Ship Design Philosophy

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Engineering and Propulsion

1. How small can you manufacture a gravitational based manoeuvre drive?

2. Something is propelling the fifty kilogramme missiles, which we usually assume are reactionary rockets.

3. Even if the reactionary rocket required technological level doesn't always sync up with the stated technological level of the missile.

4. So reactionary rockets, completely scalable.

5. Logic would indicate the minimum size of a gravitational based manoeuvre drive to be fifty kilogrammes, based on minimum five tonne hull.

6. Possibly, thirty five kilogrammes, after thirty percent deflation.

7. Then I recalled factor/zero reaction control thrusters.

8. Spacecraft design places them at half percent, therefore seventeen and a half kilogrammes to twenty five kilogrammes.

9. Spacestations at quarter percent, twelve and a half to eight and three quarters kilogrammes.

 

[Condottiere]

Starwarships: The Return of the TIE Avenger (and Why TIE Fighters are Awesome)

Spacedock delves into the return of the classic TIE Avenger in #andor season 2.

Aggressive aesthetic.

Burst laser.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Engineering and Propulsion

A. How small can you make a spacecstation?

B. Since hull design more or less follows spacecraft, that would be five tonnes.

C. Since a control centre is minimum ten tonnes, you'd have parts sticking out.

D. So, you'd have to virtualize it, and let the computer run it.

E. In theory, an unmanned satellite.

F. Since, there's unlikely to be much volume left to accommodate a human.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

1. I can't figure out the published version.

2. And if I did, I suspect I wouldn't want them, or bother installing them.

3. The carronade was designed as a short-range naval weapon with a low muzzle velocity for merchant ships, but it also found a niche role on warships.

4. The carronade can be seen as the culmination of a development of naval guns reducing the barrel length and gunpowder charge. The Carron Company was already selling a "new light-constructed" gun, two-thirds of the weight of the standard naval gun and charged with one sixth of the weight of ball in powder before it introduced the carronade, which further halved the gunpowder charge.[4]

5. The smaller gunpowder charge reduced the barrel heating in action, and reduced the recoil.

6. Simplifying gunnery for comparatively untrained merchant seamen in both aiming and reloading was part of the rationale for the gun.

7. The reduced charge allowed carronades to have a shorter length and much lighter weight than long guns.

8. Carronades also required a smaller gun crew, which was very important for merchant ships, and they were faster to reload.[citation needed]

9. The Royal Navy was initially reluctant to adopt the guns, mainly due to mistrust of the Carron Company, which had developed a reputation for incompetence and commercial sharp dealing.[8]

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

A. The carronade was initially very successful and widely adopted, and a few experimental ships were fitted with a carronade-only armament, such as HMS Glatton and HMS Rainbow.[8]

B. Glatton, a fourth-rate ship with 56 guns, had a more destructive broadside at short range than HMS Victory, a first-rate ship with 100 guns.

C. Glatton and Rainbow were both successful in battle, though the carronade's lack of range was a tactical disadvantage of this arrangement against an opponent who could keep out of carronade range, but within the range of his long guns.[citation needed]

D. In the 1810s and 1820s, tactics started to place a greater emphasis on the accuracy of long-range gunfire, and less on the weight of a broadside.

E. The carronade was a popular armament among Anglo-American opium traffickers.[9]: 11 

F. Its light weight meant that opium traffickers could maintain both speed and asymmetrical force projection in Asia.[9]: 11–12

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

G. So, our carronade takes up four hardpoints.

H. Though, only takes up four tonnes of volume.

I. Which is less than a barbette.

J. And that, we can install on three firmpoints.

K. So, that seems somewhat incongruous.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

L. Consequently, naval tactics in line of battle counted on the effect of rapid broadsides at short range, to which the carronade could make a significant contribution.

M. Generally, although the power of the "smashers", as they were called,[2][11] was acknowledged, most captains continued to prefer long guns.[citation needed]

N. To summarize, carronades can be nasty surprises to vessels that approach smaller ships too closely.

O. Gunnades, introduced around 1820, are distinct from the earliest carronades, which also featured trunnions.

P. In the late 18th century, a new type of cannon was developed in Britain which was a cross between a cannon and a carronade, called a "cannonade" (not to be confused with the term cannonade which refers to rapid and sustained artillery fire or the act of firing as such).

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

Q. So, underpowered, short ranged, high damage.

R. Easy to operate, which could be disputable.

S. Easy to install, which sort of excludes four hardpoints.

T. In the last edition, I'd say firmpointed barbettes, which take up two firmpoint slots.

U. I guess I'd stick with that choice, in this update.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

V. I don't think it's mentioned, how many times you multiply the damage from a carronade.

W. Optimistically, sixteen raw dice worth.

X. I suppose, we could take the fusion barbette, default five dice, and times that by three.

Y. Plus, we get the strong residual force, which provides us with armour piercing three and radiation.

Z. At twenty power points, and four megastarbux.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

1. Is a carronade a worthwhile investment?

2. Probably not.

3. On the other hand, a firmpointed fusion barbette might be accessible to commercial shippers.

4. It's not cheaper, and it's unlikely to differ in handling to the default fusion barbette.

5. The fact that the range drops to adjacent might make it legal for freighters.

6. Energy requirement drops to fifteen power points.

7. Customization would allow range increase to close.

8. Depending on your interpretation, you could have a firmpointed barbette every full seventy tonnes of hull.

9. So that a seven hundred tonne freighter, you'd have room for ten firmpointed barbettes, or seven hardpointed barbettes, or, a combination of both.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

A. You could, in theory, use this method to increase the number barbette missile and torpedo barbettes, by forty two percent.

B. Of course, they're still subject to the two tonne additional requirement.

C. No, I don't know why that was added in.

D. And if a requirement for the firmpointed variant, why the other firmpointed barbettes aren't subject to it, either.

E. So, aside from missile and torpedo barbettes, the idea is to get into dogfight range.

F. And, of course, once you're in dogfight mode, you can shoot off energy weapon systems, until you run out of power.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

G. Or, they melt down.

H. Instead of improving them, you could also make them cheaper.

I. I wouldn't pick energy inefficiency for dogfighting weapon systems.

J. At this range, inaccuracy probably doesn't matter.

K. Inflated size might not matter, either; though it would uniqueize it.

 

[Condottiere]

Startrucks: Engineering and Why Did Shields Change? (And Why They Fail)

Deflector Shields, defensive screens or a starship's forcefields are all well and good when they work, but often we see them fail. What does "shields at 60%" actually mean? How do they fail and go offline and why do they change shapes? This video aims to explore the lore around them to answer such questions, thanks for watching this Star Trek lore theory and analysis!

1. Porous.

2. Bubble and hull conformed sheath.

3. Bubble weaker due to stretched thinner energy field.

4. Also, applicable to jumping.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

L. So, what you want carronades for?

M. It's a weapon system, that if the opponent knows is onboard, makes him reluctant to get too close.

N. If he doesn't, it comes as a nasty surprise.

O. Has to be fairly inexpensive to own and maintain.

P. And, in effective range, has an overpowering effect.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

Q. The problem is, engagement ranges are likely to increase.

R. And there aren't that many hardpoints to distribute.

S. What might be preferable, is a weapon system that can demonstrate some flexibility.

T. Sandcaster and missile designers are sadly unimaginative.

U. The obvious choice is a short ranged missile, with a fat warhead.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

V. There's a fifty percent chance that a missile gets lost after half an hour.

W. So, you design missiles with only a five round endurance.

X. Assuming default reactionary rocket, acceleration factor ten would be twenty percent rocket, and twenty five percent fuel.

Y. You reach very long range in four rounds.

Z. Forty five and seven eighths kilogrammes makes up the warhead and guidance package of the default standard missile.

 

[Condottiere]

Misjump: You can never go home.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

1. Which leaves us thirty seven and a half kilogrammes for fuel and propulsion.

2. We alter the weights, and the percentages change as well.

3. Likewise, with the percentages.

4. Half the fuel tank, and the missile weighs 72.91666666666667 kilogrammes.

5. Propulsion now makes up 22.85714285714286%.

6. That's potentially a tad above acceleration factor eleven.

7. Going by our hand time of arrival chart, with acceleration factor twelve, long range is achievable, immediately.

8. Doesn't alter with acceleration factor fifteen.

9. Though, for very long range, it pips the lower acceleration by one round.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

A. If we assume that Robots is correct, that torpedoes have a default endurance of twenty rounds, or two hours.

B. Then the standard torpedo has a twenty percent propulsion, plus fifty percent fuel tank.

C. That leaves a hundred kilogramme warhead, and guidance package.

D. A technological level fourteen advanced torpedo would be thirty percent propulsion, and thirty percent fuel tank.

E. Assuming highly technologized reactionary rockets.

F. Which would a one and one third hundred kilogramme warhead and guidance package.

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft: Armaments and Carronades

G. We take the standard torpedo, and cut it in half.

H. You could call it a half arsed torpedo.

I. The propulsion and fuel tanks make up forty percent of volume.

J. Increase propulsion to twelve percent, and fuel tank takes up eight percent.

K. Default endurance at full power would be sixteen minutes, or a tad over two rounds.