The one in SC2 is the smallest?[]
Just as it says, is the one in StarCraft II really the smalles variation of the Gauss rifle? It looks the biggest to me. It especially looks far bigger compared to the one used in the original StarCraft.
- StarShade 15:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Just a few pointers. Gauss Weaponry doesn't eject casings and are by default caseless. That's one of the biggest things that have irked me in Starcraft, the inaccurate portrayal of gauss weaponry, they look like ordinary rifles. Real gauss guns don't have muzzle-flashes, noisy bangs or ejecting casings. L33telboi 18:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
If they really are gauss weapons, the casing may be expended batteries. (Fiddling with my own universe I once had something similar, with each projectile encased in its own battery. I later discarded the idea, but I can understand where others are coming from in that idea.) Muzzle flashes could be the result of barrel and projectile materials vaporizing during firing. (A coilgun maybe designed to have contact between the projectile and barrel like any other gun.) The problem is that we're not sure if the muzzle velocity is even high enough since it doesn't seem to be consistent across sources. As for the noisy bang, I have no idea what a supersonic projectile minus the expanding gases would sound like. Meco 19:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps, but where apart from artwork have shell casings ever been seen? Besides, StarCraft is set in the late 25th/early 26th century, featuring Terrans who'd have to build weapons from scratch. I don't think there's really an issue of accuracy here.--Hawki 20:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
What you said, Maco, is possible. Personally I've been toying with the idea that the muzzle-flash is superheated coolant ejected from the rifle, to keep it cool in a vaccum like space. Explains why rifles don't melt. The battery idea was intriguing though, hadn't thought of that. The problem lies more in the fact that you have to come up with explanations in the first place.
As for casings, they've been seen on the Reaper's twin pistols and now on the C-14 on the artwork where a Marine squares off with two Hydralisks.
L33telboi 21:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Wow, apparently none of you have any experience with cutting-edge Navy and Marine Corps weapon systems. "Gauss" weaponry, as depicted in the games, appear to magnetic induction weapons, the same as the one prototyped by the USN. Researched as an alternative to pieces normally seen on heavy vessels, and scalable to infantry fightng vehicles, the one they built produced an incredibly loud and sharp report, as would anthing that produces a supersonic projectile, and there was a significant flash associated with the discharge, and the projectile travels so quickly, that it has a visible halo of flame that follows its passage. The massive SNAPBANG is the instant dump of ridiculous amounts of electricity, and the simultaneous breaking of the sound barrier as the round is instantly accelerated past Mach 5, hence the project motto Velocitus Eradico: Speed Annihilates. Griever0311 20:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
"Wow, apparently none of you have any experience with cutting-edge Navy and Marine Corps weapon systems."
That goes without saying. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) 23:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't necessarily mean experience gained through practical application during warfare or weapons trials, but through emperical research. I was merely asserting that what Meco and Unsigned Guy said was incorrect, not through blind claims, but through research and observation of active, contemporary military prototypes. Magnetic induction weaponry produces a brilliant muzzle flash by superheating the air around the muzzle, and a visible plume of flame marks the projectile's trajectory. The "superheating coolant" theory is completely unfeasible, because using even the most generous liquid-gas expansion ratios, the operator's weapon would overheat and terminally fail within an incredibly short time frame unless the coolant supply was continually replaced; making coolant as great a commodity in hostile conditions as ammunition.
On another note, i don't understand how the one in Starcraft 2 could be the smallest, because by all appearances, that rifle is firing at least a 25mm or 30mm round, AT MINIMUM. With Meco being correct about the projectile and barrel being in constant contact (an absolute necessity with induction weaponry) it would follow that the projectile is comparable to the gargantuan barrel we see during the cinematic. Given the small size of what I assume to be a box-type detachable magazine, I'm being incredibly generous with a grand total of 20-30 spikes. One can look at the barrel and see that it's obviously NOT an 8mm weapon; the muzzle looks to be about the size of a grown man's fist. user: Griever0311 17:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't aware the USN had released any information about experimental coilguns (i.e. gauss guns). They have, however, released a very nice video or two of their experimental railgun. Coilguns/gauss guns and railguns are not the same.
The muzzle flash produced by the USN's railgun is primarily caused by the plasma generated by the friction between the projectile and rails. The material is eroded from the projectile and the rails, not surprising given the significant speeds achieved. That there is also significant electrical current running thought the eroded materials probably also helps plasma creation.
A coilgun need not have any contact between the propelling magnets and the projectile, and therefore need not produce such a muzzle flash. But as I speculated above, a coilgun with contact between barrel and projectile is not unreasonable and given sufficient speeds would also result in similar erosion. Of course, whether such a plasma plume would be created is a bit more iffy given the lack of an electrical current running through the projectile and like it does in a railgun. This was the subject of the speculation farther above: how to get a coilgun to generate a muzzle flash.
Just being railgun or coilgun does not cause the air near the muzzle to superheat. I suspect the closest you get to that is if the projectile transfers energy to the air via friction. It is perfectly possible to build a coilgun firing subsonic projectiles that has no muzzle flash whatsoever.
Now, obviously Blizzard was just throwing out junk terms on the "rule of cool". It would have worked much better if they had said the C-14 was a railgun and not a gauss gun. But anybody who has half a mind to look that closely into the tech would probably spend their time more wisely examining an actual science fiction universe whose creator(s) put more than just passing thought into such matter. - Meco (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2009 (UTC)