Isaac Ji KuoMar 24, 2024

@[email protected] @nyrath @FredKiesche

What sort of vehicle should accelerate at 1 g or so, though? You get the benefits of the Oberth effect at much lower accelerations, and designing for lower accelerations provides a lot of benefits. You get reduced structural mass - especially for solar arrays and radiators, lower thruster/engine mass, and usefully better specific impulse.

Show threadCharlie StrossMar 25, 2024
@isaackuo @sudnadja @nyrath @FredKiesche If you've got a magic reaction drive (unlimited thrust, no waste heat, no fuel mass problem), then you might as well thrust at whatever acceleration is best for the cargo. If that's humans, it would be the *lowest* acceleration to keep the adverse medical effects of microgravity at bay (probably a lot less than 1g but more than 0.1g).
Show threadIsaac Ji KuoMar 25, 2024

@cstross @[email protected] @nyrath @FredKiesche

Depending on your definition of "unlimited thrust", you could squint and say artificial spin gravity qualifies. It obviously has no waste heat or fuel mass problem.

If your spacecraft spins, the most intuitively obvious thrust axis is parallel to the spin axis, but it's not a no-brainer. For example, with solar electric you probably want the spin axis pointed to the Sun, but you usually want thrust perpendicular to the Sun.

Show threadKarl SchroederMar 25, 2024
@isaackuo
Once you stop accelerating, you split the ship in two and let out a line. Then you spin the bolo. Simple! People think of spacecraft like boats, as necessarily unitary. Baw. Split 'em up into however many pieces you need and spin the parts separately if you need to. It's not like the other sections are going anywhere unless they're pushed.
@cstross @[email protected] @nyrath @FredKiesche
Show threadRichard HendricksMar 25, 2024
@KarlSchroeder @isaackuo @cstross @sudnadja @nyrath @FredKiesche Rotating warships a la B5 are just a bad idea (no matter how cool they look). Rotating is enormous momentum and makes it hard to do dynamic motions. And damage to the section would rapidly cascade into a disaster. Expanse's "everyone strap in for high G" is the only sensible way to fight.
Show threadKarl SchroederMar 26, 2024
@hendric
Realistic space warships aren't single entities except when under power; they're dispersed constellations (swarms) and typically will engage in battle from millions of kilometers away. Incoming ordnance will be stealthed and traveling at tens of kilometers per second. Possible fleet trajectories will be known ahead of time. The concept of 'maneuvering' simply doesn't apply.
@isaackuo @cstross @[email protected] @nyrath @FredKiesche
Show threadWilliamMar 26, 2024

@KarlSchroeder @hendric @isaackuo @cstross @sudnadja @nyrath @FredKiesche once upon a time, like 20 years ago, I joined an open source effort to build a multi-user "realistic" space battle game.

I think I basically killed the project by pointing out how, at a solar-system scale and without magic, warfare is mostly a game of electronic warfare (sensor arms races and emissions control) and information warfare.

Once you're discovered, it's nukes-on-drones time and goodnight.

Show threadsynlogic

@phenidone @KarlSchroeder @hendric @isaackuo @cstross @sudnadja @nyrath @FredKiesche one reason I like The Expanse & Honor Harrington novels: they each make effort to portray realistic space fleet combat... that still has drama & still has sparkly sci-fi

long ago I tried making a 2D space combat sim with realisticish physics... from a "fun play" perspective? the horrors, the horrors... debris became a real problem. large exploded ships becomes huge number of tiny fast friendlyfire projectiles

Mar 27, 2024 at 1:24amWeb
Show threadIsaac Ji KuoMar 27, 2024

@synlogic

If you want, you can ignore the problem of debris.

The thing is ... natural debris is a real problem, which more or less demands Whipple shielding. The debris from a nearby exploded ship isn't going to be going nearly as fast, so your shielding may be fine with it.

You might want to angle solar arrays parallel to the debris "flow", though.

@phenidone @KarlSchroeder @hendric @cstross @[email protected] @nyrath @FredKiesche

Show threadWilliamMar 27, 2024

@isaackuo @synlogic @KarlSchroeder @hendric @cstross @sudnadja @nyrath @FredKiesche yeah, simulation fidelity and gaming fun are two different goals.

I did enjoy the Expanse - it was pretty open about its (drive) magic - despite a few places where an inability to detect ships/drives was sadly necessary for the plot.