FALL 1924: Missile possibilities

Jonathan_S wrote:

Relax wrote:I've button punched the Cataphract numbers multiple ways and nothing works. PS: 2nd stage is 60s you have labeled as 75s.

I got that 75s directly from Duckk -- and since he has access to the tech bible...

Duckk wrote:Cataphracts go 467 KPS^2 for 180 seconds, then 961 for 75

viewtopic.php?f=1&t

(And secondarily why did the 2nd stage performance seem to stay the same even as later improved cataphracts made such massive improvements to 1st stage performance?)

Not talking about original Cataphract. I am talking about the UH/TEIF Cataphract numbers which do not Work with EITHER 60s 2nd stage or 75s 2nd stage.

Or to make things work with the 84,000G and 75s, 98,000G 2nd then solving for Time for 1st gets ~200s... Now technically I suppose it is an improvement over 180s except DW loves integers of 30 or half integers in the case of CM drives. Just to keep the HV 'clean' I would have expected 210s drive time giving range of 33Mkm, not under 32Mkm as stated in the books.

That number above can be close enough to correct. On the other hand, The PREVIOUS Cataphract 70,100G missile with 19Mkm range does not work under ANY scenario as cutting 2nd stage CM drive to 60s still obtains a range of +20Mkm, not 19Mkm when first stage is 180s. If its 2nd stage drive time was like Cataphract I, @75s, it SHOULD have a stated range of 23Mk, not 19Mkm.

Even if we assume DW fumble fingered it and meant to type 60,100G instead of 70,100G, we still get a range of 20Mkm using a 75s 2nd stage drivetime.

I give up.

Relax wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:I got that 75s directly from Duckk -- and since he has access to the tech bible...
>>"Duckk">>Cataphracts go 467 KPS^2 for 180 seconds, then 961 for 75<<
viewtopic.php?f=1&t

(And secondarily why did the 2nd stage performance seem to stay the same even as later improved cataphracts made such massive improvements to 1st stage performance?)

Not talking about original Cataphract. I am talking about the UH/TEIF Cataphract numbers which do not Work with EITHER 60s 2nd stage or 75s 2nd stage.

Or to make things work with the 84,000G and 75s, 98,000G 2nd then solving for Time for 1st gets ~200s... Now technically I suppose it is an improvement over 180s except DW loves integers of 30 or half integers in the case of CM drives. Just to keep the HV 'clean' I would have expected 210s drive time giving range of 33Mkm, not under 32Mkm as stated in the books.

That number above can be close enough to correct. On the other hand, The PREVIOUS Cataphract 70,100G missile with 19Mkm range does not work under ANY scenario as cutting 2nd stage CM drive to 60s still obtains a range of +20Mkm, not 19Mkm when first stage is 180s. If its 2nd stage drive time was like Cataphract I, @75s, it SHOULD have a stated range of 23Mk, not 19Mkm.

Even if we assume DW fumble fingered it and meant to type 60,100G instead of 70,100G, we still get a range of 20Mkm using a 75s 2nd stage drivetime.

I give up.

RFC may have just fumbled the numbers. I seem to recall at least one where he seemingly forgot to include some of the first stage numbers and ended up with text seeming to imply that the second stage reduced the missile's range.

But I haven't specifically tried to integrate the UH of TEIF missile numbers into my spreadsheets; so haven't yet really looked at the ones you've been fighting with.

The numbers in UH are at battle of Ajay, erm prime terminus.

I think they are also stated again at Sol.

PS: It is stated in TEIF that there was no R&D of cataphract I, II, or III done at Ganymede.

Is there actually 4 versions of Cataphracts?

Torch is Cataphract II
Fillaretta used Cataphract I's

Yet, UH, has 2 more version of Cataphract with 19Mkm range and 32Mkm range respectively.

Not that I think there is an answer, other than the author needed more range and something to talk about, but from an engineering/logistics perspective, why are there 4 versions in such a SHORT period of time?

Could be the MALIGN were scrambling extremely hard and at a war footing where ANYTHING being built was better than nothing. The ol' P47 dilemma. It had a new cooling solution/spinner wish MUCH superior aerodynamics upping its top speed significantly(somewhere on the order of 20-->40mph(depending on elevation), but would have shut down production line for I think they said 3 weeks--> 2 months and the "j" version never went into production in 1943'. Just another ~12,000 D models and slight variations of the D model named M/N got produced instead

Jonathan_S wrote:RFC may have just fumbled the numbers. I seem to recall at least one where he seemingly forgot to include some of the first stage numbers and ended up with text seeming to imply that the second stage reduced the missile's range.

That was the TEiF case, see the "Cataphract performance numbers" thread. To make the numbers as stated in the text work, the second stage would have had to have negative acceleration.

But I haven't specifically tried to integrate the UH of TEIF missile numbers into my spreadsheets; so haven't yet really looked at the ones you've been fighting with.

See the thread, where I supplied a possible explanation and made the numbers work. I don't know if they are in conflict with yours; would be nice to know if they match, in which case it would be a good indication that they are what was expected.