|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 20, 2018 12:21:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 21, 2018 2:05:07 GMT
I didn't read the formulas in detail but I just sneak picked one of their stuffed whipple shield design. Seems that their rule of thumb is that bumper-space-textile-space-backplate, I just added anti-laser and spall liner each at the outermost and innermost. Tin was one of their suggestion, surprisingly. Innermost Para-Aramid Fiber 0.0075 Boron Filament 0.05 Graphite Aerogel 0.2 Aramid Fiber 0.003 Fused Quartz Fiber 0.003 Graphite Aerogel 0.2 Tin 0.003 Diamond 0.001 Outermost   It worked better than my previous crappy armor, at least... Maybe need third space between backplate and spall liner? |
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 21, 2018 2:38:30 GMT
What are the specs on that ship?
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 21, 2018 2:46:01 GMT
|
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 21, 2018 19:57:07 GMT
I think my one gripe with asymmetrical ships (aside from a general dislike for asymmetry >=p ) is that when they can't really take advantage of sloped armor. You could always put the ship in a square armor config but it's not going to be the same unless you screw up the aspect ratio. At best you are dealing with 45* angles (assuming the AI can figure out how to orient it).
also, why did you put fused quartz fiber in the plate? I have never used that before, what is it good at?
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 21, 2018 20:34:02 GMT
I think my one gripe with asymmetrical ships (aside from a general dislike for asymmetry >=p ) is that when they can't really take advantage of sloped armor. You could always put the ship in a square armor config but it's not going to be the same unless you screw up the aspect ratio. At best you are dealing with 45* angles (assuming the AI can figure out how to orient it). also, why did you put fused quartz fiber in the plate? I have never used that before, what is it good at? Triangles means you are dealing with 30° angles, assuming a compliant AI. |
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 21, 2018 20:50:17 GMT
That is my issue with triangle formation, I can never get them aligned right even when under direct control. Triangular would be Ideal for this type of ship given the amount of shielding the radiators would get. However, AI aside Triangular just happens to be the least efficient armor config due to them being the farthest shape from a cylinder and all the propellant tanks, crew modules, ammo racks, etc. are cylindrical. AI aside it is the best symmetrical shape for glancing shots from the side.
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 21, 2018 22:56:14 GMT
I think my one gripe with asymmetrical ships (aside from a general dislike for asymmetry >=p ) is that when they can't really take advantage of sloped armor. You could always put the ship in a square armor config but it's not going to be the same unless you screw up the aspect ratio. At best you are dealing with 45* angles (assuming the AI can figure out how to orient it). also, why did you put fused quartz fiber in the plate? I have never used that before, what is it good at? My one gripe with symmetrical shape is it looks like giant dil---------------- No, with it you can't do "selection and concentration" which is a key factor of modern(>1906) navy. With that hexagonal shape of 2.0 aspect ratio, I don't have to armor up the radiator side (<70% of the ship, if you expose your back you're already dead anyway) and don't have to worry about how many of my 18 railguns can open fire (theoretically, if the ship orient broadside fine...which is a big problem yet). Moreover you can dodge while firing to avoid enemy shots. The low cross section and super sloped angle of nose facing scheme might be able to offset the inefficiency, but unable to dodge can't be overcome and at least I can't find it out with stock ship design. Gunship is amazingly resilience with the armor shape, but it loses its strong point when it orient broadside to open fire at me... Most important, I use this scheme only for CQC vessel, which is meant to be in a line battle at most 80km away. If you face a laserstar at this range it's your strategical failure and you'll gonna be dead whatsoever. If you face kinetic vessel you have to cover your radiators up. When it comes to drone/missile carriers that not to face enemy ship in close quarter or laserstars are meant to overwhelm in firing range, I use nose first scheme(still with hexagonal 2.0 for some space/cross section saving issue). That's my guess. About fused quartz fiber, NASA/NASDA/ESA configs of stuffed whipple shield is consist of (outermost) aluminum bumper - space - Nextel fiber & Kevla - space - aluminum backplate (innermost) with a multilayer insulation thermal blanket(MLI) somewhere in between, see below:  There was no Nextel fiber in CDE, so I found a fiber decent enough rather than Kevla(Para-Aramid), came up with fused quartz fiber. I was lazy so didn't check FQF ingame is similar enough to the Nextel AF62 IRL and good at defending enemy shots compared to conventional schemes. Will do soon-ish  (At least it was more resilience to my eyes) |
|
(At least it was more resilience to my eyes)