Maybe move that dome radar on the bridge back a few feet and put it there? Should give good coverage for the traverse limits on the gun
Advertisement
by Dewhurst-Narculis » Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:12 am
by Stasnov » Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:14 am
Puzikas wrote:"Wanna know how I got these scars?"- Gorby probably
Yalos wrote:"Nazi Germany lost WW2 because it thought like an NS player"
by Imperial Cirasthayi » Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:45 am
Kassaran wrote:Imperial Cirasthayi wrote:You could do both, depending on how good your railguns are. If you can do a rapid-fire accurate railgun (this is probably a PMT thing given current power reqs and recoil), then you can CIWS. Otherwise it's a main turret weapon for very long range artillery support.
Incidentally, a railgun is not a line of sight weapon. The projectile moves very fast, but it is nevertheless a projectile and is affected by gravity. Given appropriate launch velocity and range, it is absolutely possible to perform over-the-horizon strikes, and that's the intended purpose of the railguns in development by the US Navy today.
What recoil?! A railgun is built to lower recoil, not raise it. People tend to think that the more powerful the gun, the more the recoil is, but recently, with the advent of electro-magnetic propulsion leading to the coil-gun and the rail-gun, people forget why recoil exists in the first place. Recoil is what happens when that explosion inside your gun that ignites the gun-powder to propel your bullet also presses against you. Initially we just made a stock to take the recoil, but nowadays we have intense spring and low-recoil designs meant to neutralize it. The same goes for Naval guns and here's the thing, railguns are only so lovely because they lower the chance of needing to compensate for recoil. How? By simply using electricity to propel the round forward, not gunpowder. Electricity does the work, and now you don't have a kilogram of explosives detonating in the barrel so you can focus on important things.
Something else people forget, you can slow down how fast a round is going. Right now we're simply using the highest power settings because that's what we know very well, but we could just as well turn down the power supplied to the rail-gun. This in return would allow the round to be travelling slower, and if we were using something other than a kinetic round- say, a High Explosive anti-ship shell, then you could really do some damage by factoring in the distance of your enemy and seeing if the shell has the muzzle velocity resistance (because some shells aren't really built for leaving a gun going just over Mach 8.5), so you could instead have them leaving the barrel at the same speed as- say- a low-velocity artillery shell at 700 m/s or so.
by The Soodean Imperium » Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:37 am
Stasnov wrote:Guys, can somebody help me with this ship? http://s1368.photobucket.com/user/RedTe ... a.png.html
I made it (for the most part) by using radars and stuff from ships i found on shipbucket. So yeah, i don't know the names of the radars
Also, what would be the displacement of a ship that size?
by Urran » Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:29 am
The Blood Ravens wrote: How wonderful. Its like Japan, and 1950''s America had a baby. All the racism of the 50s, and everything else Japanese.
by The Soodean Imperium » Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:38 am
Urran wrote:I have brilliant idea, a corevette armed with only CWIS!
by Imperial Cirasthayi » Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:43 am
The Soodean Imperium wrote:Urran wrote:I have brilliant idea, a corevette armed with only CWIS!
I don't think CIWS works the way you think it does...
Although, patrol boats with 30mm CIWS fore and aft made up most of the USSR's border-patrol force, though that was more a matter of self-defense and limited anti-surface capability than "shoot down storms of missiles."
by Urran » Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:47 am
The Soodean Imperium wrote:Urran wrote:I have brilliant idea, a corevette armed with only CWIS!
I don't think CIWS works the way you think it does...
Although, patrol boats with 30mm CIWS fore and aft made up most of the USSR's border-patrol force, though that was more a matter of self-defense and limited anti-surface capability than "shoot down storms of missiles."
The Blood Ravens wrote: How wonderful. Its like Japan, and 1950''s America had a baby. All the racism of the 50s, and everything else Japanese.
by Stasnov » Sun Nov 23, 2014 1:18 pm
The Soodean Imperium wrote:Stasnov wrote:Guys, can somebody help me with this ship? http://s1368.photobucket.com/user/RedTe ... a.png.html
I made it (for the most part) by using radars and stuff from ships i found on shipbucket. So yeah, i don't know the names of the radars
Also, what would be the displacement of a ship that size?
As an additional note, you will need to rethink the placement of that P-700. It's almost twice the diameter of the Klub series, though incidentally it's less than a meter longer than the 2-stage 3M54 with booster. At first glance, this would seem to offer the opportunity of "quad-packing" Klubs into a P-700 cell, but this is not the case either; P-700 is "cold-launched" by a mechanism inside the ship, and its interior launch tubes are actually mounted at a ~40 degree angle rather than being properly vertical. Which, incidentally, means you can't have them in the stern here as they'd overlap with the hangar internals.
If I were you, I'd toss the P-800s, put the P-700s in the forward set of cells, and use the aft set of cells for the Klubs.
Puzikas wrote:"Wanna know how I got these scars?"- Gorby probably
Yalos wrote:"Nazi Germany lost WW2 because it thought like an NS player"
by Gallan Systems » Sun Nov 23, 2014 1:55 pm
The Soodean Imperium wrote:Urran wrote:I have brilliant idea, a corevette armed with only CWIS!
I don't think CIWS works the way you think it does...
Although, patrol boats with 30mm CIWS fore and aft made up most of the USSR's border-patrol force, though that was more a matter of self-defense and limited anti-surface capability than "shoot down storms of missiles."
by The Soodean Imperium » Sun Nov 23, 2014 11:27 pm
Gallan Systems wrote:The Soodean Imperium wrote:I don't think CIWS works the way you think it does...
Although, patrol boats with 30mm CIWS fore and aft made up most of the USSR's border-patrol force, though that was more a matter of self-defense and limited anti-surface capability than "shoot down storms of missiles."
Clearly you don't play "WRD".
by The Akasha Colony » Wed Nov 26, 2014 4:49 am
by New Frenco Empire » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:24 pm
by Newne Thernania » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:29 pm
by New Frenco Empire » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:33 pm
by Greater Soviet Ukraine » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:37 pm
by Spirit of Hope » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:38 pm
New Frenco Empire wrote:Estovnia wrote:
No.
Your exo-atmospheric fleet should be capable of sub-orbit operations
if needed, you should have a few subs for hunting down xeno underwater bases
This would be built around the justification that the space fleet is too valuable (early FT, after all) to keep around for peacekeeping or sustained operations in situations where orbital dominance is achieved. Hence, it's done the "old fashioned" way.
Sounds fine to me, but is it worth it even with that argument factored in?
Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!
by The Akasha Colony » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:38 pm
New Frenco Empire wrote:This would be built around the justification that the space fleet is too valuable (early FT, after all) to keep around for peacekeeping or sustained operations in situations where orbital dominance is achieved. Hence, it's done the "old fashioned" way.
Sounds fine to me, but is it worth it even with that argument factored in?
by New Frenco Empire » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:40 pm
Greater Soviet Ukraine wrote:Ocean navies are so 2020.
by Greater Soviet Ukraine » Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:17 pm
by New Frenco Empire » Sat Nov 29, 2014 12:28 am
Greater Soviet Ukraine wrote:New Frenco Empire wrote:You obviously aren't reading my latest inquiry.
@everyone else
Point taken. I might keep something around for submarines, though. They'll still be handy.
I'm pretty sure that by the time you colonize your solar system, oceans will just been seen as huge containers for life support. Shipping will be outdated by faster orbital systems, or at least complicated with all the water extractors, so submarines are useless, mostly. But oceans should still be defended, because they give water, oxygen, and hydrogen to off-world colonies.
by Gallan Systems » Sat Nov 29, 2014 12:33 am
by New Frenco Empire » Sat Nov 29, 2014 1:00 am
Gallan Systems wrote:Airplanes obsoleted container ships, so clearly starships will obsolete them too.
by The New Lowlands » Sat Nov 29, 2014 3:15 am
New Frenco Empire wrote:Greater Soviet Ukraine wrote:I'm pretty sure that by the time you colonize your solar system, oceans will just been seen as huge containers for life support. Shipping will be outdated by faster orbital systems, or at least complicated with all the water extractors, so submarines are useless, mostly. But oceans should still be defended, because they give water, oxygen, and hydrogen to off-world colonies.
Ocean worlds, friend.
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]
Advertisement