(01-27-2016, 07:32 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2016, 07:25 AM)Lost Rinoah Wrote: [ -> ]At that point the pilot may as well give someone a hug and eject. (Put all that wild energy to SOME use) As they'll be left fused afterwards. Leg will be melted together. Mech will probably be on it's route to going critical with heat constantly going up and no way to stop it after flushing coolant.
God I'd forgotten about the fusion core. Course even those old mechs that can't fight ammo burns will sooner dump their core than let it go critical. You'd need a total and instantaneous detonation to compromise the core before the computer dumps it, and at that point the meltdown is just fuel in the HEAP fire.
Older ones couldn't dump their core either, mate. :/
But yeah. Looong time ago, Somehow jammed 6 PPCs on a thor. Moment I alpha striked the core blew, lel.
So yeah. Remember, during that period flamer arrays were fricking EVIL weapons. Could just shut heavies down and let everyone else pick em apart like Vultures. ;P
(01-27-2016, 07:48 AM)Lost Rinoah Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2016, 07:32 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]God I'd forgotten about the fusion core. Course even those old mechs that can't fight ammo burns will sooner dump their core than let it go critical. You'd need a total and instantaneous detonation to compromise the core before the computer dumps it, and at that point the meltdown is just fuel in the HEAP fire.
Older ones couldn't dump their core either, mate. :/
But yeah. Looong time ago, Somehow jammed 6 PPCs on a thor. Moment I alpha striked the core blew, lel.
So yeah. Remember, during that period flamer arrays were fricking EVIL weapons. Could just shut heavies down and let everyone else pick em apart like Vultures. ;P
I don't see anything on Sarna about core dumping being a new feature, just that any Fusion Engine has enough safety measures against a meltdown to make it a virtual non-issue.
"Such dramatic failures are rare, though. It is difficult to sustain the fusion reaction and very easy to shut down. Safety systems or damage to containment coils will almost always shut down the engine before such an explosion occurs. The massive shielding of the engine (in the case of standard fusion engines, this is a tungsten carbide shell that accounts for over 2/3 of the weight of the engine) usually buys the safety systems the milliseconds needed to shutdown the engine when severe damage is inflicted. "
(01-27-2016, 07:54 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see anything on Sarna about core dumping being a new feature, just that any Fusion Engine has enough safety measures against a meltdown to make it a virtual non-issue.
"Such dramatic failures are rare, though. It is difficult to sustain the fusion reaction and very easy to shut down. Safety systems or damage to containment coils will almost always shut down the engine before such an explosion occurs. The massive shielding of the engine (in the case of standard fusion engines, this is a tungsten carbide shell that accounts for over 2/3 of the weight of the engine) usually buys the safety systems the milliseconds needed to shutdown the engine when severe damage is inflicted. "
Ahh. Thank you for this knowledge. Did not know that. Should have figured, with how we already make our nuclear reactors even today.
(01-27-2016, 08:42 AM)Lost Rinoah Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2016, 07:54 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see anything on Sarna about core dumping being a new feature, just that any Fusion Engine has enough safety measures against a meltdown to make it a virtual non-issue.
"Such dramatic failures are rare, though. It is difficult to sustain the fusion reaction and very easy to shut down. Safety systems or damage to containment coils will almost always shut down the engine before such an explosion occurs. The massive shielding of the engine (in the case of standard fusion engines, this is a tungsten carbide shell that accounts for over 2/3 of the weight of the engine) usually buys the safety systems the milliseconds needed to shutdown the engine when severe damage is inflicted. "
Ahh. Thank you for this knowledge. Did not know that. Should have figured, with how we already make our nuclear reactors even today.
It does state that an overheat meltdown is possible, and that breaching the casing can cause a spectacular explosion, just that whatever is going to set it off as to move incredibly fast before the reactor offs itself for safety purposes.
Oh yeah, fusion isn't so flawlessly clean either. A core breach would go off like a dirty nuke, scattering radioactive isotopes over a wide area.
The common D-D fusion reaction that is being aggressively pursued by most researchers spews a steady stream of neutrons when in operation. Although these neutrons do not participate in the reaction like their fission counterparts do, they cause the reactor body to be transmuted into unstable isotopes that decay again over time.
Fortunately, fusion is nicer than fission because all you have to do to turn it off is release the pressure or lower the temperature, both of which can be done quite quickly at the pressures and temperatures involved.
(01-27-2016, 02:37 PM)OdinYggd Wrote: [ -> ]Oh yeah, fusion isn't so flawlessly clean either. A core breach would go off like a dirty nuke, scattering radioactive isotopes over a wide area.
The common D-D fusion reaction that is being aggressively pursued by most researchers spews a steady stream of neutrons when in operation. Although these neutrons do not participate in the reaction like their fission counterparts do, they cause the reactor body to be transmuted into unstable isotopes that decay again over time.
Fortunately, fusion is nicer than fission because all you have to do to turn it off is release the pressure or lower the temperature, both of which can be done quite quickly at the pressures and temperatures involved.
Also a fusion reactor stops producing high levels of radiation once shut down, unlike fission reactors, in which the fission fuel continues to radiate regardless.
Tfw mission 42'd in MGSV TPP
(01-27-2016, 03:44 PM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2016, 02:37 PM)OdinYggd Wrote: [ -> ]Oh yeah, fusion isn't so flawlessly clean either. A core breach would go off like a dirty nuke, scattering radioactive isotopes over a wide area.
The common D-D fusion reaction that is being aggressively pursued by most researchers spews a steady stream of neutrons when in operation. Although these neutrons do not participate in the reaction like their fission counterparts do, they cause the reactor body to be transmuted into unstable isotopes that decay again over time.
Fortunately, fusion is nicer than fission because all you have to do to turn it off is release the pressure or lower the temperature, both of which can be done quite quickly at the pressures and temperatures involved.
Also a fusion reactor stops producing high levels of radiation once shut down, unlike fission reactors, in which the fission fuel continues to radiate regardless.
No, actually. While turning the reactor off does result in a drastic reduction in how much radiation leaks from it, the entire core assembly has become radioactive itself by neutron bombardment. Thus it will continue to emit potentially dangerous amounts of radiation for several weeks after being shut down as the shorter half-life neutron capture isotopes break down. Long term though it still produces only a fraction of the radiation that a fission core does, and because the reaction stops immediately the cooling system only needs to deal with the thermal mass- there is no long-term decay heat.
I managed to create an actually decently attractive character in Inquisition, in comparison to my normally ghastly ones.
Screencap was a little wonky, though.
(01-27-2016, 04:15 PM)OdinYggd Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2016, 03:44 PM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ]Also a fusion reactor stops producing high levels of radiation once shut down, unlike fission reactors, in which the fission fuel continues to radiate regardless.
No, actually. While turning the reactor off does result in a drastic reduction in how much radiation leaks from it, the entire core assembly has become radioactive itself by neutron bombardment. Thus it will continue to emit potentially dangerous amounts of radiation for several weeks after being shut down as the shorter half-life neutron capture isotopes break down. Long term though it still produces only a fraction of the radiation that a fission core does, and because the reaction stops immediately the cooling system only needs to deal with the thermal mass- there is no long-term decay heat.
Yes, you just talked about that. But the same thing presumably happens in a fission reactor, too. So, nothing in that regard is gained by choosing fission.
The thing that really makes fusion better than fission though is probably that fusion creates much less radioactive waste. The waste tends to be the biggest problem with fission reactors, after all.
(01-27-2016, 05:10 PM)Reks Wrote: [ -> ]I managed to create an actually decently attractive character in Inquisition, in comparison to my normally ghastly ones.
Screencap was a little wonky, though.
I wonder how that happened...
(01-27-2016, 05:10 PM)Reks Wrote: [ -> ]I managed to create an actually decently attractive character in Inquisition, in comparison to my normally ghastly ones.
Screencap was a little wonky, though.
Very good. Yeah, the more in-depth a character creation system, the more difficult it is to make good looking characters...
and the more fun it is to make intentional abominations. You should see some of my old Soul Calibur 5 creations... Heh.
(01-27-2016, 07:29 PM)Shaadaris Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2016, 05:10 PM)Reks Wrote: [ -> ]I managed to create an actually decently attractive character in Inquisition, in comparison to my normally ghastly ones.
Screencap was a little wonky, though.
Very good. Yeah, the more in-depth a character creation system, the more difficult it is to make good looking characters...
and the more fun it is to make intentional abominations. You should see some of my old Soul Calibur 5 creations... Heh.
Did somebody say intentional abomination?
Double the smashing
http://cdn.pcgamesn.com/sites/default/files/fallout%204%20waluigi.jpg
Waaah
http://i.imgur.com/fVBy24B.jpg
Heil Hitler.
(01-27-2016, 07:43 PM)SCN-3_NULL Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2016, 07:29 PM)Shaadaris Wrote: [ -> ]Very good. Yeah, the more in-depth a character creation system, the more difficult it is to make good looking characters...
and the more fun it is to make intentional abominations. You should see some of my old Soul Calibur 5 creations... Heh.
Did somebody say intentional abomination?
Double the smashing
Oh yes, Fallout 4. When I have access to you again and get a graphics card that doesn't lag to death in the character creation screen, I am totally going to make the most screwed up potentially-Human that I can.
My sinuses have finally cleared up. I can breath! I CAN FIGHT! No but seriously this is such a relief even if my throat still hurts like a bitch.
(01-27-2016, 02:37 PM)OdinYggd Wrote: [ -> ]Oh yeah, fusion isn't so flawlessly clean either. A core breach would go off like a dirty nuke, scattering radioactive isotopes over a wide area.
The common D-D fusion reaction that is being aggressively pursued by most researchers spews a steady stream of neutrons when in operation. Although these neutrons do not participate in the reaction like their fission counterparts do, they cause the reactor body to be transmuted into unstable isotopes that decay again over time.
Fortunately, fusion is nicer than fission because all you have to do to turn it off is release the pressure or lower the temperature, both of which can be done quite quickly at the pressures and temperatures involved.
I'm not entirely certain but I think battletech accounts for most of this, in the event a core breach the vacuum sealed core will suck air into the superheated plasma chamber, where thermal expansion will cause a spectacular but not strictly nuclear explosion.
"More often a destroyed engine will be punctured by weapons fire. Because the plasma is held in a vacuum chamber (to isolate the superheated plasma from the cold walls of the reactor; contact with the walls would super-chill the plasma below fusion temperatures), a punctured reactor can suck in air where the air is superheated. Normal thermal expansion of the air causes the air to burst out in a brilliant lightshow often mistaken for a "nuclear explosion". This thermal expansion damages anything within 90 meters of the destroyed 'Mech."
However the radioactive fallout from this is not of any real consequence to the surrounding mechs as almost all are sealed for operation in areas with little to no atmosphere, so shielding against solar radiation around the cockpit is basically a given.
As for the reactor body..well I'm gonna hazard a guess that a tungsten carbide casing that makes up 2/3rds of the entire reactor is about the best you can do for a long lasting seal.
It probably also warrants mention that Battletech fusion engines use lighter isotopes than real research reactors, so protium is the fuel of choice as opposed to deuterium and/or tritium, though I have no immediate idea of how this reflects in the radioactivity of the core or it's emissions.
So after some cursory research a Protium fusion core would give off no neutrons, though it's not clear if any electrons or protons are discharged, or how that would affect the integrity of the reactor body.
wherein Surge abandons all pretenses of lore friendliness.
Felt good to play men of war with friends again, even if we got literally nowhere and at one point I just flipped on march of cambreadth so I could pretend we were dying heroically or actually going to pull through at some point.
(01-28-2016, 04:03 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]Felt good to play men of war with friends again, even if we got literally nowhere and at one point I just flipped on march of cambreadth so I could pretend we were dying heroically or actually going to pull through at some point.
I like that game, even though I suck at it.