Outpost Universe Forums
Projects & Development => GORF => Hall of Fame => Topic started by: Gagagigo3 on October 11, 2006, 01:18:57 PM
-
I thinked about if it would be fun if you could colonize other planets with orther habitats with that ship Conestoga :op2:
But there would be more editting, right?
I just need YES or KNOW from an admin and im ready
[REALLY just YES or NO]
-
lol that kindya rude of you say just yes or no admin. if get look try compling to format that suppose too.
Though think good idea for cool if game was not so limit only a planet.
-
It would be cool if we could colonize entire solar systems. Even asteriods and moons and stuff. And build space stations all over with difernet tasks like a lab or a mine or a colony on a space station.
-
But why? If you can barely survive as it is you're not going to make yourself weaker by spreading out. That's like somebody saying they're going to cut off their arm so they have less to feed.
-
he obvouis vague cause more think op1 how chose planet you going colonize :P
-
I think it would be brilliant if you could colonize other plants, but as Sirbomber pointed out - we're talking about the last survivors of the human race. They hardly have the resources, population or motive to spread out like that.
Remember what happened when the original Edenists decided to split into two colonies to increase their chance of survival.... didn't work out too well, did it?
-
This sounded like you wanted a multipul starting planet choice. like here, here, or there. A interesting idea but then you might have to makes or tweak the story for each planet because the environment its self would have alot to do with the goings on.
-
The main story and the campaign will be about New Terra and Cythera. Other planets wouldn't fit in too well.
For Skirmish mode, however, it would be possbile. In that case the player would be allowed to choose from different planets with different environments, which may not stand in any relation to the original story.
Some problems might be caused by the techtree that we are making for Cythera and not some other totally different planet.
-
Well if we had a mode like the campain missions or what ever they were called but not then main campain, we could have a totaly new way of play. We could star out with a map of the know area from the explorations of the Casanoga before they found New Terra, then go to picking a landing site, making the colonies, exploreing the area of space around and then make space sations and stuff.
-
The point to new terra was that it was the closest that would support life. They passed by alot of planets that couldnt you wouldnt want to land on them and try to live there because you would just be confined to the colony for the rest of your life. Humanity can not survive in a cage.
-
well, seeing as how the blight terraformed new Tera, eventually it will run out of material to break down, and it would effectively starve to death
perhaps as the star ship is fueling on the gas giant they could come by this information (the sky dock was also a com relay), and thus would choose to go back to New Tera rather then risk another trip to the stars
New Tera would have a new atmosphere, but it still would not be breathable by humans, why? because of the intense volcanic activity would spew tons of C02 and sulfur compounds into the atmosphere, making it toxic, so from a game play stand point they would still have tubes and sealed buildings, and war would still be fought by robots
-
i dont see why it would ever be fought by humans with there being so little of them
-
In the novella, only one starship was finaly luanched in time, yet there are two skydocks that were operational. If we are to have eden and/or plymouth back, we must think of an excuse as to WHY they are still alive. Did the other faction modify the Skydock to support life for 400 people, not just the regular 6 as the crew working to build the startship? Did they hide on one of New Terras moons? What?
-
well sustaining people in suspended animation in orbit would require a lot less resources than sending them off to another star
so I could see them adopting a wait it out strategy if they were not able to fully construct the star ship
-
Moons are alot farther then a skydock orbit it would take alot more to get there
-
The Skydock isn't the starship. It's just a satellite that allows launched starship modules to be built in to the starship. "Our Skydock will function as an orbital command post. In addition to docking facilities for our launch vehicles ferrying components and technicians, it serves as a command and control facility for construction of our starship." Like the name of it kinda suggests.
But yes, there were two starships. One (Plymouth's, no matter which novella you follow) was incomplete, however. Maybe it was marginally completed so that it could get to one of the moons.
-
Is there any confirmation that new terra has a moon or moons i know there seems to be one in the main screen for op2.
-
Two moons are shown at the same time in the vidio clip things. So there are two moons whether or not anything esle mentions them.
-
Well i would rather go by what the novella says because those might be disproportionate planets
-
Well i would rather go by what the novella says because those might be disproportionate planets
THAT close to New Terra?
-
why would it need to go to a moon when it can just wait it out in orbit?
-
why would it need to go to a moon when it can just wait it out in orbit?
Because they wouldn't be waiting it out.
-
in orbit or on a moon its still waiting cant stay on moon or in orbit forever
-
But why? If you can barely survive as it is you're not going to make yourself weaker by spreading out.
I disagree.
Why? Becuse if some "accident" happens at for example New Terra and no one can survive at the planet, than everything depends on onther people on other planets/asteroids
How ever, if those other colonys where made beyond homeplanet, they are going to be run by CPU, not you. You could just set material sending, people shipment, food, earth and oxygen shipment and all these materials needed for building the base.
I think that this idea is good.(thumbsup)
-
I agree as well, but the colonies will be run by people. In game yes CPU but novella and other things it must clearly stae run by people. The other colonies need a human commander.
Why cant we control the other colonies dircetly to make a change, yet most of the time not run by you? I think that would be a good idea.
-
you dont realize you cant repopulate the human race with 20 people lol
-
If they had offworld colonies then you could easly evacuate one.
-
you dont realize you cant repopulate the human race with 20 people lol
Then why in God's name did I waste a valuable misison "liberating" Plymouth's Gene Bank?!
-
because its the right size to hold a keg a most important part on a starship
-
you cant repopulate the human race with 20 people lol
No you can't but, when they have appropriate medical care, DIRT and nursery and humans "repopulate" themselves, you will repopulate Human Race.
(thumbsup)
-
you dont realize you cant repopulate the human race with 20 people lol
I know you cant, but they had 400 people when the left New Terra. When they get 500 or 600 then they could have the population needed to run offworld stations, while still keping the main colony on the new homeworld operational.
-
How ever, if those other colonys where made beyond homeplanet, they are going to be run by CPU, not you. You could just set material sending, people shipment, food, earth and oxygen shipment and all these materials needed for building the base.
You could create Multiplayer Campaign [i know this idea may sound "what...?"] in where a good (thumbsup) player can launch a starship and ''goodies''
'with it and then another player controls that colony in a different environment. But save games will have to save on the server or the game should run fultime, wich means there have to be no enemies or you will be attacked while you SLEEPING... :'(
But...there could always be another way, like my project FOSOG i will start next week...you know FOSOG [Fulltime Outpost Strategically Online Game] I could make a "multiplayer campaign" there.
Enough writing: PS: look for my poll for my gamename
-
shipments of materials that is bad very bad because shipment in the future would have the same problem that shipments on earth have. Late or dont show up for what ever reason. And that makes me think that the game would turn into space trading economy game which isnt op2ish.
-
Your right.
-
This whole idea would work but not in OP3. It would have to be "OP6" or something like that where there are thousands or millions of people again and they are all at different planets or something.
The only logical reason I could see a "new planet" being used in OP3 (or really a moon, a planet is a stretch) is if Cythera didn't have some resource that they needed (or it was very difficult to get a resource). For the sake of assumption let's assume that it was impossible to mine rare ore -- but for some reason a moon contained rare ore in its crust.
If that were true however it wouldn't justify actual human habitation. Mining (in OP2) is done by robots so there would be no reason it couldn't be done by robots on a moon as well.
Furthermore the idea over-complicates the game, because the game is an RTS the player is not going to want to worry about activity on multiple planets.
Keep in mind that the Genesis team wants ideas that would improve OP3 (as an RTS based on OP2), not ideas that would radically change the whole design / idea of the game! Adding extra planets or FPS views or anything like that doesn't fit in well with the concept of an RTS.
Same with some other ideas like burrowing units. This is not starcraft and a robo-dozer cannot burrow underneath the Creep.
-
Why would they need hundereds of thousands of people? Why not just a few thousand?
-
I think the idea of a remote mining colony could be a possibility. It is engrained in the novella in the form of the Gulag missions and such. One could have 2 windows, hitting tab switches between them. For the sake of simplicity, the non-active colony could be run using a highly simplified engine. To those who have played the X-Universe series, this would be equivilent to OOS (Out Of Sector) where combat is based on weapon strength values vs shield/hull strength values to calculate who wins and how much damage is given. This would require a second minimap window to keep tabs on the base. Popluation and resources would have to be for each base but you could have a way to send convoys between your bases. Maybe the farther the bases are supposed to be apart the longer it takes for the convoy to go from one game screen to the next. just an idea and my brains are turning to mush. I might finnish this idea later if there is interest but right now I need to sleep.
Brian
-
Mining colonies on other planets? Well, let's look at what you'd need for such a project:
Starship (obviously)
Miners
Surveyors or EDWARD Sat
Trucks
Dozers (maybe)
Earthworkers
Defenses
Command Center
Structure Factory
Vehicle Factory
Smelters
Agridomes
Residences
Med Centers
Nursery and University
Spaceport
Power Sources/Solar Sat(s)
Observatory and Meteor Defenses (Eden)
At this point, you'd be better off just building a real colony. It would cost too much and need too many people to operate. The ore mined would also take too long to get back to the main colony and most of the metal (for Plymouth) would have to be spent on SULVs to get to and from orbit. They'd also have to design a new SULV that can land, or they'll have a VERY hard time getting the metal down to the colony without teleportation. (Eden of course has the already heat-shielded RLV, making it only slightly more feasible for them. Of course, they would still need one for each colony.)
-
The X universe games are 3D sim with trading and all that the mines and all the factories in that game have workers and robots but they dont have you manage that stuff because it would be over whelming and it would completely kill the way the game works.
BUILDINGS NEED WORKS AND SOME TIMES SCIS YOU CANT HAVE A ROBOT CONTROLLED COLONY :P
managing one colony is bad enough but now you want to manage the other with a small mini screen i say f*** that there is more to a colony that can be shoved on a mini screen unless that screen is like 1248x1024
-
Mining colonies on other planets?
.....
At this point, you'd be better off just building a real colony. It would cost too much and need too many people to operate. The ore mined would also take too long to get back to the main colony and most of the metal (for Plymouth) would have to be spent on SULVs to get to and from orbit. They'd also have to design a new SULV that can land, or they'll have a VERY hard time getting the metal down to the colony without teleportation. (Eden of course has the already heat-shielded RLV, making it only slightly more feasible for them. Of course, they would still need one for each colony.)
No no no... Mining colonies on the same planet. Why would all types of ore be in one location? Maybe the current area of play has more than enough common ore on the map but only has one or two single bar rare beacons on it. From priliminary scans when the starship got to the planet, there might be 6 or so other sites that were thought to be possible starting colony sites except for maybe the terrain was too rough to be able to start with. Now that the colony is up and operational but lacking in rare ore, it would the available resources to send a detachment of vehicles to secure and prepare the site. Then you send some ConVecs with base making gear and some cargo trucks, etc. If you have enough workers and scientists available, you have the vehicles/kits built and ready, and you have enough food and ore to sustain a colony till they become operational, this would be very feasable. I was thinking that once another colony is up, there would be a "Convoy beacon" at the edge of the map supposedly in the direction of the colony.
managing one colony is bad enough but now you want to manage the other with a small mini screen i say f*** that there is more to a colony that can be shoved on a mini screen unless that screen is like 1248x1024
Yet again people seem to be completely misunderstanding what I am trying to convey. The layout would not be all that different from the current OP2 layout. The only real difference would be that instead of one minimap in the top right corner, there would be a second. Just below the second minimap would be a button to switch between which colony you are actively managing at a particular moment. Think of it like Alt+Tabing between windows.
If there are any other points that need clarifying just let me know.
-
In the novella, only one starship was finaly luanched in time, yet there are two skydocks that were operational. If we are to have eden and/or plymouth back, we must think of an excuse as to WHY they are still alive. Did the other faction modify the Skydock to support life for 400 people, not just the regular 6 as the crew working to build the startship? Did they hide on one of New Terras moons? What?
that would not work as Eden blasted off in search of a new planet in a new star system, if you could just wait off one of the moons then eventually the blight would consume everything and destroy itself and the colonists could resettle back on new terra in the same type of sealed buildings. If that was going to happen then why did both colonies want to waste so much time and energy in building star ships. much more sensible to just relocate to one of the moons and carry on from there.
-
Wait, instead of u controlling both of colonies in the 2 windows, why can't we have a "savant" system where a savant computer (AI) controls the basic fuctions of the secondary colony and the human player stepping in to quarterback the major decsions and if there is an attack or something?
-
I think this might be an option for a single player campaign. Mostly like "Go out on a mining mission for the main colony." The results when you go back to the main colony would depend on your performance setting up the mining colony.
Good job = Steady income of ore
Okay job = less ore
Bad job = a trickle of ore (or none?)
Your main colony could continue to "run" while you're gone. So the longer you spend away, the higher chances of something bad happening.
But I think the idea of running multiple colonies (especially in multiplayer) would be overly tasking for the scope of games most people play.
-
It sounds ok, but I dont think people would like to come back to find there colony wiped out by an earthquake, or starved to death.
-
WITH so much ore on one planet why in the hell would you spend all your resources to go to another planet for more ore.
The What IF things you keep talking about. what IF a earth quake happened what IF a vortex happened ect. If the people of New Terra played that WHAT IF game they would have died in space.
It seems to me that you guys want this to be more like a Intergalactic MMORTS.
The possible amount of planets that could support a colony are astronomicaly small. Asteroid dont form in every system. They formed in our solar system because The Sun Mars and Jupiter all having a pull effect on what would have been the 5th planet. But yes Asteroid would be a good source of Ore and if there in the system that makes them closer but most arent big enough to support any thing.
-
I see your point. Why not a space station, that is atached to an asteriod at one end? It could mine the asteroid, ship the ore back and then go on to another one.
-
Distance is a MAJOR factor. Your not going to be sending ore from one colony to the other because its just to far they dont have any Faster Then Light drives and Warp cores. The ORE will not be MAGICALY beamed back to the planet. They have ION drive and Liquid/Solid Booster Tech Ion drives arent that fast and Liquid/Solids dont have the fuel capacity.
Attaching to a asteroid is another problem one that doesnt need to be bothered with the game but in the style of OP2 there is science behind why you cant. You Attach some thing that big to a asteroid your going to change the way it moves or make it start to move and a asteroid has alot more mass compare to any space ship. You could Tow the asteroid in to a shared orbit with the planet or make it a new moon. that would get it closer but you still have to deal with the time and its pretty damn risky to bring some thing that can be mined into orbit. We are talking End of the planet type sizes. Interstellar or Intergalactic mining just isnt a good idea because of the logistics.
-
Again, I think the game is mostly about survival. With 200 people, you're probably not going to spend so much time and resources to spread out over a second moon. Or mine an asteroid when there would be plenty of ore to support a colony of that size. (Or to support even several thousand)
Yes, the colony has the capability to build a spaceship. But the last time they only built it because they HAD to. It would take a lot of time and work to create a starship big and powerful enough to make mining asteroids worth while. And at that, it would not be instantaneous.
They have ION drive and Liquid/Solid Booster Tech Ion drives arent that fast and Liquid/Solids dont have the fuel capacity.
This is very true. It takes months and years for an ion drive to come up to full speed (though it is much more efficient than a chemical propellant). Chemical propellants are not efficient enough to push large amounts of material. You would need very large scale production facilities for this. Again, it would take a lot of manpower.
My suggestion earlier (about a "mining outpost" mission) was more of a campaign type game. And there is more behind my idea of a time dependent mission than should be posted in this thread.
-
It's not just 200 people. In reality, it's somewhere in the thousands. Population was low ingame for gameplay purposes.
-
I'm not sure that really changes my point much. I was trying to stay in scale with the game. So even if we're talking about 20,000 people, I still don't think you'd want to spend the resources. How many people does it take for our manned space program? Yeah, now we'll argue that it's not a manned mission to mine an asteroid. But we're also debating colonization of moons and other planets.
Or was the point of this thread to be able to choose your initial planet? (Like in OP1)
-
It dosent take many people to operate the space port, why a space program? It would take a lot for an offworld colony though....
-
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.
-
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....
-
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.
-
What about developing some new techs? like the anti matter drive or something. Lets not restrict ourselves to only the technologies used in op2
-
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.
-
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.
-
an event like that in OP2 just mihgt happen before we bring it to a usable setting
-
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.)
-
Damn. you got me
-
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:
-
Sounds mighty interesting, I bet china steals the tech from us before we can use it.
-
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.
-
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solars...m/mag_beam.html (http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/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....
-
You still have to get the receiving station to the destination. It can't get there under the same type of power...
-
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.
-
The Conestoga (or Casanoga as the case may be ;) ) is already enroute. You can't change it's engines now...
-
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.
-
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.)
-
Chemical Rockets cheap and effective. Very fast.
-
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?
-
Any suggestions Sirbomber?
-
What the hell is this thread about again? Are we talking about colonizing additional planets or evacuation? <_<
-
i am sure its about colonizng other planets.
-
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?
-
Seconded.
For curious people FTL (faster than light as stated in battlestar gallactica) speed is said, until contradiction occur, to be impossible. THe more you approach the speed of light the more heavy you are so you move more faster in time. Example X go to A FAST SPEED for one hour. Y on the other hand stayed on earth. X came back from is speed trip and realise that Y is now 1 year older (random numbers to explain the damn thing). The more you approach the speed of light, the more energy you need to keep going faster because the faster you go the more heavy you are.Even the light seem to be traveling NEAR C constant value but, not beeing equal with C.
Most individuals are accustomed to the addition rule of velocities: if two cars approach each other from opposite directions, each travelling at a speed of 50 km/h, one expects that each car will perceive the other as approaching at a combined speed of 50 + 50 = 100 km/h to a very high degree of accuracy.
At velocities at or approaching the speed of light, however, it becomes clear from experimental results that this rule does not apply. Two spaceships approaching each other, each travelling at 90% the speed of light relative to some third observer between them, do not perceive each other as approaching at 90% + 90% = 180% the speed of light; instead they each perceive the other as approaching at slightly less than 99.5% the speed of light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_...cial_relativity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_special_relativity) for more info
Hope you guys understand my explanation.
-
yes my lord that was so easy to understand. Thank you so much
-
FTL and warp drives (for the Trekkies out there) work on a different theory than relativity. What you said is correct, but it doesn't apply to FTL and Warp. Those are space bending theory and not "pushing" matter up to the speed of light.
-
Yes. FTL is merely moving in Normal Space faster than the speed of light, whereas Warp (AKA Hyperspace, Wormholes, etc) bends space, making the two points (source and destination) closer together, meaning that the distance between them and hence the time it takes to travel between them is much less. Try the old folded paper trick: draw two points, and draw a line between them. The line is the distance you need to travel from A to B. What if you bend the paper? Instantaneous translation. This form of travel has not been disproven as much as moving FTL has.
Anyone here played I War or read the Nights Dawn Trilogy. I war had quite a good physics in it, and both the game and book's jump system was quite detailed and believable. In I War, jumps had to be made at a Lagrange Point (a point in space where all the gravitational fields cancel each other out - one exists very close to us between the earth and moon), they also had an LDS (linear displacement s...) drive for speeds up to the speed of light (but not including). The Night's Dawn Trilogy had drives that tear a wormhole in space, with the length of the tunnel dependent apon the amount of energy you put into making it, hence jumps had to be made when travelling in the direction of the destination.
-
I was just stating that the FTL drives used in BSG are not normal space drives. They are space bending.
Space bending (unified theory) was the one thing Einstien was upset with himself for. He never explained it to his satisfaction. He certainly proved that you can't travel faster than the speed of light (without bending space/time). As far as I know, nobody has disproven space bending. It just requires absurd amounts of energy.
-
like the philidelpha experiment. lol
-
When it comes to a Space craft that is going to carry the human race. You want some thing that is
1. Reliable
2. Wont have a reactor leak and turn every one into mutants.
3. Easy to use
4. Fuel can be found for it easy.
5. Some that is sturdy and can take some hits before you have to land.
FTL and Warp drives are nice and all but they dont exsist and as above would require so much power that 75% of your ship would have to be the reactor/power suply. And concidering the ship has to hold People and Resources for a new colony. thats a rather large ship. Which would need more power to stay in orbit. Because of Mass vs gravity.
The ION Drive is the best way because all you have to do is stop and fuel at a gas giant and there going to be in almost every Solar System. And yes I realize hydrogen can explode most violently.
-
*cough* challenger *cough* H bomb *cough*
Indeed...I just began to read about modern physics so there are things that I have yet to find out about it ;)
-
for one, for hydrogen to explode, there has to be oxygen, because this is a fusion reactor and not a chemical one there is no oxygen to burn, so the worst that could happen is the hydrogen leaks out
another thing is that you could consider the ships in op2 to be sleeper ships, they travel much slower then light for hundreds of years carrying the people in suspended animation, thus more realistic engines can be used (at the cost of more advanced and fictional medical technology stasis systems and all that) so no ftl needed
-
I'm thinking more of a pressure explosion than anything. Hydrogen is not very energy dense so you need a massive amount of it.
This means that you need to store the hydrogen at spectacular pressures, on the order of 30 MPa (earth atmosphere = about 101~102 kPa) or higher. The chance of a bad explosion if there was a fault in the container storing the hydrogen at that pressure would be very high.
-
in reality they store hydrogen in the form of a liquid, so the chance of a freak explosion is pretty low
-
Yes Explosive Decompression would be the big thing and leaks but those two go hand in hand some times. But Hydrogen leak could explode hehehe.
by the way Challenger was a Rocket Booster the skinny white ones on the side. That has the critical O-ring failure. The Big orange tank holds Liquid O2.
-
WARP DRIVE DISCLAIMER
It should first be noted that warp drive relies on not one but several leaps of faith and suspensions of disbelief. Even though it can and has been argued by leading modern physicists that warp drive works in theory, any plausible explanations involve more energy than could possibly be generated by even a matter-antimatter reaction. Additionally, several of the key components of warp travel - subspace, warp fields, warp energy, and the like - have multiple and contradictory definitions and descriptions, even within the episodes themselves. There are, therefore, several points where we will simply have to guess or assume how something works, or simply pass it off as the work of the magical Paramount Field, which defies the comprehension of, or manipulation by, mere mortals such as ourselves who are grounded in the realm of 21st century physics. I believe the following footnote from the Next Generation Technical Manual, page 64, says it best:
"Early in the series, Patrick Stewart came up and asked how warp drive worked. They explained some of the hypothetical principles described in the sires, but added that such a device is far beyond present-day physics. We emphasized that no one has any real idea how to make a ship go faster than light. "Nonsense," Patrick declared. "All you have to do is say 'Engage.'" And he was right..."
Just as a note, why not? Engage.... ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! (other side of galaxy) lol
-
The O-ring failure on the Challenger caused a jet of hot gasses to slice into the external fuel tank (the big orange one). The fuel tank exploded and caused most of the damage. (It contains both Oxygen and Hydrogen) The boosters continued to fly out of control for a short while afterward (as seen in the video). They had about than a minute left to burn.
Warp drive is theoretical but then again, so are a lot of things in OP2. (Tok?)
When you reduce the temperature of a gas to a very cold level, the pressures required are not very high.
-
The ION Drive is the best way because all you have to do is stop and fuel at a gas giant and there going to be in almost every Solar System. And yes I realize hydrogen can explode most violently.
If I am correct, you don't NEED to stop off at a gas giant to recharge your ion drives. An ion drive works by blasting a jet of ions out the back. These ions could practically be any atom (obviously some work better than others).
TIE fighters in Star Wars (TIE = Twin Ion Engine) used their solar panels to provide the power for their ion engines. As for the atoms? In system, solar winds tend to give you enough crap to pick up, but as for out system, you'd need to have a fuel tank.
Most books/games I've read/played use helium (He3 - tritium?) for their fusion drives, so expoloding hydrogen would not be a problem. And we're only using the fusion drive for the initial kick in the pants, the constant acceleration to maintain speed will be done by the ion drives.
-
Yes you need to stop at Gas giants to fuel you ION drive Intergalatic travel would burn up alot. Solar panels collect energy not solar wind particles. Solar wind out side of the Solar system isnt as abundant. Plus Solar wind slows down after a while. As for a fusion drive i dont know i would suspect they had fussion or fission reactors on the ship to keep power to the life support. I dont think they used it as a interstellar drive. Be much simpler to use some kinda chemical engine to take off.
-
lol. Chemical engines? lol. Why would that be better? There no where near as efecient or powerful as a Fusion Drive would be. lol, chemical.... lol
-
the fusion drive uses D-He3 reactions, because that produces the most energy, it uses the engine directly during in system maneuvers because of its high thrust, and once it gets into interstellar range the fusion reactor becomes the power source for the ion drive
a fuel stop at the gas giant is needed because the amount of D-He3 would be huge and I doubt either one would be abundant on New Terra (deuterium might, but He3 would not)
-
Because chemical based rockets are powerful and there rather cheap to make.
-
Like the SULV. It used some didnt it?
-
the RLV and SULV both did
-
The starship didnt though.
-
Chemical rockets are used for taking off a planets surface due to the high thrust generated, this is because the reaction mass is also the fuel mass, so the more you dump in the more thrust you get.
Even though nuclear or ion rockets are more efficient they are not able to produce such high thrusts because the density of plasma or ions is so little.
So launching from a planets atmosphere will probably always be done by chemical rockets, its not a matter of technology its a matter of physics.
-
I understand, but the ship is in a high orbit isnt it?
-
Yes in Orbit i would assume there first thrust would be from a chemical rocket because they have to undock from the skydock i think.
-
the op1 ship did had strap on chemical rockets, but the cinematic for op2 shows it using the fusion engine, it may have enough thrust to escape orbit, but in doing so it would have to use a lot of hydrogen to increase the mass of the exhaust so it could get the necessary thrust, that would deplete the storage very fast, and thus would necessitate the need to go to the gas giant
-
Yes chemical rockets to get out of earth gravity well.
-
We could strap a ring of them on the top half circle or something then.
-
Since we have gotten completely off subject...
Here is a fairly good article on the basics of Fusion drives.
How Stuff Works (http://www.howstuffworks.com/fusion-propulsion.htm)
An Ion drive works in a similar manner but is not quite as sophisticated. (Ion drives are a reality, fusion drives are still theoretical and even more efficient.)
In any case, the drawback to both of these is that it takes some time to get up to speed. So if we're talking about travel from Cythera to it's moon(moons?), then it's impractical. Additionally, you can't use ion or fusion drive modules to escape the surface of a mars/earth/venus sized planet. It doesn't have enough umph...
An interstellar space ship wouldn't require any solid fuel rockets because that weight in fuel would be better spent on fuel for the ion drive. If you're going to argue to me that it would be needed to separate from the sky dock, I would say that the solid rockets could be attached to the sky dock and not the star ship.
Yes, solid fuel is cheaper and easier to deal with. But its not the most efficient for long term use.
Edit: I forgot to talk about this...
the op1 ship did had strap on chemical rockets, but the cinematic for op2 shows it using the fusion engine, it may have enough thrust to escape orbit, but in doing so it would have to use a lot of hydrogen to increase the mass of the exhaust so it could get the necessary thrust, that would deplete the storage very fast, and thus would necessitate the need to go to the gas giant
While this statement is true, it's not completely accurate. You're going to use the same amount of thrust to escape wether you use chemical or fusion/ion. If you say that a lot of the hydrogen would be used up to escape the gravity of Earth, then we have the same problem when we stop at a gas giant for fuel. Actual orbital mechanics wouldn't require you to break orbit in the first try. You can slowly work the orbit away from the planet until you finally break free. (Sort of the reverse of aerobraking.)
-
Do you need to keep an engine running in space to keep it the same speed? There isnt much to slow the ship in interstelar space so why would they need to keep the engine pouring out hydrogen matter to keep it going?
-
No, you don't need to keep putting out matter to keep the speed going because there aren't any drag forces to slow it down (like air). This isn't completely true either, but for the basic idea it's a really safe assumption.
The reason why you would still want to use an ion/fusion drive that burns much longer is that you can achieve much higher speeds that using the same amount (mass) of a chemical type of engine. It takes the same amount of force to propel the same amount of mass no matter how you push it. So you want the most energy efficient storage available.
Its like the difference between a coal power plant and a nuclear power plant. You get more energy out of nuclear fuel than from the same amount of coal. But the coal burns up a lot faster. (sorry, this is a really loose analogy)
-
Since people are in cryostatis they have all the time in the world.
Chemical Booster rockets would would have there own fuel tank they wouldnt taken from the main. Plus i think They were to get the ship moving and get it to the local Gas giant then fuel up then get moving. Because there isnt enough Hydrogen to fuel the ship from the planet.
-
I think that was said some where already.
-
If we do at least have a little more space capability, id like to post my idea for an agristation. (Ill make a new thread)