Gateworld Virtual Fleet 4.0 - Discussion thread

[Cmdr. Setsuna F. Seyei]

@ the killman: you are forgetting one thing about plasma when you stated that it is of no use versus kinetic energy weapons. with kinetic energy weapons a plasma shield actually creates 3 lines of defense.

1. the external magnetic field that keeps the plasma from drifting away from the ship. This could be considered a first line defense as some KE ammo has iron based materials in it. also anything passing through the field would be subject to intense EM flux(EM flux comes from Shield interacting with ionized particles from the plasma). if the KE weapon includes a warhead then the warhead may not go off or may detonate at the point of impact with the shield as we have seen at least once when we fired on Goa'uld ships with earth based missiles.

2. The plasma itself is not only there as a density type barrier. remember for any type of material that we know of including plasma when you increase pressure by increasing density you also get a corresponding increase in temperature. and at the densities required for normal operation I Guarantee that the plasma will more than likely be a super hot type plasma.

3. if somehow the KE weapon managed to survive the first 2 barriers it would still be most likely moderately to severely damaged and the second magnetic field (the one that keeps the plasma from hitting the ship) would come into play affecting the weapons systems or make up(i.e. Iron materials)

[thekillman]

@ the killman: you are forgetting one thing about plasma when you stated that it is of no use versus kinetic energy weapons. with kinetic energy weapons a plasma shield actually creates 3 lines of defense.

1. the external magnetic field that keeps the plasma from drifting away from the ship. This could be considered a first line defense as some KE ammo has iron based materials in it. also anything passing through the field would be subject to intense EM flux(EM flux comes from Shield interacting with ionized particles from the plasma). if the KE weapon includes a warhead then the warhead may not go off or may detonate at the point of impact with the shield as we have seen at least once when we fired on Goa'uld ships with earth based missiles.

2. The plasma itself is not only there as a density type barrier. remember for any type of material that we know of including plasma when you increase pressure by increasing density you also get a corresponding increase in temperature. and at the densities required for normal operation I Guarantee that the plasma will more than likely be a super hot type plasma.

3. if somehow the KE weapon managed to survive the first 2 barriers it would still be most likely moderately to severely damaged and the second magnetic field (the one that keeps the plasma from hitting the ship) would come into play affecting the weapons systems or make up(i.e. Iron materials)

*the magnetic field will only repel a projectile if it's ferromagnetic. Tungsten isn't. Secondary precautions can be made by using a poorly conducting projectile too so inductive magnetism won't work either. Conduction requirements for weapons (e.g. railguns) are already subverted because they use a sabot which holds the actual projectile. The sabot is conductive. The projectile won't be.

*the specific kinetic energy of an object travelling at 10-16km/s is already higher than that of TNT. (50 respectively 160MJ/kg). Therefore, conventional explosives are outdone by kinetic penetrators.


*nukes are already thoroughly shielded to ensure they don't go off by accident, meaning that strong magnetic fields and heat and EM do squat to bigger projectiles.



So no, it's not effective against projectiles.

EDIT:
I forgot to add: The denser the plasma is, the higher the EM frequencies it defends against. This means that the technologically superior foe wins, always, without question. An enemy ship equipped with X-ray opaque shields and gamma lasers could fire straight through their own shield, while your puny X-ray lasers bounce off. Of course, that means that pursuing better lasers is going to be a major tech arms race, and that a point may be reached where the plasma needs to be so dense, the magnets so strong and the reactor so big, it's more practical to ditch the shield and take a hit while firing 3x as many lasers.

[thekillman]

He says it is to be a Escort/Gunship role and my thought was 'more like a fireworks barge to me due to its size compared to all your other ships which most are six times larger'

I am sorry princess, i realized something far more important as an argument against big warships. It's kind of buried in my earlier post, but this deserves FAR more attention.


I am going to assume that the ship is kind of cylindrical, and longer than it is thin, with engines at the back (i assume your guy wants to go places).


His problem is this formula:

I = 1/12 * m*L^2

It is the moment of inertia for a rod-shaped object (and because of spaceship considerations, that's a good shape). Now it's good to pay attention to the terms of this equation. "m" is your ship's mass. "L" is your ship's length.

I will use Atomic Rocket's estimation of a 100m ship's mass (1000 tons). Assuming the density of a ship doesn't change much across bigger distances, a 1000m ship will weigh (1000/100)^3 * 1000 = 1 000 000 = 1 million tonnes.

A 10 000m ship will thus proportionally weigh 1 000 000 000 tonnes or 1 billion tonnes.

Now consider the moment of inertia:


I(100m) = 1/12 * 1000 000kg * 100m^2 = 8,3* 10^8
I(1000m) = 1/12 * 1 000 000 000 kg * 1000m^2 = 8,3*10^13
I(10000m)= 1/12 * 1 000 000 000 000kg * 10000^2 = 8,3 *10^18.


A 10x longer ship has a 100 000x bigger moment of inertia.
a 100x longer ship has a 10 000 000 000 x bigger moment of inertia

The importance of this lies in it's ability to change direction. Assume the ship can go 10g, which is the maximum a human can tolerate for a short tine.

F=m*a. 10g translates to 98,1m/s^2. m is given above. You'd need:

F(100) = 98,1 million newtons of thrust.
F(1000) = 98,1 billion newtons of thrust.
F(10000)= 98,1 trillion newtons of thrust.


Assume the ship wants to have an angular acceleration (alpha) of 1 radians per second squared. T = I * alpha. The torque is calculated by T=F*r. Assuming 2 thrusters, one at the nose and one at the tail, we get T=2*F*r. r is half the length of the ship, so we can just take T=F*L. this gives us:

F=I*alpha / L.

F(100m)= 8,3 MN (that is, million newtons). This is 10% forward thrust
F(1000m)= 8,3 *10^4 MN. This is 80% forward thrust
F(10000m)= 8,3 *10^9 MN. this is 84,6x forward thrust.

What this means is that your ship will have a hard time maneuvering fast, as the engines necessary to rotate will be MASSIVE.

Oh and by the way, since 360 degrees is 2*Pi radians (~6.3), if you want to point your rocket in any direction in a second you'd need at least a 6x higher acceleration.

Lastly, there's the centripetal acceleration. At 1 rad/s^2 angular acceleration, a person standing at the front of the ship would be smacked against the windshield at 10 000m * 1rad/s^2 = 10 000 m/s^2 or 1000g.

(note: after a 1-second rotation burn, that means an object of 1kg would move at 10km/s and on impact would act like a kilogram of TNT). (alternatively, a 1kg object would express 10 000N on something it sat on, or if you put it on a scale, would weigh 1000kg. I don't think a ship could even structurally withstand this)




CONCLUSION:

A 10km ship is effectively a sitting duck. Rule #1 of defense is, don't get hit.

so for colony ships, generational ships and stuff, big ships work. For military purposes, a kilometer isn't even practical. (a person in the front would experience 100g) and would still be sitting duck territory. For practical purposes, 10g acceleration is already pass-out territory. There's no way you're gonna make 1km long warships unless it's having a support&maintenance function. (or it's an interstellar carrier).


BONUS:

yes, a hiveship is insane when it comes to combat. It doesn't look like it was made to be in combat in the first place anyway.

[Gormagon]

To directly answer your question:


Drones, Shuttles, transport shuttles pretty much all fall in the same category. Chemical for a low-tech environment or cheap transfer if the fuel is there, ion or solar power for cheap transits. Plasma for faster fancytech solutions. For transports, Solid Core, closed-cycle nuclear thermal rockets if allowed (when you don't need to be near other ships all the time). For military uses, the above mentioned nuclear rocket or fusion if the tech is there.

maybe you could share the kind of ideas for ships you have (as a rough outline) so i can get some feeling for what you're trying to do?

Well, I am helping a friend design his universe, a semi hardcore scifi universe.

We agreed on unmanned Drone fighters for maneuverability and acceleration capacity, well ships with crew function mainly as a carrier role until the development of the magical inertial dampener. We decided to add artificial gravity as well. ( http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum...onductors.html ) What do you think of that?

Like I said, semi hardcore, we will keep it as 'real tech' based as possible without making it beyond inconvenient and boringly slow paced.

I had already figured a mixture of chemical drives (Hydrogen based because of the availability of ice) for maneuvering or docking for larger ships and nuclear based engines for longgevity. With the addition of an FTL system, we figured Ion Drives would not be very common place, unless there is a way to increase the acceleration factor well maintaining a the higher fuel efficiency. Could you give me some more detail on the 'plasma drive?'

[Gormagon]

Oh, what about the plausibility of hand held EM propelled weapons with nano engineered capacitors?

[Gormagon]

Oh also here is some bits and pieces of subspace/an exotic element from the semi hardcore scifi universe. Transium: The first exotic element encountered by the Alliance, and highly sought after by all races with space age technology that are aware of its existence. It is absolutely vital for the efficient size and function of any technology related to subspace, including RFTL (Relatively faster then light) sensors, communications, and travel. Transium is also used in SCCR (Subspace crossover conversion reaction.) technology, a system that generates electric current through the conversion of subspace energy via a series transium based thermocouples. This allows for micro sized generators, transium is still the most valuable commodity on the Colonial market however, making such generators a rare and quite expensive.

Transium is the potential outcome of heavy atomic nuclei being exposed to large amounts of subspace radiation which saturates the nucleus, changing its very nature, this process is called ‘elemental nature shift’. For one, it is common for the subspace particles now present in the nucleus to create an auxiliary field little understood by Alliance science, the fifth force, making the atom no longer radioactive and therefore not subject to decay, however this is not always the case. But more importantly it causes the atom to exist in both subspace and in ‘normal’ space at the same time. Transium maintains a constant connection with subspace, allow for easy, quick access into that realm. Transium is formed by the following means; when a star goes nova, the sudden massive energy release can temporarily (or permanently) open up a subspace tear releasing large amounts of subspace radiation and energy that when combined with the sudden formation of heavy elements by super nova, the result can be transium. It can also be formed from open shiftway’s unleashing subspace radiation in the vicinity of heavy elements for very long periods of time. There is also a breeder reactor theory for generating transium artificially, but the size of the reactors and the amount of energy required has proven detrimental to the project.

• Subspace Drive System: Transium is the perfect link into subspace. Transium control rods are charged, resulting in a stimulated release of subspace particles that create an expansive field around the vessel. It also causes what is called subspace polarity, acting as a sort of subspace magnet which draws the vessel into subspace. Subspace energy currents are then readily available, and the specific current designed for the end location is channeled through the drive system along the transium rods, where it is expelled to provide propulsion through subspace. When subspace drive systems go critical from damage or poor maintenance and meltdown, they can create a subspace tear or new shiftway

[thekillman]

Well, I am helping a friend design his universe, a semi hardcore scifi universe.

We agreed on unmanned Drone fighters for maneuverability and acceleration capacity, well ships with crew function mainly as a carrier role until the development of the magical inertial dampener. We decided to add artificial gravity as well. ( http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum...onductors.html ) What do you think of that?

Like I said, semi hardcore, we will keep it as 'real tech' based as possible without making it beyond inconvenient and boringly slow paced.

I had already figured a mixture of chemical drives (Hydrogen based because of the availability of ice) for maneuvering or docking for larger ships and nuclear based engines for longgevity. With the addition of an FTL system, we figured Ion Drives would not be very common place, unless there is a way to increase the acceleration factor well maintaining a the higher fuel efficiency. Could you give me some more detail on the 'plasma drive?'

We decided to add artificial gravity as well. What do you think of that?

Googling for gravitoelectromagnetism yielded the result that it was indeed a fluke and not an actual effect.

We agreed on unmanned Drone fighters for maneuverability and acceleration capacity, well ships with crew function mainly as a carrier role until the development of the magical inertial dampener.

I could easily poke holes in that decision, but i won't dedicate a page of this thread to why it's a bad idea. Simply put, there's nothing a fighter can do that a missile can do literally 10x better. The idea of teleoperations isn't that bad (remote-controlled drone craft) and if you follow through, it can be a very strong incentive for manned bases throughout the solar system (and beyond). Things like faster than light communications are certain to ruin this.

Drone craft: While the ideal size for a craft largely depends on the exact tech solutions, i would argue that a single manned craft among a few dozen drone craft isn't that bad of an idea. Analogous to naval, it would be a cruiser with a Destroyer escort. The drone ships would be fully fledged ships equipped with all the needs and technologies for fighting a war, but without the distinct weakness of humans on board. It won't kill the drama as losing a ship means that the actual Monitor ship itself is at (increased) risk. Ideas of responsibility would still exist with the teleoperating crew, as they are controlling multi-million dollar property. There's no need for the Monitor to carry the destroyers either, as all would be very capable of handling their own fights. You'd simply be looking at something closer to Ender's Game (the movie) in terms of space combat.

FTL (the easy kind) would be certain to ruin the suspense. You can't wage a battle with the Monitor far away as the light speed lag would be to great. Landing that mars rover was called "the seven minutes of terror" for a reason, the light speed lag is so bad that by the time NASA gets the confirmation of the landing, the rover would be on the ground already. The Monitor would have to be within lightseconds reach of Drone ships. With lasers, that's in firing distance (although one could justify a means to remove them from the equation and have closer-range, more interesting combat).

I would like to add another thing: The acceleration capacity is never a problem if you enforce human crews. Everyone and everything would be subject to a maximum of about 5-6g, maybe 10g for a short and sudden maneuver. Beyond that and people pass out. That's true for a 12km supership or a 5m fighter craft. By abolishing fighters (which are so squishy that acceleration is a need) you can focus on combat without the need for inertial dampeners. Furthermore, the above problem i outlined with scaling when talking to Princess, also applies to Inertial Dampeners. They do not solve a problem. They only create more. If you can fit an ID to a fighter you can also fit it to a missile, and the missile will use it MUCH better than your ship. And worst of all, it will make an RKV -the most devastating weapon imaginable- a FAR easier thing to make. It's better to never resort to such an evil and play it straight. It's going to pay off.

Could you give me some more detail on the 'plasma drive?'

The rocket equation gives a ratio of e^(exhaustspeed/shipspeed). This means that the higher the exhaust velocity of an engine, the more efficient it is. The upper limit is c, the speed of light. This means that a laser is the best propulsion system you can ever invent. However, this requires about a megawatt per newton thrust and the abovementioned 100m ship would need terawatts of energy to get anywhere. Obviously it's not ideal.

Ion engines and Plasma engines share a similarity, in that the exhaust velocity is really high without needing to throw a ton of matter down the pipe. The power of a chemical engine comes directly from the strength of the chemical reaction. With a plasma, you can just keep on adding energy to it to make it more and more efficient. Important is that a plasma engine works by having a working fluid (or gas) heated via electrical means (e.g. microwave) to thousands or millions of degrees, then accelerated via an electromagnetic field (which also contains it) and shot out the back as a thin beam of super hot, super fast plasma. Unlike the ion engine which uses tiny ions and has a physical limitation to how powerful it is (the ions will eventually clog and prevent faster discharges), the plasma engine throws a lot more matter out the back without the clogging. It's simply more powerful. Furthermore, unlike a chemical engine, it is possible to keep up this reaction for a LONG time without using much ReMass, ensuring a long "burn time". Even though the thrust may not be all to high, applying a little thrust over a long time does the same -or more- than a ton of thrust for a few seconds.

[thekillman]

Oh, what about the plausibility of hand held EM propelled weapons with nano engineered capacitors?

I do not believe high-energy weapons of the handheld kind are useful. Guns are too simple and effective to go through the trouble of trying to use advanced electronics, optics and power systems to try and equal that. Your opponent has a piece of metal shooting a piece of metal with some gas, springs and levers.

Transium

It depends on what you precisely do with resources in the various systems, but generally macguffins are a good way of enforcing space travel. If you limit the presence of too advanced robotics and computers, you can also enforce human presence in space via teleoperations.

a system that generates electric current through the conversion of subspace energy via a series transium based thermocouples.

I would like to urge caution, as too easy energy production may mean that various engineering projects are no longer profitable nor needed. Oh and it makes nuking your enemy into oblivion proportionally easier.

including RFTL (Relatively faster then light) sensors, communications

This is again (in my opinion) extremely detrimental to what you want. Remember what many series would've looked like if they flipped open a cell phone and asked what was up? Lack of knowledge is an extremely powerful plot device and this virtually destroys it. It is especially detrimental to enforcing space travel. In stead of sending a ship over there (FTL or not) you just send a tiny probe with FTL sensors and FTL communications to see however far you want to see. Colonies can't revolt because the moment they do, the homeworld knows and can respond in stead of lagging behind by months.

Lastly, Subspace is (imho) a lame way of explaining things. In stead of going lengths about this, i would simply like to point out that other methods exist that may be more in your favor.


*wormholes: from a Sci Fi POV they may be not the most interesting, but it's definitely the easiest. A softer approach would be roughly what Stargate did (where Hyperspace appears to be a wormhole with significant length). They do have a huge gravity influence so it's necessary to place them outside star systems (i believe the influence radius for a traverseable wormhole was about 20 AU) meaning combat is choke-point based.

*Alcubierre Drive. Well technically it's demoted to Device, but still. A ring of some form of exotic matter (generating negative energy) is used to warp space and shorten the distance a ship travels. It doesn't break relativity. According to the most recent data, the energy requirements no longer are in the order of jupiter mass-energies and the system itself doesn't impart a direction, so the acceleration of the ship is what gives the field direction.

*temporary wormhole drives (like BSG), while having little basis in reality, may be a useful alternative. In stead of instantly traversing massive distances, a series of jumps are performed.



In the end, i would give the advice to establish a number of rules first and play by them. It's mostly important to be internally consistent.

[Gormagon]

I do not believe high-energy weapons of the handheld kind are useful. Guns are too simple and effective to go through the trouble of trying to use advanced electronics, optics and power systems to try and equal that. Your opponent has a piece of metal shooting a piece of metal with some gas, springs and levers.

Yeah, I figured as much, we would limit them of course, and still heavily rely on simple chemical mass drivers. We have two classes of Earth Alliance weapons, OSC, Old Series Chemical, and NS, New series, weapons which are quite new and which rely on Electromagnetic coils or plasma propulsion to fire the projectile at high velocity, they run off of capacitors. Its not vital at all, but I know chemical propellants are at their upward limit right now. The NS have disadvantages of course, they run out of power, they are more expensive, complex and harder to fix and easier to damage, and heavier because of the capacitors weight. However I can always do more research on the best chemical propelled weapons we have right now.

It depends on what you precisely do with resources in the various systems, but generally macguffins are a good way of enforcing space travel. If you limit the presence of too advanced robotics and computers, you can also enforce human presence in space via teleoperations.

Well, I tried to get him to stay in our solar system but he insisted on other colonies so i'm working on that with him.

II would like to urge caution, as too easy energy production may mean that various engineering projects are no longer profitable nor needed. Oh and it makes nuking your enemy into oblivion proportionally easier.

Yes I figured as much myself, I was thinking of trying to find a way to make them not work on a larger scale for some reason, any ideas?

IThis is again (in my opinion) extremely detrimental to what you want. Remember what many series would've looked like if they flipped open a cell phone and asked what was up? Lack of knowledge is an extremely powerful plot device and this virtually destroys it. It is especially detrimental to enforcing space travel. In stead of sending a ship over there (FTL or not) you just send a tiny probe with FTL sensors and FTL communications to see however far you want to see. Colonies can't revolt because the moment they do, the homeworld knows and can respond in stead of lagging behind by months.

Yeah we are still constructing the principles of subspace, our travel will be much slower then Stargate, meaning even if they knew immediately it would take time to send forces even after talking about it, strategising, and collecting the desired military units. We were also thinking about the communications, perhaps limiting the range of subspace communications because of signal interference from subspace itself and the available power to broadcast? Perhaps requiring relay stations or vessels large enough to have the necessary equipment? We want some conveniences without making it too easy.

ILastly, Subspace is (imho) a lame way of explaining things. In stead of going lengths about this, i would simply like to point out that other methods exist that may be more in your favor.

Yeah I considered those. I know subspace is cheesy but its what he wants. I actually wanted a negative energy project that got put on the back burner when they discovered a 'shiftway', (A semi sort of stable/permanent but dangerous subspace wormhole.) or however we decide they learned about subspace. Like, the Bermuda Triangle being a shiftway. As far as the combat point being choke based, yes absolutely, only the largest vessels have independent subspace drives, 'wild shiftways' are VERY DANGEROUS, and we have what are called shiftway stations made by a Precursor race (We will keep Precursors cool and mysterious.) that can stabilize shiftways, and allow smaller vessels to use FTL, but they are similar to Stargates in that they can be choke points. Also, we are still debating the power up time for subspace drives, and how often they can be used, cool down times, gravity well effect on the drive, ect.

I will insist on internal consistency.

I*wormholes: from a Sci Fi POV they may be not the most interesting, but it's definitely the easiest. A softer approach would be roughly what Stargate did (where Hyperspace appears to be a wormhole with significant length). They do have a huge gravity influence so it's necessary to place them outside star systems (i believe the influence radius for a traverseable wormhole was about 20 AU) meaning combat is choke-point based.

*Alcubierre Drive. Well technically it's demoted to Device, but still. A ring of some form of exotic matter (generating negative energy) is used to warp space and shorten the distance a ship travels. It doesn't break relativity. According to the most recent data, the energy requirements no longer are in the order of jupiter mass-energies and the system itself doesn't impart a direction, so the acceleration of the ship is what gives the field direction.

*temporary wormhole drives (like BSG), while having little basis in reality, may be a useful alternative. In stead of instantly traversing massive distances, a series of jumps are performed.



In the end, i would give the advice to establish a number of rules first and play by them. It's mostly important to be internally consistent.

[thekillman]

weapons which are quite new and which rely on Electromagnetic coils or plasma propulsion to fire the projectile at high velocity, they run off of capacitors.

I've seen plans for a microwave weapon to inflict excruciating pain at no physical damage, so weapons of such a kind would warrant energy weapons research. While you could conceivably create sufficiently powerful energy weapons, the downside is that you're creating sufficiently powerful micro powersources. This will reflect in the entire spectrum of small electronics. It means longer range handheld phones, stronger hand grenades, stronger handheld explosive weapons (e.g. Stingers/RPG's, and eventually Powered armor.

Of course, if you already wrote in powered armor you're gonna have enough juice to fire electromagnetic weaponry.

Lastly, stuff like Lasers wouldn't really make sense to damage armor as kinetic weapons do it easier and better, though if you're in space it may be useful to have an instahit weapon with no recoil. I'd also question the use of personal combat in space as boarding is damn hard when the enemy can see you weeks ahead.

Well, I tried to get him to stay in our solar system but he insisted on other colonies so i'm working on that with him.

How big is your empire? Given that we're pretty much blind to anything beyond pluto, one could conceive finding alien technology that links planets together with wormhole tech. Similarly, the Alcubierre warp drive is a device that isn't instant-FTL. When invented it'll first be an STL system that needs a significant engine to go anywhere at all with marginal gains. It'll take decades of further research to go reasonable fractions of c (allowing insterstellar travel to nearby stars). It'll take centuries to go places at FTL.

Furthermore, it's possible to have your cake and eat it too. Even at STL, one could send packets to nearby stars and build infrastructure, then send over humans with a vast genetic database and allow natural children plus 1 artificial baby per, say, 2 natural ones. Enforcing this over the years allows sending a small party (couple of thousand) humans over without running into complex problems like extensive pre-selection of humans or 100% arranged marriage.

You'd still need rules to prevent incest (or significant devaluation of the gene pool) but it would be better than just having the population.

Anyway, depending on how generous Earth is, the colonies could receive additional waves of colonists to speed up colonization. In a century or two you can build up quite the colony.

Then, in your present day, you can simply have proper stories in a solar system. A solar system is a damn big place and for all intents and purposes, you could have plenty of story to write per system. If you want to mimic stargate more, having two habitable planets in a solar system helps. If you want to prevent a need for extremely efficient drives, having said planets around a jupiter-like planet would effectively create a micro solar system.

For interstellar propulsion, an Orion Drive is probably your best bet. If you chose to, primordial black holes would be a poor man's black hole drive. It would circumvent the more problematic phase of a black hole drive (and power source) namely the creation of black holes. one of the problems may be that such a black hole is too hard to feed (it's atomic sized) and you'd need to discard the black hole shortly after arriving (after which it explodes in a gamma ray and X-ray bang). However, if you can keep one fed then antimatter-level power and truly insane power storage are yours. Of course it could lead to black hole R-bombs but it would require quite the effort.

Lastly, if you per se want FTL communications, use Entangled Matter. It allows instant communication across infinite distance. The catch is that it first needs to be transported to it's location. This further reinforces the need for proper starships as the entangled matter would need to be transported regularly to the sites. Only important information could securely be transmitted with everything else confined to an archive on a supply or trade ship.

Yes I figured as much myself, I was thinking of trying to find a way to make them not work on a larger scale for some reason, any ideas?

I wouldn't allow it to begin with, but if you like to stick with it, everything degrades. Have the stuff degrade over time when exposed to this energy drain system. That way, it's limited to the amount of stuff you can afford to lose to generate power.

I would simply like to point out (again ) that a LOT is already possible with a pinch of sci fi. I don't understand how you call it semi-hardcore when you have subspace and other fantasy elements. I don't understand how you go through the trouble of figuring out proper drive systems when you then insert a magical power source.

Yeah we are still constructing the principles of subspace, our travel will be much slower then Stargate, meaning even if they knew immediately it would take time to send forces even after talking about it, strategising, and collecting the desired military units. We were also thinking about the communications, perhaps limiting the range of subspace communications because of signal interference from subspace itself and the available power to broadcast? Perhaps requiring relay stations or vessels large enough to have the necessary equipment? We want some conveniences without making it too easy.

well knowing is half the battle. Again a major driver for stories is lack of knowledge. I think it's just shooting yourself in the foot with conveniences you don't need but only hurt what you want. abovementioned entangled matter would do the same trick, but requires to be restocked. It means that one would need to lay his hands on such matter (which would be heavily contained and guarded so it's not used up by unwanted interactions). It also means that short messages are preferable as it uses less entangled matter.

Like, the Bermuda Triangle being a shiftway

well the bermuda triangle isn't a mystery any more and hasn't been for decades.

I will insist on internal consistency.

Please keep shiftways a natural resource only.


Subspace was discovered, but plans for hyperdrive technology fell hugely short of the energies needed and no successful jump could be made. However, shortly before dying out permanently the Voyager probes pick up an hereto unseen signal. Further investigation with better drive systems leads to a weak force field (like EM and gravity etc) that is barely a hundred meters across, with no visible source. Hoping to fulfill their dreams of a hyperdrive, the earth top brass constructs a teleoperation base far out into the kuiper belt. using robotics and various forms of sensors the anomaly is studied.

Eventually a hyperdrive is sent there and activated, discovering that it acts like a weakpoint to subspace. unlike the utterly outrageous power requirements for entrance into subspace anywhere, the usage of a shiftway allows for easier entrance. Now knowing what to look for, far out into space and near other stars, as well as deep in the void more potential shiftways are discovered. some turn out to be false, but others lead to useful stars.

Bonus difficulty:
shiftways are temporary. You could follow an inverse size rule (bigger ones last short, small ones last long) or a direct size rule (bigger ones last longer, shorter ones are temporary).

Further bonus:
it can be days, weeks, months or years before the next shiftway occurs. Predicting the lifetime of a shiftway isn't hard, but predicting the appearance of the next is.

[Gormagon]

We are dissecting all of this. Question, how effective would gas propelled projectile weapons be in a vacuum? (Since EM is being discarded for now due to inefficient power sources and expense.)

And I cannot find the official name of that new defense technology that creates an EM field around an area that detects incoming weapons fire, then shoots them down with shotgun like blasts.

Also any thoughts on the "Quantum stealth" tech? http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/

[thekillman]

We are dissecting all of this. Question, how effective would gas propelled projectile weapons be in a vacuum? (Since EM is being discarded for now due to inefficient power sources and expense.)

And I cannot find the official name of that new defense technology that creates an EM field around an area that detects incoming weapons fire, then shoots them down with shotgun like blasts.

Also any thoughts on the "Quantum stealth" tech? http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/

First part:
In space, there aren't make forces acting on whatever you put there. Engines and whatever happens during launch are the main source of a need for structural strength. A regular gun would be as effective on the ISS as it is against an aeroplane. The walls are like paper, and the ISS is a display of advanced origami.

So unless you're dealing with actual armor, there's nowhere you can hide in or around a space ship or station where bullets can not find you. Well, if you dare hide behind stuff like engine components etc then you'll probably survive.

Of course, recoil is the main problem.



Second part:
I literally put your sentence in Google and found that it's called Trophy. Not sure what to say about it, it's essentially a Phalanx/Goalkeeper for vehicles with the necessary adjustments to make it work (e.g. shotgun blasts in stead of thousands of 50cal rounds)

Third part:
Had to say as it's not very clear what it is. My guess would be a fiber optic weave. Just about every stealth demonstration i've seen is about either cameras or metamaterials so i find it weird that a supposedly ideal technology like this is kept in the dark. However, countermeasures already exist so it's not exactly a perfect system either.

There's no such thing as stealth in space though.

[Gormagon]

First part:
In space, there aren't make forces acting on whatever you put there. Engines and whatever happens during launch are the main source of a need for structural strength. A regular gun would be as effective on the ISS as it is against an aeroplane. The walls are like paper, and the ISS is a display of advanced origami.

Well, I just know chemical propellants that rely on oxygen to burn would not work...unless you had a really complex contained gun....so I had started designing a gas propelled AP compact rifle for easy use in vacuum conditions.

Of course, recoil is the main problem.

Yes, the would have to be tethered or holding onto something when they fired, unless they wanted to move.

Second part:
I literally put your sentence in Google and found that it's called Trophy. Not sure what to say about it, it's essentially a Phalanx/Goalkeeper for vehicles with the necessary adjustments to make it work (e.g. shotgun blasts in stead of thousands of 50cal rounds)

Then its something up with my search engine because it kept pulling up very different things.

Third part:
Had to say as it's not very clear what it is. My guess would be a fiber optic weave. Just about every stealth demonstration i've seen is about either cameras or metamaterials so i find it weird that a supposedly ideal technology like this is kept in the dark. However, countermeasures already exist so it's not exactly a perfect system either.

There's no such thing as stealth in space though.

No, not without magic tech. I was more concerned with ground or in ship warfare. See, currently one story arc is the rebellion of a neglected over taxed planetary colony. They have a benefactor however, who gives them with weapons and supplies in exchange for...well, not important. Anyways, among the supplies are a selection of stealth suits and cloaks, designed to blend in perfectly and hide IR from Alliance Troopers. That's why this jumped out at me.

[thekillman]

Well, I just know chemical propellants that rely on oxygen to burn would not work...unless you had a really complex contained gun....so I had started designing a gas propelled AP compact rifle for easy use in vacuum conditions.

uhm....

Bullets -of any kind- have an explosive in them that causes them to propel. The reason an explosive is an explosive and not just a slow burn is because they can oxidize very fast. And they can oxydize very fast because they don't need air. The explosive is self-oxidizing, that is it either is a metastable molecule (e.g. nitroglycerine) or an oxidizer/fuel mixture (IIRC most plastic explosives).

TLDR: you could shoot a gun into space with a rocket, get it on the ISS, load, pull the trigger and kill people with no modification whatsoever. You might want to hold on to something while doing so.

Yes, the would have to be tethered or holding onto something when they fired, unless they wanted to move.

Even a tether won't work (unless you want to get dizzy). Magnetic boots or so, or stuff to grab onto would be the only way. Though obviously, hand combat in space would be rare.

No, not without magic tech. I was more concerned with ground or in ship warfare. See, currently one story arc is the rebellion of a neglected over taxed planetary colony. They have a benefactor however, who gives them with weapons and supplies in exchange for...well, not important. Anyways, among the supplies are a selection of stealth suits and cloaks, designed to blend in perfectly and hide IR from Alliance Troopers. That's why this jumped out at me.

As the site you linked mentioned, countermeasures already exist. It may just work. If it really does work, it's something both companies and military would want to keep secret.


Two more notes;

Chemical lasers and gyrojets.

It may be possible to use a handheld chemical laser. (you can see them at the end of Iron Man 2). The obvious problem is that the chemical is expended when firing the laser and there's a definitive upper limit to how powerful such a laser is. Will have to look that up. For recoilless zerogee combat it's probably going to be worth it.

gyrojets are something i think never really took off because regular guns are simpler and just as powerful if not more powerful. The idea is that in stead of an explosive, the bullet has a miniature rocket engine and so self-propels. Well rocket engine sounds too sci fi, it's more like shooting fireworks. A hollow piece of metal with solid fuel, pulling the trigger ignites the fuel and the bullet shoots off and keeps on accelerating even after leaving the barrel.

The obvious advantage is that it too is recoilless. It's basically a miniature rocket launcher. It's like a regular rifle without the recoil. The disadvantage is that after shooting it takes a while for the bullet to go full speed. Still not THAT long but i think the lag would be noticeable. It would also probably be more expensive. But i guess armed astronauts are more expensive so it's worth it.

[thekillman]

Chemical laser:

The ABL (airborne Laser) uses a chemical laser.

The heart of the system is the COIL, comprising six interconnected modules, each as large as an SUV. Each module weighs about 6,500 pounds (3,000 kg). When fired, the laser produces enough energy in a five-second burst to power a typical American household for more than an hour.[9]

So how much energy respectively power is that?
[QUOTEUS energy information]How much electricity does an American home use?

In 2012, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential utility customer was 10,837 kWh, an average of 903 kilowatthours (kWh) per month.[/QUOTE]

10,837KWh / year = 29,7KWh/day = 1,2KWh/hour (obviously, that's 1,2 KW for the duration of an hour).

1 hour = 3600 seconds.
1,2KJ/s * 3600s = 4,32MJ
4,32MJ/5s = 864KW.


So it's a 4,32MJ shot over 5 seconds.

If the ABL achieves its design goals, it could destroy liquid-fueled ICBMs up to 600 km away. Tougher solid-fueled ICBM destruction range would likely be limited to 300 km,

The laser uses chemical fuel similar to rocket propellant to generate the high laser power. Plans called for each 747 to carry enough laser fuel for about 20 shots, or perhaps as many as 40 low-power shots against fragile TBMs.

efficiency of a COIL is about 33%. Loss due to fiber optics is about 10%.

Energy density of rocket fuel is hard to find. Using hydrogen peroxide, i get 813 Wh/kg.
(or .8KWh/kg).

To generate the abovementioned joules, we get:

813Wh = 2,9MJ
It takes about 1,5kg of peroxide.

However, the process is 0,33*0,9=29,7% efficient.

So we need 1/0,297=3,37x more.

That yields 1,5 * 3,37=5,05kg of peroxide for a 4,32MJ shot.



Conclusion so far: the amount of chemicals you need to fire such a laser isn't all that bad actually. For volume multiply by 1,46, so that's 7,3L of peroxide to fire the laser.

That may sound like a lot. However, for industrial practices, to cut a sheet of metal lasers in the order of kilowatts are used. We're talking maybe 6kw for 3mm steel. Granted that's point blank but still. Clearly the fuel source isn't the problem.

I would like to point at something else, namely the laser itself. We're talking six modules at 3000kg each. The fuel:laser ratio is then about 0,05%

Design of a handheld laser:
Looking at these numbers and conceding that we don't need humongous range lasers, it is conceivable that a handheld laser may be possible.

At 12m per minute we get about 1mm plate thickness for a 1KW COIL
That's cutting 200mm of plate per second. 5mm thick at 16mm/s.

The beam quality does degrade over distance. However, assuming we're gonna cut through human armor (~5mm is THICK) and we are going to fire for a second, you'll be looking at about ~5KW (for safety) for a laser. Applying the 30% efficiency we get 3,3*5KW = 16,5KW. That's 16,5KJ for a shot. That's 16,5 / 2900 = 5,7grams of peroxide. (or 8ml)

The laser itself will weigh about 16,5KJ/4320KJ * (6*3000kg)=68 kg.

Ok. that's heavy. Assuming that's all steel, i get 0,49KJ/KgK. 68kg * 0,49 = 33,7KJ/K.

We have a 16,5KJ shot with a 5KJ laser burst, so 11,5KJ of energy wasted. That's quite a bit of energy but the gun will heat up by about a third of a degree.

Assuming it's air cooled we get 11 degrees hotter air (1kg of air)