DAL59

Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical questions

Recommended Posts

On 1/14/2019 at 3:00 AM, p1t1o said:

There exists today, proposals for systems operating on a similar principle, but slightly less sci-fi. 

The high-velocity jet of a shaped charge can be disrupted with magnetic/electric fields, the advantage here is that the jet is only destructive if well aligned/focused so it only takes a moderate disruption to negate its penetration.

It relies not on a static magnetic field, but on the current flow between two layers of armour. One layer is highly chaged and a pentrating jet connects the circuit to the other, the resulting current generates fields which "spatter" the jet.

It is hoped that it can be upgraded to deal - by dumping enough energy into it to cause it to melt - with kinetic "rod" type projectiles one day.

I am not sure how far this has gotten or if it is vaporware however.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_Armor

https://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/6098489/BMTDSL-Electric-Armour-for-Armoured-Vehicles-Casestudy.pdf

I read about explosive tank armour many years ago, using the end result: the explosive on top of the armour defocuses the cutting jet of the shaped charge on the incoming warhead. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seemed a little too appropriate to not add in to the thread...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

I read about explosive tank armour many years ago, using the end result: the explosive on top of the armour defocuses the cutting jet of the shaped charge on the incoming warhead. 

Kinetic deformation (or, in at least one model produced by Denel, it would appear that the armour is purposefully detonated at range) is much easier than relying on electromagnetic forces and basically wrapping your tank in capacitors.

Problem is, things smaller than tanks have a problem not imploding from ordinary ERA, and nearby infantry gets shredded by Arena-style 'flying claymores', which encourages the search for these sorts of exotic systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reunited mongolian empire vs reunited roman empire, Rome gets Turkey, who would win?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

Reunited mongolian empire vs reunited roman empire, Rome gets Turkey, who would win?

Mongolians lose at first. Then they use their guerilla tactics and wreck havoc on Rome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Xd the great said:

Then they use their guerilla tactics

(Tries to imagine the ancient Mongolian guerilleros...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

(Tries to imagine the ancient Mongolian guerilleros...)

*Charges foward, fires arrows, as enemy returns fire or falls into turtle formation, run and disperse*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DAL59 said:

Reunited mongolian empire vs reunited roman empire, Rome gets Turkey, who would win?

At their respective historical tech and pop level? Neither. Roman territory is unfavourable to Mongol cavalry operations, even without the Empire’s immense fortifications. It’d be a draw.

Russian experience is extremely pertinent here, because we sit north of a steppe corridor which kept spewing forth nomandic tribe after nomadic tribe from the Eurasian interior; the Mongols were just meaner than usual, and after the main empire disintegrated we had to, among other things, deal with the Crimean Khanate, who partook in the Islamic slave trade in addition to ordinary plunder. The result with the zasekas, which were pretty damn close to the Imperial Limes, and they at least worked well enough to keep reestablising them as the borders moved south.

At present? Having China is instant victory through sheer trampling numbers. A total war would probably involve eight-digit militaries.

Edited by DDE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that setting USA belongs to ...?

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

In that setting USA belongs to ...?

Sweden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DDE said:

Sweden.

So, the German tribes attacking the Roman Empire from North.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

So, the German tribes attacking the Roman Empire from North.

I’m more thinking about selling cigarettes and Bofors guns to either side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DDE said:

At present? Having China is instant victory through sheer trampling numbers. A total war would probably involve eight-digit militaries.

How, logistically, would they get 5000 miles to Roman territory from China without being bombed and landmined?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

How, logistically, would they get 5000 miles to Roman territory from China without being bombed and landmined?  

1) we really need to tie-down what era this is happening in.

2) If one side has bombs + mines, the other side has the modern countermeasures to deal with them.

3) More practical question would be - who is paying for these 8-figure armies to march halfway around the world? Modern warfare limited by money and fuel far more than by offensive/defensive technology. When was the last time a modern nation pulled out of a warzone because they were physically defeated rather than politically motivated to cease operations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, p1t1o said:

) we really need to tie-down what era this is happening in.

right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, DAL59 said:
48 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

) we really need to tie-down what era this is happening in.

right now

What about Celts and Germans? Do they attack Rome from NW?
Does Italy still keeps the legions on the Hadrian's Wall?

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

What about Celts and Germans? Do they attack Rome from NW?
Does Italy still keeps the legions on the Hadrian's Wall?

All other countries are neutral, militaries in modern locations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DAL59 said:

All other countries are neutral, militaries in modern locations.

Hungary and Balkanian Slavic states have some problems with that, as the Migration Period was just starting in the times of Roman Empire.
Western and Eastern Slavic states even more.

Turkey and Iran are exactly between those two, as Parthian Empire was.

Though the Egyptian fleet is strong like now.

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

Hadrian's Wall

There's a wet'n'wild there now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And only one small Gaulish village still keeps the secret of a magic drink which they pour into M45 and M51 SLBM rockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roman Empire would have a slightly larger air force and navy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess, depending on who owns the British and French missiles (Romans or local barbarians), there could be a draw.
The opponents are far away from each other, so the land battles would be expensive and tedious. "Roman Empire" has some superiority in missiles and aviation, "Mongolian Empire" in land forces amount and territory.
So, noone could eliminate the opponent, but both will be tired.

And then there are neutral Germans and Slavs to the North of them both...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its basically turned into the militaries of Europe vs. the militaries of Asia.

But it turns out we actually have quite a good idea what a ground invasion of Europe from the East would look like.

Just take those projections made for the Fulda gap during the cold war and scale up by about 2-400% and you're about there I reckon. Weapons and units are more sophisticated today, but no great paradigm-shifts in warfighting since then.

Massed ground assault vs defence in depth with a seasoning of nuclear escalation.

 

Most projections had the West holding out against a Soviet assault....but only just. It would have come down to the vaguaries of war and nuclear politics.

Now increase the invading force by several times and the picture looks a lot more hopeful for the East and the West doesnt have much else to add to the table (Cold war already involved all NATO countries).

So my reckoning is that it would be a easy success for the East, barring nuclear exchange which would level the playing field somewhat, but might destroy the thing being fought over.

Edited by p1t1o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to start politics, but I believe that Fulda gap story irl would finish with a general truce (but ruined and rebuilt again Germany) in a month or two.

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler

The Romans would of course use their cloaking device.

... err ... no ... wrong movie. Those were the Romulans ... nevermind.

Btw., the Romulan Roman Empire finally (phew) ended 1453 ;-) Renaissance is dawning ...

Edited by Green Baron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.