|
|
Post by ross128 on Oct 19, 2016 4:10:55 GMT
I do wish we could have actual MIRV warheads instead of having to put launchers on drones. A small explosive charge with the warheads clustered around it would be a lot cheaper than a set of launchers, a reactor to run them, and radiators to cool them both.
The MIRV drones are kind of cool to watch in action though, they almost look like dive bombers in space.
|
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Oct 19, 2016 6:24:36 GMT
My two sub-kilogram designs. I would probably use the uranium in a missile and the plutonium in a coilgun (since the armature materials are so expensive, you can save money by using a lighter, more expensive bomb and reducing the armature mass). But these really get hit hard by the weight of the remote control; the smallest I have actually used thus far is 1.54kg, 541t yield.   Wait... reproducing the top one without DT fuel drops the yield by like a factor of 10, despite that being a minor component of the output energy. Is there a physics bug lurking here? |
|
|
|
Post by blothorn on Oct 19, 2016 12:24:39 GMT
No, that is how fusion-boosted nukes work: the high-energy neutrons produced by fusion can be very effective at triggering fission (and the additional fissions produced then chain-react). Thus, even very small amounts of fusion fuel can dramatically improve the efficiency of fission.
|
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Oct 19, 2016 22:06:07 GMT
Has anyone tried to make neutron bombs as anti-nuke warhead, to cause other nukes to fizzle with neutron flux?
|
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Oct 19, 2016 22:47:32 GMT
Has anyone tried to make neutron bombs as anti-nuke warhead, to cause other nukes to fizzle with neutron flux? I dint think that's possible in the game engine |
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Oct 19, 2016 23:20:47 GMT
A neutron bomb is a nuke optimised to emit as many neutrons as possible, while conventional nukes are optimised to reflect back as many neutrons as possible for better efficiency.
So a neutron bomb is definitely possible with the game engine. The question is, is an efficient neutron bomb possible?
To start with, is the neutron radiation of a nuke indicated somewhere?
|
|
|
|
Post by nivik on Oct 20, 2016 14:41:17 GMT
A neutron bomb is a nuke optimised to emit as many neutrons as possible, while conventional nukes are optimised to reflect back as many neutrons as possible for better efficiency. So a neutron bomb is definitely possible with the game engine. The question is, is an efficient neutron bomb possible? To start with, is the neutron radiation of a nuke indicated somewhere? I think the bigger issue is that there probably isn't separate handling of neutron effects: nuclear weapons are treated like big flashbulbs that dump thermal energy into things. That said, nukes can be used to knock out missiles and payloads via thermal effects. |
|
|
|
Post by redparadize on Oct 20, 2016 15:33:31 GMT
I do wish we could have actual MIRV warheads instead of having to put launchers on drones. A small explosive charge with the warheads clustered around it would be a lot cheaper than a set of launchers, a reactor to run them, and radiators to cool them both. The MIRV drones are kind of cool to watch in action though, they almost look like dive bombers in space. I have something like that. Its a drone that lunch low dv nuclear missile. Really effective. |
|
|
|
Post by nerd1000 on Oct 21, 2016 2:50:08 GMT
Has anyone tried to make neutron bombs as anti-nuke warhead, to cause other nukes to fizzle with neutron flux? I dint think that's possible in the game engine The tutorials do mention this as an issue, however it is apparently fairly easy to build a boosted fission warhead that is almost invulnerable to such things. |
|
hal
New Member
Posts: 34 
|
Post by hal on Oct 21, 2016 4:29:33 GMT
I dint think that's possible in the game engine The tutorials do mention this as an issue, however it is apparently fairly easy to build a boosted fission warhead that is almost invulnerable to such things. The tutorial doesn't specify that it occurs explicitly due to neutrons. Nuclear weapons are heavily reliant on precise and careful detonation of their explosive shells at multiple points, so if the explosive shell is detonated by the thermal effect of a nuclear detonation it is unlikely for the nuke in question to perform properly. |
|
hal
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by hal on Oct 23, 2016 5:22:48 GMT
Not really a pocket nuke, but a cheap one:  |
|
|
|
Post by nerd1000 on Oct 23, 2016 9:14:36 GMT
Not really a pocket nuke, but a cheap one: Depleted uranium as fissile material? What magic is this? |
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on Oct 23, 2016 11:12:08 GMT
Hmmm some interesting Science! with a 3 kt pocketnuke and a 26cm diameter 40cm thick aluminium (50~60kg IIRC) rad shield on top.
It seems to generate alot of spalling and fragments on the rear armor in the usual stock ships armor lay outs.
Entry hole seems like the usual you expect with a big EFP.
I wonder if the Al pill is shattered into a tighly constrained mass or the velocity is low enough that it shatters wildly what it impacts.
My basic targets are the stock silo ships without an engine. What you usually see on em is that impacts are clustered around the big radiator section taking out the methane tanks directly behind em.
During this test the impacts were in the usual location but the spalling was from about 30 degrees rearward to about 70ish degrees forward. It took out basically everything inside except the forward most crew section and the nuke reactor.
|
|
|
|
Post by nerd1000 on Oct 23, 2016 13:33:55 GMT
Hmmm some interesting Science! with a 3 kt pocketnuke and a 26cm diameter 40cm thick aluminium (50~60kg IIRC) rad shield on top. It seems to generate alot of spalling and fragments on the rear armor in the usual stock ships armor lay outs. Entry hole seems like the usual you expect with a big EFP. I wonder if the Al pill is shattered into a tighly constrained mass or the velocity is low enough that it shatters wildly what it impacts. My basic targets are the stock silo ships without an engine. What you usually see on em is that impacts are clustered around the big radiator section taking out the methane tanks directly behind em. During this test the impacts were in the usual location but the spalling was from about 30 degrees rearward to about 70ish degrees forward. It took out basically everything inside except the forward most crew section and the nuke reactor. Did you use more than one missile at the same time? I've had that effect happen with regular, non-efp nukes when (due to the proxy fuse bug) the first missiles in a swarm hit the enemy ship and punch a hole in the side, allowing a subsequent missile to fly through the hole and explode inside the ship. |
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on Oct 23, 2016 16:22:46 GMT
Perhaps, but the fusing has a 125m standoff. I was also watching from the missiles pov and they seemed to be detonating properly. I make sure to disable the friendly ship minimum range. ( since missiles are ships ).
It sure didnt have the telltale signs of unfused missile impacts. The missile body I used for these tests goes straight through without any payload, it has a 1cm iron armor ring over the engines to pull the CoG back.
Nukes going off inside a ship should heat it far more than what was observed.
|
|
