|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 30, 2017 19:38:47 GMT
Now I wonder... Who was the first player on the forum to show missile carrying drones?
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Jan 30, 2017 21:37:59 GMT
Now I wonder... Who was the first player on the forum to show missile carrying drones? Good question i know i did it pretty early on back in the late summer/early fall when i got my beta key, but i just assumed everyone did it like we did with allot of stuff like the broken coil guns.
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Jan 31, 2017 1:52:56 GMT
Not me that's for sure. I saw someone else micromissile drone carrier and based my own missile drone carrier on it with massive weight reduction.
|
|
|
Post by Crazy Tom on Jan 31, 2017 3:45:55 GMT
After a considerable amount of trial and error, Liberty Arsenal has experienced a breakthrough in developing a missile that can take down laser-boats without cratering my frame rates, which for me essentially meant a goal of "less than ~400-500 missiles". RCC is utilized rather than Aramid as a cost-saving measure, but also because it held up surprisingly well in practical tests. It's arranged in spaced layers, so that the vacuum in between insulates each subsequent layer from the layer above. Essentially, it's a 6kg thermos with 16kg of rocket stuffed inside it. These were the test targets used for evaluation (these will be kept behind the links to save screen space): A large array of small lasers A small array of large lasersEach of these targets was successfully taken down with a volley of 200 missiles, with roughly 50 +/-25 missiles surviving typically. Due to variation in survival rates, I think 200 can be taken as the safe minimum to secure a kill (at least against these targets). There is a caveat of course. Even with this layered armor the survival time of each missile is still measured in tenths of a second, especially the last 500km of approach. But with a fast enough approach, it's enough. In order to reduce exposure time, the missiles are boosted into a precision high-velocity intercept by this: Deployment from this first stage allows the missiles to be boosted in at over 6km/s, and hit with a terminal velocity in excess of 11km/s even after burning some dV on guidance. This allows them to cross a million-meter engagement range in under 2 minutes. Each drone carries 200 missiles, meaning each drone deploys with enough missiles to secure a kill against most targets. The addition of intercept calculations on the strategic map were a huge benefit to this system: in order to ensure a hit, a nearest approach of 2km or less is strongly recommended. Additionally, near bodies with strong gravitational fields, a retrograde orbit relative to the target is strongly recommended in order to exploit local gravity to gain dV and reduce exposure time. Could you post the code for it?
|
|
|
Post by theholyinquisition on Jan 31, 2017 17:12:07 GMT
After a considerable amount of trial and error, Liberty Arsenal has experienced a breakthrough in developing a missile that can take down laser-boats without cratering my frame rates, which for me essentially meant a goal of "less than ~400-500 missiles". RCC is utilized rather than Aramid as a cost-saving measure, but also because it held up surprisingly well in practical tests. It's arranged in spaced layers, so that the vacuum in between insulates each subsequent layer from the layer above. Essentially, it's a 6kg thermos with 16kg of rocket stuffed inside it. These were the test targets used for evaluation (these will be kept behind the links to save screen space): A large array of small lasers A small array of large lasersEach of these targets was successfully taken down with a volley of 200 missiles, with roughly 50 +/-25 missiles surviving typically. Due to variation in survival rates, I think 200 can be taken as the safe minimum to secure a kill (at least against these targets). There is a caveat of course. Even with this layered armor the survival time of each missile is still measured in tenths of a second, especially the last 500km of approach. But with a fast enough approach, it's enough. In order to reduce exposure time, the missiles are boosted into a precision high-velocity intercept by this: Deployment from this first stage allows the missiles to be boosted in at over 6km/s, and hit with a terminal velocity in excess of 11km/s even after burning some dV on guidance. This allows them to cross a million-meter engagement range in under 2 minutes. Each drone carries 200 missiles, meaning each drone deploys with enough missiles to secure a kill against most targets. The addition of intercept calculations on the strategic map were a huge benefit to this system: in order to ensure a hit, a nearest approach of 2km or less is strongly recommended. Additionally, near bodies with strong gravitational fields, a retrograde orbit relative to the target is strongly recommended in order to exploit local gravity to gain dV and reduce exposure time. 1. How do you use a missile carrier drone? Have it boost outside to a max speed, then launch missiles that intercept on their own? 2. Why aren't you using nitrile rubber, if cost is the concern? 3. Have you tried making these NEFPs?
|
|
|
Post by vegetal on Jan 31, 2017 20:23:04 GMT
I follow a different concept on anti-laser missiles, I prefer bigger ones so I can use less of them and don't worry about framerates.
My usual salvo to defeat a GW laser platform is the standard 20 missiles. Usually 18 to 19 survive until impact.
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Jan 31, 2017 21:37:47 GMT
1. How do you use a missile carrier drone? Have it boost outside to a max speed, then launch missiles that intercept on their own? 2. Why aren't you using nitrile rubber, if cost is the concern? 3. Have you tried making these NEFPs? _________________________________________________________________________ Yes. The carrier sets up the intercept, deploys the missiles, then breaks away if possible. Getting the closest-approach as low as possible while setting up the intercept is important. Swinging into a retrograde orbit is usually easier than taking a straight shot, but the drone does have enough dV to give you a high-speed intercept even there isn't a convenient gravity well nearby. Jiggling the vectors around to minimize the intercept is tedious, I'll admit, but it's just the price of using hypervelocity missiles until/unless we get a much smarter auto-intercept algorithm (ie one that can set up the intercept with small burns well in advance, instead of burning hard at the last second and still missing by hundreds of kilometers). Attempting the combat-deploy the missiles post-intercept typically ends poorly, as you end up with a trail of missiles that can be picked off and risk losing the carrier before deployment finishes. A system that can combat-deploy would certainly be more convenient because it could get away with wider margins on the intercept, but to pull it off you'd need an armored drone with multiple launchers that is configured to hide its radiators. Nitrile rubber was passed up because I wanted something hard enough to punch through light or medium armor. RCC won't crack heavy armor even at 11km/s, but laser boats usually can't afford heavy armor due to the weight of their radiators. However, I didn't want to go so far as to assume that the target would be armored with aerogel and a smile even if that is typical of a standard laser boat. Against strictly light armor though, nitrile rubber probably would be sufficient simply because the remote control unit can be used as a payload. Making it a NEFP should be a simple matter of adding the warhead, since unlike flak warheads, NEFPs can't be set off by lasers. However, doing so would raise cost and weight while reducing dV and acceleration, which would make them less cost effective overall. If you find yourself needing a NEFP I would recommend having a separate, minimally-armored NEFP missile for the purpose. Use the anti-laser missile to take out laser boats, follow up with NEFPs to crack armor. Armoring a NEFP for anti-laser duty would only be necessary if your opponent was crazy enough to armor several GW of lasers with Osmium and VCS, though in that particular case, the increased cost would be entirely justified to take down what is likely a multi-gigacredit ship. As far as code goes: Missile: CraftBlueprint KKV Micromissile FH-AL Modules 5.00 km/s Fluorine Hydrogen Gimballed Combustion Rocket 1 0 null 0 GLRC 1 1.3393 null 0 7.71 kg Fluorine Tank 1 -0.5 null 0 410 g Hydrogen Tank 1 0 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 1.6785 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 2.6785 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 3.6785 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 4.6785 null 0 7.71 kg Fluorine Tank 1 -0.25 null 0 410 g Hydrogen Tank 1 1 null 0 Armor ArmorLayers Reinforced Carbon-Carbon 0.0015 0 0 1 1 Reinforced Carbon-Carbon 0.0015 0.01 0.501 1 1 Reinforced Carbon-Carbon 0.002 0.01 0.755 1 1 Drone: CraftBlueprint KKV MIRV Drone AL Modules Default Remote Control 1 -1.9389 null 0 251 kW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 1 -3.057 null 0 8.15 km/s Hydrogen Deuteride Gimballed Nuclear Thermal Rocket 1 0 null 0 3x0.5 Osmium Radiator 2 5.9988 251 kW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 0 1.000 t Hydrogen Deuteride Tank 1 0 null 0 50.0 kW KKV Micromissile FH-AL Launcher 1 6.3687 null 1.57 0.2x0.10 Osmium Radiator 2 6.7758 50.0 kW KKV Micromissile FH-AL Launcher 0 200x KKV Micromissile FH-AL 1 6.9205 null 0 1.000 t Hydrogen Deuteride Tank 1 2 null 0 1.000 t Hydrogen Deuteride Drop Tank 3 14.171 null 0 1.000 t Hydrogen Deuteride Drop Tank 3 25.257 null 0 Armor ArmorLayers Silica Aerogel 0.001 0 0 1 1 Edit: However, because it was requested, I will at least try to test an anti-laser NEFP because why not. Hopefully NR armor will save enough weight to mostly make up for the heavier warhead. Results pending.
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Jan 31, 2017 23:32:24 GMT
Update: Anti-Laser NEFP is a success. End result gained 2kg and lost 1.04km/s dV, but actually ended up nearly 200Cr cheaper overall because as of the last patch, my 95t micro-nuke only costs 16Cr. Which essentially means there's now only a 16Cr difference between a NEFP and a long-rod KKV (both use about the same weight of Osmium in their payload, the only difference is the shape and the nuke). I'm not sure exactly how my nuke ended up so cheap, but I suspect the scaling factor for enriching U-233 got nerfed (it uses 97% enriched U-233, so its price is very sensitive to that scaling factor).
Oddly enough, strictly speaking switching to NR actually removed more weight than the NEFP warhead added. Switching the armor material removed 1.7kg, the warhead weighs 1.41kg. The 2kg weight gain was because the extra length of the warhead pushed the second layer of armor past a calculation threshold. Theoretically, I could remove it by adjusting the length of the second armor layer to put it back on the low side.
Calculation exploits aside, attrition rates were within the margin of error for the KKV version, so there is effectively no difference in performance between the two except, of course, the NEFP's signature excessive lethality on impact. With a little adjustment to the armor to exploit how armor weight is calculated, and some testing to ensure that adjustment didn't compromise time-to-live, I think it will be quite safe to declare rubber-NEFP the superior model.
In fact now that my micro-nuke only costs 16Cr there's very little practical reason to use KKVs at all, 16Cr is a small price to pay for the sheer lethality a NEFP brings to the table.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Feb 1, 2017 2:29:49 GMT
Update: Anti-Laser NEFP is a success. End result gained 2kg and lost 1.04km/s dV, but actually ended up nearly 200Cr cheaper overall because as of the last patch, my 95t micro-nuke only costs 16Cr. Which essentially means there's now only a 16Cr difference between a NEFP and a long-rod KKV (both use about the same weight of Osmium in their payload, the only difference is the shape and the nuke). I'm not sure exactly how my nuke ended up so cheap, but I suspect the scaling factor for enriching U-233 got nerfed (it uses 97% enriched U-233, so its price is very sensitive to that scaling factor). Oddly enough, strictly speaking switching to NR actually removed more weight than the NEFP warhead added. Switching the armor material removed 1.7kg, the warhead weighs 1.41kg. The 2kg weight gain was because the extra length of the warhead pushed the second layer of armor past a calculation threshold. Theoretically, I could remove it by adjusting the length of the second armor layer to put it back on the low side. Calculation exploits aside, attrition rates were within the margin of error for the KKV version, so there is effectively no difference in performance between the two except, of course, the NEFP's signature excessive lethality on impact. With a little adjustment to the armor to exploit how armor weight is calculated, and some testing to ensure that adjustment didn't compromise time-to-live, I think it will be quite safe to declare rubber-NEFP the superior model. In fact now that my micro-nuke only costs 16Cr there's very little practical reason to use KKVs at all, 16Cr is a small price to pay for the sheer lethality a NEFP brings to the table. Could we get the code for the custom modules for your missiles? The code you gave in your first post doesn't do anyone any good if you don't give that info.
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Feb 1, 2017 2:46:14 GMT
Could we get the code for the custom modules for your missiles? The code you gave in your first post doesn't do anyone any good if you don't give that info. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Alright, I'll go ahead and post a breakdown of the latest iteration (featuring improved armor layering and a NEFP warhead). Missile: CraftBlueprint NEFP Micromissile FH-AL Modules 5.00 km/s Fluorine Hydrogen Gimballed Combustion Rocket 1 0 null 0 GLRC 1 1.5937 null 0 7.71 kg Fluorine Tank 1 -0.5 null 0 410 g Hydrogen Tank 1 0 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 1.6785 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 2.6785 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 3.6785 null 0 10.0 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 4.6785 null 0 7.71 kg Fluorine Tank 1 -0.25 null 0 410 g Hydrogen Tank 1 1 null 0 95.0 t Boosted Fission Nuke 1 1.1696 null 0 10.0 cm Diameter 3.00 mm Radiation Shield 1 1.5089 null 0 Armor ArmorLayers Nitrile Rubber 0.0015 0 0 1 1 Nitrile Rubber 0.0015 0.01 0.055 0.33 1 Nitrile Rubber 0.0015 0.03 0.668 1 1 Nitrile Rubber 0.002 0.04 0.755 1 1
Engine: CombustionRocketModule 5.00 km/s Fluorine Hydrogen Gimballed Combustion Rocket UsesCustomName false Reaction Fluorine Hydrogen StoichiometricMixtureRatio 1 ThermalRocket ChamberComposition Boron ThroatRadius_m 0.0047 ChamberWallThickness_m 0.00015 ChamberContractionRatio 11 NozzleExpansionRatio 91 NozzleExpansionAngle_degrees 5.4 RegenerativeCooling_Percent 1 Injector Composition Boron Nitride PumpRadius_m 0.024 RotationalSpeed_RPM 87 Gimbal InnerRadius_m 0.035 ArmorComposition Polyethylene ArmorThickness_m 0.0001 MomentumWheels Composition Boron RotationalSpeed_RPM 1e+005 GimbalAngle_degrees 9.5
Controller: RemoteControlModule GLRC UsesCustomName true AspectRatio 2 HomingBehavior PropellantForBoostPhase_Percent 0 BoostPhase GuidanceLaw Augmented Proportional Navigation Accelerate false DampingEngineMultiplier 0.5 MidcoursePhase GuidanceLaw Unguided Accelerate false DampingEngineMultiplier 0.1 TerminalPhase GuidanceLaw Proportional Navigation Accelerate true DampingEngineMultiplier 0.83
(note: if you're not staging or gun-launching, enable the boost phase or replace with your own RC unit) Fuel tanks: PropellantTankModule 7.71 kg Fluorine Tank UsesCustomName false Propellant Fluorine StructureComposition UHMWPE ReactionMass_kg 7.708 HeightToRadiusRatio 2.9 AdditionalArmorThickness_m 0
PropellantTankModule 410 g Hydrogen Tank UsesCustomName false Propellant Hydrogen StructureComposition UHMWPE ReactionMass_kg 0.41 HeightToRadiusRatio 12 AdditionalArmorThickness_m 0
Nuke: NuclearPayloadModule 95.0 t Boosted Fission Nuke UsesCustomName false CoreComposition U-233 ReflectorComposition Diamond SlowExplosive CombustionReaction Silicon Thermite DelayComposition Calcium DelayCompositionMassFraction 0 FastExplosive Nitrocellulose CoreMass_kg 0.01 Enrichment_Percent 0.97 HollowCoreRadius_m 0.02 InnerExplosiveWidth_m 0.0096 FusionBoost Deuterium Tritium FusionFuelDensity_kg__m3 60 Detonator HardRange_km 0.02 ActivationRange_km 0.03 MinimumRange_km 0.6 OverrideTimer_s 0 TargetsShips true TargetsShots true
Rad shield: RadiationShieldModule 10.0 cm Diameter 3.00 mm Radiation Shield UsesCustomName false Composition Osmium Dimensions_m 0.05 0.003
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Feb 5, 2017 6:37:59 GMT
I got bored and noticed someone weaponized drop tank a month or two ago. So I decided to miniaturize it and do something with it. The result is this. Which caused this to happen. Because of these holes. When you throw enough shits at the wall, everything will break. Also the major delta-V error when using non-compatible droptanks should really get fixed.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 5, 2017 17:47:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 5, 2017 17:49:43 GMT
The big one has the power of 15MT of tnt (castle Bravo nuclear test) at 1Km and 15Kt of Tnt (Hiroshima nuclear strike) at 1000Km
|
|
|
Post by theholyinquisition on Feb 5, 2017 19:22:36 GMT
The big one has the power of 15MT of tnt (castle Bravo nuclear test) at 1Km and 15Kt of Tnt (Hiroshima nuclear strike) at 1000Km I feel that that the appropriate response here is a quote from the bhagavad gita: "If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one..." Or, if you want something a bit more pithy, Fallout 3, addressed to an AI: "You're an abortion of science."
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Feb 5, 2017 20:12:22 GMT
The big one has the power of 15MT of tnt (castle Bravo nuclear test) at 1Km and 15Kt of Tnt (Hiroshima nuclear strike) at 1000Km I feel that that the appropriate response here is a quote from the bhagavad gita: "If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one..." Or, if you want something a bit more pithy, Fallout 3, addressed to an AI: "You're an abortion of science." "War, war never changes." The captain solemnly spoke, as he released an equivalent amount of energy to the entire first ten thousand years of human civilisation and armed conflict in about nine and a half minutes.
|
|