Tamri Профиль Публикации Комментарии Подписки
↓ Немного проклятый (Slightly damned) – Выпуск №354: 744
↓ Т.А.Й.Н.А. – Выпуск №33
#452696/SVlad, да, 14 суток непрерывной работы реакторов с указанной мощностью. ИРЛ наверное будет чуть больше: с одной стороны, прыжки должны быть довольно энергозатратными, с другой - летать можно и не на форсаже, а маршевые 25G - это довольно неплохая экономия энергии. На крайняк, можно для экономии топлива летать по инерции.
#451928/SVlad, там написаны энергопотребление для движения Рапиры с ускорением 30 G + огонь из орудий. Да, и я порядок перепутал. Там 900+оружие указано в минуту, а не в секунду. Т.е. Примерно 1 ПДж/мин получается. Всего в таком случае выходит 448.640 тонн (АМ+материя). Полкилотонны, короче. И жечь в реакторах тогда надо примерно по 400 милиграмм топлива в секунду.
Это на активно маневрирующую и палящую из всех стволов Рапиру. На просто летающую получается чуть меньше. Вот оригинал:
<< That's true; like in SFB, the engines are your primary source of energy, which is used to power most of the systems on your ship. There will be backup reactors and the like (auxiliary power), but big energy expenditures like firing the main batteries will require main power, that is, engine power. If you divert all power to the drives, you will be able to accelerate faster than if you are reserving some energy for weapons fire, but I'm guessing not by much. Accelerating a 350 kiloton cruiser at 30 G for one second requires 15 terajoules, which I suspect is enough energy in the form of weapons fire to burn that cruiser to cinders. If we hypothesize that the cruiser has four main batteries, and that each main battery requires about 10 terajoules to fire, and can fire once every minute, then maximum weapons fire consumes 40 TJ per minute, while the drives consume 900 TJ per minute. So diverting weapons power to the drives adds 4% more energy, which (assuming the efficiency remains the same) adds 1.3 G. If you can run the powerplants at 105%, that nets you another 1.4 G. So is "sprinting" at 32.7 G instead of 30 G going to save the ship? Probably not in most cases (an extra 2.7 G won't help you outrun a 60 G torpedo), but the option is there. The application that comes to mind is trying to get across a system faster in an emergency, but that's also the situation in which overloading the engines for a prolonged period is the most dangerous. >>
Это на активно маневрирующую и палящую из всех стволов Рапиру. На просто летающую получается чуть меньше. Вот оригинал:
<< That's true; like in SFB, the engines are your primary source of energy, which is used to power most of the systems on your ship. There will be backup reactors and the like (auxiliary power), but big energy expenditures like firing the main batteries will require main power, that is, engine power. If you divert all power to the drives, you will be able to accelerate faster than if you are reserving some energy for weapons fire, but I'm guessing not by much. Accelerating a 350 kiloton cruiser at 30 G for one second requires 15 terajoules, which I suspect is enough energy in the form of weapons fire to burn that cruiser to cinders. If we hypothesize that the cruiser has four main batteries, and that each main battery requires about 10 terajoules to fire, and can fire once every minute, then maximum weapons fire consumes 40 TJ per minute, while the drives consume 900 TJ per minute. So diverting weapons power to the drives adds 4% more energy, which (assuming the efficiency remains the same) adds 1.3 G. If you can run the powerplants at 105%, that nets you another 1.4 G. So is "sprinting" at 32.7 G instead of 30 G going to save the ship? Probably not in most cases (an extra 2.7 G won't help you outrun a 60 G torpedo), but the option is there. The application that comes to mind is trying to get across a system faster in an emergency, but that's also the situation in which overloading the engines for a prolonged period is the most dangerous. >>