|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Crispin McTarmac
   |
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:42:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: kyrieee
Railguns experience a recoil force but they have no moving parts and should not animate. It's not a pistol.
Railguns don't just experience a bit of recoil force. They experience a LOT of recoil force. If any gun should recoil, it should be the railgun.
What concerns me is that a lot of the railgun models, particularly the dual ones, look much more like blasters than the actual blasters do. They even have a round bit for the cyclotron and everything. Do you think maybe some of the models got mixed up?
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:49:00 -
[2]
There's some weird einsteinian thing about light isn't there. It doesn't have any mass so it shouldn't impart a physical force, but somehow it does because space is weird. Either way, the force from light is pretty much negligible even for amarr super-lasers so I hope they take out the recoil for these at some point.
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:54:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Elienore
I haven't noticed any recoil on my Apoc >,>
I bet you noticed some recoil on the maller at the login screen. It's pretty hard to miss
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 11:57:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Crispin McTarmac on 28/06/2011 11:57:37
Originally by: Crispin McTarmac
Originally by: Elienore
I haven't noticed any recoil on my Apoc >,>
I bet you noticed some recoil on the maller at the login screen. It's pretty hard to miss
Quote:
However once they put railguns on battships they will need recoil barrels or the whole ship would flip over when the guns fire.
It's not so much that, I think the barrel recoiling mechanism is more to prevent damage to the structure of the turret by spreading the force it recieves over a couple of seconds.
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 14:41:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: DuKackBoon
I have a much bigger problem with Railguns: Where the fheck are the muzzles? Most railguns have no muzzle openings.
Why would it matter?
I think it would probably matter quite a lot if you designed a gun with nowhere for the bullet to come out.
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 15:18:00 -
[6]
Originally by: xeitgeist
Edited by: xeitgeist on 28/06/2011 15:09:05
travelling faster than light is impossible yet nobody complains about that
Ships in eve don't travel faster than light. They move the space occupied by the ship faster than the speed of light. Space can move as fast as it likes. Granted we don't have the technology to do that yet, but it's possible given the current information we have about the universe that there might be an adequate way of moving space.
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 15:41:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Serpent Kamri
That's not entirely true actually, EVE warping is based on the theory that everything can move faster in complete vacuum ( called "perfect vacuum" ), including light. The warp drives create a bubble of a sort around the ship that clears all matter and energy particles, and then spends the rest of the capacitor power to give the ship a good speed boost. Warp drives are like slightly fancier MWDs with shiny bubbles.
Well that's just nonsense. That's even worse than the dark matter explanation for giving ships a "top speed" attribute. There's no friction in space travel to begin with, and you still have to accelerate the ship at a rate of billions of Gs which is going to reduce your crew to strawberry jam and require a ridiculous amount of energy. And if you even solve those problems the lightspeed barrier is still as strong as ever. I think I'll keep my own explanation thank you very much
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 16:06:00 -
[8]
So when my half kilometre-long maelstrom travels with the warp drive, it's actually using the warp drive merely to remove the lightspeed barrier and using the standard drive to accelerate to that speed? Why can't I accelerate at billions of Gs in the same way during combat, and fly around at hundreds of kilometres a second? Also why don't the particles of the ship and it's pressurised atmospheric habitat count when figuring out if the warp bubble contains a "perfect" vacum?
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 17:39:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Crispin McTarmac on 28/06/2011 17:39:57
Originally by: Xionis Zeshun
Lazers don't have recoil, they have cooling sheaths. Or at least that's how I think of it. Since they added heat glow to the barrels, and space is a ****ty place to try and get rid of heat (wonder how many people gonna argue that one), it makes sense to include some kind of heat sink the barrel can retract into before the next shot.
Nice, I hadn't thought of that. Or perhaps it's some oddball design which incorporates a coolant pump into the structure of the barrel itself, pumping hot fluid into radiator veins and emitting the heat into space.
|
Crispin McTarmac
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 18:28:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Ellen Forestfire
But considering you can see the laser beams to begin with in the absence of an appropriate medium, it should be the least of all concerns in terms of realism. Lasers should be completely invisible in space even to cameras unless it's reflected off something or excites a medium to the point of emitting light.
That's not really a problem. Being able to see where a laser is firing is useful information to have on your screen, so it makes sense to assume that the camera drone is rendering a laser beam effect for this purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|