|
Post by fallingaggressively 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?
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Sept 16, 2017 5:38:18 GMT
So, if an ir imaging seeker would be able to determine that a flare is not the original target due to having a different spectral signature, how do you go about fooling it?
Would this require a decoy with the same signature as the ship? And would it be possible to make such a decoy cheap enough to be viable?
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Mar 29, 2017 22:55:46 GMT
I need to do more testing but from what I've seen material hardness is also an important factor in armor penetration. For example swapping the stock flack warhead from aluminium to osmium gives better penetrations.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Mar 29, 2017 4:03:18 GMT
>nearly 600kw radiation hazard per missile Jesus Christ, who fucking needs the laser star? I have a ship with over a Tw of heat, speaking of, lawson, Twatt flare maybe? A Twatt flare? That seems a little, um, rude.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Dec 2, 2016 9:19:21 GMT
So a bit of testing has shown me that if speed of sound is a factor, then it is one that can be ignored in favor density! The two primary attributes that make a good kinetic penetrator in COADE are high material density and low radius.
Very heavy death needles. Sounds like a metal band...
I even added some extra armor on (3cm boron / 1.4m aerogel/ 5cm boron / 3cm carbon / 2cm diamond) and switched to 2kg osmium 1.5m long rod and threw it at the armor package with ~60deg slope and it held up for a number of hits, but the behind armor effects were pretty horrific. Loose the angle and its straight through (even when the rod was 0.8m long).
Hate to think about how effective NEFP will be when its a fully realised weapon.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 29, 2016 5:16:29 GMT
Hehe, whoops! Yes 9km/s. As you may have guessed from my name, I'm not as thorough as I should be. Something I'm working on!
Does the speed of sound issue mean it would be better to use boron carbide or something? The testing, it never ends...
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 28, 2016 5:02:01 GMT
Has anyone tried using two-part penetrators/payloads for their guns? Considering the velocities and how most stock ships bite the dust after one or two hits from a heavy projectile, I don't know if it's strictly necessary, but segmented penetrators are a contemporary thing for defeating spaced/bulging composite armors. Might find some kind of effectiveness against packed whipple shields. 2kg tungsten long rod with a diameter/ length ratio above 40 (I think it was at 57 when I ran out of time) at 9m/s penetrates 3cm boron / 1.4m aerogel / 5cm boron after a few hits. It appears the simulation does not factor in warping of the rod on impact. The stuff I've read suggests that at that ratio the rod should be shattering... The coil gun that fires it is almost at reasonable cost weight range. If only we didn't need to have reaction wheels.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 24, 2016 11:15:33 GMT
I made the long rod from radiation shields and apparently the game thinks this is not how radiation shields should be used and broke my user designs!
So after I rebuilt all the designs I'd lost I went back to the drawing board and used the flak rods with the fuse turned off (and I think this is an easier way of creating the rods of a length at a given weight) and they work very well. The armor still holds them off for a bit but when when it makes it through... it goes straight through and does very localised damage along the projectiles path. Its almost surgical, except for the wonky accuracy of my coil gun!
I'd post pics but I need to build my ships again!
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 23, 2016 19:03:30 GMT
I tried to stick to the 20:1 length/diameter ratio which modern apfsds are designed to. Making it 600mm long as real designs are made it a bit heavy and slow, but if someone can make a better coil gun? I also made it with the rad shield only, which may have an effect depending on how they are modelled in the game engine.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 23, 2016 18:33:28 GMT
I tested one of the ~50/60 km/s 1gram coil guns which gave a stand off of about 200km against the 3cm boron/1.4m aerogel/5cm boron armor package and it held up for a good five minutes...
My test really only ended because the ship misaligned and copped a spray to the weak sides. With a better armor shadow I think it would have survived all 10000 rounds...
To be fair that same armor withstood the payload design just as well, and I tried a 14kg rod at 7km/s too. I be interested to know how well modeled the penetration effects are as rod length/diameter and composition is a significant factor in real world designs.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 21, 2016 18:27:20 GMT
Changing my methane tank material from RCC to Van chrome stopped the crashing, so perhaps its related to the tank detonating? Van chrome tank detonates with complete destruction of the drone I was using it in, so I'm only assuming the RCC tank was trying to do the same.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 18, 2016 12:21:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 11, 2016 13:10:25 GMT
Two reasons why I think its a PID. First is that they are a great tool for a control system. Second is that I tried to create a space battle game and that is a behavior I observed. I got around it by cheating and giving up on some authenticity...
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 10, 2016 10:03:08 GMT
I think that pulsing of the RCS is due to the PID being used to control the RCS is setting its target too low which causes the control value to oscillate around the target value because of either overcompensation or lag in the control response. I'm probably explaining that really badly but its something along those lines.
It basically boils down to PID tuning being hard to do properly.
|
|
|
Post by fallingaggressively on Nov 8, 2016 1:57:50 GMT
It needs power to fire then it needs power to reload and, very likely simultaneously, needs power to traverse.
If it works the way I think it does, if you have a 300kw weapon with a 300kw reloader with a 300kw reaction wheel then its power use will jump between 300kw and 600kw for one turret depending on relative movement.
I would need to test it more to prove but I've not had power issues since reading it that way. (If so chance I'm wasting power... maybe I will test it)
|
|