|
Post by Easy on Jan 21, 2017 17:12:59 GMT
// What I really like about these is the pinpoint accuracy, disabling the range limit with the guns will have them kill stingers @ 100km and most basegame ships I've tested it against the first salvo goes through the main weapon the reactor and the main weapon on the opposing side (convenient placing though, I hope most won't design their ships like that), the only thing it has problems killing is missiles heading straight for it since the sloping deflect pretty well on those, but having them defend a larger target they can usually take out 1-2 missiles per drone, giving them a nice extra role as secondary point defence. I am slightly concerned the cannon may be underpowered compared to the 33mm cannon. 1g vs 5g (20%), 29ms vs 78ms (37%), 3.65km/s vs 2.25km/s (162%). Per projectile kinetic energy 6,661 J vs 12,656 J and it fires almost three times slower. Beyond that I very much like your design, the classic stinger has two major weaknesses, low delta V (runs out during combat) and laser weakness (not much can be done).
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on Jan 21, 2017 17:34:06 GMT
I am slightly concerned the cannon may be underpowered compared to the 33mm cannon. 1g vs 5g (20%), 29ms vs 78ms (37%), 3.65km/s vs 2.25km/s (162%). Per projectile kinetic energy 6,661 J vs 12,656 J and it fires almost three times slower. Beyond that I very much like your design, the classic stinger has two major weaknesses, low delta V (runs out during combat) and laser weakness (not much can be done). Well the kinetic energy is a lot lower, and so is the fire rate, with the increase in accuracy though the results have proven that the efficiency is higher than the one of Stingers against corvettes, gunships, missile swarms and other stingers. I do encourage recreating the cannons for testing, I was highly surprised of the results (mounted on drones that is, ships which was my initial test bed did not give it justice).
|
|
|
Post by lieste on Jan 21, 2017 17:48:22 GMT
They are quite big though. My fastest railgun can hit them from 285km or so, a more conservative (and more useful) one from 194km. My PD railguns would work them over from 70km and 43km (main armament of the PD frigate and the secondary weapon of all capitals).
I also have area defence drones which reach to ~56km on a hull around a quarter that of the manned frigate classes (which are all variants of the PD frigate).
Against capital ships all distances are significantly higher of course.
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on Jan 22, 2017 11:17:37 GMT
They are quite big though. My fastest railgun can hit them from 285km or so, a more conservative (and more useful) one from 194km. My PD railguns would work them over from 70km and 43km (main armament of the PD frigate and the secondary weapon of all capitals). I also have area defence drones which reach to ~56km on a hull around a quarter that of the manned frigate classes (which are all variants of the PD frigate). Against capital ships all distances are significantly higher of course. I'm sorry but you made me giggle, really though, look at this quote "Basically, it's a challenge I created in hope for stirring some more creativeness as the current meta always make us push more maximum efficiency without making the fun design more.".
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 22, 2017 12:26:57 GMT
Right, I figured I might as well take what I've learned from everyone else's submissions and see if I can't make something that will meet all of the requirements outlined in the original post. While the drone is technically 10.6 tons instead of 10.5, it still masses the same as the Stinger drone it's replacing, which I feel makes it's extra 100 kilograms of weight much less of an issue. part 2 part 3It's armed with my own version of Easy 's 3.8 mm Mk3 railgun, refitted to have the same muzzle velocity but with superior accuracy, allowing it to be superior to the 33mm cannon on the Stinger drone in all respects except for power draw, and also a pair of 500 kW missile launchers and 8 missiles between the two of them. The drone itself has approximately 2+ km/s greater delta-V than the original stinger, with higher acceleration and superior maneuverability, all with a cost approximately 200 kc cheaper than the Stinger drone. This is also combined with the fact that it is smaller in both length and hull diameter, which, when combined with it's use of more compact radiators, means that it has an overall diameter that is significantly less than that of the Stinger Drone, and a much smaller cross section as well. Finally, while the missiles themselves aren't technically stock (they use Lithium Hydride as their propellant [credit to Rocket Witch and someusername6 for their work on that]), it shouldn't be difficult to make a missile with the same form factor and mass that is stock compliant, at least so long as you were willing to take a hit to performance. In conclusion, the AQ-9 Minimus drone is superior in all respects to the Stinger drones currently in service with the RFP navy, and I eagerly await the day when they replace the Stinger drone in service.
|
|
|
Post by Easy on Jan 22, 2017 20:01:30 GMT
I've been working on a lightweight and inexpensive RTG using PO-210, which as those who have tried is frustrating. So I have coaxed out a little more than 3.7 kW. So here is my best attempt so far with a low power conventional cannon. 26,896 J KE per shot. Was experimenting with copper vs osmium rounds, difference appears negligible. The main drawback is the low power limits the turret traverse speed and the weapon doesn't have the power to fire and aim simultaneously. It doesn't matter much when used in mass at long range with ignore range but you can do that without a turret. There seems to be an advantage to having a turret vs no turret and my testing of large, mid and medium diameter turret sizes have been inconclusive so far. Sufficie it to say that a MW reactor with a railgun is significantly better.
Maybe I need to give up on the 5g projectile and go full sandblaster. zorbeltuss perhaps had the right idea with his high velocity, just maybe more power into the loader to get that fire rate up.
further testing has shown that a larger turret with lightweight reaction wheels is superior, with the turret being near equal diameter to the drone's hull diameter. The faster turning speed lets the weapon fire much more consistently.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jan 23, 2017 18:53:15 GMT
Drop tanks are needed for my 7.26t drone (will be posted in 6 hours) to be in the mass limit, firepower is a 20mm super-rapid firing cannon designed for use in PD batteries with loader power dropped down to 28kw to fit the 28.1kw reactor taken from the standards thread, armor is Diamond coated Amorphous carbon 20.5-30.5mm total thickness. DeltaV in the sub 5km/s range, accel is slightly more then 1g on a hydrogen Fluorine thruster. a heavy version with more armour and triple the firepower is available for a mass of 26.something tons
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 23, 2017 19:29:02 GMT
Drop tanks are needed for my 7.26t drone (will be posted in 6 hours) to be in the mass limit, firepower is a 20mm super-rapid firing cannon designed for use in PD batteries with loader power dropped down to 28kw to fit the 28.1kw reactor taken from the standards thread, armor is Diamond coated Amorphous carbon 20.5-30.5mm total thickness. DeltaV in the sub 5km/s range, accel is slightly more then 1g on a hydrogen Fluorine thruster. a heavy version with more armour and triple the firepower is available for a mass of 26.something tons How much does it cost?
|
|
|
Post by theholyinquisition on Jan 23, 2017 19:30:15 GMT
Drop tanks are needed for my 7.26t drone (will be posted in 6 hours) to be in the mass limit, firepower is a 20mm super-rapid firing cannon designed for use in PD batteries with loader power dropped down to 28kw to fit the 28.1kw reactor taken from the standards thread, armor is Diamond coated Amorphous carbon 20.5-30.5mm total thickness. DeltaV in the sub 5km/s range, accel is slightly more then 1g on a hydrogen Fluorine thruster. a heavy version with more armour and triple the firepower is available for a mass of 26.something tons So if it's firing point defense(which really should be done by lasers) and heavily armored, is it a weapon sponge? Is it a shipkiller? What is it supposed to do?
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jan 23, 2017 20:40:49 GMT
Drop tanks are needed for my 7.26t drone (will be posted in 6 hours) to be in the mass limit, firepower is a 20mm super-rapid firing cannon designed for use in PD batteries with loader power dropped down to 28kw to fit the 28.1kw reactor taken from the standards thread, armor is Diamond coated Amorphous carbon 20.5-30.5mm total thickness. DeltaV in the sub 5km/s range, accel is slightly more then 1g on a hydrogen Fluorine thruster. a heavy version with more armour and triple the firepower is available for a mass of 26.something tons So if it's firing point defense(which really should be done by lasers) and heavily armored, is it a weapon sponge? Is it a shipkiller? What is it supposed to do? 6 of the PD cannons given a 0.5 engagement window and the full power draw can kill 333.333 (not 1/3 0.333) missiles if they fire in 15 round bursts at different targets. the drone is designed to replace the stinger drone so yeah anti-ship is the role. ash19256 the cost will go up with the drone in 2-4 hours
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jan 23, 2017 23:42:19 GMT
Here is the drone that I was talking about, comparded to a stinger and compared to the heavy version which can only fire one gun at a time
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jan 23, 2017 23:50:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 24, 2017 5:56:11 GMT
Looking at your engine hurts - Flourine Hydrogen caps at about 5 km/s. Why does your engine have less than 500 thrust/weight ratio? At this scale you can easily achieve at least 1,000 even with form factor considerations. Take a look at my engine and look back to yours. My design weighs less than 1/20th of yours, generates nearly as much thrust, at massively increased velocities. This isn't even heavily optimized, I'm sure deskjetser could make it at least 30% better...
|
|
|
Post by caiaphas on Jan 24, 2017 6:09:52 GMT
Looking at your engine hurts - Flourine Hydrogen caps at about 5 km/s. [snip] I have a F/H combustion engine that caps at around 5.05 km/s, but it has an inferior thrust-to-weight as compared to yours. Anyone know how to crunch the actual numbers on theoretical limits for this?
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jan 24, 2017 14:33:57 GMT
got a new motor based on newageofpowers tips
|
|