09-03-2019, 08:35 PM | #21 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: The Utility of Bombs [Spaceships]
Which is true even when you're not in orbit.
Bombs are smaller than shells because they just have the warhead, but not the propellent. So the only way to throw them at an enemy is to move the whole ship that way and then eject them. Guns at least impart some delta-V to the warhead. Missiles have more, and can apply it other than just at the point of launch. |
09-03-2019, 08:51 PM | #22 | |
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Land of Enchantment
|
Re: The Utility of Bombs [Spaceships]
Quote:
Yes, that's the way these bombs would work. Once deorbited, they go ballistic just like Apollo as the launching ship burns to re-orbit away. That's the only difference- the deorbit drives are on the launching ship instead of a disposable service module. The bombs can maneuver even while in the plasma envelope- not much but at those altitudes and velocities it doesn't take much- and then they start guidance as soon as the plasma resolves a few miles high. Without a warhead these are Thor, a.k.a. Rods from God. But there is no reason their mass can't be warhead, obviously. This is all meant to emulate Traveller's ortillery.
__________________
I'd need to get a grant and go shoot a thousand goats to figure it out. Last edited by acrosome; 09-03-2019 at 08:59 PM. |
|
09-05-2019, 03:27 AM | #23 |
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Re: The Utility of Bombs [Spaceships]
The webcomic Crimson Dark retains bombs as a feature of space combat - unguided bombs delivered by ballistic plot. Their main benefit, apparently, is that they tend to be more or less at ambient by the point they are released and have no electronic signature, which makes them very hard to detect and shoot down on their run in. In universe they are said to be hard to use effectively but nasty when used well.
|
|
|