Quick question(s): guns.

There's a technical slant when people talk about gun calibers, I'd be inclined to go for 60mm (ditto .50 Browning machine-guns, 12-inch cannons, etc.) over spelling it out.

In outer space, recoil is something to be feared so I prefer to equip my troops with energy weapons. Once they're on the ground, anything goes.

-Derek

an energy weapon could be of massive use, but ship to ship, if you had the space to deal with it a cannon would be slaughter. with little to slow the target ship, even if its sheilds and armor held it would drive it off course.

and you can do things with the barrels like brake out backs, bags of water in the back of it and an auto airlock to close it after fire. the momentum would go to whatever you decide to put in the back, it would come apart and put the momentum to the air. the other ship will take it full.

it would damage superstructure, crack plates, cause the ship to move and send people inside flying.

Ditto dpaterso on the digits over letters.

As for energy weapons, I don't see an issue with using them in sci-fi. I've used lasers in an old project, along with charged particles and plasma. I'm afraid I'm not up for much on the science side of things, because these types of weapon are way out of our league for now, so research was a little depressing.

Is this dialog? If so, think about whether the character would really say "Use the 60mm shells." What about something more like "Use the sixties"?

FennelGiraffe said:

Is this dialog? If so, think about whether the character would really say "Use the 60mm shells." What about something more like "Use the sixties"?

Click to expand...

Agreed. If it is in description I would use "60mm shells." In dialogue I would spell it our or use another slang term as Fennel suggested. I would assume a copy editor would most likely correct it either way later on anyways.

Also, this could be a mute point, but most weapon systems only have one caliber. Therefore it might be more realistic to say, "Use the twenty-five pounder! Not that stupid mortar! Are you not trying to blow them the hell up!?"

Now if your are specifying the type of shell, that's a different story. Like when a tank commander orders to use a AP round and the loader replies "AP up!" as he drives the round into the breach.

When writing calibres and gun sizes, use digits as opposed to letters. "She lifted the 9mm Browning automatic off the desk." "He preferred the .357 stub-nosed Magnum."

empyreal said:

First Question
When you're writing a sci-fi novel and it comes time to handing out orders pertaining to which guns to use, do you think numbers are preferred over actually writing it out?

Example: "Use the 60mm shells", or "Use the sixty-millimeter shells"?

Click to expand...

I third what the long-necked guy said. Though if it's not dialog i'd say pretty much always go with numbers. It's easier to read imo.

Second Question
Have any of you ever had projects dealing with energy based weaponry? If so, what was your reasoning behind it? So far, I'm just going with advanced charged particles and plasma beams! Or is that taboo: reasoning (even if far-fetched and stretched to the limits ) behind such improbable advancements? =\

Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by reasoning. Lasers aren't improbably advanced weapons at all. There are already laser weapon prototypes today. The bigges problem that prevents their general adaption for weapon use is only that current batteries/capacitors can't store enough energy for portable use.
Charged particle beams are basically the output of a cyclotron, also doable today, and weaponizable with reasonably more advanced batteries. (Though cyclotrons are BIG. Not really good for a handgun.
Plasma is similar, basically an ion drive like it has been used on space probes before is a plasma beam. Just remember that plasma is highly charged, very hot, and as such under extrem internal pressure. I.e. it dissipates very fast and can only be used for something like a flamethrower. (Though shells that release some kind of plasma on impact work as well. Heck, the effect of modern anti-armor missiles could be called a plasma jet created with the explosive in the missile.)

Also if you check the realistic space combat topic, there's been some extensive discussion on differing weapon systems in space.

Remember, with any energy weapon, the biggest drawback is heat. If you can't get rid of it, you'll cook the crew alive, or at the last burn up your weapon.