Originally by: Tarminic

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Well a weapon discharge from an Avatar royally screwed over a planet (storyline from some months ago), kind of on the 'mass extinction event' which implies at least hundreds of thousands of MT range, if not Millions of MT range.

---

Based on my previous calculations a Doomsday Device would a yield somewhere between 20 and 40 megatons, so certainly enough to have some climate-altering properties.

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

---

Well a weapon discharge from an Avatar royally screwed over a planet (storyline from some months ago), kind of on the 'mass extinction event' which implies at least hundreds of thousands of MT range, if not Millions of MT range.

---

Based on my previous calculations a Doomsday Device would a yield somewhere between 20 and 40 megatons, so certainly enough to have some climate-altering properties.

---

no no no... we're talking mass extinction event...

There have been over five hundred atmospheric nuclear weapon tests including the 57 MT Soviet monster - they are totally insignificant, feeble even, next to a genuine mass extinction event such as a large asteroid impact. Hundreds of thousands of MT is a lower limit.

I don't think you could really infer much from game numbers either- they're for game balancing, for 'realistic' numbers you'd have to look into the backstory

---

Originally by: DubanFP

---

The other "non-missile" weapons would be harder to measure though. I would imagine they'd be much weaker in actual yield but much more focused "rather then having most of the blast get directed into space"

---

Originally by: Nachshon

---

This is probably the same as the yield for projectiles. Railguns are more precise, but damage a smaller area. Bombarding a city with capital railguns would not necessarily turn it to parking lot, but it would make it very unpleasant.

---

Originally by: DubanFP

---

Originally by: Nachshon

---

This is probably the same as the yield for projectiles. Railguns are more precise, but damage a smaller area. Bombarding a city with capital railguns would not necessarily turn it to parking lot, but it would make it very unpleasant.

---

Well think about the immense "but precise" railguns for a moment. Wouldn't an iron rod going at 1/10th the speed of light tend to create a rather significant seismic event? I would think the shockwave would travel through the ground and collapse the foundation of pretty much any building in a pretty wide radius. No foundation = no building.

---

Originally by: Tortun Nahme

---

think of getting hit by a minicooper packed full of nuclear weapons

thats 1400 mm arty

---

Originally by: Arknox

---

Edited by: Arknox on 22/08/2007 18:16:50
imagine getting hit by a 1400mm bullet ...

or better, a 3500mm

---

Originally by: Mamarto

---

Originally by: Arknox

---

Edited by: Arknox on 22/08/2007 18:16:50
imagine getting hit by a 1400mm bullet ...

or better, a 3500mm

---

That's pretty much a fuel tanker truck!
That actually makes sense you know, now we know how they make xl phased plasma rounds.

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Originally by: DubanFP

---

Originally by: Nachshon

---

This is probably the same as the yield for projectiles. Railguns are more precise, but damage a smaller area. Bombarding a city with capital railguns would not necessarily turn it to parking lot, but it would make it very unpleasant.

---

Well think about the immense "but precise" railguns for a moment. Wouldn't an iron rod going at 1/10th the speed of light tend to create a rather significant seismic event? I would think the shockwave would travel through the ground and collapse the foundation of pretty much any building in a pretty wide radius. No foundation = no building.

---

Agreed. The Railguns the US navy is going to start using in the next five years or so will have the same impact of a 21-inch battleship-mounted weapon from WW2. The kinetic impact of a projectile travelling at 3500 meters a second is incredible, even if it is just a relatively small metal slug.

---

Originally by: Illyria Ambri

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Originally by: DubanFP

---

Originally by: Nachshon

---

This is probably the same as the yield for projectiles. Railguns are more precise, but damage a smaller area. Bombarding a city with capital railguns would not necessarily turn it to parking lot, but it would make it very unpleasant.

---

Well think about the immense "but precise" railguns for a moment. Wouldn't an iron rod going at 1/10th the speed of light tend to create a rather significant seismic event? I would think the shockwave would travel through the ground and collapse the foundation of pretty much any building in a pretty wide radius. No foundation = no building.

---

Agreed. The Railguns the US navy is going to start using in the next five years or so will have the same impact of a 21-inch battleship-mounted weapon from WW2. The kinetic impact of a projectile travelling at 3500 meters a second is incredible, even if it is just a relatively small metal slug.

---

Not sure where you are getting your information but there are nor were there ever any guns on a boat larger then the IJN Yamato's 18.1 inch guns.

---

Originally by: Grez

---

There was a super old discussion about this a few years ago, and I believe the Tachyon Beam came out on top as the most powerful weapon in EVE if it were ever to come to fruition. Some serious math was done to get the result too...

---

Originally by: Dracborne

---

Edited by: Dracborne on 22/08/2007 19:57:01
Considering the 16" guns on Iowa class battleships are only 406.4 millimeters and weigh between 1900 and 2700 pounds, the 1400mm Arties would be roughly 55" in diameter and weigh something ungodly. The destructive power of the 1400mm's would be off the carts as well, considering the payload in the descriptions of some of the Large Projectile ammo.

---

Originally by: Illyria Ambri

---

Originally by: Grez

---

There was a super old discussion about this a few years ago, and I believe the Tachyon Beam came out on top as the most powerful weapon in EVE if it were ever to come to fruition. Some serious math was done to get the result too...

---

Is a TackyOn anything like a StickIt? or a PostIt?

---

Originally by: DJ P

---

There is one parameter you forgot.
Gravity and gravitational fields. The bigger the bullet on Earth the more propelant/explosives you need. In space a significal smaller amound of propelant/explosive can sent a 1400mm car eeer bullet, faster, farther and with more accuracy in straight line :) So 3500mm is still fine. :)

---

Originally by: Jimer Lins

---

Originally by: DJ P

---

There is one parameter you forgot.
Gravity and gravitational fields. The bigger the bullet on Earth the more propelant/explosives you need. In space a significal smaller amound of propelant/explosive can sent a 1400mm car eeer bullet, faster, farther and with more accuracy in straight line :) So 3500mm is still fine. :)

---

The fastest-traveling projectiles we can currently produce would take several seconds to travel the shortest distances most combat occurs at in this game.

Tamount of energy required to make projectiles move at near relatvistic speeds, which would be required to achieve the instant impact we see in the game, is impractical to be able to apply; no substance could survive the application of that much power, and certainly no devices such as a nuclear warhead. Also, the amount of energy required to launch something at those speeds would be problematic for the launching ship.

---

Originally by: Tarazed Aquilae

---

Originally by: Dracborne

---

Edited by: Dracborne on 22/08/2007 19:57:01
Considering the 16" guns on Iowa class battleships are only 406.4 millimeters and weigh between 1900 and 2700 pounds, the 1400mm Arties would be roughly 55" in diameter and weigh something ungodly. The destructive power of the 1400mm's would be off the carts as well, considering the payload in the descriptions of some of the Large Projectile ammo.

---

From memory your numbers are right. If you double the diameter of a shell but keep the proportions the same you have eight times the volume. 1,400mm artillery would be roughly 3.5 times the diameter of a 16ö gun and that means it would have over 42 times the volume. (The proportions on the shell might change so IÆm rounding some.)

That means the shell would weigh about 113,400 pounds. Only about half of a shells weight is explosive though so that means you have 56,700 pounds of HE in that shell. ThatÆs over 28 tons. We are talking about enough to level city blocks.

A Minmatar battleship might have 6 of these and be able to fire them every 20 seconds. That translates into being able to drop over thirty thousand tons of explosives into a target in an hour. (It would need some serious hauler support to supply the ammo.)

All of this is assuming itÆs using conventional chemical explosives. As a minimum then, an Eve battleship has enough firepower to cripple any city in minutes, any nation in hours, and an entire planet in a day.

---

Originally by: Nachshon

---

Edited by: Nachshon on 22/08/2007 18:25:53
I imagine that the phalanx rocket is even smaller than the smallest modern tac-nukes. Nuclear weapons have a far greater yield:size ratio than conventional explosives, so it makes sense to develop smaller nukes.

---

Originally by: Jimer Lins

---

The fastest-traveling projectiles we can currently produce would take several seconds to travel the shortest distances most combat occurs at in this game.

Tamount of energy required to make projectiles move at near relatvistic speeds, which would be required to achieve the instant impact we see in the game, is impractical to be able to apply; no current substance could survive the application of that much power, and certainly no devices such as a current nuclear warhead. Also, the amount of energy required to launch something at those speeds would be problematic for the launching ship.

---

Quote:

---

Smacking my own alt in a nerf-thread while drunk, he was irritating a Hauler full of tech II n00bs, Oops.

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Originally by: Jimer Lins

---

The fastest-traveling projectiles we can currently produce would take several seconds to travel the shortest distances most combat occurs at in this game.

Tamount of energy required to make projectiles move at near relatvistic speeds, which would be required to achieve the instant impact we see in the game, is impractical to be able to apply; no current substance could survive the application of that much power, and certainly no devices such as a current nuclear warhead. Also, the amount of energy required to launch something at those speeds would be problematic for the launching ship.

---

Fixed.

While the amount of energy needed and quality of materials needed certainly seems insane by today's standards, this IS at least 40 thousand years in the future. Remember that a few hundred years ago someone calculated the energy needed to escape earth's gravitational field and wrote it off because there was no way someone could ever produce that much energy in a single location.

---

Quote:

---

<Cro_Magnus> what I don't get is why people bother with "mm" as a caliber after 1000... I mean... 1400mm, why not call it "Mobile car launcher" and have done with it?
<Cro_Magnus> 1400mm shells basically equate to the ship firing volksvagens at high speed
<Cro_Magnus> knowing minmatar that's probably what they *are* firing too
<Wrangler> except they are projectiles, not cars, and explosive
<Cro_Magnus> car @ several thousand meters per second = projectile
<Cro_Magnus> car loaded with fuel impacting ship = explosive
<Cro_Magnus> your point?
<Fenria> GAAAAH Captain... there is a beetle heading our way at 18kps
<Wrangler> OMG! We're being attacked by volkswagens!"!
<Fenria> DAMN THOSE GERMANS
* Wrangler fires counter measure trabants

---

Originally by: CCP Prism X

---

It's better to be safe than sorry: This is a joke, TQ is not actually run by hamsters! We use bunnies, they reproduce faster and can utilize bigger running-wheels.

---

Originally by: Jimer Lins

---

Originally by: DJ P

---

There is one parameter you forgot.
Gravity and gravitational fields. The bigger the bullet on Earth the more propelant/explosives you need. In space a significal smaller amound of propelant/explosive can sent a 1400mm car eeer bullet, faster, farther and with more accuracy in straight line :) So 3500mm is still fine. :)

---

The fastest-traveling projectiles we can currently produce would take several seconds to travel the shortest distances most combat occurs at in this game.

Tamount of energy required to make projectiles move at near relatvistic speeds, which would be required to achieve the instant impact we see in the game, is impractical to be able to apply; no substance could survive the application of that much power, and certainly no devices such as a nuclear warhead. Also, the amount of energy required to launch something at those speeds would be problematic for the launching ship.

You do realize that the entire premise behind rail guns is the use of magnets to launch the projectile..
And there would be problems in atmosphere due to fritcion with the air which would melt more projectiles. In space however.. no friction.

---

Originally by: Jimer Lins

---

While it's true that any sufficiently advanced technology shall be indistinguishable from magic- and I should avoid making absolute pronouncements, I think it's safe to say that there's certain things that just won't work unless the laws of physics change.

I mean, we know now that the universe isn't truly newtownian, but actions have reactions, and the amount of energy required to accelerate an object is going to produce an effect by the platform doing the acceleration. There's a practical upper limit to the mass of any object you can move or the amount of energy you can impart to it, simply because past a certain point you'll push yourself away or more likely, destroy your ship. ;)

---

Quote:

---

I need to find someone to crunch the numbers on how much energy would be required to launch a 1400mm projectile fast enough to reach a target 50km away at a speed so fast that a human being couldn't detect any lag between shot and impact. That would be useful for determining how much mass the firing platform would require and how strong the projectile would have to be in order not to be reduced to plasma.

---

Originally by: Nocturnal Avenger

---

RL calcs used in a fictive world are bound to fail.

---