|
Post by CELS on Jan 15, 2004 19:05:24 GMT -5
Heheh, if Kage has lost interest? Hm. No. He's just kinda busy with work these days. Still though, we're 21 members of the forum, and he's written a third of the posts. I wouldn't say that he's the one who's lost interest
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jan 16, 2004 4:47:58 GMT -5
i'm holding my interest, I'm just stuck for ideas a bit. ;D
Anyway, what's next for the Master of the Stars?
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 16, 2004 5:28:13 GMT -5
Well, once we've figured out the size and weight, I guess we're supposed to talk about how much armour the ship has, what kind of weapons (the Retribution has plasma weapon batteries. Of course, it's up to us to figure out what these are), what kind of real-space drives the ship has, what kind of generators.... then I suppose we make "guesstimates" about how much space all of this is going to take, and what we'll do with the rest of the space. Either this, or Kage has his own plans, and maybe even some new guidelines
|
|
|
Post by malika on Jan 16, 2004 8:18:41 GMT -5
Heheh, if Kage has lost interest? Hm. No. He's just kinda busy with work these days. Still though, we're 21 members of the forum, and he's written a third of the posts. I wouldn't say that he's the one who's lost interest yah I think we should get more members, I mean the project started on portent, couldnt we get some more member from eldar online or something, or another big good board...maybe leave DakkaDakka out, cos Ive seen some realy stupid things come from there..I mean did you see the pics from their shows? the stuff is cool but some stuff is just lame IMHO (they have a good modelling section on the board though) sorry for getting off topic here
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jan 16, 2004 8:51:32 GMT -5
Right then, opiniopns on number and type of point defence weapons from everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 16, 2004 10:17:11 GMT -5
I haven't lost interest but as posted on another thread, I'm doing a full-time job and a full-time PhD... that tends to severely limit your spare time. On the bright side it should only be a few more months after which I'll have time in abundance. Well, unless the so-called supervisors keep on coming up with additional things that they think that I should be doing (and which they could have told me about years ago). As to guidelines, I'm working through those presented in GURPS Vehicles, but to do this we're going to need some reasonable estimates on weights, volumes, general ideas of weaponry, etc., before we can get started. Armour protection is useful for calculating the penetrative features of weapons that we are also going to have to design as 'standards' (to be used with later designs), and so on. At the moment I'm just trying to get an overall idea before we move onto specifics. If you want, however, I can move to the specifics and then we can just chat about the relevancy of those specifics... Kage
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jan 16, 2004 15:40:54 GMT -5
We need tha sutable density for a warship in order to work out the mass, since we already have guesstimate volumes for them.
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 16, 2004 15:41:07 GMT -5
I haven't lost interest but as posted on another thread, I'm doing a full-time job and a full-time PhD... that tends to severely limit your spare time. Excuses, excuses ;D On the bright side it should only be a few more months after which I'll have time in abundance. Well, unless the so-called supervisors keep on coming up with additional things that they think that I should be doing (and which they could have told me about years ago). Does my male intuition sense some frustration? As to guidelines, I'm working through those presented in GURPS Vehicles, but to do this we're going to need some reasonable estimates on weights, volumes, general ideas of weaponry, etc., before we can get started. Are we satisfied with our estimations on weight and volume? As for weaponry, I'm not quite sure how to proceed. What do we need to know anyway? We know how GW says that plasma weapons work in 40k, right? It's explained in my 2nd Ed wargear book anyway. Range should be easy enough to calculate, right Minister? I assume you know the scale used in BFG, more or less. Weapon strength is going to be tough. Well, we know how devastating portable plasma weapons are, and we know how devastating the plasma cannon is. We might be able to find out just how powerful Titan-mounted plasma weapons are. Most of the plasma guns in the Retribution's weapon batteries will be a two or three times as big as that mounted on Titans, I reckon, which should give us a fair idea. Anything else? Armour protection is useful for calculating the penetrative features of weapons that we are also going to have to design as 'standards' (to be used with later designs), and so on. Ah, yes, armour. I seem to recall that the only part of the ship made of 'adamantium' or whatever that very, very hard metal was called, is the ram. I think the prow shielding is made from plas-steel. Looking at artwork, I would think that the rest of the ship has a plascrete exterior. I don't know if plascrete is tough enough for this to be true. If it's anything like concrete, we can obviously forget about it. As for the thickness, I think some novels might have mentioned how thickly armoured Imperial ships are. Maybe Soul Drinker, Execution Hour, Shadow Point, or the Space Wolf novel where they have a boarding action? At the moment I'm just trying to get an overall idea before we move onto specifics. If you want, however, I can move to the specifics and then we can just chat about the relevancy of those specifics... I'm fine either way. Might as well start to chat about the specifics, but there's already something to work out.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 16, 2004 18:05:46 GMT -5
Excuses, excuses ;D I'm quite found of that one, myself... and yes, there is a healthy dose of frustration in there. <sigh> Are we satisfied with our estimations on weight and volume? Well, the volume is fine. The weight calculation will depend on the final design sequence but it is useful to guestimate for when the overall acceleration is determined. But it is not going to be fixed until later... We might be able to find out just how powerful Titan-mounted plasma weapons are. Most of the plasma guns in the Retribution's weapon batteries will be a two or three times as big as that mounted on Titans, I reckon, which should give us a fair idea. All we need to do is figure out what effects what and guestimate the armour and armour type. Thus with PA in the other thread. Kind of. E.g. it was based on the fact that a good hit from a lasgun will damage PA, but bolters are also designed to effect it so it should penetrate... and so on... a chain of logic. Kage
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jan 22, 2004 6:15:23 GMT -5
Eeenteresting: PLASMA ENGINE Humans tested plasma engines, as early as the mid-twentieth century. Early plasma engines were hydrogen, or deuterium based, powered by crude nuclear fission reactors. Essentially, plasma engines (also known as plasma jets), fire a stream of very hot gas in the form of charged particles, containing an equal number of positive ions and electrons. Plasma engines can produce a great deal of thrust, quickly and with great stability. Plasma engines, due to their low maintenance and simple construction, are used by less advanced races who depend on nuclear fusion/fission reactors. Plasma is also an extremely good conductance of electricity, and some races actually use direct current vents in their ship, bumping plasma and powering their vessels. Plasma can also, due to it's high conductivity, be used a formidable weapon. A given subject can fire a stream of plasma with a high electric charge, resulting in a powerful energy weapon. However plasma weapons have a very short effective range. ION PARTICLE ENGINE Ion propulsion is a technology that involves ionizing a gas to propel a craft. Instead of a spacecraft being propelled with standard chemicals, gas like xenon (which is like neon or helium, but heavier) is given an electrical charge, or ionized. It is then accelerated electrically via the use of a magnetic field, to a speed of about 30 km/second. When ions are emitted at such high speed as exhaust from a spacecraft, they push the spacecraft in the opposite direction. Ion engine technology has existed on earth since the mid 20th century, but was not seriously used until the early/mid 21st century due to testing and the need for a stable power source. One of the first Ion engine to be used on a space vessel was back in the year 1998. NASA tested this Ion engine on April 30th 1996, at the NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA. It was a simple solar powered xenon ion engine, and proved that Ion engine technology could be a viable replacement for primitive and less efficient chemical engines. Ion propulsion is far more propellant efficient than either plasma or chemical propulsion, because it expels molecules from the engine at a much higher speed. A chemical propulsion engine has an exhaust velocity of 10,400 miles per hour while ion propulsion exhaust is 70,200 miles per hour or greater. Ion engines are very stable, fuel efficient, and quite powerful. Their stability and high endurance make them the sub-light engine of choice for most of the younger races. The last revolution in Ion propulsion technology took place in the early 22nd century, when Paul Beigle-Bryant of "Leading Engines Corp." developed what would become the standard engine design used on all EarthForce starships - the 9000-A particle thrust engine. The principles of the BB9K are the primary design basis for all major engine designs used on Earth vessels, as well as many other races in the cosmos. Unlike the classic Ion engine designs, the BB9K type engine can accelerate particles to speed close to that of light, in order to create thrust. Paul Beigle-Bryant achieved this high velocity of thrust by adding an additional stage to Ion propulsion system and revolutionized the field. Unlike normal Ion engines, which only use electron bombardment and magnetic field to accelerate charged particles to a speed of 70,200 miles, the BB9K type engine filters the positively charged atoms into a "Particle Accelerator." Here the Ions are accelerated to a velocity near that of light. When these particles are expelled, they can provide a starship with over 20 times the thrust of a normal Ion engine. Until Paul Beigle-Bryant, Ion engines were renowned for their high stability, and low rate of acceleration. Now they were not only efficient and stable, but also Ion propulsion finally had the one key element they'd always been missing - the ability to provide a starship with a high rate of acceleration. Swiped from www.b5tech.com , but it could be of use and/or interest with reference to the drives.
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jan 22, 2004 10:40:25 GMT -5
Could I put forward a theory on weaponry?
Suppose a 'lance' is an antiparticle beam?
Firing, say, antiprotons at a high enough energy at any solid matter would disintegrate it with absolutely no form of defence, releasing vast, vast quantities of energy in the process. It would be like hitting the insides of the ship with a sustained nuclear blast from a warhead the size of a large building.
|
|
|
Post by Minister on Jan 22, 2004 11:18:59 GMT -5
Acording to the BFG book the Lance is a large energy weapon, and I am willing to belive this. Besides, an antimatter beam of any sorts is rather auquard to build...
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jan 22, 2004 11:44:02 GMT -5
It would explain the immense power of the lance battery design. The primary destructive power would be from the matter-antimatter annihilation caused by the beam coming in contact with solid material.
And besides, if we use Positrons instead, it's sort of like energy...
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 22, 2004 20:51:19 GMT -5
If an anti-matter weapon works by energizing anti-protons and releasing them in a beam, then per definition, an anti-matter weapon could be a lance.
Of course, one must consider what kind of technology level anti-matter weaponry is. Kage might whip out some guidelines on this, but personally I think anti-matter is too advanced to make it one of the most common weapons in the Imperial Navy.
I was always under the impression that lances were just big, big energy weapons, and either plasma weapons or laser weapons. The difference between lances and weapons batteries, is that a lance produces a single beam, whilst a battery consists of different types of weaponry (ballistic, missile and beam) which are co-ordinated differently depending on range and target.
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Jan 23, 2004 14:34:56 GMT -5
I highly doubt that nova cannon uses anti-matter because it was used within an atmosphere which is IIRC impossible – air is matter, so annihilation will start just before the barrel.
|
|