MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop NCA Warhammer Dreadnought StrikerMilitary
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
NCA Warhammer Dreadnought Striker
The NCA Warhammer Dreadnought striker is the latest in anti-armor fighters. The Warhammer has a high attack speed, excellent maneuverability, and massive cannons make it the perfect aircraft for taking down the massive air warships that many factions have put into service.
About this creation

The NCA Warhammer is the latest in capital ship assault units. Many air warships have some form of laser anti-missile defense. To circumvent this issue, the Warhammer uses massive cannons.


The forward swept wing profile gives the Warhammer superior maneuverability at combat speeds, which is typically between mach 2 and 3.




The Warhammerís cannons. It has two dual 75mm chaingun pods and 2 single 200mm dual-arm railguns; muzzle velocity standing still: mach 10. All cannons use pure tungsten armor piercing rounds.
Since the plane weighs a couple thousand times more than the bullets itís firing, recoil isnít much of an issue.

These massive cannons make the Warhammer also capable of quickly sinking ships, though its high attack speeds limit its effectiveness in anti-shipping.



REVISION: Due to the number of complaints regarding realism, I made a minor modification in the weapons setup. The railguns are located on the inner mountings and all weapon barrels have been lenghtened.


Building instructions
Download building instructions (LEGO Digital Designer)

Comments

 I made it 
  April 12, 2013
Quoting Matthew McCall Actually, railgun barrel length does matter due to having more time to accelerate the object being fired, that's why the proposed railguns to send objects into orbit would have multi-mile long tracks for their projectiles. Anyway, the build was looking good until I saw the back of the plane. As far as I know, while it's fine to have the main wings be forward-swept, all 4 of the tail fins really should be reversed for proper aerodynamics. (Sorry for coming off so aggresive, it must feel like being tag-teemed. Just keep in mind that I, like you, don't use airships and instead use other means to take them down. :) )
Matthew, you arent agressive. Even when you are being very harsh, I find it only mildly annoying. The whole long mathematical rant with Jack was . . . mildly hostile. To attempt to disprove your critiques, here I go (nothign perrsonal, I just like my physics to work): A railgun's velocity is a function of length combined with the strength of the EM field. The more energy you push through the accelerator coils in the arms, the faster it can accelerate the slug, thus negating the need for superlong rails. The jet engines are gear-linked to a large alternator to provide this power. Even still, that isnt enough so the back end of the railguns house capacitors to build a large enough charge to fire at mach 10. As the rear end goes, it has been proven that forward swept wings, stabilizers, and control surfaces give better handling at the sonic buffer (mach 1) than contemporary swept wings. Even though it typically fights at mach 2-3, it was decided that the need for superior mach 1 handling was a concern and thus the tail shape.
  April 8, 2013
Actually, railgun barrel length does matter due to having more time to accelerate the object being fired, that's why the proposed railguns to send objects into orbit would have multi-mile long tracks for their projectiles. Anyway, the build was looking good until I saw the back of the plane. As far as I know, while it's fine to have the main wings be forward-swept, all 4 of the tail fins really should be reversed for proper aerodynamics. (Sorry for coming off so aggresive, it must feel like being tag-teemed. Just keep in mind that I, like you, don't use airships and instead use other means to take them down. :) )
 I made it 
  April 5, 2013
Okay then Mr. Kenyon, lets to the math again accounting for a modified version that has slightly longer rails. I dont see how muzzle velocity has anything to do with barrel length. The more power I run through the rails, the faster I can accelerate the shells. Its about power, not length. On to some more math. This time we will assume a 200mm tungsten shell weighs 40 pounds. Thats roughly 18.2kg. Mach 10 is still 3043 m/s. That gives me 55382.6kJ for one shell. Assuming we are firing both guns, thats 110765.2kJ total. The jet hasn't changed and still has a momentum of 7231800kJ. Thats still only about 1.5% of its total velocity. Even if a tungsten shell weighs 80 pounds, that's still only 3%. Now I ask you, is my math flawed? I never explained the jet in detail so here's some insight. Those two jet turbines are gear linked to a generator that provides all the power the railguns need. There is enough jiuce there to send those shells out at more than mach 10. P.S. Dont use bigger isnt better with me, I am not the one who builds an airship with 9 1150mm cannons.
 
By Zach Eli "Sierra" Sykes
Add to my favorite builders

3
people like this. See who.

599 visitors
3 comments
Added April 2, 2013
 


LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop NCA Warhammer Dreadnought StrikerMilitary


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2014 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use