Tank melter

  • 54 Replies
  • 11822 Views
*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #30 on: April 10, 2008, 10:53:18 AM »
Too easy to counter, IMO. Next we'll have tanks with reflective surfaces...90 percent of the beam goes that way, and if you really want to be evil, you could computer control the mirrors directionality to fire straight back at the plane. Dead plane now, not dead tank... Personally,  I think that directed energy weapons are too easily countered. Mass ftw!

Oh, and if you don't feel like doing that, you could always have heat dissipation techniques...way too easy...

Plus I doubt the air forces capabilities. My guess is it will underperform, and the accuracy will be too low to get melting. I think all they'll do is warm up the tank... Not to mention it's probably more efficient to launch a missile at it...

It should also be noted that said laser is actually focused on the target.  The energy density is huge when a 20 inch beam is focused to within a few inches. Even the most reflective surface would be destroyed by heat. 

Let me add that the AF has already produced greater than a kiloWatt CO2 laser.  It only takes about 40 Watts to cut 18 gage steel.  By comparison, your average laser pointer is 0.001 Watt. 

Also, high-power lasers easily ionize the air they travel through, which forces the gas molecules out of the beams path due to their electrostatic force.  Modern telescopes use this technique to get clearer images through Earth's atmosphere.  Dust, fog, and other airborne interferences -- if not vaporized -- would be ionized and pushed out of the beams way.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 11:03:39 AM by EvilToothpaste »

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #31 on: April 10, 2008, 11:10:57 AM »
Plan:

We steal the "laser" and use it to burn the icewall, thereby putting the entire Earth into DROUGHT!!!

MU HA HA HA HA!

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #32 on: April 10, 2008, 12:18:04 PM »
Too easy to counter, IMO. Next we'll have tanks with reflective surfaces...90 percent of the beam goes that way, and if you really want to be evil, you could computer control the mirrors directionality to fire straight back at the plane. Dead plane now, not dead tank... Personally,  I think that directed energy weapons are too easily countered. Mass ftw!

Oh, and if you don't feel like doing that, you could always have heat dissipation techniques...way too easy...

Plus I doubt the air forces capabilities. My guess is it will underperform, and the accuracy will be too low to get melting. I think all they'll do is warm up the tank... Not to mention it's probably more efficient to launch a missile at it...

It should also be noted that said laser is actually focused on the target.  The energy density is huge when a 20 inch beam is focused to within a few inches. Even the most reflective surface would be destroyed by heat. 

Let me add that the AF has already produced greater than a kiloWatt CO2 laser.  It only takes about 40 Watts to cut 18 gage steel.  By comparison, your average laser pointer is 0.001 Watt. 

Also, high-power lasers easily ionize the air they travel through, which forces the gas molecules out of the beams path due to their electrostatic force.  Modern telescopes use this technique to get clearer images through Earth's atmosphere.  Dust, fog, and other airborne interferences -- if not vaporized -- would be ionized and pushed out of the beams way.

Not really. It's a common misconception that a laser's heat is different than its light. Point a laser at a mirror. The laser beam bounces off. The heat due to the IR radiation(which I assume is what they are using -- most efficient), would have the same thing, its just a different frequency of light. I believe a standard bathroom mirror reflects about 85% of the light it receives, correct me if I'm wrong, so that means that 85% of the heat goes off, which means you would need 5-6 times more power. Let's say we get a 99% mirror, that means that you need 100 times more power than normal. A perfect mirror would reflect all heat. Period. You're argument is like saying that even a perfect mirror couldn't reflect because the light would blast through it...and you can always put an extremely conductive material underneath the reflective surface if someone decides to go nuts with the wattage on that laser. And, furthermore, let's say it actually works. OK, you've put a hole in the tank. Now its the tanks turn. Seriously, a rocket blows the tank up, whereas this just puts a small hole in it. You may manage to kill one of the operators in the meantime, but the tank will still work. Even a dumbfired rocket without explosives would do better.

We've been promised super-accurate super-powerful directed energy weapons for too long for me to buy this nonsense. I might have believed it ten years ago, but no more. And this all works under the assumption that the tank is sunning itself rather than actually, you know, fighting back, or having the slightest form of air support, or indeed, moving, because you may know its harder to keep your beam focused on one part of the target if its not staying still. Oh, and the air force seems to have missed the memo about the Cold War being over...the USAF doesn't fight anyone with tanks anymore. In fact, they barely do much fighting, period. The future of war is guerrilla warfare, bypassing this.
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #33 on: April 10, 2008, 01:05:10 PM »
If that 15% of the heat that isn't reflected could damage the mirror then near 100% of the laser would be hitting the now non reflective tank. So the mirror would fail.

Also they would obviously not just "put a hole in the tank" either it would be aimed at a vital area, say the motor or the payload of shells. That would take out the tank or cause an explosion, or simply heat the interior of the tank enough to kill people. Ever sat inside multiple inches of steel as it is burned through? I'm voting that the geniuses that invented this laser didn't just assume putting a hole in a tank would be a fun idea.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 01:07:44 PM by Saint Raist »

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #34 on: April 10, 2008, 01:05:49 PM »
I'm not arguing with the ability of this weapon to incapacitate a tank, because I have no idea.  I hope you agree that you also know nothing about that specific subject.  None of us have any real reason to be talking about it at all. 

And as was said before, ANY imperfection in the reflective surface -- such as a grain of dirt or grease -- absorbs heat and destroys a mirror's ability to reflect.  Even with less than 100W on a greater than 99% reflective surface, the smallest piece of dust will destroy a mirror

Hilariously, you seem to have also missed the memo about Operation Iraqi Freedom.  It's not just the Soviets that have tanks anymore!  On another twist, "modern war" has missed your memo about its future. 

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #35 on: April 10, 2008, 02:01:07 PM »
I'm not arguing with the ability of this weapon to incapacitate a tank, because I have no idea.  I hope you agree that you also know nothing about that specific subject.  None of us have any real reason to be talking about it at all. 

And as was said before, ANY imperfection in the reflective surface -- such as a grain of dirt or grease -- absorbs heat and destroys a mirror's ability to reflect.  Even with less than 100W on a greater than 99% reflective surface, the smallest piece of dust will destroy a mirror

Hilariously, you seem to have also missed the memo about Operation Iraqi Freedom.  It's not just the Soviets that have tanks anymore!  On another twist, "modern war" has missed your memo about its future. 

I do agree, but I also remember the fact that we've been promised these superweapons a few too many times. Actually, an imperfection in the surface(dirt, grease), isn't going to stop the mirror, its just going to give the mirror a free cleaning by vaporizing that particle. And some of you have missed the memo about physics, that being that 15 percent is a bathroom mirror, and a proper mirror would be more like 99.9%. And, that the heat which isn't reflected has to melt the mirror, which, as I said, would be a lot harder with a conductor behind it. So, we have 0.1 percent of your heat here, plus heat dissipation techniques, and this thing is useless. IF it works. If it were so easy, and the air force was chock full of your geniuses, we'd already have this thing. I've read articles from 20-30 years ago saying we'd have these within the next 10 years.

About other people having the tanks in guerrilla warfare, true, some come around, but not many at all, and they account for very few of the casualties, if I'm not very much mistaken. IED's are a far bigger threat, and in my guess, will continue to be. We'll see how modern war goes along, but I think the U.S. military is still trying to fight the cold war, when guerrillas are much harder. And about heating the tank to kill people, more feasible, but still an issue because you must heat the interior of the tank without just burning through. And while aiming for the explosive stuff is fun and workable, I highly doubt that kind of accuracy is possible -- yet. Don't get me wrong, I think directed energy stuff is workable, but not anytime soon. My guess is that directed energy weapons will have to be backed up by mass weapons, in order to take out the countermeasures. You can reflect a directed energy beam back upon the source without damage, but try doing that to a bullet/mortar/rocket. Then directed energy can be used.

Like I said, however, this is moot, as guerrilla warfare has a great inbuilt advantage over any kind of military resistance. If I were to defend a country, I'd say surrender first, and then make them wish they'd never bothered with IED's and other morale-destroying weapons. Unless they're willing to wipe out every citizen in the country (not probable with the U.S. involved), it'd be extremely hard to satisfactorily occupy the country. I should have made this clearer before, but  I don't doubt its possibility or capabilities, only its feasibility, and the gung-ho attitude about it, as I think its extremely easily countered, just like everything else.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 02:03:33 PM by fshy94 »
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #36 on: April 10, 2008, 03:56:22 PM »
Oh, dirt will stop the mirror; I see it every day, actually.  A piece of dust that can't be seen with the naked eye burns the Si reflective coating.  The Si is either covered with a carbon halo or flaked entirely off.  And this is under an unfocused beam, mind you, on a greater than 99% efficiency mirror.  We have to keep a pure nitrogen environment inside the optic train as well as coat the backside with thermal paste so as to save mirrors. 

Guerrilla warfare is something I know little about, though.  The tanks I was referring to were those owned by Iraq and subsequently destroyed by our relentless freedom. 

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #37 on: April 10, 2008, 05:14:32 PM »
Oh, OK, you're still talking about the standard reflective coating type of mirror, there are other types which are less susceptible. Also note that there are several issues with laser weapons, like the vapors from the melting shielding the rest of the metal, and so on. They're written here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon

Again, though, even if my system doesn't work, I can guarantee something will. And remember, even if they just ramp up power to insane levels, they have to generate that power somewhere, and even simpler countermeasures can make the thing run out of power, like conductor/insulator alternation, which would look a lot less stupid and obvious than a mirror. If this thing becomes too much of a threat, a countermeasure will be created.

I didn't realize you were talking about Saddam's tanks. That was nothing. He didn't really have much of a chance. Granted, laser weapons would have helped, but only because no-one prepared for them. New developments in technology, in warfare, are good one-time only, as long as surprise is around. After that, countermeasures galore. Mustard gas? Gas masks. Fortresses? Cannons.

About guerrilla warfare, that's a much more serious problem, IMO. As it is, I think the U.S. has the power to hold a serious force in conventional warfare, but I don't think that's the war we're going to be fighting. And honestly, I'm not even sure there is a solution. Guerrilla warfare is the most ingenious strategy ever, and guerrilla forces have been known to hold off forces 20-30 times their own size with ease, because of the psychological impact. Guerrillas kill without being seen, that is practically their motto, and they blend in with ordinary citizens. You can't just use superlasers against them, unless you want to follow Star Wars' example, and just Death Star everyone, rebel and innocent alike.
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #38 on: April 10, 2008, 09:51:22 PM »
meh

I'm done.

?

Pope Zera

  • 329
  • A Firm Believer in NOTHING
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #39 on: April 10, 2008, 11:15:34 PM »
About explosives blahblahblah whereas a tank has an interior, a crew, and some shells.

Indeed, but those of us in the know have good news.  They are currently applying this technique to making more durable missiles.

How to Create Laz0rproof Missiles
1. Feed Canadian dynamite.  The canadian insulates the explosives, causing it not to spload prematurely when shot down via laz0r.

2. Tie jet engine to Canadian.  Self explanatory.

3. Put stainless steel partyhat on Canadian.  This increases aerodynamacitaciousness to compensate for Canadians being fat.  And stupid.

4. Launch Canadian at Laz0r Base located on Ganymede.  Self explanatory.


They breed like rabbits, so clearly this is more efficient than wasting perfectly good missiles on Laz0r Bases located on Ganymede.

I went there.

?

Emporer DAT

  • 130
  • -- I KNOW --
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #40 on: April 10, 2008, 11:32:47 PM »
Obviously there is a counter to every weapon and a counter to every counter as well as a counter to every counter counter, so arguing over whether or not any given weapon is teh 1337 uber ploxxorz is completely irrelevant. However, a giant mirror at 99.9% would get the job done but would have to be replaced regularly in order to remain effective to make up for the fact that it is not at a full 100.0% quality. The cost of such an endeavor would be astronomical, that is why the entire economical system should be abolished and everything made free for the military, the government and those in power such as Bill Gates.

Another flaw is that said weapon is impractical; counters will always be developed and the weapon will be made obsolete after multiple uses on the battlefield, resulting in a lot of tax money gone to waste. This particular weapon will most definitely be useless once force fields are developed.

In conclusion I'll have to agree with Fishyninetyfour, guerrilla warfare is the most effective and is the only form that can only be countered by itself. Therefore I recommend all soldiers to fashion hand grenades from pineapples and then chuck them in the back seat of someone's wagon.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 11:35:50 PM by Emporer DAT »

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #41 on: April 10, 2008, 11:48:24 PM »


 If I were to defend a country, I'd say surrender first, and then make them wish they'd never bothered with IED's and other morale-destroying weapons.


Ah yes, a variation of the famous strategy known as the Pétain Plan.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #42 on: April 11, 2008, 05:40:46 AM »
Obviously there is a counter to every weapon and a counter to every counter as well as a counter to every counter counter, so arguing over whether or not any given weapon is teh 1337 uber ploxxorz is completely irrelevant. However, a giant mirror at 99.9% would get the job done but would have to be replaced regularly in order to remain effective to make up for the fact that it is not at a full 100.0% quality. The cost of such an endeavor would be astronomical, that is why the entire economical system should be abolished and everything made free for the military, the government and those in power such as Bill Gates.


OK people. Any imperfection on the mirror would cause blackening from the laser, this would cause it to instantly lose it's reflectiveness. So yes the mirror would never work. Die in a fire.

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #43 on: April 11, 2008, 09:40:35 AM »
Why must everyone assume that we're applying bathroom mirrors to tanks? ???
I mean, its more economical, but...seriously, there are other mirrors that don't get murdered by a simple piece of dust. And even if a small speck of dust burned out a small section of the mirror, the energy is still wasted on the sections which aren't. A small speck of dust isn't going to blow out the whole mirror.
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #44 on: April 11, 2008, 11:33:03 AM »
You, Fishy, are the only person talking about bathroom mirrors; seriously.  And just saying "other mirrors exist" isn't too convincing or illustrative. 

Here is a quote from the very article you cited earlier:
"Some believe that mirrors or other countermeasures can reduce the effectiveness of high energy lasers. This has not been demonstrated. Small defects in mirrors absorb energy, and the defects rapidly expand across the surface. Protective mirroring on the outside of a target could easily be made less effective by incidental damage and by dust and dirt on its surface."

I work with high-powered lasers five days a week (the Coherent K500 sealed beam CO2 IR laser for example).  We don't use bathroom mirrors.  We use more than one type of mirror, all of which are susceptable to damage due to dust, grease, scratches, and heat.  My company has been in the laser business for 30 years.  We have drawers full different types of unused mirrors that just don't last long enough to bother with.  Even lenses, with no reflective coating AT ALL, are destroyed by debris on their surface.  Mirrors.  Are.  Easily. Compromised. 

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #45 on: April 11, 2008, 12:00:51 PM »
Fair enough, debris has a good chance of compromising a mirror, but heat dissipation? And why would you put your mirrors on the outside? You'd put it underneath a protective metal layer or something, no? I mean, you do seem to be assuming that everyone on the countermeasure department is retarded, while the offensive department is full of geniuses...

OK, let me backtrack and throw away my mirror idea. Now, I'm going to be very nice, and assume you are not lying abut your laser usage (seriously, anyone can bullshit on the internet). What kind of power source do you use for your high power lasers? If you're going to tell me its battery operated, I'm going to laugh at you. Because quite simply, the power source needed is quite large, and a simple power-wasting countermeasure like conductor/insulation layering is likely to waste a good bit of power, possibly enough to either buy enough time to make conventional weapons more efficient, or to even finish whatever power source is in the plane. Also, using something which releases a lot of vapor when melted will help by murdering the focus and power.

About plasma windows (which is what I assume someone was talking about when they mentioned force fields), I rather doubt those will work. Same-particle interactions are not allowed on bosons, and I doubt plasma (electrons) will do squiddly-dot. About realistic countermeasures, I'd go with gasses with optical properties, and so on. Actually, gasses do seem to be another way to go, as they'd defocus the light.

Furthermore, the development of room temperature superconductors just murders their existence, if it ever happens. And in space, these guys are useless, because low-temperature superconductors already exist, and could be used there.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2008, 12:05:25 PM by fshy94 »
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #46 on: April 11, 2008, 01:06:04 PM »
We plug ours into the wall.  But this airborne laser is chemical, not electrical. 

I would call someone retarded who puts their mirrors underneath something opaque.   ;D

The vapor producing layer could work, but has not been demonstrated. 

The whole point, really, is to have just another way to destroy something.  If someone makes a glass-mirrored tank to counter a laser, it then is much easier to smash it with a rock, whereas a rock-proof tank could easily be burned with a laser. 

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #47 on: April 11, 2008, 05:03:41 PM »
Fair enough, but that's what I said before, that these weapons would need to be backed up by massed weapons. If room temperature superconductors are made, however, its a gauranteed KO for this technology, however.
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #48 on: April 11, 2008, 06:29:32 PM »
How is it guaranteed? 

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #49 on: April 11, 2008, 06:45:31 PM »
Because of the properties of a superconductor. It will distribute the heat across the entire surface area and re-radiate the heat nearly instantaneously. We already have superconductors that can work in space-temperatures, so lasers don't work too hot there, but room temperature superconductors haven't been developed yet, but if they are, instant kaput. All this laser does now is heat up the air...
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #50 on: April 11, 2008, 06:58:52 PM »
You guys are retarded.

I spend $20,000 on a powerful laser
You spend $200M on a giant mirror


Without using my laser, I've won.

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #51 on: April 11, 2008, 09:18:22 PM »
I'm with the Narcmeister on this one. 

I love sci-fi arguments.  You're going to have to wake up from you superconducting wet-dream.  Plus, "space-temperatures" makes me laugh.  Not to mention laser weapons would work just fine in outer space since solar arrays are not superconductors.  Nor any other real part of current satellites.  Aim said laser at solar array: end of satellite.  Such a superconducting satellite would have to always be kept out of sunlight because "space-temperatures" can be extremely hot in direct sunlight. 

The superconductor sounds like it would cook the guts of a tank even quicker than conventional armor; from all sides like a convection oven. 

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #52 on: April 11, 2008, 11:41:41 PM »
4 Star General:  "Damn it!  Why is your battalion of tanks not in position for the strike?"
2 Star General:  "Sorry, sir.  They crews were busy polishing their tanks after last night's rainstorm.  Then they had to stop and remove the scratches they left on the mirrors getting into the tank.  Then, they had to replace a few of the mirrors 'cause some of them were damaged driving to the battlefield.  Then they had to stop, get out the dust mop, and remove all the dust that had collected on the surface of the tank before they could be ready for battle."


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #53 on: April 12, 2008, 12:14:13 AM »
4 Star General:  "Damn it!  Why is your battalion of tanks not in position for the strike?"
2 Star General:  "Sorry, sir.  They crews were busy polishing their tanks after last night's rainstorm.  Then they had to stop and remove the scratches they left on the mirrors getting into the tank.  Then, they had to replace a few of the mirrors 'cause some of them were damaged driving to the battlefield.  Then they had to stop, get out the dust mop, and remove all the dust that had collected on the surface of the tank before they could be ready for battle."

One has to give, that is funny. Might make a good sci-fi comedy/satire/parody.
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Tank melter
« Reply #54 on: April 14, 2008, 05:33:04 PM »
Yup along with the metal covered mirrors......