|
|
Post by redparadize on Nov 24, 2016 20:45:35 GMT
Are you testing at 1000 km ? That's the thing, the same laser did not give the same result depending on range. |
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 24, 2016 20:51:29 GMT
Are you testing at 1000 km ? That's the thing, the same laser did not give the same result depending on range. Maybe I'm misunderstading something , but isn't that normal ? |
|
|
|
Post by redparadize on Nov 24, 2016 21:08:53 GMT
Maybe I'm misunderstading something , but isn't that normal ? Let me reformulate. A laser and set it to 1000km engagement range will destroy 10 missiles in the last 100km. The same laser set to 100km will kill 30 on the same 100km. Another thing. On a 1000km setup. I will lose 20 missile before the 800km mark. Then 5 from 800km to 100km, and 30 on during the final maneuver. Getting more of them destructed during maneuver make sense, what does not is that the rate at wish they were destroyed got lower around 500 km... Its like if Laser had a peak of power at 1000km. I was even more drastic at higher power. These number are trown from the top of my head, but are representative of what I observed. |
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 24, 2016 21:10:55 GMT
Ooook this is strange.
|
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Nov 25, 2016 9:28:02 GMT
Saw the rubber, tested it. It... does reasonably, but I have had better luck with aerogel. Tested a few others: Setup: 2cm aerogel 4mm of test substance 500km launch to 500km ranged 395nm lasers ( 3x of them) Results: Basalt fiber: eh, not really useful Aramid: 5-20x missiles will fly to target with <5 losses Nitrile and PTFE: loses about a missle every few seconds at 500-450km Silicon dioxide: lol useless you do realise that while that laser is strong, its only good on missiles that are larger then 3m diameter? a 30cm aperture laser would be 100x more effective also you can make really strong really cheap armour out of: 1mm silica (gap) 1mm silica (gap) 1mm silica (gap) 1mm silica (gap) 1mm silica if you adjust the gap correctly so your armour is double the width of your missile, its a bit(lot) of a cheat, but if the AI does not focus fire it can not penetrate this setup because all the damage spreads across the missile and never actually hits any of the armour by passing through the gaps between armour layers and out the other end of the missile... No, I did not. That... actually seems counter-intuitive to me. Why is that? |
|
|
|
Post by amimai on Nov 25, 2016 14:38:44 GMT
you do realise that while that laser is strong, its only good on missiles that are larger then 3m diameter? a 30cm aperture laser would be 100x more effective -s- No, I did not. That... actually seems counter-intuitive to me. Why is that? I actually do not know since the math does not add up, per cm^2 both beams do the same output but smaller beams work better on smaller targets, while larger beams effect larger targets more. probably has something to do with the way armour is simulated... just test it yourself: 20cm beams vs micro missiles (result: micro missiles ded, giant gaping holes in it hull/whole armour melts) 200cm beam vs micro missiles (result: not a single missile dies, one missile looses some armour, maybe 1 layer) 20cm beams vs large missiles (result: large missile dies slowly due to burst fuel tank) 200cm beam vs large missiles (result: large missile dies due to giant gaping holes in its hull) |
|
|
|
Post by redparadize on Nov 25, 2016 14:59:18 GMT
I need to test further to confirm but I believe there is many thing that don't add up with laser...
|
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Nov 25, 2016 18:36:46 GMT
Wait, the point of a giant laser mirror is supposed to be so it can focus on a small point further away. Does that means that the CoaDE can't simulate a focusing mirror giving a smaller beam waist than its diameter?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Nov 25, 2016 20:34:56 GMT
Let me reformulate. A laser and set it to 1000km engagement range will destroy 10 missiles in the last 100km. The same laser set to 100km will kill 30 on the same 100km. That may be because at 1000km the laser isn't delivering enough energy to heat the targets' armour quickly enough to burn through at a single point, and once they do get within its really effective range they're radiating the incoming heat away faster due to being hotter overall from the long period of ineffectual heating, meaning heat is conducted away from the beam's contact point faster. Same principle as is commonly understood to affect radiators. |
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Nov 25, 2016 21:08:10 GMT
Let me reformulate. A laser and set it to 1000km engagement range will destroy 10 missiles in the last 100km. The same laser set to 100km will kill 30 on the same 100km. That may be because at 1000km the laser isn't delivering enough energy to heat the targets' armour quickly enough to burn through at a single point, and once they do get within its really effective range they're radiating the incoming heat away faster due to being hotter overall from the long period of ineffectual heating, meaning heat is conducted away from the beam's contact point faster. Same principle as is commonly understood to affect radiators. if I understand correctly he isn't talking about the first 100km of a 1000km range , he is talking about the last 100... so in this case it really is strange... I didn't get anything conclusive with my experiments however... didn't notice anything strange switching from 1000 to 500 |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Nov 25, 2016 21:58:31 GMT
That may be because at 1000km the laser isn't delivering enough energy to heat the targets' armour quickly enough to burn through at a single point, and once they do get within its really effective range they're radiating the incoming heat away faster due to being hotter overall from the long period of ineffectual heating, meaning heat is conducted away from the beam's contact point faster. Same principle as is commonly understood to affect radiators. if I understand correctly he isn't talking about the first 100km of a 1000km range , he is talking about the last 100... so in this case it really is strange... I didn't get anything conclusive with my experiments however... didn't notice anything strange switching from 1000 to 500 I took it to be temporal — the last thing that occurs in this scenario is the close range part. I think I get what you mean though, 'the last bit of range added on the end', ie. the furthest point of it rather than the closest. I've got no idea then. |
|
|
|
Post by magusunion on Nov 25, 2016 23:52:02 GMT
Let me reformulate. A laser and set it to 1000km engagement range will destroy 10 missiles in the last 100km. The same laser set to 100km will kill 30 on the same 100km. That may be because at 1000km the laser isn't delivering enough energy to heat the targets' armour quickly enough to burn through at a single point, and once they do get within its really effective range they're radiating the incoming heat away faster due to being hotter overall from the long period of ineffectual heating, meaning heat is conducted away from the beam's contact point faster. Same principle as is commonly understood to affect radiators. Huh, that might explain my luck with this: |
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Nov 26, 2016 0:52:44 GMT
One major thing I noticed: KKVs are much better than flak for the Brannigan Strategy, because flak warheads sometimes get detonated by the lasers. This results in a cloud of not-accelerating flak in front of your still-accelerating missiles, meaning you can Kessler Syndrome yourself. KKVs don't explode, so they don't have this problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Nov 26, 2016 9:45:47 GMT
Huh, my crude testing did find smaller lasers more effective. I... am confused by that.
A side note: nitrile rubber is my new anti-laser coating on cap ships.
|
|
|
|
Post by spacechicken on Nov 26, 2016 20:36:55 GMT
Huh, my crude testing did find smaller lasers more effective. I... am confused by that. A side note: nitrile rubber is my new anti-laser coating on cap ships. I think it works like this: Laser damage is rated by MW/m^2, but a small crossection target is .5 m^2 While the large aperture lasers are delivering 500MW, they are doing it over a larger area. So the MW/m^2 is lower. So: great for a capital ship at 1000km, but a mini missle can stay cool with insulation and ablative armor. Also: Im pleased the nitrile idea has propagated  |
|
