|
|
Post by tessfield on Dec 31, 2016 23:12:11 GMT
Hello Everyone, and welcome to this open, virtual session - please mind light speed lag. Here at the S S O S are very grateful for having being chosen as the to-go organization for determining standards after the Cataclysm.
As many of you know, with the advancement of old, and creation of new technologies, we have had to come together as a species and agree on common grounds among all of us to make sense of our numbers; our Science, our Economics. One of such agreements is the cryptocurrency we use - for the first time as humans, we all use the same currency, a tremendous advancement for any individual seeking trade and order within the Solar System.
Today, we welcome all of you to this meeting across nations to decide on system-wide standards of information for vendors of civilian and military technology to display their products with. This way, we will encourage our trading partners to aim for transparency and quality, allowing all customers to quickly, efficiently, and effectively compare products, prices, efficiencies, weights, and find the best module for their application. By providing a centralized, standardized location for vendors to offer their products, we effectively erase the borders between small companies and megacorporations when it comes to advertising their products, generating a more competitive market that will no doubt result in the best quality, most efficient products being acquired.
The Solar System Organization of Standardization is holding out this session to determine the data that should be displayed on the new system-wide vendor, on products such as military lasers or civilian MPDs, so, without further ado, I kindly ask we begin!
---
So, basically, there are many tables and Modules and such in the SSOS thread. For those, specially lasers, I don't really know what's the information ya'll need to see in order to compare and choose the best fitting module, and I'd like some feedback so I can improve all listings.
Thanks for reading so far and giving me your 20 mc!
|
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 1, 2017 1:47:24 GMT
I definitely think that one thing that is important for figuring out whether or not we want to use a module is the outlet temperature for any coolant loops. That way we can decide whether or not the tradeoffs of a high output temperature vs. a low output temperature are worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tessfield on Jan 1, 2017 2:51:49 GMT
I definitely think that one thing that is important for figuring out whether or not we want to use a module is the outlet temperature for any coolant loops. That way we can decide whether or not the tradeoffs of a high output temperature vs. a low output temperature are worth it. Hiya there! Thanks for replying to this thread! Could you let me know what modules types you'd like to see this in exactly? Easier to organize my head/the thread that way. |
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 1, 2017 3:05:21 GMT
Here's a general list of what I would want to see:
-Reactors: These are organized rather well in the existing thread, so you could probably carry their organization over just fine.
-Launchers: These tend not to produce much heat, so being able to tell if a design has been optimized for low mass/low cost radiators would probably be a good thing.
-Lasers: Considering that the two schools of thought when it comes to laser design differ primarily in what temperatures they have been optimized for, it would be a good idea to have output temp as a column/row in their table, if nothing else to help you determine which school of thought the laser you are looking at has been built towards.
There are probably other modules that people would want to see output temperature for, so others can feel free to ad to the list.
Additionally, here's an overall list of modules I would like to see have tables/repositories of their own. This list includes modules that already have tables.
-Reactors
-NTRs
-Railguns/Coilguns
-Lasers
-Radiators
-Remote Controls
-Chemical Rocket Motors
|
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 1, 2017 3:53:00 GMT
Regarding Lasers: We at Altarris Heavy Industries find that total efficiency, heat output/temperature, and spot size+intensity at standard ranges (10, 100, 1000km) are critical considerations in warship and combat drone design. Whilst these can be reverse engineered from other weapon characteristics, it would aid in system design and selection to have this data up front. While the SSOS does not currently maintain libraries of optimized kinetic weapon designs, this may change in the future. If so, we urge them to require the submission of payload data along with the weapon design if not utilizing a standard monolithic round (with pyrotechnic tracer) in the weapon. |
|
|
|
Post by deskjetser on Jan 1, 2017 6:20:11 GMT
tessfield here is my 20mc on rocket engines. Nice pun btw.  Personally I believe NTR and combustion engines should be categorised by fuel; Since that largely determines overall vessel parameters. In addition, in my opinion the most important stats for an engine are exhaust velocity, mass and thrust. Followed closely by TMR, cost and volume/size. The ability to compare engines of the same fuel and exhaust velocity to find the one with the lowest mass, would be the ideal scenario.
|
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Jan 1, 2017 6:23:20 GMT
Here at totally cool company name I didn't make up on the spot incorporated, we find that the data for wavelength and efficiency is unnecessary, and could possibly be replaced with output heat and temperature as well as the total dimensions of the laser would be quite beneficial. Also we would like to have the name of our patented blue laser to be "Completely Gratuitous Blue Laser" Or CGBL for short. As the laser was only created to fill the need for more colored lasers.
Also Tess, you can keep your 20mc, you've earned way more than that with what you have done here over the last few months. *raises fancy glass* Thanks for all you have done!
|
|
|
|
Post by tessfield on Jan 1, 2017 16:23:54 GMT
<snip> total efficiency, heat output/temperature, and spot size+intensity at standard ranges (10, 100, 1000km) <snip> Total Efficiency is already included, right? Or is this a different field? How would I go about calculating the spot size? Do you think I should get rid of 1km standard range? Also, does the intensity ever change besides being multiplied by .01? It sounds like intensity at 1Mm is the only important stat if that's the case. Wavelength and efficiency could be ignored I suppose, but it's nice information to have. I decided to use more than a single row for laser information, resulting in a hopefully more readable, more compact table that doesn't add horizontal scroll to the OP. Once someone tells me how to calculate spot size, I'll add it. As for new tables, feel free to post the headings + an example module and I'll update the OP with it. |
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jan 1, 2017 16:29:05 GMT
Regarding Lasers: We at Altarris Heavy Industries find that total efficiency, heat output/temperature, and spot size+intensity at standard ranges (10, 100, 1000km) are critical considerations in warship and combat drone design. Whilst these can be reverse engineered from other weapon characteristics, it would aid in system design and selection to have this data up front. to me; the only spot size & intensity important is at max range (usually 1 Mm, but max range should be explicitly stated). Due to the intensity falling off at the square of distance, it can be VERY easily calculated for any shorter distance. Total diameter (whichever dimension is longest) would also be nice. Edit1: tessfield : Spot size is, we expect, output power divided by intensity. Edit2: I for one like the total efficiency value being shown; it is an easily-seen indicator of what choices drove the design. I find heat output to be unnecessary, as it is simply the power input minus power output (size your radiators to the power in, since the power out is miniscule by comparison, up to only ~4.5% of power in!). MPDs: In my opinion, MPDs should be separated primarily by fuel, and then ordered by power input. Important data off the top of my head: power, exhaust velocity, thrust, mass flow rate, diameter. For MPDs, mass & cost are ignorable unless diameter is huge. |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Jan 1, 2017 17:09:32 GMT
Maybe having all the power related data in one column
Input Power
Output Power
Efficiency
Total Heat
Keep total heat in, as I feel that SSOS is here to reduce a lot of the math and guessing new players have to deal with when playing the game. It's a nice bit of information to have and they might not know that it's simply the amount of power that doesn't go out the laser.
Then have all the physical properties in one column
Mass
Cost
Dimensions
Data for intensity at ranges I feel are the most important of any of the data. Since the "max range" is an arbitrary number set by the end user, having different intensities at ranges can help the end user decided what they want their max range to actually be - if not 1Mm.
|
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jan 1, 2017 18:03:52 GMT
Keep total heat in, as I feel that SSOS is here to reduce a lot of the math and guessing new players have to deal with when playing the game. It's a nice bit of information to have and they might not know that it's simply the amount of power that doesn't go out the laser. A more reasonable way to deal with this problem is to simply tell new players that the waste heat is the input power minus output power. Maybe other relations should be similarly explained as well. If you find use in direct comparisons of the heat stat, that's fine, but an argument like "for the children" doesn't really work. This isn't politics by overprotective parents. In my view, SSOS exists to decrease R & D labor for a person who just wants to play with designing ships instead of modules, as well as to increase specialization overall by forum members. (This is happening.)  |
|
|
|
Post by tessfield on Jan 1, 2017 19:09:43 GMT
Lol, where are my manners? In the part of my brain that doesn't handle cold logic data calculations that's where, a part which isn't active while reading feedback and working on improvements Thanks @newageofpowers, deskjetser and apophys for your 20 mc! And David367th for his 0mc, the compliment and thanks  I agree about the payload, of course, @newageofpowers. I see most people here would like to see more tables in the OP, I can add them as soon as I get headings + example module/s to go with them, or just headings and we can wait till someone submits a module. apophys thanks for letting me know how to calculate spot size, adding now. David367th I agree with the ranges being shown in order to let the user decide what range to use, but the intensity at range just moves the dot two digits to the left, so it's kinda pointless. In my view SSOS exists to provide a measuring stick, as well as to let users know how those measuring stick were created Also as a damn useful repository, since we rarely want/try to create all modules for a ship at once, usually we optimize one module at a time. |
|
|
|
Post by tessfield on Jan 1, 2017 20:09:29 GMT
Updated lasers table, let me know what you think and/or please help me complete missing information where possible  |
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Jan 1, 2017 21:20:15 GMT
Looks great Tess, thanks again for everything!
EDIT: I am having trouble getting to the Docs, but I don't really know if its just my issue or anyone else's.
|
|
|
|
Post by tessfield on Jan 1, 2017 21:31:19 GMT
David367th I am having some trouble too? I think it's an extension I failed to add to make it more visually easy to edit; I'll create a new doc, thanks for letting me know!
|
|
