A question about General Relativity

[Earthworm]

Ok, I missed this on my first pass of the top of that post. You're fuel scoops are open (from what I take) full blast all the time.

No, they're not. They can be closed or opened. When they're closed, the ship will fly much faster than it can with scoops open because there's no drag, but it won't gather any fuel, and will have to use thrusters to turn (and even then the turns will be very slow).

You're thrusters manuver you ship around, and your main engines push you in that direction that you are facing. I'd imagine that's how it works 600 years into the future, since that's how the space shuttle and Mir works now.

Do you realy expect that in 600 years propulsion will be that similar to what we have today? Especialy seing all other technological advancements in WC?

 

[Knight]

Do you realy expect that in 600 years propulsion will be that similar to what we have today? Especialy seing all other technological advancements in WC?

Yes.

------------------
HTML Assistant: WC Space Command
Administrator: UBW 5th Fleet
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
I might be right, I might be wrong, but then again, I just might not care either. Got a problem with that?--Me.

 

[Meson]

Do you realy expect that in 600 years propulsion will be that similar to what we have today? Especialy seing all other technological advancements in WC?

Physics will always be physics. so yes propulsion 600 years from now will be very similar to what it is today. The materials used might change, but the rules that govern them won't.

------------------
Meson
Fleet Commander Homepage

Wing Commander is not just a game. It's a lifestyle.

Those whose eyes have seen shall not live to tell about it -- commercial for the American version of Gundam Wing

 

[Chernikov]

You can use scoops to turn... just crank the field up.. you get more turn, and gather more fuel. Pivoting thrusters just help. And the propulsion idea is the same... impart energy to lots of little particles and dump them out the back. The only changes are where the particles come from and how the energy is imparted... IE chemical reaction energising fuel carried on-board (extemely inefficient) Vs. fusion reactor exciting particles "scooped" from deepspace. The idea has even been considered for possible deepspace vessels, just not used yet due to lack of tech. Slightly different application of proven principles from the one and to my knowledge only real world.

------------------
I don't respect your authority BECAUSE YOU HAVE NONE!!!

 

[Earthworm]

Physics will always be physics. so yes propulsion 600 years from now will be very similar to what it is today. The materials used might change, but the rules that govern them won't.

That's true. But the internal dampening system makes ships behave like they're in the atmosphere. So physics from space won't always apply.

[This message has been edited by Earthworm (edited April 11, 2000).]

 

[Knight]

That's true. But the internal dampening system makes ships behave like they're in the atmosphere. So physics from space won't always apply.

[This message has been edited by Earthworm (edited April 11, 2000).]

If life 600 years from now is a video game, I'd agree with you without thinking. But at the rate announced technology is going, I doubt we'll be that far 600 years from now, if we're even still here that long......

------------------
HTML Assistant: WC Space Command
Administrator: UBW 5th Fleet
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
I might be right, I might be wrong, but then again, I just might not care either. Got a problem with that?--Me.

 

[Meson]

That's true. But the internal dampening system makes ships behave like they're in the atmosphere. So physics from space won't always apply.

To the best of my knowledge, internal damping systems work by by creating small thrusts at different places on the ship. In space, all you need to over come is inertial. So in most cases a small amount of thrust compared to the sise of the ship is needed. This can be done by bleeding some of the thrust from the main engines forward to let's say to stop the ship. These thrusts may be made of particles like Chernov said and not chemicals like it is with current technology, but the laws that govern them are the same as they are today. This doesn't account the drag friction created by the scoops when they collect particles.

New discoveries are bound to happen, but they never replace what already exists. Much as the same way, Relativity does not replace Newton's Laws. The new rules are just a generalization of the old ones. Subjump travel is a specific case of space travel. The new rules would be for the more gerealized jump, hopper drives, and other forms of interstellar travel.

In matter of fact, the technical sections of the WC manuals seem it indicate this, making this little rant WC fact.


------------------
Meson
Fleet Commander Homepage

Wing Commander is not just a game. It's a lifestyle.

Those whose eyes have seen shall not live to tell about it -- commercial for the American version of Gundam Wing

[This message has been edited by Meson (edited April 11, 2000).]

 

[carpter]

Hey peoples, new member for the chat zone, so go easy on me.

I know this post is probably a week older than it should be, but whatever the case, realistically, you wouldn't have fighters in space. As soon as you take away from the fantasy of the game, then you have to think realistically. Realistically thinking (duh), fighters would not be economical. Not to mention any sort of manually aimed weapon on a fighter would be stupid. If you did have manually aimed weapons on any ship, your speed would probably be limited to the combat speeds of current day air fighters [? 450 knots]. Of all flight-sim games, the FS universe is [my opinion] has the most accurate speeds for the circumstances.

Anyway, I'm rambling now. =)

syl!

------------------

What does not kill
you, allows you to live a
little bit
longer.[/QUO

 

[Penguin]

OK I don't too much about all this physics stuff but in response to carpter:
Fighters not economical? In about 600yrs time technology and interstellar economics have probably progressed to the stage that fighters are economical.
Why would manually aimed weapons impact on your speed more so than automatic ones? In real life dogfighting, pilots flying planes less agile than their opponent's plane will usually do straffing runs. Fly in fast, take a shot with a missile, attempt a gunnery pass if necessary then burn away. The defender is too busy evading fire to counter attack and by the time he/she has turned about to face the attacker the attacker has moved out of range. At that point the attacker either disengages completely or attempts another pass.

Nice to see conversation about WC is still alive and kicking despite the shelving of WC