my argument is solely based on the presented circumstance.
here they are : in non-vacant point per point manner
- can not exceed 1 kps in atmospheric conditions (reference book, yes i read it myself)
- carrier has atmosphere inside (reference book, game intros, etc)
- you can reach top speed in about 2 seconds (700'000 metres per second^2 accelleration relative to the arrow) (reference wc3)
1'400'000 metres per second in 2 seconds
700'000 metres per second^2
- maneuvering thrusters, not scoops, are used to maneuver. (reference privateer)
- scoops are used to gather hydrogen particles to maintain fuel supply (reference book)
- ships do not run out of fuel, but use internal fuel (reference any game)
- ships take off with fuel in the tanks (reference book)
- ships need to be loaded into the launch tubes (reference wcprop)
- artificial gravity is pointed into the floor (reference book, game intros)
- carrier mass is (concordia) 73'000 metric tonnes. (reference CIC)
- earths mass is 5.972e24 kg (5.972e21 tonnes) (reference
http://www.seds.org/nineplanets/nineplanets/earth.html)
- earths gravity 9.8 m/s^2 (i hope i dont need to prove this to you)
- carrier gravity inside (9.8 m/s^2) (assimed from people walking about normally inside)
- carrier gravity well : (i hope you understand the formula)
(target / source) * source value = target value.
(73'000 metric tonnes / 5.972e21 tonnes) * 9.8 = ANS
7.3e4 / 5.972e21 = 5.06054e-8 m/s^2
thats 0.0000000506054 m/s^2 gravity well for the carrier
that is also 700'000/0.0000000506054 times weaker than the fighter engines.
that is 13832515900000 times WEAKER. meaning the fighter can effortlessly escape the ships gravity well.
- there is no collision issue with using scoops, of any sort. just see how perfectly fine fighters do on the victory. (reference wc3)
- fighters can hover in gravith of 9.8 m/s^2 (reference wc3 takeoff videos
https://www.wcnews.com/news/update/3190)
- fighters dont spew out flames taking off on low power (reference wc3 takeoff videos
https://www.wcnews.com/news/update/3190)
- launch tubes are not specified to have atmosphere inside them or no atmosphere, unknown (never mentioned)
- if a lunch tube has atmosphere, you are limited to 1 kps max. (resultant of 1kps cap with atmosphere, see above)
- if a launch tube has no atmosphere, you are unlimited for takeoff (resultant of no friction)
- if a launch tube has no atmosphere, there is noone there except the fighter ready for takeoff (people need air to breathe)
- if a launch bay is used, full afterburn is limited because of possible damages (people are there)
- if a launch bay is used, the speed cap is 1 kps (atmospheric cap, see above)
- carrier length (lets look at the shortest we have here, victory) 720 metres (reference CIC)
- time taken to reach 1 kps. (max you can do in atmosphere)
700'000 metres per second^2 accelleration
700 Kmetres per second^2 accelleration
1/700 seconds.
0.001428 seconds
- distance taken to reach 1 kps at full burn
accelleration function is 700x (KM, m would be 700'000x)
integral (the velocity) is 350x^2
integral2 (the position) is 116.666x^3
plug in the time into the position formula
116.666(0.001428 seconds)^3 = ANS
ANS = 3.397280525 e-7KM
= .00000033972 metres. not even a metre.
this is how far it would take to get up to max speed in a launch tube, for a fighter by itself, no catapult, with full burn, if the tube had an atmosphere.
- max speed reached in a tube, saying it was as long as the victory, with no atmosphere, no catapult.
take the position function and solve it for 720 metres.
integral2 (the position) is 116'666.666x^3
116'666.666x^3 = 720m
x^3 = .0061714286
x = .1834 u
plug into the velocity formula
350'000x^2
350'000(.1834^2) = ANS
11'772 m/s
11.772 kps
much slower than max speed.
- speed at the end of a catapult launch is max mil. 520kps for arrow.
so lets see what the lag time is in catching up to max mil. this would be the difference in time between a catapult launch and full burn launch.
time to max speed is about 2 seconds for arrow (known)
time to max military is .742 seconds
speed when leaving a ship with catapult launch is 520.
speed when leaving a ship with full burn from vacuum is 11
catapult in vacuum vs launch tube no catapult in vacuum :
speed needed to catch up is 509 kps.
thats time to max mil - time starting at
700x = 509 = .727 seconds
just under a quarter second advantage.
catapult in vacuum vs launchbay with atmosphere :
speed needed to catch up is 519 kps.
700x = 519 = .741 seconds.
a quarter second advantage.
- lock times are a few seconds. except FF missiles. (reference any game, cic, whatever)
- fighters are stored in their arking locations (reference cutscenes of the games)
now lets look at the evidence :
*if the launch tubes were in atmosphere, both normal and catapult launches would be capped to 1 kps. so they tie.
*if the launch tubes were vacuum, the catapult has almsot a quarter second advantage relative to getting fighters up to speed.
*if launching off the deck, the catapult were in vacuum, there would be a quarter second advantage in getting fighters up to speed.
*catapults must be loaded. taking time.
*launch tubes without catapults take time to load, but not as much since there is no latching to do.
*bay doesnt need to be loaded
* fighters dont need a catapult machine to get them off the deck since they can hover
* the accelleration due to the gravity well of the ship is 13832515900000 times weaker than the power of the fighter to escape it, meaning the fighter does not need the help getting away.
* lets say the prep time for a fighter is 5 minutes.
* lets say the launch tube loading time is 10 seconds
(this would be radically fast anyways to move a giant machine into a tube and position it. i'm underestimating by leaps and bounds to keep you happy here)
remember the fighters are stored parked. they would have to be moved from there (not exactly on the spot) to the tubes, and attached to the catapult.
* lets say the latching time is 2 seconds (to connect the fighter to the catapult)
continued on next post ---