|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Oct 31, 2018 20:15:35 GMT
How? Heres a screen shot of two ships, one with three 1gw lasers with 75cm apertures, the other with thirty 100mw lasers with 50cm apertures. Both sets of turrets armored with 5cm of amorphous carbon. The 100mw lasers killed twenty turrets in the time it took the 1gw lasers to kill 16. I don't know why your results are different than mine. My 1 GW lasers destroyed 107 turrets in the time that the 100 MW lasers destroyed
22 turrets. After the ship with 100 MW lasers lost about 80 turrets it turned its nose away. Regardless, its the maneuver did nothing but worsen its already bad situation. So the outcome was not much different. It is worth noting that the ship equipped with the 100 MW lasers is about 12.5% heavier, 30 meters longer, and requires double the crew. Moreover, the ship with 1 GW lasers has nearly 3 times the turrets it needs whereas the 100 MW laser ship only has 16.7% more turrets than it needs. (I could not fit any more)
Your laser stars seem to be quite far from optimal. For reference, here's one of mine with a similar design: There's a good few of those in this thread: childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/thread/3376/challenge-750-ton-wonders
|
|
|
Post by tepidbread on Oct 31, 2018 21:53:48 GMT
I don't know why your results are different than mine. My 1 GW lasers destroyed 107 turrets in the time that the 100 MW lasers destroyed
22 turrets. After the ship with 100 MW lasers lost about 80 turrets it turned its nose away. Regardless, its the maneuver did nothing but worsen its already bad situation. So the outcome was not much different. It is worth noting that the ship equipped with the 100 MW lasers is about 12.5% heavier, 30 meters longer, and requires double the crew. Moreover, the ship with 1 GW lasers has nearly 3 times the turrets it needs whereas the 100 MW laser ship only has 16.7% more turrets than it needs. (I could not fit any more)
Your laser stars seem to be quite far from optimal. For reference, here's one of mine with a similar design: There's a good few of those in this thread: childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/thread/3376/challenge-750-ton-wondersNow that is a glass cannon! I wanted a bit more armor than that.
|
|
|
Post by airc777 on Oct 31, 2018 22:30:35 GMT
I'd need to build lighter reactors before I could build a craft that light, my current most watts per kilogram is also my smallest reactor, my 10gw reactors are about 1/3rd as efficient. Cool stuff though.
|
|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Oct 31, 2018 23:37:08 GMT
Now that is a glass cannon! I wanted a bit more armor than that. Armor doesn't do much when you're fighting at 10 Mm. The MPD is enough armor to protect you from kinetics, and lasers should handle everything else. I'd need to build lighter reactors before I could build a craft that light, my current most watts per kilogram is also my smallest reactor, my 10gw reactors are about 1/3rd as efficient. Cool stuff though. Apophys has you covered: childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/thread/1624/ae-catalog-standard-modulesFor reference, here's the reactor my laserstar used: The reactors seem to be very close to the global optimum, so I just use all AE reactors these days. It's not worth the trouble to try to get past those in efficiency.
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Nov 1, 2018 15:36:30 GMT
I'd need to build lighter reactors before I could build a craft that light, my current most watts per kilogram is also my smallest reactor, my 10gw reactors are about 1/3rd as efficient. Cool stuff though.
Your reactor also doesn't seem physical being so far below critical mass.
|
|
|
Post by doctorsquared on Nov 3, 2018 21:27:27 GMT
I've been tinkering with my 1kg Autocannon design and applying some of the lessons learned from my ultralight ~500g total mass drone gun design. - Replaced the original chromium vanadium steel barrel with one made of high-grade carbon fiber epoxy composite to save weight.
- Switched barrel armor from diamond to boron nitride for improved heat transfer
- Changed the propellant from nitrocelluose to octogen to increase weapon efficiency.
End result reduced a 13 ton gun down to 3.64 tons.
|
|
|
Post by AdmiralObvious on Nov 4, 2018 3:09:36 GMT
I've been tinkering with my 1kg Autocannon design and applying some of the lessons learned from my ultralight ~500g total mass drone gun design. - Replaced the original chromium vanadium steel barrel with one made of high-grade carbon fiber epoxy composite to save weight.
- Switched barrel armor from diamond to boron nitride for improved heat transfer
- Changed the propellant from nitrocelluose to octogen to increase weapon efficiency.
End result reduced a 13 ton gun down to 3.64 tons.
I'm pretty sure carbon fiber epoxy is a "future tech" mod, but nonetheless, a good improvement. One question though, why not use a harder projectile. Iron is nice and all, but it shatters pretty easy against any actually tough bulkhead armor.
|
|
|
Post by Apotheon on Nov 4, 2018 15:00:04 GMT
Question: what's the small block behind the bullet and propellant in the blueprint of the gun?
Also, what's barrel armour for? I don't have any on my guns, I just use one material for the entire barrel. Also, regarding hardness, I've found that's not always necessary. At least, I've been able to use Tungsten instead of Osmium and could probably use something softer still.
|
|
|
Post by airc777 on Nov 4, 2018 15:45:06 GMT
Question: what's the small block behind the bullet and propellant in the blueprint of the gun? Also, what's barrel armour for? I don't have any on my guns, I just use one material for the entire barrel. Also, regarding hardness, I've found that's not always necessary. At least, I've been able to use Tungsten instead of Osmium and could probably use something softer still. Several things you could do with barrel armor. You can make the barrel itself out of vanadium chromium steel the minimum possible thickness to not rupture due to pressure and then add a uhmwpe fiber barrel jacket until the barrel doesn't deflect due to stress. Uhmwpe fiber has a higher strength to weight ratio so it will result in a lighter (although much thicker) barrel, you can keep adding barrel armor thickness to make the barrel more rigid and improve accuracy. You could also make the barrel out of VCS and then make the barrel armor out of diamond which has the highest thermal diffusivity, which will make the gun radiate heat faster, which will intern make the gun fire longer before overheating or not overheat at all. Reinforced carbon carbon is also a good material if diamond is making your barrel shatter due to thermal expansion stress or uhmwpe fiber is making your turret to large. Some examples:
|
|
|
Post by AdmiralObvious on Nov 4, 2018 18:46:38 GMT
Question: what's the small block behind the bullet and propellant in the blueprint of the gun? Also, what's barrel armour for? I don't have any on my guns, I just use one material for the entire barrel. Also, regarding hardness, I've found that's not always necessary. At least, I've been able to use Tungsten instead of Osmium and could probably use something softer still. I'm pretty sure the small block is the reinforcement of the barrel. It gets bigger if you use larger grains of propellant, or if you use extremely small grains. You should notice that the barrel base gets bigger and smaller based on the grain size. Tungsten is a perfectly fine projectile. Iron borders on not being useful enough, unless you actually want the round to shatter. Granted a few months ago I asked for a "riot gun" which shot rubber. It was surprisingly effective.
|
|
|
Post by airc777 on Nov 4, 2018 19:07:50 GMT
Question: what's the small block behind the bullet and propellant in the blueprint of the gun? Also, what's barrel armour for? I don't have any on my guns, I just use one material for the entire barrel. Also, regarding hardness, I've found that's not always necessary. At least, I've been able to use Tungsten instead of Osmium and could probably use something softer still. I'm pretty sure the small block is the reinforcement of the barrel. It gets bigger if you use larger grains of propellant, or if you use extremely small grains. You should notice that the barrel base gets bigger and smaller based on the grain size. Oh, the 'bolt head'. It rotates into place and locks to contain the barrels pressure. They look like this, this ones from an Armalite pattern rifle. The seven studs sticking out around the face of the bolt head are the locking lugs that interface with the barrel.
Edit: 'Breech block' is the more technical term, but I rarely hear it used outside of the context of artillery and tanks and warships.
Additional edit: Conventional Guns as depicted by the game play mechanics are all technically 'electric machine guns', sometimes really big electric machine guns but all still electric machine guns. I'm not completely certain which is the more accurate term in the given context, but I sure it's just semantics and not a functional difference.
|
|
|
Post by linkxsc on Nov 4, 2018 19:26:10 GMT
I get that it's the breech block. but in most cases, a larger grain size means lower peak pressure (and thus needing a smaller block... but it doesn't seem to have an effect on the gun's weight, so it doesn't matter much)
You can probably get a noticeable performance jump, switching from firing coins to firing rods.
Currently your weapon is firing a coin ~8cm in diameter, and 1cm thick. The contact area of the shot is ~50cm2. Thats a pretty large area of the target's armor resisting your shot penetrating.
Instead you can probably make a round ~2cm in diameter and like 15-20cm long. Contact area is then only ~3cm2. 1/16th the amount of armor is available to try and resist penetration.
There's a few options to do this. 1 easy one is to just make a "radiation shield" use it as the basis for a projectile, and just shoot those out of the gun. Another is to make a smaller rad shield, load it into the ammo design, and then add armor to it to make up the bulk of it. Can add a spacer to the nose when doing this to give it a pointed nose. But in practice I haven't noticed better penetration from having a sharp nose on my projectiles. Bug warning. last I messed around with it heavily, there was a bug where with a thin enough rad shield core for a round, you could add armor in a broken manner where for the same total mass, the projectile was denser.
|
|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Nov 4, 2018 20:07:45 GMT
I've been tinkering with my 1kg Autocannon design and applying some of the lessons learned from my ultralight ~500g total mass drone gun design. - Replaced the original chromium vanadium steel barrel with one made of high-grade carbon fiber epoxy composite to save weight.
- Switched barrel armor from diamond to boron nitride for improved heat transfer
- Changed the propellant from nitrocelluose to octogen to increase weapon efficiency.
End result reduced a 13 ton gun down to 3.64 tons.
Your gun has a lot of excess mass in the loader and momentum wheels. Two of these will be significantly lighter than one of yours, while having identical rate of fire: Coilguns are also quite good at lower velocities, and they naturally fire needle rounds which are far better at penetrating armor: Two guns with a reactor and radiators have 6x the fire rate for roughly twice the mass:
|
|
|
Post by airc777 on Nov 4, 2018 20:48:26 GMT
One 50 MW reactor could drive ten or more of those 50 MW non capacitor coilguns. The loaders only draw 10 KW of power, the guns don't draw 50 MW at all times because they aren't filling capacitors. You should be able to half the size of the reactor. Electric actuators should greatly reduce the power draw of aiming the turrets so they can all turn and shoot at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Nov 4, 2018 21:30:15 GMT
One 50 MW reactor could drive ten or more of those 50 MW non capacitor coilguns. The loaders only draw 10 KW of power, the guns don't draw 50 MW at all times because they aren't filling capacitors. You should be able to half the size of the reactor. Electric actuators should greatly reduce the power draw of aiming the turrets so they can all turn and shoot at the same time. That does not work since the gun fires every frame, and hence draws 50 MW constantly. If I drop reload speed by a factor of 10, I can support 10 guns with one 50 MW reactor, which is interesting. I never thought the game would take that into account, since having a faster loader than firing time allows you to shoot at maximum firerate without increasing your power draw, effectively allowing efficiencies above 100%.
|
|