?

Theemile wrote:
Plus fusion reactor, spider drive, structure, stealth hardware, sensors and AI. Normal Grasers lock onto a sidewall and use it for their final lensing, so you've gotta have a grav lens projector as well (as all old spinal mounts must have). So a Grav torp has gotta be an easy 5, if not 8 Ktons - or 80% of a old LAC.

I'm guessing the MAN torps are at least shrike sized. But it's a guess.

Jonathan_S wrote:Their firing time seems kind of irrelevant in a missile combat situation. Those things are usually closing at better than 80% the speed of light. Heck it’ll fly through the entire formation end well under one second, so make it burn longer than 3 seconds, doesn’t matter. As is is there wouldn’t be anything in range after 3 seconds.

Maybe. But, if firing time and mode are both mission selectable before or after launch, they would be that much more practical. Like for instance when launching on a Fleet of sitting ducks in space. Or when attacking infrastructure which is somewhat close together. It should even be possible to fire from behind a formation that has formed up into a wall of battle hoping for up the kilt shots as you travel thru the formation.

Jonathan_S wrote:I also think you’re overestimating their effect on anything protected by an active sidewall; so far we’ve only seen the graser torps hit poorly armored objects that lacked sidewall protection. Expecting to one shot kill an SD with a single CL graser seems optimistic; no mater how close it fires from.

But I lack faith than even our resident tech wizards can take an energy weapon mount that’s been roughly the same size for centuries and apply the 80-90% shrink Ray you’d need to even start thinking about squeezing it into an MDM.

Correction. That is a 3-second-firing-graser torp. I accept that it isn't popular, but we don't know for sure. It reminds me of the conversation about an orphaned MK-23E control missile having no effect when ramming. Let's agree to place them both in the pill bottle. The large pills bottle. I'm thinking a 3-second-firing graser at strafing range, should have as much effect as TWTSNBN fired at range.

cthia wrote: I'm thinking a 3-second-firing graser at strafing range, should have as much effect as TWTSNBN fired at range.

Long duration beams require long dwell time to be useful.

At a relative closing velocity of 250,000km/sec, what is the minimum effective range needed for a 3 second beam from a CA graser to get 3 seconds of dwell time on a SD? I see this (ignoring relativity) as 750,000 km.

What is the stated effective range of a CA graser against an SD?
It appears this is under 100,000 km.

So I don't think this will work as you think.

kzt wrote:

cthia wrote: I'm thinking a 3-second-firing graser at strafing range, should have as much effect as TWTSNBN fired at range.

Long duration beams require long dwell time to be useful.

At a relative closing velocity of 250,000km/sec, what is the minimum effective range needed for a 3 second beam from a CA graser to get 3 seconds of dwell time on a SD? I see this (ignoring relativity) as 750,000 km.

What is the stated effective range of a CA graser against an SD?
It appears this is under 100,000 km.

So I don't think this will work as you think.

The more I think about it, kzt, I think it may work even better. This thing could turn out to be a surprise as far as how effective it actually is. It seems it would fit right in with the Apollo program and is a shoe-in for the next force multiplying iteration.

Actually, the effect of this missile is to INCREASE dwell time by increasing time on target. First off, you must not become too married to the 3-seconds as an absolute. At any rate, consider that a GA missile can only fire for microseconds. Which means it has to wait for the optimum range from target. But a missile in general doesn't HAVE to wait until it is at its "optimum" range before it begins firing. It can begin to fire BEFORE its optimum position, placing its output on target before optimum range on thru optimum range and continuing right on thru the ascending side of optimum. The stilettos of a graser may still be effective even if it is delivered outside of "optimum" range. A GA missile can't accomplish that because its firing time is measured in microseconds.

Plus, the geometry of an attack may actually utilize all three seconds. Consider a stern chase like Honor's battle with Sirius. When firing missiles in a stern chase, dwell time is longer. And strafing possibilities are increased naturally.

And, depending on the geometry of the attack, if the missile's bearing is a head-on engagement then its stilletos are ever impacting the sidewall, INCREASING in intensity in a kind of Doppler Effect. There is no way a sidewall can withstand increasing directed energy. Plus, with Apollo, the pirouette CAN be programmed to keep as much of the energy focused on the same section of the sidewalls.

Also, as I said upstream, firing for longer greatly increases the chances of up the kilt shots by sustained firing until the open throat of the wedge is FINALLY exposed - the throat of the ship you are attacking, or that of some unfortunate soul who happens to turn his ass towards you. Maneuvering can consistently get you killed in a sea of these things. Guys, the first time this thing is used to fire for effect, I think it's even going to frighten the GA.

"WTF!!! "
"The pinball effect! "
"OMG! Grasers have now become machine guns!"

It's a giant missile. It's very distinctive. You can see it coming for minutes.

You roll ship to put the wedge between the missile and your ship.

kzt wrote:It's a giant missile. It's very distinctive. You can see it coming for minutes.

You roll ship to put the wedge between the missile and your ship.

Yep. "Guns" taught us aboard Fearless that we can not get something the size of a nuclear device into attack range.(?) Unless we sneak it in. So, yes, if it remains as huge as it is even after the GA gets its hands on it, the point is moot.

But what if it can be scaled down to a more practical size? You know, I wonder how much longer GA missiles could fire if they were pushed to the point of slagging.

This Death Blossom mode is also a possibility for the MA. If they could manage to actually spin the huge missile. But again, I'm doubtful whether a sidewall can handle sustained 3-second graser fire. From point blank range.

cthia wrote:

kzt wrote:Long duration beams require long dwell time to be useful.

At a relative closing velocity of 250,000km/sec, what is the minimum effective range needed for a 3 second beam from a CA graser to get 3 seconds of dwell time on a SD? I see this (ignoring relativity) as 750,000 km.

What is the stated effective range of a CA graser against an SD?
It appears this is under 100,000 km.

So I don't think this will work as you think.

The more I think about it, kzt, I think it may work even better. This thing could turn out to be a surprise as far as how effective it actually is. It seems it would fit right in with the Apollo program and is a shoe-in for the next force multiplying iteration.

Actually, the effect of this missile is to INCREASE dwell time by increasing time on target. First off, you must not become too married to the 3-seconds as an absolute. At any rate, consider that a GA missile can only fire for microseconds. Which means it has to wait for the optimum range from target. But a missile in general doesn't HAVE to wait until it is at its "optimum" range before it begins firing. It can begin to fire BEFORE its optimum position, placing its output on target before optimum range on thru optimum range and continuing right on thru the ascending side of optimum. The stilettos of a graser may still be effective even if it is delivered outside of "optimum" range. A GA missile can't accomplish that because its firing time is measured in microseconds.

Plus, the geometry of an attack may actually utilize all three seconds. Consider a stern chase like Honor's battle with Sirius. When firing missiles in a stern chase, dwell time is longer. And strafing possibilities are increased naturally.

And, depending on the geometry of the attack, if the missile's bearing is a head-on engagement then its stilletos are ever impacting the sidewall, INCREASING in intensity in a kind of Doppler Effect. There is no way a sidewall can withstand increasing directed energy. Plus, with Apollo, the pirouette CAN be programmed to keep as much of the energy focused on the same section of the sidewalls.

Also, as I said upstream, firing for longer greatly increases the chances of up the kilt shots by sustained firing until the open throat of the wedge is FINALLY exposed - the throat of the ship you are attacking, or that of some unfortunate soul who happens to turn his ass towards you. Maneuvering can consistently get you killed in a sea of these things. Guys, the first time this thing is used to fire for effect, I think it's even going to frighten the GA.

"WTF!!! "
"The pinball effect! "
"OMG! Grasers have now become machine guns!"

You are missing something, the gtorp cannot see a ship through it's sidewall - it's sensors are even more myopic than a starships's would be, and more limited because it is moving so fast and has a more distant targeting profile immediately before it starts firing it's missile. even if the beam can penetrate the sidewall, it cannot localize the ship behind it, so it needs to random walk the beam around the target area to ensure a hit the ship, so there will be no dwell in one space. so also, no secondary targets, only one. in addition, the missile has staedied it's course 100,000s of kms further out, making it easier for defenses to hit during it's attack phase. yes, it can fire further out, but it will probably be destroyed before it can fire for the entire duation..

And as KZT pointed out, at likely closing velocities, you may be able to fire from 750,000 km out (timed to allow a 3 sec beam), but no graser can defeat a sidewall over 400-500,000 km. and small grasers need to get closer to get through heavier sidewalls. Add in ships accelerating through the target area, and you will never get anything like a 3 second beam on target. maybe 1 second doing a random walk on a sidewall, but not much more.

cthia wrote:You know, I wonder how much longer GA missiles could fire if they were pushed to the point of slagging.

I’m confused? GA missile already slag themselves on firing. The blast of their enormous grav pinch fusion warheads consume the missile’s laser head emitter rods in a fraction of a second. (Not explicitly stated but I assume the blast overwhelms the grav lending fields very shortly afterward and slags the rest of the missile body. But either way the emitter elements are gone “in a flash” and there’s nothing left to push harder/longer)

kzt wrote:

cthia wrote: I'm thinking a 3-second-firing graser at strafing range, should have as much effect as TWTSNBN fired at range.

Long duration beams require long dwell time to be useful.

At a relative closing velocity of 250,000km/sec, what is the minimum effective range needed for a 3 second beam from a CA graser to get 3 seconds of dwell time on a SD? I see this (ignoring relativity) as 750,000 km.

What is the stated effective range of a CA graser against an SD?
It appears this is under 100,000 km.

So I don't think this will work as you think.

Interesting. If I do the math right, in my head, the missile can begin firing at -250,000 km on up thru +250,000 km for a full two seconds of time on target.

Energy weapons are measured in microseconds. If GA missiles fire for one microsecond then that is two million times normal time on target.

Two microseconds and it is still one million times more time on target.

And one full second of that is ever increasing energy in a Doppler Effect!

I don't think there will be a need to waste more of a 3-second nominal firing time even on an SD. So, go into DB mode and hope for other kills.

Which leads me to this next interesting post ...

Jonathan_S wrote:Their firing time seems kind of irrelevant in a missile combat situation. Those things are usually closing at better than 80% the speed of light. Heck it’ll fly through the entire formation end well under one second, so make it burn longer than 3 seconds, doesn’t matter. As is is there wouldn’t be anything in range after 3 seconds.

I also think you’re overestimating their effect on anything protected by an active sidewall; so far we’ve only seen the graser torps hit poorly armored objects that lacked sidewall protection. Expecting to one shot kill an SD with a single CL graser seems optimistic; no mater how close it fires from.

But I lack faith than even our resident tech wizards can take an energy weapon mount that’s been roughly the same size for centuries and apply the 80-90% shrink Ray you’d need to even start thinking about squeezing it into an MDM.

If a gtorp can "potentially" fire for 3-seconds, and if two of those seconds turn out to be overkill, then one would have to wonder if these things can pulse on and off. Why not? If so, and they survive point defense with time left on the drive, they can seek out other targets. That makes them a limited reuse munition. A missile with a second life - a missile in its midlife crisis.

At any rate, after these things attack, I just don't foresee the usual beaten and battered hulls surviving. There won't be any "mission kills." Targets will either be destroyed or not. Stray fire from any other missile's DB mode will put paid to it all.

OMG! These things represent mutual missile support!, i.e., concentrating missile fire without concentrating missile fire.

But! After having been introduced to the effectiveness of these things, can you imagine the emotions on the C.O. and the bridge's faces when they hear, "It seems they are concentrating their fire on us sir."

"Huh? Wait. What?"

"Get those ships in closer!"

"Uh uh. Didn't you get the memo? These things changed our policy on mutual ship support!"


______Funnybone______

If Pavel Young would have been living in these times, he would have had a reason to run. And he would have been covered "by the book."

Oops, caught editing again.

.

First - now that I've had a chance to crunch the numbers below I see I was wrong about how fast a missile at 0.8c would pass through a formation; it'd be more than 3 seconds.

Second - due to length I've omitted any quoting of the previous post(s).



Let's set up a situation ludicrously in favor of prolonging the time a missile is within your proposed +/- 250,000 km. [1]
Give the enemy 600 gees of acceleration (something only the GA currently has), then let them start next to to missile launch site yet have an entire hour running directly away from it before it launching (which would never happen). Doing so gives them a combination of large base velocity away from the missiles (chase scenario) and keeps the missile range down so they can't work up to their full terminal velocity.

So, we've given them more acceleration that we'd expect, put them where our missiles have lower velocity than we'd expect, and given them a much larger velocity away from us that we'd ever expect.


After that 1 hour at 600 gees the enemy is 38,102,400 km away, moving at 21,168 kps (0.07c). The missiles (Mk23s - 180s @ 46,000g per drive) will catch them 461 seconds later at a range of 47,923,329 km. The missiles' velocity is up to 207,819 kps (0.69c), while the ships are now at 21,439 kps (for an relative velocity of 186,380 kps [0.62c]) and so the missiles will cover that proposed first 250,000 km in just 1.34 seconds.
Okay, that's a longer time than I'd have thought.



However the issue I think they'll have is weapon turning speed. Of course if you're headed on a direct intercept course with the target then you don't need to change heading at all - but you won't get the +250,000 km portion because you'd have splattered across their sidewall at -10km (assuming they didn't roll enough to nick you with the edge of their wedge at -450 km). But assuming you're setting up for a near miss you'd have to change your heading continuously through your prolonged firing cycle to keep on target, and I don't think missiles or their warhead can pivot quickly enough to track like that (not while maintaining the crazy levels of precision pointing necessary to hit a target from those kind of ranges).

Let's look at about the closest reasonable pass, say a closest approach of 10,000 km.[2]. When the slant range hits -250,000 km in this chase scenario the missile will be 10,000 km offset to the side of the target and 249,799.9 km behind (pointing at an an angle from flight path of 2.292°). So for the +/- 250,000 km slant range it'll actually cover a forward distance of "only" 499,599.8 km, and do so in 2.68 seconds. In that time it needs to whip around 175.416°, for an average rotational rate of 65.440°/s. That's not too bad. But let's look an the near-peak rate. As it goes from +/- 100 km from passing through its closest point of 10,000 km away from target it has to swing through 1.146° in just 0.0010731 seconds; for an average rotation rate during that 200 km of forward travel of 1067.956°/s
Okay, that's only 178 RPM, but contently varying your rotation rate from nearly zero up to over 178 rpm and back down to nearly zero; all while maintaining a sub-radian precision in your point of aim is a huge, huge, ask!


And remember, these conditions were set up to give the missiles as low an overtake velocity as plausible. Usually they'll have closing speeds about 20% faster, which would cause rotation rates in this scenario to be about 30% faster.

---

[1] As I understand it you were using -250,000 for before the missile made closest approach and +250,000 for after the missile had blown by the target and was shooting back at it -- so that's how I'm using them here1)
[2] For these scenarios I'm ignoring ship acceleration; as it would greatly complicate the calculations and at the velocities involved the effect of 3 more seconds of acceleration should be negligible.