Ship Design Philosophy

Condottiere said:
More likely braking.


Oh yeah, do a high speed ballistic entry at Mach 3-5 then brake hard to get nape of the earth as fast as possible. heat shielding lets you make high speed entries rather than come down like a nice slow target drone.
 
And with inertial compensation, the crew and passengers wouldn't be effected.

You also want to stop on a dime in the landing zone.

We should call the drop ships Ospreys.
 
Condottiere said:
And with inertial compensation, the crew and passengers wouldn't be effected.

You also want to stop on a dime in the landing zone.

We should call the drop ships Ospreys.
There would definitely be a needed for craft that can fill the role of an Osprey. Long range high speed over the horizon transport. a standard cutter might be useful for general purpose transport but it's not going to be much use for dropping into defended areas. or prolonged atmospheric operations. Of course, you have to trade cargo capacity for, speed, armor and weapons but being able to survive a bit better in a contested area is a good tradeoff.
 
Speaking of trade-offs, you then have to reconfigure the chapter on upgrades to allow balancing off the advantages and disadvantages.

As for the standard cutter, while it's probably vulnerable in a contested aerospace zone, probably is sufficient when the natives aren't well equipped.
 
Spaceships: Armaments and Ye of Little Mind

If smallcraft missiles are restricted to close range, and if at close range or shorter missiles, and presumably torpedoes, become dumb, what's the point of arming smallcraft with them?
 
Condottiere said:
Spaceships: Armaments and Ye of Little Mind

If smallcraft missiles are restricted to close range, and if at close range or shorter missiles, and presumably torpedoes, become dumb, what's the point of arming smallcraft with them?

Heavy damage in a small package. they are still guided they just lose the "Smart" weapon trait. torpedoes are still resistant to point defense and can mount a wide range of warheads.
 
Condottiere said:
Spaceships: Armaments and Ye of Little Mind

If smallcraft missiles are restricted to close range, and if at close range or shorter missiles, and presumably torpedoes, become dumb, what's the point of arming smallcraft with them?
I have not made that interpretation. Missile racks have no range, but missiles do. Firmpoints and hardpoints launch the same missiles, hence they have the same range?
 
AnotherDilbert said:
Condottiere said:
Spaceships: Armaments and Ye of Little Mind

If smallcraft missiles are restricted to close range, and if at close range or shorter missiles, and presumably torpedoes, become dumb, what's the point of arming smallcraft with them?
I have not made that interpretation. Missile racks have no range, but missiles do. Firmpoints and hardpoints launch the same missiles, hence they have the same range?

This is my interpretation as well.
 
Spaceships (and mini-spaceships): Engineering and Short Haul Flights

Missile flight times table says that short range, basically a thousand kilometres, can be covered immediately by a missile with six gees, which is also coincidentally Orbital Range.

So smallcraft missiles and torpedoes can easily rip out propulsion and replace them with a six gee reaction rocket, twelve percent, and a turn of fuel, one and a half percent.

A fast commercial ship limited to planetary operations won't need more than five or six gees.
 
Spaceships (and mini-spaceships): Engineering and Short Haul Flights

You could also replace the guidance systems of smallcraft missiles or torpedoes with a cheap unsophisticated one.

An interesting question would be how much stand off does a bomb pumped laser warhead need?

Long range missiles would be moot.
 
Spaceships: Expanding Universe, or Deutschland über Hulls

Like pop up turrets, aerofins should either add or subtract volume from a hull, when expanded or retracted.
 
Spaceships: Armaments and Rail, Rail Against The Sighing of the Wright

Railgun
. Advantages
.. Accurate
... dee emm plus one to all attack rolls
... requires two advantages
.. Easy to Repair
...dee emm plus one to all repair attempts
.. Energy Efficient
... reduces power consumption by twenty five percent
.. High Yield
... damage rolls replace ones with twos
.. Very High Yield
... damage rolls replace ones and twos with threes
... requires two advantages
.. Long Range
... iffy
... range is increased to the next band
... requires two advantages
.. Resilient
... of all critical hits severity reduced by one
.. Size Reduction
... done
. Disadvantages
.. Energy Inefficient
... increases power consumption by thirty percent
.. Inaccurate
... dee emm minus one to all attack rolls
.. Increased Size
... increases tonnage by twenty percent
 
Spaceships: Armaments and Doughnut Flow Went Well at the speed of Light

A spinal mounted railgun, regardless of size, fires a twenty tonne ball bearing at relativistic speed; how'd you'd differentiate enough at that speed to figure out the damage, the size of the ball bearing is the same, and so apparently is the speed, whether from a three thousand tonne launcher or a twenty thousand tonne one.

The ball bearing down on you is faster than a missile, and bigger as well, the range should extend in battle to at least very long, and if the target is on a predicted course, like a planetary object moving along it's orbit, far far away,
 
Not likely...

To accelerate a mass of 20 tonnes to ⅟₁₀ c would take about 10¹⁹ J (~5 billion kt), or about 3 × 10¹⁶ W for 360 s (1 round), or roughly 3 000 000 000 Power. The recoil would impart a speed of 600 m/s to a million tonnes ship in a fraction of a second, an acceleration of perhaps 600 G, instantly killing everyone aboard (unless the inertial compensators can handle that).

The ammo fired has to be far smaller (perhaps 1 g, less than a pistol round) and/or far slower, even if the packaging is 20 dT.


Hitting an actively evading target at 50000 km with sub-lightspeed weapons should not be trivial. Giving it Medium range (upgradable to Long) is generous enough.


More likely we are firing a few grains of sand in a pattern, hoping that one of them hits the target.
 
Accelerating something with a constant acceleration in a 100 m spinal to ⅟₁₀ c ≈ 30 000 000 m/s?

d = at²/2
v = at
so
d = vt/2
or
t = 2d/v = 2 × 100 / 30000000 ≈ 0,000007 s = 7 µs.

The acceleration then must be a = v/t ≈ 30000000 / 0,000007 ≈ 4,5 × 10¹² m/s or 450 billion G.


The recoil from accelerating a piece of gravel (1 g) to 30 000 000 m/2 in 7 µs would impart 600 m/s in 7 µs, accelerating the ship with 90 000 000 m/s² or 9 million G. Good luck surviving that...


I guess frac-c railguns have to use some kind of reactionless gravitic M-drive derivate to accelerate the munitions.
 
The game designers will have to define what are sizable fractions of the speed of light.

Half? A third? A quarter?

It actually would be pretty reckless and irresponsible to use spinal mounted railguns in heavy trafficked systems, it would be just like throwing mines into the North Sea.
 
Condottiere said:
The game designers will have to define what are sizable fractions of the speed of light.

Half? A third? A quarter?

It actually would be pretty reckless and irresponsible to use spinal mounted railguns in heavy trafficked systems, it would be just like throwing mines into the North Sea.

Okay my math is rusty but I do know where to find online calculators to crunch the numbers :D

A 1-kilogram mass accelerated to 1% the speed of light would deliver 1 Kiloton of destructive power to its target. odds are it would vaporize instantly if hit any sort of atmosphere creating a rather spectacular airburst too high up to do any good.

100 Kilogram mass = 107 Kilotons
1000 Kilograms = 1.07 megatons.

A 18143.6948Kg (20 tons) mass would deliver 19 megatons of energy to its target.

the 100 Kg round would tear through any ship it hit stem to stern if it remained intact after impact. more likely it would flash vaporize on impact and blow the bow off of the ship.


A bit of overkill to be honest, you don't have to deliver that sort of damage to be effective, and if you could keep the electromagnetic forces from melting the projectile in the barrel it would be very expensive to build.

A single 20 ton Iron projectile (1.8 meters in diameter) fired at hypersonic velocities would deliver roughly the same amount of energy as 21 tons of high explosive which is more than enough to deal critical damage to even a dreadnought. Of course, the muzzle velocity of 7100mph would limit it to very close ranges against a mobile target due to flight time. But it would sting a bit when it hit, and sand/PD/EW would be useless against it.
 
Back
Top