tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post8120499075307600577..comments2024-03-28T00:36:19.403-07:00Comments on Rocketpunk Manifesto: The Good ShepherdRickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comBlogger148125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-19771574933300796282010-05-12T18:32:53.208-07:002010-05-12T18:32:53.208-07:00And from the lack of response to my inquiries, I&#...And from the lack of response to my inquiries, I'll take it that they don't have a deffinative answer, but rather vague and opinion based. If that's the case, then I guess I could take a leaf off of the <a href="http://james-camerons-avatar.wikia.com/wiki/Interstellar_Vehicle_Venture_Star" rel="nofollow">ISV Venture Star</a> and simply have the maximum acceleration of the craft be only 70% that of c. I could go as high as 90% and have it fueled by pure bull *bleep*, but something tells me that such STL Delta-V velocities aren't technically possible within the technological timeframe that I have envisioned. Granted, Atomic Rocket's <a href="http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3c2.html" rel="nofollow">Engine List</a> has some details on various rocket engine designs and their performances, however I know absolutely nothing as to how to convert Newtons into acceleration in Earth Gravities, let alone c. <br /><br />Though during the meanwhile, other thoughts have plagued my mind that would need to be addressed. One is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_sail#Interstellar_travel" rel="nofollow">Magnetic Sail</a>. It was mentioned that it could be utilized as a remass-less braking function for STL DeltaV interstellar craft. Not such a bad idea since a good portion of any interstellar journey via STL Delta-V drives would be the thrust-towards-destination phase, a.k.a. deacceleration, to enter an extrasolar system rather then fly past it. Though it does beg the question of this being an advisable system for star system entering with STL craft or if it needs to be augmented with rocket engines similar to my IP Warp Drive idea?<br /><br />Another would be the Bussard Ramjet idea. Specifically the replacement of an electromagnetic ion scoup with an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard_ramjet#Electrostatic_ion_scoop" rel="nofollow">Electrostatic scoup</a>. Would this design modification make the Bussard Ramjet a viable STL Interstellar Rocket alturnative or is that not possible within the 2050s-2270s timeframe I mentioned?<br /><br />And speaking of IS (interstellar) STL drives, a strange thought occured just today. We all know that Anti-Matter Rockets require first the production of Anti-Matter. But after recalling the information about the aformentioned ISV, I wonder if there was a way and/or design that colonists could produce their own Anti-Matter using hydrogen from the local gas giants? Particularly using the starcraft's rocket drive and/or onboard reactor to convert Hydrogen into Anti-Hydrogen or does the process still require a city sized particle accelerator that isn't easily built into said colony starcraft?<br /><br />And finally, a question that I had forgotten to ask in my previous post. In comparision, would holographic simulated environments akin to Star Trek's Holodecks be technologically possible within the next few centuries or would cyberpunk-ish VR suits be the better choice?<br /><br />I ask mostly in the on-craft training of military personnel and in any area where space for training is highly limited. The simulation of walking via Virtual Reality could be utilized by a design similar to the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de6YAZzPYRs" rel="nofollow">Virtual Sphere</a>, though other forms of movement such as running, jumping, and crawling would present more of a challenge.<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-39895792738500285492010-05-06T17:50:56.027-07:002010-05-06T17:50:56.027-07:00Well obviously there'll be noticable time dila...Well obviously there'll be noticable time dilation difference between the onboard crew and the universe outside, though this'll be more conciously apparent once one approaches relatavistic velocities. However, it still doesn't measure the settlement radii from Earth. Granted, it does give a plausible explanation as to why modern day languages such as English and Russian exist as they are despite the near millenia of linquistic evolution throughout the rest of human settled space.<br /><br />However, the only Relativistic Veolcity STL engines that come to mind is the <a href="http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aj.html#valkyrie" rel="nofollow">Valkyrie Antimatter Rocket Engine</a> and the <a href="http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aj.html#bussard" rel="nofollow">Bussard Ramjet</a>. The Bussard has limitations of its own which includes the aformentioned drag and the Valkyrie design requires a well established Anti-Matter production industry beforehand. Either Relatavistic STL drives are highly improbable to exist between the mid-to-late twenty first century to 2270 timespan. Unless there are some details and STL designs that I have neglected to mention?<br /><br />As for that note on genetic engineering to better cope with FTL travel, while an interesting idea which gives an interesting plausibility and justification for <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RubberForeheadAliens" rel="nofollow">Rubber Forehead Aliens</a> in addition to adaptation to an alien environment to call home, it has been warned that any modification to one's DNA will have unforseeable consequences that would do more harm than any theoredical good. Same with any cybernetic and bionic augmentation.<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-38276391701155371532010-05-06T03:16:37.161-07:002010-05-06T03:16:37.161-07:00I think that the plausible STL drive will have tim...I think that the plausible STL drive will have time dilation effect on the passengers. While hundreds of years may have passed for the outside world, they may have only experienced like 50 years... much of that may have been in cold sleep.<br /><br />It is conceivable that modifications to the human body need to be made to accept FTL travel. While those that grew up with those modifications may think them common place, they would be completely alien to someone 500 years older. So the irony is that the later generations may appear as deadly invading aliens to the people that have made colonies.Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-7300090482432007602010-05-05T02:11:48.059-07:002010-05-05T02:11:48.059-07:00Citizen Joe: "what prevents pirates from jump...<b>Citizen Joe:</b> <i>"what prevents pirates from jumping such a ship is the ridiculous amount of remass needed to catch up to, match speed, then depart. Of course, in a torch drive setting, that isn't really a problem."</i><br /><br />Well, considering that much of the spacecraft and starcraft in my setting utilize Torch Drives with a maxium acceleration of 1 G, it would probably limit potential raiders to those wealthy enough (or have enough connections to aquire) a Torch Craft. Not exactly the kind of image a "pirate" would have in such an environment, and would probably be more akin to a syndicate or mafia. Which reminds me<br /><br /><i>"The other issue is that the He3 doesn't exist until it gets fused from deuterium. Which means there's nothing to steal for the first year or so into the trip."</i><br /><br />Which also limits potential pirate gangs to those who are able to access such information and data in addition to timing the rondevous just right to organizations who hold many a corrupt officials in their payrole. And the possiblity of these movable refineries being manned also means that the boarding parties would have to be armed enough to pacify said crew, though not enough to kill them outright. Threatening and kidnapping the crew for randsom is one thing, but such murder will only bring about unwanted attention from certain powers that have enough firepower to blow the raider craft to atoms.<br /><br />It's an interesting idea, but probably something I won't really dwelve into much detail.<br /><br />Though I do have one more question. In my setting, before the dark ages that caused the aformentioned five century long technological stagnation there were various interplanetary colonization projects which utilized a manner of STL propulsion system that began in the mid-to-late twenty first century and the last STL Colonization craft was deployed at about 2270. In standard sci-fi fare, these STL craft are treated with the classic "jumping the gun" gag, especially when there's an established FTL drive system. However, in my setting, due to the little dark age these colonization craft actually arrived at an extrasolar planet suitable for colonization BEFORE the FTL exploration craft. This arrival time difference varies depending upon the settlement of the colonization craft itself, with few centuries old colony worlds with the majority had "just arrived" that ranged from a whole year to a little over a month in Earth Time.<br /><br />My question is, with the plausible STL Interstellar propulsion that is available for such projects in the time frame and the head start lasting for centuries, what would be the maximum radius of STL Craft settled colony worlds from Earth?<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-22349792690678270432010-05-04T13:13:00.236-07:002010-05-04T13:13:00.236-07:00That was me. It was ships from the Uranus moons o...That was me. It was ships from the Uranus moons of Oberron and Titania. Water and or methane ice was pre filtered to increase the deuterium content. Then it got packed onto these huge tanker/refinery ships. They would crack the hydrogen out and use the waste product as 'free' remass. The hydrogen would then get vacuum distilled (which required the spin grav) in order to get the deuterium. The Deuterium was then fused to produce He3 (the real prize) and Tritium. Some of the Deuterium and Tritium was used to power fusion rockets, but most of the trip is powered by the D-D breeder reactor and VASIMIR style rockets.<br /><br />A lot of the process is automated, but there's a lot of repairs, inspections, and judgment calls. The AI's aboard usually present many options but someone still has to push the button.<br /><br />Anyway, what prevents pirates from jumping such a ship is the ridiculous amount of remass needed to catch up to, match speed, then depart. Of course, in a torch drive setting, that isn't really a problem. The other issue is that the He3 doesn't exist until it gets fused from deuterium. Which means there's nothing to steal for the first year or so into the trip.Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-47220906370194384562010-05-04T01:38:15.501-07:002010-05-04T01:38:15.501-07:00So basicly the sensation of gravity will be felt b...So basicly the sensation of gravity will be felt by the onboard crew and passengers in the direction of thrust no matter the orientation of the craft so long as the rocket drives are on. Somehow that seems rather backwards in my honest oppinion, but then again I'm no rocket scientist. Just trying to add in some realism to my Space Opera setting without desrupting my previously mentioned commandments for the native Milky Way civilizations.<br /><br />Either way, this blog entry comments, among others, have helped me get a better grasp of the Realistic [TM] tech to make some of my ideas plausible. Other then some sapient life form designs, I really don't have much other questions for my setting. Well, unless someone has an idea on how to create a "laser trap" for a Rifle Grenade. I doubt that there's a non-magitech answer, but it wouldn't hurt to ask.<br /><br />And speaking of which, I recall a commentor in a previous blog entry whose subject escapes me at the moment about having the interplanetary tanker transporting gas giant resources such as He3 with an onboard refinery to process said He3 on the way to the inner planets. Such a spacecraft may not even need an onboard crew if the automation is sophisticated and reliable enough. Though something tells me that though possible, it would be more economical to just have pure tankers to just hold and shuttle the gas but that's for another time.<br /><br />My question, which is more like a brain fart now that I think about it, is what's to prevent opportunistic "pirates" from plotting an intercept course with the possibly unmaned craft and potentially equally unarmed vessel to syphon some of the He3 and/or the remass and fuel for their own use or sell it on the black market?<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-60088205566164351772010-05-02T17:19:29.694-07:002010-05-02T17:19:29.694-07:00Heinlein torchships performed what he always calle...Heinlein torchships performed what he always called a 'skew-flip' maneuver to go from accelerating to decelerating (which as Citizen Joe noted is just accelerating in the other direction).<br /><br />This maneuver would be felt on board as if the decks were slightly tilted, but if done slowly and smoothly no one would notice. <br /><br />But note that the argument for crosswise decks really only applies if your drive has high acceleration. A Realistic [TM] midfuture deep space drive with milligee acceleration does not require it, and the ship might well spin during acceleration/deceleration.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-34402122927221336682010-05-02T07:41:14.538-07:002010-05-02T07:41:14.538-07:00Sabersonic: "Citizen Joe:
Beyond the technica...Sabersonic: "Citizen Joe:<br />Beyond the technical wording of the whole process, it still leaves the question of internal deck orientation during those phases. The direction of 'down' will inevitably change during the corse of the journey, though continual thrust during the flip phase described earlier would probably make the transition more smooth. Mounting individual rooms on rotating gimbals would prove to be a solution, but one that has maintenance and mechanical problems of its own and something tells me that a simpler design solution is available. What that might be, I have no idea."<br /><br />Don't worry about any of that; the passengers of your rocketship won't notice any change in the direction of "down" unless you don't have thrust during your 'flip' or end-over-end manuver at midpoint in your journey; if you do have thrust during your midpoint manuver, then they won't even notice; I susspect that what has you confused is that on Earth you have an external gravity field; however, in space, the only 'gravity' you feel is produced by the rocket engines thrusting; so long as your rocket is thrusting, the passagers will feel 'gravity' and to them, down will always be toward the engines!<br /><br />FerrellAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-33845304197086494402010-04-30T15:21:10.226-07:002010-04-30T15:21:10.226-07:00Citizen Joe:
Beyond the technical wording of the w...<b>Citizen Joe:</b><br />Beyond the technical wording of the whole process, it still leaves the question of internal deck orientation during those phases. The direction of 'down' will inevitably change during the corse of the journey, though continual thrust during the flip phase described earlier would probably make the transition more smooth. Mounting individual rooms on rotating gimbals would prove to be a solution, but one that has maintenance and mechanical problems of its own and something tells me that a simpler design solution is available. What that might be, I have no idea.<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-74612650956582637102010-04-30T06:15:05.589-07:002010-04-30T06:15:05.589-07:00You don't. When you flip, you accelerate in th...You don't. When you flip, you accelerate in the opposite direction. 'Down' is always in the direction of the thrust. Don't think of it as acceleration and deceleration phases, think of it as acceleration towards and away from the destination.Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-52048798770661303932010-04-30T01:21:17.571-07:002010-04-30T01:21:17.571-07:00Citizen Joe:
Let me reword my question: After the...<b>Citizen Joe:</b><br /><br />Let me reword my question: After the flip of the rocket ship and it enters the deceleration phase of the interplanetary journey, how does one design the decks when the ceiling during the acceleration phase becomes the floor during the deceleration phase of the trip and vise versa without having to include such drastic additions such as double of everything?<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-25408061295742105342010-04-29T14:10:18.675-07:002010-04-29T14:10:18.675-07:00You flip the whole rocket and point the nose away ...You flip the whole rocket and point the nose away from your destination. It isn't quite that simple, the turn about is a bit like a wide turn so you continue to thrust through the whole turn.Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-63075334427526831752010-04-29T12:06:51.852-07:002010-04-29T12:06:51.852-07:00Luke
- Lidar/LADAR Blaster:
I'll take that as...<b>Luke</b><br /><br />- <i>Lidar/LADAR Blaster:</i><br />I'll take that as a "yes" then to the previous question. Granted, the larger scope will have to be placed stragegically across the spacecraft as to reduce the amount of blind spots and increase zones of crossfire.<br /><br />- <i>Particle and Electromagnetic Tank Guns:</i><br />So another "yes" in that question as well. The EM Gun would no doubt have variable yield and warheads, though I wasn't really sure about the charged particle beam.<br /><br />It does allow one to postulate two-man MBTs if one doesn't have to worry about a loader. Though then again if something were to hit the main power supply....<br /><br />- <i>Particle Beam Protection:</i><br /><br />I think it's safe to assume that particle beam weaponry would be best mounted upon environmentally sealed and radiation protected vehicles and spacecraft. I figured as much but I thought that there was some way to reduce or eliminate the radiation backwash of firing a charged particle weapon.<br /><br />And spekaing of spacecraft, a scientifically accurate rocketship is designed with its decks stacked like a sky scraper rather then as a surface ship to which gravity is simulated by the acceleration of the torch drive. However the trip does require a deacceleration phase to which the rocket engine is flipped towards the destination or else risk overshooting into empty space and certain doom. What I want to know is if it is possible to arrange the interior so that the transition of floors and cieling is not so dramatic as to warrant two sinks?<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-50204242077493830842010-04-29T08:38:21.319-07:002010-04-29T08:38:21.319-07:00Sabersonic
I see no reason why a multi-purpose la...Sabersonic<br /><br />I see no reason why a multi-purpose laser couldn't serve the dual purpose of lidar and blasting things. You might want two separate beam pointers for the laser - one is a small scope that can rapidly spin to point at new positions - this is a wide field lidar scanner. The second is a large scope that can be used for narrow focus, high resolution lidar and also zapping things.<br /><br />I could see variable yield particle beams. Just emit more electron bunches in a burst, for more energy and more ability to bore through both armor and air. I could also see variable energy projectiles from electromagnetic guns.<br /><br />The usual method of protecting the operator from radiation backscatter of particle beams is to have him behind a shield - depending on the type of particle beam, a few centimeters of lead, several centimeters of borated polyethylene, and maybe several centimeters of iron.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09617890536562434320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-35302025936284451772010-04-28T20:26:18.574-07:002010-04-28T20:26:18.574-07:00Since we're still on the subject of weapon sys...Since we're still on the subject of weapon systems, lets see if anyone can answer these questions.<br /><br />I don't really remember which blog entry featured this comment, but one commentor stated that the Sensor Operator and Weapons Gunner should occupy the same seat since if a Sensor Op could detect a threat then it would be more effiicent to just have them have the fire button ready to be pressed and take it out rather then to just report the detection of such object (assuming that the "weapons free" order is issued). My setting has spacecraft that utilize Lidar and Ladar sensors for detection, navigation and targeting and I'm wondering if it isn't that big a leap to postulate that Ladars could be utilized as low powered laser point defense systems?<br /><br />The Main Gun of tanks are smooth bore to allow more versatile rounds to tackle a variety of threats with the more well known being Kinetic Penetrators used against other MBTs and HEAT rounds for more "light skinned" targets. So would it be possible in a near-far future setting for armored fighting vehicles equipted with Particle Beam weaponry to have the same variable yield as contemporary main guns or would this make more sense with Electromagnetic Guns?<br /><br />And speaking of Particle Beams, how does one solve the little radiation problem for the shooter when said DEW types are fired?<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-36067046054415700522010-04-27T10:18:28.865-07:002010-04-27T10:18:28.865-07:00While it is unlikely to hit something in an oort c...While it is unlikely to hit something in an oort cloud, you don't want to wait a thousand years and then oops! hit a grain of sand. That means you have to plan for that contingency. Just like the target can't really see your R-bomb, your R-bomb can't really see stuff in front of it.Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-9123824664177435472010-04-26T20:48:11.648-07:002010-04-26T20:48:11.648-07:00Luke:
- Plasma Arc Grenade:
Well I do have two ide...<b>Luke:</b><br />- <i>Plasma Arc Grenade:</i><br />Well I do have two ideas on plasma arc generation. One is to have wire(s) with anchors on the end deployed from the central unit and electircity flows through it. The other is to have an open circuit and a gas injector to generate a conducting cloud. Granted, I have no idea how plausible either are in generating the plasma arc based explosion. I am open to other ideas though.<br /><br />And speaking of explosions, such a grenade rugged enough to survive an explosion with a yield twice the equivilent conventional explosive mass would probably make it either expensive or heavy for normal grunt work. Oh well, it was worth a shot.<br /><br />Though now I'm wondering if there's a way to have a grenade that's a credible threat to power armor outside of shoulder mounted rockets and shape charged rifle grenades.<br /><br />- <i>Deuterium Fuel and Remass:</i><br />As far as I know, Deuterium is harvested from water. Granted, water is plentiful in the form of ice and hydrogen gas in gas planets (how much ppm on each gas giant, no idea), it doesn't really equate to economical Deuterium as in propellant fuel in addition to fusion reactor fuel.<br /><br />Though then again, it does give even more plausability and reason to keep my solar powered particle accelerators orbiting close to the sun. Not only in the production/replecation of Anti-Hydrogen, but for Deuterium as well.<br /><br /><b>Ferrel:</b><br />- <i>R-Bomb and Oort Cloud:</i><br />Somehow I doubt that the density of the Oort Cloud of any starsystem is significant enough to be an obstacle. If I remember correctly, the Asteroid Belt has an average distance between asteroides of about sixteen times the distance between the Earth and the Moon and it's pretty much the densest collection of junk in the solar system outside planetary rings.<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-7641984822903336402010-04-26T18:40:37.081-07:002010-04-26T18:40:37.081-07:00Luke: Ok, I had thought that there was something w...Luke: Ok, I had thought that there was something wrong behind the R-Bomb concept, but didn't know exactly what...thanks for clearing that up. Although, it occures to me that any civilization that could acuratly target a planet at interstellar distances could just zap that world with a laser or artificial GRB...also, wouldn't the Oort Cloud be a major obstical to any R-Bomb?<br /><br />FerrellAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-82780098961650153422010-04-26T17:26:40.415-07:002010-04-26T17:26:40.415-07:00Ferrel
1. From the analyses I've seen, you d...Ferrel<br /><br />1. From the analyses I've seen, you don't.<br /><br />2. There is no reason you can't determine the position of high relativistic objects. Some arguments for using relativistic projectiles in interstellar warfare give that since the projectile is going almost as fast as its light, once you see the object, it is almost upon you and you don't have much time to prepare. However, given point 1, above, the launch process will probably give plenty of warning time.<br /><br />3. Using your figures (3 hydrogen atoms per cubic meter at 0.9 c) you will absorb about 0.16 watts per square meter. This will reach a steady state where heat coming in (from impacting hydrogen plus heat from the cosmic microwave background) equals heat going out (from thermal radiation) at a temperature of 41 K. 41 K is pretty cold, cold enough that nitrogen is still a solid, for example. At 41 K, it will not be very visible.<br /><br />At 3 hydrogen atoms per cubic meter at 0.9 c, the relativistic projectile will experience a drag pressure of about 1E-18 N/m^2. Over a full year, this corresponds to a change in momentum of about 3E-11 kg m/s per square meter of frontal area. If the projectile is a 1 meter by 1 meter by 1 meter block of iron (1 m^2 frontal area, 7.8E3 kg), it would not have slowed down appreciably over the entire lifetime of the observable universe (assuming constant physical conditions, that is - I'm neglecting that the early universe was much denser than it is now).<br /><br />4. A magnetic "deflector" field would cause some drag. The field will not necessarily use any energy - a ferromagnet or superconductor can maintain a field without dissipating any energy.<br /><br />5. Not using the parameters of point 3, above.<br /><br />6. What limits the R-bomb is that your target will likely see the launch, and then put something in the way a good distance from the planet they are trying to protect. At 0.9 c, a 1 gram bit of gravel will explode against the projectile with about 30 kilotons of explosive boom.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09617890536562434320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-54119448856570538852010-04-26T16:55:06.287-07:002010-04-26T16:55:06.287-07:00Sabersonic
Well, you're going to need some wa...Sabersonic<br /><br />Well, you're going to need some way to generate the plasma in order to make it explode - an electric arc is one fairly direct method if you have electric energy available.<br /><br />In order to re-use an arc grenade of the sort described, it will need to be able to survive direct contact with an explosion more intense than that generated by modern high explosives. Even though the grenade would be made of tough stuff, I imagine it would get pretty beat up, and maybe completely disintegrated, by the blast. <br /><br />Plasma flame-throwers have many of the limitations of plasma bolt guns. If the jet of plasma is at greater than atmospheric pressure, it will very rapidly expand until it is at atmospheric pressure. Thus, at any reasonable range the jet will be at ambient pressure. To get ambient pressure, you can have a cold, dense jet or a hot, low density jet. A cold jet rather defeats the purpose of a flame-thrower, since it is not going to burn anything. A hot jet will have low density and will have trouble punching through a reasonable distance of air. There is also the issue of coupling the plasma energy to the target - the target will only be in thermal contact with a thin layer of the plasma, which insulates the target from the rest of the plasma, resulting in most of the plasma just going around or bouncing off the target without heating the target.<br /><br />Now you can get hot, ambient pressure plasmas to propagate for short distances through air, and to dump their energy well enough to cut metal. I don't see how you can get it to go more than a few nozzle diameters, though.<br /><br />If, for some reason, deuterium is very cheap, you can use it for propellant. For some fusion rockets, you have no choice but to use deuterium as propellant, since you are leaking the fusing plasma out into space while only burning a small fraction of it. In this latter case, deuterium is both propellant and fuel (and probably also either tritium or helium-3, as well).<br /><br />Lasers emitting beams that are in the green, blue, or near ultraviolet parts of the spectrum can penetrate tens of meters through clean water without significant attenuation. The more junk there is in the water, the more attenuation of the beam.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09617890536562434320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-47799476536391938532010-04-26T15:36:21.526-07:002010-04-26T15:36:21.526-07:00Continued from previous post
Ferrel:
- Interstell...<i>Continued from previous post</i><br /><br /><b>Ferrel:</b><br />- <i>Interstellar R-Bomb:</i><br />1) Something tells me that it can only be achieved through magi-tech if only because the waste heat (let alone the energy used to accelerate said R-Bomb in the first place) would produce so much energy that it might even eclipse that of the parent star. Granted, thermal energy travels at the speed of light and would take light-years for the nearest civilization to detect it. <br /><br />2) That one I never really heard before. Previously I thought that if you can detect such an object and observe it for any lenght of time, you could determine its velocity and calculate its course from its first known position.<br /><br />3) If said R-Bomb can be slowed, without the relativistic effects of weapon to the stray hydrogen atom making it go "boom" prematurely, then it would probably have a limited range even if the remass and/or fuel capacity isn't an issue. Sooner or later it'll slow down and become "dead" in space (no pun intended).<br /><br />4) Well if it caused drag on a Bussard Ranjet to give it a maxium velocity, then yes it would probably slow the R-bomb down. The lifespan of the onboard powerplant needed to power the "Navigation Array", assuming that the R-Bomb doesn't have one in the first place, would also give the weapon a limited range as well. The waste heat would also be an issue in that it would require radiators to be deployed while en route to the target.<br /><br />5) Anything on a spacecraft that generates energy to power something is going to be seen on a thermographic sensor. After all, we're able to measure the temperature of distant stars, though now that I think of it the waste heat would be insignificantly small by comparison. Though then again just because you can detect an object moving at relatevistic velocities doesn't exactly guarantee that one would have enough time to do something about it.<br /><br />6) If the variables were enough to reduce the effective range of an R-Bomb from "infinite" to a measurable range and that range is exponentially less than a galaxy, then for the purposes of preemptive strike in a war that must be decided here and now the R-Bomb would be best deployed at interplanetary ranges. If one is willing to wait millenia to have the weapon reach its designated target(s) then its a near-ideal fire-and-forget weapon. Only problem is that the world/star system you're protecting might be attacked by an enemy's own R-Bomb or invasion force by the time your own R-Bomb reached its target.<br /><br />And now for another random question: Is it physically possible to have lasers operate as effective weapons in water?<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-56956669447143928262010-04-26T15:35:41.906-07:002010-04-26T15:35:41.906-07:00Luke:
- Plasma Explosives: The way you describe el...<b>Luke:</b><br />- <i>Plasma Explosives:</i> The way you describe electric arc explosive makes it that it would be more appropriate to call them Plasma Arc explosives, though the idea of the yield dependent upon the internal storage capacity does give rise to the idea of variable yield warheads that could range from EMP and stun effect to Anti-Armor. And considering that the Plasma Arc doesn't mention anything about the device being destroyed after the initial discharge, perhaps that makes a Plasma Arc Grenade reusable?<br /><br /><b>Ferrell:</b> <br />- <i>Deuterium for Starships:</i> Well that answered my question, though now I'm wondering how well Deuterium is as remass?<br /><br />- <i>Plasma Bolts:</i> Well, one would think that moving a plasma bolt through freespace at high speeds would keep it coherent enough to be a viable ranged weapon system. However, previous discussion kind of disways such thoughts since it either puffs out into nothing if its too dense or crashes into air if the atmosphere itself is denser than the plasma bolt itself once it leaves the confindes of the barrel. The best solution would be to have an extended electromagnetic barrel beyond the physical one that determines maximum effective range.<br /><br />Though it does give one thought: If it can't be weaponized as a free-space bolt, what about the idea of a plasma-based flamethrower?<br /><br />- <a href="mailto:Sabersonic@hotmail.com" rel="nofollow">Hotmail Address</a><br /><a href="mailto:jrposadas@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">Gmail Address</a>Sabersonicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-86126228671480443882010-04-25T23:00:14.695-07:002010-04-25T23:00:14.695-07:00And now, for something completely different!
I ha...And now, for something completely different!<br /><br />I have been thinking about this for a while...<br />Relitivistic velocity weapons; R-Bombs for short. I've got some questions about them:<br /><br />1. How do you launch one without a quarter of the gallaxy seeing it?<br /><br />2. If , as some say, you cannot determine the position of an object travelling at .9c plus,; then how would you navigate an STL starship, much less a ballistic R-Bomb? Either you can't determine your position (just as an outside observer would, or wouldn't), or you can determine your position and thus you do know where the R-Bomb is during it's flight; if you can detect it, determine it's speed and distance, use some math, then you can determine where it's at NOW, thus enabling you to intercept it.<br /><br />3. Now, if you launch this thing, at say .9c, and it has a square face (1000m x1000m = 1000000m) then it will strike 270,000,000,000 cubic meters per second; if there are only 3 atoms per cubic meter, then your R-Bomb will strike 810,000,000,000 atoms per second, and they will explode on impact. So, your ballistic R-Bomb will glow and be slowed over time (years, decades, centuries...). So, no steath interstellar projectiles, and a limited effective range?<br /><br />4. Wouldn't using some sort of magnetic field to keep the interstellar medium from impacting the R-Bomb also cause brakeing and need a power source that produced a lot of waste heat?<br /><br />5. If you used some sort of engine to counter the brakeing effect, wouldn't you be able to see it from lightyears away?<br /><br />And finally,<br />6. wouldn't all of the above limit an R-Bomb to just interplanetary, not interstellar effective ranges?<br /><br />Just some thing I've been thinking about...<br /><br />FerrellAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-21716815202768995842010-04-25T22:26:39.017-07:002010-04-25T22:26:39.017-07:00Sabersonic: "- Deuterium for Starships: Did y...Sabersonic: "- Deuterium for Starships: Did you mean "fuel" as in for onboard reactors or as a mistype of remass for rockets?"<br />Actually, both; sorry for the confution, I think I typed that late at night when I was tired.<br /><br />As for plasma weapons, yes, very short range weapons (if plasma expands at 80km/s and you have to launch it at at least that fast, or faster, then you now have a 'blaster'; especially if you shoot it in the atmosphere), but if you can use an ultracapasitor to turn a small amount of, say, Mercury into a plasma, then that 80km/s expantion would be pretty devistating.<br /><br />FerrellAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-31675970751879975182010-04-25T18:30:32.020-07:002010-04-25T18:30:32.020-07:00Sabersonic
The yield depends on what sort of ener...Sabersonic<br /><br />The yield depends on what sort of energy source you have packed into your warheads. Modern explosives have a specific energy of about 4 MJ/kg. If, for example, you have electrical storage devices with specific energies greater than this, you can either have your storage devices explode or (if they can discharge fast enough) discharge their stored energy in an electric arc that produces an explosion. The latter design could be called a plasma explosive, if you like, since the glowy bits of electric arcs are plasmas. So if, for example, your electric batteries store 8 MJ/kg, they would explode with twice the blast effect of an equivalent mass of high explosive.<br /><br />The absolute most energy you can pack into batteries (or capacitors, flywheels, torsion springs, superconducting solenoids, or any other energy storage device) made of normal matter and without using nuclear effects is about 40 MJ/kg to 50 MJ/kg. That is the limit of what chemical bonds can handle before they break (blowing your battery to bits before you get to use it). Electromagnetic fields can't get past these limits - the fields produce stresses and pressures that will break your battery if the stored energy exceeds this limit. Note that this is the <i>theoretical</i> maximum - practical maximum energy storage can be a lot lower than this (and is, for modern energy storage). By some reckoning, you can get around this limit by only counting part of the mass of the reacting system - gasoline burning in oxygen stores about 15 MJ per kg of gasoline/oxygen mix, but if you don't care about the oxygen because you can get it for free without carrying it around, you can treat it as if gasoline stores 40 MJ/kg.<br /><br />So decide how potent your batteries are. This tells you how powerful non-nuclear explosives can be.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09617890536562434320noreply@blogger.com