|
Post by vegemeister on Jan 20, 2017 21:04:41 GMT
Detonation velocity is zero. its not an explosive, its an incendiary weapon that carries oxidizer with it, wait now I want incendiary shells for my coilguns Explosive lenses bend shockwaves the same way regular lenses bend light. When a wave crosses a boundary between materials that propagate the wave at different speeds, it changes direction. The greater the relative difference in speeds, the greater the change in direction. A material that propagates a shockwave with "zero" velocity is like a transparent material with infinite index of refraction. It can be used to make zero-thickness lenses. Or rather, in the equations that define the shape of a lens, as the detonation velocity goes to zero, so does the thickness of the lens. From what I've read, some modern bombs use lenses made of materials that aren't explosive but do propagate a shockwave. Once you have a converging shock, you can use it to trigger a layer of high-energy explosive around the pit.
|
|
|
Post by vegemeister on Jan 20, 2017 19:34:49 GMT
I don't buy your statements either way. Missiles with overtuned drives can break 20G of acceleration, and can hit (or close enough, for standoff payloads) manouvering targets even with a closing velocity >10 km/s. For warships/drones with MPD, you can always do a deceleration burn prior to entering combat envelope. In fact, by taking a fuel mass ratio closer to a NTR/other fuel warship you can easily exceed 100 km/s; in this case, if you want an extended combat window you burn 25km/s to close the distance, then spend another 24.5 km/s to bring the approach velocity down to 500m/s for some lovely 200+ second engagement window. In this scenario, you still have half your dV remaining even after chasing down (and presumably crushing) the NTR fleet. I'm not contesting that missiles/drones can catch up to a ship for an intercept. What I am referring to is what happens when the intercept actually takes place. As in seconds before impact. In this frame of reference the ship is effectively standing still, and the missiles are traveling at high velocities to overcome the laser death zone (especially with Cerium doped lasers), interceptor missiles, interceptor drones and and array of cheap sandblaster CIWS. What a ship can do in those few seconds before impact is fire it's engines, and assuming it has a sufficiently high trust to weight ratio change its relative position by dozens or even hundreds of meters. Those missiles now have to change course. But this takes time, and when you are already traveling at 10+ km/s, takes a lot of deltaV. Notice how difficult it is to change course if a multi-G enemy ship evades minutes from the intercept when your missiles are traveling at over 10 km/s? This is even harder if this happens two seconds before impact. Even more so if their relative velocity is dozens of kilometres per second. Even if your missiles can pull 20Gs and have a few kilometres of delta V left they're going to miss. Now, of course we could spread out the missiles or have them travel in a line. In the first case we can just focus on the missiles that are most likely to impact the ship, and then repeat the last second manoeuvre and combine it with front and rear mounted directional thrusters to further reduce the chance of a successful impact. In the second case we will have an easier time to destroy the missiles individually, because for this formation to be effectiveness you need significant distance between the missiles for them to still reliably get an intercept with their multi-G propulsion. The formation system is difficult to test in the first case, and highly impractical in the second case (Unless you have the time to space a thousand or so 1 missile fleets 1-2 kilometres apart). But the whole act of dodging at the last second is already possible in game. If the missile acceleration is at least equal to the target acceleration, it can follow the target in all its moves. At least within the limitation of it's turnabout time, so your "put engines on both ends so that the direction you're going to dodge can't be known" strategy could actually work, at least against a single missile. Faster intercepts actually help, assuming the target starts dodging 1000 km out, because then the missile doesn't need as much Δv. If the missile acceleration is much greater than the target acceleration, and the missile guidance can perfectly predict how the target will dodge, it only needs to expend half the Δv. But in practice, the guidance can't perfectly predict the target, so the target can force the missile to piss away it's Δv. Also the attitude controller isn't stable with very short turnabout times, so a higher acceleration missile can't turn proportionately faster, so it spends a lot more of its fuel on turning.
|
|
|
Post by vegemeister on Jan 20, 2017 15:42:55 GMT
I do not expect Multiplayer to make an appearance in CoaDE due to the technical complexity of coding it. The way I see it is CoaDE's final form will be single player, with all the reality breaking bugs fixed and a wide assortment of systems modeled. CoaDE is going to be about building realistic warships and coming up with the basic doctrine of how they fight one another. Then years and years down the line CoaDE 2: Solar War comes along with all those polished design and modeling systems ready to go out of the box. The big deals will be Multiplayer and Tactical AI Behaviors. Without multiplayer, I don't think it's possible to work out the doctrine. The AI doesn't know how to use missile buses. It doesn't shut off the guidance on its nuclear missiles and detonate them simultaneously to avoid flares and predetonation. It doesn't set guns that fire guided shells to ignore range. It doesn't set ignore range at 10 seconds out on high-velocity drone intercepts. And as soon as the AI is improved or the gunnery algorithms are fixed, humans will come up with new tactics that it can't keep up with.
|
|
|
Post by vegemeister on Jan 18, 2017 1:27:24 GMT
wait silicon thermite (and nanothermite) is bugged?!?! Detonation velocity is zero.
|
|
|
Post by vegemeister on Jan 17, 2017 18:39:47 GMT
Same should apply to conventional guns, as well as a varied barrel thickness. As far as I am aware, and this may be completely innaccurate as it could just be a graphical model thing, but conventional gun barrels are just straight cylinders of X material. Ideally, they should taper down to a smaller thickness, although that might need some more complex equations. You don't need your gun barrel to withstand the same pressures at the base as at its exhaust. Either way, I have something to contribute. This nuclear payload is a few centimeters smaller than the current smallest payload, so I guess it'd count (nearly 2,5 cm). It does, however, come at a cost. But it allows for even smaller bullets/missiles (missiles which, by the way, will be wider anyway due to the control module being too big. I tried.) Some fiddling around could probably make it even smaller. NuclearPayloadModule 'Nut' >3cm 96.8 t Boosted Fission Nuke UsesCustomName true CoreComposition Pu-239 ReflectorComposition Vanadium Chromium Steel SlowExplosive CombustionReaction Silicon Thermite DelayComposition Boron DelayCompositionMassFraction 0 FastExplosive Octogen CoreMass_kg 0.01 Enrichment_Percent 0.97 HollowCoreRadius_m 0.011 InnerExplosiveWidth_m 0.014 FusionBoost Deuterium Tritium FusionFuelDensity_kg__m3 110 Detonator HardRange_km 0 ActivationRange_km 0.2 MinimumRange_km 0 OverrideTimer_s 0 TargetsShips true TargetsShots true
[tr] [td style="border:1px solid #bbb;padding: 5px;"]'Nut' 2.58cm 96.8t[/td] [td style="border:1px solid #bbb;padding: 5px;"]@utilitas[/td] [td style="border:1px solid #bbb;padding: 5px;"]96.8 t[/td] [td style="border:1px solid #bbb;padding: 5px;"]60.2 c[/td] [td style="border:1px solid #bbb;padding: 5px;"]455 g[/td] [td style="border:1px solid #bbb;padding: 5px;"][a href="http://i.imgur.com/loiP9BP.png"]http://i.imgur.com/loiP9BP.png[/a][/td] [td style="border:1px solid #bbb;padding: 5px;"]http://pastebin.com/r4wnvrC2[/td] [/tr] Remember that silicon thermite and nanothermite are currently bugged, so any nukes using them are unphysical. The smallest atomic bomb I've been able to find is the W54, at 13.6 cm radius and 23 kg mass. If you've built something smaller than that, it just might run on magic. I've had pretty good luck with Nitroglycerin/Calcium, but based on the results, and the fact that I can't find any reference to that combination through Google, I suspect that may be unphysical as well. Also I don't think it should be possible to make a bomb with Pu-240 at all, due to predetonation.
|
|