My Assistant
Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)
  |
 Today I played with automatic weapons, how they felt to me in the flesh |
 Mar 25 2008, 10:34 AM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Dragon  Group: Members Posts: 4,328 Joined: 28-November 05 From: Zuerich Member No.: 8,014  |
Recoil of heavy guns can be nasty. Once, a driver of one of our M-113 forgot the breaks, and when the 120 mm mortar mounted in the back fired, the APC ended up in a shack nearby.
|
 |
 
|
|
Mar 25 2008, 12:59 PM
Post
#52
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 944 Joined: 19-February 03 Member No.: 4,128 |
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Mar 24 2008, 08:02 PM)  Well hate to rain on your parade, but the steam will keep the laser from penetrating that deep. That is why in Surgical use of YAG/Dye lasers their is a device called a smoke evacuator. You would get surface steam explosions but no deep penetration. Also the cutting edge in todays lasers is not solid state, more along the lines of very toxic chemicals. WMS You are right about the low penetration. You will get a shallow, relatively wide crater. What I don't know is how large the burn radius would be, since the steam couldn't possibly carry off all the heat. You may well have a 1" explosive wound with a 6" burn radius around it. Comparing surgical lasers to military lasers is like guessing the effects of a sword from watching a scalpel in use. Surgical lasers use the minimum necessary power at just the right frequency to minimize tissue damage. Battle lasers use as much power as possible at just the right frequency to maximize tissue damage. 10 minutes with Google leaves me with no more hard facts about laser injuries, other than eye injuries. Any links would be welcome (and yes, I have already seen that Rick Astley video... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) ) |
|
|
|
|
Mar 25 2008, 02:18 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,159 Joined: 12-April 07 From: Ork Underground Member No.: 11,440 |
QUOTE (Ed_209a @ Mar 25 2008, 07:59 AM) You are right about the low penetration. You will get a shallow, relatively wide crater. What I don't know is how large the burn radius would be, since the steam couldn't possibly carry off all the heat. You may well have a 1" explosive wound with a 6" burn radius around it. Comparing surgical lasers to military lasers is like guessing the effects of a sword from watching a scalpel in use. Surgical lasers use the minimum necessary power at just the right frequency to minimize tissue damage. Battle lasers use as much power as possible at just the right frequency to maximize tissue damage. 10 minutes with Google leaves me with no more hard facts about laser injuries, other than eye injuries. Any links would be welcome (and yes, I have already seen that Rick Astley video... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) ) No a surgeon's scalpel and a sword both use the same cutting technology. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) As for surgical lasers using minimum power, (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) not in any of my hospitals. Most surgical lasers have more power than they need, the surgeon's are like Tim "The Tool Man" Taylor, ie "More Power". Weapons grade lasers are not solid state, but again use combination's of caustic/toxic chemicals or other nice things. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) Links Directed Energy Weapons Wiki Deuterium Fluoride Laser THEL Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser THEL Laser Beam Rifle Again most of the above links use chemical lasers. Any real information on Weapons Laser damaging tissue will not be found on Google, my guess it would military research, and not put on the web where Google bots can find it. WMS |
|
|
|
|
Mar 25 2008, 02:39 PM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,991 Joined: 1-February 08 From: Off the rock! Back In America! WOOOOO! Member No.: 15,601 |
Yeah, so far as I know no ones been uhm... shot with a weaponized laser (except in the eyes as already mentioned). I remember seeing a video some years ago where a guy was using a portable laser to cut into a steak, not very impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 25 2008, 06:04 PM
Post
#55
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
PEW! PEW!
Someone had to say it. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 25 2008, 09:03 PM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
WMS, your links aren't working.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 13th April 2022 - 10:35 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.