Difference between revisions of "Talk:Particle Projector Cannon"

Line 14: Line 14:
 
:As energy weapons, they should be recoilless. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 01:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 
:As energy weapons, they should be recoilless. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 01:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
  
Totally not unique. Not to be too wikish, but no sources, just where are we getting that, cause lots of universes use some kind of particle projection technology. Largely because its real, like most BattleTech tech, its based on real theoretical, but as of yet unfeasible, technology, patented in this case by Nikola Tesla in the 30s. As for recoil, not to be combative, but you should think. It causes impact damage as well as energy, therefor conservation of momentum tells us it must possess recoil, although that could be dampened or out and out countered (as there are many ballistic recoilless weapons in existance). The PPC projects particles from itself against the target, this is infact essiantially the same process as is used for ion engines, which project Xenon particles to push themselves through space, as the lack something other than themselves to push against (as is the case with tires on a road or rotor blades on the air). Infact, I believe Tesla's designs called for Xenon to be used, a brilliant, crazy man. Friend of man, lover of pigeons.
+
Totally not unique. Not to be too wikish, but no sources, just where are we getting that, cause lots of universes use some kind of particle projection technology. Largely because its real, like most BattleTech tech, its based on real theoretical, but as of yet unfeasible, technology, patented in this case by Nikola Tesla in the 30s. As for recoil, not to be combative, but you should think. It causes impact damage as well as thermal, therefor conservation of momentum tells us it must possess recoil, although that could be dampened or out and out countered (as there are many ballistic recoilless weapons in existance). True energy weapons cause only thermal and so lack recoil because the lack impact or mechanical kinetic energy. The PPC projects particles from itself against the target, this is infact essiantially the same process as is used for ion engines, which project Xenon particles to push themselves through space, as the lack something other than themselves to push against (as is the case with tires on a road or rotor blades on the air). Infact, I believe Tesla's designs called for Xenon to be used, a brilliant, crazy man. Friend of man, lover of pigeons.

Revision as of 02:32, 4 January 2010

I am curious about the statement regarding the PPC being a unique weapon in the Battletech Universe. There are a range of different PPC's now available (ER, Snub-Nose, Heavy). Do you mean that the weapon is unique to this universe, as in it doesn't exist in other games? If so, I would like to point out that in Robotech, there is a weapon called PBC (Partical Beam Cannon). These were installed on the Excaliber mechs (Unseen Warhammer in CBT).

I think "unique" this case refers to PPCs not existing in other fictional universes. I'm not sure how true that is, but I'm sure that is what the statement in the article is supposed to mean. Particle weapons do exist, but I've not heard any other series use the term "PPC" for their weapons. Haruspex 13:16, 6 October 2008 (CDT)

I also confirm that the PPC is really the Battletech Universe's signature --FIVE-one 09:16, 7 October 2008 (CDT)

We might be missing the point is. Is statement this verifiable? --Scaletail 20:04, 7 October 2008 (CDT)


Newbie here, but PPCs are not unique weapon, though it might be a unique name. It's basically just an ion/particle cannon. Of course, ion/particle cannons function differently depending on the fictional universe, but it's also a real weapon at least in principle. 76.25.193.14 16:46, 9 June 2009 (PDT)


Recoil

Do PPC's have recoil? In one of the campaigns I've done, a Panther got knocked into space and was using its PPC to attack the enemy aerospace units. If it had recoil it would have rapidly gone into a spin and been unable to aim.--DragonoftheRust 19:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

As energy weapons, they should be recoilless. --Scaletail 01:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Totally not unique. Not to be too wikish, but no sources, just where are we getting that, cause lots of universes use some kind of particle projection technology. Largely because its real, like most BattleTech tech, its based on real theoretical, but as of yet unfeasible, technology, patented in this case by Nikola Tesla in the 30s. As for recoil, not to be combative, but you should think. It causes impact damage as well as thermal, therefor conservation of momentum tells us it must possess recoil, although that could be dampened or out and out countered (as there are many ballistic recoilless weapons in existance). True energy weapons cause only thermal and so lack recoil because the lack impact or mechanical kinetic energy. The PPC projects particles from itself against the target, this is infact essiantially the same process as is used for ion engines, which project Xenon particles to push themselves through space, as the lack something other than themselves to push against (as is the case with tires on a road or rotor blades on the air). Infact, I believe Tesla's designs called for Xenon to be used, a brilliant, crazy man. Friend of man, lover of pigeons.