AA cannons

Other talk that doesn't fit elsewhere.
This is for General Discussion, not General chat.
User avatar
psychopompos
Trained
Trained
Posts: 470
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 09:18
Location: UK

Re: AA cannons

Post by psychopompos »

themousemaster wrote:Just in theory, but... if you are using heat to "destroy" a vehicle of any type, isn't the idea less to vaporize the armor, and more to turn the vehicle into an oven to cook the pilot?
unless the vehicle can resist radiation sufficiently, that is kinda how they work... by cooking the people, not the armour.

Skrim wrote:This same idea won't work on a vehicle, unless you're so accurate that you hit an unarmored fuel tank and home on it long enough to ignite it.

As for the original topic, that died a long time ago.
dont forget that IRL, rather then hollywood, diesel wont ignite if you throw a lit zippo into it.
so yo ustil need significant heat
TVR
Trained
Trained
Posts: 216
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 22:59

Re: AA cannons

Post by TVR »

Skrim wrote:... Low altitudes make things worse for lasers. ...
Indeed, but an AA LASER is used vertically, not horizontally, therefore lower altitude implies less distance to the target.
Skrim wrote:... or if the tank I'm targeting just puts up a simple smokescreen ...
Remember that weaponized electromagnetic radiation is not limited to the IR spectrum, attenuation could be limited by using the least absorbed frequency for a specific smokescreen [A property of Free Electron LASERs].
Skrim wrote:... since such a laser would have extreme cooling problems ...
Open-cycle LASERs vent coolant after each firing cycle, essentially forming a type of ammunition [coolant].
Skrim wrote:... and home on it long enough to ignite it ...
Current ABM LASERs operate on a wave of indefinite length, a pulse LASER concentrates all the energy excreted by continuous wave operation in an instant, vaporising holes due the limitation imposed by the speed of sound on heat dissipation.
User avatar
Skrim
Trained
Trained
Posts: 156
Joined: 02 May 2008, 19:39

Re: AA cannons

Post by Skrim »

TVR wrote:Indeed, but an AA LASER is used vertically, not horizontally, therefore lower altitude implies less distance to the target.
In your previous post, you mentioned an anti-tank laser and not an anti-aircraft laser. Big difference.
Remember that weaponized electromagnetic radiation is not limited to the IR spectrum, attenuation could be limited by using the least absorbed frequency for a specific smokescreen (A property of Free Electron LASERs).
Gee whiz. So change the smokecreen composition. On one side, you have a high-tech Free Electron Laser and spectral equipment to deduce the composition of smokescreen defenses. On the other side, you have a low-tech smokescreen.
Open-cycle LASERs vent coolant after each firing cycle, essentially forming a type of ammunition [coolant].
Having a finite amount of coolant gives you a finite number of shots, and thereby losing the laser's no-ammo-needed advantage.
Current ABM LASERs operate on a wave of indefinite length, a pulse LASER concentrates all the energy excreted by continuous wave operation in an instant, vaporising holes due the limitation imposed by the speed of sound on heat dissipation.
On a tank, you'd maybe manage to chip away a bit of armor with that laser pulse, and then it'll cool down after a few seconds. Use the same energy and the same capacitor bank on a mass driver weapon and you have an armor-piercing dart slashing through several layers of armor, either killing whatever is inside or weakening the armor for another shot to break through.

The laser's progress can also be hindered by heat-dissipating ablative armor(which we know as "Thermal Armor" in WZ) that controls the rate at which an energy weapon away at it, but then, there's an armor for every kind of weapon.

HESH(anti-structure squash-head warhead) -> Spaced Armor or Slat Armor.
HEAT(explosive shaped charge found in AT missiles) -> Slat Armor, Explosive Reactive & Electromagnetic Reactive Armor.
HE-Frag(anti-personnel fragmentation warhead, found in artillery shells) -> Any thick metal or composite armor.
APFSDS(kinetic penetrator used by modern tank cannons and mass drivers) -> Thick Composite Armor.
Pulse Laser -> Heat-Resistant Ablative Armor.
TVR
Trained
Trained
Posts: 216
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 22:59

Re: AA cannons

Post by TVR »

Skrim wrote:... In your previous post, you mentioned an anti-tank laser and not an anti-aircraft laser. Big difference. ...
Sorry, I was implying the usage of the Warzone 2100 Heavy Laser turret against aircraft.
Skrim wrote:... Having a finite amount of coolant gives you a finite number of shots, and thereby losing the laser's no-ammo-needed advantage. ...
Anything that releases joules is already limited by the amount of energy stored, be it the amount of propellant, or the capacitor for a LASER or electromagnetic weapon.
Skrim wrote:... On a tank ...
Indeed, LASERs are much less efficient when deployed in a slugging fest, but aerial combat relies not on armour, but manoeuvre-ability.

Hypervelocity weapons can still miss if turbofan-aircraft does not fly in a predictable manner, but LASERs are guaranteed hits on an identified target, even for scram-jet aircraft.
Skrim wrote:The laser's progress can also be hindered by heat-dissipating ablative armor(which we know as "Thermal Armor" in WZ) that controls the rate at which an energy weapon away at it, but then, there's an armor for every kind of weapon.
While ablative armour is effective for heating beams, it is not as effective as much denser slabs of tungsten for a pulse LASER.

The true counter-armour for hypervelocity weapons would be a whipple shield, rather than standard kinetic armour plating.
User avatar
Skrim
Trained
Trained
Posts: 156
Joined: 02 May 2008, 19:39

Re: AA cannons

Post by Skrim »

Anything that releases joules is already limited by the amount of energy stored, be it the amount of propellant, or the capacitor for a LASER or electromagnetic weapon.
Duh. But it's much easier to store electric energy than it is to store explosive shells, metal slugs, or missiles. Coolant would be allow for more shots than a projectile weapon, but a lot less than an air-cooled laser(but at a much higher rate of fire). Also, I believe the laser's optics would eventually wear out and have to be replaced.
Indeed, LASERs are much less efficient when deployed in a slugging fest, but aerial combat relies not on armour, but manoeuvre-ability.

Hypervelocity weapons can still miss if turbofan-aircraft does not fly in a predictable manner, but LASERs are guaranteed hits on an identified target, even for scram-jet aircraft.
Aerial combat relies on detection and maneuverability. Detection is the battle of stealthiness & ECM vs. sensory systems - this was going to be implemented in WZ, but the entire ECM aspect died somewhere along the way.

Once detected, the first weapon to be used would be(and IRL, is) missiles, because of their very long effective range. How well the target knows about a missile heading towards them depends on the missiles own ECM & stealthiness, as well as the signature of it's guidance system if it's using active guidance(a built-in radar), and of course, it's closing speed. The longer time the target knows about the missile, the better chance it has of evading it.

Only once you close in to a sufficiently short range can you deploy a pulse laser. The pulse laser cannot be dodged once it's pointed at the target, so if a combat aircraft has expended it's missiles and isn't armed with an AA laser, or knows that it's opponent has a longer-ranged laser than it, it's best choice is to turn tail and run for it's life. It sounds like a cool proposition for future dogfights, and of course, the old cannons would be long obsolete.



Of course, pulse laser weapons can be further developed into electrolasers, by adding another capacitor bank that discharges into the plasma stream caused by the pulse laser's blooming to create a lightning bolt overlapping with the laser shot. It would do yet more thermal damage and knock out the target's electronics.
In fact, I think WZ's "laser" weapons ARE Pulsed Electrolasers given that they would be visible, and that electrolasers would have three-fold effectiveness against cyborgs(powersuit troops, i.e): 1) Thermal damage chips away the armor. 2) The person inside gets fried. 3) The electronics on which the cyborg depends get fried. If the laser pulse loses energy by blooming through a denser gas(smokescreen, dust, etc.), the electric pulse gets a thicker ion stream to conduct through. So cyborgs and aircraft would be at immense risk against this weapon, and ground vehicles would take some damage, though not as much.
While ablative armour is effective for heating beams, it is not as effective as much denser slabs of tungsten for a pulse LASER.

The true counter-armour for hypervelocity weapons would be a whipple shield, rather than standard kinetic armour plating.
Yeah, the true armor for mass driver weapons would be a Whipple shield backed by composite armor plating. It would also act as spaced armor, dissipating shaped charges to an extent and stopping squash-head warheads entirely. Add a capacitor bank to this set-up and you also have electromagnetic reactive armor, further countering out shaped charges and reducing the damage done by shattered hypervelocity rounds. Electromagnetic reactive armor may also work against the electric half of an electrolaser pulse by putting up a magnetic field and counter-current for a short amount of time to ride out the pulse.
TVR
Trained
Trained
Posts: 216
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 22:59

Re: AA cannons

Post by TVR »

Skrim wrote:... Also, I believe the laser's optics would eventually wear out and have to be replaced. ...
Depends on the type of LASER, the previously mentioned Free electron LASER does not have optics [if it were to be deployed to emit ionizing radiation].
Skrim wrote:... by adding another capacitor bank that discharges into the plasma stream caused by the pulse laser's blooming ...
The problem with such electric discharges is that:
1) The energy used to create the current may as well be used to further power the LASER.
2) Attenuation by the atmosphere ['blooming'] principally occurs at H2O, CO2, Nitrogen, and Oxygen spectral absorption bands, thus limiting the potential of a FEL.
3) Against an aerial target, twice as much energy must expended in order to form a bidirectional current, whereas ground targets are grounded.