Standard Guns or Laser Guns

Why not both? I imagine that if/when laser guns are brought into play, there are bound to be some problems with jamming, misfiring, etc. Maybe having a back-up standard weapon would be a good idea, for when the lasers don't work as they are supposed to.

From a modern military standpoint the idea of backup guns is a stretch. Modern guns using conventional rounds jam and misfire all the time thanks to moving parts and a job that involves lots of dirt. I would speculate that a sci-fi laser gun with no moving parts would be incredibly reliable- but sodliers don't carry around a second rifle. It's cumbersome and expensive.

That said, ballistic wepaons are much, much cooler than little lasers. The sounds and carnage that physical projectiles inflict is more appealing for a violent futuristic world, in my opinion. Lasers are clean.

Edit: Warhammer 40k miniatures come with a vast array of energy and projectile type wepons. Look at the Imperial Guard and Space Marine models for inspirtation. You can see some at www.games-workshop.com. Remember to follow the Rule of Cool in Sci-Fi, unless it absolutly HAS to work a certain way for plot reasons, go with whatever seems coolest to you. Does it matter if the rifle is magnetic and fires superheated chunks of metal, or if it has a small diesel engine that cranks out high explosive cannisters- or something totally other? Pick whichever is cooler.

Flailing wildly at the keyboard, hoping for words.

I think a mix of the two would be cool. Not standard and laser on the same person, but more like... some will have one, some will have the other. Would add a little bit of variety and would make some sense, too.

Some people would probably like vintage things and would buy them and get them back into working order. If that number of people were to be anywhere near the amount of people who do that now with thier vintage cars, there would be a good number of people who would carry the standard guns.

Then on the other hand, there would be those who want to keep up with the technology and such, and would always have the latest laser weapon system. These would still jam or malfunction or some such thing, as all weapons do from time to time, but the users wouldn't mind because it's what they prefer.

And then there would be the people with crazy guns, like portable railguns or something. Not quite bullets or lasers, but something entirely different. There's no telling what might appear - it could look like a regular pistol, but it could shoot I dunno.. acid or something.

In a futuristic world I think this would make for a nice array of weapons. The audience (and likely you) would rarely get bored with the guns featured since there could always be a new one around the corner of any of the three catagories. There would always be a new (and possibly more powerful) weapon that could jump out at the characters. All three catagories have their advantages and disadvantages, and based on that characters would choose which they wanted.

My life is saved on the hard drive of my computer!

Thanks for the opinions, guys, I really appreciate it.

The card with the rules on it.

personally i say advanced ballistics, such as rail guns, coil guns, etc. for hand held weaponry, but it would be cool to have lasers play a part as artillery perhaps.

lasers require a lot of power and cooling, and are ideal for their accuracy at range, all things that would make handheld lasers less plausible

If a picture is worth 1000 words, would 50 pictures win NaNaWriMo?

You should take a look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Storm

It's a completely new approach to standard firearms that's being developed right now. It has potential for very high rates of fire, unheard of muzzle velocities using no more powder and excellent accuracy. It may appear in deployable form any time now, they're basically in the final troubleshooting stages.

It might not be as futuristic as lasers but it's real and looks to be the future of standard firearms.

It also has the benefit of having no jacket / casings which means very little wasted metal, smaller and lighter weapons and no evidence (spent casings) left behind.

If you're looking at futuristic warfare and want to ground yourself in what's likely, ou should also look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_soldier

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Force_Warrior

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IdZ

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Integrated_Soldier_Technology

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_125

Hope that helps!

Voodoo Tofu! Un-official Week Three Pep Talk Now Available!!

The problem with lasers (or any general zap gun) is the power problem. Seventy watts will handily slice through metal, but the portable power plant necessary to provide that has, so far been hard to come by.

If your future has really, really great batteries (say, nuclear piles, rather than chemical piles) or some other kind of delivery system to get energy to the infantry (Tesla's broadcast-power, for example) then lasers, PBWs and mass drivers all have advantages inherent to chemical-explosion based firearms.

Incidentally, plasma = fire, so we already have plasma weapons, in the form of flamethrowers.

The other direction you can go is to up the ante with chemical explosives. Currently, we use cordite (a TNT derivative) to drive our slugs. We already have explosives that are more efficient per volume, and would only need to to account for the additional stressors on weapons, users (i.e. recoil management) and the bullets (say use tungsten instead of lead), and could make rifles that'll crack tanks in half, or stay on target at miles away.

Keep in mind, contemporary warfare technology is focusing on killing people less. After the nuke, we already realized there's a limit to bigger bangs, so now we're focusing on smarter bangs, or better yet, weapons that neutralize but don't kill the enemy. A nasty bio-agent that only gives dysentery, for example, could disable an entire army while leaving them alive to recruit later.

Frequent haunts (San Francisco)
Cafè Enchantè, Geary @ 26th Ave.
Coffee Bean @ Market, 3rd & 4th streets next to Four Seasons
Peets, Fillmore @ Sacramento
Peets, Van Ness @ Bush
Peets, Mission @ 3rd Street
On The Corner Cafè, Divisadero @ Oak St.

Something to keep in mind might be that 'laser' guns wouldn't have the same psychological impact that ballistics would. Guns can be loud, and there would be situations where the cocking of a pistol or firing a shot into the air could escalate (or de-escalate) a situation without someone being shot. Lasers don't, if you'll pardon the expression, give you the same bang for your buck.

--Ryan

TW FB LJ

Actually, lasers can be pretty damn noisy themselves. I remember visiting an university three years ago or so where they demonstrated one. While far too big to be used as a firearm, the sound it made when it fired was a sharp crack, like lightning. Speaking of which, I think that's what caused the sound. Ionized air.

Anyway, I'm personally a fan of advanced ballistics. Lasers are nice, but for some reason, I like the idea of guided rocket-bullets more.

I have both, and different societies with different technological levels use one or the other.

Mine aren't lasers, they are something called an "Energy Weapon" which is basically a tiny fusion reactor that starts off a mass energy conversion reaction. This brews up until the containment lets go (milliseconds after you pull the trigger) and everything comes out in a concentrated beam. That's photons from the infra red right up to hard gamma, charged particles and unburnt hydrogen.

This simply fries the target. Hit someone in the chest and the blood in their heart becomes superheated steam.

The weapon has an adjusting ring from Off to 7. Off is the safety, 1 is for lock breaking, 2 fro hand to hand and so on up to 7 which is the tankbuster, but kills the charge in two shots.

Incidentally I have a scene where someone is trying to fight with a laser plugged into a portable generator. He takes cover, but leaves the genny in plain sight. My MC ignores him and fires one shot that smashes the genny, disarming him. She then says, "I know it was a rental generator, and you just forfeited your deposit."

Thanks for the links, they were a great help!

The card with the rules on it.

I have both. My reasoning was that standard, projectile-based guns are great for killing people, but on starships and space stations you risk putting a hole through something best kept intact, and opening up a hole to the void. So most spacers carry plasma-based weaponry. It can burn through living tissue, but not steel, making it an effective and safe choice while traveling the stars. The guns are also heavier, overheat faster, and don't fire as fast, which makes them a pain while dirtside.

2004: A Memory Not Mine (55K)
2005: Double Edged (76K)
2008: Empire Farms (64K)
2009: No Asylum (goal: 100K)

I'd imagine your average, galactice-empire spanning military force would carry around several standard-issue weapons in their arsenal. What if you're fighting on a high-grav world, and the range of an average ballistic weapon is halved, or even thirded? Use a laser weapon, where the shot has no weight for the planet's gravity to act upon.

A planet with stong electromagnetic fields that plays hell on power-packs for lasers? Use a solid-shot weapon.

Doing both (and adding plasma rifles, magnetic accelorators and any other gun you come up with) has the bonus that you can get a few thousand extra words of different characters arguing over the weapons. The higher power of plasma compensates for it's shorter range vs laser's precision and power make up for lack of penitration and tracer effect vs railgun's kenetic kill makes up for it's overheating problems vs conventional chemical thrown slugs, which are cheap and dirt-reliable thanks to being around longer than all other technologies combined. This can turn into a checkov's gun where one character's dogged insistence on an outdated/unpopular type of gun ends up saving the day due to it's unique features.

Millitaries will pick one gun and stick to it, though, to prevent the supply problem from becoming to great. Adding a second type of gun means two types of reloads, two types of spare parts, two separate manuals-of-arms to teach a soldier, and a separate logistical nightmare for each. A rag-tag band of mercenaries will mix, match, pick and choose and have at least one person who chose his guns because they're the prettiest/most historically noteworthy instead of functional.

I don't think projectiles will ever be ditched, because even if you do solve the power problem and make lasers a compact portable size, you still have one problem: they're electronic, and have all the weaknesses inherent to electronics. For one, electronics are somewhat fragile. A laser weapon probably wouldn't be suited to all the craziness of a battlefield. If your focusing lenses get damaged or knocked out of alignment, then your beam gets crooked and more spread out, severely reducing its effectiveness. If a circuit board inside gets cracked, then you've lost your control over the weapon. If someone sets off an emp, then everybody's energy weapons are toast. I think an effective laser would be mounted somewhere above the battlefield.

Laser guns are already in development, so there is no reason why not (except for economic feasibility). However, lasers do not produce nice clean holes in things. They basically hyper heat the atoms which smash into other atoms and make things blow up. Basically, think of the Nazi guy's head when he looks at the Ark of the Covenant in Raiders of the Lost Ark.

O_o Whoa!! I should totally add some laser guns to my story!

Explosions: 3
Gunfights: 4
Deaths: 6
Villains: 6&1/2
Tables stolen: 0
People with secret identities: 9
Guns pointed in MC's face: 5
Ninjas: 0

I'll second that. Real lasers aren't much like the "blasters" seen in Star Wars. You typically wcan't see the beam unless it is scattering off of something, and a high powered laser actually causes an explosion on its target because it dumps so much energy into such a small space. This ionizes the atoms and the resulting plasma expands rapidly, causing a "crack" sound.

High-powered lasers will cause this to happen all along the beam as they ionize the air. It's like linear lightning but without the current flowing. The plasma is typically opaque to the laser, which is why most high powered lasers are pulsed: it is easier to get more power by storing it up and releasing it as a pulse, and it give the plasma time to dissipate so you're not blocking your own shot.

All of that said, I think projectile weapons are going to be around for a long time. As others have mentioned, lasers are way too sensitive to the alignment of their optics, etc to be very practical. Of course, we're talking sci fi here,s o if you want to use them, go ahead, but it takes a hell of a big laser to pack the same punch as a typical bullet.

My blog about science and space exploration - http://martianchronicles.wordpress.com

How about this:
Laser guns are the standard, and normal ballistic guns are the illegal weapons that gangs use (Oh yes, I went there)? You know how gangs use knife violence? Well...ballistic guns could be the knife of the future!

You know...that sounds like a really good novel idea...

What would happen if you fired a ballistic weapon on a space ship? Would it pierce the hull and have all the precious oxygen flush out into space, and everyone does from decompression, or from the cold had vacuum?

Would lasers prevent this?

Lasres can be cool, but they tend to be silent. No sound, just a beam of light. No PEW PEW PEW. No recoil. Someone shot by a laser wouldn't fly backwards

For story AWESOME, bang noises, recoil, shrapnel bursting around you, counting only 3 shots remaining, and four enemies approaching.... is cooler.

Also, how cheap would the tech be? What is cheaper to produce?

Shut up and LOVE it!

I'd make use of a variety of both, really.

Lasers and PB weapons are great fun, but they have a lot of drawbacks if you're not getting fancy-smancy. Different civilizations with different capabilities will make use of whatever's practical.

I doubt projectile weapons with chemically-propelled rounds will ever go away, because they're dirt-simple technology. You don't need much more than the common components of gunpowder and an ironworks to make a fire-arm - and obviously the technology scales up as industry improves.

A high-end projectile weapon could do all kinds of neat things, and if you want the pew-pew blaster effect, just use tracer rounds. The advantages of a high-end smart-gun, things like built-in targeting/tracking, guided/powered bullets, various mission-specific warheads, etc., shouldn't be underestimated, and that's before you even get into some really crazy stuff like railgun/coilgun tech.

If you've got the power to run them, lasers and PBWs would make good squad-level or man-portable fixed weapons for whatever infantry or security forces you have in place. If you've got really good power-tech and really efficient (i.e., not creating a lot of heat) lasers, you could make them ubiquitous, but that implies other cool features too. Frankly once you're fielding that, you've effectively got WMD-scale power in the hands of your infantry with all that implies; with that kind of power you could make some kickass coilguns.

Plasma weapons as presented in fiction are really just particle-beam weapons, but a "real" plasma weapon would make a nasty, nasty flamethrower.

All the options are worth exploring, really. Any military that can field these things would almost certainly explore their use in combined-arms roles.

2009: The Kings of Distant Stars

If you write space-based fiction and have questions, read the Atomic Rockets page.

Lasers have 10 million problems, the largest being if they are fueled by fusion the emp cancels out the laser itself. I think the gun of the future is a mix of railguns, MAC cannons, gauss turrets and (most likly) some kind of hyper advanced MG's

See above about lasers being noisy. You're right about the recoil and not flying backwards, but then, people don't actually fly backwards after gun blasts the way they are portrayed in movies either: http://mythbustersresults.com/episode25

My blog about science and space exploration - http://martianchronicles.wordpress.com

Huh? Why would there be an EMP from a fusion power source (wouldn't things like that be contained?) And how could the EMP cancel out the laser? To cancel out they would have to be the same wavelength and in phase...

My blog about science and space exploration - http://martianchronicles.wordpress.com

What about superheated bullets? You'd get the laser type look ala Babylon 5, but with something that as well as hitting the target would cook them as well. No idea if its posible but its an idea I suppose.

Arthur C Clarke had a similar idea for a surface-to-ship weapon, and DARPA is working on similar technology:
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2008/04/science-fiction-insp...

My blog about science and space exploration - http://martianchronicles.wordpress.com

Most of these posts cover all the good points. I just wanted to say that laser guns like we see in the movies are not feasible. They look good in the movies, but realistically a laser is a ray of light in exactly one dimension (we only "see" the refraction of that ray through atmospheric interference). You wouldn't see bursts of light in a vacuum (i.e. ship to ship). In fact you wouldn't see bursts of light at all - the speed of light is so fast that even if you had the mechanics to do move fast enough to turn a laser on and off so fast that it had a front and back (as opposed to a front and source), it would go by at the speed of light and you'd never see it.

I get around this by having both futuristic (better) ballistics and ill-defined plasma-type weapons, that shoot bursts of illuminated (for effect only) chemicals or materials that won't (a) melt the weapon itself, and (b) travel in more than one direction. Laser-like, but I'll never call them lasers.

Maybe I'm trying too hard to be realistic? :-) But then, plasma guns aren't realistic (yet) either. Science will change in 200 years so much so that you can pretty much make anything up you want and it might be realistic based on the understanding of physics in 200 years. I mean, think back 200 years ago - LASER BEAMS? The ability to generate LIGHT from ELECTRICITY? What the heck is ELECTRICITY? Just because they couldn't imagine it then doesn't mean it won't be discovered or invented and feasible enough in time for your story.

So don't get hung up on it :)

I do like the answer about ballistics creating carnage. I can't imagine any future without highly destructive explosive devices, and more likely they will get nastier and nastier.

----------
2009 Goal: Get out and meet people.

Yeah it wouldn't.

If you're actually carrying a real fusion reactor in a man-portable weapon, you've long since solved any problems that would arise from it. It's already magic, so you might as well magic away the problems too.

2009: The Kings of Distant Stars

If you write space-based fiction and have questions, read the Atomic Rockets page.

Lets be realistic, shall we? If it has a circut board, the EMP will fry it. And did no one listen to my other comment? There is a certain amount of respect Hyper Ballistics and Rail/MAC/Gauss Cannons deliver. A laser would just be FLASH and the whole battle is over. Not good for word count AT ALL

Is there some reason you're trying to confuse everyone and pollute the thread with misinformation?

2009: The Kings of Distant Stars

If you write space-based fiction and have questions, read the Atomic Rockets page.