Subject:
|
Re: Giant space ship links site idea
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:43:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
784 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin writes:
> Matthew at moulton@hscis.net wrote:
>
> > I disagree, I think it has more to do with overall size and capacity
> > than it does stud length. The Behemoth on my site is 90 studs long,
> > which doesn't sound too impressive until you note that it's also
> > around 60 studs wide and around 18 studs high.
>
> Ok, you have a point there.
>
> > I think that the ship
> > should have to have an overall volume of a certain amount. For
> > instance the Behemoth would have an average volume of 97,200 bricks.
> > So you could have two classes of large ships, those that are 50,000 to
> > 100,000 brick volume and then those that are 100,000 or higher. So
> > basically if you wanted to find the average volume of your ship you
> > would take the heigth, width, and lenght, and then multiply them
> > together.
>
> Hmm, so my Mithrandir would be approx. 74,480 if you don't count the engine
> pods on the sides of the main hull. The problem is that the ship has many
> different widths all along its length. If I include the engine pods, the
> number goes up over 200k, which is obviously inaccurate. I suppose we'll
> just have to shoot for a "relative" volume that excludes protrusions and
> wing-like bits, like what you've mentioned below.
>
> > Of course the only bad thing is that I could put a rather
> > large antena on the top of my ship and suddenly it's volume would be
> > huge. So I think you'd have to exclude anteni, radar, extraneous
> > weapons, etc.
>
> Yep. Even my 74k figure is off, because of the skinny portions of the ship
> mixed with the command tower in the middle. I'd guesstimate the actual
> number would be somewhere around 45-50k. I suppose one could measure out
> different portions of the ship, calculate them, and then add them together.
>
> > On the other hand it could just be a judgement call. I
> > mean if it looks big then it's gotta be big right? Well, those are
> > just some of my thoughts.
>
> Yeah, I guess if it gives sort of a "massive" feeling, then it's a capital
> ship. I suppose our points were the same... I was just trying to say that
> something long n' skinny doesn't necessarily qualify as a cap-ship, but
> short n' massive certainly can.
>
> ~Mark
I agree with the volume idea for definition of a Capital Ship - with one other
addition. IMHO a Capital Ship must have a crew size greater than a fighter,
scout or simple transport. I suggest that the crew compliment has to be at
least 20. This requires that the ship designer/builder takes into account the
need for more than the minimum systems (engineering, bridge, weapons (for
military)). Added systems would then include environment, off-duty necessities
(staterooms, galleys, etc.) and so on. Further, to define a Capital Ship, the
crew needs to operate in shifts - due to its extended voyage lengths - which
enhances the need for crew size and environmental systems. This may help
separate the large boats from the real ships.
When I do a calculation for width, length and height, I count the greatest
dimension and adjust it for the average of that dimension. So, a long skinny
ship with a bulge would have maybe a 40% of maximum width as its average
width. Then the volume becomes closer to actual without spending a lot of time
counting/multiplying.
I also like the "Galactic Ship Yard" for a name.
If there is a decision to add micro/nano fig scale ships, it might work by
having separately linked pages to N/M ships - so the 'casual observer' isn't
too confused.
Wayne
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Giant space ship links site idea
|
| (...) <cut> (...) I think a crew of 20 is slightly large if it's a requirement. Taking a look at Chris Giddens' U.S.S. Crusader, it only has a crew of 10, but the size would make it a Capital Ship IMO ((URL) What about something like a crew of 10 or (...) (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Giant space ship links site idea
|
| (...) Ok, you have a point there. (...) Hmm, so my Mithrandir would be approx. 74,480 if you don't count the engine pods on the sides of the main hull. The problem is that the ship has many different widths all along its length. If I include the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.space)
|
25 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
|
|
|
|
