glyphstrip FAQ button
Halo.bungie.org
glyphstrip
Frequently Asked Forum Questions
 Search the HBO News Archives

Any All Exact 
Search the Halo Updates DBs

Halo Halo2 
Search Older Posts on This Forum:
Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts


Re: UNSC MAC round velocity
Posted By: Vanguard21 <legionnaire18@yahoo.com>Date: 1/28/05 1:11 p.m.

In Response To: UNSC MAC round velocity (Vanguard21)

Well, here's the way I see it:
SuperMAC at .4c is calculated at 5.1 teratons.
Mind you, errors are to be expected from Fall of Reach considering he had 7 weeks to finish it.
I personally think the 30 km/s figure for the MAC fired by the Commonwealth is off. Making it 30,000 km/s would put it more in tune with the 120,000km/s figure for the Super MACs.
Now, consider this: The Covenant shield shrugged off a nuke that was undoubtedly high end megaton range, and yet it was struck by a MAC round and took significant damage. If it's 30km/s, then we're talking about maybe 50 kilotons of energy, which wouldn't make sense since it's probably not even 1/1000th that of the nuke. However, the 30,000km/s would make more sense since it actually did damage and is in the high end gigaton level damage.
Also consider that the combat range in that instance was 3,000km at the very least and a 30km/s round would take 100 seconds to reach the Covenant ship, which is MUCH slower than the Archer missiles(we have a figure on them later on at being about .1c) that the ship was able to dodge previously, and *those* things can track.
Btw, the Ascendant Justice's turrets(and presumably most Covenant Capital ships) is around 200 Gigatons of energy based off the fact that it was able to melt an asteroid 3km long with some still pouring out. That should give you a figure of what kind of energy the UNSC ship Titanium-A armor have to absorb.


Message Index




Replies:

UNSC MAC round velocityVanguard21 1/27/05 11:18 p.m.
     Re: UNSC MAC round velocityAlex Cross 1/28/05 12:09 a.m.
           whoa, careless error ;)gspawn 1/28/05 12:31 a.m.
                 *sigh* GoddamnitAlex Cross 1/28/05 6:14 a.m.
                 Re: whoa, careless error ;)Son of Ral 1/28/05 3:51 p.m.
           "Boo"Son of Ral 1/28/05 3:47 p.m.
     To sum it up, .4c :) *NM*Alex Cross 1/28/05 12:11 a.m.
     idiot's summarygspawn 1/28/05 12:27 a.m.
           Re: idiot's summaryPvt. Jenkins 1/28/05 12:44 a.m.
                 Re: idiot's summarygspawn 1/28/05 1:00 a.m.
                 hear hear *NM*Corgana 1/28/05 1:02 a.m.
           iMac? :) *NM*Michael M. 1/28/05 1:06 a.m.
           Re: idiot's summarydevolver 1/28/05 1:47 a.m.
           Re: idiot's summaryreplay 1/28/05 2:21 a.m.
           Re: idiot's summarymrbananas 1/28/05 9:38 a.m.
                 Re: idiot's summaryBonekin 1/28/05 10:36 a.m.
                       Re: idiot's summarymrbananas 1/28/05 11:18 a.m.
                 Re: idiot's summaryGrady 1/28/05 11:32 a.m.
                       the possible cause of confusion and doubt.mrbananas 1/28/05 1:07 p.m.
                             Re: the possible cause of confusion and doubt.Louis Wu 1/28/05 1:42 p.m.
                                   Re: the possible cause of confusion and doubt.Vanguard21 1/28/05 2:49 p.m.
           Re: idiot's summaryGre'Thor 1/28/05 12:10 p.m.
           Re: idiot's summaryE.T. the Extremely Tired 1/28/05 12:54 p.m.
           Re: idiot's summaryEric Trautmann 1/28/05 3:23 p.m.
           To put it in very simple terms...Calvin Chaos 1/28/05 4:25 p.m.
     Re: UNSC MAC round velocityVanguard21 1/28/05 1:11 p.m.
           Re: UNSC MAC round velocityCalvin Chaos 1/28/05 4:37 p.m.
                 Re: UNSC MAC round velocityVanguard21 1/28/05 5:12 p.m.



contact us

The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33.