[Gearhead] [UT] Beam Weapon Efficiency

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Darekun

Trivially, CO2 lasers? IR output, supports Q-switched micropulsing, gas medium close enough to ordinary air to not interfere with breathing after one's shot next to you. Used for industrial apps today because of scalability and cost, but too power-hungry for battlefield use.

There are CO2 lasers capable of delivering the KE of a 5.56 or 7.76 rifle round at equivalent ranges witch comparable size and weight to current assault rifles? Can you link to an example?

[Darekun]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

There are CO2 lasers capable of delivering the KE of a 5.56 or 7.76 rifle round at equivalent ranges witch comparable size and weight to current assault rifles? Can you link to an example?

They aren't built because there's no role for them, yet the technology scales. Determining scaling isn't that hard given a number of examples, that's what this thread is for :J

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Darekun

They aren't built because there's no role for them, yet the technology scales. Determining scaling isn't that hard given a number of examples, that's what this thread is for :J

You anticipate near-future battery storage technology that can achieve instantaneous power discharge equivalent to a nuclear reactor feeding a large bank of capacitors?

[Darekun]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

You anticipate near-future battery storage technology that can achieve instantaneous power discharge equivalent to a nuclear reactor feeding a large bank of capacitors?

No, I'm taking UT's powercells as written.

We know our battery technology is behind the curve. We don't know by how much, but I see comments that powercells are too optimistic often enough.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Darekun

No, I'm taking UT's powercells as written.

I think that settings with Man-Pack chemical lasers probably aren't the same ones with unrealistic power storage densities. The chemical lasers are included for settings with more realistic batteries.

We know our battery technology is behind the curve.

Which curve is that?

We don't know by how much, but I see comments that powercells are too optimistic often enough.

AFAICT, they were deliberately so in order to make man-portable DEW possible.

[Darekun]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I think that settings with Man-Pack chemical lasers probably aren't the same ones with unrealistic power storage densities. The chemical lasers are included for settings with more realistic batteries.

Yeah, my surprise was that UT seemed to have them coexisting. Mounted weapons use powercells, personal weapons use chem packs. What?

Also, if they actually intended it to be a techpath thing, then that's even more reason to get a TL9 powercell-based laser, even if it were replacing the assault laser with a powercell-based sniper laser.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Which curve is that?

The rest of our tech, and notably the sharp increase now that we're catching up is the same sharp increase predicted in the 80s if we bothered working on it. The question is how long it will last, i.e. how much improvement until we're done catching up.



Also, dinnertime over here :J

[lwcamp]

Originally Posted by Darekun

Trivially, CO2 lasers? IR output, supports Q-switched micropulsing, gas medium close enough to ordinary air to not interfere with breathing after one's shot next to you. Used for industrial apps today because of scalability and cost, but too power-hungry for battlefield use.

CO_2 lasers also have wavelengths in the far IR, meaning they have a seriously limited range due to diffraction, especially when compared to mid infrared (deuterium fluoride) and near infrared (Nd:YAG, chemical oxygen iodine). The long wavelength also means that the breakdown threshold in air is considerably lower than at shorter wavelengths, so focusing the beam to where it can cause significant damage will also decompose the air in the beam into a plasma that will absorb the beam. CO_2 is also common in air, so that the emissions of the laser can be absorbed by the air. All these make them impractical as weapons (although they're great for industrial processes).

The Nd:YAG and related neodymium lasers are probably closer to what you are looking for. They are being weaponized. The best I've heard of so far (Northrop Grumman's FIRESTRIKE laser) is several 15 kW modules being linked up to form a single 105 kW beam. The scaling is by no means guaranteed, as you get more powerful beams you also need to cool the crystals more, and ensure they don't warp from the heat and ruin your beam quality. The FIRESTRIKE laser gets you about 80 W/kg. To get something that could disable a person through direct injury (rather than blindness) on combat timescales would not be man-portable.

Luke