Prev: Re: [FT] Battle report - Dreadplanet vs KV Next: Re: interesting Glen's designs/gaming

Re: S:AAB USS Saratoga specs

From: Charles Stanley Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:37:46 +0100
Subject: Re: S:AAB USS Saratoga specs

In message <v03130301b587e9d0e79e@[194.176.206.220]>
	  Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com> wrote:

[snip]
> 
> B5 did it reasonably well given that it was TV (ie: scientifically it
was
> better than nothing....) - the EA ships didn't have anything apart
from
> spin habitats until the White Star with its Minbari tech. One of the
TV
> movies (IIRC, "In the Beginning") has a couple of nice zero-G scenes
on the
> bridge of Sheridan's old Hyperion class. I don't THINK the Narn ships
have
> AG either, at least you always see the crew strapped in.....

Hmm.. but then the Centauri ships appear to have their decks parallel to
the main engine thrust vector ("wet navy" style) (based on 'window
light' lines and scenes with Londo looking out the window) - but IIRC
JMS claimed they did _not_ have artificial gravity... Hmmm....

Narns OTOH fasten seatbelt before leaving orbit? - but their War
Cruisers appear to have a crew of 3 :-)

White Stars have WN decks - but have ArtiGrav - can probably land as
well.

> 
> 2001/2010 got it pretty well, with the Discovery's carousel and the
> Leonov's spin habitat.

However, the Discovery appears to have a 'dimensionaly transcendent'
interior - especially in 2010 :-) (theres this long corrior set leading
of the pod pay for instance - there have been a lot of attempt to fit
the interior sets for the discovery into the hull - anyone know if
anyone succeeded?).

Hmm.. I have sudden vision of spoof Star Trek UFP starfleet design where
the command saucer spins :-)

> Offhand I can't think of any others that don't have "implied" AG
(excepting
> factual stuff like Apollo 13 of course....) ;-)
> 
> Jon (GZG)

Charles
-- 

Prev: Re: [FT] Battle report - Dreadplanet vs KV Next: Re: interesting Glen's designs/gaming