Reply to topic  [ 4187 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157 ... 168  Next
Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm
Posts: 1626
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Having been in the army I can safely say that the brass tends to want a neat space at all times, even 'private' parts like lockers had to be arranged according to regulations and heaven help you if you go caught 'vandalizing' something to leave a mark. On the bright side I earned a few brownie points with a couple of officers when I tidied up a mess that was left behind when a neighboring company moved out of their barracks.

Thinks are more relaxed in outposts and small postings but in the main base things had to be tidy at all times. We even had a daily cleaning routine where a platoon would be assigned to pick up litter from around the base. Most of it being plastic coffee cups that idiots forgot to put in the bins.

_________________
My fan fics:

Looking forward to the mirror (Delayed editing)
Reforged (Irregular updates)
The Pale Horse (Completed, could use some editing)


Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:09 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 520
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
The backgrounds being relatively plain and free of clutter is a deliberate stylistic choice. It's partly to help fit the style of the hand-drawn foreground characters, and partly to save myself from having to sink even more time than I already do into building the background assets.

I figured as much already. But you're pretty good at keeping those choices consistent with the setting. Fair point on Tempest being a military ship that Needs to be run tightly. I would love to see a Loroi commons area however.
My question also extends to the Loroi themselves. SG51 is an elite unit in a high risk, high stress environment with an "innovative" supply situation. Under these conditions, any human unit would look like patchwork. An example of what I mean would be the mountaineers from my old unit, who, while wearing the same uniform, had a different kind of boots and the "Edelweiß" too. For such a vast empire, the Loroi seem to be remarkably uniform.

@dragoongfa
You should have been one of the IT-guys. Officers are downright hand-tame to even concsripts if these conscripts have their own locked office.


Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:40 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Werra wrote:
My question also extends to the Loroi themselves. SG51 is an elite unit in a high risk, high stress environment with an "innovative" supply situation. Under these conditions, any human unit would look like patchwork. An example of what I mean would be the mountaineers from my old unit, who, while wearing the same uniform, had a different kind of boots and the "Edelweiß" too. For such a vast empire, the Loroi seem to be remarkably uniform.

Fallschirmjäger, eh?

The Loroi armored uniform is their badge of office; it's an emblem like the sword of a samurai, sacred even beyond military regulation. Custom alterations to the uniform are not tolerated except in the case of medals, and these are usually unit citations rather than individual honors, and generally seen only in infantry units and not usually in the fleet. Fleet unit citations are usually displayed on the ship itself (as with the special markings on Black Razor and Tsunami).

However, individuals can customize their hairstyles, and as we have seen, some have tattoos or other personalized decorations.

_________________
Outsider


Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:55 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:00 pm
Posts: 462
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
The Loroi armored uniform is their badge of office; it's an emblem like the sword of a samurai, sacred even beyond military regulation. Custom alterations to the uniform are not tolerated except in the case of medals, and these are usually unit citations rather than individual honors, and generally seen only in infantry units and not usually in the fleet. Fleet unit citations are usually displayed on the ship itself (as with the special markings on Black Razor and Tsunami).

However, individuals can customize their hairstyles, and as we have seen, some have tattoos or other personalized decorations.


Do this go to equipment as well? Some alterations seem to be tolerated in that we see Stilstorm wearing a dagger and Fireblade usually omit her personal sidearm I am almost sure that she have been given one even if she rarely carries it. I also suspect that regional needs may force alterations but that isn't anything I can expect to see on a ship but special conditions on some planets may require that.

How do the loroi handle uniform alterations like a new model are taken into production, are both new and old variants use side by side for a while or would they go for a specific date when everyone in the entire union are expected to make a switch? It seem wasetful to me ig the change is minor, especially if it isn't really an upgrade but a modification done specifically to make them easier/cheaper to produce.


Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:52 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 10:02 am
Posts: 172
Location: On your PC as a background program.
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
Fleet unit citations are usually displayed on the ship itself (as with the special markings on Black Razor and Tsunami).


Does this lead to situations where a ship's crew are loathe to abandon a vessel that has been rendered dangerous to them if it bears such displays?
Or was the crew of Winter Tide simply unlucky rather than reluctant?

_________________
Image


Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:49 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Sweforce wrote:
Do this go to equipment as well? Some alterations seem to be tolerated in that we see Stilstorm wearing a dagger and Fireblade usually omit her personal sidearm I am almost sure that she have been given one even if she rarely carries it. I also suspect that regional needs may force alterations but that isn't anything I can expect to see on a ship but special conditions on some planets may require that.

I don't think an army that required every soldier to ritually carry the exact same equipment would be a very effective army. As you observed, it should be evident that different Loroi carry different equipment.

Sweforce wrote:
How do the loroi handle uniform alterations like a new model are taken into production, are both new and old variants use side by side for a while or would they go for a specific date when everyone in the entire union are expected to make a switch? It seem wasetful to me ig the change is minor, especially if it isn't really an upgrade but a modification done specifically to make them easier/cheaper to produce.

There is no requirement that all Loroi be identical; you can see that there are quite a few variants of the uniform based on rank and title, and even what their current duty is (Fireblade changed from a dress/duty uniform into combat armor). All I meant was that personalized non-regulation alterations to uniform are not generally allowed (which, I think, is not unusual in the military world).

CF2 wrote:
Arioch wrote:
Fleet unit citations are usually displayed on the ship itself (as with the special markings on Black Razor and Tsunami).

Does this lead to situations where a ship's crew are loathe to abandon a vessel that has been rendered dangerous to them if it bears such displays?
Or was the crew of Winter Tide simply unlucky rather than reluctant?

I would like to think that any proud crew would be reluctant to abandon a working vessel as long as there was a chance to save it, regardless of what special markings it carried. I think in a war situation like this you have to rate the operation of the ship higher than the survival of the crew. But in the case of a ship that's in imminent danger of exploding, just jumping out the airlock won't save you, so you're probably better off to stay at your post and try to work the problem. For Winter Tide, I don't think there was adequate time or a clear enough assessment of the problem to really consider evacuation.

_________________
Outsider


Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:08 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:00 pm
Posts: 462
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
I would like to think that any proud crew would be reluctant to abandon a working vessel as long as there was a chance to save it, regardless of what special markings it carried. I think in a war situation like this you have to rate the operation of the ship higher than the survival of the crew. But in the case of a ship that's in imminent danger of exploding, just jumping out the airlock won't save you, so you're probably better off to stay at your post and try to work the problem. For Winter Tide, I don't think there was adequate time or a clear enough assessment of the problem to really consider evacuation.


I came to think of those "almost never work" warp core dumping systems they have in Star Trek. The only time that I remember that it DID work it didn't explode but was stolen!

Joke aside, regarding Star Trek, do you imagine that the powers in Outsiderverse have similar (but hopefully working) systems? The Winter Tide was doomed anyway since there just wasn't enough time but could a crew end up in a dilemma where they are forced to choose between dumping something about to explode or trying to fix it. Dumping a critical part of you ship may strand you after all. Not an ideal situation in a battle situation. Facing a civilized enemy a crew in this situation could dump and wait out the outcome of the battle, risking been taken prisoners but the Umiak seem to be a bit lacking in that regard so surrender isn't really a viable option.

Above lead to another problem, our tendency to apply our CURRENT rules of engagement on a fictional or historical situation. And also ignoring cultural differences. In ancient times it was perfectly fine to take slaves and massacre the defenders of a fortress/city that resisted for to long. This didn't mean that there wasn't rules of war, they where just different.


Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:10 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Sweforce wrote:
I came to think of those "almost never work" warp core dumping systems they have in Star Trek. The only time that I remember that it DID work it didn't explode but was stolen!

Joke aside, regarding Star Trek, do you imagine that the powers in Outsiderverse have similar (but hopefully working) systems?

Taimat reactors do have an emergency measure in which you can vent the fuel into space, but since some of it will ignite in the process as it boils, this is a drastic measure that's likely to severely damage the ship.

I don't think it would be practical to design a reactor, especially for a warship, that could be neatly ejected from a ship that would not immediately explode without its associated regulation and cooling infrastructure, much less one that could remain intact so that you can go back and pick it up later. Even if you had reactor technology that allowed you to design an ejectable core, on a warship do you really want to put your most critical and vulnerable system close to the surface of the hull behind a door that says "shoot here"? And given the likelihood that something dangerous is going on, how long will this ship survive without main power? This may be one of the dumber things that they've done in Star Trek; I don't think it was added until DS9.

Sweforce wrote:
Above lead to another problem, our tendency to apply our CURRENT rules of engagement on a fictional or historical situation. And also ignoring cultural differences. In ancient times it was perfectly fine to take slaves and massacre the defenders of a fortress/city that resisted for to long. This didn't mean that there wasn't rules of war, they where just different.

In addition to the martial nature of Loroi society which considers the risk of death to be just a necessary part of the job, one must consider the questionable value of turning your warship into an extremely expensive lifeboat when you are fighting an enemy that wants your species to stop existing, and is not obliged to observe rules of prisoner treatment.

_________________
Outsider


Sun Feb 24, 2019 8:11 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm
Posts: 1626
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
Sweforce wrote:
I came to think of those "almost never work" warp core dumping systems they have in Star Trek. The only time that I remember that it DID work it didn't explode but was stolen!

Joke aside, regarding Star Trek, do you imagine that the powers in Outsiderverse have similar (but hopefully working) systems?

Taimat reactors do have an emergency measure in which you can vent the fuel into space, but since some of it will ignite in the process as it boils, this is a drastic measure that's likely to severely damage the ship.

I don't think it would be practical to design a reactor, especially for a warship, that could be neatly ejected from a ship that would not immediately explode without its associated regulation and cooling infrastructure, much less one that could remain intact so that you can go back and pick it up later. Even if you had reactor technology that allowed you to design an ejectable core, on a warship do you really want to put your most critical and vulnerable system close to the surface of the hull behind a door that says "shoot here"? And given the likelihood that something dangerous is going on, how long will this ship survive without main power? This may be one of the dumber things that they've done in Star Trek; I don't think it was added until DS9.



One of the concepts I have been working in my head in regards to 'ejecting' an unstable reactor/drive was to have them on protruding nacelles that would be cutoff when the drive was going critical. At first I expected that the Loroi would have a similar mechanism in place, their engines are ideally suited in this regard. The main problem would be to have a system that would be able to do that without sacrificing structural integrity. My 'handwave' was to have an 'inert' explosive placed in key areas, said explosive should be inert and stable even under extreme circumstances and would only act after a deliberate procedure is triggered by the crew.

They key reason as to why a space navy would elect to follow such a procedure was to not only save the crew but to also salvage the rest of the ship if they maintain control of the battlefield. Spaceships should be considered more like tanks rather than seaborn ships. As a natural insulator space allows for the reclamation of any equipment left drifting and just like how thousands of tanks that were knocked out were reclaimed and sent back to the fray after battlefield reclamation so too could warships be reclaimed and repaired if given the opportunity.

On modern tank designs it is common practice to place the ammo racks in compartments where the blast from their destruction wouldn't transfer to the fighting compartment or the engine itself while the engine and fuel tanks are in separate compartments as well that would allow for the survival of the crew and the rest of the equipment should they be hit.

_________________
My fan fics:

Looking forward to the mirror (Delayed editing)
Reforged (Irregular updates)
The Pale Horse (Completed, could use some editing)


Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:14 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
dragoongfa wrote:
One of the concepts I have been working in my head in regards to 'ejecting' an unstable reactor/drive was to have them on protruding nacelles that would be cutoff when the drive was going critical. At first I expected that the Loroi would have a similar mechanism in place, their engines are ideally suited in this regard. The main problem would be to have a system that would be able to do that without sacrificing structural integrity. My 'handwave' was to have an 'inert' explosive placed in key areas, said explosive should be inert and stable even under extreme circumstances and would only act after a deliberate procedure is triggered by the crew.

So once you've cut your engines loose, how do you move the rest of the ship to a safe distance before they explode? Federation ships have powerful secondary engines, but Loroi ships would be limited to maneuvering thrusters, so this could only work in a case where you still had one working engine. Otherwise this would require the addition of secondary engines which would serve no purpose except for in this unlikely scenario.

dragoongfa wrote:
They key reason as to why a space navy would elect to follow such a procedure was to not only save the crew but to also salvage the rest of the ship if they maintain control of the battlefield. Spaceships should be considered more like tanks rather than seaborn ships. As a natural insulator space allows for the reclamation of any equipment left drifting and just like how thousands of tanks that were knocked out were reclaimed and sent back to the fray after battlefield reclamation so too could warships be reclaimed and repaired if given the opportunity.

Engineless 300m+ warships are not as easy to transport as a tank. Battles rarely take place in systems with shipyards, so the hulk would have to be transported by a jump-capable tug. And since the engines nacelles are surely the most expensive part of the ship (including the main armament as well as the reactors and drives), would this really be worth it? Such a hulk seems like it would be a more valuable prize for the enemy than for your own side.

dragoongfa wrote:
On modern tank designs it is common practice to place the ammo racks in compartments where the blast from their destruction wouldn't transfer to the fighting compartment or the engine itself while the engine and fuel tanks are in separate compartments as well that would allow for the survival of the crew and the rest of the equipment should they be hit.

Sure, you design a fighting vehicle to be able to resist as much damage as is practical, but you may notice that tanks aren't designed to eject their fuel or ammo or engines.

_________________
Outsider


Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:30 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Posts: 1292
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
hi hi

In Star Trek, at least, I don't really think the glaring structural weaknesses are such a big deal. At least in the early days, the shields were always the primary means of defense. They had some idea that no material could realistically provide protection given the speeds and amounts of energy they were throwing around (and as an added bonus, they didn't have to display damage on their costly model) so usually it was game over once the shields went down.

Obviously it isn't going to do much good to eject your antimatter when you're in a pitched battle, but since the ships in Star Trek were more multi-purpose, there are lots of situations where they could reasonably expect a tow.

Although to be honest, given the tiny amount of antimatter in the core at any one time, they probably could have just ejected the fuel instead. (And maybe prosecute whoever designed the flow valves that never closed.)

I suppose it depends on how time sensitive the emergency is. I would imagine that the ships in Outsider would be able to expel their fuel using roughly the same method they use to reload it. It might not be a push of a button and done in seconds, but outside of a close quarters battle with the enemy, things in space generally take a long time anyways. An Apollo 13 style faulty part might crop up anywhere, at any time.


Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:38 pm
Profile WWW
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
icekatze wrote:
Obviously it isn't going to do much good to eject your antimatter when you're in a pitched battle, but since the ships in Star Trek were more multi-purpose, there are lots of situations where they could reasonably expect a tow.

Although to be honest, given the tiny amount of antimatter in the core at any one time, they probably could have just ejected the fuel instead. (And maybe prosecute whoever designed the flow valves that never closed.)

I think that the perhaps more glaring problem is that there's no reason why an antimatter reactor should be in imminent danger of "going critical" in the first place; since there's no chain reaction, cut from a supply of fuel, the reactor should quit cold. I recall several instances where in TNG they had to invent crises in which the antimatter injectors got "stuck open" causing a runaway reaction... as if there were no failsafes to simply cut the fuel supply. But at least at that point the writers seemed to have understood the basic nature of an antimatter reactor. Fast forward to DS9 in freefall down the technobabble wormhole, and the writers don't even know what to call it anymore (when did the antimatter reactor become a "warp core"? It's got nothing to do with the warp drive).

(I guess there could be a problem if the antimatter fuel is losing containment, but presumably the majority of the fuel is not stored in the reactor anyhow, so ejecting the reactor core would not solve this problem.)

_________________
Outsider


Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:41 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:00 pm
Posts: 462
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
icekatze wrote:
Obviously it isn't going to do much good to eject your antimatter when you're in a pitched battle, but since the ships in Star Trek were more multi-purpose, there are lots of situations where they could reasonably expect a tow.

Although to be honest, given the tiny amount of antimatter in the core at any one time, they probably could have just ejected the fuel instead. (And maybe prosecute whoever designed the flow valves that never closed.)

I think that the perhaps more glaring problem is that there's no reason why an antimatter reactor should be in imminent danger of "going critical" in the first place; since there's no chain reaction, cut from a supply of fuel, the reactor should quit cold. I recall several instances where in TNG they had to invent crises in which the antimatter injectors got "stuck open" causing a runaway reaction... as if there were no failsafes to simply cut the fuel supply. But at least at that point the writers seemed to have understood the basic nature of an antimatter reactor. Fast forward to DS9 in freefall down the technobabble wormhole, and the writers don't even know what to call it anymore (when did the antimatter reactor become a "warp core"? It's got nothing to do with the warp drive).

(I guess there could be a problem if the antimatter fuel is losing containment, but presumably the majority of the fuel is not stored in the reactor anyhow, so ejecting the reactor core would not solve this problem.)


At least they got one thing right IF it is even possible to fold space (probably unlikely) it will require a LOT of energy and even if you just accelerate to a good fraction of the speed of light you will have a massive energy potential built up in the ship in the form of momentum. You could cause a cataclysm on a planet just by ramming into it.

I also note that the Romulans use tiny black holes to power their ships. This have been proposed for real actually and just as the
power cores of the Romulan ships they will not be able to shut of once you started them, well you can but they will rapidly cease to function if you stop feeding the black hole that keep radiating massive amounts of Hawking radiation. Interesting enough, the more massive a black hole are, the less it will bleed of Hawking radiation. Tiny black holes are highly unstable and short lived unless fed.

In Star Wars the death stars explodes violently when their power systems are damaged but considering that these things are designed to momentarily put out more energy then a sun a more safe power source are probably out of the question. An observation thou is that if Rouge One are to be trusted they also use massive amounts of kyber crystals in their weapon systems. That would make the death stars essentially into gigantic light sabers!


Mon Feb 25, 2019 1:21 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm
Posts: 1626
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
I think that we are going away from the topic of 'Loroi questions' so I would understand if it is best to drop or move the subject at hand to its own thread.

Arioch wrote:
So once you've cut your engines loose, how do you move the rest of the ship to a safe distance before they explode? Federation ships have powerful secondary engines, but Loroi ships would be limited to maneuvering thrusters, so this could only work in a case where you still had one working engine. Otherwise this would require the addition of secondary engines which would serve no purpose except for in this unlikely scenario.


At the speeds involved even when 'stationary' the maneuvering thrusters should be enough to be able to move away from the ejected nacelle. The distance that should be covered would be depended on the yield of the explosion but I think that 1000 kilometers should be more than sufficient for a safety distance.

Quote:
Engineless 300m+ warships are not as easy to transport as a tank. Battles rarely take place in systems with shipyards, so the hulk would have to be transported by a jump-capable tug. And since the engines nacelles are surely the most expensive part of the ship (including the main armament as well as the reactors and drives), would this really be worth it? Such a hulk seems like it would be a more valuable prize for the enemy than for your own side.


I never said it would be easy, dedicated salvaging should be part of the operational and procurement doctrine of the navy in question. Such a doctrine would have to involve the following:

1) Salvage tugs would have to be an organic part of the fleets, I envisioned them as oversized engines that would lock on the ship and help it on its way. If the jump drives (or other FTL) are not on the nacelles then the tugs wouldn't have to be FTL capable themselves, using their drives to push the ship to jump position and velocity. They should be working in tandem with an auxiliary mothership.

2) Fast repair ship auxiliaries. Shouldn't be considered as mobile shipyards but rather a 'first aid' ship. There to make sure that the rest of the ship is in a tolerable working order (life support, structural damage, maybe even patch some easy to fix damage on other ships). Probably the motherships of the tugs.

3) Heavy repair auxiliary with logistic chain support. Essentially a mobile shipyard that is not as much about repairing damage but to replace damaged components entirely with spare parts that are brought in from the logistics chain. (should be a couple of jumps behind the front and should be able to pack up and leave in a timely manner).

4) All of the above combined with the shipbuilding techniques and crew training necessary to make the process as streamlined and straightforward as possible.

Cost is of course an issue, with some easy to damage components being far more important than others but the chief benefit isn't about minimizing the cost of 'building less ships' but to be able to return as many ships as possible back into fully combat capable status in a timely manner. Such ships could be more capable and spaceworthy than just abandoned derelicts but if the doctrine of field repair auxiliaries is in place then the salvage of otherwise 'lost ships' could become a reality allowing the fleet to remain at optimum strength for extended periods of time.

Quote:
Sure, you design a fighting vehicle to be able to resist as much damage as is practical, but you may notice that tanks aren't designed to eject their fuel or ammo or engines.


They are designed to be easily replaced and restocked in a timely manner without the need of dedicated facilities, replacing the engine for example is something that can be done in a matter of hours with a heavy duty winch and a replacement engine.

_________________
My fan fics:

Looking forward to the mirror (Delayed editing)
Reforged (Irregular updates)
The Pale Horse (Completed, could use some editing)


Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:27 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 9:28 pm
Posts: 718
Location: Central Florida
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
How big is a loroi warship engine?

_________________
Hoenn


Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:41 am
Profile WWW
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
dragoongfa wrote:
At the speeds involved even when 'stationary' the maneuvering thrusters should be enough to be able to move away from the ejected nacelle. The distance that should be covered would be depended on the yield of the explosion but I think that 1000 kilometers should be more than sufficient for a safety distance.

Let's assume that's a good number for safe distance. Starting velocity is irrelevant, because it will be the same for the engine and the rest of the hull; only acceleration matters. Let's say you have two seconds after separation to reach minimum safe distance of 1,000 km. That would require an acceleration of:

s = 1/2 at^2
t = 2*60 sec
s = 1,000,000m
a = 2s/t^2 = 2,000,000/14400 = 138.88 m/s^2 = 14.17 g

14g is almost half of the maximum acceleration for most Loroi ships with two working main engines. I don't think I've ever specified what the maximum acceleration of the maneuvering thrusters is, but it's certainly less than 5g (and probably less than 1g). So a ship with one working engine might be able to get away, but one with no engines probably couldn't. Winter Tide was without main power at the time of the reactor failure, and so being able to cut the engine loose would probably not have saved her.

dragoongfa wrote:
I never said it would be easy, dedicated salvaging should be part of the operational and procurement doctrine of the navy in question.

Well, that's the thing: it has to be easy, or it doesn't make economic sense. You've outlined a whole set of new classes of ships which would be very expensive to build and maintain (and the increased logistics and lower speed of which would add significant new restrictions on fleet movement); unless the value of salvaged hulls exceeds the cost of this system, then it's a waste of resources. Since the Loroi engage primarily in hit and run warfare, in most situations they do not "hold the field" to allow such salvage operations to take place. For example, such a system would not have been able to salvage Winter Tide and Thunderbolt.

It may be significant that no modern navy on Earth has ever had such a system.

Hālian wrote:
How big is a loroi warship engine?

If you mean the engine nacelles, they tend to be about 30% the length of the ship, not including the thrust vanes.

If you mean the reactors and drives themselves, they take up a large portion of the nacelle. You can get a rough sense of the relative size from this schematic:

Image

_________________
Outsider


Mon Feb 25, 2019 8:27 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 520
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
How effective is the Wave Loom against planetary targets?

And how did Stillstorm, unfavoured as she is, get to command such a big ship?


Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:11 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Werra wrote:
How effective is the Wave Loom against planetary targets?

It's effective, but so are most of the standard weapons. Damaging the surface of a planet is really easy at this tech level, if you can get into range.

Werra wrote:
And how did Stillstorm, unfavoured as she is, get to command such a big ship?

Stillstorm got to be a group commander by being very good at her job; SG51 is an elite unit with a superb combat record, despite being made up of misfits and outcasts. In wartime a sensible leadership makes use of all its assets, even if they are unpopular.

A group commander rates a command ship. But as command ships go, Tempest is fast but outdated, the last of her class, with substandard protection and a problematic primary armament. I doubt there were many who wanted her.

_________________
Outsider


Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:31 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 520
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Arioch wrote:
It's effective, but so are most of the standard weapons. Damaging the surface of a planet is really easy at this tech level, if you can get into range.

The AoE doesn't affect this? Could be a fearsome terror weapon if it did.

Which leads me to the question, did Stillstorm manage to raid Umiak frontier worlds?

Arioch wrote:
A group commander rates a command ship. But as command ships go, Tempest is fast but outdated, the last of her class, with substandard protection and a problematic primary armament. I doubt there were many who wanted her.

She got it second hand?


Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:59 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Posts: 1292
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
hi hi

To be fair, planetary atmospheres tend to turn any high energy space weapon into an AoE weapon of mass destruction.


Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:36 am
Profile WWW
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Werra wrote:
Arioch wrote:
It's effective, but so are most of the standard weapons. Damaging the surface of a planet is really easy at this tech level, if you can get into range.

The AoE doesn't affect this? Could be a fearsome terror weapon if it did.

It does, but it's not special in this regard. Torpedoes, high-velocity AMM's, and taimat or antimatter bombs will all do catastrophic damage to the surface of a planet.

icekatze wrote:
To be fair, planetary atmospheres tend to turn any high energy space weapon into an AoE weapon of mass destruction.

Yep.

Werra wrote:
Which leads me to the question, did Stillstorm manage to raid Umiak frontier worlds?

In the Steppes theater, the Umiak populated worlds are well behind the front lines, so Loroi raids have mostly been against client races' territory (Morat and Lurs, chiefly). It's very likely that Stillstorm participated in at least one of these raids.

Werra wrote:
Arioch wrote:
A group commander rates a command ship. But as command ships go, Tempest is fast but outdated, the last of her class, with substandard protection and a problematic primary armament. I doubt there were many who wanted her.

She got it second hand?

Yeah, she was not the ship's first commander.

_________________
Outsider


Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:57 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm
Posts: 1626
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
I think that I should have made myself clear that I am not arguing for the Loroi having such a salvage, repair and reclamation system but for the validity of the system itself. Such a system is doctrinal by nature, requiring decades of procurement and procedures to become effective. If the Loroi didn't have such a system before the war they certainly couldn't afford to implement it during the war.

Arioch wrote:
Let's assume that's a good number for safe distance. Starting velocity is irrelevant, because it will be the same for the engine and the rest of the hull; only acceleration matters. Let's say you have two seconds after separation to reach minimum safe distance of 1,000 km. That would require an acceleration of:

s = 1/2 at^2
t = 2*60 sec
s = 1,000,000m
a = 2s/t^2 = 2,000,000/14400 = 138.88 m/s^2 = 14.17 g

14g is almost half of the maximum acceleration for most Loroi ships with two working main engines. I don't think I've ever specified what the maximum acceleration of the maneuvering thrusters is, but it's certainly less than 5g (and probably less than 1g). So a ship with one working engine might be able to get away, but one with no engines probably couldn't. Winter Tide was without main power at the time of the reactor failure, and so being able to cut the engine loose would probably not have saved her.


If I was a crew member I would have hoped that the Captain wouldn't have taken chances and would have elected to cut the engine as soon as it was deemed unsalvageable :P

One of my pet peeves in sci-fi storytelling is trying to 'save/stabilize' the reactor. A captain's duty is to the nation and the crew, taking risks in warfare is natural but in many stories the commanding officers take extreme risks when they could have elected to cut their loses and save what they could.

In the case of cutting the engine to save the rest of the ship I would hope that the ejected nacelles would have been ejected at least a minute before the estimated meltdown and that the failsafe systems would still be working independently to minimize the destruction.

Quote:
Well, that's the thing: it has to be easy, or it doesn't make economic sense. You've outlined a whole set of new classes of ships which would be very expensive to build and maintain (and the increased logistics and lower speed of which would add significant new restrictions on fleet movement); unless the value of salvaged hulls exceeds the cost of this system, then it's a waste of resources. Since the Loroi engage primarily in hit and run warfare, in most situations they do not "hold the field" to allow such salvage operations to take place. For example, such a system would not have been able to salvage Winter Tide and Thunderbolt.

It may be significant that no modern navy on Earth has ever had such a system.

The reason as to why no navy ever had or even plans to have such a system is because of the very nature of the medium naval ships operate in. One cannot salvage anything of worth from a sunk warship, water is extremely corrosive and no equipment that we can design can survive after being fully submerged into water for even a few seconds. This is the reason I brought the tank as an analogy. Tanks don't have this issue and they can easily be salvaged if the damage they received is repairable, in WW2 and all wars where tanks were fielded, a significant number if not the majority of the loses suffered were salvaged provided that the field was held for the amount of time necessary to repair or tow the vehicles to safety.

This is why warships in space should be like tanks in terms of survivability. They cannot be sunk like naval ships which would render them irrevocably lost, to irrevocably lose a spaceship it would have to suffer extreme amounts of damage: broken to pieces, reactor explosion or pounded to scrap. As long as the superstructure of the ship is relatively undamaged they ship is repairable even if it cannot move on its own power.

How many ships would such a system actually save to pay for itself? That could be debated until the heat death of the universe as long as we don't field warships in space. I personally think that the loss to salvage ratio would be comparable to my tank analogy.

_________________
My fan fics:

Looking forward to the mirror (Delayed editing)
Reforged (Irregular updates)
The Pale Horse (Completed, could use some editing)


Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:42 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 3094
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
dragoongfa wrote:
If I was a crew member I would have hoped that the Captain wouldn't have taken chances and would have elected to cut the engine as soon as it was deemed unsalvageable :P

One of my pet peeves in sci-fi storytelling is trying to 'save/stabilize' the reactor. A captain's duty is to the nation and the crew, taking risks in warfare is natural but in many stories the commanding officers take extreme risks when they could have elected to cut their loses and save what they could.

I think a captain's primary duty is to accomplish her mission. I agree that combatants need to know their own value and not throw themselves away needlessly, but combatants who are concerned first and foremost about their own safety will not be very effective war fighters.

However, in this case I think you're assuming perfect information in a chaotic situation. Winter Tide's captain died in mid-sentence reporting that she thought the situation could be brought under control, so clearly she didn't think the engine was unsalvageable. A captain that drops her engines the moment she takes damage won't remain a captain for very long.

dragoongfa wrote:
In the case of cutting the engine to save the rest of the ship I would hope that the ejected nacelles would have been ejected at least a minute before the estimated meltdown and that the failsafe systems would still be working independently to minimize the destruction.

Situations in which a catastrophic failure is inevitable and unstoppable yet perfectly predictable more than a few seconds into the future are rare outside Hollywood scripts.

_________________
Outsider


Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:17 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:27 pm
Posts: 520
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
dragoongfa wrote:
They cannot be sunk like naval ships which would render them irrevocably lost, to irrevocably lose a spaceship it would have to suffer extreme amounts of damage: broken to pieces, reactor explosion or pounded to scrap. As long as the superstructure of the ship is relatively undamaged they ship is repairable even if it cannot move on its own power.

Any large scale salvage operation practically forces the enemy to render ships unsalvageable.
With the powers starships throw around, it costs the other side very little to do that to a ship drifting essentially dead in space.
Which happened with allied tanks on the western front actually.

@Arioch
The more I learn about Stillstorm, the more I believe she just needs a hug and somebody to tell her that the others are just mean bullies.


Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:12 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm
Posts: 1626
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread
Werra wrote:
dragoongfa wrote:
They cannot be sunk like naval ships which would render them irrevocably lost, to irrevocably lose a spaceship it would have to suffer extreme amounts of damage: broken to pieces, reactor explosion or pounded to scrap. As long as the superstructure of the ship is relatively undamaged they ship is repairable even if it cannot move on its own power.

Any large scale salvage operation practically forces the enemy to render ships unsalvageable.
With the powers starships throw around, it costs the other side very little to do that to a ship drifting essentially dead in space.
Which happened with allied tanks on the western front actually.


That's why maintaining control of the battlefield is paramount. In the midst of battle the enemy will always prioritize to combat the greatest threat in the field without dispersing their available firepower to run down stragglers and give the finishing blows to otherwise knocked out ships, as doing so invites defeat in detail.

As long as an organized and capable force is in the field one cannot salvage their own derelicts nor can they destroy or even capture the enemy derelicts themselves.

_________________
My fan fics:

Looking forward to the mirror (Delayed editing)
Reforged (Irregular updates)
The Pale Horse (Completed, could use some editing)


Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:33 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 4187 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157 ... 168  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.