|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 30, 2016 8:27:48 GMT
So, if you used a boosted fission bomb, it would seem to work?
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 30, 2016 8:07:02 GMT
Given the current spate of nuke designs over in the Post your designs here! thread, I'd start up a showcase for nukes in particular. My first entry: I've made some smaller ones, with the objective being smaller, more precise nukes (yes, you read that right). I'll post pics of them downthread tomorrow evening.
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 30, 2016 6:08:30 GMT
As others have mentioned, approach at relatively low speed. It really does make a difference.
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 20:44:04 GMT
Tried it. It hit that magnetic saturation point about where I stopped. ANd yeah, wound up using a traditional cannon to get the velocity I wanted. I call it the Casaba Howitzer, for obvious reasons.
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 20:08:33 GMT
So, per the below: Pocket nuke: Any questions? XD You are now obligated under space law to design a coilgun that fires pocket nukes. ... Deal. XD I am attempting to create a coilgun capable of spitting the above mininuke at a reasonable velocity to get it to the target in a timely manner. THAT SAID: Coilgun optimization is a right pain in the ass. I keep hitting a magnetic saturation wall at far less than my initial target of 1 km/s. And that's with an even smaller, 477 tons equivalent nuke that weighs a mere 12.6 kilos and is 10.3 cm in radius... Any bright ideas to improve performance?
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 19:36:15 GMT
You are now obligated under space law to design a coilgun that fires pocket nukes. ... Deal. XD
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 19:02:37 GMT
Pocket nuke: Any questions? XD
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 8:13:27 GMT
Tinker with some of the stock designs and see what happens?
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 8:11:18 GMT
Yeah, it doesn't make sense. But, exploit it while you can! XD
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 7:41:15 GMT
Agreed. Even with neutron reflectors and a fast-neutron reactor, that core for the NTR wouldn't get the kind of reaction rates needed to get hot enough to actually WORK.
EDIT: 97% enriched fuel? Christ on a crutch, that's not an NTR, that's a BOMB!
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 6:20:11 GMT
Haven't gotten to that part yet. XD BUT, the plan is to launch these in the direction of oncoming traffic, then manually detonate them to scatter shrapnel in the path of the inbound hostiles. After all, getting hit by a shotgun spray moving at over 700 m/s is gonna leave a mark on most lightweight stuff like drones and missiles.
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 5:59:57 GMT
Okay, got myself a blindingly fast interceptor missile: Custom warhead and engine to maximize performance and intercept chance. Time to start on some other fun stuff.
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 5:47:04 GMT
Actually, both are correct, as they are used to provide a uniform compression to whatever lies inside, whether it be the fissile "pit" of the primary, or the fusion fuel for the secondary. In the latter case, it wraps around the fusion fuel (usually lithium deuteride if memory serves) and essentially acts as both insulation from the plasma and high intensity radiation. The tamper actually ablates off a part of its mass rather quickly and violently, and this creates the compressional shock that primes the secondary for ignition by the fissile "sparkplug" at its heart:
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 5:14:43 GMT
Because NTRs get much more mass efficient as you get larger. THey're also rather low thrust for a given weight, which makes them terrible for high-impulse missions like short range missiles.
|
|
|
Post by mavericksawyer on Sept 29, 2016 4:31:58 GMT
Hydrogen/Fluorine is the highest energy chemical fuel mix possible, though the hydrogen is going to be... bulky. Worth investigating, though.
|
|