Subject:
|
Re: Defining the term "Capital Ship"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Sat, 31 Aug 2002 18:09:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
880 times
|
| |
|
|
> In lugnet.space, Jude Beaudin writes:
> What is the minimum length (studs) of a 'capital ship'?
I think 80-90 seems about right at minifig scale. I think it would be nice
to measure "displaced weight" but I'm not sure how apply it to a spacecraft.
I guess all the dimensions should be considered to factor a ship's overall
volume. However, I don't think size should be the primary factor to
determine a capital ship. I think it's function FIRST and then size is just
a side effect.
> Can a 'capital ship' land on a planet?
For the most part, no. But then again, I think the gravity of a planetary
body should also be considered (it's easier for a massive ship to land on a
planet with weaker gravity).
> Can it take off again?
That's an interesting question. I'm not sure how to answer that or how it
would apply. For me, the ability for a vessel to take off again wouldn't be
a factor in defining a "capital ship."
> Does a 'capital ship' have to carry smaller craft?
I think yes. If you look at ocean going vessels that are comparable, such as
freighters, destroyers, or carriers, they all carry other ships, such as
launches, yachts and lifeboats. So I think that should be a requirement in
considering whether a ship is a "capital ship." That would go hand in hand
with not being able to land since sending out a smaller craft is more efficient.
> What functions can a 'capital ship' serve in?
Military, commericial, public or private. However, I think part of the
function of a capital ship is it's ability to operate independently for long
periods of time. With that, it should also be able to traverse great distances.
> What would be the minimum crew complement of a 'capital ship'?
It could be manned or unmanned, with great numbers of passengers or no
passengers and just a few crew. It really depends on the technology and
automation. I say if it was a manned vessel, you'd need a pilot, co-pilot,
navigator and engineer to start with, and then more crew for non-automated
functions (like gunners, pilots, mechanics, etc). Then with that, you'd need
a ship's doctor and possibly a cook. The more people you add and less
automation you have, the more support roles you need to fill.
> Give some SF examples of 'capital ships'.
The Enterprise and other Star Trek starships
Imperial Star Destroyer
The Sulaco (Aliens)
The Yamato/Argo
> Have you built a 'capital ship'?
Yes.
> If so, please give a URL to some pictures.
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=1554
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=5016
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=7226
Dan
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Defining the term "Capital Ship"
|
| For the sake of this discusion, all LEGO ships refered too should be minifig scale. What is the minimum length (studs) of a 'capital ship'? Can a 'capital ship' land on a planet? Can it take off again? Does a 'capital ship' have to carry smaller (...) (22 years ago, 29-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
36 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
