Updated Vehicle Handbook in the works

Geir said:
I was thinking of that, but didn't know the stat (or didn't look it up, anyway - you don't have to know anything anymore, except how to ask a question...) so... that's 1.255 people per square metre???
Click to expand...
By comparison, a hot racked Solomani Accommodation Block that houses three shifts has a density of .67 people per square metre.
 
Condottiere said:
High rise.
Click to expand...
Right. The actual issue is square metres based on the number of floors, on average. Or cubic metres or Spaces or dtons. And the flying city works out to ~15 dtons per person.

What the Kowloon Walled City, looked like is 10-14 stories throughout (yes, and alleyways), but just going with 12 stores ~ 36 metres, then (one coffee math): 45 cubic metres per person, or 3.22 dtons. High Guard medium accommodations is 4 dtons per person. I'm using 40 Spaces = 10 dtons per person for medium accommodations, 16 =4 for poor, and lower than poor, 'low' (all based on the SOC DM) 8 = 2 dtons - that's for SOC 0-2, so I don't feel so bad about my numbers... even if we are comparing it to the most crowded location on Earth. The walled city is gone, but Dharavi in India probably holds the title now - the Wikipedia photos don't make it look like it goes up to anything like 10 stories, though.
 
I have to say, I like that you're looking at creating a city with the new vehicle creation rules. Is Traveller: Mortal Engines on the horizon?
 
Seffix said:
I have to say, I like that you're looking at creating a city with the new vehicle creation rules. Is Traveller: Mortal Engines on the horizon?
Click to expand...
If you want to build it. I still want to build a city in a giant nuclear-powered monowheel city. In one of Alistair Reynolds books there a city on a rail track that migrates to avoid getting burnt to a crisp (and I do have railroad rules, but... they don't consider anything other than basically standard gauge... you'll need probably a bunch of those in parallel. And you can do the same on the moon to keep constant sunlight for solar panels - easier if you do it closer to the poles, but even at the equator it's only 15ish kph, or Idle Speed.

The premise evolved from wanting to do structures as a type of vehicle - since everything but locomotion sort of applies to the surface and interior of a structure. And then, well you can build a Highport with with High Guard, so why not a Downport out of structures and surfaces (and tunnels - you've got a tunneller, let tunnellers tunnel) and well, lifters came back with the Starship Operators Manual (and helps better explain how those Type As land and take off from Size 8+ worlds without straining the engines) so it can be used for a flying city. Or an arcology that does not fly, or, I suppose a suburban neighborhood with a golf course (is that a garden or a park? - probably park). Or an underwater city, or a city that is a giant submersible or surface ship following the currents or chasing migratory fish-like things.
 
Geir said:
If you want to build it. I still want to build a city in a giant nuclear-powered monowheel city. In one of Alistair Reynolds books there a city on a rail track that migrates to avoid getting burnt to a crisp (and I do have railroad rules, but... they don't consider anything other than basically standard gauge... you'll need probably a bunch of those in parallel. And you can do the same on the moon to keep constant sunlight for solar panels - easier if you do it closer to the poles, but even at the equator it's only 15ish kph, or Idle Speed.

The premise evolved from wanting to do structures as a type of vehicle - since everything but locomotion sort of applies to the surface and interior of a structure. And then, well you can build a Highport with with High Guard, so why not a Downport out of structures and surfaces (and tunnels - you've got a tunneller, let tunnellers tunnel) and well, lifters came back with the Starship Operators Manual (and helps better explain how those Type As land and take off from Size 8+ worlds without straining the engines) so it can be used for a flying city. Or an arcology that does not fly, or, I suppose a suburban neighborhood with a golf course (is that a garden or a park? - probably park). Or an underwater city, or a city that is a giant submersible or surface ship following the currents or chasing migratory fish-like things.
Click to expand...
2312 by Kim Stanley Robinson had one too. The city of Terminator rides on an elevated track that expands in the heat of the Mercurial day. The expansion of the tracks pushed the city-train forward, IIRC. The back end had a big heatshield to block direct sunlight.
 
Last edited:
Geir said:
If you want to build it. I still want to build a city in a giant nuclear-powered monowheel city. In one of Alistair Reynolds books there a city on a rail track that migrates to avoid getting burnt to a crisp (and I do have railroad rules, but... they don't consider anything other than basically standard gauge... you'll need probably a bunch of those in parallel. And you can do the same on the moon to keep constant sunlight for solar panels - easier if you do it closer to the poles, but even at the equator it's only 15ish kph, or Idle Speed.

The premise evolved from wanting to do structures as a type of vehicle - since everything but locomotion sort of applies to the surface and interior of a structure. And then, well you can build a Highport with with High Guard, so why not a Downport out of structures and surfaces (and tunnels - you've got a tunneller, let tunnellers tunnel) and well, lifters came back with the Starship Operators Manual (and helps better explain how those Type As land and take off from Size 8+ worlds without straining the engines) so it can be used for a flying city. Or an arcology that does not fly, or, I suppose a suburban neighborhood with a golf course (is that a garden or a park? - probably park). Or an underwater city, or a city that is a giant submersible or surface ship following the currents or chasing migratory fish-like things.
Click to expand...
I don't like the lifters. A1 Free Traders shouldn't be able to land on higher than a 1G world.
 
According to canon, you can make a soft planetary landing with a manoeuvre drive factor/zero.

Which has the additional virtue of being a manoeuvre drive, so you won't need to install heat shielding.
 
Condottiere said:
According to canon, you can make a soft planetary landing with a manoeuvre drive factor/zero.

Which has the additional virtue of being a manoeuvre drive, so you won't need to install heat shielding.
Click to expand...
The idiot who wrote that doesn't understand simple physics. 1G - 0.25G = 0.75G of acceleration towards the ground. How is that supposed to be a soft landing?
 
The brick falling towards the ground will reach terminal velocity for its surface area, at which point air resistance and weight cancel each other. It is then a simple matter of using your m-drive deceleration to cancel that terminal velocity.
 
Sigtrygg said:
The brick falling towards the ground will reach terminal velocity for its surface area, at which point air resistance and weight cancel each other. It is then a simple matter of using your m-drive deceleration to cancel that terminal velocity.
Click to expand...
Just less than terminal velocity is still not a "soft" landing. As you slow down using a combination of air resistance and your M-drive, the slower you go, the less air resistance that you have and the more M-drive you need to overcome it. At terminal velocity, it would be in balance, but you are still speeding towards the ground. Someone would have to do the math to know for sure, but I do not see how your statement makes any sense. If I do an orbital jump out of a ship to a 0.75G planet, I am still dead when I hit the ground from massive blunt force trauma. What is the terminal velocity for 0.75G and an Earth-like atmospheric density? Use the same brick in both scenarios.
 
MasterGwydion said:
Just less than terminal velocity is still not a "soft" landing. As you slow down using a combination of air resistance and your M-drive, the slower you go, the less air resistance that you have and the more M-drive you need to overcome it. At terminal velocity, it would be in balance, but you are still speeding towards the ground. Someone would have to do the math to know for sure, but I do not see how your statement makes any sense. If I do an orbital jump out of a ship to a 0.75G planet, I am still dead when I hit the ground from massive blunt force trauma. What is the terminal velocity for 0.75G and an Earth-like atmospheric density? Use the same brick in both scenarios.
Click to expand...
What about a landing on a heavy-gravity world with no atmosphere at all?
 
MasterGwydion said:
Just less than terminal velocity is still not a "soft" landing. As you slow down using a combination of air resistance and your M-drive, the slower you go, the less air resistance that you have and the more M-drive you need to overcome it. At terminal velocity, it would be in balance, but you are still speeding towards the ground. Someone would have to do the math to know for sure, but I do not see how your statement makes any sense. If I do an orbital jump out of a ship to a 0.75G planet, I am still dead when I hit the ground from massive blunt force trauma. What is the terminal velocity for 0.75G and an Earth-like atmospheric density? Use the same brick in both scenarios.
Click to expand...
Using an engineer to put the lifter/M-0 into overdrive sounds like an option here... until he fails a roll, the sparks start flying and your ship turns into the metaphorical equivalent of a sperm whale and a bowl of petunias.
So big... Round... Ground... I wonder if he's friendly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Ship vs vehicle cost
2 3
Replies
58
Views
2K
MasterGwydion
M
T
Please Mongoose Fix the Vehicle Handbook
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
6K
tytalan
T
T
Vehicle handbook update request
Replies
19
Views
1K
Condottiere
C
M
Grav Locomotion in the RH on high-G planets?
Replies
0
Views
280
MasterGwydion
M
T
Fixing Vehicle Fusion plants
Replies
10
Views
1K
tytalan
T
Back
Top