RUS New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 6 of 6«123456
Forum » SpaceEngine » Gameplay Discussions » How space battles would be in SE?
How space battles would be in SE?
HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 06.01.2015, 03:33 | Message # 76
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8714
Status: Offline
If anyone has ever played Mass Effect, then you should be familiar with the challenges of stealthing a large high-powered spacecraft. You need a very sophisticated set of devices to absorb/store energy emitted from the ship, and even then you only have until the heat sinks heat up beyond their containment capacity before you have to vent them, and thus break stealth. Otherwise the interior of the ship would be roasted. Even if you did create such a system, it would be a major engineering and technological challenge.




All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
 
parameciumkidDate: Wednesday, 07.01.2015, 07:02 | Message # 77
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 277
Status: Offline
^ Agreed. I wouldn't expect any but the most advanced civilizations to get good stealth working for large ships. But the way I see it stealth isn't even necessary until the ship gets close enough to be seen by its enemies.

Another idea regarding advanced civilizations and the heating problem: If we can tame wormholes to the point of being capable of building jump gates, it should be feasible to bring a wormhole along inside the ship and run pipes through it to vent heat elsewhere - and also draw power, communicate, etc. For the most part I'd imagine this to be more of a thing for motherships than smaller fighters and the like.





Intel HD Graphics 4000 ;P
 
WatsisnameDate: Wednesday, 07.01.2015, 08:17 | Message # 78
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2611
Status: Offline
Quote parameciumkid ()
*on-board wormholes as a trash bin for waste heat*


Eh, I, err...



That's some pretty amazingly advanced space-time (and heat) manipulating technology, of course, but cool idea.





 
takazorDate: Wednesday, 14.01.2015, 13:51 | Message # 79
Observer
Group: Newbies
Germany
Messages: 2
Status: Offline
Created an account just to weigh in on the stealth discussion. The main problem is not the heat radiation resulting from day to day operations.

If you want to attack a system, you first need to get there. One possibility is to use an Alcubierre drive, which does not need much acceleration and deceleration. However, it distorts spacetime in a highly violent manner. Doing so will certainly emit strong gravitational waves, so anyone looking for gravitational waves will know where you are and that you are coming.

If you use conventional methods to move to an enemy base, you need to accelerate from where you are, and decelerate when you are closing in. Conservation of momentum forces you to hurl something in opposite direction of travel to lose momentum. Usually you fire thrusters, which is probably orders of magnitude brighter than heat radiation (for the one you want to attack, since your thruster faces them).

The only possibility I can come up with is to decelerate using photons emitted in a greater solid angle, with a blind spot where you want to go. But that kind of deceleration is painfully weak and it would take much time for your weapon to reach its destination.

So a better option would be to hide your weapon behind a cloak of diplomacy wink
 
AerospacefagDate: Wednesday, 14.01.2015, 19:43 | Message # 80
Pioneer
Group: Users
Russian Federation
Messages: 401
Status: Offline
Quote takazor ()
If you use conventional methods to move to an enemy base, you need to accelerate from where you are, and decelerate when you are closing in.

If you really need to attack something, you do't really need to.

My concept is called "sub-light torpedo" and the idea is a spacecraft that is being accelerated to 90-99% speed of light, when energy of each gram of material, be it steel or a fluff, is approaching to that of nuclear material. In other words, the more you approach to the light speed, the more energy is used, and more energy is stored in the projectile. So to say, if there's a steel cylinder with diameter 1 m and height 5 m, it is accelerated to the subluminal speed and it moves inertially or it has some primitive guidance system. It is almost impossible to notice(the light only outpaces it's speed by several percent) it in time and almost impossible to intercept(you need the projectile with similar energy characteristics). It has a mass of 30 tons a kinetic energy of about 1.5*10^21 joules, which is the equivalent of equal amount of antimatter. Roughly the impact of an asteroid several kilometers wide.

There's a similar concept in "Iron Sunrise", where the relativistic bombers, or "R-bombers" are used - with the same basic idea and effect.


Edited by Aerospacefag - Wednesday, 14.01.2015, 19:44
 
takazorDate: Thursday, 15.01.2015, 09:48 | Message # 81
Observer
Group: Newbies
Germany
Messages: 2
Status: Offline
Quote
My concept is called "sub-light torpedo"


That is of course feasible, if you just want to destroy everything. But where is the sense in that? Your enemy has built infrastructure which you can use if you conquer it.

Such an attack might be very effective against planetary targets. If you deliver enough energy to cause an ice age, the planet will not be habitable for a long time. However, you might have your difficulties in hitting anything significantly smaller than that. If the industry is based on scattered space stations in an asteroid belt, the damage you would inflict with such a device would be limited to one such station, if you hit anything at all. The faster you are, the harder it is to change direction significantly!

Also, you would not need to take any special measures to hide the torpedo, since it is hardly detectable anyways. So it does not warrant the need for a stealth device.
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Thursday, 15.01.2015, 12:20 | Message # 82
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4799
Status: Offline
Quote takazor ()
Your enemy has built infrastructure which you can use if you conquer it.

You can't use enemy infrastructure. Its systems uses unknown software which can have a lot of backdoors and trojans. And without this soft all systems are useless. So the better solution is just destroy all smile





 
AerospacefagDate: Thursday, 15.01.2015, 15:06 | Message # 83
Pioneer
Group: Users
Russian Federation
Messages: 401
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
So the better solution is just destroy all

Reprocess into valuable materials sounds better. It's no use to reprocess enemy base if it's dispersed through entire circumplanetary space, so the careful application of force is advised.

Quote takazor ()
Such an attack might be very effective against planetary targets. If you deliver enough energy to cause an ice age, the planet will not be habitable for a long time.

That limits the use of such weapons to planets that are not very hospitable, in theory at least - they are too valuable for their notable quality.

Even though the object itself is very small, the force of such rocket isn't really that limited for planets with atmosphere. It's powerful enough to rip open the planet crust, but the problem is that it has too much speed and I think it will be annihilated on contact with atmosphere, causing tremendous thermonuclear blast at the height of 50+ km and wiping out the good portion of some continent.
 
WatsisnameDate: Thursday, 15.01.2015, 16:04 | Message # 84
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2611
Status: Offline
Quote Aerospacefag ()
1.5*10^21 joules


More like between double and ten times that amount, depending on where you are between .9 and .99c. Formula is KE=(γ-1)mc2, where γ=(1-v2/c2)-1/2

Such a kinetic weapon is excellent in terms of difficulty in detection and avoidance, as well as the amount of energy delivered, but is absolutely horrible in terms of energy cost to deliver vs. energy delivered. (A 1:1 ratio. You can do tremendously better with conventional explosives or nukes). All of that kinetic energy must be supplied by the launch system. There's also the question of how one actually accelerates a rigid mass to such speeds without either taking a huge amount of time (and space) or otherwise vaporizing it in the process.

Added:
Quote
It's powerful enough to rip open the planet crust, but the problem is that it has too much speed and I think it will be annihilated on contact with atmosphere, causing tremendous thermonuclear blast at the height of 50+ km and wiping out the good portion of some continent.


The mass of atmosphere it penetrates (if it's somewhat Earthlike) would suggest it is destroyed before hitting the ground (the impact depth approximation). However, it's moving so fast that most of the mass of the projectile, while in the process of exploding, hits the ground before it can disperse very much, proceeding to scour its way through the crust. Much of the actual destruction from this weapon thus comes from the subterranean explosion. The shockwave and radiation from atmospheric passage is definitely not trivial either, but the whole event transpires so fast it barely matters. smile





 
letaxDate: Friday, 23.01.2015, 12:04 | Message # 85
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 9
Status: Offline
Uh, eh. Battles in space with realistic physics. Anyone who ever tried to build a missile launching ship (or a kamikaze attack vessel) in Kerbal Space Program and tried to hit a stationary orbiting target knows how hard it is to even set it up to hit the target (without guided missile mod).

It is fun, but it is hard. Maybe space shotgun would be one of solutions - release a explosive case with its own propulsion system filled with smaller projectiles which would be shot at the target when the shell would be close enough. Kessler mayhem would ensue, though biggrin That would be useful mainly for a bombardment of the planet from orbit, I think.

Of course, with a rocket with self-guidance and course correction thrusters it is easy to hit anything.
 
schwarzwolfDate: Saturday, 24.01.2015, 19:58 | Message # 86
Astronaut
Group: Users
Germany
Messages: 40
Status: Offline
Its most likely, that the combat will function with laser and guided missiles for large distances. Not so much like in many sci-fi films, more like in today warfire. The laser could possible work with computer controlled targeting system.

Possible would be aswell railguns and coilguns.
Looking at the Pinch effect, it might even be possible to have plasma and particle beam weapons against my earlier toughts.

Shotgun style weapons would most likely only work for short distance fighter defense or defense against missiles.

To KSP, yes combat is more or less modded in and the missiles are rocket parts. Without a guidance, it would be really difficult to hit a moving target in a larger distance. So i see it like a air battle in todays time. non guided missiles wouldn't be most likely be used. Only to torp some station, so something large not mobile.
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Gameplay Discussions » How space battles would be in SE?
Page 6 of 6«123456
Search: