Prev: Re: Assult shuttles Next: Re: Vector Rules / Inertial dampers

Re: Vector Rules

From: "Christopher Weuve" <caw@w...>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 09:25:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Vector Rules

Imre A. Szabo said:
Status: RO

> The G-forces arguement doesn't hold water.  The crew would be
> at the center of the ship where the effects will be minimum, and the 
> equipment will be designed to handle it.  If you think there will not
> enough room for the crew in the center of the ship, you are wrong. 
> Contrary to Star Wars and many sci-fi novels, crew sizes will be very 
> small.  Men don't man most naval gun turrets directly now (men
> in the turret); what will it be like in 200 years??? 

Even discounting crew effects, 1) the ship still masses a tremendous
suggesting that idly assuming that they can spin like tops is
inaccurate, and 
2) such rotation is still putting a *lot* of stress on the frame of the
Pick up a naval ship design manual sometime -- while not spacecraft
design, it 
will explain what happens when you put stress on large hulls, and it
will talk 
about some of the scaling affects that you run into.

> Absolute maximum crew size for ships would be 2 men per mass and 1 to
> men per fighter (assuming fighters are manned), not more.  Probably
> to 1 man per mass with un-manned fighters is a better number.  Most 
> damage control, maintence, repair, etc. will be done by machines. 
> may make boring sci-fi, but is a bit more likely to be what will

Really?  And what are these numbers based on?  _FT_ is far too generic
to make 
any such determination: we have no idea concerning computer capability, 
robotics, etc.	Heck, this vision might not happen purely on the basis
human crews being *cheaper* (which we can't determine because of lack of


> One last point just in case no one has made it yet (I'm fairly knew to

> the list). There is only one reason why the shuttle and other current 
> technology spacecraft use vector movement instead of "cinematic 
> movement," fuel.  Spacecraft CAN manuever just like you see in Star
> (hyperspace jumps ommitted).	It just takes lots of fuel to do so and
> $1,000's per pound to orbit, every pound of fuel, or anything else for

> that matter, counts.	

No; with a sufficient amount of fuel and sufficiently powerful thrusters

pointing from every conceivable surface, a ship might be able to perform
some* of the maneuvers in question, *provided they were not anywhere
near the 
limits of their performance capbilities*.   The different types of
vehicles at 
the limits of their performance capbilities would have radically
course profiles.  Since military vehicles have a tendency to push the 
envelope, when it counts, vector movement doesn't look like Star Wars. 
don't think the shuttle could do it under any circumstances -- I don't
the engines are powerful enough.

-- Chris Weuve	 [My opinions, not my employer's.]
------ (h) (w)		Vector movement for AoG's B5
game, (perm)	books, stuff for sale and more

Prev: Re: Assult shuttles Next: Re: Vector Rules / Inertial dampers