Ship Design Philosophy

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Engineering and (Im)pulsethrust Option

10. Minimal manoeuvring does not include long periods at full thrust, so solar power alone is useless for most commercial and military vessels.

On the other hand, if the issue is that the energy production of the solar panelling petered out due to the inherent power draw of the manoeuvre drive, than a second set of solar panelling can be installed, and activated alternatively to feed the manoeuvre drive.

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: Warhammer 40,000: Darktide - Official Gameplay Trailer

From the developers of the best-selling and award-winning franchise Vermintide, Warhammer 40,000: Darktide is a visceral 4-player co-op action game set in hive Tertium. Fight together with your friends against hordes of enemies in this new Warhammer: 40,000 experience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-UifdRoC8I

Looks like melee is back on the menu, boys!

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Engineering and One Shot Jump Drives

1. Seven one shots cost the same as the same sized default jump drive, so that by my calculations, in the most optimal of circumstances, that's twenty one transitions, which could easily take place in a year.

2. So a one shot would statistically only be used once every ten years.

3. Ironically, you would want a one shot that can move the greatest distance, which means a lot of factors that would make it attractive, low technological base and cheap price, are compromised.

4. Once performance is above jump three, you'e going to need some means to refuel.

5. You could get around that with drop tanks.

6. I assume that the fourth jump is at a penalty of minus sixteen; it would be an expensive form of death sentence, or a great new extreme sport.

7. I don't really see it as that feasible for a Devil's Island or St. Helena's one way exile ride, unless it's over a ten or twelve parsec rift.

8. The only feasible employment I see for it, besides a long storage lifeboat, is when the chances that the jump drive will be seriously damaged, or that it's unlikely to be used again, as during a kamikaze mission.

9. Or possibly a bombing raid, though I suspect casualties would have to be above ten percent to make it worthwhile: Thousand Bombers Over Dingir.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Tactics and Cold War Soviet Submarine Tactics

Explanation of the 4 most common Soviet Submarine tactics NATO observed during the Cold War. Ice Picking, Bottom Sitting, Laying on liquid sand (soil), and Station Keeping. Featuring Leroy's cousin, Ivan!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX9vwK4y3Ug

1. Asteroid picking

2. Dirtside sitting

3. Floating on the atmosphere

4. Tidal locked?

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Engineering and Fission Reactors


Fission: A fission plant requires radioactive elements as fuel. Fission drives only produce half as much power as a fusion drive of the same type – when calculating required power plant rating, work out the required rating for a fusion drive and then find the rating for a drive that produces twice as much power. For example, a 400 ton ship with manoeuvre and jump ratings of B requires a fusion plant with rating B. Cross-referencing B and 400 tons on the Performance by Hull Volume table gives ‘1’. A fission plant for that ship would have to be rating D or higher, as that is the minimum rating to get performance level ‘2’.

Fission drive fuel costs 1,000,000 Cr. per ton.

Power plants use the following table to determine how many tons of fuel they consume with a year of operation:

FISSION PLANT FUEL
Power Plant Power Plant A B C D E F G H J K L M N P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Tons of fuel per year 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48

Mongoose First Core


Fission power plants: Fission power plants: Page 109 of the core rule book (first printing) is now amended. Fission plants provide the same power as a fusion power plant and can provide any power performance level. However, they are twice the size and price of a fusion power plant. They are available at TL7.

POWER PLANT TABLE
Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6
% of displacement 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 5
Chemical power plants are 40% larger.
Fission power plants are 100% larger.
TL 8 to 10 fusion plants are 25% larger.
TL 15+ fusion plants are 25% smaller but cost twice as much.
Antimatter plants are the same size and are only available from TL 17.

Cost per ton is as follows:
Chemical power plants MCr 1.25
Fission power plants MCr 1
TL8–10 Fusion MCr 2
TL11–14 Fusion MCr 2.5
TL15 Fusion MCr 5

Mongoose First High Guard


Power Plant
Type Power per Ton Cost per Ton
Fission (TL6) 8 MCr0.4
Chemical (TL7) 5 MCr0.25
Fusion (TL8) 10 MCr0.5
Fusion (TL12) 15 MCr1
Fusion (TL15) 20 MCr2
Antimatter (TL20) 100 MCr10

Mongoose Second High Guard


And that's all she wrote, as far as I can tell.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Engineering and Fission Reactors

Of course, there's the Vehicular design process, which if I understand it correctly takes a cut of the space allocation, and for all practical purposes, doesn't need refuelling.

I don't think you can distill that down to apply it to a spacecraft template.

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: The Expanse – Season 5 Official Trailer

The future of The Belt has begun as Marco Inaros wages Armageddon against the Inners for a lifetime of oppression and injustice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caLji74IIp4&ab_channel=AmazonPrimeVideo

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Triple Deck Planes - Where Are They? And What Are They Like?

Triple-decked aircraft - why don't airlines fly them, what would they be like if they existed, and why we will never see their like again! Let us jump into this never-built video!

I do have to stress that yes, there are technically triple-decked aircraft flying today in the form of the Boeing 747 and Airbus A380. As in, they have three levels, two for passengers and one for cargo on the lower deck.

What we are talking about is aircraft with three levels for passengers throughout the aircraft and then in addition, a cargo deck. Truly a gargantuan aircraft monstrosity.

This aircraft design would be able to accommodate well over 1000 passengers in three different classes, with the very best in first class having their own private suites for long haul flights. Other features may include rentable bunks like a Japanese pod hotel, an onboard spa for passengers looking to relax, a business center to keep working while in flight, bars and dining establishments for airlines to earn additional revenue, and even gyms.

Although as we have said in our future aircraft cabin concept video, the idea of a gym onboard is perhaps not the best idea with access to showers (and plus, would airlines really want to carry the extra weight of dumbbells.

although... knowing airlines they would more likely try to cram as many passengers onboard as possible to earn as much money as possible. Let me know in the comments if you would fly on a high-capacity version of the plane.

This plane would be long haul, making sense only for flights across the world from Asia to Europe and North America between major hubs like Singapore, Dubai, London, and New York. These planes carry so many passengers that it would require a high-density route - lighter routes would make no financial sense and domestic short-haul routes, even New York to LA, would be impossible.

So you likely are halfway through this video and wondering, hey nick, this is all well and good and I'm enjoying the animations but surely this doesn't exist.

The first is the AWWA Sky Whale - now this plane is totally bonkers and relies on technology that's beyond even the latest James Cameron. But we can admire the artist's vision for an aircraft that has an evolution beyond what we currently have today.

The plane is a different take of what is known as the Breguet Range equation - how to fly as efficiently as possible.

They are propulsive efficiency (how efficient are your engines?); aerodynamic efficiency (is lift maximized and drag minimized?); and structural efficiency (how much payload can you carry?). Airlines naturally want the best engine and aerodynamic efficiency but then want to carry as much cargo, be it post or passengers, as possible.

Second, we have the more conservative DECK III concept that can be built today with current technology. Seemly a marriage between a Boeing 747, Airbus A380 and an Antonov An-225 Mriya.

But what about if we brought the concept to the current market using the aircraft we have today - like the Boeing 747 and Airbus A380?

After all, that cargo deck could be re-purposed for passengers and has been done so in the past. For example, The Lockheed Martin L-1011 had an option to turn the forward cargo deck into a boarding lounge with its own features stairway.

Another example of using the cargo area for passenger services was the Airbus A340. This plane had not only bathrooms on the lower level of the plane but also a galley with room for several passengers.

There are some issues.

1st - flexibility. As mentioned at the start of this video, these aircraft require substantial routes to operate on a profit, such as flying halfway across the world. Outside of these routes, they will not earn a dime for an airline despite costing well over half a billion to buy and more to operate over its lifetime.

Speaking of service, airports will have trouble getting access to the plane in order to stock food and fuel, with no ground cars able to reach that high. Airports will also need bigger and longer runways to land the planes, impossible for airports like Heathrow and JFK which already have space problems - and significant redesigns for taxiways and parking ramps.

Lastly, being a passenger onboard you could expect long boarding and disembarking times, a serious evacuation risk if you were involved in an accident and don't even consider getting a meal while its hot.

Before we go, a special mention of the Boeing 314 had three decks and was the mainstay for travel around the world for many years. But we will do a video on this incredible aircraft and where it flew in another video - so you will just have subscribe and tune in next time for my next video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncE_4Dm6Bd4

Basically, infrastructure, one of the reasons we never got to hundred thousand tonne battleships, and why the Royal Navy sort of wanted to stay in the thirty five kay range, and force everyone else there as well.

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Interstellar Navigation

Navigating the vast ocean of the galaxy to reach distant stars will be no easy matter, but future spaceships may find many new difficulties finding their way throughout space, and also throughout time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8u-rtHypvk&ab_channel=IsaacArthur

1. You'll precipitate before you hit serious trouble.

2. Jumping transmit data faster, and with less noise.

3. And if time is less of a factor, you can do that one parsec at a time.

4. I guess there can be times when that astronavigation degree comes in useful.

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Cockpitting and Sensor Stations

1. The extension to a cockpit costs a tonne and ten thousand starbux.

2. A sensor station is a tonne and worth a semimegastarbux.

3. The advantage to both is that they're one off costs, compared to that of a bridge, which is calculated on a default semimegastarbux per hundred tonnes.

4. Which sort of implies that tying any cockpit extension to a sensor like a station, shouldn't in theory have the same advantages or access.

5. Possibly you could overcome this with a computer programme.

6. At a minimum, additional cockpit extensions would have access and control of aerospace flight controls and onboard sensor suites.

7. It does leave open how this effects a station dedicated to astrogation, engineering, weapon systems, aerospace operations, and whatever else takes place onboard that I haven't thought of.

8. A barebones starship control system only needs flight controls, sensors, engineering, life support, security and astrogation.

9. That might pay off big for large freighters, since these would be one off costs, rather than per hundred tonnes.

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: The Complete Cyberpunk 2077 History & Lore! (Part 1!)

All Cyberpunk 2077 Lore, History & Events condensed into a two part series exploring everything from Night City and it's people, to Cyberware, Drugs, Bars, Public Transport, Trauma Team, Megacorps, the Corporate Wars, Combat Zones, Agriculture and Food in the US, Law Enforcement, Gangs, The Collapse, and other events and moments in the 2077 timeline that spawned in Cyberpunk 2013 and 2020.

Welcome to the Complete History & Lore of Cyberpunk 2077!

Timestamps:
0:00 - Intro & Housekeeping
1:13 - Samurai & Johnny Silverhand -
2:45 - Cyberpunk TTRPG Roots (2013, 2020)
4:34 - An Intro To Night City
7:40 - The People Of Night City
8:15 - Trauma Team
12:28 - Cyberware & Its History
17:00 - Drugs & Its History
21:30 - Bars In Night City
23:53 - Public Transport In NC
25:25 - Megacorps
27:20 - Corporate Wars
29:44 - Combat Zones
32:50 - The Rockerboy Movement
35:42 - Agriculture & Food In The US
38:41 - The Weapons Of 2020
42:52 - Gangs & Gang Types
48:10 - Obscure Cyberweapons
50:23 - Law Enforcement & The NCPD
53:53 - The Collapse Part 1
57:54 - The Net

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


The Complete Cyberpunk 2077 History & Lore! (Part 2!)

Timestamps:
0:00 - Housekeeping, Check Out Part 1
1:04 - Vehicles & CHOOH2
2:27 - Up & Coming Megacorporations
4:49 - Nomads, Nomad Nations & Their History
12:20 - Bioware
15:13 - The Eurodollar & Methods Of Payment
17:43 - Alt Cunningham & The Soulkiller
20:26 - The 4th Corporate War (Arasaka VS Militech)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Kr49KE9t9w

If the Imperium was seriously cyberpunked, it would explain the lack of resources devoted to interstellar Travelling.

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Star Wars: KSE Firespray-31 (Slave I) | Ship Breakdown

Spacedock breaks down the iconic pursuit craft of Jango and Boba Fett, the KSE Firespray (Slave I).

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

I doubt the ship has enough hardpoints, or firmpoints.

Looks like an elephant's head.

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: A Plane Without Wings: The Story of The C.450 Coléoptère

Throughout the 1950s, aircraft designers around the world began developing a unique aircraft configuration, called a tail-sitter. Unlike conventional airplanes, tail sitting planes rested on their tails and used engine power alone to lift off the ground before transitioning to vertical flight, and returning to land vertically once again on their tail. The configuration, although technically challenging to develop, would allow aircraft to operate without runways, fundamentally changing how and where air forces could use their aircraft.

In the early 1950s French aerospace firm SNECMA (Société nationale d'études et de construction de moteurs d'aviation) began developing wingless test rigs to prove the viability of the tail sitting concept. At the time, American firms were also developing tail sitting prototypes of their own, But SNECMA would take it a step further by developing a tail sitting aircraft with a highly unconventional annular (cylindrical) wing. The cylindrical wing promised greater efficiency over a conventional wing by eliminating wing-tip vortices. It would also be more compact, further reducing the space needed for vertical take-off and landings. French designers also theorised that a cylindrical wing could eventually be engineered to function as a ramjet engine, propelling the aircraft to supersonic speeds.

The C.450 Coleoptere was constructed in 1958, with tethered flight testing beginning in early 1959. By May, the unconventional plane had achieved its first successful unassisted hover, even reaching altitudes of 800 meters. Despite early successes during flight tests, flaws soon emerged in the aircraft’s design. The Coleoptere proved extremely difficult to pilot. An innovative pilot seat could swivel 90 degrees, but pilots still struggled to judge the aircraft’s distance from the ground while landing. Without a conventional wing to provide resistance, the Coleoptere also had a tendency to slowly spin on its axis.

On July 25, 1959, the Coleoptere performed it’s 9th test flight. This time, the pilot was to transition the aircraft from vertical to horizontal flight, a challenging procedure that would mark a huge milestone for the program. The Coleoptere lifted off successfully, but during its transition, it suddenly became too inclined and slow-moving to maintain altitude. The aircraft started tumbling back to earth as the pilot struggled to regain control, barely managing to eject at the very last minute. The Coleoptere was destroyed.

A second prototype of the Coleoptere would never be built. By the 1960’s it was clear that the tail sitting configuration was a dead-end. It was simply too much of a compromise when it came to payload and range, and far too difficult to pilot. It was clear that vectoring thrust, allowing the aircraft to remain horizontal, was a more practical and safer solution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unz6mfjS4ws&ab_channel=Mustard

1. Probably solved with fly by wire.

2. Seems more likely mated with reactionary rockets.

 

[Condottiere]

 

[Condottiere]

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Hull, Armour, and Anti-torpedo bulge

The anti-torpedo bulge (also known as an anti-torpedo blister) is a form of defence against naval torpedoes occasionally employed in warship construction in the period between the First and Second World Wars. It involved fitting (or retrofitting) partially water-filled compartmentalized sponsons on either side of a ship's hull, intended to detonate torpedoes, absorb their explosions, and contain flooding to damaged areas within the bulges.

Essentially, the bulge is a compartmentalized, below the waterline sponson isolated from the ship's internal volume. It is part air-filled, and part free-flooding. In theory, a torpedo strike will rupture and flood the bulge's outer air-filled component while the inner water-filled part dissipates the shock and absorbs explosive fragments, leaving the ship's main hull structurally intact. Transverse bulkheads within the bulge limit flooding to the damaged area of the structure.

The bulge was developed by the British Director of Naval Construction, Eustace Tennyson-D'Eyncourt, who had four old Edgar-class protected cruisers so fitted in 1914. These ships were used for shore bombardment duties, and so were exposed to inshore submarine and torpedo boat attack. Grafton was torpedoed in 1917, and apart from a few minor splinter holes, the damage was confined to the bulge and the ship safely made port. Edgar was hit in 1918; this time damage to the elderly hull was confined to dented plating.

The Royal Navy had all new construction fitted with bulges from 1914, beginning with the Revenge-class battleships and Renown-class battlecruisers. It also had its large monitors fitted with enormous bulges. This was fortunate for Terror, which survived three torpedoes striking the hull forward, and for her sister Erebus, which survived a direct hit from a remotely-controlled explosive motor boat that ripped off 50 feet (15.25 m) of her bulge. On the other hand, the bulges to Glatton nearly led to a disaster in Dover Harbour on 11 September 1918. Glatton caught fire in her 6" cordite magazine and had the potential to explode in proximity to a loaded ammunition ship. The admiral on hand ordered the Glatton scuttled to prevent a catastrophic explosion. The first attempt to do so with 18" torpedoes failed due to the protective effect of the bulges. Half an hour later, a larger, more powerful 21" torpedo was able to sink the Glatton by striking the hole caused by the initial, ineffective hit.[1]

Older ships also had bulges incorporated during refit, such as the U.S. Navy's Pennsylvania class, laid down during World War I and retrofitted 1929-31. Japan's Yamashiro had them added in 1930.

Later designs of bulges incorporated various combinations of air and water filled compartments and packing of wood and sealed tubes. As bulges increased a ship's beam, they caused a reduction in speed, which is a function of the length-to-beam ratio. Therefore, various combinations of narrow and internal bulges appeared throughout the 1920s and into the 1930s. The external bulge had disappeared from construction in the 1930s, being replaced by internal arrangements of compartments with a similar function. An additional reason for the bulges' obsolescence was advances in torpedo design. In particular, the proximity fuze allowed torpedoes to run beneath a target's hull and explode there, beyond the bulges, rather than needing to strike the side of the ship directly.[when?] However, older ships were still being fitted with new external bulges through World War II, particularly US ships. In some cases this was to restore buoyancy to compensate for wartime weight additions, as well as for torpedo protection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-torpedo_bulge


Torpedo belts

It was not until 1922, in the wake of the Washington Naval Treaty that curtailed ship weights and with the introduction of the British Nelson-class battleships, that a true layered torpedo belt was introduced. The two Nelsons used a water-filled belt, which was written off in the tonnage limits, as water was not part of the calculations for allowed displacement. Over the next 20 years many innovative designs of TDS were tried by various nations.

A warship can be seriously damaged underwater not only by torpedoes, but also by heavy naval artillery shells that plunge into the ocean very close to the targeted ship. Such shells which are usually armor-piercing shells (AP shells) can pass through a short stretch of water and strike the warship some distance below the waterline. In 1914 typical AP shells were expected to punch a hole in the exterior plate and detonate there with a destructive effect similar to a torpedo. However by the 1940s, advances in AP shell technology incorporated delayed fuses which give AP shells deep penetration capability before exploding; such AP shells will typically make a smaller hole than a torpedo in breaching a ship's hull, but detonating beyond the belt in the hull can cause splinter damage to machinery spaces and secondary magazines, which in turn compromises watertight integrity and encourages progressive flooding.[1] To improve protection against both shells and torpedoes, an air space can be added between the torpedo belt and the hull to increase the buoyancy of the warship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_belt

1. The only example of composite armour we have are nickel iron of the planetoids, and whatever the current cutting edge of the technology level applied would be.

2. It would basically be spaced armour, but using the fuel tanks, partially or wholly filled with water.

3. While in the rules drop tanks are treated as rather fragile, they would fulfill the role of torpedo bulges, attached to the correspondingly vital areas of the spaceship you'd want to protect.

4. It would, in theory, explain the curious belts of fuel tanks widely distributed in deckplans.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Sensors and How Sonar Works (Submarine Shadow Zone) - Smarter Every Day 249

This is the document you want to read:
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqqaYs7LjlM

1. Two dee picture, when the three dee projector is knocked out.

2. For visualization, ray tracing?

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Japan developing wooden satellites to cut space junk

By Justin Harper
Business reporter, BBC News

A Japanese company and Kyoto University have joined forces to develop what they hope will be the world's first satellites made out of wood by 2023.

Sumitomo Forestry said it has started research on tree growth and the use of wood materials in space.

The partnership will begin experimenting with different types of wood in extreme environments on Earth.

Space junk is becoming an increasing problem as more satellites are launched into the atmosphere.

Wooden satellites would burn up without releasing harmful substances into the atmosphere or raining debris on the ground when they plunge back to Earth.

"We are very concerned with the fact that all the satellites which re-enter the Earth's atmosphere burn and create tiny alumina particles which will float in the upper atmosphere for many years," Takao Doi, a professor at Kyoto University and Japanese astronaut, told the BBC.

"Eventually it will affect the environment of the Earth."

"The next stage will be developing the engineering model of the satellite, then we will manufacture the flight model," Professor Doi added.

As an astronaut he visited the International Space Station in March 2008.

During this mission, he became the first person to throw a boomerang in space that had been specifically designed for use in microgravity.

The wood it is using is an "R&D secret" a spokesman for the company told the BBC.

Space junk
Experts have warned of the increasing threat of space junk falling to Earth, as more spacecraft and satellites are launched.

Satellites are increasingly being used for communication, television, navigation and weather forecasting. Space experts and researchers have been investigating different options to remove and reduce the space junk.

There are nearly 6,000 satellites circling Earth, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF). About 60% of them are defunct (space junk).

Research firm Euroconsult estimates that 990 satellites will be launched every year this decade, which means that by 2028, there could be 15,000 satellites in orbit.

Space junk travels at an incredibly fast speed of more than 22,300 mph, so can have cause considerable damage to any objects it hits.

In 2006 a tiny piece of space junk collided with the International Space Station, taking a chip out of the heavily reinforced window.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55463366

You could grow spaceship hulls; gravitational motors should take care of atmospheric friction.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Accommodations and Welcome Aboard the R-100

Here we take a tour of the inside of the R-100, and see what it was like to travel in the giants of the 1920's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-4P-6b3lFI&ab_channel=AirshipHeritageTrust

1. Essentially, long range starships are giant gasbags.

2. Staircases, galleries and open space indicates a luxruious use of common space, at the expense of stateroom allocation.

3. Actual weight being more of an issue, than volume occupied.

4. Push of small staterooms, pull of extensive common areas.

5. Crew ladders.

6. Crew curtained off cubicles.

7. Control car.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Launch Facilities and THE MANDALORIAN S02 E08 - EMERGENCY DOCKING IN THE TIE-FIGHTER LAUNCH TUBE, BO-KATAN, LAMBDA SHUTTLE

THE MANDALORIAN S02 E08 - EMERGENCY DOCKING IN THE TIE-FIGHTER LAUNCH TUBE - BO-KATAN, BOBA FETT, GROGU, BABY YODA, DIN DJARIN, CARA DUNE, BO-KATAN, FENNEC SHAND, MOFF GIDEON, DARK TROOPERS, LAMBDA, IMPERIAL SHUTTLE, IMPERIAL LIGHT CRUISER, TIE-FIGHTER, STAR WARS, CHAPTER 16, Disney+ --- THE MANDALORIAN stars Pedro Pascal, Gina Carano, Carl Weathers and Giancarlo Esposito. Directors for the new season include Jon Favreau, Dave Filoni, Bryce Dallas Howard, Rick Famuyiwa, Carl Weathers, Peyton Reed and Robert Rodriguez.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srErwdmOiL4&ab_channel=SFAxis

Well, no launch tube, more of a an optimized hangar and launch facility, and to be fair, it's a light cruiser.

Considering the TIE Fighter is spherical, the smart thing for a quick reaction alert interceptor would be dangling underneath the cruiser on docking clamps, not an actually unknown posture for the Imperial Navy.