Re: "soft" turrets and doctrine

From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@mis.dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: "soft" turrets and doctrine
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:36:01 +0100 (MET)

> Anybody feel like working up the damage vaule?  It should be a few (maybe
> 1d6) of hits with a tiny damage value (maybe DV of 1d6?).

  Ok here it is:

Kinetic Damage Table for Tiny Pellets

Impact Speed    Damage by Pellet Size
(G-turns)       5mm	3mm	2mm	1mm	.5mm	.25mm	.1mm

 1		1-18	1-11	1-8	1-4	1-2	1-1	1-.5
 2		1-27	1-17	1-12	1-6	1-3	1-2	1-1
 3		1-35	1-22	1-15	1-8	1-4	1-2	1-1
 4		1-41	1-26	1-18	1-10	1-5	1-3	1-1
 5		1-47	1-30	1-21	1-11	1-6	1-3	1-1
 6		1-52	1-33	1-23	1-12	1-7	1-4	1-2
 8		1-62	1-39	1-27	1-15	1-8	1-4	1-2
10		1-71	1-45	1-31	1-17	1-9	1-5	1-2
15		1-91	1-57	1-40	1-21	1-11	1-6	1-3
20		1-108	1-68	1-47	1-25	1-14	1-7	1-3
30 		1-138	1-87	1-60	1-32	1-17	1-9	1-4

# of pellets	
in 150kg WarHd	1.3E5	5.9E5	2.0E6	1.6E7	1.3E8	1.0E9	1.6E10

  BTW, all are tungsten/DU. Using 'sand' (density around 2 instead of
around 18) would degrade the performance seriously.

  Personally I'd select 1mm pellets. They seem to have a good tradeoff
between penetration and quantity (16,000,000). That is enough to blanket
a 54km circle with enough density to statistically hit a 100ton spherical
hull with one pellet.

  And if we direct them at a surface target at 30gt, they'd shave
1.6 meters(!) off the rock surface within a radius of 4.5kilometers(!!),
even if we assume a 50% overlap between the individual craters.
That's a level of destruction above nuclear, and a fine illustration 
of the principle behind cluster bombs: many small explosions is far
more effective than the sum of all those small explosions concentrated
in one spot.

> wildstar@qrc.com

-bertil-