KE weapons in trek low tech super weapon or lark?

[lordofchange13]

hello again, got a nother weapon power question: i was just doing some calcs for a war head and ifs power came to about 44.7 milliom terra joules. (its a bomb that convertes matter in to energy and the pay load is 50 kilograms), for a ship to ship weapon is this to powerful? couse right now i've got my battlecrusiers carring like 200 of them each.

[SapphireFox]

According the joules to kilotons calculator found here Link your weapon would be expected to be around ~10.6 gigatons in yield. That is of course if all the math is right. Can you give some more details on the weapon and show what math you used to get your result.

As for being too powerful well it all depends on what you are shooting at. If the universe the weapon exists in has ship and power levels on par with star trek it might be excessive, if the levels are closer to star wars it might be seen as weak individually and thus likely compensating with the missile spam.

Some more details on the universe this exists in would be wonderful as you have peaked my curiosity.

[lordofchange13]

According the joules to kilotons calculator found here Link your weapon would be expected to be around ~10.6 gigatons in yield. That is of course if all the math is right. Can you give some more details on the weapon and show what math you used to get your result.

As for being too powerful well it all depends on what you are shooting at. If the universe the weapon exists in has ship and power levels on par with star trek it might be excessive, if the levels are closer to star wars it might be seen as weak individually and thus likely compensating with the missile spam.

Some more details on the universe this exists in would be wonderful as you have peaked my curiosity.

ok:the unoverse this weapon is in would be abit higher in power (electricty, bombs,guns) but not sugnifictly. these nukes are on 875 meter ships, but the one im focusing on is 73 kilometers long with some were between 200 to 2000 onboard. now for the math: well first off the bomb is a total mater energy converter(matter/antimatter aniallater with out the antimatter) and carryes verying loads but in this one its 50 kilograms. sorry i was just reading over my old post the 44.7 million tera's was actully 4.5million. so the power out put of a kilogram destroyed gives you nearlly 90 petajoules*50+kilograms=4.5million. but it also needs to be said that if i don't change the numbers this bomb is actully kinda small, there are bombs with over a tonne of fuel.

[SapphireFox]

I'll do my best to help you but "Deus Ex Minutia" God is in the Details, so please give as much detail as you can so I can help to the best of my ability.

ok:the unoverse this weapon is in would be abit higher in power (electricty, bombs,guns) but not sugnifictly.

Alright a bit higher than what? Trek, Wars, Our Universe? I need a frame of reference to know what power level I am dealing with.

these nukes are on 875 meter ships, but the one im focusing on is 73 kilometers long with some were between 200 to 2000 onboard.

200 to 2000 what? Bombs, People, Launchers?

73 km is a BIG ship not even Uchuu Kaiju is that big and my ship is larger than most super star destroyers!

now for the math: well first off the bomb is a total mater energy converter(matter/antimatter aniallater with out the antimatter) and carryes verying loads but in this one its 50 kilograms.

Sounds more like just the antimatter is being used as antimatter would likely react with hull of the enemy ship to convert its hull matter in the annihilation process, but its your weapon it works the way you say it does. Still cool tho.

sorry i was just reading over my old post the 44.7 million tera's was actully 4.5million. so the power out put of a kilogram destroyed gives you nearlly 90 petajoules*50+kilograms=4.5million.

90 petajoules*50kg is 4500 petajoules. That converts to a be bit over 1 gigaton in yield.

but it also needs to be said that if i don't change the numbers this bomb is actully kinda small, there are bombs with over a tonne of fuel.

You really need a weapon that yield? 90 petajoules * 1000kg is 90000 petajoules. That converts to approximately ~21.5 gigatons in yield.


As a side note on the subject of questions what web browser are you using? From one bad speller to another, browser based spellcheckers have helped me so much since I started using them here. If it is IE or Firefox I can give you a download link to the free programs that have helped me since I got here. If you don't believe me just look at some of my earliest posts here before I got the spellcheckers. I don't say this to be mean I just want to give you the same help I got.

[lordofchange13]

I'll do my best to help you but "Deus Ex Minutia" God is in the Details, so please give as much detail as you can so I can help to the best of my ability.

ok:the unoverse this weapon is in would be abit higher in power (electricty, bombs,guns) but not sugnifictly.

Alright a bit higher than what? Trek, Wars, Our Universe? I need a frame of reference to know what power level I am dealing with.

these nukes are on 875 meter ships, but the one im focusing on is 73 kilometers long with some were between 200 to 2000 onboard.

200 to 2000 what? Bombs, People, Launchers?

73 km is a BIG ship not even Uchuu Kaiju is that big and my ship is larger than most super star destroyers!

now for the math: well first off the bomb is a total mater energy converter(matter/antimatter aniallater with out the antimatter) and carryes verying loads but in this one its 50 kilograms.

Sounds more like just the antimatter is being used as antimatter would likely react with hull of the enemy ship to convert its hull matter in the annihilation process, but its your weapon it works the way you say it does. Still cool tho.

sorry i was just reading over my old post the 44.7 million tera's was actully 4.5million. so the power out put of a kilogram destroyed gives you nearlly 90 petajoules*50+kilograms=4.5million.

90 petajoules*50kg is 4500 petajoules. That converts to a be bit over 1 gigaton in yield.

but it also needs to be said that if i don't change the numbers this bomb is actully kinda small, there are bombs with over a tonne of fuel.

You really need a weapon that yield? 90 petajoules * 1000kg is 90000 petajoules. That converts to approximately ~21.5 gigatons in yield.


As a side note on the subject of questions what web browser are you using? From one bad speller to another, browser based spellcheckers have helped me so much since I started using them here. If it is IE or Firefox I can give you a download link to the free programs that have helped me since I got here. If you don't believe me just look at some of my earliest posts here before I got the spellcheckers. I don't say this to be mean I just want to give you the same help I got.

1:ok, metals rangeing from dozen times the strength of steel to hundreds. crossing galactic distances in weeks, scear of govermant 37000 light years in diamiter. im not really sure what i should write hear. this is suppost to be hard scifi with only a few exseptions so theres no magic hypermatter technology.
2:200-2000 warheads
3:it takes the place of a death star in my universe, the ship supposet to lead a massive invastion against a technologicly suppire foe.
4:when i said with out antimatter i was refuring to the process of annialation,it's a 96% effecient nuclear reactor (i know modurn reacters are only like 12% efficent),geuss i should of made that more clear.
5:thats what im asking you is that to over powered?
6:im not sure what browser im useing (don't really know much about computers) i think its internet explorer, if you can sind me a link PLEASE do.

[lordofchange13]

just found my note book, which has ship weapon calcs, not all of them are finished:first there is the anti bomber and fighter weapons which is 2 8 barreld guass gatling gun that fires 200 gram rounds at just over 36 kilometers per secound, each of these guns can fire 1000 rounds per minute. then theres the particle BEAM's=fires kilo gram of mass at 66.6% light speed, has a recharge time of 2.86 secounds. the super massive ship can git up to 10,000 meters per second, and has a power out put up to 5 zetawatts(during magier battle). there are also ienertialess engines, as well as reactionless engines(the super ship uses one of these,othere whise the exost would be super deadly). with the help of ienertialess engines ships can reach 99% light speed. micro fusion and so on...

[SapphireFox]

1:ok, metals rangeing from dozen times the strength of steel to hundreds. crossing galactic distances in weeks, scear of govermant 37000 light years in diamiter. im not really sure what i should write hear. this is suppost to be hard scifi with only a few exseptions so theres no magic hypermatter technology.

Hard Sci-Fi generally doesn't need weapons in the gigaton range.... usually. As for what I was looking for I just wanted what you felt was a good comparison. For example my fic is on power with or slightly exceeding star trek. I can understand the no-magic-hypermatter clause so what type reactors are you using and what is their power output because your weapons will have to match them or at least not exceed them.

2:200-2000 warheads

OK understand.

3:it takes the place of a death star in my universe, the ship supposet to lead a massive invastion against a technologicly suppire foe.

Alright so you are the underdog in that case there IS no it's too powerful for them it would be a case of it might be too powerful for the existing universe. Although if it is similar/equivalent to the Death Star then the weapon is likely not powerful enough. If it is meant to slay worlds then it would likely do so like a Base Delta Zero from Star Destroyer that is to say fry the surface of a world making it completely uninhabitable.

4:when i said with out antimatter i was refuring to the process of annialation,it's a 96% effecient nuclear reactor (i know modurn reacters are only like 12% efficent),geuss i should of made that more clear.

I think you mean reaction rather than reactor I am not too sure of the efficiency of a nuclear explosion but I can tell you it would be vastly different then the efficiency of a modern nuclear reactor. I'll just think of it as a super nuke then.

5:thats what im asking you is that to over powered?

As a general rule of thumb there is no such thing as too much power, but generally a gigaton or twenty gigatons in most sci-fi settings would be an instant killing blow to what ever you shot it at. If that is fine for your universe then no it is not too much power however if you want your enemies to survive a hit from one or two of these weapons then you will have to dial down the power. Even with the material strength you gave me I can tell that most of your ships would likely be instantly destroyed by these weapons.

6:im not sure what browser im useing (don't really know much about computers) i think its internet explorer, if you can sind me a link PLEASE do.

Glad to help. For internet explorer you can use iespell found at http://www.iespell.com/ or you can download the google toolbar which has a spellchecker built in. Google toolbar can be found here Link or here http://download.cnet.com/Google-Toolbar ... 56938.html

just found my note book, which has ship weapon calcs, not all of them are finished:first there is the anti bomber and fighter weapons which is 2 8 barreld guass gatling gun that fires 200 gram rounds at just over 36 kilometers per secound, each of these guns can fire 1000 rounds per minute.

Lets see your weapon would have a kinetic energy per round of 129,600,000 joules and suck down at least 2,151,360,000 watts of power per second of operation.

then theres the particle BEAM's=fires kilo gram of mass at 66.6% light speed, has a recharge time of 2.86 secounds.

OK your particle beam would have a resulting KE of about ~20,000,000,000 joules and take a little more than 7,000,000,000 watts

the super massive ship can git up to 10,000 meters per second, and has a power out put up to 5 zetawatts(during magier battle). there are also ienertialess engines, as well as reactionless engines(the super ship uses one of these,othere whise the exost would be super deadly). with the help of ienertialess engines ships can reach 99% light speed. micro fusion and so on...

Cool I like the sound if your ship already.

[lordofchange13]

OK your particle beam would have a resulting KE of about ~20,000,000,000 joules and take a little more than 7,000,000,000 watts

is that a miss type or did i just made a gun that breaks reality? were are you getting the calcs for watt consumption? thanks for the link just set it hope my spelling looks better (at the end when i had to to spell check there were over 12 wrong! ) anyway most of the sovereign ships in my universe are powered by the same matter to energy conversion tech as the bomb just bigger. also i was thinks about the metals i mentioned:are they to weak for a quadrant spanning race? thanks for all you're help!!!! lastly is there a page somewere devoted to calcing?

[lordofchange13]

lordofchange13, learning how to write basic English should be a much higher priority for you than worrying about weapon power levels.

considering this is a sci fi obsessed website, I'm pretty sure good math is more important then spelling.

[Batman]

lordofchange13, learning how to write basic English should be a much higher priority for you than worrying about weapon power levels.

considering this is a sci fi obsessed website, I'm pretty sure good math is more important then spelling.

Not with spelling that bad I suspect.

[SapphireFox]

OK your particle beam would have a resulting KE of about ~20,000,000,000 joules and take a little more than 7,000,000,000 watts

is that a miss type or did i just made a gun that breaks reality? were are you getting the calcs for watt consumption? thanks for the link just set it hope my spelling looks better (at the end when i had to to spell check there were over 12 wrong! ) anyway most of the sovereign ships in my universe are powered by the same matter to energy conversion tech as the bomb just bigger. also i was thinks about the metals i mentioned:are they to weak for a quadrant spanning race? thanks for all you're help!!!!

Yes your spelling looks much better like this and your welcome, however Destructionator XIII is correct in that you like myself need to learn how to spell better. Spellcheck only corrects the mistakes already present, it will always be better to know how to spell as the mistakes will not be there to need correction. However while a spellchecker makes finding where the problem spellings are much easier. Just keep in mind that spellcheck does not help with grammar, you can only learn to fix that on your own.

As for the calcs they are relatively simple. Joules divided by seconds is watts so for example a 9 terajoule weapon with a recharge time of 3 seconds needs a constant power supply of at least 3 terawatts "9/3=3" I merely simplified the recharge time of your weapon by rounding to 3 seconds and rounded the answer up to 7e9 because your recharge time is slightly less than 3 seconds.

Since the material science of most sci-fi is made of whathefuckium and unobtainium just say your materials are as strong as you need. Odds are no matter how many times normal steel in strength your materials are, you are probably going to need them to withstand things that any realistic material could never hope to take.

[lordofchange13]

Considering this is a sci-fi obsessed website, I'm pretty sure good math is much more important than spelling.

Fixed that for you. By the way, your poor spelling is just one of your many basic deficiencies.

Is that a mis-type, or did i just made a gun that breaks reality? Where are you getting the calcs for watt consumption?

Thanks for the link to the spell checker. I just set it up. Hope my spelling looks better (at the end, when I had to to spell check, there were over 12 wrong! )

Anyway, most of the sovereign ships in my universe are powered by the same matter to energy conversion tech as the bomb, just bigger.

Also I was thinking about the metals I mentioned: are they too weak for a quadrant spanning race? Thanks for all your help!!!! Lastly, is there a page somewere devoted to calcing?

Fixed that for you, too. Well, at much as I could, anyway.


Even when dealing with people who value numbers and math, nobody is ever going to see it if they can't read your writing.

well I'm sorry if I've made you angry, ill git right on my spelling, like what i do every night for the last 3 years.

[lordofchange13]

Since the material science of most sci-fi is made of whathefuckium and unobtainium just say your materials are as strong as you need. Odds are no matter how many times normal steel in strength your materials are, you are probably going to need them to withstand things that any realistic material could never hope to take.

the only reason i don't is that if i make the metal 50000 times steel then I'd have to make the weapons a lot stronger. also i want the next chapter the story was so interesting.

[SapphireFox]

No you don't need to give a listed strength index for your super metal just make a storytelling call on what can and can't frag it. It only needs to be as strong as you need it to be for story purposes. Just name it say it is an uber metal and move on. I'm trying to have the Senwa be as hard science as I can in my story but damned if I am going to try to quantify the exact resistance for my armor. I will give a listing of thickness and what weapons might be expected to penetrate it at a certain depth, but damn if I try and quantify it completely in real world terms. It is just too hard to maintain consistency in the story and detracts from the storytelling.

As for the next chapter a few posts up (and a day or two ago) I stated that it would be a week from that post at most. Don't worry it is coming and there will be more action.

[lordofchange13]

then there's the particle BEAMs=fires kilo gram of mass at 66.6% light speed, has a recharge time of 2.86 secounds.

OK your particle beam would have a resulting KE of about ~20,000,000,000 joules and take a little more than 7,000,000,000 watts

i redid the weapons joule out put on Wong's relativity calculator and it keeps telling me the destructive power is 2.0E16, i put in one kilo going 200,000,000 m/s. did i do something wrong, or was it you?

[SapphireFox]

???? Must have missed a few decimal places somewhere in the original equation. I did the equation a second time and got a larger number so I must have not put all the zeros in the first equation to start with. Sorry about that.

Anyway the second time through seems to bear Lord Wong's calculator out. The redone calculations are as follows.

Newton KE is ~2E16 Joules

Power needed per second is ~7E15 Watts

weapon output ~4.8 Megatons

So yeah a jump of several orders of magnitude both in power output and more importantly power drain.

[lordofchange13]

sorry to call you out, but i wanted to git my facts strait. going to lower the speed just abit. also i was thinking about recoil: wouldn't the weapon need twice the power input to the weapon yield,otherwise were is the recoiling energy coming from.the answer will help me a bunch.

[SapphireFox]

sorry to call you out,

Meh, if you screw up then one should fully expect to get called on it. No worries.

but i wanted to git my facts strait. going to lower the speed just abit.

I know I found you the spellchecker but please be more careful of your words. For instance I am quite certain you meant get not git. Your spellchecker would show it to be a true word but the meaning is very different.

(ɡɪt)

—n
1. a contemptible person, often a fool
2. a bastard

[C20: from get (in the sense: to beget, hence a bastard, fool)]

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition

However I doubt you intend insult so just remember which one you mean because you use this one quite often.

also i was thinking about recoil: wouldn't the weapon need twice the power input to the weapon yield,otherwise were is the recoiling energy coming from.the answer will help me a bunch.

This calculation like most assume a perfect 100% energy conversion from the reactor to the weapon. It is just a crude estimate of output like most to obtain an order of magnitude. As for the recoil doubling the needed energy, no as it is a reaction generated by force emitted by the weapon rather than powered by the weapon itself. At worst I would expect all the inefficiencies to amount to a increase the needed reactor power demand by an order of magnitude. Speaking of recoil how is your ship going to handle the recoil of weapons of this output?

[lordofchange13]

sorry to call you out,

Meh, if you screw up then one should fully expect to get called on it. No worries.

but i wanted to git my facts strait. going to lower the speed just abit.

I know I found you the spellchecker but please be more careful of your words. For instance I am quite certain you meant get not git. Your spellchecker would show it to be a true word but the meaning is very different.

(ɡɪt)

—n
1. a contemptible person, often a fool
2. a bastard

[C20: from get (in the sense: to beget, hence a bastard, fool)]

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10Th Edition

However I doubt you intend insult so just remember which one you mean because you use this one quite often.

also i was thinking about recoil: wouldn't the weapon need twice the power input to the weapon yield,otherwise were is the recoiling energy coming from.the answer will help me a bunch.

This calculation like most assume a perfect 100% energy conversion from the reactor to the weapon. It is just a crude estimate of output like most to obtain an order of magnitude. As for the recoil doubling the needed energy, no as it is a reaction generated by force emitted by the weapon rather than powered by the weapon itself. At worst I would expect all the inefficiencies to amount to a increase the needed reactor power demand by an order of magnitude. Speaking of recoil how is your ship going to handle the recoil of weapons of this output?

1)i do use git instead of get a lot,it slipped my mind a lot.
2)I'm trying to research how recoil works,but at the moment I'm using a quantum stabilizer field generator=a machine that magically eats up the force from the recoil with out any side effects. i have noticed that is i use the my current engine designs, the ship will fly backward after only one or 2 shot,and that's at maximum burn. do you know a way to get (got it this time) ride of it? i really appreciate all the help you've given me through out this thread.

[SapphireFox]

1)i do use git instead of get a lot,it slipped my mind a lot.

Just keep plugging away at it and your sure to improve.

2)I'm trying to research how recoil works,but at the moment I'm using a quantum stabilizer field generator=a machine that magically eats up the force from the recoil with out any side effects. i have noticed that is i use the my current engine designs, the ship will fly backward after only one or 2 shot,and that's at maximum burn. do you know a way to get (got it this time) ride of it? i really appreciate all the help you've given me through out this thread.

Well if your main engines are too underpowered to compensate for a spinal mount shot then perhaps you can use my idea for the early underengined overgunned Senwa destroyers, that is secondary high powered burst fire engines firing in tandem with the weapon. Weather you use a nuclear pulse detonation or some super kineto-synthetic drive is up to you but if you can't compensate all for the recoil with technobabble then you just need more engine. It worked for Newton, it worked for the Senwa, and it sure as hell worked for me. So I do believe we an make it work for you. Pity your drive systems don't seem to have anything that could be used like an afterburner or I would suggest something like that.

[lordofchange13]

1)i do use git instead of get a lot,it slipped my mind a lot.

Just keep plugging away at it and your sure to improve.

2)I'm trying to research how recoil works,but at the moment I'm using a quantum stabilizer field generator=a machine that magically eats up the force from the recoil with out any side effects. i have noticed that is i use the my current engine designs, the ship will fly backward after only one or 2 shot,and that's at maximum burn. do you know a way to get (got it this time) ride of it? i really appreciate all the help you've given me through out this thread.

Well if your main engines are too underpowered to compensate for a spinal mount shot then perhaps you can use my idea for the early underengined overgunned Senwa destroyers, that is secondary high powered burst fire engines firing in tandem with the weapon. Weather you use a nuclear pulse detonation or some super kineto-synthetic drive is up to you but if you can't compensate all for the recoil with technobabble then you just need more engine. It worked for Newton, it worked for the Senwa, and it sure as hell worked for me. So I do believe we an make it work for you. Pity your drive systems don't seem to have anything that could be used like an afterburner or I would suggest something like that.

didn't understand all the science words you use there, but i think i got the jest. i should use some high acceleration engines mostly at the rear(as my heavy guns only point forward) or have small drives behind the weapon to offset its recoil. anyway i finished redesigning my warship engines, so that now they can take the recoil but not all the weapons at once,now all i have to do is quantify my ships shield strength and my space battles will be perfectly defined. i never really liked using technobabble so I'm probably going to use some sort of mini-engines dispersed around the ship.

[Coalition]

sorry to call you out, but i wanted to git my facts strait. going to lower the speed just abit. also i was thinking about recoil: wouldn't the weapon need twice the power input to the weapon yield,otherwise were is the recoiling energy coming from.the answer will help me a bunch.

If you lower the speed, you'll also lower the range. For recoil, that'd make for a nice emergency solution. The main engines are hit, and the ship has to accelerate free of (something). So they turn the ship around, and use the main gun to accelerate. Lots of surges in the inertial dampeners, meaning they need lots of repair/replacement afterwards, but the crew is alive to make the repairs.