950 replies to this topic

[Vanguard319]

There is a skill that makes the user undetectable to sensors and impossible to hit, even when on thier knees right in front of you. Has been used by Morgan Kell, Patrick Kell, Yorinaga Kurita, and possibly Aiden Pryde.

[Melcyna]

FD Wulfette, on 07 October 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

I have been reading this thread for a good while now and I just have to say a few things
1.) Gauss Rifle slugs are not the size of VW bugs but the size of medicine balls. Ammo is 8 rounds per ton 2000/8=250 So each slug is 250 Lbs of ferrous nickel-iron. Do to density of each of the metals the math adds up and you find that it comes out to be roughly 11 inches in diameter per round.
2.) Gauss rifles explode because of the capacitors wich holds a heavy charge. The rifle explodes due to the massive amounts of energy being released from aforementioned capacitors is no longer contained and violently released.
3.) Battlemech armor is of a higher density but also much lighter than conventional armor used on todays most modern tanks. The armor of a battlemech can withstand a direct shot from a HEAP round fired from the 120mm housed on the abrams main battle tank. This shot would lack the energy needed to penetrate the armor and it would just flatten out upon impact. If it was lucky it would cause 1 point of damage to a mechs armor. although the bore on the abrams's main gun is roughly the size of a single barrel of a AC/10 wich is a multi barrel weapon so it would take 10 abrams firing at the same time to equal the damage of 1 AC/10 although the powder charge on the abrams 120mm main gun would still be insufficient.
4.) The neurohelmet is a direct interface and uses the pilots balance (From the inner-ear and cerebellum) to make slight adjustments to the mechs gyro this keeps it upright and biped.
5.) The pilot does sit in the mechs head. Yes they sit shallow in the head. However they really are protected the "viewscreen" is in itself armor. It is Ferro-Glass wich is comprised of transparent ferro-fibrous. In other words it the mech version of lexan. The ferroglass is a part of the mechs head armor and it is factored into the head armor.
6.) The GAU-8 of the A-10 warthog is a 30mm cannon. Hummmm... 30mm canon in battletech that would put it of the same caliber and class of an AC/2, typical AC's in battletech range from 25mm to 203mm. The AC/2 wich is a long range weapon on TT play. In fact the AC/2 is the longest ranged weapon in the game not even LRM's have the range of AC/2. Two points of damage for the GAU-8 and that is if all seven rounds from the muzzle actually hit. Again our most modern weapons can just barely scratch a battlemech.
I have more but I will let this information soak in before I post some more rebuttals.

correction, Abrams like ANY modern tank do not use HEAP (High Explosive Armor Piercing) rounds,

they do use HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank) rounds which does not use kinetic energy from the launch (so it doesn't make sense of it flattening or what not since the penetrating part is the molten metal jet and the molten metal jet either drill it's way through or it does not)... while APFSDS rounds are PURE kinetic energy projectile... and carries ZERO, i repeat ZERO high explosive content... APFSDS are nothing more than penetrating dart fired at near hypervelocity.

the main anti tank munition of modern day is the APFSDS, due to it's trajectory and speed which makes them more suited for long range engagement than HEAT.]

That the gauss capacitor explodes makes no sense either from what i understand...

a capacitor as the name imply store charges, if the capacitor is breached or otherwise compromised then the charge would either escape or otherwise the material used to store the charge form escapes but they would be no more or less destructive than their normal state while storing the charge.

The energy in the charge potential would only be destructive if it's CHANNELED through to something and thus converted to some other form of energy.

what? did you think that if you shoot your battery it'll explode? The penetrating material can creates a shortcut path for the charge and they can short circuit which will burn out the capacitor (well the capacitor is screwed either way if the material that holds the charges are contaminated and leaks out either way) which still doesn't exactly result in explosive reaction

Unless if the material storing the charge ITSELF is explosive or volatile which is a separate matter and had nothing to do directly with capacitor exploding when shot since the material would've exploded anyway regardless if it's in capacitor form or not.

Edited by Melcyna, 07 October 2012 - 09:22 PM.

[Kaziganthi]

Melcyna, on 07 October 2012 - 04:57 PM, said:

The mech actually has a gyroscope for balance control, the pilot only assist with the balance through his neurohelmet

and the rest ie:
Throttle, Joystick, Rudders?

those are all the controls used by 'Stick and Rudder' pilots, the expression 'Stick and Rudder' guy essentially refer to the pilots who controlled the aircraft using the 3 main input (joystick, rudder, throttle) in addition to the other instruments.

it's an old practice coming from the age where a pilot must essentially be good at 'stick and rudder' to actually fly at all since back then aircraft didn't have automated system and computer regulated input, ie: a stick and rudder pilot is an expression that indicates that he is a good pilot essentially for being well versed with his primary input tools on an aircraft.

a mech input device, is THAT primitive... they are using a control mechanism aside of the instruments that are IDENTICAL to 50s aircraft (with some touch of HOTAS, but they never fully understood what HOTAS controller are supposed to have so this was never expanded properly). There's little sense to support putting the pilot on a HEAD of all things when the input device is essentially the same old 'stick and rudder'

Yes a mech has a gyro, but without the use of the neural helmet to give it the balance feed, the mech can only stand
I suggest you read

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Neurohelmet

and then you have

http://www.sarna.net...eural_Interface

[Vanguard319]

Melcyna, on 06 October 2012 - 11:57 PM, said:

If we're talking about the REAL one,

Spoiler

then strictly speaking from the inner mechanism point of view they are both electromagnetic propulsion/accelerator device, there's a whole argument several pages long i made about it with others in this very thread a while back.

the method in which the electromagnetic propulsion is applied however differ drastically, in the case of gauss rifle the magnetic force generated by the coils on the gauss rifle barrel are sequentially switched on and off (generating a moving electromagnet essentially just ahead of the projectile) to drag the projectile out of the barrel...

a railgun on the other hand utilizes force on moving charge that is exhibited when you have moving charge or current through an electromagnetic field. So unlike the gauss rifle, railgun has a flowing current through the armature (projectile or part of it) and the force it experience is directly related to it.

A coil gun or gauss gun has the advantage in that it's projectile is very simple... it has to be ferromagnetic (or at least it's sabot needs to be ferromagnetic) so that the electromagnet on the gauss gun barrel can drag it along but that's about it, it doesn't need current flowing through the projectile, or for it to touch the barrel even which gives it one of it's primary strength: ie: the ability to propel just about ANYTHING ferromagnetic as long as it fits within the barrel chamber and length.

this in fact is the reason why mass reactive propulsion for future space design considered using coil gun system for the propulsion.

The downside to coil gun/gauss gun is that you have to switch the electromagnet along the barrel very rapidly necessitating some sort of time sensitive switch and you must know where exactly the projectile is along the barrel at all time to know when to switch the electromagnet at the right time for maximum acceleration. Failure to do so results in the system slowing itself down which is counterproductive.

Railgun is the opposite in that it does not need a special time sensitive switch, the projectile forms part of the running circuit of the system but other than that the system is very straightforward... current flows through the system (and the projectile) electromagnetic field are formed and the moving current in the projectile experiences force as it is subjected to the electromagnetic field based on the right hand rule and voila you get the force that moves and accelerate the projectile.

no need to time it, and the system automatically cuts itself off the moment the projectile leaves the barrel since the projectile itself is part of the circuit.

The downside to railgun is that since the massive current that forms the circuit has to go through the projectile (it's main propulsion unlike gauss gun is not magnetic force but force on moving charge) it creates several difficult challenge in itself (using it as propulsion like gauss gun is obviously out of the question as it would be impractical).

As far as battletech is concerned however, the actual weapon they specifically called 'RAILGUN' is basically just a massively enlarged gauss rifle... ie: projectile based weapon, VERY heavy, takes more slot, does more damage per slug than a gauss rifle etc... but otherwise very similar.

they don't particularly touch, care, or even KNOW in all likelihood of the difference between the two.


Neither which makes sense,

i mean human form factor for robot of such scale makes no sense for military purpose to start with and we know that, but of course they do look kinda cool which is why we like the game.

but even considering it from the IN GAME battletech point of view... it doesn't make sense either because the pilots are not controlling the battlemech movement with his brain, he is controlling it using OLD FASHIONED STICK AND RUDDER like a traditional vehicle.

not that it makes sense to put him in some sort of artificial head mind you even if he does control it with his mind, since we do NOT actually feel the presence of our brain (unless it actually hurts) nor does it matter strictly where it's located for the purpose of the brain functioning and governing the body (it just happens that we're designed that way).

There is another disadvantage to a railgun. because the projectile is in contact with the rails, and also due to rail velocities reaching speeds exceeding mach 10, the rails are subject to severe stress and erosion due to kinetic heating and friction. This is one of the major reasons why the technology has never been deployed as a weapon, even though the technology is well understood: A cannon that has to be repaired or replaced every few shots isn't economically feasable or even battlefield practical.

[Melcyna]

Kaziganthi, on 07 October 2012 - 09:46 PM, said:

Yes a mech has a gyro, but without the use of the neural helmet to give it the balance feed, the mech can only stand
I suggest you read

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Neurohelmet

and then you have

http://www.sarna.net...eural_Interface

Ironically, that VERY article mentions

Quote

With a multi-ton gyroscope and powerful myomers in the limbs, BattleMechs can stand upright and remain balanced on their own, but the limited intelligence of BattleMechs and natural conservatism of their control computers means they often need to be told when it is acceptable to be off balance, which may be helpful in battle as MechWarriors push their machines.

you tell me, how ppl will interpret that as far as the NEED for the human balance input into the battlemech because their sentence suggests the mech is in fact capable of balancing itself for the most part and the human balance merely pushes the envelope of the battlemech capability...

Vanguard319, on 07 October 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

There is another disadvantage to a railgun. because the projectile is in contact with the rails, and also due to rail velocities reaching speeds exceeding mach 10, the rails are subject to severe stress and erosion due to kinetic heating and friction. This is one of the major reasons why the technology has never been deployed as a weapon, even though the technology is well understood: A cannon that has to be repaired or replaced every few shots isn't economically feasable or even battlefield practical.

Which is what i argued all the way back when the whole argument between railgun and coil gun in this thread came up a few weeks back, but i can't be bothered retyping the whole thing again... apparently some ppl still think that it makes no difference and that coil gun and railgun can be lumped up together still despite all that (and the fact that their propulsion principle is fundamentally different).. so go figure.

Edited by Melcyna, 07 October 2012 - 10:23 PM.

[CrashieJ]

dropships can hold legions upon legions of battlemechs but can only hold 5 maybe 10 aerospace fighters

[Lord Perversor]

Quote

you tell me, how ppl will interpret that as far as the NEED for the human balance input into the battlemech because their sentence suggests the mech is in fact capable of balancing itself for the most part and the human balance merely pushes the envelope of the battlemech capability...

To put simply the Mech basic stability seems to be enough for normal flat surfaces but in the middle of the fight while running at 80kp/h and walking up and down hill it's the job of the Mechwarrior to *bend* the mech in order to not fall over on the same way we bend forward while running/walking up something or backwards when walking down some terrain.

[Melcyna]

That doesn't make sense however because the first half of what you are referring is 'gait' which does not specifically require a mandatory human balance sense to maintain and can be done with gyroscope's inertia sensor as long as the limb can perform the necessary movement.

the second half comes into trouble in that any inclination, or angle on the surface would affect the mech regardless of whether the mech is standing still or on moving gait, so if the mech can stand up straight normally without the mechwarrior input (which they implied) then the mech KNOWS the information about the surface it's stepping on which only makes sense because that's basic knowledge necessary to PERFORM a gait in the first place and not fall.

so either way we have a problem.

it's only sensible that the mech KNOWS the angle of what it's stepping on because otherwise the mechwarrior literally has to guide it's movement step by step during a gait which is nonsensical or topple.

mind you that the angle in which something needs to lean itself during movement, be it gait, or even on vehicles with wheels are NOT ART unless if the movement gait has no pattern, they are discrete based on well known physics... and can be calculated PRECISELY... which is why vehicles have known limit of what speed it can reach and safely turn and why we know HOW MUCH we have to lean with motorbikes or bicycles EXACTLY for any specific speed. (incidentally the automated system for vehicles that has to balance itself can do this as well).

Edited by Melcyna, 07 October 2012 - 11:25 PM.

[HellsBlackAces]

gavilatius, on 07 October 2012 - 10:44 PM, said:

dropships can hold legions upon legions of battlemechs but can only hold 5 maybe 10 aerospace fighters

I take it you've only looked at mech transports. Off the top of my head aerospace fighter bays and mech bays are a one for one replacement.

Seriusly, look at at carrier dropships like the Leapard-CV, Titan, Miraborg, Vengeance, and unstatted Union-CV. They only carry aerospace fighters. The Vengeance carries 40 aerospace fighters and 3 small craft. The Titan-C and the Miraborg carry 30 aerospace fighters each.

Nighpher, on 07 October 2012 - 08:45 PM, said:

One of these babys!

The source books have made it quite clear that most of the wieght in Targeting Computers are active compensators of varius types. You guys can keep ignoring that if you want, but if so I'll just be chilling in the Terran SDS Command Center with it's nice 100 yottabyte data storage reading a book on my nice tablet computer.

Edited by HellsBlackAces, 08 October 2012 - 12:06 AM.

[Kaziganthi]

gavilatius, on 07 October 2012 - 10:44 PM, said:

dropships can hold legions upon legions of battlemechs but can only hold 5 maybe 10 aerospace fighters

Leapoard class holds 4 mechs
Union class holds 12 mechs
Overlord holds 36 mechs

Vengence holds 40 fighters

Name the drop ship that can hold legions?

Lord Perversor, on 07 October 2012 - 10:59 PM, said:

To put simply the Mech basic stability seems to be enough for normal flat surfaces but in the middle of the fight while running at 80kp/h and walking up and down hill it's the job of the Mechwarrior to *bend* the mech in order to not fall over on the same way we bend forward while running/walking up something or backwards when walking down some terrain.

Correct, the gyro is enough for the mech to stop itself from falling over when stationary, otherwise, exverytime a mech powered down it would fall over, making the task of repairing very tedious. The moment it needs to do the simplest of things like walking, it needs human input via the nueral helmet, let alone complex actions like running around a building, while dodging fire and returning the same.

Edited by Kaziganthi, 08 October 2012 - 12:22 AM.

[Melcyna]

Which makes no sense since if the mechwarrior only supplies the information of the balance itself then that's the same information that gyroscope and tilt sensor would've provided anyway (and this is how self righting/stability vehicle works)

and if he/she is telling the mech which way to lean or otherwise shift it's balance during a gait or movement then that's something one can calculate PRECISELY (and this is how we calculate the algorithm that controls balance gyro to resist disruption to stability that allows self righting vehicle to remain stable).

ie: either case, they can be automated and does not require human input.

[Kaziganthi]

Melcyna, on 08 October 2012 - 01:10 AM, said:

Which makes no sense since if the mechwarrior only supplies the information of the balance itself then that's the same information that gyroscope and tilt sensor would've provided anyway (and this is how self righting/stability vehicle works)

and if he/she is telling the mech which way to lean or otherwise shift it's balance during a gait or movement then that's something one can calculate PRECISELY (and this is how we calculate the algorithm that controls balance gyro to resist disruption to stability that allows self righting vehicle to remain stable).

ie: either case, they can be automated and does not require human input.

Can you calculate precisely how to balance when dodging an incoming weapon attack or melee attack. The mechs sensors are limited to visual, heat, seismic and thermal. So in theory they could probably use these as the eyes, then instead of having a human pilot, replace it with a computer AI to do all the actions and combat, no need for humans to fight and die.

Eventually the machines become self aware and then we have 20 to 100 tonne terminators walking the streets.

Personally, i'd rather have the human factor controlling the mechs, than leave it to some tin man.

Edited by Kaziganthi, 08 October 2012 - 01:24 AM.

[Melcyna]

Quote

Can you calculate precisely how to balance when dodging an incoming weapon attack or melee attack.

Since the mech doesn't auto dodge itself and the mechwarrior is the one with command on where to move in general basis? nope...

but if the mechwarrior orders the mech for example to lean to the right or the left (or otherwise brings the system out of balance)

we CAN and we KNOW how to right ourself back up and keep the balance because all the information is there...

if we are hit by a weapon fire that can topple the mech? we KNOW how to compensate that too automatically just by using the information available from the sensor.

to correct your statement

Quote

The mechs sensors are limited to visual, heat, seismic and thermal.

There is one more information at least that the mech knows... ie: the INERTIA, and this includes pitch, yaw, and roll movement of the mech at any time..

why does the mech knows this? because THIS IS WHAT GYROSCOPE sense... it's the whole point of gyroscope in a sensor function.
(incidentally this is how a cruise missile or other guided missile and vehicle KNOWS where they are even without GPS and camera or radar or any other form of sensor, all they need is a point of reference at the start and an accurate map and using the gyroscope and accelerometers they can know where they are at all time, the system forms what's called INS, Inertial Navigation System)

The question of AI and all that? irrelevant to us... because regardless of that the mechwarrior is the one that still gives the general movement and firing command.

what we're concerned with here is whether the pilot input is even needed for the mech balance or not... to which the answer is ... nope, unless if the mechwarrior has control over the limb movement DIRECTLY of which we know they don't, at least not until direct neural interface came in.

The use of the mechwarrior to send the machine purposely off balance or leaning or similar movement however either for dodging, or because the mechwarrior anticipates movement that he is about to execute (for example he leans to the right a moment before executing a hard right bank) is still valid since the sensor only responds AFTER a response is detected, and it does not know what the mechwarrior will attempt to do in advance.

So the sensor will most certainly give enough information for the mech to maintain balance (common sense since a human balance mechanism is essentially a GYROSCOPE in biological form) even if you banked hard to either side for example, but you might be able to cut the time it takes for the mech to bank itself by purposely putting yourself off balance to the right moments before you order the mech to bank hard to the right and then correcting the balance again.

Edited by Melcyna, 08 October 2012 - 01:58 AM.

[Johnny Z]

FD Wulfette, on 07 October 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

I have been reading this thread for a good while now and I just have to say a few things
1.) Gauss Rifle slugs are not the size of VW bugs but the size of medicine balls. Ammo is 8 rounds per ton 2000/8=250 So each slug is 250 Lbs of ferrous nickel-iron. Do to density of each of the metals the math adds up and you find that it comes out to be roughly 11 inches in diameter per round.
2.) Gauss rifles explode because of the capacitors wich holds a heavy charge. The rifle explodes due to the massive amounts of energy being released from aforementioned capacitors is no longer contained and violently released.
3.) Battlemech armor is of a higher density but also much lighter than conventional armor used on todays most modern tanks. The armor of a battlemech can withstand a direct shot from a HEAP round fired from the 120mm housed on the abrams main battle tank. This shot would lack the energy needed to penetrate the armor and it would just flatten out upon impact. If it was lucky it would cause 1 point of damage to a mechs armor. although the bore on the abrams's main gun is roughly the size of a single barrel of a AC/10 wich is a multi barrel weapon so it would take 10 abrams firing at the same time to equal the damage of 1 AC/10 although the powder charge on the abrams 120mm main gun would still be insufficient.
4.) The neurohelmet is a direct interface and uses the pilots balance (From the inner-ear and cerebellum) to make slight adjustments to the mechs gyro this keeps it upright and biped.
5.) The pilot does sit in the mechs head. Yes they sit shallow in the head. However they really are protected the "viewscreen" is in itself armor. It is Ferro-Glass wich is comprised of transparent ferro-fibrous. In other words it the mech version of lexan. The ferroglass is a part of the mechs head armor and it is factored into the head armor.
6.) The GAU-8 of the A-10 warthog is a 30mm cannon. Hummmm... 30mm canon in battletech that would put it of the same caliber and class of an AC/2, typical AC's in battletech range from 25mm to 203mm. The AC/2 wich is a long range weapon on TT play. In fact the AC/2 is the longest ranged weapon in the game not even LRM's have the range of AC/2. Two points of damage for the GAU-8 and that is if all seven rounds from the muzzle actually hit. Again our most modern weapons can just barely scratch a battlemech.
I have more but I will let this information soak in before I post some more rebuttals.

Well said. Even 150 years ago many of these same guys would have said today's computers were beyond fiction .

[Melcyna]

True, but real science and it's development were never illogical for the most part.

the problem with lore in soft sci fi materials especially for games like battletech is not that it's using tech that does not exist yet or otherwise...

the problem is that THEIR VERY OWN LOGIC often makes no sense and often contradicts common sense and logic even when using their own view which is to be expected since they are entertainment material. (why the heck do their weapon lose energy OF MULTIHUNDRED MEGAJOULES in mere METERS? ????? The real answer is of course, gameplay BALANCE, but from lore logical point of view there's virtually ZERO way to justify it because it defy known physics and logic).

Sometimes they contradict THEMSELVES because they did not realize that a capability implied in one section is contradicted by another different one they state in a different section. (especially common when multiple ppl writes the lore... ie: Star Wars, the king of i can't decide what my Lore will be and thus i shall retcon every stat and record as i go)

[FD Wulfette]

Melcyna, on 08 October 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

True, but real science and it's development were never illogical for the most part.

the problem with lore in soft sci fi materials especially for games like battletech is not that it's using tech that does not exist yet or otherwise...

the problem is that THEIR VERY OWN LOGIC often makes no sense and often contradicts common sense and logic even when using their own view which is to be expected since they are entertainment material. (why the heck do their weapon lose energy OF MULTIHUNDRED MEGAJOULES in mere METERS? ????? The real answer is of course, gameplay BALANCE, but from lore logical point of view there's virtually ZERO way to justify it because it defy known physics and logic).

Sometimes they contradict THEMSELVES because they did not realize that a capability implied in one section is contradicted by another different one they state in a different section. (especially common when multiple ppl writes the lore... ie: Star Wars, the king of i can't decide what my Lore will be and thus i shall retcon every stat and record as i go)

The answer about the weapons is an easy one. We face it today making beam weapons trite and unpredictable. Its called blooming, directed energy weapons (ie Lasers and PPC's) begin to cause plasma breakdown in the air at energy densities of around a megajoule per cubic centimeter. This effect, called "blooming," causes the beam to defocus and disperse energy into the atmosphere. It even gets worse when other material is in the air as well for example dust particles accelerate the energy loss. So if you hit a armored surface with the laser it would vaporize/ionize part of the target but then the resulting ionization would disperse the beam and cause a massive blooming effect. Hope that explaines it for you. That is why the ranges of the beam weapons are set the way they are. Its all baised on science. too bad most people overlook this fact due to lack of education on the given subject matter.I

Yes Abrams do use HEAP rounds I personally loaded HEAP, HEAT, APFSDS and assorted other rounds onto abrams tanks. MY MOS was 45g Known as 45 Gulf. IE Heavy combat vehicle refuel/rearm. So don't tell me that crap cause unlike some of you I have been to the sandbox.

Ok YES CAPACITORS DO EXPLODE VIOLENTLY. if you have ever taken an electronics class then you would know this. Just wire one up backwards and watch the fireworks. A critical hit the the gauss rifle will destroy the weapon, it causes the capacitors to short circuit, feedback and then explode. Just I broke out my electronics breadboard and reversed the poles so power would cycle backwards through it. and BOOOOM it exploded. I used a 22 micro Fared 250v barrel cap and now its just feathery dust floating in the air. there is a video of caps exploding. Need I go on about this Think about it if the cap explodes that violently just using a tiny one what about the caps needed for a battlemech gauss rifle the resulting explosion would be massive and there ya go mech destruction due to exploding caps

Edited by FD Wulfette, 08 October 2012 - 06:35 AM.

[Melcyna]

I don't want to sound condescending here, well too late i already do since ages ago, but anyway...

let me break it down first one by one.

A.
energy dissipation, on laser? Blooming does not dissipate MULTI HUNDRED MJ over mere meters thank god, if laser loses energy at such rate or rather if our atmosphere is capable of dispersing that much energy then our laser would not have function AT ALL beyond ultra short distance.... our military laser which have a fraction of that energy mind you maintain most of their energy over multiple dozen km away.

It's possible of course to have the atmosphere attenuate most of the energy on specific condition ie: fog, smokes, rain, etc...

Whether it will attenuate THAT MUCH even with very high obstruction in the air is open to debate, but chances are extremely unlikely that such a huge portion of the energy can be dissipated into the air so rapidly.

That aside however, it doesn't explain why PROJECTILES suffer from similar problem...

B.
Now the Capacitor? Let's be specific here, ELECTROLYTE CAPACITOR? let's see what happened...

you reverse the polarity and RUN YOUR ELECTRIC current through... since the dielectric material is polarized, you effectively destroyed it's property and composition by running a current in reverse through it, so what we have left?

ONE TUBE CONTAINING EX-ELECTROLYTES (conducting liquid is all is left after it loses it's dielectric property effectively but liquid none the less) and short circuited path inside... effectively you turned it into a boiler except with the ex-electrolytes (the liquid) unable to escape.

so you get boiling liquid thanks to the current you pass through it like a boiler and increasing pressure which is obvious when you heat the liquid and BANG... the tube explodes from the excess pressure.

SO...

2 IMMEDIATE problem here comparing this and the theoretical gauss capacitor...
A. we assume that the capacitor is LIQUID BASED
B. in this example you used, the power that cooked the electrolytes and boiled it is FROM YOUR EXTERNAL CURRENT, not the capacitor internal charge at all... ie: the capacitor charge wasn't the one causing the explosion, THE CURRENT YOU PASS THROUGH IT that cook the liquid caused it...

(incidentally this is why some electrolytes capacitor has a safety valve built on the top of the capacitor shaped like a triangle section cut, this automatically break open and vent excess pressure from the capacitor in the event that it had it's polarity reversed or any other destructive cause that generates excess pressure inside it... the capacitor would still be destroyed, but it just won't do it as spectacularly as a completely sealed electrolyte capacitors)

It's nice and all to make the claim, but it does work wonder to examine something in detail to figure out what actually happened and why, so we can make an actual logical observation.

I am totally interested btw on a full thought process dissection on what should happen if a massive capacitor is hit by weapon fire, but if we are to do that, it will be done PIECE BY PIECE, every step of the thought process rationalized with logic. Will it explode? WHY? HOW? WHAT WILL DO IT? every single question stripped, examined, and answered...

Edited by Melcyna, 08 October 2012 - 07:09 AM.

[FD Wulfette]

Electrolytic or non electrolytic capacitors explode. the Power feed system from a mechs fusion reactor provides the external current. I reversed polarity just to use it as an example. Fact is any power spike can cause a CAP to explode. there ya go its a NON-electrolytic Ceramic capacitor (NO liquid in it and it still blows up) this time it was done with a power spike. that didnt exceed the 120v rating of the CAP. Hummmm... Im not trying to be a B!+(h but I am an electronics engineer and do this for a living. I want the entire community to understand why a CAP blows and hence why a Gauss rifle will blow up.

[Melcyna]

What you missed is WHY it explodes in your case,

in an electrolytic capacitor (one without safety valve anyway) overheated electrolyte would expand rapidly with the current passing through it...

if it has NO MEANS of venting the pressure, you essentially have an over pressurized tube, BANG. If it has a mean to do so (like a safety valve, the overpressure breaks the valve open and the expanding content essentially spills out (in whatever form it's left after)

now let's take a ceramic capacitor...

WHAT's INSIDE it? ceramic powder? ceramic slurry? depends...

what matters is HOW MUCH WILL IT EXPAND? HOW FAST? does the expanding material have room to do so? or to escape? NO? then you have a problem, if yes? can the expansion escape fast enough to maintain the pressure inside?

Explosion don't COME OUT OF NOTHING just by short circuiting something and dumping energy.. it has to come from some sort of expansion...

SOMETHING has to expand so rapidly as to cause the explosion, and for obvious reason you can prevent such explosion via the reverse deduction, ie: ensuring that whatever is inside has room to expand or at least enough that it does not cause catastrophic structural failure.

Gauss gun also gets an extra benefit in that it does not need one singular massive storage and can instead be segmented into several smaller storage since the power during gauss rifle acceleration will be triggered sequentially across the barrel length, unlike a railgun but that's another story.

Edited by Melcyna, 08 October 2012 - 07:54 AM.

[FD Wulfette]

Blooming's effect is 1 MJ per CENTIMETER ok do the math and see for yourself 1 meter is 100MJ of power so 10 meters is 1000MJ dissapated a hex on TT is 30 meters so 30X1000=3000MJ lost in one hex distance. Yes todays lasers are ultra short ranged especially the ones used by science because the energy needed to weaponize and give it range just cant be harnessed to that effect at this point in time. Ballistics weapons suffer from limitations as well since a projectile of a gauss rifle is so dense it suffers from its own mass and bleeds energy more quickly. AC's are propellant baised so ranges are varying but look at [color=#000000]

Japanese

[/color] fighters of WWII the lighter the weapon the further its projectile traveled. the 7.7 could outrange the 20mm due in part to a heavier powder charge in the 7.7 and the smaller of bore made the projectile lighter thus it traveled farther than the 20mm..

Gravity is still 9.8m² on earth. Not all celestial bodies have the exact same mass density or even composition as terra so it would really depend on those underlying factors on to what each weapon could effectivly do per planet. Look at earth and earths moon for example if you struck a golf ball with enough force to drive it 400 yards on earth then struck it with the same force on the moon the said golfball would be able to break the gravitational pull of the moon. Thus continueing outward to an unknown point. On earth it traveled only 400 yards but on the moon it traveled millions upon millions of miles.