|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Sept 1, 2017 20:57:43 GMT
I bet all your ships look like dumb cylinders too. Get a load of this guy. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Sept 1, 2017 21:25:10 GMT
I doubt a gun like Rift's would actually work. The game only requires reinforcement to go outward, and it's made of aerogel, no less. There is a point in engine design where the throat can be so small that increased chamber thickness stops actually reducing stress, and I figure guns should but don't account for a similar problem. The way the force transmits between the massive density differential between the two materials would probably shear them away from each other or something [citation needed]. Don't use diamond either, it's not isotropic (afaik) and manufacturing it with the right crystal alignment to withstand beam deflection stress may not be reasonable, if it's even possible. Also, propelling nukes at such high accelerations may detonate the explosives prematurely and/or require a very structurally reinforced munition (remember, structural integrity for ships, including those of the payload type, isn't accounted for), ruining the gun's velocity to the point where a conventional gun would work better anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Sept 1, 2017 21:27:57 GMT
I doubt a gun like Rift's would actually work. The game only requires reinforcement to go outward, and it's made of aerogel, no less. There is a point in engine design where the throat can be so small that increased chamber thickness stops actually reducing stress, and I figure guns should but don't account for a similar problem. The way the force transmits between the massive density differential between the two materials would probably shear them away from each other or something [citation needed]. Don't use diamond either, it's not isotropic and manufacturing it with the right crystal alignment to withstand beam deflection stress may not be reasonable, if it's even possible. Also, propelling nukes at such high accelerations will probably detonate them prematurely, no? I can't speak to rocket nozzles but nukes tend to not explode unless you detonate them, if you have a contact fuze they might go off, maybe, if you didn't accout for inital acceleration then you deserve what happens. tl:dr the nuke might get broken but won't explode (fully) |
|
|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Sept 1, 2017 21:32:07 GMT
You don't make a nuclear railgun to be efficient, you make one so you can say you have a nuclear railgun. You guys don't understand the first thing about style.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Sept 1, 2017 21:35:55 GMT
I doubt a gun like Rift's would actually work. The game only requires reinforcement to go outward, and it's made of aerogel, no less. There is a point in engine design where the throat can be so small that increased chamber thickness stops actually reducing stress, and I figure guns should but don't account for a similar problem. The way the force transmits between the massive density differential between the two materials would probably shear them away from each other or something [citation needed]. Don't use diamond either, it's not isotropic (afaik) and manufacturing it with the right crystal alignment to withstand beam deflection stress may not be reasonable, if it's even possible. Also, propelling nukes at such high accelerations will may detonate the explosives prematurely and/or require a very structurally reinforced munition (remember, structural integrity for ships, including those of the payload type, isn't accounted for), ruining the gun's velocity to the point where a conventional gun would work better anyway. Supercriticallity would only occur if all explosive lenses implode the fissile core at the same time. Worst that can happen is that the chemical explosive explodes |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Sept 1, 2017 21:42:39 GMT
I doubt a gun like Rift's would actually work. The game only requires reinforcement to go outward, and it's made of aerogel, no less. There is a point in engine design where the throat can be so small that increased chamber thickness stops actually reducing stress, and I figure guns should but don't account for a similar problem. The way the force transmits between the massive density differential between the two materials would probably shear them away from each other or something [citation needed]. Don't use diamond either, it's not isotropic (afaik) and manufacturing it with the right crystal alignment to withstand beam deflection stress may not be reasonable, if it's even possible. Also, propelling nukes at such high accelerations will may detonate the explosives prematurely and/or require a very structurally reinforced munition (remember, structural integrity for ships, including those of the payload type, isn't accounted for), ruining the gun's velocity to the point where a conventional gun would work better anyway. Supercriticallity would only occur if all explosive lenses implode the fissile core at the same time. Worst that can happen is that the chemical explosive explodes full yield supercriticallity is unlikely if the warhead is destroyed by weapons fire (it could happen, maybe, like 1 in 1 followed by as many zeros as you want + 1) however the core may under go partial fission at vastly reduced yield |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Sept 1, 2017 21:45:55 GMT
Yes, the explosives is what I meant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Sept 1, 2017 21:50:37 GMT
Supercriticallity would only occur if all explosive lenses implode the fissile core at the same time. Worst that can happen is that the chemical explosive explodes full yield supercriticallity is unlikely if the warhead is destroyed by weapons fire (it could happen, maybe, like 1 in 1 followed by as many zeros as you want + 1) however the core may under go partial fission at vastly reduced yield Wouldn't the core just get destroyed if the explosive force isn't evenly distributed? |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Sept 1, 2017 22:44:29 GMT
full yield supercriticallity is unlikely if the warhead is destroyed by weapons fire (it could happen, maybe, like 1 in 1 followed by as many zeros as you want + 1) however the core may under go partial fission at vastly reduced yield Wouldn't the core just get destroyed if the explosive force isn't evenly distributed? yes, which might lead to a clump of Uranium getting crtical mass |
|
|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Sept 1, 2017 22:45:27 GMT
Since you guys didn't like my railgun design and it didn't kill gunboats fast enough, I made a more optimized design. It's an autocannon that can fire 4 450t nuclear cartridges per second, and is still fairly light and spammable. I put 24 of those on a ship that goes fast, resulting in a rate of fire of ~5,800 RPM. Cannon, bullet and ship designs: Combat test: First comes one salvo of flak missiles. They don't live long when faced with the nuclear sprayhose though.  Next is time for the actual combat. Doing a close approach, sending some nukes downrange like there's no tomorrow.  The salvo hits, and the gunship is instantly cooked both inside and out. It looks like a miniature sun from this far.  Cooked insides:  |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Sept 1, 2017 22:50:25 GMT
Wouldn't the core just get destroyed if the explosive force isn't evenly distributed? yes, which might lead to a clump of Uranium getting crtical mass You need a certain weight and density to reach supercriticallity. If the explosiin starts on one side and moves to the other no major compression would occur. If it was that easy to achieve a nuclear, even a small one then wouldn't nearly everyone who tries have them? It took the Manhattan project many years until they could produce the first nuclear bomb. |
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Sept 2, 2017 0:21:22 GMT
Since you guys didn't like my railgun design and it didn't kill gunboats fast enough, I made a more optimized design. It's an autocannon that can fire 4 450t nuclear cartridges per second, and is still fairly light and spammable. I put 24 of those on a ship that goes fast, resulting in a rate of fire of ~5,800 RPM. Cannon, bullet and ship designs: Combat test: First comes one salvo of flak missiles. They don't live long when faced with the nuclear sprayhose though. Next is time for the actual combat. Doing a close approach, sending some nukes downrange like there's no tomorrow. The salvo hits, and the gunship is instantly cooked both inside and out. It looks like a miniature sun from this far. Cooked insides: These are fun and effective. I prefer a smaller 112mm 105t cannon however. Cheaper and able to spam even more mini-nukes. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Sept 2, 2017 0:26:14 GMT
yes, which might lead to a clump of Uranium getting crtical mass You need a certain weight and density to reach supercriticallity. If the explosiin starts on one side and moves to the other no major compression would occur. If it was that easy to achieve a nuclear, even a small one then wouldn't nearly everyone who tries have them? It took the Manhattan project many years until they could produce the first nuclear bomb. it's called a fizzile, it's why the gun type Thin man plutonium bomb would not work, it's what happened at Chernobly |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Sept 3, 2017 5:44:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Sept 3, 2017 6:04:04 GMT
Efficiency of an coolant is determined by if apophys uses it in his reactors. |
|
