Tesla's 'Death Ray'

[Jack the Anarch]

For those of you who don't know what the topic title refers to check the article here, and for those of you who know I've a question:

'How do you feel about having a Death Ray device playing a pivotal or somewhat less, but still significant role in a hypothetical Fallout 3 game?'

(Proposed scenario: A death ray battery grid was installed prior to the war to defend USofA from strategical droppings of ill intentioned thermonuclear conflagration, but due to the apt work of inside sabotage agents (cough, of very competent engineers) , the system was disabled and failed to do it's intended assignment. Now the threat (in some time after Fallout 2 storyline) of a nuclear weapon in hands of a diabolical sex-deprived madman looms over the reawakening wasteland's echo of a 21st century's civilized life, with only the stories of an anteconflagratory device of immemorial heritage giving any hope of survival (other than breaking in to the impenetrable hut and chopping off the psycho's button pressing fingers.) )

 

[Vox]

I am no scientist but after reading this it seems like it's pretty vulnerable to the EMP of a nuclear strike.

That might be the main problem with the whole theory about Fallout 3 and the 'dethz rayz' of Tesla.

But despite that, a very interestig link.

Tkanks for that.

 

[Sander]

It's easy to shield such a device from EMP, that wouldn't be a problem.

However, this would be somewhat silly. It would essentially mean that there'd be more ways to go and destroy the planet than just bombing it to hell, so why wasn't that used?

 

[Vox]

After some research on Tesla I found out that heaps of his technological miracles were ignored and forgotten.

 

[Sander]

After some research on Tesla I found out that heaps of his technological miracles were ignored and forgotten.

Good for you.
And now what?
Also note that out of all those heaps of 'miracles' almost none were actually proven.

 

[Vox]

True. Still interesting.
And what would be humanity without mad scientists?! :farnsworth:

 

[Brother None]

However, this would be somewhat silly. It would essentially mean that there'd be more ways to go and destroy the planet than just bombing it to hell, so why wasn't that used?

Who says it wasn't? Remember, the Fallout timeline around the end of great war is extremely murky. It is actually NEVER clarified who fired first and with what weapons, though it is known by the after-effects that a significant number of nuclear weapons and/or dirty bombs were used.

Including 50's death rays in weapons fired around the time would not be a stretch of the imagination. Especially not as Tesla is one of the things included in Fallout lore because his fits in 50's sci-fi so well.

Good find, good idea.

 

[Sander]

Who says it wasn't? Remember, the Fallout timeline around the end of great war is extremely murky. It is actually NEVER clarified who fired first and with what weapons, though it is known by the after-effects that a significant number of nuclear weapons and/or dirty bombs were used.

Very true, but in this case they had been in war or on the verge of war for years and actively trying to take over anything to do with fossil fuels. It wouldn't make much sense for them not to use it sooner, since such a weapon could decimate China in seconds. Although I suppose you'd still have the MAD problem.

Including 50's death rays in weapons fired around the time would not be a stretch of the imagination. Especially not as Tesla is one of the things included in Fallout lore because his fits in 50's sci-fi so well.

Good find, good idea.

True, but come on, a Death Ray with that potential? How are you going to encorporate that into Fallout well other than historically?

Then again, come to think of it, it could make for an excellent bunker exploration a la the Vats.

 

[Jack the Anarch]

To Sander and Kharn. I wasn't sure how powerful Tesla's Death Ray was supposed to be, or could it's defensive potential have been used as a tool of aggression as well, so I looked it up. Here's what I found:

...PROGRESS along such lines will be impossible while nations persist in the savage practice of killing each other off. I inherited from my father, an erudite man who labored hard for peace, an ineradicable hatred of war. Like other inventors, I believed at one time that war could he stopped by making it more destructive. But I found that I was mistaken. I underestimated man's combative instinct, which it will take more than a century to breed out. We cannot abolish war by outlawing it. We cannot end it by disarming the strong. War can be stopped, not by making the strong weak but by making every nation, weak or strong, able to defend itself.

Hitherto all devices that could be used for defense could also be utilized to serve for aggression. This nullified the value of the improvement for purposes of peace. But I was fortunate enough to evolve a new idea and to perfect means which can be used chiefly for defense. If it is adopted, it will revolutionize the relations between nations. It will make any country, large or small, impregnable against armies, airplanes, and other means for attack. My invention requires a large plant, but once it is established it will he possible to destroy anything, men or machines, approaching within a radius of 200 miles. It will, so to speak, provide a wall of power offering an insuperable obstacle against any effective aggression.

If no country can be attacked successfully, there can be no purpose in war. My discovery ends the menace of airplanes or submarines, but it insures the supremacy of the battleship, because battleships may be provided with some of the required equipment. There might still be war at sea, but no warship could successfully attack the shore line, as the coast equipment will be superior to the armament of any battleship.

I want to state explicitly that this invention of mine does not contemplate the use of any so-called "death rays." Rays are not applicable because they cannot be produced in requisite quantities and diminish rapidly in intensity with distance. All the energy of New York City (approximately two million horsepower) transformed into rays and projected twenty miles, could not kill a human being, because, according to a well known law of physics, it would disperse to such an extent as to be ineffectual.

My apparatus projects particles which may be relatively large or of microscopic dimensions, enabling us to convey to a small area at a great distance trillions of times more energy than is possible with rays of any kind. Many thousands of horsepower can thus be transmitted by a stream thinner than a hair, so that nothing can resist. This wonderful feature will make it possible, among other things, to achieve undreamed-of results in television, for there will be almost no limit to the intensity of illumination, the size of the picture, or distance of projection.

I do not say that there may not be several destructive wars before the world accepts my gift. I may not live to see its acceptance. But I am convinced that a century from now every nation will render itself immune from attack by my device or by a device based upon a similar principle.

You can find the whole article here.

Here's a bottled down theoretical glimpse at what Tesla might have had in mind when he talked about the "Machine to end all wars": http://www.americanantigravity.com/graphics/tesla/Tesla-Death-Ray-Reconstruction.pdf

Thus the 'Death Ray' of Nikola Tesla could have looked much more closer in operation to the Tesla Coil of 'Red Alert' games than to the beam weapons we immediately associate with the notion of a 'Death Ray'. Either way, it would be impressive, to say the least.

 

[uziel]

I think that before we think of the ending, we need to think of a beginning. It's nice and all to have an end, but you usually see the beginning more often when it comes to video games. But I do like the notion and the idea. Perhaps the main character could be one of said madman's lackeys...?

 

[Sander]

I think that before we think of the ending, we need to think of a beginning. It's nice and all to have an end, but you usually see the beginning more often when it comes to video games. But I do like the notion and the idea. Perhaps the main character could be one of said madman's lackeys...?

Who said it would need to be an ending or even a part of the story of a new game?
Also, constructing the ending first allows you to work towards that ending, which is also a way of writing that works.

 

[uziel]

It can also lead to sloppy writing and hasty development from my personal experiences. I've seen some writings with the end result determined first and then the rest has been haphazard and ended abruptly.
[Example: The Prequel Star Wars trilogy.]

 

[Sander]

Not if the writer is actually good.
Aside from that, because of the nature of great RPGs this is very different. There are more contingencies to take into account, so they are forced to properly think every possibility through.

 

[Brother None]

It's not really much of an option to do it in much of another way for branching RPGs, though, uziel. If you have a branching, freeform storyline, you'll have to determine both the end and the start before you determine the middle, otherwise you're going to end up having to throw half your written material away.

 

[uziel]

I suppose that would be more feasable if there were multiple writers.

 

[E]

My not really very humble opinion,

Too many small/medium problems with having a grid of tesla deathrays.
To get enough coverage to stop a bomber you need alot of towers/masts/antennas and the fallout setting is post apocalyptic with the country blown to shite.

You need LOTS of electricity for a single "death ray cannon" which again doesn't really fit.

if the setting is post Fallout 2 then the tech of that nature is getting really shabby, new and adapted technologies seem to be the direction taken in fallout 2.

That being said the Tesla theories on broadcasted power could be a good "Game winner" fire up the big generator and the remains of "good ol' Uncle sam's" bomber defenses fire up when they get the signal.

i.e. This amazing "Computer" controlled fighter can fly for ever, Keeping you safe, it's electric motor is kept supplied with power by the tesla mast you see in the back ground.
(Edit second thoughts on a computer controlled aircraft, computer controlled AA gun?)

That begs the question. What kind of AntiAircraft defences exist in fallout?

Too much tesla stuff means there is no reason for all the powered armour, lasers, miniguns and the other meaty goodness of fallout.

For a nuke to be delivered in fallout it has to be delivered by someone as I recall there are no ICBM's.
For nuke delivery think "doctor strangelove" so instead of someone with their finger on the button you get someone who is on the radio to their bomber crew.
(Now who's regretting not having "persuasion" tagged)

Edit
Tesla Deathray might work on a smaller scale
"we need to get the powerstation and its defences online before "evil guy" and his army gets here, and turns the whole place into a giant A-bomb. Why did they build this place on a fault line?"

 

[Jack the Anarch]

Good thoughts E. Just a few remarks here:
While the USofA did not field an ICBM during the fifties, the story was different on the other side of the ocean. In 1957. the Soviet Union had test fired its first ICBM, the R-7 Semyorka rocket.

The R-7 was 34 m long, 3 m in diameter and weighed 280 metric tons, it was two-stage, powered by rocket motors using liquid oxygen (lox) and kerosene and was capable of delivering its payload around 8,800 km, with an accuracy (CEP) of around 5,000 m. A single nuclear warhead was carried with a nominal yield of 3 megatons of TNT (Mt of TNT). The initial launch was boosted by four strap-on rockets making up the first stage with a central 'sustainer' motor powering through both the first and the second stage. The guidance system was inertial with radio control vernier rockets.

The missile had become operational in 1959. but was soon replaced with more capable second generation ICBMs.

More on Tesla's Death Rays by the man himself:

It is perfectly practical to transmit electrical energy without wires and produce destructive effects at a distance. I have already constructed a wireless transmitter which makes this possible. ... But when unavoidable may be used to destroy property and life. The art is already so far developed that the great destructive effects can be produced at any point on the globe, defined beforehand with great accuracy

"The flying machine has completely demoralized the world, so much that in some cities, as London and Paris, people are in mortal fear from aerial bombing. The new means I have perfected afford absolute protection against this and other forms of attack."

- Nikola Tesla (letter to J. P. Morgan, Jr. on November 29, 1934)

Tesla claims that only a dozen or so of his projectors are to be placed on the coast to achieve a sufficient coverage as to repel any invading air force. Other than that, your reasoning seems well placed, as power shortages could cause problems, but not so as to disable the entire defense Grid. A single Tesla death ray wouldn't need that much power, since it was proposed in 1937 when all they had were hydroelectric and thermal power plants with limited power distribution capabilities.

Since you mention Tesla's wireless energy transport, it's fair to say that he also proposed what is now called a Free Energy collector harnessing the neutrino radiation the Earth is being bombarded with on a daily basis giving us a fueless electric generator.

 

[Brother None]

While the USofA did not field an ICBM during the fifties, the story was different on the other side of the ocean. In 1957. the Soviet Union had test fired its first ICBM, the R-7 Semyorka rocket.

Irrelevant, there are no ICBMs in Fallout. We're talking Fallout's history here, not ours.

 

[Jack the Anarch]

Irrelevant, there are no ICBMs in Fallout. We're talking Fallout's history here, not ours.

You are obviously more knowledgeable than I in these matters, but the only thing I can agree with you is that there is no mention of ICBMs in Fallout, but from that truth it doesn't by any means follow that there in fact were no ICBMs in the Fallout universe. In fact, as far as I am aware of course, there is very little mention at all of how the nukes were delivered. Can you please elaborate on why you believe there were no ICBMs and if so, how then were the nukes delivered and where in the game can I find reference to this.
Thanks.

 

[Sander]

No, there are no ICBMs in Fallout because they don't fit either the technology (no transistors) or the basis of the setting (50s retro sci-fi).

While theoretically possible within Fallout's technological setting, it's highly unlikely and would require huge facilities vulnerable to attack (like the ICBMs of the 60s).

Aside from that, the setting is very important as well. I suggest you go watch Dr. Strangelove to grasp why this doesn't really fit the setting.