

There is no 'overkill' only 'open fire' and 'I need to reload'. -Schlock Mercenary
 
nicholasneko
i did say it released energy. if you read the first line of the second paragraph you quoted.. just kill the thread already. i'm stupid. i think we pointed it out.
Edited by nicholasneko on 10-10-2005 23:54
 
JustinWick
The appropriate technology for this would be a neutrino blast wave. I do not know how to generate such a wave, but it would disrupt delicate computational/communicational systems temporarily (possibly catostrophically).

Neutrinos are (theoretically) impossible to shield against. They are neutrally charged, do not (as far as is known) decay, and have no magnetic moment. They do, however, interact through the "weak" nuclear force, which allows them to be stopped by colliding with a nucleus. Unfortunately nucleii are far too small to stop many neutrinos.

I would say that such a weapon should deplete the blue bar.
===================================

Who would sup with the mighty must climb the path of daggers.
 
RagingBlueWind
neutrions carry no such property as far as i have researched. neutrions, yes, can literally pass through anything because they are so small, but do not have an intended "emp" effect with computers. if this was the case, nothing electronic would work on earth because neutrions are produced both by nuclear reactors and from background radiation so basically we're getting hit by neturions constantly - and they're doing nothing.

the only possible explanation for an interference effect i can see has something to do with charged current neutrinos but thats used on a matter of detection. the equipment has to be so specifically calibrated to cath neutrion emissions that.... you get the point, the chances of some kind of interaction happening against a ship thats not particularly trying to catch neutrions is one in a million. unless wikipedia is lying to me, as far as i see, neutrions can't work as an "emp" thingy.
 
JustinWick

Quote

RagingBlueWind wrote:
neutrions carry no such property as far as i have researched. neutrions, yes, can literally pass through anything because they are so small, but do not have an intended "emp" effect with computers. if this was the case, nothing electronic would work on earth because neutrions are produced both by nuclear reactors and from background radiation so basically we're getting hit by neturions constantly - and they're doing nothing.


That logic is fallicious. That's akin to saying "modern computers cannot be affected by radio waves because there are radio waves all around us, that's how radios work." I guarantee you that if you put your laptop right next to a megawatt RF antenna, you will violate your warrantee.

Please see this article:
http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/7...news/7/5/7

The idea I have here is that given sufficiently concentrated neutrino flux, it would be possible to generate disruption in logical circuitry (quantum/photonic computers).

Quote


the only possible explanation for an interference effect i can see has something to do with charged current neutrinos but thats used on a matter of detection. the equipment has to be so specifically calibrated to cath neutrion emissions that.... you get the point, the chances of some kind of interaction happening against a ship thats not particularly trying to catch neutrions is one in a million. unless wikipedia is lying to me, as far as i see, neutrions can't work as an "emp" thingy.


Please read this page:
http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/7...news/7/5/7

You will see that there is a shower of particles that takes place during neutrino interactions. Neutrino detectors work by seeing these showers, and the idea behind my weapon idea is that a very short pulse of neutrinos, sufficiently concentrated, would cause tiny bursts of energy to be generated within computational equipment, causing random bit-flips, noise, and errors to occur. It's entirely possible that with a high enough flux, it could force recomputations or even corrupt a working program or AI in ways that are not recoverable (critical failure).

I would suggest any such weapon do damage to the blue bar that is highly randomized.

Disclaimer: my field of research is astrophysics, not particle physics
===================================

Who would sup with the mighty must climb the path of daggers.
 
RagingBlueWind

Quote

JustinWick wrote:


That logic is fallicious. That's akin to saying "modern computers cannot be affected by radio waves because there are radio waves all around us, that's how radios work." I guarantee you that if you put your laptop right next to a megawatt RF antenna, you will violate your warrantee.


but thats premised on the idea of field magnitute. neutrions have the problem of passing through stuff regardless of how strong the wave is. how would u garuntee ur neutrion wave would always interact with the matter its going through. additionally, all your article prooves is neutrion interactions can only occur with fissionable material which is actually really interesting but ill deal with that later. if neutrions can pass through the earth, theres no reason they cant just pass through a ships computer or something. and remember, the reason neutrions can pass through everything is cause they are so small. in the case you can make it so they are focused enough to interact with computer parts THEN that also means ship hulls could stop the neutrino beam. even if some particles manage to seep through, their impact would be so minimal that you could easily deal with this problem by having redundant computer systems. finally, since you're obviously proposing some kind of focused neutrno device, that means you need a way to direct your neutrino beam. that being said, shielding can be made to deflect incoming neutrinos. finally, power source requirements for neutrino generation as of TODAY are massive... to create a neutrino beam of enough concentration to ensure interaction with matter would suck ship resources dry. ur artciles neutrion device needs 50GW already and i suspect a feasable neutrino device would need way more (remember it takes hundreds of feet of rock and thousands of tons of detection material to pick up ONE neutrino.... ur neutrino device has got to be absurdly powreful).

something interesting however, is that if you do manage to make this neutrino thing work, as your article indirectly points out.... to hell with messing with computers, why not just blow up all the nukes on the ships! i mean until now, PDS has been under the assumption that nukes are good cuz they do lotsa damage but can't be predetonated. if u manage to make a neutrino device that can mess with nukes....
 
Drachen

Quote

RagingBlueWind wrote:
[quote]JustinWick wrote:
finally, power source requirements for neutrino generation as of TODAY are massive... to create a neutrino beam of enough concentration to ensure interaction with matter would suck ship resources dry. ur artciles neutrion device needs 50GW already and i suspect a feasable neutrino device would need way more (remember it takes hundreds of feet of rock and thousands of tons of detection material to pick up ONE neutrino.... ur neutrino device has got to be absurdly powreful).

something interesting however, is that if you do manage to make this neutrino thing work, as your article indirectly points out.... to hell with messing with computers, why not just blow up all the nukes on the ships! i mean until now, PDS has been under the assumption that nukes are good cuz they do lotsa damage but can't be predetonated. if u manage to make a neutrino device that can mess with nukes....


I know we all hate this idea...But dedicated neutrino beam ship (Maybe BB hull with extra reactors and generators just for the sole purpose of generating the beam)?
Which perhaps serve an advanced anti-projectile role and to a lesser extent, an offensive role in setting off other ships' munitions.
 
Glacialis
What would the particle density need to be compared to say, an ion beam? ICA? Would more energetic neutrinos have any effect whatsoever? What is the effect of one neutrino hitting a hydrogen atom? Iron? Super-heavy alloy used in armor construction? Biological tissue?

If we're talking orders of magnitude more neutrinos, that energy might be better spent generating a bigger, badder DEW using known particle beam technology.
 
enterprise
in thery only the ionic composition of the standard ion cannon can make interference with ship system.
yes some system are shielded but anntennas, sensors, eps grid near weapon and all other system directly connected with open space i think that it's impossible to shield and if anyone see star wars an "ion cannon" generate an incredible amount of electrical energy. now if the computer are based on optical elements (lihe ancient's tecnolgy in Stargate Atlantis) no problem but some system i think that need in all condition a electrical component. a variant of our ion cannon with a incredible electrical charge if hit a ship can overload ship's system (see VCA in Cataclysm).
another way are massive cosmic rays, i read that a cosmic ray out of earth's electromagnetic field may trasnsform in computer a 0 into 1 and this can disable all ship computer, i think that all type of shielding have an absorption limit and a weapon specifically contructed to break that limit there isn't possible but necessary!
not a warhead (not enought energy for beam intensity) but a beam cannon connected with a massive hull thype new haarsuk super carrier or a modified prince of hiigara hull can operate. this cannon fire a single short beam overcharged that hit the hull and in one hit pass the ship's shields sytems for it's concentrated naturem, the only problem is own for his nature the weapon can be fired in a big period of time for the reason that the beam electronic remainder if not completely dissolved can damage the same ship that fire it
to boldly go where no one has gone before
 
Jump to Forum