Advice Thread OOC Future Tech Only

[Ularn]

Consequently, strike craft are thoroughly pointless as an offensive platform.

Now, as a defensive platform, shooting down incoming missiles, that's a different matter altogether. Or as a missile protection platform, shooting down OPFOR missile killer spaceships just like themselves. Here they're perfectly useful (Point defence on the capships themselves being vastly overrated - it does suffer from fundamentally short ranges, as laser/ particle beam effective range is partially determined by aperture size, and macroscopic KE takes ages to reach a target, nevermind the target's ability to evade it at longer distances).

But even in these instances, I'd not make them 'Fighters'. I'd make them something along the lines of corvettes, destroyers, frigates. Small enough that spending anti-cap missiles is a bit of a waste, big enough to be able to tank the damage a, say, fighter could do.

This. In my fleets, cruisers, (inc. heavy cruisers and battlecruisers) dreadnoughts and Superdreads do the ship killing while Frigates and occasionally corvettes will be tasked with protecting the fleet from incoming missiles and kinetics (and fighters, if the enemy is silly enough to use them). Destroyers are a bit of a mix of both with some light ship killing weapons in addition to a frigate's point defence.

I do have atmospheric fighters which, could operate in space because they use the same propulsion (the gravity drive) as starhips. But canonically, every admiral in history who thought he'd be clever and try to pull off a fighter offensive was promptly disappointed and then demoted in that order. so far, no-one in the Ularn Space Navy has come up with a way to make fighter-sized vessels effective against spacecraft.

[Rethan]

-snip-

Yes, large ships are impressive, and I'm not saying they're useless. But, again, more engine means less everything else. It doesn't exactly scale linearly, either; as a ship grows larger in class (fighter > frigate > full-on capitol), life support requirements increase exponentially, considering that (as RPed, at least) many large ships have large rooms, which have to be pressurized and supplied with oxygen. Same idea for other systems; the larger and more abundant engines require more complex automation (thus requiring more computing power) or more manpower operating/maintaining them (thus requiring more life support), the increase in weapons quantity to effectively repel being surrounded by strike craft also requires an increase in computing power or life support for the same reasons - see where I'm going with this? I'm not exactly comfortable with the idea that a lolhueg ship can be as maneuverable or agile as a fighter and have the advertised benefits associated with being a larger ship.

Like I said, it's tech based. A low-mid tech race can't hope to use a massive ship to its full potential, precisely because of those things. However, once you have access to AIs? Or even VIs? Most of the problems with being lolhueg disappear. A single AI can do the work of many, many air breathing people. A network of them can run a ship the size of a star destroyer, with the life support requirements of a rock. Ie, none. For further discussion, I'd default to AI above. Since I'm distracted with college work and he's better at articulating himself than I am. ; - ;

Realistically, I would imagine smaller strike craft are absolutely necessary to balance out the slower change of velocity with larger ships, at least for me ICly, being a younger contender in the intergalactic community.

It's your state, go for it. Just keep in mind some people do have the ability change velocity quickly on larger ships. Those people who roleplay such advanced tech competently (Otagia, Derscon and a few rare others) generally aren't the type to go LULZ SMASH though, so I don't anticipate much in the way of problems for you.

Out of curiosity, when you say Strike Craft, do you mean fighter or destroyer type things? <_< I'm getting kinda confused. >_>

And there's another issue (and question): oxygen. What are the most common ways of implementing oxygen supply for aerobic life support? I was thinking algae tanks, with the produced oxygen branching into three destinations: breathing, water production, and backup storage. I would think it unrealistic to say that a larger vessel can carry enough oxygen to support its entire crew for a long-duration operation without being able to efficiently produce its own.

Algae or plant tank is probably your best bet, yes. Or scoop it from planetary atmospheres.

[YellowApple]

Yes, large ships are impressive, and I'm not saying they're useless. But, again, more engine means less everything else. It doesn't exactly scale linearly, either; as a ship grows larger in class (fighter > frigate > full-on capitol), life support requirements increase exponentially, considering that (as RPed, at least) many large ships have large rooms, which have to be pressurized and supplied with oxygen. Same idea for other systems; the larger and more abundant engines require more complex automation (thus requiring more computing power) or more manpower operating/maintaining them (thus requiring more life support), the increase in weapons quantity to effectively repel being surrounded by strike craft also requires an increase in computing power or life support for the same reasons - see where I'm going with this? I'm not exactly comfortable with the idea that a lolhueg ship can be as maneuverable or agile as a fighter and have the advertised benefits associated with being a larger ship.

Like I said, it's tech based. A low-mid tech race can't hope to use a massive ship to its full potential, precisely because of those things. However, once you have access to AIs? Or even VIs? Most of the problems with being lolhueg disappear. A single AI can do the work of many, many air breathing people. A network of them can run a ship the size of a star destroyer, with the life support requirements of a rock. Ie, none. For further discussion, I'd default to AI above. Since I'm distracted with college work and he's better at articulating himself than I am. ; - ;

AI still requires a proportional increase in computing power. I guess that's a better way of allowing more room for those massive engines and steering thrusters, though

Then again, I'm not sure if I'd trust an AI with weapons. Or at all. One computation error or kernel panic / BSOD, and now you're stuck in a giant space coffin that's killing everything in sight and forcing you to watch helplessly.

Realistically, I would imagine smaller strike craft are absolutely necessary to balance out the slower change of velocity with larger ships, at least for me ICly, being a younger contender in the intergalactic community.

It's your state, go for it. Just keep in mind some people do have the ability change velocity quickly on larger ships. Those people who roleplay such advanced tech competently (Otagia, Derscon and a few rare others) generally aren't the type to go LULZ SMASH though, so I don't anticipate much in the way of problems for you.

Out of curiosity, when you say Strike Craft, do you mean fighter or destroyer type things? <_< I'm getting kinda confused. >_>

By "strike craft", I exclusively mean fighters and similarly-sized vehicles (around 100 meters long or less) and my definition of corvettes (which maxes in length at around 200 meters).

"Destroyer" in my definitions would be at about 500-1000 m.

And there's another issue (and question): oxygen. What are the most common ways of implementing oxygen supply for aerobic life support? I was thinking algae tanks, with the produced oxygen branching into three destinations: breathing, water production, and backup storage. I would think it unrealistic to say that a larger vessel can carry enough oxygen to support its entire crew for a long-duration operation without being able to efficiently produce its own.

Algae or plant tank is probably your best bet, yes. Or scoop it from planetary atmospheres.

Alright then, algae it is.

I was also thinking about hydroponics, as food supply is another issue if operations are taking place far from agricultural resources.

[Ularn]

I was also thinking about hydroponics, as food supply is another issue if operations are taking place far from agricultural resources.

This was a fun one for me. Though warships are always kitted out with a full store of food, it's almost all freeze-dried and vacuum-packed due to storage constraints. as a result, fresh vegetables are always welcome and it's not uncommon for some enterprising crew to convert a few disused bunks in their quarters or occasionally even a brig cell into a hydroponics farm.

[YellowApple]

I was also thinking about hydroponics, as food supply is another issue if operations are taking place far from agricultural resources.

This was a fun one for me. Though warships are always kitted out with a full store of food, it's almost all freeze-dried and vacuum-packed due to storage constraints. as a result, fresh vegetables are always welcome and it's not uncommon for some enterprising crew to convert a few disused bunks in their quarters or occasionally even a brig cell into a hydroponics farm.

Well that's creative. I don't imagine it to be as sustainable as a dedicated hydroponic farm, but it's certainly useful for breaking the monotony of canned/freeze-dried MREs.

Another question: artificial gravity. What are the most effective ways of implementing it? I imagine the most obvious would be a centrifuge-type arrangement, which would be useful in stationary (relatively speaking) installations and what not, and I'm guessing that a way of artificially creating higher localized gravitational pull (via space-time warping of some kind) would be more compact/rule-of-cool, at the cost of power consumption.

Similarly, are there benefits to having artificial gravity in a tactical setting, or would I be safe with simply keeping ship crews in zero-g to cut down on ship costs?

[Sskiss]

In FT, the size of any given craft of the same type (Example: Destroyer) will very widely from species to species. For one species, it might be something like 200 meters, for another 2000 meters and so on. Some people claim their nation could build ships 10k or more in size, others, like my people, would never allocate that many resources into a single vessel. It just wouldn't be practical. Bottom line, there are no "standards" here.

Also, Rethan, brought up a good point about the speed and maneuverability of larger ships. It would depend (certainly to some degree) on the technology used and the overall design of the vessels itself. Cigar/stick shaped vessels and especially dispersed structures (ala Star trek - especially Fed vessels) are more vulnerable to stress caused by high speeds and manoeuvring. Chunky structures, like our ships, are not.

[YellowApple]

Cigar/stick shaped vessels and especially dispersed structures (ala Star trek - especially Fed vessels) are more vulnerable to stress caused by high speeds and manoeuvring. Chunky structures, like our ships, are not.

I didn't even think about the high physical stresses of trying to move a typical massive ship as if it were a fighter. That would also make slower maneuvers more reasonable for larger ships, unless they're designed in a way that allows for structural stress to be handled evenly no matter the direction of thrust. I thus imagine something circular or spherical would be the best bet for a large craft expected to accelerate quickly in any given direction.

[Ularn]

This was a fun one for me. Though warships are always kitted out with a full store of food, it's almost all freeze-dried and vacuum-packed due to storage constraints. as a result, fresh vegetables are always welcome and it's not uncommon for some enterprising crew to convert a few disused bunks in their quarters or occasionally even a brig cell into a hydroponics farm.

Well that's creative. I don't imagine it to be as sustainable as a dedicated hydroponic farm, but it's certainly useful for breaking the monotony of canned/freeze-dried MREs.

Another question: artificial gravity. What are the most effective ways of implementing it? I imagine the most obvious would be a centrifuge-type arrangement, which would be useful in stationary (relatively speaking) installations and what not, and I'm guessing that a way of artificially creating higher localized gravitational pull (via space-time warping of some kind) would be more compact/rule-of-cool, at the cost of power consumption.

Similarly, are there benefits to having artificial gravity in a tactical setting, or would I be safe with simply keeping ship crews in zero-g to cut down on ship costs?

It's not so much meant to be relied upon as a food source as it is a way to keep the crew busy in their off-hours.

Most of my tech relies of space-warpy artificial gravity - I had a lot of fun thinking about that various ways grvitic manipulation could be used beyond gluing your feet to the ground. Gravitics can also stop the crew getting squished by crazy accelerations (letting your ship go much faster; most people don't consider the impact rapid course cange would have on the crew unless you have some sort of inertial compensator) or thrown around wildly if she gets hit. This also allows the ship itself to survive those accelerations, since we use the cigar design Sskiss mentioned. The same technology also goes into buildings on planets, allowing them to be built much higher. Also, in the same way as it pulls the crew onto the floor, artificial gravity can also be used to pull/push the ship itself in any given direction, which is how warships move around. Additionally, gravitics can be used to accelerate projectiles, like in the main guns on capital ships and finally, if focused enough, a gravitic singularity could crunch incoming projectiles or bend light from lasers, creating a shield. At my tech level, this last one is hugely energy intensive and still largely in development. Most warships can only protect a small area of their ship with gravitic shielding, and not well enough to deflect lasers. Instead it gets waved around like a fly-swatter against missiles and kinetics.

This is only for warships though; gravitic technologies are, in my canon, very expensive to build and operate so they're only used by the military, the government, and some very large shipping firms. Everyone else has to make do with boring fusion rockets or ion drives.

[YellowApple]

artificial gravity can also be used to pull/push the ship itself in any given direction, which is how warships move around

That would be reliant on other nearby objects to push/pull away from, wouldn't it? Thus, I don't imagine it to be as effective outside of solar systems.

Your other points are pretty reasonable, though; I suppose artificial gravity would be useful in keeping crew members from being thrown around so much. Smaller ships, however, likely wouldn't need that, as strike craft pilots can just stay strapped in.

In fact, any crew can just stay strapped in during combat. They shouldn't be running around anyhow

[Ularn]

artificial gravity can also be used to pull/push the ship itself in any given direction, which is how warships move around

That would be reliant on other nearby objects to push/pull away from, wouldn't it? Thus, I don't imagine it to be as effective outside of solar systems.

Your other points are pretty reasonable, though; I suppose artificial gravity would be useful in keeping crew members from being thrown around so much. Smaller ships, however, likely wouldn't need that, as strike craft pilots can just stay strapped in.

In fact, any crew can just stay strapped in during combat. They shouldn't be running around anyhow

I could imagine the engineering and weapons staff doing a fair bit of running once the shooting starts.

Also, most of my gravitics work by me messing with spacetime to create gravitic singularities wherever we want. In other words, we fool the universe into thinking there is a very big planet in front of the starship, making it "fall" forwards (or sideways or wherever you want). Of course, this totally buttrapes Newton's three laws but at least it does so more gently than most.

[Arthropoda Ingens]

I was also thinking about hydroponics, as food supply is another issue if operations are taking place far from agricultural resources.

This was a fun one for me. Though warships are always kitted out with a full store of food, it's almost all freeze-dried and vacuum-packed due to storage constraints. as a result, fresh vegetables are always welcome and it's not uncommon for some enterprising crew to convert a few disused bunks in their quarters or occasionally even a brig cell into a hydroponics farm.

I'm imagining the crewmen in gardener aprons, ensuring their precious little vegetables grow properly, and viciously hunting down the inevitable aphid colony that somehow always gets on board. Bloody buggers.

I'd do it with soil rather than hydrophonics for stylistic reasons, mind. Having a flower next to one's hammock gives a much more homely feeling when it's growing inside soil~

[Arthropoda Ingens]

Also, most of my gravitics work by me messing with spacetime to create gravitic singularities wherever we want. In other words, we fool the universe into thinking there is a very big planet in front of the starship, making it "fall" forwards (or sideways or wherever you want). Of course, this totally buttrapes Newton's three laws but at least it does so more gently than most.

Problem with that is that it also makes everything else in the vicinity do the same. Just imagine switching that drive on in orbit of an actual planet...

I'm a strong supporter of 'It's technology, but I ain't gonna explain shit!' with regards to How Spaceships Fly for this reason. Something always fucks it up as soon as one starts with the explanations.

[Ularn]

Also, most of my gravitics work by me messing with spacetime to create gravitic singularities wherever we want. In other words, we fool the universe into thinking there is a very big planet in front of the starship, making it "fall" forwards (or sideways or wherever you want). Of course, this totally buttrapes Newton's three laws but at least it does so more gently than most.

Problem with that is that it also makes everything else in the vicinity do the same. Just imagine switching that drive on in orbit of an actual planet...

I'm a strong supporter of 'It's technology, but I ain't gonna explain shit!' with regards to How Spaceships Fly for this reason. Something always fucks it up as soon as one starts with the explanations.

I dunno; we make it so the singularity only works in one direction or something? It wouldn't be the worst travesty of physics in this game.

[YellowApple]

This was a fun one for me. Though warships are always kitted out with a full store of food, it's almost all freeze-dried and vacuum-packed due to storage constraints. as a result, fresh vegetables are always welcome and it's not uncommon for some enterprising crew to convert a few disused bunks in their quarters or occasionally even a brig cell into a hydroponics farm.

I'm imagining the crewmen in gardener aprons, ensuring their precious little vegetables grow properly, and viciously hunting down the inevitable aphid colony that somehow always gets on board. Bloody buggers.

I'd do it with soil rather than hydrophonics for stylistic reasons, mind. Having a flower next to one's hammock gives a much more homely feeling when it's growing inside soil~

Yes, aphids. Or in my case, parasprites.

Speaking of which, I imagine your flag is roughly what a parasprite would look like in an FT setting.

[Ularn]

Speaking of which, I imagine your flag is roughly what a parasprite would look like in an FT setting.

This is now a part of my canon!

[Sskiss]

I didn't even think about the high physical stresses of trying to move a typical massive ship as if it were a fighter.

Square/Cube law. Nasty as hell.

That would also make slower maneuvers more reasonable for larger ships, unless they're designed in a way that allows for structural stress to be handled evenly no matter the direction of thrust.

True, but regardless, all else being equal, the smaller ship will tend to possess a greater potential for speed and maneuverability.

I thus imagine something circular or spherical would be the best bet for a large craft expected to accelerate quickly in any given direction.

And perhaps more importantly, better for durability, armour (smaller surface area relative to volume) and shielding (less power for the some reasons as armour).

[Arthropoda Ingens]

While spheres and derived shapes are indeed beneficial for these reasons, it shouldn't be forgotten that they're more difficult to construct than simpler geometries - 'Ideal' shapes went out of fashion to to these issues IRL (Teardrop-shaped submarines come to mind. Awesome hydrodynamics, but a nightmare to actually build).

Engineering's always a tradeoff, and it's generally nice to see designs reflect this.

Now, I do run with ellipsoid shapes myself, since the aesthetic happens to please me (Also, base stats, such as volume & mass, are easy to generate), but they're not fundamentally better - in terms of production speed and expense, they can easily be worse. Something that should probably be reflected in overall numbers, if applicable.

[Ularn]

I tend to go for the cigar-shape myself. Actually, most of my ships probably look like a "Women's Massage Aid" if you get my meaning. Although not ideal for structural purposes, gravitics allows us a bit more leeway on that area and it means that the front of the ship, which is the only part the enemy is ever supposed to be able to shoot at, has a much smaller, harder to hit surface area. This means armour can be concentrated at the front while point defence has a better chance of intercepting anything coming from the sides.

[Ularn]

Actually, here is a picture of a WIP model of the Vengeance class Superdreadnought - the 800m behemoths I mentioned earlier. I still need to add the other three radiator panels (the thing next to the fuel tanks that looks like a wing), airlocks on the crew module (second from the front) and the thrusters on the forward engineering module (third from the front). I'm also going to do some more work on the shape of the rear engineering module (back).

The weapons module (front) is pretty much complete though, with eight graser turrets, sixteen missile tubes, one gravitic cannon for the main gun and four gauss cannons providing point-defence. Those panels of eight circles on the forward three modules are the escape pods.

Most of my ships have this basic shape, only smaller and with less guns. I won't be offended if from now on people want to refer to the Ularn Space Navy by the nickname of "the dildos"

[Sertian]

Alright, a lot of catching up to do...

On Small Ships and Speeds; generally the larger ship will be able to accelerate and achieve greater speeds than smaller strike craft, baring their reaction to stress of course. This is because as the larger the ship gets, the more advanced engines you can mount on it (ones that haven't been miniaturized to the point that it and its fuel can be put on a strike craft). For example, for fighters you might have chemical rockets, while on larger dreadnoughts you have the space and size to mount a torch drive or antimatter beam core; which also doubles as a nasty weapon if you turn your ship around. However, since technology bases (and even the rules of physics) are flexible in nationstates, you can say you have a drive system which scales better at lower masses than higher ones, so your strike craft WOULD be faster than their larger cousins.

The Sertian Empire does have fighters, although they're usually deployed for orbit to ground warfare. The fighter/bombers did have a use though in that they're the smallest vessel with an FTL drive, and could potentially jump inside a vessel's shields and release a large barrage of fusion explosives against surface mounted weaponry and sensors to help disable the capital ship (and hopefully bugging out before the ship's weapons fried them). They've been phased out for this purpose, but I see a place for them to rekindle their glory. >:3

On Artificial Gravity (and Gravity Manipulation); Don't forget that you could accelerate your ship at a constant speed and get artificial gravity (so long as your decks are arranged perpendicular to your drive), a constant gravity of acceleration and your people feel nice and comfy, mind you everyone and their grandmother in the system now knows where you are, and you'll have to have the fuel to support that acceleration. Artificial Gravity does give you the benefit of inertial compensator/dampeners/whatever, which I imagine work by applying an artificial force in the opposite direction of acceleration (thus canceling it out for the people inside). Do remember though, that at least with physics as we know it gravity is a much weaker force than electromagnetism, meaning that you'll pump out much more energy to accelerate your ship or shells with gravity than with an electromagnet (or potentially laser drive). This is probably one of the major reasons gravity technology isn't widely used in my Empire, it's not as efficient as other technologies.

On Vessel Shapes! I tend to go with pyramid shaped designs, sort of with the star destroyer mentality; focus all your firepower forward and blow shit up! My vessels are pretty much designed to face towards their attackers, so this does give the benefit of having all your firepower available for whatever target you want to blow up, armor of inclination for approaching shells (although this isn't truly necessary, given the nature of my ship's hull material), and hiding the typically fragile and large drive systems (usually a magnetic bottle for a torch drive) behind the rest of the ship. It's also a fairly sturdy and rugged design, to boot.

[Vocenae]

Vocian philosophy on ship design is the same, big guns up front, turrets to cover the rest of the ship.

My ship are towards the large end of the scale so while I've got the firepower, I've also got the mass. So smaller warships arew more capable of outmanuvering my cruisers but god help them if they get hit by even my turret shots.

It's all about finding the balance. For every improvement you have, you need to have something that keeps the ship from being too powerful. Unless, of course, you've cleared it with your rp partner beforehand.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

This was a fun one for me. Though warships are always kitted out with a full store of food, it's almost all freeze-dried and vacuum-packed due to storage constraints. as a result, fresh vegetables are always welcome and it's not uncommon for some enterprising crew to convert a few disused bunks in their quarters or occasionally even a brig cell into a hydroponics farm.

I'm imagining the crewmen in gardener aprons, ensuring their precious little vegetables grow properly, and viciously hunting down the inevitable aphid colony that somehow always gets on board. Bloody buggers.

I'd do it with soil rather than hydrophonics for stylistic reasons, mind. Having a flower next to one's hammock gives a much more homely feeling when it's growing inside soil~

The larger Russian ships typically have a large greenhouse on the top deck, partly because we like to troll the other FT nations by having huge glass windows on our ships, but also because hydroponically grown food tastes funny.

[YellowApple]

I'm imagining the crewmen in gardener aprons, ensuring their precious little vegetables grow properly, and viciously hunting down the inevitable aphid colony that somehow always gets on board. Bloody buggers.

I'd do it with soil rather than hydrophonics for stylistic reasons, mind. Having a flower next to one's hammock gives a much more homely feeling when it's growing inside soil~

The larger Russian ships typically have a large greenhouse on the top deck, partly because we like to troll the other FT nations by having huge glass windows on our ships, but also because hydroponically grown food tastes funny.

Huge glass windows are quite difficult to engineer in a space-faring context; the difference in pressure between the greenhouse interior and the near-vacuum exterior would cause most forms of glass to shatter under the sheer stress. That's why RL space vehicles like the Space Shuttle and high-speed aircraft like the Concorde have small windows, since it's easier to reinforce a small window.

I'd suggest using something tougher than glass to contain your greenhouses.

---

Another question: what are some common FT power production methods? I already RP with nuclear fusion, slush hydrogen combustion, and solar power in PMT settings, but I'm sure there are many more interesting and creative ways of generating electrical and/or thermal energy in the FT world.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

The larger Russian ships typically have a large greenhouse on the top deck, partly because we like to troll the other FT nations by having huge glass windows on our ships, but also because hydroponically grown food tastes funny.

Huge glass windows are quite difficult to engineer in a space-faring context; the difference in pressure between the greenhouse interior and the near-vacuum exterior would cause most forms of glass to shatter under the sheer stress. That's why RL space vehicles like the Space Shuttle and high-speed aircraft like the Concorde have small windows, since it's easier to reinforce a small window.

I'd suggest using something tougher than glass to contain your greenhouses.

Mission success.

[Sertian]

Actually, the pressure is only one atmosphere (potentially less, or more, depending on your species needs). The problem more has to do with micrometerites and other pesky space things which make fragile windows very bad ideas. And of course, there's perhaps a variety of different see through plastics or metals that can be used instead of normal glass.

As for power production... I typically lump them into three categories... Or rather, four. Perhaps five if you wanted to be technical and have remotely generated and beamed power sources as a separate type.

Chemical; Petroleum or other generator that derives its power from chemical reactions.
Nuclear; Fission and fusion generators that derive their power from the weak or strong nuclear force, commonly the most used space-fairing power source. Solar power would also, technically, be a source of nuclear energy.
Conversion; Total (or at least partial) conversion of a fuel's rest mass into energy. Can be done through Anti-matter, microsingularities (harvesting the hawking radiation produced by a small black hole for power), or other methods.
'Dark Energy Harvesting'; Drawing power from some universal, constant energy in the universe, can be the aforementioned dark energy or, like in the Foundation Series, drawing power from the gravitational energy of the galaxy (a practically limitless energy source if you can harvest it).