[Spaceships] Warhead system

[lexington]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

One thing to remember is that Spaceships takes a fairly realistic approach to the amount kinetic energy spaceships have. Challenger and Endevour were both impacted by a paint flake in space and the second case it penetrated half the depth of the glass (which is around an inch thick). I've heard an orbiting bolt would probably go in one side and out of the other of the Space Shuttle... longways. Every built-for-purpose space weapon design and used to date have kinetic-kill.

So you can see why at miles-per-second velocity explosives aren't worth the trouble.

A explosive has the advantage of being able to cause some damage even if it misses. In a setting without superscience engines being able to deny a slightly larger area by using a a nuclear or antimatter weapon might be worth it.

The hypervelocity talk makes me wonder about enormous shaped charge weapons. Would the lack of atmosphere extend the range of the jet?

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by lexington

The hypervelocity talk makes me wonder about enormous shaped charge weapons. Would the lack of atmosphere extend the range of the jet?

It would probably do a number of complicated things to it but my best guess is that you'd get a mathematical looking cone/spray of metallic droplets instead.

Since the top of HEAT jet speed is at the bottom of orbital speeds there would only be a small niche where the HEAT offered any advantage over direct impact.

[panton41]

Originally Posted by lexington

A explosive has the advantage of being able to cause some damage even if it misses. In a setting without superscience engines being able to deny a slightly larger area by using a a nuclear or antimatter weapon might be worth it.

In space there's nothing to propagate the shock wave, so explosives really wouldn't have that large of an effective blast radius. In real-live naval warfare if it's not a direct hit the ship isn't likely to suffer enough damage to sink it. (Unless, of course, the attack comes from below where the water effectively propagates the blast waves.)

Nuclear and antimatter weapons work in Spaceships because there are other effects (hard radiation, X-Rays, heat, etc.) that serve to deliver the energy. Most of an atom bomb's blast damage on Earth comes from (and this is freakin' awesome) the air literally burning from the amount of X-Rays generated.

[lexington]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

In space there's nothing to propagate the shock wave, so explosives really wouldn't have that large of an effective blast radius. In real-live naval warfare if it's not a direct hit the ship isn't likely to suffer enough damage to sink it. (Unless, of course, the attack comes from below where the water effectively propagates the blast waves.)

Nuclear and antimatter weapons work in Spaceships because there are other effects (hard radiation, X-Rays, heat, etc.) that serve to deliver the energy. Most of an atom bomb's blast damage on Earth comes from (and this is freakin' awesome) the air literally burning from the amount of X-Rays generated.

I know that the effects are reduced due to lack of atmosphere to play with but if you fire your purely KK missile it can't afford to miss its target at all. The blast won't be nearly as effective as a direct hit from the missile as a back up it seems worth considering.

[lwcamp]

Originally Posted by lexington

I know that the effects are reduced due to lack of atmosphere to play with but if you fire your purely KK missile it can't afford to miss its target at all. The blast won't be nearly as effective as a direct hit from the missile as a back up it seems worth considering.

Realistically, the direct effects of the blast have no effect. What might be useful is using a small bursting charge to fragment a warhead at some stand-off distance. This will produce a cloud of debris that can cover a wider area, moving at about the same relative speed as the original projectile. You will want to adjust the bursting charge, size of the fragments, and stand-off distance so that the fragments offer a significantly greater chance of scoring a hit, so that the effects of the fragments is significant to the target, and so that the fragments are not so diffuse that they are unlikely to hit at all.

Luke

[panton41]

Originally Posted by lwcamp

Realistically, the direct effects of the blast have no effect. What might be useful is using a small bursting charge to fragment a warhead at some stand-off distance. This will produce a cloud of debris that can cover a wider area, moving at about the same relative speed as the original projectile. You will want to adjust the bursting charge, size of the fragments, and stand-off distance so that the fragments offer a significantly greater chance of scoring a hit, so that the effects of the fragments is significant to the target, and so that the fragments are not so diffuse that they are unlikely to hit at all.

Luke

And there's already a rule for that in Spaceships. SS1 p59 "Proximity Detonation".