My House Rule - Shooting At Starships

[wbnc]

I'd say the odds of actually hurting a starship in a meaningful way with light small arms is slim. Mostly due to the fact the ship can get out of engagement range so quickly in 10 seconds accelerating at 1G it will be around 170-180 Meters away.In thirty seconds it will be 4 kilometers away...if it is accelerating in the verticle it will be well out of range for most small arms in short order.

Of course a flying starship would be difficult to hit, and out of range before you could blink.

Any scenario with infantry weapons firing on a starship has to be against a stationary, landed starship?

which is why Han Solo Installed drop down Blasters

Nickel iron, appears to be a viable alternative, and possibly aluminium.

Or some new alloys...
http://newatlas.com/steel-alloy-strong-light-titanium/35996/
http://newatlas.com/metal-foam-bullets/42731/
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-04/armored-t-shirts-contain-boron-carbide-nanowires
also carbon fiber, or carbon nanotube-based fabrics.

 

[Condottiere]

I suspect most effective as composite or layers.

 

[phavoc]

I'd say the odds of actually hurting a starship in a meaningful way with light small arms is slim. Mostly due to the fact the ship can get out of engagement range so quickly in 10 seconds accelerating at 1G it will be around 170-180 Meters away.In thirty seconds it will be 4 kilometers away...if it is accelerating in the verticle it will be well out of range for most small arms in short order.

Of course a flying starship would be difficult to hit, and out of range before you could blink.

Any scenario with infantry weapons firing on a starship has to be against a stationary, landed starship?

That's a good question - just how fast/maneuverable would a starship be in an atmosphere? G-ratings aren't necessarily good examples for speed in atmosphere. I would think most starships are relative slug-like in atmosphere, unlike actual aircraft or craft designed for high-speed in atmosphere. I can't remember which version had a good chart to show what spacecraft would do within atmosphere based up on their G-rating. Plus their is their configuration - in space all configurations are the same, but in atmosphere drag is king, plus the faster you push against air, the more resistance you get, thus the slower you go.

Was it MT, or GURPS that had atmospheric speeds attached to the ship descriptions?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

MT has.

1G is max 1200 km/h in vacuum, streamlined ship 1000 km/h in atmosphere. Very fast if you are trying to hit it with a rifle.

You would accelerate from low speeds rather quickly, from 0 - 100 km/h would be ~3 s.

 

[arcador]

If we bother to calculate the speed bands, even with 1G it can move at the maximum band, which is -8 to hit (even more), depending on the angle.

 

[wbnc]

I'd say the odds of actually hurting a starship in a meaningful way with light small arms is slim. Mostly due to the fact the ship can get out of engagement range so quickly in 10 seconds accelerating at 1G it will be around 170-180 Meters away.In thirty seconds it will be 4 kilometers away...if it is accelerating in the verticle it will be well out of range for most small arms in short order.

Of course a flying starship would be difficult to hit, and out of range before you could blink.

Any scenario with infantry weapons firing on a starship has to be against a stationary, landed starship?

That's a good question - just how fast/maneuverable would a starship be in an atmosphere? G-ratings aren't necessarily good examples for speed in atmosphere. I would think most starships are relative slug-like in atmosphere, unlike actual aircraft or craft designed for high-speed in atmosphere. I can't remember which version had a good chart to show what spacecraft would do within atmosphere based up on their G-rating. Plus their is their configuration - in space all configurations are the same, but in atmosphere drag is king, plus the faster you push against air, the more resistance you get, thus the slower you go.

Was it MT, or GURPS that had atmospheric speeds attached to the ship descriptions?

Drag is an issue when you can't bulldoze your way through the air, mostly due to the fact that to generate power in a conventional system you have to burn fuel. More drag, more fuel, until you reach the point where you can't provide fuel fast enough, or carry enough fuel to simply shove the air aside. A fusion powered starship has as much power as it needs to strong arm it's way through the air.

A ship like the free Trader or S-type would not be as seriously impeded by wind resistance as others. They have fairly clean hulls, and are designed o have a decent aerodynamic shape. they would have acceleration characteristics of a high-performance helicopter or VTOL.Only once they reached transonic speeds where the air can't get out of its way fast enough and basically turns into a wall will it start having problems due to drag.

trying to hit a starship that can go from zero to one hundred KPH in a few seconds is not going to be an easy ask for anyone firing a handheld weapon. It's hard enough to hit rapidly maneuvering aircraft at less than one gee of acceleration at more than a few hundred meters. If that few hundred meters in the vertical then gravity and ballistics are gong to conspire to make the shot even harder.

any ship larger than a small craft or Free Trader would most likely simply ignore your small arms fire turn its guns on the shooter and dig a nice sized hole in the ground as it vaporizes the shooter and turns a cumbic meter of earth into molten slagand if it is in a position where it can't maneuver then it can still flash fry a squad of troops in less time than it takes to power up it's drives.



so it's back to don't try this at home kiddies.....if the ship doesn't simply fly out of your range after a few shots, it will burn your shadow into the nearest solid surface.

 

[-Daniel-]

so it's back to don't try this at home kiddies.....if the ship doesn't simply fly out of your range after a few shots, it will burn your shadow into the nearest solid surface.

Well that sums it up nicely. :mrgreen:

 

[phavoc]

Drag is an issue when you can't bulldoze your way through the air, mostly due to the fact that to generate power in a conventional system you have to burn fuel. More drag, more fuel, until you reach the point where you can't provide fuel fast enough, or carry enough fuel to simply shove the air aside. A fusion powered starship has as much power as it needs to strong arm it's way through the air.

A ship like the free Trader or S-type would not be as seriously impeded by wind resistance as others. They have fairly clean hulls, and are designed o have a decent aerodynamic shape. they would have acceleration characteristics of a high-performance helicopter or VTOL.Only once they reached transonic speeds where the air can't get out of its way fast enough and basically turns into a wall will it start having problems due to drag.

trying to hit a starship that can go from zero to one hundred KPH in a few seconds is not going to be an easy ask for anyone firing a handheld weapon. It's hard enough to hit rapidly maneuvering aircraft at less than one gee of acceleration at more than a few hundred meters. If that few hundred meters in the vertical then gravity and ballistics are gong to conspire to make the shot even harder.

any ship larger than a small craft or Free Trader would most likely simply ignore your small arms fire turn its guns on the shooter and dig a nice sized hole in the ground as it vaporizes the shooter and turns a cumbic meter of earth into molten slagand if it is in a position where it can't maneuver then it can still flash fry a squad of troops in less time than it takes to power up it's drives.

It's true that a fusion plant gives you a ton of advantages, as does having contragravity for lift. However there's still an issue of resistance. Unfortunately I don't have a modeling program to give the data. I need to go back to my MT books and see how they are calculating G ratings into KPH, because airspeed is not a direct 1-1 relationship to acceleration in space. The ratings given for a 1 G ship accelerating is in a vacuum, not an atmosphere.

so it's back to don't try this at home kiddies.....if the ship doesn't simply fly out of your range after a few shots, it will burn your shadow into the nearest solid surface.

Question is, would a starship be able to actually target ground personnel? It's sensors are not designed for ground attack.

 

[wbnc]

Drag is an issue when you can't bulldoze your way through the air, mostly due to the fact that to generate power in a conventional system you have to burn fuel. More drag, more fuel, until you reach the point where you can't provide fuel fast enough, or carry enough fuel to simply shove the air aside. A fusion powered starship has as much power as it needs to strong arm it's way through the air.

A ship like the free Trader or S-type would not be as seriously impeded by wind resistance as others. They have fairly clean hulls, and are designed o have a decent aerodynamic shape. they would have acceleration characteristics of a high-performance helicopter or VTOL.Only once they reached transonic speeds where the air can't get out of its way fast enough and basically turns into a wall will it start having problems due to drag.

trying to hit a starship that can go from zero to one hundred KPH in a few seconds is not going to be an easy ask for anyone firing a handheld weapon. It's hard enough to hit rapidly maneuvering aircraft at less than one gee of acceleration at more than a few hundred meters. If that few hundred meters in the vertical then gravity and ballistics are gong to conspire to make the shot even harder.

any ship larger than a small craft or Free Trader would most likely simply ignore your small arms fire turn its guns on the shooter and dig a nice sized hole in the ground as it vaporizes the shooter and turns a cumbic meter of earth into molten slagand if it is in a position where it can't maneuver then it can still flash fry a squad of troops in less time than it takes to power up it's drives.

It's true that a fusion plant gives you a ton of advantages, as does having contragravity for lift. However there's still an issue of resistance. Unfortunately I don't have a modeling program to give the data. I need to go back to my MT books and see how they are calculating G ratings into KPH, because airspeed is not a direct 1-1 relationship to acceleration in space. The ratings given for a 1 G ship accelerating is in a vacuum, not an atmosphere.

so it's back to don't try this at home kiddies.....if the ship doesn't simply fly out of your range after a few shots, it will burn your shadow into the nearest solid surface.

Question is, would a starship be able to actually target ground personnel? It's sensors are not designed for ground attack.

Air resistence in an earth type atmosphere won't affect a streamlined starship that much. if ou look at the aerodynamics of a shuttle it's not exactly sleek. but it can accelerate at 3 gees for brief periods before it expends its boosters and is running on its own rockets,

Below transonic I wouldn't think the drag would slow a ship that Much. You really only need a specialized shape when trying to exceed Mach one. if you drop a house off a cliff it accelerates at 1 Gee, and it's as aerodynamic as well a house. Air resistance does affect terminal velocity,but not A 747 can exceed mach one in a dive and it is not much more streamlined than a free trader or Scout. it has a rather blunt nose.

I fired up an online calculator and ran the math at one Gee a ship will reach transonic speeds in around 30 seconds. If you only allow for half a gee in a atmosphere it will still reach mach one in one minute. wich is impressive considering most frontline generation 4 fighters can't go from zero to mach one that fast. Very few aircraft can generate 1 gee in straight line flight.


as for the sensors, I'd have to sa yes they can target an object the size of a man. I have no idea how the backscatter from the ground would foul up a TL-12 radar, but the lidar would have no problems. and technically if yu have a radar that can track anything at 100,000 Km the power output of the radar would probably cook a man like a microwave at a few kilometers....or at least remove him fro the gene poll by means of sterilization.

 

[-Daniel-]

Question is, would a starship be able to actually target ground personnel? It's sensors are not designed for ground attack.

You say target like it matters. Sweep the beam back and forth and bathe the area the shots came from. Any laser that powerful and that close just is overkill. Melt everything in the area and the man sized target becomes a man sized burnt crisp. :lol:

 

[Condottiere]

It's the heat that gets you.

Always contract a good tiler.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Yes, we can target people:

When spacecraft are involved in combat against Travellers or vehicles directly, or against other spacecraft at Close range (10km or less) use the Close Range Combat rules.

We do not even have to hit them directly:

When attacking a Ground target, Spacecraft weapons can be assumed to have the Blast 10 trait.

If a spacecraft weapon can hit a spaceship (~10 m) at 50000 km, they should be able to hit something the size 1/50000 m at 1 km, i.e. the ship can choose which individual strand of hair on your head they want to target.

 

[phavoc]

Air resistence in an earth type atmosphere won't affect a streamlined starship that much. if ou look at the aerodynamics of a shuttle it's not exactly sleek. but it can accelerate at 3 gees for brief periods before it expends its boosters and is running on its own rockets,

Below transonic I wouldn't think the drag would slow a ship that Much. You really only need a specialized shape when trying to exceed Mach one. if you drop a house off a cliff it accelerates at 1 Gee, and it's as aerodynamic as well a house. Air resistance does affect terminal velocity,but not A 747 can exceed mach one in a dive and it is not much more streamlined than a free trader or Scout. it has a rather blunt nose.

I fired up an online calculator and ran the math at one Gee a ship will reach transonic speeds in around 30 seconds. If you only allow for half a gee in a atmosphere it will still reach mach one in one minute. wich is impressive considering most frontline generation 4 fighters can't go from zero to mach one that fast. Very few aircraft can generate 1 gee in straight line flight.


as for the sensors, I'd have to sa yes they can target an object the size of a man. I have no idea how the backscatter from the ground would foul up a TL-12 radar, but the lidar would have no problems. and technically if yu have a radar that can track anything at 100,000 Km the power output of the radar would probably cook a man like a microwave at a few kilometers....or at least remove him fro the gene poll by means of sterilization.

Doing a little forum digging and this was discussed in great detail (with maths!) a few years ago: http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=89&t=56475

Yes, we can target people:

When spacecraft are involved in combat against Travellers or vehicles directly, or against other spacecraft at Close range (10km or less) use the Close Range Combat rules.

We do not even have to hit them directly:

When attacking a Ground target, Spacecraft weapons can be assumed to have the Blast 10 trait.

If a spacecraft weapon can hit a spaceship (~10 m) at 50000 km, they should be able to hit something the size 1/50000 m at 1 km, i.e. the ship can choose which individual strand of hair on your head they want to target.

I'm referring to the idea that space craft sensors are designed to work in space. Individuals on the ground aren't the same as space objects, thus the sensors are not necessarily calibrated to detect people. And, based upon the quote you are stating, nothing there even talks about the idea of how you would use RADAR/LIDAR to target a person on the ground. Yes, I'm very aware it's a game, and I'm painfully aware that MGT does a horrible job of actually explaining how tech works.

As for hitting them "directly", well, dirt is great for armor. Combat in the atmosphere will be different because you have concepts like pressure, and heat, and even sound, that would affect your target which you don't have in space. That would be the blast effect, though I scratch my head trying to figure out how you get a blast effect out of a laser weapon.

A person is a far smaller target than a ship, so yes, it's reasonable to have questions.

 

[Condottiere]

If you want to be sure of hitting anything, you have to use the Force.

Outside of that, a beam laser that you can lead to the target.

 

[wbnc]

Air resistence in an earth type atmosphere won't affect a streamlined starship that much. if ou look at the aerodynamics of a shuttle it's not exactly sleek. but it can accelerate at 3 gees for brief periods before it expends its boosters and is running on its own rockets,

Below transonic I wouldn't think the drag would slow a ship that Much. You really only need a specialized shape when trying to exceed Mach one. if you drop a house off a cliff it accelerates at 1 Gee, and it's as aerodynamic as well a house. Air resistance does affect terminal velocity,but not A 747 can exceed mach one in a dive and it is not much more streamlined than a free trader or Scout. it has a rather blunt nose.

I fired up an online calculator and ran the math at one Gee a ship will reach transonic speeds in around 30 seconds. If you only allow for half a gee in a atmosphere it will still reach mach one in one minute. wich is impressive considering most frontline generation 4 fighters can't go from zero to mach one that fast. Very few aircraft can generate 1 gee in straight line flight.


as for the sensors, I'd have to sa yes they can target an object the size of a man. I have no idea how the backscatter from the ground would foul up a TL-12 radar, but the lidar would have no problems. and technically if yu have a radar that can track anything at 100,000 Km the power output of the radar would probably cook a man like a microwave at a few kilometers....or at least remove him fro the gene poll by means of sterilization.

Doing a little forum digging and this was discussed in great detail (with maths!) a few years ago: http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=89&t=56475

Yes, we can target people:

When spacecraft are involved in combat against Travellers or vehicles directly, or against other spacecraft at Close range (10km or less) use the Close Range Combat rules.

We do not even have to hit them directly:

When attacking a Ground target, Spacecraft weapons can be assumed to have the Blast 10 trait.

If a spacecraft weapon can hit a spaceship (~10 m) at 50000 km, they should be able to hit something the size 1/50000 m at 1 km, i.e. the ship can choose which individual strand of hair on your head they want to target.

I'm referring to the idea that space craft sensors are designed to work in space. Individuals on the ground aren't the same as space objects, thus the sensors are not necessarily calibrated to detect people. And, based upon the quote you are stating, nothing there even talks about the idea of how you would use RADAR/LIDAR to target a person on the ground. Yes, I'm very aware it's a game, and I'm painfully aware that MGT does a horrible job of actually explaining how tech works.

As for hitting them "directly", well, dirt is great for armor. Combat in the atmosphere will be different because you have concepts like pressure, and heat, and even sound, that would affect your target which you don't have in space. That would be the blast effect, though I scratch my head trying to figure out how you get a blast effect out of a laser weapon.

A person is a far smaller target than a ship, so yes, it's reasonable to have questions.

thanks for the info on in atmosphere movement that will be handy.


as for sensors......I will agree that there could be a better description of how sensors and such work. But I am a tech geek so any background on tech is great

It's not beyond the ability of tech to have dual mode radar, one mode for ship to ship one for ground combat. it would require extensive software support and hardware modification. JSTARS can track individuals from kilometers away. So the hardware aspect is possible. I'd say you would apply the odds for attacking smaller targets to any sensor checks made to target beyond visual range.

within visual range a bore sighted camera with some basic imaging hardware would be sufficient to hit targets within line of sight. since you dont have to account for lag between firing and impact, or projectile drop.

Burst radius for lasers is pretty straight forward. A few megajoules of energy applied to say concrete in less than a second would vaporize, shatter and turn bits of rock and earth into high-velocity fragments. on top of that you would get some decent concussion effects as vaporized material expands rapidly. You would basically be creating a blast along the lines of a mortar or howitzer scale round when you dump that much energy on a spot on the ground.

another way to achieve burst radius would be to adjust the beams width. You just bathe an area 10m across with a few megajoules of coherent photons. particle weapons wold be even more lethal the atmosphere would buffer out a lot of the ionizing Alpha/Beta radiation but the charged particles would be brutal.Since you are delivering sufficient charged particles to turn anything in its footprint into deep fried meat product 27.

 

[Solomani666]

JSTARS can track individuals from kilometers away. So the hardware aspect is possible. I'd say you would apply the odds for attacking smaller targets to any sensor checks made to target beyond visual range.

PLEASE DO NOT LEAK CLASSIFIED INFORMATION ON A PUBLIC FORUM!

To Moderators: Yes! I am using red.

Not any more.

 

[wbnc]

JSTARS can track individuals from kilometers away. So the hardware aspect is possible. I'd say you would apply the odds for attacking smaller targets to any sensor checks made to target beyond visual range.

PLEASE DO NOT LEAK CLASSIFIED INFORMATION ON A PUBLIC FORUM!

To Moderators: Yes! I am using red.

Not any more.

In order to give away classified information, one must possess classified information...that much you can find out reading articles and watching a few videos.

 

[Condottiere]

I think we should be more afraid of Google Street View, and our cell phones.

 

[-Daniel-]

I think we should be more afraid of Google Street View, and our cell phones.

Or psychos with Automatic firearms. :lol: