• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

General The infantry laser problem

Another issue that really isn't dealt with on lasers is the time they are applied to a target. Unlike a chemical cartridge + bullet or gauss rifle, a laser--and other energy weapons--don't release their energy in an instant and that's all you get. With a laser you can keep it on a target and continue to dump more energy into the hit location sort of like a light speed machinegun. If a fraction of a second burst doesn't work, give the target several seconds of energy and see what happens.

Energy weapons are like garden hoses limited only by how much energy you have available to use. So, if you were some laser armed infantryman your laser rifle fires as long as you hold the trigger down. If it has some limiter to length of fire you can bet at some point if the weapon needs longer bursts somebody will figure out how to get around that circuitry...
The target's not likely to cooperate: you aim and fire, the target moves and twists, the beam gets spread over a larger area instead of applying all its energy at one point. Might be a useful application of the weapon as a tool though: there are all kinds of mentions of energy weapons being used to cut through bulkheads and partitions, which would be difficult if the laser had only a pulse feature.
 
Even if the weapon is pulsed, how it pulses would make the difference. For example, it might pulse at say, on for 1 millisecond, off for 9. That means it pulses 1000 times a second but is only on for 1/10th of a second total in that time period. If each pulse were a watt, you deliver in 1 second 1000 watts of power to say a 1 square millimeter surface area. Scale that up as necessary or change the time intervals.

Your maths is off by a factor of 10. If it pulses on for 1 ms then is off for 9ms, that is 100 cycles per second rather than 1000.
 
In fact I've always wondered it the Laser weapons really need barrels or are more "torch like" (for lack of better description). Unlike chemical or magnetic propelled rounds, or even plasma/fusion, taht need to be acceperated, the laser does not, and so doesn't need a barrel for the acceleration.

When I was a boy, one of the things that caught my attention in Space 1999 TV show was their handguns had no barrel, and I have assumed sicne then maybe lasers don't really need it (though I must concede maybe they had nothing to do with lasers)...

(Image taken from https://moonbasealpha.fandom.com/wiki/Stun_gun)

View attachment 5304

Just for laughts: this was then my stun gun then when playing (not sure it was this exact model, but you'll understand):

1724954959081.png

Remember: I was a kid...

Of course, staples were removed (security first)...
 
Last edited:
Barrels are for the excitation tube. Length has a direct bearing on beam power.

Thanks for the save. I always thought that there was a barrel for laser weapons.
 
As far as logistical footprint, lasers would be key, barring reflec. Militaries spend a thousand times on procuring, and transporting ammunition, vs what they spend on small arms; which with battles in another star system would only get worse.
 
You were not alone, my mom’s vacuum cleaner tube and attachments became part of my flamethrower.
flamenwerfer.jpg
 
Whenever I see this Star Wars Kid, I feel real sad. Someone released this on the internet without his permission and he found himself being bullied even more at school. So very sad. :(
It is ironic that for some he became an object of ridicule and for other's he became a hero that legitimized what we all did [without a camera].

Heck, I am over 60 and my daughter is 19 and we just fought with plastic Halloween Light-sabers while watching a Star Wars movie on TV last month.
 
Back
Top