Tuesday, 15 January 2019

Weapons Technology in the Technic Civilization Stories by Johan Ortiz


Flandry with blaster and stunner 

Blasters and stunners and needlers, oh my!

 

The Technic civilization stories are not hard military sf in the style of for example David Drake. Nonetheless, Poul Anderson took some care regarding the kinds of weaponry his heroes and their foes would use. There are auto-guided missiles, most carrying nuclear warheads. There are energy weapons, so called “Blasters” which are not lasers – note how Technic “blaster cannon” are contrasted with more primitive Merseian lasers in a one-sided confrontation in THE DAY OF BURNING. Ships and men are protected by armour, which delay damage from blasters by virtue of having to be burned through first, but also by “force screens” which deflect or absorb incoming energy, such as blasters and lasers. Laser weapons seem to be considered obsolete, since they are only used by the (at the time) backward Merseians. Possibly they require more power than blasters for any given level of energy on target, making them impractical as hand held weapons.

Moving on to personal weapons, beside the mainstay blasters, there are “stunners”, which seem to be some sort of non-lethal energy weapon. There are slug throwers – we can assume this is the future name for old school projectile weapons in an age where a “gun” naturally refers to a blaster. And finally, there are “Needle guns”. Although the more usual seems to be carrying only two guns, blaster and stunner, the formidable Chee Lan likes to carry around a panoply of the four previously mentioned types of guns, as she did when exploring old ruins on the planet Dathyna in SATAN’S WORLD.  Chee Lan’s arsenal is interesting, as it indicates that different types of gun have their distinct purposes, or at least strengths and weaknesses important enough to warrant the carrying of four different weapons in some situations. Let us explore these four types in turn.

Blasters

Beginning with the ubiquitous “blasters”, we can infer from the descriptions of their use that they are some form of directed energy weapons, and most probably neutral particle beam weapons. Such a weapon creates charged particles or ions by stripping atoms, to be used as projectiles, of some of their electrons. Once possessing a charge to be able to be affected by magnetism, these ions can be accelerated in much the same way as metallic slug in a magnetic rail gun. In the case of atomic or subatomic particles, relativistic speeds could be attained, up to near light speed.

A charged particle beam would soon scatter because homogenously charged ions would repel each other. For this reason, to create a beam of uncharged (neutral) particles, electrons are reattached to the ions just prior to leaving the projector, restoring them to proper atoms. Using uncharged particles has another advantage – a charged particle beam could easily be dispersed in the same manner as its component particles where accelerated in the first place – with magnetism. A magnetic screen would however be useless against a neutral particle beam. Since blaster beams are not described as scattering even in space combat between starships with ranges of hundreds or thousands of kilometres from gun to target, we can reasonably conclude that blaster beams, (if particle beams at all) are indeed neutral particle beams.

Such a beam would be mostly invisible in space, except where it collided with the occasional atom of gas or particle of dust, causing a light flickering here and there. In an atmosphere, the particle beam would flash brightly as the particles collide with atoms in the air and gradually lose power. This is consistent with the brightly white beams described by Poul Anderson, for example in THE MAN WHO COUNTS. Such a particle beam would be a devastating weapon, inflicting damage through kinetic force, heat and ionization. If we imagine the mass of one hit as being one millionth of a gram, at half the speed of light that would mean roughly 17-18 times the power of a .45 ACP round. While the weight of ammunition would be negligible, power requirements would not and would constitute the limiting factor in determining how many times a blaster could be fired before needing a reload. In theory, and surprisingly, a simple AA battery has enough power for two such shots, given an (admittedly unlikely) 100% efficiency. It is not then unimaginable, given a few hundred years of technology development, to have a magazine-sized power pack (with an integral small amount of heavy metal to be fired) capable of firing two or three dozen blaster shots.

We note that blasters can be set to a “needle beam”, i.e. a very narrow beam, in order to more likely cause incapacitating injuries rather than death. This is entirely feasible, indeed one important difficulty with a particle beam weapons is making the beam wide enough to cause significant damage. A short needle pulse could pass through a target causing minimal damage, as in fact has happened in laboratories such as CERN, where in at least one incident a scientist accidently had a particle beam fired straight through his head. Being the width of a single molecule, it caused no discernible damage at all!

As an interesting aside, the atoms used as projectiles could be of many kinds, but heavier ones would be more devastating at any given speed and would lose speed at a slower rate than light ones. If using poisonous heavy metals such as mercury, lead or perhaps plutonium, the victim of the blaster would not only be pierced and burned – he would be poisoned! Fortunately, the Technics seems too civilized for this, since Adzel in particular is shot repeatedly with blasters and is never poisoned.

Stunners

Moving on to stunner guns, it is much less obvious how they are supposed to work. At first glance I suspected they might have been electro laser “lightning guns”, where a short pulse laser ionizes atoms in its path to plasma, creating a conductive channel, through which an electric discharge is sent, presumably knocking out the target, much in the same way as a police taser. Such a weapon would probably have a short range, given that the electric discharge need to find less resistance in the plasma channel than any other route to grounding. Note that an electro laser could easily be made lethal, simply by ramping up the electric charge. It could also be used eminently well to fry electronics.

Curiously I found both support and evidence against this theory in the same passage in A CIRCUS OF HELLS:

A purple light ray flashed, guiding the soundless hammer-blow of a supersonic beam.

So indeed, the stunner is a two-component weapon and has a guiding beam, just like what we would expect from an electro-laser – but the discharge of such a weapon would look like a bolt of lightning, rather than a “purple light ray”. Also, the actual stunner beam is explicitly described as a “supersonic beam”, not an electric bolt. This is also the only way stunner weapons are described in other stories, such as SATAN’S WORLD – as firing “supersonic beams”. When googling for that phrase, one finds mainly references to “supersonic molecular beams”:

…supersonic molecular beam, which is generated by a free jet expansion source. Gas expands isentropically with molecular velocities greater than the speed of sound. The translational and vibrational energies of the beam can be independently controlled, and hence the energies of molecules that impinge on the surface.

If this is what Poul Anderson had in mind, we’re dealing with a jet of gas moving at very high, (indeed, supersonic) speed. A narcotic effect cannot be entirely ruled out, although it would require exposed skin and compatible biochemistry for the weapon to work. Still, the effect being immediate, one would guess the victim is rendered unconscious through concussion, rather than by any narcotic effect from the gas. This notion is reinforced by the descriptive “hammer-blow” delivered by the beam. I cannot say if the propagation and/or direction of a supersonic jet of gas would be aided by creating an ionized conduit for it, as would an electric current. It does not seem entirely implausible that it would tough. The range of the weapon would still be rather short. In order to reliably stun a target, the “hammer-blow” would have to be aimed at the head, pretty violent and potentially lethal, as blunt force often is. While this might be a reasonable explanation how a "supersonic beam" could be used to stun a target, it is not consistent with how stunner effects are described in the stories.

There is however another possibility. According to www.vocabulary.com

Originally, the word supersonic meant "having to do with sound waves beyond human hearing," but by 1934 it described movement exceeding the speed of sound, with ultrasonic taking on the old meaning.

It is possible that Poul Anderson was using the term “supersonic” in the old sense, what we today would call ultrasonic. Ultrasound have long been studied for use as a non-lethal weapon, and could potentially affect a target's nervous system, cause violent muscle contractions and/or affect the inner ear and balance system. This does sound a lot like the described effect of a stunner, although the point of the guiding purple light ray then becomes more obscure.

Projectile weapons

Slug throwers are not often used in the stories, and this seems logical when blasters would appear to be the better weapon in every way, excepting only the issue of visibility. The blindingly white particle beam of a blaster would immediately give away the position of the one firing it, whereas a traditional chemical energy projectile weapon would not. But this would seem of more importance for a sniper’s gun than for a handgun, and a high-power laser – silent, invisible, without bullet drop and with instant effect on targets within visual range – would seem like a far better choice for that purpose. There might however be one situation in which the archaic slug thrower would be the superior choice, namely against a target protected by an energy screen. These devices seem to dissipate directed energy beams such as blasters and lasers, but a solid projectile might conceivably pass right through it. Otherwise it is hard to imagine why Chee Lan would burden herself with one.

As for Chee Lan’s fourth gun, the “needle gun”, it is not clear what kind of weapon is intended. Historically, a “needle gun” was a precursor to the bolt action rifle, in which a needle would pierce a paper cartridge to hit a primer inside the cartridge, at the base of the bullet. This is obviously not what Poul Anderson had in mind. As previously noted, a blaster can be set to “needle beam”, thus not necessitating a special kind of gun to fire one. The needler must be some other type of weapon.
Most sci-fi references to needle guns seem to refer to a rail gun type of weapon magnetically firing a small needle-shaped projectile. It is hard to see what such a weapon system would have going for it compared to a blaster, except, again, stealth. If the needle is fired at supersonic speed, then the weapon will be rather loud, producing a sonic bang (comparable to the cracking of a whip) with every shot, but there will be no visible white beam. The range will be short, as a lightweight needle will quickly lose momentum in air. However, such a needle could well be carrying a drug or poison, and in fact we have a reference supporting that notion. In THE PLAGUE OF MASTERS Flandry ponders the use of a “a cyanide needler with a compressed air cartridge”. It would seem then that Technic needlers are not magnetic coil guns after all, but rather compressed air tranquilizer guns firing drug-carrying needle projectiles. Such a weapon could be used as a substitute to a conventional stun gun or if using lethal poison, as an assassins tool.

16 comments:

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

A brilliant example of how specialized knowledge can enhance appreciation of Poul Anderson's works.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul and Johan!

Paul: I agree!

Johan: Many thanks for writing an article on topics I never thought to write about in any of my essays!

Yes, slug throwing chemical powered weapons of the kind we have now were obsolete in the Technic stories. We see most about them in THE PLAGUE OF MASTERS, where Biocontrol's policy was to deliberately keep technology on Unan Besar as obsolete as possible. It was a serious offense for unauthorized persons to have slug throwers (never mind blasters!). Only Biocontrol's Guards were supposed to have such weapons (and even most Guards generally carried only knives). Dominic Flandry was very glad to get his hands on slug throwers after Kemul the Mugger relieved him of his blaster.

I would stress some need to modify your comments about stunners, however. While you convincingly argued that a real world stunner technology could be potentially fatal to "stunned" persons, a stunner was plainly considered a definitely non-lethal weapons. So I think some means of reducing the effects of being stunned was built in. I recall that the worst thing happening to persons who were stunned was waking up with a bad headache.

Also, I disagree that the Wodenite Adzel was a brawler! He was anything BUT quarrelsome and aggressive. He is most frequently described as peaceful, gentle, and very patient. The size, strength, and matural body armor of the draco-centauroids of Woden seems to have encouraged the development of such traits in most members of that race.

I think your two articles, perhaps with some revision, deserve to be republished in one of the SF magazines or in LOCUS!

Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Johan and Sean,
maybe you could both get your articles published in magazines, acknowledging where they first appeared of course!
Paul.

David Birr said...

Mr. Ortiz:
With regard to the "purple light ray" of the stunner... if the stun effect is produced by invisible ultrasound, the purple light might be a low-powered laser beam used to put a dot on the target and confirm to the shooter that he/she is aiming correctly. Such things are, after all, already in use for our 21st century pistols and rifles. That would explain the use of the term "guiding" in the passage from A Circus of Hells. I'll also note that the Dumarest novels of E.C. Tubb commonly referred to lasers using a "ruby guide beam," with an implication that the real damage was done by an invisible beam.

In at least one story ("Holmgang") of Anderson's Psychotechnic League future history, needle darts are used, with the further refinement that if the needle hits armor or a wall rather than injecting its drug into flesh, it is designed to shatter and the drug inside then volatilizes into a narcotic (or lethal) vapor. This trick may have also been used in the Technic Civilization.

Johan Ortiz said...

Thank you kindly, Paul!

Sean, I actually agree with you regarding stunners. Just like you I found the idea of a bludgeoning "supersonic" beam not to be fully consistent with the description of stunner effects in the books. I lean towards the stunner beams being ultrasonic, and Anderson simply using the term "supersonic" in an old-fashioned way. That seems more consistent with what is being described in the books.

Mr Birr, I'd say yours is the most likely explanation for the "purple light ray". The only question is why blasters are not (described to be) similarly equipped.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

Many thanks! I have sometimes wondered, when indulging some vanity, whether a few of my articles could be plausibly republished elsewhere. Examples being "The Imperial Gardener," with "The Widow of Georgios" attached to it; or my proposed revision of Sandra Miesel's Chronology of Technic Civilization. And my revision of "Andersonian Chess."

Sean

Johan Ortiz said...

About Adzel, when I wrote that he has a propensity for brawling, I meant that he at more than one occasion chose to engage in hand-to-hand combat. I should have stressed that he did this because he did not wish to cause fatal harm using lethal weaponry, not from bloodlust or savagery. In doing so, he even exposed himself to being shot at with blasters, of which his great strength and size allowed him to absorb several hits without serious harm.

Adzel was indeed a gentle soul in an immensely powerful body.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Johan!

Good, we agree as regards stunners. It's plausible to think that by the time of Nicholas van Rijn, advances in technology had made stunners a practical non-lethal weapon.

Sean

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Johan!

But, in that case, it was a mistake to use a word like "propensity." There were times when Adzel found it necessary to fight, but he tried to be as minimal in his use of force as possible. And it was his natural body armor which made Adzel able to tolerate several blaster shots without too much harm.

Sean

Johan Ortiz said...

Sean,

Indeed it was a mistake, it would lead an uniformed reader to get an entirely wrong idea about Adzel's character.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Johan!

I think you can ask Paul to make some revisions to your article, if you wish. I have sometimes done so myself.

Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Yes.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Johan!

I hope it does not offend you, but I would have added one more sentence at the end of your 13th paragraph (the one beginning, "If this is what Poul Anderson had in mind..."): "But it's reasonable to think advances in technology would have minimized the possibly fatal effects of using a stunner so that it became a non-lethal weapon." It would "save the appearances" of why Technic stunners were not as lethal as blasters.

Of course this suggested revision is entirely up to you to accept or not!

Sean

Johan Ortiz said...

I'm not offended in the least, but I am of the opinon that "supersonic beam" should be understood as "ultrasonic beam", that is to say, that the author was using the word in the old way, the one that would have been the more common during his youth and studies. This is for two reasons - first and most compellingly, because ultrasonics are already today researched for use as non lethal weapons. If we already today know ultrasounds could cause nausea and loss of balance, I do consider it plausible at least that in the future it could be used to reliably cause loss of consciousness. It is much harder to imagne how you could with any technology safely knock someone out cold with any kind of mass moving at supersonic speed.

And second, because anything moving at supersonic speed causes a sound bang, just as I imagined a electromagnetic needler would. A truly supersonic jet of gas would probably be deafening! This last fact, which I overlooked in the essay, I believe is a powerful argument for interpreting "supersonic" in this context as "ultrasonic" - just a question of, at the time, slightly dated language.

I should and would however, if Paul would accept it, change the last sentence, which reinforces the notion that stunners are kinetic weapons:

Such a weapon could be used as a more stealthy and less violent substitute to a conventional stun gun (in case one does not wish to “hammer-blow” ones opponent into submission) or if using lethal poison, as an assassins tool.

I would remove the bold sections.

Thank you for your continued interest and constructive criticism!

Johan Ortiz said...

I'm referring, of course in the above comment to the fact that the stunner projected a "soundless supersonic beam" - something which, with the current meaning of the word "supersonic" is quite impossible. An ultrasonic beam, by definition, can not be heard by a human.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Johan!

Many thanks for your explanation. So Technic stunners would be best understood as being ultrasonic stunners.

I can see many advantages if such non-lethal weapons became practical. Policemen, for example, could carry them in addition to lethal slug throwers, to give them an alternative to using lethal force. Of course there will be times when slug throwers have to be used.

Sean