Why don't Star Wars ships use RAILGUNS? | Star Wars Lore

[@EckhartsLadder]

Leave a like if you enjoy, and keep an eye open for tonight's poll! Twitter: twitter.com/eckhartsladder

[@charliefisher1375]

EckhartsLadder can we hear about why other Republic vehicles didn’t use a composite laser beam like we see on the LAAT?

[@ursaber]

Hey, why don't you do a video detailing some of the most unique and customized Imperial Star Destroyers such as the Chimera, the Conqueror and the Anakin Solo.

[@Galen55]

The Reaver class ISD-I has a kilometer long railgun on the ventral hull. It was just designed by MarcusStarkiller just for me. It is on Furaffinity.

[@audiohacked]

Honestly, I'd be happy to watch any video you make......

[@reesemartens759]

Another reason is a little bit of the physics behind it. Every time you fire a shot, momentum must be conserved, i.e. there is going to be recoil. Now light has some momentum but very little when compared to objects with mass. This seems insignificant however, the thermal properties of light make it much better as it is able to deliver much more thermal energy to the target relative to its total energy. Thermal energy is the energy that will punch through the armored hull of any SW capital ship. Despite all this, let's say turbolasers fire plasma. The energy of the heated plasma is going to be huge when compared to its kinetic energy as the plasma has to be carried over a long distance. Thus the same is true as the primary thermal energy from a mass driver is caused by friction between the target and the projectile. TLDR better thermal energy to recoil ratio for energy weapons.

[@UGNAvalon]

Droids can make complex calculations for hyperspace jumps. Droids can’t calculate their enemies’ position in order to hit them from a distance. :/

[@arkhaan7066]

Long distance shooting is inhibited by the relatively nimble ships in Star Wars, it gets to a point where the possible location for your target is a very large area and you are firing very small projectiles. Add in some serious cyber warfare to corrupt any automated targeting and that’s it for droid gunnery

[@henrypaleveda7760]

it doesn't seem like the droids are doing math to make the shots (I know that isn't how machines work but hear me out); droids seem to have some capacity to improvise, while not on the same [or even remotely similar] level as humans and other organics, they have shown the ability to judge risks, and elect weather or not to take them. Though this isn't shown on large scale due to the fact that most if not all combat droids have orders, but droids in combat attempt to flank/ out maneuver other combatants and you even see assassin droids who freelance, meaning that they are choosing what missions to go on or not. if they have this kind of autonomy then perhaps they also have the ability to approximate. Operating with this in mind, they might simply not be using the guns/equipment properly (the standard battle droids used by the C.I.S. were meant as infantry so operating turbo lasers may have been too big a jump for them).

[@slate8409]

@@arkhaan7066 That argument makes zero sense when you consider far slower turbolasers and laser cannons and their effectiveness. If those can hit targets a railgun round moving thousands of times faster can do it.

[@arkhaan7066]

@@slate8409 and when you miss with those railguns what happens with the ammunition? It’s scattered through space moving at high velocity and pretty quickly will start shutting down travel in the main trade corridors, and leave hazards for generations to come. Turbolasers and blasters dissipate quickly enough to be “safe” for use in high traffic regions. Edit: also the shields that defend against solid objects are CONSIDERABLY stronger than the shields that defend against energy weapons. Navigational shields alone vaporize multi thousand ton asteroids with ease.

[@slate8409]

@@arkhaan7066 ... except they don't? If that was the case no one would ever use concussion missiles - even the assault variant - in capital ship combat as those are conventional explosive packed missiles. Proton torpedoes might offer some basis for debate as they're basically tactical nukes but concussion missiles are not... nor are the conventional rockets in Squadrons, for additional example. Those same asteroids are spoken of as a serious threat in almost every instance, such fields treated as though they'll casually chew up fleets. Most gameplay across various titles supports this as well. Mind, a lot of it comes down to the velocity of the round on top of its mass but there's no reason to believe that accelerating rounds to relativistic speeds able to outclass shield technology is an undoable or even taxing feat given power generation within said universe. And regarding the bit about trade corridors... no. Space is big. VERY big. More to the point, hyperspace travel does not occur within "real" space and often accounts for the vast majority of travel, with most journeys ending and returning to realspace only after being pulled out of hyperspace after entering a planet's gravity well. It's the entire reason blockades work in Star Wars. The only real explanation I've seen and been able to agree with is the one offered in the video. Basically that tibanna gas is cheap and readily available, and due to the shared development across all tibanna gas platforms it's a matter of convenience rather than the technology itself not being up to par. Railgun technology would have a bevy of tactical and strategic advantages over turbolasers but the latter are known and trusted so it really becomes a question of why bother.

[@admiralroadrunner4559]

When eckhart posts a poll: Fanbase: This getting out of hand now there are **too many choices** That one guy: Picking A is a cool trick! Eckhart: plz no....

[@Azakadune]

@LilianaLloyd74 Same.

[@admiralroadrunner4559]

@LilianaLloyd74 lmao

[@eageraurora879]

Ive been curious about this ever since i turned to my friend during an armada match and mentioned that nebulon B's "Looks like a massive fucking gun"

[@admiralroadrunner4559]

@@eageraurora879 lmao they do!

[@blackshogun272]

@@eageraurora879 time for a few "minor" modifications 😂😂😂

[@TheRealHelvetica]

Star Wars galaxy: "projectile weapons are so uncivilized" Yuzong Vong: "lol okay" proceeds to railgun meteors and moons into planets

[@nobody3761]

There actually are ships that use projectile weapons apart of the Zann Consortium, one such is unshielded but features heavy armor and actually poses a threat to ISD's

[@vitiate5093]

@@nobody3761the one they stole after scavenging the Death Star ruins

[@nobody3761]

Nope, Zann Consortium had others such as mandalorian warships, outfitted with just heavy armor and kinetic cannons@@vitiate5093

[@DamianMaisano]

“Slugthrowers” have one great advantage: lightsabers can’t deflect them. They just melt going through. At least in Legends bounty hunters out to kill Jedi specifically use such weapons.

[@eiselda]

Damian Maisano they can be redirected/stopped midair by some Jedi though

[@theredvelvetyfox8814]

Parry this nerd, *fires scattergun slug thrower at close range*

[@nobleman9393]

Bullet wouldn't melt because it wouldn't be in contact with a lightsaber for long enough.

[@Mr_Fish10]

Doesn't matter. Some jedi can use the force to stop them... some.

[@hospee8760]

And not to mention, firearms are cheaper and the ammunition is even easier to manufacture.

[@cptgofer1acb377]

IMO using a combination of projectile weapons (railguns/mass drivers) i.e. the Zann Consortium, is the most effective. By firing energy and hard ammo at a single target you are forcing the enemy to use 2 forms of shielding which can drain the enemy power generation dramatically over a shorter time span. After which you then are melting off armor with the turbo lasers and punching bigger and more damaging shots with the projectile weapons. As with any form of warfare and engagement the needs to be an effective and efficient balance.

[@scottmurphy4946]

the real reason rail guns are rarely used lasers in space look cool on film

[@burnttoast.2017]

Ah but those lasers are impossible you see if they were lasers it would be a constant beam. Plasma. Not sure why so many colors tho.

[@goldenrootsnet]

Without any particles reflecting the light you would not even see a beam. Even in a normal atmosphere you don't see the beam.

[@scottmurphy4946]

Well it is star wars, all ships only have engines in the back but fly like they are in atmosphere. Last jedi had ships that ran out of fuel slpw down and stop in space like it was a boat

[@s.m.2523]

The first star wars films were created in the eighties and the idea of "cool futuristic energy weapons", call them laser, phasers, mzon beam, plasma or whatever, had been a stapple of science fiction since the fifties. Star trek and about every sci fi show was using tit and of course a big glob of light on the screen just scream futuristic becuse it doesn't look like what modern weapon look like. By comparaison raillguns and coilgun weren't really a thing then. (I mean oh sure the idea and plans of raillguns have existed since the early 20 century but it was a physics nuts and weapon nuts thing. Most people would even know about, it certainely wasn't part of the pop culture imaginary.) They only really started to make a big shoift when.. well they started to become slightly more realistic prospect in real life. I mean as someone born in the eighties, I've seen raillguns and coillguns start popping everywhere in sci fi since ...the early 2000, really.

[@cm275]

@@scottmurphy4946 A ship that cuts thrust in space will stop accelerating and be overtaken by a pursuing ship that is still accelerating, which is pretty much what we saw in TLJ. Star Wars has always played fast and loose with physics though.

[@marshwalker7217]

Shields confuse me. In some references the shields are quite strong, in some they don't seem to exist at all, and others they block one thing or the other. Is shield just another way of saying 'plot'?

[@skylark306]

Sean Clancy even warhammer40k void shields are more consistent than these.

[@Dracounius]

yes, this also describes the real reason why projectiles weapons are not used. They are not as cool looking on screen...that's it, pure rule of cool at work

[@Phoenix1234554]

For time reasons i guess and to make the battles more interesting ,most ships that have good shields can survive longer in books or games

[@scorpixel1866]

A shield strength is directly related to its crew's importance to the plot, the exact same can be said about its evasion chance so it only act as a second layer just in case too many eyes are rolling up

[@jakedempsey3809]

Shields in most science fiction are pretty weird, it's not just Star Wars.

[@wesleyduffee6108]

Have the Jedi and Sith ever been able to coexist peacefully for an extended period of time? #askEck

[@jplegend98]

Not really. The only time they kinda did in legends they were in a cold war situation. Sometimes a single sith or Jedi would briefly team up but its rare.

[@vutava8292]

In Legends, the predecessor of the Jedi Order believed in a balance between light and dark (or Ashla and Bogan, as they called them), and kept that balance for millennia before the Rakata ruined everything.

[@mariobadia4553]

Did a sith and a jedi ever fuck?

[@ArmorFrogEntertainment]

In Legends: no. In Canon: we don't know yet.

[@death299]

the jedi have always prosecuted those who practiced the "dark" side of the force , and the sith order only began to exist after some jedi were exiled for the practice and took over the sith race and the race has always had war at it's core they don't coexist peacefully with anyone, including themselves

[@RaeSyngKane]

I think it’s because lasers make nice little electronic sounds, lights, and they seemed more sci-fi than railguns. These weapons are designed to fit the film, not the universe. That’s why almost all star wars blasters have pathetic ranges, rates of fire, and accuracy in comparison to IRL weapons. Because the story needs it to be that way. Railguns would have the ships annihilating each other at 200 mile distances. The HMS Hood opened fire at the Bismarck at 15 mi (24.2km). BAE systems is currently working on a 2.4km/sec velocity 33MJ railgun. But IRL weapons make for terrible special effects, they’re too real. That’s why movies use gasbags and detcord to simulate explosions and all the machine guns fire slowly and no one needs to reload,

[@bohemicbohemian9190]

TL;DR because lasers are cool :)

[@RomeTWguy]

turbolasers have an effective range of several light minutes fam

[@RaeSyngKane]

@@RomeTWguy railguns have a functionally infinite range and much better velocity. The velocity bit is easy to tell, since you can see a turbolaser shot, it is traveling slower than a railgun can fire. The range is pretty simple as well, it goes until it hits something.

[@JB-yb4wn]

And BAE wants to make the rail gun rapid firing. This would be totally awesome.

[@cmdr_kai2492]

@@RomeTWguy Cough cough bullshit cough cough Thrawn: Treason establishes that they have a maximum range of 1,200 km, and older numbers (and other sources) put them at 16-100 km.

[@willjohnson3299]

This is why I like this channel he releases his videos in a democratic way by Polling his fans to see what we want!

[@dankmeme1326]

I love democracy

[@JoelFeila]

and in the spirit of UK democracy i table a vote if no confidence. lol

[@StationaryGamingReal]

We are the Senate

[@wyattvanthul8893]

And he says Sifi democracies don’t work!

[@brettbush2670]

I'm not brave enough for politics

[@kamenwaticlients]

If star wars shields block matter then why can fighters get close enough to take out turbo laser turrets. The movies say the weapons loose power over long ranges. If your railgun is firing projectiles in the fractions of c then they would do hella damage. The projectiles would be moving way faster then the sublight speeds of the ships.

[@noone-igloo]

Source material often states that shields are better at stopping physical objects the faster they are moving, which is why fighters can waltz through. This would suggest that slow moving explosive projectiles, rather than kinetic projectiles, might be effective. But as seen in Clone Wars, there is also something called "thermal shielding", which can be installed on a capital ship, that is very good at defeating explosive projectiles. However, this shield seems to not be in a bubble around the ship, but is instead right up against the hull. The goal of the fighter then would mostly be to simply get close enough to a ship that it can fire blasters/lasers from inside the main shield bubble. Of course we know that missile weaponry can be effective, as seen in the last jedi, but this might be because such weapons are so rarely used against capital ships that the necessary shielding is not often installed. Edit: I should note we also sometimes see, including in a clip used in this video, from phantom menace, that there are shields a human cannot even walk through. However, these are always seen on a very very small scale.

[@Phoenix1234554]

Their particle shields can block physical objects

[@dnerd2791]

I've wondered about this too. How do fighters pass through a capital ship's shields?

[@jakedempsey3809]

I wonder this as well. I wonder why boarding vessels can actually get to the point where they can punch into a ships hull

[@cgi2002]

Star wars basically has an issue with its tech in that they can nev err decide what does what, how it's done, or even if it exists. And when in doubt can always just say "Oh this does that". They've through the movies basically proven they have little to no defence against physical impacts other than armour. The examples we have are several, asteroids hit ships however do little damage, which is fairly reasonable, they are fairly small and not overly dense or travelling at high speeds. Fighters hit ships, with varying damage, some explode on the armour, some crash into bays, some kill star destroyers (or their bridges). Larger ships hit each other, with drastically different results. Sometimes devastating for 1 ship and no damage to other, sometimes larger ships hit another and literally rip one another apart. And then there is the single most railgun "esq" hit in star wars, the hyperspace ram. That is at the end of the day, a railgun shot using a ship.

[@_robustus_]

You guys are sooo lucky I showed up today, because I’m gonna clear this up for you. Pyoo pyoo good. Bang bang bad.

[@siullkallig9757]

I think the Silencer from the Sith Inquisitor storyline from The Old Republic is an amazing weapon. The Silencer was a massive beam weapon that was attached to a Harrower-class Dreadnaught and were expensive to make but could destroy entire armadas with a single blast. I'm a little disappointed it hasn't been used more in the universe.

[@houndthered5270]

Being a heavy Elite: Dangerous player on top of a huge Star Wars fan, my assumption has been that one of the major benefits of a laser-type weapon is the lack of physical ammunition, thus lightening the load of a craft while also offering it an extended operating time out of port. I don't remember off the top of my head if turbo lasers/laser cannons require some sort of expendable resource to operate other than their power source, but I can tell you that it is much more convenient to not have to worry about constantly returning to a dock or parent vessel to resupply.

[@jayschmidt4844]

Plus railguns can't be gimballed, would be counterproductive to have to angle your Star Destroyer for every shot on a new target.

[@iBloodxHunter]

Turbo Lasers and Blasters both use Tybanna Gas. Somehow it's easy to turn into plasma, which is their primary weapon of choice. From what I understand, everything but the biggest guns are conservative with ammo.

[@camillecirrus3977]

As Blood Hunter said, they use gas. The plasma has to come from somewhere. Although yeah, laser weapons, provided you have enough energy to power them, are gonna be much more efficient. A big enough ship would however be able to store quite a LOT of slugs for its railguns, considering as little as few grams per shot would rip apart ships.

[@joshrust3310]

@@camillecirrus3977 I believe that Eckart has a point regarding the shields that are used in the star wars universe, these shields are capable of protecting against many things. The one mitigating problem that I always seem to find in the shield strength is the fact that the different weapons have differing effectiveness against the many types of shields. It is quite possible that the star wars ships are equipped with multiple types of shields for different situations but as clearly shown through many examples they can't be used together, this has most likely led to the development of a neutral shield that can resist almost all forms of damage somewhat equally. In my opinion it is most likely that the particle, laser and plasma weapons have differing specialized shields but due to the shared nature of the star wars technology you cannot just install a single defensive system because you may not know what the enemy might have as their ace in the hole. In regards to the warship ammo magazines, they may not even be a physical storage locker compared to our understanding of bullets. The weapons themselves may create their own ammunition when fed with the correct materials, this won't be possible with all weapon types but it would be safer to have a bunch of inert ammo components than live explosive rounds secured across your starship.

[@hawkstable8889]

@@joshrust3310 Railguns do not use any explosives, only electricity to drive an inert kinetic projectile.

[@ryancarrell3186]

Why do the Republic Gunships only use the bubble turrets at the first battle of Geonosis? They seem quite powerful, but they never are seen again. #askEck

[@Fordo007]

Better yet why did the clone pilot go 'we're out of rockets sir' when they told him to shoot Dooku down. You still have two laser turrets and 4 beam turrets...

[@cnoyes72]

Budget cuts

[@ArchaevisSolemnaceGalleries]

@@Fordo007 When a Count Dooku deflects a rocket, the rocket explodes. When a he deflects beams and turrets, he sends them right back to you.

[@Lellianna]

Why was General Veers standing so close to Vader? #askEck

[@jovee6155]

#askEck how did Gen. Veers prepare his men?

[@patrickyoung9727]

#askECK how was General Veers?

[@ChristopherWhiteRock]

How Veers?

[@ryancarrell3186]

Because he’s brave

[@IkairusMaxx]

@@ChristopherWhiteRock Veers?

[@JP_RS6]

In a scientific sense blaster weapons used by all factions are plasma based (even looking at diagrams) so they are essentially a rail gun hurling super heated plasma projectiles. As turbo lasers and blasters used Tibana gas (bad spelling), super heat that gas to a plasma contained in a magnetic field and shot out by a rail gun. See Because Science channel for that info.

[@ashcanproductions9822]

But can gas be considered a projectile?

[@quentinreid3111]

A plasma is still technically a projectile. The main difference between a plasma projectile and a conventional projectile is the energy deposited to the target with plasma is from heat and energy and ionization and some kenetic energy, where a slug of metal is depositing a majority of kenetic energy and some heat.

[@arghnoor]

@@ashcanproductions9822 it's not gas, its plasma. It's not the same, plasma is a totally different state of matter

[@krispalermo8133]

@@quentinreid3111 iron charged as an electro magnet, 1/2,000th of a gram the size of 1/8th of a cubic mm is size." speck of dust." i.) Base math 2kilograms x 12,000meters(12km)/sec ^ : to reach speed. "24,ooo,ooo joules kinetic Impact 12x10^6 = 3 ton impact strike.? ii.) Now as a 1/2,000th of a gram weight. = 6,ooo watts/j (6 kilowatts/j) per sq inch.PSI at 12km/sec. " hard to wrap your head around ?" * What about the remain energy from the other 8,000th of a gram ?* You have the energy to move 2kg worth of iron at 12km/sec to only move 1/2,oooth of a gram . Does that mean that 2 mg BB Gun ball a thousand times faster ? 6,ooo,ooo watt/ or 6 mega joules " little over one ton of tnt." ? iii.) Also the weight of iron can be adjusted by making it an electro magnet. Thus carrying and ion charge, I chose the base travel speed at 12km/second cause that is what it takes to send something out into space. Human reflex times for boxing and knife fighting moves at 1/7th to 1/10th of a second. Radar's laser weapon lock warning system flashes a light letting you to know when to pick and roll your aerospace craft. Causing you to move 10's of meters in a split second. Base on engagement range, I would guest base range weapon speed will be at around 120km/sec. base energy out put 2kg x 14,400,000,000= 28,800,000,000 joules: 28.8x10^8 divided by the weight of projectile. How quickly can the space fighter charge it's engines and power banks ? "cough,cough," Wookieepeda stated concussion missiles have the power out put/ yield of 1kiloton TNT. weapon damage 8d10x2, X-wing 120hp , YT-400 light transport/ freighter 180hp. Now what type my structural integrity fields, material need to take a hit of 250tons to 1,000tons to a 4sq inch area ?

[@archangel6676]

Nah that would be Plasma THROWERS, rail guns (mass drivers to give them there proper name, and yes they do exist the US has had a few on some of there ships since the 60's) fire a solid state magnetic round at incredible speeds as mr Palermo is probably a bit more versed in actual speeds than i am.

[@InveterateMendaciousness]

>vong uses superheated plasma weapons >so does literally every other faction in Star Wars Not a projectile weapon

[@osets2117]

Not entirely true, vong ships fire molten rocks at their targets. Most people erroneously call their weapons plasma based

[@krispalermo8133]

@@osets2117 Solid, liquid, gas, plasma. You can still heat a liquid to steam but keep it under pressure to remain as a liquid state. Remove or add electrons to create plasma. But is it just an over advance " steam " cannon.?

[@osets2117]

@@krispalermo8133 it's described in the novels as firing molten rocks, it's not plasma.

[@InveterateMendaciousness]

@Dylan Prothero I understand basic physics lol. It is implicit that “projectile” refers to a solid piece of material. Lasers fire photons, which are projectiles, but they are not categorized as projectile weapons. The same logic applies to plasma weapons. Fluidic projectiles aren’t really synonymous with the usual term “projectile.”

[@95spades]

I've never seen a laser in a SW movie except for maybe the DS one and some other sustained beam weapons. Everything else "laser" is plasma. Laser is just a short hand for light that is homogenous in wavelength, rotation, source and direction and you can't see light travel with your naked eye - it would leave the barrel and hit the target in the same instant as far as an observer without any measuring device is concerned. Hence, almost every gun in SW, including turbo "lasers" are in fact rail guns firing plasma. This is also the reasons for reloads, aside from straight up power sources, and recoil. Edit: spelling. Phone tries to auto correct to swedish words.

[@twistedyogert]

One could argue that certain blaster types might use a laser to energize the gas.

[@systemhalodark]

* Laughs in EaW Hypervelocity Gun * No really, that thing was broken as heck in that game.

[@SirMattomaton]

Well... the concept of railguns is far more recent than Star Wars itself. That plays into that massively, I believe.

[@Dracounius]

Far older actually, as in a pre WW1 idea (for the coil gun) rail guns specifically was in-between WW1 and WW2

[@corwinhyatt519]

The concept was around when Star Wars was written, it just isn't as flashy.

[@Phoenix1234554]

Also the germans in WW2 were building a massive railgun but it was destroyed by the US.

[@ReddwarfIV]

@@Phoenix1234554 The V3 supergun was still a chemically propelled weapon, not a railgun. They had very large _railway_ guns but these were conventional artillery on a railway chassis.

[@SirMattomaton]

I know the concept of such weapons have existed. But recent (past 15-20 years) developments have mainstreamed the idea of the railgun as commonly known now.

[@europanzer3929]

Now I'm curious about the different turbolaser colours with rebels and the empire.

[@martykarr7058]

Lasing elements and/or type of Tibiana gas they use.

[@samyconpro9430]

The empire used there own and the rebels I think used CIS turbo lasers that’s why they are blue and red

[@dudeman6592]

@@martykarr7058 how do you spell it? I see many people spelling it in many ways tibanna gas I think..

[@Reyma777]

Aren’t turbo lasers projectile weapons? I am certain a turbo lasers shoot bolts of plasma not beams of light.

[@Dracounius]

In modern day physics and weapons research (as in the stuff the various military in the world are currently researching) both particle (like beam weapons) and plasma based weapons are considered energy weapons not projectile weapons. And with good reason as they behave very different from projectile weapons. Projectile weapons instead are weapons that fire lumps of matter, not just clouds or streams of individual particles like plasma based weapons do.

[@MandalorV7]

From what I under stand star wars weapons use gas that has been converted into a plasma bolt.

[@digitalis2977]

I've never encountered a real explanation for it...only that Tibanna Gas converts energy into "coherent energy"...whatever that means, though it would stand to reason that a laser bolt contacting solid matter would generate a plasma reaction/explosion, that would be occurring at the point of contact, so an electromagnetic shield to dissipate said energy would technically yield no such reaction.

[@fatherjack8274]

Yup, this. The best explanation I've seen for turbolasers is that they are a twin element weapon. There is the laser, invisible that fires first and sweeps clear any debris or stray particles. The weapon then discharges a bolt of magnetically contained plasma that rides the invisible laser beam until it either hits a target or the bolt loses coherence and dissipates. Don't quote me, but I think this came from Curtis Saxton who went on to write the official Star Wars Technical Commentaries books.

[@joshuahadams]

That’s why Kylo Ren could catch one in The Force Awakens.

[@Bonekraka]

I do enjoy the BGM its relaxing settles you at the same time passing on knowledge without over-stimulation any info passed on without episode is good Thank you EckhartsLadder

[@permafrostinsanity1799]

Regardless of what most may believe, I still consider that the Mass Drive Cannon, used by the Zann Consortium, is a rail gun and a very effective one.

[@Abandonsoyciety]

mass drivers are capable of launching vehicles and projectiles hence the name, think advanced sling shot.

[@HolyFurryFish1998]

One minute you're saying the railgun shots wouldn't be accurate enough to be effective, but the next you're saying that ships are engaging at close range (where accuracy wouldn't be a problem). If modern day railguns are as accurate as they are now, in the Star Wars universe with the vast wealth of technological developments, short-range engagements and extremely short flight-time, railguns would be very effective. Don't forget that railguns don't require combustion; the shells are magnetically accelerated, so there's going to be no need for disposal/storage of empty casings like you would with traditional firearms. So you can basically use power generators to power the railgun, a turret to house the equipment and gunner (should you desire), and a barrel/rails to propel the shell.

[@goldenrootsnet]

@Sir Bone-voyage! Lasers suffer from diffraction. Badly. The power of lasers in space drops painfully fast with distance, and frequency doubling only ameliorates the issue slightly. Lasers are notoriously low efficiency compared to projectile weapons. But that’s not the main issue. When comparing hypervelocity projectile impact research with laser ablation research, one discovers a stark contrast in their efficacy. Laser ablation is simply less effective at causing damage than projectile impacts. Whereas hypervelocity projectiles cause spallations and cave in armor effectively, laser ablation is poor, with energy wasted to vaporization, radiation, and heat conduction to surrounding armor. In terms of actually destroying enemy capital ships, lasers can cut into the enemy bulkhead all day with basically zero effect, the ablation of a monolithic armor plate happens at micrometers per second.

[@benjamin1359870]

@@goldenrootsnet children of a dead earth ?

[@goldenrootsnet]

@@benjamin1359870 yes

[@f0rb1d3n]

I think the biggest reason that they don’t have railguns is simply because projectiles require you to have a projectile ready. A plasma cannon just requires the cannon while railgun requires crew and large inventory of which ever kind of missile etc... they need. Ammunition is expensive, requires more resources and constant restocking. As well as the risk of holding so much explosives in a ship which can lead to their own destruction. Lasers are more convenient at least thats how i always saw it rather than which is more powerful

[@goldenrootsnet]

@Sir Bone-voyage! I ignored plasma because most real life info on plasma weapon is classified. However firing 1-2mg of plasma at 3000 km/s would create an explosion of about 12 MJ (and bombard the target with x-ray radiation, but this can be defeated with lead). It is however not stated how much energy is required for this. So we don't know how the damage you cause compares to the other options for the same amount of energy you input. It doesn't matter how powerful your laser gets, because J for J the rail gun causes more damage. The same amount of energy you put in your laser, you can put in the rail gun. You are right that the laser is better than the rail gun at short range, but only at VERY short range. But at that range high yield missiles are a much better option. Also we have nothing, not even in theory that is anything like science fantasy shields, so any property attributed to those shields is pure speculation/fantasy. There is no reason to assume it is better at stopping physical objects than energy or vice versa. The most prudent assumption would be that it would absorb an X amount of energy no matter the source. On the otherhand if the shield was based on photons, it could cancel out the laser simply by being in opposite phase of the laser should they manage to match the wave length. And should such a shield be indeed better in stopping projectiles, it would also stop the plasma bolt due to it's physical properties. Heat damage is not greater than kinetic damage. Look up people dipping their hand in molten metal and not be effected. If that same hand was hit by a slug with the kinetic energy equal to the energy from the heat, they'd be a lot of pain. They were shielded from the heat simply from the moist of their hands. A battleship could easily be coated with something that would shield the heat from the laser, long enough for a slug to disable the laser canon.

[@darklordopain3958]

I want to hear your mega star destroyer origins theory!

[@orbaitv5991]

I think that they scrapped the emperor's super star destroyer and used other resources from the unkown region to build it and it was finish probably 4 or 5 years before the sequel trilogy.

[@dnerd2791]

Can you explain the differences between shields in Star Trek and other sci-fi franchises like Trek?

[@martykarr7058]

Star Trek takes a more "real world" approach to the matter. You have two types of shields on a Star Trek ship. You have a navigational deflector which is in front of the ship and protects it from space debris. This is necessary for high speed travel in space where a grain of space dust would at near-light speeds hit with the effect of say a 88 mm shell. When they say shields in Star Trek, they mean the system that protects the entire ship.

[@bolothegiantfriendlypillbu4075]

Actually there was a railgun and it was a superweapon too. It was in the Dark Empire, most people would know it as the Galaxy Gun. I mean yeah, it's payload is what counts and it had to use hyperspace, but it was still a projectile cannon.

[@ChadZLumenarcus]

That was a really good explanation and covering of railgun like weapons and why a setting such as Star Wars wouldn't be using high ranged weaponry. Nicely done!

[@SavageProfessor14]

It's important to note that Railguns require them to store ammo on the ship. More mass for the mass driver means a heavier, less maneuverable ship and a limited ammo supply

[@JohnPC00]

You also need to store ammunition in different calibers, requiring you to choose between firing one type of gun more often than the others.

[@Dracounius]

Considering that in most cases in the films (never ones anyway) they are using shells for the tibana gas for larger turbolasers (like when you see inside the venators in the battle of courusant) that is the same for the current energy weapons. And as electrically driven projectiles need no propellant they would be far safer to store.

[@Samuraiedge2]

@@Dracounius You don't actually see any shells on the Guarlara(the venator in the cutscene). The guns you see with shells being ejected on the Invisible Hand were flak guns.

[@Dracounius]

@@Samuraiedge2 I stand corrected. Admittedly you would still need to store and transfer tibana gas to the turbolasers, but the mass would be significantly smaller than the one for projectile weaponry as long as you don't use single shot storage cells. Still probably more dangerous to store the gas, since inert metal is not very explosive (unlike tibana gas).

[@benjamin1359870]

Well you can simply shoot really fast small pellet, realistic railgun would not actually need ammunition heavier than few grams to be really effective, so a tons of amunition would be 1 000 000 shot

[@shahmirm7226]

Covenant CAS Assault Carrier vs Resurgent Class Star Destroyer (28th try like so eck can see)

[@darthjarjarthewise3279]

shahmir m CAS. That things a monster

[@LazyTestudines]

Try adding #askECK considering he asks you to use it for questions.

[@shahmirm7226]

testudines #askEck is for short questions that he answers at the end of each video. I’m looking for a dedicated video to settle the debate

[@LazyTestudines]

@@shahmirm7226 I can't remember the last time he did a ship vs. video. I'm not sure he does those any more. Edit: I just checked, he used to do them also every week for a while. However, the last one was in August 2018.

[@shahmirm7226]

testudines well let’s try to get him to them again

[@akarbit3r111]

Just saying a Cairo Station level MAC would split a SD in half, especially since Covie ships are shielded as well along with a SD and the station being about the same size

[@frost7463]

Except in legends a single medium turbolaser is 4x as powerful as an SMAC.

[@Matt-yg8ub]

Imagine a star destroyer with point defense rail guns in concert with it’s laser batteries. It would be one hell of a nut to crack for fighters

[@bakerhalo1]

I think the main reason that tubo lasers are more used is that storage for the tabana gas, you can compress a gas to a very high amount so that you require less space on the ship to hold in comparison to the same amount of ammo for the railguns

[@kennethkates3140]

Best Personal shield technology Dune Halo Mass Effect and Star Wars. 15+ Attemts

[@-JustHuman-]

Warhammer 40K could be added.

[@martykarr7058]

While I don't know about HALO or Mass Effect, Dune personal shields have two drawbacks. One is that they attract Sandworms. Two is that if you fire what they called a lasgun at it, it causes a tactical nuclear weapon sized explosion.

[@jayschmidt4844]

@@-JustHuman- Warhammer is just really gay though. Like, *super* gay.

[@-JustHuman-]

@@jayschmidt4844 Jep, I agree it's pretty mirthful, exuberant, animate and playful or gay as you say it.

[@jayschmidt4844]

@@-JustHuman- no no no, you misunderstand, I meant 'gay' as in 'faggy.' As much as I wanted to like Warhammer, it's just so damn homosexual. I don't even mind gays themselves, but Warhammer tops it all. And the fanbase. . if any of them were ever cool I could maybe pretend to not be bugged by it, but none of you ever seem to have any real shred of dignity, either looking like that World-of-Warcraft guy from South Park, or just anime-dorks who can't jerk off to a female unless she is rendered in colored-pencil. Even Pokemon has a few fans that aren't complete loser-fags. Not Warhammer tho. Y'all probably liked Digimon too you jagoffs.

[@lordcline217]

How did palpatine originally find out about the impending vong invasion #askeck

[@ReddwarfIV]

he foresaw it

[@Kobolds_in_a_trenchcoat]

Wasn't it the republic era attempt to map the uncharted territory (or whatever it is clled) that led palpatine to discover the "far outsiders" (chiss name for vong st the time)? It's featured in several of eck's videos.

[@cameronzwicke5761]

He foresaw it before the clone wars . It's why he sent jorus c'boath on the Outbound Flight.

[@Cdre_Satori]

It came to him in a dream

[@picklerick4944]

He didn't. It's all a legend. As we know during the legends vong invasion canon has the rise of the first order

[@jaxlegoproductions4147]

0:27 I'm so tired that for a second there I thought that it was saying that 8% of Stormtroopers were Clones.

[@dc521977]

In one of the Essential Guides it's stated that the turbo laser turret on an ISD has a range of 8 light minutes. The ranges you see in the movies are there for cinematic enjoyment. I'd chalk up the short ranges to jamming and the sort.

[@peskymacaw9033]

In a Because of science video, Kyle explained that one of the major problems about space combat is heath lose and how overheathing can destroy ships; as the only way to lose heat on space is radiation. Since laser radiates heat I think that would be an effective way to destroy a ship. That video covers other topics about space combat like distances and reach, speed and speed. Check it out!

[@Thylacinus]

Because Science! :D Awesome Channel!

[@leewilcox1500]

The problem with that is that lasers deliver far more heat to the ship that has them than the ship that gets hit by them. Most lasers are obscenely inefficient, and pretty much anything that isn't laser ends up as waste heat. It'd be easier to destroy your own ship with the laser that way than the other guy's.

[@eiselda]

OMG YES, I FORGOT THAT HE SAID THAT (because science is the best)

[@khornateberzerker5439]

Technically, admiral Holdo did turn her ship into the largest railgun shell around and it worked pretty damn well...

[@marrqi7wini54]

More than just that. It was turned into an RKM. (Relativistic Kill Missile)

[@krankysfirebrand485]

Well not technically but figuratively

[@VieneLea]

We don't talk about that here

[@steampunk_cat5592]

But you’re in space, there’s no air friction slowing down your bullet so it would give you unlimited range and you could snipe enemy stations from another solar system

[@Woopor]

Put a mega Mass Driver on a planet and you’d have a starkiller base. Probably easier to build than starkiller base which literally harnesses the power of the sun.

[@SkyeKingTv]

Yo, What do you think of the gravestone? The old republic "super" weapon

[@stubbornspaceman7201]

Another possible reason is the weight of the ammo. Because I’m pretty sure 10,000 shots worth of tibanna gas is going to be a lot lighter than 10,000 railgun rounds.

[@thefallenC073]

The funny thing is since their designed to block plasma RailGuns AKA MAC (Magnetic Accelerator Cannons) would be super effective against them

[@barrybend7189]

Railguns are not flashy enough.

[@hyperionman420]

Pfft, when you can kick ass at that level, who cares about appearances?

[@corwinhyatt519]

@@hyperionman420 Writers and publishers/producers in the 1940s, 50s, 60s and 70s...

[@skylark306]

Nukes are very flashy. Also does emp, pretty great.

[@corwinhyatt519]

@@skylark306 Releasing a movie in the late 70's and early 80's where the ships use nuclear weapons would have killed the franchise with A New Hope...

[@HolyFurryFish1998]

Obviously you haven't seen what happens when a railgun shell hits a target.

[@ColonelFrontline1152]

Could you please make a video about all X-Wing Starfighter variants both in legends and Canon. #AskEck

[@derrickstorm6976]

(Use the tag at the end of the comment)

[@ColonelFrontline1152]

@@derrickstorm6976 thanks pal

[@t65bx25]

I’m the best.

[@ColonelFrontline1152]

@@t65bx25 You and your brethren are superior then inferior TIE-Fighters. And for that I worship you.

[@randomcoyote8807]

Also, with railguns, you need physical projectiles, usually pretty dense ones, which will add mass and storage demands to your ship. Whereas with energy weapons, you just plug 'em in to the already existing drive system, and you don't have to carry around tons of shells. Plus shells/projectiles, after you've fired off thousands of them, you've altered the tonnage of your ship enough that new hyperspace calculations may be needed to jump away.

[@jsleazy5838]

So the other night I was fairly stoned , and my little brother asked me who would win: Magnaguard vs Skorge (gears of war 2) and at first I wasn’t sure but then I remembered your versus series and thought why not? Not sure your familiarity with GOW but worth a shot ! Thanks for the great content Eck

[@mt-ni6qk]

Theoretically kinetic weapons are far superior since it transfer energy much more efficietly

[@chaosindustry2279]

Sins of a solar empire rebellion titan battle royale or which titan is the best

[@AJCavalier]

Second

[@d-man9921]

"EXPAND AND EXTERMINATE!"

[@majesticwolfyguy6629]

TEC Rebels, most damaged focus

[@bonomael7902]

@@majesticwolfyguy6629 I see a man of culture here

[@joshuachase9742]

In the Empire at War games, shields didn't block projectiles. I loved playing the Zann Consortium in the expansion because all I had to do was use a ship with mass drivers to destroy an enemy ship's shield generator, then all my ships could pick it apart with ease. I don't know how much those games are considered canon, however.

[@osets2117]

Mass drivers still work the same in canon

[@ckr3167]

Thanks for answering the questions we want! Love the channel!!

[@kauske]

Even limited by non-automated gunners, they should be able to engage targets at stupid distances, unless they haven't developed optics... IE, no one in SW has ever noticed curved glass can magnify light. Real world gunners are only limited by atmospheric conditions and the curvature of the planet. With very little tech artillery in WWI was able to hit objects behind the horizon by relaying telegraph messages from areal spotters. Just the most simple gun sights should let them target objects that are tens of thousands of kilometers away. It all sounds like the usual issue with Starwars; they've never once hired an engineering consultant to run an idea past. So we end up with point blank broadside in space 'because it looks cool.'

[@todo9633]

Recoil is a thing too, every gun would require either a full recoil neutralizer or else it would move the ship.

[@z3r0_35]

Star Wars' spacecraft don't obey Newtonian physics, or at least not in the way you'd expect they would in space (it WOULD make sense if one's inside a planetary atmosphere)

[@archangel6676]

not with magnetic weapons that dont use chemical propellants, thats a limitation only standard firearms have, although the mac from halo isnt a true example of a coilgun as it uses a chemical component in the gun (and there by has recoil)

[@todo9633]

@@archangel6676 Railguns have recoil. The same amount of recoil as a chemical weapon for the same acceleration and the same projectile in fact, because conservation of momentum is a thing, The recoil would be less instantaneous of course, because railguns impart their energy onto the projectile in a more spread out timeline rather than just an explosion, but the same amount of force is being created.

[@jaroftar]

@@todo9633 the proyectile is accelerated in a railgun, in a firearm, there is an explosion that is what pushes the gun back, without that explosion there is no recoil, momentum is only conserved in the proyectile and not the cannon

[@TheAussief1]

To quote V. You don’t have guns, you have bullets. Pray when you run out of bullets you have killed me. Phasers on a small ship could the same as the bigger ship the only limitation is how much power you can pump into it. A rail gun size dictates its power, small ship, small rail gun, small output.

[@kennethkates3140]

Best Energy Rifle: E-11 Blaster Rifle Star Wars; Type-3 Phaser Rifle Star Trek; PPG Rifle Babylon 5; Type-25 Energy Rifle Halo

[@scytheseven9173]

The phaser rifle takes this no problem. No travel time, very precise, very effective against armor, and can disintegrate targets.

[@Predator42ID]

I pick the P-90 its proven to kill the unkillable and you can actually buy one called the PS-90.

[@ArmorFrogEntertainment]

@@scytheseven9173 Does anyone else think it's odd how clean Star Trek phasers are? I would think the amount of energy required to vaporize an adult human would result in an explosion.

[@-JustHuman-]

@@ArmorFrogEntertainment It does not explode anything, it breaks the bonds of matter so it simply disintegrate a humanoid sized creature. There is no heat or steam explosion as the bonds in the water is broken down before it can expand into an explosion. Now you can set it on heat ray or cutting if you want to be cruel, or any just use any setting between 2.5 and 10, that would be enough to kill a person or directly disintegrate one.

[@-JustHuman-]

@@scytheseven9173 Yeah, I would also choose the Phaser, it's much more uses full to other things than just killing, as it can cut and heat stuff or be used as a high grade explosive or auto turret. And it has more ammo and is easier to restock ammo for too as it's just energi.

[@Riael]

I like these spaceship/space battles videos you're making, implying that you also play games what's your favorite space battle one? (Not necessarily stars war related but like, game where you get to design ships and fight other ships)

[@Buckeyes43]

I think it’s because Star Wars came out in a time where SiFi was booming and laser weapons were seen as the future. Especially by the last Jedi standards high speed mass is far superior to any laser weapon

[@philllllllll]

Biggest drawback for projectile weapons: The need for storage space to store all the ammunition you need. By using energy weapons you save a LOT of space and weight.

[@ANTSEMUT1]

Still have to store tibana gas.

[@camillecirrus3977]

Except a railgun can fire slugs with enough force that few grams is gonna already rip ships apart.

[@utrix_1121]

A shell the size of a pea would rip through any ship with a railgun.

[@Rampant16]

@@utrix_1121 Not necessarily, metal slugs tend to vaporize when impacting things at very, very high speed. Of course the energy from a vaporized slug would still do a lot of damage but it would be difficult to make a slug that did not vaporize if you smash it into a ship at super high speeds. Already depleted-uranium SABOT rounds fired by tank cannons tend to vaporize on impact rather than punch cleanly all the way through and those are flying at a fraction of the speed possible with railguns. So even if your pea is going a fraction of the speed of light, it is not going to destroy a large spaceship.

[@brucelouie4613]

@@camillecirrus3977 that's not who physics work you idiot

[@brockkent4846]

Meanwhile in Warhammer 40K: Macrocannon- Am I a joke to you? Every Infantryman's trusty Lazgun- I'm just a fancy flashlight.

[@DolphyBlueDrake]

Could you at some point cover the living planet-ship, Zenoma Sekot from the Dade Leviathan fan series? I think the concept of a sapient, force-sensitive planet with its own hyperdrive built into it by the native species is a cool concept.

[@digitalis2977]

It's an incredibly cool concept, but it comes from the Yuuzahn Vong story arc of the Expanded Universe (first appearing in "The New Jedi Order: Force Heretic III: Reunion) not from a fan fiction.

[@DolphyBlueDrake]

@@digitalis2977 I missed that one. I'll have to read it. But, I like it because not only does it have hyperspace engines, but in the Dade Leviathan fan _series_ (as in, multiple fan fictions, not just one), it's also where Dade Leviathan and 6 other Jedi outcasts founded a Grey Jedi order and built the temple of their order on its surface (they chose it because it's supposed to be an absurd nexus of the Force which hides them from being sensed by the Sith and Jedi, and if they get detected, they can either use the planet's own point defense system to destroy ships, or use the hyperdrive to escape into deep space (which the series has them do when the Republic falls so the Empire can't find them).

[@user-ht9my8zq2i]

I love the way your channel is essentially a democracy, letting your viewers pick from some really cool choices It ensures that the fans get what they want :p more youtubers should do this in my opinion Anyways keep doin what you’re doin

[@narri214]

Another factor could be storage space of munitions, I think you almost mentioned it when talking about the Zann Consortium, But physical munitions (solid munitions) being stored on a ship would take up huge areas compared to Tibanna gas being compressed into storage tanks. Also with Tibanna already being used to power a ships engines, using the same "type" of fuel to also power weapons makes sense from a logistics point of view. Consider how often Wedge Antillies complains about getting enough proton torpedoes (Solid munitions) for his squadrons vs fuel. I think the acquisition of one supply vs many different supplies and the physical space to store it on a ship could play a huge role in the galaxies love of energy weapons

[@Jessie_Helms]

Idea: What would happen if during the clone wars there was a tabana gas shortage? #AskEck

[@HawkTheRed]

because they're not Manly enough, *HALO UNSC FOREVER!*

[@nobleghost1177]

OORAH!!

[@apollon5205]

Heretics...

[@roadhouse6999]

MASS EFFECT SYSTEMS ALLIANCE FOREVER! Fellow ballistic weapon users.

[@beejebes1856]

*gets warhammer 40k Emporer class Battleship* keep your heresy I'll take my brute fire power

[@irontemplar6222]

or maybe its because kinetic weapons are outdated and will not have a use past the development of certain technology. not a team energy weapons guy but if we are realistic missiles are better than anything. but Lasers and partical beams would still have longer range than railguns.

[@SES77]

Love the channel

[@Tom-Nooks-Rainbow-Six-Siege]

Kinda interesting coming back to this video after watching your video about "ether" and how space in star wars might actually not be a vacuum. I doubt George was thinking about that when he decided on to use lasers, but it's definitely another point against using railguns.

[@th3nightlion624]

Turbolasers and blasters aren't true lasers, they are more likely particle or plasma guns, as they are slow enough to be seen, this would actually result in Star Wars energy weapons being more restricted in atmosphere especially

[@Trevor-ig1cj]

Hey Eck, I’ve got another question: Why are Star Destroyer classes named in Latin? #askEck

[@lucagerulat9114]

Becouse it Sounds cool

[@blackshogun272]

Most Sith Lord names are also Latin as well. A few are out of the wazzu but some are indeed Latin. And like the guy earlier responded: *It's cool bro..."*

[@CT-Clone]

Why did the republic utilize walkers as their main battle tanks instead of repulsor lift vehicles during the clone wars? #askeck

[@emsipin9480]

Because shieldings interfere with repulsors. In the Battle of Naboo, the Trade Federation used battle droids to attack the Gungan Army under the protection of their shield dome. The Trade Federation had tanks on repulsor lift tech but they held it back until the droids disabled the Gungan shield generator.

[@tyvernoverlord5363]

@@emsipin9480 Repulsors allow all exoatmospheric "aircraft" in Star Wars to fly the way do in-atmo. So if they did interfere, the X-Wing would just start careening out of control and the tie series would hilariously flail about in spectacular failure.

[@digitalis2977]

X-Wings and TIEs fly on standard drives in-atmo; repulsors are only utilized to achieve enough altitude to engage the fusion/ion drives. Repulsors lose effectiveness around 15 meters because there's no mass for the repulsors field to push against. Also...TIE Fighters are unshielded.

[@SoftisNelaris]

@@emsipin9480 Except the Republic fielded a shielded repulsorlift hovertank. (See: TX-130 Saber Tank)

[@Jfk2Mr]

@@SoftisNelaris have you checked if their shield covers their bottom?

[@captainiwin1914]

Could you do a video or give some info about the guards of the jedi temple, were they jedi or cloned, how were they picked, were they force sensitive or not? #AskEck

[@dominiqueminor8039]

The jedi temple guards were jedi knights who were chosen and trained by Cin Drallig to protect the temple on coruscant. They were trained to use shortened double-bladed lightsabers and wore ceremonial robes and masks to hide their identity and become more intimidating. Being a temple guard was a life-long commitment and required them to become emotionally detached, though this sometimes led to the dark side.

[@hartleydall167]

Recently suggested, your channel was. I was surprised I had not already subscribed. I have now done. Thank you for well presented lore.

[@Ryuondo]

I find it rather interesting that you make this video when due to your video on the major design flaws of the ISDI/II I decided to design an ISD of my own. It incorporates a central "MAC" and a battery of coil cannons.

[@JB-yb4wn]

You are telling me that when the stormtroopers are boarding Leia's ship, "that blasters are more efficient"? No. I would say that some 50 cal machine guns and automatic shotguns and grenade launchers would have made short work of the boarding party. You don't really have to go through the armour, the percussive damage alone would turn their guts in to mush. Moreover, I can't imagine Vader trying to force stop something he can't see. Guns are far faster than blasters and don't require any special care like blasters do. Fewer moving parts and a wide variety of ammunition.

[@viysnjor4811]

i dont think id want a .50 ripping open holes in the ship considering the ship is the only thing between me and the void of space

[@JB-yb4wn]

@@viysnjor4811 Like a submarine, you can always isolate the vacuum sections with air locks, much better than getting chicken choked by Vader.

[@viysnjor4811]

@@JB-yb4wn But the stormtrooper armor and vader's armor are both capable of withstanding a dozen minutes or so exposed to vacuum, so all youd be doing is killing your own troops and reducing the ground you have to hold

[@JB-yb4wn]

@@viysnjor4811 Well no, if you saw the original 1977 film those guys were coming through a door, there is no vacuum as the ship has been captured and bayed in Vader's destroyer. Here is the clip, tell me that fully automatic machine guns and shotguns wouldn't have made all the difference here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fl6YfqKllKyNoJo

[@viysnjor4811]

@@JB-yb4wn Okay so then, you want weapons that are ONLY useable if your ship gets literally absorbed by a massive capital ship, at which point you have already lost, and these same weapons cannot be used during a standard, in vacuum boarding action for risk of killing your own men?

[@helio68]

Maybe for safety reasons, the projectile wont dissipate over time

[@GrexTheCrabasitor]

Imagine instead of thousands of mines left after a war, you have millions of fast moving projectiles orbiting a solar system lol

[@MandalorV7]

Makes me think of a pop up even in Stellaris where your ships can get hit by railgun rounds fired from other galaxy millions of years ago. As far as I know an object in space will keep on going till it hits something or gets pulled in by something with a greater gravitational pull.

[@Gravem1nd]

This actually makes a lot of sense

[@OzixiThrill]

@@MandalorV7 Not 100% correct, since space is not a perfect vacuum. However, it does take an insanely large amount of time for a projectile unaffected by anything else.

[@nicjobro_4653]

You could but in a bursting charge that destroys the projetel after a set distance. It also prevents heavy guns doing only minor damage because of overpenetrion.

[@levitan71]

when you fire a rail gun in space you are ruining someone's day, somewhere or some time ^.^

[@osets2117]

You do not eyeball it! Your not some cowboy firing from the hip

[@alexhergenhan7610]

Could also be explained with physics. If a railgun fires, it accelerates a lot of mass. F=MxA so this means a high force - which is what makes the weapon so effective at blasting holes in ships. But each force has an equal and opposite force. This opposite force acts on the ship like recoil when the projectile is fired. This means ships would be moved around and could collide with each other etc.

[@jakeaurod]

I can think of several reasons to prefer energy weapons to mass projectiles: 1 - mass is massy, more mass for the engines to move and takes up space inside the hull and needs to be resupplied 2 - infinite coasting makes it a danger to navigation. It would also make envelopment tactics prone to friendly fire casualties. I'm not sure about Star Wars energy weapon ranges, but lasers and plasma in our universe spread out over distance and time. 3 - power conversion, a relativistic mass can impart a lot of energy, but getting it going that fast takes a lot of energy and may wear out the coils or whatever on the driver, causing to to have a short time between overhauls 4 - size, as you say in the video, a militarily useful mass driver for capital or surface bombardment may be so big as to be fixed to the hull, whereas a moderately capable energy weapon may be more movable.

[@drawd4789]

why is the so few stealth ships in star wars

[@thegreatstapley]

#AskEck

[@Damian-ww1qz]

Damn right. I know like two of them. first from clone wars (Anakin used it) and the second is Tarkins from "Tarkin" book.

[@Phoenix1234554]

Also cloaking generators require alot of space

[@adamorick2872]

@TV-94 which is why it's worth using. Expense is not a factor when you can't be hit and can take enemies by surprise

[@blackshogun272]

@@adamorick2872 I never understood the power of currency to an Empire when you can just make a people do something for you. It's the situation where you shoot a prisoner because the last guy you interrogated didn't spill. They could've stopped the death but instead chose to keep their mouth shut and hold on to what little pride they retain. If I was an Imperial Admiral and I captured a system relatively similar to isolationist Umbarans then I'd make sure these people work specifically for the Empire. Trade and economic growth would be a benefit course but I don't care what they could offer me. I care what they "will" offer me. As a government controlling 90% of all known space sectors, I shouldn't have to use funds of the Empire to get the new weapons and resources the war machine needs ! I could've summed this whole thing up by stating: *"Support the Empire and relay your resources to the nearest Imperial Cargo Haulers or prepare for your planet to suffer. It's your choice. Watch your seas boil, your cities melt, and your land blacken if you do not concede to The Emperor's will !"*

[@firesturmgaming]

Try putting the Gustav cannon on a ship. Its a "rail" gun after all. With a 6.8 ton HE shell. :>

[@osets2117]

Uuuugh... Yes

[@thomasmasters8434]

In Rogue One during the battle of Scarrif we see Red 5 get shot down, is this why Luke is Red 5 in Ep 4 or is there another reason?? #askEck

[@FrostyFoxDrake]

Ya don't have to ask Eck to get the answer: I'll tell ya. Yes. Rogue One chronologically takes place immediately before A New Hope, thus leaving the Red 5 designation open until Luke was given it, as the Rebellion probably hadn't found a replacement X-Wing pilot of sufficient skill to be in their main (and most important) strike team.

[@sunyavadin]

I implemented a whole bunch of such shipboard weaponry such as conventional missiles and torpedoes in my homebrew Xim-era sourcebook for the Star Wars RPG, with the logic of the kiirium plating on many warships of the era absorbing much of the impact of many direct energy weapons, while there's little in the way of shielding tech to prevent other forms of attack.

[@EmpPeng2k7]

One point I think you omitted about projectile weapons is Ammo volume, as you mentioned, because of Hyperspace and Shields, SW ships are already developing massive amounts of power that can be tapped into to fire Laser/Blaster weapons, with Rail/Coil/etc not only do you have large energy requirements you also have to store the ammunition, this has an impact on both the size of the ships and the logistics train to keep the ships supplied, especially with the side by side existence of Proton and Concussion launchers on most warships and many civilian craft.

[@George-Hawthorne]

Star Wars: Lasers are better than projectile weapons Imperium of Man: Hold My Beer.

[@rommdan2716]

Star Trek: Yeah? Take my disruptor

[@hyperionman420]

Because then they would be TOO cool.

[@derrickstorm6976]

Shooting iron bars is cooler than shooting lasers? Okay

[@hyperionman420]

Yeah and those iron bars make the lasers look like bb pellets. RAILGUNS ARE BETTER, SHUT IT.

[@skylark306]

sized down advanced ballistic weapons are probably HEAVILY regulated in this universe because it’s not as flashy. And where do we see most important characters exit cover? Wide open landing pads with a couple too many skyscrapers where, ye know, is easy to shoot from.

[@HolyFurryFish1998]

@@derrickstorm6976 >TFW those "iron bars" gut your star destroyer from bow to stern in just over half a second.

[@zenthedying91]

@@hyperionman420 where you suppose to be dead...

[@evankent6049]

"I'm using the term 'railgun'... in a totally non-scientific sense... any weapon system which inflicts damage primarily through a launched projectile which unleashes kinetic energy..." then proceeds to butcher this definition and completely miss the point of "railguns."

[@arghnoor]

Most people know what rail guns do. Easier to get your point across. Most people would not understand other names for weapons like that, such as the coil gun

[@willfrost1998]

He also used a MAC as an example, but a MAC is a rail gun

[@irend1163]

@@willfrost1998 isn't MAC is a coilgun?

[@archangel6676]

@@irend1163 coilguns/Magnetic accelerator canons/railguns/mass drivers are all just different terms for the same weapon (any weapon that uses magnets to "propel" not fire without a chemical accelerate the round)

[@evankent6049]

@@archangel6676 False. Coilguns and railguns are both magnetically accelerated, but they use different principles to accomplish acceleration. A "mass driver" is synonymous with "projectile weapon", regardless of whether or not it is direct or indirect fire. Modern rifles that use the pressure from a chemical burn to propel bullets are mass drivers. A trebuchet is also a mass driver.

[@Shrapnel57]

Zann Consortium uses mass driver cannons quite regularly. There was a throw away line somewhere that said their use was made illegal in some galactic pact.

[@nicolastousignant9160]

I think blaster/laser technololy was prefered for the same reason modern armed forces would be interested in them, logistics. You don't particularly complex systems to feed the weapons or rearm them. Power supply technology is likely broardly the same wether you want to run a hyperdrive or computer core. Gas is reasonably simple to move from point A to B. And significantly lighter. A definite advantage for infantry but certainly ships as well. Having capital ship running on the same 'ammo' as fighters is also a godsend. Those ships you talk about that do use railguns can't restock if they travel to planets not part of their sphere of influence. In short, solid (non missile/torpedo)munitions don't seem to offer a significant enought advantage over their shortcomings to be common. Anyway, love your content and keep up the good work

[@GrexTheCrabasitor]

Because george lucas didnt know about them

[@vampirecount3880]

I think energy weapons are used because of how powerfull SW shields are. Projectiles wont cut it i believe. And since SW ships are this tanky it would require a lot of projectiles to bring down the shilds. Those projectiles would need space inside the ship. Energy can be more efficient to produce. The SW capital ships can cross an asteroid field tanking all that mass. Imagine the order of magnetude of shield strength you need for that.

[@ORegan77]

Another thing to note is storing ammunition for projectile firing weapons would take up more space compared to whatever particle containers are needed for turbolasers

[@kommando293]

See this does explain a lot about why we never see ships with Rail weapons as much beyond the Chiss and the Zann Consortium. It’s also why when I got my hand on a Keldabe I switched it over to just big plasma cannons that could do more for what seemed like less. Nonetheless awesome video

[@matthewblackwelder6487]

I'd like to see a video talking about the arms race between blasters and armor. Also the tactical implications of blaster letting infantry carry hundreds or thousands of rounds with minimal weight

[@supertinnietank]

I think another significant factor is ammunition mass. We haven't seen anything approaching Star Trek style replicators, so favoring weapon systems that are ready to go as long as the ship has power would make perfect sense.

[@RifterBlade]

Sorry for any redundant points (this post is a year old) -- but the dissipation of energy for the lasers is a feature, not a defect. Rail gun rounds that miss a target can go for literally forever and still strike with major kinetic force, unless you have a delayed destruct mechanism of some kind. Not good to have an incoming freighter taken out by mistake two weeks after the battle!

[@assassinxsteveo]

Thanks for another great video Eck!!

[@dorkavenger42]

So yeah this is probably way past the time to post a question here. Something I never thought of until you spoke about the range differences between Energy weapons versus projectile weapons. Energy weapons Dissipation might be a good thing. Imagine any space battle and replace all the energy weapons with projectile weapons. No the inertia in zero gravity will allow those projectiles to carry-on but for how far? Space is crazy vast so perhaps little would come of it. Still what if you accidentally flew into a cloud of a forgotten battle? Would that affect a ship in hyperspace?

[@iamjoeysteel]

Really important to remember weight and capacity. Ballistics have weight and on a infantry level, carrying 2 gas canisters for thousands of shots as apposed to weighted ammo gives a massive bonus to mobility and resisting fatigue. On the ship level, similarly, gas may be able to be compressed to the point it stores more shots per cubic inch than ballistics. While turbo laser have a lot of tech taking up room, I can garentee trying to get ballistics ammo spread across a ship will be a lot hard than turbo laser fuel. There's also the whole opposite equal reaction bit, which wouldn't mess with capital ships but would definitely be a bit more problematic for smaller fighters, and in regards to fighters I think the ammo capacity still very much applies.