Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: New Planets  (Read 29464 times)

Offline Skydock Command

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
New Planets
« Reply #50 on: November 04, 2006, 05:42:40 PM »
It dosent take many people to operate the space port, why a space program? It would take a lot for an offworld colony though....
Logged
Savant Computer: Communications link established.
Skydock: This is Skydock Command. We have received your message.

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
New Planets
« Reply #51 on: November 04, 2006, 09:25:33 PM »
To go to another planet that could support a colony would be futile because of the time and distance required.  This is really some that would happen after the humanity was going strong and needed to spread out.
Logged

Offline Skydock Command

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
New Planets
« Reply #52 on: November 05, 2006, 07:27:27 AM »
Quote
To go to another planet that could support a colony would be futile because of the time and distance required.  This is really some that would happen after the humanity was going strong and needed to spread out.
I can understand that, but it wouldnt take that long to reach another planet. NASA has developed new reactor and engine systems that would get you to mars in just a month and a half. Whith thier advanced technology, id asume they might do it in a week or so. But, they didnt do much space technology development untill the Blight came in....
Logged
Savant Computer: Communications link established.
Skydock: This is Skydock Command. We have received your message.

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
New Planets
« Reply #53 on: November 05, 2006, 05:17:49 PM »
A month and a half to mars put up some proof of that.  If NASA is sending a probe that isnt another thing its small and doesnt carry a human payload.  There are reasons why you cant go very fast and its all be cause of G Force.

Taking the TECH that is used in OP2 you have ION drives and Chemical Rockets thats it.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2006, 05:19:17 PM by Freeza-CII »
Logged

Offline Rags

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
New Planets
« Reply #54 on: November 06, 2006, 10:02:01 AM »
What about developing some new techs? like the anti matter drive or something. Lets not restrict ourselves to only the technologies used in op2
Logged

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
New Planets
« Reply #55 on: November 06, 2006, 01:02:58 PM »
because op2 was based on tech tht humans could possibly make or had some plauseblity to them.  Antimatter drives are star trek i think we need to keep techs from movies and tv shows out of the game.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2006, 01:04:37 PM by Freeza-CII »
Logged

Offline Rags

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
New Planets
« Reply #56 on: November 07, 2006, 09:12:42 AM »
antimatter drives are plausible.  

scientists has already begun studying this problem with funding from NASA. Since you can't store antimatter in a regular fuel tank, NASA has found ways to capture antimatter created in the lab before it annihilates itself.

One method involves keeping magnetized antiprotons in a container of frozen hydrogen. The magnetic field and the deep cold would keep the particles from bouncing into the walls and destroying themselves.

Either way, NASA expects the stored material would most likely take the form of tiny crystals, or "nanosnowflakes" of antihydrogen. Which then can be split to give off energy.

sorry to nitpick but it and techs like it are in the realm of possibility.

 
Logged

Offline CK9

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6226
    • http://www.outpost2.net/~ck9
New Planets
« Reply #57 on: November 07, 2006, 09:38:53 AM »
an event like that in OP2 just mihgt happen before we bring it to a usable setting
Logged
CK9 in outpost
Iamck in runescape (yes, I still play...sometimes...)
srentiln in minecraft (I like legos, and I like computer games...it was only a matter of time...) and youtube...
xdarkinsidex on deviantart

yup, I have too many screen names

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
New Planets
« Reply #58 on: November 07, 2006, 07:43:11 PM »
Antimatter as a power source might be in the forseeable future (waaay forseeable). But antimatter driven, faster than light (or subspace) drives are much further down the road. It takes considerably more research to even harness the power of an antimatter reaction for energy, let alone to drive an interstellar engine.

This might be a technology to work toward for end game. (i.e. leave New New Terra / Cythera with an antimatter drive) But it might be beyond the resource capability of the last of the humans.

(And antiprotons aren't magnetized, but they are held in a magnetic field. The magnetic field controls an electric field. The antiprotons are actually held by the electrically charged field, and the electric field is controlled by the magnetic field. It works similar to a TV. A magnetic torid was another method of containment.)
Logged

Offline Rags

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
New Planets
« Reply #59 on: November 09, 2006, 08:13:48 AM »
Damn. you got me
Logged

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
New Planets
« Reply #60 on: November 09, 2006, 04:53:24 PM »
Off topic: Amazingly, star trek got the antimatter containment correct. And actually had some realistic science on combining and controlling the reaction. However, the only useful antimatter drives current science can come up with is the "bang" theory. You push an antimatter bomb out the back of a space ship and blow it up. The pressure wave propells the space ship. (The russians came up with this idea but for nuclear bombs.)

How would you like to get kicked in the pants by an a-bomb?   :heh:  
Logged

Offline Vexhare

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
New Planets
« Reply #61 on: November 10, 2006, 11:24:44 AM »
Sounds mighty interesting, I bet china steals the tech from us before we can use it.
Logged

Offline Skydock Command

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
New Planets
« Reply #62 on: November 11, 2006, 06:11:47 AM »
Quote
A month and a half to mars put up some proof of that.  If NASA is sending a probe that isnt another thing its small and doesnt carry a human payload.  There are reasons why you cant go very fast and its all be cause of G Force.
 
I forget where I saw it, and its not a probe. They redesgined some engin system to use nuclear reactors and now it can get to mars in less then two months.

Ill go look for the adress.
 
Logged
Savant Computer: Communications link established.
Skydock: This is Skydock Command. We have received your message.

Offline Skydock Command

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
New Planets
« Reply #63 on: November 11, 2006, 06:14:59 AM »
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solars...m/mag_beam.html

Hahahaha, I was way off with that nuclear reactor, and the time it would take to get there. Imagine, just 50 days....
« Last Edit: November 11, 2006, 06:18:07 AM by Skydock Command »
Logged
Savant Computer: Communications link established.
Skydock: This is Skydock Command. We have received your message.

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
New Planets
« Reply #64 on: November 11, 2006, 07:30:52 AM »
You still have to get the receiving station to the destination. It can't get there under the same type of power...
Logged

Offline Skydock Command

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
New Planets
« Reply #65 on: November 11, 2006, 07:39:19 AM »
Thats only for short distances I think. If we luanched the Casanoga with this, it could coast and contiunusly slow down, then spin around and use the fusion engine to slow itself even more, thus reaching its destianion in a mere 30 years or so, not a century.
Logged
Savant Computer: Communications link established.
Skydock: This is Skydock Command. We have received your message.

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
New Planets
« Reply #66 on: November 12, 2006, 01:15:42 PM »
The Conestoga (or Casanoga as the case may be  ;) ) is already enroute. You can't change it's engines now...
Logged

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
New Planets
« Reply #67 on: November 12, 2006, 01:59:54 PM »
In Op2 Eden and Plymouth Both came from the same ship they were split up on the same planet so it was clear that trying to go to another planet wasnt going to happen.

The problem with the nuclear power is you cant refuel the ship so easy.  you would have to land on a planet and get the ore and then refine it using strong magnetic fields.  With the ION drive you pull up to a Gas Giant and suck some hydrogen off of it and keep going.

the Distance between planets is like city blocks the distance between Solar systems is cross country.  But at the speeds your going it would be like walking.  Because of the distance and the problem of finding a planet that supports life or would even be suitable for a colony (like new terra) is astromonical.  It would be like diging in your back yard looking for oil.  Sending probes would still take the same amount of time And by the time the message got back to you things would have all ready changed greatly.  Interstellar possible is there is a planet that could support a colony. Intergalactic Not going to happen the distance is to great to risk 50% of the entire human race.
Logged

Offline Skydock Command

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
New Planets
« Reply #68 on: November 12, 2006, 05:54:22 PM »
Guys, you know I was talking about if we have to evacuate Cythera. If they need to evacuate, and they need to evacuate FAST like something will blow up the planet, an ion engine would take years to get up to speed.  So, this could be used for the plot. (Note: I know this probably wont work, but they realy only need one station and its not like they cant fly off on there own after the beam is cut.)
Logged
Savant Computer: Communications link established.
Skydock: This is Skydock Command. We have received your message.

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
New Planets
« Reply #69 on: November 12, 2006, 07:30:58 PM »
Chemical Rockets cheap and effective. Very fast.
Logged

Offline Sirbomber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3238
New Planets
« Reply #70 on: November 12, 2006, 07:54:44 PM »
Maybe we should plan on moving away from "Somebody released a terrible plague/disaster/doomsday weapon, run away" and "The aformentioned terrible plague/disaster/doomsday weapon is going to kerplode the planet, we must go to space" and find something more original?
Logged
"As usual, colonist opinion is split between those who think the plague is a good idea, and those who are dying from it." - Outpost Evening Star

Outpost 2 Coding 101 Tutorials

Offline Rags

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
New Planets
« Reply #71 on: November 13, 2006, 07:04:47 AM »
Any suggestions Sirbomber?
Logged

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
New Planets
« Reply #72 on: November 13, 2006, 06:46:14 PM »
What the hell is this thread about again? Are we talking about colonizing additional planets or evacuation? <_<  
Logged

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
New Planets
« Reply #73 on: November 13, 2006, 09:21:54 PM »
i am sure its about colonizng other planets.
Logged

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
New Planets
« Reply #74 on: November 13, 2006, 09:37:55 PM »
I still don't think colonizing another planet while you're currently building a new civilization.

1) You barely have enough people to eek out an existence as it is.
2) It took the resources of an entire planet to make a starship last time. Granted, it wouldn't need to be as large but...
3) What would be the driving component to force the populace into co-colonizing another planet?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up