Deckplanning Gravity Rings

[zero]

Ok, thanks again Captain Jonah, I get what youre saying and it makes perfect sense.

The only thing now is thinking of deckplanning some mechanism that stops the arms from despinning when needed and also negates the course alterations.

I thought of maybe something that spins the wheel as a default when the course is set (such as the astrogation check to set the T-Drive course) as there wont be any course changes in the accel/deccel windows, then the wheel can be stopped if manouvring is called for.

Any suggestions as the ship will be 100 dtons and wont be the biggest thing out in space.

 

[GJD]

well, the arms/ring contain a lot of kinetic energy. One way to despin them is to transfer that to a free floating gyroscope that will store the energy whilst you make a course correction, then transfer it back into the spin mechanism to spin up the arms/ring when you are done. Or just use thrusters on the arms themselves to start and stop them.

G.

 

[Colin]

2300AD will have rules for spin habitats when it comes out this fall or winter. In the meantime, figure about 5-10% waste volume for spin machinery.

Check out some of the ships in the game Jovian Chronicles. They handled spin habs very well.

 

[zero]

Ok, thanks for the tip, so 1dton for a gyroscope for arms 5-10 dtons in length, yes?

I prefer the gyroscope idea over the the thruster one. Not sure how the deckplan would look for something like that as I assume my deckplan will look like a toilet door sign man with his arms sticking out (if that made sense)

 

[Captain Jonah]

1Dton of gyro for every 10-20Dtons of ring.

Call it 1Dton for every 10Dtons of spin habitat and that way it includes all the spin mechanisms, the contra rotating ring, flywheel etc.

Deck plans don't need to include the length of the arms, just the ship based bots like the ring and contra ring. Then add a short stub of the arms and then just put the pods next to the ship.

If someone would kindly explain how to put diagrams inside these posts I could put an example here :wink:

 

[AndrewW]

If someone would kindly explain how to put diagrams inside these posts I could put an example here :wink:

Use

 

[zero]

I think at this point I will need a diagram to see how what Captain Jonah explained looks on a deckplan (also notation on the diagram showing the working would be good).

I've already decided that when the ship goes into an atmosphere that the arms lock into place like lengthy wings alongside the smaller fuel wings, making it like a dart-shape when it jets down dirtside.

 

[GJD]

I think at this point I will need a diagram to see how what Captain Jonah explained looks on a deckplan (also notation on the diagram showing the working would be good).

I've already decided that when the ship goes into an atmosphere that the arms lock into place like lengthy wings alongside the smaller fuel wings, making it like a dart-shape when it jets down dirtside.

Goes into atmosphere? It's streamlined and has thrusters for take off and landing? That's gonna have to be some very good materials tech there. I don't know Cstars, but conventional scifi tropes tend to put spin-hab equipped ships as zero-g only, being too fragile to make planetary landings. YTUMV, of course.

 

[Captain Jonah]

Oh. Erm. Ok.

Sorry Zero I had no idea you were streamlining. With the lack of gravity drives you just are not going to be able to stream line a pod or ring ship. You could do a tiny internal ring but not in something as small as a 100Dton ship.

I have assumed that the ship is a pure space craft and you dock at orbital platforms or stations and the cargo and people go up and down in streamlined shuttles.

A shuttle would have a higher G drive and no transit drive. Plus a lot more fuel for its Thrust drive. Trying to do both deep space and planetary landings is going to be very hard from a profit point of view.

 

[zero]

Okay, I could take off the streamlining, adding more cash for some more bonuses to keep the hard scifi edge.

I may keep the rough streamlined shape just for rule of cool, though it would be a station-to-station type ship (As the inner system planets have quite high-class spaceports, I expect more than Earth will have Up-ports).

My reasoning is that I wanted to have my crew be able to touch down onworld and have adventures without needing to pay a shuttle trip to see the worlds.

Any ideas, as I cant really add a shuttle to the design and keep it that profitable, at all (meaning what should I do as I want a ship that can touch down, or should I give up that dream?)

 

[far-trader]

...Any ideas, as I cant really add a shuttle to the design and keep it that profitable, at all (meaning what should I do as I want a ship that can touch down, or should I give up that dream?)

Teleporters

It worked for ST

...but seriously, locally provided shuttles. Think taxi or bus. The characters dock their ship at the local space station and hire a ride up or down as needed. So much more open to adventure than having their own spaceship to tool around in.

If you're keeping the streamlined and winged bits for colour, might as well add some function and extra colour to them at no extra cost. Make it an emergency landing configuration. The spin hab bits and external cargo containers are jettisoned and the rest of the now streamlined airframe glides deadstick in atmo to a landing. Only for those absolute last ditch emergency situations of course. And maybe the odd plot McGuffin

 

[rust]

... meaning what should I do as I want a ship that can touch down, or should I give up that dream?

You could replace two of the 5 dton cargo pods with a 10 dton launch, pre-
ferably one that is old and cheap, but this would probably eat too much in-
to the ship's profits because it could transport less cargo, even if the crew
would use the launch as "auxiliary cargo pod" during flights.

No, I do not see a good way to solve this problem, I think it will have to
be commercial shuttle flights between orbit and planetary surface for the
characters. However, the highport docking fees could well include one
shuttle trip to the surface and back for the ship's crew, so this would not
necessarily cause additional costs.

 

[zero]

The cargo will just be internal rooms now anyway. I like the idea of an emergency landing configuration too, but not that the spin hab has to be jettisoned, its a pain that they wont be aerodynamic enough to go down safely with my ship.

I guess some profits can go towards shuttle rides down to the planets and little adventures there.

Looks like deliveries will be made to the local Highport which can be shuttled down by the spaceport crew. Passengers have to go through customs anyway so they can be dropped off there and hopefully they got the shuttlefare to move on :roll: :lol:

Another thing; seeing as I'll be having an in-orbit only ship to begin with now, I hear alot about lift-off from worlds needing more fuel from the reaction drive or more Thrust, possibly down to DeltaV or w/e... can someone point out what Thrust, fuel consumptions and transit time would be needed for lift-offs (Mercury, Venus and Earth only) and why having shuttles to do this would be better?

Even at Thrust 1 the ship is bombing along at a fair old tick.

 

[Solomani666]

Take the diameter of the ring area in squares and multiply by three.
The resulting number is the length of the ring in squares.
This also allows for some clearance space between the ring and the outer hull.

 

[DFW]

Another thing; seeing as I'll be having an in-orbit only ship to begin with now, I hear alot about lift-off from worlds needing more fuel from the reaction drive or more Thrust, possibly down to DeltaV or w/e... can someone point out what Thrust, fuel consumptions and transit time would be needed for lift-offs (Mercury, Venus and Earth only) and why having shuttles to do this would be better?

Even at Thrust 1 the ship is bombing along at a fair old tick.

This will explain for Earth to orbit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propellant_mass_fraction

 

[zero]

About Solomani's explanation - is that right?

So if I have a length of squares for a ring and I divide that by 3, thats my radius in squares?

So If I had a ring of (for example) - 6 squares (30 ft long) and divide it by 3 = 2 squares (10 ft diameter), thats the diameter??

Good - I can use this in my Cstar game atm, set on an Arduous Class Frigate that has a Gravity Ring. 8)

 

[hdan]

About Solomani's explanation - is that right?

So if I have a length of squares for a ring and I divide that by 3, thats my radius in squares?

So If I had a ring of (for example) - 6 squares (30 ft long) and divide it by 3 = 2 squares (10 ft diameter), thats the diameter??

Good - I can use this in my Cstar game atm, set on an Arduous Class Frigate that has a Gravity Ring. 8)

Yes, though by "3" he really meant "3.1415927etc." (that is, "pi").

3 is close enough when you're on a grid.

 

[zero]

Excellent. I shall remember and note this for when the crew are within the Gravity Ring, using Spin Calc I can let them know a more exact simulated G

 

[Solomani666]

About Solomani's explanation - is that right?

So if I have a length of squares for a ring and I divide that by 3, thats my radius in squares?

So If I had a ring of (for example) - 6 squares (30 ft long) and divide it by 3 = 2 squares (10 ft diameter), thats the diameter??

Good - I can use this in my Cstar game atm, set on an Arduous Class Frigate that has a Gravity Ring. 8)

Yes, though by "3" he really meant "3.1415927etc." (that is, "pi").

3 is close enough when you're on a grid.

I figured the extra digits would be used to leave some space between the ring and the outer hull that contains the ring.

If the ring is too short in diameter, (as with all of the deck plans from CStar) you will get a severe coriolis effect that will cause your coffee to pour at an angle instead of straight downwards. People will also walk really funny and be prone to dizziness. It will simulate gravity at a really odd angle with respect to the floor.

A larger diameter ring will lessen the coriolis effect as the ring can spin more slowly to simulate 1G.

You will also want to stop the ring before performing any high G turning maneuvers. The ring will want to stay straight as the ship turns putting a TREMENDOUS strain in the supporting spindle.

It would be best to have two rings spinning in opposite directions on the same axis. Anything else causes a whole lot of problems. Helicopters have a tail rotor for a reason. Ever see a helicopter with a busted tail rotor? That will be your ship if it has to suddenly stop a single ring in order to start combat maneuvers. Without stopping the rotor it can't maneuver due the gyroscopic effect of the spinning ring. Stopping 2 rings spinning in opposite directions negates this effect.

Remember. CStar uses reaction fuel with few ships having more than a few hours of thrust at maximum G. Without two rings a ship would waste much fuel simply stabilizing itself to start or stop its gravity ring.

With 2 rings, the ship only needs electrical power to start or stop the rings.

Hope this helps.


.




.

 

[Imeanunoharm]

Ever see a helicopter with a busted tail rotor? That will be your ship if it has to suddenly stop a single ring in order to start combat maneuvers. Without stopping the rotor it can't maneuver due the gyroscopic effect of the spinning ring. Stopping 2 rings spinning in opposite directions negates this effect.

Remember. CStar uses reaction fuel with few ships having more than a few hours of thrust at maximum G. Without two rings a ship would waste much fuel simply stabilizing itself to start or stop its gravity ring.

With 2 rings, the ship only needs electrical power to start or stop the rings.

You bastard! You stole my analogy! I was literally reading all this fluff and was going to mention this as one of my greatest pet peeves in sci fi. Unless you have a frictionless bearing for the central axis, there is no real reason to to rotate a ring around it. You just rotate the whole ship! Central access included. Hasn't anyone here seen 2001?

In game terms the only reason you need to rotate a ship for grav, is when you have no grav plates, which probably also means no arm wavery frictionless bearings.