Oolite Bulletins

Faster and packs a bigger punch than standard missiles and more resistant to ECM versus hardened missiles. A play-test release will be posted in this thread.

personal opinion, but i'd say a torpedo should be slower than a missile, especially to offset the bigger punch and resistance.

You know how cartoon characters have 3 fingers, otherwise they look 'wrong'?

And you know how the reflection drawn in someone's eye is ALWAYS a 4-pane window, because otherwise they look 'wrong'?

Naval Investment Board Minutes wrote:

If I'm paying good taxpayer's money for a missile, boy, I want fins on it, dammit, vacuum or no vacuum! Oh, and a pointy front end.

High Admiral Eejit, Projectile Procurement Division

Any chance of a red-stripe-down-the-side model for Killer Wolf? Those ones go quicker.

I am flexible to all replies but in regard to the model, there will be no changes. You can not see the torpedo in flight except for it's exhaust.

sounds like a Wing Commander Skipper Missile. Can't say i'm too in favour of cloaked ordnance though.

I presume it's not cloaked - just black - and therefore will still be on the scanner.

Making it tricky to see would go well with making it slower (especially if it's ever going to be chucked in the player's direction).

Faster but less manoeuvrable?

DaddyHoggy wrote:

Faster but less manoeuvrable?

so therefore great for large targets

including pirate bases...

CaptSolo I like your model, it looks like a torpedo. What is a torpedo? Torpedoes are used by submarines. They travel straight and at much greater velocity than a submarine and they pack a hell of a punch. In other sci-fi torpedoes are similar, they go straight, much faster than the ship that launched it and packs are large yield. With no guidance system a torpedo should be immune to ecm, right? And this really would be good for taking out big, slow and unmaneuverable vessels. Having a much wider range for the proximity of detonation might not be so good as the damage would not be as great. But if the proximity was larger it might be useful for clusters of smaller ships or ship and escorts. Maybe have 2 models of torpedo(smallyield/faster and highyield/slower) each with 2 damage range/proximity range patterns(shortrange/closeproximity and longrange/farproximity). Then a model can be purchased based upon how it is going to be used. It might be interesting to be ambushed by a small cluster of ships and go head on, launch a smallyieldfast torpedo with farproximity/damagerange and pull a 180 and run and have the torpedo catch the whole bunch of them. The scanclass of the torpedo would have to be set to something other than MISSILE or the ship targeted would run away. Perhaps just NORMAL would do. If not this could also be entertaining as the ship targetted runs while his buddies keep coming and the proximity detonates anyway when they are in range.

On a side thought, what if a script for the torpedo could be created that messaged the ships AI's ahead of it within a certain cone "FLEE" using a once per second check with a very slim chance at far range and a good chance just before the torpedo detonates. It would simulate the pilots figuring out what it was just before detonation and it would be fun to see them scrambling to get out of the way too late. And some pilots would see ahead of time and avoid/run away. Would be realistic if it could be done.

A torpedo is a weapon you'd want to deploy against large, slow (or stationary) hardened targets, especially when you don't want the collateral damage of a bomb. In that light, I'll agree with the other guys that a torpedo need not be as fast or agile as a dogfighting missile, yet it can have longer range.

CommonSenseOTB wrote:

What is a torpedo? … They travel straight … With no guidance system

Guided torpedoes were first demonstrated in the 1890s and became the norm in WWII.

The difference between a torpedo and a missile is that a torpedo travels in water and a missile travels in air, but for metaphorical use in a space context the most reasonable (and quite well-established) distinction would be that torpedos are much bigger and slower than air-to-air missiles, being intended for larger targets.

Ahruman wrote:

CommonSenseOTB wrote:

What is a torpedo? … They travel straight … With no guidance system

Guided torpedoes were first demonstrated in the 1890s and became the norm in WWII.

The difference between a torpedo and a missile is that a torpedo travels in water and a missile travels in air, but for metaphorical use in a space context the most reasonable (and quite well-established) distinction would be that torpedos are much bigger and slower than air-to-air missiles, being intended for larger targets.

I should have said minor course correction instead of no guidance.

The principle difference comparing missiles to torpedoes is the level of guidance. Missiles can do 180degree turns making multiple passes at a target while torpedoes in RL use guidance only for minor course correction to keep it aimed at the target but still travelling in the same general direction. Can a missile(named torpedo) be programmed to have only minor course correction? If you give a 0.1 pitch and roll would that do it? or would it just make a big loop? Practically speaking it should not have the ability the change direction, only minor course correction to keep it on target. And if that's not possible then making them go straight only would be a good compromise. IMHO

Another thing one could do is give a torpedo trivial course correction but have a range past which they would detonate anyway.

The principle difference comparing missiles to torpedoes is the level of guidance. Missiles can do 180degree turns making multiple passes at a target while torpedoes in RL use guidance only for minor course correction to keep it aimed at the target but still travelling in the same general direction. Can a missile(named torpedo) be programmed to have only minor course correction? If you give a 0.1 pitch and roll would that do it? or would it just make a big loop? Practically speaking it should not have the ability the change direction, only minor course correction to keep it on target. And if that's not possible then making them go straight only would be a good compromise. IMHO

Another thing one could do is give a torpedo trivial course correction but have a range past which they would detonate anyway.

Having worked at DERA Bincleaves for a time during my life with the MOD I can say that torpedoes can do considerably more than minor course corrections.

for example - one tactic to escape a torpedo that is a wake tracker (listens to the tracks allow the bubbles produced by a ship's propellers) is for the ship to turn a tight a circle as possible and once the circle is complete to cut the engine and break hard port or starboard out of the circle, hoping the torpedo continues to travel around the circle while the wake dissipates and the ship remains undetected.

Given the turning circle of a modern frigate or destroyer is the shipping equivalent of a London Taxi and the torpedo can follow that wake - I would refute the "minor course" corrections claim as misinformed. The MOD wouldn't spend a considerable sum of money in anti-torpedo decoys if they were only capable of minor course corrections.

I've also been a rocket scientist - specifically modelling missile guidance system.

Missiles do not make "multiple passes". They also don't turn 180 degrees - mainly because their guidance systems aren't designed for this - the sensor is gimbled with respect to the missile body and can rarely move more than 30 degrees off body axis. Therefore it can only turn 180 degrees if it can continually track the target through this manoeuvre. Given (a very non-classified example) a missile usually performs a skid-to-turn of approximately 30g at 700m/s with a boost phase of only 7 to 10s, after this its in sustain mode and any manoeuvring scrubs off massive amounts of speed, to this end missiles generally solve a PN course very early on during their fly out - and thus for the majority of their flight they're performing very minor flight corrections, almost irrespective to what the target is doing.

This comes as a shock to most fighter pilots who used to see my videos - previously safe in the (incorrect) knowledge that they would "turn inside" a missile in their 250m/s 9g turning aircraft...