Ascent January 19, 2012 - 7:53pm | Would gauss launching fighter craft, the way depicted in Battlestar Galactica, be feasable, both as non-dangerous and as energy-efficient? View my profile for a list of articles I have written, am writing, will write. "It's yo' mama!" —Wicket W. Warrick, Star Wars Ep. VI: Return of the Jedi "That guy's wise." —Logray, Star Wars Ep.VI: Return of the Jedi Do You Wanna Date My Avatar? - Felicia Day (The Guild) |
jedion357 January 19, 2012 - 8:18pm | I'm sure its possible though whether its efficient? Dunno. In all likelihood you need a reactor fission or fission that supplies a lot of power for doing this with a fighter. No doubt its wasteful but the fact that it gets a fighter in space right fast is the overriding concern. Would a civilian platform do this? Naw. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
rattraveller January 20, 2012 - 6:14am | The Battlestar Galactica as presented followed a very different tech path then current Earth. Probably closer to SF in that while they have some tech which is very far in advance of Earth but alot which does not seem to have gotten past the 1980s. This might be explained in the fascinating thread where nothing changes for a very long time until one person stumbles across a better way and suddenly a whole new technology builds up around it. For example 1950s movies had instant and small comm devices but they were only radios or analog tech. It wasn't until later that digital tech gave us the smart phone wonder devise. The launch rails used in BG probably came about because they were fighting a war and there was a concentration of effort in safe, fast and efficient star fighter research which brought it about. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
jedion357 January 20, 2012 - 6:26am | To a certain degree the archaic 1980s tech was a counter measure in and of itself against cylinder viral attack. All the phones on Galactica were not wireless and no linked wireless computer networks allowed. But I do agree with your reasoning. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
Gilbert January 20, 2012 - 3:53pm | Here's a bit of info for you to read about gauss launched fighters. It seem the military now is experimenting with the idea of launching fighters with the same process. http://www.michaelvacirca.com/2010/12/23/electromagnetic-rail-gun-launches-fighter-jet/ |
AZ_GAMER January 20, 2012 - 4:37pm | One interesting history I read for BSG stated that the Cylons actually served on the early battlestars before the cylon rebellion as soldiers and space labor. It wasn't until the rebellion that they yanked all the wireless tech so that the cylons couldnt access it. Galactica's class of ship was one of the first that had an all human crew according to this history. I think we will see a lot more of this when Blood and Chrome comes out. |
FirstCitizen January 20, 2012 - 9:00pm | My (c) 1978 blueprints of the Galactica specify the Viper launch bay as having "catapults". Which could be a form of mass driver, or something more primitive as with aircraft carriers - lowtech & reliable. There was that one episode (exodus?) where Athena did a "steam purge" on the launch tube Starbuck and Cassiopeia are, ah, having a private moment in, so maybe it is lower tech. How long would a launch tube need to be so that the crew survives while being an effective launch system? On Luna, if there was a Mass Driver 3.5km long, with superconducting magnet rings spaced 40m apart at the head and ~80m at the end, a load would be under 100 gravities to reach the 1.6kps lunar escape velocity. 6km long might be passenger capable. |
jedion357 January 21, 2012 - 7:01am | There is no actual escape velocity to overcome with Galactica I suspect its more an issue of imparting as much initial velocity as possible to clear the safety limits of the fighter's drive. It probably boils down to how many seconds can we save in fighter operations when seconds may make a difference. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
Ascent January 21, 2012 - 7:46am | Exactly, jedion. Time is the factor. Let's assume the track is 50 meters long. (That seems about the length of the track in the fighter launch video,) Humans can safely stand 22g for 1 second without konking out. How fast would that get the fighter before it is fully launched. I'm not good at that sort of calculation. View my profile for a list of articles I have written, am writing, will write. "It's yo' mama!" —Wicket W. Warrick, Star Wars Ep. VI: Return of the Jedi "That guy's wise." —Logray, Star Wars Ep.VI: Return of the Jedi Do You Wanna Date My Avatar? - Felicia Day (The Guild) |
TerlObar January 21, 2012 - 9:15am | If the tube was 50m long and you were throwing them out at 22g you'd be in the tube for 0.68 seconds and exit with a velocity of 146.8 m/s (about 330 mph). Ad Astra Per Ardua! My blog - Expanding Frontier Webmaster - The Star Frontiers Network & this site Founding Editor - The Frontier Explorer Magazine Managing Editor - The Star Frontiersman Magazine |
Ascent January 21, 2012 - 10:14am | What am I doing wrong in checking your equation? I'm doing 9.81066 x 9.81066 (from 9.81066 m/s2 = 1g acceleration) = 96.2490496356 m/s x 0.68 sec = 6.5449353752208 x 22g = 1,439.885782548576 m/s or 5,184 kph (3,221 mph) Then I thought that if the acceleration is reduced due to time reduced, then I might have a smaller acceleration to start, so I tried this equation: 9.81066 x 0.68 = 6.6712488 x 6.6712488 = 44.50556055150144 m/s x 22g = 979.12233213303168 m/s or 3,525 kph (2,190 mph) Can you give me the correct calculation to check the result? View my profile for a list of articles I have written, am writing, will write. "It's yo' mama!" —Wicket W. Warrick, Star Wars Ep. VI: Return of the Jedi "That guy's wise." —Logray, Star Wars Ep.VI: Return of the Jedi Do You Wanna Date My Avatar? - Felicia Day (The Guild) |
Ascent January 21, 2012 - 10:30am | I figured out the equation that checks your figures. You multiply the 9.81066 m/s x the number of seconds, in this case 0.68. I seem to remember this differently, but I guess I'm wrong. If the seconds are supposed to be squared, shouldn't the seconds be 0.4624? Thus, the result would be 99.8 m/s or 359 kph (223 mph) View my profile for a list of articles I have written, am writing, will write. "It's yo' mama!" —Wicket W. Warrick, Star Wars Ep. VI: Return of the Jedi "That guy's wise." —Logray, Star Wars Ep.VI: Return of the Jedi Do You Wanna Date My Avatar? - Felicia Day (The Guild) |
TerlObar January 21, 2012 - 12:46pm | The equiations are (assmuming you're startting from rest): distance = 1/2 * acceleration * time * time velocity = accleration * time Ad Astra Per Ardua! My blog - Expanding Frontier Webmaster - The Star Frontiers Network & this site Founding Editor - The Frontier Explorer Magazine Managing Editor - The Star Frontiersman Magazine |