this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
117 points (81.6% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6611 readers
610 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.

Join our Matrix chatroom

Other communities you may be interested in

Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Shit@sh.itjust.works
OttoVonNoob@lemmy.ca
fist_of_fartitude@sh.itjust.works
verity_kindle@sh.itjust.works
verity_kindle@lemmy.world
skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
nuke@sh.itjust.works
skillissuer@sh.itjust.works
Estiar@sh.itjust.works
neidu2@feddit.nl
neidu3@sh.itjust.works
117
Lasers won’t make noise and aren’t moving a physical mass that would create sound as it passes by. (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 11 months ago by CDRMITTENS@sh.itjust.works to c/noncredibledefense@sh.itjust.works
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 125 points 11 months ago (2 children)

A laser that is powerful enough to hurt a human target (especially a human target with body armor) is going to be powerful enough that it'll be ionizing the air to some degree. It'll be like a lightning bolt, there'll be flashes of light and sharp cracking sounds. That's also ignoring the fact that the random bits of terrain that the laser is hitting will also be exploding. Someone under "suppressing fire" from a laser weapon would be quite aware of the fact.

[–] quicksand@lemm.ee 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Also whatever you're using to generate that much energy will make noise as well

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago

Yes, but it might be a power plant hundreds of kms away.

[–] Dimand@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The pure joy of putting a single joule of optical power into a sub nanosecond pulse.

For those not familiar with lasers, that's a GW of instantaneous power that you can focus down to a micron sized spot.

https://youtu.be/Z1Xky_ermd4?si=1Luz0fuzm4kcwIwc

All that said, the successful laser weapons right now seem to all be anti drone/aircraft and they are typically using tracked CW (not pulsed) lasers with heating over time to avoid atmospheric lensing. Lots of challenges to overcome in getting pulsed energy a long way through air.

[–] vivadanang@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I was wondering if we'd see pulsed lasers in anti-drone warfare.... the power supply advantages aside, focusing on just the right point in time with the pulse seems hard.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The hard part is predicting atmospheric effects to get the focus right. It's basically impossible without some form of just in time compensation. One idea I've seen is that you fire a physical projectile and use that to calibrate the focal point at arbitrary distance, almost like a laser tracer.

[–] Dimand@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

It's not easy but you can correct the atmosphere. This is done with guide stars and adaptive optics.

The bigger challenge is that for intense pulsed lasers, the standard laser profile causes them to self focus in air through nonlinear effects. To overcome this you need to make weird profiles like top hats that are much hard to get just right.

This is a fundamentally physical limitation that is pretty tricky to overcome.

[–] Antimoon51@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

It might be hard, but with the processing power we can fit into microchips these days I'd say we fixed harder problems already. I mean, the controller needs at least two cameras or another methode of locating the target and estimating the distance, but I'd guess we could completely get rid of time of flight calculations as the light pulse would be instant for that matter.

But again: I'm just guessing here

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 51 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Suppressive fire is already an obselete doctrine. That's why the British army is replacing their machine guns with DMRs (Canadian military may be heading in the same direction).

Turns out turning a motherfuckers head into a fine red mist with a 7.62 tends to make everyone else around them really eager to seek cover. The threat of a well placed shot has a far better suppressing effect than the reality of a bunch of inaccurate fire.

[–] FocusFire@lemm.ee 29 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

What's with the credible takes?

Sir this is NCD

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 36 points 11 months ago (4 children)

May I propose a fully-automatic, belt-fed 7.62 sniper rifle as a noncredible happy medium?

[–] Narrrz@kbin.social 18 points 11 months ago

borderlands has entered the chat

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think you meant to say .22LR APFSDS DMGG (designated marksman gatling gun)

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Does anyone hear a popcorn machine?

[–] FocusFire@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

Now this is the quality content I come here for

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

It's just the car gun from The Jackal.

[–] cro_magnon_gilf@sopuli.xyz 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Curious where you found a credible take.

This "we're past machine guns now" thing has been tried multiple times before, including by the brits.

our rifles will shoot better instead

our rifles will shoot more instead

I wonder what MG they'll get after this doesn't work

[–] Stuka@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Sounds more like somebody doesn't want to spend as much on small arms ammo than found a superior infantry doctrine

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 12 points 11 months ago

I'd imagine a sniper is probably one of the most effective ways to suppress a group. They probably don't know where the shots are coming from, and don't know when it's safe to move again.

Having said that, I would imagine there are situations where traditional suppression is better. A hail of bullets against the side of an APC is probably terrifying even if none of them are getting through. It's going to be tough to get someone to open the hatch as the bullets are flying in. But, with designated marksmen only, you'd have to wait until the enemy tries to get out of the APC and then make a tough shot to hit them as they do.

[–] state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 11 months ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_marksman_rifle for those who had no idea what the fuck a DMR was.

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I don't know, I'd probably at least duck if the fucking Macrowave started ionizing the piss out of the air near my face.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago

I am a simple man. I see styropyro and I upvote while he is still alive.

[–] MightyGalhupo@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Yeah macrowave

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 13 points 11 months ago

The purpose of suppressive fire is to force the enemy to keep their heads down, so that you can flank them or something. Unless what you're firing is harmless, it could be used to suppress.

[–] teft@startrek.website 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

You also wont be able to see them with the naked eye. Imagine you're on patrol and your buddy drops dead and there was no sound and no visible sign except the crackling from the fire that carved a hole in his chest. War is already scary enough tyvm. Everyone is going to have to wear white or reflective gear.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago

or reflective gear

It would be fun if the silver spandex of classic Sci-Fi turned out to be standard uniforms to counter laser fire.

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Just like with snipers today, although i suspect that giant laser is not optimal weapon in high stakes hide and seek game

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago (4 children)

If there's a constellation of them orbiting a few hundred kilometers up they'll be pretty optimal. Like fairly optimal. Sufficiently optimal.

[–] Narrrz@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

satisfactorily optimal.

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You can't hide those from ground-based anti-satellite laser

It'll be like with GBAD in Ukraine but in space, and satellites can shoot at other satellites too

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Okay, hear me out: camouflage. Desert camo for the satellites orbiting between Earth and Mars. Ocean gray for satellites orbiting between Earth and Neptune. And we can get Hugo Boss to design the camouflage for the satellites between the Earth and the moon.

[–] LockMartRep@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

I like your style

[–] carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The atmosphere wants a word with you.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

we can shoot that too

[–] brianorca@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

If they are wearing white, all the better to see them, and use a variety of guns on them. Besides, no white is perfect, even when clean, (which won't last long) so the laser would still chew them up.

[–] cosmic_skillet@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Also depends on the frequency of radiation used. Does it reflect infrared or microwaves? UV?

[–] brianorca@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

All true, but nothing reflects 100% even in the best case.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago

At very high power levels they would displace air via conduction heating.

[–] Kalothar@lemmy.ca 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Yeah, a large part of suppressive fire is that the enemy doesn’t want to be randomly wounded.

[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

We gotta make the guns make the PEW PEW PEW sounds

[–] Kanda@reddthat.com 7 points 11 months ago

If people were not aware of the suppressive fire, you'd be shooting it and watch people melt out of nowhere

[–] Narrrz@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm just sad that plasma weapons are essentially a no-go in an atmospheric environment...

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 11 months ago

plasma glows so it's visible from far away, why not check out this sick neutral particle beam that already works https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a26858944/pentagon-particle-beam-space-2023/

[–] bouh@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Time to fall back to suppressive drone strikes!

[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

Meh. If I saw a bunch of people pointing shit at me and the smell of ozone that would work, probably indefinitely.

[–] Fades@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

who knows, maybe the charging makes a sound or something else, not the laser itself

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ominous hummmmmmm.

[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago

You could mount a speaker in a big round case.

[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

They sound like this "pew pew pewww"

[–] EvilEyedPanda@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If Star Wars has taught me anything, this is incorrect, well still be sitting at about a 35% hit rate.