General Weapons topic

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | >> (show all)
MJB
03/01/17 08:28 PM
172.58.33.135

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The ability of lasers to effectively focus is heavily compromised by particulate matter.

We used to carefully track line-of-effect between units so that we could account for smoke, haze, blown off armor bits, ICE exhaust (diesel was worse than gasoline), all that kind of stuff in order to keep our games scientifically accurate.

Calculating the effects of different types of stars and their predominate light spectra was the hardest, but worth it for true realism.
MJB
03/01/17 08:31 PM
172.58.33.135

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
We had to adjust the BV of those diesel-powered Capellan Galleon refits just because they were had such a huge impact on laser-dependent units.
MJB
03/14/17 01:27 AM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
We also had a chart for projectile weapons and missiles to adjust for local gravity.

BT is so Earth-centric, but science is universal !
MJB
03/16/17 12:34 AM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Not to mention that in both rules and fiction, missiles operate normally in vacuum. Without atmosphere (or oxygen) how does that work, scientifically?
ghostrider
03/19/17 02:08 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It would figure they would be like normal rocket fuel and have oxygen suspended in the fuel mixture. But that is assuming.

Did you allow projectiles to go further in a vacuum or lack of atmosphere? Since there is no air resistance to slow it down?
I believe there was some rules that dealt with jump jets and such but don't remember any penalties for missiles targeting anything. I guess the implication here was fins on the missiles that allowed some turning, but would need air flow to do so. Also, the lack of should allow them to move further, faster. The arrow shot from a bow comes to mind.
And to remove the definition issue, I was thinking rockets are straight fire projectiles, while missiles have some turning abilities, though it may not be much.
CrayModerator
03/19/17 12:58 PM
72.189.109.30

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Not to mention that in both rules and fiction, missiles operate normally in vacuum. Without atmosphere (or oxygen) how does that work, scientifically?



The same way as with real world missiles: they carry their own oxygen. It's unlikely that missiles are liquid fueled, since those are a pain to store, so BT missiles will be solid fueled. Solid rocket fuel is a mix of fuel and oxidizer. The shuttle's solid rocket boosters used aluminum powder (fuel, 16% by weight) mixed with a rubber binder (fuel, 12% by weight) and a lot of ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer, 70% by weight). There were also traces of epoxy and iron oxide for other purposes.

During the lull in shuttle operations following the Challenger disaster, one of the manufacturers of the shuttle booster oxidizer continued production of ammonium perchlorate since no one told them to stop. This led to the 1988 PEPCON disaster, one of the largest non-nuclear, manmade explosions in history. That was the oxidizer getting excited, not the fuel or explosive.

At the smaller scale missiles like the Hellfire use solid fuel rockets, too. The Hellfire's TX-657 motor is another rubber-and-ammonium perchlorate solid fueled motor. It avoids aluminum to avoid generating prodigious amounts of smoke since military users don't like smoke trails leading back to their launch position. The motor would burn just fine in a vacuum, though it wouldn't have a means of steering.

Note that firearms also have their own oxidizer in their gunpowder. Even ye olde black powder was mostly oxygen by weight. That magical mix of sulfur, charcoal, and salt peter (potassium nitrate) was mostly oxygen in the form of nitrates. Modern smokeless powders have focused on nitrate-based compounds to pack in as much oxygen as possible. After all, when you start an explosion there's no way for fresh oxygen to reach the unburned explosive in the center of the explosion. Likewise, a pistol's bullet cartridge would need 1 to 2 liters of air to burn the gunpowder in the cartridge, and that's obviously not present in the cartridge or gun barrel. It has to be in the gunpowder itself.

Steering without air would be accomplished by thrust vectoring (which was used in rockets long before it was used in jet aircraft) or smaller thrusters.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.


Edited by Cray (03/19/17 01:09 PM)
ghostrider
03/19/17 02:03 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The vector thrust is known, though I seriously doubt they have it on the normal stock of missiles used by the ground forces. I can see it being used in the aerotech industry, though there is no statement that I have seen from the developers to suggest you can not use normal non capital missiles in the space contingency.

I had not really thought about the liquid portion of rocket fuel for ground launched rockets. I was thinking more of the model rocket base of thrust, which is used by explosive ordinance.
CrayModerator
03/19/17 02:37 PM
72.189.109.30

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
The vector thrust is known, though I seriously doubt they have it on the normal stock of missiles used by the ground forces.



The stock missiles of BattleTech - LRMs and SRMs - are used by BattleMechs, aerospace fighters, battle armor, WarShips, DropShips, and everything else. They're used in vacuum and they're used in an atmosphere. If they don't use the simple solution of a thrust-vectoring nozzle, then they need the manufacturing complication of a reaction control system (smaller rocket motors.)

Ghostrider, I work for a company that builds military missiles now, and I work on those missile programs. Solid fuel with a vectoring nozzle is the easiest solution for an all-environment missile like BT's SRMs and LRMs.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
ghostrider
03/20/17 12:55 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I was thinking cost verses unneeded additions for ground forces.
Basically cheap out for ground missiles. I may be the only one here to think like this since their range and guidance systems suck compared to what we have today. Even back when the game was made, missiles used by the military were better then the ones in the game.

As the 120 lrm missiles in a ton for the game runs about 137,000 dollars using the 27000 cbill cost times 5 for the cbill value at that time, I would not think they have any advanced things like vector thrusting in them.
It may be wrong, but I had figured they were similar to the gyroscope on a side winder to keep costs down. Which still has more range and better tracking then the game has.

And I was not attacking your or your information, which I get the feeling you thought I was. I was trying to say they don't use the advanced systems to keep the ammunition as cheap as they can.
This is for the normal stock. The streak ones probably do use the other system.
It appears the designers did the same ammo to avoid having to worry about different ammo loads needed. According to these same rules the ammunition for clan weapons are the same as IS, since they do not use a different listing for ammo.

Game balance and logic do not mix in the game. Otherwise the clan munitions would have alot greater range and ability to hit. But this would be getting off the missile issue some.
ghostrider
03/26/17 12:53 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Rheinmetall 120 mm gun. 1,190 kg (2,620 lb) for the gun, the mount is 3.317 kg (7,313 lb).

One type of ammo used by the Rheinmetall. the DM33 has a three-part aluminum sabot and a two-part tungsten penetrator, and is said to be able to penetrate 560 millimeters (22 in) of steel armor at a range of 2,000 meters (2,200 yd).
The upgraded version of that ammo is the DM53 with the projectile including sabot weighing in at 8.35 kilograms with a 38:1 length to diameter ratio and with a muzzle velocity of 1,750 meters per second (5,700 ft/s), the DM53 has an effective engagement range of up to 4,000 meters (4,400 yd).

According to the internet's wiki, this is the main gun used on the M1A1 Abrams, as well as a few other tanks.
Now with this, I find the acs in the game dramatically overweight and underpowered.
I will grant you the original version was made in 1974, but not the current version. I seems to have been redesigned in 1990.

Interesting that the ammunition has a 'silver bullet' among the names. Wonder if that is where the inspiration for the gauss shotgun came from. The types of ammo really are interesting.
ghostrider
08/06/17 03:55 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Random thought came up, and it made me realize just how crappy missiles are in the game.
Figured out roughly, you get 3 points of armor per ton for building material, and an LRM does one point of damage.
So 30 missiles are needed to take down a 30 cf one hex building.
So a single missile could not destroy a house in the game.
Even a single srm couldn't do it. Hell the 12 points from a full 6 pack on up to 18 points for the 3 point missiles still could not do so in a single volley.

Now the standard armor protects about 5 times better. Which still makes me wonder just how poorly the weapons are, and that is without the ability to target the damned house from a kilometer away.

Now I see why infantry survived things like a missile volley. There really isn't much more then home made rockets with a pipe bomb on them.
Guess I need to stop thinking, as this comes out as very sad. Ironically funny at the same time.
ghostrider
09/20/17 11:59 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Another question came up.
It is said that the short ranges in the game is because of poor targeting computers.
So how is it, you slap an er mod on a unit, and suddenly, it can target something further out?
This is also clear as nothing was ever said about omnis needing any sort of program to account for it when using different weapons systems.
I have yet seen anywhere in the clan invasion talk about having to reprogram or increase the battle computers size to accomidate captured clan weapons for this feat.
I would think for energy weapons atleast, one that has an erll on it, should be able to focus the shorter ranged weapons at a longer range. It already has to account for everything to allow it to focus on the target at that range.

And after the clans initial civil war, nothing was ever done to fix this?
The star league never had any systems that could target something accurately over a half a klick? Besides naval weapons.
Which ground based ones don't seem to have an issue firing the full distance out of an atmosphere.
I would assume they can hit a grounded dropship as long as the curve of the planet does not prevent a straight shot.

So I guess the question that needs to be asked is if each weapon has it's own programs to hit and damage anything?
Retry
09/20/17 11:52 PM
64.189.132.158

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Random thought came up, and it made me realize just how crappy missiles are in the game.
Figured out roughly, you get 3 points of armor per ton for building material, and an LRM does one point of damage.
So 30 missiles are needed to take down a 30 cf one hex building.
So a single missile could not destroy a house in the game.
Even a single srm couldn't do it. Hell the 12 points from a full 6 pack on up to 18 points for the 3 point missiles still could not do so in a single volley.

Now the standard armor protects about 5 times better. Which still makes me wonder just how poorly the weapons are, and that is without the ability to target the damned house from a kilometer away.

Now I see why infantry survived things like a missile volley. There really isn't much more then home made rockets with a pipe bomb on them.
Guess I need to stop thinking, as this comes out as very sad. Ironically funny at the same time.


Would a single missile be able to destroy a house in real life?

There's 50 rounds in a SRM-2, so 100 missiles total for one ton, so about 10kg per. That's not a 50kg Hellfire missile (you'd want a Thunderbolt warhead then), it's closer to the 11kg 9M14 Malyutka with a 125mm diameter and a ~2.5-3.5kg warhead. RL anti-tank missiles are HEAT based (except for one historical oddball that went with HESH), which are good for penetrating armor but not so great at general mass destruction against unarmored targets until structural failure like High Explosive rounds would be.

The LRM is even smaller than the SRM at about 8kg and has half the warhead.

The base missiles are fluffed as fielding a "special armor piercing explosive" and is probably optimized for ablating armor off of a Battlemech instead of killing infantry and blowing up bunkers. Otherwise ammunition types like frag missiles would be superfluous.

Hitting a normal single-story house with a Malyutka or MILAN size missile would seriously mess it up and give its occupants a bad day, but it's hard to see that one missile by itself causing critical structural failure unless it somehow found its thermal exhaust port.
MJB
11/12/17 10:27 PM
107.199.74.86

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Still no thoughts regarding fumes, particulate matter, or gravity?

I am disappointed!
ghostrider
11/14/17 03:47 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
That is kind of sad.
2750 has energy weapons, including partical projection cannons, but yet have not found a way to get more boom out of missiles. Granted, I shouldn't be surprised, as they can not hit much on the ground at distances over a kilometer, but yet in space, they can hit for a few hundred kilometers.
Given the distance of some long range shots, I find it hard to believe the computers can hit in space, as the size of the target should be smaller at the long range in space, then a tank in the field.
And using the same ammunition to boot. Well lrms, mrms, and srms.

Maybe I have watched too many movies dealing with things like this.

I can understand hardened, or even just heavy construction, but a light constructed building?
Maybe I didn't realize the missiles are probably going thru the house, and exploding when it head out the back. Much like an armor piercing bullet would do.

Fumes could be said to light the building on fire, as unspent fuel comes to mind.
Particulate matter could well be used as an IED, as a few novels suggested.
Gravity could drop the building if you hit the supporting structure.
Is there something you had in mind?
ghostrider
03/14/18 01:31 AM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Does the newer rule sets let c3's work with artemis systems?
Or do you have to shut the artemis off to use the c3 part?

Seen a couple of mechs use this combination.
Retry
03/15/18 02:50 PM
64.189.130.11

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Yes, C3 works with Artemis.
AmaroqStarwind
03/28/18 06:42 PM
174.235.19.144

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I noticed that there was an Artemis IV and an Artemis V, but there isn't an Artemis I, Artemis II or Artemis III.
Discord: Amaroq the Kitsune#1092
Telegram: @Lycanphoenix
MechEngine (Alpha) -- On Hiatus

The Scientist Caste has determined that time travel is dishonorable.
ghostrider
03/29/18 04:20 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
More issues with the way some things turned out. 2750 could have used those as early models to the current systems, but the developers failed to make a back story for it. You don't see anything about some of the older models of say the pulse lasers. The large bulky way more heat and less damage that is normal for experiments. And some of the fluff says some systems were experimental when the league started using them.
AmaroqStarwind
03/29/18 07:25 PM
174.235.19.144

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Perhaps the Artemis III is what comes built-in to LRM and SRM launchers?
Discord: Amaroq the Kitsune#1092
Telegram: @Lycanphoenix
MechEngine (Alpha) -- On Hiatus

The Scientist Caste has determined that time travel is dishonorable.
TigerShark
03/30/18 01:44 PM
12.130.166.32

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
More issues with the way some things turned out. 2750 could have used those as early models to the current systems, but the developers failed to make a back story for it. You don't see anything about some of the older models of say the pulse lasers. The large bulky way more heat and less damage that is normal for experiments. And some of the fluff says some systems were experimental when the league started using them.



Prototype rules have been published for all of these weapons.
AmaroqStarwind
04/01/18 01:43 AM
174.235.15.250

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Unless otherwise noted, the following rules apply:
- Prototype energy weapons produce 50% more heat.
- Prototype projectile weapons have 20% less ammunition per ton, and will frequently jam.

I forgot the rule for prototype missile launchers.
Discord: Amaroq the Kitsune#1092
Telegram: @Lycanphoenix
MechEngine (Alpha) -- On Hiatus

The Scientist Caste has determined that time travel is dishonorable.
TigerShark
04/02/18 01:34 PM
12.130.166.32

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Prototype rockets suffer a penalty to their cluster rolls.

EDIT: I don't recall even seeing rules for primitive missile racks. Even the Primitive missile carriers have "modern" LRM/SRM racks attached.


Edited by TigerShark (04/02/18 01:47 PM)
AmaroqStarwind
04/16/18 06:58 PM
174.235.17.105

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
So, I learned the rule for Primitive Missile Launchers (excluding Rocket Launchers).

They function the same, except they carry 25% less ammo per ton, cannot use advanced guidance systems such as Artemis or NARC, and have a -3 penalty on the cluster hits table. It says nothing about special munitions however, and I therefore imagine that many Primitive LRMs and Primitive SRMs would be using either Heat Seeking, Laser Guided or Dead Fire munitions.

Speaking of missiles, I am really confused about Artemis systems.

If you have four LRM-5 systems in one location, do you need to mount a separate Artemis for each of them, or do you only need to do that if 1) each launcher is in a different location or 2) the launchers are mismatched, such as LRM-5 and LRM-15?
Discord: Amaroq the Kitsune#1092
Telegram: @Lycanphoenix
MechEngine (Alpha) -- On Hiatus

The Scientist Caste has determined that time travel is dishonorable.
Retry
04/16/18 08:13 PM
64.189.130.11

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Primitive prototype missile launchers have a -2 penalty on the cluster hits table, not -3.

Every launcher needs an Artemis if you're going to install Artemis.
AmaroqStarwind
04/16/18 09:19 PM
174.235.17.105

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Lame. MegaMek gets Artemis completely wrong; it lets you use only a single Artemis system for every missile launcher regardless of their location, only requiring a separate module for different types of launcher.
Discord: Amaroq the Kitsune#1092
Telegram: @Lycanphoenix
MechEngine (Alpha) -- On Hiatus

The Scientist Caste has determined that time travel is dishonorable.
bestdrones
04/18/18 01:07 PM
207.244.77.13

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
i read all stuff and i appreciate the knowledge you have shared. keep up the good work!
TigerShark
04/19/18 02:14 PM
12.130.166.32

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
According to the rules as written, if Artemis is installed at all, on any launcher, it needs to be installed for EVERY launcher. Exempting those that are Streak launchers, of course.

i.e.: If you have two LRM-10s and two SRM-4s, you can't just install it on the LRMs. It needs to be on the SRMs as well.

Errata:

Artemis IV Fire-Control System (p. 207)
Under “Construction Rules”, replace the first and second paragraphs with the following:

“The Artemis IV FCS is only applicable to standard LRM, SRM and MML launchers (including any one-shot or torpedo versions). If Artemis IV is added to an applicable launcher, every applicable launcher on the unit must have Artemis IV (non-applicable launchers, such as Streak SRMs, may still be installed). For example, if a unit has one Artemis IV-equipped LRM launcher, then every single standard LRM, SRM and MML launcher on the unit must have Artemis IV. Note that while Clan ATM launchers have Artemis IV integrated as part of their design, ATM launchers do not count as an applicable launcher type, meaning you can have ATMs on the same unit as LRM, SRM or MML launchers without Artemis IV.

Artemis IV must be placed in the same location as the launcher it is added to. If a launcher that must receive an Artemis enhancement is set in a location with no space remaining for the Artemis, then Artemis IV may not be mounted on that unit at all, because one of its launchers cannot receive the required upgrade. For OmniMechs with one or more fixed (i.e. non-pod-mounted) missile launchers, whether or not the fixed launchers have Artemis determines the ’Mech’s usage of Artemis. This cannot be modified through alternate configurations. For example, for an OmniMech with fixed launchers without Artemis, no launcher on the ’Mech, fixed or not, may have Artemis. Conversely, for an OmniMech with Artemis-equipped fixed launchers, all its applicable launchers must be equipped with Artemis.”
AmaroqStarwind
04/19/18 03:24 PM
174.235.17.105

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Jeeze, that's way too strict... May as well require that the player fires all of their missile launchers at once with a single attack roll and cluster roll on top of that (or a separate roll for SRMs versus LRMs), since they really seem to be heading in that direction. And also ban Artemis launchers from using special munitions.

Like, really... That's just maddening.
Discord: Amaroq the Kitsune#1092
Telegram: @Lycanphoenix
MechEngine (Alpha) -- On Hiatus

The Scientist Caste has determined that time travel is dishonorable.
ghostrider
04/19/18 04:10 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Idea came up for the possibility for something like a sabot round for acs. This would allow smaller rounds to be used in the larger cannons, like an ac 20 could use a sabot round of an ac 5. It would be an ac 5 shot in all aspects, but fired from a 20.
The damage, range, even minimum would be of the ac 5. The number of shots would have to be changed, but using the 5, it would definitely be more then 5 shots, but less then the full 20 of normal shots.

Sabot might not be a good name for it. Necked down I believe is the term.
Though I can see some arguments for more power as you are using more charge in the shell.
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | >> (show all)
Extra information
1 registered and 117 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 46734


Contact Admins Sarna.net