-
Posts
732 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
19
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by N-L-M
-
-
Looks very nice, very competently done.
If you want more efficiency, put a limit switch on the reservoir that declutches the main pump and locks it, while at the same time throttling down the prime mover. Will require a reservoir large enough to provide propulsion effort while the prime mover throttles up and the pump reconnects, but that gives you good idle efficiency.
You seem to have forgotten the out line from the second motor block to the reservoir, but thats just overly pedantic details.
-
AP caps do not count against the stack limit, no.
Steel long rod penetrators can cope with 2000m/s
Low pressure is anything up to the equivalent of the Cockerill 90mm LP gun.
-
Change the reference to 250 BHN, should give a bit of an edge.
-
27 minutes ago, LostCosmonaut said:
What are the armor penetrating capabilities of Cascadian LMG and HMG rounds (non-armor piercing)?
Approximately 10mm RHA and 25mm RHA at 50m respectively (7.62 RFN and .50 BMG)
28 minutes ago, LostCosmonaut said:About what technological level is the Calfornian Navy's submarine arm operating at? Is the Project 641 a reasonable comparison?
The Sea Auditory Forces are mostly a surface force, as the Thetan must not be unduly separated from the clean sea air.
The sub branch is however indeed operating Foxtrot equivalents.
-
3 minutes ago, Xoon said:
I damn well am going to have my special tank.
The DPRC strongly encourages diversity and acceptance of the special members of society, as well as their AFV counterparts.
-
3 minutes ago, Collimatrix said:
And surely this changes a little if you have a tungsten head on a steel body.
Yes, it moves the CG forwards, increasing the stability for a given aerodynamic arrangement (or allowing smaller fins to achieve the same stability).
-
Sea blue.
-
1 minute ago, Collimatrix said:
Yeah, the shorter penetrators mean that the fins have a lot less leverage for stabilizing the dart, which means that the fins are gigantic
This is factually incorrect. You see, the upending moment is also proportional to the length. For a given upending force on an constant-section solid rod, we therefore find that the upending moment scales with rod length (as the moment arm is half the rod length), but so too does the stabilizing moment from a tail of constant size, as its moment arm is also approximately half the rod length!
And indeed, we find this to be the case:
The tail surface area of all the above darts is very similar.
-
Considering how draggy the Soviet rounds were and the rated performance at 2000m, I'd say Longrods is being pessimistic.
-
Segmented rods are indeed Halal!
You have to make sure the sabot can adequately grip both parts to not leave the rear one behind, and they suffer from a 15% penalty to penetration, and can only be stacked 2 high, but other than that? Go for it!
@Toxn I'm pretty sure the tungsten bit penetrates more like a classic AP driven by the long steel rod and so L-O is not the best at describing it.
For the record, I'm willing to accept that a moderately longer 3BM-15 with a shorter WC core would have similar performance at similar velocities.
The claimed performance the Soviets got out of the extremely draggy 3BM-15 even at extended ranges suggests a bigger improvement, about which I am open to suggestions regarding how to quantify it.
PELE is indeed possible if desired.
-
34 minutes ago, Toxn said:
Having futzed around a bit with various gun designs, I think I can confidently say that all-steel APFSDS with a 15:1 L/D limit cannot meet the penetration
That's what you have the 100g of Tungsten for. Cargo culting off the Soviet APFSDS designs, it seems that it increases performance by quite a margin. The 115m 3BM-21 APFSDS slung by the T-62 wasn't far off the performance mark at all; and the 3bm-15 for the 125mm was more than capable of matching the required performance.
-
-
12 minutes ago, Toxn said:
Does that even count as a single vehicle though?
Yes. The overall weight limit applies to the combined vehicle, and the armor requirements apply to both. (Including mine protection).
-
K1 equations:
Light RA vs HEAT: k1=min(0.5/sin(x)+0.5, 6) Light RA vs KE: k1=min(0.025/sin(x)+0.975, 1.25) Heavy RA vs HEAT: k1=min(0.3/sin(x)+0.7, 4) Heavy RA vs KE: k1=min(0.25/sin(x)+0.75, 3.5)
-
5 minutes ago, Xoon said:
In a way, the vehicle would be a turret on tracks
Everything below the ring that connects it to the track is the hull; I am however willing to make a broad exception:
In the cases in which the hull or turret are over 75% of the silhouette, the aim point is shifted to the centroid of the large body instead of the center of the turret ring. The spec includes what distance from the aim point needs to be protected, and those instructions are to be followed.
I believe that should cover that.
-
2 hours ago, Zadlo said:
Because I doubt you've ever learned any other advanced abilities above that.
...you do realize Toxn was one of the winners of the last competition, right?
Again, you're strongly encouraged to chill and face the fact that A. You were wrong about Chobham and B. You're gonna have to live without advanced ceramics in this competition.
If you can't cope with B you can freely leave the thread and if you can't cope with A this may be the wrong site for you.
-
Another clarification: for modelling purposes, the arrays need not be modelled in full detail, but may be modelled as solid blocks of given thickness and mass as calculated separately.
-
Also if you don't already know that theres no ceramics in NATO box tank armor but in fact its all NERA with steel (or aluminum, see Chieftain 5/2) backing, get larned.
-
3 minutes ago, Zadlo said:
But why?
Because the DPRC's high end AlO production is allocated to aircraft, LAV and personal body armor and not for tanks; the sheer quantity needed for large AFV production exceeds reasonable production capacities.
At the same time, performance is not expected to reasonably exceed that of fused silica against the reference threats.
6 minutes ago, Zadlo said:On the one hand you allow to use fused silica but on the other hand you can't allow to use granite balls which were first used in armor in mid-50s!
Fused silica is in effect just very pure glass, easy to mass-produce. It has also seen use in armor since the early 1950s; it is assessed as offering similar performance at significantly lower costs vs the existing threats compared to more esoteric solutions such as granite, which is therefore disqualified on cost grounds.
19 minutes ago, Zadlo said:I think the competition is a bit broken.
Such Suppressive Personship is the sign of a Reactive Mind. Hatethink like this may get your Operating Thetan clearance revoked and you audited for sedition.
On a more serious note, you're invited to, y'know, actually participate before complaining about the rules.
-
9 minutes ago, Zadlo said:
But what year to be precise?
1961.
9 minutes ago, Zadlo said:Can we use metal matrix composites with alumina or granite balls as an armor?
No, ceramic production is fully allocated to other projects.
9 minutes ago, Zadlo said:Are there any restrictions about using tungsten or tungsten carbide as an armor?
As the 100g limit for ammo suggests, tungsten supplies are limited.
So that's a big no.
-
-
-
9 hours ago, holoween said:
150mm cavity with NERA-light at 14° from horizontal, 30mm RHA, 205mm cavity with NERA-light at 10° from horizontal
Them cavities are too short for good coverage. Phoneposting right now, but those cavities gotta be 223 and 311mm respecitvely based on my math.
(To achieve good overlap such that any LOS will penetrate a sandwich in the front face and out the back face, the overall length of the cavity must be (18/cos(α)*3) for a vertically stacked array like you describe.
Also note that the k2 LOS component does not include the rubber.
-
50 minutes ago, Toxn said:
DPICM
DPICM is a threat to the roof of the hull and turret, not to the rear.
Competition: Californium 2250
in Sturgeon's Contests
Posted
0.45m.