Ship Design Philosophy

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Armaments, Increased Size, and Turrets

Does customized increased size effect the size of turrets, or the number of weapon slots allocateable?

No, with quad turrets as a yardstick, you could increase the size to one hundred thirty three percent, and you can still stuff in three increased size turret weapons into a one tonne turret.

 

[Sigtrygg]

What you have for point defence depends on your paradigm for ship combat.

If it is cartoon action hour cinematic bullshit then you can have Star Wars WWII fighter pew pew bollocks, with PC ships having shields that get all the way down to 2% until they run away or kill the bad guy,

But for combat in space that is a bit more realistic then point defence becomes critical for swatting incoming missiles and drones.

 

[Condottiere]

Usually cinematically inspired.

 

[Sigtrygg]

have you spotted the big difference between ship combat in the Expanse and BSG?

 

[Condottiere]

Yes.

Closest we have to that are fragmentation missiles, but that's not exactly cheap.

Turret railguns aren't rated point defence, so maybe dirtside kinetic weapon systems with fragmentation shells.

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: Spaceship Battle in the Atmosphere

All models, textures, animations, and effects were done by me. Except for the sound effects which I gathered and put together. It took about a year to make, of almost constantly working.

Wouldn't really try this, unless my starwarships were dead slow, in which case, I couldn't really manoeuvre or evade in any event, and forcing my opponent into dogfight mode is likely to penalize them more than me.

 

[Condottiere]

Starwarships: NOVA CLASS BATTLESTAR | The greatest colonial warship ever built | Battlestar galactica lore

Hello hello, today, we talk about a topic suggested by a member of SCIs patreon. The one, the only, the biggest baddest ship in all of battlestar galactica fandom. The Nova class battlestar, a fan made ship of impossibly stupid proportions. So settle in as we go on an adventure to discover the origins of this ship along with some other silly BSG facts and tidbits.

1. Probably not worth it.

2. You have to protect Twelve Colonies, plus outposts.

3. And then there's maintenance and repairs.

4. Maybe it could clone itself.

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: Battlestar Galactica (1920) | Fritz Lang Style |

//Let's imagine what current movies/series would be like in 1920..//

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Engineering, Manoeuvre Drives, and Vectoring

1. Currently, you can vector the "lift" of a manoeuvre drive at a right angle at twenty five percent efficiency.

2. Most inhabited planets seem to be smaller than Terra.

3. But if you happen to be on Terra, technological level nine manoeuvre drive factor one will only provide a quarter gee lift, if you embed it horizontally on a bellylander.

4. Embed it vertically in a tailsitter, it would neutralize, theoretically, Terran gravity.

5. You probably would need a reactionary rocket, presumably factor one, to lift off and reach orbit.

6. For a bellylander, you probably want manoeuvre drive factor five, to provide lift and forward propulsion.

7. That would get you a quarter gee to apply to reach orbit, if you just intend to float away.

8. However, you could angle rearwards, at let's say, forty five degrees, but without some supporting force, you both fall forward and have propulsion.

9. Which, at this point, I suppose you need a lifting body and/or wings.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Engineering, Manoeuvre Drives, and Vectoring

A. With surplus lift, if you vector it towards the rear, you have both propulsion and lift.

B. If angled correctly, you sacrifice some propulsion for enough lift that the spacecraft doesn't fall forward, and you won't need wings to create the missing lift.

C. To make things more relatable, think of a small flying saucer.

D. You have a factor three manoeuvre drive embedded vertically, which means you could blast your way vertically to orbit.

E. Vector it slight away from centre, opposite the direction you want to go, minimum one factor for lift, and let's say fractional gee to move in that direction.

F. It's probably not linear, but if it were, that would be 240°, maybe 247.5° lift neutral.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Engineering, Manoeuvre Drives, and Vectoring

G. Centre of gravity, through the positioning of the manoeuvre drive module(s), might be important.

H. If they are embedded in the front, the backward tilt, when in flight, would be more noticeable.

I. This might actually make the spacecraft faster in level flight, if embedded vertically.

J. To keep it level, you' have compensate with a slightly sharper angle.

K. Or maybe embed it at an angle.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Engineering, Manoeuvre Drives, and Vectoring

L. Manoeuvre drive factor two embedded at 225° would be lift neutral on Terra, if vectored downwards at forty five degrees.

M. Considering twenty five percent efficiency at right angles, it's probably two hundred thirty and a half degrees.

N. If you shift the manoeuvre drive closer to hundred eighty degrees, the more you can allocate as horizontal propulsion.

O. I don't think this is the same as grav motors in air/rafts.

P. That's probably a field effect, that will manipulate the anti gravity cloud is on to fall forward, or any other direction required.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Armaments and Prep Time

1. A meson or particle accelerator spinal mount takes twenty four to fifty four minutes to power up from a safe state.

2, Conceivably, you could surprise a cruiser or a battleship with it's pants down.

3. I tend to think that a well drilled gunnery crew can do this faster.

4. But, this aspect has not been incorporated.

5. It would be more interesting to find out how long it takes to kickstart a drive or power plant.

6. At the other end of the scale, turret mounted lasers, and presumably loaded, railguns, sandcasters, torpedo tubes, and missile racks, default to one to six minutes.

7. Small fusion bays would need eight minutes forty five seconds to fifteen minutes.

8. Railgun spinal mounts would have a quickdraw of sixteen to thirty six minutes.

9. Maybe less surprise, more unprepared.

 

[Condottiere]

Starship: The Tailsitter

1. There are easier options.

2. First, you have to clarify why you want to design this type of ship.

3. Then, you can figure out how you can design it.

4. For me it tends to be about costs, construction and operating.

5. Then, hull configuration and tonnage.

6. The problem with reactionary rockets (besides being gas guzzlers), is that you need heat shielding, which is extraordinarily expensive in Traveller.

7. At best, you have a hybrid arrangement, currently referred to as high burn thrusters, which would give the necessary lift for escape velocity, while the manoeuvre drive acts as anti gravity lift.

8. The manoeuvre drive fulfills two purposes, constant acceleration, and no need for heat shielding during atmospheric reentry.

9. With a factor three manoeuvre drive, you wouldn't need rocket assist.

 

[Condottiere]

Starship: The Tailsitter

A. The first type of spacecraft that seems most suited to the concept is the dropship.

B. The military use is to deliver troops to the desired landing zone(s).

C. Civilian would be for passenger and cargo delivery.

D. Create enough lift, and it becomes a wireless elevator, that can carry passengers and cargo to orbit, usually a space station.

E. You could make the space station geostationary.

F. The dropships could be various shapes and sizes, but that would depend on traffic.

 

[Condottiere]

Starship: The Tailsitter

Why the Roci Lands on her tail

In the Books when the Rocinante lands on planets she lands on her belly. BUT as we see in the Expanse Seson 4 landing Video. she now lands on her tail. I suspect this is why

nolanwhite1876
2 years ago
This isn't why the Rocinante lands on her tail, it's because of the floor orientation.

However this specific landing was intentionally designed to mirror the Blue Origin landing, as a nod to Amazon for helping save the show, giving way for three more seasons.

The Expanse Season 4 Comic-Con Sneak Peek | 'Rocinante Lands on Ilus' | Rotten Tomatoes TV


Synopsis: With the Ring Gates now open to thousands of new planets, a blood-soaked gold rush begins, igniting new conflicts between Earth, Mars, and the Belt. Meanwhile, on one unexplored planet, the Rocinante crew gets caught in a violent clash between an Earth mining corporation and desperate Belter settlers as deadly new threats from the protomolecule emerge.

You can veer off to find a more suitable landing area.

 

[Condottiere]

Starship: The Tailsitter


The Expanse - Bobbie Arrives On Earth


A highly thought provoking scene from season 2, where we see for the first time how Martians deal with Earth's gravity. A fascinating insight and an excellent sequence I thought.

1. Inertial compensation would eliminate felt acceleration.

2. Add an extra gee to that, and reverse gravity to that, you could walk on the ceiling without feeling the gravity from the local gravity well.

3. Possibly, you could orientate that to the walls at ninety degrees, if the inertial compensation field is tweaked.

4. Interesting question would be if while falling, the drop ship activates the vertically embedded factor one manoeuvre drive.

5. Does everything come to a sudden stop, or is it a breaking effect?

6. Manoeuvre drive likely functions differently from vehicle gravitational motors, that probably reject gravity, and therefore should come to a sudden stop.

7. With a manoeuvre drive, I suppose it would be the drop ship's terminal velocity within an atmosphere.

8. Frictionless, it should be escape velocity, but in reverse.

9. Presumably, on Terra, you'd slow down to a controlled landing at some point where a continual acceleration of factor one would nullify velocity maybe a metre above the landing area.

 

[Condottiere]

Inspiration: Sci-fi inspired tractor beams are real, and could solve a major space junk problem

By Harry Baker published October 29, 2023

Researchers are developing a real-life tractor beam, with the goal of pulling defunct satellites out of geostationary orbit to alleviate the space junk problem.

In science fiction films, nothing raises tension quite like the good guys' spaceship getting caught in an invisible tractor beam that allows the baddies to slowly reel them in. But what was once only a sci-fi staple could soon become a reality.

Scientists are developing a real-life tractor beam, dubbed an electrostatic tractor. This tractor beam wouldn't suck in helpless starship pilots, however. Instead, it would use electrostatic attraction to nudge hazardous space junk safely out of Earth orbit.

Sci-fi inspired tractor beams are real, and could solve a major space junk problem

Researchers are developing a real-life tractor beam, with the goal of pulling defunct satellites out of geostationary orbit to alleviate the space junk problem.

www.livescience.com

Tweak a particle accelerator?

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Why Don't They Launch Rockets From Mountains Or The Equator?

Why aren’t we taking full advantage of the planet we’re living on? If we launched rockets from mountains, they'd be closer to space where the air is thinner so we could use more vacuum optimized engines.

Or why don't we launch rockets from the equator? The Earth is moving quite quickly at the equator which gives a substantial boost in the initial velocity of the rocket. I mean it’s free energy right? How much of a difference does launching rockets from different locations actually have?

Today we’re going to dive into the physics of launching rockets from different spots on the earth. We’ll go over the pros and the cons of launching from mountains or closer to the equator in great depth and see if we can figure out why exactly we just don’t see rockets launching from these locations all that often if at all.

Prerequisite "Orbit VS Suborbit" -

• The MASSIVE difference between orbit ...

00:00 - Intro
02:45 - Launching from a mountain
12:45 - Launching from the equator
20:10 - Summary

1. Nozzle volume.

2. Urban proximity.

3. Support logistics.

4. Compromise.

5. How would this effect factor one manoeuvre drives?

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: The MASSIVE difference between orbit and sub-orbit

Today we’re going to dive into the differences between space and orbit, dive into orbital velocity and the Karman line, some rundowns on orbital mechanics and things like apogee and perigee, how, when and why exactly astronauts experience zero g.

00:00 - Intro
02:05 - Space vs Orbit
02:55 - Zero G and Weightlessness
05:15 - Is there gravity in space?
07:28 - Where does space begin?
08:45 - Kármán line
11:05 - Apogee and Perigee
13:55 - Orbit vs Sub-Orbit
19:15 - Summary and final thoughts

1. Pulled in all directions.

2. Karman Line one hundred klix.