reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Feb 12, 2017 3:59:49 GMT
Before we begin any discussions, let us point out the problems of applying CoADE-knowledge to current nuclear engineering. Our reactor designs have radically different considerations than current technology, earthbound powerplants. The biggest I can think of is that on Earth, you have a reliable, sub-373k heatsink readily available; water. A local stream or even just the ocean can provide a output temperature far cooler than any practical radiator setup; as a result, there is no need to run reactor cores near the melting point of Uranium oxide. Next, utility (power generation for civilian Electric Grid needs) reactor and powerplants must be designed for economical manufacture, extended service life, and ease of maintenance. They must also be relatively robust, as conditions on Earth can change rapidly; Earthquakes, Storms, Tsunamis, etc. Player built CoADE reactors tend to be built with maybe a six month operational lifetime, and then they are operated sometimes within a single kelvin of reactor core meltdown. I'll be honest, I didn't think about that. I'm just trying to get help wherever I can lmao, I didn't realize how bad I am at finding information. Thankfully I still have a ton of time.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Feb 12, 2017 3:08:49 GMT
It's not really a paper. I'm currently doing a course that's more about getting us prepared for university, so we have to do stuff close to university level, while not being as hard. My main issue right now is I'm having trouble finding all the information I need for my notes, before I start writing. I'm making progress but just wanted some help finding sources lmao. (Or if you're a source, having qualifications for it.)
So, still gotta take it seriously, properly sources info on nuclear power and all related things. From what I've seen, at least a few people who frequent these forums have backgrounds in engineering and physics.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Feb 12, 2017 2:55:52 GMT
So, I thought this would be the best place to ask.
I'm writing an informative report on the prospect of using nuclear power, and well, I'm just a little stuck. I'm trying to get some data on things, i.e the amount of power generated per gram of uranium used. Along with other general stuff. This seemed like the best place to ask since the game is really big on being scientifically accurate, so all the information used had to come from somewhere.
It'd be great if you could source stuff. Otherwise, I really appreciate any help.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 23, 2016 3:20:49 GMT
i thought we had a discord server already, and thats like, IRC but better, no? I think IRC is better for text chat than discord is, at least with a good bot to help out. Discord does have its strengths too, though, but I find it more conducive to actually gaming than simple conversation. Discord is for voice chat anyway, isn't it? It'd be a bit like using Teamspeak or Curse Voice for text chat.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 13, 2016 0:22:35 GMT
It'd be nice to get detonators that explode on contact/slightly after contact. If it penetrates the armor, then explodes, well, RIP.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 12, 2016 0:40:31 GMT
Whatever I think sounds cool at the time. Usually with a suffix of ship class, i.e Hyperion Battleship, Akatsuki Destroyer.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 11, 2016 6:20:50 GMT
So I was wondering, do crew modules actually model the crew at all? i.e, lets say you've got crew module with 30cm of Boron armor. Would spalling be an issue, or is the only way to kill crew through penetration or high Gs?
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 11, 2016 6:13:22 GMT
Are you using a spacer? Or was that part sheared off by enemy fire. If it's the latter, than yes, we have a problem. If it's the former, spacers in game don't work the way IRL spacers do, so even though they look like they aren't attached, they still are in fact connected. It's a spacer, yeah. But from how it looks, there's nothing there to hit, since the spacer is 0m x 25m. Even if it still acts as an object, it's then just a graphical issue I guess.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 9, 2016 2:50:24 GMT
On the topic of missiles, if we had capacitors or some other power storage, or maybe just some really good reactors, do you think nuclear missiles with a laser on top would work? In a book I read, completely forgot the name, there were missiles that had gamma lasers on top. Although, they also did use antimatter propulsion. If it was a nuclear missile, the laser was probably bomb-pumped, i.e. the gamma/x-ray emission of the explosion was used to power a laser that would remain briefly intact just long enough to translate the nuke's power into a useful beam. There were some experiments run to see if such systems would be viable for SDI purposes, but unclassified data on them is inconclusive on the matter. I reckon since drones are already disposable, arming them with their own warheads isn't a bad idea. I figured out the book, Jupiter War and related sequels, by Neal Asher. 99% sure anyway.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 8, 2016 6:00:28 GMT
You probably want to armor your turrets against lasers first and foremost. If you want both, I think basalt fiber is great at both, at a horrendous price. But really, your best defense against kinetics is distance. Losing a gun or two shouldn't be an issue if you have redundancy.
EDIT: Well, your best defense against kinetics is probably sloped armor. I want custom ship shapes, and maybe weapons that aren't turreted, but still can move. Sorta like a Tank Destroyer gun.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 8, 2016 5:58:10 GMT
On the topic of missiles, if we had capacitors or some other power storage, or maybe just some really good reactors, do you think nuclear missiles with a laser on top would work? In a book I read, completely forgot the name, there were missiles that had gamma lasers on top. Although, they also did use antimatter propulsion.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 7, 2016 0:28:39 GMT
One thing I noticed about your most recent episode (5?) is that it seemed like your main defense against drones was trying to shoot them down before they got to you, or by doing clever maneuvers that the AI had a hard time responding to. My counter to both incoming drones and missiles was to launch a fleet of 5 stinger drones and 5 striker nuclear missiles in response to each enemy drone or missile fleet. From there, I tried to get as direct an encounter as possible. Once they did have the encounter and got into combat enemy missiles would detect the drones as an enemy fleet and then seek directly too them. Granted, this loses me 5 drones but nearly every missile in that fleet is going to blow itself up. I killed 20 and 30 size missile fleets with that trick. With enemy drones on the other hand they'd also detect my drones as a valid target and so they'd all start shooting at each-other. When the enemy drones got close enough or ran low on dV I'd let my missiles start homing and even 1 nuke was usually enough to kill the drones since they were clustered so close together. I managed to finish the missile without ever getting my capital ships into combat directly. It was all long range missiles and drones. Granted, my fleet was 3 modified siloships with the armour stripped off, 25 stinger drones each, and then as many nukes as I could fit in. You don't even need to lose a drone/missile. Just manually use the move order to dodge projectiles and missiles, and your missile/drone will live on to ruin another fleet of missiles or drones. This will hopefully be fixed, though.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 7, 2016 0:14:50 GMT
That presents an interesting problem again, which is something this game seems to generate in spades: If you were using a SESpaD missile or missile bus/drone, how would it even home on the laser emitter without being fried? If you're using a seeker that would be resilient (or "dull" enough, if you follow?) against military grade lasers, surely it couldn't be sensitive enough to accurately home in? I'm very familiar with laser seeker heads as I used to deal with them in the military, and they work off of reflected coded-pulsed light, not direct lasing in the MW/m2 level. I guess there could be some kind of step-down optical device, the opposite of a photo-multiplier tube... Well, there's uh, laser bleed off, isn't there? You can still see the laser being fired even if it's not being aimed directly at you. I'm not sure if current missiles are advanced enough to distinguish that, but I imagine future missiles could.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 7, 2016 0:13:07 GMT
Could be possible to use propellant as cooling maybe. Along with that, how about hollow propellant tanks, so you could have a singular propellant tank with a spinal weapon going through the centre.
|
|
reviire
New Member
I'm pretty great
Posts: 44
|
Post by reviire on Nov 5, 2016 9:54:41 GMT
Were you launching decoys at the time? Missiles seem to like targetting friendly decoys. Tip of the day: Missile won't target friendly decoys if the decoy have a remote control. Tip of the week: If you gonna had a remote control to decoy, why not adding a engine and a fuel tank to it? Decoy missile are the ultimate nuclear missile defense. You might be on to something here.
|
|