That's a more well-rounded answer.
Added at: 22:47
Personally, I'm a fan of The Concordia from Wing Commander.
[Question] What is the best fictional spaceship?
- Thread starter Frank
- Start date
- Status
Added at: 22:47
Personally, I'm a fan of The Concordia from Wing Commander.
I'm going to go in a completely different direction. Here are two qualified choices, both from the same author...Alan Dean Foster.
The second (and much cooler) ship is Flinx's personal ship Teacher, which you could consider an interstellar treehouse/library/apartment/laboratory. It's every boy's dream.
--Patrick
Taking the "badassery" crown, a seemingly innocent moon orbiting a gas giant planet several times the size of Earth is revealed to be no moon, but actually a giant ancient artifact--and weapon of unimaginable power*--when it awakens and effortlessly vaporizes a group of intruders.
*a weapon which can generate a destructively powerful gravitational field that can be targeted anywhere within a few light years. It rips matter apart by stripping it of its electrons.
...the moon is later drawn down into a pocket on the surface of the planet itself, which clears its cloudy covering to reveal the moon as nothing more than a shuttle for the planet-sized main ship, whose surface is dotted with dozens (or even hundreds, according to the protagonist) of similar modules.
--Patrick
I still haven't finished the last mission for Homeworld 1...
Necronic
Staff member
Oh wow the last page just started going on a complete nerd rampage.
My borg sphere/cube comment was a joke of course. They are both clever for the aerodynamics issue (which actually doesn't hold up at high enough speeds in space dear god don't start talking about the physics of a "warp bubbles" now), but it's a one trick pony of a joke and once you get past that they are boring ships.
My all time favorite ship is probably the X-Wing. It's such an iconic shape that has been in my head since before I can remember otherwise. It's just such a cool starfighter. Much better that the last star fighter btw.
My borg sphere/cube comment was a joke of course. They are both clever for the aerodynamics issue (which actually doesn't hold up at high enough speeds in space dear god don't start talking about the physics of a "warp bubbles" now), but it's a one trick pony of a joke and once you get past that they are boring ships.
My all time favorite ship is probably the X-Wing. It's such an iconic shape that has been in my head since before I can remember otherwise. It's just such a cool starfighter. Much better that the last star fighter btw.
Why would you need aerodynamics in space?
Necronic
Staff member
Because space isn't actually a vacuum, and the faster you go the less of a vacuum it actually is. Once you start hitting near light speeds you will actually have some degree of drag from the small quantities of interstellar gas that exist.
On top of that there is the issue of stellar debris, and the easiest way to avoid that is to present a smaller profile. The larger your area the larger the probability of some micro-meteorite punching a hole through your spaceship. It also makes sense to have sloping sides facing forward as it will reduce the force of impact substantially. That said this issue ultimately has to be one of those "thank god we invented the whatchamacallit" things because it really makes high speed space travel completely unfeasable.
Edit: Just for fun I calculated the force/cm2 if you are travelling 1au/s through "cold space" which has 20-50 atoms/c3. This would create a pressure of ~4.5 * 10^-12 g/cm2. Now if you have a ship that is 1 km2 front face that is a total pressure of ~.0045 g. Actually not very much and you would have to really be booking it.
On top of that there is the issue of stellar debris, and the easiest way to avoid that is to present a smaller profile. The larger your area the larger the probability of some micro-meteorite punching a hole through your spaceship. It also makes sense to have sloping sides facing forward as it will reduce the force of impact substantially. That said this issue ultimately has to be one of those "thank god we invented the whatchamacallit" things because it really makes high speed space travel completely unfeasable.
Edit: Just for fun I calculated the force/cm2 if you are travelling 1au/s through "cold space" which has 20-50 atoms/c3. This would create a pressure of ~4.5 * 10^-12 g/cm2. Now if you have a ship that is 1 km2 front face that is a total pressure of ~.0045 g. Actually not very much and you would have to really be booking it.
But it does not go where you WANT to go. The funny English pilot will inspire you to the point that you give your life for the greater cause. It does not go "Wonk Wonk Wonk Wonk" when you remember to let the brake off...
Wow, now that's badly put... pretty sure a space scientist would rip your head of for that...
But yeah, the bigger the speed the more the stuff that's there matters... but i always assumed it wouldn't be that much... and quite irrelevant to ships that use shields...
Hint: energy doesn't exist by itself...
But i guess it could be a situation like with bullet proof vests not being good against knifes...
GasBandit
Staff member
In both star wars and star trek, there are canonical examples of shields deflecting/destroying solid objects. In fact, the "big dish" on the front of the secondary hull of every enterprise is the "Navigational Deflector" - it's primary purpose was to deflect space debris at speed. And really, if Star Wars shields didn't stop physical objects, why bother taking down the shield generator on Endor before flying into the superstructure of the Death Star II?
It's a long time since I did anything nerdy technical in Star Wars but I'm pretty sure my old source books mention particle shielding as well as energy shielding, protection against asteroids and torpedoes on one hand and another set of projectors to shield against laser and blaster shots.
Right. Star Trek is one of those continuities where shields CAN block/deflect physical objects. All I'm saying is that it is difficult to pit canon against canon when both are potentially following different rules (or existing in universes with different rule sets). The 1701-D is a good example. I know what the deflector dish is there for (I have the Interactive Technical Manual and it's called the Deflector, after all), but that only explains what happens in the Roddenberryverse. In the Lucasverse (for example), blaster fire can be parried by a hand weapon, but there is no way of knowing whether that could be done with phaser fire. People travel by shuttle, not transporter. Little things.
Obviously any civ which can figure out an attractive force (tractor beams) can figure out a repulsive one (pressor beams) and can no doubt adapt that to defense, but whether that defense is static (can't move past this line but once inside you're fine) or dynamic (anything closer than X radius is pushed out to X radius) is the question. I see plenty of evidence that shields prevent physical movement (brig cell doors, preventing decompression in the shuttle bay, etc) but I am not sure how that would work with energy weapons or anything moving at relativistic velocities.
And we haven't even touched on drive technologies yet!
--Patrick
Obviously any civ which can figure out an attractive force (tractor beams) can figure out a repulsive one (pressor beams) and can no doubt adapt that to defense, but whether that defense is static (can't move past this line but once inside you're fine) or dynamic (anything closer than X radius is pushed out to X radius) is the question. I see plenty of evidence that shields prevent physical movement (brig cell doors, preventing decompression in the shuttle bay, etc) but I am not sure how that would work with energy weapons or anything moving at relativistic velocities.
And we haven't even touched on drive technologies yet!
--Patrick
Necronic
Staff member
Meh, vacuum is simply the lack of pressure. The situation I described would increase pressure, therefore reduce vacuum. It is a bit like saying that you will reduce the cold by increasing the heat, since heat is actually a thing and cold is simply the absence of it.
Edit: also wtf is a "space scientist"?
GasBandit
Staff member
Dr. Jonas Venture, Sr?
Death Star.
It has a reactor that has the energy output of a small star and is capable of destroying planets in 1 shot. Just add in a few safety barriers and you're good to go.
It has a reactor that has the energy output of a small star and is capable of destroying planets in 1 shot. Just add in a few safety barriers and you're good to go.
That's quite an interesting definition of a vacuum... i went with the whole lack of matter thing myself...
A scientist IN SPACE.... (i guess astrophysician, the word just didn't come to me at the time)...
GasBandit
Staff member
That's not a spaceship, it's a space station. That's like saying, "What's the best car there is? FORT KNOX."
I'd have to, LOOK AT THE SIZE OF THAT THING!
The Death Star had a hyperdrive and sublight drives, so things might be a bit blurred there. I guess it depends on the precise definition one is using.
A space station that can move... can your Fort do that without transforming into a giant robot?
GasBandit
Staff member
In Supreme Commander, the Fatboy can. It's a ground unit factory and air resupply platform with 12 heavy artillery grouped into 4 turrets, two anti air turrets and a few short range machine guns for defense.
And it's on treads so it can move.
But that doesn't make it the best "tank."
figmentPez
Staff member
No, just the most awesome...
- Status