70 replies to this topic

[Hawkeye 72]

Don't see a whole lot of green plasma rings, smoke trails, and other gimmicks. Maybe just a flash as the stored energy discharges and a quick blur as the sound barrier is broken to please those who want a nice visual (even though Park explained why that wouldn't happen). But get rid of the green rings. That's ridiculous.

Edited by Hawkeye 72, 11 April 2012 - 07:45 PM.

[Insidious Johnson]

Tech answer = sn00zeeeee
Lore answer = keyboard drool
Answer we all want = COOOOOOooooooooLLLLLLlllllll!

[CCC Dober]

OT:
The artwork and background information leave me a bit puzzled tbh.

1. I can dimly remember reading in one of the novels that the muzzle velocity was double as much as any conventional ballistic weapon at the time, which is nowhere near the Mach figures some of you have posted. Can't remember which novel exactly, but it was one where somebody decided to swap out his trusty AC for one of the new Gauss Rifles, maybe Kai Allard-Liao modifying Yen-Lo-Wang idk. Can somebody confirm this?

2. Second thing is the shape of the projectile. Is it really a slug or a ball? Which one of these has more 'magnetic grip'?

[Thomas Hogarth]

I agree from a physics standpoint: A coilgun will not produce a muzzle flash. The reason I claim it should be included is for balance reasons. The projectile should be fairly difficult to find, but the firing position should be anything but.

[EDMW CSN]

There should be a plume to give away the firer's position.

After all it is equal to a sniper rifle that kill with a headshot in BT (not until Clan ERPPCs/Heavy Large Lasers / Heavy PPC / Binary laser / any PPC with a cap mod) appears anyway.

[Strum Wealh]

CCC_Dober, on 11 April 2012 - 09:56 PM, said:

OT:
The artwork and background information leave me a bit puzzled tbh.

1. I can dimly remember reading in one of the novels that the muzzle velocity was double as much as any conventional ballistic weapon at the time, which is nowhere near the Mach figures some of you have posted. Can't remember which novel exactly, but it was one where somebody decided to swap out his trusty AC for one of the new Gauss Rifles, maybe Kai Allard-Liao modifying Yen-Lo-Wang idk. Can somebody confirm this?

2. Second thing is the shape of the projectile. Is it really a slug or a ball? Which one of these has more 'magnetic grip'?

1.) Modern conventional ballistic projectiles seem to top-out in the realm of Mach 4.0-5.0 (high supersonic velocities), just below true hypersonic velocities (Mach 5.0-10.0), and still further below the "high hypersonic" regime (Mach 10.0-25.0) and the "re-entry" regime (Mach 25+).
So, a Mach ~8-9 Gauss Rifle slug would be approximately twice as fast as nearly every conventional ballistic projectile (and the vast majority of modern missiles and rockets).

2.) "A slug is a term used for a solid ballistic projectile. It is "solid" in the sense of being composed of one piece; the shape can vary widely, including partially hollowed shapes. The term is occasionally applied to bullets (just the projectile, never the cartridge as a whole), but is most commonly applied to shotgun projectiles, to differentiate from shotshells."
"A shell is a payload-carrying projectile which, as opposed to shot, contains an explosive or other filling, though modern usage sometimes includes large solid projectiles properly termed shot (AP, APCR, APCNR, APDS, APFSDS, and proof shot)."
I would think that the more oblong design would be better (mainly from an aerodynamic standpoint).
From a magnetic standpoint... there's probably some obscure equation regarding solenoid design and armature length that would help?

[Thorn Hallis]

I always liked the way the Gauss-shot looked in MW3.

And I don't care about real life physics in that case.

[LordDeathStrike]

the gauss round is moving around mach 30, thats re entry speeds, at that kind of velocity its gonna be a fireball due to the air screaming crying and catching fire from friction on the round.

to sum it up, the speed at which mechwarrior gauss rifles fling a hunk of metal the size of a volkswagon = flaming ball of metal leaving an air cavity in its wake that will be full of smoke particles from the burnt air.

thats a blackish or greyish jetstream with a flaming ball at the head of it, and ya, when it hits your mech, its gonna hurt

[John Clavell]

I'd certainly like to hear a good sound effect, a big sonic boom, not the piddly sound we had in MW4.

[Thomas Hogarth]

LordDeathStrike, on 11 April 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

the gauss round is moving around mach 30, thats re entry speeds, at that kind of velocity its gonna be a fireball due to the air screaming crying and catching fire from friction on the round.

to sum it up, the speed at which mechwarrior gauss rifles fling a hunk of metal the size of a volkswagon = flaming ball of metal leaving an air cavity in its wake that will be full of smoke particles from the burnt air.

thats a blackish or greyish jetstream with a flaming ball at the head of it, and ya, when it hits your mech, its gonna hurt

6,000 meters per second is not mach 30. As I suggested in my last reply to you in this thread, do more research.

[LordDeathStrike]

Thomas Hogarth, on 11 April 2012 - 11:39 PM, said:

6,000 meters per second is not mach 30. As I suggested in my last reply to you in this thread, do more research.

6 km / second, in real measurement would be 5 miles. at sea level on earth mach 1 is around 500 mph. 5 miles per second, is 5x60x60 miles per hour. or to simplify, 18,000 mph. divide by mach 1, = mach 36, since mach 1 at sea level is a little more then 500 i rounded it down and said around mach 30+. mach speeds are subjective, based on planets air density sound moves at different rates. but reguardless, if it is within breathable tolerances, and the guass slug is moving at 15 thousand miles per hour or faster, its a fireball with a cavitation behind it full of the smoke from its burning of the air as it smashes the molecules mercilessly.

[Gunmage]

I'm fine with anything that's easily differentiated from AC and PPC shots.

But green trail in MW3 and swirly blue stuff in MW4 were just wrong.

[Thomas Hogarth]

LordDeathStrike, on 11 April 2012 - 11:58 PM, said:

6 km / second, in real measurement would be 5 miles. at sea level on earth mach 1 is around 500 mph. 5 miles per second, is 5x60x60 miles per hour. or to simplify, 18,000 mph. divide by mach 1, = mach 36, since mach 1 at sea level is a little more then 500 i rounded it down and said around mach 30+. mach speeds are subjective, based on planets air density sound moves at different rates. but reguardless, if it is within breathable tolerances, and the guass slug is moving at 15 thousand miles per hour or faster, its a fireball with a cavitation behind it full of the smoke from its burning of the air as it smashes the molecules mercilessly.

And I see your issue. You've failed to do basic research on mach speeds at sea level. Yes, mach speeds vary based on ATM pressure, which tends to manifest itself as speeds varying based on altitude. However, ground pressure - no matter if you have a trough over your head or a ridge - tends to be pretty close to static. It changes, sure, but not enough to swing calculations as massively as yours have.
[edit] to be more clear, your figures are wildly inaccurate.

Furthermore, your 6km figure is fundamentally flawed as well. I'll give you a hint here: In the place that gauss slugs move 6,000m/s, it's faster to travel in atmosphere than space.

Edited by Thomas Hogarth, 12 April 2012 - 12:44 AM.

[ZnSeventeen]

LordDeathStrike, on 11 April 2012 - 11:58 PM, said:

6 km / second, in real measurement would be 5 miles. at sea level on earth mach 1 is around 500 mph. 5 miles per second, is 5x60x60 miles per hour. or to simplify, 18,000 mph. divide by mach 1, = mach 36, since mach 1 at sea level is a little more then 500 i rounded it down and said around mach 30+. mach speeds are subjective, based on planets air density sound moves at different rates. but reguardless, if it is within breathable tolerances, and the guass slug is moving at 15 thousand miles per hour or faster, its a fireball with a cavitation behind it full of the smoke from its burning of the air as it smashes the molecules mercilessly.

Okay, your math is interesting, and terribly imprecise. 6 km/s is 3.7 mi/s. Next, standard mach is 660 mi/h, and at sea level and 20 degrees is 768 mi/h. So, if we for some reasons decided on 6km/s it would be mach 17.5 to 20.
In any case, yes you are right that at these speeds the projectile would be extremely hot.
However, it is likely that the actual speed that would be achieved by even advanced coil guns/ gauss cannons would be far lower than 6 km/s. I am confident that to accelerate the projectile to that speed would require more tesla than can be achieved by any non explosive means, and that is including super magnets. (Extremely powerful magnetic fields cause destabilization of surrounding molecules, bonds, and affect electrical fields, making it so even super magnets can only achieve high magnetic field strength for short, destructive bursts.)

And as to how it should look, I imagine it would have a nice shockwave, with a trail of decompression, but I am not sure at all. I always imagine they would be far to fast to follow, but would leave a very pretty, straight, distorted line in the air.

[CCC Dober]

Strum Wealh, on 11 April 2012 - 10:39 PM, said:

1.) Modern conventional ballistic projectiles seem to top-out in the realm of Mach 4.0-5.0 (high supersonic velocities), just below true hypersonic velocities (Mach 5.0-10.0), and still further below the "high hypersonic" regime (Mach 10.0-25.0) and the "re-entry" regime (Mach 25+).
So, a Mach ~8-9 Gauss Rifle slug would be approximately twice as fast as nearly every conventional ballistic projectile (and the vast majority of modern missiles and rockets).

2.) "A slug is a term used for a solid ballistic projectile. It is "solid" in the sense of being composed of one piece; the shape can vary widely, including partially hollowed shapes. The term is occasionally applied to bullets (just the projectile, never the cartridge as a whole), but is most commonly applied to shotgun projectiles, to differentiate from shotshells."
"A shell is a payload-carrying projectile which, as opposed to shot, contains an explosive or other filling, though modern usage sometimes includes large solid projectiles properly termed shot (AP, APCR, APCNR, APDS, APFSDS, and proof shot)."
I would think that the more oblong design would be better (mainly from an aerodynamic standpoint).
From a magnetic standpoint... there's probably some obscure equation regarding solenoid design and armature length that would help?

If this holds water, then we can safely ditch the canon/rules stating that each projectile weighs in at 125 kilos. It's just too heavy to be accelerated to such speeds. The kinetic energy is just ... words fail me http://www.csgnetwor...energycalc.html

Gauss: 125kg@3500m/sec = 766 MJ
For comparison 120mm APFSDS: ~4kg@1750m/sec = 6 MJ http://defense-updat...igits/120ke.htm

The latter is among the most advanced anti-tank munitions on the market right now, not like those back in the 80's when this game was developed.

I can understand the reasons to limit the ammo capacity of Gauss Rifles for the sake of balance, but the weight of 125 kilos (8 shots per ton) is just plain wrong. The necessary muzzle energy to accelerate this mass is more than 100 times higher than what is feasible these days (20+ years later) with conventional guns. How the hell do you store all that energy in such a small place, much less recharge it in a couple of seconds?

[EDMW CSN]

CCC_Dober, on 12 April 2012 - 03:14 AM, said:

I can understand the reasons to limit the ammo capacity of Gauss Rifles for the sake of balance, but the weight of 125 kilos (8 shots per ton) is just plain wrong. The necessary muzzle energy to accelerate this mass is more than 100 times higher than what is feasible these days (20+ years later) with conventional guns. How the hell do you store all that energy in such a small place, much less recharge it in a couple of seconds?

1) Mechs are powered by fusion reactors.
2) Gauss rifles store energy within their own capacitors that will explode violently when destroyed.
3) Gauss rifles have traditionally long reload times, but I prefer to call it a recharge time.
4) It is Battletech don't be too serious !!!

For point 4, let's share a little thing about BT wonky stats.
10 points of Normal Damage (Aka the PPC) = does 1 point of Capital damage.
2 points of Capital Damage (Aka the AC-20) = 1 Kiloton of nuclear firepower.


That would mean a single AC-20 will deliver what equals to 1 Kiloton of armor smashing firepower to a specific point on the target. An Atlas would be carrying the equal of 10 1-Kiloton warheads inside it's body.

An Arrow IV Catapult would basically be lobbing mini-nuclear artillery everywhere.
FYI, the Little Boy that was dropped over Nagaski was on the bench mark of 15+ Kilotons.


So don't take it seriously, because things get really silly if you try to calculate Battletech.
Like a guy in Battle armor taking a 0.5 KT shot to the face, stand up and shoot you back.

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 12 April 2012 - 03:31 AM.

[LordDeathStrike]

CCC_Dober, on 12 April 2012 - 03:14 AM, said:

If this holds water, then we can safely ditch the canon/rules stating that each projectile weighs in at 125 kilos. It's just too heavy to be accelerated to such speeds. The kinetic energy is just ... words fail me http://www.csgnetwor...energycalc.html

Gauss: 125kg@3500m/sec = 766 MJ
For comparison 120mm APFSDS: ~4kg@1750m/sec = 6 MJ http://defense-updat...igits/120ke.htm

The latter is among the most advanced anti-tank munitions on the market right now, not like those back in the 80's when this game was developed.

I can understand the reasons to limit the ammo capacity of Gauss Rifles for the sake of balance, but the weight of 125 kilos (8 shots per ton) is just plain wrong. The necessary muzzle energy to accelerate this mass is more than 100 times higher than what is feasible these days (20+ years later) with conventional guns. How the hell do you store all that energy in such a small place, much less recharge it in a couple of seconds?

fusion reactor mech engine puttering out giga joules of power?

[Mason Grimm]

I'll leave all the science aspect of this to you guys.

For me this answer is simple; the same visual a spotter sees when a sniper sends a .50 calibre round down range. There IS a visual which allows a spotter to call corrections both while the round is in transit and after the round impacts the area around the target.

[Strum Wealh]

CCC_Dober, on 12 April 2012 - 03:14 AM, said:

If this holds water, then we can safely ditch the canon/rules stating that each projectile weighs in at 125 kilos. It's just too heavy to be accelerated to such speeds. The kinetic energy is just ... words fail me http://www.csgnetwor...energycalc.html

Gauss: 125kg@3500m/sec = 766 MJ
For comparison 120mm APFSDS: ~4kg@1750m/sec = 6 MJ http://defense-updat...igits/120ke.htm

The latter is among the most advanced anti-tank munitions on the market right now, not like those back in the 80's when this game was developed.

I can understand the reasons to limit the ammo capacity of Gauss Rifles for the sake of balance, but the weight of 125 kilos (8 shots per ton) is just plain wrong. The necessary muzzle energy to accelerate this mass is more than 100 times higher than what is feasible these days (20+ years later) with conventional guns. How the hell do you store all that energy in such a small place, much less recharge it in a couple of seconds?

Well...

Quote

Muzzle velocities range from approximately 400 ft/s (120 m/s) to 1,200 ft/s (370 m/s) in black powder muskets, to more than 4,000 ft/s (1,200 m/s) in modern rifles with high-performance cartridges such as the .220 Swift and .204 Ruger, all the way to 5,700 ft/s (1,700 m/s) for tank guns firing kinetic energy penetrator ammunition.

We know from various descriptions that Gauss Rifle slugs are typically hypersonic, so we have a (rather wide) range of possible muzzle velocities - from Mach 5.0 (1,710 m/s) to Mach 10.0 (3,415 m/s).
There are also instances of supersonic (rather than hypersonic) Gauss Rifle slugs: the Yellow Jacket VTOL sports a Gauss Rifle that fires with a muzzle velocity of Mach 2.2 (~749 m/s) - though, the Yellow Jacket is ICE-powered and flying, so the muzzle velocity may have been capped due to power and recoil/stability limitations.

BattleMechs, on the other hand, are grounded bipedal tanks powered by portable, self-sufficient artificial star-fire generators of unknown output (how... poetic?) and operated by one person in their skivvies.
And Gauss Rifles use massive, futuristic capacitors charged by said artificial star-fire generators.

Part of the problem is that most of the BT/MW fanbase is fairly tech-savvy and we know how most of the constituent technologies (or roughly-equivalent equipment) should work... we of the 21st century just don't have 1.) the ability to produce the needed energy outputs in a portable device and 2.) the ability to overcome certain other limitations (capacity of capacitors (for Gauss Rifles), overcoming blooming for particle beam weapons (that is, PPCs), and so on).

Also, the Rheinmetall 120 mm gun (the German-made original version of the M256 used on the modern Abrams MBT), with muzzle velocities of 1,500 to 1,750 m/s, has been in service since 1979.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 12 April 2012 - 04:20 AM.

[CCC Dober]

I give up on making sense of any of this. Capacitors the size of handbags storing the power output of a fusion reactor ... BS.
It is hard enough to accept small scale fusion reactors, but capacitors storing their output on a much smaller scale ... this is where I draw the line.

Also the supposed kinetic energy of a Gauss ... with that number you can punch through several Mechs in a row. W T F ! ! !
Sure, give it plasma plumes and make it cause a nuclear detonation on target, can't get more ridiculous than it is already LOL