|
Post by The Astronomer on Mar 8, 2017 3:31:46 GMT
Well, with regards to the sensors, if you simply ablate the lens so it is less and less transparent (to IR or whatever wavelength the sensor is using), it will functionally destroy the sensor. Also, you can simply ablate it such that it mechanically destroys the actual sensor aka the thing vaporizes or cracks. Since one of the prime concepts of armouring missiles is to make an absolute minimum cross section facing your target and severely sloping that cross section, it will actually be a challenge to affix good sensors to that type of design. You could end up with varying grades of sensors that are used at various times of the missile's flight. Either way, more granularity and simulation of vital systems will only improve the game, removing abstraction and ways of "cheating" that bias various weapon systems. It may not be very practical to destroy all the sensors on a constellation of 100 missiles, but on 5 or 10 drones? Perhaps. One more limitation that can bring things closer to reality. I can destroy 20 lasers with one 100 kw counter laser within one second , so it take only a few seconds to destroy 100 sensors. But it could be a bug , because if it is not a bug a flashlight should destroy any type of laser instantly... Future laser: flashlight-grade laser beaming to destroy huge ass lasers WHAT A BUG
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 8, 2017 3:37:40 GMT
I think the wire guided solution's drawbacks are self-evident ... Actually no, they aren't to me. The sensor doesn't have to go far, just outside of the missile/drone armour. Why wouldn't cable work? Wire-guided is useally command guidence, missiles go far, very far, even a megameter cable is impratical to store
|
|
|
Post by beta on Mar 8, 2017 5:28:54 GMT
Actually no, they aren't to me. The sensor doesn't have to go far, just outside of the missile/drone armour. Why wouldn't cable work? Wire-guided is useally command guidence, missiles go far, very far, even a megameter cable is impratical to store Yes. Wire guided for a sensor that is at most a few km from a missile, sure. One that is from the launching ship, 15Mm across an orbit to the enemy ship ... not so much.
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Mar 8, 2017 10:55:42 GMT
Actually no, they aren't to me. The sensor doesn't have to go far, just outside of the missile/drone armour. Why wouldn't cable work? Wire-guided is useally command guidence, missiles go far, very far, even a megameter cable is impratical to store Oh, I simply meant between the missile and the sensor. It doesn't have to go that far, a few m is probably enough, if not a few cm. Command guidance is probably using laser link, which is pretty much EC-proof outside of atmosphere.
|
|
|
Post by Bard on Mar 8, 2017 11:10:49 GMT
Wire-guided is useally command guidence, missiles go far, very far, even a megameter cable is impratical to store Oh, I simply meant between the missile and the sensor. It doesn't have to go that far, a few m is probably enough, if not a few cm. Command guidance is probably using laser link, which is pretty much EC-proof outside of atmosphere. "The longest range wire-guided missiles in current use are limited to about 4 km (2.5 mi)." Laser guided makes sense, but possible to jam.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 8, 2017 11:45:54 GMT
Wire-guided is useally command guidence, missiles go far, very far, even a megameter cable is impratical to store Oh, I simply meant between the missile and the sensor. It doesn't have to go that far, a few m is probably enough, if not a few cm. Command guidance is probably using laser link, which is pretty much EC-proof outside of atmosphere. wire guided missiles have a spool of wire on the missile connected to the launcher, very range limited, examples include the TOW
|
|
|
Post by Argopeilacos on Mar 8, 2017 14:07:03 GMT
I think thorneel meant to have the missile drag the sensor along on a leash. Having the missile connected to the ship is obviously ridiculously impractical.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 8, 2017 14:08:45 GMT
any reason not to have the sensor on the missile then?
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Mar 8, 2017 14:42:15 GMT
Tethering the seeker to avoid putting a hole in your armor is pointless, because having the seeker shot off will mission-kill the missile anyway. A missile that's not going to hit is as good as dead.
The problem with exposed seekers could be avoided if we used active radar homing for terminal guidance. We'd just have to pick a radar band that nitrile rubber is transparent to, allowing us to put the seeker package inside the armor. If the sensor has a decent resolution it could also use rudimentary image-recognition to be highly resistant to chaff, larger ships in particular would need a *lot* of chaff to sufficiently obscure their silhouette, especially if they're showing the flat sides of their radiators.
Radar-based homing would also, naturally, be immune to flares. Sufficiently powerful jamming could potentially mask a target, but because the jammer must necessarily broadcast in a band that the sensor can detect the missile can just home in on the source of the jamming to destroy it. So you'd want to put your jammer in a disposable drone.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 8, 2017 14:44:02 GMT
ross128 chaff can mask a ships precise location although using a nuke to clear flak seconds before the main strike could work, also nukes don't have to hit to kill so its a mute point EDIT: might have to use nitrile rubber in monolithic plates as I use a composite of aramid-Amorphous Carbon-Diamond
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Mar 8, 2017 15:30:42 GMT
I think thorneel meant to have the missile drag the sensor along on a leash. Having the missile connected to the ship is obviously ridiculously impractical. Almost, yes. I meant to have a small launcher on the missile that regularly throw a new sensor outside of the missile armour to check on targets. If the sensor is insta-flashed, well as long as it had time to get one frame that's fine. As the sensor will never go very far from the missile, a short wire should be enough.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Mar 8, 2017 15:44:45 GMT
I have bad memories from KSP with attachment of stuff with a cable to an accelerating ship.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Mar 8, 2017 15:58:07 GMT
I have bad memories from KSP with attachment of stuff with a cable to an accelerating ship. 'bad memories'? It sounds like you were attached to a cable attached on Jeb's 20 m/s ascending launch rocket or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Mar 8, 2017 17:08:40 GMT
I have bad memories from KSP with attachment of stuff with a cable to an accelerating ship. 'bad memories'? It sounds like you were attached to a cable attached on Jeb's 20 m/s ascending launch rocket or something like that. More like "what will happen if I try to drag this stuff behind the tug ? I don't really need much ... wait not in that direction, wait STOP "
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 8, 2017 17:40:03 GMT
I am worried about the sensor being whipped into the armour of my missiles and puncturing a tank
|
|