Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Godofgamblers 11/2/2009 2:59:14 AM

When you think about it, any tech an alien race would have would certainly be nuclear-based since it is ther power thar fuels the stars and most activity in the universe. It seems logical that an alien race would have mastered all aspects of nuclear power, for power, travel, warfare etc

While the only weapon we have using nuclear power is a bomb, it is conceivable that they have an array of weapons using nuclear power. For example, weapons using extremes of sound, light, radiation in addition to guns, bombs and so on.

Quote Reply

stbretnco 11/2/2009 3:18:54 AM

Plenty of civilizations have been given bloody noses or worse by low tech warriors who excelled at using the tech they had in hand in an expedient manner.

We have microwave radiation weapons, sound weapons, and light weapons (lasers and dazzle weapons) which work well for crowd control, but we're banned from using them,courtesy of your friendly legal beagles.

Sound weapons would be useless on the moon, no medium to transmit the energy, unless you're planning on using sound to ruin any underground bases, in which case a nuke would be more efficient.

A crossbow would work well, but they tend to have a low rate of fire. Same with a longbow.

A microwave weapon would work well on the moon, plenty of power available (light), depending on what they were using for shielding in their space suits.

Sad, really, that they were talking about ion motors and nuclear rockets in the '60s, and we're still stuck here on the third rock from the sun. Thanks, Proxmire.

Quote Reply

WarNerd 11/2/2009 5:23:59 AM

The question I would have about using modern firearms in a no gravity or low gravity environment would be the reliabitlity of the weapons, i.e., jamming or failures to feed. Since most gas and recoil operated firearms rely upon springs to operate the bolt, would low or zero gravity affect this? What about magazine springs? Would low gravity cause the weapons to fire at a higher than normal rate of fire, and wouldn't this cause the weapon to jam? If this were the case then maybe bolt action rifles, especially higher capacity ones like the Enfield would be the way to go.

Gravity has no effect on the action of springs. (Really, where did you come up with that idea?)

Temperature does, but this MAY not too much of a problem in an enclosed mechanism given proper materials selection.

Lubrication will be a serious problem because of the wide temperature range that would be encountered and the rapid changes combined with violent action when you hid is the shadows (~4K) for several hours and then open fire at full auto. They will also need to be able to operate in both vacuum and human and alien atmospheres.

Fouling will be a bigger problem because water vapor from combustion will tend to form crystals on ultra cold surfaces, even in vacuum. Automatic weapons will probably have to use recoil or delayed blowback operating systems. New cleaning systems will be required as well, especially if the troops need to be able to clean their weapons in vacuum.

Quote Reply

Mikko .22 LR? 11/2/2009 9:32:16 AM

Depending on the protection the Plutonians are using, wouldn't the lightest possible cartridge support the needs for this moon war? If .22 LR was enough to puncture the space suits the invaders had it would be the most efficient caliber to go with. Least weight to haul to the orbit and beyond - cartridges, barrels and magazines included.

Take away self-loading properties if extreme temperature conditions made them a liability and go bolt-action. Go single-shot if bolt-action rifles were seen too vulnerable. I think a large, say, 200-500 round magazine and a bolt action would be my choice, considering all the previous arguments here. You don't want to handle individual cartridges with spacesuit gloves. Also multiple barrell & single shot & autoloader could do the trick, especially if your enemy had a somehow compartmentalized space-suit design.

No lubrication for the gun itself, just loose parts internally and maximum protection from the dust. If and when the mechanism fails, just toss the lock and attach a new one to the barrell, stock & magazine.

This is how we were taught to think when I did my service in Experimental Lunar Brigade project of the ESA. A good project. Top secret. We use the Vatican as our public front. The Pope is just a new spacesuit design.

Mikko

Quote Reply

warpig 11/2/2009 12:15:42 PM

I certainly agree that the extreme and potentially rapid cooling and heating could be a major concern with the operation of small arms, and definitely the issues of lubrication and fouling are likely to be critical. Stories from the Eastern Front at -50degrees C are alarming enough. I believe in winter they often just ran their guns dry (i.e., no lubricant at all) because even the slightest amount of oil just turned to glue in the cold. Also, the primary by-products of combustion of hydrocarbons is water and carbon dioxide. Current propellants have other ingredients as well, but no matter what they produce, that stuff will be hanging around and undoubtedly rapidly build up in the actions and barrels between shots. Also, good point about the possible extreme temperature effects on thin metal parts like springs, and this may be a limiting factor on recoil operated firearms if current spring metallurgy can not give us sustainable springs in that environment.

Laws of motion like momentum and kinetic energy are a function of mass, not weight, so I'm not at all convinced that recoil will be any more of an issue on the moon than on earth. The reason firing a pistol on earth doesn't cause you to drift backwards like it would if you were in free-fall out in space is because of friction between the earth and your feet. This also would exist on the moon. Granted, the earth's gravity is what keeps you in contact with the earth and therefore a frictional force can exist that resists your feet from being pushed backwards, even if you fire at the ground in front of you. I admit I do not know exactly how to calculate it, nor do I know the exact numbers involved, but I suggest that since the recoil from even a powerful rifle is only several pounds of force for a fraction of a second, I seriously doubt that even a hand-held M-60 fired straight down could suffice to lift you off the moon's surface, as at best that can only exert several pounds of force "continuously" (although it is not really continuous at all). As for recoil into your shoulder while firing at the enemy, again, equations like momentum and energy use mass, not weight, in their calculations.

Mikko and perhaps some others are on the right track also with regard to the type of weaponry and ammunition. Depending on what the Plutonians use for environmental protection suits, all that is really necessary is to cause loss of integrity of the suit greater than can be repaired in time. If the suit is easily perforated, the best weapon for close combat given all of the above might end up being a pump-action shotgun. Provided they don't have self-sealing suits a la bladder-lined fuel tanks, then small size birdshot could cause far too many holes spread too far apart to effectively patch before losing too much atmosphere. If larger holes are necessary, there is a wide range of shot sizes to select from. However, if the Plutonian suits were heavily armor-plated or thick Kevlar, for example, shotguns would be much less (or even non-)effective. While spin-stabilized bullets from rifled barrels would still function just fine in the vacuum of the moon/space, and of course spherical shot will also, the best way to try to achieve some armor penetration with shotshells on earth is by using flechettes. Fin-stabilized (i.e., atmosphere stabilized) projectiles would be basically useless in the vacuum of space.

Quote Reply

warpig 11/2/2009 12:28:54 PM

I alos like what some pointed out regarding the much greater ranges possible with firearms, which could easily allow incredibly long-ranged sniping by earth standards. I am still concerned that the fouling would build up between shots, though. Perhaps some modification to the firearm could somehow purge the barrel immediately after each shot is fired, before any remaining gases can freeze to the very rapidly cooling action and barrel.

Quote Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan 11/2/2009 3:20:25 PM

If Plutonians can land an occupying force on the moon, they are already far ahead of us and our fizzle driven foil boxes.

But they will be heavily shielded against heat, on the dark side of moon it is probably mildly tropical to them. So thermal weapons and weapons that damaged their heat shields would be a way to let the sun do its thing without us having to have lethal force weapons, which the Plutonians will orient their defenses towards.

And I suspect once we have our first battle with aliens, no one will acknowledge any humanitarian treaties or rules of engagement.

Quote Reply

stbretnco 11/2/2009 3:35:20 PM

Nan, the surface of the Dark side of the moon and the surface of Pluto are about the same temp, about 40K. The problem with that temp is that chemical reactions are slowed to an extreme, so the actual chances of chemical based life are nil.

Being that the dark side and the surface of pluto are the same average temp, heat wouldn't be an issue for the hypothetical Plutonians.

It would, however, be an issue for us virus infested meatbags.

Quote Reply

albywan 11/2/2009 4:56:49 PM

Space arms race 'an inevitability'

From correspondents in Beijing, China

Agence France-Presse

November 02, 2009 07:43

A TOP China air force commander has called the militarisation of space an "historical inevitability", state media said today, marking an apparent shift in Beijing's opposition to weaponising outer space.

In a wide-ranging interview in the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Daily, air force commander Xu ...Qiliang said it was imperative for the PLA air force to develop offensive and defensive operations in outer space.

"As far as the revolution in military affairs is concerned, the competition between military forces is moving towards outer space... this is a historical inevitability and a development that cannot be turned back,'' Commander Xu told the paper.

"The PLA air force must establish in a timely manner the concepts of space security, space interests and space development.

"We must build an outer space force that conforms with the needs of our nation's development (and) the demands of the development of the space age.''

Superiority in outer space can give a nation control over war zones both on land and at sea, while also offering a strategic advantage, Commander Xu said, noting that such dominance was necessary to safeguard the nation.

"Only power can protect peace,'' the 59-year-old commander said in the interview given to coincide with this month's 60th anniversary of the founding of the PLA air force.

China has long stated that it supported the peaceful uses of outer space and opposed the introduction of weapons there. Beijing has also sought to establish an international treaty to control the deployment of weapons in space.

In January 2007, China surprised the world by shooting down one of its own weather satellites in a test seen by many, including the United States, as a possible trigger of an arms race in space.

Quote Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan 11/2/2009 9:47:22 PM

Being that the dark side and the surface of pluto are the same average temp, heat wouldn't be an issue for the hypothetical Plutonians.

It would, however, be an issue for us virus infested meatbags.

Life could be crystalline based, with a supercooled liquid serving as their life blood. Such liquids are capable of conducting electricity and have nearly perfect flow.

As for the Plutonians on the dark side of the moon, that is the only side they could occupy, if they wanted to threaten the Earth, they'd have to 1. launch ships from the dark side 2. put a base on the light side.

We could use thermal weapons to force them out of the dark side of the moon and kinetic weapons to damage/destroy their heat shields.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT