Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

zothen    

Rank #24079 on Comments
zothen Avatar Level 132 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
Offline
Send mail to zothen Block zothen Invite zothen to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:6/14/2011
Last Login:11/13/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#24079
Highest Comment Rank:#14931
Comment Thumbs: 336 total,  425 ,  89
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 70% (7/10)
Level 132 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 133 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
Subscribers:0
Total Comments Made:173
FJ Points:327

Show:
Sort by:
Order:

user favorites

latest user's comments

#4868 - **zothen rolls 501,240,897** 10/24/2014 on Free Steam +1
#2 - I am so stupid. It took me like 20 seconds to get it. 09/14/2014 on Censorship +1
#74 - She looks nothing like an iron man. 10/10 09/12/2014 on (untitled) +3
#158 - Now start a company and call it Jacobs. 09/09/2014 on Firearm Aesthetics 0
#5 - Explosions are far less effective in empty space than on earth…  [+] (10 new replies) 08/04/2014 on Space Battles done right +11
User avatar #24 - skypatrol (08/05/2014) [-]
That is a common misconception.
Bullets, and missiles are self-containing.

Now, you are right in the fact that they will not be as effective in space. But the only thing that wont be effective is the blast radius. That would diminish very quickly.

But, the actual explosion, Michael Bay portion of the missile is still very damaging. And if you make it a directional blast to propel all the force into a single point it would be very good.
Also, AP missiles work by superheating copper upon impact and propelling it forward. Which being in space, would not effect all that much.

But the most effective method of warfare in space would be, you are right, contained plasma, ionic compounds that could expand in all directions, if you were shooting at say, a squadron of fighters or more realistically and closer to our lifetimes, asteroid fields.

Also, missile trajectory would not really be that much of an issue, watch videos of firing missiles from submarines... Same concept in space.

User avatar #10 - galaxyguy (08/04/2014) [-]
Out of curiosity, what would you say would be the best method of space combat, then? Standard non-explosive kinetic weapons?
User avatar #33 - talosknight (08/05/2014) [-]
Coilguns and railguns are really your most effective. Coilguns fire slower velocity, but require less throw distance, and railguns fire faster projectiles but are longer in launch distance.

You could also use missiles, contrary to what a lot of people here are saying, just not conventional ones. As stated above, a standard missile would merely dissipate fairly harmlessly over a hull designed to be a in the depths of space. Now if you used a missile as a delivery system (ie. the ICBM system) and then a shaped charge, designed to puncture a hull would work. Nuclear weapons would also have a surprising effect, just without the radiation damage.

Another cool factor of space is that its very cold or very hot, depending if the sun is hitting you. Larger, damaging lasers are possible. I did a research paper on it in a class in university. You could safely mount a terawatt laser in space, with minimal heat dissipation methods, since space mostly ignores it. You could then shoot down ICBM no problem with these, as no one could stop them. I got a little darker in the paper with it, but it was good.
User avatar #60 - moc (08/05/2014) [-]
about that heat dissipation, im pretty sure i read up on a paper somewhere that in space heat dissipation is really difficult due to the lack of methods to dissipate the heat. radiating is not efficient enough
User avatar #30 - matamune (08/05/2014) [-]
Since there is no resistance in space, you'd probably be well off using mass accelerators, just fling a hunk of metal at near light speed right through their hull/engine/cockpit and get your salvage teams over there to loot their fuel and stuff. (Or make a more fragile round designed to break apart after penetrating their main bulkheads or whatever, so you'll mess up the whole ship)
#6 - teranin (08/04/2014) [-]
Look I'm not saying their perfect, however when you have a complex payload delivery system like a missle, your method for that missle causing damage will likely not be kinetic in space. Most commonly it would involve thermal force (something like a plasma burst) a chain reaction (releasing energy that forces electron movement in what it impacts, weakening or destroying the chemical bonds of things in the effected area) or chemical (acid still works in space). I agree that just blowing up isn't forcing any wind to move so the kinetic force would be insignificant.

Also, railguns (the most likely space weapon) would not be an easy thing to build trajectory correction into as their damage is based on kinetic force of impact, which would be heavily reduced by any heading alterations mid-flight.
User avatar #34 - talosknight (08/05/2014) [-]
You forget, a railgun works on linear acceleration. For example, if you build a railgun capable of MACH 5 (as a round number), that could then fire with a precalculated trajectory. With no wind resistance, that would be MACH 5 on top of the speed of the firing vessel. Due to required maneuvers to make turns, you wouldn't be able to do much to avoid it.
#50 - skalias (08/05/2014) [-]
Solid state lasers is where it's at bro.
User avatar #12 - carneymaster (08/04/2014) [-]
I would have to agree railguns or a missle that impacts acts like a railgun exploding midship. Emp also would be insanely effective. Though i would think ships would be shielded from that. so lasers or railguns would be the best 2 i think.
#7 - amonlavtar (08/04/2014) [-]
Screw rockets

Lasers, ftw
#2 - Missiles in space are not that usefull.  [+] (16 new replies) 08/04/2014 on Space Battles done right +4
User avatar #44 - topperharly (08/05/2014) [-]
true, but i think if you can build a spaceship you can build missles that do heavy dmg in space to other spaceships
#3 - teranin (08/04/2014) [-]
weapons that can alter their trajectory mid-transit aren't useful in space, where the calculations to hit something require math so complex it takes teams of people at NASA to figure out going from our planet to mars?
#58 - Womens Study Major (08/05/2014) [-]
Complex math? You probably didn't finish highschool yet did you? The math (technically newtonian gravity, so physics) you learn in highschool is beyond sufficient for travel in our solar system, errors in units though, have given rise to problems.

User avatar #61 - teranin (08/05/2014) [-]
Triginometry (mapping linear trajectories on a 3d plane... you know, high school math) Is the math used, and it is complex, regardless of where it is taught. I didn't say "mathemetician level" math. I said complex.
User avatar #5 - zothen (08/04/2014) [-]
Explosions are far less effective in empty space than on earth. Its like having a ball of pressurized gas trying to break something but at the same time you have vacuums on every point of the surface of that ball to suck energy away. It's just not effective.
If you penetrate hull somehow atmosphere in the room of spaceship tries to go away completely negating remaining energy of the explosion.
And if you use missiles just to ram your target it's still less effective than just shooting mass because you have to propel mass of the missile and fuel it is carrying as a opposite to just simple projectile shot from cannon on spaceship. That projectile can still have some tracking abilities like smart bombs or projectiles have today.
User avatar #24 - skypatrol (08/05/2014) [-]
That is a common misconception.
Bullets, and missiles are self-containing.

Now, you are right in the fact that they will not be as effective in space. But the only thing that wont be effective is the blast radius. That would diminish very quickly.

But, the actual explosion, Michael Bay portion of the missile is still very damaging. And if you make it a directional blast to propel all the force into a single point it would be very good.
Also, AP missiles work by superheating copper upon impact and propelling it forward. Which being in space, would not effect all that much.

But the most effective method of warfare in space would be, you are right, contained plasma, ionic compounds that could expand in all directions, if you were shooting at say, a squadron of fighters or more realistically and closer to our lifetimes, asteroid fields.

Also, missile trajectory would not really be that much of an issue, watch videos of firing missiles from submarines... Same concept in space.

User avatar #10 - galaxyguy (08/04/2014) [-]
Out of curiosity, what would you say would be the best method of space combat, then? Standard non-explosive kinetic weapons?
User avatar #33 - talosknight (08/05/2014) [-]
Coilguns and railguns are really your most effective. Coilguns fire slower velocity, but require less throw distance, and railguns fire faster projectiles but are longer in launch distance.

You could also use missiles, contrary to what a lot of people here are saying, just not conventional ones. As stated above, a standard missile would merely dissipate fairly harmlessly over a hull designed to be a in the depths of space. Now if you used a missile as a delivery system (ie. the ICBM system) and then a shaped charge, designed to puncture a hull would work. Nuclear weapons would also have a surprising effect, just without the radiation damage.

Another cool factor of space is that its very cold or very hot, depending if the sun is hitting you. Larger, damaging lasers are possible. I did a research paper on it in a class in university. You could safely mount a terawatt laser in space, with minimal heat dissipation methods, since space mostly ignores it. You could then shoot down ICBM no problem with these, as no one could stop them. I got a little darker in the paper with it, but it was good.
User avatar #60 - moc (08/05/2014) [-]
about that heat dissipation, im pretty sure i read up on a paper somewhere that in space heat dissipation is really difficult due to the lack of methods to dissipate the heat. radiating is not efficient enough
User avatar #30 - matamune (08/05/2014) [-]
Since there is no resistance in space, you'd probably be well off using mass accelerators, just fling a hunk of metal at near light speed right through their hull/engine/cockpit and get your salvage teams over there to loot their fuel and stuff. (Or make a more fragile round designed to break apart after penetrating their main bulkheads or whatever, so you'll mess up the whole ship)
#6 - teranin (08/04/2014) [-]
Look I'm not saying their perfect, however when you have a complex payload delivery system like a missle, your method for that missle causing damage will likely not be kinetic in space. Most commonly it would involve thermal force (something like a plasma burst) a chain reaction (releasing energy that forces electron movement in what it impacts, weakening or destroying the chemical bonds of things in the effected area) or chemical (acid still works in space). I agree that just blowing up isn't forcing any wind to move so the kinetic force would be insignificant.

Also, railguns (the most likely space weapon) would not be an easy thing to build trajectory correction into as their damage is based on kinetic force of impact, which would be heavily reduced by any heading alterations mid-flight.
User avatar #34 - talosknight (08/05/2014) [-]
You forget, a railgun works on linear acceleration. For example, if you build a railgun capable of MACH 5 (as a round number), that could then fire with a precalculated trajectory. With no wind resistance, that would be MACH 5 on top of the speed of the firing vessel. Due to required maneuvers to make turns, you wouldn't be able to do much to avoid it.
#50 - skalias (08/05/2014) [-]
Solid state lasers is where it's at bro.
User avatar #12 - carneymaster (08/04/2014) [-]
I would have to agree railguns or a missle that impacts acts like a railgun exploding midship. Emp also would be insanely effective. Though i would think ships would be shielded from that. so lasers or railguns would be the best 2 i think.
#7 - amonlavtar (08/04/2014) [-]
Screw rockets

Lasers, ftw
#4 - sinery (08/04/2014) [-]
#1 - That is unfair! Why do i have to put up with this **** . 08/03/2014 on Guys will understand +1
#3 - I am one polygeneration above you  [+] (1 new reply) 08/01/2014 on Sony Playstation 5 +1
#4 - deathspawn (08/01/2014) [-]
Ive got the polystation 3 MINI though
#1 - Picture  [+] (3 new replies) 08/01/2014 on Sony Playstation 5 +2
#2 - deathspawn (08/01/2014) [-]
Polystation MASTER RACE!!!!
User avatar #3 - zothen (08/01/2014) [-]
I am one polygeneration above you
#4 - deathspawn (08/01/2014) [-]
Ive got the polystation 3 MINI though
#8 - DEATH RAY! 07/27/2014 on Death Ray 0
[ 173 Total ]
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 1465 / Total items point value: 4522

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)