A-bomb pumped Meson missiles?

[BetterThanLife]

I hate it when that happens.
The idea being that you don't have to connect to cause the damage. You aren't close enough to be effected by Nuclear Dampers and you are scoring hits. You should be close enough to get several hits still. Especially against a Capital ship. Depending on aspect and exact range when it does explode you can get a few dozen laser hits from very powerful lasers. It definitely won't be precise, it won't be a very effecient way to cause damage but it should work. As for hitting a bullet, (the best analogy I have heard when targeting a ballistic missile) They were trying to do that at range. Using a Nuke from a high orbit sattelite to power a laser. Not setting off a Nuke in close proximity to the target and hitting it with several lasers. In this case the missile is getting close and then setting off all those lasers. Different targeting situation.

 

[aramis]

Targeting: the issues:

1: 30Mm is 1/10 the "OTU LS", and just shy of the real world one.

So, since this means we're usually shooting at ranges of 1/10 LS, targeting data is going to result in a 2/10 second delay. For ships, this results in positional chances of 20cm/G and base movement of several meters per second...

at longer ranges, you don't fire where you see the ship, but where it "Should be" when the shots arrive. In the relative time and distance scales of FF&S, this isn't a terribly big issue... until you start looking at 16G (FF&S designed) fighters and 20 G missiles.... mind you, those missiles are also generally small, so an actively dodging missile won't be where you saw it....

Now, missiles have the disadvantage that they don't dodge all that well... otherwise point defense fire would be pretty near terminal range (The range where you'll get hit by the shrapnel if you shoot it!).

Even at 1/10 LS (1 BL Hex), a stadard missile from SS3, 6G discretionary burn, can only dodge 120cm maximum, but when you consider that it's aspect on target is a circle some 10cm across... loads of room for error.

By the same token, those KKSM's are NOT going to have fancy guidance, the missile does, and at 20+G's, tey ramp up along the intercept, and probably most miss... but they are intended to burn for just a minute or three... with a starting vector of the missile, and it's already aimed for intercept.

Prox warheads should probably do more damage to larger targets.

 

[mike wightman]

According to SS3 the interception ranges of a proximity warhead are between several hundred metres and 2.5 kilometres. This indicates that high explosive and focused explosive warheads must be KKSMs as Aramis suggests because there is no medium for the explosive blast wave to propogate through.
Also as Aramis suggests the number of hits should depend on target size and also actual proximity to the target. Of course if the missile gets too close without detonating then point defence weapons can't miss.
Now, how to simplify all this so it fits into book 2 combat?

 

[aramis]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
According to SS3 the interception ranges of a proximity warhead are between several hundred metres and 2.5 kilometres. This indicates that high explosive and focused explosive warheads must be KKSMs as Aramis suggests because there is no medium for the explosive blast wave to propogate through.
Also as Aramis suggests the number of hits should depend on target size and also actual proximity to the target. Of course if the missile gets too close without detonating then point defence weapons can't miss.
Now, how to simplify all this so it fits into book 2 combat?

Log10(TonsOfTarget) = ProxHits

and ignore the realities... (G)

Seriously, if we assume a prox warhead to be poping at 1/2 hex, that's 0.05LS, or 0.5*10*G*0.0025 m, or 12.5cm/G A nominal 6G Disc. Burn could be more than it's own length out. The KKSM's, from that range, are too small to target effectively, as thheir own variation is more than their length in the final boost phase, and they are accellerating rapidly while on arapid advance course. Simple physics says that either they ripple fire, or they "dump" in either case, small veriations in thrust mechanism will result in spread.

The closer in the shatter point, the less spread.

The bigger the targget, the less effect given spread will have.


Now, if these are semi-guided, that can make them even more fun.

and ungided, non thrusted KKSM's are also possible. simple vector damage alone.

 

[mike wightman]

If you shot one of the penetrators at close range wouldn't you just end up getting hit anyway by a very very fast, expanding, ball of metallic plasma?
How heavy do you think these penetrators would be, or ,to put it another way, how many would you get in the 20 to 30 kg warhead of the KKSM?
Anyone happen to know how heavy the penetrator in a tank discarding sabot round is?
Is it just me, or does the 50kg missile appear to be a bit too small to do the job it is designed for?

 

[aramis]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
If you shot one of the penetrators at close range wouldn't you just end up getting hit anyway by a very very fast, expanding, ball of metallic plasma?

Once it has crossed the "Terminal Impact Threshold", yes, that's pretty close.. the effects of the plasma are not going to be as severe as the KKM impact, but will be a surface efffect.

Air to Air missiles also have a T.I.T.. For certain "Popup-Dropdown" missiles, this terminal threshold is the point where they detonate anyway; many modern missiles for AA work used basically a giant single shot shotgun. (KKSM deadfire flechette and/or shot.)

This is not for better energy transfer (contact explosions do that better) but for more efficient use of the transferred energy... the skin of an airplane is usually thin, and the multipl penetrations are more likely to damage electronics and disturb airflow than a singl large explosion. The latteer is more likely to damage a single component, and do deeper damage.

Important to note, tho: Most shotgun missiles are aimed at the rear of the opponent... a coupel pieces into an engine can, but necessarily will, can cause a catastrophic failure of the engine fans, which often results in total destruction of the airframe.

How heavy do you think these penetrators would be, or ,to put it another way, how many would you get in the 20 to 30 kg warhead of the KKSM?
Anyone happen to know how heavy the penetrator in a tank discarding sabot round is?
Is it just me, or does the 50kg missile appear to be a bit too small to do the job it is designed for? [/QB]

probably in the 0.5 to 1kg range, with 1/2 the mass ebiing the penetrator, the other being the terminal boost fuel.

tank penetrators range from 0.5 kg to 50+ kg, depending upon round, metal choices, and type of penetrator. Pure KEAP rounds from static arty can be on the upper end, or more.

Ship-fired KEAP naval rounds can exceed 100Kg for the penetrator. (WW2 era munitions used for field fortification destruction.) Some modern ones were designed for use self-guided... I don't know if they have been field deployed.

 

[mike wightman]

The film Behind Enemy Lines has a very nice sequence showing a SAM proximity detonation.
It's very much like you describe.

I've been looking through Striker today(because these are CT missiles we're discussing) and I've found a problem. An unarmoured spacecraft is given an armour value of 40 which is comparable to a WW2 heavy tank. Armoured spacecraft are even worse. This means the KKSM penetrators would have to be the size of tank gun rounds. This site gave me the numbers for how heavy tank apfsds penetrators are.

Ok, the missile itself will generate a lot of the KE for the KKSM, but wouldn't it still have to resemble a bundle of tank rounds being fired? Even assuming lightweight solid rocket propellent each penetrator is still going to have a mass of between 4kg-8kg. You would probably want different warheads for different targets.

 

[aramis]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
The film Behind Enemy Lines has a very nice sequence showing a SAM proximity detonation.
It's very much like you describe.

I've been looking through Striker today(because these are CT missiles we're discussing) and I've found a problem. An unarmoured spacecraft is given an armour value of 40 which is comparable to a WW2 heavy tank. Armoured spacecraft are even worse. This means the KKSM penetrators would have to be the size of tank gun rounds. This site gave me the numbers for how heavy tank apfsds penetrators are.

Ok, the missile itself will generate a lot of the KE for the KKSM, but wouldn't it still have to resemble a bundle of tank rounds being fired? Even assuming lightweight solid rocket propellent each penetrator is still going to have a mass of between 4kg-8kg. You would probably want different warheads for different targets.

Depends on the type of penetrator... also, remember that the CT missile design sequences are actually in L, tho labeled KG, assuming an overal density of 1ton/m^3 1m^3 also known (more correctly) as a kiloliter, or kL.

But anyway, the overal kietic energy need not be that much bigger in order to penetrate. (I designed a 2mm round, using 3G3, that could penetrate the striker AV 67 of an armored space warship. It would be man fireable, from a battlesuit.)

Lets take a hypothetical 1KG KKSM. 500 Gram 5mm diameter hardened superdense penetrator (TL13), surrounded by 400g propellant, 50g of controls, 50 g of outer casing. All the kinetic energy is focussed on a 5mm penetrator, with a narrower tip. It *SHOULD* penetrate a considerable distance... assuming a solid hit and nothing harder than it for armor surface.

Also, unlike autocanon, we can ignore atmospheric friction losses.

(500g pentrators of DU are used in some anti-vehicular autocanon, BTW.)

One thing striker ignored in the design sequences it that you can design massive but thin high density projectiles which will penetrate armor very well.

These penetrators have vastly LESS damage potential overall, but can and do penetrate armor exceedingly well. Now, when shooting at modern vehicles, most subsystems are NOT terribly sturdy. (A .22LR can take out an operating jet engine or tank turbine... if it can get to the fans or electronics.)

Also, we don't need "Full Penetration", in fact, many modern anti-tank rounds DON'T penetrate; they transmit shock which causes a spall to fly about the still-enclosed space.

In MT, the rules are somewhat more realistic in terms of damage effects, and we can (using other non canonical formulae, to wit 3G3) to develop high penetration rounds damage and pen stats. Since, to do damage, we need either a non-uniform surface armoring with a pen of 0.1xAV or more, or a Pen of AV or more. It isn't hard, using 3G3, to develop sufficient 1cm DU projectiles with a half kg slug, and pens into the 40's.

That HG ignores the proximity warhead is probably not an accident; it will probably not penetrate armored hulls.

In T20, change the damage dice... fewer, larger dice (hence more armor effects) for same potential damage baseline to unarmored ships.... say 1d12 per 2 USP rather than 1d6 per 1...