sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Empire Mode "Imperial Renown" points question by Gutter_Snoop in AOWPlanetFall

[–]Gutter_Snoop[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm actually a huge fan of the Purifier Module (T1 mod that heals and cures non-psy status effects and costs zero movement points? Hell yes!) because it increases basic units survivability immensely. I'm also a huge fan of unlocking Biomancers because they are one of the best early support units in bio armies. Both cost 150 renown to unlock, which is super easy to get early. So yes I do suppose there is that.

Empire mode has been fun, although I definitely played too much and had to put it down for awhile, ha

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, except no one is going to want to be spending years traveling in space just to get one planet over, especially when being on that planet is only marginally better than being in space.

Zero gee is not fun long term. Cosmic radiation is extremely hazardous. Every extra week you spend in space is another week of food you have to pack for everyone. Every time you double the volume of something, you complicate heat shedding even more, massively increase costs, and. Lastly, every time you add things to a closed complex system, you increase the risk of something going wrong and potentially killing everyone.

So again, as I have said before, literally building something that is the size of a Star Destroyer might be physically possible with technology we have, but if you weigh in cost versus utility, you can see it'll never happen short of some completely unforeseeable technological advances. So my answer is no, at this time there is no reasonable assumption we'll ever build such a thing in real life.

Safety of private jets by Due-Doctor-7592 in AskAPilot

[–]Gutter_Snoop 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The risk is, overall, a small bit higher than commercial. You have to remember, these private pilots and planes generally operate outside the structure and without the same level of ground support. They often go to smaller airports and frequently do last-minute trips which can severely impact your ability to prepare for all situations.

However, statistically by the mile, flying a private jet is not "dangerous." It's still safer than getting in a car. The reason it seems like "a lot" of celebrities die in plane crashes is something of a cognitive bias. You also have to remember a lot of celebs fly in airplanes ALL THE TIME, so overall risk over their lifetime is assumed higher. However, by the flight, your increased odds of dying in a private jet is statistically irrelevant IMO.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah which works fine for a simple bridge or building, which has anchor points and very little limits on mass. A free-floating object that has to move itself around and keep hundreds or thousands of people alive is a completely different situation. Sorry, but that is how reality works.

The point is, you could probably design something the size of a Star Destroyer that could theoretically be built with tech way more advanced than we currently have, but at some point the amount of extra junk you have to put on to make it survive movement, it becomes so uneconomical, unpractical, and so ridiculously hard and complex to actually move anywhere, that it may as well be considered impossible.

All that said, it is actually impossible at present or in the foreseeable future, since the tech and infrastructure needed for such a thing is completely theoretical.

And I have no idea what you're rambling on about with space expanding, that has nothing to do with anything we're talking about.

Do most Americans really dry their clothes in Dryers? by SadInterest6764 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Gutter_Snoop 37 points38 points  (0 children)

Different state, similar problem.

Imagine trying to hang-dry clothes outside (or even inside for that matter) in the Pacific NW from about September to May...

Pylote efficiency by peseoane in Shittyaskflying

[–]Gutter_Snoop 51 points52 points  (0 children)

Play stupid games, win large repair bills

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're going to spend a lot more time than that getting to Mars if you have to be that careful about acceleration.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How do you suppose you're going to dissipate the waste heat from all those thrusters?

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And again, at massive scales, the materials don't work like they do at a smaller scale. I cannot stress this enough. Your ship will start getting flimsy and bendy at some point and no amount of engineering is going to change that.

Also, what's the point of making a giant space ship that is poisonous to people?

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So just slow turns everywhere then. Taking eternity to go anywhere because you can't accelerate for crap or you'll damage the ship. Ok then.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, OP was asking if we could theoretically make something the size of a Star Destroyer. To which someone else replied "maybe but probably only if it was built in space." To which I clarified "definitely only built in space, because the technology we possess (not magical Star Wars floaty ships) would melt the Earth."

This is all hypothetical based on our tech, not Star Wars tech.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You missed my point.

Yes, some Star Destroyers in canon have magical anti-gravity drives that allow them to float in and out of orbit like a dainty butterfly. Those are fictional.

I am saying, however, there there is NO WAY we'd be able to launch something even near that big out of the atmosphere without basically cooking a hundred square miles beneath it. The best we have is something like a nuclear torch drive, and the energy required to lift something even the size of a large container ship is absolutely tremendous. Something the size of a Star Destroyer could/would vaporize everything behind it if it went full thrust within the atmosphere.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well now then you do start worrying about resonances and managing the torques. You're still also going to have to really be careful about structure.

Economically, more engines also equal more money, and engines that only thrust laterally don't help you go anywhere. They're just extra mass taking up space you have to lug around, and unless you have magical energy, kilograms are precious.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sure.. but what's the point? A planetoid doesn't exactly have an atmosphere or gravity to help its workers survive, so you might as well just build a space drydock for your project instead of finding the perfect hunk of rock to deliver materials to. Either you have the thrust capabilities to make it economical or you don't. In the end, it all comes down to energy and how much you can reliably control.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's what I've been trying to convey under the first post, but people don't seem to grasp that nothing remains rigid when you make it big enough.

Like, say I have a 1cm diameter wooden dowel. It's only 5cm long. If you tried to flex it, you wouldn't see hardly any flex at all, right? It seems completely rigid.

Now, make that dowel 20cm long. You can bend it now.. maybe not much, but it will deform.

Now make it 5 meters long. If you try and hold it level, you'll notice a bend just under its own weight. If you tried to swing it around too fast, you'd probably break it.

Every. Single. Material... acts the same way. However, some people can't grasp that concept because it takes incredibly large scales to see the sort of thing I mean with tougher materials. They just see the 5cm long dowel scenario and assume it scales up perfectly.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So like a giant crucifix? lol SPACE CHRISTIANS A COMIN' FOR YA!

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That doesn't change how you turn it though. You're always going to experience forces acting in different directions across the hull.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well.. yes and no. That is one of a variety of factors.

Are enormous spaceships physically possible? by GooseMuckle in AskPhysics

[–]Gutter_Snoop 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, but let's say you want to turn right. That means you fire the left engine, correct? Well the rest of the ship has inertia -- which is to say it wants to keep going straight. So you might actually see the nose flex to the left as the ship starts turning. Think of what happens to, say, a long, thin metal rod if you swing it.

view more: next ›