Register Register

Author Topic: Primitive Chemical Lasers  (Read 2546 times)

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 943
Primitive Chemical Lasers
« on: 19 August 2021, 00:53:21 »
Howdy all.  With the chemical laser being brought up in MW5, I figured it was worth looking at.

The base chemical laser, clan tech E, is straight up vastly better on vehicles than most weapons, earning it's spot as clan tech.  On mechs though, the medium/large chemical laser still outperforms standard inner sphere lasers with a trivial ammo load.  A hunchback 4p, with 8 medium lasers and 23 heatsinks fires all 8 for 1 extra heat.  A similiar chemical laser hunchback with 8 chem lasers would generate only 16 heat, meaning you could have 17 heat sinks and over 20 shots per gun, thus the chemical laser version with plenty of shots generates 2 less heat.  The ammo risk is very much a thing, but the power level regardless is higher than the base version.

So to represent these weapons that are supposedly on par with rifles for pirate and low tech periphery realms, what about a Tech B innersphere version of the chemical laser.

The Tech B chem laser shares all the same stats as the clan equivalent, but has the same -3 damage to BAR8 armor as rifle/cannons do.  Thus they are still great on vehicles, and good versus building and infantry, but there is a reason NOT to switch all your lasers over to chemical lasers in the periphery.  And, may I add, a 15 range 5 damage (after the -3 is applied) primitive large chemical laser is still a desirable tank gun at 5 tons, as is the 2 damage 1 ton medium primitive chemical laser.  The small chemical laser would be best as part of a space craft's point defense bay, as prior to the antimissile system small lasers had the best damage/ton for point defense, and chemical lasers were noted as being good for point defense which the -3 damage to armor doesnt change.

Being Tech B with an introduction date of the second soviet civil war in ~2000 also means that those very early designs pre-2300 had an energy weapon to choose besides the vehicle flamer.

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #1 on: 19 August 2021, 10:39:44 »
While I am not a fan of the damage reduction scheme of Rifle Cannons, if one were to do the Primitive Chemical Lasers, this would be the consistent result.  Also your proposal would be rather effective against Battle Armor as well.

As another alternative would be that they just have a lower damage output to begin with, such as Large Laser just doing 5-6, Medium 2-3, and Small 1 damage, no matter the armor (aside from Ferro-Lamellor) or build. I wonder if just a lower heat scale would be proper to go along with this, but still requiring CVs to carry the Sinks to compensate.  (One of the Hell's Horses CL advantages would be that their heat doesn't carry heat in to CVs, along with the lack of toxic chemicals). 

Speaking of toxic chemicals, weapon damage could result in an effect on the crew, either by killing some or "stunning" them as they work to contain the spill.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

idea weenie

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3526
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #2 on: 19 August 2021, 18:47:29 »
Speaking of toxic chemicals, weapon damage could result in an effect on the crew, either by killing some or "stunning" them as they work to contain the spill.

Add in bonus difficulty if the vehicle crew is smaller than recommended, or slightly reduced difficulty if the crew is larger than recommended?

I.e. if the crew is recommended as 1 per 15 tons, the vehicle masses 50 tons, and you have 5 crew, then you get a bonus for having 1 more crew than recommended

Or Chemical lasers with enhanced safety systems taking up more tonnage/criticals, but reducing the likelihood of the chemicals affecting the crew?  This would be phrased as:
ChemLaser-H-S2, where enough tons/crits have been added to give a 2-pt benefit on the chemical spill roll.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #3 on: 19 August 2021, 19:49:54 »
Howdy all.  With the chemical laser being brought up in MW5, I figured it was worth looking at.

(sni)

I love the idea of Primitive Chemical Lasers and have been wishing they were a part of the game for ages. Pretty much since reading

Considering when Chemical Lasers were first introduced (late 1990's- early 2000's), I would put them in Tech C. I'd also be against reducing their damage. They were originally intended to take out ICBMs. They can't do that with their damage reduced. And please note that Primitive Aerospace Armor has an introdate of Early Spaceflight. So Crippen Station and other stations would have had BAR-10 armor.

I would barrow from the rules for Primitive Prototype Weapons. Reduce Chemical Lasers ammo amount the same way Ballistic Weapons ammo is reduced. I would also up the heat the same for energy weapons.

Small Chemical Lasers 45 shots, 2 heat
Medium Chemical Lasers 22 shots, 3 heat
Large Chemical Lasers 7 shots, 9 heat

While the increased heat wouldn't hamper vehicles, it would cause problems for aerospace craft. (Makes me wonder what was used to get rid of heat before 2022 when Heat Sinks were introduced.) I think the reduced ammo also makes them a little more competitive with Rifle Cannons and Machine Guns. Where one trades for weight the other gains in ammo, damage and/or range.


Add in bonus difficulty if the vehicle crew is smaller than recommended, or slightly reduced difficulty if the crew is larger than recommended?

I.e. if the crew is recommended as 1 per 15 tons, the vehicle masses 50 tons, and you have 5 crew, then you get a bonus for having 1 more crew than recommended

Or Chemical lasers with enhanced safety systems taking up more tonnage/criticals, but reducing the likelihood of the chemicals affecting the crew?  This would be phrased as:
ChemLaser-H-S2, where enough tons/crits have been added to give a 2-pt benefit on the chemical spill roll.

I would think that kind of thing would be considered when replacing ammo. I doubt the chemicals are just splashing around in an open container, in the tank. It'd be like a gas tank with no lid on it. I can see big sign on the hatch saying, "Crew Must Wear a Full Chemical Suit To Operate This Vehicle". for tanks with the Ammunition Feed Problem Quirk.










Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #4 on: 20 August 2021, 12:04:15 »
I would barrow from the rules for Primitive Prototype Weapons. Reduce Chemical Lasers ammo amount the same way Ballistic Weapons ammo is reduced. I would also up the heat the same for energy weapons.

The original Chem Lasers didn't use ammo.  The chemicals were built in to the system.  It was the Hell's Horses idea to minimize the toxic chemical problem by making them ammo dependent.  This is why weapon damage would cause a chemical spill in the CV rather than an ammo bin being hit.  As a contrast to this, these PCLs should still need the heat sinks, just not require power amplifiers.

If we also consider them at the same mass as Standard lasers, but at a reduced base damage, this would take in to account their bulkier and more massive systems all around.  Of course, having them be as mass intensive as their Pulse Lasers would also fit as well.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #5 on: 20 August 2021, 14:52:48 »
The original Chem Lasers didn't use ammo.  The chemicals were built in to the system.  It was the Hell's Horses idea to minimize the toxic chemical problem by making them ammo dependent.  This is why weapon damage would cause a chemical spill in the CV rather than an ammo bin being hit.  As a contrast to this, these PCLs should still need the heat sinks, just not require power amplifiers.

If we also consider them at the same mass as Standard lasers, but at a reduced base damage, this would take in to account their bulkier and more massive systems all around.  Of course, having them be as mass intensive as their Pulse Lasers would also fit as well.


What?  :o
The chemicals are the ammo. The whole point of standard lasers is that they're ammo free. That's what made them better than Chemical Lasers. And since the chemicals are ammo,  Chemical Lasers suffer ammo explosions like other ammo weapons. You can fluff that as chemicals splashing all over if you want. That's cool. It's still the ammo bin being hit though.

Where are you getting that Primitive Chemical Lasers are more massive than the Clan versions? And why do they have to be more massive than Clan versions? After all Clan Rotary AC/s are bulkier than IS versions.

I do agree that they should generate heat on Aerospace Units. The problem is Heat Sinks weren't introduced until more than a decade later. So we need a primitive heat sink.

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 943
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #6 on: 20 August 2021, 23:53:15 »
Chemical lasers do generate heat on aerospace units, and on mechs without an ICE engine.  Super primitive aerospace has to rely on the free 10 dissipation from the engine since modern heat sinks didn't exist.

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #7 on: 21 August 2021, 12:59:34 »
What?  :o
The chemicals are the ammo. The whole point of standard lasers is that they're ammo free. That's what made them better than Chemical Lasers. And since the chemicals are ammo,  Chemical Lasers suffer ammo explosions like other ammo weapons. You can fluff that as chemicals splashing all over if you want. That's cool. It's still the ammo bin being hit though.

Review the development of Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers.  The Hell's Horses scientists got around the problem of the chemicals' toxicity by storing them in ammo containers.  This is how the Clan Chemical Lasers came to have ammunition.  The whole point of utilizing lasers in our time is because of their lack of ammunition with the laser utilizing the chemicals as a power amplifier.  Nothing was stated about the primitive chemical lasers having an ammunition system of any kind.

Where are you getting that Primitive Chemical Lasers are more massive than the Clan versions? And why do they have to be more massive than Clan versions? After all Clan Rotary AC/s are bulkier than IS versions.

Because they are Primitive, lacking almost 1000 years of material development.    Almost everything Primitive is more massive for its job.  There is no correlation with the Clan Rotary ACs in this at all as the difference in material development between Inner Sphere and Clan are minimal when compared to the difference between what they have and what we have today, to say nothing about their inexperience with building Light ACs in the first place.

Because they DON'T have ammo, so the chemicals they use would have to be incorporated in to the weapon system itself.  It would have some intensive maintenance requirements as a result, but that is not the same thing.

I do agree that they should generate heat on Aerospace Units. The problem is Heat Sinks weren't introduced until more than a decade later. So we need a primitive heat sink.

True, or some primitive cooling system that fills the role.  More massive than the "Standard" Heat Sinks for the results you get.  Not likely included on an individual basis, but like the Targeting Computer increases in size according to the unit's needs.  That compartmentalization comes in to play with the Heat Sink system we're familiar with in the 31st Century.

But that only matters if we're looking at making pre-fusion units.  Redeveloped Primitive Chemical Lasers would likely be supported by the modern "standard" single heat sinks.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #8 on: 21 August 2021, 15:40:08 »
Chemical lasers do generate heat on aerospace units, and on mechs without an ICE engine.  Super primitive aerospace has to rely on the free 10 dissipation from the engine since modern heat sinks didn't exist.

Agreed on Aerospace and Mechs. In regards to Primitive Aerospace, I'm not sure what to make of the dates. In one table it'll say ES in another it says 2110. I'd be okay with calling Heat Sinks before 2022 prototypes. It's what TPTB did with the PPC. Construction of everything besides Space Stations before 2110, I'm not sure about.


Review the development of Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers.  The Hell's Horses scientists got around the problem of the chemicals' toxicity by storing them in ammo containers.  This is how the Clan Chemical Lasers came to have ammunition.  The whole point of utilizing lasers in our time is because of their lack of ammunition with the laser utilizing the chemicals as a power amplifier.  Nothing was stated about the primitive chemical lasers having an ammunition system of any kind.

Review Where? TacOps? 

TO p132
Quote
Chemical lasers were actually the first effective energy weapons able to physically damage relatively robust targets, like solid-fueled missiles and unarmored military vehicles. With the advent of economical fusion engines and refinements in electrically powered lasing mechanisms, however, they were quickly overtaken by a new generation of “fuel-free” laser weapons that have become today’s standard.
Seeking a more weight-economical alternative to vehicle-mounted lasers (which often require power amplifiers on non-fusion units), Clan Hell’s Horses recently returned to the chemical laser concept. Though reliance on chemical “ammunition”(which remains as energetic and highly toxic as the early laser versions) promises to reduce their endurance in combat, the resulting weapons may be mounted on non-fusion vehicles without requiring power packs or heat sinks.


The key points
Quote
a new generation of “fuel-free” laser weapons
That's clearly the old Chemical Lasers being replaced by Standard Lasers. Standard Lasers don't require fuel.

Quote
Though reliance on chemical “ammunition" (which remains as energetic and highly toxic as the early laser versions)
Obviously TO is stating that the old Chemical Lasers used ammo.

So the old primitive Chemical Lasers used Ammo.

Quote
Because they are Primitive, lacking almost 1000 years of material development.    Almost everything Primitive is more massive for its job.  There is no correlation with the Clan Rotary ACs in this at all as the difference in material development between Inner Sphere and Clan are minimal when compared to the difference between what they have and what we have today, to say nothing about their inexperience with building Light ACs in the first place.

Heat Sinks.
Quote
Introduced: Circa 2022
(TMp220)
1 ton, 1 critical slot. Been that way for around 1,129 years. They haven't gotten lighter. We do have DHS that are 3 times as bulky. We have Compact HS that weight twice as much. Standard Heat Sinks? Haven't Changed.

How about all the other equipment with an introdate of Pre-Spaceflight, or Early Spaceflight? Machine Guns? Rifle Cannons? Vehicle Flamers? Vehicle Grenade Launchers? Primitive Rocket Launchers? Fluid Guns? Backhoes? Bridge Layers? There's a large number of items, including weapons, that haven't changed in over a 1,000 years. Why should Chemical Lasers?

As for ACs, I said Rotary Cannons. The Clan version of LACs are called Protomech ACs (PAC) and are lighter than IS versions but they are bulkier. Clan Rotary Autocannons though are just as heavy as IS versions and bulkier. There was less than 15 years between the IS and the later Clan versions. 15 years where items got bulkier in spite of advanced materials. So no not everything gets lighter and smaller with time.


Quote
Because they DON'T have ammo, so the chemicals they use would have to be incorporated in to the weapon system itself.  It would have some intensive maintenance requirements as a result, but that is not the same thing.

TacOps says otherwise.

No, we don't know how heavy or big the old Chemical Lasers were but we do know they used ammo. We also know they were used to clear minefields and shoot down ICBMs. We also don't know whether or not Clan Scientists drew up completely new plans for chemical lasers or went with existing plans. For all we know, Clan Chemical Lasers are Tech E only because they have more ammo per ton. Plus Clan Chemical Laser's stats, aside from ammo, completely matching IS Standard Laser would be a big coincidence if Clan Scientists drew up plans with new weapons. 

Quote
True, or some primitive cooling system that fills the role.  More massive than the "Standard" Heat Sinks for the results you get.  Not likely included on an individual basis, but like the Targeting Computer increases in size according to the unit's needs.  That compartmentalization comes in to play with the Heat Sink system we're familiar with in the 31st Century.

But that only matters if we're looking at making pre-fusion units.  Redeveloped Primitive Chemical Lasers would likely be supported by the modern "standard" single heat sinks.

I don't think primitive heat sinks have to be that massive. For all we know they're just prototypes of the one that came out around 2022. It worked with Prototype PPCs. Why not Heat Sinks?

Agreed :thumbsup: I'd still love to have rules for rocket powered spacecraft though.  :)

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #9 on: 21 August 2021, 19:36:37 »
The key points That's clearly the old Chemical Lasers being replaced by Standard Lasers. Standard Lasers don't require fuel.
 Obviously TO is stating that the old Chemical Lasers used ammo.

No, it says it used fuel, not ammo.  It may sound semantical, but it is a very important difference.  Because we need to ask:  How much fuel?  Did it vary or did they all have the same amount and could be used over such a long period of time that it was as inconsequential as the fuel system for an ICE or Fuel Cell engine (i.e. incorporated in to that system already with no ability to alter it).

One must also consider what was the target damage ability that is required.  They wouldn't be looking at trying to hit what the Clans were expecting as the Terrans would be looking at almost anything.

Vehicle Flamers are noted as utilizing fuel listed as ammo, but those already have separate rules for them and noted as being an exception.

Heat Sinks. (TMp220)

Non sequitor.  You quoted me me talking about the size of the lasers, but then go off on the heat sinks... Why?

1 ton, 1 critical slot. Been that way for around 1,129 years. They haven't gotten lighter. We do have DHS that are 3 times as bulky. We have Compact HS that weight twice as much. Standard Heat Sinks? Haven't Changed.

Can I get a quote on that?  A Sarna author seems to think otherwise, stating, "They have shrunk in size and are now offered in forms with greatly improved efficiency, but the basic principles of heat sinks have not changed."  Sadly, no footnote has been provided as to a source on that.

How about all the other equipment with an introdate of Pre-Spaceflight, or Early Spaceflight? Machine Guns? Rifle Cannons? Vehicle Flamers? Vehicle Grenade Launchers? Primitive Rocket Launchers? Fluid Guns? Backhoes? Bridge Layers? There's a large number of items, including weapons, that haven't changed in over a 1,000 years. Why should Chemical Lasers?

Are they really no different?  Consider the fact that most of those are still based off of old tech resurging in to availability, much like Inner Sphere Endo-Steel is no different from the Star League's Endo-Steel.

Machine Guns aren't affected by the BAR of the armor, so something has obviously changed there.  Bridge layers have to cover for mech travel as well as vehicles so internal changes would be made.

Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers were pretty much built from scratch and (likely) required a higher expected output per mass involved.  No doubt they were shooting to match their own ER Laser's output, but ended up being satisfied with the SSW standard Laser's output for field testing and early deployment.

As for ACs, I said Rotary Cannons. The Clan version of LACs are called Protomech ACs (PAC) and are lighter than IS versions but they are bulkier. Clan Rotary Autocannons though are just as heavy as IS versions and bulkier. There was less than 15 years between the IS and the later Clan versions. 15 years where items got bulkier in spite of advanced materials. So no not everything gets lighter and smaller with time.

The Rotary Autocannon is basically a bunch of Light Autocannons bound to rotate in improve its ability to fire.  Initial development of the Rotary would be based on the principles of the Light Autocannon, which the Clans do not use Mech-sized versions of.  The Protomech AC was delivered in 3073 (and still undergoing trials) while the Clan Rotary was first devloped in 3069.  The Light ACs were prototyping in the 3050s, though released after the Rotary.

Not to mention, you're comparing 15 years to 1000.  The 250 years of Clan development and Inner Sphere degradation improved almost everything across the board that had a match with the original SLDF equipment Kerensky left with.  Just compare what the Clans did with the ER Large Laser in that time.  Improved its damage capacity, reduced its mass, and reduced its bulkiness.

So a Primitive Chemical Laser would likely be weighing in heavier for what it could do than even the Succession Wars could provide for their laser systems.

I don't think primitive heat sinks have to be that massive. For all we know they're just prototypes of the one that came out around 2022. It worked with Prototype PPCs. Why not Heat Sinks?

I never stated how massive they would be.  I just used the Targeting Computer as a reference for mass, such as that you take one number (like total Laser heat output) and divide it by a certain number, and that would be the cooling system's mass.  This would be a purely Vehicular/aerospace cooling system, so slot size doesn't technically have to be a concern any more than the heat sinks are now.

However, if we wanted to look at a Primitive Cooling System for Industrial Mechs, then we would be looking at its bulkiness.

Agreed :thumbsup: I'd still love to have rules for rocket powered spacecraft though.  :)

High Thrust for a massively intensive mass requirement and high fuel consumption rate?  Consider that the Space Shuttle basically had a Max Thrust of 18, but even though its fuel tank had far more volume than it did for that launch, it still only burned for about 8-9 minutes, burning 535,000 gallons/1.5 million pounds (750 tons) of fuel to accomplish this task, and that was a relatively low orbit.

Those are numbers I don't think we need to look at often...  But hey, you do you in that regard.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #10 on: 22 August 2021, 20:06:10 »
No, it says it used fuel, not ammo.  It may sound semantical, but it is a very important difference.  Because we need to ask:  How much fuel?  Did it vary or did they all have the same amount and could be used over such a long period of time that it was as inconsequential as the fuel system for an ICE or Fuel Cell engine (i.e. incorporated in to that system already with no ability to alter it).

Fuel is ammo. I've shown multiple places where the chemicals are referred to as ammunition. Other weapons, flamers, fluid guns, sprayers, also use fuel as ammo.



Quote
One must also consider what was the target damage ability that is required.  They wouldn't be looking at trying to hit what the Clans were expecting as the Terrans would be looking at almost anything.

We're looking at at least shooting down ICBMs which going by ISP3 would be equivalant to a Baracuda capitol missiles.


Quote
Vehicle Flamers are noted as utilizing fuel listed as ammo, but those already have separate rules for them and noted as being an exception.

And as said, and pointed out, fuel is ammo. It is for flamer, fluid guns, spayers, and Chemical Lasers. The Chemicals are referred to as ammunition more than they are as "fuel".


Quote
Non sequitor.  You quoted me me talking about the size of the lasers, but then go off on the heat sinks... Why?

You said things change in 1000 years. I pointed out things that haven't.


Quote
Can I get a quote on that?  A Sarna author seems to think otherwise, stating, "They have shrunk in size and are now offered in forms with greatly improved efficiency, but the basic principles of heat sinks have not changed."  Sadly, no footnote has been provided as to a source on that.

Sarna isn't canon and I have said where it says Heat Sinks were introduced. Tell me where in any of the source materials that says  Heat Sinks have gotten smaller? The only smaller Heat Sinks I know of are Compact Heat Sinks which are heavier. The only improved heat sinks are DHS-Ps and DHS which are bulkier. So Heat Sinks as they are haven't changed since 2022.

Quote
Are they really no different?  Consider the fact that most of those are still based off of old tech resurging in to availability, much like Inner Sphere Endo-Steel is no different from the Star League's Endo-Steel.

Not really. The tech is the same. The stats are the same. They're the same.

Quote
Machine Guns aren't affected by the BAR of the armor, so something has obviously changed there.  Bridge layers have to cover for mech travel as well as vehicles so internal changes would be made.

Which is a problem with the rules, as I and other have pointed out. The damage reduction for Rifles based on BAR is inconsistent with other weapons, especially pre-spaceflight weapons.


Quote
Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers were pretty much built from scratch and (likely) required a higher expected output per mass involved.  No doubt they were shooting to match their own ER Laser's output, but ended up being satisfied with the SSW standard Laser's output for field testing and early deployment.

Source material please. Where does it say that?


Quote
The Rotary Autocannon is basically a bunch of Light Autocannons bound to rotate in improve its ability to fire.  Initial development of the Rotary would be based on the principles of the Light Autocannon, which the Clans do not use Mech-sized versions of.  The Protomech AC was delivered in 3073 (and still undergoing trials) while the Clan Rotary was first devloped in 3069.  The Light ACs were prototyping in the 3050s, though released after the Rotary.

Regardless of which came first, it doesn't change the fact that the most advanced version is actually bulkier than the original.

PACs were introduced in 3073. They were prototyped around 3070.  They don't become common until 3145 but they've been out of the experimental phase and in production since 3073.


Quote
Not to mention, you're comparing 15 years to 1000.  The 250 years of Clan development and Inner Sphere degradation improved almost everything across the board that had a match with the original SLDF equipment Kerensky left with.  Just compare what the Clans did with the ER Large Laser in that time.  Improved its damage capacity, reduced its mass, and reduced its bulkiness.

That is exactly my point. You're saying in 1000 years things get lighter and smaller. Only there is a whole list of items that haven't changed since they were introduced. We've got items that have gotten bulkier. Time does not improve everything.


Quote
So a Primitive Chemical Laser would likely be weighing in heavier for what it could do than even the Succession Wars could provide for their laser systems.

Where is the evidence of that? Considering the heat sink weight for energy weapons, chemical lasers could be heavier but other than as point defense weapons, who'd use them? They'd end up being heavier than Rifle Cannons. It doesn't make sense. On the other hand, we do have examples of Primitive transitioning to Standard.
Ballistics get more ammo. Energy Weapons generate less heat.


Quote
I never stated how massive they would be.  I just used the Targeting Computer as a reference for mass, such as that you take one number (like total Laser heat output) and divide it by a certain number, and that would be the cooling system's mass.  This would be a purely Vehicular/aerospace cooling system, so slot size doesn't technically have to be a concern any more than the heat sinks are now.

However, if we wanted to look at a Primitive Cooling System for Industrial Mechs, then we would be looking at its bulkiness.

Not really. Each unit type handles heat differently. If by bulk we're talking about space used, then BattleMechs with smaller engines have it worse. If we go by sheer weight, then it'd be Support Vehicles who's engines don't come with heat sinks.



Quote
High Thrust for a massively intensive mass requirement and high fuel consumption rate?  Consider that the Space Shuttle basically had a Max Thrust of 18, but even though its fuel tank had far more volume than it did for that launch, it still only burned for about 8-9 minutes, burning 535,000 gallons/1.5 million pounds (750 tons) of fuel to accomplish this task, and that was a relatively low orbit.

Those are numbers I don't think we need to look at often...  But hey, you do you in that regard.

I think BT was a bit more advanced back in the 20th Century in terms of space travel so I'm not sure the numbers would be that bad. Still, I think it'd be interesting to have spacecraft who's operational thrust is limited to minuets or less.

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #11 on: 22 August 2021, 22:46:52 »
Fuel is ammo. I've shown multiple places where the chemicals are referred to as ammunition. Other weapons, flamers, fluid guns, sprayers, also use fuel as ammo.

It can be considered such, and I admitted that.  That being said, where does it state that the fuel was stored in such containers and how limited was the firing rate for the capacity it had?  Without that answer what I'm saying is equitable to what you are saying.

We're looking at at least shooting down ICBMs which going by ISP3 would be equivalant to a Baracuda capitol missiles.

Why?  Where does it state that a Barracuda is equivalent to an ICBM?  An ICBM is only armored for aerodynamics and reentry, nothing else because when the vast majority were designed and built there was no way to intercept them.  A Barracuda was designed with interception in mind because of said interception methods being available.

You said things change in 1000 years. I pointed out things that haven't.

But we have seen things change within 250 years as well, and those Primitive Chemical Lasers were discontinued a very long time ago.

Sarna isn't canon and I have said where it says Heat Sinks were introduced. Tell me where in any of the source materials that says  Heat Sinks have gotten smaller? The only smaller Heat Sinks I know of are Compact Heat Sinks which are heavier. The only improved heat sinks are DHS-Ps and DHS which are bulkier. So Heat Sinks as they are haven't changed since 2022.

I did say that quote was unsupported.  Do you just not like to read certain things?

But counter to that, where does it state that a Single Heat Sink is exactly the same in 2023 as they are in 3025?

Not really. The tech is the same. The stats are the same. They're the same.

An assumption, prove it.  The Machine Gun changed in Clan hands, so there's something wrong there.

Which is a problem with the rules, as I and other have pointed out. The damage reduction for Rifles based on BAR is inconsistent with other weapons, especially pre-spaceflight weapons.

But which also demonstrates some changes going around somewhere.

Source material please. Where does it say that?

Are you saying that the SLDF took off with Primitive Chemical Lasers in their stores?  A weapon system that was extinct before the first Jump Drive was constructed.  I can consider some concepts are possible, but that?  Now, they had the records of it, but they still had to work out construction methods with the technology they had.

Regardless of which came first, it doesn't change the fact that the most advanced version is actually bulkier than the original.

But it's not necessarily more advanced, just made with bulkier materials.  And coming first means a lot in development capabilities, especially when one considers the line of research that lead to those systems being in play.  FedCom/Suns built them from their research in to the Light Autocannon while the Clans reverse-engineered the FedCom/Suns RAC.  And the Clan scientists aren't perfect in reverse-engineering, as the Plasma Cannon can attest.

That is exactly my point. You're saying in 1000 years things get lighter and smaller. Only there is a whole list of items that haven't changed since they were introduced. We've got items that have gotten bulkier. Time does not improve everything.

I said they can.  Why ignore all the Clan equipment?  For every piece of equipment the SLDF took off with, the only thing that didn't change with them is the Single Heat Sink.  Everything else is reduced in weight, size, and/or increased in damage capacity, including the Machine Gun (which actually covers a LOT of territory and concepts).

Where is the evidence of that? Considering the heat sink weight for energy weapons, chemical lasers could be heavier but other than as point defense weapons, who'd use them? They'd end up being heavier than Rifle Cannons. It doesn't make sense. On the other hand, we do have examples of Primitive transitioning to Standard.
Ballistics get more ammo. Energy Weapons generate less heat.

Already given the evidence in the changes that the Clans made with SLDF equipment, and they did that in a quarter of the time we're talking about.

Therefore if the Clans can change a 5 ton/2 slot ER Large Laser that does 8 damage in to a 4 ton/1 slot ER Large Laser that does 10 damage in less than 250 years, how much improvement in laser systems would the fusion-powered Large Laser be over a Primitive Chemical Laser, especially when factoring in fuel requirements?

Not really. Each unit type handles heat differently. If by bulk we're talking about space used, then BattleMechs with smaller engines have it worse. If we go by sheer weight, then it'd be Support Vehicles who's engines don't come with heat sinks.

You didn't really point out where I was wrong.

The bulkiness would not be considered for a Vehicle any more than Heat Sinks are now, but the mass would be.

A Mech, be it Industrial or Battle, DOES have to take in to consideration the bulkiness of gear. 

Considering that Heat Sink tech had been around that no one would have used a Primitive Cooling System with any Mech at all when they were first constructed, I don't think it would normally be a consideration.  It would if someone tried to resurrect it, but those would be strange circumstances where you could build myomer but not heat sinks.

I think BT was a bit more advanced back in the 20th Century in terms of space travel so I'm not sure the numbers would be that bad. Still, I think it'd be interesting to have spacecraft who's operational thrust is limited to minuets or less.

Possibly.  The first operational fusion reactors was apparently brought online this year in the BTU.  While we do have fusion reactors today, they are so inefficient that their output is far lower than their input so very unsustainable.

I think the only people who would want that type of spacecraft are so primitive they literally do not have fusion technology or it is literally an escape pod or boarding torpedo.  Anything else is so impractical when compared to the efficiency of fusion systems that it would actually hurt them more than help them.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #12 on: 23 August 2021, 12:17:11 »
It can be considered such, and I admitted that.  That being said, where does it state that the fuel was stored in such containers and how limited was the firing rate for the capacity it had?  Without that answer what I'm saying is equitable to what you are saying.

Quote
Chemical Laser ammunition must be installed in full-ton lots for all units except ProtoMechs. When mounting Chemical Lasers on ProtoMechs, ammunition may be purchased at a per-shot rate

Quote
The ammo for Chemical Lasers follows normal ammo explosion rules for critical hits and heat, inflicting damage equal to weapon times the remaining shots in the ammo slot (affected by CASE or CASE II as normal).

Ammo goes in ammo bins. The only weapons and ammo that are integrated all in one "unit" are Rocket Launchers, Vehicle Grenade Launchers, A/B/M Pods, and infantry weapons when mounted in small vehicles.


Quote
Why?  Where does it state that a Barracuda is equivalent to an ICBM?  An ICBM is only armored for aerodynamics and reentry, nothing else because when the vast majority were designed and built there was no way to intercept them.  A Barracuda was designed with interception in mind because of said interception methods being available.

ISP:3p106
Quote
Each planet in the Alexandrian Covenant maintains at least
one firebase capable of Surface-to-Orbit attacks (see pp. 109-110,
Strategic Operations). These surface-to-orbit batteries are derived
from older technology, but perform in gameplay in the same
manner as a Barracuda capital missile.

It doesn't say ICBM, explicitly, but ICBMs are older technology. ICBMs would fit the description of Capitol Missiles and could conduct surface to orbit attacks. With the lack of any other information, this is what I'm going by. If new info becomes available, that may change.



Quote
But we have seen things change within 250 years as well, and those Primitive Chemical Lasers were discontinued a very long time ago.

I did say that quote was unsupported.  Do you just not like to read certain things?

That doesn't mean that everything changes, or that the changes are massive. You're proposal completely ignores how Chemical Lasers work, in canon, and you keep insisting on it even when I pointed out where it says otherwise. 


Quote
But counter to that, where does it state that a Single Heat Sink is exactly the same in 2023 as they are in 3025?

Why would I presume heat sinks have changed since 2022? TechManual says when they were introduced, how much they weigh, how many slots they take, and how much heat the remove.


Quote
An assumption, prove it.  The Machine Gun changed in Clan hands, so there's something wrong there.

There is no assumption. Inner Sphere MGs were introduced Pre-Spaceflight. Clan MGs were prototyped  around 2821 and introduced in 2825. It says so in TechManual and in Interstellar Operations. Even Tactical Operations says the same about Pre-Spaceflight items.

See the chart in Interstellar Operations p 118
Quote
Weapon System     Prototype    Production
Machine Gun              NA*       Pre-Spaceflight*
*These items were perfected to modern standards prior to interstellar space travel and thus have no Prototype phase.

Quote
But which also demonstrates some changes going around somewhere.

It demonstrates that TPTB went overboard in making sure Rifle Cannons are inferior to Autocannons.


Quote
Are you saying that the SLDF took off with Primitive Chemical Lasers in their stores?  A weapon system that was extinct before the first Jump Drive was constructed.  I can consider some concepts are possible, but that?  Now, they had the records of it, but they still had to work out construction methods with the technology they had.

Where do you get the idea that primitive chemical lasers went extinct before the first jump drive was constructed? Chemical Lasers were used to shoot down missiles during the Second Soviet Civil War. That was 2011-2014. The first Jumpship started being build in 2103 and the first jump was in 2107. (Dropships and Jumpships p 9) That's nearly a century, after, Primitive Chemical Lasers were introduced and used in combat. Primitive Chemical Lasers would have continued to be in use until replaced by Standard Lasers. That wouldn't have been after the 2320. And going by other weapons, they'd of lingered on for a while after that. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if there were plenty of examples in museums during the Star League. After all Crippen station, where those lasers were installed, became a museum and lasted until the Star League Civil War.

Also, not all recovered technology goes through a prototype phase. The Narc Missile Beacon didn't. If it did, any changes were so small that the stats didn't change. The only thing for sure that says Clan Chemical Lasers are different from Primitive versions is their Tech Rating. For all we know, that's simply the ammo being increased. Yes, the older versions may be heavier but if they're too heavy, who'd use them for anything other than Point Defense? And when they were used, Rocket powered spacecraft were still a thing. Weight is very critical when so much fuel is needed.


Quote
But it's not necessarily more advanced, just made with bulkier materials.  And coming first means a lot in development capabilities, especially when one considers the line of research that lead to those systems being in play.  FedCom/Suns built them from their research in to the Light Autocannon while the Clans reverse-engineered the FedCom/Suns RAC.  And the Clan scientists aren't perfect in reverse-engineering, as the Plasma Cannon can attest.

Clan weapons and equipment are either the same weight and crits as IS versions or they're lighter and smaller, with the exception of their Rotaries. Even their Plasma Cannon weighs half as much.


Quote
I said they can.  Why ignore all the Clan equipment?  For every piece of equipment the SLDF took off with, the only thing that didn't change with them is the Single Heat Sink.  Everything else is reduced in weight, size, and/or increased in damage capacity, including the Machine Gun (which actually covers a LOT of territory and concepts).

I'm not. I'm pointing out that there's a lot of things that haven't changed. More than that has really. All the industrial equipment hasn't changed. Standard Mechs, Vehicles, Aerospace, haven't changed. Engines, Structures, Cockpits, Sensors, Life Support all the same. Tube Artillery, the same. Artillery Cannons, Mech Jump Packs/Drop Packs, the same. Everything with a Tech Base of IS/Clan is the same. For all we know, Clan Scientists just built according to the old plans, saw they worked and sent them to production. The only thing that says they're "advanced" is their Tech Rating and I'm not putting a lot into that. Cruise Missiles are Pre-Spaceflight Tech (Tech B) but are listed as Tech E. Yes, the fluff says modern versions are based on heavily modified ARROW IVs but really? A 40 ton increase for the launcher with the missile weighing 25 tons compared to 200 kg? That's like modifying the FT-17 in to a Maus. 



Quote
Already given the evidence in the changes that the Clans made with SLDF equipment, and they did that in a quarter of the time we're talking about.

Therefore if the Clans can change a 5 ton/2 slot ER Large Laser that does 8 damage in to a 4 ton/1 slot ER Large Laser that does 10 damage in less than 250 years, how much improvement in laser systems would the fusion-powered Large Laser be over a Primitive Chemical Laser, especially when factoring in fuel requirements?

Actually, the Clans didn't go from the Large laser to Clan ER Large Laser. The Clans improved on the Standard Large Laser and the SLDF ER Large Laser. The Improved Large Laser is only 1 ton lighter and 1 crit smaller than the Standard version. No other changes. Their ER Laser is also lighter and smaller by the same amount with a bit more damage and range. They did not go from Standard Large Laser to Clan ER Large Laser.

Going from Chemical Laser to Standard Laser trades the fuel/ammo requirement for increased heat. Maybe the lasers got lighter. Maybe not. We don't know. Presuming they're massive is presuming facts not in evidence. There are a lot of facts, and other examples that say that these lasers would not be massive.



Quote

You didn't really point out where I was wrong.

The bulkiness would not be considered for a Vehicle any more than Heat Sinks are now, but the mass would be.

A Mech, be it Industrial or Battle, DOES have to take in to consideration the bulkiness of gear. 

Bulk and weight are two different things. HS and DHS weight the same. DHS are 2-3 times as bulky, depending on the tech.

That is true. Sort of. A Support Vehicle Fusion Engine does not come with Heat Sinks. A Combat Vehicle Fusion Engine does. That is a big difference in weight.

Yes, however, an IndustrialMech does not have to have Heat Sinks. Their need of heat sinks depends on the equipment mounted on them. BattleMechs though need heat sinks to function. The reason is because BattleMechs generate heat while moving while IndustrialMechs do not.


Quote
Considering that Heat Sink tech had been around that no one would have used a Primitive Cooling System with any Mech at all when they were first constructed, I don't think it would normally be a consideration.  It would if someone tried to resurrect it, but those would be strange circumstances where you could build myomer but not heat sinks.

That is presumes there is a primitive cooling system beyond prototype heat sinks. I don't know what was used prior to 2022 but prototype heat sinks is the easiest solution. Otherwise, we'll need to create rules for Radiators. Which would be cool but more complicated.


Quote
Possibly.  The first operational fusion reactors was apparently brought online this year in the BTU.  While we do have fusion reactors today, they are so inefficient that their output is far lower than their input so very unsustainable.

I think the only people who would want that type of spacecraft are so primitive they literally do not have fusion technology or it is literally an escape pod or boarding torpedo.  Anything else is so impractical when compared to the efficiency of fusion systems that it would actually hurt them more than help them.

They'd either not have fusion technology or their fusion technology is so primitive that it can't be used in smaller aerospace craft, like fighters.

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6350
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #13 on: 23 August 2021, 13:35:21 »
Solutions:

Ammo -> Liquid Storage (same shots per ton?)

Heat Sinks -> Integrated Cooling (further increase weight for net 0 heat)

Also require Environmental Sealing when vehicles use them..
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society
Nebula Confederation Ships

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #14 on: 23 August 2021, 16:09:16 »
Solutions:

Ammo -> Liquid Storage (same shots per ton?)

Heat Sinks -> Integrated Cooling (further increase weight for net 0 heat)

Also require Environmental Sealing when vehicles use them..


I believe that's only legal for Sprayers and for some reason Coolant Trucks with Vehicle Flamers. If it is legal, it still ends up being so many shots per ton, so same thing really.

We already have rules to build support vehicles and space stations so that doesn't help with engines or heat sinks.  :( Rocket powered vehicles we don't have :( but I would think that Environmental Sealing would be automatic.

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #15 on: 23 August 2021, 17:33:05 »
Ammo goes in ammo bins. The only weapons and ammo that are integrated all in one "unit" are Rocket Launchers, Vehicle Grenade Launchers, A/B/M Pods, and infantry weapons when mounted in small vehicles.

So with that precedent, why would Primitive Chemical Lasers also not fit that scheme, especially when one considers that Vehicle fuel systems are also integrated in to the engine?  Without knowing how long they could fire without addressing their fuel situation, it is only speculation on whether or not they had an integrated fuel or not.

It doesn't say ICBM, explicitly, but ICBMs are older technology. ICBMs would fit the description of Capitol Missiles and could conduct surface to orbit attacks. With the lack of any other information, this is what I'm going by. If new info becomes available, that may change.

So you are just assuming that those Cold War ICBMs match those Surface to Space missile systems.  Got it.

That doesn't mean that everything changes, or that the changes are massive. You're proposal completely ignores how Chemical Lasers work, in canon, and you keep insisting on it even when I pointed out where it says otherwise. 

Actually the only Chemical Lasers we actually have in canon is the hybrid system that the Hell's Horses developed which require delivering fuel in an ammo-like system.  So I am not ignoring how they work in canon as there is nothing there.  I did ignore your interpretation of it, though, mostly because of how lasers work in our day where the power and heat are the biggest hindrances rather then the reactive system used to catalyze the system.

Why would I presume heat sinks have changed since 2022? TechManual says when they were introduced, how much they weigh, how many slots they take, and how much heat the remove.

You are presuming they haven't, as the TechManual only considers it from a modern perspective, not historical.  Not to mention, the bulkiness of heat sinks isn't even notable until they are installed in Mechs.

There is no assumption. Inner Sphere MGs were introduced Pre-Spaceflight. Clan MGs were prototyped  around 2821 and introduced in 2825. It says so in TechManual and in Interstellar Operations. Even Tactical Operations says the same about Pre-Spaceflight items.

So ignoring the Clan development allows you to assume they haven't changed in 1000 years.

See the chart in Interstellar Operations p 118
It demonstrates that TPTB went overboard in making sure Rifle Cannons are inferior to Autocannons.

Not necessarily (though I agree with the sentiment), especially when one considers just how much HAS changed.

Where do you get the idea that primitive chemical lasers went extinct before the first jump drive was constructed? Chemical Lasers were used to shoot down missiles during the Second Soviet Civil War. That was 2011-2014. The first Jumpship started being build in 2103 and the first jump was in 2107. (Dropships and Jumpships p 9) That's nearly a century, after, Primitive Chemical Lasers were introduced and used in combat. Primitive Chemical Lasers would have continued to be in use until replaced by Standard Lasers. That wouldn't have been after the 2320. And going by other weapons, they'd of lingered on for a while after that. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if there were plenty of examples in museums during the Star League. After all Crippen station, where those lasers were installed, became a museum and lasted until the Star League Civil War.

Let me quote the TechManual's first paragraph:
"With the advent of economical fusion engines and refinements in electrically powered lasing mechanisms, however, they were quickly overtaken by a new generation of “fuel-free” laser weapons that have become today’s standard."

Now that doesn't necessarily mean they were extinct, per se, but they definitely were going dodo by the first Jump in the Sol system as the first efficient Fusion generator was in 2021, almost a hundred years before.

And just because they might be in a museum on Terra doesn't mean they were loaded on to Kerensky's Exodus Fleet, "just in case".  In fact, common sense would dictate they be left behind because data is very cheap to store, mass-wise.

Also, not all recovered technology goes through a prototype phase. The Narc Missile Beacon didn't. If it did, any changes were so small that the stats didn't change. The only thing for sure that says Clan Chemical Lasers are different from Primitive versions is their Tech Rating. For all we know, that's simply the ammo being increased. Yes, the older versions may be heavier but if they're too heavy, who'd use them for anything other than Point Defense? And when they were used, Rocket powered spacecraft were still a thing. Weight is very critical when so much fuel is needed.

And was I suggesting that they would be too heavy?  You're being rather hyperbolic in this.  I was only saying they were heavier.

A higher tech rating could also just indicate the much safer ammo-feeding system as well.

Clan weapons and equipment are either the same weight and crits as IS versions or they're lighter and smaller, with the exception of their Rotaries. Even their Plasma Cannon weighs half as much.

And the Rotaries and the Plasma Cannons are the example where their reverse-engineering didn't work as well as the improvements they applied to the SLDF's equipment.  While the Plasma Cannon weighs half as much as the Plasma Rifle, it just doesn't provide the same firepower at all.

I'm not. I'm pointing out that there's a lot of things that haven't changed. More than that has really. All the industrial equipment hasn't changed. Standard Mechs, Vehicles, Aerospace, haven't changed. Engines, Structures, Cockpits, Sensors, Life Support all the same. Tube Artillery, the same. Artillery Cannons, Mech Jump Packs/Drop Packs, the same. Everything with a Tech Base of IS/Clan is the same. For all we know, Clan Scientists just built according to the old plans, saw they worked and sent them to production. The only thing that says they're "advanced" is their Tech Rating and I'm not putting a lot into that. Cruise Missiles are Pre-Spaceflight Tech (Tech B) but are listed as Tech E. Yes, the fluff says modern versions are based on heavily modified ARROW IVs but really? A 40 ton increase for the launcher with the missile weighing 25 tons compared to 200 kg? That's like modifying the FT-17 in to a Maus. 

The mass of those old system may be registered the same and accomplish the same function, but there are a lot of little things that are missed in this generalization that would be noticeable in universe if you compared them side-by-side.

Actually they couldn't have built according to the old plans AND add a feeding system in to it at the same time.  That's like taking the plans of a 1965 Ford Mustang and then putting a modern hybrid engine in it.  It took them about 2 years to reach prototype stage with these Chemical Lasers according to Tactical Ops.

And then there is there is the consideration that they would want its energy output to match their current ER lasers, which would require figuring out how to improve on their output.  What was released would likely be a compromise between what the Primitives could output, accepting the "Standard" laser level, when they couldn't match their more advanced fusion-powered systems.

Actually, the Clans didn't go from the Large laser to Clan ER Large Laser. The Clans improved on the Standard Large Laser and the SLDF ER Large Laser. The Improved Large Laser is only 1 ton lighter and 1 crit smaller than the Standard version. No other changes. Their ER Laser is also lighter and smaller by the same amount with a bit more damage and range. They did not go from Standard Large Laser to Clan ER Large Laser.

Nor did I say they did.
"...if the Clans can change a 5 ton/2 slot ER Large Laser that does 8 damage in to a 4 ton/1 slot ER Large Laser that does 10 damage in less than 250 years..."  That's the progression from what the SLDF left with to what they started Operation Revival with.

Going from Chemical Laser to Standard Laser trades the fuel/ammo requirement for increased heat. Maybe the lasers got lighter. Maybe not. We don't know. Presuming they're massive is presuming facts not in evidence. There are a lot of facts, and other examples that say that these lasers would not be massive.

That is only the case with the Hell's Horses systems.  Without information on the PCLs, you're making up the rest.

And I was suggesting the likelihood that they would be more massive, and for every example you gave, there are examples otherwise that you dismiss.

Bulk and weight are two different things. HS and DHS weight the same. DHS are 2-3 times as bulky, depending on the tech.

Why are you restating things I have stated as if I didn't state them?

That is presumes there is a primitive cooling system beyond prototype heat sinks. I don't know what was used prior to 2022 but prototype heat sinks is the easiest solution. Otherwise, we'll need to create rules for Radiators. Which would be cool but more complicated.

There would have to be some kind of primitive cooling system for the modular heat sink system to be developed from especially if PCLs are pre-spaceflight.  Either the cooling system would need to be an integrated in to the mounted unit or integrated in to the weapon system itself.  Since increasing the weapon's mass doesn't make sense with the construction paradigm of the game, having it integrate in to the unit as its own part makes the most sense.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #16 on: 24 August 2021, 13:09:52 »
So with that precedent, why would Primitive Chemical Lasers also not fit that scheme, especially when one considers that Vehicle fuel systems are also integrated in to the engine?  Without knowing how long they could fire without addressing their fuel situation, it is only speculation on whether or not they had an integrated fuel or not.

Those weapons are single shot. Chemical Lasers were used in space as point defense weapons. Would you trust single shot weapons could shoot down nukes aimed at your cities? Would you trust them knowing how much time and effort it will take to get replacements up to the station to replace those weapons?



Quote
So you are just assuming that those Cold War ICBMs match those Surface to Space missile systems.  Got it.

In the absence of any other information, yes. I am presuming they are.


Quote
Actually the only Chemical Lasers we actually have in canon is the hybrid system that the Hell's Horses developed which require delivering fuel in an ammo-like system.  So I am not ignoring how they work in canon as there is nothing there.  I did ignore your interpretation of it, though, mostly because of how lasers work in our day where the power and heat are the biggest hindrances rather then the reactive system used to catalyze the system.

What hybrid system?
Canon clearly states that Chemical Lasers use ammunition.


Quote
You are presuming they haven't, as the TechManual only considers it from a modern perspective, not historical.  Not to mention, the bulkiness of heat sinks isn't even notable until they are installed in Mechs.

TMp287
Quote
INTRODUCTION AND EXTINCTION DATES
In addition to the general Availability Ratings, all items also
present up to three dates (years) for the Inner Sphere and the
Clans, respectively. These dates note when the items or components were first introduced in a final production-quality
form (and which faction introduced them).
IOp33
Quote
Production (Faction): Production items have entered a phase where they have been approved for general manufacture, but are still considered proprietary to the producing faction(s) and their allies. At this point, the items are no longer in a “prototype” format, but instead use their “final” in-game rules.

TMp220
Quote
HEAT SINKS
Introduced: Circa 2022 (Western Alliance, Terra)

Heat Sinks have an introduction date. The rules clearly state items with an introduction date are in their "final form". The rules state Heat Sinks haven't changed.

Quote
So ignoring the Clan development allows you to assume they haven't changed in 1000 years.

I'm not ignoring anything. The Clans have "improved" something. They haven't "improved" a lot more.


Quote
Not necessarily (though I agree with the sentiment), especially when one considers just how much HAS changed.

It makes less sense when you consider how much things don't change.


Quote
Let me quote the TechManual's first paragraph:
"With the advent of economical fusion engines and refinements in electrically powered lasing mechanisms, however, they were quickly overtaken by a new generation of “fuel-free” laser weapons that have become today’s standard."

Now that doesn't necessarily mean they were extinct, per se, but they definitely were going dodo by the first Jump in the Sol system as the first efficient Fusion generator was in 2021, almost a hundred years before.

And just because they might be in a museum on Terra doesn't mean they were loaded on to Kerensky's Exodus Fleet, "just in case".  In fact, common sense would dictate they be left behind because data is very cheap to store, mass-wise.

What page in TechManual is that quote from? It looks more like a quote from TacOps. Fusion Engines were introduced in 2026. Those "fuel-free" lasers weren't prototyped until 2290 for the Small and Medium Lasers and 2306 for the Large Laser. That's about 300 years later. That's a lot of time for Primitive Chemical Lasers to be used.

I also didn't say that Kerensky would take working examples. Just that it's possible they had survived that long.




Quote
And was I suggesting that they would be too heavy?  You're being rather hyperbolic in this.  I was only saying they were heavier.

You said they were bulkier and more massive. That isn't heavier. That's a lot heavier.


Quote
A higher tech rating could also just indicate the much safer ammo-feeding system as well.

Maybe but where does it say that ammo-feed systems have gotten better?


Quote
And the Rotaries and the Plasma Cannons are the example where their reverse-engineering didn't work as well as the improvements they applied to the SLDF's equipment.  While the Plasma Cannon weighs half as much as the Plasma Rifle, it just doesn't provide the same firepower at all.

So why would Clan Chemical Lasers be better than Primitive ones?


Quote
The mass of those old system may be registered the same and accomplish the same function, but there are a lot of little things that are missed in this generalization that would be noticeable in universe if you compared them side-by-side.

Like what? Cooling connections for Mechs? Clan Jade Falcon's versions looking a bit different than Clan Hell's Horses? They're functionally and stat wise the same. If they followed old blueprints exactly, then they'd be exactly the same.



Quote
Actually they couldn't have built according to the old plans AND add a feeding system in to it at the same time.  That's like taking the plans of a 1965 Ford Mustang and then putting a modern hybrid engine in it.  It took them about 2 years to reach prototype stage with these Chemical Lasers according to Tactical Ops.

What? Chemical Lasers are ammo using weapons. They have feed systems. It doesn't matter how old they are or when they were built.

Actually it took 2 years do go from research and development to prototype and production. The prototype is the production version. If it isn't, where's the production version?


Quote
And then there is there is the consideration that they would want its energy output to match their current ER lasers, which would require figuring out how to improve on their output.  What was released would likely be a compromise between what the Primitives could output, accepting the "Standard" laser level, when they couldn't match their more advanced fusion-powered systems.

We don't know any of that. What Clan ammo using weapon does more damage than their IS versions? Sure they may want better range and damage but they're still going to be constrained by the performance of the ammo. Clan Scientists would know that.



Quote
Nor did I say they did.
"...if the Clans can change a 5 ton/2 slot ER Large Laser that does 8 damage in to a 4 ton/1 slot ER Large Laser that does 10 damage in less than 250 years..."  That's the progression from what the SLDF left with to what they started Operation Revival with.

Apologies. It read as if you did. But have you thought that the Improved Large Laser is 1 ton lighter and 1 crit smaller than the Standard Large Laser? Chemical Lasers match IS Standard Lasers in performance. If the Clans improved Chemical Lasers wouldn't they match their Improved Laser's performance? Or are you saying that the Primitive Chemical Large Laser weighed 6 tons? That would be okay, really. Heavier but not "massively" so.

Quote
That is only the case with the Hell's Horses systems.  Without information on the PCLs, you're making up the rest.

And I was suggesting the likelihood that they would be more massive, and for every example you gave, there are examples otherwise that you dismiss.

It'd be that way for all Clan Chemical Lasers. I'm also not making up anything. It's all right there in TacOps p132.
Quote
Seeking a more weight-economical alternative to vehicle-mounted lasers (which often require power amplifiers on non-fusion units), Clan Hell’s Horses recently returned to the chemical laser concept. Though reliance on chemical “ammunition” (which remains as energetic and highly toxic as the early laser versions) promises to reduce their endurance in combat, the resulting weapons may be mounted on non-fusion vehicles without requiring power packs or heat sinks.

All those heat sinks and power amplifiers are being replaced by reliance ammunition. A Standard Large Laser weighs 13.5 tons with heat sinks and power amplifiers. A Chemical Large Laser weighs 6 tons with ammo. More if more ammo is desired. That is a huge trade in weight from heat and power to for ammo dependence.


Quote
Why are you restating things I have stated as if I didn't state them?

If I am, it's because what you posted reads as if you were.


Quote
There would have to be some kind of primitive cooling system for the modular heat sink system to be developed from especially if PCLs are pre-spaceflight.  Either the cooling system would need to be an integrated in to the mounted unit or integrated in to the weapon system itself.  Since increasing the weapon's mass doesn't make sense with the construction paradigm of the game, having it integrate in to the unit as its own part makes the most sense.


We already know how units are made then. We've got rules to make them so we can't change that. I do think that there should be some kind of cooling system. I'm thinking a prototype heat sink with the same stats but higher cost makes the most sense. After all if the Prototype PPC can be used for 20 years, why not a prototype heat sink?

There is something else to consider. The largest class of laser used for Point Defense are Small Lasers. It could be that the Clan "improvements" over Primitive Chemical Lasers were increased ammo and the additions of Medium and Large classes. I think that would be kind of odd that there wouldn't be other classes though.

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #17 on: 25 August 2021, 20:32:22 »
Those weapons are single shot. Chemical Lasers were used in space as point defense weapons. Would you trust single shot weapons could shoot down nukes aimed at your cities? Would you trust them knowing how much time and effort it will take to get replacements up to the station to replace those weapons?

Infantry weapons are single shot?  That's interesting to know.  Now, about the fuel that ICE and Fuel Cell Engines use?

In the absence of any other information, yes. I am presuming they are.

You mean the absence of ANY information.  The job of a Surface to Space missile  in an age of Warships is constructed VERY differently from an ICBM designed when the things could not be intercepted.

What hybrid system?
Canon clearly states that Chemical Lasers use ammunition.

Hybrid system in that the Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers utilize a shell system, while what fuel that was provided for the Primitive Chemical Lasers did no such thing.  I assume there was a pump system involved, but you haven't provided a case where any fuel system of the PCL wasn't integrated with the weapon or need to not be.

Heat Sinks have an introduction date. The rules clearly state items with an introduction date are in their "final form". The rules state Heat Sinks haven't changed.

That's odd when we both know that there are other things which do not fit that category (i.e. Clan equipment).  Also note that these are for our in-game rules.  That doesn't mean that they haven't changed in-universe.  Heck, the capacity for Double Heat Sinks and Compact Heat Sinks demonstrates changes in the system that were not possible in almost 1000 years.  They may not be strong enough to be noticeable at the scale Battletech construction started with (i.e. measured in 1/2 tons and their slot size), standards changed (in-universe, i.e. like 1 possibly Heat point in 3145 was 10 Heat to 2021) or maybe the authors didn't consider it necessary to cover all those changes.

I'm not ignoring anything. The Clans have "improved" something. They haven't "improved" a lot more.

Examples, please.  The only SLDF combat equipment that hasn't been changed, aside from the Single Heat Sink, is Warship-scale tech, and they really don't focus on that much at all.

What page in TechManual is that quote from? It looks more like a quote from TacOps. Fusion Engines were introduced in 2026. Those "fuel-free" lasers weren't prototyped until 2290 for the Small and Medium Lasers and 2306 for the Large Laser. That's about 300 years later. That's a lot of time for Primitive Chemical Lasers to be used.

You're right, it was TacOps, I had both open, and thought I was looking at one instead of the other.

First Military Fusion Engine is listed as 2021 in the TechManual copy I have.  And those lasers you're referring to are the Standard Lasers.  We have no information on any "primitive" lasers that may have existed between them.

I also didn't say that Kerensky would take working examples. Just that it's possible they had survived that long.

But you were talking as if the Hell's Horses had working samples to build off of, which would mean that Kerensky took them on the Exodus with them.  Unless they managed to secure them from the Invasion Clans who sent them back home for some reason, that is the only way they could get it.

You said they were bulkier and more massive. That isn't heavier. That's a lot heavier.

4 tons is a lot of mass.  5 tons is more massive.  The key root word of massive is "mass".  "More" indicates that there was more of it.  We're looking at the mass of the weapon for tonnage, not its volume.  Volume is what is considered for bulk.  If the term "massive" was to be taken as a dramatic increase, the statement would have read, "massively more heavy" instead of "more massive".

Maybe but where does it say that ammo-feed systems have gotten better?

Where does it say it didn't?

So why would Clan Chemical Lasers be better than Primitive ones?

Already answered this.  To be as desirable as possible, they would be using their own lasers as a target point for output.  Apparently they weren't able to reach that point as they came up with as they settled for the "Standard" level of output for their Chemical Lasers.  They already made some changes, and I doubt they bothered resurrecting old manufacturing techniques to reproduce low-quality (relatively speaking) parts for this purpose.  As you pointed out, the Clan RAC utilized Endo-Steel in its construction while the Feds did not.  There is about 1000 years of material development that would be involved that goes in to make Clan Lasers so much more powerful.

For our game purposes, those stats were probably used for consistency and balance consideration.

Like what? Cooling connections for Mechs? Clan Jade Falcon's versions looking a bit different than Clan Hell's Horses? They're functionally and stat wise the same. If they followed old blueprints exactly, then they'd be exactly the same.

And what says they followed the old blueprints exactly?  There are numerous examples of different weapons operating differently between manufacturers IN UNIVERSE, such as a Large Laser that builds up more heat (Amdecker 300), an Autocannon that is more difficult to service (Luxor D-series AC/10), and so on.

And yes, Heat Sinks would need to be changed to suit Battlemechs due to the centuries of use between them.

What? Chemical Lasers are ammo using weapons. They have feed systems. It doesn't matter how old they are or when they were built.

How effective would putting a fuel-cell in to the tank of your petrol-using car?  That is what you are equating in this statement.  This is most definitely canon that they changed the system to accept shells of the fuel.  The mass of the empty shells would be quite different than a big fuel tank would be, and moving shells is far different than moving a chemical without a shell.

Now it could be just a dead heat in equality for firing duration per ton of fuel, with the Hell's Horses' system being much more efficient and having a higher output, but each individual shell's mass destroys that advantage in stamina.

Actually it took 2 years do go from research and development to prototype and production. The prototype is the production version. If it isn't, where's the production version?

It is listed as "Protoype and Production date", and I said "about".  It could have been closer to 3 years to reach production if development started in January and the first production started in December of their respective years.  Way to be hyperbolic.

We don't know any of that. What Clan ammo using weapon does more damage than their IS versions? Sure they may want better range and damage but they're still going to be constrained by the performance of the ammo. Clan Scientists would know that.

There is a huge difference between throwing a shell or a ball of steel and projecting a coherent beam of energy.

Not to mention, we have NO idea what the output of the "IS versions" was when we literally have zero information on such.  This whole thread was about brainstorming what they would be like.

Apologies. It read as if you did.

You seem to do that a lot, and aren't the least apologetic when you do.  Try slowing down and read what you are quoting instead of just going off.

But have you thought that the Improved Large Laser is 1 ton lighter and 1 crit smaller than the Standard Large Laser? Chemical Lasers match IS Standard Lasers in performance. If the Clans improved Chemical Lasers wouldn't they match their Improved Laser's performance? Or are you saying that the Primitive Chemical Large Laser weighed 6 tons? That would be okay, really.

I was looking about that difference for the Large Laser, or maybe even up to 7 tons if the fuel tank was part of the mass, depending on how primitive we want it to be.  Medium Laser I would probably think would probably be about 1.5 to 2 tons, with the Small approximately 1 ton, but a lot of that could be considered in output as well (i.e. PCL Large would be 5-6 base damage, Medium 3-4, and Small 1-2).

All those heat sinks and power amplifiers are being replaced by reliance ammunition. A Standard Large Laser weighs 13.5 tons with heat sinks and power amplifiers. A Chemical Large Laser weighs 6 tons with ammo. More if more ammo is desired. That is a huge trade in weight from heat and power to for ammo dependence.

Actually the purpose was to just not need the power amplifiers.  Not needing the Heat Sinks was just a bonus (and I think maybe too much of one from a game development purpose).  And the information you're going on is still solely what the Hell's Horses developed, nothing is statted out for the PCL, so any other comparisons are just guess work.  Hence this thread.

If I am, it's because what you posted reads as if you were.

Because maybe you read them too fast and answer what you THINK I wrote, as pointed out earlier with the ER Large Laser example where you thought I mentioned the Large Laser.

We already know how units are made then. We've got rules to make them so we can't change that. I do think that there should be some kind of cooling system. I'm thinking a prototype heat sink with the same stats but higher cost makes the most sense. After all if the Prototype PPC can be used for 20 years, why not a prototype heat sink?

That would be part of the introduced date, and there would have had to have been something cooling those systems for at least 20+ years before that.

There is something else to consider. The largest class of laser used for Point Defense are Small Lasers. It could be that the Clan "improvements" over Primitive Chemical Lasers were increased ammo and the additions of Medium and Large classes. I think that would be kind of odd that there wouldn't be other classes though.

The largest used in Warship combat.  ICBMs are big boys, easily matching the size and mass of an ASF (at least, the US's Minuteman comes in a little over 37 tons), and I doubt they match the speed and electronics systems of a Warship killer like a Barracuda.  So I don't think it would be too much to consider one of the larger models being developed initially, especially if we're thinking about them being mounted in Combat Vehicles or ASF.

Not to mention, it runs counter to your earlier argument about them just developing them as is.
« Last Edit: 25 August 2021, 20:36:37 by Charistoph »
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #18 on: 26 August 2021, 15:12:00 »
Infantry weapons are single shot?  That's interesting to know.  Now, about the fuel that ICE and Fuel Cell Engines use?

Infantry weapons are only used by Infantry/Battle Armor, and Small Support Vehicles. They're not mounted on Space Stations to shoot down missiles.

What about engine fuel? Have you looked in TM?


Quote
You mean the absence of ANY information.  The job of a Surface to Space missile  in an age of Warships is constructed VERY differently from an ICBM designed when the things could not be intercepted.

No. I meant what I said. How do you know missiles are created differently. Are you saying modern Capital Missiles include shields to prevent their being shot down?
ISPp86
Quote
To guard against external threats, the AAF maintains firebases housing crude but effective surface-to-orbit missile silos.
ISPp106
Quote
These surface-to-orbit batteries are derived from older technology, but perform in gameplay in the same manner as a Barracuda capital missile.

That sounds like ICBMs to me. Or are you saying that older technology can't have the same effect as modern? Or are you saying that a missile that can travel thousands of miles can't be used to target units in orbit?



Quote
Hybrid system in that the Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers utilize a shell system, while what fuel that was provided for the Primitive Chemical Lasers did no such thing.  I assume there was a pump system involved, but you haven't provided a case where any fuel system of the PCL wasn't integrated with the weapon or need to not be.

What shell system?
I'm presuming a pump is used to pump the ammo from the ammo bin to the laser where it is consumed generating the laser when fired.



Quote
That's odd when we both know that there are other things which do not fit that category (i.e. Clan equipment).  Also note that these are for our in-game rules.  That doesn't mean that they haven't changed in-universe.  Heck, the capacity for Double Heat Sinks and Compact Heat Sinks demonstrates changes in the system that were not possible in almost 1000 years.  They may not be strong enough to be noticeable at the scale Battletech construction started with (i.e. measured in 1/2 tons and their slot size), standards changed (in-universe, i.e. like 1 possibly Heat point in 3145 was 10 Heat to 2021) or maybe the authors didn't consider it necessary to cover all those changes.

In universe Heat Sinks have weighed 1 ton, taken 1 critical slot, and remove 1 heat since 2022. That's not just game stats. That in universe stats. Brand A may be different from Brand B but any differences as so small as not to be noticeable. Brand A is not .25 tons heavier and takes 2 critical slots, while Brand B weighs .75 tons and takes up 1 critical slot. Their stats are are pretty much identical. 1 ton. 1 critical slot. -1 heat point.


Examples, please.  The only SLDF combat equipment that hasn't been changed, aside from the Single Heat Sink, is Warship-scale tech, and they really don't focus on that much at all.

Really? Take a look at the tables in IO, TM, TO. All the construction rules in IO, TM, TO, SO. I don't think TPTB would appreciate me listing everything here but how about Standard Fusion Engines. They haven't changed since 2470. And of course there's the Standard Heat Sink. Still the same after over 1100 years. The Medium Laser?  We may have gotten alternative versions but we don't have improved versions.

Quote
You're right, it was TacOps, I had both open, and thought I was looking at one instead of the other.

No prob.


Quote
First Military Fusion Engine is listed as 2021 in the TechManual copy I have.  And those lasers you're referring to are the Standard Lasers.  We have no information on any "primitive" lasers that may have existed between them.

Which would have been used on Aerospace craft and most likely had standard heat sink since heat sinks could have been introduced up to 3 years before. So they'd be okay to use lasers. And are you trying to say that there were a set of lasers between the 1990's Chemical Lasers and the 2290's Primitive Prototype Lasers? If so, the only lasers that we have that come between the two are Naval Lasers.


Quote
But you were talking as if the Hell's Horses had working samples to build off of, which would mean that Kerensky took them on the Exodus with them.  Unless they managed to secure them from the Invasion Clans who sent them back home for some reason, that is the only way they could get it.

Considering Kerensky took every Mackie he could find, it wouldn't surprised me if they did have actual physical examples. However, I'm going to go with they went by old research and plans. Which they would have had.


Quote
4 tons is a lot of mass.  5 tons is more massive.  The key root word of massive is "mass".  "More" indicates that there was more of it.  We're looking at the mass of the weapon for tonnage, not its volume.  Volume is what is considered for bulk.  If the term "massive" was to be taken as a dramatic increase, the statement would have read, "massively more heavy" instead of "more massive".

There's also implication. Going from 4 to 5 isn't a lot. Going from 4 to 10 is massive.

Quote
Where does it say it didn't?

If it had, would they weigh so much? Or are you saying that, that's why most Clan weapons are lighter?


Quote
Already answered this.  To be as desirable as possible, they would be using their own lasers as a target point for output.  Apparently they weren't able to reach that point as they came up with as they settled for the "Standard" level of output for their Chemical Lasers.  They already made some changes, and I doubt they bothered resurrecting old manufacturing techniques to reproduce low-quality (relatively speaking) parts for this purpose.  As you pointed out, the Clan RAC utilized Endo-Steel in its construction while the Feds did not.  There is about 1000 years of material development that would be involved that goes in to make Clan Lasers so much more powerful.

Other than Rifle Cannons, which are a complete anomaly, what other ammo using weapon sees an increase in damage with "improved" ammo? SAC/5 5 points, IAC/5 5 points, UAC/5 IS+C 5 points. Where's the improved AC/5 ammo that does 6 points of damage?

And what 1000 years of development? As far as we know, Chemical Lasers haven't been in production since 2320. There hasn't been any further development on them until 3057. Or are you talking about the Clan's using lighter materials? We've seen that they're not always lighter with their Rotary Autocannons.

But let's say they are lighter. That would make the PCLL 6 tons? 7?  What about the Medium and Small Classes?  Should we follow the Clan ER Prototype examples? 1.5 tons for the Medium and increased heat for the Small? I've already suggested using the Primitive Prototype rules for reducing ammo and increasing heat.


Quote
For our game purposes, those stats were probably used for consistency and balance consideration.

Or maybe, that's the best that can be done with Chemical Lasers.

Quote
And what says they followed the old blueprints exactly?  There are numerous examples of different weapons operating differently between manufacturers IN UNIVERSE, such as a Large Laser that builds up more heat (Amdecker 300), an Autocannon that is more difficult to service (Luxor D-series AC/10), and so on.

There isn't anything that says the followed old blueprints exactly. But if you had a choice, follow old blueprints or completely design your own which would you do? Which would enter production sooner?

True. In universe there are variances. Such variances might mean that Clan Jade Falcon Chemical Lasers are more difficult to maintain than Clan Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers. Or it might mean that CHH's CLs are more accurate. Or that CJF's CLs have poor cooling jackets. Their stats don't change though.

Quote
And yes, Heat Sinks would need to be changed to suit Battlemechs due to the centuries of use between them.

That's changing where a bolt might go or a coolant line attaches. That's not changing the heat sinks stats any.


Quote
How effective would putting a fuel-cell in to the tank of your petrol-using car?  That is what you are equating in this statement.  This is most definitely canon that they changed the system to accept shells of the fuel.  The mass of the empty shells would be quite different than a big fuel tank would be, and moving shells is far different than moving a chemical without a shell.

Now it could be just a dead heat in equality for firing duration per ton of fuel, with the Hell's Horses' system being much more efficient and having a higher output, but each individual shell's mass destroys that advantage in stamina.


See the table in TMp127. How much fuel depends on tech level, engine type, fuel type, and how far you want to go on a tank of gas.

What "shells of fuel"? Where in canon does it say Chemical Lasers use "shells"? Where's your source? What book? What page?


Quote
It is listed as "Protoype and Production date", and I said "about".  It could have been closer to 3 years to reach production if development started in January and the first production started in December of their respective years.  Way to be hyperbolic.

You said it took two years to get to the prototype stage. It took two years to get to production. Possibly less if months get involved.


Quote
There is a huge difference between throwing a shell or a ball of steel and projecting a coherent beam of energy.

Not to mention, we have NO idea what the output of the "IS versions" was when we literally have zero information on such.  This whole thread was about brainstorming what they would be like.

So?

True we don't know what the output of the old IS versions were. That does not mean we have zero information about them. I keep providing sources but you keep ignoring them.



Quote
I was looking about that difference for the Large Laser, or maybe even up to 7 tons if the fuel tank was part of the mass, depending on how primitive we want it to be.  Medium Laser I would probably think would probably be about 1.5 to 2 tons, with the Small approximately 1 ton, but a lot of that could be considered in output as well (i.e. PCL Large would be 5-6 base damage, Medium 3-4, and Small 1-2).

If you're including ammo in with the total weight that's what we have now. CLL 6 tons. CML 2 tons. CSL 1.5 tons.


Quote
Actually the purpose was to just not need the power amplifiers.  Not needing the Heat Sinks was just a bonus (and I think maybe too much of one from a game development purpose).  And the information you're going on is still solely what the Hell's Horses developed, nothing is statted out for the PCL, so any other comparisons are just guess work.  Hence this thread.


Um...no. Power Amplifiers are not always required for energy weapons. Heat Sinks are. And the purpose of using Chemical Lasers was to create "a more weight-economical alternative to vehicle-mounted lasers". A Large Laser weighs 5 tons. The Power Amplifier, if required, weighs .5 tons and costs 10,000. The required number of Heat Sinks, if not included, weight 8 tons. Even if they are included, they still costa total of 16,000. There's more weight and money in heat sinks than in power amplifiers. Getting rid of the amplifiers would be the bonus.


Quote
That would be part of the introduced date, and there would have had to have been something cooling those systems for at least 20+ years before that.

What?  Why would there be cooling systems 20+ years before something that needed cooling? Cooling is going to follow heat. Developers say, "This thing is," or "is going to get hot. We should have something to cool it down." and start making that something.
Now I can certainly believe that there were prototype heat sinks before 2022. R&D probably started in the late 80's early 90's just for the Chemical Laser. Would it have the same stats? I don't know but why not?


Quote
The largest used in Warship combat.  ICBMs are big boys, easily matching the size and mass of an ASF (at least, the US's Minuteman comes in a little over 37 tons), and I doubt they match the speed and electronics systems of a Warship killer like a Barracuda.  So I don't think it would be too much to consider one of the larger models being developed initially, especially if we're thinking about them being mounted in Combat Vehicles or ASF.

Not to mention, it runs counter to your earlier argument about them just developing them as is.

Point defense are used by all Aerospace units. The largest class laser used for point defense is small. That includes Chemical Lasers.
The weight of a Barracuda Missile is 30 tons. A White Shark weighs 40 tons. Why couldn't there be an ICBM the same performance as a Barracuda? There were Space Stations then, and they have Capital Scale Armor.
And I said,
Quote
I think that would be kind of odd that there wouldn't be other classes though.
I didn't say that there wouldn't be. It could be that the nations of Earth were satisfied with just having the one laser. It's a bit hard to believe but then stranger things... It could also be that our modern version are exact copies of the originals. That they're Tech E doesn't mean much. Tech E dates back centuries before the Star League.

In the absence of any other information, I think simpler is better. Simplest is use them as is. Want a more "Primitive" feel? Simplest would be to use the Primitive Prototype rules. Want them to have an even more prototype feel? What prototypes compare to production? Generally, a crit or two bulkier and some are a .5 ton heavier and for energy weapons 50% more heat. We shouldn't be trying to re-invent the wheel when we're trying to put inner tubes back in the tires.

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6350
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #19 on: 26 August 2021, 18:00:17 »
Or are you talking about the Clan's using lighter materials? We've seen that they're not always lighter with their Rotary Autocannons.
Clan RACs are not a good example, as those have improved range, so better barrels at the same weight.

 
Quote
But if you had a choice, follow old blueprints or completely design your own which would you do? Which would enter production sooner?
Redesign as the old stuff was taken out of production for a reason.
 
Quote
What "shells of fuel"? Where in canon does it say Chemical Lasers use "shells"? Where's your source? What book? What page?
RED KITE, TRO3150: here they use a loader and not a pump.


Current I would propose a higher tonnage for a Primitive CLs because of lesser materials & integrated cooling.
SCL, Prim: 3 tons (1+2)
MCL, Prim: 7 tons (2+5)
LCL, Prim: 19 tons (7+12)

Using Liquid Storage for ammo, and also requiring Environmental Sealing.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society
Nebula Confederation Ships

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #20 on: 26 August 2021, 20:35:29 »
Infantry weapons are only used by Infantry/Battle Armor, and Small Support Vehicles. They're not mounted on Space Stations to shoot down missiles.

We're talking about weaponry in general in the game, and you said all these weapons are one shot, and included Infantry Weapons in that list.

What about engine fuel? Have you looked in TM?

Where do you track its inclusion in construction?  Oh, yeah, it is integrated in to the engine with a set range.

ISPp86ISPp106
That sounds like ICBMs to me. Or are you saying that older technology can't have the same effect as modern? Or are you saying that a missile that can travel thousands of miles can't be used to target units in orbit?

ICBMs are surface to surface missile, it's part of the name.  They're not designed to be attacking units in space.  They might be able to be reprogrammed to do otherwise, but that would be somewhat challenging as it is very old even now.

And you're missing out on a huge difference between designing something you know CANNOT be intercepted (again, the whole point of ICBM was to go beyond interceptable areas of the time), and something you know WILL be intercepted.  Things like armor or evasion protocols can make a HUGE difference for a ship-killer rather than a rocket-powered artillery wrote on a massive scale.

What shell system?
I'm presuming a pump is used to pump the ammo from the ammo bin to the laser where it is consumed generating the laser when fired.

I read it on Sarna, but I just noticed that it didn't have a proper reference.  Maingunnery provided the reference.

In universe Heat Sinks have weighed 1 ton, taken 1 critical slot, and remove 1 heat since 2022.

Reference.  Keep in mind that the introduction states that it is the FINAL production system for the game, with no mention of any changes that may have happened in primitive times.  Consider all the "Primitive" equipment that the Mackie was listed with when there was no such listed equipment provided for at the time.

Really? Take a look at the tables in IO, TM, TO. All the construction rules in IO, TM, TO, SO. I don't think TPTB would appreciate me listing everything here but how about Standard Fusion Engines. They haven't changed since 2470. And of course there's the Standard Heat Sink. Still the same after over 1100 years. The Medium Laser?  We may have gotten alternative versions but we don't have improved versions.

Ah yes, Standard Fusion Engines, I forgot about those.  Clans haven't use Medium Lasers for almost 2 centuries before Operation Revival.

But all the advanced equipment that was utilized by the SLDF is lighter (less mass), leaner (less bulky), and/or more powerful.  XL Engines and Endo-Steel are leaner.  Ferro-Fibrous Armor is both leaner and lighter.  The Large Laser series and ER PPC fit all 3 of those categories, while the Medium and Small Lasers provide more output.  The ballistic weapons are also lighter, with only the Machine Gun not being leaner (of course, it IS one slot to begin with).  Active Probe and ECM Suite?  Yeah, both leaner and lighter.

Each of these qualify so well that you literally do not see the Standard use of those equipment outside the second-line combat equipment, and even then, it is only the Single Heat Sinks (because Combat Vehicles) and Standard Fusion Engines that exist.

Which would have been used on Aerospace craft and most likely had standard heat sink since heat sinks could have been introduced up to 3 years before. So they'd be okay to use lasers. And are you trying to say that there were a set of lasers between the 1990's Chemical Lasers and the 2290's Primitive Prototype Lasers? If so, the only lasers that we have that come between the two are Naval Lasers.

It very well could have been the Primitive Prototype lasers in one form or another.  Protoyping  can take a while.

Considering Kerensky took every Mackie he could find, it wouldn't surprised me if they did have actual physical examples. However, I'm going to go with they went by old research and plans. Which they would have had.

It would surprise me.  It was so primitive that it would be like considering bringing along a catapult (the ancient siege weapon, not the 'Mech).

There's also implication. Going from 4 to 5 isn't a lot. Going from 4 to 10 is massive.

The implication only was in YOUR head, not in my words.

If it had, would they weigh so much? Or are you saying that, that's why most Clan weapons are lighter?

As the sole reason for lighter Clan ACs?  No.  However better feeding systems could very well be a contributing factor.  And let's face it, a shell-delivery system is safer than a pump and pipe in most cases.

Other than Rifle Cannons, which are a complete anomaly, what other ammo using weapon sees an increase in damage with "improved" ammo? SAC/5 5 points, IAC/5 5 points, UAC/5 IS+C 5 points. Where's the improved AC/5 ammo that does 6 points of damage?

AP ammo and Tandem Charge for two.  Inferno rounds do the exact opposite.

However, the ammo isn't the only thing that contributes to a laser's effectiveness.  There are things like focusing lenses which can alter how much damage those lasers can provide.

And what 1000 years of development? As far as we know, Chemical Lasers haven't been in production since 2320. There hasn't been any further development on them until 3057. Or are you talking about the Clan's using lighter materials? We've seen that they're not always lighter with their Rotary Autocannons.

1000 years of laser and material development.  The Clans didn't bomb themselves in to the stone age setting their tech back 300 years like the Inner Sphere did.  A lot of those developments will easily translate over in to a modern version of a laser system.  Things like the optics which focus the beam as well as housing material that is both lighter and much more compact.  Taking many of the principles utilized in the ER and Pulse Laser ranges and applying them to CLs would see an improvement in efficiency across the board, from mass to waste heat to overall output.

Or maybe, that's the best that can be done with Chemical Lasers.

Possibly, but I'm sure that there was some poor schmuck in 2600 thought that the laser could never be improved in damage, but 200 years later the Clans improved their power by a notable degree.

There isn't anything that says the followed old blueprints exactly. But if you had a choice, follow old blueprints or completely design your own which would you do? Which would enter production sooner?

Depends on the perception.  In this case, I would follow the blueprints for the first test unit, and then see what could be improved from there.  Stopping with just the blueprints is wasteful for the Scientist Caste.

True. In universe there are variances. Such variances might mean that Clan Jade Falcon Chemical Lasers are more difficult to maintain than Clan Hell's Horses Chemical Lasers. Or it might mean that CHH's CLs are more accurate. Or that CJF's CLs have poor cooling jackets. Their stats don't change though.

That depends on if you see a Quirk as a stat...

See the table in TMp127. How much fuel depends on tech level, engine type, fuel type, and how far you want to go on a tank of gas.

Wouldn't matter if you placed an incompatible fuel delivery system in to the mix.  Filling up a petrol tank with fuel cells wouldn't get you very far, and pouring petrol in to a fuel cell repository would be disastrous.

You said it took two years to get to the prototype stage. It took two years to get to production. Possibly less if months get involved.

Go back and read what I said.  I did say it was about 2 years, and for good reason.

The R&D stage is listed in 3057 with no month given.  Prototype stage is listed in 3059, also with no month give. 

If that's all to go on, 2 years is sufficient for the term, with "about" covering the variables.  Because when months get involved we could be looking between 1 year and 3, depending on how it rounds out.  If Development starts in January 3057, but Prototyping ends in December 3059, you're looking at 35 months, which rounds out to 3 years.  However, if one reverses those months with Research beginning in December 3057 and Protyping begins in January of 3059, that's 113 months rounding out to 1 year.  "About 2 years" covers the possible averages without being locked in to a statement.

So?

You don't see the relevance to considering how much firing a beam is different from launching a projectile?

Consider this: How much difference is the damage between an Inner Sphere ER Large Laser and a Clan ER Large Laser?  How much difference is the damage between an Inner Sphere Gauss Rifle and a Clan Gauss Rifle.

True we don't know what the output of the old IS versions were. That does not mean we have zero information about them. I keep providing sources but you keep ignoring them.

Actually, you have provided zero resources on what the PCLs had.  All we KNOW is what the Hell's Horses ended up with and deployed.  You're assuming a universalism because other things have had universalism applied to them (while ignoring how much other things have changed).

Um...no. Power Amplifiers are not always required for energy weapons.

While using an ICE or Fuel Cell engine, name one that isn't a Chemical Laser or a Vehicle Flamer (both of which are treated as ballistic weapons anyway).

Heat Sinks are. And the purpose of using Chemical Lasers was to create "a more weight-economical alternative to vehicle-mounted lasers". A Large Laser weighs 5 tons. The Power Amplifier, if required, weighs .5 tons and costs 10,000. The required number of Heat Sinks, if not included, weight 8 tons. Even if they are included, they still costa total of 16,000. There's more weight and money in heat sinks than in power amplifiers. Getting rid of the amplifiers would be the bonus.

You didn't complete the quote.  "Seeking a more weight-economical alternative to vehicle-mounted lasers (which often require power amplifiers on non-fusion units),"  Heat sinks were not listed as a purpose, but were included as the end result.

What?  Why would there be cooling systems 20+ years before something that needed cooling? Cooling is going to follow heat. Developers say, "This thing is," or "is going to get hot. We should have something to cool it down." and start making that something.

PCLs are dated as pre-spaceflight.  That heat has to go somewhere.  And while the Hell's Horses weapons don't have to take that heat in to account, nothing has been provided which state the PCLs did not.

And trust me when I say, they need it, after working on an assembly line with 4 laser welders in the Phoenix Metro area for 3 years.

Now I can certainly believe that there were prototype heat sinks before 2022. R&D probably started in the late 80's early 90's just for the Chemical Laser. Would it have the same stats? I don't know but why not?

Because they are primitive, perhaps?

Point defense are used by all Aerospace units.

Warship level play as in, not ground-play.

The weight of a Barracuda Missile is 30 tons. A White Shark weighs 40 tons. Why couldn't there be an ICBM the same performance as a Barracuda?

Educate yourself.  Look up what an ICBM actually is designed to do.  Consider its mobility with its limited drive systems.  Consider how much interception the designers considered in its design.

Ship Killer missiles are designed with interception in mind because they go between ships and don't really have a ballistic run like ICBMs are designed to do.

And I said,  I didn't say that there wouldn't be. It could be that the nations of Earth were satisfied with just having the one laser. It's a bit hard to believe but then stranger things... It could also be that our modern version are exact copies of the originals. That they're Tech E doesn't mean much. Tech E dates back centuries before the Star League.

I was providing a supporting argument as to why there would be more more sizes.  If there was only the Small PCL, where would the Medium and Large come from without more development?  Thus considering all three sizes existed (or some equivalent) is more justified if the Hell's Horses just built them to spec.

Considering the development time, I think most of it was in recreating the chemicals "safely", applying their advanced knowledge to the materials and beam attenuation, and inventing the "shell" system than in upscalling from a smaller system.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

DevianID

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 943
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #21 on: 26 August 2021, 23:10:50 »
So addressing some points

1.  Could primitive chemical lasers be larger?  Sure, they don't exist, they can be anything.  The reason I propose they stay the same is to match existing primitive rules, such as primitive rocket launcher systems that are identical save for cost and damage (in the form of a cluster makes.)  I personally love the -3 to advanced armor rule, so I used that.  People who hate that rule will likely prefer a 2/3/5 damage value but again, i love how the -3 works.

2. Primitive chemical lasers on support vehicles.  This one was a good point.  While I consider the primitive chem laser balanced for combat vehicles, as 10 pmcl do 20 versus 14 for an ac20, with the ac20 having massive upside with ammo selection and rapid fire, in the era of support vehicles before 2400 the primitive chem laser is vastly superior to the rifle.  So as a fix for that, borrowing from the thread, primitive chemical lasers on support vehicles require heat sinks.

3. Primitive chemical laser ammo/ton.  Debate about fuel vs ammo doesnt actually matter, we are balancing a weapon here in the fan section so if the weapon is heavier but includes unlimited (or a fixed amount) of shots as part of its massive size, or if the weapon is smaller but has ammo like now, it doesnt matter.  I choose to match the existing weapon--see reason 1--in keeping with the 'keep it simple' paradigm.  That said, the point about primitive autocannons also having reduced ammo/ton was brilliant, and should address some of the complaints about fuel used.  So primitive chenical lasers will have their ammo reduced by the same token that primitive autocannons do.

4.  Chem lasers versus icbm.  I personally would use the Tele operated missiles to represent primitive capital missiles, as besides the new kraken the rest of the Tele missiles were a step backwards tech wise in the fluff.  Small chem lasers are the best point defense damage, so they work.  Medium and large would be useful picking off tele missiles at range, missile command style.  Tele missiles cant cross the interference hex iirc, so they should make for great icbms in gameplay. 

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #22 on: 27 August 2021, 06:06:37 »
Clan RACs are not a good example, as those have improved range, so better barrels at the same weight.

Clan UAC/s vs IS UACs. Clan ER Large Laser vs IS ER Large Laser. and so on. All those weapons got better range and got lighter and smaller. RACs didn't. Plus there's other Clan Weapons that have no improvement over IS versions at all.


Quote
Redesign as the old stuff was taken out of production for a reason.
 RED KITE, TRO3150: here they use a loader and not a pump.

Thanks. However that doesn't mean that the loader isn't a pump. 
Quote
As the chemical lasers do not recoil, the loader was modified to feed through a fixed turret ring. Unfortunately, this system is prone to jam if the loader cycles while the turret is rotated more than sixty degrees off center.

If there's no recoil, where does the casing go?


Quote
Current I would propose a higher tonnage for a Primitive CLs because of lesser materials & integrated cooling.
SCL, Prim: 3 tons (1+2)
MCL, Prim: 7 tons (2+5)
LCL, Prim: 19 tons (7+12)

You forgot the ammo. You're also way heavier than any point defense weapon.

edit
Also remember what craft would have been flying using these weapons. They'd of been powered by chemical rockets. So a lot of weight would have been taken by fuel. Would they of had the weight available for a 20 ton weapon?


Quote
Using Liquid Storage for ammo, and also requiring Environmental Sealing.

Cargo is only available for ammo with Sprayers. Plus you don't get a full ton of ammo with Liquid Cargo. TMp239 (Transport Bays) TMp248  (sprayers)

« Last Edit: 27 August 2021, 08:47:59 by RifleMech »

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #23 on: 27 August 2021, 08:53:26 »
We're talking about weaponry in general in the game, and you said all these weapons are one shot, and included Infantry Weapons in that list.

Read what I said in response to ammo and weapons being integrated.
Ammo goes in ammo bins. The only weapons and ammo that are integrated all in one "unit" are Rocket Launchers, Vehicle Grenade Launchers, A/B/M Pods, and infantry weapons when mounted in small vehicles.

I also said that
Infantry weapons are only used by Infantry/Battle Armor, and Small Support Vehicles. They're not mounted on Space Stations to shoot down missiles.

And those are the weapons we are talking about. Vehicle Scale Weapons. Furthermore, not all infantry weapons are one shot. Not that it matters because they can't be mounted on medium to large vehicles


Quote
Where do you track its inclusion in construction?  Oh, yeah, it is integrated in to the engine with a set range.

No exactly, no.  Combat Vehicles and Mechs have a set range but can be extended with an external fuel tank which takes up space. Support Vehicles and Aerospace craft have to figure the weight of the fuel tanks when designed. More fuel can be added as a refit at the cost of tonnage or external fuel tanks which take space.


Quote
ICBMs are surface to surface missile, it's part of the name.  They're not designed to be attacking units in space.  They might be able to be reprogrammed to do otherwise, but that would be somewhat challenging as it is very old even now.

So? Are you saying someone 1000 years in the future couldn't build and program them to hit targets in space?


Quote
And you're missing out on a huge difference between designing something you know CANNOT be intercepted (again, the whole point of ICBM was to go beyond interceptable areas of the time), and something you know WILL be intercepted.  Things like armor or evasion protocols can make a HUGE difference for a ship-killer rather than a rocket-powered artillery wrote on a massive scale.

The purpose of ICBMs it to hit targets a great distance away. There aren't things like evasion protocols. The armor is equal to the Capital Missile's attack value. You also need to 2 or more Point Defense Weapons to damage it. A Barracuda's "armor" is it's attack value which is 2. Point Defense weapons also do half damage, rounding down.

Edit
Corrected Barracuda damage.





Quote
I read it on Sarna, but I just noticed that it didn't have a proper reference.  Maingunnery provided the reference.

Sarna isn't canon. Maingunner's evidence isn't a whole lot of evidence. The loader could be a pump and the feed system a hose but lets say it isn't. Let's say Chemical Lasers work like the Demolisher's ChemJet Guns. Only there's a problem with that. Lasers don't recoil. Where's the casing go?


Quote
Reference.  Keep in mind that the introduction states that it is the FINAL production system for the game, with no mention of any changes that may have happened in primitive times.  Consider all the "Primitive" equipment that the Mackie was listed with when there was no such listed equipment provided for at the time.

Again. In bold so it's not so easy to miss.

TMp287
Quote
INTRODUCTION AND EXTINCTION DATES
In addition to the general Availability Ratings, all items also
present up to three dates (years) for the Inner Sphere and the
Clans, respectively. These dates note when the items or components were first introduced in a final production-quality
form
(and which faction introduced them).
IOp33
Quote
Production (Faction): Production items have entered a phase where they have been approved for general manufacture, but are still considered proprietary to the producing faction(s) and their allies. At this point, the items are no longer in a “prototype” format, but instead use their “final” in-game rules.

Heat Sinks were introduced in 2022, in their final production form.
That's canon. In game and in universe. As for the Mackie, somethings improved. Some haven't.


Quote
Ah yes, Standard Fusion Engines, I forgot about those.  Clans haven't use Medium Lasers for almost 2 centuries before Operation Revival.

We don't know that the Clans haven't used them. They don't manufacture them but they were using SLDF Equipment at least up until the end of the Jihad when their Caches were running empty.
TMp220
Quote
these “archaic” weapons—every bit as efficient as their Spheroid varieties—may still be found on vintage Clan-owned
Star League units once in a while.
The Clans also use a lot of other "Standard" things. Cockpits. Sensors. Life Support. Standard Armor and Internal Structure. Heat Sinks.



Quote
But all the advanced equipment that was utilized by the SLDF is lighter (less mass), leaner (less bulky), and/or more powerful.  XL Engines and Endo-Steel are leaner.  Ferro-Fibrous Armor is both leaner and lighter.  The Large Laser series and ER PPC fit all 3 of those categories, while the Medium and Small Lasers provide more output.  The ballistic weapons are also lighter, with only the Machine Gun not being leaner (of course, it IS one slot to begin with).  Active Probe and ECM Suite?  Yeah, both leaner and lighter.

I think you're mixing SLDF Tech and Clan Tech. And not all Clan Tech is lighter and smaller than it's IS counterparts. Tube Artillery. Artillery Cannons. Pretty much everything with a IS/Clan Tech Base.


Quote
Each of these qualify so well that you literally do not see the Standard use of those equipment outside the second-line combat equipment, and even then, it is only the Single Heat Sinks (because Combat Vehicles) and Standard Fusion Engines that exist.

Standard Internal Structure. Standard Armor. Cockpits, Life Support, Sensors. Clan Improved Weaponry when first introduced in TRO:3050. And the list goes on.


Quote
It very well could have been the Primitive Prototype lasers in one form or another.  Protoyping  can take a while.

Sometimes. Not always.



Quote
It would surprise me.  It was so primitive that it would be like considering bringing along a catapult (the ancient siege weapon, not the 'Mech).

We've have infantry wearing medieval armor, using swords, bows and arrows. I don't think someone deciding to bring an old Chemical Lasers is too hard to believe.


Quote
The implication only was in YOUR head, not in my words.

I think most people wouldn't consider going from 4 to 5 a massive increase.


Quote
As the sole reason for lighter Clan ACs?  No.  However better feeding systems could very well be a contributing factor.  And let's face it, a shell-delivery system is safer than a pump and pipe in most cases.

A Pump and Pipe is just another form of feeding system.


Quote
AP ammo and Tandem Charge for two.  Inferno rounds do the exact opposite.

Those aren't standard ammo are they?


Quote
However, the ammo isn't the only thing that contributes to a laser's effectiveness.  There are things like focusing lenses which can alter how much damage those lasers can provide.

Those things would be included in the weapons weight. 


Quote
1000 years of laser and material development.  The Clans didn't bomb themselves in to the stone age setting their tech back 300 years like the Inner Sphere did.  A lot of those developments will easily translate over in to a modern version of a laser system.  Things like the optics which focus the beam as well as housing material that is both lighter and much more compact.  Taking many of the principles utilized in the ER and Pulse Laser ranges and applying them to CLs would see an improvement in efficiency across the board, from mass to waste heat to overall output.

You're presuming such systems are comparable with ammo based lasers. You're also presuming that all Clan equipment is an improvement over IS versions. They're not. 


Quote
Possibly, but I'm sure that there was some poor schmuck in 2600 thought that the laser could never be improved in damage, but 200 years later the Clans improved their power by a notable degree.

That wasn't a chemical laser though was it? What Clan ammo based weapons do more damage than IS versions?


Quote
Depends on the perception.  In this case, I would follow the blueprints for the first test unit, and then see what could be improved from there.  Stopping with just the blueprints is wasteful for the Scientist Caste.

And if the weapons were needed now?  You're not just talking making a weapon lighter and smaller. You're also increasing the range and damage. Sure some of that could be done by improving the weapon. Other may require a change in the ammo. It could turn out that you can't improve the ammo so the only way to get the results you want is a heavier, bigger weapon.


That depends on if you see a Quirk as a stat...
Quote

If we're going to bring in, in universe weapon variances, we kind of do don't we. Otherwise, a Chemical Large Laser is a Chemical Large Laser, regardless of its manufacturer.


Quote
Wouldn't matter if you placed an incompatible fuel delivery system in to the mix.  Filling up a petrol tank with fuel cells wouldn't get you very far, and pouring petrol in to a fuel cell repository would be disastrous.

What are you talking about?



Quote
Go back and read what I said.  I did say it was about 2 years, and for good reason.

This is what you wrote
Actually they couldn't have built according to the old plans AND add a feeding system in to it at the same time.  That's like taking the plans of a 1965 Ford Mustang and then putting a modern hybrid engine in it.  It took them about 2 years to reach prototype stage with these Chemical Lasers according to Tactical Ops.

The R&D stage is listed in 3057 with no month given.  Prototype stage is listed in 3059, also with no month give. 

If that's all to go on, 2 years is sufficient for the term, with "about" covering the variables.  Because when months get involved we could be looking between 1 year and 3, depending on how it rounds out.  If Development starts in January 3057, but Prototyping ends in December 3059, you're looking at 35 months, which rounds out to 3 years.  However, if one reverses those months with Research beginning in December 3057 and Protyping begins in January of 3059, that's 113 months rounding out to 1 year.  "About 2 years" covers the possible averages without being locked in to a statement.

1) Every weapon, except for single shot weapons has a feed mechanism. It could be a power cable. It could be a pump and pipe. It could be a bunch of shells linked together.

2) It took Clan Hell's Horses' Scientists two years to go from R&D to production. Not about two years to reach prototype stage.

The R&D started in 3057. That's Scientists brainstorming and looking through old research and history books. By 3059 the prototype had passed testing and the weapons had entered production. That's not R&D taking about 2 years to get to a prototype. That's the whole works taking two years or less.

Quote
You don't see the relevance to considering how much firing a beam is different from launching a projectile?

I'm not the one trying to turn a beam into a projectile.


Quote
Consider this: How much difference is the damage between an Inner Sphere ER Large Laser and a Clan ER Large Laser?  How much difference is the damage between an Inner Sphere Gauss Rifle and a Clan Gauss Rifle.

2 points and 0 points. Your point?

Quote
Actually, you have provided zero resources on what the PCLs had.  All we KNOW is what the Hell's Horses ended up with and deployed.  You're assuming a universalism because other things have had universalism applied to them (while ignoring how much other things have changed).

In case you missed it. Dropships and Jumpships pages 5-6, talks about the Space Defense Network and weapons being used to shoot down ICBMs. ER:2750 talks about lasers being used to detonate mines and booby traps and shoot particles and rocky bodies in space. TOp132 says they were used against missiles. Jihad HS: Terra p138 talks about the station shooting down the missiles.

I am also not ignoring that some things have changed. You are ignoring that many things have not.


Quote
While using an ICE or Fuel Cell engine, name one that isn't a Chemical Laser or a Vehicle Flamer (both of which are treated as ballistic weapons anyway).

What?


Quote
You didn't complete the quote.  "Seeking a more weight-economical alternative to vehicle-mounted lasers (which often require power amplifiers on non-fusion units),"  Heat sinks were not listed as a purpose, but were included as the end result.

Power Amplifiers are not required for for energy weapons when powered by a Fusion or Fission Engine. Heat Sinks are always required for Energy weapons. Most of the weight of energy weapons are the heat sinks. Power Amplifiers weigh 10% of the total weight of the energy weapons rounded to the nearest .5 ton. For vehicles Heat Sinks are 1 ton per heat point. Heat Sinks are far more costly in terms of weight, except for fusion engines. Which cost more than ICE of Fuel Cells.  The monetary cost for Heat Sinks climes quickly as well. So doing away with Power Amplifiers is a minor bonus.



Quote
PCLs are dated as pre-spaceflight.  That heat has to go somewhere.  And while the Hell's Horses weapons don't have to take that heat in to account, nothing has been provided which state the PCLs did not.

They are?  They were introduced before 1950? Says where? The best I can tell is early 1990's maybe late 1980s. Plans for Crippen Station with the defense network had been drawn up in 1994.

Vehicles don't have weapon heat. That's why they require heat sinks to use energy weapons. Aerospace craft do have weapon heat so they'd need something. Easier something is prototype heat sinks.
 

Quote
And trust me when I say, they need it, after working on an assembly line with 4 laser welders in the Phoenix Metro area for 3 years.

 ???

Quote
Because they are primitive, perhaps?

Warship level play as in, not ground-play.

Are backhoes primitive? They haven't changed.

Point Defense is used by Aerospace Units. Aerospace units can be on the ground. Warships can target units on the ground. Ground units can target Warships.

Quote
Educate yourself.  Look up what an ICBM actually is designed to do.  Consider its mobility with its limited drive systems.  Consider how much interception the designers considered in its design.

Considering ICBMs date back to 1944 with the V2, designers probably didn't consider anything could shoot them down because nothing else could fly fast enough or high enough to hit them. Sixty years later we have Chemical Lasers in orbit just for that purpose.


Quote
Ship Killer missiles are designed with interception in mind because they go between ships and don't really have a ballistic run like ICBMs are designed to do.

They're missiles. Really big missiles but still missiles. They're designed with destruction in mind. You fire them at the target and hope they hit. They're not Tele-Operated missiles that can be steered in flight. Those weren't even prototyped until 3053.


Quote
I was providing a supporting argument as to why there would be more more sizes.  If there was only the Small PCL, where would the Medium and Large come from without more development?  Thus considering all three sizes existed (or some equivalent) is more justified if the Hell's Horses just built them to spec.

And all I said was that it was possible that CHH's created the Medium and Large classes of Chemical Lasers. I really don't think so though. I think it far more likely multiple classes have been around since the 1990's but it's possible.

Quote
Considering the development time, I think most of it was in recreating the chemicals "safely", applying their advanced knowledge to the materials and beam attenuation, and inventing the "shell" system than in upscalling from a smaller system.

What development time? It was a couple years to finished product. And if they had plans for the lasers, wouldn't they have the chemical formulas for the ammo? And there is no shell system. That's from Sarna and it isn't canon.
« Last Edit: 27 August 2021, 09:28:59 by RifleMech »

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #24 on: 27 August 2021, 09:36:45 »
So addressing some points

1.  Could primitive chemical lasers be larger?  Sure, they don't exist, they can be anything.  The reason I propose they stay the same is to match existing primitive rules, such as primitive rocket launcher systems that are identical save for cost and damage (in the form of a cluster makes.)  I personally love the -3 to advanced armor rule, so I used that.  People who hate that rule will likely prefer a 2/3/5 damage value but again, i love how the -3 works.

I agree they could be bigger but keeping them as is and maybe including the Primitive Prototype Weapon Rules to give them an older feel.

I'm glad you like the -3 damage. I'm against it though. The Small Chemical Laser would have been used as Point Defense. It'd need to be able to damage a Capital Missile. Point Defense Weapons already do half damage to missiles. And they still need 2 or more to shoot down a Capital Missile. If the damage is reduced further they wouldn't do anything to a Capital Missile. Even an old one. And if it can't do that BT history falls apart.

Quote
2. Primitive chemical lasers on support vehicles.  This one was a good point.  While I consider the primitive chem laser balanced for combat vehicles, as 10 pmcl do 20 versus 14 for an ac20, with the ac20 having massive upside with ammo selection and rapid fire, in the era of support vehicles before 2400 the primitive chem laser is vastly superior to the rifle.  So as a fix for that, borrowing from the thread, primitive chemical lasers on support vehicles require heat sinks.

Heat works for Aerospace but it goes against the point of Chemical Lasers not generating heat in vehicles. I also don't think they'd be that superior to Rifle Cannons. Pretty comparable, yes, especially if their ammo was reduced. I think their best way to keep them "in chech" would be cost and availability. Rifle Cannons can't be used in space. The closest alternative would be the Chemical Large Laser. With them being used on Aerospace units in space that's less of them available for ground vehicles.  And if the cost gets inflated the way it was for Prototype PPCs that's even less incentive to use it for ground units. It'd still be done. Just not that widely. The Rifle Cannon is still going to be the main tank weapon.


Quote
3. Primitive chemical laser ammo/ton.  Debate about fuel vs ammo doesnt actually matter, we are balancing a weapon here in the fan section so if the weapon is heavier but includes unlimited (or a fixed amount) of shots as part of its massive size, or if the weapon is smaller but has ammo like now, it doesnt matter.  I choose to match the existing weapon--see reason 1--in keeping with the 'keep it simple' paradigm.  That said, the point about primitive autocannons also having reduced ammo/ton was brilliant, and should address some of the complaints about fuel used.  So primitive chenical lasers will have their ammo reduced by the same token that primitive autocannons do.

 :thumbsup:


Quote
4.  Chem lasers versus icbm.  I personally would use the Tele operated missiles to represent primitive capital missiles, as besides the new kraken the rest of the Tele missiles were a step backwards tech wise in the fluff.  Small chem lasers are the best point defense damage, so they work.  Medium and large would be useful picking off tele missiles at range, missile command style.  Tele missiles cant cross the interference hex iirc, so they should make for great icbms in gameplay.

Steerable missiles is a tech step backwards?  :o   Medium and Large are available for point defense but whatever. I'd be okay allowing it. Of course I think all units should be able to use point defense. ICBMs do go into orbit though.

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6350
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #25 on: 27 August 2021, 11:08:08 »
Clan UAC/s vs IS UACs. Clan ER Large Laser vs IS ER Large Laser. and so on. All those weapons got better range and got lighter and smaller. RACs didn't.
Both LACs and RACs are both already quite advanced but still the Clans found a way to get better range at the same tonnage. That higher tech rating helps with better and/or lighter technology is a fact, it is even a part of the support vehicle rules (Structural Tech Rating).


Quote
Thanks. However that doesn't mean that the loader isn't a pump.
Loaders and pumps are two completely different concepts, disregarding that would be like flushing the dictionary down the toilet.

Quote
If there's no recoil, where does the casing go?
The presence or lack of recoil does not matter for a casing, in real life some loaders can use recoil for mechanical power but that is merely an engineering option.   

Also how do you think a loader could jam without a shell to jam on?

Quote
You're also way heavier than any point defense weapon.
I see no problem here.

Quote
Also remember what craft would have been flying using these weapons. They'd of been powered by chemical rockets.
Got any source with rockets using anything bigger than a small?

Quote
Cargo is only available for ammo with Sprayers. Plus you don't get a full ton of ammo with Liquid Cargo. TMp239 (Transport Bays) TMp248  (sprayers)
That can simply be abstracted away as Liquid Storage having equal number of shots per ton as the current chemical laser ammo.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society
Nebula Confederation Ships

Charistoph

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #26 on: 27 August 2021, 14:49:45 »
And those are the weapons we are talking about. Vehicle Scale Weapons. Furthermore, not all infantry weapons are one shot. Not that it matters because they can't be mounted on medium to large vehicles

I know Infantry Weapons aren't one shot, but you brought them up as if they were as you included them in that list, not me.  I merely pointed it out.

No exactly, no.  Combat Vehicles and Mechs have a set range but can be extended with an external fuel tank which takes up space. Support Vehicles and Aerospace craft have to figure the weight of the fuel tanks when designed. More fuel can be added as a refit at the cost of tonnage or external fuel tanks which take space.

Yes, exactly yes.  Since I'm talking about something having an integrated fuel source, it is a proper example of concept.  That more can be added wasn't in discussion, but about the possibility of integrated fuel systems.  I have said that several times at this point.

So? Are you saying someone 1000 years in the future couldn't build and program them to hit targets in space?

Possibly, but then they wouldn't be ICBMs any more, they'd be Surface to Space Missiles.  What you have been referencing are the ICBMs which were designed before the PCLs were created, not the ones created when fusion engines are ubiquitous.  They are very glorified rocket artillery built on a large scale, little more.

The purpose of ICBMs it to hit targets a great distance away. There aren't things like evasion protocols. The armor is equal to the Capital Missile's attack value. You also need to 2 or more Point Defense Weapons to damage it. A Barracuda's "armor" is it's attack value which is 2. Point Defense weapons also do half damage, rounding down.

Exactly my point.  ICBMs are programmed to travel a ballistic arc, not track a moving target nor have been made take in to consideration that something might shoot it down.

Barracudas ARE designed to hit moving targets and possibly include evasion protocols to make it harder to shoot down, to say nothing of the armor.  It's like comparing a katyusha to a Phoenix missile.

Sarna isn't canon. Maingunner's evidence isn't a whole lot of evidence. The loader could be a pump and the feed system a hose but lets say it isn't. Let's say Chemical Lasers work like the Demolisher's ChemJet Guns. Only there's a problem with that. Lasers don't recoil. Where's the casing go?

More evidence than you have yet to counter except to casually dismiss it.  As to where the casing goes, possibly out of the Vehicle in a neutralized state, or maybe even returned to the ammo bay so the chemicals can be reloaded.

We don't know that the Clans haven't used them. They don't manufacture them but they were using SLDF Equipment at least up until the end of the Jihad when their Caches were running empty.

TechManual says that Standard Lasers went Extinct with the Clans about 2820.  Sure they probably had them in caches that they equipped the Wolf's Dragoons with, but as a Clan standard, they were out of use 200 years before Hanse Davion toasted the Capellan Confederaion at his wedding.

I think you're mixing SLDF Tech and Clan Tech. And not all Clan Tech is lighter and smaller than it's IS counterparts. Tube Artillery. Artillery Cannons. Pretty much everything with a IS/Clan Tech Base.

No, I'm saying that equipment that came out of the SLDF (instead of the standard equipment ubiquitous to the Houses) and has equivalents in Clan Tech have.  I gave examples of what I was talking about, but you're just being obtuse.

Artillery is not a Clan strong suit as it doesn't allow people to find glory, and were quite pissed off when it was used against them by the Inner Sphere.  That they have it and remains unchanged isn't that remarkable.

Sometimes. Not always.

Without more information, it is only guesswork.  You have no information to properly counter it other than pushing universality by a group which has exceeded that.

We've have infantry wearing medieval armor, using swords, bows and arrows. I don't think someone deciding to bring an old Chemical Lasers is too hard to believe.

Considering the mass, toxicity, and reactiveness involved when compared to bringing along a Standard Laser, ER Laser, or Pulse Laser in its place?  One would be a very odd nut to include it.

I think most people wouldn't consider going from 4 to 5 a massive increase.

Good thing I didn't say that then.  I said, "more massive", not "massively heavier".  You assumed I said the latter.  I said "more massive" to indicate its mass instead of the force provided in its pull by gravity.  Blame it on a sudden remembered influx from my school days when mass was pounded more than weight as mass doesn't change while weight can.

Those things would be included in the weapons weight. 

Not necessarily.  There is no mass difference between a Standard Large Laser and an Inner Sphere ER Large Laser, yet it still has greater range.

There is the differences that the Clan ER Laser has over the SLDF/IS ER Laser which does provide a good case for the Clan Chemical Lasers being lighter than the PCLs.

You're presuming such systems are comparable with ammo based lasers. You're also presuming that all Clan equipment is an improvement over IS versions. They're not.

Actually I'm not.  I'm using the cases provided in their Energy weapons and applying them directly in this case.  That isn't presumption, I'm making a case for the probability of CCLs being less mass-intensive and more powerful than PCLs due to such things as improved optics and casing.

And you have nothing but your presumptions that CCLs are exactly the same as PCLs.

That wasn't a chemical laser though was it? What Clan ammo based weapons do more damage than IS versions?

This might be a pertinent question if how a laser works was solely reliant on the ammo itself.  If it was chucking a beam of fuel at the target, then it would apply.  Instead it is a system that provides a coherent beam of photons on a target.  Fuel is just one factor of many.

And if the weapons were needed now?  You're not just talking making a weapon lighter and smaller. You're also increasing the range and damage. Sure some of that could be done by improving the weapon. Other may require a change in the ammo. It could turn out that you can't improve the ammo so the only way to get the results you want is a heavier, bigger weapon.

One still has to produce the equipment in question.  Some materials may just be unavailable for the construction because nobody has used them for so long.  Downgrading your equipment to create something inferior to use on a new project is wasteful.

If we're going to bring in, in universe weapon variances, we kind of do don't we. Otherwise, a Chemical Large Laser is a Chemical Large Laser, regardless of its manufacturer.

And the only Large Chemical Laser is the one developed by Clan Hell's Horses.  We do not have the PCLs (though they wouldn't have called them that at the time).  Still it shows that not everything is as universal in-universe as you are presenting.

What are you talking about?

I'm referring to the shell-delivery system referenced several times at this point.  If I took a Hell's Horses Chemical Laser "shell" and put it in the tank of a PCL, nothing would happen.  If I put the raw chemicals of the PCL in to the "shell" bin of the Hell's Horses CL ammo, "Bad Things" would likely happen.

This is what you wrote

Let me highlight it for you, "Actually they couldn't have built according to the old plans AND add a feeding system in to it at the same time.  That's like taking the plans of a 1965 Ford Mustang and then putting a modern hybrid engine in it.  It took them about 2 years to reach prototype stage with these Chemical Lasers according to Tactical Ops."

I said "about 2 years" because I didn't know how the months lined up to it.

1) Every weapon, except for single shot weapons has a feed mechanism. It could be a power cable. It could be a pump and pipe. It could be a bunch of shells linked together.

Changing something to go from liquid fuel to fuel cells requires an entirely different feeding system.  Yes or no?

2) It took Clan Hell's Horses' Scientists two years to go from R&D to production. Not about two years to reach prototype stage.

The R&D started in 3057. That's Scientists brainstorming and looking through old research and history books. By 3059 the prototype had passed testing and the weapons had entered production. That's not R&D taking about 2 years to get to a prototype. That's the whole works taking two years or less.

Then why list the year as a "Prototype and Production year:" if the prototype wasn't developed that year.  Final Prototype could have been in January or December.  That's a lot of time to justify "about".

As for production date... Odd that nothing has been referencing using it for quite some time afterwards.  We don't even have any OmniVehicles listed using them for any variants.  First time we see a unit with them it's almost 100 years later.  I think that date was a flub.  It should have been closer to when units started using them.

I'm not the one trying to turn a beam into a projectile.

Actually you are trying to turn it in to a projectile since you are insisting that as an ammo-based weapon, nothing can change between them.  Except you're using only considering ammo delivery weapons when we're talking about an energy delivery system that just happens to use ammo.

Just because we're saying that the CCL is using a shell to deliver the fuel to the weapon doesn't mean we think it's shooting the shell.  Rather it is utilizing the shell as a fuel cell, swapping them out after depletion.

2 points and 0 points. Your point?

The point is, as I have been saying, that the materials used in construction of this new system (such as the optics) can adjust an energy delivery system, while an ammo delivery system wouldn't change without changing the ammo.

In case you missed it. Dropships and Jumpships pages 5-6, talks about the Space Defense Network and weapons being used to shoot down ICBMs. ER:2750 talks about lasers being used to detonate mines and booby traps and shoot particles and rocky bodies in space. TOp132 says they were used against missiles. Jihad HS: Terra p138 talks about the station shooting down the missiles.

You are referencing what they DID not what they HAD or HOW they did it.  One is the job, and the other is the stats that make it work in game.

I am also not ignoring that some things have changed. You are ignoring that many things have not.

Actually you are ignoring them when you say that "such and such is impossible" while I'm saying that there is proof when such universality is improbable.

What?

Name an energy weapon outside the Vehicle Flamer and Chemical Laser which doesn't require power amplifiers on a Vehicle powered by an ICE or Fuel Cell Engine.

Power Amplifiers are not required for for energy weapons when powered by a Fusion or Fission Engine. Heat Sinks are always required for Energy weapons. Most of the weight of energy weapons are the heat sinks. Power Amplifiers weigh 10% of the total weight of the energy weapons rounded to the nearest .5 ton. For vehicles Heat Sinks are 1 ton per heat point. Heat Sinks are far more costly in terms of weight, except for fusion engines. Which cost more than ICE of Fuel Cells.  The monetary cost for Heat Sinks climes quickly as well. So doing away with Power Amplifiers is a minor bonus.

Right, but the heat sinks were not listed as a reason, just a result.  The part I bolded and you ignored was about the power amplifiers not the heat sinks.  The heat sink part comes later.

Vehicles don't have weapon heat. That's why they require heat sinks to use energy weapons. Aerospace craft do have weapon heat so they'd need something. Easier something is prototype heat sinks.

Exactly.  So something was cooling it off before heat sinks came in to production.
 
Point Defense is used by Aerospace Units. Aerospace units can be on the ground. Warships can target units on the ground. Ground units can target Warships.

Are you being deliberately obtuse or just annoyingly pedantic?

Considering ICBMs date back to 1944 with the V2, designers probably didn't consider anything could shoot them down because nothing else could fly fast enough or high enough to hit them. Sixty years later we have Chemical Lasers in orbit just for that purpose.

And when were the majority of ICBMs designed and built?  Before the advent of orbital chemical lasers or after?

And apparently you didn't do your research.  Are ICBMs set up to be rocket artillery or are they set up to be interception missiles?

They're missiles. Really big missiles but still missiles. They're designed with destruction in mind. You fire them at the target and hope they hit. They're not Tele-Operated missiles that can be steered in flight. Those weren't even prototyped until 3053.

Guidance systems for artillery pieces are much more simple than they are for anti-ship missiles, largely because cities don't dodge very well.

And all I said was that it was possible that CHH's created the Medium and Large classes of Chemical Lasers. I really don't think so though. I think it far more likely multiple classes have been around since the 1990's but it's possible.

Yes, I understood that much.  I was not agreeing with you.  I think the probability was so low that considering it a possibility was overly generous with the time constraints involved.

What development time? It was a couple years to finished product. And if they had plans for the lasers, wouldn't they have the chemical formulas for the ammo? And there is no shell system. That's from Sarna and it isn't canon.

Having the formula doesn't mean you can reproduce it on the spot.  Care for producing it so it doesn't kill all your Laborers before they can supply you is but one concern, hence "safely" was used.  That also doesn't even consider changing scale from Small to Large is not done with a click of the fingers.

I used Sarna because that is what I have access to.  I don't have access to the FM or TRO that it was introduced in or the unit that Maingunnery referenced.  Apparently you don't either as you haven't refuted it, or consider it an abherent one off.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Charistoph's Painted Products of Mechanical Mayhem

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #27 on: 27 August 2021, 17:14:13 »
Both LACs and RACs are both already quite advanced but still the Clans found a way to get better range at the same tonnage. That higher tech rating helps with better and/or lighter technology is a fact, it is even a part of the support vehicle rules (Structural Tech Rating).

True but Clan RACs did not get lighter nor did they get smaller, and that is the point. The Clan UAC/5 is 2 tons lighter and 2 crits smaller than the IS UAC/5, and it has better range. Clan RACs are the same size and are bulkier than IS versions, yet they are 1 Tech Rating higher. If higher tech ratings equals lighter and smaller Clan RACs should be lighter and smaller.


Quote
Loaders and pumps are two completely different concepts, disregarding that would be like flushing the dictionary down the toilet.

They move ammo from the bin to the weapon. Fluid Guns, Flamers, Sprayers, Chemical Lasers.

Quote
The presence or lack of recoil does not matter for a casing, in real life some loaders can use recoil for mechanical power but that is merely an engineering option.
 

So you're saying Chemical Lasers are a type of chain gun?


Quote
Also how do you think a loader could jam without a shell to jam on?

Ever have a hose get kinked? TOR:3050p42
Quote
Unfortunately, this system is prone to jam if the loader cycles while the turret is rotated more than sixty degrees off center.
Sounds as if the hose is getting kinked to me. And then there's the Guillotine. Pilots have to be careful moving it's left  arm or the feed cables to the large laser get snapped. It sure doesn't have an autocannon style loader.


Quote
I see no problem here.

If it's too heavy, would it still be a point defense weapon?

Quote
Got any source with rockets using anything bigger than a small?

Since we don't have rules for those vehicles, no. However, considering the fuel requirements, I think a small laser is more likely to be used than a Large. Especially if it weighs 20 tons.


Quote
That can simply be abstracted away as Liquid Storage having equal number of shots per ton as the current chemical laser ammo.

That only works for Sprayers. They are the lone exception to firing cargo as ammo and TOAU&Ep172 says they get half as many shots when using alternative ammo.



Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6350
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #28 on: 27 August 2021, 17:57:40 »
True but Clan RACs did not get lighter nor did they get smaller, and that is the point. The Clan UAC/5 is 2 tons lighter and 2 crits smaller than the IS UAC/5, and it has better range. Clan RACs are the same size and are bulkier than IS versions, yet they are 1 Tech Rating higher. If higher tech ratings equals lighter and smaller Clan RACs should be lighter and smaller.
No, the range bonus is so large that I find it more plausible that they sacrificed such reductions for even more range.

Quote
They move ammo from the bin to the weapon. Fluid Guns, Flamers, Sprayers, Chemical Lasers.
So got any loaders for sprayers? 
 
Quote
So you're saying Chemical Lasers are a type of chain gun?
How did you come to that?

Quote
Ever have a hose get kinked?
That is called a kink, not a jam. Words have distinct meanings or else we just get useless gibberish.

Quote
If it's too heavy, would it still be a point defense weapon?
Where is the weight limit for point defense weapons?

Quote
That only works for Sprayers. They are the lone exception to firing cargo as ammo and TOAU&Ep172 says they get half as many shots when using alternative ammo.
That is when used for sprayers.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society
Nebula Confederation Ships

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3286
Re: Primitive Chemical Lasers
« Reply #29 on: 27 August 2021, 21:07:56 »
I know Infantry Weapons aren't one shot, but you brought them up as if they were as you included them in that list, not me.  I merely pointed it out.

You wanted weapons and ammo all in the same package. I pointed out which weapons that did and why they won't work for Primitive Chemical Lasers.


Quote
Yes, exactly yes.  Since I'm talking about something having an integrated fuel source, it is a proper example of concept.  That more can be added wasn't in discussion, but about the possibility of integrated fuel systems.  I have said that several times at this point.

There's running an engine and firing a weapon. Weapons, outside those previously mentioned and machine guns, require ammo in full ton lots which takes up at least 1 slot. That is not "integrated."



Quote
Possibly, but then they wouldn't be ICBMs any more, they'd be Surface to Space Missiles.  What you have been referencing are the ICBMs which were designed before the PCLs were created, not the ones created when fusion engines are ubiquitous.  They are very glorified rocket artillery built on a large scale, little more.

Exactly my point.  ICBMs are programmed to travel a ballistic arc, not track a moving target nor have been made take in to consideration that something might shoot it down.

They go into space. Barracudas could be used to hit another continent. ICBMs = Capital Missiles. ICBMs go where they're programed to go. That can include straight up.


Quote
Barracudas ARE designed to hit moving targets and possibly include evasion protocols to make it harder to shoot down, to say nothing of the armor.  It's like comparing a katyusha to a Phoenix missile.

There are no evasion protocols. They go where they're aimed. The only missiles that can be steered are tele-operated.


Quote
More evidence than you have yet to counter except to casually dismiss it.  As to where the casing goes, possibly out of the Vehicle in a neutralized state, or maybe even returned to the ammo bay so the chemicals can be reloaded.

What evidence? Maingunnery telling us where the Red Kite has a loading mechanism? All Weapons have loading mechanisms. It's how the ammo gets from the ammobin to the weapon. And there is no casing for Chemical Lasers. There would need to be a recoil. They don't recoil.


Quote
TechManual says that Standard Lasers went Extinct with the Clans about 2820.  Sure they probably had them in caches that they equipped the Wolf's Dragoons with, but as a Clan standard, they were out of use 200 years before Hanse Davion toasted the Capellan Confederaion at his wedding.

1) The extinction date given for Standard Lasers in Clan use is 2850. Not 2830. I'll guess you just misread that.
2) Reread the section in TM , 227, about Standard Lasers again.
3) It says they could still be found from time to time.
As you pointed out, Wolf's Dragoons were equipped with them. So they could not be extinct.
4) 200 years before Hanse's marriage Clan ER Lasers hadn't reached common use yet. Standard Lasers wouldn't go "Extinct" for another 20 years after that. So they were being used by the Clans while Hanse toasted as his wedding.
5) Given all the evidence to the contrary, in this case extinct doesn't mean extinct. It means, not in frontline service. It should be brought up with TPTB.


Quote
No, I'm saying that equipment that came out of the SLDF (instead of the standard equipment ubiquitous to the Houses) and has equivalents in Clan Tech have.  I gave examples of what I was talking about, but you're just being obtuse.

1) You didn't say anything about the Clans there.
2) Not all SLDF equipment was lighter than IS. UAC/5s are heavier and bulkier than Standard UAC/5s. XL Engines are not leaner. They take up more crits. Clan XL Engines are leaner than SLDF XL Engines though but you specifically said SLDF. ES lots of crits over Standard IS. Same with FF. Clan versions are "leaner" than SLDF versions. I have no idea where you're getting Small and Medium Lasers have more output.


Quote
Artillery is not a Clan strong suit as it doesn't allow people to find glory, and were quite pissed off when it was used against them by the Inner Sphere.  That they have it and remains unchanged isn't that remarkable.

Actually, Clan Arrow IV Missiles are lighter smaller and have greater range. Vehicle Tube Artillery though is unchanged. Clan Vehicle Flamers haven't changed. Fluid Guns, Sprayers, haven't changed. The Clans started making Artillery Cannons in 3030. Why aren't they lighter than IS versions? Why aren't they smaller? Why don't they have better range? 




Quote
Without more information, it is only guesswork.  You have no information to properly counter it other than pushing universality by a group which has exceeded that.

Clan Chemical Laser went from R&D to production in 2 years. The Beagle Active Probe was prototyped in 2560. The production version wasn't introduced until 2576. One item went into production, as is, within 2 years. The other was prototyped for 16 years and the final version was .5 tons lighter and 1 crit smaller. So no, prototyping does not always take a while.


Quote
Considering the mass, toxicity, and reactiveness involved when compared to bringing along a Standard Laser, ER Laser, or Pulse Laser in its place?  One would be a very odd nut to include it.

The universe is full of odd nuts. The Clans were founded by one. And everything you said about the PCL could be applied to ICEs too. Yet, the Clans are still using them. They haven't changed either. And it was the Clans using those engines that made them look a Chemical Lasers again.


Quote
Not necessarily.  There is no mass difference between a Standard Large Laser and an Inner Sphere ER Large Laser, yet it still has greater range.

There is the differences that the Clan ER Laser has over the SLDF/IS ER Laser which does provide a good case for the Clan Chemical Lasers being lighter than the PCLs.

ER Large Lasers are also 50% hotter than Standard Lasers. That's an additional 4 tons in heat sinks. Clan ER Large Lasers are lighter, by themselves, which is were their advanced metallurgy comes in. However, not everything Clan is lighter.

Quote
Actually I'm not.  I'm using the cases provided in their Energy weapons and applying them directly in this case.  That isn't presumption, I'm making a case for the probability of CCLs being less mass-intensive and more powerful than PCLs due to such things as improved optics and casing.

And you have nothing but your presumptions that CCLs are exactly the same as PCLs.

Actually, you are presuming they can do so. Where's the Improved .5 ton Medium Laser? Surely the Clans would want .5 ton weapon that could do 5 points at 9 hexes. It'd clearly be superior to their ER Small Laser.

I also didn't say they were. I'm saying it's the easiest solution. Why presume Primitive Chemical Lasers are massively heavier and bulkier just because they're primitive? Especially when other Primitive weapons aren't. Why must we presume that because they're Clan made that the stats we have must be lighter and smaller when it is a fact that not everything Clan is?

If TPTB were to publish stats for Primitive Chemical Lasers tomorrow with only two classes that don't match any laser we have, I'd be okay with that. If they say that weight 50% more than  Clan versions, I'd be okay with that too. Until then, I'm not going to hurt myself trying to reinvent them.
 

Quote
This might be a pertinent question if how a laser works was solely reliant on the ammo itself.  If it was chucking a beam of fuel at the target, then it would apply.  Instead it is a system that provides a coherent beam of photons on a target.  Fuel is just one factor of many.

Put Clan ammo in a IS weapon and the IS weapon does not get better range. Put IS ammo in a Clan weapon and it does get better range. The difference is in the weapon, not the ammo.


Quote
One still has to produce the equipment in question.  Some materials may just be unavailable for the construction because nobody has used them for so long.  Downgrading your equipment to create something inferior to use on a new project is wasteful.

You're presuming that you have to downgrade to produce the items. Which, isn't true since not everything the Clans produce is "advanced".



Quote
And the only Large Chemical Laser is the one developed by Clan Hell's Horses.  We do not have the PCLs (though they wouldn't have called them that at the time).  Still it shows that not everything is as universal in-universe as you are presenting.

We don't know that. All we know is that Clan Hell's Horses possibly made the first Large Chemical Lasers in almost 800 years.



Quote
I'm referring to the shell-delivery system referenced several times at this point.  If I took a Hell's Horses Chemical Laser "shell" and put it in the tank of a PCL, nothing would happen.  If I put the raw chemicals of the PCL in to the "shell" bin of the Hell's Horses CL ammo, "Bad Things" would likely happen
.

And the only source for this "shell delivery system" is Sarna, which is not canon.  Give me a book and page number where it says Chemical Lasers have a "shell system". Without a canon source the "shell system" doesn't exist.


Quote
Let me highlight it for you, "Actually they couldn't have built according to the old plans AND add a feeding system in to it at the same time.  That's like taking the plans of a 1965 Ford Mustang and then putting a modern hybrid engine in it.  It took them about 2 years to reach prototype stage with these Chemical Lasers according to Tactical Ops."

I said "about 2 years" because I didn't know how the months lined up to it.

Which is wrong because it took 2 years to go from R&D to production.


Quote
Changing something to go from liquid fuel to fuel cells requires an entirely different feeding system.  Yes or no?

No. It requires a whole new engine.


Quote
Then why list the year as a "Prototype and Production year:" if the prototype wasn't developed that year.  Final Prototype could have been in January or December.  That's a lot of time to justify "about".

R&D 3057, Prototype: 3059, Production: 3059.


Quote
As for production date... Odd that nothing has been referencing using it for quite some time afterwards.  We don't even have any OmniVehicles listed using them for any variants.  First time we see a unit with them it's almost 100 years later.  I think that date was a flub.  It should have been closer to when units started using them.

So? How many OMNIs mount Artillery Cannons or Fluid Guns? They are used the Athena-XR in 3068, Svartalfa Ultra ProtoMech in 3083, the Vidar heavy defense tank in 3085. the Incubus II


Quote
Actually you are trying to turn it in to a projectile since you are insisting that as an ammo-based weapon, nothing can change between them.  Except you're using only considering ammo delivery weapons when we're talking about an energy delivery system that just happens to use ammo.

So by your logic Flamers fire shells. Fluid Guns fire shells. Sprayers fire shells. The rules say Ammunition. The Fluff says Ammunition. Ammunition does not equal shells.



Quote
Just because we're saying that the CCL is using a shell to deliver the fuel to the weapon doesn't mean we think it's shooting the shell.  Rather it is utilizing the shell as a fuel cell, swapping them out after depletion.

Which there is no cannon evidence of.


Quote
The point is, as I have been saying, that the materials used in construction of this new system (such as the optics) can adjust an energy delivery system, while an ammo delivery system wouldn't change without changing the ammo.

The only ammunition that requires changing the ammo delivery system is Caseless Autocannon Ammunition. Unless you're using a quirk, everything else can change between ammo types without changing the feed system.

Quote
You are referencing what they DID not what they HAD or HOW they did it.  One is the job, and the other is the stats that make it work in game.

You're not reading them are you. Those sources state what they had and what they did. Do we have stats for them? No. But we do know they used Chemical Lasers to shoot down nukes.


Quote
Actually you are ignoring them when you say that "such and such is impossible" while I'm saying that there is proof when such universality is improbable.

Wrong. You are taking a few examples and proclaiming them as a universal must. That because one Clan thing is lighter and smaller, all Clan things must be lighter and smaller. That is completely false, and I've been saying so. I've given many examples how not everything Clan is lighter and smaller.


Quote
Name an energy weapon outside the Vehicle Flamer and Chemical Laser which doesn't require power amplifiers on a Vehicle powered by an ICE or Fuel Cell Engine.

Fluid Guns and Sprayers. Name a non ammo based energy weapon that doesn't generate heat on any unit.


Quote
Right, but the heat sinks were not listed as a reason, just a result.  The part I bolded and you ignored was about the power amplifiers not the heat sinks.  The heat sink part comes later.

I haven't ignored anything. You are ignoring the very first part of the sentence and making an occasionally needed pierce of equipment the sole reason for the project.
Quote
Seeking a more weight-economical alternative to vehicle-mounted lasers
That's the whole reason for the Chemical Lasers. A weight and economical alternative to Standard Lasers. Power Amplifiers are only occasionally a part of the weight and economic problem. Heat Sinks always are.




Quote
Exactly.  So something was cooling it off before heat sinks came in to production.

On Aerospace units? Sure. Prototype Heat Sinks.

 
Quote
Are you being deliberately obtuse or just annoyingly pedantic?

Are you saying a grounded dropship can't fire Point Defense systems?

Quote
And when were the majority of ICBMs designed and built?  Before the advent of orbital chemical lasers or after?

Wrong question. The question should be, when did they stop making them? Answer; They haven't. Do you think we'd have Missiles now if AMS and Point Defense Weapons were a deterrent to launching missiles?


Quote
And apparently you didn't do your research.  Are ICBMs set up to be rocket artillery or are they set up to be interception missiles?

Guidance systems for artillery pieces are much more simple than they are for anti-ship missiles, largely because cities don't dodge very well.

According to research, newer ICBMs like the LGM-118 Peacekeeper
have improved targeting systems that can hit pinpoint targets. Are you saying that these weapons couldn't hit a target in space? When scientists can work out precisely where and when it'll be in orbit? When they were doing all that math with paper and pencil, not the more advanced tech that Battletech had then?

Quote
Yes, I understood that much.  I was not agreeing with you.  I think the probability was so low that considering it a possibility was overly generous with the time constraints involved.

I didn't say I agreed with me either. In fact I said I didn't think so. Just stating a possibility. For all we know, Primitive Chemical Lasers didn't come in classes. They could come in sizes. Like Tank Cannons. Yes, I know they're not canon or legal but they're more believable that all the wars from the late 19th century until the 2300s were fought with just 3 classes of cannon. So why not multiple sizes of Chemical Lasers?


Quote
Having the formula doesn't mean you can reproduce it on the spot.  Care for producing it so it doesn't kill all your Laborers before they can supply you is but one concern, hence "safely" was used.  That also doesn't even consider changing scale from Small to Large is not done with a click of the fingers.

Of course not. You need to gather the ingredients first. And if they had plans for one why not the others? And why wouldn't it be just as easy as a click of the fingers? We know how much chemicals are used in each shot. Why couldn't a scientist, or even someone good at math, be able to figure out going from one class to another?

Quote
I used Sarna because that is what I have access to.  I don't have access to the FM or TRO that it was introduced in or the unit that Maingunnery referenced.  Apparently you don't either as you haven't refuted it, or consider it an abherent one off.


You mean the Red Kite from TRO:3150? Done that. And it doesn't matter if you have the book or not. I hope we can all get the books we're missing but it still doesn't change the fact that, Sarna is not canon. It's on okay reference source for Battletech, when it actually lists the source material the articles are based on. However, it should never be taken as canon, especially when the source material isn't referenced. Without that, the article isn't a good reference.