or just use explosive stuff with a one mile blast radius
that sounds a bit more likely to happen than them actually calculating where the shot'll end
| Gamecommunity =GCHQ= http://forum.gamecommunity.co.uk:8080/ | |
| Uber Railgun http://forum.gamecommunity.co.uk:8080/viewtopic.php?f=122&t=47818 |
Page 2 of 4 |
| Author: | Tjolbi=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
or just use explosive stuff with a one mile blast radius
that sounds a bit more likely to happen than them actually calculating where the shot'll end
|
|
| Author: | Tao [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Grey Wolf=GCHQ= wrote: elbow=GCHQ= wrote: Bodopo wrote: LeBeourfCurtaine wrote: Chips=GCHQ= wrote: Mach 7 shell? 220 Miles? Imagine trying to calculate the effects of wind currents on that thing over that distance Amazed they could lob huge bits of metal that far accurately  Negligble at Mach 7, surely? yeh from my limited knowledge of physics i would think that the shell would be carrying so much energy that to alter its flightpath wouldn't be possible by simple wind? its about 2 and a half minutes of flight time, so its travelling for long enough to be significantly affected by the wind....and over 220 miles the wind is going to change a lot....it'll be quite a challenge and it'd be interesting to see how they get over it.... if the wind speed was a constant 10 mph crosswind it'd knock you off target by over 2/3 of a mile over a full 220 miles shot. its not going to be accurate, its unguided. that's all based on a rather rudimentary approach to particle kinematics, but it seems unlikely it'll just fly in a straight line.... Sounds to me like a similar problem in sniping, hitting pinpoint accuracy with a piece of metal over a huge distance with a lot of enviromental factors, although of course on a much grander scale. Well they have that down to a fine art on the field with simple equipment. I'm sure on a nuclear powered battleship the calculations needed to aim the damn thing wouldn't be much of a problem for the onboard computers and gunner team. In my opinion anyway. Yeah read something about the world record for distance sniping, and he said that they had to aim way of the target 10's of metres to hit because of the velocity changes. |
|
| Author: | Warning Level=Bert =GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
you wouldn't be able to put explosive shot in a raigun, mainly cause it would etonate as soon asyou tried to fire it, the poitn of the solid slug is that its travelling with so much energy that does the damage. I think |
|
| Author: | Tjolbi=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Warning Level =Bert=GCHQ= wrote: you wouldn't be able to put explosive shot in a raigun, mainly cause it would etonate as soon asyou tried to fire it, the poitn of the solid slug is that its travelling with so much energy that does the damage. I think
it uses magnetic fields to propel the projectile so i'm sure they could manage something that can withstand its force 
|
|
| Author: | elbow=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
the issue is not so much calculating the trajectory as actually knowing exactly what the weather is like between here and there. |
|
| Author: | SO19Firearms=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Could they modify excalibur to work at those stresses? Or would the magnetics screw it up from the off anyway? |
|
| Author: | elbow=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I suspect the magnetics/acceleration would pretty much knacker any electrics/mechanics inside....the philosophy behind the rail gun is that whilst it is damned expensive to build, the running costs are minimal - all you need is electricity and a lump of metal |
|
| Author: | Slayer=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
So how quick would it be to cover 220 miles roughly?? Thats gotta be like 20mins or something |
|
| Author: | Tao [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Slayer=GCHQ= wrote: So how quick would it be to cover 220 miles roughly??
Thats gotta be like 20mins or something Elbow answered it earlier about 2 1/2 min, speed of sounds about 760mph. At 220 miles, would you get anything like corolis effects on the flight path? |
|
| Author: | Grey Wolf=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
elbow=GCHQ= wrote: I suspect the magnetics/acceleration would pretty much knacker any electrics/mechanics inside....the philosophy behind the rail gun is that whilst it is damned expensive to build, the running costs are minimal - all you need is electricity and a lump of metal
I'm waiting for the day when they blow up Osama with a can of beans
The whole point of Metal Gear was them putting a nuclear warhead in one of those slugs, if they could actually do that it's a little scary. Being able to deliver a nuclear payload from 200 miles within a couple of minutes that is untrackable and impossible to stop. I'm hoping that part is science fiction 
|
|
| Author: | elbow=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Tao=GCHQ= wrote: Slayer=GCHQ= wrote: So how quick would it be to cover 220 miles roughly?? Thats gotta be like 20mins or something Elbow answered it earlier about 2 1/2 min, speed of sounds about 760mph. At 220 miles, would you get anything like corolis effects on the flight path? yes, that would come into play, but don't ask me how much because I might scream....it would be significant, though not of orders of magnitude greater than the inaccuracies already present |
|
| Author: | Tjolbi=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Grey Wolf=GCHQ= wrote: The whole point of Metal Gear was them putting a nuclear warhead in one of those slugs, if they could actually do that it's a little scary. Being able to deliver a nuclear payload from 200 miles within a couple of minutes that is untrackable and impossible to stop. I'm hoping that part is science fiction
if that won't work, they'll find another way  
|
|
| Author: | LeBeourfCurtaine [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
How about some magnetic rifling? |
|
| Author: | Chips=GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Grey Wolf=GCHQ= wrote: Sounds to me like a similar problem in sniping, hitting pinpoint accuracy with a piece of metal over a huge distance with a lot of enviromental factors, although of course on a much grander scale.
Well they have that down to a fine art on the field with simple equipment. I'm sure on a nuclear powered battleship the calculations needed to aim the damn thing wouldn't be much of a problem for the onboard computers and gunner team. In my opinion anyway. Think the longest i've heard of was just over 1 mile... but within 1 mile, the winds won't vary that much - and it's likely to be the same for the snipers as for their target (or small differences). With that gun, 220 miles is a huge amount of difference and variation along the way. Whilst the sniper can count on wind being the same, his shot will probably only reach 10m above the ground before descending again in a parabola (or whatever it's called). For 220 mile range 2.5 minute flight time, the projectile will probably reach 1-2 miles in altitude at least, and wind currents vary greatly not only over the range of the firing, but also in the altitude it will go in (winds are faster higher up after all!). Chance for collateral would be so high, i assume only certain types of targets (harbours, airfields, factories) would be on the receiving end of it. Bet it could sink an aircraft carrier in one shot at 50 miles though 
Mind you, bet the ship carrying it would have been sunk by said carriers fighters and bombers before it got within 300 miles of it
220 miles is impressive, but missiles go further - and it'd come under attack before it could fire surely? |
|
| Author: | Skrunk =GCHQ= [ Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
7 times faster than the speed of sound? how can u attack that!? |
|
| Page 2 of 4 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |