Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

Inefficient and buggy chemical thrusters make the Venture-Class slower than the already-slow ITC.

Hmmm

[NUKE9.13]

Inefficient and buggy chemical thrusters make the Venture-Class slower than the already-slow ITC.

Hmmm

Yeah, I saw that also. Guessing Amaok has designed a ship called the Venture. Or it's a joke.

Anyway, course-correcting ammo (and potentially more)!

Advanced Jormungandr Bolter: (2) Draignean, NUKE9.13

[Detoxicated]

Advanced Jormungandr Bolter: (3) Draignean, NUKE9.13, Detoxicated

[Nirur Torir]

Alright. I'm concerned by our limited ability to defend transports, but it might be fine. They'll probably be focusing on C2, since we're about to take that, so we can just send our ship there.

Ideas for ship names:
ITC 1: Moe SS Mist
ITC 2: Moe SS Steam
ITC 3: Moe SS Vapor
MWS 1: Moe SS Drafty
Illiad 1: Moe SS Illiad

[NUKE9.13]

First ship in a class has the same name as that class, so the first (and currently only) Iliad should be called the Iliad.

[Madman198237]

I'm voting prefixes of MSS not Moe SS.

And I'd call the first ITC the "Plug Ugly" or "Slowboat" or possibly just "Drafty"

[Detoxicated]

ideas
Magnetic propulsion - Systems that use a planets Magnetic field to move -> ships, suits, vehicles

Tritanium - a strong 3d printable metal for all things.

Artillery - a big gun that shoots to faraway places

[Shadowclaw777]

I really doubt magnetic propulsion could work, and we are desperate need of better thrusters when compared to our increasing ill-effective chemical thrusters. Things like fusion or anti-matter engines are way beyond our scopes, we need something that we could develop within a turn.

Fission Engines: Our current generation of chemical thrusters have proven multiple times to be too weak and dormant for our current ships. The process of nuclear fission has a much greater degree of power output that will easily be able to move our new designs of ships through its increased ability to propel force and energy. Nuclear reactors are stored within the engines to provide a continual source of energy through fission radioactive decay and nuclear transmutations.

[Madman198237]

Fission reactor powering??? I'd say a plasma thruster system. Long-term thrust, higher thrust than ion engines, less weight in fuel (Probably) than chemical engines. That said, keep some chemical engines on the design for extreme emergency maneuvering.

Advanced Jormungandr Bolter: (4) Draignean, NUKE9.13, Detoxicated, Madman198237

[Shadowclaw777]

First off, fission engines is a simple way to upgrade our power, and a way more reliable route, than ions or plasma engines. I really doubt pursuing another research path in our next design phase is going to be the most optimum idea, and it also gives us a consistent path that doesn't require investment. Nuclear fission engines can be done in 1 design phase, plasma and ion engines would take several design phases, to even get a weak version of them.

Advanced Jormungandr Bolter: (5) Draignean, NUKE9.13, Detoxicated, Madman198237, Shadowclaw777

[10ebbor10]

Advanced Jormungandr Bolter: (5) Draignean, NUKE9.13, Detoxicated, Madman198237, Shadowclaw777, 10ebbor10

[Madman198237]

Sorry, but, welcome to science.

You do not understand.

A fission reactor provides electricity. This is all well and good, but it doesn't move a ship through space. A fission engine cannot replace a chemical thruster (Like todays rockets, basically), because it doesn't do anything to provide thrust. A plasma engine uses the electrical energy generated by a fission reactor or other power source to speed up particles (Bits of superheated gaseous material (Plasma), in the case of a plasma engine). It is just one option for interstellar propulsion, which can also be applied to interplanetary travel. That said, only our ITCs or extremely large vessels could make use of them, since they're not as good for combat maneuvers. That said, it won't matter if they're not as good if we can make a better plasma engine regardless.

Anyway, at this stage of sci-fi, it will be pretty darn easy to make a plasma engine---it's already been deployed and sent to space IRL. Just not made quite useful enough for interplanetary travel...yet. That said, we should be able to make it. The science, after all, is fairly easy.

[10ebbor10]

Pretty sure Shadowclaw777 is referring to Nuclear Thermal Engines, which provide thrust just fine.

[Madman198237]

Nuclear thermal? Meaning what? I'm pretty sure you're not referring to the Project ORION proposed nuclear-bomb propulsion method, and Shadow specifically mentioned nuclear reactors, which are USELESS to use right now. Whatever power source our ships use (DM Question: What exactly powers our ships with electricity?) is sufficient right now. A reactor is just another way to cause damage. If you burst the steam pipes (Would futuristic fission reactors rely on steam? I'm not sure, but I doubt it, not at any reasonable space-going size) or other heat-conductor, or, heaven forbid, crack the reactor casing, you will blow things up (Burst steam pipes) or melt things while simultaneously turning them radioactive "hot" (Reactor casing breach).

So, my point stands. A fission reactor provides no thrust. A plasma engine can use the enormous amount of energy you can get from fission to provide thrust. One is useless without the other. That said, a plasma engine (Low-yield one, anyway) can also use solar panels or whatever to provide energy for its thrust, but fission is much more energetic, allows for much more powerful plasma drives.

[Draignean]

First off, fission engines is a simple way to upgrade our power, and a way more reliable route, than ions or plasma engines. I really doubt pursuing another research path in our next design phase is going to be the most optimum idea, and it also gives us a consistent path that doesn't require investment. Nuclear fission engines can be done in 1 design phase, plasma and ion engines would take several design phases, to even get a weak version of them.

Though he's a bit blunt about it, Madman is right. (EDIT: Actually, see the options below. I spoke too soon.) The only (EDIT: I'm a derp. Never say only. You'll always be wrong.) form of fission power that provides direct propulsion is the rather unique strategy of dopping bombs behind you and catching a lift on the radiation shockwave. Effective for rapid maneuvering, and if we can achieve low-mass fusion criticality (which requires a helluva energy source) it might be worth it for evasive action, but not really something we're currently capable of exploiting.

My personal feeling is that we should move toward something closer to the edge of current science, in order to exploit the fringe factor, such as the Cannae drive. If it works, it's a reactionless drive that only needs electricity and maintenance, and it gives us a nice fat research credit in the field of theoretical physics- in case we want to do some justification for a much more advanced research project down the line.

EDIT: Actually, I think Shadow is referring to this. Which is interesting, and I'm still reading up on.

EDIT2: Actually actually, THIS is what Shadow is referring to, and I'm also reading up on that.