|
Post by zuthal on Jan 18, 2017 14:35:01 GMT
Definitely, yes - I think a closed cycled GCNTR, i.e. nuclear lightbulb, might actually be somewhat easier to implement in game - as you do not have to worry about fuel loss. And might be preferred for military use anyways, if possible, since I am not sure if you could maintain fuel containment in an open-cycle GCNTR under high acceleration
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Jan 18, 2017 10:11:43 GMT
The main advantage of Orion is that it is the only remotely feasible engine with torchlike performance - high exhaust velocity AND high thrust, so you can use it to get a TWR>1 even for very large payloads with high double or triple digit km/s delta-V, allowing you to boost straight from Terra to Mars on a brachistochrone trajectory.
Of course, even when using pure fusion detonators (and thus having more or less absolutely no fallout) you would still want to keep the launch site away from population.
Though, Orion wouldn't be nearly as environmentally bad as usually thought, because it only uses very small, sub-kiloton devices.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Jan 17, 2017 6:42:52 GMT
We really need to be able to make composite rails/coils - like, say, a silver core with a VCS cover.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Jan 16, 2017 18:07:58 GMT
I have made a reactor which is a flat upgrade from ash19256's 70 kW GPR, at only 4.11 kg and 138 c for the same power output, waste heat and outlet temperature. ThermoelectricFissionReactorModule 70.0 kW Reactor 10 cm 4.11 kg UsesCustomName true ReactorCoreDimensions_m 0.1 0.02 NuclearReactor Coolant Ethane Moderator Graphite ModeratorMass_kg 0 Fuel U-233 Dioxide FuelMass_kg 0.1 FuelEnrichment_Percent 0.97 ControlRodComposition Boron Nitride ControlRodMass_kg 0.1 NeutronReflector Boron Nitride ReflectorThickness_m 0 AverageNeutronFlux__m2_s 1.3e+18 InnerTurbopump Composition Amorphous Carbon PumpRadius_m 0.058 RotationalSpeed_RPM 350 ThermocoupleInnerDimensions_m 0.099 0.1 Thermocouple PTypeComposition Tungsten NTypeComposition Osmium Length_m 0.001 ThermocoupleExitTemperature_K 2400 OuterCoolant Sodium OuterTurbopump Composition Polyethylene PumpRadius_m 0.012 RotationalSpeed_RPM 3.2
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Jan 5, 2017 1:33:37 GMT
I have started cataloguing the critical intensities (laser intensity above which more intensity in a single laser results in no more increase in ablation rate) and maximum ablation rates of various materials, under the assumption that the game ignores heat of vaporisation/decomposition (which seems reasonable, as they would likely be otherwise noted for armour materials) and that it has 0 K as the ambient temperature. docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e_DPOISz5ibFHV0d7khJXA_NV-OssKRC83x5Et1D918/edit?usp=sharingJust a note for your testing procedure; I've found that if you give the enemy ship just a little bit of dV and an engine (I use a custom minimized propellant tank for mine) it'll automatically be pointing head-on towards you when the tactical screen loads. Helps tremendously with consistency when I'm testing my own weapons systems. The test target that I put as the one to be used in the doc actually has an engine, and propellant - so it will start out always pointing right at you.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 29, 2016 17:28:33 GMT
I do not have anything really relevant to add... except for this relevant song:
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 21, 2016 10:26:07 GMT
Specifically, assuming that both heat engine efficiency (as a percentage of carnot) and radiator efficiency are independent of temperature, the optimum cold side temperature is 75% of the hot side temp, to optimise for radiator area per electrical power output. Earth-bound powerplants can push the cold side down to only a few tens of degrees above room temperature because on Earth, you can do open-cycle cooling, as you generally have large reservoirs of cold, dense fluid. You cannot do that in space.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 18, 2016 2:32:41 GMT
While the frequency quadding does make lasers much scarier, there is one type of weapon that much benefits from this update too: Swarms of micromissiles, which can now, if in large enough numbers, evade destruction by lasers because their small size makes them hard to target.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 9, 2016 7:44:53 GMT
Contrary to what you might think, I think a cargo ship would have at least marginal armour - in order to protect against micrometeorites.
Also, those reactors seem maybe a bit unreasonably powerful for what a civilian ship could have - I do not think civvies would be allowed to run weapons-grade fuel, maybe 10% enrichment maximum.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 7, 2016 6:50:32 GMT
Engine TWR isn't THAT critical, as engine mass is usually only a few percent of craft mass. I would focus more on exhaust velocity and getting the thrust you need, a TWR in the hundreds of g0 is perfectly fine.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 6, 2016 22:31:24 GMT
An as-yet unnamed battleship. 19.2 kt, 190 m long, 5 km/s delta-V and 245 Mc pricetag. Main weapon is 18 20 MW coilgun, firing 700 gram frag rounds at 14.7 km/s and 600 rpm. The rounds are highly effective, penetrating even heavy armour with great ease. The target ship shown here has, from inside to out, 2.5 mm aramid-1 cm diamond-5 mm VCS-50 cm space-1 cm boron-1 cm silica gel. This shows penetration of 30 cm VCS after about 500 rounds had been fired, from maximum range.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 6, 2016 13:54:51 GMT
Those ranges are only roughly where it is as bright as the background stars, though. It will still likely be brighter than the background between the stars, and it will also be moving against the background.
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 5, 2016 23:32:38 GMT
Yeah, especially since the thrust chamber is 100 micron thick boron foil The engine should rapidly fail under the stresses of gimballing, but /shrug
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 5, 2016 22:23:16 GMT
Okay, yeah, I'll grant you that much. But if your targetting software cannot distinguish an enemy ship from Sol, I would recommend not going for the lowest bidder next time
|
|
|
Post by zuthal on Dec 5, 2016 20:50:18 GMT
Actually, a 20 GW light source at 10 Mm distance has an apparent magnitude of -6.9, which is brighter than Venus, and much brighter than any star.
Plus, the ships will be moving against the background of the stars, and will be able to be differentiated in that way.
|
|