StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The droid gunships from ROTS have "concussion bombs". How powerful are these things? What is their weight relative to the missiles the gunship also carries? I'm trying to design a good CAS craft for the New Republic / post Endor Empire era, and was thinking about its payload.

The design choice for the CAS craft is between guided bombs/air to surface missiles with limited propulsion such as these, and the power generators and equipment needed for a laser artillery piece plus the systems needed to make the beam curve. I do not want to consider the laser artillery without seeing what sort of power consumption and raw weight such a system would have, so a scaled up droid gunship seems the best bet so far.

None of the air weapons we saw in attack of the clones or revenge of the sith came across as being any more powerful, sometimes much less powerful, then what we could expect out of similar sized modern weapons filled with chemical explosives. No one can tell you how much any of that stuff weighs, we just don't know. At best you could make comparisons based on size to real weapons. In which case those things look to be in the 250-500lb class. However I wouldn't worry that much about weight either, since Star Wars can make 900 meter long warships fly using repulsors. They aren't bound like a normal aircraft, in which a certain hard weight limit will prevent a craft from being able to fly. Whatever looks cool they could make work.

We almost never see laser weapons in Star Wars, so I wouldn't use them. My personal theory on why they don't use lasers is that all that super technology they have allows them to create highly conductive armor. Thus everyone uses blasters instead which have at least some kinetic energy as well as heat, preventing the enemy from using a highly optimized armor against them.

^ Thanks.

Essentially, I need something that's not totally Line-of-Sight. In AOTC, some people saw the really heavy artillery beams arc. These are the guns the Clones brought in on Geonosis to take down the Separatist pod-ships. This is why I was wondering if this curving - laser technology is used in other places in SW.

I'm trying to work out the minimum weapons needed to take out AT-PT's, Juggernauts, and at least incapacitate AT-AT's from at least 5km (no harpoons!!)

[quote="Bottlestein"]^ Thanks.

Essentially, I need something that's not totally Line-of-Sight. In AOTC, some people saw the really heavy artillery beams arc. These are the guns the Clones brought in on Geonosis to take down the Separatist pod-ships. This is why I was wondering if this curving - laser technology is used in other places in SW.

I'm trying to work out the minimum weapons needed to take out AT-PT's, Juggernauts, and at least incapacitate AT-AT's from at least 5km (no harpoons!!)[/quote]

In AOTC those SPHA-Ts don't arc at all, they are totally LOS. However weapons that at least have the same chassis and appear to have the same main weapon do arc in the oringial Clone Wars micro series chapter 5. These are used as convential artillery

Bottlestein wrote:^ Thanks.

Essentially, I need something that's not totally Line-of-Sight. In AOTC, some people saw the really heavy artillery beams arc. These are the guns the Clones brought in on Geonosis to take down the Separatist pod-ships. This is why I was wondering if this curving - laser technology is used in other places in SW.

I'm trying to work out the minimum weapons needed to take out AT-PT's, Juggernauts, and at least incapacitate AT-AT's from at least 5km (no harpoons!!)

Proton torpedoes would work, they take out AT-ATs in more then one book, and are a lot smaller then the droid gunship missiles. Proton torpedoes use some kind of nuclear shaped charge, but the yields vary (no doubt because more then one model is produced). No doubt the gunship missiles are larger but weaker because they use a cheeper warhead. Proton torpedoes are described as being quite expensive.

One would expect the missiles on the driod gunships can already at least blow up an AT-PT, those things are damn small, they might well be able to take out heavier armor. So if you could just create a missile about size of the driod gunship missile but with a cheaper larger kind of proton torpedo warhead, and which acts like a SRAM missile, able to fly over the horizon and follow the terrain, but also able to fly a ballistic arc for max range, or a direct flight path right at the target for the shortest possible time of flight. Flight path is set upon launch depending on what you need to do.


As for energy weapons, I don't think those giant walkers in AOTC have curved fire, its pretty clearly straight lines at point blank range. One idea you might use is some kind of podded blaster weapon pylons, with more then one kind of pod. An anti armor pod would mount a single large blaster, fixed firing forward and used for conventional strafing runs. A different pod would hold a lighter, much faster firing blaster (or more then one even) which is in a turret like the driod gunship has, and can cover a wide arc on the ground to shoot up soft targets. If the gunship could haul two such pods, then you could mix and match as the mission requires. Not everyone will have lots of giant walkers you need to destroy, but if the enemy DID have lots of walkers then you might want two anti armor guns.

In general Star Wars really underestimates what future ground weapons should be like, so its not hard to find ways to vastly improve upon what we see in the movies. The ranges in particular are painfully short, but movie makers always want to put both sides on screen at the same time which means 1000km range scramjet missiles on a gunship dont work.

^Thanks.

I think the proton-torpedo warhead SRAM may be the best solution, with some handwaving as to cost. Essentially, this should be a "One size fits all" CAS gunship. It should be able to handle reinforced threats that infantry would encounter. In my thinking, I had this divided into unshielded bunker, durasteel / "permacrete ?" reinforced bunker, walker / IFV , gun / missile /sensor array emplacement / "ruins" (yavin etc.)

I had originally thought the gunship would use chemical weapons to get through the bunker, but so many factions use NBC protected personal suits that its too risky. With thermobaric rounds - again there's so many different ways that different factions might counter the overpressure wave - they have "inertial dampers" everywhere, so who knows what they've put in the bunker.

This is how I came to the conclusion of just outright massive energy depositing weapons, since something like that may also deal with walkers, ruins and emplacements if used correctly.

The gunship will have communication equipment that can go through enemy jamming, and probe droids going with infantry will act as target designators. Some battlefield observation modified TIE's, as well as FAC's within the infantry can also act in this role. The missiles will have sufficient image-processing ability that once the target has been designated, it'll complete the final approach and detonation autonomously (i.e. hit the bunker, walker, whatever at the spot that the threat library says should be the most effective).

The anti - "soft target" weapons are a real pain to design - this is actually giving me some grief now. You're right about not worrying about the weight, but now I've actually started worrying about power consumption even more!! My first design had required too many turrets dedicated to anti- soft targets, so I'm redoing the saucer design. I guess the repulsor drive / damper fields may be extremely fuel efficient, so aerodynamics may be chucked out the window and I don't have to worry about the surface area of the turrets...

Skimmer how effective are the end-phase sram maneuvers t avoiding defenses?

JointStrikeFighter wrote:Skimmer how effective are the end-phase sram maneuvers t avoiding defenses?

I really don’t know, everything agility wise about US missiles past the early 1960s is still classified. Shep has spent a huge amount of time hands on looking for it in archives over the last couple years. I think that little picture is also just in reference to the use of SRAM as a target missile to simulate commie SRBMs. It appears to have greater range then a stock SRAM, likely because it has no weight of warhead.

However I can speculate that maneuverability on a SRAM might be sufficient to help trip up short range defenses, like radar directed guns and smaller SAM systems. It’s not likely to matter that much against S-300 which has a really big 330lb directional fused warhead and far greater speed then the SRAM missile itself. Mach 3 vs. Mach 5-7. Though the all new SRAM-II, killed in 1991, would have had much higher speed, greater range and no doubt greater evasive/flight path options since it had way newer computers.

SRAM also had the advantage of being quite small, with no forward facing air intakes since both models were rocket powered. So it was going to be very hard to detect on the radars of the time. Even with the external pylons gone, a B-1B could haul enough SRAMs to blast through several Soviet defended areas, drop megaton plus gravity bombs on what was inside them, and keep going. Defending against one SRAM was doable, but several at once flying those different trajectories? The odds are not good with cold war systems, and 200kt means the missile only has to get close to kill you.

Bottlestein wrote:^Thanks.

I think the proton-torpedo warhead SRAM may be the best solution, with some handwaving as to cost.

Sounds good to me. An AT-AT or Juggernaut should be pretty high value targets for it to blow up anyway.

Essentially, this should be a "One size fits all" CAS gunship. It should be able to handle reinforced threats that infantry would encounter. In my thinking, I had this divided into unshielded bunker, durasteel / "permacrete ?" reinforced bunker, walker / IFV , gun / missile /sensor array emplacement / "ruins" (yavin etc.)

I’m not sure I totally get how you are splitting those categories up, but it sounds good. Ruins might be considered a ‘deep bunker’ kind of target. Something that isn’t that resistant to impacts, but very massive so you need a real long fuse delay to get the warhead to explode inside it.

I had originally thought the gunship would use chemical weapons to get through the bunker, but so many factions use NBC protected personal suits that its too risky. With thermobaric rounds - again there's so many different ways that different factions might counter the overpressure wave - they have "inertial dampers" everywhere, so who knows what they've put in the bunker.

That’s good thinking. If they had droids running the bunker, then they could suck out the air too. That would mean less destructive overpressure, since all gas must come from the bomb itself, and a thermobaric bomb couldn’t even ignite.

This is how I came to the conclusion of just outright massive energy depositing weapons, since something like that may also deal with walkers, ruins and emplacements if used correctly.

Yeah nothing can replace raw intensive firepower for assured target destruction. Star Wars certainly presents a lot of hard targets. Are you familiar with the relatively new field of reactive metal warheads? It’s a fairly new spinoff of thermobaric bomb design that’s gaining ground like crazy, in which you coat metal fuels with a powder coating of oxidizer metal. This turns the metals into an explosive with far more energy then any normal bulk high explosive. Like a thermobaric bomb the blast isn’t as intensive, its more hot then bang, but its not dependent on consuming outside air and the heat levels can be as high as 8,000 degrees. That’s with stuff they’ve already done in real life, but the field has only scratched the surface of the possible compounds.

With Star Wars technology and random Star Wars materials, you could dream up a super effective reactive metal warhead that’s more powerful then any current high explosive, but not on par with nuclear warheads/proton torpedoes. Something like a Duraluminum/potassium superoxide bomb. Half it is real, the other half has the power of handwavium!

The gunship will have communication equipment that can go through enemy jamming, and probe droids going with infantry will act as target designators. Some battlefield observation modified TIE's, as well as FAC's within the infantry can also act in this role. The missiles will have sufficient image-processing ability that once the target has been designated, it'll complete the final approach and detonation autonomously (i.e. hit the bunker, walker, whatever at the spot that the threat library says should be the most effective).

Sounds good, the gunship can carry more of the probe droids too and drop them into battle as needed.

The anti - "soft target" weapons are a real pain to design - this is actually giving me some grief now. You're right about not worrying about the weight, but now I've actually started worrying about power consumption even more!! My first design had required too many turrets dedicated to anti- soft targets, so I'm redoing the saucer design. I guess the repulsor drive / damper fields may be extremely fuel efficient, so aerodynamics may be chucked out the window and I don't have to worry about the surface area of the turrets...

If you want a way to deal with soft targets, which I should note could include some fairly well protected battle droids or armored stormtroopers, you aren’t just limited to blasters to mow them down. Nothing stops a missile from delivering cluster bombs or dispensing a cloud of flechettes. In fact the US military has mere 70mm rockets which can deliver both types of warheads, besides the basic high explosive warhead.

Given highly advanced technology you could have small missiles which reach high supersonic or hypersonic speed over a very short distance, and then spray out 10,000 metal flechettes onto the target area. Each flechette would strike with the kind of force a modern autocannon round would, and could also include an incendiary base so it can set fire to vehicles and buildings.

Aerodynamics still matter a little. The Star Wars vehicle design style suggests that anyway. Not because you need them for lift, but because clean aerodynamics help with flight control. Even if the flight control itself is based on the repulsor, it will work better if it isn’t fighting the air like mad. Also what are you considering for propulsion? Some star wars craft are purely repulsor, but others have additional forward engines. Will this gunship be able to fly into space for assaults, or is it purely atmospheric?

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Essentially, this should be a "One size fits all" CAS gunship. It should be able to handle reinforced threats that infantry would encounter. In my thinking, I had this divided into unshielded bunker, durasteel / "permacrete ?" reinforced bunker, walker / IFV , gun / missile /sensor array emplacement / "ruins" (yavin etc.)

I’m not sure I totally get how you are splitting those categories up, but it sounds good. Ruins might be considered a ‘deep bunker’ kind of target. Something that isn’t that resistant to impacts, but very massive so you need a real long fuse delay to get the warhead to explode inside it.

It was just what I remembered off-the-cuff from the movies, really. My thinking was, if ground troops are being sent in, as opposed to just outright orbital nuking/glassing etc, then the heavier planetary shielding as well as the really wide area ground shields are not a concern. Then, the strongpoint the infantry needs to take over is like Hoth. A lot of the sensors and artillery pieces are in towers above ground (I guess they need Line-Of-Sight over a wide area), and this is what I generally termed emplacements. Then there's unshielded bunkers that actually contain the enemy soldiers and E-webs, RPG's, point defense missiles etc. The reinforced bunker is what I termed things like the transport hangars at Hoth, or Dooku's hangar at Geonosis. It can have a local shield generator, but it can be disabled. The walls will probably be heavily reinforced. The "ruins" category is a bit vague, and I agree that "deep" bunker probably covers it.

Yeah nothing can replace raw intensive firepower for assured target destruction. Star Wars certainly presents a lot of hard targets. Are you familiar with the relatively new field of reactive metal warheads? It’s a fairly new spinoff of thermobaric bomb design that’s gaining ground like crazy, in which you coat metal fuels with a powder coating of oxidizer metal. This turns the metals into an explosive with far more energy then any normal bulk high explosive. Like a thermobaric bomb the blast isn’t as intensive, its more hot then bang, but its not dependent on consuming outside air and the heat levels can be as high as 8,000 degrees. That’s with stuff they’ve already done in real life, but the field has only scratched the surface of the possible compounds.

With Star Wars technology and random Star Wars materials, you could dream up a super effective reactive metal warhead that’s more powerful then any current high explosive, but not on par with nuclear warheads/proton torpedoes. Something like a Duraluminum/potassium superoxide bomb. Half it is real, the other half has the power of handwavium!

I've only heard of it vaguely - most of the seminars we get here dealing with metal-metal surface physics are all geared towards applications in electronics manufacturing or tribology (engine - lubricants etc). I knew they used aluminum catalysts for some explosive processes, but that's about all really. This seems like it could work - superoxides, better explosions than peroxides!

If you want a way to deal with soft targets, which I should note could include some fairly well protected battle droids or armored stormtroopers, you aren’t just limited to blasters to mow them down. Nothing stops a missile from delivering cluster bombs or dispensing a cloud of flechettes. In fact the US military has mere 70mm rockets which can deliver both types of warheads, besides the basic high explosive warhead.

Given highly advanced technology you could have small missiles which reach high supersonic or hypersonic speed over a very short distance, and then spray out 10,000 metal flechettes onto the target area. Each flechette would strike with the kind of force a modern autocannon round would, and could also include an incendiary base so it can set fire to vehicles and buildings.

This is a good idea. This also means the craft will get lighter after part of the mission is completed, so hopefully this will add to loiter time over the target. I'll go for larger missile bays rather than more turrets then.

Aerodynamics still matter a little. The Star Wars vehicle design style suggests that anyway. Not because you need them for lift, but because clean aerodynamics help with flight control. Even if the flight control itself is based on the repulsor, it will work better if it isn’t fighting the air like mad. Also what are you considering for propulsion? Some star wars craft are purely repulsor, but others have additional forward engines. Will this gunship be able to fly into space for assaults, or is it purely atmospheric?

No space assault capability. Essentially the idea is to have a better doctrine against threats within a planet than what the Tarkin Method could achieve (both in terms of effectiveness and political acceptability). So this craft is just hardware for when space superiority is achieved, as well as clear transmissions with planetary forces. Enemy atmospheric defences may still be active, but this will be much closer to point defences. Any "network" type defence on continental scales have been defeated, or the enemy has been denied the chance to put them up. The craft does not need to be fast - the cruise speed of a TIE bomber in atmosphere will easily do the trick - it may even be overkill. It'll attack guns well outside their range anyway.
Forwards engines should just be enough to achieve this speed - since it has repulsors it shouldn't need the excess power for emergency flight conditions our airplanes need. We can have backup repulsors / repulsor power generators for the crew's peace of mind, but generally it should be sufficiently shielded against fighters and fast threats rather than rely on outrunning them. Range and loiter time are the watchwords when we're thinking about engines, power generators, crew workload, crew comfort etc on this ship. I'm hoping for 1-2 hrs on station - is this too optimistic?

The layout I had in mind originally was: Take the TIE bomber (or a 1.5 times longer version of our TIE bomber) minus the solar panels. Add a second weapons bay tube on the other side of the pilot cabin tube, and take the engines off what is now the center tube (the pilot cabin tube). Thicken the connecting bits between the tubes and mount the repulsor underneath this assembly. Put the repulsor vanes where the solar panels on the TIE would have gone, but in whatever arrangement is most efficient (I was going to look at diagrams of Jabba's barges, Luke's landspeeder, and speeder bikes as samples). The craft won't need the TIE's bomb doors underneath - the missiles will leave the port in front, so having repulsors there is fine. Then - turrets as needed, but now the number of turrets might have to be reworked. Essentially, the only reason to add to this layout should be whatever we need for shield generator housings, power generator housings, communications and countermeasure array housings, or more bulkheads to have some degree of crew protection in case the weapons bays are breached. The probe droid drop-off should be at the aft of the center (pilot cabin) tube - I can add whatever scoops / deflectors /vanes necessary to the engine exhaust nozzles so that the saps don't get fried. We can have a small scale catapult pointing behind the craft to fling them clear of the jet exhaust / repulsor field "edge" effects / inertial damping "edge" effects / what have you...