DUST Search - [Request] Swarm missiles travel at a realistic speed

Asha Starwind wrote:

So much fail in this thread, this is basic high schools physics.

F=ma, for the sake of the argument presented as a=F/m

F = Force provided by the fuel/propellant
m = mass of the warhead being propelled
a =acceleration, self-explanatory (i hope i'm not giving you guys too much
credit here)

Time for some conjecture, now let's take the FGM-148 and the fictional swarm launcher since the FGM was mentioned first and they are both fired from shoulder mounted launchers. The Javelin is massive by comparison it takes up as much space as the launcher itself compared to a swarm missile which are fired 5-6 at a time and are packaged in a lunch box sized magazine that holds (15-18) of them.

So it's safe to say the m[fontsize=2]fgm[/fontsize] is greater than m[fontsize=2]swarm[/fontsize]

Let's assume both propellants are equally efficient, so F[fontsize=2]fgm[/fontsize] and F[fontsize=2]swarm[/fontsize] are equally proportionate but since swarm missles travel a lot further than throwing distance, F applied on a swarm missle is significantly less than the FGM.

Therefore going back to the previously mention equation:

a=FGçè/mGåô GçÆ aGåô

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
ratamaq doc Edge Regiment 292	Posted - 2013.12.27 16:32:00 - [1] - Quote Somewhere between mach 1.7 and mach 2.2, you know, like that multiple thousand year old technology they had back in the 20th century on Earth with FGM-148 and the FIM-92 YouTube 30D Recruiting
ladwar Death by Disassociation Zero-Day 1933	Posted - 2013.12.27 18:45:00 - [2] - Quote they do travel at a realistic speed... slower speed bigger warhead. Level 2 Forum Warrior, retired vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth not looking for a corp, don't ask.
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 2977	Posted - 2013.12.27 18:52:00 - [3] - Quote ladwar wrote: they do travel at a realistic speed... slower speed bigger warhead. They go slower than a bottle rocket. Also, bigger war heads generally travel faster because they use more propellant. My alts: GeneralJohnRipper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior.
Munin-Frey Fish Spotters Inc. 36	Posted - 2013.12.27 19:06:00 - [4] - Quote ratamaq doc wrote: Somewhere between mach 1.7 and mach 2.2, you know, like that multiple thousand year old technology they had back in the 20th century on Earth with FGM-148 and the FIM-92 +1 Yes, good idea
ladwar Death by Disassociation Zero-Day 1933	Posted - 2013.12.27 19:17:00 - [5] - Quote DeadlyAztec11 wrote: ladwar wrote: they do travel at a realistic speed... slower speed bigger warhead. They go slower than a bottle rocket. Also, bigger war heads generally travel faster because they use more propellant. lol, no. smaller warheads travel faster because it has less weight. more or less propellant just means more range. Level 2 Forum Warrior, retired vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth not looking for a corp, don't ask.
Munin-Frey Fish Spotters Inc. 36	Posted - 2013.12.27 19:21:00 - [6] - Quote Rocket Scientists
ratamaq doc Edge Regiment 298	Posted - 2013.12.27 19:21:00 - [7] - Quote ladwar wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: ladwar wrote: they do travel at a realistic speed... slower speed bigger warhead. They go slower than a bottle rocket. Also, bigger war heads generally travel faster because they use more propellant. lol, no. smaller warheads travel faster because it has less weight. more or less propellant just means more range. Aim-9 Mach 2.5 Aim-120 Mach 4 Sidewinder is about half the size of an AMRAAM and moves almost half the speed. YouTube 30D Recruiting
ladwar Death by Disassociation Zero-Day 1933	Posted - 2013.12.27 19:38:00 - [8] - Quote ratamaq doc wrote: ladwar wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: ladwar wrote: they do travel at a realistic speed... slower speed bigger warhead. They go slower than a bottle rocket. Also, bigger war heads generally travel faster because they use more propellant. lol, no. smaller warheads travel faster because it has less weight. more or less propellant just means more range. Aim-9 Mach 2.5 Aim-120 Mach 4 Sidewinder is about half the size of an AMRAAM and moves almost half the speed. lol... im not even going to tell you whats wrong with your statement, you wouldn't understand it. Level 2 Forum Warrior, retired vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth not looking for a corp, don't ask.
ratamaq doc Edge Regiment 300	Posted - 2013.12.27 19:47:00 - [9] - Quote ladwar wrote: ratamaq doc wrote: ladwar wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: ladwar wrote: they do travel at a realistic speed... slower speed bigger warhead. They go slower than a bottle rocket. Also, bigger war heads generally travel faster because they use more propellant. lol, no. smaller warheads travel faster because it has less weight. more or less propellant just means more range. Aim-9 Mach 2.5 Aim-120 Mach 4 Sidewinder is about half the size of an AMRAAM and moves almost half the speed. lol... im not even going to tell you whats wrong with your statement, you wouldn't understand it. If you're referring to the fact that I am using air to air missiles as an example, you can try to discredit, but you'll fail. I know ordinance, and we can go all day. But by all means, make as many baseless vague statements as you wish. The AIM-54 was so large it was carried on only one platform. Speed? Mach 5. It was ever so slightly larger than the missiles in a swarm launcher. YouTube 30D Recruiting
ladwar Death by Disassociation Zero-Day 1933	Posted - 2013.12.27 20:14:00 - [10] - Quote ratamaq doc wrote: If you're referring to the fact that I am using air to air missiles as an example, you can try to discredit, but you'll fail. I know ordinance, and we can go all day. But by all means OS2, make as many baseless vague statements as you wish. The AIM-54 was so large it was carried on only one platform. Speed? Mach 5. It was ever so slightly larger than the missiles in a swarm launcher. oh so you slept all day and got off before first call to colors and had 100% to OS1. right i should really listen to an OS. the only thing you guys are good for is cleaning. Level 2 Forum Warrior, retired vet. I shall smite Thy Trolls with numbers and truth not looking for a corp, don't ask.

ratamaq doc Edge Regiment 301	Posted - 2013.12.27 20:17:00 - [11] - Quote ladwar wrote: ratamaq doc wrote: If you're referring to the fact that I am using air to air missiles as an example, you can try to discredit, but you'll fail. I know ordinance, and we can go all day. But by all means OS2, make as many baseless vague statements as you wish. The AIM-54 was so large it was carried on only one platform. Speed? Mach 5. It was ever so slightly larger than the missiles in a swarm launcher. oh so you slept all day and got off before first call to colors and had 100% to OS1. right i should really listen to an OS. the only thing you guys are good for is cleaning. No, I was calling you an OS2, maybe I was mistaken? But given you limited shop talk I figured you either for one or worked for one. FC maybe? That would give you a little more credit in my book. YouTube 30D Recruiting
TheEnd762 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 315	Posted - 2013.12.27 20:22:00 - [12] - Quote I'm no ordinance tech, but I know the AT-4 travels at 285m per second, and the BGM-71 TOW travels at about 278m per second. Swarm missiles in Dust don't travel anywhere near those speeds.
Smooth Assassin Stardust incorporation 558	Posted - 2013.12.27 20:40:00 - [13] - Quote Rocket surgery. *Assassination is my thing.*
Alena Ventrallis The Neutral Zone 388	Posted - 2013.12.27 21:05:00 - [14] - Quote Muzzle velocity of an AT-4 is 950 feet per second. Swarms should move at least that fast.
TheEnd762 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 316	Posted - 2013.12.27 21:26:00 - [15] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Muzzle velocity of an AT-4 is 950 feet per second. Swarms should move at least that fast. Well, the AT-4 is an unguided, medium-range rocket. The closest comparisons I can think of to the Swarm Launcher would be the FGM-148 Javelin or the FIM-92 Stinger, both of which are actual missiles, guided, man-portable, and fired from the ground. The Javelin has a speed of about 108m per second, and the Stinger about 700m per second. However, the Javelin is primarily an anti-TANK weapon, and has an irregular flight path (it takes off diagonally, then drops down on top of the target). The Stinger can be used against borh airborne and ground targets, and is direct fire with tracking (it flies directly at the target and moves to follow it), so it would be the more apt of the two.
Asha Starwind VEXALATION CORPORATION 4	Posted - 2013.12.28 04:35:00 - [16] - Quote So much fail in this thread, this is basic high schools physics. F=ma, for the sake of the argument presented as a=F/m F = Force provided by the fuel/propellant m = mass of the warhead being propelled a =acceleration, self-explanatory (i hope i'm not giving you guys too much credit here) Time for some conjecture, now let's take the FGM-148 and the fictional swarm launcher since the FGM was mentioned first and they are both fired from shoulder mounted launchers. The Javelin is massive by comparison it takes up as much space as the launcher itself compared to a swarm missile which are fired 5-6 at a time and are packaged in a lunch box sized magazine that holds (15-18) of them. So it's safe to say the mfgm is greater than mswarm Let's assume both propellants are equally efficient, so Ffgm and Fswarm are equally proportionate but since swarm missles travel a lot further than throwing distance, F applied on a swarm missle is significantly less than the FGM. Therefore going back to the previously mention equation: a=FGçè/mGåô GçÆ aGåô
TheEnd762 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 317	Posted - 2013.12.28 04:37:00 - [17] - Quote Asha Starwind wrote: So much fail in this thread, this is basic high schools physics. F=ma, for the sake of the argument presented as a=F/m F = Force provided by the fuel/propellant m = mass of the warhead being propelled a =acceleration, self-explanatory (i hope i'm not giving you guys too much credit here) Time for some conjecture, now let's take the FGM-148 and the fictional swarm launcher since the FGM was mentioned first and they are both fired from shoulder mounted launchers. The Javelin is massive by comparison it takes up as much space as the launcher itself compared to a swarm missile which are fired 5-6 at a time and are packaged in a lunch box sized magazine that holds (15-18) of them. So it's safe to say the m[fontsize=2]fgm[/fontsize] is greater than m[fontsize=2]swarm[/fontsize] Let's assume both propellants are equally efficient, so F[fontsize=2]fgm[/fontsize] and F[fontsize=2]swarm[/fontsize] are equally proportionate but since swarm missles travel a lot further than throwing distance, F applied on a swarm missle is significantly less than the FGM. Therefore going back to the previously mention equation: a=FGçè/mGåô GçÆ aGåô So the conclusion of that, in words, would be...?
Ulysses Knapse Knapse and Co. Mercenary Firm 904	Posted - 2013.12.28 04:40:00 - [18] - Quote I don't really care about totally realistic physics, but what I do know is that swarm missiles need to go much faster. An anti-vehicle missile that can be outrun by most vehicles is a terrible anti-vehicle missile. What's the difference between an immobile Minmatar ship and a pile of garbage? The pile of garbage is more lethal.
TheEnd762 SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 317	Posted - 2013.12.28 04:45:00 - [19] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: I don't really care about totally realistic physics, but what I do know is that swarm missiles need to go much faster. An anti-vehicle missile that can be outrun by most vehicles is a terrible anti-vehicle missile. So are ones that can be shaken off like water balloons hitting a... tank.
Munin-Frey Fish Spotters Inc. 38	Posted - 2013.12.28 08:07:00 - [20] - Quote Swarms look cool but that is about it... After 1.7 they are useless. If we are going to debate physics I want somebody to analyze the physics of a 40 ton tank driving like a Formula race car. Tanks might be able to go as fast as they do in Dust but they can't turn or accelerate like they do and if you really were going as fast as they do and hit something there would be major damage. While we are on the subject of swarms I think the shock that bounces the vehicle around on impact should be much greater...especially for maxed out proto swarms. Each missile has mass/inertia and the force of the explosion would make you wreck regardless of whether your shields protected you.

BL4CKST4R WarRavens League of Infamy 1439	Posted - 2013.12.28 08:43:00 - [21] - Quote Munin-Frey wrote: Swarms look cool but that is about it... After 1.7 they are useless. If we are going to debate physics I want somebody to analyze the physics of a 40 ton tank driving like a Formula race car. Tanks might be able to go as fast as they do in Dust but they can't turn or accelerate like they do and if you really were going as fast as they do and hit something there would be major damage. While we are on the subject of swarms I think the shock that bounces the vehicle around on impact should be much greater...especially for maxed out proto swarms. Each missile has mass/inertia and the force of the explosion would make you wreck regardless of whether your shields protected you. Physics in EVE/Dust mean nothing.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 208	Posted - 2013.12.28 12:48:00 - [22] - Quote Munin-Frey wrote: While we are on the subject of swarms I think the shock that bounces the vehicle around on impact should be much greater...especially for maxed out proto swarms. Each missile has mass/inertia and the force of the explosion would make you wreck regardless of whether your shields protected you. Dropships already suffer this sufficiently. Adding some form of shake when impacting on HAVs/LAVs would be a good idea.
Stephen Seneca Providence Guard Templis CALSF 37	Posted - 2013.12.28 17:18:00 - [23] - Quote I dunno man. The M1 and Leopard 2 make tanks look nimble.. and I think theyre heavier than 40 tons. Tanks shouldnt be able to outrun missiles imo. Thats just common sense to me. Whether you buff the swarms or slow the tanks, im for it. For the State! Keep your stick on the ice and get the pucks in deep, eh. Rail Rifles. All. The. Way!
Mobius Kaethis Molon Labe. Public Disorder. 1139	Posted - 2013.12.28 18:15:00 - [24] - Quote As my signature says fun needs to trump realism in a game. By reducing the damage on the swarms and the lock on range CCP effectively made the weapon un-fun to play with. By simply increasing the lock on range the swarms would once again become fun. There is no need to up the missile speed as dodging missiles and having your missiles miss on occasion adds to the fun. For the love of fun CCP make every weapon useful! Fun > Realism
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 882	Posted - 2013.12.28 19:03:00 - [25] - Quote In order for swarms to be usable again without giving them a damage buff, we need: 175% missile speed increase A return of the 5 swarm clip 10% reduction to lock-on times for standard variant Better swarm variant options (seriously, who's stupid enough to use an assault to fire on 2 targets at once when you need at least 2 swarms to kill even an LAV?!) As for the variants, maybe make the assault able to lock onto the vehicle multiple times at once as long as LoS is maintained (lock immediately lost when LoS is lost) & fire them all off at once (maybe up to 3?). Perhaps also give it a longer lock-on timer to compensate. And perhaps a breach variant which fires higher damage missiles but has less in the clip and longer reload. Buff passive scans & fix TTK! My Closed Beta Alts - Overlord Ulath, Overlord Bosse, Overlord Zero
zibathy numbertwo Nox Aeterna Security 315	Posted - 2013.12.28 20:05:00 - [26] - Quote Mobius Kaethis wrote: As my signature says fun needs to trump realism in a game. By reducing the damage on the swarms and the lock on range CCP effectively made the weapon un-fun to play with. By simply increasing the lock on range the swarms would once again become fun. There is no need to up the missile speed as dodging missiles and having your missiles miss on occasion adds to the fun. For the love of fun CCP make every weapon useful! I like your mindset :) Long Live Freedom; Long Live the Federation.
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 884	Posted - 2013.12.28 20:12:00 - [27] - Quote Mobius Kaethis wrote: As my signature says fun needs to trump realism in a game. By reducing the damage on the swarms and the lock on range CCP effectively made the weapon un-fun to play with. By simply increasing the lock on range the swarms would once again become fun. There is no need to up the missile speed as dodging missiles and having your missiles miss on occasion adds to the fun. For the love of fun CCP make every weapon useful! Having the ability to lock on from range doesn't mean a thing if your missiles never have a chance to connect because of vehicle speeds. Buff passive scans & fix TTK! My Closed Beta Alts - Overlord Ulath, Overlord Bosse, Overlord Zero
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 918	Posted - 2013.12.28 20:27:00 - [28] - Quote Even tho I don't agree on the reason (for more realistic) of the suggestion, I do agree on the improvement suggestion. *Swarms should have way more* speed, but lesser homing capability.** Faster hitting missiles, harder to evade by post-launch reactive navigating BUT less 'bending-around-the-corners' ++ber godmissiles. Feeling the scanner is too simple and off balance? The fix:
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 2997	Posted - 2013.12.28 20:30:00 - [29] - Quote Asha Starwind wrote: So much fail in this thread, this is basic high schools physics. F=ma, for the sake of the argument presented as a=F/m F = Force provided by the fuel/propellant m = mass of the warhead being propelled a =acceleration, self-explanatory (i hope i'm not giving you guys too much credit here) Time for some conjecture, now let's take the FGM-148 and the fictional swarm launcher since the FGM was mentioned first and they are both fired from shoulder mounted launchers. The Javelin is massive by comparison it takes up as much space as the launcher itself compared to a swarm missile which are fired 5-6 at a time and are packaged in a lunch box sized magazine that holds (15-18) of them. So it's safe to say the mfgm is greater than mswarm Let's assume both propellants are equally efficient, so Ffgm and Fswarm are equally proportionate but since swarm missles travel a lot further than throwing distance, F applied on a swarm missle is significantly less than the FGM. Therefore going back to the previously mention equation: a=FGçè/mGåô GçÆ aGåô It's wrong to assume they would both use the same type of propellant since they obviously do not. My alts: GeneralJohnRipper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior.
DeadlyAztec11 Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 2997	Posted - 2013.12.28 20:31:00 - [30] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Even tho I don't agree on the reason (for more realistic) of the suggestion, I do agree on the improvement suggestion. *Swarms should have way more* speed, but lesser homing capability.** Faster hitting missiles, harder to evade by post-launch reactive navigating BUT less 'bending-around-the-corners' ++ber godmissiles. That only occurs with the 4 shot standard and militia versions. The Proto and Advanced are a lot less bending and tend to hit objects at a greater frequency. My alts: GeneralJohnRipper, Draxus Prime, MoonEagle A, Long Evity And this is why I am the #1 forum warrior.

KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 919	Posted - 2013.12.28 20:53:00 - [31] - Quote DeadlyAztec11 wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Even tho I don't agree on the reason (for more realistic) of the suggestion, I do agree on the improvement suggestion. *Swarms should have way more* speed, but lesser homing capability.** Faster hitting missiles, harder to evade by post-launch reactive navigating BUT less 'bending-around-the-corners' ++ber godmissiles. That only occurs with the 4 shot standard and militia versions. The Proto and Advanced are a lot less bending and tend to hit objects at a greater frequency. Wow, did not know that, thx for pointing out. Can someone else confirm this, just to be sure? Feeling the scanner is too simple and off balance? The fix:
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 887	Posted - 2013.12.28 21:02:00 - [32] - Quote KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: KEROSIINI-TERO wrote: Even tho I don't agree on the reason (for more realistic) of the suggestion, I do agree on the improvement suggestion. *Swarms should have way more* speed, but lesser homing capability.** Faster hitting missiles, harder to evade by post-launch reactive navigating BUT less 'bending-around-the-corners' ++ber godmissiles. That only occurs with the 4 shot standard and militia versions. The Proto and Advanced are a lot less bending and tend to hit objects at a greater frequency. Wow, did not know that, thx for pointing out. Can someone else confirm this, just to be sure? It's true to a point.... it's very situational and depends how close you are to the target really. If you are near the target and shoot in the opposite direction, the proto's will go straight and then cut back sharply to the target stil. But in general, they do seem to corner much worse than militia and standard. Just speculation, but this may be to help avoid missile-on-missile collisions and/or bugs caused when missiles contact missiles. Buff passive scans & fix TTK! My Closed Beta Alts - Overlord Ulath, Overlord Bosse, Overlord Zero


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]