Ship Design Philosophy

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

L. While freefalling bombs are an extremely effective (and cheap) way of destroying a target, their use does expose the carrying aircraft to danger as it is forced to overfly the enemy.

M. By adding flip-out wings and streamlining, a bomb can be made to glide to a designated target with great accuracy.

N. This upgrade can be given to any bomb, modifying it as detailed below.

O. It will gain a horizontal range equal to half the altitude of the launching aircraft.

P. Factor/zero acceleration should give it enough guidance to orientate the missile to the target.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

Q. Glide bombs adapted from existing unguided bombs such as FAB-500 and FAB-1500 using inexpensive UMPK kits have been used extensively by Russian forces in the Russian invasion of Ukraine due to their low cost and reduced vulnerability to Ukrainian air defenses compared to more sophisticated cruise missiles, hypersonic missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles with longer flight times and more easily detected propulsion systems.

R. Russian forces have been using Su-34 and Su-35 jets to launch glide bombs from within Russian-held territory beyond the range of Ukrainian air defenses.[2]

S. These glide bombs can carry between 250kg and 3 tonnes of explosives for over 60km and have been cited as one of the primary reasons for the Ukrainian retreat from the town of Avdiivka in February 2024 by the Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief General Syrskyi.[7]

T. In theory, you could use sand canisters as dumb bombs.

U. Install a guidance munitions kit on them, they become smart bombs.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

V. A very short-ranged weapon, the sandcutter fires a hail of electromagnets into the midst of an enemy sand cloud.

W. A sandcutter canister may be targeted against an enemy ship within Adjacent or Close range and a successful attack halves the protection given by any sand canisters the enemy uses that round.

X. Sand casters then have a potential range of close, somewhere in a six minute window.

Y. Close range is upto ten thousand metres.

Z. In an environment with microgravity and no atmosphere.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

1. I assume muzzle velocity would be either howitzer or mortar.

2. Would have to dig out the rules which either converts space based weapon systems to dirtside range.

3. Or dirtside equivalent weapon systems ranges, to microgravity and non atmospheric environments.

4. Fourteen cubic metres means that each canister is seven hundred thousand cubic centimetres.

5. Missiles, divided by twelve, would be 1.166666666666667 cubic metres each.

6. As a result of this efficiency, 20 missiles can be carried per ton of missile magazine connected to the IMS, rather than the usual 12.

7. This indicates that standard size for missiles is a lot less than one and one sixth cubic metres.

8. Odds are, sand canisters should be smaller as well.

9. Or not, since they don't carry a sizeable amount of explosive components, that might need to be secured.

 

[Condottiere]

2000lb High Capacity bomb specifications

​

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Bomb

​

	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]2,000-lb HC Mk I[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]2,000-lb HC Mk I-III[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Construction[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Cast Steel[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Cast Steel[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Usual weight[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]1,842lb (837.27kg)[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]1,723lb (783.18kg)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Charge/weight ratio[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]73%[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]71%[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Total length[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]162in (411.48cm)[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]131in (332.74cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Body length[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]99.5in (252.73cm)[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]89in ([/FONT]226.[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]06cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Body diameter[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]18.5in (46.99cm)[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]18.5in (46.99cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Wall thickness[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]0.19in (0.48cm)[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]0.19in (0.48cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Tail length[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]60in (152.4cm)[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]40in (101.6cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Tail width[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]18.6in (47.24cm)[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]17.9in (45.46cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Filling[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Amatol 60/40[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Amatol 60/40 or 50/50, RDX/TNT 60/40, Torpex 2[/FONT]

[/FONT]​

332 x 1'735 = 576'020 cubic centimetres

larger than a two thousand tonne bomb, including tail

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]4000lb General Purpose bomb specifications[/FONT]​

​

[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Bomb

​

	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]4,000-lb GP Mk I-II[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Construction[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Cast Steel[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Usual weight[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]3,587lb (1630.45kg)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Charge/weight ratio[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]30%[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Total length[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]106.5in (270.51cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Body length[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]79.3in (201.42cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Body diameter[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]24.5in (62.23cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Wall thickness[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]1.35in (3.42cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Tail length[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]23.5in (59.69cm)[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Tail width[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]-[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Filling[/FONT]	[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Amatol 60/40 or Amatex 51/40/9[/FONT]

[/FONT]​

252 x 3'019 = 815'130 cubic centimetres

somewhere inbetween

​

 

[Sigtrygg]

Something has gone very wrong with the formatting of that post

 

[Condottiere]

I took a look at the posted result, and decided I had made my point.

Missiles and canisters are the size of Great Patriotic War bombs.

Which means, if I stuffed a canister full of explosives, I should get the same result, at a minimum.

 

[Sigtrygg]

All I see is a page full of font this and font that, no information at all.

 

[Geir]

Does this look like gibberish to anyone else or is it just my browser?

Mostly gibberish, though there is data mixed in. (on Chrome 138.0.7204.101 anyway)

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

A. Anyway, sand canisters (and missiles) are as large an Great Patriotic War bombs.

B. It's sort of implied that missiles are aerodynamic, since they can be used within atmospheres.

C. I don't think I've ever seen claims that sand canisters are.

D. Also, because their function is to distribute widely their crystalline payload, it sort of implies their casings aren't as robust as missiles.

E. I've always been of the opinion that sand caster ordnance have a vast under utilized potential.

F. And, like missiles, launch velocity (and thus, range), should take into account launching spacecraft velocity.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

G. Missile (and I would suppose, torpedo) launches are detectable.

H. I would suppose, that the greater the acceleration, the more detectable it should be.

I. Torpedoes, being a size larger, should be more easily seen.

J. I don't recall sand canister casting being detectable.

K. And, if you can't detect it, you can't shoot it down, nor directly screw with it's electronics.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

L. Filled with explosives, you could drop them like ortillery.

M. Though, I suspect, depth charging a gas giant cloud might actually be more fruitful.

N. We might not be able to detect stealthed system defence boats lying doggo within there, but it might unnerve them sufficiently to try and bolt.

O. There's this trick where you dump a bunch of magnets on a hull.

P. The effect depends on what you'd want to achieve, from stealthily unstealthing the spacecraft, to having them create an annoying racket that echoed inside.

 

[Anstett]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law
K. There is no air resistance in space.

*Citation needed

 

[Condottiere]

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

Q. Reminiscing about Confederation meson weapon systems reminded me about long range customization.

R. Sand casters have a default range of close, or ten klix.

S. Move that up to technological level eleven, and range becomes short, or twelve hundred and a half hundred klix.

T. Even if you factor in gravity and atmospheric friction, that becomes quite a long distance, especially if it goes ballistic.

U. In space, let's say you cover two hundred and fifty klix per minute muzzle velocity, fifteen thousand klix per hour, or 4'166.67 m/s.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

V. At that range and muzzle velocity, pebble canisters should qualify for anti missile, and anti torpedo, point defence.

W. One groundscale deadly dice translates to one default dice of spacecraft damage.

X. Which bodes ill for smallcraft.

Y. With a little more guidance, we have theatre range rockets.

Z. Catapults, anyway.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments, Ordnance, and Newton's Third Law

1. We know that missiles aren't affected by firmpoint limitations.

2. Considering that firmpoints reduce weapon systems power requirements to seventy five percent listed.

3. Which, presumably, is the reason their range drops by several orders of magnitude.

4. Sand casters don't have a perceivable power requirement, like missiles.

5. Thus, we can increase their range from close to short.

6. Though, missiles have an independent propulsion.

7. And, we need the caster to catapult the canisters.

8. In which case, the scale would tilt towards the firmpointed sand canister has an adjusted range of adjacent.

9. Though, that leaves the default sand caster still able to increase it's range to short.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Is This New York's Most Cursed Skyscraper?

Buried in lawsuits, 432 Park Avenue might just be New York's most controversial skyscraper.

00:00 - Intro
02:10 - Billionaires' Row
03:23 - 432 Park Avenue
04:31 - Building 432 Park Avenue
08:48 - Launching 432
10:21 - The first lawsuit
15:49 - The latest lawsuit
17:15 - Is 432 PA a success?

1. The next Azhanti.

2. One to fifteen.

3. Twenty eight and a half metre squared.

4. Four and a quarter hundred metres tall.

5. Inner tube nine metres squared.

6. Bulkheaded.

7. Solar winds.

8. Noise problems, motion sickness, structural damage.

9. Five mechanical floors.

A. Tune mass damper.

B. Encountered structural stress damper.

C. Halved pendulum.

D. Leaky fuel tanks.

E. Lift shaft sway.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Did someone say spinal mounts?

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: Spinal Weapons are Just Awesome

1. Sturmgeschutz.

2. Economies of scale.

3. Accuracy, range, and recoil.

4. Point and click.