 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le Forgeron wrote:
>> I'm wondering if it wasn't Minority Report....
No, it wasn't.
> Nope, the movie name in french was "L'effaceur", "Eraser" in english.
Ah, yeah, I thought it might be. I can never remember which was which...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> Mmm... I wonder if I could model it with POV-Ray...?
...no, I can't.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Mon, 22 Oct 2007 15:34:58 +0100, Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom>
did spake, saying:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>> Red Faction 1 & 2 had an thermal vision rail gun which was very cool;
>
> Or the cursed Celtic Scythe that had the mode it would suck up the
> life-force from whoever's limbs you chopped off with it. *Very* slow to
> "reload" as you had to wait for it to finish sucking up the hit points,
> but useful if you knew only one enemy was near.
>
> Or the Invoke spell, that either brings (some types of) dead enemies
> back to life to fight for you, or causes (some types of) live enemies to
> commit suicide. Just don't use it on the enemies with the dynamite,
> unless you have somewhere to run to very quickly.
Clive Barker's "Undying" for those wondering. I'm looking forward to
"Jericho" now I've got something that'll play it. Oh and yeah I did like
Invoke.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> Le Forgeron wrote:
>
>>> I'm wondering if it wasn't Minority Report....
>
> No, it wasn't.
>
>> Nope, the movie name in french was "L'effaceur", "Eraser" in english.
>
> Ah, yeah, I thought it might be. I can never remember which was which...
Eraser is a ridiculous film in many ways, and although the basic premise
for the gun is a real one, I'm not too convinced by its high-tec
sighting software or the dubious claim that it can fire projectiles at
near lightspeed (especially when you can see them moving onscreen when
they do fire). It does have one of the Governator's 'best' crap
one-liners, however - during a gunfight at a zoo they unwittingly
release a large crocodile, which Arnie then dispatches with the line
"You're lugguge!"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> although the basic premise for the gun is a real one,
Sure. You try holding a weapon that fires something at relativistic speeds.
If you want a realistic treatment, read "A Boy And His Tank." Anyone
outside the armored vehicles within about 300 meters was toast.
>I'm not too convinced by its high-tec
> sighting software
No.
> or the dubious claim that it can fire projectiles at near lightspeed
That's what a railgun is for.
>(especially when you can see them moving onscreen when
> they do fire).
You're only seeing the shockwave. ;-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>> although the basic premise for the gun is a real one,
>
> Sure. You try holding a weapon that fires something at relativistic speeds.
>
> If you want a realistic treatment, read "A Boy And His Tank." Anyone
> outside the armored vehicles within about 300 meters was toast.
I read somewhere that if you were to fire a "bullet" at near-light
speeds, it would be more like bein irradiated with "lead radiation" than
being hit by a solid object...
But anyway, even without relativity, the recoil would be absurd.
>> or the dubious claim that it can fire projectiles at near lightspeed
>
> That's what a railgun is for.
Well... technically a railgun (not to be confused with a coilgun) fires
projectiles using electrical propolsion. There's nothing in the
definition about how fast. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 wrote:
>> If you want a realistic treatment, read "A Boy And His Tank." Anyone
>> outside the armored vehicles within about 300 meters was toast.
>
> I read somewhere that if you were to fire a "bullet" at near-light
> speeds, it would be more like bein irradiated with "lead radiation" than
> being hit by a solid object...
Well, in an atmosphere, it would be like being hit by an explosion, as
you pile up all the air in front of it. Plus, don't forget all that nice
gamma-burst radiation. (The railguns in the story actually had to fire
for a few thousand rounds to punch a hole in the atmosphere so the
needles wouldn't just vaporize.)
> But anyway, even without relativity, the recoil would be absurd.
Yep. If it can go thru a concrete wall coming out the front, the stock
can certainly break your shoulder. I mean, the big guns on a battle ship
will roll the ship in the water, and there's a serious problem with
modern tanks getting rolled over if they're traveling fast when they
fire a shell a couple miles, even if it's only a sabot.
> Well... technically a railgun (not to be confused with a coilgun) fires
> projectiles using electrical propolsion. There's nothing in the
> definition about how fast. ;-)
True. But to get the electrical propultion to work, the projectile needs
to be pretty small, which means it needs to go pretty fast. Otherwise
it's more of a thrower than a firearm. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>
> You forgot "It shoots through walls", altho I must admit I never really
> learned to take advantage of that feature, given the difficulty of
> *aiming* thru walls.
>
I found that once you learned a map really well, this actually became
reasonably easy to do, particularly since I think the gun has a bit of
spray after it goes through a wall. Once you learned an area well,
you'd know things like:
- Ok, they just went through that door, so if they run in the normal
pattern they''l be coming behind this point in the wall/floor in about a
second and a half.
- I just heard an elevator, and there's only two of those in the level,
so I'll quickly fire off a shot through the wall of the room adjacent to
one of them.
It actually got to the point when my friends and I learned that we
needed to do things like press elevators and not get on them, or run
around corners, stop, wait for the tau cannon blast or grenade through
the window, then continue.
I also liked the use of the tau cannon for propelling yourself through
the air at crazy speeds.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Well, in an atmosphere, it would be like being hit by an explosion, as you
> pile up all the air in front of it.
Wouldn't something going that fast vaporize immediately when it hit the air
going that fast? Doesn't stuff that going only a fraction of that speed
burn up in the outer atmosphere?
> Plus, don't forget all that nice gamma-burst radiation. (The railguns in
> the story actually had to fire for a few thousand rounds to punch a hole
> in the atmosphere so the needles wouldn't just vaporize.)
Ah yes, ok :-)
>> Well... technically a railgun (not to be confused with a coilgun) fires
>> projectiles using electrical propolsion. There's nothing in the
>> definition about how fast. ;-)
>
> True. But to get the electrical propultion to work, the projectile needs
> to be pretty small, which means it needs to go pretty fast. Otherwise it's
> more of a thrower than a firearm. :-)
In one of our lectures at university the dude had this rail-gun. It was
about 2 metres long and plugged into the 420V 3-phase power supply. He
loaded it with a brass (I think) solid lump of metal that was in a pointy
bullet shape. It wasn't small, about 10cm diameter and 30cm long. When he
flicked the switch it punched through (and got stuck in) a big bit of wood
just off the end of the bench he was using. Rig up 10 or 20 metres of that
baby and it would be interesting :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Bill Pragnell wrote:
>> although the basic premise for the gun is a real one,
>
> Sure. You try holding a weapon that fires something at relativistic speeds.
I meant the railgun aspect - accelerating the projectile using
electromagnetics.
>> or the dubious claim that it can fire projectiles at near lightspeed
>
> That's what a railgun is for.
No it's not. A railgun accelerates a projectile with something like a
linear accelerator. You get a fast-moving slug but I don't think
anyone's under the illusion that it could be relativistic.
> You're only seeing the shockwave. ;-)
Hmm. *shakes head dubiously*
:)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
