|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 18, 2018 9:27:18 GMT
I built a 10GW (~1GW/m^2 at 30Mm) laser and there seem to be some "issues". For a start, the laser will do absoulutely nothing unless its withinabout 9-10Mm. Secondly, on the side of the ship it hits (at 7.5Mm), it only makes small holes spaced roughly 5m to 10m apart while the oposite side more or less ceases to exist.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Dec 20, 2017 18:51:05 GMT
They should really change how missiles vanish on payload detonation. They already create shrapnel, but its only visual.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Dec 20, 2017 15:01:58 GMT
Remote control modules now weight jsut 400 grams, so we can expect some improvements here. The improved module arrangements might help a bit as well. Turns out that the M11 just got better without me having to do anything. Still, the gives 600g payload reduction gives significant room for improvement. So I made a Mk2 of the M11: PropellantTankModule 300 g Hydrogen Tank 2 UsesCustomName false Propellant Hydrogen StructureComposition Diamond ReactionMass_kg 0.3 HeightToRadiusRatio 7 AdditionalArmorThickness_m 0
SpacerModule 5.00 cm x 0 m Spacer UsesCustomName false Dimensions_m 0 0.05
PropellantTankModule 5.64 kg Fluorine Tank 2 UsesCustomName false Propellant Fluorine StructureComposition Diamond ReactionMass_kg 5.64 HeightToRadiusRatio 20 AdditionalArmorThickness_m 0
CombustionRocketModule CLRM-F18.8/H1 M8 "Longneck LG" Mk1Var2 2.5KM 5Km/s 1.3Kg0 Copy UsesCustomName true Reaction Fluorine Hydrogen StoichiometricMixtureRatio 1 ThermalRocket ChamberComposition Diamond ThroatRadius_m 0.0049 ChamberWallThickness_m 0.0001 ChamberContractionRatio 4.5 NozzleExpansionRatio 120 NozzleExpansionAngle_degrees 9.8 RegenerativeCooling_Percent 1 Injector Composition Lithium PumpRadius_m 0.038 RotationalSpeed_RPM 66 Gimbal InnerRadius_m 0.055 ArmorComposition Graphite Aerogel ArmorThickness_m 0.0001 MomentumWheels Composition Lithium RotationalSpeed_RPM 9600 GimbalAngle_degrees 1.5
RemoteControlModule Swarm test Copy Copy UsesCustomName true AspectRatio 8 HomingBehavior PropellantForBoostPhase_Percent 0.602 BoostPhase GuidanceLaw AugmentedProportionalNavigation Accelerate true DampingEngineMultiplier 8.33 MidcoursePhase GuidanceLaw AugmentedProportionalNavigation Accelerate false DampingEngineMultiplier 7.6 TerminalPhase GuidanceLaw AugmentedProportionalNavigation Accelerate true DampingEngineMultiplier 1.25 IrradianceCutoff_Percent 0.092
CraftBlueprint KKV M11-2 Viper Micro MK2 Modules Swarm test Copy Copy 1 0 null 0 0 CLRM-F18.8/H1 M8 "Longneck LG" Mk1Var2 2.5KM 5Km/s 1.3Kg0 Copy 1 0 null 0 0 300 g Hydrogen Tank 2 1 -0.5 null 0 0 5.64 kg Fluorine Tank 2 1 -0.25 null 0 0 5.00 cm x 0 m Spacer 1 1.7891 null 0 0 Armor Shape Cylindrical Concave false ArmorLayers Spider Silk 0.0005 0 0.8 1 1 0 Silica Aerogel 0.0015 0 0.4 1 1 0 Silica Aerogel 0.006 0 0.6 1 1 0 Silica Aerogel 0.02 0 0.8 1 1 0 Graphite Aerogel 0.009 0 0 1 1 0
The improvements in the M11 Mk2 are not only in the lighter guidance module, but also in the armor layout. The graphite aerogel nuke flash shield was moved to the outermost layer. This reduced the volume of the expencive silica aerogel layers, lowering the price to below 20c, without changing the effectivity of the armor much. The crossection was also reduced, allowing for less armor to be used with only little much loss in durability.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Dec 20, 2017 6:02:59 GMT
View from inside a gunship from the impact of over 800t of shrapnel.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Dec 19, 2017 18:37:46 GMT
Actually, don't ordnance have inbuilt timers? Why was the fuze needed for them?
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Dec 19, 2017 13:35:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 27, 2017 20:58:40 GMT
I doubt if a missile can survive 4000000 gee of acceleration I seriously doubt most of our missiles can even withstand their own acceleration. Are you suggesting, that my missiles with 300g acceleration and micrometer thin walls might rip themselves appart?
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 20, 2017 15:32:04 GMT
[...] Police are the only thing that would qualify as anything close to infantry, but I think that would be akin to saying cars are technically the same as tanks. Cars and tanks: all vehicles are "cavalry", in the same context as "infantry" is used in this thread. I only intended "extra vehicular", or "personal" combat and not to imply any institutions. [...] Thats hardly a good way to think about this. By this definition, anyone with a weapon intended for a fight, but not in a vehicle, is infantry. It means that, if I were to carry a knife with the aim to use it in self defence if necesarry, I would be considered "infantry". Further more, would a bouncer at a club, armed with a taser, not also be infantry? The context in which you use infantry in this thread is so loose, that it makes discussion practically impossible. I readily agree that a discussion about infantry in space should be about more than just the millitary branch of infantry, but it should not be as wide as personal combat. Also, you misinterpreted my analogy in the same sense. A car is to a tank (perhaps millitary wheeled vehicle would be a better analogy) what infantry is to armed personel in generall. Not all armed individuals are necessarily combatants (like competition shooters) and not all combatants are necessarily armed. Police are armed and trained very differently (this is true even for special units, like anti terror units) compared to millitary units. This is because the goals and limitations of the combat environment are generally very different from actuall combat. A very good example of this in modern terms are expanding projectiles. They are banned from military use, but are highly prevelant in law enforcement and are even mandatory for hunting in some cases. Another good comparision is police marksman rifles vs. millitary marksmans rifles. The reason, then, why I would exclude police from this discussion, is because the way a police force operates, and thus, the technology it uses, are more dependant on the legal, ethical and economical systems that surround it, rather than the necessities of combat. Predicting the relevant legal, ethical and economical systems is basically impossible and doesn't allow for a generall discussion (as any arbitrary technologies and tactics could be used by selecting apropriat systems). For this reason, I think a discussion about infantry in space should focus mainly on those combatants, for whom the primary motivation behind technology and tactics is what is possible (and viable to achieve their goals), rather than what is permitted (while the millitary is regulated in use of technology, they are only restricted in technologies and tactics, that cause significantly more harm to combatants and noncombatants than others for only little benefit).
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 7, 2017 20:41:27 GMT
Don't mind it. Whether those are some real racketeers or a government-sponsored terrorism or interdiction or whatever, nukes seemed like an needless overkill. Even governments don't arm every group of convenient 'liberty fighters' or 'volunteers' with nukes if they can avoid it. Au contraire, I think warships, or at least military involvement, make a lot of sense in this scenario. If you think about it, this weapon platform hunting civilian shipping is a lot like a submarine hunting maritime shipping. Who do you think corporations will turn to after the first attacks? If mining asteroids becomes a significant part of national economy, that nation will build means to protect it. It is what happened historically, and I don't think there are any reasons for it to be different in this scenario. Not being able to protect vital economic interests from a drone some shithead placed out there really sends the wrong message to your rivals on Earth and to your own citizen. Have you heard of Cod Wars? Apparently, involved people in the UK are mad about that even today. Fittingly, after the outbreak of piracy at the beginning of this decade, navies of various nations got involved and the number of attacks, not to mention successful attacks, declined sharply after that. Not to mention that in this case you can usually start investigating on Earth. Who proposed the deal? What kind of payment they required? Who made the hardware and how was it purchased? Regular investigation in other words. I ask for your definition, if asteroid mining becomes a significant part of national economics wouldn't you say it would become sophisticated interplanetary trade/travel? The moment asteroid mining becomes significant, is the moment it becomes more sensible to start prioritizing space stations over planets. Significant mining activity means that technology has advanced enough to allow for planet independant life support and like I said, it's significantly easier just to mine and use resources outside of gravity wells. That means stations clustered around high resource areas, all of them with laser defense grids tracking anything larger than a pebble within 100km. Not an ideal environment for piracy.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 7, 2017 14:07:41 GMT
Infinite stealth in space violates one of the fundamental law of physics: thermodynamics. If you can hide all of your heat signature, you'll either get cooked or need some seriously huge heat sink (very, very huge), which should give you a few hours of stealth at best. Certainly not enough. Even if you cheat and put all the radiators in the shadows, look, that particularly black patch in the sky blocks background stars and CMB. It is an object! Infinite is a straw man. One does not need "infinite" anything to have an effective technology as far as I can tell. Assuredly the crypsis of modern SSBN or stealth aircraft is no where near "infinite" but they are still quite "effective" despite being "finite." The irony here is that, while “stealthy enough” may well be possible, it pretty much precludes human crew. Humans produce a lot of heat and the systems that are needed to support them even more. Anything cold enough to be missed needs to be basically inert.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 6, 2017 17:02:14 GMT
It’s not about going full dyson. In order to rebel in any meaningful way, the rebelling entity would need to be resource independent from earth. If, by the time that happens, a comparable population lives on stations/ships, it is safe to assume that there is a significant investment in combat ships. Further more, the population of such a colony/outpost would then no longer be significant enough to warrant a grueling ground assault. This is especially true, considering the threat anyone capable of accelerating a significant mass into an interscept with earth technically poses. While planetary defense networks would probably eliminate any would be impactors, I think governments would probably slag anyone they have adequate reason to believe would send one their way. The only thing that really makes sense then, are covert ops and police. And by covert ops, I don’t mean special forces units, which serve many roles. Covert ops units in space would be highly specialized for covert ops and would probably be mostly noncombatants. Police are the only thing that would qualify as anything close to infantry, but I think that would be akin to saying cars are technically the same as tanks.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 6, 2017 15:08:44 GMT
That argument relies on humanity colonizing mars to self sufficiency before going the Dyson sphere route. I highly doubt that’s going to play out like that however, since the technology for a self sufficient mars and a Dydon sphere are practically identical and resource gathering and building are easier and cheaper up the well than down one.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 6, 2017 8:17:14 GMT
I'd like to see the most powerful nuke missile on the smallest missile. From eyeballing that curve thing in the nuke creation screen it seems like a large nuke should be able to wipe out everything in a fairly large radius. Slap one of those on a small enough missile (with enough dV) and "win button?" The problem with nukes is that any ship that is armored to withstand main battery lasers on cap ships for any amount of time, will be virtually impervious to a nuke. This is because the radiation intensity of a nuke flash is far less then that of most lasers. The only reason nukes work against (my) missiles, is because they only have ablative anti laser armor at the front, leaving them vulnerable to nuke flashes from the side and rear.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Nov 5, 2017 15:58:47 GMT
Humans always find a way to adapt to fighting in their milieu. There is no question of whether there will be infantry in the future. The only questions concern doctrine, equipment and culture. People have been predicting the obsolescence of the fighting man since at least the 13th century. Naturally, the fighting man will never truly disapear (on a timescale we are interested in). Humans evolved to be incredibly adaptive, effective and efficient over a period of, arguably, 4 billion years (around 252 million years if you want to consider just mammels). That human enginuity, as amazing as it may be, has been unable to find a better solution to the problems face on the battlefield in the 100,000 years it's been around is hardly surprising. The catch is that humans are only incredibly adaptive, effective and efficient in the environment they evolved the traits in. This is clearly seen in navel and arial combat. In space, human infantry will still be the go to for earth like environment, but since space as a whole is not earth like, they will not play much of a role in millitary conflict. Police (or occupation force), sure. Specialist millitary units, yes. Piracy/crime rings, very probably. Querrilla warfare, maybe. Mainstream millitary, definitely not.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Oct 23, 2017 14:32:26 GMT
Does this mean that acceleration inside a coilgun, using induction forces, cannot be applied to superconducting projectiles? I don't quite understand the question. Induction still works on superconductors and the current inside a superconductor will change if the external magnetic field changes in order to maintain the fact that the magnetic field doesn't penetrate the surface. So changing the field in a coilgun will accelerate the projectile, the exact way that happens may be different.
|
|