| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Davinel Lulinvega
   |
Posted - 2009.06.17 16:02:00 -
[31]
It's not that eve doesn't have acceleration. It's that its physics model acts as if everything is underwater instead of in space.
 Originally by: CCP Tuxford
Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Washell Olivaw
|
Posted - 2009.06.17 16:11:00 -
[32]
Originally by: badbush
Originally by: deathstriker seven
The speed of sound is 343ms x 7 = 2380ms or 1236km per hour if you prefer
Not in space it isn't......in fact, even on Earth, it isn't constant.
Since we're nitpicking: Speed of sound is often used as in plane/rocket/missile/shuttle flies at x times the speed of sound. In all these cases, the speed of sound is 343m/s a.k.a. the speed sound travels through air at sea level. Since he was stating railgun specs with the projectiles being accelerated to 7x the speed of sound, 343m/s is the one and only correct number.
Originally by: Signature
Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente
The Aduro Protocol
|
Posted - 2009.06.17 16:43:00 -
[33]
There's sound in EVE?
There's sound in SPACE?
There is no "speed of sound" in space because in space you aren't at friggin' sea level.
The speed of sound is 343 meters per second (1,125 ft/s) at sea level.
Now, continue the discussion \o/
|
Marcus Gideon
Gallente
The NightClub
|
Posted - 2009.06.17 17:03:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Marcus Gideon on 17/06/2009 17:03:40
Short Stories: The Jovian Wetgrave
Quote:
"Audio synthesizers? What do you mean?" Pirkotan thought.
"As you know there is no sound in space, but when we were developing the capsules we found that people wanted to use as many of their senses as possible, thus we added the sound. By letting a computer create three dimensional sound we also add to the awareness you have while in battles, for instance."
|
Tal Kjelthorne
Kjelthorne Industries
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 00:45:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Tal Kjelthorne on 18/06/2009 00:46:25
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
It's not that eve doesn't have acceleration. It's that its physics model acts as if everything is underwater instead of in space.
Why do people think that one would accelerate infinitely in space by the thrusters on the ship?
I defer to Newton's Third Law of Physics: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This means that the ship can go no faster than the expulsion of the (fuel?) from the thrusters in the ship. You could increase that rate of expulsion by large margin and get the ship up to 100,000m/s if you wanted, but the rate of acceleration would be really, really low (read, months).
I would assume the ABs in the game increase that rate of expulsion by using energy from the capacitor to make the ship fly faster. Obviously the MWD does what it sounds like it does, It's a small warp drive, which of course is still theoretical on earth.
Why are we talking about this?! It's internet spaceships!
___________
I reserve the right to be wrong.
We the Unwilling
Led by the Unknowing... |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 01:15:00 -
[36]
Edited by: De''Veldrin on 18/06/2009 01:16:29
Originally by: Tal Kjelthorne
Edited by: Tal Kjelthorne on 18/06/2009 00:46:25
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
It's not that eve doesn't have acceleration. It's that its physics model acts as if everything is underwater instead of in space.
Why do people think that one would accelerate infinitely in space by the thrusters on the ship?
I defer to Newton's Third Law of Physics: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This means that the ship can go no faster than the expulsion of the (fuel?) from the thrusters in the ship. You could increase that rate of expulsion by large margin and get the ship up to 100,000m/s if you wanted, but the rate of acceleration would be really, really low (read, months).
I would assume the ABs in the game increase that rate of expulsion by using energy from the capacitor to make the ship fly faster. Obviously the MWD does what it sounds like it does, It's a small warp drive, which of course is still theoretical on earth.
Why are we talking about this?! It's internet spaceships!
It's been years since my last physics class, but I actually think the velocity would continue to go upwards. I'd rephrase what you said as "The ship can't accelerate faster than the expulsion of thrust from it's engines." Velocity is limited by things such as friction and the weight (not mass) of the object when it's in a gravity well - but these forces are minimal at best in space.
And, in reality, the acceleration would be limited by two factors - the force of the thrust expelled from the engine, and the mass (not weight) of the vessel. |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 01:34:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Tal Kjelthorne
Edited by: Tal Kjelthorne on 18/06/2009 00:46:25
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
It's not that eve doesn't have acceleration. It's that its physics model acts as if everything is underwater instead of in space.
Why do people think that one would accelerate infinitely in space by the thrusters on the ship?
I defer to Newton's Third Law of Physics: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This means that the ship can go no faster than the expulsion of the (fuel?) from the thrusters in the ship. You could increase that rate of expulsion by large margin and get the ship up to 100,000m/s if you wanted, but the rate of acceleration would be really, really low (read, months).
I would assume the ABs in the game increase that rate of expulsion by using energy from the capacitor to make the ship fly faster. Obviously the MWD does what it sounds like it does, It's a small warp drive, which of course is still theoretical on earth.
Why are we talking about this?! It's internet spaceships!
Because we understand physics and you don't. The velocity the fuel is expelled at does not matter. Only the force. The fuel is moving at the same speed as the ship so it always imparts a force no matter what speed it is expelled at relative to the speed of the ship.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Vyllana
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 01:42:00 -
[38]
Acceleration from a constant power thruster would only begin to taper off once you were in the relativistic speed range, since the effective mass of the ship would increase.
|
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 01:43:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Vyllana
Acceleration from a constant power thruster would only begin to taper off once you were in the relativistic speed range, since the effective mass of the ship would increase.
You just had to bring relativity into this didn't you >.< .
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 02:05:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
Originally by: Vyllana
Acceleration from a constant power thruster would only begin to taper off once you were in the relativistic speed range, since the effective mass of the ship would increase.
You just had to bring relativity into this didn't you >.< .
It's about the time for it.
Wait for it...
Relatively speaking.
--Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Hait
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 02:10:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Hait on 18/06/2009 02:12:31
You have to admire the manufactures of the rail charges.
0 -> 0.2c in a matter of meters, that's some serious G. |
AstroPhobic
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 02:15:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Veritas Falx
Let's assume physics, I know its a strech, so E=(1/2)mv^2.
Railguns fire the entire shell which weighs .1kg.
The activation cost of my 350mm Railgun I loaded with Antimatter L is 16.5. This is with skills, but the overall change is going to remain inside a magnitude of 10.
So that is 16,500,000,000J = (1/2) * .1kg * v^2
33,000,000,000J = .1kg * v^2
330,000,000,000 m^2/s^2=v^2
574456.265m/s=v
That is about .2% of the speed of light.
So that means to hit a target 100km away it takes around .17 seconds.
So my point is: Why are missiles so bad compared to real life?
Thread made me lol, but nobody else got it.
It's poking fun at this thread.
|
Morikai Acler
Caldari
Demon Theory
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 05:59:00 -
[43]
Originally by: deathstriker seven
Originally by: Brodde Dim
Your question is; Are eve railguns bad compared to real life railguns?
Do you have much experience of railguns? What kind of velocity do you get out of your railguns at home?
Existing railguns can fire a projectile ect at over 7 times the speed of sound and that is ridiculously slow compared to the systems used in eve.
The speed of sound is 343ms x 7 = 2380ms or 1236km per hour if you prefer, so a projectile fired from a existing railgun firing at eves max sniper range of 249km would take around 12 mins to reach the target......and you think you have tracking problems now....
Yeah, but real railguns being fired on earth are also affected by friction and the earths gravity. If they were fired in 0g it would be different. |
Information Broker
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 07:16:00 -
[44]
I went deer huntin the other day n got myself a nice 12 point buck with mah railgun pa built last fall..
If ya be wantin to test it, feel free 
|
Imaos
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 07:35:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
It's not that eve doesn't have acceleration. It's that its physics model acts as if everything is underwater instead of in space.
If you have ever played the babylon5 flight simulator you really wish for a speed throttle on any vessel if you want some room for manoeuvre. If a missile would accelerate as long as it could (in space) most ships could just sidestep it if they saw the launch vector and the missile wont turn in a radius small enough too hit (or even has fuel onboard for that).
Same for ships. If you dont have the matter to slow you down you can go too fast to take significant turns.
Imaos |
killerbitsch
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 10:31:00 -
[46]
although it's a funny read this thread is, i got totally convinced that a serious boost to the dosage of the medicine you get from those white dressed guyz, and/or a nerf to your spare time would answer all the above mentioned questions...
:D |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 13:37:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Imaos
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
It's not that eve doesn't have acceleration. It's that its physics model acts as if everything is underwater instead of in space.
If you have ever played the babylon5 flight simulator you really wish for a speed throttle on any vessel if you want some room for manoeuvre. If a missile would accelerate as long as it could (in space) most ships could just sidestep it if they saw the launch vector and the missile wont turn in a radius small enough too hit (or even has fuel onboard for that).
Same for ships. If you dont have the matter to slow you down you can go too fast to take significant turns.
Imaos
That is true, but I would still like the option to accelerate as long as I wanted instead of being capped at an arbitrary value.
Originally by: killerbitsch
although it's a funny read this thread is, i got totally convinced that a serious boost to the dosage of the medicine you get from those white dressed guyz, and/or a nerf to your spare time would answer all the above mentioned questions...
:D
It's not so much spare time as bored time at work. |
Letifer Deus
Balls Deep Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 15:25:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Letifer Deus on 18/06/2009 15:26:57
In eve, you can travel from one end of a solar system to the other in seconds. Why anyone is using current weapons as a baseline for limitations on weapons in eve is beyond me.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Blastrodamus
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 15:36:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Veritas Falx
So my point is: Why are missiles so bad compared to real life?
this is not a real life simulation game at all.
|
DARTHxFREE
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 16:13:00 -
[50]
Got sum for you Veritas Falx,...
Quad 3500mm arty ( Dreadnaught gun)
Compare density to....= milk @ chilled temperature
results are quite interesting
/join Cheeze & Whine Club
|
Alessa Steele
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 11:52:00 -
[51]
The only thing really stupid about missiles is the explosion velocity. IRL its so much higher than in the game its factor in determining damage against a moving target would become a moot point. No ship would move close to the explosion velocity of a real missile. |
Jacob Holland
Gallente
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:47:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Sidus Isaacs
As for antimatter, 0.1kg of it makes the sun look pale if it is annailated against the proper matter :P.
Not quite true.
The mass loss from the Sun is well in excess of 200g/second... well in excess of 2000kg/second... It has in fact been estimated at approximately 2,000,000,000kg/second.
While one might suggest that the mass loss from 100g of antimatter and 100g of matter react instantly that is not in fact the case, and as mathmaticians among us may be able to gather, the entire reaction would have to take place within one ten-billionth of a second in order to match the energy release rate of our local star.
--
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Miranda Cho
Caldari
The First Church of the Azure Carrot
The Dominion Empire
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 14:44:00 -
[53]
The other issue with antimatter that screws the pooch when you're talking about (relatively) huge amounts of matter/antimatter coming into contact is the annihilation efficiency. In a one-particle annihilation reaction, you get 100% efficiency, that is every antiparticle annihilating one particle and releasing the full amount of energy from each in accordance with the conversion formula. When you're doing with millions and even billions of antiparticles, you don't get the full effect due to the fact that they're not all coming into contact with conventional matter particles at the same instant. The energy released by the initial annihilation reaction affects both the matter component (in this case, the target ship) and the antimatter component (the rest of the railgun projectile). As a result, the antiparticles are dispersed and some will be thrown clear of the desired matter target, hence reducing the overall efficiency of the reaction. That's not to say that antimatter doesn't make an effective weapon, only that you can't do simple E=MC^2 calculations based on double the mass of the antimatter projectile, because with a full projectile your efficiency is going to be well below 100%.
Of course an actual railgun operates by literally welding the projectile to a pair of rails and flinging it along them, hence both the eventual wear on the rails themselves and the ability to fire conductive but non-ferrous (magnetic) materials. The rub, of course, is that actual railguns require matter-to-matter contact with the projectile, and hence rule out the possibility of antimatter ammunition. Coilguns would work, along with other theoretical forms of magnetic accelerator, but using real-world railguns as a basis for comparison is not practical given the presence of antimatter munitions. |
Marquis Jeladriel
|
Posted - 2009.06.20 04:40:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Miranda Cho
...
Of course an actual railgun operates by literally welding the projectile to a pair of rails and flinging it along them, hence both the eventual wear on the rails themselves and the ability to fire conductive but non-ferrous (magnetic) materials. The rub, of course, is that actual railguns require matter-to-matter contact with the projectile, and hence rule out the possibility of antimatter ammunition. Coilguns would work, along with other theoretical forms of magnetic accelerator, but using real-world railguns as a basis for comparison is not practical given the presence of antimatter munitions.
Description of Antimatter Charge S
Consists of two components: a shell of titanium and a core of antimatter atoms suspended in plasma state. Railguns launch the shell directly, while particle blasters pump the plasma into a cyclotron and process the plasma into a bolt that is then fired.
The railgun would have matter to matter contact with the shell - not the actual antimatter.
(Since this is an internet spaceship game, I think it's pretty plausible to believe that the shell can be a shiny, high tech, expensive piece of technology that can safely contain antimatter/be loaded into imaginary internet spaceship guns)
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |