|
Post by scottwashburn on Feb 22, 2016 18:27:51 GMT
I was thinking the other day about what the British Army had done with Martian technology to create their coil gun field piece. As I understand it, it uses an electromagnet to fling a 2-pound projectile at enormous velocity. Okay, fair enough. But I can't see the Royal Navy standing idle with such a thing available. In the time period we are talking about naval gunnery underwent a revolution. in 1898, during the Spanish-American War naval guns were aimed exactly the same way they had been since someone first mounted a gun on a ship: someone put his head close to the barrel and looked along it and when he though it was lined up with the target, he stepped back and pulled the lanyard. Effective ranges were a few thousand yards. Only about ten years later, naval gunnery had a new system using stereoscopic range finders and crude analog computers to allow the ships to hit targets 20,000 yard away. A major factor in aiming a naval gun at such ranges was the fact that it might take as much as 30-40 seconds for the shell to get from the gun to the target. You needed to aim where you THOUGHT the enemy ship would be 30-40 seconds in the future. No easy thing! But obviously if you could increase the velocity of the shell, the time of flight decreases and the task of aiming becomes a lot easier. So I could see the Royal Navy building new classes of ships mounting much larger coil guns and powering them with the ship's steam turbines. 32 lb or 64 lb coils guns anyone? In addition to their enormous hitting power, they would have very flat trajectories and probably be able to hit pretty much any target they could see. Any Martians which stray too close the ocean where the RN is around better watch out!
|
|
|
Post by wisercj on Feb 24, 2016 4:14:16 GMT
Speaking of the Spanish American War, dynamite guns might be useful against Tripods. Even if they miss the resulting explosion might knock them over. The USS Vesuvius was a Dynamite Cruiser equipped with 3 15" guns that fired a 550 lb nitroglycerine shell 1 mile with the use of compressed air. The ship had to be pointed towards the target, like a bow torpedo tube, and was not particularly accurate but very useful for shore bombardments. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Vesuvius_(1888)
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Feb 24, 2016 12:00:46 GMT
Nice add on the ship. BTW I did use a 'special' gun on my ship under the Nemos Nightmares TO&E. But, I'd have to look into the whole coilgunned vessel some more - I can see paddlewheelers generating lots of power for these things. (I use alot of ACW upgraded ships).
|
|
|
Post by phgamer on Mar 8, 2016 19:13:07 GMT
In addition to their enormous hitting power, they would have very flat trajectories and probably be able to hit pretty much any target they could see. Are you following modern naval news? This sort of weapon is going to dominate in the next decade or two.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Mar 17, 2016 11:53:33 GMT
One of the things I incorporated in some of the ACW upgraded paddlewheelers was the use of large coilguns. Not only did the paddlewheels generate the power for the coil, but overcharges could be discharged harmlessly into the waters as well. Many of the 'modern' WW1 ships had below the waterlevel ('submerged') torpedoe tubes. With no (currently) human navies fighting and more destroyers and torpedoe boats, these ships submerge tubes could be removed and changed into miniturbines for powering up the coilguns above. The use of Tesla guns on board should also be considered in this context. A large ship moving through the water at 10 to 20mph would definately charge a Tesla gun fairly quickly whilst also acting as a 'lightning rod' for discharges. phgame, one thing I don't follow with the new naval gunnery is what they plan to do about the 'horizon' effect. Wouldn't guns with flat trajectories have a problem hitting over the horizon targets (no arc)?? My knowledge of naval gunnery is very limited and as a former 'mortar man' its all in the 'arc' lol.
|
|
|
Post by wisercj on Mar 18, 2016 5:58:15 GMT
One of the things I incorporated in some of the ACW upgraded paddlewheelers was the use of large coilguns. Not only did the paddlewheels generate the power for the coil, but overcharges could be discharged harmlessly into the waters as well. Many of the 'modern' WW1 ships had below the waterlevel ('submerged') torpedoe tubes. With no (currently) human navies fighting and more destroyers and torpedoe boats, these ships submerge tubes could be removed and changed in to miniturbines for powering up the coilguns above. The use of Tesla guns on board should also be considered in this context. A large ship moving through the water at 10 to 20mph would definately charge a Tesla gun fairly quickly whilst also acting as a 'lightning rod' for discharges. phgame, one thing I don't follow with the new naval gunnery is what they plan to do about the 'horizon' effect. Wouldn't guns with flat trajectories have a problem hitting over the horizon targets (no arc)?? My knowledge of naval gunnery is very limited and as a former 'mortar man' its all in the 'arc' lol. I hear you (IMLC Ft Benning 1992). Even 'flat trajectory' weapons will be effected by gravity as long as there is a projectile of any sort. Can't say the same for energy beam weapons though. But if it is truly a beam then it will not be able to drop over the horizon unless there is some way to bounce it or even perhaps 'bend' it. I'm a humanities guy so you will have to find a scientist to answer that question.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Mar 19, 2016 20:15:06 GMT
Coilguns and railguns are devastating new additions to Artillery. The "Real" USN has functional prototypes, at least that's what published sources say.
Coilguns and railguns are different. Coilguns use the linear induction principles, while railguns work more like a Jacob's ladder. Both turn electric power into kinetic energy with good efficiency. In both cases, the amount of harm they can deliver to the target is limited more by the amount of energy that can be put into the weapon than by other factors, but there are lots of significant other factors, from air friction to internal magnetic interference.
Bigger projectiles are more efficient at delivering harm than smaller ones, and then the physics becomes tricky. One factor is that with more mass a projectile is more affected by magnetism.
The amount of armor a 2 pound projectile can penetrate is going to be less that the amount of armor a 6 pound projectile can penetrate. I can go into more detail if others so wish.
As Scott suggests, a warship, with big, powerful engines can put a lot of power to a coilgun or several coil guns. Now comes another set of awkward decisions. Many guns or fewer bigger guns? Rapid fire or more deliberate but more accurate fire?
Wisercj brought up the Dynamite guns used in the Spanish American War. These guns used compressed air to launch the projectiles because gunpowder would cause a shock that would detonate the dynamite. A Coilgun could be configured to accelerate a projectile with "less Delta" and "more V" or a longer acceleration with less of a sudden jolt. This would allow a coilgun to hurl a very heavy projectile full of very nasty stuff a very long distance.
My recommendations, for what they are worth:
I would have my Coilgun Battleship have a triple turret in the "Q" position with 20-inch guns, configured to hurl 2000 pounds of TNT 30 miles inland.
The A, B, X and Y positions would have double turrets with 12-inch guns that fire solid projectiles with a range of about 17 miles. The range is limited by the horizon. They can hit whatever they can see, and hit it very hard.
I would have 4 wing turrets with dual 3-inch guns designed for rapid fire and intended for close defence.
|
|
|
Post by wisercj on Mar 22, 2016 16:05:53 GMT
Coilguns and railguns are different. Coilguns use the linear induction principles, while railguns work more like a Jacob's ladder. Both turn electric power into kinetic energy with good efficiency. In both cases, the amount of harm they can deliver to the target is limited more by the amount of energy that can be put into the weapon than by other factors, but there are lots of significant other factors, from air friction to internal magnetic interference. I would have my Coilgun Battleship have a triple turret in the "Q" position with 20-inch guns, configured to hurl 2000 pounds of TNT 30 miles inland. The A, B, X and Y positions would have double turrets with 12-inch guns that fire solid projectiles with a range of about 17 miles. The range is limited by the horizon. They can hit whatever they can see, and hit it very hard. I would have 4 wing turrets with dual 3-inch guns designed for rapid fire and intended for close defence. hardlec : You exceeded my science quotient with linear induction and Jacob's ladder. Although in principle I got it. But what I really want to know is what tabletop, er parking lot, do you intend to place this battleship of yours to fight against 15/18mm scale Martian Tripods? Or are you actually proposing this to the US Navy, in which case this may not be the right forum.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Mar 23, 2016 15:40:31 GMT
I think representation would be on a smaller scale; the largest 1:300, then going down in size 1:600, 1:1200, 1:2400. At the bottom scale, GHQ makes a nice range of all sorts of ships from IRL WW1 that would work - to a lesser degree Old Glory has a small selection of 1:600 ships. All these could use my "Ships" thread to sit on the table add fire/be fired on in a proportional manner; making his Coilgun Battleship a real possiblity on the tabele. Not sure what ship would work for his unusual two And three gun turrets - there are some excellent 3 gun turreted ships as well as the usual mix of 2 gun turreted ships - all with wing turrets and side barbettes. I can see this at some point.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Mar 23, 2016 15:58:01 GMT
(Embarrassed Chuckle) The US Navy should build at least 3 such ships. One for the Gulf Coast, and two in the Great Lakes. There are ports on the Great Lakes with the ability to build a ship of that size.
The "Benjamin Franklin" class Coastal Battleships would be 5 feet long and have a beam of 18 inches in scale. Not much good on a 4'by6' table.
For the game, I'd recommend the Human player be able to purchase Barrages from the main batteries. So the Human player can pay, say, 25 points for a 4" +4 barrage. Scenarios will limit the number of such barrages, and possibly the turns that the fire may be called.
It seems logical that the Main Batteries, the 12 inch coilguns, should have the ability to launch high explosive ordinance as well. This suggests scenarios where devastated Martian pods are being "mopped up" after the Wrath of Teddy Roosevelt falls from the sky.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Mar 23, 2016 16:26:57 GMT
Consider a more modest construction: A barge with a double turret, 8 inch coilguns with the ability to fire 250 pound projectiles.
Start with Scott Washburn's barge. Add a turret.
The barge should only draw about 4 feet of water, i.e. it can float on a heavy dew. Throughout Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota and the Midwest US, there are lots of rivers and creeks that are ready-made highways for such craft. Brown Water Navy, river rats, well, Sailors know how to fight.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Mar 23, 2016 22:11:33 GMT
Like both the ideas, especially the paperterrain one! Hey like your new picture btw.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Mar 24, 2016 11:01:43 GMT
On further study of the Paperterrain barges, its important as to the diameter of his large & small gun turrets as to how well they'd fit on the barge. I'd think I'd prefer to use the 'towed' barge, as it has more room (more than one turret) and could be towed behind a 'motored' barge with troops to be landed after the LZ is softened up. A further thought is 'Rocket Barges', barges with rocket batteries along their interior firing in a multiple barrage situation. They did this to some extent in WW2 and currently the Marines (I think) have some MRL type craft rather like converted landing craft with really awesome firepower. Line it up, elevate the rocket launchers to the desired angle and let rip!
|
|