Re: [HoE] Re: Tech Level

["Eric Young" <ecyoung@mediaone.net>]

>> >True, but Fleschette's have poor armor penetration, and are really
>> >only effective against human targets.  A conventional bullet is more
>> >versatile.....
>>
>>
>> What else would you be shooting at with an assault rifle?
>
>Humvees, LAVs, helicopters.....
>Infantry in bunkers
>

But doesn't the army's OICW project suggest that you should be using 20mm
"smart" grenades against those targets?

>> That's exactly my point though. I'm not looking for a
>> substantial change,
>> just some change. I don't want everyone running around with
>> phasers, but
>> for the most part the weapons listed in HOE are all 1950's
>> technology. I
>> would expect that in 100 years caseless ammo would be the standard and
>> buying cased ammo weapons would be like buying black powder
>> weapons now.
>> I'm sure that in 100 years at least a few countries would be issuing
>> flechette weapons. ETC weapons would probably be in limited
>> use as well.
>
>Oh, so we agree?

I don't think we ever really disagreed, it was just a matter of a different
point of view. I was never looking for a huge advance in weapon tech, just
something a little more advanced than what is commonly available now.

>What's ETC?

Electrothermal-Chemical: An ETC round consists of a projectile exactly like
that fired by a conventional powder charge and a casing behind it. This
casing consists of two parts, a fuel supply and a combustion chamber. The
fuel can consist of any fluid, even water, although chemically energetic
fluids work best (the difference between basic ET weapons and ETC is that
ETC harnesses and enhances the chemical energy of the working fluid, rather
than using an inert working fluid). A powerful electric current converts
the fuel in the combustion chamber to a plasma state, which escapes out the
front of the casing and propels the projectile down the barrel. How is this
different from a conventional round and what makes it more efficient?
 Conventional barrels are designed to withstand the high pressures created
by firing the explosive that propels the round out of a gun. However, a
conventional explosive propellant produces a dramatic pressure spike at the
breach end of the barrel, which falls off dramatically as the projectile
moves down the barrel (as the volume of space behind it in the barrel
increases). This means that even though most guns have reinforced breaches
and thinner barrels near the muzzel, they are capable of withstanding much
more pressure toward the end of the barrel than they are called on to
withstand.
 In the case of ETC however, the fuel is not converted to a plasma all at
once. The initial conversion creates pressure behind the projectile
similiar to that found in a conventional weapon, but as the projectile
moves down the barrel, the casing continous to convert fuel to plasma,
maintaining the same pressure in the barrel. ETC propulsion techniques
allow effective doubling of muzzel energy without any increase in the
weight of the weapon (although some additional recoil compensation may be
necessary).

All info from the book "Fire, Fusion, and Steel".

The last I heard ETC weapons are currently in the prototype testing phase.

Eric