ndeo
Junior Member
It's not a flashlight... It's a High-frequency relativistic boson cannon
Posts: 67
|
Post by ndeo on Apr 12, 2017 14:11:15 GMT
"Triple Action Thunder" Breach-loaded .50 BMG pistol ... What?
|
|
|
Post by mrsandman on Apr 12, 2017 16:29:44 GMT
"Triple Action Thunder" Breach-loaded .50 BMG pistol ... What? ***20mm anti-tank pistol. If they die, my arm was a worthy sacrifice.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Apr 12, 2017 17:19:05 GMT
"Triple Action Thunder" Breach-loaded .50 BMG pistol ... What? ***20mm anti-tank pistol. If they die, my arm was a worthy sacrifice. 20 mm gyrojet with HE-fag, HEAT or thermobaric warhead. Blow up IFV's without messing up your wrist.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 12, 2017 17:24:03 GMT
***20mm anti-tank pistol. If they die, my arm was a worthy sacrifice. 20 mm gyrojet with HE-fag, HEAT or thermobaric warhead. Blow up IFV's without messing up your wrist. 88mm gyrojet HEI anti-personal rounds from a breach action pistol
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Apr 12, 2017 20:51:31 GMT
.22 Long Rifle You just have to aim well(*)
(*) with servos, webcam and a Raspberry Pi for target tracking - if CoaDE taught me one thing, it's that manual aiming is passé
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 12, 2017 22:14:34 GMT
Wanting anything more than a mag full of Speer Gold Dot 9mm+P is like leaving manna and quails for onions and leeks.
|
|
|
Post by coaxjack on Apr 13, 2017 0:27:47 GMT
20 mm gyrojet with HE-fag, HEAT or thermobaric warhead. Blow up IFV's without messing up your wrist. 88mm gyrojet HEI anti-personal rounds from a breach action pistol You're in luck
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 13, 2017 2:48:32 GMT
88mm gyrojet HEI anti-personal rounds from a breach action pistol You're in luckpssst, thats 8 4mm
|
|
|
Post by acrosome on Apr 13, 2017 14:40:07 GMT
What have I done...
|
|
|
Post by theholyinquisition on Apr 14, 2017 4:02:07 GMT
Please. We all know the true caliber: 1mm 1g rounds the length of the barrel.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Apr 14, 2017 6:16:28 GMT
Please. We all know the true caliber: 1mm 1g rounds the length of the barrel. Ha, try 27 ng aerogel slugs
|
|
|
Post by Hicks on Apr 30, 2017 13:34:19 GMT
[n+1] big bangs, where n is however many of whatever you just said.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on May 2, 2017 17:23:17 GMT
So, the semester started a week ago, and I decided to ask a few people who know some more about the mathematics involved. Turns out what I'm attempting is pretty much impossible. Basically, anything to do with hit chance would take some rather in depth statistical analysis for guided munitions. Beyond that, the chance to cause critical damage with a distribution of shots for non guided munitions is to highly dependant on the choice of targets. To define any sort of "effectiveness" you would have to define a population of targets and test hit position effectiveness for an arbitrary distribution of shots. As for Heck, we don't even have a useful way to compare weapons in the same class, such as handguns*, because target factors, let alone compare lasers to coilguns to nukes. *Every "handgun stopping power" metric that you have ever heard of is crap, so please don't try to cite one to me. In fact, the moment someone says the term "stopping power" you should probably conclude that they have nothing productive to say on the subject at all. There has been exactly one reasonably scientific approach made to this issue, and above a certain minimum cartridge size/power the only factor that seems to matter is how many times you hit the guy. I will avoid clogging this forum with further explanation, but I do want to head off the pointless objections that I can see coming. I'm a military trauma surgeon, and yet any time someone asks me a question on just one small aspect of this subject my answer is always "I'd have to get a grant and go shoot a thousand goats to answer that."
and What I'm more interested in if we get these metrics, is the effectiveness of specific, namely kinetic weapons against different types of armor. You might be covering this under impulse, but one thing I've always wanted to figure out is how well will a weapon perform assuming a 100% chance to hit the mark it was aiming for. If the shot doesn't penetrate, will it cause spall? If it does penetrate, does it vaporize or penetrate fully, or something in between? I am very much interested in what you got planned here however, and am as much at a loss as you in figuring out numbers to show for a project like this. Also, isn't static energy irrelevant? The hole point of such a metric is to be independent of target properties. It is almost impossible to tell what a weapon will do to a specific non trivial target, let alone an arbitrary group of targets. I'm pretty sure that determining the effect of any weapon an all possible targets is in fact impossible. The metrics would have taken into account how much damage the weapon could have done to a target. How much damage a weapon can do is dependant solely on its carried impulse, energy and dimensions. Seeing as this becomes problematic for large numbers of projectiles (plasma/fluid lance from SC or EFP/NEFP) and radiation/laser damage, energy conversion terms are calculated for these that determine how much "damage" is applied to the target from a set amount of energy (these terms are dependant themselves on impulse and energy, as an example of why this is necessary: lasers vaporizing the armour impart additional impulse into the armour due to the vaporising armour than the light itself carries, but solid 1kg tungsten rods at 5km/s cause little to no vaporization and the ejected material has next to no impulse compared to the projectile).
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on May 2, 2017 20:55:37 GMT
something which I think would be far more useful is armour metrics, Ex, 60Mj (list of equal to that energy, in kinetic, laser, and plasma) on a 6cm radius circle (variable) for armor (variable) pen on flat surface (variable) at 90* (variable)
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on May 3, 2017 8:28:35 GMT
something which I think would be far more useful is armour metrics, Ex, 60Mj (list of equal to that energy, in kinetic, laser, and plasma) on a 6cm radius circle (variable) for armor (variable) pen on flat surface (variable) at 90* (variable) Armour metrics run in to the problem of armour being to complex. Weapon damage metrics can work, because there are non trivial best case scenarios (all energy/impulse is used to cause damage). Both best case and worst case scenarios for armour damage are trivial, meaning that the armour is either obliterated completely or completely unharmed. Thus, only intermediate case studies are possible, and the result from these are so situation specific that they are useless for comparisons.
|
|