|
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 3, 2016 19:06:36 GMT
So... from what I gather, orion drive is going to arrive sooner or later and I think its not a bad idea to start a thread about it. Lucky for us that probably the only realistic space battleship design ever done is an orion driven ship, I'm speaking of course about this: There is some pretty good info on it here if you haven't seen it already (I assume most of you have) It includes everything you can hope for - big guns , hypersonic shuttles , 90 missiles and hundreds of Casaba howitzers, with the notable exception of lasers that I assume were too SciFi for that time. You will notice a few things that we currently lack in the game - turrets that are hidden behind sliding covers. The same turrets are arranged radially but can fire forward. So to start with the questions... What I don't see on the model and plans are radiators. Which is not surprising since nothing on it looks particullary power hungry. If you have to arm it with lasers however this changes very fast. What do you imagine a good placement for radiators could be in this situation? Do you think something completely hidden behind the plate or a design with deployable radiators that are just unusable during acceleration? Combination of both perhaps ? How vulnerable are going to be the shock absorbers to damage ? I can only guess a lot less than the normal engines but a lot more than I would like... but this is pure speculation.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 3, 2016 19:11:51 GMT
via mobile
Post by Durandal on Nov 3, 2016 19:11:51 GMT
So... from what I gather, orion drive is going to arrive sooner or later and I think its not a bad idea to start a thread about it. Lucky for us that probably the only realistic space battleship design ever done is an orion driven ship, I'm speaking of course about this: There is some pretty good info on it here if you haven't seen it already (I assume most of you have) It includes everything you can hope for - big guns , hypersonic shuttles , 90 missiles and hundreds of Casaba howitzers, with the notable exception of lasers that I assume were too SciFi for that time. You will notice a few things that we currently lack in the game - turrets that are hidden behind sliding covers. The same turrets are arranged radially but can fire forward. So to start with the questions... What I don't see on the model and plans are radiators. Which is not surprising since nothing on it looks particullary power hungry. If you have to arm it with lasers however this changes very fast. What do you imagine a good placement for radiators could be in this situation? Do you think something completely hidden behind the plate or a design with deployable radiators that are just unusable during acceleration? Combination of both perhaps ? How vulnerable are going to be the shock absorbers to damage ? I can only guess a lot less than the normal engines but a lot more than I would like... but this is pure speculation. I was thinking about this yesterday (while contemplating how to modify timed flak shells for a tactical makeshift Orion drive). There's a video on the link you posted that has retractable shutters that cover up the pistons in combat. Other than that, perhaps they could be armored or constructed out of damage resistant materials? I'd imagine an unplanned close range nuke impact would play hell with them, let alone hypervelocity slugs. As for radiators, I would think they would have to be placed on the brick or command section. Depending on the degrees of expansion from the plasma cone they may be protected by the pusher plate.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 3, 2016 19:24:44 GMT
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 3, 2016 19:24:44 GMT
Do you think attacking with the plate forward is going to be a viable tactic ?
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Nov 3, 2016 19:50:24 GMT
Do you think attacking with the plate forward is going to be a viable tactic ? In other fiction that I've read that has been suggested as a viable tactic. It would depend on how robust the pusher plate is, along with how much extra mass you're wanting to pack in to armor it. Im not sure how hyper-KE slugs might or might not cause problems with the pusher plate, but I'd imagine a lucky strike against the bomb pump wouldn't be a good thing. That said, protecting your hI'll with a few inches of tungtston/osmium/denseassshit would be better than relying on graphite aerogel and boron.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 3, 2016 19:56:48 GMT
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 3, 2016 19:56:48 GMT
This was always one of my first assumptions , that the whole thing is going to be probably a ot more dense as a complete design then what we currently use.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 3, 2016 22:24:28 GMT
Post by dpidz0r on Nov 3, 2016 22:24:28 GMT
Do you think attacking with the plate forward is going to be a viable tactic ? Probably as viable as anything else. Especially if you start chucking sacrificial bomb pumped x-ray lasers out the back to take advantage of each detonation, it'd basically be your main weapon: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_ExcaliburThough I'd suppose the protection provided by the plate would depend on what's shooting at you. That might leave some interesting tactical options though, e.g. you could turn around and present the plate to a wave of incoming nukes, then rotate to present a whipple shield covered main body if they open up with hyperkinetic projectiles.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 1:20:31 GMT
Post by Rocket Witch on Nov 4, 2016 1:20:31 GMT
Wouldn't using the plate as armour and exposing it to the kind of damage that kinetic penetrators inflict (lots of little pinpricks instead of a uniform blast) harm its ability to function as propulsion? If bits are chipped and burnt away and there's a bunch of extra matter attached to it in the form of partial penetrations, it'd take the stress of its intended operation a lot less well, I think.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 1:30:58 GMT
Post by jonen on Nov 4, 2016 1:30:58 GMT
Hell, any sort of uneven ablation (due to kinetics, lasers, hell, even non-spec nukes going off off center, or non-spec nuclear EFP) would probably mandate a complete inspection and possibly overhaul before using the plate for thrusting again, or risk catastrophic pusher plate failure.
Well, okay, with an Orion you can probably afford enough safety margins in the engineering of the plate that you can probably thrust a bit (particularly with lower powered propulsion units. And given that Orion drive craft tend to be massive enough to render other propulsion systems rather... Well... Anemic... That may be preferable to respeccing the plate for full thrust on the fly.
I'd say I would prefer not to put the pusher plate towards the enemy if at all possible, but it's definitely a more viable option than putting your exhaust nozzles for your NTR towards the enemy.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 6:53:55 GMT
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 4, 2016 6:53:55 GMT
Ok so lets put the pusher plate forward option as "risky but not completely insane" depending on the tactical situation. Back on the topic of armor, I agree with durandal that its going to look a lot more like a normal battleship/tank armor ... heavy is no longer a big problem and without large propellant tanks armor area is not going to escalate that fast. But I would place 1 meter of aerogel on top of it just to annoy him .
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Nov 4, 2016 8:17:29 GMT
Do you think attacking with the plate forward is going to be a viable tactic ? "Hey, we have a giant slab of material resilient to mind-boggling shock loads and repeated close-range nuking. Want to hide behind it from enemy fire while we set off nukes in their general direction to blind their sensors as we approach within weapon range (or better yet, let the propulsion nukes glide a little to close to them)?" -- asked concretedonkey"nah, lets aim the crew cab at them. I am really worried about damaging that slab of material" -- said no one ever (but in all seriousness, I am trying to understand how this wouldn't be a good idea. KE penetrator risk or needing to broadside seem the most viable)
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 8:39:41 GMT
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 4, 2016 8:39:41 GMT
Well I guess it depends on how vulnerable it will be in practice, my first thoughts were exactly the same as yours - its a giant plate of armor , what could go wrong... but on the other hand I remembered how good every single armor test I did with giant slabs or armor went and it wasn't very good. So for the moment I'm undecided. P.S. You can check the other people's opinions above mine , you can see that they mostly gravitate towards risking a mobility kill. But sure, lets needle the scientifically inept FX artist who can't calculate if his coil guns aren't broken without a calculator and searching other people's posts in the forum
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 9:03:18 GMT
Post by jonen on Nov 4, 2016 9:03:18 GMT
"Hey, we have a giant slab of material resilient to mind-boggling shock loads and repeated close-range nuking. Want to hide behind it from enemy fire while we set off nukes in their general direction to blind their sensors as we approach within weapon range (or better yet, let the propulsion nukes glide a little to close to them)?" -- asked concretedonkey "nah, lets aim the crew cab at them. I am really worried about damaging that slab of material" -- said no one ever (but in all seriousness, I am trying to understand how this wouldn't be a good idea. KE penetrator risk or needing to broadside seem the most viable) Actually, speaking of this tactic... I'm trying to wrap my head around how you plan an approach that starts nuking the enemy far enough out they can't reach you with long range lase or kinetics that doesn't leave you eventually thrusting away from them. I mean, yeah - sure - as long as you have deltaV to spare you can pick your engagements, and it takes a special kind of crazy to charge at you... Use really small pulse units? Downside of that is you don't really get effective blinding or harming of enemy sensors...
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 16:22:22 GMT
via mobile
Post by Durandal on Nov 4, 2016 16:22:22 GMT
"Hey, we have a giant slab of material resilient to mind-boggling shock loads and repeated close-range nuking. Want to hide behind it from enemy fire while we set off nukes in their general direction to blind their sensors as we approach within weapon range (or better yet, let the propulsion nukes glide a little to close to them)?" -- asked concretedonkey "nah, lets aim the crew cab at them. I am really worried about damaging that slab of material" -- said no one ever (but in all seriousness, I am trying to understand how this wouldn't be a good idea. KE penetrator risk or needing to broadside seem the most viable) Actually, speaking of this tactic... I'm trying to wrap my head around how you plan an approach that starts nuking the enemy far enough out they can't reach you with long range lase or kinetics that doesn't leave you eventually thrusting away from them. I mean, yeah - sure - as long as you have deltaV to spare you can pick your engagements, and it takes a special kind of crazy to charge at you... Use really small pulse units? Downside of that is you don't really get effective blinding or harming of enemy sensors... Presumably you would have a secondary weaponized bomb unit for such situations. Either an NEFP or a true Casaba Howitzer.
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 16:25:25 GMT
Post by jonen on Nov 4, 2016 16:25:25 GMT
Presumably you would have a secondary weaponized bomb unit for such situations. Either an NEFP or a true Casaba Howitzer. Probably yeah. Still probably gives you a bit of thrust. (Else, why need to put the pusherplate at it, exposing it to enemy action?)
|
|
|
Orion
Nov 4, 2016 19:25:08 GMT
Post by coaxjack on Nov 4, 2016 19:25:08 GMT
Set the engine pulse timing computer into Offense mode and let the bomb launcher fire off drive bombs that have much longer fusing delay.
|
|