Fallout laser weapons aren’t real lasers

[a Hippobottomus]

They have recoil.

[Hobo Misanthropus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von DouglasGrave:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Travis:

Funny thing, I recall they show that, you can't see real lasers in real world, no sure thing like star war or this game show color like red or green, ect where you see it. Navy had been deveped laser in real life, but not same way like star war or fallout 4 sence, petty deadly when you can't see laser but so was gun and bullet as it's so go fast and can't see it anyhow.

You certainly can see lasers in the real world, but it depends on the exact conditions and the nature of the laser itself.

Yeah, you can see two things when it comes to lasers. One is the light, (if in visible spectrum) refracted off atmospheric moisture or particulate in the air and the second (if the laser is hot enough) the actual boiling off of said water vapor, which is what would create the loud "Crack" of a laser, and why any modder who creates a "Silenced" Laser rifle is dumb.

On the subject of suppressors, the reason why Suppressors in Fallout drop your range so much, is because in real life, a Suppressor only works on subsonic rounds. Or, more accurately, only eliminates audible sound on subsonic rounds effectively. Hyper-sonic rounds such as all rifles still produce a sonic boom, so in order to "Silence" The weapon, you must drastically cut the muzzle velocity.

To date, the only truly "Silent" Firearm ever produced was the Welrod.

Ursprünglich geschrieben von KrayToast:

Lasers are for boys. Plasma is for men.

Lasers create plasma for a nanosecond.

[MortVent]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von DouglasGrave:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von a Hippobottomus:

You cant see it in a clear environment. If it were foggy however...

The power level of the laser also makes a difference, as does the colour, and the ambient light level. Lasers still pass through the air, and have some minimal degree of interaction with that air, which can become more visible as the power of the laser increases.

Ironically, you often see visible lasers displayed depicted in space battles, which would be one of the least likely places to see them.

Well I do know a protoype of a man portable laser included a visible secondary laser, to give the shooter a guide to see. I could see such in space battles being the norm, to allow gunners to have visual guides to see what is going on (kind of like tracers)

[a Hippobottomus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Bad Distraction Carnifex:

This thread reminds me that the internet is a horrible place filled with even worse people. Seriously, the guy made a correct observation and he's getting jumped on like this? You guys should feel bad...

Hey, im not seeing any harm. If there’s anything im saying wrong, i don’t care if people make fun of me for it as long as im corrected.

[Ceejay]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von MortVent:

Funny factoid: military grade lasers have .. recoil dampening mounts. The discharge of a military grade laser is huge, not to mention the chemical exhaust it creates (mostly toxic as well)

Most man portable lasers would have negligible recoil, but also lesser power. Anything powerful enough to damage a person the level Fallout lasers do would have a good bit of recoil

i notice you skipped over that point.

Also your concerned about recoil, I am thinking lasers really have a huge distance so, the fact they some only go like 70ft makes no sense if they are doing a lot of damge, they would go much much further, they should be the longest ranged weapons in the game really.

As for plasma weapons, they should be leathal the tempratures that plasma needs to be at, to be even created, then your shooting it at people, it would just burn the crap out of anything it hit, it would make a flamethrower seem just like a mild itch in comparrison.

[MortVent]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ceejay:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von MortVent:

Funny factoid: military grade lasers have .. recoil dampening mounts. The discharge of a military grade laser is huge, not to mention the chemical exhaust it creates (mostly toxic as well)

Most man portable lasers would have negligible recoil, but also lesser power. Anything powerful enough to damage a person the level Fallout lasers do would have a good bit of recoil

i notice you skipped over that point.

Also your concerned about recoil, I am thinking lasers really have a huge distance so, the fact they some only go like 70ft makes no sense if they are doing a lot of damge, they would go much much further, they should be the longest ranged weapons in the game really.

As for plasma weapons, they should be leathal the tempratures that plasma needs to be at, to be even created, then your shooting it at people, it would just burn the crap out of anything it hit, it would make a flamethrower seem just like a mild itch in comparrison.

Range is dependant on a lot of things. Wavelength of the beam, atmospheric conditions, etc.

Some of the more powerful lasers have super low ranges compared to less powerful ones due to the type of laser they are. Plus dust, moisture, etc can easily make a laser worthless at long ranges (one reason orbital lasers are meh, they have all the atmosphere down to the target to worry about)

[Ceejay]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von MortVent:

........

Some of the more powerful lasers have super low ranges compared to less powerful ones due to the type of laser they are. Plus dust, moisture, etc can easily make a laser worthless at long ranges (one reason orbital lasers are meh, they have all the atmosphere down to the target to worry about)

This is true, but my point is if a laser has more than enough power to kill something at 70ft, its not stopping at 70ft, it will go much much further, just the damage will lessen the further it gets.

[a Hippobottomus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von MortVent:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ceejay:

i notice you skipped over that point.

Also your concerned about recoil, I am thinking lasers really have a huge distance so, the fact they some only go like 70ft makes no sense if they are doing a lot of damge, they would go much much further, they should be the longest ranged weapons in the game really.

As for plasma weapons, they should be leathal the tempratures that plasma needs to be at, to be even created, then your shooting it at people, it would just burn the crap out of anything it hit, it would make a flamethrower seem just like a mild itch in comparrison.

Range is dependant on a lot of things. Wavelength of the beam, atmospheric conditions, etc.

Some of the more powerful lasers have super low ranges compared to less powerful ones due to the type of laser they are. Plus dust, moisture, etc can easily make a laser worthless at long ranges (one reason orbital lasers are meh, they have all the atmosphere down to the target to worry about)

Ooh, i enjoy talking about science.

[DouglasGrave]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ceejay:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von MortVent:

........

Some of the more powerful lasers have super low ranges compared to less powerful ones due to the type of laser they are. Plus dust, moisture, etc can easily make a laser worthless at long ranges (one reason orbital lasers are meh, they have all the atmosphere down to the target to worry about)

This is true, but my point is if a laser has more than enough power to kill something at 70ft, its not stopping at 70ft, it will go much much further, just the damage will lessen the further it gets.

That's pretty much exactly what happens in Fallout 4; you can hit things beyond a weapon's listed range, you just deal less damage.

[a Hippobottomus]

This is something on the opposite end of the spectrum: the gauss rifle has way less recoil than it should.

[Lem]

If we want to get in to some theory crafting, then theoretically a laser that is powerful enough, focused enough, and fast enough, could rapidly heat and ionize the area along it's path so quickly that it creates thunder. That rapid expansion of air in front of the weapon and shooter would act as recoil.

For more fun, there are ideas for weapon system that use a conductive ionized path created by a laser to channel electricity... sort of a laser electro-ray.

[a Hippobottomus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von archgaden:

If we want to get in to some theory crafting, then theoretically a laser that is powerful enough, focused enough, and fast enough, could rapidly heat and ionize the area along it's path so quickly that it creates thunder. That rapid expansion of air in front of the weapon and shooter would act as recoil.

For more fun, there are ideas for weapon system that use a conductive ionized path created by a laser to channel electricity... sort of a laser electro-ray.

Then it would also vaporize the barrel.

[Lem]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von a Hippobottomus:

Then it would also vaporize the barrel.

Why? Assuming you even had a barrel, the barrels on conventional firearms aren't vaporized by rapidly expanding gas and high temperatures. They're designed to handle it. Of course real laser weapons don't have or need barrels.

They have lenses as the comparable portion of the weapon, and the lenses have to be transparent to the wavelength of the laser, thus absorbing practically none of the energy. It's relatively easy to make lenses that can handle heat from plasma, since plasma isn't very dense and doesn't transfer heat quickly. The concussion from a thunderbolt in open air is relatively harmless against most solid things. A lense is no different.

Of course, the best evidence of a laser weapon surviving a surge of electricity injected into the beam is that the weapon already exists.

https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-06/armys-laser-guided-lightning-weapon-delivers-high-voltage-through-air

[a Hippobottomus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von archgaden:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von a Hippobottomus:

Then it would also vaporize the barrel.

Why? Assuming you even had a barrel, the barrels on conventional firearms aren't vaporized by rapidly expanding gas and high temperatures. They're designed to handle it. Of course real laser weapons don't have or need barrels.

They have lenses as the comparable portion of the weapon, and the lenses have to be transparent to the wavelength of the laser, thus absorbing practically none of the energy. It's relatively easy to make lenses that can handle heat from plasma, since plasma isn't very dense and doesn't transfer heat quickly. The concussion from a thunderbolt in open air is relatively harmless against most solid things. A lense is no different.

Of course, the best evidence of a laser weapon surviving a surge of electricity injected into the beam is that the weapon already exists.

https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-06/armys-laser-guided-lightning-weapon-delivers-high-voltage-through-air

If it creates heat fast enough to make thunder, then any air in the barrel would expand and destroy the barrel or vaporize it. Alternatively, if it didn’t have a barrel, the thunder would almost certainly destroy/damage any lense.

[Lem]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von a Hippobottomus:

If it creates heat fast enough to make thunder, then any air in the barrel would expand and destroy the barrel or vaporize it. Alternatively, if it didn’t have a barrel, the thunder would almost certainly destroy/damage any lense.

You didn't read anything... are you aware that a regular bullet is projected by rapidly expanded hot gas created by a chemical reaction initiated by igniting the propellant in the bullet? Thunder is the result of rapidly expanding hot gas. You're literally saying that a barrel would be destroyed by the very same thing it is designed not to be destroyed by.

Considering the weapon I mention exists, clearly lenses can be designed to survive the same effect. Glass is quite strong when it's thick enough. Laser weapons have very thick lenses already. Also, the gas expansion from thunder doesn't have a lot of force when it isn't confined. It's the old firecracker on an open hand vs a firecracker in a closed hand scenario. That gas is only exerting a few pounds of force on the lense at most. That might be enough to give a bit of noticeable recoil, but it would take a lot more to crack a good lense.

[a Hippobottomus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von archgaden:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von a Hippobottomus:

If it creates heat fast enough to make thunder, then any air in the barrel would expand and destroy the barrel or vaporize it. Alternatively, if it didn’t have a barrel, the thunder would almost certainly destroy/damage any lense.

You didn't read anything... are you aware that a regular bullet is projected by rapidly expanded hot gas created by a chemical reaction initiated by igniting the propellant in the bullet? Thunder is the result of rapidly expanding hot gas. You're literally saying that a barrel would be destroyed by the very same thing it is designed not to be destroyed by.

Considering the weapon I mention exists, clearly lenses can be designed to survive the same effect. Glass is quite strong when it's thick enough. Laser weapons have very thick lenses already. Also, the gas expansion from thunder doesn't have a lot of force when it isn't confined. It's the old firecracker on an open hand vs a firecracker in a closed hand scenario. That gas is only exerting a few pounds of force on the lense at most. That might be enough to give a bit of noticeable recoil, but it would take a lot more to crack a good lense.

A bullet doesn’t create nearly as much heat as the heat of a laser weapon would, and thicker glass is more likely to break under heat than thinner glass. And even the slightest movement of the lense would ruin it. Have you never seen videos of weapons overheating/being destroyed when they are fired? Its pretty common to see a high caliber weapon ‘self-destruct’ after long term use.