Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: silverpig
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Why would they be more accurate than any other ballistic? Some of the same things that affect accuracy still play the same role: wind, aim, shape of object.
Try chucking a baseball at a can. Then try it with a wiffle ball
If it's faster, then wind doesn't have nearly as much of an effect.
This. Sure, they have the same effects. But you'll mostly be firing at the enemy from the same distance, possibly a little further away. And yet you'll have the projectile arrive so much faster than a fuel-based ballistic projectile.
About the only thing that will affect accuracy of these things is the curvature and magnetic properties of the Earth. And at the distances these things will be used, those won't even touch these projectiles.
Aim will be the only thing to have an effect on accuracy. Wind won't do anything to an object of the size these projectiles will be, in consideration to distant of target from position of fire, and time of travel until projectile arrives at target. Mach 5+ makes a chunk of metal the size of a cannon ball arrive at the target basically instantaneously. Remember, eye's on is still going to be required - some how. And based on the fact that curve of the Earth MUST be calculated when firing a direct-shot weapon, these things will not be fired from extreme distances. Meaning, the projectile will likely arrive at basically the same speed at which it had been fired.
A large chunk of metal, flying at 5 times the speed of sound, hits a steel-enforced concrete building. What happens? Two possibilities. The projectile simply slams right through all material, leaving a gaping hole in every wall in the way but the building remains standing. OR, the projectile is aimed carefully, and the projectile basically destroys the integrity of the building and the shockwave from a Mach5 projectile striking a stationary object ripples through all nearby material and brings whatever building down to rubble.
First, re: silverpig - I know what you mean, and you're absolutely correct. Less time in flight = less time for identical forces to act on the object (assuming the same shaped projectile) Whiffle ball analogy doesn't work though, because I can throw a whiffle ball at the same speed I can throw a baseball. If they had identical surfaces, they'd both experience the same drag. However, by Newton's Law, F=ma, the ball with much smaller mass would have much higher acceleration (deceleration). Thus, the lighter ball is more affected by drag forces. Those little holes greatly affect the aerodynamics, making aim more difficult with a spinning ball.
Now, "Mach 5+ makes a chunk of metal the size of a cannon ball arrive at the target basically instantaneously. " Allow me to do the math for you. If you read the article, they're looking for distances of 200 miles. For the sake of having some numbers, let's assume an average speed of Mach 5.5, and 100mph. That's 4187mph. Damn fast. But, 100 miles is damn far for an unguided projectile. 100/4187, converted to minutes & seconds = 1 minute 26 seconds. Hardly "instant."
Furthermore, think for a moment. "About the only thing that will affect accuracy of these things is the curvature and magnetic properties of the Earth. And at the distances these things will be used, those won't even touch these projectiles." Do you have advanced knowledge that our future enemies are going to start building their most important buildings in the middle of the ocean (rather than inland somewhere)? Ooops. Thank man, think!
"The projectile simply slams right through all material, leaving a gaping hole in every wall in the way but the building remains standing. OR, the projectile is aimed carefully, and the projectile basically destroys the integrity of the building and the shockwave from a Mach5 projectile striking a stationary object ripples through all nearby material and brings whatever building down to rubble.
" I shot a squirrel with my 22. The muzzle velocity is super-sonic. Not only did I kill the squirrel, but you should have seen the trees that got knocked down by the sonic boom. I'm laughing at the thought of shooting out the critical i-beam that holds up the whole building. But, for what it's worth, no, the projectile won't go through the building (at least I think they'll have figured this one out) with the hope that it'll hit critical components in its path. The projectile will be designed to "explode" upon impact or mushroom out, rather than pierce the object. i.e. many bullets do this: they shatter inside rather than passing cleanly through, for maximum internal damage.
Facebook
Twitter