|
Post by ErnestBorgnine on Jul 8, 2004 13:23:37 GMT -5
There would be relatively cheap and energy efficient ways to ship large cargos. Mass drivers (magnetic or gravitic) to get the shipment into space, ion engines or solar sails that might take years to reach top speed but could in theory accelerate to a significant fraction of c.
Would you bother? Maybe.
One of the codices has a page of fluff where a world kept calling for reinforcements and things kept getting worse and the final entry that the mine on the planet would have played out in a few more years so they saved their men and let it fall. To me, this indicates the Imperium bureaucracy occasionally thinks in the very long term when it comes to supplies. If the mines on a world are going to be good for a few centuries, and if it might take that long to build a transport, it may be worth sublight shipping cargo, especially where it's something like ore for a forgeworld - always in demand and relatively predictably so. The forgeworld would be more interested in having enough ore at any time to keep the forges running than how it got there. So long as a new mine comes online and starts firing cargo pallets on 100 year journeys at least a century before the last one is exhausted, bobs your uncle.
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Jul 9, 2004 1:41:16 GMT -5
First of all, welcome to the Anargo sector project, ErnestBorgnine! I’m very pleased that you’ve started with my post. I’ve read some of your messages on the Portent and I’m sure that you can really help to boost this project. I advise you to introduce yourself in general thread (cannot bother to supply the ink, but you’ll find it). There would be relatively cheap and energy efficient ways to ship large cargos. I agree with your points but the problem is (it’s minor problem, anyway!) that Kage tries to use Traveller and more general GURPS tech levels (TL) in the project whenever possible. At the TL, even when they are just rough guidelines, don’t allow him to use some drives because they are too good for Imperium. Moreover, he, like many others, sees warp a lot like usual SF hyperspace – i.e. just a way to overcome speed of light and to shorted travels from millennia to weeks. I always point that warp is irregular and chaotic so that you cannot really ensure achievement of commodities in time by the warp travel.
|
|
|
Post by ErnestBorgnine on Jul 9, 2004 7:40:18 GMT -5
WRT tech levels, both ion engines and solar sails, not to mention magnetic mass drivers, are theoretically within current technological limits in the real world, but we don't do it because there's no one on Alpha Centauri to accept delivery of our goods. It's economics more than science holding us back.
Yeah, I would lurk and check out ASP from time to time when I figured a Portent argubate must surely have been covered here already, but I had yet to post.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 9, 2004 14:05:47 GMT -5
I agree with your points but the problem is (it’s minor problem, anyway!) that Kage tries to use Traveller and more general GURPS tech levels (TL) in the project whenever possible. At the TL, even when they are just rough guidelines, don’t allow him to use some drives because they are too good for Imperium. <breathes carefully> I'm going to try very carefully to not shout and take a tempered approach since this is self-evidently not the approach that I've been taking. I'm going to use italics a bit, but please don't take them as shouting... merely emphasis since the lack of use previously obviously didn't bring my point across. Different words as well, otherwise it really would be shouting. Phew... I went off on one. Apologies zholud, but I'm going to leave the text here for the most part unchanged. Yes, I try to use the more structured approaches of these systems as a general guideline since I strongly feel they offer more than they take away. They prevent the kind of tedious approach where you have caveman building, say, antimatter reactors... "But they have an STC and it says here...!" They create a structure where the 'unthinking' assumptions can be moderated so that one can then apply that thought and move beyond the realm. I seem to have trouble, despite numerous attempts at saying this, at bringing this across. What I am saying is that if you have a technology being utilised in one field it makes sense to apply it elsewhere. If you have a device of generating massive delta-v with huge fuel efficiency to transport things via fast subluminal, then you use it elsewhere... I do not advocate the myopic approach where you use a technology in one place because you happen to think it is 'cool' and then ignore the ramifications. I am more than willing to have far more advanced thrusters but, once again, I do try and keep things relatively consistent with the 'fluff' where possible. I'm even willing to stretch the 'fluff' - as is self-evident - but I merely advocate that we don't fall into GW myopia. "Oh, we've thought of a problem in the 'fluff'. Let's make up an entirely different reason why it shouldn't be so!" And, coincidentally, those TLs do allow for more advanced drive systems. But does the 'fluff' beyond the "Rule of the Cool"? (You will note that I've been trying to get a reasonable answer to an approach on drive systems utilised by the Imperium, but to no avail...) Moreover, he, like many others, sees warp a lot like usual SF hyperspace – i.e. just a way to overcome speed of light and to shorted travels from millennia to weeks. Actually, no I don't. Or not exactly. I merely point to the 'fluff' and look at phrases such as " average travel times" or " calculated warp jumps" and, well, point at it... The implications are that on average travelling this distance with a Navigator takes this time in the warp and this time in the matterium... That if use calculated warp jumps then it implies a level of calculation and not just, metaphorically, close your eyes, push a button and hope. And, incidentally, I view the original warp - the so-called 'harmonious' warp - of being like hyperspace. I view the modern version as something which can be 'predicted' but which is subject to significant variation. Kind of like the warp really. Admittedly I tend not to over-emphasise the chaotic aspects and the fact that daemons are omnipresent, etc. I do not, however, think that is a bad thing. I always point that warp is irregular and chaotic so that you cannot really ensure achievement of commodities in time by the warp travel. And I merely point out on average you can assume if a world is around a parsec away it's going to take anywhere between 109 minutes and 13 hours to travel this distance. Again, on average... the whole normal distribution gig with the problem that it's probably not normally distributed, or at least galactically. Based upon the 'fluff' self-evidently it can take longer or even much shorter... even to the extent of arriving before they left! [glow=blue,2,300]But on average... [/glow] But then again that 'fluff' comes from a source which states that the Astronomican is 50,000 light years in diameter but the Imperium is 75,000 light years in breadth... 'Fluff' contradiction, typographic, implication that the 'Astropathic beacons' cover a zone of 12,500 light years past the main Astronomican... Or a C'tan conspiracy? Or 12,500 light years where sublight drives not used elsewhere are used? (Damn, sorry... couldn't resist. This is tongue-in-cheek but I was torn whether to delete it or not... Didn't want there to be misinterpretation.) With that said, the Astropathic Network is predicated upon the reasonable predictability of communication. Oh yes, and one cannot help but think of the concept of "insurance", more particularly the development of it...
|
|
|
Post by Dazo on Jul 9, 2004 23:21:18 GMT -5
So why not say that its a typo, if the imperium spans 75,000 LY then so must the astronomicon, or that in some parts it is only visible for 50,000 LY and in others 75,000, the imperium isn't a perfect sphere is it.
And for me imperial warp drive is the only form of superluminal travel that allows a star ship to leave a planetary system because of the ort cloud, this is an asteroid field stretching for at least half a light year, , somthing that the startrek warp drive ignores and i would assume so does the necron. faster than light travel using this form of warp drive would be near unfeasable if you have to negotiate this type of debri feild at sub light speeds or i may be wrong.
But you wouldn't be able to just pop into a system with out any one noticeing you as the necron do, unless they use space folding ala dune style, the outliyng defense screens would detect the massive energy and gravametric distortions as a fleet dropped out of warp giving time for a defense to be prepared or am i wrong again Did that make sense to anyone
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Jul 10, 2004 5:26:03 GMT -5
<breathes carefully> I'm going to try very carefully to not shout and take a tempered approach since this is self-evidently not the approach that I've been taking. I'm going to use italics a bit, but please don't take them as shouting... merely emphasis since the lack of use previously obviously didn't bring my point across. Different words as well, otherwise it really would be shouting. ok, as I’ve said on other agrubatable thread (where I thought about this message of yours) – I beg you pardon. I haven’t attempted to insult you in any way. Moreover, while I cannot prompt a system, which is better than TLs, we are stuck with them. I just point out that TL already caused problems with Ork tech, where gadgeting has to be used. There is such a story – Archimedes allegedly created steam engine, but it was not necessary in his times even though it was as efficient as first new steam age engines… how he overleapt several TLs to do what he did? But I’ve gone OffT, sorry. I just want to emphasise that sometimes it seems that you give too much value to TL in comparison with GW stuff. I prefer whenever possible, take official fluff as interpretation based on real, in 40k-verse, facts. So, if Eldar ships use something akin to sails that affect their star-ward and star-outward moves, they do use them. The fact that visible part of them cannot generate necessary thrust just means that we haven’t accounted for something. Same with Imperium ships – there are references about warp jumps from Sol system beyond Pluto, suggesting that they are able to get to the point quite fast with real space thrust system. Why it is not used in BFG Combat? – possibly because these drives exhibit inertia and have to be turned on and heated for hours, similar to problem with Pearl Harbour, where US ships were unable to manoeuvre because to heat up their engines they needed two hours… They prevent the kind of tedious approach where you have caveman building, say, antimatter reactors... "But they have an STC and it says here...!" They create a structure where the 'unthinking' assumptions can be moderated so that one can then apply that thought and move beyond the realm. If we used a setting named Cavemen with anti-matter reactors I’d argued that they can. Same here – we have very long-time planning in Imperium, at least in some areas, and if assassin comes a century later than necessary and this is not shocking fact for Administratum, I guess that a ship en route for a decade is not such a wonder for Imperials. What I am saying is that if you have a technology being utilised in one field it makes sense to apply it elsewhere. If you have a device of generating massive delta-v with huge fuel efficiency to transport things via fast subluminal, then you use it elsewhere... Unless they have severe drawbacks, like being efficient only if ran for at least 1 year – so called break-even point… like they create small super nova but unable to turn it off and have to wait till it burns out. On averages idea I generally to some extent agree with you, but I have to point out that there is such thing as catastrophic damage in risk management – means that even though a failure is improbable, we prefer it to be impossible, so we do not start a project where it may exist. Even if it is profitable on average
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jul 10, 2004 6:29:02 GMT -5
Where? Everything I've seen suggests that ships take weeks to get from the biospheres to the outer reaches.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 10, 2004 7:27:43 GMT -5
I had a huge reply addressing each specific point, but realised that there wasn't a reason for doing that. It also explained some of the previous post, mostly because this is something that I would argue should be taken to PM given that it comes close to a 'personal attack', if one done exceptionally politely. Since it tackles what many people who come from it on the wargame side of things, e.g. Lordof's comments that the project was (in essence) too detailed because all people wanted was a place to "blow things up" and all that detail is only required for "uber hardcore RPGers", I've kept it not only on a public board (as opposed to PM or PPL) and continue to reply here.
(Incidentally, those comments by Lordof are appropriate but also difficult to understand without the rest of the private discussion... Take them with a pinch of salt because of this.)
Ultimately itboils down to what appears to be the assumption of conformance to specific things, I feature which I believe is a misinterpretation which both of us perpetuate.
You feel that I am conforming to GURPS merely because that is what I do. I could argue that you're conforming to the 'fluff' merely because that is what you do, i.e. pre-eminence of the wargame. Both are incorrect. We both try and take an open-minded approach to the 'fluff'.
The main difference is, from the above, you assume the ultimate 'truth' of the 'fluff', where I question it and use 'revisionism' and "parallel consideration" of the 'fluff' try try and integrate where possible. For me, why use several arguments when one will do.
Thus with the - admittedly unsurprising - reference to eldar 'solar sails'. All I said was that solar sails fail as a true representation of an eldar propulsion system based on reasonable extension of physical facts (i.e. lack of surface area to provide 'solar thrust'), and a 'fluff' consideration (e.g. eldar ships are generally more manoeuverable). I further questioned the use of solar energy provided the motive thrust for 'grav drives' merely because it inherently impinges upon the strategic value of eldar ships in a particularly damaging effect. I did, however, think that it was a novel solution... I also questioned the use of 'neutrinos' mostly because it required the creation of spurious 'solar sail materials' capable of interacting with these pesky little buggers (they must have a mass or 'virtual' mass that is exceptionally significant), and also their incidence upon a given volume is relatively small...
With reference to Minister's suggestion of 'gravimetric drives' you will remember that I liked this suggestion, merely asking for a reasonable 'mechanic' which would generate the somewhat tedious 'tacking' model advocated by GW. Indeed, I suggested some possibilities, though IIRC these were ignored.
Still the answer of eldar propulsion is stalled. Is it because we are missing something? Obviously. Consistency in the 'fluff'. We need to address that through a system other than "Oh dear, well the 'fluff' says that they use solar sails so we're just going to have to use them and have the sun beaming out 'laser beams' at eldar ships just to make them move..."
Is this paying too much attention to GURPS. Perhaps, but I also think that you significantly over-state my 'conformance' to it or the fact that I allow it to 'dominate' my approach. This is untrue. You will note that in other threads I've continually asked for a consistent approach and not the one advocated by so many which, in essence, is: make it up as you go along. I prefer a structure, that is all...
Indeed, this is evident in the "Economy Thread". I personally would advocate the use of GURPS Traveller: Far Trader or something similar. Why? Because it offers a consistent set of rules and assumptions for modelling economy that are accessible to all (well, if I typed them out or you downloaded them or bought the actual book) rather than the supposedly specialist knowledge of a few... Accessibility is important, another reason that the Guide was made available and used. With that said you will also note that I was asking for discussion based upon the potential differences in the assumptions of the universe since that would shadow its use...
So what do I use it for, and why not another system? Well, I prefer it. It does everything that I want. Is it inappropriate to the 40k universe? No. What about the 'restrictive' TL system that cannot explain orks without gadgeteering? First, I would reply that orks cannot be explained by anything other than gadgeteering... they do not have a significant technological basis and the 'fluff' begs that Mekboyz be described in this fashion. It's just the best way of modelling the 'fluff'. But what about the Imperium? "I think that the Imperium is a TL6+4 campaign", meaning that they're basically sub-modern technology but with some high-tech pieces... except that kind of Retrotech/Steampunk imagery doesn't quite work...
(And, BTW, don't forget the Difference Engine... a computer invented in the 19th century which was steam driven IIRC and would have actually worked if Babbage could have got the financing for it.)
My approach to the TL system is that it be used as a guideline and as a framework of interpretation. "Oh dear, I want my Guard regiment to use lasguns but they come from an Industrial Revolution world..." just means that the author think about things rather than just performing the normal 'hand waving' and going with it... Where do they get the lasguns from? Is there some form of franchise for certain components, or are they imported...?
If a technology is not permissible within the 'established' adeptus mechanicus of GTL10 then the system only begs that the individual ask why and offer an explanation. You think that Imperial drive systems should be capable of continuous acceleration to be able to get them out of a system (Pluto distance) in hours, or weeks... Then argue the case and apply it to not just one specific part. That is what I ask, not that you accept the specific numbers associated with an RPG system in the same way that I ask people not to ask me to blindly accept a piece of 'fluff' merely because it happens to have been pulped and printed onto a GW/BL/whatever publication merely because "GW says so".
Returning this back to the topic in hand, again I merely ask that if you truly are advocating that the Imperium utilises a significant and, for the most part, hidden 'fleet' of cargo ships that utilise, that you consider the ramifications. For example:
Propulsion system... Why do these subluminal ships have a significantly more efficient and/or advanced propulsion system than utilised anywhere else in the Imperium. E.g. the standard propulsion is 'plasma engine' which, at least superficially, is modelled with a "fusion engine" and does not appear capable of generating that level of thrust and fuel efficiency?
If it is present elsewhere, then fine. But what is that drive system? Hand-waving and saying that it is just an "efficient drive system, we don't really understand how it works or, even, what it is called" does not work in the ASP. If it does exist then please given enough information that, if accepted by the other members of the project, how it works (at least in rough terms) and offer features (fuel, etc.).
If it utilises exotic means of propulsion, then engage the 'ole noodle about the ramifications of those technologies. Do not naturally assume the STC model, a feature which is questioned.
Volume of traffic... Given the volume/mass of the cargo that you're talking about, have you really given a consideration to either the size of the vessel, the numbers or, perhaps more appropriately, both?
Why...!? Given your advocation of the 'fluff' - one which I agree with and do my best to keep, rather than just unthinking application - transit time in the warp is, roughly, predictable. Not only do you have the tabulated average transit times, but also the concept of stable warp pathways, etc. Given this canonical material, the question 'why' pops up. Why does the Imperium utilise a system of advanced subluminal ships that will take (at least) centuries to arrive if it arrives at all (I would suggest that you understate the dangers of interstellar travel)? Why, when they have a system of ships which may take centuries to travel between systems, if it arrives at all, though the statistics show that it is more likely to take around a day or so.
Hmmn...
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 10, 2004 7:28:07 GMT -5
Type | Journey Time | Automatic Arrival | Warp | Days (1-5 ly) | No; maybe lost in the warp and may take longer | Subluminal | Centuries (at least, for 1-5 ly) | No; for any number of countless reasons |
Yes, on average the subluminal ship will arrive, but then again so will the warp ship. Indeed, the warp ship takes much less time so if it doesn't arrive then you're going to know that something is up... If the subluminal ship doesn't arrive then you're going to know that something happened to it, but there's not a great deal that you can do accept wait for the next one and hope that arrives. Furthermore, the warp ship is more capable of reacting to specific need since it has a turnover rate of less than a year (with slow Warp zone:mainworld transition times) and thus can make 200 (ish) trips in the time it takes the subluminal ship to make one. (Oh yes, and both 'terminals' are going to more than likely require significant technologies to be able to refit, etc., these subluminal ships.) It is this - or rather these - arguments, and not the propulsion system, that I find to be far more substantial reasons against the subluminal concept. And on the Astropathic Network... And if the warp is as chaotic as you stated above, then the Astropathic Network which the canonical 'fluff' relies on as the exclusive means of communication (I disagree with this, but there we go), would be just as unreliable. On average, however, we know that it is reasonably reliable... another little tid-bit of information and reason against the subluminal concept. Based on your arguments of the concept I find it difficult to believe in it... The technical considerations are entirely parallel and, for the most part, inconsequential with the exception that they should not be applied exclusively to such a 'minor feature'.
|
|
|
Post by Dazo on Jul 10, 2004 9:11:17 GMT -5
Right, how about this then, eldar build just about everything out of wraith bone, which only partially exists in this dimension the other half being part of the warp, might not they then be used not to catch a solar wind but a warp current, objects of high mass have an effect upon warp currents do they not, might not the sails be used to harness this disturbance. I have no data to back that up but to me it makes alot of sense so be kind in your critisism
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 11, 2004 1:40:29 GMT -5
It's a possibility, but one which wouldn't seem to be entirely consistent with the 'fluff' more so on the nature of the warp and currents than anything else. If you want to discuss this aspect, head over to Factory. Indeed, the discussion also addresses zholud's "concerns"... here.
|
|