RyuaNesha Posted December 21, 2008 Author Share Posted December 21, 2008 But the big point is that, as cool and awesome as they are, they wouldn't have a bright beam of electromagnetic energy. Which is what it is in most games with Gauss guns. I think the confusion started when someone looked them up and saw electromagnetic coil, but didn't read the entire thing. The second post sounded more like he was separating the two (Gauss guns and coil). If they found a way to use the magnets more efficiently, it wouldn't require all of the power and wouldn't create such a discharge on a working one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
furtim Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 But the big point is that, as cool and awesome as they are, they wouldn't have a bright beam of electromagnetic energy. Which is what it is in most games with Gauss guns. I think the confusion started when someone looked them up and saw electromagnetic coil, but didn't read the entire thing. The second post sounded more like he was separating the two (Gauss guns and coil). If they found a way to use the magnets more efficiently, it wouldn't require all of the power and wouldn't create such a discharge on a working one. I tried running some actual numbers, but I hit a subscription wall when I got to the end. :( Basically, the absolute lower limit for the energy of the EM field, assuming 100% efficiency of the conversion from EM energy to kinetic energy, would be 1700J or so, if we want a projectile with equivalent ballstics to 5.56 NATO. Trouble is, I looked up studies of dielectric breakdown energies for air, and they're all behind subscription walls. I don't think it's completely implausible after all for a field of that energy to cause air breakdown. However, the sticky part is that all of the abstracts I could find that dealt with measuring air breakdown energy used microwave frequency pulses. It's not entirely clear (again, because I can't get the articles themselves) how frequency factors into this. It's even less clear what the EM frequency produced by a practical Gauss gun would be. So it's perhaps actually plausible for a Gauss gun to produce a visible electric discharge, but I doubt we'll be able to get much farther than that without making assumptions on a large number of things that it would be very hard to make educated guesses at. (Unless somebody wants to buy me a subscription to IEEE's journal library.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blasph23 Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 For one thing, Gauss is simply the name of a scientist that worked a lot on electromagnetic fields' theories, back in 19th century. As such, gauss gun is more than appropriate name for a weapon that mainly uses magnetic/electromagnetic fields for projectile acceleration.It is possible to create such a weapon even today but only if you have near limitless financial resources as well as you don't plan to make it a hand-held portable. Best modern superconductors work flawlessly in a temperature of around 90 degrees (Kelvins), easily achievable with nitrogen. Also there are means to supply high enough energy source to power any device you can construct (assuming you met the financial requirement). Gauss weapon would most likely work as a set of multiple strong magnets (or electromagnets) in an incremental way, accumulating enough energy to send a projectile at great speed in a desired direction. As of 2008, such a gun would be more or less inefficient and would have no practical uses, additionally being a long, heavy stationary canon rather than a rifle. In 2077... well with the today's technological development, it's much more plausible. 70 years is a LOT of time for technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyro Paul Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 the reason you see 'Gauss' type weapons being represented as a type of beam or laser weapon is acctually something from the early concepts of the electro-magnetic coil/rail weapon theory. the idea is that you take a very small peice of metal and hyper accelerate it using large massive super conductor electromagnates to near light speeds. this is what gives it the 'laser' like look, as effectively the round reaches the target before you can blink. the acctual 'laser' effect is how the round disturbed the atmosphere it traveled through... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
furtim Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 That frickin' Eraser movie needs to burn in Hell forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skree000 Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Technically if the Rock-It-Launcher used magnetism it would be a very loud Gauss weapon heh... that somehow fires teddybears :) (lets assume the teddy bears have iron filings in them lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldiabs Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Try out my version of the Gauss Rifle (Coil Gun, Monkey Spitwad Launcher of Doom...whatever you want to call it). Let's just pretend all those little cylinders on the weapon are indeed fusion cells that can power the weapon for an indefinite period of time. The barrel is made of unobtanium or some crap. And yes, it fires metal slugs... No laser beam of doom type projectile. Just an extremely accelerated Mez projectile fx (for imagination and fx sake). When it hits....well, lets just say it does cool things to the target...even if they don't die. Kinetic energy! Credit to these two for some things:SpeedyB64 -Gauss Rifle - Model and Textures tycn - Gauss Rifle - Reference material Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r4y30n Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 So it's perhaps actually plausible for a Gauss gun to produce a visible electric discharge, but I doubt we'll be able to get much farther than that without making assumptions on a large number of things that it would be very hard to make educated guesses at. (Unless somebody wants to buy me a subscription to IEEE's journal library.) Here's a vid of a real US Navy rail gun test fire. Draw your own conclusions. It does appear, however, that it's built up enough velocity in the projectile to become explosive from the tremendous kinetic energy alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strofkocz Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 I dont know much about the specifics of magnets, but the laser effect, could be some discharged electricity attracted to the slug, or more feasibly the air the projectile is passing through turning into plasma (not sure thats possible, but I was told thats like the 4th phase, but I've also heard that plasma is only usedto describe superheated, uranion or deuterium or somehshit like that) via the intense friction caused by something fireing that fast, or more mundanly the air is ignited, once again by intense friction, and the funky colours could be explained by the material of the slug being used up in the combustion coloring it... however as has been said a coild gun cant shoot that fast... least not currently, currently, theres no way to make a laser rifle, that can turn someone to ashes >.> so I think its safe to say some technological jumps have occured, perfecting guass and/or rail technology better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyro Paul Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 That frickin' Eraser movie needs to burn in Hell forever. acctually, the first real visual concept of the Gauss Rifle is from the Battletech series and the video game 'MechWarrior' which has the Gauss rifle fire a green beam like weapon. however it is identified as 'ballistic' the thing is people think that they are shooting bullets which are compherable to similar sized weapons... however, this is acctually the opposit, the Gauss rifle would be shooting extreamly small rounds comperatively at higher speeds. so while you have a .50 caliber round the Gauss rifle of similar size would be shooting around about the size of a Pin needle tip... shooting a smaller round faster = same amount of energy as shooting a larger round slower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.