|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 8, 2017 22:19:20 GMT
I think that saying is pretty much Universal because its mocks the "Alahu Akbar" line that gets used alot if you have ever watched some Jihadi vids. Its certainly was the first word play that came to my mind when I first saw some of those vids. If you believe the inclusion of Hawaiian terms into idiomatic English is universal... you might be an American. Hawaiian?
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 6, 2017 22:07:27 GMT
This should also be obvious, but the constant potential element of "random problem arises" is not so great either for a purely unmanned ship/drone fleet. Add to that "Random human complicated problem arises" and things only get worse for the ai ship.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 6, 2017 16:08:44 GMT
assuming a few cm of li6 a reasonable does would be a few megawatts, at least I guess i should have stipulated that as well, we are not just hot lugging these things inside the suits but would realistically have a radiation protector wrapped around the reactor(accounted for in the 2000kg Earth G weight/300sh Lunar G weight) , so as not to fry the poor bastard standing behind us in the troop transport. I suppose to simulate this in game you could throw armour layer of Li6 around the whole reactor/radiator/jet combo perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 6, 2017 15:58:12 GMT
radiation hazard should be as low as possible, max no more than 500w Lets see, 500W hazard, assuming 1/10th hits a 50kg human, 1W/kg -> 1Gy/s. Wait a minute, that seems high. Yes, at 1Sv/Gy, that is 4.5s for LD50. Even assuming I screwed up 2 orders of magnitude on the math, I think this radiation hazard level is a bit relaxed... Yeah i have never really dealt with radiation in terms of watts before so i did not really know what to even it out too(not to mention i have never converted Watts of radiation to Sievert's/Grey before either). After i found out 1 rad = 0.01 Gy = 0.01 J/kg, i realise that assuming the 1/10th dose that comes out to 5000 rads? am i getting that right? either way that is a bit steep considering 400 is LD50 for humans i would say that a re adjustment is in order. In watts what is a realistic dose for a reactor(assuming a few cm of Li6 rad shielding on your behind as well) like 100w-50w?
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 3, 2017 2:58:44 GMT
Solar and wind are the cheapest power source. Not at all, no one power source is "the best" or necessarily "the cheapest". Even a self contained gas generator off the shelf for say 500$, export that to pluto and the cost goes up to 100's of millions. That is not to say that they are bad or explicitly expensive just that that blanket statement is pretty dumb.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 3, 2017 2:52:12 GMT
Fukushima is a strikingly similar case, where even with extensive bio-concentration the radioactive caesium washing up on the west coast of the USA will be about as bad as flying a passenger airliner.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 2, 2017 17:20:02 GMT
TL;DR: It may be cheap to produce power, but it takes a damn lot of space, and everything costs a lot to build. Solar and wind are also horrible for the power grid. You make allot of good points, but i do have one major counter argument. That is mainly that as most structures and societies exist now, much like with the materialism and consumerism we express in product consumption, we like wise are hilariously wasteful in energy consumption as well. Many people simply forget to turn their lights off or unpower appliances and items all the time, burning many more watts than necessary. Additionally even if the families are over all conscientious about their consumption, the simple design of many homes and apartments that are old/designed cheaply/designed replaceable put a much smaller emphasis on energy efficiency in regards to heating. Now when the thread talks about 21+ power, that in my opinion might cover secondary colonies as well. In that regard efficiency is utmost important. Likewise the precious room needed for power production is not so limited on exo bodies. So yes Nuclear is indeed the best bang for sqaure buck, but secondary supplies should not simply be written off.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 2, 2017 0:44:42 GMT
Have fun figuring out how to turn a theoretical fusion reactor into a hypothetical propulsion system. Are there even any proposals or papers on fusion propulsion? Yes numerous, one of the better is a molybedenum reaction bowl using laser induced fusion on He3-H2 pellets, then riding the fusion explosion. If you want to read up more look into project damoclese i believe.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Apr 1, 2017 19:39:04 GMT
Not meaning to nitpick, but just wanted to point out that most heavy military aircraft do carry maintenance crew on board when they aren't doing a local mission. I've seen up to three individuals travel with a single aircraft before, but one was usually in training or a specialist. Very common for helicopters that have room also. Those maintainers or flight engineers are very limited in what they can actually do unless the plane or destination has CTKs. My comment was aimed at long-term maintenance, like subs have. I can amend what you quoted with "planes don't carry an avionics guy, hydro troop, engine backshop bubba, or sheet metals tech" We should also consider that relatively speaking space craft are pretty damn privileged in that unlike virtually all modern combat vehicles which require constant engine functions to be "on mission"(keep the plane flying/sub moving/tank driving), outside of our reactors there might be days or even months of down time to work on parts and fixes/upgrades.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 31, 2017 0:35:38 GMT
damn i was actually gonna make a earth regulations bracket as well.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 31, 2017 0:17:23 GMT
but is the thrust boost worth it? Id say the biggest boost is if the total amount of thrust and burn time is superior to a resisto-reactor propellant combo. Granted the thruster is not supposed to be the primary mobility mechanism, just a jet boost.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 30, 2017 17:59:48 GMT
Erm. You'd just carry both a NTR and a reactor... Okay now i feel like this may have been answered before, but as the propellant is also the coolant, wouldn't you need to build another set of radiators for the "cold" period when you are not actively using it? Not to mention the increased radiation load on top of the already active reactor strapped to your back, the resisto jet seemed to be the safest and redundant system.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 30, 2017 15:31:36 GMT
Wow these submissions are actually pretty great! I did not expect everyone to go for the whole set.
In regards to evonix
Yes a NTR would generally be a purer solution if you were just trying to jet a sod someplace quickly, The jets however are mainly for tactical manoeuvring over obstacles or between cover. And while a NTR is great for missiles, when on the ground the NTR would need some extensive conversion process to basically turn it back into a regular nuclear reactor to power the suit.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 30, 2017 5:50:34 GMT
... probably should be moved to Gameplay discussion though. Edit: maybe? We can deploy the components in game but not the power armour as a whole. Picture comparisons with human notwithstanding. I'll try to make something either way; heat limit seems to be the hardest constraint right now. Well the point is obviously not that we can make suits in game, merely that designing the sub components would be neat.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 30, 2017 3:39:38 GMT
So this is exactly what it sounds like, as miniaturisation of reactors has produced smaller and smaller models, i got to thinking. We should really have a competition to see if we can design a power armour capable reactor. Additionally the radiator and jump jet would also be neat to design.
Regulations:
PART 1 Reactor 1 metre height/15cm radius 1 Kw output power weight should ideally be under 1000kg-500kg heat should be as low as possible ideally less than 4 kw radiation hazard should be as low as possible, max no more than 500w
PART 2 Radiator
Should be able to handle all waste heat from reactor can be multiple small units instead of one big one double efficiency also possible as a flat mount using one side NOTE only on side of the radiator must be capable of dumping all reactor heat.
PART 3 Resisto Jet
Resisto jet should be no larger than 30 cm in diameter Smaller multiple jets are possible All jet(s) must be able to lift approximately 332 kg of Lunar weight, or be able to apply about 550 n of thrust to lift suit
I look forward to seeing what people can create!
|
|