Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Spiderking50]

I'll fill you in on armaments tomorrow, my bad

OK, I may change my request at that point 

[Dampe]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

F-623B Comet IV
Fighter
+ Very Fast
+ Responsive
- Overheats Easily
Armament:
2x XM1593 15mm Kinetic Chainguns (625 rpg)
14x R-339S Rattlesnake Missiles

F-625A Patriot III
Fighter
+ Reliable
+ Simple
- Lightly Armored
Armament:
1x XM2794 Stroboscopic Laser Cannon (1.5in)
6x R-339S Rattlesnake Missiles
2x R-847D SARAH (Semi-Active RAdar Homing) missiles

F-627D Wildcat IX
Fighter
+ Reliable
+ Well-Rounded
- Poor Maneuverability
Armament:
2x XM2792 Stroboscopic Laser Cannons (1in)
6x Modular Wing-Mounted Pylons (Accepts all basic weapons platforms)

[Harry Baldman]

I see! That does change things somewhat. Changing my request.

[UnicodingUnicorn]

May sound like a stupid question, but do the laser cannons use ammo/overheat?

[Dampe]

May sound like a stupid question, but do the laser cannons use ammo/overheat?

No, but the basic laser cannon is more likely to malfunction than a kinetic weapon.

[Dampe]

Think of kinetic weapons as throwing toasters at incredible speed towards your target.
Most tungsten slugs aren't the size of toasters, but you get the idea.

[Playergamer]

Alright, what do you think my chances are, gents? I only need a moment to fire the missiles and dive, but I have no clue how well armed these guys are, or how good their pilots are.

[Harry Baldman]

Alright, what do you think my chances are, gents? I only need a moment to fire the missiles and dive, but I have no clue how well armed these guys are, or how good their pilots are.

You are going to die.

Honestly, though, we should probably keep as much distance from these fellows as possible. After all, some of our weapons travel at the speed of light, and hopefully theirs do not.

Also, not sure you can actually do a proper dive in space. At least not in the way you describe, considering our likely velocity. A velocity that does not fill me with any degree of confidence, considering we're basically getting shot at enemies.

Speaking of, what is the USSF Delaware orbiting?

[Playergamer]

You can dive, although directions are weird. The basic plan is to keep their aim off long enough for somebody to kill them. Hopefully you don't suck at shooting.

[Harry Baldman]

You can dive, although directions are weird. The basic plan is to keep their aim off long enough for somebody to kill them. Hopefully you don't suck at shooting.

What I mean is that we already have a velocity in relation to the Delaware, and probably a considerably greater one in relation to the blips. So it's more a question of how much can you affect your velocity vector with the thrust you are provided, which remains largely unclear. When I consider it, I'm thinking we're initially moving at a couple hundred m/s in relation to the Delaware, which theoretically should allow reasonable maneuverability. However, considering we're already moving at orbital velocity in relation to something, I wonder how much we can really affect our trajectory.

It's at times like this I wish I was actually a KSP player, you know?

[Harry Baldman]

Top speed of 32000 mph? I was under the impression that the top speed in a vacuum was 300 000 km/s or thereabouts, considering there's no air to provide resistance-based deceleration.

Or are we operating on Aristotle physics?

[Playergamer]

I'm not trying to pull a steep dive, I'm essentially trying to angle down, and weave through to avoid enemy fire, using my speed to get "under" them before they can hit me. Even if the missiles miss, which, chances are, they will, you should still have enough time to gank anybody who tries to turn on me.

[Dampe]

Top speed of 32000 mph? I was under the impression that the top speed in a vacuum was 300 000 km/s or thereabouts, considering there's no air to provide resistance-based deceleration.

Or are we operating on Aristotle physics?

I think we're operating on Dampe-doesn't-know-anything physics...

[Harry Baldman]

I think we're operating on Dampe-doesn't-know-anything physics...

It's the laws of motion at work here. If there's nothing accelerating or slowing you down (or the accelerations compensate one another), you retain your velocity. This is the Newtonian interpretation, considerably more correct than Aristotle's, who believed that objects tend to slow down unless acted upon (he didn't factor in friction, air resistance, gravity and things like that).

In an atmosphere, your top speed is determined by air resistance. In outer space, where there is no atmospheric soup to fly through, so the only thing slowing you down is the gravitational pull of various objects, which with appropriate maneuvering and acceleration can be overcome (utilizing orbits, usually). Hence why for spacecraft an important measurement is delta-v - how much of a change in velocity can it make with its thrusters, and top speed isn't really relevant to anything.

However, considering the space fighters are called aircraft and the officers are called airmen (rather than, say, spacecraft and spacemen or, heh, starcraft and starmen), we might be a bit too deeply entrenched in space being air to backpedal much on the design (which would include probably removing wings from our spaceplanes if they're not meant to land on a planet) without it becoming unrecognizable). It's also unfortunate that both dogfights and starfighters aren't exactly practical in actual space, either, so I might as well not bother pushing more hardness into the setting, even if I was really looking forward to exploiting my minimal, if probably sufficient physics knowledge and exploring decidedly non-air combat maneuvers.

[Dampe]

I guess that's why they call it science fiction...
.~.