PDA

View Full Version : The Rail Gun Questions



!Dorentus!
July 17th, 2005, 07:03 PM
Who made them? On one hand they seem really advanced like an energy weapon, and I just might remember someone saying the Asgard gave them to us for the Prommie but yet when col. Everett was talking about them it seemed like they were just regular old projectile guns that just went faster. He was talking about them so fast that I didn't even get what they were(I might not be up on the military ammunition lingo, but I do know what mach is and what rounds are). So what makes a rail gun a rail gun? Are they like half energy weapon/ half projectile? Did you see those fancy plastic or glass discs (I really don't know what their called, they kind of looked Asgard-ish) they put in the guns when they were setting them up? What were they? I know somebody knows. Right?!
Oh! and how do they work?!:D

_Owen_
July 17th, 2005, 07:08 PM
Simple, we made them. Even today in real life we have rail guns. The rail gun is not an energy weapon, they give that illusion, but they are not. The reason they look like they fire energy is because they launch the projectiles at Mach five, they are moving incredibly fast, and in an atmosphere, they would superheat the gas around them, converting it to plasma, which would help with the illusion. As well, they move incredibly fast, so they could be moving fast enough to blur the image to apear stretched, so the plasma, making it apear as energy, and the fast speeds bluring the image, and stretching it would create the illusion of an energy burst.

Owen Macri

Col. Newman
July 17th, 2005, 07:16 PM
Simple, we made them. Even today in real life we have rail guns. The rail gun is not an energy weapon, they give that illusion, but they are not. The reason they look like they fire energy is because they launch the projectiles at Mach five, they are moving incredibly fast, and in an atmosphere, they would superheat the gas around them, converting it to plasma, which would help with the illusion. As well, they move incredibly fast, so they could be moving fast enough to blur the image to apear stretched, so the plasma, making it apear as energy, and the fast speeds bluring the image, and stretching it would create the illusion of an energy burst.

Owen Macrithey have tracers duh

!Dorentus!
July 17th, 2005, 07:19 PM
Simple, we made them. Even today in real life we have rail guns.
Owen Macri
WoW! So are some of them being used in the military today or are they just tied up in a lab somewhere?
Do you know what those plastic Asgard-ish things were or are you thinking?
Or you have NO idea what I'm talking about. That's always a possibility:rolleyes:

Col. Newman
July 17th, 2005, 07:22 PM
Even today in real life we have rail guns. i didn't think we do, though i know the U.S. Navy is working on them i didn't think they had a working prototype yet

_Owen_
July 17th, 2005, 07:26 PM
To tell you the truth, I can only assume that the military is using them, but I can't be sure, all I know is, they exist.

As for the plastic asgardish things, I have no idea what you are talking about, were they inserted into the rail gun? If so, they probably contained the ammunition. If you could give me a scene when they were shown, I can go and quickly run through the episode to look, they were in "The Seige Part II" right? I just happend to watch that episode today, but I will go check it out, if you want.

Owen Macri

Col. Newman
July 17th, 2005, 07:32 PM
WoW! so are some of them being used in the military today or are they just tied up in a lab somewhere?
Do you know what those plastic Asgard-ish things were or are you thinking?
Or you have NO idea what I'm talking about. That's always a possibility:rolleyes:I think he is talking about the magazines, they are just ammo magazines and we made them duh

Chachi
July 17th, 2005, 07:50 PM
the military isn't using them yet. It's sweet technology, but the only place you could employ one would be on a ship because of the power requirements and what would the targets be then (figuring that missiles would take out enemy fighters/bombers). The Navy has employed a rocket-assisted cannon on their new destroyers that has a 60+ mile range.

a rail gun would be good for a sniper (as seen in Eraser), or for some sort of another infantry weapon....but the power required to generate the magnetic fields is simply too much to carry on the field in batteries or to make with a chemical reaction or portable generator.

-Chachi

!Dorentus!
July 17th, 2005, 08:00 PM
As for the plastic asgardish things, I have no idea what you are talking about, were they inserted into the rail gun? If so, they probably contained the ammunition. If you could give me a scene when they were shown, I can go and quickly run through the episode to look, they were in "The Seige Part II" right? I just happend to watch that episode today, but I will go check it out, if you want.

Owen Macri
Again thx for the help, I'm a curious guy. Well, yes they were in Part II, and I'm pretty sure they weren't ammo; they only stuck them in once b4 the battle ever started they didn't feed them in like a 50 cal. machine gun or whatever but the seen was I think just after Everett was showing Ford the specs of the city and then it goes into all these clips of them preparing for battle and that's where it is. It could be just before the first fight at night w/ the wraith.

_Owen_
July 17th, 2005, 09:51 PM
Ok, I will check it out, I can't right now, because it is almost 2:00 in the morning here, but I will try to check it tommorow... or today.

I believe I know the device you are typing of, but I am not sure, so I'll check it out.

No problem, I am happy to help, any time, just ask!

Owen Macri

Quakerbone
July 18th, 2005, 05:01 AM
To be precise, a rail gun is a gun that uses a very different type of propulsion. Where a normal gun or rocket uses a chemical charge behind the projectile, a rail gun simply takes a magnetic projectile, and uses alternating charges along the barrel to launch and spin it. The main difference is that there is no friction, since the projectile doesn't even touch the barrel.

The main researcher of this technology I have heard of is the US Navy, trying to create a new type of ship-based artillery. NASA has also been rumored to be working on a large-scale rail gun sytem as a new launcher for orbiters.

Jarnin
July 18th, 2005, 05:12 AM
Railgun info from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun)

!Dorentus!
July 18th, 2005, 10:05 PM
I think he is talking about the magazines, they are just ammo magazines and we made them duh
Could you describe what these magazines would look like so I can rest assured that that is what I saw? PLZ, THX

Jarnin
July 19th, 2005, 12:15 AM
Could you describe what these magazines would look like so I can rest assured that that is what I saw? PLZ, THX
FYI: The round goes in the clip. The clip goes in the magazine. The magazine feeds the weapon.

http://24.15.104.200/pictures/stargate/vlcsnap-2993641.png

That is a clip of railgun ammo from The Seige II. Not the best picture, but it's the best I could conjure.

Halo
July 19th, 2005, 04:54 PM
they have tracers duh

no they dont...the slug just moves so fast it generates a purple color...

anyway these days electromagnetic railguns are in development. they fire a slug like mach 6 or 7 i think that can destroy a target without explosive aid.

_Owen_
July 19th, 2005, 07:36 PM
Sorry, I can't see the picture, could you post a link?

Owen Macri

Col. Newman
July 19th, 2005, 09:44 PM
Sorry, I can't see the picture, could you post a link?

Owen MacriI think the picture is on his computer ROFL

Lord §okar
July 20th, 2005, 03:33 AM
WoW! so are some of them being used in the military today or are they just tied up in a lab somewhere?
Do you know what those plastic Asgard-ish things were or are you thinking?
Or you have NO idea what I'm talking about. That's always a possibility
They're not in use but the physical principles behind their operation are incredibly simple (I studied them in the first year of high school physics). You have a pair of conductive metal rails between which sits a conductive projectile. The Lorentz force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_force) felt is responsible for accelerating the projectile out of the barrel. The electricity supplied need be of extremely high current.

a rail gun simply takes a magnetic projectile, and uses alternating charges along the barrel to launch and spin it.
That's incorrect. THe projectile does not spin and it specifically must contact the barrel. You're referring to a coil gun, see above.

no they dont...the slug just moves so fast it generates a purple color...
Explain to me why fast motion would create a purple colour.

FYI: if you can see them moving they're going no where near fast enough to glow.

ColonelWilliams
July 20th, 2005, 01:37 PM
here's a thought; they should put rail guns on 302's and let em tear up darts and w/e else anyone has t throw against us. this is one of the best ways to maximize the 302's potency, along with shield generators... that would be one mean fighter

_Owen_
July 20th, 2005, 05:00 PM
Explain to me why fast motion would create a purple colour.

It doesn't necesarily have to be purple, I thought it looked blue, but whatever. Anyways, the immense speeds of the projectiles within an oxygen rich atmosphere would convert the surrounding gas to plasma.

Owen Macri

!Dorentus!
July 20th, 2005, 10:12 PM
FYI: The round goes in the clip. The clip goes in the magazine. The magazine feeds the weapon.

http://24.15.104.200/pictures/stargate/vlcsnap-2993641.png

That is a clip of railgun ammo from The Seige II. Not the best picture, but it's the best I could conjure.
Thanks Jarnin for the clip,-doesn't look so Asgardish now does it :) , anyway on some shots I think it looks more advanced, when I described it as plastic I meant those things inside the case (I suppose they're rounds), sorry 4 the confusion, thanks for the answers.
I won't bother to go back and quote but it was said that these rail guns would work real good on the x-302, I don't know, but they seem pretty big for the fighter ship. Is it possible? Is it feasible? Would TPTB ever put it into writing (IMO as of yet most likely not)?*edit* is there another thread on putting rail guns on our fighter ships or are those about Prometheus?*edit*

_Owen_
July 20th, 2005, 10:43 PM
Oh, is that the things you thought looked Asgardish? Yes, that is what I thought it was. Anyways, problem solved.

You might be able to put a rail gun on an X-302, but you are right it would not be practical for the size of the ship. Unless you just used one on top, or managed to decrease the size.

Owen Macri

Col. Newman
July 20th, 2005, 11:49 PM
yeah i knew he was talking about that

_Owen_
July 21st, 2005, 07:39 AM
So did I but he wasn't sure. That's allright, problem solved now.

Owen Macri

valha'lla
July 22nd, 2005, 07:14 AM
Oh, is that the things you thought looked Asgardish? Yes, that is what I thought it was. Anyways, problem solved.

You might be able to put a rail gun on an X-302, but you are right it would not be practical for the size of the ship. Unless you just used one on top, or managed to decrease the size.

Owen Macri
but is not most of the bulk off the rail gun weapon taken up by the power source and seat and the F-302 should be able to run them of the excess power from hiperspace drive or if this has been removed put a power source where it was situated to do the job and it has no need for the seat so it might be acheivable using the current one.

ColonelWilliams
July 22nd, 2005, 09:13 AM
but is not most of the bulk off the rail gun weapon taken up by the power source and seat and the F-302 should be able to run them of the excess power from hiperspace drive or if this has been removed put a power source where it was situated to do the job and it has no need for the seat so it might be acheivable using the current one.

ya, that's it, just put 2 under or in the wings. the 302 isn't a small bird. there shouldn't be any size issue

_Owen_
July 22nd, 2005, 09:42 AM
Yes you are right, the Rail Guns, the actual rail part could be removed, it would greatly decrease the required space. Assuming that each X-302 has a naquadah or naqadria generator to power the hyperspace window generator, then the rail guns could be hooked into that. Sorry, my mistake.

Owen Macri

ColonelWilliams
July 22nd, 2005, 11:49 AM
yeah i think that would be sweet because they could still hold missles and save em for the capital ships and own the smaller craft with the rail guns. they could hold a lot more ammo too. this addition to the 302 would make it a lot better and more efficient imo

-the col.

_Owen_
July 22nd, 2005, 11:54 AM
I agree, it would probably help significantly, and while they are add it, make antimatter projectiles with phase shifting capabilites, the 302, while they are at that, they could give the ship itself phase shifting capabilities. With these additions, plus my redundant shielding and flawless inertial dampeners. I believe that 1 X-302 could take on the entire fleet of Wraith hive ships, Darts, and Cruisers. I am not over estimating.

Owen Macri

Avatar28
July 25th, 2005, 04:39 PM
While you're at it, why not use the blackhole blowing up sun trick to take out a Wraith fleet. Kind of how

The Daedalus intercepted the wraith fleet coming out of hyperspace. Assuming they were near a sun and depending on the range for the remote activation of the gate, they could possibly have dropped a gate towards the sun and dialed the black hole planet. Even though it's in a different galaxy, I think I can safely guarantee that a star would be able to provide MORE than enough energy to dial out. The wraith ships appear and seconds later the sun explodes, boom! No more wraith fleet. Nobody really knows what happened, the assumption is just bad timing. :-)

_Owen_
July 25th, 2005, 05:02 PM
That is a good idea, however the gate would need to dial while already recieving energy from the star. So you would have to use some kind of remote dialer, depending on the range, maybe a puddle jumper would do it. If it is too far, perhaps a signal through subspace, but then you would need subpace sensors on the gate, which probably wouldn't be hard to accomplish, sheild them in naquadah and the stars heat probably wouldn't effect them.

Owen Macri

valha'lla
July 25th, 2005, 05:03 PM
well the one problem with the above statment is the fact that u need alot of power to create a worm hole like that like a ZPM and ud have to keep it on gate and sheild both it and the gate so not really fesiable given the small amount of time between events. Or the fact that we want to keep the ZPM we did not want it im sure causing it to exlplode would take care of the wraith fleet

_Owen_
July 25th, 2005, 06:28 PM
Well we proposed that the star which we were blowing up could provide the excess power required. It wouldn't be as powerfull as a ZPM but it would probably do the trick.

Owen Macri

valha'lla
July 26th, 2005, 03:45 AM
Might do the trick i guess butif u are talikng about the atliantis gate is that not attached to the floor of the city? Pluse it the only gate that looks like that so they could not reuse the prop :D lol

_Owen_
July 26th, 2005, 09:07 AM
Yes, of course the Atlantis gate would not be used, but I don't think it would be a problem to get it out, the Asgard transporter could do it, and if all else fails, Plasma torches!

Owen Macri

Lord §okar
July 27th, 2005, 09:14 PM
It doesn't necesarily have to be purple, I thought it looked blue, but whatever. Anyways, the immense speeds of the projectiles within an oxygen rich atmosphere would convert the surrounding gas to plasma.

Owen Macri
No. I can't comment on the verity of your theory without research, but they are going no where near fast enough to cause that. Those are tracer rounds glowing.

_Owen_
July 27th, 2005, 09:23 PM
They are being propeled at Mach 5 I have not investigated either, but it seems likley that they could convert the surrounding gas to plasma, one would need to calculate the mass of the projectile, the surface area, the amount of friction between the projectile and the surrounding gas and the heat created by that amount of friction. Once that is calculated one only needs to compare the figures of the heat being emmited by the projectile and the heat required to convert a gas to plasma, as well you would need to factor in the previous air temperature, without these figures it is impossible to calculate, so I am simply assuming that the speeds would be great enough. I can do no more than assume, as well in this case neither can you.

Owen Macri

Gargen
August 25th, 2005, 02:36 PM
i think the asgard might have helped a bit in making pack a bigger punch, oh and the US government has even developed weopons that are quite large but actually fire a shot of some form of energy (not sure) but they will be in testing stages for a while

nimitz
August 25th, 2005, 02:56 PM
Do you mean like the airborne laser project which theyre trying to put on boeing 747s.They could probaly super power one using the naquadria engine and give it a sheild penetraiting capabilities.Which could be a good weapon as long as youre oppent does not have a naquada hull.

Schrodinger82
August 25th, 2005, 04:18 PM
Simple, we made them. Even today in real life we have rail guns. The rail gun is not an energy weapon, they give that illusion, but they are not. The reason they look like they fire energy is because they launch the projectiles at Mach five, they are moving incredibly fast, and in an atmosphere, they would superheat the gas around them, converting it to plasma, which would help with the illusion.

Even in space?

Lord §okar
August 25th, 2005, 06:38 PM
It doesn't necesarily have to be purple, I thought it looked blue, but whatever. Anyways, the immense speeds of the projectiles within an oxygen rich atmosphere would convert the surrounding gas to plasma.
No they wouldn't, first of all it wouldn't become plasma, second the gas would have to be hotter than the surface of a blue giant star, over 20,000K. Thirdly, the projectile must have so much kinetic energy that it can impart that kind of heat for many seconds, which they don't and lastly any metal that hot would vapourize instantly, ignoring the disruptive effects of travelling through an atmosphere.

_Owen_
August 27th, 2005, 09:45 PM
While that sounds like a large temperature, it really isn't a lightning bolt it between 30,000 and 27,000 Kelvins, last I read. There is nothing to say that the projectiles are not made out of a strengthend alloy, native to the Stargate Universe. As well, the speed is not impossible to achieve especially with the power sources readily available in the Stargate universe.

Owen Macri

Col. Newman
August 27th, 2005, 10:23 PM
Why can't you guys just except that those blue "glowy things" are tracers they are moving to slowly to be the actual rounds

Avatar28
August 30th, 2005, 05:16 PM
Tracers works for me. He's right, Owen. Unless it has an outer coating that ablating (which is possible I suppose) it's most likely a tracer round. Actually, since the railgun won't fire anything that's not a projectile and it doesn't use a chemical explosive to ignite the tracer, I'm not sure how that would work.

Regardless, it may all be a moot point since even IRL without the advanced gate tech, the military has managed to shrink a laser like the one in a 747 into a much smaller size. It's likely that we will have fighters equipped with high energy lasers within a few years. Screw your rail guns! ;-)

cozzerob
August 30th, 2005, 11:41 PM
rail guns have their advantages tho - no messy powder everywhere -
just clean lead -> target resulting in death.

Also, the rails guns are probably our best chance of propelling small projectiles at very high speed, imparting massive amounts of energy on impact and causing significant damage - think 'our version of the ion cannon'.

Temp2
August 31st, 2005, 08:14 AM
Regardless, it may all be a moot point since even IRL without the advanced gate tech, the military has managed to shrink a laser like the one in a 747 into a much smaller size. It's likely that we will have fighters equipped with high energy lasers within a few years. Screw your rail guns! ;-) Well, yeah, considering that with proper targeting systems, I would think that a laser-armed F-35 or one of the AL-1s could take out a railgun's projectiles. At any rate... screw railguns. We need Gauss Rifles!

Avatar28
August 31st, 2005, 10:41 AM
Well, yeah, considering that with proper targeting systems, I would think that a laser-armed F-35 or one of the AL-1s could take out a railgun's projectiles. At any rate... screw railguns. We need Gauss Rifles!

AKA Coil guns. Definitely the better way to go for very high speed stuff I'm thinking, as long as the timing issues for the magnets can be worked out. Maybe it could be used to get the thing up into relativistic speeds.

EnigmaNZ
August 31st, 2005, 04:40 PM
Try googling railgun and coilgun. You have heard of the magnalev trains in japan and I think germany. Work on the same principle. As does a motor or generator.

Basically, take a pair of conducting rails, place an armature between them, connect the rails to a dc power source, apply power, it goes from one rail, through the armature, to the other rail, so the armature has to be in contact. This creates a force that causes the armature to move along the rails. MHD propulsion uses a similar principle to work. T

he problems today are the large power requiremnts prohibiting portability, extreme wear on the rails from the friction of the armature and arcing, and the magnetic field forcing the rails apart causing distortions in the rails if the support structure is not strong enough.

They are looking at graphite armatures to lessen the wear and various compact power sources, such as making the ship or ground vehicle all electric, then using some of the power (applies to solid state lasers as well).

The advantage of a RG are the speed of the projectile, making an explosive warhead unnecessary, like the lastest patriot 3 with it's KE warhead, and not having to carry the means to move the shell in each projectile makes it smaller and easier to handle.

As an example;

1 Kg KEP @ 10 Kps = 50 Mj = 12.5 Kg TNT Eqivalent. (KEP energy focused on the same sized spot as the penetrator's diameter) As a comparison, the 120mm APFSDS KEP round from a modern tank has a yield on impact of about 18 - 20 Mj.

50 Kg KEP @ 10 Kps = 2.5 Gj = 625 Kg TNT Eq.

2000 Kg KEP @ 100 Kps = 10 Tj = 2500 tons of TNT approx eqivalent yield.

In the SG universe, power is plentiful thanks to naquadah generators, naquadah is strong and a superconductor, ideal for the rails, and trinium is strong and light, ideal for strong support structures, with carbon fibre for non support areas.

One advantage in SG is that most battles are short ranged, the biggest problem is getting a warhead to the enemy before he destroys it. If you can fire a RG projectile at 10 Kps, then a battle at that distance would see the projectile hitting the enemy a second after leaving the barrel. If we want to be able to strike the enemy at ranges out to 100 Km, then we probably need to look at 100 Kps, perhaps a spinal RG with 100 Kps for engagements at these ranges, and shorter turreted RG's with 10 Kps cababilty for short to medium range duels, both firing Mk 8's, the spinal cannon also firing Mk 9 warheads.

The CIWS RG seems to have a velocity of approx 1.5 Kps, ie approx mach 5, at 250 miles (so what is it when it leaves the barrel). Was this referring to it's performance in space, in an atmosphere, I wish they would be clearer in their statements. Prosumably space. In an atmosphere air resistance would mean a LOT faster when fired. 10,000 rounds in such a compact space would keep the calibre down, probably quite small. If they were man handling a 10,000 round mag, the individual rounds may be only 10 grams or so max.

10 grams traveling at 1.5 Kps = about 75 Kw KE on impact, multiplied by the number of rounds impacting per second. 20 seems reasonable (1200 rpm) so thats about 1.5 Mj per sec (1.5 Mw)

Speculation folks, hehehe.

Interesting site.
http://www.powerlabs.org/railgun2.htm

Lord §okar
August 31st, 2005, 05:57 PM
While that sounds like a large temperature, it really isn't a lightning bolt it between 30,000 and 27,000 Kelvins, last I read. There is nothing to say that the projectiles are not made out of a strengthend alloy, native to the Stargate Universe. As well, the speed is not impossible to achieve especially with the power sources readily available in the Stargate universe.

Owen Macri
While that sounds like a large temperature, it really isn't a lightning bolt it between 30,000 and 27,000 Kelvins, last I read.
So because lightning it hotter 20,000K isn't really big at all? It's an immense temperature.

There is nothing to say that the projectiles are not made out of a strengthend alloy, native to the Stargate Universe.
Of course there isn't, except, well common-sense and a little knowledge of chemistry. Try it out.

As well, the speed is not impossible to achieve especially with the power sources readily available in the Stargate universe.
Erm, how fast do they look like they're going, to you?

FreeStyLA
September 1st, 2005, 07:35 AM
While that sounds like a large temperature, it really isn't a lightning bolt it between 30,000 and 27,000 Kelvins, last I read.
So because lightning it hotter 20,000K isn't really big at all? It's an immense temperature.

There is nothing to say that the projectiles are not made out of a strengthend alloy, native to the Stargate Universe.
Of course there isn't, except, well common-sense and a little knowledge of chemistry. Try it out.

As well, the speed is not impossible to achieve especially with the power sources readily available in the Stargate universe.
Erm, how fast do they look like they're going, to you?

I tend to agree... the Colonel said "Mach 5" for the projectile... at that speed it is doubtful that it would superheat the air to make it become plasma like. For comparison if I recall... the average velocities for bullets from rifles stand at approximately Mach 3... which isn't that great of a difference. Rockets, probes, The Space Shuttle: Upon re-entry into the earth's atmosphere, they will be speeding down at approximately 28,000km/h and at that speed, it is enough to ionise the air so that radio signals cannot be sent either in or out of the spacecraft. On the ascent to space, I think (not sure though) that rockets do achieve Mach 5 way before they get into space or get to such a height where the atmosphere has been sufficiently rarified.

I also know that the SR-71 Blackbird developed by the US Air Force a number of years ago (but which has now been retired and no longer in use) was able to achieve Mach 3 using ramjet engines (not scramjets... they are still being tested out currently). As far as I know, even at that speed, the conversion of air to plasma did not occur.

FreeStyLA
September 1st, 2005, 07:45 AM
Basically when it comes down to it... the blue/purple streaks are there just for show I guess... the general audience doesn't have a highly scientific mind with regards to such stuff... and also I guess the blue/purple streaks simply look cool. We know the movie "Eraser" starring Arnold Schwarzenegger also had railguns and yet the visual of the path of the projectile looks a lot different to the one shown on Atlantis. So yeah... it's just for show... If I were to haphazard another statement of sorts... the projectile of the railgun shouldn't be travelling at Mach 5... railguns are designed to get the projectile at even greater speeds than that... I'd use my common sense and say in excess of Mach 10. The projectiles themselves need not be very big... they can be smaller than a bullet (even a 9mm standard) but as long as the velocity is suitably high... they can create a lot of damage.

The formula for kinetic energy is:

K.E. = (1/2)m*(v^2)

in words:

Kinetic Energy = (half) multiplied by (m) multiplied by (v squared)

where m = mass of the object
v = velocity

increasing the velocity has a much greater effect on energy imparted than increasing the mass.

However to get velocities you do need a lot of current... and I guess with that... anything goes in the Stargate universe... but when I say a lot... you need A LOT.

Indum'kra
September 1st, 2005, 10:14 AM
Nota big military type, but what are tracers? what's their purpose?

Is that temp really necessary for plasma to occur? Since when shuttles come down out of orbit, plasma has been observed forming outside on the superheated hull.

nimitz
September 1st, 2005, 10:51 AM
Tracers are a bullet that travels slower and lights up.They are used so a person knows were theyre fired.

Indum'kra
September 1st, 2005, 11:42 AM
Tracers are a bullet that travels slower and lights up.They are used so a person knows were theyre fired.
Interesting.....It would be cool if they didn't then we had rail-gun sniping.....

Lord §okar
September 1st, 2005, 04:22 PM
Why is that? A sniper rifle that emits truly stupendous magnetic fields, dislocates your shoulder with every shot and has only enough energy in its battery to fire twice.

Is that temp really necessary for plasma to occur? Since when shuttles come down out of orbit, plasma has been observed forming outside on the superheated hull.
Yes, to emit purple light it nees to be even hotter than 20 kilokelvins. Hotter than 30, to be more specific.