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.

Chainswords ... they are bad swords, in the sense that they are extremely poorly balanced, because they are very top heavy (compared to a real sword). That means its slower to change directions mid swing, making them bad for fencing/duelling. On the other hand hits have more power to them, alone from the weight in motion itself. The balance is like a medieval falchion. So it basically handles like a club.

Now about the chain action... It makes a continuous cut. It's good for cutting obviously and may make cutting through soft stuff almost effordless. However things get problematic if it hits hard objects. If it comes in contact with another hard object it "grabs" it, either propelling the object downwards, or letting the chainsword recoil upwards. Doing this repeatedly would offer a good chance to lose alot of the teeth and/or lose the sharpness of the teeth. Monomolecular edges cut well... but they break and deteriorate pretty quick if you bang it on similar hard materials. Depending on the strength and speed of the motor inside the chainsword, it may or may not be possible to simply "grind" against armor with the running chain, the higher both, the stronger it bounces of everything hard basically.
Against hard armor, it's basically like cutting with a knife across it. Terribly inefficient, and good chance of damaging the weapon, at the very least the teeth would get dull pretty quickly. Even superior metals like adamantium don't stay in shape forever.

Another problem is that the blade itself is fairly thick. And since the teeth have to fit inside the "housing" around it, there are parts on the front that do not cut. It's very good against humans. A cut to the arm will propably cut it off, or at the very least the remainder of the arm will just dangle and release the blade eitherway. If you cut into something very big but soft (e.g. a squiggoth... or some tyranid parts for example) the chances are high that the friction with the side of the blade let it get stuck (like a chainsaw in a big tree, if you don't apply proper technique using wedges).

Against power armour its less then ideal, because you have to aim for weakpoints. And stabbing is easier for that, therefore a combat knife is propably easier for H2H Marine-on-Marine combat. Unless you use the chainsword as a club and beat the opponend on the head repeatedly or something.

Yes, I think that using it as a bludgeon is basically what I'm getting at; with the additional advantage that it can be used to throw an opponent off-balance.

Essentially, I'm visualising it not running constantly, but being 'gunned' in order to cause horrendous wounds on unarmoured enemies, or to disarm/off-balance heavily-armoured foes.

The main killing power doesn't then come from the blade so much has simply battering the opponent to the floor.

 Finlandiaperkele wrote:
Bolt weapons: Very much possible. But as stated in this thread already, it'd be extremely overkill, and inefficient weapon in our current engagements.

Inefficient? INEFFICIENT?!! HERESY!!!

Also, on AI: We already have fully functinal Artificial Intelligences. aka: fake intelligences (see: any FPS, RPG, or RTS video game ever)

Now, having a fully functional synthetic intelligence on the other hand... THAT would be an amazing discovery, and I would sell my right kidney for one.

 dusara217 wrote:
Also, on AI: We already have fully functinal Artificial Intelligences. aka: fake intelligences (see: any FPS, RPG, or RTS video game ever).

having an AI in a game with very limited ruleset is not the same as having AI in reallife, because its alot more complex in real life. You can't use predefined cover spots, predefined walking paths and so on in real life...

 Apologist wrote:
A few musings on chain weaponry, which on the face of it is fairly ridiculous (if awesome!)

If the weapon weren't powered-up (i.e. moving), it's essentially got a blade with many small points of contact with the material being cut – and therefore applying more pressure at each point than a straight blade. In addition, the points of contact are at a sharper angle to the material being cut, resulting in an action that involves many small splits in the surface of the material being cut, which cumulatively serve to cut the material along the line of the blade.

That to me sounds like a more reliable way to deal with very thick armour than a straight blade, assuming you've got the raw strength behind it to force it in in the first place. So, assuming a marine on marine combat, a chainsword actually seems a better weapon than a combat blade; which, while very sharp, can become lodged in ceramite. If a chainsword gets stuck in your enemy's armour, you can quickly gun the blade to throw them off balance and free the blade.

In addition, the fracturing results of a chainsword blow might result in ceramite splintering (I think it's mentioned somewhere that ceramite armour chips like rock, rather than metal), which helps stop the blade getting stuck in the first place.

Finally, perhaps we accept that ceramite power armour is proof against things like blades and chainswords. In this case, you can aim to hit the opponent while in close, sending the spinning blades skittering across the plate armour towards vulnerable joints and cables. Basically; get it between you and the opponent and rely on your armour to protect you while you tear open vulnerable sections.

Not a perfect argument, I'm aware; but I see chainswords being used more like drills than like a traditional sword.

Uh.

Chain-weapons are actually the single dumbest thing to be found in 40K and would not function at all similar to the way they are claimed in the lore or gameplay. Chainsaws would make terrible weapons as they can barely cut through flesh without getting clogged (and then your weapon is completely useless if the motor is jammed), not to mention that like in real life, chain weapons in 40K struggle to overcome any actually decent armor unless they're of the specially crafted variety.

Unless you're chopping down trees, chain weapons are just terrible for cutting through metal or flesh. A better weapon would be powered by sonic vibrations, like the vibroswords in Star Wars or the sword Raiden uses. Hit it with the right frequency and the thing will cut through flesh like a hot knife through butter. And it'd certainly cut through armor better then a chainsword.

Even in BL lit chain weapons suck. I'm pretty sure in ADB's books every character who uses a chain weapon ends up discarding it at some point when it gets clogged (which they always do)

Also the blade component of chain weapons are of plot device-tanium and are replaced at regular intervals due to getting messed up all the time.

 Finlandiaperkele wrote:


Rail-weapons (Magnetic accelerator weapons in general): Possible, but as with Power Armour, it lacks the efficient powersource. Also the rails lack efficient material. Currently limited to naval applications.

Ya know, between these and lasers, technology is soon going to make manned air forces obsolete. Cheap swarms of drones're going to be the only thing worth putting up in the air.

Real world 'gauss' weaponry is a form of mass driver or railgun that uses electromagnets to propel a projectile at ridiculous velocities without an explosive charge.

Necron 'gauss' weaponry seems to disassemble matter on a molecular level, possibly by disrupting the strong and/or weak nuclear forces that make things 'stick together'.

In real life plasma is highly unstable and requires some kind of magnetic 'bottle' to keep it coherent. The instant you'd fire a plasma bolt out of a gun it'd start to disperse. Presumably sometime during the Dark Age of Technology someone figured out a way to contain plasma long enough for it to reach a target and damage it.

Tau 'pulse' weaponry is amazingly ill-defined. It seems to be some kind of energy pulse that also requires a solid matter slug. Anyone who can actually explain how pulse weapons work, please help.

Boltguns have been described as gyrojets by some GW sources in the past. Other sources suggest that the .54 caliber shells are initiated by a propellant charge and then 'rocket assisted'. While not technically a gyrojet, they seem to be some kind of hybrid between conventional and gyrojet tech. The type(s) of warhead employed by Boltguns are irrelevant to this part of the discussion.

Lasers are currently under development as naval and tank weaponry. The main issue seems to be weapon size, power generation and storage. Lasers are also subject to degradation by battlefield conditions (smoke, haze, fog, rain, etc.) While the problems preventing deployment today are very real, it's a reasonable assumption that between the 2nd and 30th millenium someone could figure out a way to overcome such technical issues.

Writing lasers off as impractical based on current science is a mite premature. After all, if you can justify Dark Lances, Meltaguns, Tesla weaponry and Shuriken Catapults, why not lasers that are at least based on real world technologies?

My two teef.

Warboss Gorhack wrote:
Real world 'gauss' weaponry is a form of mass driver or railgun that uses electromagnets to propel a projectile at ridiculous velocities without an explosive charge.

Necron 'gauss' weaponry seems to disassemble matter on a molecular level, possibly by disrupting the strong and/or weak nuclear forces that make things 'stick together'.

In real life plasma is highly unstable and requires some kind of magnetic 'bottle' to keep it coherent. The instant you'd fire a plasma bolt out of a gun it'd start to disperse. Presumably sometime during the Dark Age of Technology someone figured out a way to contain plasma long enough for it to reach a target and damage it.

Tau 'pulse' weaponry is amazingly ill-defined. It seems to be some kind of energy pulse that also requires a solid matter slug. Anyone who can actually explain how pulse weapons work, please help.

Boltguns have been described as gyrojets by some GW sources in the past. Other sources suggest that the .54 caliber shells are initiated by a propellant charge and then 'rocket assisted'. While not technically a gyrojet, they seem to be some kind of hybrid between conventional and gyrojet tech. The type(s) of warhead employed by Boltguns are irrelevant to this part of the discussion.

Lasers are currently under development as naval and tank weaponry. The main issue seems to be weapon size, power generation and storage. Lasers are also subject to degradation by battlefield conditions (smoke, haze, fog, rain, etc.) While the problems preventing deployment today are very real, it's a reasonable assumption that between the 2nd and 30th millenium someone could figure out a way to overcome such technical issues.

Writing lasers off as impractical based on current science is a mite premature. After all, if you can justify Dark Lances, Meltaguns, Tesla weaponry and Shuriken Catapults, why not lasers that are at least based on real world technologies?

My two teef.

Pulse weapons are probably a two-state plasma weapon that either accelerates or energizes a solid slug to such a state that it becomes a plasma "pulse". Basically it makes a bullet very very hot until it breaks down from matter into plasma.

 Wyzilla wrote:

Warboss Gorhack wrote:
Real world 'gauss' weaponry is a form of mass driver or railgun that uses electromagnets to propel a projectile at ridiculous velocities without an explosive charge.

Necron 'gauss' weaponry seems to disassemble matter on a molecular level, possibly by disrupting the strong and/or weak nuclear forces that make things 'stick together'.

In real life plasma is highly unstable and requires some kind of magnetic 'bottle' to keep it coherent. The instant you'd fire a plasma bolt out of a gun it'd start to disperse. Presumably sometime during the Dark Age of Technology someone figured out a way to contain plasma long enough for it to reach a target and damage it.

Tau 'pulse' weaponry is amazingly ill-defined. It seems to be some kind of energy pulse that also requires a solid matter slug. Anyone who can actually explain how pulse weapons work, please help.

Boltguns have been described as gyrojets by some GW sources in the past. Other sources suggest that the .54 caliber shells are initiated by a propellant charge and then 'rocket assisted'. While not technically a gyrojet, they seem to be some kind of hybrid between conventional and gyrojet tech. The type(s) of warhead employed by Boltguns are irrelevant to this part of the discussion.

Lasers are currently under development as naval and tank weaponry. The main issue seems to be weapon size, power generation and storage. Lasers are also subject to degradation by battlefield conditions (smoke, haze, fog, rain, etc.) While the problems preventing deployment today are very real, it's a reasonable assumption that between the 2nd and 30th millenium someone could figure out a way to overcome such technical issues.

Writing lasers off as impractical based on current science is a mite premature. After all, if you can justify Dark Lances, Meltaguns, Tesla weaponry and Shuriken Catapults, why not lasers that are at least based on real world technologies?

My two teef.

Pulse weapons are probably a two-state plasma weapon that either accelerates or energizes a solid slug to such a state that it becomes a plasma "pulse". Basically it makes a bullet very very hot until it breaks down from matter into plasma.

That seems highly improbable, but this is 40k, so it makes sense through the lense of my 40k-goggles.

Just for arguments' sake, wouldn't it take a fair amount of time (even with rediculously advanced tech) for a bullet to pass through three stages of change (melting and, for lack of better terms, gasification, plasmification). Unless you could somehow find a way to heat it so quickly that it skips the phases of liquid and gas, Pulse weapons seem highly improbable for such a young race. Now, if they had found it in a DAoT lab and adapted it to their use, then that would make a LOT more sense. Or even stolen it from the Necrons or bought it from the Eldar. You know what, I'm going to go off of the assumption that they bought it from the Eldar (who were more advanced than the Forerunners).

 dusara217 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

Warboss Gorhack wrote:
Real world 'gauss' weaponry is a form of mass driver or railgun that uses electromagnets to propel a projectile at ridiculous velocities without an explosive charge.

Necron 'gauss' weaponry seems to disassemble matter on a molecular level, possibly by disrupting the strong and/or weak nuclear forces that make things 'stick together'.

In real life plasma is highly unstable and requires some kind of magnetic 'bottle' to keep it coherent. The instant you'd fire a plasma bolt out of a gun it'd start to disperse. Presumably sometime during the Dark Age of Technology someone figured out a way to contain plasma long enough for it to reach a target and damage it.

Tau 'pulse' weaponry is amazingly ill-defined. It seems to be some kind of energy pulse that also requires a solid matter slug. Anyone who can actually explain how pulse weapons work, please help.

Boltguns have been described as gyrojets by some GW sources in the past. Other sources suggest that the .54 caliber shells are initiated by a propellant charge and then 'rocket assisted'. While not technically a gyrojet, they seem to be some kind of hybrid between conventional and gyrojet tech. The type(s) of warhead employed by Boltguns are irrelevant to this part of the discussion.

Lasers are currently under development as naval and tank weaponry. The main issue seems to be weapon size, power generation and storage. Lasers are also subject to degradation by battlefield conditions (smoke, haze, fog, rain, etc.) While the problems preventing deployment today are very real, it's a reasonable assumption that between the 2nd and 30th millenium someone could figure out a way to overcome such technical issues.

Writing lasers off as impractical based on current science is a mite premature. After all, if you can justify Dark Lances, Meltaguns, Tesla weaponry and Shuriken Catapults, why not lasers that are at least based on real world technologies?

My two teef.

Pulse weapons are probably a two-state plasma weapon that either accelerates or energizes a solid slug to such a state that it becomes a plasma "pulse". Basically it makes a bullet very very hot until it breaks down from matter into plasma.

That seems highly improbable, but this is 40k, so it makes sense through the lense of my 40k-goggles.

Just for arguments' sake, wouldn't it take a fair amount of time (even with rediculously advanced tech) for a bullet to pass through three stages of change (melting and, for lack of better terms, gasification, plasmification). Unless you could somehow find a way to heat it so quickly that it skips the phases of liquid and gas, Pulse weapons seem highly improbable for such a young race. Now, if they had found it in a DAoT lab and adapted it to their use, then that would make a LOT more sense. Or even stolen it from the Necrons or bought it from the Eldar. You know what, I'm going to go off of the assumption that they bought it from the Eldar (who were more advanced than the Forerunners).

Um......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_railgun

We've built them. They're not incredibly advanced at all given how small railgun ammunition is compared to the bang you get from it.

Also, outside of the Eldar Empire just before the Fall, when they made the Dread Machine, the Eldar are woefully behind the Forerunners of Halo.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

Warboss Gorhack wrote:
Real world 'gauss' weaponry is a form of mass driver or railgun that uses electromagnets to propel a projectile at ridiculous velocities without an explosive charge.

Necron 'gauss' weaponry seems to disassemble matter on a molecular level, possibly by disrupting the strong and/or weak nuclear forces that make things 'stick together'.

In real life plasma is highly unstable and requires some kind of magnetic 'bottle' to keep it coherent. The instant you'd fire a plasma bolt out of a gun it'd start to disperse. Presumably sometime during the Dark Age of Technology someone figured out a way to contain plasma long enough for it to reach a target and damage it.

Tau 'pulse' weaponry is amazingly ill-defined. It seems to be some kind of energy pulse that also requires a solid matter slug. Anyone who can actually explain how pulse weapons work, please help.

Boltguns have been described as gyrojets by some GW sources in the past. Other sources suggest that the .54 caliber shells are initiated by a propellant charge and then 'rocket assisted'. While not technically a gyrojet, they seem to be some kind of hybrid between conventional and gyrojet tech. The type(s) of warhead employed by Boltguns are irrelevant to this part of the discussion.

Lasers are currently under development as naval and tank weaponry. The main issue seems to be weapon size, power generation and storage. Lasers are also subject to degradation by battlefield conditions (smoke, haze, fog, rain, etc.) While the problems preventing deployment today are very real, it's a reasonable assumption that between the 2nd and 30th millenium someone could figure out a way to overcome such technical issues.

Writing lasers off as impractical based on current science is a mite premature. After all, if you can justify Dark Lances, Meltaguns, Tesla weaponry and Shuriken Catapults, why not lasers that are at least based on real world technologies?

My two teef.

Pulse weapons are probably a two-state plasma weapon that either accelerates or energizes a solid slug to such a state that it becomes a plasma "pulse". Basically it makes a bullet very very hot until it breaks down from matter into plasma.

That seems highly improbable, but this is 40k, so it makes sense through the lense of my 40k-goggles.

Just for arguments' sake, wouldn't it take a fair amount of time (even with rediculously advanced tech) for a bullet to pass through three stages of change (melting and, for lack of better terms, gasification, plasmification). Unless you could somehow find a way to heat it so quickly that it skips the phases of liquid and gas, Pulse weapons seem highly improbable for such a young race. Now, if they had found it in a DAoT lab and adapted it to their use, then that would make a LOT more sense. Or even stolen it from the Necrons or bought it from the Eldar. You know what, I'm going to go off of the assumption that they bought it from the Eldar (who were more advanced than the Forerunners).

Um......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_railgun

We've built them. They're not incredibly advanced at all given how small railgun ammunition is compared to the bang you get from it.

Also, outside of the Eldar Empire just before the Fall, when they made the Dread Machine, the Eldar are woefully behind the Forerunners of Halo.

Yeah, I guess that they lost most of their tech by 40k.


Also, any Plasma Gun would require Magnetic Accelerator technology to control the Plasma and fire/launch it. We can barely even create Plasma; let alone do so within milliseconds after pulling a trigger/ hitting a firing stud.

 dusara217 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

Warboss Gorhack wrote:
Real world 'gauss' weaponry is a form of mass driver or railgun that uses electromagnets to propel a projectile at ridiculous velocities without an explosive charge.

Necron 'gauss' weaponry seems to disassemble matter on a molecular level, possibly by disrupting the strong and/or weak nuclear forces that make things 'stick together'.

In real life plasma is highly unstable and requires some kind of magnetic 'bottle' to keep it coherent. The instant you'd fire a plasma bolt out of a gun it'd start to disperse. Presumably sometime during the Dark Age of Technology someone figured out a way to contain plasma long enough for it to reach a target and damage it.

Tau 'pulse' weaponry is amazingly ill-defined. It seems to be some kind of energy pulse that also requires a solid matter slug. Anyone who can actually explain how pulse weapons work, please help.

Boltguns have been described as gyrojets by some GW sources in the past. Other sources suggest that the .54 caliber shells are initiated by a propellant charge and then 'rocket assisted'. While not technically a gyrojet, they seem to be some kind of hybrid between conventional and gyrojet tech. The type(s) of warhead employed by Boltguns are irrelevant to this part of the discussion.

Lasers are currently under development as naval and tank weaponry. The main issue seems to be weapon size, power generation and storage. Lasers are also subject to degradation by battlefield conditions (smoke, haze, fog, rain, etc.) While the problems preventing deployment today are very real, it's a reasonable assumption that between the 2nd and 30th millenium someone could figure out a way to overcome such technical issues.

Writing lasers off as impractical based on current science is a mite premature. After all, if you can justify Dark Lances, Meltaguns, Tesla weaponry and Shuriken Catapults, why not lasers that are at least based on real world technologies?

My two teef.

Pulse weapons are probably a two-state plasma weapon that either accelerates or energizes a solid slug to such a state that it becomes a plasma "pulse". Basically it makes a bullet very very hot until it breaks down from matter into plasma.

That seems highly improbable, but this is 40k, so it makes sense through the lense of my 40k-goggles.

Just for arguments' sake, wouldn't it take a fair amount of time (even with rediculously advanced tech) for a bullet to pass through three stages of change (melting and, for lack of better terms, gasification, plasmification). Unless you could somehow find a way to heat it so quickly that it skips the phases of liquid and gas, Pulse weapons seem highly improbable for such a young race. Now, if they had found it in a DAoT lab and adapted it to their use, then that would make a LOT more sense. Or even stolen it from the Necrons or bought it from the Eldar. You know what, I'm going to go off of the assumption that they bought it from the Eldar (who were more advanced than the Forerunners).

Um......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_railgun

We've built them. They're not incredibly advanced at all given how small railgun ammunition is compared to the bang you get from it.

Also, outside of the Eldar Empire just before the Fall, when they made the Dread Machine, the Eldar are woefully behind the Forerunners of Halo.

Yeah, I guess that they lost most of their tech by 40k.


Also, any Plasma Gun would require Magnetic Accelerator technology to control the Plasma and fire/launch it. We can barely even create Plasma; let alone do so within milliseconds after pulling a trigger/ hitting a firing stud.

Lolwut.

I think you mean electromagnetic field to contain the plasma. Magnetic accelerator is a fancy word for railgun or coilgun.

Well Imperial Plasma guns have a magazine of sorts, and magnetic coils on top (which many people paint glowing blue or green). Presumably, the magazine is a magnetised bottle which stores the plasma. When loaded into the weapon, the much more powerful coils of the gun itself take over and draw the plasma into the chamber, where it "siphons off" a small chunk of the plasma for the shot. It then spins the plasma rapidly which helps it maintain its structure in air ( I believe Fallout 3 used that explanation) and then launches it via magnetism like a railgun does. The spinning and centripedal force as a result helps it maintain integrity until it strikes a target or reaches maximum range where it dissipates due to the spinning stop.
Charging the gun probably just involves a large portion of the plasma and spinning faster and longer before firing, meaning it goes farther and faster and does more damage.

Re: Pulse weaponry; could it be a solid projectile that is struck/propelled by a laser beam as it travels along its path? That'd (potentially) be a way to convert it to a plasma state as it travels, and explains both the extended range (the plasma travelling along an ionised 'tube') and the presence of solid material. Perhaps even a two-stage process, with one stage of heating before it leaves the chamber, and the laser converting it further?

Re: Chainswords; I realise they're basically non-functional as described, but isn't the point of the thread to work out plausible or interesting ways they could be used?

... Chainswords work just fine when you actually know what they are. They are not "just" chainsaws with handles. Each of the teeth on that blade is made of adamantine and given a mono-molecular edge. This means several things: one, the blade isn't going to snag on much of anything. Two, the teeth aren't going to break against much of anything. Three, it's going to mess you up real bad if you get even a glancing hit from one. Four, it's going to feth up almost any weapon used against it real bad.

Against any mundane armor, the chainsword's monomolecular edge, applied to teeth made of one of the strongest metals known to mankind, is going to shear right through. The flesh and bone underneath the armor doesn't have any better of a chance.

Mono molecular edges would break easier surely. If something is one molecule thick, there's not going to be any strength there? I could be wrong, but the thinner you get, the weaker it will be, right?

ImAGeek wrote:Mono molecular edges would break easier surely. If something is one molecule thick, there's not going to be any strength there? I could be wrong, but the thinner you get, the weaker it will be, right?

This is entirely true. It doesn't matter how strong a metal is if isn't even thicker than a single molecule, than it will be sheared off. Even 2,510 molecules would be insanely thin and insanely weak. The only reason that they say things have a "monomolecular edge" is because it sounds cool, not because it would actually be any more effective in battle.

Apologist wrote:Re: Pulse weaponry; could it be a solid projectile that is struck/propelled by a laser beam as it travels along its path? That'd (potentially) be a way to convert it to a plasma state as it travels, and explains both the extended range (the plasma travelling along an ionised 'tube') and the presence of solid material. Perhaps even a two-stage process, with one stage of heating before it leaves the chamber, and the laser converting it further?

Re: Chainswords; I realise they're basically non-functional as described, but isn't the point of the thread to work out plausible or interesting ways they could be used?

The laser would only melt the projectile, and even with a short charging time it would be highly unlikely that it could even turn the metal into gas (metals have rediculously high melting points and gasifying points). Although, if you're going to be making plasma, you don't really need a metal; just something that melts quickly. I suppose a capsule full of mercury would do the trick; low melting point, gasifies faster, and therefroe plasmifies faster (I understand the Hg is still a metal). But still, that would take take time. If a laser were just passed over it (no matter how hot) it would take some time to turn it into gas, let alone turn it into plasma.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Mono molecular edges would break easier surely. If something is one molecule thick, there's not going to be any strength there? I could be wrong, but the thinner you get, the weaker it will be, right?

Correct... Especially if you bang it with high speed& frequency against something else that is pretty hard... Power Armour and Terminator armour contain adamantium... So you scratch the material with the same material. That's useless. Also, just because something is of superior material (adamantium) doesnt mean it won't break or deteriorate.
Also, the "flesh cloggs the chain in short time" is not true. You can design chain system with very good selfcleaning abilitiies.

I find power weapons to be way more unbelievable/ridiculous then chainswords actually... Because where the feth do they get incredible power from to cut through everything... And what material is the weapon itself off to not be destroyed by it. Power Swords in particular - which can also be wielded by humans that dont have power armour -> the powerunit needs to be inside the weapon and very tiny.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Mono molecular edges would break easier surely. If something is one molecule thick, there's not going to be any strength there? I could be wrong, but the thinner you get, the weaker it will be, right?

We have monomolecular blades in real life, they're called scalpels, and it's why you don't even feel them cutting.

Of course, after one use they have to be discarded as they've lost their monomolecular edge.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Mono molecular edges would break easier surely. If something is one molecule thick, there's not going to be any strength there? I could be wrong, but the thinner you get, the weaker it will be, right?

We have monomolecular blades in real life, they're called scalpels, and it's why you don't even feel them cutting.

Of course, after once use they have to be discarded as they've lost their monomolecular edge.

It would depend on just how strong the molecular bonds between adamantium molecules really are, and given what we know from the setting, its practically indestructible by convential weaponry (Terminator Armour) and requires specialised, unconvential weaponry like power weapons (which disrupt the molecular bonds via hand wavium) and superduper weapons meant to bring down buildings and heavy vehicles. Likely, you could chalk this fictional supermetal up to having such incredible strength of bonding that it can survive numerous used, while not breaking off or blunting because it is simply too strong to break off the molecules along the edge. It is the simple reason that chainswords of today would be impractical. We don't have an indestructible supermetal.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Mono molecular edges would break easier surely. If something is one molecule thick, there's not going to be any strength there? I could be wrong, but the thinner you get, the weaker it will be, right?

We have monomolecular blades in real life, they're called scalpels, and it's why you don't even feel them cutting.

Of course, after once use they have to be discarded as they've lost their monomolecular edge.

Yeah but, you're just slicing them into flesh, not repeatedly banging them into hard armour plates. And like you say, one use and the edge is lost, and that's just on skin and muscle haha.

 Psienesis wrote:
... Chainswords work just fine when you actually know what they are. They are not "just" chainsaws with handles. Each of the teeth on that blade is made of adamantine and given a mono-molecular edge. This means several things: one, the blade isn't going to snag on much of anything. Two, the teeth aren't going to break against much of anything. Three, it's going to mess you up real bad if you get even a glancing hit from one. Four, it's going to feth up almost any weapon used against it real bad.

Against any mundane armor, the chainsword's monomolecular edge, applied to teeth made of one of the strongest metals known to mankind, is going to shear right through. The flesh and bone underneath the armor doesn't have any better of a chance.

Until it hits the side of the chain rail.

the way it is (model wise) the chain would only cut in like an inch and sit there as the sides of the sword are thick as feth. If the chains sat on the outside of the rail like regualr chainsaws do then they could grind through.

Problem here is people are trying to apply modern materials science to a society 38,000 years in our future. Mono-edged weapons could be self-sharpening... or be alloyed with plasmatic diamonds (which is something we do IRL, commonly in the bits for core drills), further increasing both cutting edge strength and power.

With the "tooth" of the chainblade being, basically, triangular (in the same way that an avian talon is triangular), as it cuts, it sweeps the now-separated matter away as the next tooth bites in. This will basically result in a furrow-like trench being carved into whatever you're hitting... and since the blades are continuing to spin, using the weight of the weapon (these are, after all, "choppy" things), along with the strength of the wielder, you're basically wedging whatever you're hitting apart.

Also, notice how hooked those teeth are in most depictions of the chainsword? This thing will, by its own action, be attempting to pull itself forward through whatever you hacked into (don't lose your grip!). With the pressure of the weapon's weight, driven by the strength of the wielder, it's going to dig its way through whatever you've hit, unless and until you start getting out of the arc of your swing. In most cases, however, if it's an Astartes wielding the weapon, that arc is going to be more than sufficient to cut through any target of generally-human proportions.

As to the fragility of the teeth? They're not because we're told they aren't. RL physics has no place in a discussion of 40K. It's a setting written by gamers, not scientists. This is not even a "science-fiction" game, it's "science-fantasy".

 Psienesis wrote:
Problem here is people are trying to apply modern materials science to a society 38,000 years in our future. Mono-edged weapons could be self-sharpening... or be alloyed with plasmatic diamonds (which is something we do IRL, commonly in the bits for core drills), further increasing both cutting edge strength and power.

With the "tooth" of the chainblade being, basically, triangular (in the same way that an avian talon is triangular), as it cuts, it sweeps the now-separated matter away as the next tooth bites in. This will basically result in a furrow-like trench being carved into whatever you're hitting... and since the blades are continuing to spin, using the weight of the weapon (these are, after all, "choppy" things), along with the strength of the wielder, you're basically wedging whatever you're hitting apart.

Also, notice how hooked those teeth are in most depictions of the chainsword? This thing will, by its own action, be attempting to pull itself forward through whatever you hacked into (don't lose your grip!). With the pressure of the weapon's weight, driven by the strength of the wielder, it's going to dig its way through whatever you've hit, unless and until you start getting out of the arc of your swing. In most cases, however, if it's an Astartes wielding the weapon, that arc is going to be more than sufficient to cut through any target of generally-human proportions.

As to the fragility of the teeth? They're not because we're told they aren't. RL physics has no place in a discussion of 40K. It's a setting written by gamers, not scientists. This is not even a "science-fiction" game, it's "science-fantasy".

Not much to be done about fictional materials but like i pointed out the weapon is still pretty silly in the fact that even if you could cut without ever breaking or dulling the blade, it would never go further than the size of the tooth because of the way the blade it self is built.

Edit: (stop copies me geek )

None of that explains the fact that the actual cutting part, the teeth, are thinner than the width of the whole weapon, so it would just stop at the depth of the teeth, even when you hand wave away other problems with the weapon because 'physics has no place in a discussion of 40k' (I thought that was the whole point of this thread?)

It functions like a wedge. Once the teeth bite, the rotary blade-action basically allows it to chew through the target, just like a real chainsaw. The rest of the weapon, being dragged into the wound cavity, will press the outer/upper limit of the cavity outward, while pressing the inner limit (the part closest to the teeth) together, like a "V". The teeth then bite into the bottom of that V, and keep pulling in and downward. Then, all of a sudden, it reaches the end of whatever it's carving through, and the whole thing flops off.

 Psienesis wrote:
It functions like a wedge. Once the teeth bite, the rotary blade-action basically allows it to chew through the target, just like a real chainsaw. The rest of the weapon, being dragged into the wound cavity, will press the outer/upper limit of the cavity outward, while pressing the inner limit (the part closest to the teeth) together, like a "V". The teeth then bite into the bottom of that V, and keep pulling in and downward. Then, all of a sudden, it reaches the end of whatever it's carving through, and the whole thing flops off.

'

What happens when you hit a hard carapace or even power armor ceramics.

It would be understandable that a chain sword could be forcibly pressed into a wound but unless the wielder was strong enough to physically pry apart armored cermite by hand there is no way a chain sword could pull the rest of the weapon into it.

edit extreme version of the edge im talking about

 Psienesis wrote:
It functions like a wedge. Once the teeth bite, the rotary blade-action basically allows it to chew through the target, just like a real chainsaw. The rest of the weapon, being dragged into the wound cavity, will press the outer/upper limit of the cavity outward, while pressing the inner limit (the part closest to the teeth) together, like a "V". The teeth then bite into the bottom of that V, and keep pulling in and downward. Then, all of a sudden, it reaches the end of whatever it's carving through, and the whole thing flops off.

It would only function like a wedge if it was shaped like a wedge. If the case went in a wedge shape either side of the teeth I could kinda see what you're saying but it's just a rectangular block, it would just stop when the housing hit the armour and wouldn't fo any further. It's like trying to push any rectangular shaped object through armour.

I mean you could hit them hard and have a club like effect with some nasty surface cuts added by the chain, but it's not cutting right through much even if the monomolecular edges stay sharp somehow.

Right, now, look at that picture, and realize that the inner cutting-edge of those teeth are meant to be monomolecular cutting edges, as well as the "flat" edge (the "tip of the claw" so to speak). Ideally, the inside faces of those teeth should be angled like blades, not flat as is depicted (but was probably much, much easier to model).

So these claw downward and basically "gouge" a hunk out of whatever it is you're hitting. And they do it a lot, because these teeth have a few score revolutions per second (might even be hundreds, I don't remember). In that gouging motion, they're pulling the target into them, or themselves into the target.

If it can't "bite", it will skitter and bounce across (this is why they put Power Fields on Eviscerators), probably throwing sparks and such all over the place. If it can, however, it's going to bite as deep as it can (and keep biting) until the physical motion of those involved in the combat pull it free from the trench it just carved. A smart warrior will try to land his next hit immediately next to this trench, because this will force that armor-plate or whatever to basically "throw" that wedge out when the material separates at wherever the two "V"s intersect... leaving a much larger, open area for a telling blow to be struck.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A better picture of the blade:



Notice how pointy the teeth are? The whole profile of the weapon is a wedge between the point of the teeth and the back of the blade-case. Also, note the angles on the blade's case. It's designed to "wedge" in and provide outward pressure (as described above).

Another image (this one is kinda huge):