|
Post by ash19256 on May 25, 2017 14:40:35 GMT
IIRC, that was due to dissociation of the propellant. I wonder... Is dissociation that powerful? No idea.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 25, 2017 13:55:53 GMT
I think the weapons/engines, assuming assembled and explicitly used in space would be viable, probably. I bet they wouldn't. The game does not model at all many key factors that would be critical IRL, like materials weakening as they approach melting temperature, and even beyond that the game has bugs and approximations that can lead to nonphysical results, see resistojets violating conservation of energy IIRC, that was due to dissociation of the propellant.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 25, 2017 6:25:55 GMT
Well, I'll think about doing something with this. If it were allowed, I'd request permission to use modded materials for this, mostly so I could use either TaHfC or Graphene clad fuel rods and possibly either liquid lithium (if that would be allowed, it'd be being stored in a boron tank) or either hexadecane or icosane for the propellant. If not, then I might still make an attempt at this, although it's probably going to suck lots.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 24, 2017 19:20:32 GMT
My heavy missile body uses 6 in the flak config. 1x 1 kg/1kg frag with a minimal radius. 1x 2.5kg/245g frags 10m radius. 2x 3.5 kg/50g frags 20m radius. 2x 3.5 kg/15g frags 40m radius. 1x 10 kg/1.25g frags 100m radius. 100m detonations produce nasty ragged holes. Ohh and thx for the 3x fixed engine tip. Works pretty darn good. That sounds both heavy and painful to be on the receiving end of.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 24, 2017 12:45:02 GMT
One of the neater concepts I've seen is designing missiles so that they have a tandem warhead design, where one of the charges scatters into a relatively small number of heavy fragments (something like 33 grams per fragment IIRC) to blast holes in armor and another that shatters into a crapton of 1 gram fragments to fuck over radiators. Put one of them in the head of the missile and the other in the tail, and even if you don't core the target with the heavy flak, any radiators near where the missile hit are now Swiss cheese. I use tandem warheads myself but I don't see the benefit of this particular layout. It works already with both warheads in the head. IIRC, if you put the wide spread warhead in the tail, when the missile goes boom there's more room for the wide spread flak to spread out, allowing it to hit more of the radiators and such.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 24, 2017 1:45:03 GMT
One thing I've noticed is that if you want to get into making high-quality ships, I can highly recommend concretedonkey 's Stock ships redesign thread, as I've found the ships in there to be very capable even using stock modules, not even getting into modded materials or the Solar System Organization of Standardization thread's many highly-minmaxed modules (mostly reactors and nuclear fission devices, although I might develop some RP-1 NTRs for the thread at some point). I do however recommend modded materials if you are interested in getting a wider variety of choices when making things.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 23, 2017 20:17:58 GMT
One of the neater concepts I've seen is designing missiles so that they have a tandem warhead design, where one of the charges scatters into a relatively small number of heavy fragments (something like 33 grams per fragment IIRC) to blast holes in armor and another that shatters into a crapton of 1 gram fragments to fuck over radiators. Put one of them in the head of the missile and the other in the tail, and even if you don't core the target with the heavy flak, any radiators near where the missile hit are now Swiss cheese.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 20, 2017 1:39:01 GMT
I pale at the amount of power that a Ce:LLF variant of that laser could put down range.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 19, 2017 20:54:44 GMT
You might be able to direct the light coming out into a gain medium and create a direct nuclear laser. ... Wouldn't that basically be a fission pumped version of the normal lasers we use these days in CoaDE?
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 19, 2017 18:56:52 GMT
You know, with how much thermal energy is being output, I wonder how easy it would be to make this system use a two-stage cooling loop, with there being a thermocouple in between the two loops to put some of that wasted thermal energy to use. Possibly also having the outer loop run a turboelectric set-up for even more efficiency?
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 19, 2017 3:45:45 GMT
once i knew i could do this i made this what is this and this tho As far as I can tell, it's a space suit model used as a black box power generator with attached remote control, radiator, and 16mm "internal" heavy machine gun autocannon. I guess it's meant to model an astronaut with a big-ass gun?
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 18, 2017 17:47:00 GMT
kaiserwilhelm Kinder einer Toten Erde Much the same as normal CoaDE, except that you have access to multi-gun turrets ala WWI and WWII battleship turrets, and the main faction is a send-off of the WWI German Empire, with the USTA being replaced either by Space Commies or Space Nazis. I don't really recall what your big thing was, so I just went with what little I recalled and your username.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 16, 2017 8:53:42 GMT
I've stated this before, but our rocketships have a NTR burn time measured in minutes, sometimes under 5 minutes. Coking builds up, send in cleaning robot, need deceleration burn, remove cleaning robot. Plus, our rocket nozzles will likely be plated in Amorphous Carbon (thermal conductivity, melting resistance)... So carbon buildup wouldn't even be a big issue, imho. The way I understand it is that coking affects the reactor core's uranium rods by changing their thermal conductivity. This means that the hot uranium is not being cooled effectively by the propellant flow, and this causes a meltdown. Soot deposits on the nozzle is of minor consequence. And considering that it's entirely plausible that the graphene coated fuel rods that are standard to my NTR designs are always running much hotter than the melting point of just about anything that could be deposited on the fuel rods, that's much less of a problem for my reactors I suspect.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 16, 2017 8:53:18 GMT
With regards to apophys Descendants of a Dead WorldMassively more min-maxing of reactors, all of which also are forced to obey the fact that you need a lot more than a few grams of U-233 to achieve fission. Also, lasers have stupendous range, missiles take orbital mechanics into account when trying to hit the target, and RCS is a thing. Amongst other things
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on May 15, 2017 17:09:02 GMT
Unless, of course, you happen to like getting halfway decent performance out of your engines, at which point RP-1 is good enough. Of course, if you don't mind mods, then icosane is the way to go. Isn't RP-1 hydrocarbon? The problem of them is coking, as stated in the thread's name. ... fair enough.
|
|