Gateworld Virtual Fleet 4.0 - Discussion thread

[thekillman]

But you also need to make each container pressurized

why? i absolutely see no need to make every container pressurized.

if it's atmosphere-atmosphere, the containers will be pressurized anyway. and if it's space-space, then no pressure is required


oh and one more thing: the Skeletal freighters could also carry stuff in a "belly" forcefield, for stuff like corn, wheat, ore, LPG, oil, heavy water, whatever.

plus, you could simply have varying sizes of containers. and more specialized transport will simply use rigs.

[Davidtourniquet]

Sorry I've been away for such a long time, lots of phd work been going on.

The gatetrain idea is a good one, but you couldn't have it on good old-fashioned victorian rails, as Tom said it would have to be a maglev or even just an antigrav system with it's own engine system.

On the Moon vs everywhere else debate for the stargate; If you put it on antartica, then being attacked by a nuke isn't going to do a lot of damage. Also, if you put it on the Moon, you are asking the asgard beaming to travel over 240,000 miles (not sure on the range of the beaming tech), so the only other way of getting people to the gate is by ship anyway. So Earth based I would say is the best idea and in a neutral place such as antartica.

What could be done is a gatetrain is designed and built, one type for freight and commercial reasons and one for public transport. I would go as far as saying that we could use the alpha site for the commercial hub and Earth as the public hub. With Earth-bound freight going through the alpha site and then being transported to Earth, a few times an hour (also would add to security if any non-public traffic had to go through the alpha site).

[thekillman]

If you put it on antartica, then being attacked by a nuke isn't going to do a lot of damage.

uhm. a multi-gigaton warhead will do massive environmental damage. and that will be perhaps more painful than direct kills.

Also, if you put it on the Moon, you are asking the asgard beaming to travel over 240,000 miles

so? they do surface-orbit with ease. add some bigger senders and receivers and you, quite simply, are done.

[Davidtourniquet]

But it's the cost that is the key to this.

Need to check on explosion on ice, cause research has been done on how asteroid impacts on ice do not leave a mark on the Earth.

[thekillman]

but the moon does not cost us a thing aside from a facility. the costs of ecological damage can be in the trillions with ease. i'm not an expert on multi-gigaton nuclear explosion effects, but if i look at what the Tsar Bomba did, i don't quite see how a nuclear explosion 20x won't affect the ecology at a major level. radiation, the shockwave, potential tsunami's, you name it.

[Davidtourniquet]

But explosions on ice have a different effect than in the sea or on land.

[fugiman]

Even still it would be better to isolate a base to the moon where no biological, nuclear or other forms of alien weaponry could affect earth as well if the base somehow does get taken over it would be easier to blow up and not worry then worry about the effects of the explosion on the planet.

[thekillman]

while true, i can't see how the damage won't be massive wherever the nuke hits. at those energies, it really does not matter WHAT you hit

[s09119]

while true, i can't see how the damage won't be massive wherever the nuke hits. at those energies, it really does not matter WHAT you hit

Just pointing in to say the guy's got a point

[thekillman]

hey s09 long time no see

[Davidtourniquet]

Just pointing in to say the guy's got a point

Big explosion yes, but if it's sitting on somewhere so remote as antartica, the effect on the rest of the planet will be minimal.

http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/ImpactEffects/ this is a good site for calculating the effect of an asteroid impact on various materials (unforunately ice isn't one of them). But a 500m asteroid impacting with a speed of 17 km/s at an angle of 45 degrees will give an energy value around the 2 gigaton mark.

[thekillman]

this is for a nuke

http://stardestroyer.net/Empire/Science/Nuke.html

for a dense rock asteroid (10 Mt impact)

Here

the 10 000 kilometers would put the person around the equator should the imaginary meteor hit in the middle of the arctic at a 90 degree angle.


seismic:

The major seismic shaking will arrive approximately 33.3 minutes after impact.
Richter Scale Magnitude: 7.3
Mercalli Scale Intensity at a distance of 10000 km:

Nothing would be felt. However, seismic equipment may still detect the shaking.

Little rocky ejecta reaches this site; fallout is dominated by condensed vapor from the projectile.

in other words: a hellovalot of dust is blasted in the air.




there are some problems with this program:

-it's about an asteroid and not a nuke, obviously. radioactive fallout will accompany the regular fallout.

-the asteroid usually fragments and showers the earth. a nuke can be approached as such an object striking the earth in one piece, which obviously will have greater effects.

-the fireball is from kinetic energy conversion. so it's a different fireball from a nuclear one.



Stardestroyer gives this for a nuke of 9190MT. (impact energy of the asteroid)

thermal (3rd degree burns): 491.8 kilometres

Air blast radius (widespread destruction): 146.7 kilometres

Fireball duration 273.3 seconds

Fireball radius (airburst) 20.3 kilometres



i haven't found calculators for what happens when such nukes go off underground, since the ISGC at antarctica would naturally be underground, but i'd say the amount of dust and crap blasted in the air will only be worse.



granted, it's not earth-annihilating, hardly. but my argument was more about the ecological damage than the direct deaths.

especially the fallout is my concern. if i look at the radiation scans of the Gatebuster, i really think such a nuke shoved through the gate would be EXTREMELY bad. granted, its our own weapon design, but really why can't the LA build a nuke which you can shove through the gate and annihilate gates with. it only really takes an existing nuke and all naquahdah you need.

[Princess Awinita]

Let me see if I can get this right; if someone uses a say, 12 gigaton Void-7 Sesimic charge out in space, it acts similar ot a tactical nuclear warhead, correct ?

[immhotep]

while true, i can't see how the damage won't be massive wherever the nuke hits. at those energies, it really does not matter WHAT you hit

Which is why you base it not just in Antartica, but UNDER. You put the gate back where it belongs. Now you could put it near the outpost. If you want to benefit from its protection, powersource, and potential catacombs and construction sites. But if you want to blow up the gate then you wont want that. But we know for example that the outposts are capable of providing protection from Millions of tons of hot lava, and filtering out pollutants over its area. So we should be able to adapt that technology to enable us to filter out radiation, fallout and pollition from a given defined area. SAY if we had a shield protecting the gate in a remote location on Earth. We KNOW we can use beaming technology and shield technology to scrub out radiation and pollution for areas. Just take when a hatak was in the radiation of a dwarf star for an example. Or when we used atlantis's shields to contain the gate blowing up. Now we CAN do that on Earth. The only reason that taxed the shields was because Rodney rewrote half the shield programming in order to do it and the shield was not desisnded to contain from within as all the shield emitors were on the outer piers. So if we used Asgard shields, with gate facing reflectors we could benefit not only from a base shield, a gate shield and a contain shield at the same time. But also be able to limit the fallout to only a few square miles rather than a major continent. For the record, even gate nukes on planets, such as when we attacked Asuris or the beachhead planet, while they did have a massive radius, the Could have be contained. As it happened the priors did exactly what im saying. They used shield technology, powered through the stargate (like the replicators have done with this kind of technology before) and to contain and then repress the force of the explosion. As to power generation to the shield. We can easily power a shield that can withstand a nuke. Also nukes are not the only option. A combination of Nerve gas and Sybiote poision will kill most things that could come through the gate. We also have a variety of much more containable non nuke options before we got to the stage where we HAVE to nuke. These points will be explored in great detail in my 12k post

[immhotep]

If you let me rip off Morgana I can make BOTH a much better base than the one on the moon but ALSO let the gate still be on the moon..