open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked So...the new lasers have recoil?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (10)

Author Topic

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.05.27 09:12:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Paukinra
Sorry, I didnt write that clearly.

They have no rest mass, when accelerated they do have mass.

ANd anyway there is no proof they dont have mass (although I do agree it is unlikly they do)


Laughing

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.05.27 09:52:00 - [62]
 

Edited by: Nova Fox on 27/05/2011 09:55:38
Depends on the laser design itself actually.

A chemical based laser would likely require not only venting but cycling the hot used gas with unused and cool gas, and deal with the gas' expansion this can be accomplised with a gas channeling methood in various ways similar to how guns use expanding gas from bullet powder explosion to reset the hammer, this would result in a recoilt similar to other guns. However some would argue having the catalyst gas in the barrels a stupid design however I have to say its alot smarter than having extremly toxic chemicals on the inside breaking though the seals where as in the barrels if it gets shot off, oh well out in space it goes.

An crystal based laser would 'fan the blades' after all the focaling of energy though the materials would heat it up and degrade it eventually, but letting the blades of base materials cool down or cycle out would allow for faster refiring rates, this however doesnt require recoiling back like a traditional gun but a opening vents on the side instead and possibly compressing forcing the blades to be exposed to a slightly cooler envrionment. So these lasers should look like an accordian when recoiling.

However in this day in age in eve we're likely dealing with the warhead lasers where you basically set off a nuke in a containment chamber and then focus all that energy down range. This however would create alot material, gas, pressure, energy, and excess radiation all which needs to be removed before refiring. The recoil can simply be a purge mechanism meant to deal with that readying the laser for the next nagasaki to go off in its chamber.

Either way as mentioned earlier physics would declare that shoving that much energy out would and should have nearly dissimilar equal counter energy on the giving end. Most of this will be heat however and less kinetic in a lasers case but who says energy waves cant manipulate objects to force them to move, I mean how else would an optical tweezers work or the xray scope for nanoconstruction in current real tech.

Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
Posted - 2011.05.27 10:00:00 - [63]
 

Who cares if internet space-submarines have rayguns that recoil, it looks good!

Hanneshannes
Posted - 2011.05.27 10:30:00 - [64]
 

I want animated missile launchers =(

Calathea Sata
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.05.27 10:51:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: CCP Spitfire
Good question, actually. I'll check with the storyline team and get back to you; meanwhile a quick search (but please do not take it as an "official" answer) suggests that sci-fi laser weapons may indeed have recoil according to the conventional laws of physics.




Accord to that article: Pulsing lasers which fire for very short amount of time (30 nanoseconds) might have a kick similar to a .22.

But the beam lasers in EVE are no where as "pulsey" as that... it's a slowwwwww stream of energy (the laser beams last at least HALF A SECOND) so they shouldn't have any recoil.

TLDR: Beam lasers shouldn't have recoil. Pulse lasers might have.

Culerrta McNab
Posted - 2011.05.27 11:03:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Calathea Sata
Accord to that article: Pulsing lasers which fire for very short amount of time (30 nanoseconds) might have a kick similar to a .22.

But the beam lasers in EVE are no where as "pulsey" as that... it's a slowwwwww stream of energy (the laser beams last at least HALF A SECOND) so they shouldn't have any recoil.

TLDR: Beam lasers shouldn't have recoil. Pulse lasers might have.


You're going on the assumption that the lasers in EVE have the stopping power of a .22, which is clearly not the case. Otherwise fleet fights would take aaaaaaaaaaages.

Calathea Sata
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.05.27 11:06:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Calathea Sata on 27/05/2011 11:27:02
Originally by: Culerrta McNab
Originally by: Calathea Sata
Accord to that article: Pulsing lasers which fire for very short amount of time (30 nanoseconds) might have a kick similar to a .22.

But the beam lasers in EVE are no where as "pulsey" as that... it's a slowwwwww stream of energy (the laser beams last at least HALF A SECOND) so they shouldn't have any recoil.

TLDR: Beam lasers shouldn't have recoil. Pulse lasers might have.


You're going on the assumption that the lasers in EVE have the stopping power of a .22, which is clearly not the case. Otherwise fleet fights would take aaaaaaaaaaages.


My bad, shouldn't have mentioned the .22.

The calculations were done using the assumption "Laser power = Gun firing a bullet". It should scale up and down just fine.

edited to explain: a laser with the power of a gun will have a recoil like a gun. A laser with the power of a cannon will have the recoil of a cannon.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.05.27 11:50:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Astroka
The new turret models and animations look absolutely incredible. I'm excited to see these in-game and just watch them shoot forever. 'Cause they're that cool.

However, I am a little put off by the fact that the new laser turrets show recoil when they fire. It's obviously not game-breaking and I'll live, but it is honestly a little off-putting. I suppose it would be a lot less visually appealing for them not to show recoil when all the other ones do, but I looked at it and immediately thought, wtf? It's not a big deal, but in this case I prefer realism over aesthetics. It just looks weird.

Let the trolling commence. And if there is already a thread on this, my apologies. I didn't find it.


It looks like recoil but it's simply the cooling system operating. Yeah, that's it.

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.05.27 11:51:00 - [69]
 

Edited by: Ghoest on 27/05/2011 11:51:33
Originally by: Calathea Sata
Edited by: Calathea Sata on 27/05/2011 11:27:02
Originally by: Culerrta McNab
Originally by: Calathea Sata
Accord to that article: Pulsing lasers which fire for very short amount of time (30 nanoseconds) might have a kick similar to a .22.

But the beam lasers in EVE are no where as "pulsey" as that... it's a slowwwwww stream of energy (the laser beams last at least HALF A SECOND) so they shouldn't have any recoil.

TLDR: Beam lasers shouldn't have recoil. Pulse lasers might have.


You're going on the assumption that the lasers in EVE have the stopping power of a .22, which is clearly not the case. Otherwise fleet fights would take aaaaaaaaaaages.


My bad, shouldn't have mentioned the .22.

The calculations were done using the assumption "Laser power = Gun firing a bullet". It should scale up and down just fine.

edited to explain: a laser with the power of a gun will have a recoil like a gun. A laser with the power of a cannon will have the recoil of a cannon.


NO

While it is true that a rapidly pulseing laser could have recoil, it is false that a a laser with energy like given gun will in turn have recoil comparable to that gun.

I would have to look it up to get a an accurate number but the laser would only have a tiny fraction of the recoil that kinetic gun of similar energy has.

Calathea Sata
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.05.27 11:59:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Ghoest
While it is true that a rapidly pulseing laser could have recoil, it is false that a a laser with energy like given gun will in turn have recoil comparable to that gun.

Depends on the laser firing time. Hence the difference between beam lasers (a slow long-lasting stream of energy) and pulse lasers (a burst in a very small time).

Soden Rah
Gallente
EVE University
Ivy League
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:03:00 - [71]
 

Edited by: Soden Rah on 27/05/2011 13:03:47
Light does not have mass (otherwise it wouldn't travel at the speed of light), but it does have momentum. If the power of the laser beam was high enough then the turret may well have to recoil.
There are possibilities however if the beam strength is not powerful enough to justify having the gun recoil.

If for example the lasers were powered electrically, then the currents involved in the wiring could induce huge forces (varying electric charges induce magnetic fields and varying magnetic fields induce electric currents and they all induce forces on each other)

When I visited Oxford Uni on an open day one of the things they showed us was the magnetic field research labs, In one of their bins was the remains of an electromagnet that had imploded due to the forces generated when they discharged an entire room full of capacitors into it.

It's possible that the recoil is not caused by the laser light at all but is in fact a mechanism to absorb the forces generated inside the laser turret by the enormous currents involved.

or it could be that this is a computer game and it just looks cool...

You decide.

BTW. railguns/coilguns/plasma weapons ALL have recoil due to the mass being fired at extremely high speeds. conservation of momentum requires that they have a recoil.

Peter Powers
FinFleet
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:18:00 - [72]
 

in sciencefiction movies/series you see sometimes that energy based weapons recoil,
a common explanation by movie makers for that is, that while the energy beam focused its never perfect, and that the recoil is to prevent the cannon from taking damage through straylight while firing, assuming that the straylight would cause the cannons to heat up at those energy levels.

Shiera Kuni
Repurposed Armaments
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:20:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Stitcher

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. a Railgun accelerates a projectile by applying electromagnetic force to it. There MUST be an equal and opposite reaction force, you can't escape that. Therefore, Railguns experience recoil. Anybody who claims otherwise is an idiot.

if the gun experiences recoil, then it might have a mechanism for compensating for that recoil - say, compressed-gas shock absorbers, with the barrel and loading mechanism being free-floating and able to recoil into the gas, which translates kinetic energy into heat by compressing and heating up in accordance with Boyle's Law.

Just because the railguns YOU claim to have been involved in designing don't have moving parts to handle recoil does not mean that future railguns won't need or use them.


So you're telling me that you believe a metal slug travelling along a magnetic rail track, not creating a backblow as standard cased ammo does, would cause recoil? The only way I can see it causing recoil is if it produced enough shock after leaving the barrel to push it back. Now of course, I'm thinking of current applications and not suspended plasma as it is in EVE. You're correct in that aspect at least, the suspended plasma charges -could- be producing recoil from gas ventilation.

BLACK-STAR
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:28:00 - [74]
 

I believe CCP was trying to make each weapon battery with an animation, having a laser battery shoot and be motionless wouldn't be as appealing next to the other weapons. (Missile launchers are an exception they haven't been touched yet). the lasers wouldn't look as cool firing if there was just...a laser coming out of a tube.

S'qarpium D'igil
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:41:00 - [75]
 

Edited by: S''qarpium D''igil on 27/05/2011 13:41:23
Laser "recoil" can easily be explained as an active mechanical process intended to cool the firing 'chamber.' It does not necessarily have to be a reactive process caused by the release of energy.

I fly Amarr, I think it looks damn cool, and I hope it stays as it is.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:44:00 - [76]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 27/05/2011 13:52:47
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: CCP Spitfire
Good question, actually. I'll check with the storyline team and get back to you; meanwhile a quick search (but please do not take it as an "official" answer) suggests that sci-fi laser weapons may indeed have recoil according to the conventional laws of physics.
Minus that there a pulse time on a nanosecond scale is used, beam lasers have pulses of several seconds, so you can divide that by about a billion.
Originally by: Calathea Sata
Accord to that article: Pulsing lasers which fire for very short amount of time (30 nanoseconds) might have a kick similar to a .22.

But the beam lasers in EVE are no where as "pulsey" as that... it's a slowwwwww stream of energy (the laser beams last at least HALF A SECOND) so they shouldn't have any recoil.

TLDR: Beam lasers shouldn't have recoil. Pulse lasers might have.
…but plus the fact that he's comparing it to a 136 J / 0.83 Ns bullet, whereas the lasers in EVE deal with gigajoules of energy, so we can multiply that by about a billion again.

So see above: a Tachyon II would have an impulse of a couple of hundred Ns. If we are to believe the mass stats on that ting (granted, we really really shouldn't, because it's so silly), that's enough to accelerate the entire turret to 300m/s.
Originally by: Shiera Kuni
So you're telling me that you believe a metal slug travelling along a magnetic rail track, not creating a backblow as standard cased ammo does, would cause recoil?
Of course it will. Just like a bullet (or, rather, the exploding propellant) pushes equally on the bullet itself and on the gun that encloses that explosion in all other directions, the magnetic field used to push the slug along the rails will also push the rails back in the opposite direction. The momentum the magnetic field impart on the slug must also be imparted on the rails.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:45:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Skippermonkey
Who cares if internet space-submarines have rayguns that recoil, it looks good!

Virtue Maulerant
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:47:00 - [78]
 

It looks super cool, thank you very much.

Good job CCP, <3.

Swynet
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:51:00 - [79]
 

Pulse or Beams are two different laser "projectors", why the hell should they recoil? -e-peen stuff, looks cool.

They should add smoke with and empty cartridges at each shotLaughing


Shiera Kuni
Repurposed Armaments
Posted - 2011.05.27 13:59:00 - [80]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Of course it will. Just like a bullet (or, rather, the exploding propellant) pushes equally on the bullet itself and on the gun that encloses that explosion in all other directions, the magnetic field used to push the slug along the rails will also push the rails back in the opposite direction. The momentum the magnetic field impart on the slug must also be imparted on the rails.


Hmm... I hadn't considered that. Admittedly my designs had failsafes in place in case it would occur, but I was banking on the unique structure of the rail track to disperse any possibility of recoil. I suppose I'll have to see what the prototype brings.

Mia Restolo
Posted - 2011.05.27 14:02:00 - [81]
 

Originally by: Shiera Kuni

So you're telling me that you believe a metal slug travelling along a magnetic rail track, not creating a backblow as standard cased ammo does, would cause recoil? The only way I can see it causing recoil is if it produced enough shock after leaving the barrel to push it back. Now of course, I'm thinking of current applications and not suspended plasma as it is in EVE. You're correct in that aspect at least, the suspended plasma charges -could- be producing recoil from gas ventilation.


I'm going to assume from your troll sig that you are in fact trolling rather than not having a clue about simple physics... you know that whole equal and opposite reactions thing.

Shiera Kuni
Repurposed Armaments
Posted - 2011.05.27 14:04:00 - [82]
 

You're right, I'm a troll, a sexy troll but a troll none-the-less. But if you look at the post I made after that, I conceded that even I had a fallback in the event of recoil. Still, what I'm trying to work on is a recoilless design.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.05.27 14:08:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Shiera Kuni


So you're telling me that you believe a metal slug travelling along a magnetic rail track, not creating a backblow as standard cased ammo does, would cause recoil?


The railgun magnets pull on the slug. The slug is also pulling on the magnets. That's your recoil.

In RL, if you put a magnet near a relatively heavy ferrous object, the magnet will try to move towards the object.

Also, railguns from wikipedia sayeth:
"The rails and projectiles must be built from strong conductive materials; the rails need to survive the violence of an accelerating projectile, and heating due to the large currents and friction involved. The recoil force exerted on the rails is equal and opposite to the force propelling the projectile. The seat of the recoil force is still debated. The traditional equations predict that the recoil force acts on the breech of the railgun. Another school of thought invokes Ampère's force law and asserts that it acts along the length of the rails (which is their strongest axis).[7] The rails also repel themselves via a sideways force caused by the rails being pushed by the magnetic field, just as the projectile is. The rails need to survive this without bending, and must be very securely mounted."

Ana Vyr
Caldari
Posted - 2011.05.27 14:50:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Shiera Kuni
So you're telling me that you believe a metal slug travelling along a magnetic rail track, not creating a backblow as standard cased ammo does, would cause recoil?


Newton says yes it would. In fact, the recoil would be equal and opposite to the force imparted to the projectile.

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.05.27 14:57:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: Calathea Sata
Originally by: Ghoest
While it is true that a rapidly pulseing laser could have recoil, it is false that a a laser with energy like given gun will in turn have recoil comparable to that gun.

Depends on the laser firing time. Hence the difference between beam lasers (a slow long-lasting stream of energy) and pulse lasers (a burst in a very small time).


NO.

The majority of any lasers energy is not kinetic so the recoil would be minimal relative to its damage inflicted.

Ghoest
Posted - 2011.05.27 15:02:00 - [86]
 

Originally by: Shiera Kuni


So you're telling me that you believe a metal slug travelling along a magnetic rail track, not creating a backblow as standard cased ammo does, would cause recoil? The only way I can see it causing recoil is if it produced enough shock after leaving the barrel to push it back.


Your lack of perception or vision has no bearing on physics.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.05.27 15:05:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Furb Killer
Recoil on a mounted turret (like on a ship) is only needed if the mechanical construction couldnt handle the forced without having space for recoil.


Recoil handling is crucial in space. Otherwise the ship absorbs it and drifts off course... unlike naval vessels that have an entire ocean of recoil absorption. Though CCP's fluidspace wouldn't necessarily have that issue...

Virtue Maulerant
Posted - 2011.05.27 15:06:00 - [88]
 

The new turrets including what you like to call "recoil" are great. Who gives a **** about physics and realism.

NinjaSpud
Posted - 2011.05.27 15:11:00 - [89]
 

Edited by: NinjaSpud on 27/05/2011 15:18:55
Edited by: NinjaSpud on 27/05/2011 15:14:06
Originally by: Ana Vyr
Originally by: Shiera Kuni
So you're telling me that you believe a metal slug travelling along a magnetic rail track, not creating a backblow as standard cased ammo does, would cause recoil?


Newton says yes it would. In fact, the recoil would be equal and opposite to the force imparted to the projectile.


You're correct, newton states that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. You're only mistake is the word "recoil"

Recoil from a gun is caused by the explosion of the powder, not the bullet traveling along the barrel. Guns still kick when there's a blank inside. When it detonates, the energy from the explosion needs an exit, it finds the path of least resistance and exits out the barrel, pushing the bullet along with it.

Again, with the equal and opposite reaction thing, you get a massive force leaving out the end of the barrel -----> and as a result, it pushes the bullet but also propels the gun in the opposite direction <-----

The amount of energy lost when you fire a bullet is staggering.

Railguns on the other hand, have no explosion, therefore have no recoil. I'm not saying they don't produce kinetic energy (they produce a **** load), but I am saying that the kinetic energy is conserved in the projectile instead of wasted in the explosion. The result is the projectile has way more kinetic energy then a bullet, more because the energy is conserved (or focused in the projectile) and does not release until impact.


True story here, my uncle was in the army in the late 80's. he had top secret clearance (computer nerd for spec ops) and one day, they went to a 'new weapons demo'. the army was testing one of its first rail guns.

They took an aluminum casing (non magnetic material) about 500MM. If I remember, that's the size of a football...American not European. In the very center of that casing, was a single steel BB (magnetic material), the same kind you shot birds with as a child.

The loaded this casing into a rail gun, and shot it at an old tank, 5 miles away. He said the gun didn't make a single noise or movement. the only noise they heard was the 500MM casing breaking the sound barrier.

when they inspected the tank, it had a perfect football sized hole clean threw it.

kewl **** eh?.

Edits:sloppy grammer

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2011.05.27 15:11:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: Destination SkillQueue on 27/05/2011 15:17:45
Originally by: Virtue Maulerant
The new turrets including what you like to call "recoil" are great. Who gives a **** about physics and realism.


Nerds care and most of them propably care just because they like arguing about it.

Quote:
Railguns on the other hand, have no explosion, therefore have no recoil.


Also because people keep posting stupid **** like this.


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (10)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only