|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 23, 2018 12:06:00 GMT
Eat your heart out Marvel! Boeing got you beat by 50 years. Although, since we are using balloons, the USS Akron might be a better comparison (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron_(ZRS-4)). While we're on the topic of cloud cities.... and this is gonna sound even more far fetched but... what about Uranus? 0.886 g, all the Hydrogen and Methane you could ever need, and ONLY 950 kmph wind speeds (250m/s). Unless you experience heavy crosswinds wouldn't you just go with the flow? You probably wouldn't even notice you were belting around the equator and since Uranus's circumference is 150,000 (give or take) you should only take 150 hrs to go around the planet (again assuming the winds are equatorial and you experience no crosswinds).
I guess when it comes to outer planet, habitability is irrelevant but economic sustainability is much more important. If the resources make enough money, capitalism can build Disney World there. Think about Dubai for example. (Yes, Dubai is hyper much habitable than Titan or Uranus, the resources must be hyper more marketable.)
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 23, 2018 12:09:51 GMT
Eat your heart out Marvel! Boeing got you beat by 50 years. Although, since we are using balloons, the USS Akron might be a better comparison (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron_(ZRS-4)). While we're on the topic of cloud cities.... and this is gonna sound even more far fetched but... what about Uranus? 0.886 g, all the Hydrogen and Methane you could ever need, and ONLY 950 kmph wind speeds (250m/s). Unless you experience heavy crosswinds wouldn't you just go with the flow? You probably wouldn't even notice you were belting around the equator and since Uranus's circumference is 150,000 (give or take) you should only take 150 hrs to go around the planet (again assuming the winds are equatorial and you experience no crosswinds).
Would a balloon even work well enough on Uranus? And you would be stuck in a very deep gravity well. Laser thermal drives might work, but solar is pretty anemic that far out, so you'll have to use precious fissiles.
|
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 23, 2018 13:35:23 GMT
Well, there is plentiful hydrogen and methane for fuel, of course those are useless without the presence of oxygen and/or nuclear fusion. Guess the only point for visiting is to harvest deuterium/methane from orbit. Shoot.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 23, 2018 13:42:01 GMT
Well, there is plentiful hydrogen and methane for fuel, of course those are useless without the presence of oxygen and/or nuclear fusion. Guess the only point for visiting is to harvest deuterium/methane from orbit. Shoot. Those two are one of the best fuel even without oxygen and fusion, saying NTR. Titan, especially, has tons of potential to be space-Arabia: If you have to explore outer solar system, having a Titan methane base or not is almost everything. Here's a good paper from NASA about colonizing outer planets: ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170008828.pdf
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 23, 2018 13:55:47 GMT
Those two are one of the best fuel even without oxygen and fusion, saying NTR. Titan, especially, has tons of potential to be space-Arabia: If you have to explore outer solar system, having a Titan methane base or not is almost everything. Here's a good paper from NASA about colonizing outer planets: ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170008828.pdfPropellant, not fuel.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 23, 2018 13:57:25 GMT
Those two are one of the best fuel even without oxygen and fusion, saying NTR. Titan, especially, has tons of potential to be space-Arabia: If you have to explore outer solar system, having a Titan methane base or not is almost everything. Here's a good paper from NASA about colonizing outer planets: ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170008828.pdfPropellant, not fuel. oooops
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Aug 24, 2018 15:51:35 GMT
Right now I am working on a prototype mission for a possible Prosperous campaign. The player is playing as an EAM admiral rescuing a cargo freighter stranded in orbit around Mercury and nobody is helping because a hostile NESR fleet is coming. At the beginning of the level, pretty much all laser platforms and warships were disabled but one NESR siloship. The siloship is going to attack the freighter, and the player must bring the freighter back before the missiles get to it. Companies involved are chosen from the OP, and as of now consists of newageofpower 's Altarris Heavy Industries as the owner of the cargo station where the player will bring the freighter to, and apophys ' Apophys Electrics, a company which constructed many space infrastructures in the Mercury orbit. Currently, ships and stations used are stock placeholders. Custom ships are welcomed, especially if they're designed by AHI itself. I think NAOP put their ships somewhere a while ago...
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Aug 24, 2018 16:09:41 GMT
Btw, the project is still accepting players' companies!
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Aug 24, 2018 16:10:40 GMT
What tech level (gameplay wise) is involved in project prosperous?
Stock-like, deeply suboptimal stuff? [AE] style insane, multi-GW artificial suns? Something in-between?
I wouldn't mind DCA stuff (original or module-swapped) appearing in a custom campaign, but so far I have only pushed stock variants and don't really have ideas for background.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Aug 24, 2018 16:30:12 GMT
What tech level (gameplay wise) is involved in project prosperous? Stock-like, deeply suboptimal stuff? [AE] style insane, multi-GW artificial suns? Something in-between? I wouldn't mind DCA stuff (original or module-swapped) appearing in a custom campaign, but so far I have only pushed stock variants and don't really have ideas for background. I expect GCNRs to be widely used in this setting. Fusion power is also available, but still rather expensive and thus rare. No pure fusion bombs. Antimatter is not available in large quantity due to several disputes, protests and lobbying preventing large amat stations from being built and more efficient ways to create amat to be developed. As for reactors, probably AE-level insanity, lol. But well, there's not a lot of other choices, really. And AE is supposed to be the standard of the Sol System reactors. Fusion reactors if possible, gotta ask Kerr.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 24, 2018 16:51:28 GMT
Still there's no room for a political entity but economic, right? I'm kinda interested with how people self organize themselves in given condition, thus politic...
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Aug 24, 2018 18:38:46 GMT
Wouldn't it be better to at least throttle the spaceship tech down to what COADE can actually model (maybe + beamed propulsion offscreen)?
Hell, given the state of the workshop (including the only attempts at custom campaigns so far) and workings of the import system I'd even consider starting with a few stock module only missions and seeing if you can keep the game working.
|
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 24, 2018 19:18:54 GMT
It would definitely be practical to scale down the tech more towards the sub-optimal stock designs. Yes, I know some of the devices don't make sense, cooling a nuclear reactor in space with Heavy Water for example. In spite of this, they work both in game and in reality. As updates move along we will have to resort back to stock parts repeatedly as our 100kmps 1 gram plasma throwers break and our gigawatt lasers get nerfed and those 1MC 10 GW reactors go critical. So for the sake of realism and planning for future updates let's keep the modules stock.
As far as Fusion goes we might not ever get to the point where it is feasible to use. We need to reach 3 steps before we can consider it practical.
1. Scientific Breakeven: The amount of power gain from running the reactor is greater than the amount we used to run it. (we are here with current technology)
2. Engineering Breakeven: The nuclear energy converted into electrical energy is greater than the amount of energy used to run the reactor and convert it's power.
3. Economical Breakeven: The power gained is enough to justify the construction and operation of the reactor as opposed to building more fission reactors and a new school for Tommy.
The last probably won't be reached until the price of Uranium is higher than its Megawatt equivalent of Tritium.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Aug 24, 2018 19:48:24 GMT
The AstronomerThose haven't been updated since the Great Boron Nerf, but if you want, I can construct something similar. What are your requirements? Large Freighter, Large Fueller, Large Personnel Transport?
|
|
|
Post by Apotheon on Aug 24, 2018 21:30:04 GMT
Btw, the project is still accepting players' companies! Can you explain this? It's not immediately apparently how this stuff works from the first post and browsing the rest of the thread will take a while.
|
|