Re: BSG 2003 (Long)

On Sunday 23 January 2005 02:54, Rrok Anroll wrote:
> --- Samuel Penn <sam@bifrost.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Given that they mount FTL drives, they probably don't have much room
> > for anything else.
>
> Well I do see what you're saying... but I'd have to say that I'd think
> that it probably would have been just as easy or believable to use
some
> form of energy weapon. I mean, power couplings, converters, etc, would
> probably take about the same space as a .50 cal and it's ammo...
> besides, with the little space that would be available, they wouldn't
> be able to carry much ammo before having to return for arming....

It's generally more efficient to accelerate a mass than it is to
power a laser or similar weapon. The limited supply of ammo is
countered with the extra energy needed to power the laser. More
energy requirements mean more cooling is needed, or less power
to other systems.

Lasers make sense in some circumstances (point defence against
missiles for instance, since they can be more accurate). It is
possible that a shift in technology will make lasers a better
choice in general, though 'Hard SF' purists tend to think not.

>
> > Actually, one thing I do like about the series is that it's not
using
> > laser guns just for the hell of it.
>
> I will definitely grant you this one, using something other than
lasers
> is very cool. However, I will say that using high velocity penetrators
> in space does require a little forethought...

Actually the problem is that you're littering the battle field with
thousands of bits of high velocity junk. If a Cylon is heading towards
the Galactica, and you're on their tail firing at them, for every
round that misses is another round heading towards the Galactica,
and it won't stop until it hits something.

At least lasers diffuse over distance.

-- 
Be seeing you,				   http://www.glendale.org.uk/
Sam.					jabber: samuel.penn@jabber.org