|
Post by shurugal on Dec 9, 2016 23:19:45 GMT
Hell, if that's your victory criteria, let's just saturate each other with thousands and thousands of 1 kT nukes. We'll pump out so much radiation that we find a way to neutron-activate vacuum. Thats... literally what my Assault Carrier drones do... launch thousands of 2.68 kt nukes... Yeah, modern war/future war is likely to be hellish for the combatants... but it can be fought. Thinking about it is a good mental exercise, one that I'm glad we've participated Modern war already is hellish for combatants. Making new ways to kill soldiers won't make us any more miserable than we already are, it will just make the aftermath more gruesome.
|
|
|
Post by kaiserwilhelm on Dec 10, 2016 11:20:09 GMT
Just a question how many fps do you all have when launching all those microdrones/micromissies?
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 10, 2016 12:07:32 GMT
Graphogel Ian there to stop lasers, graphogel seems to work as a shock absorber, it lets armour on its surface survive truly massive kinetic hits. Mmm, yea apparently graphogel is the ultimate squishy marshmallow, you can literally compress it to paper thin and it will spring back no worse for wear... put a metal plate on it and it will take all the force out of a hit without fractures or suffering catastrophic damage unlike most armour materials It's also much stronger then silica gel structurally, and can survive huge forces that most other material would take damage from. Per kg it's probably one of the strongest materials ingame. Also note that while per kg silica gel is 10-20% stronger then amorphous carbon vs thermal weapons, silica gel has atrocious mechanical properties and is not suitable to taking any kind of kinetic damage. What is 'graphogel'? I NEED THEM FOR MY SHIP NOW
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 10, 2016 12:16:04 GMT
Just a question how many fps do you all have when launching all those microdrones/micromissies? I followed these people's ways and built a fission bomb coilgun. The result of using them as a long range weapon is one hell of game lag.
|
|
|
Post by amimai on Dec 10, 2016 12:22:30 GMT
Graphogel : graphite aerogel : aerographite Same thing different name
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 10, 2016 12:32:30 GMT
Graphogel : graphite aerogel : aerographite Same thing different name Great, but what's better for ship armor, between reinforced carcon-carbon and graphite aerogel?
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Dec 10, 2016 12:36:57 GMT
Graphogel : graphite aerogel : aerographite Same thing different name Great, but what's better for ship armor, between reinforced carcon-carbon and graphite aerogel? By weight and cost: graphite aerogel (against kinetics).
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 10, 2016 12:40:01 GMT
Great, but what's better for ship armor, between reinforced carcon-carbon and graphite aerogel? By weight and cost: graphite aerogel (against kinetics). Not for lasers, right? Outer 5 cm silica gel layer got this.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Dec 10, 2016 13:05:20 GMT
By weight and cost: graphite aerogel (against kinetics). Not for lasers, right? Outer 5 cm silica gel layer got this. Against lasers,silica airogel still seems king, when you're talking about monolithic armour at least. At the thermal armour thread, some really nifty composite armour has been developed (inner Si-aerogel layer for insulation, thin layers of graphite aerogel with empty space in between to spread out heat, and an outer layer of nitrile rubber to vaporize and carry away heat). Not sure which is better by weight or cost though.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 10, 2016 13:29:44 GMT
Not for lasers, right? Outer 5 cm silica gel layer got this. Against lasers,silica airogel still seems king, when you're talking about monolithic armour at least. At the thermal armour thread, some really nifty composite armour has been developed (inner Si-aerogel layer for insulation, thin layers of graphite aerogel with empty space in between to spread out heat, and an outer layer of nitrile rubber to vaporize and carry away heat). Not sure which is better by weight or cost though. I changed the armor layout from reinforced carbon-carbon to graphite aerogel and added some delta-v. In the unrelated note, I tried boron shield (slightly edited radiation armor) vs boron armor, and it seems that armor work FAR better.
|
|
|
Post by Pttg on Dec 10, 2016 20:00:53 GMT
Armor may have a role if there is a social or political reason to mount fairly low-power weapons systems. Possibly just plain space piracy/subterfuge.
Say you have your war carrier and it's doing its job acting as force projection near a spaceport. If an enemy warship were to approach, you'd have plenty of time to spool up the reactors, line up a shot, and fire a small handful of missiles, all before the enemy ship even entered orbit. Armor would be a waste of mass.
Except then a civilian ship drifts by on MPD engines and its cargo containers explode because it's not actually a civilian ship, it's basically a nuclear claymore mine. The directed shrapnel makes swiss cheese of the battleship (and if the pirates/insurgents/infiltrators use several tubes and some careful aiming, any number of battleships), then space marines who happened to be "on vacation" 3d-print some guns and lock down the civilian station, take what they want, and get an extract. They have all the time in the system.
Oh, and micrometeorites. Gonna want a basic whipple shield just in case.
|
|
|
Post by shurugal on Dec 10, 2016 21:05:28 GMT
all good reasons, but none are modeled in CoaDE
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Dec 10, 2016 21:35:18 GMT
Armor may have a role if there is a social or political reason to mount fairly low-power weapons systems. Possibly just plain space piracy/subterfuge. Say you have your war carrier and it's doing its job acting as force projection near a spaceport. If an enemy warship were to approach, you'd have plenty of time to spool up the reactors, line up a shot, and fire a small handful of missiles, all before the enemy ship even entered orbit. Armor would be a waste of mass. Except then a civilian ship drifts by on MPD engines and its cargo containers explode because it's not actually a civilian ship, it's basically a nuclear claymore mine. The directed shrapnel makes swiss cheese of the battleship (and if the pirates/insurgents/infiltrators use several tubes and some careful aiming, any number of battleships), then space marines who happened to be "on vacation" 3d-print some guns and lock down the civilian station, take what they want, and get an extract. They have all the time in the system. Oh, and micrometeorites. Gonna want a basic whipple shield just in case. Man-portable EFP can pierce any reasonable armour. If pirates get close enough for improvised/man-portable weapons to work, armour won't help much. This website seems to indicate that shaped charges with a mere 1 m diameter are capable of penetrating 40 to 80 cm of armour. A EFP or HEAT-warhead with a 20 m diameter (hidden in the nosecone of a freighter for example) would be able to penetrate at least 8 m (low-end EFP) to 200 m (high-end HEAT) of (presumably RHA) armour.
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Dec 10, 2016 21:44:08 GMT
Armor may have a role if there is a social or political reason to mount fairly low-power weapons systems. Possibly just plain space piracy/subterfuge. Say you have your war carrier and it's doing its job acting as force projection near a spaceport. If an enemy warship were to approach, you'd have plenty of time to spool up the reactors, line up a shot, and fire a small handful of missiles, all before the enemy ship even entered orbit. Armor would be a waste of mass. Except then a civilian ship drifts by on MPD engines and its cargo containers explode because it's not actually a civilian ship, it's basically a nuclear claymore mine. The directed shrapnel makes swiss cheese of the battleship (and if the pirates/insurgents/infiltrators use several tubes and some careful aiming, any number of battleships), then space marines who happened to be "on vacation" 3d-print some guns and lock down the civilian station, take what they want, and get an extract. They have all the time in the system. Oh, and micrometeorites. Gonna want a basic whipple shield just in case. This is a really good point, the only reason armoring is even working today is the majority of weapons used in conflicts are small arms or other fairly low power weapons systems. If an arms ramp up during a conflict were to take place armor becomes less practical; for example, a 5,000,000$ tank can be destroyed easily by a 3,000$ anti-armor rocket, or 100,000$ missile. Even in today's military we don't build armor to survive all weapons systems in direct combat, we instead build counter measures to attempt to not get hit in the first place. Fleets on the sea defend themselves with a multi-layer defense (air craft interception > counter measures > close in weapons systems > armor / praying nothing critical gets hit). In this type of situation if you have a mass and cost limit increasing the outer layers of defenses is more effective than just tanking more damage on your ship. I am actually pretty interested to see how the dynamics of naval warfare will change with the creation and implementation of the railgun since now an extremely low cost projectile can easily destroy even the largest naval vessels from fairly extreme range. Armoring against it is nowhere near financially doable. I think this dilemma is what most of us are facing at the moment in game, and there isn't a real world solution example yet.
|
|
|
Post by shurugal on Dec 10, 2016 22:58:57 GMT
I am actually pretty interested to see how the dynamics of naval warfare will change with the creation and implementation of the railgun since now an extremely low cost projectile can easily destroy even the largest naval vessels from fairly extreme range. Armoring against it is nowhere near financially doable. I think this dilemma is what most of us are facing at the moment in game, and there isn't a real world solution example yet. The naval railguns going into trials now will not be magical superweapons that kill everything everywhere. Their penetration at over-the-horizon ranges will be comparable to what we already have. The most important difference is that the rounds will cost less, take up less space, and be far, far safer to store. Now, for direct-fire situations? Yeah, the railgun is going to penetrate any naval armor currently afloat. But at the ranges naval battles are actually fought these days, atmospheric drag will slow the projectile down to speeds comparable to conventional AP rounds. The extra velocity the railgun imparts will simply allow it to compete with missiles for range, while modern PGM guidance packages will enable similar accuracy.
|
|