Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-14-2022, 02:31 PM   #11
weby
 
weby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantasm View Post
Pretty sure this is a "changed my thought halfway through"; it's 6 rear, not 2.

But yes, an armor module - like all modules - takes up 5% of the ship's overall mass.
Indeed, wrote the thing in a different order first but was less clear so then had a copy paste error on rewrite.. :)
__________________
--
GURPS spaceship unofficial errata and thoughts: https://gsuc.roto.nu/
weby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2022, 05:33 PM   #12
Polydamas
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

When I saw the original thread topic, I thought it was about whether the GURPS Spaceships rules assume thick solid armour like in space opera or Whipple Shields like on some real spacecraft.

There are some quibbles whether spaceships with a lot of armour should have their SM reduced because so much mass is in high-density armour, but any simple rule has limits.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper

This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature
Polydamas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2022, 06:50 PM   #13
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydamas View Post
When I saw the original thread topic, I thought it was about whether the GURPS Spaceships rules assume thick solid armour like in space opera or Whipple Shields like on some real spacecraft.
I don't think there's an option for Whipple Shields anywhere in Spaceships. Such probably wouldn't count as high-density systems anymore, but would have much better performance against hypervelocity impactors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydamas View Post
There are some quibbles whether spaceships with a lot of armour should have their SM reduced because so much mass is in high-density armour, but any simple rule has limits.
As I mentioned upthread, Pyramid #3/34 has official rules for this. Basically, if you have 25% (5 systems) or more of armor, the surface area of the vessel decreases enough that a given mass of armor actually gives more protection. If you have 60% (12 systems) or more of armor, the volume of the vessel decreases enough for an outright reduction of -1 to SM. If you have 90% (18 systems) or more of armor, the volume of the vessel decreases enough for an outright reduction of -2 to SM.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2022, 08:05 PM   #14
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
I don't think there's an option for Whipple Shields anywhere in Spaceships. Such probably wouldn't count as high-density systems anymore, but would have much better performance against hypervelocity impactors.


.
They might for certain values of impactor size and velocity compared to equal masses of solid armor but not for all impactors. If the striking object is either too bg or too fast Whipple Shields would be ineffective. Also, they are ablative though against crater-making impacts (or ionizing radiation) all armor should be.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2022, 04:00 AM   #15
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
They might for certain values of impactor size and velocity compared to equal masses of solid armor but not for all impactors. If the striking object is either too bg or too fast Whipple Shields would be ineffective. Also, they are ablative though against crater-making impacts (or ionizing radiation) all armor should be.
I mean, they'd still provide DR, not outright immunity. An object that was too large and/or too fast would simply do too much damage for the improved DR to make much difference. Maybe it would be more realistic for there to only be a certain range in which the multiplier (whatever it is) applies, but I feel it would be simpler to just set a speed limit beyond which the Whipple Shield gets a sizable DR multiplier, and let the fact this doesn't work effectively against really big and/or fast targets come about naturally (from such targets dealing enough damage they basically ignore the DR, multiplier or not). Or maybe make the multiplier all-or-nothing?

And, yeah, a lot of threats spaceships face should probably ablate most if not all armor materials, but for simplicity GURPS generally reserves that option for corrosive damage.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2022, 05:18 AM   #16
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
I don't think there's an option for Whipple Shields anywhere in Spaceships. Such probably wouldn't count as high-density systems anymore, but would have much better performance against hypervelocity impactors.
If you're feeling generous, call that 'hardened'. Personally, given the mass and energy of the weapons we're looking at, I don't think they'd help much unless both layers of armour were quite think and the gap quite large - enough you couldn't really even call it 'spaced armour', but more like two complete hulls.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2022, 05:22 AM   #17
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
I mean, they'd still provide DR, not outright immunity. An object that was too large and/or too fast would simply do too much damage for the improved DR to make much difference. Maybe it would be more realistic for there to only be a certain range in which the multiplier (whatever it is) applies, but I feel it would be simpler to just set a speed limit beyond which the Whipple Shield gets a sizable DR multiplier, and let the fact this doesn't work effectively against really big and/or fast targets come about naturally (from such targets dealing enough damage they basically ignore the DR, multiplier or not). Or maybe make the multiplier all-or-nothing?

And, yeah, a lot of threats spaceships face should probably ablate most if not all armor materials, but for simplicity GURPS generally reserves that option for corrosive damage.
Once it becomes ineffective it will likely rapidly become less effective for a given mass than a single layer. Given how abstract Spaceships is, I'd just assume the designers chose the best (or least bad) option against the threats they expect the ship to face, and that this is built into the stats the system produces.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2022, 06:22 PM   #18
Polydamas
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert View Post
If you're feeling generous, call that 'hardened'. Personally, given the mass and energy of the weapons we're looking at, I don't think they'd help much unless both layers of armour were quite think and the gap quite large - enough you couldn't really even call it 'spaced armour', but more like two complete hulls.
My understanding is that since the 1960s, armour schemes against anything more powerful than an autocannon or roadside bomb have focused on spaced layers with air gaps or soft material between them, and that its even less plausible that solid armour would help against threats to high-powered spaceships. But its not my field.

And its not "both layers" but "all n layers" (the Stardust probe on Wikipedia seems to have at least four). Each breaks up and scatters the oncoming projectile until the fragments can be stopped by a feasable thickness of armour.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper

This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature
Polydamas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2022, 06:37 PM   #19
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydamas View Post
My understanding is that since the 1960s, armour schemes against anything more powerful than an autocannon or roadside bomb have focused on spaced layers with air gaps or soft material between them, and that its even less plausible that solid armour would help against threats to high-powered spaceships. But its not my field.

And its not "both layers" but "all n layers" (the Stardust probe on Wikipedia seems to have at least four). Each breaks up and scatters the oncoming projectile until the fragments can be stopped by a feasable thickness of armour.
Furthermore, the faster an impactor is, the more damage it takes from a thin outer layer. What you need to deal with a super-duper-hypervelocity impactor is not thicker layers but more space for the fragment plume to spread out through.
__________________

Decay is inherent in all composite things.
Nod head. Get treat.
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2022, 03:35 AM   #20
The Colonel
 
The Colonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Default Re: Spaceships hull armor…solid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydamas View Post
My understanding is that since the 1960s, armour schemes against anything more powerful than an autocannon or roadside bomb have focused on spaced layers with air gaps or soft material between them, and that its even less plausible that solid armour would help against threats to high-powered spaceships. But its not my field.

And its not "both layers" but "all n layers" (the Stardust probe on Wikipedia seems to have at least four). Each breaks up and scatters the oncoming projectile until the fragments can be stopped by a feasable thickness of armour.
I think modern layered armour is more about different materials to counter different forms of penetration and mess with energy transfer.

Old school battleship armour demonstrated pretty thoroughly that single plates were more effective than greater thicknesses of laminated plate - no-one bothered to create a battleship grade HEAT round.
The Colonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
armour, spaceships

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.