Tonnage

Sylvester

Sylvester

Vice Admiral
The WC capships are pretty light aren't they? I mean, the USS Harry S. Truman, the newest Nimitz class clocks in at nearly 100,000 tons and 1,200 feet long wheras the Concordia (wc2) is 3,000 feet lng but only wieghs 73,000 tons. And the WC3 Kilrathi Dreadnought is nearly 11 miles long but only wieghs about 2.5 times more than a 1,100 foot long aircraft carrier.
 
Maybe the spaceships´s weight actually means "mass", instead of actual "weight", because of the zero gravity and stuff.
 
Thats one way to explain the speed. And please try to read the stats right, it does say mass instead of weight.
 
That and they could have lighter alloys that are as strong, if not stronger, than current day materials. I mean, in some 600 odd years they should have advanced a bit in metallurgy.
 
To answer your question BadNacho, it is in metric tonnes. And though Terran metallurgy(to borrow your word) would have advanced quite a bit, everything would still be extremely heavy, because of its mass. Wing Commander fighters are bigger and heavier than normal fighters, and the added material from enclosing the huge hull in metal would have made it very heavy. The fact remains that it was 73,00 tonnes of mass, not weight, though I expect that Sylvester's original question would be answered as yes, the Concordia would be quite a bit heavier than 100,000 tons.
 
Balrog said:
The fact remains that it was 73,00 tonnes of mass, not weight
Click to expand...

What is "73000 tonnes of mass" equal to our metric system? I mean how many tonnes of earth wieght would that make? Is there a conversion unit or something?
 
Murray said:
What is "73000 tonnes of mass" equal to our metric system? I mean how many tonnes of earth wieght would that make? Is there a conversion unit or something?
Click to expand...

Depends on which units you're using, though a metric ton (1000kg) is just a bit lighter than an imperial ton. Though there's also the 'displacement' ton to worry about, which is (IIRC) what is used in measuring today's seagoing vessels, which represents how much water is displaced by the vessel in question... and is measured in long tons, which are heavier than normal imperial tons (2420 lbs for long tons versus 2000 for normal tons).
 
Murray said:
What is "73000 tonnes of mass" equal to our metric system? I mean how many tonnes of earth wieght would that make? Is there a conversion unit or something?
Click to expand...
73,000 tonnes is just what it is - 73,000 tonnes. In everyday life, we use the terms weight and mass interchangeably - on the other hand, in physics, weight is actually a measure of the force of gravity exerted on an object. 73,000 tonnes of mass, on Earth, would be approximately 715,400,000 newtons (73,000,000 kg multiplied by Earth's gravity, approx. 9.8 m/s).
 
COOKIES? Haven't you payed attention to the commercials?

A cookie is just a cookie, but Fig Newtons are fruit and cake.
 
There was a guy I served with who made his own carbonated water, and that's all he ever drank. He was wierd in other ways, too.
 
The thread isn't ruined. This has just been a refreshing aside. By all means, go back to discussing Tons vs. Tonnes. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top