Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 91

Author Topic: Theoretical weapons (Burn all the things!) and other ideas  (Read 102523 times)

Jimmy

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #60 on: February 25, 2016, 06:00:24 am »

The biggest problem is that the human body is remarkably resistant to death (thankfully). Explosives are the standard means of inflicting maximum damage in minimum time, however they have the problem of collateral damage. If we're not worried about collateral damage, hey, tactical nuclear detonation for the win!

By contrast, a paralytic nerve agent delivered via inhalation or dermal contact would inflict maximum human fatalities whilst avoiding structural or environmental contamination. Remember, this topic is for theoretical weapons, not necessarily ones that currently exist (at least that the general public is aware about, dun dun dun!) so it should be fine to hypothesize on our ideal nerve agent.

For our theoretical compound, I'd anticipate something like either VX gas or botulinum toxin.

VX gas has the benefit of being a simple chemical compound. The molecular structure is primitive and readily synthesized. The downside is that it's fairly good at remaining in the environment it is released into, meaning it's a poor candidate for our theoretical weapon if we then want to send our own troops into the captured space. This assumes we're not using mechanical drones to perform recovery actions of course.

Botulinum toxin is a large protein molecule, thus being far more difficult to mass produce, store for extended periods, and administer quickly. However, it's interesting to note that the overall paralytic mechanism is very similar to VX gas, yet at the same time exactly opposite. Botulinum toxin blocks acetylcholine release from nerve cells and leads to lack of activation, or flaccid paralysis. VX gas, on the other hand, blocks the body from producing the compound that is manufactured by the body to break down acetylcholine, causing build-up of acetylcholine until the muscle becomes overstimulated and completely unresponsive.

In both cases, they lead to paralysis of acetylcholine dependant muscles in the body, resulting in zero response from the nerves that rely on this neurotransmitter to function. This is typically fatal via paralysis of the diaphragm. Total death should occur roughly three minutes after this occurs, however another benefit of targeting acetylcholine dependant muscles is that you'll likely trigger loss of vision and muscle convulsions well before this point, so the unlucky subject will likely be disabled from taking any meaningful actions well before death occurs. The benefit of targeting this neurotransmitter with your chemical weapon is that you can achieve paralysis relatively quickly compared to other means as well, which is why so many natural venoms in nature act on this neurotransmitter.

I'd suggest our ideal theoretical compound should be a either an inhaled toxin featuring a potent acetylcholinesterase inhibitor or an acetylcholine inhibitor. For the former, there's actually some interesting research in medical applications for naturally occurring paralytic venoms called onchidal produced by molluscs. Note these chemical structures are relatively simple molecules and thus will likely be simple to produce. They lack the phosphate structure present in current nerve agents, and might prove a novel new way to create highly lethal paralytic toxins. For the latter, it would be too soon to predict what sort of compound could chemically recreate botulinum's acetylcholine inhibitory effect, since it's functioning at the protein receptor macro level rather than the neurotransmitter chemical micro level. Some technobabble handwaving would be required here since modern medicine isn't advanced enough to fully understand and refine this process, but the science and mechanism of action is sound.

As for protecting our own troops during retrieval, respirators would be the way to go, and antidotes to both compounds are pretty easy to manufacture even with today's technology provided you administer them in a timely manner.

Edit: A quick note to address a few other points that the OP raised about theoretical weapons in the first post. First, regarding effectiveness. Nerve agents have already been shown to be incredibly potent and effective weapons when used, though they're by nature indiscriminate. This leads us to the second point, international legality. Organophosphate weapons such as VX gas are classed as weapons of mass destruction and are thus explicitly banned and regulated by many international treaties. This is why I suggested the onchidal toxins as an interesting alternative, since they're not technically covered by any international treaties since they don't contain any phosphate compounds. Finally, for cost of manufacturing, the onchidal toxin based gases would be incredibly cheap if you can figure out a simple chemical reaction to produce your base molecule, since there's no large protein structures or complex chemicals involved. Seriously, you can't get any cheaper than carbon and oxygen.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2016, 06:23:20 am by Jimmy »
Logged

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #61 on: February 25, 2016, 07:15:48 am »

Actually botulinum toxin is far easier to mass-produce than VX, because you can extract it from bacteria whose spores are astonishingly common. I once sat in a biology lecture, and the professor wondered repeatedly why terrorists didn't simply do a botulinum poisoning of some freshwater reservoir.

On the other hand the synthesis of VX is far from trivial. Even disregarding the toxicity of the compound, sourcing the precursors would be a bitch and a half.
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

Jimmy

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #62 on: February 25, 2016, 08:14:23 am »

Seriously? VX synthesis is pretty simple stuff. It's in the damned Wikipedia article, even. Basic chemistry 101, albeit with pretty toxic precursors. For a rogue group it might be a challenge, but the OP seems to be approaching this from the perspective of a nation state interested in increasing their military capacity.

Botulinum toxin on the other hand requires bacterial culturing equipment and depends on the life cycle of a biological organism. Certainly it's viable for limited applications, but not by industrial processes that measure output in tonnes per annum. For comparisons, look at the supply issues experienced during the latter half of the 1940's and the 1950's for producing penicillin until a semi-synthetic process was invented.1 Even then, producing the penicillin molecule is child's play compared to the botulinum toxin protein structure.

Plus there's stability issues with proteins that you simply don't need to worry about with basic molecular poisons. The spores that produce botulinum toxin are relatively stable, but they're also inert and harmless unless kept in anaerobic conditions. Due to its high molecular weight, the toxin protein itself is also difficult to properly aerosolize. The Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo tried to utilize botulinum toxin as an aerosol based bioterror weapon on at least 3 occasions between 1990 and 1995 and failed due to poor manufacturing process and failures with their aerosol delivery technique.2 There is only a single case reported of naturally occurring inhalational botulinum toxin exposure in 3 veterinary personnel in Germany back in 1962. It has been successfully proven to work on primates3 and was developed as a potential weapon by Saddam Hussein's Iraq between 1985 and 1991 during the Gulf War (at least according to the USA ::)),4 but there's been no real progress made in utilizing it as anything more than a nifty way to make rich old women look less wrinkly.

And finally, there's how long it takes to work. The closest we can guess for the onset time of aerosol delivery botulinum toxin poisoning is approximately 12 to 80 hours from the primate tests. In contrast, your organophosphate gases kill within 10 minutes, and typically cause complete loss of function far sooner.

For poisoning a water supply as a terrorist attack? Sure, botulinum toxin is great. But it's too slow acting, too difficult to produce and too cumbersome to deliver for use as a battlefield weapon.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2016, 08:17:49 am by Jimmy »
Logged

Antioch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #63 on: February 25, 2016, 09:15:32 am »

ugh, this talk about the best ways to poison a population are getting a bit too serious.
Logged
You finish ripping the human corpse of Sigmund into pieces.
This raw flesh tastes delicious!

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #64 on: February 25, 2016, 09:38:33 am »

Those precursors are controlled, though. Heavily monitored. And even if the synthesis is comparatively short, it's not necessarily easy. The toxicity alone makes handling a bitch, and there's very little literature availible on these compunds, so you'll have to do all the optimization yourself - while occasionally replacing half your staff, because some fucknut left a jar open.

Bacteria culture on the other hand is a piece of cake nowadays, even for a small-time producer (or a backwater country like the one we're presumably talking about). Plus the precursors are completely inconspicuous, and upscaling is comparatively easy as well. Sure, it's more difficult to weaponize once you have it, but production is far less involved.
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

Jimmy

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #65 on: February 25, 2016, 10:03:42 am »

I'd love to see your data to support your statements, because according to my research the main precursor of VX gas is phosphorus trichloride which is literally produced by the tonne. A third of a million of them per year, to be exact.1 It's a Schedule 3 controlled chemical under the Chemical Weapons Convention since it's used in so many different legitimate reactions, so a facility can manufacture up to 30 tonnes per year on site without needing to declare it or being monitored. The chemical manufacturing process is quite straightforward, and a postgraduate organic chemist could handle it in a properly stocked university laboratory.

Thing is though, VX gas isn't the goal. The real cherry would be to develop your own aerosolized anticholinergic onchidal toxin. Initial tests with naturally occurring onchidal show you need 3250 mol of onchidal per mol of acetylcholinesterase irreversibly inhibited.2 In contrast, you need just 2.1x10-6 mol of VX gas to cause the same effect.3 Someone's thesis paper on this compound is sorely needed to begin purifying the toxin into a more viable form, but with time and research it's certainly possible.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2016, 10:33:24 am by Jimmy »
Logged

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #66 on: February 25, 2016, 10:11:43 am »

Sure, it's not a problem to get a couple grams of VX on a tabletop scale, where you don't care about yield. For the stuff to be of any real military use however you need kilos, tons of it - and scaling up is far from trivial even for comparatively harmless substances. Look into how much trouble the Nazis went through for their Tabun production, and you'll see what I mean. That scale-up is where the surveillance kicks in too, by the way: Thirty tonnes ain't all that much... And you can bet your sweet ass that you'll have more than one spy sattelite pointing at your country when you start constructing small-time VX plants all over your country.

Now, if you want a chemical that can be mass-produced easily and without great fear of surveillance, I suggest phosgene. Not as effective by far, but if you go the triphosgene route all you need as feedstock is chlorine and methanol, both of which are impossible to control even on a ton scale.
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

Dirst

  • Bay Watcher
  • [EASILY_DISTRA
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #67 on: February 25, 2016, 12:39:16 pm »

You need a grenade that releases the toxin, and then a second grenade that neutralizes the overwhelming majority of said toxin in the air and on surfaces (catalyzing oxidation or whathaveyou).  Depending on how quickly the toxin works, it could used to force surrender.  The Uplift novels used a similar idea to target a specific species among a planet's population, though it took weeks to become fatal and the author never explained how it worked.
Logged
Just got back, updating:
(0.42 & 0.43) The Earth Strikes Back! v2.15 - Pay attention...  It's a mine!  It's-a not yours!
(0.42 & 0.43) Appearance Tweaks v1.03 - Tease those hippies about their pointy ears.
(0.42 & 0.43) Accessibility Utility v1.04 - Console tools to navigate the map

Amperzand

  • Bay Watcher
  • Knight of Cerebus
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #68 on: February 25, 2016, 02:57:29 pm »

There are also so-called neutron bombs. Nuclear warheads focused on the radiation pulse rather than detonation force. Not practical for a hand grenade, but there were weapons in the fifties that killed a 250 meter radius in less than a minute, with guaranteed lethality over several days within a kilometer. They also detonated with the force of 20 tons of TNT and released fallout though.
Logged
Muh FG--OOC Thread
Quote from: smirk
Quote from: Shadowlord
Is there a word that combines comedy with tragedy and farce?
Heiterverzweiflung. Not a legit German word so much as something a friend and I made up in German class once. "Carefree despair". When life is so fucked that you can't stop laughing.
http://www.collinsdictionary.com

Catmeat

  • Bay Watcher
  • 50/50 cat pork burger wth sweet lime sauce is best
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #69 on: February 27, 2016, 08:28:02 am »

This is scifi so why does an oxyburner matter? Not all species breath the stuff. The military use charge particle beam weapons.
Most scifi has been reused and its very safe the reinvent the wheel with scifi.
Use gravity as a weapon.
An atomic seive?
Also tech can get too much where its easier and less costly to stab a guy with a stealth field around you. All youd need is a titanium alloy knife and a stealth feild generator, a very easy tech for space civs to manifacture.
Also do the ships in your storys use solid fuels? Cause energy is literaly free and simple to harness and permeates every thing.
Nobody wants to stop at the gas station on pluto
Logged
Puns are social lubricant.
Too much and you lose sensation

My Name is Immaterial

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #70 on: February 27, 2016, 11:55:03 am »

This is scifi so why does an oxyburner matter? Not all species breath the stuff.
This isn't necessarily a scenario with aliens.
The military use charge particle beam weapons.
What?
Most scifi has been reused and its very safe the reinvent the wheel with scifi.
Also tech can get too much where its easier and less costly to stab a guy with a stealth field around you. All youd need is a titanium alloy knife and a stealth feild generator, a very easy tech for space civs to manifacture.
I totally agree. Occam's Razor, and all that.
Use gravity as a weapon.
Come on, elaborate! I can think of at least five different ways to weaponize it, but I want to hear what you had in mind.
An atomic seive?
What is that? A sieve at the atomic level? Why is that better than a bullet or knife?
A stealth feild generator, a very easy tech for space civs to manifacture.
Cause energy is literaly free and simple to harness and permeates every thing.
Nobody wants to stop at the gas station on pluto
You don't get to tell me how to live my life.
Plasma vs rail.

Plasma is more powerful at penetrating armor than magnetic weapons in some cases, but I think that a railgun would be better. It's fast. Really fast. Plasma's just burny (but only really burny). Right?
That is my understanding, but I don't see why you couldn't accelerate plasma with a railgun.

My Name is Immaterial

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #71 on: February 27, 2016, 11:59:58 am »

Can't you contain it ina magnetic field? I would figure that would allow you to accelerate it with a railgun.

iceball3

  • Bay Watcher
  • Miaou~
    • View Profile
    • My DA
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #72 on: February 27, 2016, 01:56:31 pm »

Some guy made some fancy schmancy plasma-railgun. Not quite the level of plasma fiction makes us familiar with, but, supposedly, it manages to penetrate the metal plating they're shooting at at some point. Not sure if it's the copper base or the plasma that does it. Looks cool at night, though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvrQciFL0ig
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTLCHKb20zI
The gas probaaably isn't hot enough to melt through metal, though. Also, yes, I think the cameraman got hit by ricochet in the first vid.
Logged

Amperzand

  • Bay Watcher
  • Knight of Cerebus
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #73 on: February 27, 2016, 03:17:34 pm »

I think that any plasma weapon is essentially a coilgun, since you need the electromagnetic field to propel and contain it. Railguns are not very good at that, they mostly just brute-force throw electricity at whatever completes their circuit until it goes hella fast.
Logged
Muh FG--OOC Thread
Quote from: smirk
Quote from: Shadowlord
Is there a word that combines comedy with tragedy and farce?
Heiterverzweiflung. Not a legit German word so much as something a friend and I made up in German class once. "Carefree despair". When life is so fucked that you can't stop laughing.
http://www.collinsdictionary.com

Egan_BW

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Theoretical weapons (sciencey people halp)
« Reply #74 on: February 27, 2016, 03:40:21 pm »

Making a weapon that shoots plasma past very short ranges would be hard[Citation Needed]
Logged
Not true, cannot be proven, true but misrepresented.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 91