|
Post by dragonkid11 on Jan 14, 2017 0:30:05 GMT
Go here. www.csgnetwork.com/kineticenergycalc.htmlTimes the number of round your railgun or coilgun fired in one second and compared it to your energy input. If it's less, you have a non-reality breaking railgun or coilgun. If it's more, you are kicking thermodynamic off a infinitely tall building.
|
|
|
Post by Easy on Jan 14, 2017 2:08:29 GMT
The railgun obliterates physics as we know it. KE of 18MJ/s compared to 1.2 MW of input power. 102ms is the shortest cycle time permitted for the power requirement. So the rapid fire rate is what makes it physics breaking? That seems like a rather simple bugfix to throw an error or limit the fire rate. I haven't bothered to check the math to ensure new projectiles aren't being loaded before the previous exits.
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Jan 14, 2017 2:12:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 14, 2017 2:14:31 GMT
Output power = kinetic energy of projectile / time between projectiles = (projectile mass * velocity ^2 / 2) / (time between projectiles) Input power = electric power fed to module Efficiency = output power / input power Someone made a pretty good calculator for kinetic weapon efficiency. For mine, every of them never ran at efficiency higher than 95%. If it is not possible to make it run lower than 100%, the module is either fixed/deleted.
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Jan 14, 2017 6:23:05 GMT
I went a pretty different approach in making the new stinger. I went with a few different ideas on this and tried to create a multi-role fighter drone. I wanted to have the ability to deploy missile saturation attacks, intercept missile saturation attacks cost effectively, and have the long range directed energy capabilities of 1,000km lasers all in one platform. I also wanted to dabble in heavily armoring the drones against frontal attack so they could be used to buy time against larger laser arrays. The resulting drone has a 100cm diameter by 75cm thick nitrile rubber radiation shield as primary defense that must be penetrated from frontal attack before lethal damage can be dealt. Each drone has 100 attacker missiles all with 10cm of anti-laser armoring designed to engage enemy fleets from range and 100 interceptor missiles designed to intercept incoming missiles. To deal with small numbers of leakers or continue the fight when out of missiles the drone is fitted with 2x 25MW lasers. The lasers preform pretty poorly when compared to larger aperture designs but are enough to slowly burn through standard anti-laser material at 1,000km and can be used as point defense in large numbers. The drone loses points for being larger than the existing stinger but is also over half the cost and does not die quickly to laser attacks.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 14, 2017 6:29:52 GMT
I went a pretty different approach in making the new stinger. I went with a few different ideas on this and tried to create a multi-role fighter drone. I wanted to have the ability to deploy missile saturation attacks, intercept missile saturation attacks cost effectively, and have the long range directed energy capabilities of 1,000km lasers all in one platform. I also wanted to dabble in heavily armoring the drones against frontal attack so they could be used to buy time against larger laser arrays. The resulting drone has a 100cm diameter by 75cm thick nitrile rubber radiation shield as primary defense that must be penetrated from frontal attack before lethal damage can be dealt. Each drone has 100 attacker missiles all with 10cm of anti-laser armoring designed to engage enemy fleets from range and 100 interceptor missiles designed to intercept incoming missiles. To deal with small numbers of leakers or continue the fight when out of missiles the drone is fitted with 2x 25MW lasers. The lasers preform pretty poorly when compared to larger aperture designs but are enough to slowly burn through standard anti-laser material at 1,000km and can be used as point defense in large numbers. The drone loses points for being larger than the existing stinger but is also over half the cost and does not die quickly to laser attacks. Different approach... First glance: "Is that even a Stinger Drone?"
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Jan 14, 2017 6:31:44 GMT
When you say it's large, you aren't kidding...
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Jan 14, 2017 6:49:02 GMT
I actually wanted to add a micro drone launcher with tiny conventional guns on them as an additional CIWS point defense but since the requirement was to not have thousands of tiny drones I left it off. The idea would be to puke a bunch of these down around the fleet in the event of incoming missile saturation attacks to give additional targets and shoot down incoming missiles (hopefully).
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jan 14, 2017 8:11:28 GMT
The purpose of the Stinger drone appears to be hypervelocity kinetic spam. So, keeping to this theme, I over-engineered its propulsion and gave it more teeth. Note: the coilgun is 83% efficient. The barrel is molybdenum, for improved accuracy over AlCuLi. The gun is armored with 5 cm nitrile rubber. On pure MPD thrust, the drone gets 21 mg 0 acceleration. On pure NTR thrust, it gets 4.3 km/s dV. There is no escape.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 15, 2017 2:42:40 GMT
Are we allowed to go below the minimum mass limit if our drones are similarly sized to the Stinger? Ie. a ~5 ton drone that is roughly the same volume as the Stinger? Or is the minimum mass a hard limit?
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 15, 2017 2:49:10 GMT
Are we allowed to go below the minimum mass limit if our drones are similarly sized to the Stinger? Ie. a ~5 ton drone that is roughly the same volume as the Stinger? Or is the minimum mass a hard limit? Mass is hard, size isn't.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 15, 2017 2:52:20 GMT
Are we allowed to go below the minimum mass limit if our drones are similarly sized to the Stinger? Ie. a ~5 ton drone that is roughly the same volume as the Stinger? Or is the minimum mass a hard limit? Mass is hard, size isn't. Fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Jan 15, 2017 2:53:33 GMT
Are we allowed to go below the minimum mass limit if our drones are similarly sized to the Stinger? Ie. a ~5 ton drone that is roughly the same volume as the Stinger? Or is the minimum mass a hard limit? Just post your design people like to see cool things. You could also just slap huge drop tanks onto it to meet the arbitrary mass limit and increase the delta-v or way more armor and fuel or something if you wanted it to qualify as-is
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 15, 2017 3:27:05 GMT
Following advice from jasonvance , here's Verolan Space & Aeronautics Corporation's two-part bid for the Stinger Drone Replacement Contract, featuring both a replacement for the Stinger itself, and the Beam Drone that commonly accompanied it. Mass & Cost breakdownThe Yellow Jacket drone was designed initially as a response to a specification for a 15+ km/s attack drone. While V S&A did provide a number of prototypes for field testing, ultimately, the contract was cancelled, as RFP Naval Command didn't see a truly pressing need for drones with that level of delta-V. Afterwards, the Yellow Jacket was revamped with additional armor and smaller monolithic tanks, turning it into the drone seen here. Armed with 4 33mm High-Velocity turreted auto-cannons, the Yellow Jacket drone is almost half the weight of the Stinger drone and less than a third the cost. However, the relatively low density of it's methane propellant does mean that the Yellow Jacket is approximately the same size as the Stinger drone. Part 2 Part 3The AQ-6 Dreamer laser equipped attack drone was derived from an older, open-source design. Upgraded with a more powerful reactor and additional resistojet thrusters, the AQ-6 was upgraded to allow it to mostly keep pace with the Yellow Jacket drones, allowing them to provide anti-missile support to active drone constellations. The drone itself is approximately 3-3.5 tons fully loaded, and costs even less than the Yellow Jacket drone, despite the complexity of it's laser weapon system.
|
|
|
Post by caiaphas on Jan 15, 2017 3:48:13 GMT
I present for your consideration, the Hornet I. Weighing in at 10.1 tons to the Stinger's 10.6 and 120 kc to the Stinger's 264 kc pricetag and mounting a pair of 3 mm railguns (with improved engagement range and a middleweight 10-gram osmium slug to punch through the most robust of Whipple shields!), the Hornet delivers twice the firepower at half the cost, and the Hornet's advanced composite armor, thinner profile, and reduced cross-section provides increased* survival against enemy gigawatt lasers and heavy hypervelocity cannon .*Claims have not been field-tested against enemy warships. If your combat experience with the Hornet I is at all unsatisfactory, complaints must be addressed to our home office at 172 Keel Ln, Deimos Fleetyards, Deimos, Mars in person by the affected individual.
|
|