Ship Design Philosophy

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Aug 11, 2021 9:17 am

Image

(Aero)spacecraft: NASA Plans To Replace Hubble With a Giant Balloon Telescope

Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk about a new type of a telescope - a balloon based SuperBIT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSCZwvR3OYg



1. First thought, you can point that camera in the other direction, you know, for facial recognition.

2. More usefully, communications satellite.

3. Possibly, one year.

4. Inexpensive.

5. Altitude forty kilometres.

6. Solar panelling.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Aug 11, 2021 9:38 am

Image

Spaceships: How SpaceX Uses Simplicity To Engineer The Cheapest Rockets In History

SpaceX are building the cheapest rockets in history, its changing the shape of the launch market, and transforming our access to space. But doing so is extremely difficult and takes and engineering approach not previously seen in the space industry.

SpaceX have adopted a philosophy of simplicity and they apply its rigerously to their engineering approach. But how do you "Engineer" simplicity into the some of the most complicated machines ever built?

From the well known and obvious techniques, to some of the more suprising ways SpaceX build simplicity into every aspect of rocket design, manufacturing, launch and even the development process itself, this video hopes to give you an insight into the principles at work and the decisions that make it work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TllA-WMdXy4



1. Race car harnesses for acceleration couches.

2. Best part is no part, the best process is no process.

3. I'm going to leave auto destruct up to the crew.

4. Vertical integration, net complexity, inhouse, outsourcing, and invisible overhead.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Aug 11, 2021 9:17 pm

Spaceships: Armaments, Zen, and the Art of Missile Maintenance

500. Technological level eight reactionary rocket acceleration six, twelve percent volume, eleven round endurance seventeen and a half percent fuel tank, two kilostarbux for a missile, eight kilostarbux for a torpedo.

501. Twenty nine and a half percent motivation, seventy and a half percent warhead and guidance, fifty eight and three quarter kilogrammes for an ortillery missile, two hundred thirty five kilogrammes for an ortillery torpedo.

502. Chassis twenty five hundred starbux, rocketry two kilostarbux, twenty and a half kilostarbux warhead and guidance for an ortillery missile.

503. Ortillery missile warhead and guidance, technological level seven, 58.75 kilogrammes, 20'500 starbux, one deadly dice.

504. Highly technologized ortillery missile warhead and guidance, technological level ten, thirty percent size reduction, 41.125 kilogrammes, 30'750 starbux, one deadly dice.

505. Budgetted ortillery missile warhead and guidance, technological level seven, one hundred twenty percent size increase, 70.5 kilogrammes, 16'400 starbux, one deadly dice.

505. Highly techgnologized technological level fourteen reactionary rocket acceleration fifteen, thirty percent volume; five round endurance 7.5 percent fuel tank.

506. Budgetted technological level ten reactionary rocket acceleration twelve, twenty four percent volume, one hundred twenty five percent fuel inefficiency, one round endurance 3.75 percent, 1.75 percent remaining; 100 kilogrammes, rocketry 3'840.00 starbux, chassis 3'000.00 starbux, warhead and guidance 16'400.00 starbux; 23'240.00 starbux.

507. Default budgetted ortillery missile would be hundred kilogrammes, increased size, at twenty kilostarbux.

508. This is a tad cheaper than the above customized ortillery missile, which only has an endurance of one round, but double the acceleration.

509. Does this penny pinching matter? Well, it could, if you combine it with maximizing effect, like immediacy minimizing point defence, not allowing the missile to wander off, and increasing the speed to overcome inaccuracy.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Aug 11, 2021 9:58 pm

Image

Spaceships: Engineering and Two Scientists Are Building a Real Star Trek 'Impulse Engine'

Space may be the final frontier, but we can't go far on rocket fuel. Now, two scientists are working on a device that may one day make the "impulse engine" from Star Trek real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bp8fk5rosI



Image


I wonder if we could pull that off by having a very heavy bowling ball move along a rail, with alternating gravity fields.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Aug 11, 2021 10:08 pm

Spaceships: Armaments, Zen, and the Art of Missile Maintenance

510. Yes, basically, for Traveller missiles, it does come down to acceleration principally, followed by damage.

511. Then you try and figure out if the costs involved in obtaining that damage, including wastage, is worth it.

512. The ortillery missile is surprisingly cheap, probably because the designers thought that minus six would be sufficient deficit to balance it.

513. In terms of damage, it's the same as the anti matter torpedo, in terms of cost, about twelve times cheaper, it's faster, and can target sub two kilotonne ships without penalty, which might alpha strike them.

514. Admittingly, plasma torpedoes are only eight times more expensive, and in addition to the same damage potential, have armour piercing ten.

515. If you can outsource various components, you can have pretty low technology factories building them for you, as long as the launcher is embedded in a technological level fourteen constructed spaceship.

516. In theory, budgetted enlarged missile launchers would be one hundred fifty kilogrammes, instead of default one hundred twenty five kilogrammes.

517. However, launcher volumes are ignored in mounted fixtures.

518. The more expensive versions could have their chassis coated with either reflec, which should mess with laser point defence, but allow the enemy sensors a better lock, or stealthed, which would make it more difficult to detect and hit.

519. If necessary, the ones intended for actual orbital bombardment, heat shields.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Aug 11, 2021 10:13 pm

Spaceships: Armaments, Lasers, and Drill, Baby, Drill!

1. So besides carving up asteroids, what can a laser drill do, in comparison with other energy weapons?

2. When used in smallcraft, or configured for smallcraft, and this is important, it doesn't lose it's range, since the rules limit it to adjacent in any event.

3. It's more than three times cheaper than a beam laser, and six times than a pulse laser.

4. Penalty is minus three to hit, but you can add to that plus one for close range, and plus one for accuracy, and if you win the dogfight, another plus two.

5. Compared to beam laser plus four inherent, plus one for close range, etcetera; pulse laser two inherent, plus one for close range, etcetera.

6. Since drilling requires some way to finely adjusting exactly where the beam cuts, it makes sense to have them in turrets; any that are in fixed mounts would indicate combat priority.

7. Default gunner/turret skill is eight, plus dexterity modifier.

8. Beam laser at close range is three, pulse is five, drill is ten.

9. Accuracy improvement would be beam at two, pulse at four, drill at nine.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:23 am

Spaceships: Armaments, Lasers, and Drill, Baby, Drill!

10. The firm pointed variant has it's energy draw reduced to three power points from four.

11. In theory, three levels of energy efficiency could reduce that to zero.

12. That seems unlikely, as most likely you'd interpret that as meaning seventy five percent time seventy five percent reduction, eighteen and three quarters percent of the original, hardpointed, energy draw.

13. Which would be rounded up to one power point in the normal course, so the other option would be a straight twenty five percent per, requiring one (fifty percent, two power points), or two (seventy five percent, one power point) slots.

14. Considering the combat performance deficits of the drill laser, size reduction doesn't make much sense.

15. The primary advantages are cost and four dice of damage, if it hits.

16. That's like a standard missile, every round, at a cost of sevenish missiles.

17. If I had to figure out how to create a carronade, this would be it, in a quadruple turret.

18. However, it remains pretty much hit or miss, more of a really nasty surprise if someone comes really close and the dice gods smile upon you.

19. Though that low accuracy rate makes using it as dual purpose point defence a rather desperate measure.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:54 am

Spaceships: Armaments, Lasers, and Drill, Baby, Drill!

20. For military utility, you'll want the highly technologized technological level eleven version.

21. Mix in some budgetting, you could increase the size by twenty percent, but cut the cost premium to one hundred twenty five percent.

22. The two advantage requirement cuts your option to value add the really useful advantages together.

23. However, cutting the power requirement by another twenty five percent is useful, for that spare slot.

24. Which leaves us with accuracy, longer range, and intense focus.

25. With yield, I'd rather take my chances with the dice.

26. Resilient and easy to repair might make more sense, if the concept wasn't disposability.

27. Intense focus might be more interesting for the commercial use of the laser drill, as it might increase the speed and/or quantity of mining.

28. The major deficit of the laser drill is accuracy, so the plus one modifier would be more useful.

29. The other interesting option is longer range, since the laser drill's range suddenly expands tenfold to ten klicks.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Aug 13, 2021 12:58 pm

Spaceships: Armaments, Lasers, and Drill, Baby, Drill!

30. The difference between a single turret and mounted fixtures is one tonne to none, one power point to none, and two to one hundred kilostarbux.

31. Two power point requirement is one hundred thirty three and a third kilogrammes of standard fusion power plant.

32. While I personally think the weapon system would overheat, if you get to the target and hug it close, switching to dogfight mode, in one round you could shoot it sixty times, which should require a power draw times sixty.

33. Not really feasible to install a power plant that large, so you'd keep the potential stored in a battery, let loose, and break off.

34. In a way, the smallcraft fighter would be the equivalent of laser pumped torpedo, except it would be continuous and reusable.

35. If you use a budgetted one tonne diesel power plant, you have four power points, that could be split between the hull and the drill.

36. Do I actually want one or two drills?

37. With one drill, the hull could be around ten tonnes, though it probably would be a tight fit.

38. With two, the minimum tonnage would be thirty five tonnes, though not necessarily three and a half times more expensive, as you basically are a platform for two weapon systems, so maybe a fifty percent premium.

39. Also, I would split the two between either one turret and one fixture, or two turrets, in order to target them independently.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Aug 13, 2021 1:18 pm

Image

Starships: Alien: USCSS Nostromo | Ship Breakdown

Spacedock delves into a 1980s Sci-Fi Icon. The USCSS Nostromo from Alien.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3Ph5gXCf6E



1. Read employment contracts, or get your lawyer to explain it.

2. Halting ageing by limiting cell replacement.

3. Smallcraft hangar retractable shield.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Aug 13, 2021 2:17 pm

Spaceships: Armaments, Lasers, and Drill, Baby, Drill!

40. Separating the drills allows two bites at the apple, rather than just enhance damage.

41. Damage potential would then be two times four to twenty four, rather than once eight to twenty eight.

42. It's not really a hit first doctrine.

43. It's shoot a lot and hope something sticks.

44. Which means that you have to emphasize the other two parts of the formula, protection, and speed.

45. The forth part is cost, and the fifth part is resources.

46. Cost in this case is trying to make it as cheap as possible.

47. Resources would be trying to leverage lower teched manufacturing infrastructure, not only to allow the cutting edge ones the capacity to make components more strategically vital, and work programmes.

48. While the drill has a default technological level of eight, and which the budgeted version would be one eighth of a megastarbux, on the military budget that twenty five percent savings might not mean much, especially at twenty five kilostarbux, for a mining start up it might.

49. It's also a cheap way to provide military aid.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:51 pm

Image

Starwarships: TIE Fighter Hyperdrive Ring (Fan Design/Lore)

Canonically, there is no hyperdrive ring design for the TIE fighter. So I took it upon myself to create one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa5rfgH4yCY



1. One shot drives.

2. We'd have to add fuel tanks, or drop tanks.

3. I'd suggest jump tapes, but their price wasn't worth it, unless it's more a question of labour, plus computer depreciation.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Aug 14, 2021 5:59 pm

Image

Starships: The Black Hole: USS Cygnus Analysis

An examination and anaylsis of the USS Cygnus from the classic Disney film, The Black Hole.

0:00
0:12 Overview
0:54 Visual Design
1:36 Stock Features
3:27 Modifications by Reinhardt
4:48 Conclusion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rca5s-GqXv8



1. Industrial design.

2. Transportation bypass.

3. Last scene: railgun spinal mount.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Aug 14, 2021 6:37 pm

Image


Spaceships: Engineering, Hull, and The Genius of 3D Printed Rockets

3D printed rockets save on up front tooling, enable rapid iteration, decrease part count, and facilitate radically new designs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz165f1g8-E



1. Reverse warp design.

2. Reducing number of parts.

3. Mars Needs Mechanics.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Aug 14, 2021 6:47 pm

Image

Starships: Economics and Why Low-Cost Airlines Make The Most Money

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kIGNHiEWPU



1. Ancillary fees.

2. Subcontract staff.

3. Tax haven.

4. Decentralize staff.

5. Minimize competition.

6. Squeeze destination authorities.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Aug 14, 2021 6:57 pm

Image

Starwarships: The Havoc Marauder from Star Wars: The Bad Batch Analysis

The new Star Wars animated series The Bad Batch has an excellent protagonist ship, an Omicron Class Assault Shuttle called the Havoc Marauder. Let's do an in-depth analysis of this ships mission, strengths, and weaknesses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo8Gn0BAcrQ



1. Ion cannon sternchaser - could knock out engineering.

2. Likely two hundred tonnes.

3. Special forces - likely stealthed.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Aug 15, 2021 10:01 pm

Image

Starships: Accommodations, Life Support and The Future Of Vertical Farming

The future of agriculture may look very different? but how much is going to change and when is is likely to happen?

Traditional agriculture poses many global challenges, from food security to climate change. Can vertical farming improve the sustainability of our food production system? How big can the impact be? When will these changes happen?

There are many factors that help plant factories control their environment, from hydroponics and LED grow lights to CO2 regulation. However, indoor farming will have to boost it's yield significantly if its going to be able to grow key crops such as rice and wheat.

These staple crops take significant light energy to grow and will require an energy revolution to realize. But with huge growth in green technology, can solar and wind energy be used to improve the sustainability of vertical farming? Can the challenges of renewable energy be mitigated with battery storage?

When can we expect these changes to happen?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESuzrY2abAw



1. It's a complex subject, and this is just the summary.

2. Energy requirement in Traveller isn't an issue.

3. Even if you mix in economics, in a starship, all crops are valuable.

4. One would think multiplying harvests per annum, would tend to make the plant breathe more, so increase oxygen regeneration.

5. Starship volume is constrained, so vertical farming seems ideal; on the bright side, water and energy shouldn't be an issue.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Aug 15, 2021 11:02 pm

Spaceships: Armaments, Lasers, and Drill, Baby, Drill!

50. For engineering vehicles, the drill should be able to resolve most tactical problems, if you have the time.

51. If you give them the longer ranged variant, you could conduct sieges from about ten klicks out.

52. If it wasn't for the inaccuracy, you could snipe armoured fighting vehicles, so if you place it as a fixed mount, might be better described as infantry support.

53. In theory, if you decide to mount the drill on a dirtside vehicle, it's going to need one and a dedicated fusion plant.

54. How large will this fusion plant be? I'd be interested to know the answer, considering combat rounds are six seconds, and laser drills tend to imply a constant beam.

55. You could install the drill into a mech, drop it on the hull of an enemy warship, or just grapple it on your own hull.

56. It might be a good idea to place it in a turret, which is going to take another four space.

57. I assume that a dedicated fusion plant, advanced, means that the drill would require one sized to twenty percent of the vehicle platform, besides whatever power plant the vehicle itself would use, for what we would define as motivation and basic.

58. Though endurance would be a century, with no refuelling?

59. What happens if we started to coopt dirtside vehicles to power shipboard systems?
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Aug 16, 2021 9:47 pm

Image

Starwarships: Are Star Destroyers Just World War 2 Battleships in Space? A Design Comparison!

The iconic space battleship of Star Wars - the Imperial Star Destroyer...how does it compare in design to real World War 2 battleships such as the Iowa Class? Lets dig into the design details and tactical analysis, using some footage from World of warships!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN-wZwrT-Lc



1. Well, consider the spinal mount as capital sized main armament, in a forward arc only.

2. Point defence and smallcraft defence sucked, specifically for star destroyers.

3. You pretty much have to carpet bomb or swarm our battleships.

4. Default, our armour plating is homogenous.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9740
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:22 pm

Image

Inspiration: The Ten Ugliest Ships in Eve Online & Why They're Cool!

Eve has some AMAZING spaceships or starships, some are absolutely gorgeous, others scary looking, and a few are hilariously ugly!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWncO37XCcw



1. Problem with lopsided is balancing propulsion.

2. Succubus, more like horned beetle.

3. Problem with stick configuration is that it might stick outside the jump bubble; because the jump bubble diameter are more likely fixed by power output, than starship dimensions.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 36 guests