|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 7, 2016 14:58:40 GMT
INTRODUCING: THE STAR DESTROYER (AKA WALLET DESTROYER).
COMPLETE WITH SHIT TONS OF LONG RANGE 100 MW LASER RAILGUN BLASTERS, 300 MW LASERS AND QUADRUPLE TWIN ION ENGINE TWIN METHANE ENGINE FIGHTER LAUNCHERS!
THE STAR DESTROYER Ambient Heat: 3.45 GW Engines-On Heat: 4.32 GW forget about decoysMass: 240 kt Cost: 6.18 Gc it will blow your planet's walletsRailgun (Blasters)Power: 100 Mw Muzzle v: 17.2 km/s 6.00 g Round Range (small): 9.15 km Range (medium): 28.9 km Range (capital): 123 km
TWIN METHANE ENGINE FIGHTERS i should really change graphite armor to its aerogel counterpart...
anyways, i need help with drone armors. any experts?Mass: 38.0 t Cost: 9.89 Mc Railgun (Default config)Power: 250 kw Muzzle v: 6.90 km/s 1.30 g Round Range (small): 2.86 km Range (medium): 9.06 km Range (capital): 49.5 km Railgun (Accuracy config)Power: 250 kw Muzzle v: 4.98 km/s 4.00 g Round Range (small): 5.53 km Range (medium): 11.3 km Range (capital): 35.7 km WARNING: ANYONE WITH POTATO HARDWARES SHOULD EXPECT THE GAME TO TURN INTO A SLIDESHOW.Other pics 
|
|
|
|
Post by Easy on Dec 7, 2016 15:20:03 GMT
Am I a bad person for hoping the TME-Fighters were ball shaped?
They do have green tracers, correct?
|
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on Dec 7, 2016 18:18:01 GMT
Why are the fighters so heavy? Are they crewed?
Also going hydrogen-fluorine might improve performance? Finally with multiple gigawatts it might be good to try going MPD. Thrusters.
If you post your userdesigns.txt I think I can improve in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by leerooooooy on Dec 7, 2016 18:38:13 GMT
Why are the fighters so heavy? Are they crewed? Also going hydrogen-fluorine might improve performance? Finally with multiple gigawatts it might be good to try going MPD. Thrusters. If you post your userdesigns.txt I think I can improve in it. the most thrust per GW you can get out of MPDs is less than 1 MN per 50 GW, and that is restricted to high molar mass propellants. They are not good outside of very light laser boats and/or civ ships, even then they can barely reach 200mg on very optimized setups. |
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on Dec 7, 2016 18:40:21 GMT
Yes thrust will be reduced, but not by as much as you might think. Notice that most of his ships's weight is armor around the 16x10000 ton hydrogen fuel tanks. By going MPD he could possibly reduce ships's mass and cost by up to 80%.
Also notice how his accleration is 10mg, that is well within the limits of what MPDs can do.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 7, 2016 22:47:31 GMT
Am I a bad person for hoping the TME-Fighters were ball shaped? They do have green tracers, correct? Sorry for that, but making it rounder will probably kills its delta-v cleanly. Note that the TMEs are just named after their twin methane engines. Anyways, yes, they do have green (silver) tracers. |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 7, 2016 22:59:28 GMT
Why are the fighters so heavy? Are they crewed? Also going hydrogen-fluorine might improve performance? Finally with multiple gigawatts it might be good to try going MPD. Thrusters. If you post your userdesigns.txt I think I can improve in it. Well, an attempt to pack railgun power into drones while still retaining significant delta-v... Also: Methane is cheap. This Star Destroyer design is suppose to be large and slow (epicness), but don't worry about speed, these kind of thrust are common in most of my spacecrafts. Most of them have delta-v between 5-10 km/s. Will try MPDs soon, thanks for the suggestion. |
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on Dec 8, 2016 2:39:37 GMT
Definitely try Fluorine Hydrogen on the fighters if you want more deltaV, the exhaust velocity is almost double of Methane Oxygen, so you could get 3 times as much deltaV for the same mass. Then you can cut down on the fuel mass as needed.
Also if the fighters are unmanned, try using fission generators as opposed to RTGs, fission generator is much cheaper and lighter for any given output, with disadvantage being higher crew requirement.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 8, 2016 4:30:30 GMT
Definitely try Fluorine Hydrogen on the fighters if you want more deltaV, the exhaust velocity is almost double of Methane Oxygen, so you could get 3 times as much deltaV for the same mass. Then you can cut down on the fuel mass as needed. Also if the fighters are unmanned, try using fission generators as opposed to RTGs, fission generator is much cheaper and lighter for any given output, with disadvantage being higher crew requirement. SITUATION: General conversations in Martian Orbital Factory: "Fluorine is running out, right?" "Yeah, let's just trade delta-v to save our fluorine stockpile. That ship is not a serious subject anyways." "Let's just hope that they will improve the drones' fuel consuming AIs." Summary: I am okay with the delta-v, for now. They are supposed to be short-ranged, anyways. "Fission generators? I thought we were already using one?" "No, sir. They are too powerful and costly for these drones..." "Why not upgrade the guns?" "Oh, okay, great idea. I will tell them to make smaller fission generators, in case they were too power-hungry." Summary: Time to upgrade the guns, or just design smaller Fission generator. |
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on Dec 8, 2016 5:08:45 GMT
"Fluorine is running out, right?" "Fission generators? I thought we were already using one?" Twin Decane Engine+252kw Fission, reduced mass by 94%, reduced cost by 97%, doubled deltaV, too lazy to build a new engine to match your acceleration but doing that would cost at most 50kg more.  |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 8, 2016 15:36:03 GMT
"Fluorine is running out, right?" "Fission generators? I thought we were already using one?" Twin Decane Engine+252kw Fission, reduced mass by 94%, reduced cost by 97%, doubled deltaV, too lazy to build a new engine to match your acceleration but doing that would cost at most 50kg more. Turns out, using lighter, lower I sp engines yield more delta-v. I created two types of decane drones 'Solo Decane Engine' with a slightly nerfed railguns atop (233 MW instead of 250 MW). The smaller one (one 5m decane tank) have 2.61 km/s for its 12.6 t weight, while the larger one (two identical decane tanks) have 4.34 km/s for 17.6 t. Guess what? I use the bigger one for my Star Destroyer. Their delta-v is remarkable for its size. |
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on Dec 8, 2016 17:34:27 GMT
Why is it still so heavy? For carrying a single 250kw railgun with 2km/s of deltaV you should have only needed 2 tons imo.
|
|
khenderson
New Member
my god, it's full of missiles
Posts: 40 
|
Post by khenderson on Dec 8, 2016 18:23:21 GMT
Why is it still so heavy? For carrying a single 250kw railgun with 2km/s of deltaV you should have only needed 2 tons imo. Two tons? I don't see why they'd be more than 200 kilograms.   Edit: here's a more heavily armored example  |
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on Dec 8, 2016 18:51:24 GMT
The light weight railguns are arguably not as good because of the slower muzzle velocity though.
Ya, I suspect if the OP posts specs on the stardestroyer, we could build ships to match its capabilities with 2% of the cost and mass.
In particular, how many fighters does the stardestroyer carry?
|
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Dec 8, 2016 20:04:30 GMT
The light weight railguns are arguably not as good because of the slower muzzle velocity though. Ya, I suspect if the OP posts specs on the stardestroyer, we could build ships to match its capabilities with 2% of the cost and mass. In particular, how many fighters does the stardestroyer carry? It's not designed to be a minmaxed warship, it's a glorious paperweight. Yes, I can probably kill it with less than 1 kiloton of carrier drone, but that's not the point. EDIT: Old version of my of carrier drones. Those were 406t ea, my newer ones, with more optimized missiles are 455t ea and pack roughly 20% more launchers and missiles per carrier. Newer carriers also have roughly 20m 2 less cross section while posessing almost .5 km/s more dV. |
|
