Subject:
|
Re: Hypothetical design question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Thu, 26 Jun 2003 00:05:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
776 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, James Brown wrote:
| |
Nope.
You’re misapplying inertia. The whole ship, including contents, has inertia.
If it is moving, say, 1.25 Km/s (pretty darn quick) in arbitrary direction A,
it (and all it’s contents will continue to move in direction A, and which
direction it happens to be facing doesn’t mean diddly squat.
If it starts applying thrust, then it matters which direction it’s facing,
but not until then.
James
|
I was under the assumption you would accelerate after the direction change.
Actually, the way this all started, spinning the ship to shoot behind you, is a
bit foolish. Unless in a little fighter, there should be guns all around, like
a modern warship. Even if it was a fighter, it would make sense to just have 2
people and a rear-mounted gun (i.e. WW2 bombers)
-Spencer
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
| (...) Not at all. In atmospheric fighter combat, if I drop in on your six, you've got to shake me long enough to swing around and point your forward-facing guns at me before you can shoot back because you can't fly backwards. Thus, whoever gets (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
| (...) Nope. You're misapplying inertia. The whole ship, including contents, has inertia. If it is moving, say, 1.25 Km/s (pretty darn quick) in arbitrary direction A, it (and all it's contents will continue to move in direction A, and which (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
57 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
|
|
|
|
