ACTA & Fleet Action?

Discuss Mongoose miniatures game here, including Mighty Armies, Gangs of Mega-City One, and Battlefield Evolution.
lastbesthope
Executive Mongoose
Posts: 19697
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Postby lastbesthope » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:21 pm

TalosX wrote:4) Probably the biggest flaw, rotating sections generate inertia. Even in space, you would require stabalizing thrusters to prevent yourself from drifting offcourse. Another maintenance factor that could have drastic effects if they were to fail in dangerous Nav environments like hyperspace or planetary orbit.
There are other ways to counteract the effects of spin than thrusters, but it would need to be taken into account, yes.

Also, sometimes spinning sections on ships have their uses other than generation of gravity. Though generally about a different axis than the rotation of the Omega's spinning section.

LBH
I'll live forever, heaven won't let me in and hell's afraid I'll take over!!!

Mongoose Accolades
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:27 pm

locarno24 wrote:Bear in mind that, like most sci-fi shows, technology development cycles are miraculously close to zero.

Things are sometimes reverse engineered over the course of a single show; entire dead languages recovered on a laptop in a few minutes, entire gunship fleets can be built without affecting anyone's economy detectably....etc, etc.

Strictly speaking a fleet capital ship on that scale would, for a first-of-class, probably take a couple of years to build so the concept of the warlock design's existance not being common knowledge even in Santiago's presidency, let alone Clarks, is pretty ridiculous. But that's TV sci-fi for you.
QFT

According to SFOS the Brakiri reverse-engineered Vorlon weaponry based on camera footage :shock: in less than a year!
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
BuShips
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3858
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:51 am
Location: Near Mt. St. Helens (that volcano)

Postby BuShips » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:34 pm

lastbesthope wrote:There are other ways to counteract the effects of spin than thrusters, but it would need to be taken into account, yes. LBH
My solution to that would be two sections with opposite spin. It's what the Russians did on many of their heli designs and it makes sense. It gets rid of the need for a tail rotor.
©2002 Thomas Schmid, with permission. Visit http://www.3dhistory.de/.
Image
lastbesthope
Executive Mongoose
Posts: 19697
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Postby lastbesthope » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:38 pm

BuShips wrote:
lastbesthope wrote:There are other ways to counteract the effects of spin than thrusters, but it would need to be taken into account, yes. LBH
My solution to that would be two sections with opposite spin. It's what the Russians did on many of their heli designs and it makes sense. It gets rid of the need for a tail rotor.
Indeed, or you could have a denser packed core that contrarotated within the spinning section we see on an Omega.

LBH
I'll live forever, heaven won't let me in and hell's afraid I'll take over!!!

Mongoose Accolades
BuShips
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3858
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:51 am
Location: Near Mt. St. Helens (that volcano)

Postby BuShips » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:51 pm

lastbesthope wrote:
BuShips wrote:
lastbesthope wrote:There are other ways to counteract the effects of spin than thrusters, but it would need to be taken into account, yes. LBH
My solution to that would be two sections with opposite spin. It's what the Russians did on many of their heli designs and it makes sense. It gets rid of the need for a tail rotor.
Indeed, or you could have a denser packed core that contrarotated within the spinning section we see on an Omega.

LBH
Well, it would make changing sections "interesting and fun" wouldn't it? You wouldn't want to doddle much at he door, would you? :lol:

Actually, it was done very believably in 2001, on the 'Aries' moon shuttle iirc. I'm not talking about counter-rotating but rather how you would move from one section to another. Oh, and my thought was not two stacked sections but rather two separate adjacent ones along the axis/spine. For example, in the command Omega and fleet carrier that "X" design doubles the rotating mass problem but two "I" sections counter-rotating would work better (and make a longer model obviously). :)
©2002 Thomas Schmid, with permission. Visit http://www.3dhistory.de/.
Image
lastbesthope
Executive Mongoose
Posts: 19697
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Postby lastbesthope » Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:15 pm

BuShips wrote:
lastbesthope wrote: Indeed, or you could have a denser packed core that contrarotated within the spinning section we see on an Omega.

LBH
Well, it would make changing sections "interesting and fun" wouldn't it? You wouldn't want to doddle much at he door, would you? :lol:
No need for the contra rotating section to be accessible, it would simply be a spinning mass contained within the habitable rotating section to counteract the spin effects.

LBH
I'll live forever, heaven won't let me in and hell's afraid I'll take over!!!

Mongoose Accolades
darklord4
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 300
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Chandler, AZ

Postby darklord4 » Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:49 pm

Since we seem to have gone into the rotating section tangent, I'll pitch in...
From some Omega text, the spinning section was there to give artificial gravity for long-haul tours. I would take this that the captain would spin it up when cruising for crew exercise and let it spin down in combat. However, I believe all on screen appearances of the Omegas have the rotating section still rotating.

If ACTA had adopted the FA scale, it would probably still be cost effective to produce the minis. I think you could probably get 4 FA-scale ships from the same material as the B5W/ACTA scale. I don't have any VaS ships, but what I have seen online and at the LGS are pretty small.
BuShips
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3858
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:51 am
Location: Near Mt. St. Helens (that volcano)

Postby BuShips » Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:47 am

lastbesthope wrote:No need for the contra rotating section to be accessible, it would simply be a spinning mass contained within the habitable rotating section to counteract the spin effects.

LBH
Indeed. Too bad the Centauri invented Antigrav. They could have used the Narn as "spinning ballast". :lol:
darklord4 wrote:Since we seem to have gone into the rotating section tangent, I'll pitch in...
From some Omega text, the spinning section was there to give artificial gravity for long-haul tours. I would take this that the captain would spin it up when cruising for crew exercise and let it spin down in combat. However, I believe all on screen appearances of the Omegas have the rotating section still rotating.

If ACTA had adopted the FA scale, it would probably still be cost effective to produce the minis. I think you could probably get 4 FA-scale ships from the same material as the B5W/ACTA scale. I don't have any VaS ships, but what I have seen online and at the LGS are pretty small.
While I'm sure that the spinning section could be spun down and secured, I always considered it necessary to have it running all the time. It's not just exercise that's a problem; it's bone deficiency if zero-G is used too long. This does give a new thought though as why the Minbari needed to have artificial gravity for their starships, as they have so much more bone mass than Humans. :wink:
©2002 Thomas Schmid, with permission. Visit http://www.3dhistory.de/.
Image
M1ndr1d3rs
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 911
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Indonesia

Postby M1ndr1d3rs » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:34 am

BuShips wrote: While I'm sure that the spinning section could be spun down and secured, I always considered it necessary to have it running all the time. It's not just exercise that's a problem; it's bone deficiency if zero-G is used too long. This does give a new thought though as why the Minbari needed to have artificial gravity for their starships, as they have so much more bone mass than Humans. :wink:
In case anyone knows: Are both counter-rotating sections of B4 habitable? How to move from one section to the other always escapes me. :?

About the Minbari: IMO while they have more bone mass, it doesn't mean they don't get weaker in zero-g. Just not as quickly as humans. And some Minbari like the Star Riders live most of their lives on starships. :?
What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so.
Mark Twain
BuShips
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3858
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:51 am
Location: Near Mt. St. Helens (that volcano)

Postby BuShips » Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:13 am

M1ndr1d3rs wrote:In case anyone knows: Are both counter-rotating sections of B4 habitable? How to move from one section to the other always escapes me. :?

About the Minbari: IMO while they have more bone mass, it doesn't mean they don't get weaker in zero-g. Just not as quickly as humans. And some Minbari like the Star Riders live most of their lives on starships. :?
The Minbari comment was aimed more for humor that anything else. :wink:

I don't see a problem with the B4 station (I always think "before" every time I read that, heh). As the central core is in zero-G, you can just take the core shuttle between sections, then take an elevator down to the "ground". That's the way I look at it. It's not as if the two sections adjoin, right? :D
©2002 Thomas Schmid, with permission. Visit http://www.3dhistory.de/.
Image
M1ndr1d3rs
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 911
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Indonesia

Postby M1ndr1d3rs » Fri Feb 22, 2008 11:23 am

BuShips wrote: The Minbari comment was aimed more for humor that anything else. :wink:

I don't see a problem with the B4 station (I always think "before" every time I read that, heh). As the central core is in zero-G, you can just take the core shuttle between sections, then take an elevator down to the "ground". That's the way I look at it. It's not as if the two sections adjoin, right? :D
D'oh! :oops: Honestly, I remember a very similar comment about the Narn. And it was serious!

B4... B4... Well, it could also mean Data's eldest brother :wink:

OK, B4 station... I must admit I lack the imagination and/or technical knowledge to figure that out. With b5 it's 1 cylinder with 1 central core.
Does that mean b4 have two (counter-rotating) cores because there are 2 cylinders?
I think the central core shuttle was low-g, not zero-g in "The Fall of Night". The absolute center of the core will be zero-g.

BTW, anybody feel we need another section to discuss these sort of things?

I know we're getting way off topic, but the Off Topic section doesnt really seem to fit as well.
What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so.
Mark Twain
Nomad
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1002
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:54 pm
Location: Manchester

Postby Nomad » Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:49 pm

lastbesthope wrote:
BuShips wrote:
lastbesthope wrote:There are other ways to counteract the effects of spin than thrusters, but it would need to be taken into account, yes. LBH
My solution to that would be two sections with opposite spin. It's what the Russians did on many of their heli designs and it makes sense. It gets rid of the need for a tail rotor.
Indeed, or you could have a denser packed core that contrarotated within the spinning section we see on an Omega.

LBH
Several hundred years ago..
Nomad wrote:Hidden inside the centre of the rotating section (or 'spin hab') there's a massive counterweight spinning like crazy in the opposite direction to balance the angular momentum. That's what keeps the rest of the ship from rotating.

And the gyroscopic effects of all that spinning metal are why the Omega maneuvers like a pig.

That's how it works in my pocket universe, anyway.
Glad someone was paying attention :D

Actually, the counterweight would more or less double the mass of the spin hab, and that's a really ugly solution in engineering terms. BuShips counter-rotating idea is much better, and I think was actually used on the Omega prototype (the Leonov in 2010).

Both could give you some really...interesting...pitch-yaw coupling effects every time you tried to change the ships attitude, though...
Women and Captains first!
lastbesthope
Executive Mongoose
Posts: 19697
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Postby lastbesthope » Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:56 pm

Nomad wrote: Glad someone was paying attention :D
Well i did study spaceflight mechanics for 2 years. The main effect of which is I cringe every time I watch Armageddon.

LBH
I'll live forever, heaven won't let me in and hell's afraid I'll take over!!!

Mongoose Accolades
Lord David the Denied
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4260
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 10:39 am
Location: Northampton, UK

Postby Lord David the Denied » Fri Feb 22, 2008 6:09 pm

lastbesthope wrote:Well i did study spaceflight mechanics for 2 years. The main effect of which is I cringe every time I watch Armageddon.

LBH
Doesn't everyone cringe at that film? :wink:
lastbesthope
Executive Mongoose
Posts: 19697
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Postby lastbesthope » Fri Feb 22, 2008 6:27 pm

YEs, but I cringe extra because I know how wrong they got the physics.

LBH
I'll live forever, heaven won't let me in and hell's afraid I'll take over!!!

Mongoose Accolades
Lord David the Denied
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4260
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 10:39 am
Location: Northampton, UK

Postby Lord David the Denied » Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:27 pm

Like me and historical fiction... :P
BuShips
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3858
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 7:51 am
Location: Near Mt. St. Helens (that volcano)

Postby BuShips » Fri Feb 22, 2008 10:18 pm

Nomad wrote:...and I think was actually used on the Omega prototype (the Leonov in 2010).
I wanted to christen one of my Omegas "Leonov" :wink:. I recognised and also read that the 2010 ship is the grandpappy of the Omega. Because you mentioned the ship, I looked at the photos and it does have two counter-rotating sections.
©2002 Thomas Schmid, with permission. Visit http://www.3dhistory.de/.
Image
emperorpenguin
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5714
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:02 am
Location: British in Dublin

Postby emperorpenguin » Fri Feb 22, 2008 10:26 pm

Lord David the Denied wrote:Like me and historical fiction... :P
you must cringe at a lot of films then :wink:
Into the Fire: 4th place
Wheel of Fire: 9th place
Gaelcon 2006: 2nd place
Lord David the Denied
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4260
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 10:39 am
Location: Northampton, UK

Postby Lord David the Denied » Fri Feb 22, 2008 10:36 pm

emperorpenguin wrote:you must cringe at a lot of films then :wink:
Yes, mate... :(

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests