Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Desert Tyrant on January 27, 2007, 04:46:23 pm
-
I was thinking, "Maybe some Cruiser's and Capships could mount Torps to Supplement their Beam Cannons
So, what do you people think?
-
I'd say so, because looking at two destroyers duking it out in a fly-by like manner with torpedoes launching would not only look cooler, but it would give fighter escort something to do other than destroy whatever fighter / bomber pops out of the hanger.
-
In Inferno ships are equipped with torpedoes. Just look at the Tanen or the Alcyone.
-
/me thinks that all ships size Cruiser and up should be resricted to two types of weapons: Beams and Flak. LOTS of Flak.
-
/me thinks that all ships size Cruiser and up should be resricted to two types of weapons: Beams and Flak. LOTS of Flak.
Considering that almost every modern naval vessel in the world has some sort of missile launcher?
-
Considering that almost every modern naval vessel in the world has some sort of missile launcher?
Which is obviously made obsolete by beams.
You can't shoot down a beam.
-
Can't shoot down the projectiles the "blob" turrets fire, which are slow and useless.
-
/me thinks that all ships size Cruiser and up should be resricted to two types of weapons: Beams and Flak. LOTS of Flak.
Considering that almost every modern naval vessel in the world has some sort of missile launcher?
modern by todays standards. Say that again in 250 years.
-
Thanks for the feedback :)
I think that ships like Hades (kinda weak beam placement), Aelous( May need better anticap fire), Mentu(needs beams and maybe torps)
Fenathans(replace the fusion mortor, kind of weak damage, though I might be wrong) and Hecate (Er... probley needs torps to really help the beams), etc.
So, what do you think? :)
EDIT: The Hatshepsut might benifit from CapTorps, what with the number of Fusion Morters(4. I think<_<>_>)
-
/me thinks that all ships size Cruiser and up should be resricted to two types of weapons: Beams and Flak. LOTS of Flak.
Considering that almost every modern naval vessel in the world has some sort of missile launcher?
modern by todays standards. Say that again in 250 years.
They would still need them, research, prototype testing, and actual development would probably take a hell of a lot longer than that if you look at the fact that everything is held back and left to rot. The perfecting of them would take too long and the actual USE of them would be too complicated because you would have to worry about power consumpion (Blacking out the ship), thermal emissions, (Overheating the reactor cores), and keeping the damn thing from exploding after the first shot.
-
Whole lot of turrets launching swarms of Trebuchet-esque missiles would work way better than torpedo launchers. Torpedoes (or heavy missiles like Helios and Cyclops) need to be delivered by bombers to have any effect against a capital ship protected with blob and flak turrets. Even then, if they are released too early, they will be wasted before doing any real damage.
So, I would guess that they've tried that and noticed that launching torpedoes from capital ship to capital ship was not only complete waste of money in munitions, but also waste of space for some other type of turret.
Obviously, if they develop an armoured torpedo ( :lol:@concept) they can use it to penetrate flak and blob barrage and to get it to hit the enemy ship's hull...
Realistically, I would rely on projectile weapons, though. And of course any spaceship's engines could always function as weapons too. I have always thought that the engine wash should really cause massive damage to systems of any poor bugger who decides to fly behind engines that can move several kilometres long ships. And it should effect longer behind the ships. I'm not talking about mild rumbling that slowly washes shields away and disrupts targeting. I'm talking about being vaporized, annihilated and blown to kingdom come in seconds for fighter-sized objects. :mad2:
-
Armored torpedoes?
Wasn't that the Anubis?
-
And of course any spaceship's engines could always function as weapons too. I have always thought that the engine wash should really cause massive damage to systems of any poor bugger who decides to fly behind engines that can move several kilometres long ships. And it should effect longer behind the ships. I'm not talking about mild rumbling that slowly washes shields away and disrupts targeting. I'm talking about being vaporized, annihilated and blown to kingdom come in seconds for fighter-sized objects. :mad2:
Ever read Larry Niven's "Man-Kzin Wars"?
-
Basically, yes. Among my off-the-wall ideas for dealing with the Sathanas is a corvette designed to launch a single broadside of 120 Helios bombs. (If I could teach the FS AI to do an axial role, it could launch a second too.) I also have a torpedo-armed corvette planned. (The torps don't need to be armored, just faster. Try it sometime with ITDoH's Trinity and Sprint bombs.)
Unfortunately the inability to make either model convert properly renders them useless. :(
-
I always thought that the torpedos, to essetially 'cheat' the capship defenses, should have had chaff charges, or counter measures, to trick the defenses.
( Hey, it worked well in Wing Commander: End Run, the countermeasure thingy on the torps almost destroys the Tarawa(CVE-8) at least twice in the entire Novel)
No, I havent read the Man-Knizy wars books, are they anygood ?
Edit: :lol: at General battula
Hmm, the anubis could be a decent large torp.... Runs of to ask Taristan what explosive were in them anubises in tenderizer
-
In BWO the ships from Earth, lacking the advanced technology that the GTVA developed using Shivan and Vasudan sources, use torpedo based offensive armament. Its pretty nifty to see streams of torps coming from a modified Orion. Its still just not as cool as beam cannons I think. But its neat anyways.
-
Ever read Larry Niven's "Man-Kzin Wars"?
Sadly, no, but I know the general plotline and that the idea is used there. :drevil:
And considering Anubis "armored" in any context is dubious at best... I think the Anubii used in Tenderizer would have way harder time against flak cannons, which the FS1 era ships didn't have. :lol: I doubt even half of them would reach the target.
Using faster torpedoes on the other hand feels like cheating. Why not simply use high explosive or sabot projectiles instead of propelled, guided torpedoes? They are way faster and would probably have about the same armour piercing affect as a gigantic surface explosion. Since they are fast they don't need guidance system in themselves, just somewhat better aim than Emperor Pirk had with his light ball.
Better still, they have theoretically infinite range, although as range increases the chance of hit gets smaller as the enemy has time to commence evasive maneuvers...
-
If you mount torpedoes or missiles on a capital ship, you need magazines.
Beams penetrate shields and armor and make stuff explode.
Magazines explode.
I think we have a good case for the lack of torpedoes. Think about what a measly support ship does when it blows.
-
Using faster torpedoes on the other hand feels like cheating. Why not simply use high explosive or sabot projectiles instead of propelled, guided torpedoes? They are way faster and would probably have about the same armour piercing affect as a gigantic surface explosion. Since they are fast they don't need guidance system in themselves, just somewhat better aim than Emperor Pirk had with his light ball.
Better still, they have theoretically infinite range, although as range increases the chance of hit gets smaller as the enemy has time to commence evasive maneuvers...
Let's face facts: FS bombs are slow. Really, stupidly slow. You could double or triple their speed and not stretch credulity at all. Besides, they can be armor-piercing too. HEAT or shaped-charge warheads. (The Interceptor and/or Harpoon specifically mention they were designed for armor-piercing capablities. No reason it can't be applied to a larger warhead.)
Regarding magazines, recall that flak is an ammunition-based weapon and requires them as well.
-
The GTC Fenris carries torpedoes that do more damage a second than it's beam.
-
:wtf:
Wait a minute, the Fusion Morter does more damage than a Lterslash?
-
I was wrong...
LTerSlash sustained damage / second: 149
Fusion Mortar damage / second: 80
But given the realitive accuracies of these weapons, the Fusion Mortar isn't too far off.
The LTerSlash out ranges the Mortar by 1500 meters as well.
-
Eh, its not like they can take down a ship on their own anyhow.... right?
-
If you mount torpedoes or missiles on a capital ship, you need magazines.
Beams penetrate shields and armor and make stuff explode.
Magazines explode.
I think we have a good case for the lack of torpedoes. Think about what a measly support ship does when it blows.
Also think about the fact that we've already tried making these type of offensive beam weapons (Not the retarded ass anti-missile beam cannons) and they blew the testing installation they were in sky high after firing it once.
-
Also think about the fact that we've already tried making these type of offensive beam weapons (Not the retarded ass anti-missile beam cannons) and they blew the testing installation they were in sky high after firing it once.
We're not talking about now. We're talking about in FreeSpace. Beam Cannons don't cause explosions. Torpedoes, BY THEIR NATURE, explode.
-
Meh, the torp think worked in Wing Commander, but then again, They didnt have Beam Cannons
-
Lets face it, beams are just cooler in the original graphics... now if somone could make a supersexy version of torpedos... maybe.
-
I'd love to see some shipkiller missiles almost the size of a fighter used in juggernaught combat. Big, slow, and armored. It'd be so much fun to fly interceptor duty against those.
I think bombs are slow because, uh...they have to be carried on bombers, and...engines are big. Maybe they don't have the mass to mount better drives?
Freespace engine systems have always been wonky.
-
Wait...when did anyone (private industry or government funded project) try to create a fully-blown BEAM cannon? As in LASER weaponry? I remember the Star Wars project and all that jazz, but that was, as you put it, just just a panzy anti-missile cannon... and if I remember, it didn't blow up.
I'd love to see an article. Or something.
I mean, YES, a true beam weapon would generate a LOT of heat but I just don't see that as being an obstacle that modern cooling systems could not overcome. The biggest boundary I see is energy. I mean... everytime you fire the sucker you're going to owe the power company a bill the size of an entire residential blocks monthly power bill.
-
You know we have no idea what an actual Freespace beam is.
Though some kind of plasma weapon seems most likely, it wouldn't work in atmosphere at all.
-
Meh, the torp think worked in Wing Commander, but then again, They didnt have Beam Cannons
Quite possibly because they were fast and deadly :D
-
Wait...when did anyone (private industry or government funded project) try to create a fully-blown BEAM cannon? As in LASER weaponry? I remember the Star Wars project and all that jazz, but that was, as you put it, just just a panzy anti-missile cannon... and if I remember, it didn't blow up.
I'd love to see an article. Or something.
I mean, YES, a true beam weapon would generate a LOT of heat but I just don't see that as being an obstacle that modern cooling systems could not overcome. The biggest boundary I see is energy. I mean... everytime you fire the sucker you're going to owe the power company a bill the size of an entire residential blocks monthly power bill.
I'm curious too.
-
The US Navy's had a working laser weapon capable of engaging orbital targets since the early 1990's. Big old thing, looks like a telescope almost. Just the Air Force has been vehemently opposed to testing it.
-
Wassit called?
-
I dunno the project name, I just know people who worked on it. My father actually had adminstrative control of the thing for a few years as a director of Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command. I used to have poster with the project team next to thing.
It's big, they designed it as a drop-in replacement for the Mk41 VLS on an AEGIS cruiser.
-
I think cap ships should mount a large number of high-caliber, side mounted projectile cannons ("Revenge of the Sith" anyone?).
This would be an interesting mission: the player has to disable as much turrets as possible before the ships come in range.
Or, since IA ships don't roll, friendly ships could pass above the enemy ship...
-
Eh. Special Purpose torp ships, yes. Just on general purpose ships, no.
It's just one of those things that they're hard to justify use of. Torps get shot down. Beams don't. Torps run out - in all of freespacedom, not one beam weapon has simply run out of ammo. Even if they were fusion based, or otherwise not prone to just explode cause they got shot, giving the enemy a chance to block your attack while at the same time giving your logistics train another commodity to worry about doesn't seem like a great idea. Just put in a beam cannon where the torp launcher would be instead.
On specialist ships though, I can see a purpose. Beam cannons have power requirements and cool down times, so using them for fast, hard first strikes isn't so great an idea. You could, however, make something vette classed, with something like 8 or 10 torp launchers on either side and no other weapons, with the idea being to jump in, drop off it's entire payload as quickly as possible, and get the hell out of there. Over the long haul, you're better off with beam weapons, but if all you want is the heaviest strike you can get then a quick exit stage left, torps could have a use. Cruiser class probably wouldn't work though - for it to work, it has to be able to survive that first beam salvo, and that's not an easy trick for a cruiser up against something where a massive torp broadside would be appropriate.
-
Torps run out - in all of freespacedom, not one beam weapon has simply run out of ammo. Even if they were fusion based, or otherwise not prone to just explode cause they got shot, giving the enemy a chance to block your attack while at the same time giving your logistics train another commodity to worry about doesn't seem like a great idea. Just put in a beam cannon where the torp launcher would be instead.
Err... Colossus beams versus Sathanas I, the few Aeolus cruisers (or what they were) in one the multiplayer missions....
I think bombs are a good alternative for the beams but they should have some advantages over the beams for them to be used. In default FS weapons there really isnt anything - well except 'jamming' of enemy capships beams with bombs in fully beam freed missions.
Larger range (something like 8000 compared to beams 4000), higher speeds or something simple as 'corkscrew' option (AI doesnt really hit these) would balance the scales considerably.
This is mod thing but for example i use capships missiles that travel at velocity of 220 and carry enough punch to tale out a freighter on a single hit. Sure few of them gets shot down but even few impacts here and there before the capship closes on the beam cannon range can make the difference.
-
This would be an interesting mission: the player has to disable as much turrets as possible before the ships come in range.
Didn't we call that Bearbaiting?
-
Beam Turrets DO however get knocked out of action. Besides torps plus fighters plus bombers plus beam guns = overwhelmed enemy.
Plus torps don't require massive amounts of energy to fire.
-
This would be an interesting mission: the player has to disable as much turrets as possible before the ships come in range.
Didn't we call that Bearbaiting?
Much like that, but with the difference that there are a lot of not-so-though turrets, bot enemy and friendly ships are in the area, and if the player isn't quick enough, he will be caught in cross fire ;7
-
Much like that, but with the difference that there are a lot of not-so-though turrets, bot enemy and friendly ships are in the area, and if the player isn't quick enough, he will be caught in cross fire ;7
yeah, that will be good. I tried to create the same effect with INFERNO ships, but it's not so good.
-
Wouldn't depend on the "era" of ship or more or lest type.how many times do The Shivans gang rape a corvette or destoryer and you have you and dumb wing mates. it could work?
Missles and bombs are self propelled in game they don't us your engery so why would a capships use E
they'd run out {sorry if some of this was said allready i just speed thuogh this thread]
-
Tamlin... Does that nick happen to be nicked off from certain al'Thor? :)
-
Much like that, but with the difference that there are a lot of not-so-though turrets, bot enemy and friendly ships are in the area, and if the player isn't quick enough, he will be caught in cross fire ;7
yeah, that will be good. I tried to create the same effect with INFERNO ships, but it's not so good.
Are you sure?
I used it in STHCRS-mission 18 I think.
-
Much like that, but with the difference that there are a lot of not-so-though turrets, bot enemy and friendly ships are in the area, and if the player isn't quick enough, he will be caught in cross fire ;7
yeah, that will be good. I tried to create the same effect with INFERNO ships, but it's not so good.
Are you sure?
I used it in STHCRS-mission 18 I think.
steadfast, old m3, alexandiria vs phobos, i sent it to you time ago. not so bad, but not as i wanted
-
As I think I might have touched upon ealier in the thread, thereason I thought of the Torps on Capships is simply to helpout other ships with the anticapitol fire, in particular, The Hades, The Mentu, and the Hecate, as I thought they desperly need for various reasons.(The Hades, for its absoluty crappy Beam placement, The Mentu, for having no anticap fire at all, and the Hecate, to give it desperly needed punch so it can escape)
Also, good points on the loss of the Hood. Seems like a crappy way to die. Yet I thought one of the few ships that did die from the the mags blowing up to high hell was the arizona. >_>
Hmm.. I like this place, you learn stuff... I think <_<
-
/me thinks that all ships size Cruiser and up should be resricted to two types of weapons: Beams and Flak. LOTS of Flak.
Isent that the Aelous?
-
Beam Turrets DO however get knocked out of action. Besides torps plus fighters plus bombers plus beam guns = overwhelmed enemy.
Plus torps don't require massive amounts of energy to fire.
Missile Launchers are vulnerable to weapons fire as well, so torpedo tubes would be too. And on the latter, again, the point I'm making here is that if you takes the torps out, and use the space for more beam cannons and fighter/bomber space, the enemy is just as overwhelmed. Torpedo tubes require resources - space and money at a premium. Why use that space and money for torps instead of one of the many already existing weapons?
The big C didn't run out of ammo. It was overheating. The latter requires time to cool down. The former requires a freighter to bring you more ammo.
The lack of energy requirement could be a bonus, I suppose, but in any ship large enough to be taking on capships while hanging around, energy requirements shouldn't be a major factor, and if you;re talking about hit and fades...well, I mention that one specifically.
-
Hey now wait a minute. Since when did the Collie ran out of "amunition" for its beam cannons? NEVER!
The collie just had really bad heat sinks and it was severely undepowerd for the amount of beams it had to fire at once and even overcharge them. In short the Collie was not meant to fire something like 2/3 of its beams at one at one sigle target. And even if it apears that the beams were designed to be overcharged i'm sure they were not mean to be overcharged and fired in rapid fire one shot after the other. That just screams loads more heat and more powerconsumption. Much more then it was designed to handle.
Remember the Collie was tryng to take out the Sath as fast as posible and they paid the price for this.
Until i can see a bomb/torp that can move at half the speed of a beam cannon or can not be shot down i will stick to beams.
-
Well, on some further consideration, I can think of two uses for torps, though only one is really practical.
1) Combatting the Sathanas/Hecate effect: Beam weapons are only useful against targets in their cone of fire. If it's not in that cone...well, you're SOL. Since a torpedo can turn, it can be used on non primary angles or perhaps just everywhere to give it a 360/360 cone of fire. Assuming we're talking about torps more star trek speed and less starlancer speed (which would be a bad joke in FSdom anyway), there could be advantages to this.
2) Unlikely, but if you're in a nebular environment and your torps use stealth tech, you might be able to launch stealthily heavy attacks. A beam cannon neccessairly gives away your position. A torp need not.
-
It would be cool also to have "cruise torpedos": launch them from the far part of the system, make them jump capable, and spawn them 500 meters or less from the enemy fleet ;7
-
*cough*SSM*cough*
-
*cough*SSM*cough*
Oh right, forgot about it :nervous:
-
What is SSM????
-
Wait...when did anyone (private industry or government funded project) try to create a fully-blown BEAM cannon? As in LASER weaponry? I remember the Star Wars project and all that jazz, but that was, as you put it, just just a panzy anti-missile cannon... and if I remember, it didn't blow up.
I'd love to see an article. Or something.
I mean, YES, a true beam weapon would generate a LOT of heat but I just don't see that as being an obstacle that modern cooling systems could not overcome. The biggest boundary I see is energy. I mean... everytime you fire the sucker you're going to owe the power company a bill the size of an entire residential blocks monthly power bill.
Yes, it has been attempted, it was a beam cannon that could punch straight through any barrier (Walls and the sort) and vaporize everything inside it. Only thing was: it blew up after firing the first test shot and hasn't been attempted since.
-
Sources, Zane. Sources.
-
What is SSM????
Bombs coming from subspace after you "tagged" the target with the Targeting Laser. Actually, that doesn't work, but looks like modifying "ssm.tbl" will make it work.
-
The GTC Fenris Leviathan carries torpedoes that do more damage a second than it's beam.
There, fixed it for you.
-
From a players perspective I suppose the Cap-ship mounted torpedo launcher makes missions more challenging. Say you have two Orion's engaging in the AI chase tango, circling and exchanging broadsides with their beams. In a normal mission, the player would simply need to destroy 2/3 beam cannons on the opposing Orion and the major threat to the friendly vessel is gone excepting of course for any scripted bombers. Now say the opposing vessel has the mounted torpedo launchers. As well (or perhaps instead of the beams) you have these launchers to deal with, but as well as destroying the hard points, the incoming munitions must also be dealt with. Now of course the severity of their threat depends on the weapon designer, but personally I think it would make things much more challenging for the player. After all, variety is the spice of life.
-
There you go, exactly what I also said. So don't go cracking around saying that they're useless.
-
I still want to know what this 'beam cannon' you're talking about is, Zane. A laser? I'd like some technical details - I'm fairly conversant in the technology, I'd be curious to learn more.
Any articles? A name, at least?
-
From what I remember it's called a Neutral Particle Beam.
-
Herra: it's no nick, man, it my name .well second name. I think "Mike" would be pretty boring and calling myself chef which I hear eery day sucks. So my imagianation is with my "Hippy" parents
-
Fascinating. Thanks for replying, I was just wondering... :)
-
Course beams are great... but what happens when shielding starts blocking beams? Your going to want to have backups.
-
True, but there's still stuff to look at when making an energy field powerful enough to absorb something like a charged beam.
And if anyone says "magnetic deflection" for missiles, don't even bother, I find those too impractical.
-
Well, that's what armor is, Zane.
After all, what we think of as 'solid' matter is only that way because of electromagnetic repulsion.
-
Phase shields and phase torpedos.... sidewall shields and sidewall torps... torps with the ability to sync with the shields. Something like sidewalls would make beams virtually useless.
-
...except for the part where that's sci-fi technobabble, not anything remotely based on real physics.
Heck, by all rights it should be easier to sync a beam with shields than an entire torpedo. (Granted, that's technobabble too, so if you like the idea of shield-penetrating torps, more power to you!)
-
Cruise torpedos sound a likely dvelopement as it is the one location where topedos have and advantage over beams, in that they can be very long ranged, the only problem of course is that they would be easily shot down without a subspace drive, and to expensive for most engagements with one. however, if you have a few torpedo bombardment ships (probably converted old cruisers), and a faster torpedo, they would be useful in some situations.
However, I think that a better use for such vessels would be as fighter carriers that stay out of battle, but allow the destroyers to do away with their fighter bays, and carry even more weapons (or just a reasonable number, in the case of the Hecate class).
-
I'd love to see some shipkiller missiles almost the size of a fighter used in juggernaught combat. Big, slow, and armored. It'd be so much fun to fly interceptor duty against those.
I think bombs are slow because, uh...they have to be carried on bombers, and...engines are big. Maybe they don't have the mass to mount better drives?
Freespace engine systems have always been wonky.
There is one problem with big missiles - you can't make them armored for now (AFIK)
I made some pretty powerfull and big missiles for the Archangel and they might not be armored but they still manage to pass trough the enemy defense in 50% of cases... Of course Shivan AF defense if weak in most cases....
-
Course this whole thing is technobabble LOL
Actually photon/quantum type torp would be very effective. Too fast to be intercepted. You could target enemy beam turrets with them. I dunno about range though.
-
I seem to remember photon torps being rather unmanouvrable and so very difficult to hit precise locations. There again the creators of Star Trek never went much in for technological continuity...
As for ranges, this varies between original trek (enormous), and next gen trek (around 8km(16 ship lengths)).
Back to FS...
A weapon that was fast enough not to be intercepted would probably be fast enough not to need a guidance system.
Saying that, I have had the idea of a cap-ship that would aproach the enemy, get into a broadside position and open fire with lots of Tempests.
-
Uh? Are talking about dive warheads with no guidance systems? They're far better than a swarm of Tempests.
-
Uh? Are talking about dive warheads with no guidance systems? They're far better than a swarm of Tempests.
Depends on how many tempests.
-
As for ranges, this varies between original trek (enormous), and next gen trek (around 8km(16 ship lengths)).
I seem to remember that the Galaxy class was 600 meters long
-
/me thinks that all ships size Cruiser and up should be resricted to two types of weapons: Beams and Flak. LOTS of Flak.
Isent that the Aelous?
Your point?
Aelous is one of the best cap ships, IMO.
-
As for maneuverability of photon torpedoes, watch the death of General Chang and his fire-while-cloaked B'rel class bird of prey near the end of Star Trek VI.
-
As for maneuverability of photon torpedoes, watch the death of General Chang and his fire-while-cloaked B'rel class bird of prey near the end of Star Trek VI.
To be or not to be.............*BOOM* :D
-
Target that explosion and fire!
-
Eh, on the topic of Beam weapons, and missiles, see www.readyaimfuture.com
Click on "Video Galleries"
In "FutureWeapons Season 1: Part 1", view the clip "FutureWeapons: Airborne Laser" for 3 types of lasers in development.
In "FutureWeapons Season 2", view the clip "FutureWeapons: THAAD Missile"
:D
All the other clips are pretty cool, too. :cool:
-
Funny, those are all anti-missile lasers.
-
/me thinks that all ships size Cruiser and up should be resricted to two types of weapons: Beams and Flak. LOTS of Flak.
Isent that the Aelous?
Your point?
Aelous is one of the best cap ships, IMO.
QFT. I completly agree with that assesment. The Aeolus was quite a nasty crusier.
-
Funny, those are all anti-missile lasers.
:wtf: U listen to the part about the one they were mounting on the JSF?
-
It said nothing about offensive lasers being mounted on F-35 aircraft.
-
Found them on different searches, solid-state / microwave lasers. But considering that 85% of any laser based weapon I've looked at was canceled even before the half-point of testing or was just dumped for something else, it's less than likely that they'll ever come through.
-
Sigh...
Uh? Are talking about dive warheads with no guidance systems? They're far better than a swarm of Tempests.
Depends on how many tempests.
All the tempests a fighter can carry.
-
Found them on different searches, solid-state / microwave lasers. But considering that 85% of any laser based weapon I've looked at was canceled even before the half-point of testing or was just dumped for something else, it's less than likely that they'll ever come through.
The atmosphere is was really holding them back. It regrades the laser rapidly.
-
Doesn't mean you can't get a high powered laser to go even somewhat far enough to be a serious threat. It's all about making sure firing two shots doesn't vaporize whatever's housing the weapon. Or melts, or shuts down from overload, or just be too damn heavy to carry, or being so expensive that the contract is canceled (Which is the reason of almost every new project's downfall).
-
Doesn't mean you can't get a high powered laser to go even somewhat far enough to be a serious threat. It's all about making sure firing two shots doesn't vaporize whatever's housing the weapon. Or melts, or shuts down from overload, or just be too damn heavy to carry, or being so expensive that the contract is canceled (Which is the reason of almost every new project's downfall).
I think the last two especially the weight are the main ones.
-
It said nothing about offensive lasers being mounted on F-35 aircraft.
Oh, yes it did... Next, is the close-combat version called the Advanced Tactical Laser, carried on much smaller aircraft like the latest Joint Strike Fighter planes, the ATL is every bit as deadly, taking out air and ground targets with incredible stealth.
:p
-
Like I said again, there's an 85% chance that the concept will just go down the ****ter like every other laser based weapon I've read about.
-
It was still in there.. Need a hearing aide? :p ;) :lol: j/k