[Aesaar]

But further, the shape of the torpedoes themselves--unless made larger for no practical reason whatsoever--are either flat (Cyclops) or dully round (Helios). Armor penetrators don't tend to work well when featuring a wide, dull, round head to punch through armor. Shaped charges (from the ones I've seen/my limited understanding of the principles) are either conical/pointy for the armor penetration aspect, or their intended use is for precise demolitions on unarmored (or lightly armored) targets. Further, when you shoot down a bomb well before it hits its target, it explodes exactly the same way--and with the same force--as it does when it hits its target dead-on. In fact, it's rather telling that these bombs hit their targets perfectly, yet the explosion is still fully spherical and evenly distributed. That's the opposite of a shaped charge or armor penetrating weapon.

This is a bit of a sidenote, but shaped charges don't need to be super pointy.  They're made so for the same reason planes are: aerodynamics.  Look at the Panzerfaust, which was reasonably effective (for its size/weight), but very short range.  Obviously, since we're in space, aerodynamics don't matter.

[headdie]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge#Munroe_effect

bit of light reading that gets the basics across

[Colonol Dekker]

Ack! This is my bread and butter, must...not...get...involved.....

[headdie]

Ack! This is my bread and butter, must...not...get...involved.....

Explode out brains with your professional training

[SaltyWaffles]

But further, the shape of the torpedoes themselves--unless made larger for no practical reason whatsoever--are either flat (Cyclops) or dully round (Helios). Armor penetrators don't tend to work well when featuring a wide, dull, round head to punch through armor. Shaped charges (from the ones I've seen/my limited understanding of the principles) are either conical/pointy for the armor penetration aspect, or their intended use is for precise demolitions on unarmored (or lightly armored) targets. Further, when you shoot down a bomb well before it hits its target, it explodes exactly the same way--and with the same force--as it does when it hits its target dead-on. In fact, it's rather telling that these bombs hit their targets perfectly, yet the explosion is still fully spherical and evenly distributed. That's the opposite of a shaped charge or armor penetrating weapon.

This is a bit of a sidenote, but shaped charges don't need to be super pointy.  They're made so for the same reason planes are: aerodynamics.  Look at the Panzerfaust, which was reasonably effective (for its size/weight), but very short range.  Obviously, since we're in space, aerodynamics don't matter.

Okay--thank you for the clarification and correction. Though there is one thing I'm still confused about: aren't certain kinds of anti-armor warheads designed around the concept of a jet of molten metal being shot through a "funnel" out the front? Without that kind of funnel design, how would you shape the blast into a concentrated jet (instead of just a general shaped blast)?

Also, question: given the lack of aerodynamics in space, would it still matter (for a shaped blast, or molten "jet" of metal) if the Cyclops' ends are practically flat?

[BlasterNT]

Given the warheads are nuclear/antimatter, the physical shape itself likely doesn't matter.  For a Helios, all you have to do is release the containment on the front end, or create a magnetic bottle to the target, much like plasma weapons do in lore.  For Cyclopes, the shaped nature of the detonation likely comes from the structure of the nuclear material inside. 

[Aesaar]

SaltyWaffles: That is a shaped charge, but it doesn't need a funnel to concentrate the jet.  That jet is formed by the way the copper cone react to the pressure of an explosion.  I think the Wikipedia article can explain it better than I can.

Or maybe Dekker would be so kind as to do it.