10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

[dmjalund]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

If I take a bowling ball' date=' and roll it down the street, it goes so far. If that street goes Uphill, it doesn't go so far, if it goes Downhill, it goes farther, and Faster, and in nowhere, did I add a fuel source, or give it something to give itself a boost.[/quote']

 

That is converting Gravitational energy to kinetic energy (and visa versa) for a bullet to do this, it would need to be moving downward

[RexMundi]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

You don't need a fuel source, for converging/diverging mechanics. You need, Supersonic AIR FLOW, which you get once that trigger is pulled. As for water that's a different topic. Erosive hydrodynamics are goofy, Fast Water moves bigger things, but slow water moves more stuff, but I know people that work in that field so that I can ask on. Think I killed their PC's off last month actually heh.

 

Now direct yon Bullet Witch Hunt that way I say, at least until I get the 6 degree layered Physicist to reply to my query. I'm sure the hand Held Plasma weapon folk could use some torches and pitchforks.

 

~Rex

[Zeropoint]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

If I take a bowling ball, and roll it down the street, it goes so far. If that street goes Uphill, it doesn't go so far, if it goes Downhill, it goes farther, and Faster, and in nowhere, did I add a fuel source, or give it something to give itself a boost.

 

The ball is gaining kinetic energy at the expense of gravitational potential energy; this process is called "falling".

 

I . . . I really DON'T understand why the principle of conservation of energy is so hard for people to grasp. RexMundi, you're far from the first person I've encountered who has heard of the law, but doesn't UNDERSTAND it. It doesn't matter what funky flow effects exist; the bullet cannot add energy to itself without TAKING that energy from somewhere.

 

For that matter, IF the bullet works as described, what stops the effect? If the bullet is moving forward, and generating thrust as a result of this forward motion . . . shouldn't it simply accelerate until drag equals thrust and then keep moving at constant speed until it hits something? Why does the thrust effect fall off as the bullet moves faster?

 

But, again, all this is irrelevant, because the real question is: where does the energy come from?

[lemming]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

You don't need a fuel source' date=' for converging/diverging mechanics.[/quote']

 

Once again, you're missing an energy source. Otherwise there'd be a lot of messy situations involving vet collars.

[RexMundi]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

Alright, the slings and arrows can cease for the Great Professor Rex Mundi, has tried something simple, such as fact check, and go straight to the source. For the perusals of the gaming horde, I give the following email reply. I left the dates, but since Dr. Travis replied via his personal email, I x'd that out, and if you wish to contest the information you can go hit the previously posted web site upwards in the thread.

 

Re: [Fwd: [Website feedback] Von Neumann's War]

...

Sun, January 17, 2010 3:43:35 PM

From:

Travis Taylor

...

View Contact

To: Rex_Tyranis@yahoo.com

Rex,

 

Feel free to post this email back to the "naysayers".

 

The bullets in VNW are not only possible but they have been built and tested by DARPA over a decade ago. The flow equation for a jet engine works just like I explained in the book. Once the engine reaches sonic speed it will continue to accelerate the flow due to the math of the jet equation. Now for an airplane there is too much drag for the engine to overcome so fuel has to continuously be pumped into it to add enough energy to overcome the outside forces. The Jet bullets are better designed aerodynamically but they do actually reach a point where the drag becomes too much and the become unstable and decelerate. However, if they were designed with modern rapid prototyping machines their operational range could be increased. In fact, it has been tested and it worked. For better performance a solid propellant has been added to them.

 

But the math shows that it is possible. I'm not going to work the math out for them as it was a graduate level class in Aerospace Engineering. There is nothing perpetual motion about it though. That is the first thing people say in that class until they have to work out the equation and see where all the energy goes.

 

Regards,

 

Doc

 

Now, Doc's site is once again http://www.doctravis.com/ if folks want to go look up his credentials. Otherwise, for a brief synopsis for those that don't care for Link diving: Travis Shane Taylor is a born and bred southerner and resides just outside Huntsville, Alabama. He has a Doctorate in Optical Science and Engineering, a Master’s degree in Physics, a Master’s degree in Aerospace Engineering, all from the University of Alabama in Huntsville; a Master’s degree in Astronomy from the Univ. of Western Sydney, and a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering from Auburn University. He is a licensed Professional Engineer in the state of Alabama.

 

Dr. Taylor has worked on various programs for the Department of Defense and NASA for the past sixteen years. He is currently working on several advanced propulsion concepts, very large space telescopes, space based beamed energy systems, future combat technologies and systems, and next generation space launch concepts. He is also involved with multiple MASINT, SIGINT, IMINT, and HUMINT concept studies.

 

And, for those that actually wish to follow up on his writing, I got a good bit of fun out of "An Introduction to Rocket Science and Engineering" (asin Num: 1420075284), and have been scouring the shelves for all the fiction (His Warp Speed series is great stuff), since I'm an addict for anything Sci Fi that involves Real Science.

 

So there you go. The Man that wrote it, gives his reply. Seriously, just how cool is it, that someone in that line of work, takes time, to answer a GAMERS inquiry. Out of the blue, and in less then a couple of days.

 

~Rex

[Nyrath]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

Yes, I vouch that Dr. Taylor is not a crack-pot, and definitely knows what he is talking about.

[Markdoc]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

To be fair, I'm siding with the skeptics here. Ramjets still require fuel, so the bullet analogy is pretty dubious to start with, and the explanation "Once the engine reaches sonic speed it will continue to accelerate the flow due to the math of the jet equation" is either really, really badly written (so that his meaning is entirely obscured), or there's some epic science fail in there. Jets that reach supersonic (I assume that's what he means by "sonic" speed do not in fact accelerate, nor does the airflow through them magically accelerate just inside the jet. Basic physics does not allow the air to pass through the jet faster than the jet passes through the air without energy input - that's why jets have engines.

 

Before you protest that he's a NASA Scientist, I have to admit my BS detector is starting to ping pretty loudly at this point. I checked his website (http://www.doctravis.com/) - and I also checked NASA's. Despite what it implies on his website, it doesn't appear that he's ever been a NASA scientist. He's published a grand total of one technical report which is listed on NASA's servers and it identifies him as working for a small engineering company in the town where he lives (Huntsville, AL). You check out his wiki page and his home page, and there's no CV, no publications, nada - just the unsupported statements you list above. That's pretty odd. Even if he was working on highly classified projects, that's pretty unusual - and I know people who worked on classified bioterrorism projects for DARPA/DoD (indeed, I almost joined them back in 1999). But they still have publicly available CVs and they're not shy about listing them.

 

There doesn't seem to be any doubt about his PhD in optics, and maybe I'm overanalysing, but to me it looks like he's "ahem" inflating his CV to help his writing career (no big crime, considering) - and that "ramjet bullets" are powered with pure handwavium.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

Heh - given Nyrath's post, (which came in while I was checking up for mine) maybe I'm wrong!

 

Nyrath, can you explain how such a bullet would work?

 

cheers, Mark

[AnotherSkip]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

RexMundi' date=' I hesitate to use the phrase "You Fail Physics Forever"

 

Actually diving through plate glass windows isn't nearly as deadly as they present. Potentially hazardous and dangerous, sure, but having walked through a closed sliding glass door myself as well as having numerous examples of the same having been done (hell i'd do it during a shooting incident if i felt I had to like the guy who smashed through on during a shooting incident in Tx.) i wouldn't place everything these guys say upon a pedestal.

[Nyrath]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

Nyrath' date=' can you explain how such a bullet would work?[/quote']

No. Way above my pay grade.

 

I tend to think that the performance will be in-between. That is, it will not perform as well as Dr. Taylor optimistically thinks, but it is not actually violating the law of conservation of energy. In other words: a laboratory curiosity with no practical applications.

 

And I will say that what you have dug up has started me to wonder about Dr. Taylor. I think I am going to have to do some checking on my own.

[Nyrath]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

I did find this, but the munitions in question have an on-board fuel source. Not quite what Taylor was talking about. I'm still looking for a cite.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Army+tests+scramjet+to+power+kinetic+energy+tank+rounds.%28munitions...-a0107043021

[lemming]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

What Rex quoted from Doc Travis is:

For better performance a solid propellant has been added to them.

Most of my look around the net found the same, though there was even a .45 round.

 

I would like to see the math as I'm sure there are grad level math wizards on the board.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

Okay, then. Three Master's degrees, including one terminal degree from the other side of the world from his other schools?

That said, we are talking about transonic phenomena here. At transonic speeds, air cannot be treated as either perfectly compressible or incompressible, and thus fluid dynamics for these speeds cannot be approximated as linear phenomena. You end up with messy partial differential equations that make it very difficult to make assertions such as "the equations say." Instead, you input wind tunnel data into big computers to get highly uncertain results --there's a reason that the MiG-19 had nine wing fences.

In the abstract, I can see the "molecule's story" here: it passes through a scoop at the tip of the bullet, collides with the throat of the funnel, picking up kinetic energy, hence speed, at the expense of the bullet. I see no way for that molecule to give back more than this energy gain. Drag is drag. Maybe miracles happen in the wind tunnel, but people have been pushing objects up to transonic speeds for a long time now without seeing these spectacular results.

Given the nature of the transonics, this is fundamentally an empirical phenomena if it exists at all. It would not be unreasonable to ask for wind tunnel data at this point.

[Markdoc]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

I did find this, but the munitions in question have an on-board fuel source. Not quite what Taylor was talking about. I'm still looking for a cite.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Army+tests+scramjet+to+power+kinetic+energy+tank+rounds.%28munitions...-a0107043021

 

I knew about that guy. Also, there have been several (hypothetical) projects looking at so-called "hypersonic bullets" based on scramjet principles, made of material that would ignite (magnesium derivatives, mostly) so as to provide their own fuel. None of them have made it past the basic obstacles that 1) your slug ablates as it flies and to get decent range you need to make the slug heavier, which cuts your range, so you need to make the slug even heavier ...

 

It's the argument that you can get a ramjet-like effect, without an engine of some sort, which has me puzzled: I've never heard of such a thing, nor can I see any way it can be made to work.

 

cheers, Mark

 

cheers, Mark

[Old Man]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

The only thing I can think of would be for the ramjet to take advantage of heat energy in the projectile left over from firing. That heat could be transferred to the ram-compressed air, expanding it and generating a certain amount of thrust--conceptually similar to the radiator setup in the P-51. However, I don't see such an effect as being significant enough to really be worth pursuing.

[RexMundi]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

Probably isn't, not without the result being something that doesn't take the better part of a month to turn out on a rapid prototype machine. It's not something that's intended to take over the method of round propulsion either. It's meant to supplement briefly, and add a bit of range until the airflow from forward momentum decreases below that which is needed for the brief kicker effect.

 

However, it looks like the *Insert Sound Effect from the 1978 Invasion of the Body Snatchers here* is going to continue so let me go see if I can wheedle the math formula out of the smart people. As for the DARPA stuff and the Secret Stuff. I've still got NDA material from freaking game companies I can't talk about much less stuff I used to do back in the odd colored ID card days, so just because folks ain't sayin, don't mean it ain't happen. So, let me collect all the debunker stuff, and send it off all nice and polite like minus the implied contextual stuff, and we'll see what happens.

 

In the mean time. Folks can dissect the EXACTO program.

 

~Rex

[Nyrath]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

OK, asked my brain trust, and one of them found this:

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2004solic/flat.ppt

(warning: power point presentation file)

It describes a low-drag tubular bullet with extended range. It does have a hole down the middle that constricts then expands.

 

But is is not really a ram-jet. It just has a lower coefficient of friction than a conventional bullet.

[RexMundi]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

It does however use the converging and diverging effect to reduce said drag, and impart more stability. While that's not exactly my admittedly poor description (since I did forget, to be exact as possible, in order to avoid parts of it being grabbed as Definitive, instead of cinematically or energetically descriptive.(Example: Rex Posts: Birds Fly! Retort: You Fail Rex because Not all Birds Fly!)), that is very much for the most part, similar to the round described, though the VNW rounds were more complicated in scope. Anyway filled out the DARPA info request paperwork so I'll let you know about that after the extensive amount of time it requires passes.

 

~Rex...backtracks to the Source. The original Jack Kirby one not the Matrix one....

[Kristopher]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

How does a bullet with a hole down the middle even work?

[Old Man]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

I imagine it leaves a hole in its target just like any other bullet.

[Zeropoint]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

It's going to take more than an appeal to authority to overcome my problems with conservation of energy, but I'll wait until more data is available.

[Nyrath]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

It's going to take more than an appeal to authority to overcome my problems with conservation of energy' date=' but I'll wait until more data is available.[/quote']

Well, I'm no expert but if this is just some kind of low-drag bullet, it does not violate the law of conservation of energy. It just travels farther with a given charge of gunpowder than will a conventionally shaped bullet.

But it does NOT appear to be a ramjet.

[Kristopher]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

No, seriously, how does something that's powered by the pressure of expanding gas behind it, work if there's a hole through it?

[lemming]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

No' date=' seriously, how does something that's powered by the pressure of expanding gas behind it, work if there's a hole through it?[/quote']

 

For that, I imagine the hole isn't in effect, possibly because of a jacket, until after the bullet has left the barrel at which point it's at top speed. One of the ways to reduce the drag on the bullet is to cut down on the vacuum effect at the rear of the bullet, this may help with that. I also found something that generates gas at the back of the bullet to offset this as well though I think only artillery shells can take advantage of that due to size.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: 10 Sci-Fi Weapons That Actually Exist

 

I like the ramjet bullet idea for SF tech... even if it needs an onboard source of energy, 90% of all technological advances are improving on existing tech by discovering new materials & applications. I could see something at the core of the bullet that heats the airflow at the compression point.

 

This may simply be a case of not throwing out the baby with the bathwater, taking the description at face value rather than adapting it to fit physics.

 

Which brings up my next subject...

 

For a while now, I've been wanting to talk about Plasma Weapons.

Yeah, I know... a bunch of sites debunk the idea... sort of.

They take the cinematic/dramatic depictions (low temp, slow moving, etc) and proclaim NO. I consider this similar to saying revolvers can't exist because in old Westerns they shoot through long firefights without needing to reload.

I've seen passing mention, at a couple of points in the various de-bunking sites, that SOME sort of vaguely plasma-ish directed energy weapon might be possible, but would be more like a particle gun. I'm good with that.

 

AFAIK (or U), the problem with the classic depiction of a Plasma Gun is that low density gasses like hydrogen, squeezed in a magnetic bottle, superheated, and released will disperse rapidly at the aperture when it opens. Somewhere between a steam hose and an explosion.

That being said I can think of at least two real world examples where high energy high density plasma is directed to destructive potential (at least in theory). One is the Casaba Howitzer and other "Directed nuclear weapons" (frex, the Hellbores in the Bolo series). The main example my brain keeps booting up, tho, are shaped charges, such as the ubiquitous IED... the angular blast wave and the shape of the explosives and the copper/metal dish compress and focus the energy of the blast, turning said dish into a lance of superheated high pressure high impulse vaporized metal. So, if the tech level allows for the containment and power supply, why couldn't they do something similar? You'd need cartridges like Drake's Powerguns, or some sort of feeder rod (wire feed plasma guns!), but I don't see why it frankly can't work. Wouldn't look much like most depictions of plasma weapons (except possibly Sgt. Schlock's), being more of a ravening beam of death rather than a explosive "packet", but hey... that's good too

 

Oh, yeah... Steve Perry, in one of his later Matador books, used the more typical hydrogen plasma as the propellant for a projectile rather than the projectile itself. I think the aforementioned DD has something similar (firing osmium penetrators if memory serves) as well. Could be really nasty.