|
Post by skitsykitsy on May 20, 2017 5:22:06 GMT
Why? Because they obliterate reality itself. ... They crash the game. Behold. My stupidest design ever. Given that it got worse when I tried to make them more accurate by adding more engines, it's safe to say that those decane NTRs (which guzzle fuel quickly to produce hideous thrust) are the problem. That acceleration. How effective are they as weapons? I have no idea, they've never actually hit anything I fired them at! Before the extra NTRs turned these into a guaranteed crash, it never hit even a stationary Gunship. I just then managed to score a kill on a Cargo Station by firing a swarm of twenty and got one single impact on the exposed crew compartment. Is it me or is there a serious problem with the targeting for faster missiles? Does anyone use pure KKVs and see good results from them? Can you honestly say there's any reason to not add a little explosive flak? By the way, these were originally supposed to be giant explosive-formed penetrator missiles, but I decided to see if I could make giant KKVs instead. It's not an optimized design, its "warhead" is just a chunk of osmium armor, I was messing around and find it amusing that I made a missile that can kill the game instantly but can't hit anything. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on May 20, 2017 11:27:40 GMT
Why? Because they obliterate reality itself. ... They crash the game. Behold. My stupidest design ever. Given that it got worse when I tried to make them more accurate by adding more engines, it's safe to say that those decane NTRs (which guzzle fuel quickly to produce hideous thrust) are the problem. That acceleration. How effective are they as weapons? I have no idea, they've never actually hit anything I fired them at! Before the extra NTRs turned these into a guaranteed crash, it never hit even a stationary Gunship. I just then managed to score a kill on a Cargo Station by firing a swarm of twenty and got one single impact on the exposed crew compartment. Is it me or is there a serious problem with the targeting for faster missiles? Does anyone use pure KKVs and see good results from them? Can you honestly say there's any reason to not add a little explosive flak? By the way, these were originally supposed to be giant explosive-formed penetrator missiles, but I decided to see if I could make giant KKVs instead. It's not an optimized design, its "warhead" is just a chunk of osmium armor, I was messing around and find it amusing that I made a missile that can kill the game instantly but can't hit anything. Are the engines gimbaled? because that is usually the problem with missing high thrust missiles I find, every instant that the gimbals do not point in the right direction with a gimbal they are still accelerating and thereby reducing your accuracy rather than increasing it, other than that I'd assume that there is enough mass to kill anything without the osmium rods being there but that's just an inefficiency and not something that would cause it to miss.
|
|
|
Post by skitsykitsy on May 20, 2017 13:17:48 GMT
Ah, yep, they were gimballed, and you could see how it oscillates pretty badly as a result. I was over-estimating its ability to correct for its own thrust. I swapped in a non-gimballed NTR and some weaker chemical rockets. Then added some radiators for more of a cross-section. It's surprisingly effective now, if it hits just right.
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on May 20, 2017 13:20:04 GMT
Ah, yep, they were gimballed, and you could see how it oscillates pretty badly as a result. I was over-estimating its ability to correct for its own thrust. I swapped in a non-gimballed NTR and some weaker chemical rockets. Then added some radiators for more of a cross-section. It's surprisingly effective now, if it hits just right. Nice, I'm glad I could help out.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on May 20, 2017 14:37:05 GMT
big missiles, yes?, good, one 18.4Mt Nuclear coming right up
|
|
|
Post by goduranus on May 20, 2017 15:07:21 GMT
the key to scoring direct hits with missiles is to lower their gimbal range to less than 5 degrees. This is because a high gimbal angle generates a sideways acceleration that the missile wants to cancel out by turning to one side.
If you draw a diagram you'll see that a desired left turn, for example, is actually accomplished by accelerating the missile to the right, where the missile will want a even bigger turn to the left to compensate, creating a feedback loop up until the missile's deviation from the ideal heading is near its gimbal angle.
The solution seems to be to make the gimbal's sideways thrust less significant compared to forwards thrust, so that thre heading adjustment for the forward movement overwhelms the heading adjustment for sideways movement.
Some one with better math is needed to calculate the ideal gimbal angle to overcome this affect I described. From experience it seems to be dependent on the acceleration of the vehicle involved, with lower gimbal angle restrictions for a higher acceleration vehicle. This is an especial problem for kinetic missiles, where the acceleration in terminal stage is often huge, a tiny angle is needed to keep them steady.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on May 20, 2017 15:12:44 GMT
A lot of cost is held in the 1000kg of Np-237 in the bomb
|
|
|
Post by deskjetser on May 20, 2017 16:05:29 GMT
Enderminion you're doing it right when your "missile" is more massive than the fleet you're firing it at.
|
|
|
Post by Owlfeathers on May 20, 2017 16:10:11 GMT
Enderminion you're doing it right when your missile is more massive than the fleet you're firing it at. That's not a missile; it's a capship with a nuke in it.
|
|
|
Post by deskjetser on May 20, 2017 16:15:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on May 20, 2017 16:39:39 GMT
Enderminion you're doing it right when your missile is more massive than the fleet you're firing it at. That's not a missile; it's a capship with a nuke in it. doesn't help when the nuke is a kiloton and a half in mass.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on May 20, 2017 16:46:16 GMT
I've defied reality too, by using a fusion sport spacecraft as a missile against a fusion liner.
Crashed.
|
|
|
Post by skitsykitsy on May 21, 2017 0:40:56 GMT
A lot of cost is held in the 1000kg of Np-237 in the bomb Oh wow. How big is the craft that LAUNCHES that thing?!
|
|
|
Post by skitsykitsy on May 21, 2017 0:55:34 GMT
Interestingly, when I modified it to be more of a NEFP (still my favorite thing to make even though they don't truly work), it turned out to be one of the most effective on a per-missile basis that I've made. Accelerating the missile to a fast enough speed (maybe even going retrograde to the target and aiming for a high intercept relative velocity) and detonating it after enough acceleration made for a nasty impact. It had some weird effects that I'll need to screenshot for you all. This is sort of an experiment in really fast, big missiles (110gs accel. is around about the limit before it constantly crashes the game). As a kinetic kill around 300t: So far, this fast missile has started combat inside the target craft. It's gouged clean through a stock gunship and come out the other side. Vaporized itself on a 10cm Boron armored space-station. Second hit cleanly snapped it in two. Both hits were pretty. As a NEFP: Gored a stock gunship with flak of various densities/sizes but at close range. Struck the space-station and for ~20 seconds after there were constant sparks and spalling, and small cylinders (could be the flak slowed down/cooled?) were visible embedded in the armor - I believe this was the flak rebounding inside the armor, was almost always a guaranteed crew-kill. Detonating without allowing it to dump its 6km/s delta-v in acceleration resulted in slow/weak flak showers. After it accelerates, much faster and damaging. Implies to me that the best way to make use of a "EFP" weapon is to accelerate it as hard and fast as possible with as ~100g missile and pop it before counter-missile fire can knock it off course. The nuke won't accelerate the flak, but the missile itself can probably get stupidly fast in lieu of that. Next step is to try and make a missile with this acceleration but 10+km/s delta-v and see how hard it hits I guess.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 21, 2017 12:30:57 GMT
Why? Because they obliterate reality itself. ... They crash the game. Behold. My stupidest design ever. Given that it got worse when I tried to make them more accurate by adding more engines, it's safe to say that those decane NTRs (which guzzle fuel quickly to produce hideous thrust) are the problem. That acceleration. How effective are they as weapons? I have no idea, they've never actually hit anything I fired them at! Before the extra NTRs turned these into a guaranteed crash, it never hit even a stationary Gunship. I just then managed to score a kill on a Cargo Station by firing a swarm of twenty and got one single impact on the exposed crew compartment. Is it me or is there a serious problem with the targeting for faster missiles? Does anyone use pure KKVs and see good results from them? Can you honestly say there's any reason to not add a little explosive flak? By the way, these were originally supposed to be giant explosive-formed penetrator missiles, but I decided to see if I could make giant KKVs instead. It's not an optimized design, its "warhead" is just a chunk of osmium armor, I was messing around and find it amusing that I made a missile that can kill the game instantly but can't hit anything. No wonder it doesn't hit.....not enough burn time for even 1 180 degree turn.
|
|