NATION

PASSWORD

NationStates Post-Modern Tech Community Thread

A staging-point for declarations of war and other major diplomatic events. [In character]

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Roania
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1782
Founded: Antiquity
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Roania » Sat Jul 07, 2018 11:45 am

https://discord.gg/febnCaH

So, i've come up with a discord for all varieties of worldbuilding, on the principle that we're all facing many of the same challenges. We've got a good team of mentors and players, and we've been dry-running for the past two weeks.
Ten Thousand Years to the Lord and Lady of Ten Thousand Years!

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Minister
 
Posts: 3445
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Sat Jul 07, 2018 1:03 pm

Would it be possible to mount a 60 mm etc cannon and an elctrolaser on a fighter bomber?

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Minister
 
Posts: 3445
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Sat Jul 21, 2018 6:02 pm

I have gotten another one of those ideas. If you linked together several Cloud 9 tensegrity spheres or as Buckminister Fuller calls them Spherical Tensegrity Atmosphere Research Station, could you build a permanent high altitude launch platform for reusable rockets.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidewalt ... 6177284216

User avatar
Haishan
Diplomat
 
Posts: 679
Founded: Sep 08, 2010
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Haishan » Wed Aug 01, 2018 8:42 pm

UniversalCommons wrote:Would it be possible to mount a 60 mm etc cannon and an elctrolaser on a fighter bomber?


On the 60mm ETC cannon, if you have enough space and mass allowance, sure. But considering the size of such weapon, ordinary jet fighters might find it difficult as the bigger calibre, the bigger the resultant recoil from operation, necessitating certain tradeoffs. On electrolaser, it's a different ball game. While laser weapons are feasible, electrolaser poses a different kind of problem.

As electrolaser involves making the atmosphere between the emitter and the target conductive to electricity, this in my opinion, will cause certain limitations; fast moving air may be able to dissipate the created conductive channel (usually plasma) and thus affecting the overall efficiency of the weapon. if one is really unlucky, the created plasma channel will drift backwards...and electrocute the emitter instead.

It might be simpler to just use the laser as it is sans electro-thing given with proper application, the laser can cause small structural faults on target and let aerodynamic forces do the rest. Or in air to ground context, specific targeting to induce structural failure such as igniting the target's fuel tanks or similar.

On air to ground application, electrolaser might be worthwhile but what's stopping one to just use the 60mm ETC cannon and bombard the ground? The question of electrolaser then will be rather circumstantial and heavily depends on the context. Don't read this wrong, one may have the way they wanted but on practicality purposes, electrolaser is quite complex for little gain, in context of a flying platform.
Last edited by Haishan on Wed Aug 01, 2018 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
STATE CAPITALIST WITH CHAOS THEORISM | THE TECHNO-INDUSCRACY OF HAISHAN
ORDER THROUGH DISORDER
Nyhizi kizcyk kur

PROPONENT OF : UNCONVENTIONAL ELECTROMAGNETICS, NEW MATERIALS, METAMATERIALS, ENERGETICS AND, LASERS
GLOBAL AEROSPACE TRADE ASSOCIATION MEMBER | SCNS CONSTELLATION INITIATIVE (SIC)

Helio: currently working on a replacement though, it will be like 3x more powerful
TheGrimReaper: Builds cutting-edge technology > already designing a replacement by the time it is released :haishan:
Haishan, always three steps ahead than Her competitors.

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Minister
 
Posts: 3445
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Thu Aug 02, 2018 1:54 am

Haishan wrote:
UniversalCommons wrote:Would it be possible to mount a 60 mm etc cannon and an elctrolaser on a fighter bomber?


On the 60mm ETC cannon, if you have enough space and mass allowance, sure. But considering the size of such weapon, ordinary jet fighters might find it difficult as the bigger calibre, the bigger the resultant recoil from operation, necessitating certain tradeoffs. On electrolaser, it's a different ball game. While laser weapons are feasible, electrolaser poses a different kind of problem.

As electrolaser involves making the atmosphere between the emitter and the target conductive to electricity, this in my opinion, will cause certain limitations; fast moving air may be able to dissipate the created conductive channel (usually plasma) and thus affecting the overall efficiency of the weapon. if one is really unlucky, the created plasma channel will drift backwards...and electrocute the emitter instead.

It might be simpler to just use the laser as it is sans electro-thing given with proper application, the laser can cause small structural faults on target and let aerodynamic forces do the rest. Or in air to ground context, specific targeting to induce structural failure such as igniting the target's fuel tanks or similar.

On air to ground application, electrolaser might be worthwhile but what's stopping one to just use the 60mm ETC cannon and bombard the ground? The question of electrolaser then will be rather circumstantial and heavily depends on the context. Don't read this wrong, one may have the way they wanted but on practicality purposes, electrolaser is quite complex for little gain, in context of a flying platform.


I was thinking of something big like an updated version of the Tupolev or the Rockwell B-1, a kind of modernized flying fortress with a mix of tactical high energy lasers, electrothermal cannons and bombs. To make it particularly interesting we would add a Hypermach engine or a jet engine charged with superconductors. It fits with our technology platform we have been developing wind turbines and wave turbines with superconducting technology to make them more efficient. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/10/s ... s-are.html I don't think it would be mach 5, but it might be mach 2 or mach 3.
Last edited by UniversalCommons on Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:13 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
The Macabees
Senior N&I RP Mentor
 
Posts: 3492
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Macabees » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:17 pm

Very interesting Twitter thread on the economics of [space] exploration and colonization.

User avatar
Allanea
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23734
Founded: Antiquity
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Allanea » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:48 pm

The Macabees wrote:Very interesting Twitter thread on the economics of [space] exploration and colonization.


There's a question that both space exploration enthusiasts and opponents don't seem to want to answer, and it's crucial to the whole debate:

What is the price that the different space activities need to have for them to be economically viable?

Let us imagine a counterfactual, a sort of economic teleportation, if you will - suppose space launches were entirely free (that's obviously impossible). Obviously if this were the case, humanity would experience an era of space abundance where we'd be just willing our colonies to Mars by snapping our fingers.

Now, obviously, again, free space launches are physically not possible. However, it's also obvious that there is some kind of cost boundary at which, say, a moon colony or Mars colony becomes viable.

Now, currently, the cheapest you can get cargo to orbit is $1600 per kilogram (the person authoring the tweets is somewhat out of date on this). Obviously, again, neither $2000, nor $1600, nor $1400 per kilogram is a viable cost for getting significant amounts of things and people into space, and obviously, there are other issues and not only launch costs.

But I think it would clarify the debate a lot if we said 'it needs to cost X to be viable'.

I know that there are some posters on this forum who have intimate knowledge of this subject so I'd like to see their input.
#HyperEarthBestEarth

Sometimes, there really is money on the sidewalk.

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Minister
 
Posts: 3445
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:31 pm

It costs $6708 per kilogram to launch from Space X. This is a reusable rocket. Lets say I have a crazy airship the size of a Walrus Hula and pick the thing up into the air and launch from altitude like a reusable space rocket, you cut the costs by 20% or even crazier a giant cloud 9 like the STARS, Then lets say you improve the manufacturing costs and make your ship out of recycled materials and 3D printed plastics and are able to cut costs another 20%. You are down to $4295 per launch. Now lets say you pull off around 100 -- 250 kilogram satellite launches and charge 5000 per kilogram 1,250,000 per launch cheaper than anyone else. Everyone is charging 20,000 per kilogram. People have put a lot of satellites up at $20,000 per kilogram.

You have just cornered the satellite market. The costs goes way down after you reuse the launch vehicle 20 times before it blows up. You create routine automation for the launch from your high altitude platform. Your prices go down again because of reuse to $3000 per kilogram. You now start sending up cargo pods which can manufacture pharmaceuticals, exotic materials, and computer chips which are worth more than $3,000 per kilogram. Something like ZB Lan Optical Fiber . You have done a second income generating activity, manufacturing something no one else can make. It is not necessarily the whole product, but a piece for a new type of computer, part of a pharmaceutical, etc. Now you have two levels of manufacturing. You get greedy and decide you have to snatch that rock, the big one with 500 pounds of platinum in it. Industry gives you money to grab that rock before anyone else can. You now have some people in space to monitor that industry which makes money. It is not enough to keep those people up there, you have to keep them up there cheaply. You build transhab modules and you arrange to have people come up as tourists. You are bigelow aerospace. $1,000,000 per day to have a space holiday. It costs $300,000 to get them up there assuming 100 kg goes up. You now have a few more settlers. Your first rock returns. It has a giant advertisement on it and huge amounts of publicity, it makes the money from publicity initially. What is next. Get to that moon. Why the moon, Helium 3-- you can have fusion power with helium 3. Also it is possible to build fusion thermal rockets with water and Helium 3 both found on the moon. Initially the money is not what counts. You got there first and built there first.

Modification 08/18/2018
You develop a new type of rocket engine based on solid propellants. Paraffin is an ideal environmentally friendly fuel that will reduce your cost for fuel by an order of magnitude.
http://www.spg-corp.com/advanced-hybrid ... fuels.html This further reduces your costs to $2500 per kilogram.

You work on miniaturization of many of the components in the space craft to reduce weight. Then you do a general search across industries to find standardized industrial components to replace many of the parts with cheaper mass produced industrial grade parts from many different heavy industries-- trucking, airplanes, manufacturing, etc. This reduces the cost of valves and numerous standard electrical systems. The next step is to upgrade the battery and spark plug systems with standard batteries you might find in industry like lithium ion batteries in cars. We have standardized industrialized bio-batteries made from sugar. The changes further bring the costs down to $2000 per kilogram.

The DNEPR rocket created by the Russians could get a satellite into low earth orbit for about $2000 per kilogram.

More recently, The Falcon Heavy Rocket by Space X could get rockets to GEO for $1411 per kilogram with multiple flights ten of them it would go to $743 per kilogram. If it went to twenty flights, it would be below $500 per kilogram.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/02/r ... power.html

Now you are getting people up there. What is the next step, you build a space gun. The space gun can't send up people, it can send up supplies cheaply. A space gun costs about $250 per kilogram. Things like food, metals, wood, biologicals which are heavy and durable can be sent up fairly quickly. If you have a high altitude platform like a big tensegrity sphere that is heavy enough, you might even be able to use your space gun at high altitude allowing for more cargo and less chemicals for firing the shell. I think this would be kind of soft PMT. http://www.astronautix.com/a/abriefhist ... oject.html


OOC: ZB Lan Optical Fiber https://www.space.com/39039-made-in-spa ... -test.html
Last edited by UniversalCommons on Thu Aug 30, 2018 11:12 am, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
Naval Monte
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12899
Founded: Sep 04, 2014
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Naval Monte » Thu Aug 30, 2018 12:01 am

UniversalCommons wrote:Mag Lev Electric Cars
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/224 ... ev-spheres

I am looking at this and trying to figure out how you would make a Maglev Humvee, or even if it is possible to create a super maneuverable light artillery or troop transport.


To be honest as cool as a hover armored fighting vehicles will be in truth wheels and treads are better because not only are they much more simpler to make and as such are cheaper and easier to maintainer, but you will need a lot of power and resources to make a vehicle hover and most of those would be better used on a vehicle with wheels. One could say that a hover vehicle would do well with gun stabilization but even modern gun stabilizers are getting very good with targeting and accuracy and with PMT they would be better.

That is my piece of your going for Hard PMT, otherwise if it's soft than that is a different story.
Gnosis: Season of Samhain- A Dark Fantasy/Modern-Day Occult Horror and Conspiracy RP.
The Pub (P2tM RP Group)
Vim: Takes from Lumina- An Industrial Fantasy and Arcanepunk RP.

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Minister
 
Posts: 3445
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Sat Sep 01, 2018 9:45 am

If you still use wheels, would you use a non-pneumatic wheel system which is supposed to be more durable than regular wheels like a tweel tyre.

User avatar
Naval Monte
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12899
Founded: Sep 04, 2014
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Naval Monte » Sat Sep 01, 2018 5:16 pm

UniversalCommons wrote:If you still use wheels, would you use a non-pneumatic wheel system which is supposed to be more durable than regular wheels like a tweel tyre.


No idea.
Last edited by Naval Monte on Sat Sep 01, 2018 5:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Gnosis: Season of Samhain- A Dark Fantasy/Modern-Day Occult Horror and Conspiracy RP.
The Pub (P2tM RP Group)
Vim: Takes from Lumina- An Industrial Fantasy and Arcanepunk RP.

User avatar
Ardoki
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14497
Founded: Sep 14, 2013
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Ardoki » Sat Sep 29, 2018 9:51 pm

How tall could a building be? Say with an unlimited budget and PMT technology. Would buildings such as the Tyrell or Wallace corporations be possible?
Greater Ardokian Empire | It is Ardoki's destiny to rule the whole world!
Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Republic

Head of State: Grand Emperor Alistair Killian Moriarty
Head of Government: Grand Imperial Chancellor Kennedy Rowan Coleman
Legislature: Imperial Senate
Ruling Party: Imperial Progressive Party
Technology Level: MT (Primary) | PMT, FanT (Secondary)
Politics: Social Democrat
Religion: None
Personality Type: ENTP 3w4

User avatar
The Macabees
Senior N&I RP Mentor
 
Posts: 3492
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Macabees » Sun Sep 30, 2018 8:30 am

Ardoki wrote:How tall could a building be? Say with an unlimited budget and PMT technology. Would buildings such as the Tyrell or Wallace corporations be possible?


From a storyline point of view, together with how speculative we're getting as far as building materials, engineering, etc., I'd say yes.

User avatar
Allanea
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23734
Founded: Antiquity
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Allanea » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:48 am

Ardoki wrote:How tall could a building be? Say with an unlimited budget and PMT technology. Would buildings such as the Tyrell or Wallace corporations be possible?


You might want to look at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Seed_4000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_Tower
#HyperEarthBestEarth

Sometimes, there really is money on the sidewalk.

User avatar
Ardoki
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14497
Founded: Sep 14, 2013
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Ardoki » Mon Oct 01, 2018 8:00 pm

Thank you. :P
Greater Ardokian Empire | It is Ardoki's destiny to rule the whole world!
Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Republic

Head of State: Grand Emperor Alistair Killian Moriarty
Head of Government: Grand Imperial Chancellor Kennedy Rowan Coleman
Legislature: Imperial Senate
Ruling Party: Imperial Progressive Party
Technology Level: MT (Primary) | PMT, FanT (Secondary)
Politics: Social Democrat
Religion: None
Personality Type: ENTP 3w4

User avatar
Kahanistan
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1652
Founded: May 30, 2005
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Kahanistan » Tue Oct 02, 2018 11:14 pm

The bigger they are, the harder they fall. (Imagine if the World Trade Centre had been 800 stories tall. The death toll would have been in the millions.) These tall buildings are not only vulnerable to terrorist attacks, at that height planes could hit them accidentally. On the other hand if your nation is very densely populated, you might have few options for housing them.

User avatar
Lord Dominator
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5618
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Lord Dominator » Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:14 am

Kahanistan wrote:The bigger they are, the harder they fall. (Imagine if the World Trade Centre had been 800 stories tall. The death toll would have been in the millions.) These tall buildings are not only vulnerable to terrorist attacks, at that height planes could hit them accidentally. On the other hand if your nation is very densely populated, you might have few options for housing them.

If you have planes hitting your tallest buildings because your air traffic control is that shitty, I think you have bigger problems.
Dee Vytherov-Skollvaldr | Forest | TBH Major and Council Member | WA Vizier | Ambassador to the WA

User avatar
Allanea
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23734
Founded: Antiquity
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Allanea » Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:47 pm

Kahanistan wrote:The bigger they are, the harder they fall. (Imagine if the World Trade Centre had been 800 stories tall. The death toll would have been in the millions.) These tall buildings are not only vulnerable to terrorist attacks, at that height planes could hit them accidentally. On the other hand if your nation is very densely populated, you might have few options for housing them.


I'm not sure what 'vulnerable' to terrorist attacks means here.

If we're defining it as 'lots of people would die if it were to somehow blow up', then literally every large structure, power plant, and every important facility in the world is 'vulnerable' to terrorist attacks.

There are very few things in the world that would survive being hit by a 747 going at them at full speed. (The common belief is that nuclear power plants can withstand being hit with a plane, which is true, but the 'planes' in question are not actually 747s, but rather smaller aircraft).

The amount of successful incidents where terrorists brought down skyscrapers, in the entire history of there being skyscrapers, is literally just the one. It's not clear to me that such an immensely fascinatingly rare event justifies not building something.

Now I am entirely unsure that buildings of this size are a good idea (there are obvious economic, engineering, social and even psychological problems with buildings of this size). But if it were justified on those grounds, terrorism is not a good enough reason not to build them.
#HyperEarthBestEarth

Sometimes, there really is money on the sidewalk.

User avatar
The Macabees
Senior N&I RP Mentor
 
Posts: 3492
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Macabees » Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:41 am

New guide, "How to Go Nuclear in RolePlay:" viewtopic.php?f=5&t=458898

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Minister
 
Posts: 3445
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:44 am

Shimizu Megapyramid is a good example of what might be built. https://trendsideas.com/stories/the-shi ... ty-pyramid

User avatar
The Macabees
Senior N&I RP Mentor
 
Posts: 3492
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Macabees » Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:49 am

UniversalCommons wrote:Shimizu Megapyramid is a good example of what might be built. https://trendsideas.com/stories/the-shi ... ty-pyramid


Very futuristic.

Btw, any interest in picking the story back up in the expo thread? I know it's been about 6 months, no idea why I fell off the wagon there.

User avatar
UniversalCommons
Minister
 
Posts: 3445
Founded: Jan 24, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby UniversalCommons » Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:51 am

The Macabees wrote:
UniversalCommons wrote:Shimizu Megapyramid is a good example of what might be built. https://trendsideas.com/stories/the-shi ... ty-pyramid


Very futuristic.

Btw, any interest in picking the story back up in the expo thread? I know it's been about 6 months, no idea why I fell off the wagon there.


Sure, I can do that.

User avatar
Kylarnatia
N&I RP Mentor
 
Posts: 8416
Founded: Jul 07, 2008
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Kylarnatia » Tue Jan 29, 2019 10:24 am

UniversalCommons wrote:Shimizu Megapyramid is a good example of what might be built. https://trendsideas.com/stories/the-shi ... ty-pyramid


I remember hearing about these in this video some time ago. Pretty neat, and pretty fun to theorize about. I did think of the time whether to play around with these in Kylarnatia (since I'm an Egyptologist, and love to plug that when I can lel), so this has reminded me. :3
The Ancient Empire of Kylarnatia // Imperium Antiquum Kylarnatiae
Lord of Gholgoth | Factbook (Work in Progress) | Embassy & Consulate Programme
N&I Roleplay Mentor specialising in PMT-FaNT, worldbuilding and storytelling. Any questions? Ask away!
NationState's friendly neighbourhood Egyptologist
Come one, come all to my Trading Card Bazaar!
"Kylarnatia is a rare Nile platypus." - Kyrusia


User avatar
First American Empire
Diplomat
 
Posts: 809
Founded: Mar 12, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby First American Empire » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:27 am

My nation makes heavy use of Ultra Heavy Battle Tanks, and I'm wondering how to make it plausible for them to move. My UHBTs, called Land Dreadnoughts, are roughly the size of a Nimitz-class Aircraft Carrier, and I'm not sure how to make anything of that size move on land reliably. It doesn't need to be fast, but it needs to be able to move long distances, even if it takes a long time. They're mainly used for attacking important locations and essentially serve as a combined artillery platform and mobile base, so keep their battlefield role in mind.

(Thematically, I mainly want individual vehicles that are strong enough to make a major difference in large-scale land battles, similar to the role of battleships or aircraft carriers in naval battles.)
The American Empire is a socially progressive and strongly anti-nationalist absolute monarchy ruled by the heirs of Emperor Norton.

This nation doesn't reflect my political views on many issues, especially monarchism and foreign policy. I'm an ordinary social democrat in real life.

User avatar
The State of Monavia
N&I RP Mentor
 
Posts: 1527
Founded: Jun 27, 2006
Moralistic Democracy

Postby The State of Monavia » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:40 am

First American Empire wrote:My nation makes heavy use of Ultra Heavy Battle Tanks, and I'm wondering how to make it plausible for them to move. My UHBTs, called Land Dreadnoughts, are roughly the size of a Nimitz-class Aircraft Carrier, and I'm not sure how to make anything of that size move on land reliably. It doesn't need to be fast, but it needs to be able to move long distances, even if it takes a long time. They're mainly used for attacking important locations and essentially serve as a combined artillery platform and mobile base, so keep their battlefield role in mind.

(Thematically, I mainly want individual vehicles that are strong enough to make a major difference in large-scale land battles, similar to the role of battleships or aircraft carriers in naval battles.)


Given the scale considerations you are taking into account, I suggest starting your research here. Before you get too deep into this matter, bear in mind that gigantic vehicles like what you are describing tend to lack mobility and cannot function well in wet, soft, or jagged terrain. They also make for big, easy-to-hit targets that cannot be camouflaged because of their scale.
——✠ ✠——THE IMPERIAL FEDERATION OF THE MONAVIAN EMPIRE——✠ ✠——
♔ MONAVIA EST NOVUS ORDO MUNDI
Encyclopedic Compendium of the Monavian Empire Diplomatic Exchange Program
I am an N&I roleplay mentor. Please telegram me if you have questions or issues you want to discuss.
Thirteen Year Veteran of NationStates ∙ Member of the NS Writing Project and the Roleplayers Union
I am a classical monarchist Orthodox Christian from Arizona.


✠ᴥ✠ᴥ✠
ᴼ‿ᴼ
/‾‾ʽ⧓ʼ‾‾\

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to International Incidents

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Grevaria

Advertisement

Remove ads