I am a bit of a gun nut. I also like to discuss weapons in space as it is an interesting topic in my opinion. The weapons in Elite Dangerous are OK when it comes to damage but subpar when it comes to everything else.
This is somewhat long
LASERS. Pulse, Burst, and Beam.
As a directed energy weapon their price tag is in my opinion pretty low.
Their damage and power draw are OK for pulse lasers but burst and beam, their power draw per damage is high in my opinion.
Multi-cannons. Done horribly wrong in my opinion.
Power draw is insane. The lowest energy consuming one eats .280 MW, that is 376 horsepower. You do not need 376 horses to spin a motor, 50 horses (0.0373 MW) for a fixed multi-cannon would be pushing it.
Price tag is abysmal. Expanding gas propelled weapons are among the oldest weapons in existence. There should be no need for such a high price tag as one can literally make a gun with the right tools, raw materials, and know how.
Look VS performance. Multi-cannons are Gatling style weapons with the rate of fire of an autocannon. A gatling style weapon has a rate of fire between 6-18 rounds per second per barrel. The Type 2 multicannons in Elite Dangerous, using this math, should have a rate of fire between 36 and 108 rounds per second (2160 to 6480 rounds per minute). They even sound like an autocannon.
If the weapon uses Caseless ammo (and it looks like it does) then my argument is even more stressed. Caseless ammunition has two advantages over cased ammunition, ammo capacity and fire rate. Ammo capacity is general as caseless ammo negates the case which can be, on average 2/3 the weight of the ammo itself. Rate of fire is also general because caseless ammo does not need to extract the spent case, this can result in a higher rate of fire.
For sound, this is link is 75 rounds per second.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPdNMrDeeVo Naval Phalanx CWIS, 4,500 rounds/minute (75 rounds/second), it uses a M61 Vulcan Autocannon.
Now if the weapon used some sort of plasma apperatous to accelorate the projectile then I could comprehend the need for such a high cost and energy requirement. Then I would ask why make such a simple weapon so complicated.
Now for cooling, Yes I am bashing multi-cannons very hard. In atmosphere Gatling style weapons are used for numerous reasons, the main reason is surprisingly simple, cooling. As the barrels spin the air flow helps cool the barrels and prevents the high rate of fire from eroding the barrel. In space cooling is an issue as there is no convent medium for cooling, IE air. A single barrel cannon would allow for a much simplified cooling method (there are many interesting single barrel cannons in use, revolver autocannons for one).
My gripes with all expanding gas propelled weapons are the same across the board, price tag and power draw.
Railguns. The railguns in Elite dangerous are not railguns in the truest sense. If I was to hazard a guess I would call them a "Ferromagnetic fluid accelerator" weapon.
I spent some time getting an understanding of M.A.P. weapons (my little abbreviation for Magnetically Accelerated Projectile Weapons. Gauss guns and Railguns)
I won't go into detail defining the difference between rail and Gauss guns as it will take up 2 paragraphs.
Look wise the railguns use a three prong free floating accelerator. A railgun operates similar to a homopolar motor, the magnetic field of a railgun pushes the rails apart as the projectile accelerates down the barrel. If the weapon was in fact a railgun then the free floating three prongs would literally push themselves apart. Performance wise, the "railguns" have no magazine and little damage (for the implied caliber). Gameplay wise it is to balance the power of the weapon but in my opinion it is misleading as the name Railgun looks like it was used to sell a weapon that does not live up to its implied expectations.
I will give an example of energy and caliber. The projectile diameter and density, and class velocity shall remain constant.
15mm = 820 grains (53.14 grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 19,585 ft-lbs (26,553.7 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 63,499 ft-lbs (49,486 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 122,467 (166,043 joules) kinetic energy
20mm = 1944 grains (125.96 grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 46,431 ft-lbs (62,952 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 150,539 ft-lbs (204,103 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 290,337 ft-lbs (393,644 joules) kinetic energy
25mm = 3797 grains (246.04 grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 90,689 ft-lbs (122,958 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 294,031 ft-lbs (398,653 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 567,083 ft-lbs (768,861 joules) kinetic energy
30mm = 6562 grains (425.21grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 156,729 ft-lbs (212,496 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 508,148 ft-lbs (688,956 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 980,037 ft-lbs (1,328,752 joules) kinetic energy
What does this mean, it means that expanding gas propelled weapons and M.A.P. weapons of different caliber are comparable in terms of potential energy on target. This does not take into account that all things similar, M.A.P. weapons would offer higher penetration on target. In addition the main advantage of M.A.P. weapons is simple. An expanding gas propelled weapon has twice or more its volume taken up with gunpowder, a M.A.P. weapon only has a sabot or at a minimum the projectile itself. Weight wise you can cram... maybe 50% more ammo, Volume wise it is theoretically possible to cram in twice and/or more of the ammunition (my rule of thumb is 3x). Then comes a safety concern as there is no gunpowder to ignite AND cost concern as your only paying for a slug or slug and Sabot.
If you are wondering, why M.A.P. weapons would penetrate deeper, the answer is simple, energy transfer. From a physics standpoint a high speed projectile has less time to transfer energy to a target, therefore with less overall energy transfer, the penetration on target would be more pronounced... unless the projectile shatters/fragments (a likely event) then each fragment would increase the damage on target and offer less individual penetration.
Side note Newton's third law (look it up if you don't know what it is) would dictate that if a railgun or Gauss gun of significant caliber/weight and going at a significant velocity (and not braced properly), the weapon could potentially rip itself free of its housing.
I know that there are balance issues to deal with, but for me the weapons of Elite dangerous are ...distracting and immersion breaking, especially at the garage.
I am from America and I consider myself to be weird.
This is somewhat long
LASERS. Pulse, Burst, and Beam.
As a directed energy weapon their price tag is in my opinion pretty low.
Their damage and power draw are OK for pulse lasers but burst and beam, their power draw per damage is high in my opinion.
Multi-cannons. Done horribly wrong in my opinion.
Power draw is insane. The lowest energy consuming one eats .280 MW, that is 376 horsepower. You do not need 376 horses to spin a motor, 50 horses (0.0373 MW) for a fixed multi-cannon would be pushing it.
Price tag is abysmal. Expanding gas propelled weapons are among the oldest weapons in existence. There should be no need for such a high price tag as one can literally make a gun with the right tools, raw materials, and know how.
Look VS performance. Multi-cannons are Gatling style weapons with the rate of fire of an autocannon. A gatling style weapon has a rate of fire between 6-18 rounds per second per barrel. The Type 2 multicannons in Elite Dangerous, using this math, should have a rate of fire between 36 and 108 rounds per second (2160 to 6480 rounds per minute). They even sound like an autocannon.
If the weapon uses Caseless ammo (and it looks like it does) then my argument is even more stressed. Caseless ammunition has two advantages over cased ammunition, ammo capacity and fire rate. Ammo capacity is general as caseless ammo negates the case which can be, on average 2/3 the weight of the ammo itself. Rate of fire is also general because caseless ammo does not need to extract the spent case, this can result in a higher rate of fire.
For sound, this is link is 75 rounds per second.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPdNMrDeeVo Naval Phalanx CWIS, 4,500 rounds/minute (75 rounds/second), it uses a M61 Vulcan Autocannon.
Now if the weapon used some sort of plasma apperatous to accelorate the projectile then I could comprehend the need for such a high cost and energy requirement. Then I would ask why make such a simple weapon so complicated.
Now for cooling, Yes I am bashing multi-cannons very hard. In atmosphere Gatling style weapons are used for numerous reasons, the main reason is surprisingly simple, cooling. As the barrels spin the air flow helps cool the barrels and prevents the high rate of fire from eroding the barrel. In space cooling is an issue as there is no convent medium for cooling, IE air. A single barrel cannon would allow for a much simplified cooling method (there are many interesting single barrel cannons in use, revolver autocannons for one).
My gripes with all expanding gas propelled weapons are the same across the board, price tag and power draw.
Railguns. The railguns in Elite dangerous are not railguns in the truest sense. If I was to hazard a guess I would call them a "Ferromagnetic fluid accelerator" weapon.
I spent some time getting an understanding of M.A.P. weapons (my little abbreviation for Magnetically Accelerated Projectile Weapons. Gauss guns and Railguns)
I won't go into detail defining the difference between rail and Gauss guns as it will take up 2 paragraphs.
Look wise the railguns use a three prong free floating accelerator. A railgun operates similar to a homopolar motor, the magnetic field of a railgun pushes the rails apart as the projectile accelerates down the barrel. If the weapon was in fact a railgun then the free floating three prongs would literally push themselves apart. Performance wise, the "railguns" have no magazine and little damage (for the implied caliber). Gameplay wise it is to balance the power of the weapon but in my opinion it is misleading as the name Railgun looks like it was used to sell a weapon that does not live up to its implied expectations.
I will give an example of energy and caliber. The projectile diameter and density, and class velocity shall remain constant.
15mm = 820 grains (53.14 grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 19,585 ft-lbs (26,553.7 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 63,499 ft-lbs (49,486 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 122,467 (166,043 joules) kinetic energy
20mm = 1944 grains (125.96 grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 46,431 ft-lbs (62,952 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 150,539 ft-lbs (204,103 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 290,337 ft-lbs (393,644 joules) kinetic energy
25mm = 3797 grains (246.04 grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 90,689 ft-lbs (122,958 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 294,031 ft-lbs (398,653 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 567,083 ft-lbs (768,861 joules) kinetic energy
30mm = 6562 grains (425.21grams)
Expanding Gas propelled: 3280 Feet per second (1 kilometer/second) = 156,729 ft-lbs (212,496 joules) kinetic energy
Gauss Gun: 5906 feet second (1.8 kilometer/second) = 508,148 ft-lbs (688,956 joules) kinetic energy
Rail Gun: 8202 feet second (2.5 kilometer/second) = 980,037 ft-lbs (1,328,752 joules) kinetic energy
What does this mean, it means that expanding gas propelled weapons and M.A.P. weapons of different caliber are comparable in terms of potential energy on target. This does not take into account that all things similar, M.A.P. weapons would offer higher penetration on target. In addition the main advantage of M.A.P. weapons is simple. An expanding gas propelled weapon has twice or more its volume taken up with gunpowder, a M.A.P. weapon only has a sabot or at a minimum the projectile itself. Weight wise you can cram... maybe 50% more ammo, Volume wise it is theoretically possible to cram in twice and/or more of the ammunition (my rule of thumb is 3x). Then comes a safety concern as there is no gunpowder to ignite AND cost concern as your only paying for a slug or slug and Sabot.
If you are wondering, why M.A.P. weapons would penetrate deeper, the answer is simple, energy transfer. From a physics standpoint a high speed projectile has less time to transfer energy to a target, therefore with less overall energy transfer, the penetration on target would be more pronounced... unless the projectile shatters/fragments (a likely event) then each fragment would increase the damage on target and offer less individual penetration.
Side note Newton's third law (look it up if you don't know what it is) would dictate that if a railgun or Gauss gun of significant caliber/weight and going at a significant velocity (and not braced properly), the weapon could potentially rip itself free of its housing.
I know that there are balance issues to deal with, but for me the weapons of Elite dangerous are ...distracting and immersion breaking, especially at the garage.
I am from America and I consider myself to be weird.
Last edited:
