Kagetenshi
Apr 20 2004, 02:04 AM
I'm making an antipersonnel drone mounting a flamethrower and have hit the rather perplexing question of about how many shots one would get out of a given CF (.125 cubic meter) of Special Storage Area. Any answers? I tried the "talk to the GM" thing, but he had no idea as to what a sensible ruling might be.
~J
mfb
Apr 20 2004, 02:19 AM
if your GM has no idea, then tell him you did some research and discovered that 1 CF can hold 500 'rounds' for a flamethrower.
Kanada Ten
Apr 20 2004, 02:23 AM
http://science.howstuffworks.com/flamethrower3.htm1 shot = 10 liters
125 liters = .125 cubic meters
12 shots per CF
Kanada Ten
Apr 20 2004, 02:30 AM
It may be more efficient to use fuel tank capacity (as it includes load, IIRC) for the design using 1 shot = 10 liters. If you make the vehicle gas powered you can combine the tanks.
CardboardArmor
Apr 20 2004, 02:43 AM
The gas you use to drive the internal combustion engine might not be the same kind you want to use in a flamethrower weapon. Different burn properties and all that.
mfb
Apr 20 2004, 03:32 AM
flamethrowers usually use fuel thickeners--not good for engines. as far as i can tell, they usually use either gasoline or diesel.
CardboardArmor
Apr 20 2004, 03:34 AM
Try napalm. Remember, it sticks to kids!
Gotti
Apr 20 2004, 03:39 AM
Little bastards should be in school.
Kagetenshi
Apr 20 2004, 03:55 AM
I'll post the thing when I get it finished as a thank-you.
~J
CardboardArmor
Apr 20 2004, 03:56 AM
Make sure to use seperate tanks for engine fuel and flamethrower fuel if you're going that way, Kage.
If you're keeping a normal powerplant, then I think someone already crunched the math for the number of shots you have.
Kanada Ten
Apr 20 2004, 04:00 AM
I don't think you need to seperate them, CardboardArmor. Maybe add an oil or plastic tank as oil was around 5-10% of the mixture, but gasoline or diesel is a fine - if expinsive - base product.
CardboardArmor
Apr 20 2004, 04:05 AM
I'm no chemist, so I can't verify this, but I'm pretty sure that if you did that and fed both the weapon and the combustion engine off that mixture, you're liable to break one and diminish the effectiveness of the other.
I'm just skeptical because I've never seen gasoline, even thickened, used as flamethrower fuel. Almost always napalm or something like it.
Nikoli
Apr 20 2004, 04:11 AM
That may fall under "Special Storage area" int he modifications section. you can't safely store napalm in a GI ammo bin, not unless you really like getting zorched via remote and hate your drone.
Kanada Ten
Apr 20 2004, 04:12 AM
CardboardArmor
Apr 20 2004, 04:19 AM
| QUOTE (Site Kanada Ten Linked To) |
| Gasoline, being a volatile, easily ignited compound with a high energy density, was immediately used as a weapon in war. In World War I, both Germany and the Allies used it in flame throwers, but it burned itself too quickly to be very effective at igniting the target of the flame throwers. Intensive research to slow down the burning was funded by the U.S. government, and in 1942 Harvard University scientists and the U.S. army chemical warfare service found a way to jelly gasoline that worked quite well. They found that mixing an aluminum soap powder of naphthene and palmitate (hence na-palm), also known as napthenic and palmitic acids, with gasoline produced a brownish sticky syrup that burned more slowly than raw gasoline, and hence was much more effective at igniting one's target. |
Now would you put Napalm in the engine? Probably not. That's a recipe for destroying the drone. Conversely, using regular gasoline as a flamethrower fuel WOULD work, I concede that, but it wouldn't be as effective as napalm; it would simply burn off too quickly and would lose something in range as the gas vaporized while burning in mid-air.
So in the end, yes, Kanada has a point but for a superior weapons system you'd want to stick to napalm.
Kanada Ten
Apr 20 2004, 04:21 AM
Having a separate tank of superplastic-TM that mixes with the gasoline just prior to entering the flamethrower should relieve that issue then, yes?
CardboardArmor
Apr 20 2004, 04:24 AM
Perhaps. Perhaps it might.
Well done, sir. Well done. It does lead to having the superplastic hanging in it's own tank or in an external tank. But that's a problem for another thread.
He could also use some of that nifty napalm mentioned in that page that didn't burn even when people extinguised their cigarettes in it. There's a certain safety factor on that, especially when carried in an external tank.
Kagetenshi
Apr 20 2004, 04:27 AM
| QUOTE (Nikoli) |
| That may fall under "Special Storage area" int he modifications section. you can't safely store napalm in a GI ammo bin, not unless you really like getting zorched via remote and hate your drone. |
It does, and that's what I'm using.
Basic design is as follows. I'll update with a name and possible modifications in the morning, when I'm not so damn tired.
~J
Chassis: Small UAV (Markup .25)
Power Plant: Electric Fuel Cell
DPV: 199
Final Cost: ¥5,975
Hand. 4, Speed 40, Accel 3, Body 1, Armor 0, Sig 8, Auto 0, Pilot 1, Sensor 1, Cargo 0, Load 94, Fuel E (100 PF), Econ .2 Km/PF
Flamethrower (22 shots, SS, 8M) Spotlight, Infrared Spotlight, Remote-Control Interface, Rigger Adaptation
Kanada Ten
Apr 20 2004, 04:29 AM
Aztechnology Defoiler.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.