Subject:
|
Re: Defining the term "Capital Ship"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:14:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1046 times
|
| |
|
|
"Jude Beaudin" <shiningblade@rogers.com> writes:
> 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'?
Couple hundred.
> Can a 'capital ship' land on a planet?
No. It would burn up in the atmosphere.
> Can it take off again?
N/A
> Does a 'capital ship' have to carry smaller craft?
Besides escape pods, no.
> What functions can a 'capital ship' serve in?
Military command ship. An Admiral's flagship, or any ship suitable
for serving as such. Must be military, not civilian. But then, I
don't have military ships in my space unverse, since there are no
aliens to fight. And I don't build ships that big, because there's no
place to go besides our solar system, since hyperdrive is impossible.
> What would be the minimum crew complement of a 'capital ship'?
>
>
> Give some SF examples of 'capital ships'.
Battlestar Galactica: Battlestar Galactica
Star Wars: Imperial Star Destroyer, some of the larger Rebel ships
Star Trek: any of the Enterprise series
> Have you built a 'capital ship'?
No, see above.
> If so, please give a URL to some pictures.
N/A
> Do you have any other questions to help define this term? If so, add them to
> the list.
The military/civilian issue is probably the biggest sticking point
I've seen, from browsing the thread. Someone said that a capital ship
was so named because of a large capital investment required; I believe
that it actually refers to the fact that it might be the flagship of
an admiral in a military setting.
--Bill.
PS: I'm a "hard SF" person - my ships are all set in the forseeable
future. Although I assume huge improvements in drive efficiency, I
assume that the same physical limitations facing NASA today will still
be in effect. I love the Moonbase idea, but don't much care for the
androids and force fields that some modules have included.
So if I ever bulit a very large ship it would probably be a
colonization ship, that would be designed to spend dozens or hundreds
of years at near-light speeds, traveling to a nearby star system while
people on board grow old and have families on board. And I wouldn't
call it a "capital ship," even if it was 200 studs long.
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Verbing weirds language. --Calvin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Defining the term "Capital Ship"
|
| (...) Be sure to browse castle so you can make cows, pigs and sheep for your colonization ship, you just know things will go wrong, and the people will forget they're on a spaceship. And watch out for muties! George (22 years ago, 4-Sep-02, to lugnet.space)
|
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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
