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

[SquareDisc City]

No closed system can violate conservation of energy, but a Bussard ramjet ship is not a closed system - it's taking in hydrogen, fusing it, and spitting out helium. The issue is in the details - getting enough hydrogen in with low enough drag to be useful - but the general principle is sound. One paper proposes using the CNO cycle or a similar catalyzed fusion cycle to provide much higher fusion rates than for proton-proton fusion. Though coming back to the logistics issue, while in theory the carbon is conserved, in practice there are likely to be some losses requiring the fusion reactors to periodically be "refuelled" even though by mass it's much less than the hydrogen fused. A similar concern is likely to arise if you propose more exotic means of producing energy from the hydrogen.

[Federal Republic of Free States]

Open Question: How prevelant is "live fire" exercises and training in your nations military?

[Source Swarm]

No closed system can violate conservation of energy, but a Bussard ramjet ship is not a closed system - it's taking in hydrogen, fusing it, and spitting out helium. The issue is in the details - getting enough hydrogen in with low enough drag to be useful - but the general principle is sound. One paper proposes using the CNO cycle or a similar catalyzed fusion cycle to provide much higher fusion rates than for proton-proton fusion. Though coming back to the logistics issue, while in theory the carbon is conserved, in practice there are likely to be some losses requiring the fusion reactors to periodically be "refueled" even though by mass it's much less than the hydrogen fused. A similar concern is likely to arise if you propose more exotic means of producing energy from the hydrogen.

Thinking this through, the limit on your (power system's) endurance will no longer be travel time, but time at rest. I mean, think about it: your reactor is relying on collected hydrogen, which you collect by moving at speed. Standing and fighting, then, is going to deplete your energy reserves, and you'll only make up the loss over baseline by being refuelled.

It's an interesting limitation to be sure.

[Tierra Prime]

I've stated in the support ships section of my factbook that some of my transport ships have been converted into carriers, though I haven't detailed these carriers in the warship section of my factbook. My navy would consider these carriers ad hoc modifications of the original transports, not actual, dedicated fleet carriers, so does it make sense they aren't included in the warship section? I haven't put down any stats for them in the support ship section either, all I did was say they can exist.

"Due to their large size, some Endeavour-class transports have been converted into heavy fleet carriers, designated the Vengeance-class, which are capable of carrying up to four hundred starcraft of varying types, including bombers."

Well, since there's no inter-stellar treaty in FT that defines what a fleet carrier or a combatant is you can do anything you want. However, it sounds similar to IJN and USN programs to convert merchantmen and other civilian ships into carriers during World War II. (See, e.g. Sangamon class and Taiyo class) Although smaller in scale than fleet carriers, they were definitely still considered combatants. Legally, I'm certain most would consider a merchantman conversion into a warship a combatant, and subject to the laws of war as a combatant. Nonetheless, if you want to say it's still classified as a merchantman rather than a warship, feel free to do so.

Is any ship that's armed going to be classified as a warship? For example, my hospital ships are equipped with energy weapons for defensive purposes (Anti-missile, anti-aircraft and anti-asteroid duties). I don't classify them as warships and wouldn't use them to engage an enemy, but they might not know it's a hospital ship considering it's armed, unless I constantly broadcast it. Even if I chose to do that, there will always be the guy that ignores it, hence why my hospital ships have laser weapons.

[The United Dominion]

Well, since there's no inter-stellar treaty in FT that defines what a fleet carrier or a combatant is you can do anything you want. However, it sounds similar to IJN and USN programs to convert merchantmen and other civilian ships into carriers during World War II. (See, e.g. Sangamon class and Taiyo class) Although smaller in scale than fleet carriers, they were definitely still considered combatants. Legally, I'm certain most would consider a merchantman conversion into a warship a combatant, and subject to the laws of war as a combatant. Nonetheless, if you want to say it's still classified as a merchantman rather than a warship, feel free to do so.

Is any ship that's armed going to be classified as a warship? For example, my hospital ships are equipped with energy weapons for defensive purposes (Anti-missile, anti-aircraft and anti-asteroid duties). I don't classify them as warships and wouldn't use them to engage an enemy, but they might not know it's a hospital ship considering it's armed, unless I constantly broadcast it or something. Even if I did do that, there will always be the guy that ignores it, hence why I have point-defence lasers.

This is one of those cases where it depends on the player/nation. If you are hostile, then there is no reason for me to not fire upon your hospital ships. At best, a hospital ship is trying to keep people alive and well who can then be used (perhaps again) for cannon fodder against my people. If it is armed, then it can also be an active combatant, which is also a problem.

So yes, for my nation at least, your ships will be combatants and having any kind of weapons moves them up the list in threat assessment from where they would be if unarmed.

[Tierra Prime]

Is any ship that's armed going to be classified as a warship? For example, my hospital ships are equipped with energy weapons for defensive purposes (Anti-missile, anti-aircraft and anti-asteroid duties). I don't classify them as warships and wouldn't use them to engage an enemy, but they might not know it's a hospital ship considering it's armed, unless I constantly broadcast it or something. Even if I did do that, there will always be the guy that ignores it, hence why I have point-defence lasers.

This is one of those cases where it depends on the player/nation. If you are hostile, then there is no reason for me to not fire upon your hospital ships. At best, a hospital ship is trying to keep people alive and well who can then be used (perhaps again) for cannon fodder against my people. If it is armed, then it can also be an active combatant, which is also a problem.

So yes, for my nation at least, your ships will be combatants and having any kind of weapons moves them up the list in threat assessment from where they would be if unarmed.

It's the same IRL. If a ship identifies itself as a hospital ship, is painted in the colours of the Red Cross, and is unarmed, it is illegal to fire upon it. It's actually a warcrime according to the Geneva Convention if a remember correctly. Now, the British Royal Navy has a class of hospital ship that, although identifies itself as a hospital ship and is painted in the colours of the Red Cross, is armed for some reason and designated a "primary casualty receiving ship" - meaning it can be fired upon no problem. As far as my nation is concerned, any kind of medical ship is out of bounds, no matter if it's armed or unarmed, providing it doesn't engage my forces directly. My people would see any kind of attack on a hospital ship as a war crime, but then our military's all work on different doctrines, and there is no Geneva Convention equivalent to enforce any kind of standards in regards to warfare, so either position is technically correct.

[Excidium Planetis]

Then we'll settle for more starship speed, rather than a larger magnetic field. Then we will still scoop up more hydrogen for the same power usage.

Also, what the heck is an overunity device?
(and yes, you are right, it is a nuclear reaction)

Any device capable of generating more energy than is put into it. Say, a Brussard Ramjet with an EM scoop and the fusion core AND the remass all provided by the ambient hydrogen collected in flight.

Um... My design doesn't use more energy than put in to it... It never produces more energy than is generated in using the hydrogen as nuclear fuel. It is essentially a nuclear fusion powered starship that collects its own nuclear fuel while flying. All energy needed was already present in the universe. You might as well say a cargo jet refueling in flight is an overunity device.

It might have very very long endurance... but you're going to have to get it up to speed first. And then slow it down. Otherwise it is of no use at all.

It doesn't have to speed up by its own power... Perhaps you could string out a series of rocket boosters in its flight path, and accelerate it that way?

Also, there is no need to slow down... What if your goal is simply to escape X? What if this is all just a hypothetical in which slowing down is unnecessary?

(Brussard Ramjets don't work the way you describe either. They gather interstellar medium for reaction mass to be accelerated by the heat of the onboard reactor. The fusion reactor is prefulled before the BR-bearing vessel ever leaves port. I suppose its fusion could be sustained by diverting some of the captured hydrogen (not all of which will be isotopically useful for fusion) into the core, you need a hell of a lot more hydrogen than would be available.

Bussard Ramjets are traditionally designed to be used with a prefueled nuclear reactor, yes. I was specifically (if you even bothered to read my posts thoroughly, which it seems you have not) referring to a modified version as you described here, with some of the hydrogen being diverted to the reactor.

Making the ship faster doesn't solve the energy problem either. You're just moving the expenditure from the magnetic field to the speed. (And that's not how orbital mechanics works anyway.)

The ship can be brought up to speed without the use of the Ramjet... the ramjet only needs enough thrust to counter the drag creates by the hydrogen.

Then we'll settle for more starship speed, rather than a larger magnetic field. Then we will still scoop up more hydrogen for the same power usage.

No you won't. Going faster means you end up with more drag, the same as if you had used a larger scoop. That's inevitable, because your goal is to scoop the same amount of hydrogen.

Does hydrogen create more drag than the energy it provides the Ramjet (especially when using a magnetic scoop)? Surely not, since the underlying principle of a Bussard Ramjet is to use the hydrogen to provide thrust. You should be able to collect enough hydrogen both to provide enough thrust to counter the drag, and to power the ship.

The problem with a Bussard ramjet is the amount of energy required to not just scoop up the hydrogen but to compress it to sufficient densities to achieve fusion. That was the problem to which no solution was found, and it became worse when it was realized the interstellar medium was less dense than Robert Bussard expected when he proposed his design. That's why the "rocket-ramjet" hybrid was later proposed, using the scooped hydrogen solely as reaction mass and not as the actual power source.

Hmmm... What if we don't use a magnetic field at all? What if we use an Alcubierre Drive warp bubble to capture particles for fuel? A sort of FTL Ramjet?

[The United Dominion]

Open Question: How prevelant is "live fire" exercises and training in your nations military?

It will vary from community to community which ones train their security forces or military personnel tax-levies in more of a real-life scenario and which ones use simulations. At the end of the day, I don't think there would be much of a difference between the two in as far as the weapons themselves go, at least for the DEWs. Specialty projectile weapons probably are trained with using live ammunition since at the very least, they need to be able to deal with more kinetic recoil ... though actually, ixee are sturdy enough that recoil probably isn't too bad anyway, so there really wouldn't be too much need to get used to it.

So, I suppose that the real answer is "not very" but as always, is dependent on circumstances. New weapons are obviously tested, so that is one such circumstance in which there is a live-fire exercise.

[Neornith]

Open Question: How prevelant is "live fire" exercises and training in your nations military?

Very much so, the various Warrior Houses practice together constantly to keep their skills at a fine tuned edge

[SquareDisc City]

ICly the issue isn't so much "Is it a warship", but "Is it going to be targeted". And the answer to that is that even if you don't count omnicidal aggressors, there are still going to be enemies who will have no qualms about firing on a "hospital ship", a "civilian liner", a "media vessel", and so on. I don't believe there's a strong concept of international law in NSFT like there is in real life. Equally there will be enemies who will respect an unarmed ship and afford it some protections, so then your nation might consider the pros and cons of removing weapons from such ships.

OOCly, I say just don't do anything that looks like an arse-pull. RPing a warship converted from a merchant ship is fine, as is RPing a ship that you've never mentioned before, assuming in both cases that there's nothing objectionable in terms of claimed size or performance. RPing a merchant ship and then suddenly pulling out its guns when you're three feet from the target, with no prior indication in your writing or Factbook that it's an armed ship, is not fine.

[Lubyak]

Well, since there's no inter-stellar treaty in FT that defines what a fleet carrier or a combatant is you can do anything you want. However, it sounds similar to IJN and USN programs to convert merchantmen and other civilian ships into carriers during World War II. (See, e.g. Sangamon class and Taiyo class) Although smaller in scale than fleet carriers, they were definitely still considered combatants. Legally, I'm certain most would consider a merchantman conversion into a warship a combatant, and subject to the laws of war as a combatant. Nonetheless, if you want to say it's still classified as a merchantman rather than a warship, feel free to do so.

Is any ship that's armed going to be classified as a warship? For example, my hospital ships are equipped with energy weapons for defensive purposes (Anti-missile, anti-aircraft and anti-asteroid duties). I don't classify them as warships and wouldn't use them to engage an enemy, but they might not know it's a hospital ship considering it's armed, unless I constantly broadcast it. Even if I chose to do that, there will always be the guy that ignores it, hence why my hospital ships have laser weapons.

Well, this is getting into a field of international law, of which we have next to none in NS FT. In real life we have treaties that agree to universal laws of war and institutions to punish those who break those laws. In FT, we hardly have any form of international institutions at all. As such, it's going to depend on the state in question. Some may declare that any vessel with weapons is a combatant or auxillary combatant, and thus a viable or target. Others may have a different definition which excludes ships with basic self-defence equipment from being considered warships. Although maybe you and whatever nation you're RPing with have a treaty that defines what a warship is and says that you can't attack hospital ships. Really, these are all up in the air for you to determine.

[Imperial Nalydya]

Is any ship that's armed going to be classified as a warship? For example, my hospital ships are equipped with energy weapons for defensive purposes (Anti-missile, anti-aircraft and anti-asteroid duties). I don't classify them as warships and wouldn't use them to engage an enemy, but they might not know it's a hospital ship considering it's armed, unless I constantly broadcast it. Even if I chose to do that, there will always be the guy that ignores it, hence why my hospital ships have laser weapons.

Well, this is getting into a field of international law, of which we have next to none in NS FT. In real life we have treaties that agree to universal laws of war and institutions to punish those who break those laws. In FT, we hardly have any form of international institutions at all. As such, it's going to depend on the state in question. Some may declare that any vessel with weapons is a combatant or auxillary combatant, and thus a viable or target. Others may have a different definition which excludes ships with basic self-defence equipment from being considered warships. Although maybe you and whatever nation you're RPing with have a treaty that defines what a warship is and says that you can't attack hospital ships. Really, these are all up in the air for you to determine.

Pretty much. As far as the VRZ is concerned, for example, if it has guns it can be a legitimate target. You're not likely to keep a hospital ship from being targeted, I'm afraid, if it's armed. Even with that said, not having guns does not preclude you from being targeted; merchant vessels and interstellar shipping in general are seen as cogs in a greater engine-of-war that should probably be stopped.

[Stormwrath]

Well, this is getting into a field of international law, of which we have next to none in NS FT. In real life we have treaties that agree to universal laws of war and institutions to punish those who break those laws. In FT, we hardly have any form of international institutions at all. As such, it's going to depend on the state in question. Some may declare that any vessel with weapons is a combatant or auxillary combatant, and thus a viable or target. Others may have a different definition which excludes ships with basic self-defence equipment from being considered warships. Although maybe you and whatever nation you're RPing with have a treaty that defines what a warship is and says that you can't attack hospital ships. Really, these are all up in the air for you to determine.

Pretty much. As far as the VRZ is concerned, for example, if it has guns it can be a legitimate target. You're not likely to keep a hospital ship from being targeted, I'm afraid, if it's armed. Even with that said, not having guns does not preclude you from being targeted; merchant vessels and interstellar shipping in general are seen as cogs in a greater engine-of-war that should probably be stopped.

Well, since we're talking about space warfare, it doesn't matter if an installation or a ship is armed or unarmed, military or civilian. They are all connected with each other in war, and it helps to cripple one of those connections to cripple all. Civilian targets are the most effective way to do that, as they drive the nation in everything, even the military.

[The Akasha Colony]

Does hydrogen create more drag than the energy it provides the Ramjet (especially when using a magnetic scoop)? Surely not, since the underlying principle of a Bussard Ramjet is to use the hydrogen to provide thrust. You should be able to collect enough hydrogen both to provide enough thrust to counter the drag, and to power the ship.

That's what Robert Bussard thought, but he did not take into account just how low the density of the interstellar medium was, nor the energy required to attract and compress sufficient quantities of hydrogen. It's really that second part that's the problem, because Bussard's proposed proton-proton fusion cycle would produce less energy than would be required to compress the hydrogen to fusion densities. That's why later revisits broached the idea of the CNO cycle which is more energetic but requires catalysts.

Hmmm... What if we don't use a magnetic field at all? What if we use an Alcubierre Drive warp bubble to capture particles for fuel? A sort of FTL Ramjet?

Then we're getting into the realm of softer stuff and it gets easier anyway.

There have been suggestions that a relatively small magnetic field could be used provided the ionizing mechanism be made proportionately more powerful, but this of course trades energy lost to drag into energy used to power a really strong laser or other ionizing mechanism.

[Vocenae]

I think the question has been sufficiently answered, at this point. In the end what matters most in an RP isn't the science behind the thing, but how it looks and effects the story within the thread. That's the long and short of it. Yes, it's fine to attempt to understand the science behind the stuff that we use, but much like tech, how something works isn't going to be brought up in RP 99% of the time.

Moving onto the question about live fire exercises...

Space is big, and filled with all sorts of unscrupulous, piratey sorts. So hopefully your star state is doing the pro-active thing and fielding operations against them to keep their people on their toes.

[Estainia]

I like to imagine that my fellows shoot at pirates and the like. Live fire training has been standard since the adoption of steel shells however (way back in MT for me since Estainia is trans-era), as the Imperial Army goes by the axiom it's not training if you're not firing actual bullets and no one occasionally dies.

Question for the (presumably feudal) monarchies, what level of delegated power do you afford to your nobility in comparison to the king/emperor/whatever it is you call him in your heathentongues?

[The Ten Thousand Suns]

The Grand Empire prefers extensive VR simulations and VR-enhanced wargames to live fire practices. Live fire exercises are used occasionally for weapons inspection and propaganda purposes. Unarmed training - usually for stealth and tactics training is relatively common.

As for the feudal structure, each ruler controls their own territory and in theory, the territory of all subordinate rulers. In practice, direct intervention in the affairs of subordinate rulers is rather rare. A ruler will tend to get consensus from their subordinates (and often the ruler they themselves report to) before making a change. Consensus is important - hroa'agh society tends to operate as a "Big Man" society (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_man_(anthropology) ), and a ruler who doesn't have the support of her subordinates is asking for a popular coup.

[SquareDisc City]

While simulation work is likely to save money and enhance safety, I imagine some live fire exercises will still be in use. The UPT armed forces wouldn't want a soldier's first experience firing a real weapon to be in a real combat situation, no matter how good the sims ought to be. And with some of the destructive power around in an FT setting, it's worth those in command of such power have an apprehension of what it can do that can't come from a simulation, that only comes from blowing a crater in a real planet then setting foot on its rim before the lava has even cooled.

Being on the receiving end of live fire, though, is something I can't see happening much in a "civilized" and democratic nation. Small elite units infantry units might use it, aimed in a controlled and acceptably safe manner. Spacecraft, armoured vehicles, and the like might be exposed to low-intensity fire that poses no real threat to the crews, but that would still be a costly exercise. Of course despotic regimes might have far less problem with shooting directly at their would-be soldiers.

[Excidium Planetis]

Open Question: How prevelant is "live fire" exercises and training in your nations military?

Prevalent. We use simulations frequently, but nothing beats live fire, really.

In space, usually our crews will fire dud missiles at a specified target (usually an asteroid), while the crew of another ship will attempt to intercept the missiles. Automated point defenses have decreased how much the "defending" crew can really do, and it falls on the attacking team to devise clever ways to bypass the point defense.

Training for ground combat is rarer, as our ground forces do not usually see action.

And, as noted by me sometime earlier, my nation has engaged in an actual war at one time as a training exercise. The results were very good, and led to the development of several new tactics and technologies, as well as providing valuable real-war experience for our units in a very safe way.

[Stormwrath]

Open Question: How prevelant is "live fire" exercises and training in your nations military?

For PersFed:
It is prevalent in the Omospondia, even though there are simulations as well. Both projectile and direct energy weapons are used. It is often common for the Astrostratos to host combat exercises for their infantrymen and spec ops groups on some of the most hostile worlds in the Sivulon Reach. The Astronautikon on the other hand have live fire exercises to a more limited degree.

[Source Swarm]

Open Question: How prevelant is "live fire" exercises and training in your nations military?

Not especially, actually. As others have noted, counterpiracy and other police-action-type exercises provide about the bounds of live fire incidents. The Swarm is neither warlike nor particularly interested in prosecuting a war.

That having been said, simulated training is commonplace. Unlike in organic militaries, no disparity exists between the reality of a VR input or a real one, other than certain minor indicators (reminding you that you are in a simulation). Sensory input is conveyed using the same digital signals it always is.

It's possible this partial inability to distinguish real warfare from wargames is a factor in the rather cavalier attitude most military Clients bring to the table.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

The Russian Empire conducts its infantry training using a reduced charge setting and less than lethal projectile for its infantry weapons. This generally keeps deaths to roughly 10% of battlefield norms, and reduces permanent injury substantially. Bayonets are swapped for blunted versions which stun rather than slicing clean through any matter they come into contact with.

Powered armor, of course, can't really be replaced, so generally cavalrymen are instructed to attempt to avoid trampling infantrymen too much, and will have the cost of any equipment they break docked from their pay.

[Western Pacific Territories]

So I have a FT puppet I want to use in a RP, and I'm looking for some. Are there any good FT war RP's that are starting up and look promising?

[Kyrusia]

So I have a FT puppet I want to use in a RP, and I'm looking for some. Are there any good FT war RP's that are starting up and look promising?

Strictly speaking, this thread isn't designed for advertising roleplays, even Future Tech ones. I would suggest dropping by the RP Think Tank or stopping-by The Local Cluster and immersing yourself into the FT community so you can get to know other players and, thus, potential roleplay partners.

Hope that helps!

[Source Swarm]

How do some of you other FT nations approach the issue of prisoners of war? Granted we have no geneva conventions or any other real international law, so it'd be interesting to see other players' takes on such a thing.