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.

Oh maybe if you got two hits next to each other to get a bit of armour off and then a third getting the flesh underneath. My point was that in one blow you wouldn't be able to cut through something, because the housing around the blade would just stop on the armour, seeing as it's wider than the teeth.

If, assuming the monomolecular edges hold, the teeth were as wide as the casing, like an actual chainsaw, maybe it would be a functional weapon. But it just isn't. Any weapon that requires you to make three very accurate hits is just inefficient.

Oh no i wasnt talking about the Teeth. the teeth are free to cut through whatever it wants and it probably will

im talking about the issue that ariese when the depth of the cut hits the side of the guard there are no good GW pictures of that area but model wise they all are like the one i posted. and even the one from SM game



While regular chainsaws ride on the outside of the whole blade allowing it to cut through a tree completely while a chain sword always rides on the inside between two blades making the depth of cut on a non squishy target exactly how far the teeth poke out.

Against a normal human, a single swipe would disembowel them. These teeth are an inch-plus long, and (as the illustrations show) have three or four cutting edges each.

As depicted in a lot of places (DoW opening cinematic, for example, lots of kill-moves in Space Marine, etc) the purpose of a chainsword is to get to soft tissue, like the abdomen. Of course, any swordsman worth the name is going to target weak spots in armor (joints and the like). TDA might be thick, but the guy inside it still needs to be able to bend his elbows and raise his arms.

The wedge-shaped cutting profile of the chainswords that I posted illustrate why. It's a wedge, the pressure of the case being pulled inward/downward basically forces the armor apart. Now, of course, if you are taking your chainsword up against someone in TDA, then you're already at a disadvantage, because chainswords weren't designed for that sort of usage. They're designed for taking on someone in flak or light carapace or other, "mundane" forms of armor, in which case said armor gets shredded to fluff (or plastic shards) and shoved aside by the case (note the reverse-angle on the back of that UM chainblade's case... it's meant for levering it out of a wound cavity).

Did a crappy picture, just showing how the casing on a chainsword would stop it cutting through. The wedge would potentially work, and a proper chainsaw would just go straight through (assuming the teeth cut):


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:
Against a normal human, a single swipe would disembowel them. These teeth are an inch-plus long, and (as the illustrations show) have three or four cutting edges each.

As depicted in a lot of places (DoW opening cinematic, for example, lots of kill-moves in Space Marine, etc) the purpose of a chainsword is to get to soft tissue, like the abdomen. Of course, any swordsman worth the name is going to target weak spots in armor (joints and the like). TDA might be thick, but the guy inside it still needs to be able to bend his elbows and raise his arms.

I agree, but it was you who was talking about how they could cut through armour...

 Psienesis wrote:
Against a normal human, a single swipe would disembowel them. These teeth are an inch-plus long, and (as the illustrations show) have three or four cutting edges each.

As depicted in a lot of places (DoW opening cinematic, for example, lots of kill-moves in Space Marine, etc) the purpose of a chainsword is to get to soft tissue, like the abdomen. Of course, any swordsman worth the name is going to target weak spots in armor (joints and the like). TDA might be thick, but the guy inside it still needs to be able to bend his elbows and raise his arms.

It seems like a silly weapon when they could just make adamintine momomolecular daggers and trench blades that any grunt could take a stab wtih.

Lol nice picture Yeah that was what i was getting at. your maxmimum cut on non squishies is 1inch which seems very useless. for the amount of work and time that goes into each weapon.

Haha it's pretty awful but I find the iPad really hard to draw on without a stylus.

All this said though, chainswords definitely are cool. I do like the idea, but the way they are now just wouldn't work. All they'd need to do really is make the blade/housing arrangement more like an actual chainsaw and it would be much more plausible.

They do make those. Astartes Combat Knives, for example.

I agree, but it was you who was talking about how they could cut through armour...

The armor that chainswords are best used against are maybe an inch thick... at best. Those teeth are that long at least, and cut on both the tip and the bias... and are backed by the strength of a Space Marine, which will basically cause the armor to buckle inward. Flak armor that gets cut is basically so much nylon fluff.

Well even if they buckle the armour in you're still just scratching whatever's underneath, because the actual weapon is still stopped by the armour. The teeth will reach slightly further because of the buckling but not much. Surely just making it like a chainsaw means everyone wins? It just would cut straight through as opposed to being limited by the length of the teeth.

On the first picture you show, wouldn't the limited size of the teeth mean that the chainsword would not be able to reach the flesh of someone who wears armour of a certain thickness?

At least in the first picture, it almost looks like Astartes PA would be included in that category...

Then again we never really even talked about how cerimite plating works

Im 90% sure that a space marine can buckle in some light armor and for sure shred through flak

but what are the properties of cerimite? is it possible that with the gouge they can slam it in and shatter it? allow for addition cuts?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
On the first picture you show, wouldn't the limited size of the teeth mean that the chainsword would not be able to reach the flesh of someone who wears armour of a certain thickness?

At least in the first picture, it almost looks like Astartes PA would be included in that category...

Thats the point we been trying to make...

If the chain sword was actually built like a regular chainsaw then there would be no argument or discussion.

PA can resist both multiple adjacent grenade explosions and multiple direct hits from autocannons and heavy bolters.

It's solid stuff.

 Ashiraya wrote:
PA can resist both multiple adjacent grenade explosions and multiple direct hits from autocannons and heavy bolters.

It's solid stuff.

Well from the HH series unremembered empire, i dont know. girlymans plates was shattering and even getting punctured by basic bolt rounds.

We would need to find the middle ground from fluff to figure it out or use IRL comparisons with materials.

I know there's stuff about helmets being shattered with repeated blows so maybe. That's kinda what I meant with the using it like a club and causing nasty surface damage. I just think it would be more efficient to either have a blunt force weapon, or a cutting weapon. Combination weapons seem to compromise too much on something. But maybe a marine would be strong enough to crack through the ceramite.

The double-edged chainswords used by Chaos Marines and the Frost Swords used by the Space Wolves would be the only chainswords that would make ANY sense at all in a combat situation.

Also, Power Armour (ceramite) is made of a metal alloy - not a ceramic material. This is a common misconception, but metal does not "shatter" unless it has been severely frozen and is colder than permafrost. The Power Armour would dent at best.

It depends. Hardened metal does shatter.

Yup.

Even semi-flexible metal can shatter depending on how the force is applied.

Swords tend to be made from multiple types of steel, as would any armor made of multiple composites. That means you can get shattering.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yup.

Even semi-flexible metal can shatter depending on how the force is applied.

Swords tend to be made from multiple types of steel, as would any armor made of multiple composites. That means you can get shattering.

Depends on the sword. Japanese Katanas, which are made of reinforced, hard, alloys that do not bend at all shatter. European swords of the bastard sword/longsword type have flexible blades that don't really shatter so much as they snap.

Snap, shatter, really the same thing. Just depends on the relative brittleness of the object.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Snap, shatter, really the same thing. Just depends on the relative brittleness of the object.

Not at all. Shattering means breaking up into a bunch of little pieces while snap means breaks into two. If you shatter a sword, then it is broken and done-for; almost impossible to repair. If you snap a sword, on the other hand, then you can weld the two pieces together and re-work the blade so that it's almost as strong as when it was new.

 dusara217 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Snap, shatter, really the same thing. Just depends on the relative brittleness of the object.

Not at all. Shattering means breaking up into a bunch of little pieces while snap means breaks into two. If you shatter a sword, then it is broken and done-for; almost impossible to repair. If you snap a sword, on the other hand, then you can weld the two pieces together and re-work the blade so that it's almost as strong as when it was new.

Ummm yeah that would be terrible. the weld becomes a terrible hard spot that will be the first point of break when hit by anything. because when you weld two pieces of metal the center is overall the same composition

The reason a japanese katana works so well is because it is actaully two types of steel forge welded together. a Hard high in carbon outside and and a softer less carbon inside. the reason it has a curve is after the blade is forged the final step is quenching where the softer metal contracts more than the harder front, pulling the blade upwards.

The hard blade lets it keep an edge while the rear softer core keeps it from shattering.


European blades generally didn't do all that and basically was one uniform material throughout. so some times it would be a softer blade that would bend and get dull quick, or a harder metal that would be prone to chipping and breaking but kept a sharpas feth edge.

You all realise that Chainswords are generally speaking not intènded for use against heavily armoured targets? If you are going up against PA or TDA, generally speaking you'll be wanting a power weapon. Chainswords are mostly effective against lihhtly armoured targets like Orks and Guardsmen, where the strength of the swing can break the humans on impact alone, and the tearing edges simply rips them apart. Orks are a little more sturdy, but even in the Space Marine game, it was rare for one of those cinematic executions to actually make the killing strike with the blade. Mostly, Titus used the blade to do a feth-load of damage before punching or slamming them into the ground or their head off.

 Deadshot wrote:
You all realise that Chainswords are generally speaking not intènded for use against heavily armoured targets? If you are going up against PA or TDA, generally speaking you'll be wanting a power weapon. Chainswords are mostly effective against lihhtly armoured targets like Orks and Guardsmen, where the strength of the swing can break the humans on impact alone, and the tearing edges simply rips them apart. Orks are a little more sturdy, but even in the Space Marine game, it was rare for one of those cinematic executions to actually make the killing strike with the blade. Mostly, Titus used the blade to do a feth-load of damage before punching or slamming them into the ground or their head off.

This.

Chainswords are meant to be used against lightly armoured organic targets.

 Deadshot wrote:
You all realise that Chainswords are generally speaking not intènded for use against heavily armoured targets? If you are going up against PA or TDA, generally speaking you'll be wanting a power weapon. Chainswords are mostly effective against lihhtly armoured targets like Orks and Guardsmen, where the strength of the swing can break the humans on impact alone, and the tearing edges simply rips them apart. Orks are a little more sturdy, but even in the Space Marine game, it was rare for one of those cinematic executions to actually make the killing strike with the blade. Mostly, Titus used the blade to do a feth-load of damage before punching or slamming them into the ground or their head off.

Except organic targets are the one thing you never want to take a chainsaw type weapon to at all.

Despite what Texas Chainsaw Massacre would have you think, chainsaws are terrible at cutting flesh. The tissue matter just clogs up everything and mucks the whole machine up and ends up jamming stuff.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
You all realise that Chainswords are generally speaking not intènded for use against heavily armoured targets? If you are going up against PA or TDA, generally speaking you'll be wanting a power weapon. Chainswords are mostly effective against lihhtly armoured targets like Orks and Guardsmen, where the strength of the swing can break the humans on impact alone, and the tearing edges simply rips them apart. Orks are a little more sturdy, but even in the Space Marine game, it was rare for one of those cinematic executions to actually make the killing strike with the blade. Mostly, Titus used the blade to do a feth-load of damage before punching or slamming them into the ground or their head off.

Except organic targets are the one thing you never want to take a chainsaw type weapon to at all.

Despite what Texas Chainsaw Massacre would have you think, chainsaws are terrible at cutting flesh. The tissue matter just clogs up everything and mucks the whole machine up and ends up jamming stuff.

They don't really work against anything do they. Armour = won't cut through, flesh = gets all gummed up.

Maybe if there was a Xenos race made of wood...

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
You all realise that Chainswords are generally speaking not intènded for use against heavily armoured targets? If you are going up against PA or TDA, generally speaking you'll be wanting a power weapon. Chainswords are mostly effective against lihhtly armoured targets like Orks and Guardsmen, where the strength of the swing can break the humans on impact alone, and the tearing edges simply rips them apart. Orks are a little more sturdy, but even in the Space Marine game, it was rare for one of those cinematic executions to actually make the killing strike with the blade. Mostly, Titus used the blade to do a feth-load of damage before punching or slamming them into the ground or their head off.

Except organic targets are the one thing you never want to take a chainsaw type weapon to at all.

Despite what Texas Chainsaw Massacre would have you think, chainsaws are terrible at cutting flesh. The tissue matter just clogs up everything and mucks the whole machine up and ends up jamming stuff.

They don't really work against anything do they. Armour = won't cut through, flesh = gets all gummed up.

Maybe if there was a Xenos race made of wood...

Perhaps the shape and housing of the sword is self-cleaning? Or the fact these are scalpel shape indestructible blades moves at hundreds of revolutions per minute means they don't have to worry because the flesh is ripped apart before it can jam the teeth. Flesh would be practically liquified and bone would snap by the force of the Marine's blow rather than sawing. And even if it did clog it up, which has happened in fluff, nothing more id really needed to solve the problem except for the marine to rev it and the powerful motor clears it.
Not only that, but you are comparing slightly different things. Chainsaws have basically squarish teeth and are designed for a clean cut through wood at a reasonably slow pace. Chainswords are weapons of war designed to feth you up on a big way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
You all realise that Chainswords are generally speaking not intènded for use against heavily armoured targets? If you are going up against PA or TDA, generally speaking you'll be wanting a power weapon. Chainswords are mostly effective against lihhtly armoured targets like Orks and Guardsmen, where the strength of the swing can break the humans on impact alone, and the tearing edges simply rips them apart. Orks are a little more sturdy, but even in the Space Marine game, it was rare for one of those cinematic executions to actually make the killing strike with the blade. Mostly, Titus used the blade to do a feth-load of damage before punching or slamming them into the ground or their head off.

Except organic targets are the one thing you never want to take a chainsaw type weapon to at all.

Despite what Texas Chainsaw Massacre would have you think, chainsaws are terrible at cutting flesh. The tissue matter just clogs up everything and mucks the whole machine up and ends up jamming stuff.

They don't really work against anything do they. Armour = won't cut through, flesh = gets all gummed up.

Maybe if there was a Xenos race made of wood...

Wood Elves in SPAACEE confirmed.

This is why I wish that they had a tea of good authors who actually collaberate with eachother to make a good setting.

 dusara217 wrote:
This is why I wish that they had a tea of good authors who actually collaberate with eachother to make a good setting.

The setting is fine but its not like they are mechanical scientist or anything. they are just writers that want to write cool things. dont let physics get into that

 Desubot wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Snap, shatter, really the same thing. Just depends on the relative brittleness of the object.

Not at all. Shattering means breaking up into a bunch of little pieces while snap means breaks into two. If you shatter a sword, then it is broken and done-for; almost impossible to repair. If you snap a sword, on the other hand, then you can weld the two pieces together and re-work the blade so that it's almost as strong as when it was new.

Ummm yeah that would be terrible. the weld becomes a terrible hard spot that will be the first point of break when hit by anything. because when you weld two pieces of metal the center is overall the same composition

The reason a japanese katana works so well is because it is actaully two types of steel forge welded together. a Hard high in carbon outside and and a softer less carbon inside. the reason it has a curve is after the blade is forged the final step is quenching where the softer metal contracts more than the harder front, pulling the blade upwards.

The hard blade lets it keep an edge while the rear softer core keeps it from shattering.


European blades generally didn't do all that and basically was one uniform material throughout. so some times it would be a softer blade that would bend and get dull quick, or a harder metal that would be prone to chipping and breaking but kept a sharpas feth edge.

I see you've bought into the mystique of the Katana.

The Katana was actually made of very poor quality steel, then only good steel was the very blade itself. This made the katana very brittle.

By the late middle ages, European steel manufacturing was the best in the world. The best swords ever made were made in Toledo. They were flexible and lightweight and would spring back after bending.

Japan has done a good job of marketing their culture, and that includes elevating the Katana to more than it actually was. The Katana was great at cutting through flesh, but it failed miserably against any good quality armor.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 dusara217 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Snap, shatter, really the same thing. Just depends on the relative brittleness of the object.

Not at all. Shattering means breaking up into a bunch of little pieces while snap means breaks into two. If you shatter a sword, then it is broken and done-for; almost impossible to repair. If you snap a sword, on the other hand, then you can weld the two pieces together and re-work the blade so that it's almost as strong as when it was new.

Ummm yeah that would be terrible. the weld becomes a terrible hard spot that will be the first point of break when hit by anything. because when you weld two pieces of metal the center is overall the same composition

The reason a japanese katana works so well is because it is actaully two types of steel forge welded together. a Hard high in carbon outside and and a softer less carbon inside. the reason it has a curve is after the blade is forged the final step is quenching where the softer metal contracts more than the harder front, pulling the blade upwards.

The hard blade lets it keep an edge while the rear softer core keeps it from shattering.


European blades generally didn't do all that and basically was one uniform material throughout. so some times it would be a softer blade that would bend and get dull quick, or a harder metal that would be prone to chipping and breaking but kept a sharpas feth edge.

I see you've bought into the mystique of the Katana.

The Katana was actually made of very poor quality steel, then only good steel was the very blade itself. This made the katana very brittle.

By the late middle ages, European steel manufacturing was the best in the world. The best swords ever made were made in Toledo. They were flexible and lightweight and would spring back after bending.

Japan has done a good job of marketing their culture, and that includes elevating the Katana to more than it actually was. The Katana was great at cutting through flesh, but it failed miserably against any good quality armor.

Actually no im aware of the fact that the material they had was gak.
but it is still hard around soft steel that was the point.

(the at the time kinda situation)

Lets not just start assuming things shale we?

Edit: Actually the whole katana thing was for wyzillas comment on katanas.

Why has no one addressed the issue that if two people are fighting using chainswords the weapons are likely to clash when parrying one another.... regardless if the chainsword teeth are super strong and sharp, wedge like or block like... that equals two broken swords.

Chainsword is a horrendous weapon, and would probably never work. Not any better than a Chain Saw would. Which makes the sword itself redundant. and Chain saw rifles like in Gears of War much more sensical if you ignore the fact that the game clearly clashes them... even though they would break. The only way the two swords wouldn't destroy each other when snagging on each others super awesome teeth is if one had a more powerful motor and just over powered the other sword, rendering only one broken sword.

Chain Axe on the other hand, different story.