K
Krnon
Guest
Original poster
I would also be very interested in that universe, since there are a lot of things that could happen in such.
Y
Yiyel
Guest
Original poster
I don't think Star Wars is good for even ship sizes - there are discrepancies between canon and stated ship sizes, and even then, the ships' sizes were quite restrictive (and that's not mentioning that the computers seemingly run on 60's computer technology despite being FUCKING STAR SHIPS).
K
Krnon
Guest
Original poster
Y
Yiyel
Guest
Original poster
Star Trek is still rather fantasist, and Avatar was wishful thinking at best. There aren't many pre-existing universes that take into consideration everything - and for good reason, it would probably fly over most people's head.
C
Crispy
Guest
Original poster
Now you said no kill everything weapons, but god damnit space ships need a kill everything button. So here's one:
Name: ASI (Anti-Ship Impact) Missile
Armament: 5 Tritium enforced nuclear warheads
Yield: 30kt each
Max Speed: 18km/s
Range: 1100 to 1800km
Propulsion: 3 step Ion Thrust (Initial, Cruise, Impact)
Fuel: Xenon Gas
Power System: Hybrid Supercapacitors
The ASI Missiles were developed with the intention of striking and destroying a frigate size ship hull and neutralizing larger ships. It is recommended that 1 missile be fired for a frigate class vessels. Larger vessels will require comparatively more missiles to be destroyed. Despite the kinetic force behind the explosions the missiles are relatively ineffective at dispersing and destroying electromagnetic shields compared to other methods already in common practice. Though a repeated barrage will overwhelm and destroy an electromagnetic shield the use of missiles to achieve this is inefficient and not advised.
The missiles work in a time tested method. They accelerate until a cruising speed is reached and then shortly before impact accelerate to a final velocity to ensure maximum damage. Reaching speeds of 18km/s in space and 11km/s near orbit the missiles are ineffective in atmospheric environments and they are restricted to low gravity environments. Between 1 and 3 kilometers from the target the warheads will separate from the missile to ensure an effective dispersion of fire. Targeting systems rely on the ship most often, though the missiles do have a self guided program in the event that communication is lost with the ship.
The resulting shock wave from the explosion is most dangerous to small personal size ships and can sometimes inflict minor damage to larger vessels in close proximity to the explosion. The recommended shortest firing distance is 1100km to ensure damage is limited.
Name: ASI (Anti-Ship Impact) Missile
Armament: 5 Tritium enforced nuclear warheads
Yield: 30kt each
Max Speed: 18km/s
Range: 1100 to 1800km
Propulsion: 3 step Ion Thrust (Initial, Cruise, Impact)
Fuel: Xenon Gas
Power System: Hybrid Supercapacitors
The ASI Missiles were developed with the intention of striking and destroying a frigate size ship hull and neutralizing larger ships. It is recommended that 1 missile be fired for a frigate class vessels. Larger vessels will require comparatively more missiles to be destroyed. Despite the kinetic force behind the explosions the missiles are relatively ineffective at dispersing and destroying electromagnetic shields compared to other methods already in common practice. Though a repeated barrage will overwhelm and destroy an electromagnetic shield the use of missiles to achieve this is inefficient and not advised.
The missiles work in a time tested method. They accelerate until a cruising speed is reached and then shortly before impact accelerate to a final velocity to ensure maximum damage. Reaching speeds of 18km/s in space and 11km/s near orbit the missiles are ineffective in atmospheric environments and they are restricted to low gravity environments. Between 1 and 3 kilometers from the target the warheads will separate from the missile to ensure an effective dispersion of fire. Targeting systems rely on the ship most often, though the missiles do have a self guided program in the event that communication is lost with the ship.
The resulting shock wave from the explosion is most dangerous to small personal size ships and can sometimes inflict minor damage to larger vessels in close proximity to the explosion. The recommended shortest firing distance is 1100km to ensure damage is limited.
Y
Yiyel
Guest
Original poster
I'm sorry if I come across as asshole-ish, but there's just so much wrong with this.
First, while it's not a "kill everything", it's a pretty standard cluster thermonuclear missile, nothing too special about it - though it seems severely underwhelming.
Second, the mere concept of a space missile having a cruise speed is quite strange. Normally, for a weapon, you'd get it up to top speed and not let them get away, especially with a weapon like this. Having a cruise propulsion setting is basically asking to be shot down by any other weapon with a higher velocity, which is a LOT in this case.
Third, 18km/s is impossibly slow for a space fight. In ten seconds, the missiles have plenty of time to be shot down and for a counterattack to be mounted. Make that at least tenfold for a reasonable weapon at that range.
And finally, the concept of "range" in space is also quite strange. There is nothing to slow down your craft, at all. Which means that, aside from the possibility of being shot down (which can be countered by reaching a higher speed), most weapons have a pretty much infinite range.
First, while it's not a "kill everything", it's a pretty standard cluster thermonuclear missile, nothing too special about it - though it seems severely underwhelming.
Second, the mere concept of a space missile having a cruise speed is quite strange. Normally, for a weapon, you'd get it up to top speed and not let them get away, especially with a weapon like this. Having a cruise propulsion setting is basically asking to be shot down by any other weapon with a higher velocity, which is a LOT in this case.
Third, 18km/s is impossibly slow for a space fight. In ten seconds, the missiles have plenty of time to be shot down and for a counterattack to be mounted. Make that at least tenfold for a reasonable weapon at that range.
And finally, the concept of "range" in space is also quite strange. There is nothing to slow down your craft, at all. Which means that, aside from the possibility of being shot down (which can be countered by reaching a higher speed), most weapons have a pretty much infinite range.
S
SlamifiedBuddafied
Guest
Original poster
It was a fairly short lived RP which died simply from lack of response or dedication. The site no longer exists, I imagine at one point it was deleted by iBulletin, for I've not been able to locate even a shred of it. I don't remember for the life of me what the name of the RP was, but I remember (and surprised myself) a fair amount of detail. It started on Earth with a rather strange invading alien force. It turned out they expected little resistance on Earth at the time, in our timeline the split would occur about 1994, December the 12th. Mankind fended off the massive alien invading force due to a shaky alliance between the recently disbanded USSR states, The USA, China and various other powers in the world. The technology which had been salvaged from the alien ships shot mankind forward in technology with over one-hundred and twenty years of progress in just over a decade.
However there were unknown consequences of not only technology, but the alien presence in the atmosphere alone. The aliens carried a strange virus which had a 80% mortality rate and killed nearly 800-million human beings and decimated 15% of wildlife on the planet. A strange side effect however, was that survivors of the alien virus had physically and psyche wise became more than human. Genetic code had evolved and so did their minds. These same people gained strange powers, capable of manipulating dark matter and energy in a way even the newly advanced technology couldn't calculate. Problem was, many of these people couldn't understand it themselves, but if they willed it strongly enough they could manipulate the very fabric of the world around them.
You see, this is why I left all that out of this because of my limitations on things such as "space time bending" and other nonsense which couldn't be accurately be explained with science; so instead I used some vague exposition to get things rolling and come up with the science (to an extent) later.
Otherwise, I'm sorry, I've hardly done anything with working on the M-PAWC. Pulled a double today at work ($$$) and couldn't pass it up.
I'll be off after tomorrow and I'll find a few hours to stretch my brain muscles and work on this, seems like it'll be a challenge, but one that I know I can persevere through (with some added criticism for spice).
EDIT: Forgot to mention. The abilities of these many people were called magic by most, even respected scientists bent to this, only being able to supplement the findings to an extent, but much of it in theory which sat on shaky grounds.
However there were unknown consequences of not only technology, but the alien presence in the atmosphere alone. The aliens carried a strange virus which had a 80% mortality rate and killed nearly 800-million human beings and decimated 15% of wildlife on the planet. A strange side effect however, was that survivors of the alien virus had physically and psyche wise became more than human. Genetic code had evolved and so did their minds. These same people gained strange powers, capable of manipulating dark matter and energy in a way even the newly advanced technology couldn't calculate. Problem was, many of these people couldn't understand it themselves, but if they willed it strongly enough they could manipulate the very fabric of the world around them.
You see, this is why I left all that out of this because of my limitations on things such as "space time bending" and other nonsense which couldn't be accurately be explained with science; so instead I used some vague exposition to get things rolling and come up with the science (to an extent) later.
Otherwise, I'm sorry, I've hardly done anything with working on the M-PAWC. Pulled a double today at work ($$$) and couldn't pass it up.
I'll be off after tomorrow and I'll find a few hours to stretch my brain muscles and work on this, seems like it'll be a challenge, but one that I know I can persevere through (with some added criticism for spice).
EDIT: Forgot to mention. The abilities of these many people were called magic by most, even respected scientists bent to this, only being able to supplement the findings to an extent, but much of it in theory which sat on shaky grounds.
Last edited by a moderator:
S
SlamifiedBuddafied
Guest
Original poster
And that is why Star Trek is one of the most excellent shows out there. A bit odd at times, but it kept the strangest feel of being able to remain logical while appearing to be absurd at times.
Y
Yiyel
Guest
Original poster
I'm not saying I dislike Star Trek - it's an awesome show with awesome movies - I'm just saying that, as a basis for ships characteristics, I wouldn't use it.
Also, that universe sounds FUCKING AWESOME. Do you think that eventually I could salvage what is known of it to make a new one?
Also, that universe sounds FUCKING AWESOME. Do you think that eventually I could salvage what is known of it to make a new one?
S
SlamifiedBuddafied
Guest
Original poster
Yiyel, I'd be honored to have that RP revived. I haven't been involved in a successful RP for such a long time.
I can work on details later and PM you the contents when I can.
It was weird when Mass Effect came out to boot. I was playing it and thinking, "Wow! This reminds me so much of that role play!"
As Clarke's third law states, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." I tended to go there first and then work the details out later. . . even if they weren't accurate, it was still fun to do. Ah, the good 'ol days of being a kid and letting ones imagination run free on the vast span of the glorious internet; a place where one could form an entire universe from home with people so far away, one couldn't hope to meet them if not for the internet.
I can work on details later and PM you the contents when I can.
It was weird when Mass Effect came out to boot. I was playing it and thinking, "Wow! This reminds me so much of that role play!"
As Clarke's third law states, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." I tended to go there first and then work the details out later. . . even if they weren't accurate, it was still fun to do. Ah, the good 'ol days of being a kid and letting ones imagination run free on the vast span of the glorious internet; a place where one could form an entire universe from home with people so far away, one couldn't hope to meet them if not for the internet.
Y
Yiyel
Guest
Original poster
Yeah - hell, what got me started into RPing is a group where there was a RP where a massive EMP burst made the internet "bleed" into real life, so we had legit grammar nazis, idiots and all matters of internet and videogame based stuff. It was fantastic.
K
Krnon
Guest
Original poster
If you do salvage that role play, may I join it? Also, I love theoretical sciences, but like you said, applied sciences have more going for them.
A
Asuras
Guest
Original poster
Speaking of realism in considering the future of warfare (which ultimately dictates that militarized starships are utterly useless)...
Name: Omnis Intrastellar Artillery
Description: It is a simple logical fact that a stationary platform (including the Earth itself) is capable of supporting a larger weapon at a lower price than a mobile starship could. Immobility requires fewer (if any) thrusters built into the structure to facilitate movement, freeing up space for more weaponry. Given the indefinite distance weapons in space can project their payload, an approaching starship is at a distinct disadvantage to something like a surface-based ground-to-space defense system; the ship has smaller weapons, a weaker hull, and someplace to go. Anything a starship can do (besides transport cargo), an immobile platform can do better.
Thus, the use of starships in war is a silly prospect; wars in an interplanetary setting will involve about as much activity as it does to fire a nuclear missile. That is, wars will continue to adhere to the unspoken rules of MAD. A weapon such as the fictional Omnis Cannon would facilitate this political environment.
The Omnis Cannon is a space-based mass accelerator firing a massive tungsten rod carrying a miniaturized nuclear fission reactor and enough fuel to maintain continual thrust throughout its journey. Utilizing an EMDrive, the slug, once fired, can create a continual acceleration for greater speeds mid-flight and thus an enhanced impact energy once it reaches its target. The size, speed, and potential nuclear payload of an Omnis slug ensure that future warfare will result only in total annihilation between two factions possessing the technology.
Even going at just 0.5% the speed of light (~1500 km/s) it would take a mere 10 hours to reach Mars from Earth. Ships would be rendered useless, as the difficulty in producing one capable of reaching any surface faster than an Omnis slug is inconceivable. Ships would be reduced to mere transport vessels, and at that, extremely vulnerable. Wars between planets, without some form of FTL travel, would either be exchanges of interstellar weaponry like the Omnis, or would not occur at all.
K
Krnon
Guest
Original poster
True, but unless everything is fired manually, electronic warfare in space would still pose a threat, and this is how it would likely be done, but by then, it would probably be even more refined.
The reason I chose the polar caps is the magnetic fields tend to be strongest there, effectively distorting any scanners. I chose black because that is how space appears to the naked eye.
There is no weapon that is the "best" weapon for anything, unless it is your mind, because that thing called "ingenuity" is the biggest weapon of all.
Also, for each action, an equal and opposite action would need to happen. Since space is "friction-less" shooting a payload in one direction, still requires an equal force to be expended in the opposite direction, meaning the platform is moving, but it seems to be moving back to the planet it was slowly falling to in the first place.. or should I say orbiting? Should it be free floating, then you run other risks, such as asteroids, comets, space debris, etc... and glass would not hold up to all of that , which is why I would suggest using crystals or gems. (Remember transparent aluminum? forge aluminum on a higher gravity planet, I'm sure you will get it once you find out the right forging techniques and/or materials to add.)
Also, construction time would be your enemy, since someone could literally just rocket up a closed up submarine into space and launch torpedoes at you while you are building them. To each their own I guess because it is not like you can hide the fact that something is going on in space when people start seeing a massive shadow forming during the day over the planet.
If it is being made outside of the orbital sphere, that means communication can be messed with or even halted to slow or halt construction.
Also, I'm just attempting to give constructive criticism, nothing more.
- DDoS the ships systems from all sides at once from unmanned probes.
- While you are busy launching volley after volley, a small jet black drone could be deployed in space to come up from around a side of a nearby planet, it being up near the pole, to launch a few quadrillion waves of microwaves to cook, fry, and otherwise melt everything or everyone inside the facility.
The reason I chose the polar caps is the magnetic fields tend to be strongest there, effectively distorting any scanners. I chose black because that is how space appears to the naked eye.
There is no weapon that is the "best" weapon for anything, unless it is your mind, because that thing called "ingenuity" is the biggest weapon of all.
Also, for each action, an equal and opposite action would need to happen. Since space is "friction-less" shooting a payload in one direction, still requires an equal force to be expended in the opposite direction, meaning the platform is moving, but it seems to be moving back to the planet it was slowly falling to in the first place.. or should I say orbiting? Should it be free floating, then you run other risks, such as asteroids, comets, space debris, etc... and glass would not hold up to all of that , which is why I would suggest using crystals or gems. (Remember transparent aluminum? forge aluminum on a higher gravity planet, I'm sure you will get it once you find out the right forging techniques and/or materials to add.)
Also, construction time would be your enemy, since someone could literally just rocket up a closed up submarine into space and launch torpedoes at you while you are building them. To each their own I guess because it is not like you can hide the fact that something is going on in space when people start seeing a massive shadow forming during the day over the planet.
If it is being made outside of the orbital sphere, that means communication can be messed with or even halted to slow or halt construction.
Also, I'm just attempting to give constructive criticism, nothing more.
A
Asuras
Guest
Original poster
Responding to each point:
Electronic warfare is a problem with anything not manually operated. It's kind of a moot point considering my point was that ships were useless in comparison to stationary platforms. It's like saying running out of fuel is a problem for cars; of course it is. There's no need to point it out. The potential for electronic attack doesn't render a system worse than something else when all options suffer the same issue.
Except for the fact that any entity moving through the vacuum of space will appear quite readily on heat-based detection systems. There's no feasible way of eliminating heat-escape in a space vehicle, jet-black or not. Such a drone would easily be detected. Space stealth is not a thing.
Mass accelerators do not suffer from this equal and opposite reaction in the same way as chemical firearms. Being essentially a long line of railguns, mass accelerators suffer from sideways recoil which ultimately creates zero movement since equal force will be applied to both sides. Regardless, a mass accelerator, continually applying smaller forces to the projectile, won't suffer from drift as much as a singular railgun. In any case all you need is a continued and proper thrust in the opposite direction for the platform to maintain orbit after firing.
Construction is an enemy for anything large. We don't forgo making nuclear missiles because they take time, or tanks, or ships for that matter.
Electronic warfare is a problem with anything not manually operated. It's kind of a moot point considering my point was that ships were useless in comparison to stationary platforms. It's like saying running out of fuel is a problem for cars; of course it is. There's no need to point it out. The potential for electronic attack doesn't render a system worse than something else when all options suffer the same issue.
Except for the fact that any entity moving through the vacuum of space will appear quite readily on heat-based detection systems. There's no feasible way of eliminating heat-escape in a space vehicle, jet-black or not. Such a drone would easily be detected. Space stealth is not a thing.
Mass accelerators do not suffer from this equal and opposite reaction in the same way as chemical firearms. Being essentially a long line of railguns, mass accelerators suffer from sideways recoil which ultimately creates zero movement since equal force will be applied to both sides. Regardless, a mass accelerator, continually applying smaller forces to the projectile, won't suffer from drift as much as a singular railgun. In any case all you need is a continued and proper thrust in the opposite direction for the platform to maintain orbit after firing.
Construction is an enemy for anything large. We don't forgo making nuclear missiles because they take time, or tanks, or ships for that matter.
Y
Yiyel
Guest
Original poster
@Krnon - somebody played FTL I think :P But yeah, I'll let you know if either of them goes up.
But yeah, @Asuras , I agree with what Krnon said - you're assuming a lot of things. Hell - a well-placed high-atmosphere nuke would provide sufficient EMP capabilities to knock it out most likely. Hell, Krnon was spot-on on all points, but I have one more to add: while it would be almost impossible to reach ground faster than that, at .5c it still leaves you two and a half hours to tow a large asteroid in an intercept trajectory to the projectile, which sounds pretty feasible. And that's without mentioning that while it is useful for already colonized planets, it would be nigh-useless for wars over new territory or resources where there is no pre-existing infrastructures. Love the concept, though, even if it's just an upscaled TMAC.
Though you upset me claiming that mass drivers don't have recoil. I thought you would know. ANYTHING that pushes anything else away gets a force back. It's not a matter of chemical reactions pushing against the weapons - with magnetic weapons, you're just using electromagnetic fields to push, and if what you said was true, then probably maglevs wouldn't work.
But yeah, @Asuras , I agree with what Krnon said - you're assuming a lot of things. Hell - a well-placed high-atmosphere nuke would provide sufficient EMP capabilities to knock it out most likely. Hell, Krnon was spot-on on all points, but I have one more to add: while it would be almost impossible to reach ground faster than that, at .5c it still leaves you two and a half hours to tow a large asteroid in an intercept trajectory to the projectile, which sounds pretty feasible. And that's without mentioning that while it is useful for already colonized planets, it would be nigh-useless for wars over new territory or resources where there is no pre-existing infrastructures. Love the concept, though, even if it's just an upscaled TMAC.
Though you upset me claiming that mass drivers don't have recoil. I thought you would know. ANYTHING that pushes anything else away gets a force back. It's not a matter of chemical reactions pushing against the weapons - with magnetic weapons, you're just using electromagnetic fields to push, and if what you said was true, then probably maglevs wouldn't work.
A
Asuras
Guest
Original poster
-Once again, a well-placed nuclear EMP pulse would destroy anything electronic. I'm not saying it's invulnerable to such things (quite the opposite); I'm saying it has more efficient capabilities than a starship. My argument here is that starships are a poor military technology in comparison to orbiting platforms. Both a ship and a platform suffer from the same weaknesses: EMP, electronic warfare, ground-to-space weapons... but platforms can carry out the same offensive ability as a starship with less cost and greater power.
-That is if you have asteroids lying around. Do you want to tow an asteroid from the belt over to Earth for use against kinetic bombardment? The potential for a physical shield however, is obviously still there. I agree with that point.
-Of course it's useless against non-colonized areas. What does that have to do with anything? We don't make weapons of mass destruction to use on rocks. We use them to either deter war or to annihilate the enemy.
-That is if you have asteroids lying around. Do you want to tow an asteroid from the belt over to Earth for use against kinetic bombardment? The potential for a physical shield however, is obviously still there. I agree with that point.
-Of course it's useless against non-colonized areas. What does that have to do with anything? We don't make weapons of mass destruction to use on rocks. We use them to either deter war or to annihilate the enemy.
Y
Yiyel
Guest
Original poster
-Warships ARE useful even if such a network of platforms is there. Platforms, as you said, don't have thrusters, or very few. Disable a few of them and you have a hole in your coverage. Warships cover that problem by being able to mobilize better to neutralize threats.
-If my options was getting a hole on Earth and towing an asteroid, you bet that I would give the orders to do it. Though now that I think of it, a few hundred small meteorites might be just as bad as one gigantic pole...
-That has to do with the fact that warships are still useful because of their mobility. Heavy weapons that can move to cover non-infrastructured areas, with the ability to cover a greater area. Of course, you could probably tow one or two defense platforms, but that could get pretty useless, without mentioning the fact that being immobile it's at the mercy of every natural projectile there.
-If my options was getting a hole on Earth and towing an asteroid, you bet that I would give the orders to do it. Though now that I think of it, a few hundred small meteorites might be just as bad as one gigantic pole...
-That has to do with the fact that warships are still useful because of their mobility. Heavy weapons that can move to cover non-infrastructured areas, with the ability to cover a greater area. Of course, you could probably tow one or two defense platforms, but that could get pretty useless, without mentioning the fact that being immobile it's at the mercy of every natural projectile there.
K
Krnon
Guest
Original poster
My main points were that it was still able to be countered in some way or manner. Heat in space.. if I'm not mistaken, stars give off all sorts of radiation, which would also mess with scanning for heat. All you would need to do is knock out the thrusters with unmanned probes, which could be made a lot faster and cheaper then your platforms.
If you could scan for heat for an exact and relatively small thing, then why can we not do the same now for the universe as it is? Distance does mean something here, but the nearby star to us, Sol gives off gamma rays (heat), x-rays (heat), light (heat) and other things which also converts to heat.
If you could scan for heat for an exact and relatively small thing, then why can we not do the same now for the universe as it is? Distance does mean something here, but the nearby star to us, Sol gives off gamma rays (heat), x-rays (heat), light (heat) and other things which also converts to heat.
A
Asuras
Guest
Original poster
Disable a few starship thrusters and they're not only weaker than the platform but now they're immobile too.
With the distances of intrastellar space between a platform and a starship, mobility means nothing. Any projectile with thrusters on it could correct itself to hit a starship with pinpoint accuracy, even if it's moving.
All you need to do to knock out a starship is destroy its thrusters with unmanned drones. To find weaknesses in a space platform compared to a starship, you need to devise a weakness that the platform has that starships do not.
Stars give off nowhere near enough heat to disrupt our ability to detect ships approaching. The vacuum of space around Earth is utterly frigid. Any vehicle would be a glaring red light of heat in comparison, forget something further away. Heat gives off infrared light, and being light travels incredibly fast. We can detect the universe in infrared imaging. We do it all the time.
With the distances of intrastellar space between a platform and a starship, mobility means nothing. Any projectile with thrusters on it could correct itself to hit a starship with pinpoint accuracy, even if it's moving.
All you need to do to knock out a starship is destroy its thrusters with unmanned drones. To find weaknesses in a space platform compared to a starship, you need to devise a weakness that the platform has that starships do not.
Stars give off nowhere near enough heat to disrupt our ability to detect ships approaching. The vacuum of space around Earth is utterly frigid. Any vehicle would be a glaring red light of heat in comparison, forget something further away. Heat gives off infrared light, and being light travels incredibly fast. We can detect the universe in infrared imaging. We do it all the time.