Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[Avenio]

A craft designed specifically for brown-space operations can get by with no FTL drive, or a more limited one, and doesn't require the same kind of fuel storage capabilities.

I think this is kind of where the analogy breaks down, since any combat vessel restricted to sublight maneuvering or short-range FTL only is going to be so vastly outmaneuvered by forces with interstellar-class FTL drives that their utility as garrion forces (which is pretty much the only uses I can think of for creating a class of vessels with limited FTL drives and fuel capacities). If you can jump, say, like the nuBSG ships, on a tactical level, your 'brown space navy' will be spending most of its time in combat trying to deal with a foe that can cross the solar system in seconds, while it is restricted to speeds that are, by definition, fractions of what it's enemies are capable of, or risks depleting its comparatively-small fuel tanks while combat maneuvering and becoming a sitting duck for its more resilient enemies to pick off at will.

Not to mention that, from a safety standpoint, any given spaceship should be able to operate for extended periods of time without support anyways, since space is very big, and rescue operations can take a while to get to you. For example, say you're a 'black space' ship and your engines/FTL drive conks out in the Oort Cloud of an inhabited star system. You can talk via your FTL communications network to friendlies stationed in the system, but if they don't have FTL drives and there aren't any 'black space' vessels nearby to help, your crew could be waiting a rather long time for the system's relativistic craft to get to you.

[Abys]

So I recently created this factbook post and wanted some opinions on it. link to factbook post

My people are all about expanding so I was wondering of the viability of the underwater colony described in the factbooks last two paragraphs and if anyone had some suggestions for other things I should say about it.

Edit:
Somethings I should probably mention

• My people have made heavy use of genetic engineering for thousands of years now, sense they first settled their "homeworld"
• There are many different kinds of Sub-species/new species of Humans who are apart of organization called Glens.
• Glens organize future and current genetic change and ensure that has the group alters its DNA they remain compatible with each other, if not other Glens.
• Some Glens are adopted to Aquatic Life, how they have adapted depends on the Glen.
• Some have changed themselves so they are similar to Seals or otters in regard to surviving underwater, Some Have changed themselves so they
• are similar to Frogs, while other have changed themselves so they survive underwater like fishes.

[Volesia (Ancient)]

I decided to go ahead and create a new nation based around the concept I posted here. All I've done so far is write a short factbook, but I'd like some feedback on it if possible.

[Interstellar Planets]

I decided to go ahead and create a new nation based around the concept I posted here. All I've done so far is write a short factbook, but I'd like some feedback on it if possible.

There's not a huge amount there to really critique at the moment, but I like the layout so far though, with the linked contents menu and all that.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

A craft designed specifically for brown-space operations can get by with no FTL drive, or a more limited one, and doesn't require the same kind of fuel storage capabilities.

I think this is kind of where the analogy breaks down, since any combat vessel restricted to sublight maneuvering or short-range FTL only is going to be so vastly outmaneuvered by forces with interstellar-class FTL drives that their utility as garrion forces (which is pretty much the only uses I can think of for creating a class of vessels with limited FTL drives and fuel capacities). If you can jump, say, like the nuBSG ships, on a tactical level, your 'brown space navy' will be spending most of its time in combat trying to deal with a foe that can cross the solar system in seconds, while it is restricted to speeds that are, by definition, fractions of what it's enemies are capable of, or risks depleting its comparatively-small fuel tanks while combat maneuvering and becoming a sitting duck for its more resilient enemies to pick off at will.

Not to mention that, from a safety standpoint, any given spaceship should be able to operate for extended periods of time without support anyways, since space is very big, and rescue operations can take a while to get to you. For example, say you're a 'black space' ship and your engines/FTL drive conks out in the Oort Cloud of an inhabited star system. You can talk via your FTL communications network to friendlies stationed in the system, but if they don't have FTL drives and there aren't any 'black space' vessels nearby to help, your crew could be waiting a rather long time for the system's relativistic craft to get to you.

The Russian navy maintains a few 'system defense ships,' but doctrine relating to them makes them something more akin to fortifications than ships. They're mostly intended to sit near planets and shoot anything that tries to get close until the actual navy can get a task force together.

[Feazanthia]

A craft designed specifically for brown-space operations can get by with no FTL drive, or a more limited one, and doesn't require the same kind of fuel storage capabilities.

I think this is kind of where the analogy breaks down, since any combat vessel restricted to sublight maneuvering or short-range FTL only is going to be so vastly outmaneuvered by forces with interstellar-class FTL drives that their utility as garrion forces (which is pretty much the only uses I can think of for creating a class of vessels with limited FTL drives and fuel capacities). If you can jump, say, like the nuBSG ships, on a tactical level, your 'brown space navy' will be spending most of its time in combat trying to deal with a foe that can cross the solar system in seconds, while it is restricted to speeds that are, by definition, fractions of what it's enemies are capable of, or risks depleting its comparatively-small fuel tanks while combat maneuvering and becoming a sitting duck for its more resilient enemies to pick off at will.

Not to mention that, from a safety standpoint, any given spaceship should be able to operate for extended periods of time without support anyways, since space is very big, and rescue operations can take a while to get to you. For example, say you're a 'black space' ship and your engines/FTL drive conks out in the Oort Cloud of an inhabited star system. You can talk via your FTL communications network to friendlies stationed in the system, but if they don't have FTL drives and there aren't any 'black space' vessels nearby to help, your crew could be waiting a rather long time for the system's relativistic craft to get to you.

This. People tend to forget just how unimaginably huge even interplanetary distances are. I mean that literally, the distances are so huge that we have no frame of reference, and our brains actually struggle to grasp just how big it is. People also forget just how slow the average sublight drive goes. I mean, it takes light up to 22 minutes to travel between Earth and Mars, and the red planet is (on a cosmological scale) invading Earth's personal space. If your spaceboat is only able to accelerate at even a few dozen G? You're talking hours, days, weeks, even months for interplanetary tactical maneuvering.

Sublight units will do a very fine job of defending a planet's orbitals. Beyond that though, you're going to want either a short-range FTL jump capable ship, or more local garrisons around critical targets. I say critical, because by no means do you need to defend every planet in a system. If your assets are only around Venus, Earth, Mars, and Jupiter; there is no need to defend Mercury, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, or Pluto. You may launch kinetics at any enemy who tries to set up shop there just to keep them from establishing a beach head, but sending in your mobile units (unless, again, they have intra-system FTL capability) is just going to leave actual important fixed positions (i.e. planets and orbital infrastructure) vulnerable.

[Jovian Lunar Empire]

....important fixed positions (i.e. planets and orbital infrastructure) vulnerable.

The importance of the latter cannot be overstated. Whether you're using chemical rockets, nuclear rockets, linear accellerators, railguns, orbital elevators, or whatever to achieve orbit, your near-planetary orbit is almost more important than the surface from a tactical standpoint in space conflict.

These are just a few things that are going to be orbiting your planet and probably unable to defend themselves adequately:

• Orbital Elevator Upper Portions;
• Orbital Construction Facilities, or at least craft being assembled;
• Reaction Mass Depots, or other consumable depots
• Research and Sensing Stations and Sattelites
• Communications networks, both for surface and out-system
• Power Beaming Satellites
• Surface-to-outsystem transfer depots, possibly both for people and cargo
• Hab Stations, if you're that way.

Earth has about a thousand satellites we put there ourselves that serve a purpose. Quite a few of them would be hard to imagine life without - telecom, GPS, and so on. Quite a few enable the rest of them to do their job, vis TDRS. And we're a relatively primitive spaceflight culture.

As the great Heinlein said, once you're in orbit you're about halfway to anywhere, so orbital fuel depots are going to make your interplanetary missions (A)possible at first and (b) cheaper in later tech levels.

Assuming you either do sublight in system or use some sort of reaction-driven FTL. Having said that, even ships that never de-orbit need to resupply somehow.

Subscript - if anyone could take a boo at the factbook in my sig, it'd be appreciated.

[Ekoridge]

I was sent here from the military consultation thread, apparently I needed advice for something that was more advanced than MT. But now that I'm here, I think I'm in the wrong place again. My nation doesn't do much in the way of space travel and exploration... Am I in the wrong place? If so, could someone direct me to the right thread?

[Oppressorion]

I was sent here from the military consultation thread, apparently I needed advice for something that was more advanced than MT. But now that I'm here, I think I'm in the wrong place again. My nation doesn't do much in the way of space travel and exploration... Am I in the wrong place? If so, could someone direct me to the right thread?

Well, what is your 'something'?

[Ekoridge]

I was sent here from the military consultation thread, apparently I needed advice for something that was more advanced than MT. But now that I'm here, I think I'm in the wrong place again. My nation doesn't do much in the way of space travel and exploration... Am I in the wrong place? If so, could someone direct me to the right thread?

Well, what is your 'something'?

I would like some help/tips/whatever on how to make my military/other factbooks more realistic. Actually, a better word would be: believable. Or at least as realistic/believable as they can be when they're based in a fictional universe. The people in the Military Consultation Thread looked at me like I was an idiot, so... Any help from you guys in this thread?

[Vorkova]

Well, what is your 'something'?

I would like some help/tips/whatever on how to make my military/other factbooks more realistic. Actually, a better word would be: believable. Or at least as realistic/believable as they can be when they're based in a fictional universe. The people in the Military Consultation Thread looked at me like I was an idiot, so... Any help from you guys in this thread?

Link to what you want looked at?

[Dreadful Sagittarius]

Well, what is your 'something'?

I would like some help/tips/whatever on how to make my military/other factbooks more realistic. Actually, a better word would be: believable. Or at least as realistic/believable as they can be when they're based in a fictional universe. The people in the Military Consultation Thread looked at me like I was an idiot, so... Any help from you guys in this thread?

You were asking about how to make your FT military 'realistic'. Most in MT don't see FT as being realistic at all, so that's why I directed you here.

With that said, how can you be FT and not capable of space travel?

[Yumeiyo]

Tagged

[Ekoridge]

Link to what you want looked at?

Air, Artillery, & Naval units
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=ekor ... /id=158693
Ground Troops
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=ekor ... /id=158028

I would like some help/tips/whatever on how to make my military/other factbooks more realistic. Actually, a better word would be: believable. Or at least as realistic/believable as they can be when they're based in a fictional universe. The people in the Military Consultation Thread looked at me like I was an idiot, so... Any help from you guys in this thread?

You were asking about how to make your FT military 'realistic'. Most in MT don't see FT as being realistic at all, so that's why I directed you here.
With that said, how can you be FT and not capable of space travel?

It's a bit of RP stuff, but long story short,
1. My nation doesn't do military stuff in space, let alone fleets or the like.
2. Space travel has been restricted by other, more powerful nations in the RP. (Whom already have the capacity for space travel, this restriction will be lifted soon enough if the RP continues as planned.)
3. I didn't know 'FT' required space travel, and I mentioned previously that my nation is also in a weird time period. I'm thinking maybe PMT? (I'm not the greatest on terminology), I'll assume that most people would call it an 'alternate timeline' of sorts. I'm sorry for the confusion.

[Vorkova]

Link to what you want looked at?

Air, Artillery, & Naval units
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=ekor ... /id=158693
Ground Troops
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=ekor ... /id=158028

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Only problem I can see is that two turreted tank your using. Tanks with more than one turret generally don't work well.

1. My nation doesn't do military stuff in space, let alone fleets or the like.
2. Space travel has been restricted by other, more powerful nations in the RP. (Whom already have the capacity for space travel, this restriction will be lifted soon enough if the RP continues as planned.)
3. I didn't know 'FT' required space travel, and I mentioned previously that my nation is also in a weird time period. I'm thinking maybe PMT? (I'm not the greatest on terminology), I'll assume that most people would call it an 'alternate timeline' of sorts. I'm sorry for the confusion.

FT is generally regarded as Star Trek or Star Wars type technology. FTL drives, space fleets and the like. You sound like PMT bordering FT.

[Ekoridge]

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Only problem I can see is that two turreted tank your using. Tanks with more than one turret generally don't work well.

By two turret tank you mean; two stationary barrels side by side? Because, I don't think I mentioned it in there, but the idea I had is to have two barrels rotating on an axis. Like; one barrel fires while the other reloads. Does that seem any more plausible?

FT is generally regarded as Star Trek or Star Wars type technology. FTL drives, space fleets and the like. You sound like PMT bordering FT.

I've never really had to use terms like 'FT' 'PMT' or the like to relate my tech level to someone else, so I was unsure. Thanks, next time someone asks I'll know how to describe it.

[Vorkova]

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Only problem I can see is that two turreted tank your using. Tanks with more than one turret generally don't work well.

By two turret tank you mean; two stationary barrels side by side? Because, I don't think I mentioned it in there, but the idea I had is to have two barrels rotating on an axis. Like; one barrel fires while the other reloads. Does that seem any more plausible?

Oh, sorry, I thought it was a dual turret tank. Dual barrel tanks popup in FT sometimes, but it's still better to have only one. Why mount two small guns when you could have one big one? Gun power is everything in armoured warfare. You need to be unable to penetrate your enemies armour, which is much easier with a single, larger gun.

[Avenio]

FT is generally regarded as Star Trek or Star Wars type technology. FTL drives, space fleets and the like. You sound like PMT bordering FT.

Directed both to you and Ekoridge, but generally the dividing line between 'PMT and 'FT' is just the existence of faster-than-light travel of some sort, and nothing else. It's an intensely artificial dividing line, since there are lots of high science fiction works that involve travel between the stars, fantastical technologies, aliens and whatnot but don't have faster-than-light travel, but mechanistically and metafictionally it makes the most sense in a cooperative RP climate. If your given civilization has science fiction-degree technology but no FTL, your ability to RP with anyone without long interludes of cryosleep or what have you is basically limited to the setting of your solar system and nowhere else, and that gets difficult and boring to try and work around. If you don't have the ability to get to space at all, that limits your ability to RP even further, since anyone you want to RP with basically has to come to your planet and land in order to interact.

Which is fine, and I'm sure you could absolutely RP that if you had the skill and the sheer stubbornness to stick to it, but you should definitely weigh your ability to participate in the community and how much work/pain would be involved trying to cram your existing structure into the system in the balance when you're making writing about your civilization of choice.

[Vorkova]

FT is generally regarded as Star Trek or Star Wars type technology. FTL drives, space fleets and the like. You sound like PMT bordering FT.

Directed both to you and Ekoridge, but generally the dividing line between 'PMT and 'FT' is just the existence of faster-than-light travel of some sort, and nothing else. It's an intensely artificial dividing line, since there are lots of high science fiction works that involve travel between the stars, fantastical technologies, aliens and whatnot but don't have faster-than-light travel, but mechanistically and metafictionally it makes the most sense in a cooperative RP climate. If your given civilization has science fiction-degree technology but no FTL, your ability to RP with anyone without long interludes of cryosleep or what have you is basically limited to the setting of your solar system and nowhere else, and that gets difficult and boring to try and work around. If you don't have the ability to get to space at all, that limits your ability to RP even further, since anyone you want to RP with basically has to come to your planet and land in order to interact.

Which is fine, and I'm sure you could absolutely RP that if you had the skill and the sheer stubbornness to stick to it, but you should definitely weigh your ability to participate in the community and how much work/pain would be involved trying to cram your existing structure into the system in the balance when you're making writing about your civilization of choice.

So FTL is generally considered the only dividing line? I always assumed PMT was the next decade (Rail guns, some cybernetics, ect), and anything that comes after is FT.

[Ekoridge]

If your given civilization has science fiction-degree technology but no FTL, your ability to RP with anyone without long interludes of cryosleep or what have you is basically limited to the setting of your solar system and nowhere else, and that gets difficult and boring to try and work around. If you don't have the ability to get to space at all, that limits your ability to RP even further, since anyone you want to RP with basically has to come to your planet and land in order to interact.
Which is fine, and I'm sure you could absolutely RP that if you had the skill and the sheer stubbornness to stick to it, but it is going to be a decision you're going to have to make.

Well, in the RP I'm currently in, everyone's on the same planet. So the fact that I don't have FTL is not that important. Now that recently some nations have started exploring and colonizing other planets, that could definitely become more of a problem later on.

Oh, sorry, I thought it was a dual turret tank. Dual barrel tanks popup in FT sometimes, but it's still better to have only one. Why mount two small guns when you could have one big one? Gun power is everything in armoured warfare. You need to be able to penetrate your enemies armour, which is much easier with a single, larger gun.

Ok, I'll take that into consideration. I merely thought it would be a cool aesthetic-type thing to have, honestly. Even if those Dual-Headed tanks don't work well, I still have my MBT, the Dredoith. Still, if the Dual-Heads use 76.2mm, that should be able to break through some light/medium armor, right?
Also, ditto on the PMT thing, I assumed the same.

[Vorkova]

If your given civilization has science fiction-degree technology but no FTL, your ability to RP with anyone without long interludes of cryosleep or what have you is basically limited to the setting of your solar system and nowhere else, and that gets difficult and boring to try and work around. If you don't have the ability to get to space at all, that limits your ability to RP even further, since anyone you want to RP with basically has to come to your planet and land in order to interact.
Which is fine, and I'm sure you could absolutely RP that if you had the skill and the sheer stubbornness to stick to it, but it is going to be a decision you're going to have to make.

Well, in the RP I'm currently in, everyone's on the same planet. So the fact that I don't have FTL is not that important. Now that recently some nations have started exploring and colonizing other planets, that could definitely become more of a problem later on.

Oh, sorry, I thought it was a dual turret tank. Dual barrel tanks popup in FT sometimes, but it's still better to have only one. Why mount two small guns when you could have one big one? Gun power is everything in armoured warfare. You need to be able to penetrate your enemies armour, which is much easier with a single, larger gun.

Ok, I'll take that into consideration. I merely thought it would be a cool aesthetic-type thing to have, honestly. Even if those Dual-Headed tanks don't work well, I still have my MBT, the Dredoith. Still, if the Dual-Heads use 76.2mm, that should be able to break through some light/medium armor, right?

What kind of guns are they? Conventional? 76mm is small for even MT, where the standard is around 120-140mm for an MBT.

[Ekoridge]

Ok, I'll take that into consideration. I merely thought it would be a cool aesthetic-type thing to have, honestly. Even if those Dual-Headed tanks don't work well, I still have my MBT, the Dredoith. Still, if the Dual-Heads use 76.2mm, that should be able to break through some light/medium armor, right?

What kind of guns are they? Conventional? 76mm is small for even MT, where the standard is around 120-140mm for an MBT.

Well my MBTs, the Dredoith use 152mm, but the Dual-head tanks use 'special' 76mm what special means is beyond me, and I'm the one who wrote it. What could I use in place of the word 'special' to make the rounds more effective? Or do you think I could pull off replacing the conventional projectile with some sort of railgun or other FT kind of stuff? If so, what?

[Vorkova]

What kind of guns are they? Conventional? 76mm is small for even MT, where the standard is around 120-140mm for an MBT.

Well my MBTs, the Dredoith use 152mm, but the Dual-head tanks use 'special' 76mm what special means is beyond me, and I'm the one who wrote it. What could I use in place of the word 'special' to make the rounds more effective? Or do you think I could pull off replacing the conventional projectile with some sort of railgun or other FT kind of stuff? If so, what?

Well, why do you even need the Dual-Head? Is it an anti-tank or anti-infantry vehicle? There's no point in using two tanks when you can just use one.

[Ekoridge]

Well my MBTs, the Dredoith use 152mm, but the Dual-head tanks use 'special' 76mm what special means is beyond me, and I'm the one who wrote it. What could I use in place of the word 'special' to make the rounds more effective? Or do you think I could pull off replacing the conventional projectile with some sort of railgun or other FT kind of stuff? If so, what?

Well, why do you even need the Dual-Head? Is it an anti-tank or anti-infantry vehicle? There's no point in using two tanks when you can just use one.

Well, now that I look at it, I mention the MBTs being anti-infantry and anti-air... maybe I got that mixed up, lol. Maybe the dual-barrel tanks could be used for anti-air, considering that a good portion of the enemy aircraft are fairly slow and bulky? I know I only need one tank design, but I liked the idea of a dual-barrel tank, but I also had a feeling that there would be unforeseen problems with the dual-barreled design (Considering there aren't any in use today, I took that as a sign that it wasn't the best idea(as you just confirmed))
So I went the safe route, and made a MBT that was fully operational and conventional, while keeping the dual-barrel for the 'futuristic/experimental' factor. Seeing as I don't need it as it is now, how could I adapt it to be useful?

[Vorkova]

Well, why do you even need the Dual-Head? Is it an anti-tank or anti-infantry vehicle? There's no point in using two tanks when you can just use one.

Well, now that I look at it, I mention the MBTs being anti-infantry and anti-air... maybe I got that mixed up, lol. Maybe the dual-barrel tanks could be used for anti-air, considering that a good portion of the enemy aircraft are fairly slow and bulky? I know I only need one tank design, but I liked the idea of a dual-barrel tank, but I also had a feeling that there would be unforeseen problems with the dual-barreled design (Considering there aren't any in use today, I took that as a sign that it wasn't the best idea(as you just confirmed))
So I went the safe route, and made a MBT that was fully operational and conventional, while keeping the dual-barrel for the 'futuristic/experimental' factor. Seeing as I don't need it as it is now, how could I adapt it to be useful?

You could replace the dual barrels with autocannons or Gatling guns and use it to defend against helicopters or low flying aircraft. Something like this, perhaps? You can use them for anti-personnel duty as well, and I don't think you mentioned a SPAAG anywhere. This is pretty good for a base as well - the missiles are definitely useful.