Advertisement
by Axis Nova » Sun Apr 24, 2011 7:17 am
by The Corparation » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:41 am
Licana wrote:The Corparation wrote:Mostly the idea is that it would be able to move faster then a missile sub an attack and have it less easily be tracked and thus be better able to evade. That, and it would fly within the nation and be escorted by fighters. (Or I could go lulzy and give it Air to air missiles) The MIRvs would due to size limitations be of a smaller size then those of slbms but they'd be designed for more precision strikes against enemy command centers. IT also wouldn't replace subs but would serve alongside them. Wouldn't field more then a few dozen carriers (20-50) each with a single missile. Their advantage would be their ability to move across the country and away from possible targets quickly and on short notice.
Aircraft will almost always be easier to track than a submarine. The problem is that, unless you plan to keep a few of these airborne at all times, it really wouldn't have any particular use, and if you do then you waste tons of fuel to keep them in the air (not to mention maintenance and other costs). Even if you did, an enemy probably could track and intercept these missile carriers (at least, much easier than they could a sub) before or immediately after an attack.
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
by Licana » Sun Apr 24, 2011 12:07 pm
Puzikas wrote:Gulf War One was like Slapstick: The War. Except, you know, up to 40,000 people died.
Vitaphone Racing wrote:Never in all my years have I seen someone actually quote the dictionary and still get the definition wrong.
Senestrum wrote:How are KEPs cowardly? Surely the "real man" would in fact be the one firing giant rods of nuclear waste at speeds best described as "hilarious".
by The Corparation » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:02 pm
Licana wrote:You'd have a very, very short window to take off in the event of an attack, and even then you have to get far enough away from the blast zone to not get taken down by it. Your main advantage also severely restricts their mobility, increasing the chances that they could be taken out by a nuclear strike (whole point of first-strike capacity is to destroy the other guy's delivery systems first, then rape the rest of their nation) You'd be much, much better off designing/building new ballistic missile submarines for retaliatory strike capacity.
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
by Golomun » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:02 am
by The Soviet Technocracy » Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:47 am
Axis Nova wrote:The problem with Project Pluto is that it's not shielded, so it will spew radiation wherever it goes. Not exactly something you want in one of your aircraft.
by Golomun » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:44 pm
Axis Nova wrote:The problem with Project Pluto is that it's not shielded, so it will spew radiation wherever it goes. Not exactly something you want in one of your aircraft.
The Soviet Technocracy wrote:That's not a disadvantage, really.
by The Soviet Technocracy » Wed Oct 05, 2011 1:48 pm
by The Corparation » Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:22 pm
The Soviet Technocracy wrote:Golomun wrote: .. wait, how so?
Because you're not going to be having a manned crew in such a aircraft. SLAM was a UCAV. It was also going to use booster rockets to accelerate itself up to proper launch speed and altitude.
Even then, by the time SLAM was canceled, they were already looking into closed cycle nuclear engines, and it's possible they would have used one on SLAM, but an open cycle is fine too.
Considering SLAM would have demolished pretty much everything in it's path (Mach 3 + 900 feet = everything dies), salting the land wouldn't have done much more harm tbh.
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
by Golomun » Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:07 pm
by The Corparation » Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:16 pm
Golomun wrote:better reference: http://www.merkle.com/pluto/pluto.html
Still, again, proper reactor shielding could negate the exhaust effects and protect the pilot of an aircraft; although the cockpit would have to be shielded no matter what.
I know boosters would have to be used in modern times, but in post modern times, could we use a secondary engine, powered by the same reactor, for acceleration to the proper speed for the ram effect to occur?
I know NASA has produced an Ion and plasma based engine's for space travel, how would we combine a NRJ engine with an Ion engine so as to not use boosters nor expensive fossil fuels?
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
by Golomun » Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:22 pm
The Corparation wrote:Golomun wrote:better reference: http://www.merkle.com/pluto/pluto.html
Still, again, proper reactor shielding could negate the exhaust effects and protect the pilot of an aircraft; although the cockpit would have to be shielded no matter what.
I know boosters would have to be used in modern times, but in post modern times, could we use a secondary engine, powered by the same reactor, for acceleration to the proper speed for the ram effect to occur?
I know NASA has produced an Ion and plasma based engine's for space travel, how would we combine a NRJ engine with an Ion engine so as to not use boosters nor expensive fossil fuels?
You can't use an ion engine in atmo, they just don't give any amount of usable thrust. Only reason they work well in space is there's no drag and even then it takes a good time to get up to speed.
by The Corparation » Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:23 pm
Golomun wrote:The Corparation wrote:You can't use an ion engine in atmo, they just don't give any amount of usable thrust. Only reason they work well in space is there's no drag and even then it takes a good time to get up to speed.
right.. so what would you suggest in order to make a Nuclear Ram jet fighter craft feasible?
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
by Axis Nova » Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:49 pm
by The Corparation » Wed Oct 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
by The Soviet Technocracy » Wed Oct 05, 2011 6:43 pm
The Corparation wrote:The Soviet Technocracy wrote:
Because you're not going to be having a manned crew in such a aircraft. SLAM was a UCAV. It was also going to use booster rockets to accelerate itself up to proper launch speed and altitude.
Even then, by the time SLAM was canceled, they were already looking into closed cycle nuclear engines, and it's possible they would have used one on SLAM, but an open cycle is fine too.
Considering SLAM would have demolished pretty much everything in it's path (Mach 3 + 900 feet = everything dies), salting the land wouldn't have done much more harm tbh.
Not to mention the fact that it was going to be dropping nuclear bombs the whole way.
SLAM was a UCAV.
Axis Nova wrote:It's definitely possible to build an aircraft powered by a closed cycle nuclear ramjet, but I don't see it being much use except as a strategic bomber or possibly a high altitude recon plane. A fighter, definitely not-- anything with one of those whacked on is going to be pretty big.
by Kazomal » Wed Oct 05, 2011 8:10 pm
The Soviet Technocracy wrote:Golomun wrote: .. wait, how so?
Because you're not going to be having a manned crew in such a aircraft. SLAM was a UCAV. It was also going to use booster rockets to accelerate itself up to proper launch speed and altitude.
Even then, by the time SLAM was canceled, they were already looking into closed cycle nuclear engines, and it's possible they would have used one on SLAM, but an open cycle is fine too.
Considering SLAM would have demolished pretty much everything in it's path (Mach 3 + 900 feet = everything dies), salting the land wouldn't have done much more harm tbh.
by Tannelorn » Fri Oct 07, 2011 4:07 am
by The Corparation » Fri Oct 07, 2011 2:49 pm
Tannelorn wrote:I have a question on PMT, I have dabbled a tad in MT, but prefer the PMT genre, my question to PMT players is this, what general year and tech level do you consider it. I see it as anything 20-120 years from now. Space stuff is moot as an MT nation that really wanted it could have colonised the solar system in the 60's with orion drives [before any arguing, the only reason we didn't build them was treaties with the russians.], so as PMT I would assume that space is a major part.
I see PMT genre as things like ghost in the shell, apple seed, heavy gear, armored trooper votoms, even battlestar galactica, cyber punk, Early Bolo books, Aliens [early] Blade runner and the like. Is this accurate to most people? I know that having FTL is not always a part of it, though when it is in PMT genre it tends to be slow as heck, or basically hard to use. I am just really curious as to the accepted tech levels and tree's of PMT on NS by most of its players.
Its usually grouped in to MT, and I am pretty sure MT players would balk at hover tanks, heavy gears, power armour and massive AI controlled tanks, and space war ships that though STL [normally anyways] are still better then what MT nation's could pull off. Also transat fighters, super dreadnought sized ships. Laser carrying tanks that shoot down airplanes and the like. So what tech level do you PMT players normally see it as.
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
by Tannelorn » Fri Oct 07, 2011 2:52 pm
by The Corparation » Fri Oct 07, 2011 3:51 pm
Tannelorn wrote:Technically an MT society could easily have jupiter colonies. Orion wasn't just a theory, it actually worked. They were going to build one and use it to go to the moon, one trip, permanent base. Look up the orion project..it will make you cry and rage against stupid cowardly governments.
It was ended because of an arms in space treaty..and thus we lost our only chance to expand in to the solar system. The modern ones like VASHRAM are a pitiful joke. The reason I ask is that I do play FT and FT itself is like...a thousand years in the future as the average at least. I remember reading MT allowed things that are in service now.
Also I made an MT nation that had power armour and AHSCA and blimps, as my people had an alt history and it didn't go over so well heh.
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting) Orbital Freedom Machine Here | A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc. | Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia- |
Making the Nightmare End | WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. - Prop 65, CA Health & Safety | This Cell is intentionally blank. |
Advertisement
Return to International Incidents
Users browsing this forum: Arakhkhar, Derez, GermanEmpire of kaisereich, New Heldervinia, New Kiwi Repupirikana, Republic Under Specters Grasp, Romanic Imperium, Russia and Collaborative States, The Daeva
Advertisement