Looking at CoaDE capacitors, it’s looking like you can store about a mega joule per ton. So I figure a mega ton for a one second pulse on a gigawatt laser.
Looking at the capacitors for my railguns, it seems to be right around 0.75 MJ/ton after the drop to 45% efficiency (using BOPP). So ~1.667 MJ/ton input charge.
A gigawatt reactor is 9.49 tons; with accessories (radiators, laser turret(s) ) that should be around 50 tons of mandatory equipment. I'll consider 12 tons of capacitor; it seems reasonable here. 9 MJ storage (20 MJ input) gives you a pulse every 20 milliseconds, plus discharge time. The shorter your discharge time, the higher the intensity of your pulse. Ingame railguns suggest that firing times in the range of 0.1 ms are feasible, but that may not remain true for lasers.
The result is that your peak power is about 90 times more than your constant draw laser, improving intensity by 90 times. This means you can do nonzero damage 9.54 times farther than a constant laser can. If you do choose to engage at this new distance, ignoring shock effects, your rate of drilling through material will be reduced to 1/200 of the constant laser (which is low, but nonzero, unlike the constant laser at this distance; materials can radiate away all heat below a certain intensity of laser). At the same distance as the constant laser, and still ignoring shock effects, the pulsed laser will drill at about 45% of the rate of the constant laser.
Pulses induce shock effects, which improves the rate of damage (and provides a different damage mechanic that may necessitate otherwise sub-optimal armor choices in the defender). I don't have a way to quantify those, though.
Using capacitors is probably not the best way to pulse a laser, but it should work.
A 10x range increase for just 12 tons of capacitor! I can see why you want the game limitations fixed.
Post by fallingagressively on Jan 20, 2018 0:11:49 GMT
Elukka is spot on, but wether it is a pulse laser or not may still be a factor if there is significant differences in damage/utility and mass.
If I can get my head around the output formulas and methods of determining the mass of the laser, then I should be able to get an idea of which is better; a big blast laser or a number of long fire lasers.
Looking at CoaDE capacitors, it’s looking like you can store about a mega joule per ton. So I figure a mega ton for a one second pulse on a gigawatt laser. If I can find a reasonable gigawatt laser design I’ll use that for my first run guess work.
Again though, would a one second firing of a pulse laser be better or worse? I read Luke Campbell’s site and it was convincing about their penetration value.
Post by fallingagressively on Jan 18, 2018 7:30:57 GMT
I did a little reading as I thought that too and as I understand it the pulse will shock the target material rather than burn it, but pulsing in this way is done with nanosecond pulses (femto in some cases. I'm not sure of the exact range) and it can be fired in this way as long as you apply power creating a drilling effect. The actual power usage gets averaged out over time, so you can have pulse lasers that are a continuously pulsed beam. Is there a minimum power threshold for a pulse laser to be effective in this way?
I'm mashing the terminology here I'm sure but I don't know how else to say it.
I do like the idea of the range v damage trade off.
I thought the inaccuracy was a collective of all the things that should affect it. Not just sensors but vibration etc. Is the value not moddable? I've not looked.
Thank you all for taking time to reply to this btw.
Post by fallingagressively on Jan 17, 2018 20:19:38 GMT
I was wondering about some depictions of lasers as cannons with low rates of short pulse firing and the reason they would wind up being that way. From what I understand, simply making the laser larger would allow heat build up to be dealt with more easily which means ‘cannon’ style lasers wouldn’t be a worth while alternative to a larger sustained fire style.
So is there a good reason why you might go for a short fire laser over a long fire one? Are there real engineering difficulties cooling or even making larger lasers?
Post by fallingagressively on Sept 19, 2017 4:20:04 GMT
I quite like the idea of miniature versions of the capital ship as decoys, but I suspect getting the signature to match would be difficult. Especially in light of the fact that the ships signature changes as it manuvers and switches things on and off.
I was reading about how current seekers can also discriminate acceleration profiles that don't match the target. Would that be something you can put in if there is every chance you know nothing about a targets capability?
Post by fallingagressively on Sept 18, 2017 1:38:23 GMT
How costly, in terms of power, would it be to do the sort of multi-spectral jamming this Omni sensor would require? Any guesses?
I'm starting to get on-board the 'sensors should be modelled train'. It makes sense not to bother with the tiny elements as Qswitched says, but the composition of the suite would lead to interesting electronic warfare exploration. The rationale for not physically modelling it would be its arrayed nature giving it built in redundancy.
Maybe just model the active components (ie radar transmitter) that would have large bits.
Post by fallingagressively on Sept 16, 2017 18:34:43 GMT
Qswitched really did his homework. So the to make the sensor hardened, you narrow the band to shorter IR wavelengths which then require more energy to fry the sensor, but in doing so limits the ability of the sensor to pick a flare from a ship. I guess that means that sensor hardening, and how tough you can make them, is what will ultimately determine what seeker to use and what its defeat mechanism will be.
What is the cut-off point I wonder? And will creative design allow work-arounds. If I had both hard and soft sensors in the seeker then could I leave the soft one protected until the hardend one is confused? Fusing a shutter, or other protective system, shut with a laser also sounds like something that could be designed out.
Sufficient size nuke would still fry them wouldn't it?.
Post by fallingagressively on Sept 16, 2017 10:00:42 GMT
Destroying the seeker is always going to be an option, but is it a realistic one? I can't help but think that you could design the optic so that if it detected an attack it would close a shutter to protect itself or something to that effect. As to blinding, isn't that still defeated by spectrum analysis?