Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Or they're cooling vents to draw in ambient air to cool an electric motor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pilcLXpdJK0&feature=related

I mean puhleease!
Its so easy to make chainswords obsolete that its not even funny.
They should seriously rediscover kevlar and nylon in the 40k universe but they probably have superior stuff already.

Chainsword resistent lumberjacks.
Another one of GWs logic lapses

Pyriel- wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pilcLXpdJK0&feature=related

I mean puhleease!
Its so easy to make chainswords obsolete that its not even funny.
They should seriously rediscover kevlar and nylon in the 40k universe but they probably have superior stuff already.

But they won't because chainswords are soooo cool...

Personally, I find that comparing modern chainsaws to chainswords 38,000 years in the future to be laughable at best, and downright stupid and ignorant at worst. I mean, come on. After about 20,000 years of increasing technology, they have kept enough tech to overcome the problems our petty 20th century tech still has. Also realize that we are talking about monomolecular blades here. If fabric even touches the blade it will come apart, not even getting the chance to jam the gears. The blade shape is also very different from the blade shape used in chainsaws today. As said before, there are a variety of chainswords. Thus the sword technique, shape, balance, and total weight would vary widely.

That is my two cents.

Personally, I find that comparing modern chainsaws to chainswords 38,000 years in the future to be laughable at best, and downright stupid and ignorant at worst. I mean, come on. After about 20,000 years of increasing technology, they have kept enough tech to overcome the problems our petty 20th century tech still has.

What is really ignorant and laughable is "forgetting" that in 30k years the defensive aspects of warfare A L S O increase!
Thus the modern day kevlar and nylon that is so effective in rendering a chainsaw obsolete also have 40l future equivalents that keep up with the increased tech of a chainsaw.

Pyriel- wrote:

Personally, I find that comparing modern chainsaws to chainswords 38,000 years in the future to be laughable at best, and downright stupid and ignorant at worst. I mean, come on. After about 20,000 years of increasing technology, they have kept enough tech to overcome the problems our petty 20th century tech still has.

What is really ignorant and laughable is "forgetting" that in 30k years the defensive aspects of warfare A L S O increase!
Thus the modern day kevlar and nylon that is so effective in rendering a chainsaw obsolete also have 40l future equivalents that keep up with the increased tech of a chainsaw.

And just like not everybody and their mother has a kevlar vest at home, not everybody in 40k has a piece of armour effective against the chainsword.

Really, using RL logic for a game never ends well.

Thats why you get an armour save, foo! But that solves the problem of some pepole saying that chainswords should be power weapons. Fine, flak armour will stop it, but it could go around it, or bounce off onto unprotected flesh. GW's arbitrary maths says that this is a 1/3 chance of living. SHoving chainswords up joints with superhuman strength helps defeat power armour, with a 2/3 chance that the attacker will be destracted and wildly slash at a chest piece or something, or just flat out miss the joint.

If it it was me though and I expected chainsword wielding enemies in the near future I´d go get me a vest for sure.
To turn the tables on this though...not everyone has a chainsword at home in the 40k future either so the point is kind of moot and leaves a lot to chance.

But if you want logics then its far cheaper and common to find a piece of nylon fibres then a fully functioning chainsaw. Thus there should be far more on one then the other.

Math hmm, well there is also a 1/6 chance of surviving a lascannon hit

But does technology always advance equally? the answer to that is no. and as always, this is 38,000 years in the future. there is no telling what paths technology has traveled. Once again, emphasis should be put in the "sword" part of chainsword. it uses a totally different blade than a chainsaw, and thus will not react in the same way as a modern chainsaw. if they are designing it for war, they probably have a way to stop nylon or whatever fibers from jamming the chainsword. not to mention blades sharp enough to cut anything thin enough to get into the mechanism with very little pressure.

the blades are also about 1 1/2 inches long, by the looks of it, so the amount of nylon you would need would make wearing any armor over it bulky and clumsy at best. thus, making protection from ranged weapons nill. where you could put it is in power armor, but since that doesn't have it, obviously this either hasn't been thought of or would not work.

GundamMerc wrote:But does technology always advance equally? the answer to that is no. and as always, this is 38,000 years in the future. there is no telling what paths technology has traveled. Once again, emphasis should be put in the "sword" part of chainsword. it uses a totally different blade than a chainsaw, and thus will not react in the same way as a modern chainsaw. if they are designing it for war, they probably have a way to stop nylon or whatever fibers from jamming the chainsword. not to mention blades sharp enough to cut anything thin enough to get into the mechanism with very little pressure.

the blades are also about 1 1/2 inches long, by the looks of it, so the amount of nylon you would need would make wearing any armor over it bulky and clumsy at best. thus, making protection from ranged weapons nill. where you could put it is in power armor, but since that doesn't have it, obviously this either hasn't been thought of or would not work.

See, this important, and people keep forgetting it. In the 40k universe armor has outpaced ranged weaponry, and melee weaponry outpaced armor.

The chainsword should not be compared to a chainsaw anymore than an flintlock loaded with grapeshot should be compared to a beretta .50 with anti tank rounds. No, the chainsaw is not an effective tool for cutting through armor and flesh. Because it was designed for cutting wood. And no, the flintlock with grapeshot is not an effective tool for killing people, because it was designed for bird hunting.

But the chainsword was designed from the ground up for cutting through armor and flesh, WITHOUT getting jammed up. The war models seem to have been designed specifically for cutting through heavy armor, and there IS a need for melee weaponry that can do that, due to the amount of armored and tough enemies that desire to get into close combat, and the difficulty that ranged weaponry has in piercing advanced armor. Chain weaponry cuts armor and does it a lot cheaper than power weapons, though obviously not as effectively.

Saying chainswords wouldn't work because chainsaws wouldn't work is nothing more than a strawman argument.

Wouldn't be too efficient they say? Impractical they say?

This IS the 41st Millenium, I'm sure they would find a way to make technology better from now...

*doesn't read posts*

Chainswords? No. Why? Simple:

- No matter how sharp, the very concept means it can be vulnerable to "jamming up"
- Far, far too many moving parts for straight-forward repair and logistically...ugly

Is it completely, brain-numbingly ridiculous? Not entirely, but like many things in 40k, it's there for the badassery. That's really what it comes down to.

Like a lot of stuff in 40k, chainswords would be completely impractical in real life.

If you watch some of the videos, the way that they use it is they hack into the target, then saw through. This abrogates any fluidity you might have had with a smooth edge because you need to stand there and saw into the target to do the damage, rather than the slash or hack itself getting the job done.

The bolter design is impractical too (there's a reason that pistols are far more difficult to shoot than rifles: there's no stock, and leaving magazines with open sides is asking for trouble), but those who know better can accept that fluff is fluff and real life is real life.

Actually, you would not need to do much sawing. The initial swing gets you in, and all the sawing does is rearrange internal organs into a mushy mess.

If we had accepted fluff is fluff and real life is real life, we would not have cell phones, which were first shown in star trek before anyone even had the concept of a mobile phone.

Now, the weight of the Chainsword would help the user to cleave through armor and bone. If the sword was light then the teeth might just bounce along the armor till it found a soft spot. Now with the weight of the weapon the teeth would be able to chip away on the armor till the teeth it bit. The weight is what makes an axe so effective as a chopping weapon.

And with how the teeth are shaped, instead of kicking back, it would probably grab the skin, flesh, and bone, keeping it connected.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although you do not really need the sawing action as said above, it goes straight through up to a point and then rearranges the organs and other bits of flesh into a nice soup.

ZacktheChaosChild wrote:Wouldn't be too efficient they say? Impractical they say?

This IS the 41st Millenium, I'm sure they would find a way to make technology better from now...

Are you insane? Obviously if some nylon fibers can jam up a chainsaw designed today for cutting down wood they'll stop a weapon designed 38k years in the future designed to hack through armor. Duh! What are you, stupid?

Chainswords? No. Why? Simple:

- No matter how sharp, the very concept means it can be vulnerable to "jamming up"
- Far, far too many moving parts for straight-forward repair and logistically...ugly

Is it completely, brain-numbingly ridiculous? Not entirely, but like many things in 40k, it's there for the badassery. That's really what it comes down to.

Exactly!
Certain things are included in the "game" such as chainsaws, bolters etc simply because they are cool not because they are effective.
We dont see todays armed forces running around with chainsaws or carrying guns that they can only carry a very limited ammunition load for.

GundamMerc wrote:Actually, you would not need to do much sawing. The initial swing gets you in, and all the sawing does is rearrange internal organs into a mushy mess.

If we had accepted fluff is fluff and real life is real life, we would not have cell phones, which were first shown in star trek before anyone even had the concept of a mobile phone.

Nomatter how you try to cut it, there will always be a better weapon for cutting through armor than a giant chainsaw that weighs more than a rifle.

When you see a phone on Star Trek, you think, "That's cool, how can we make that work?". When I see a chainsword, I think, "Wow, that's stupid, but my Marines can't all take power weapons...".

GundamMerc wrote:If we had accepted fluff is fluff and real life is real life, we would not have cell phones, which were first shown in star trek before anyone even had the concept of a mobile phone.

Incorrect. The very first patent issued for a Mobile Phone, U.S. Patent 887,357, was issued in 1908.

Cells for mobile phone base stations were invented in 1947 by Bell Labs engineers at AT&T and further developed by Bell Labs during the 1960s.

Radiophones have a long and varied history going back to Reginald Fessenden's invention and shore-to-ship demonstration of radio telephony, through the Second World War with military use of radio telephony links and civil services in the 1950s.

Chainswords eh?

Well everyone knows the teeth are made of an indestructable grimdarkium alloy, the motor runs on limitless liquid grimdarkium, and it's surrounded by a grimdark energy field that stops it from getting gummed up.

What's the problem?

DoW

Horst wrote:reel gud

HAHAHAHHAHAHA

NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Nomatter how you try to cut it, there will always be a better weapon for cutting through armor than a giant chainsaw that weighs more than a rifle.

I still don't know that I agree.

I don't think their weight would in any way be comparable to a chainsaw as it is designed with a different purpose in mind and with different materials. I doubt it weights more than the solders firearm of choice (bolter for marines, lasgun for guard).

The goal here is to breach heavy advanced armor. Regular weapon isn't much good, even space marines do not have the physical strength to pierce armor. Short of power weapons, mechanical assistance is necessary. The biting/pulling action of the chainsaw mechanism combined with the advanced alloys and monomolecular blade would require only that a marine/trooper hit hard enough to get hold in the armor.

For the purposes of my argument I'm going to assume that a close combat, armor rending weapon is necessary in the 41st millenia. Secondly that power weapons and other advanced weaponry is rare. Assuming that the chainsword is not prone to jamming/gumming up, and is light enough to be used as intended (which if engineered specifically for its purpose I think it meet these requirements) I think it actually performs its intended duty effectively.

You claim that there will always be a better close combat weapon for cutting through heavy armor. What would you propose?

I contest that the the chainsword (if engineered the way it is depicted in the fluff) is an effective design for its intended purpose. Thoughts?

Gumming up. You would think that the would hace the chain connected to the sword with a locking teeth device around the chain that way there is no way anything could pull the chain away from the sprokit wheel. The weapon could be an high power battery motor with a gas motor that is engaged to ramp up the RPMs of the chain. The electric battery is charged each time the user depressed the trigger and spins the chain. All of this can be done now.

While the chainsword is possible, the only thing I can see that would make it hard for a normal human to use it is with the sword at high RPM the vibration would make a one handed swing difficult to control. So, I can see the motor running and the chain moving just fast enough to spin the chain and when it hit the motor has a sensor that kicks the gas motor in to ramp up the RPMs right at impact until the pressure is released.

Hmmmmm... I hope no serial killer or warlord reads this because this thread is full of deadly but technical ideas.

Hmmmmm... I hope no serial killer or warlord reads this because this thread is full of deadly but technical ideas.

I wouldn't lose sleep about it. Why would the enterprising young serial killer build a chainsword when he could use a just as painful chainsaw, or for that matter, a simple machete and a bag of lime?

I vote the chainsword IS possible. I can already think of ways to engineer it so that we do not see the issues mentioned here.

- The chain would be strung TIGHT probably simular to the drive belt in a modern car. This would greatly reduce the chain snagging. And with enough tourqe you could clear out any snag.

- I think that if you allow the "blade" to idle while swinging it and only rev up when you hit, you can reduce the vibrations factor.

- 10lbs. isn't as much as you might think to swing around. I shadow box with 10lbs weights, and based on drawings I would say 70% of the weight is in the handle anyway making it about the same balance. Also I'm no where near a military physique.

- I think that there is no modern equalivalent chainsword because it would be a war crime to do so. Protocol I Article 35 of the Geneva convention. Article 36 I think prevents their development.

- I would like to see what all of you nay sayers are building when the zombie apocolypse happens. This will be the first thing on my list!

DogOfWar wrote:Chainswords eh?

Well everyone knows the teeth are made of an indestructable grimdarkium alloy, the motor runs on limitless liquid grimdarkium, and it's surrounded by a grimdark energy field that stops it from getting gummed up.

What's the problem?

DoW

Obviously the impirials have discovered the missing element Grimdarkium

What would be better? Well let's look at what people have already done in regards to defeating armor.

Flails and maces are a traditional solution. Instead of slashing and hacking, the damage is done by crushing. I imagine that with Space Marine strength, it would be quite effective.

Chainswords eh?

Well everyone knows the teeth are made of an indestructable grimdarkium alloy, the motor runs on limitless liquid grimdarkium, and it's surrounded by a grimdark energy field that stops it from getting gummed up.

What's the problem?

The problem is that in order to make such an awesome chainsword weapon that has indestructible teeth, a field that weakens matter and some super mechanism that doesnt allow the mechanism to be jammed by cheap means then you would certainly be better of with a less complex and cheaper to manufacture freaking powersword!!!!

Its just a blade with a field to it rather then precision chain mechanism made out of impossible alloys and impossible engineering and it would be even better at going through armour...

not if the grimdarkium itself is just a psychic catalyst and it thus enhanced by the (psychic) grimdarkness of a chainsaw sword, with power weapons they're less grim dark and so need stronger power fields which in turn cost more to manufacture. much like with orks and they're if they think it works it works thing they have going on