Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Star Citizen and EVE Online players unite to call out lookalike concept ship

24

Comments

  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 3,965
    edited June 2018
    Doesn't mater how meaningful it is. If it can be used to create drama, trolls will jump on it like flies on a turd lol

    tldr: Haters gona hate
    Post edited by Babuinix on
    SBFordErillion
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 40,722
    Babuinix said:
    Doesn't mater how meaningfull it is. If it can be used to create drama trolls will jump on it like flies on a turd lol

    tldr: Haters gona hate
    Because its Friday is as good a reason to hate on SC as any other...... enjoy the ride.
    SBFord

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing ESO - Blackwood at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 3,027
    Man... SC now has a Hornet and a Vulture... and a Constellation... and a planned star system named Vendetta.  The Hornet I forgive them for as it's from Wing Commander but the rest of it... they be trollin' harder than Valve from where I'm sitting.

    /s

    (Name your ships and star systems whatever the hell you want; there are over a hundred of each planned) 

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance

  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,996
    edited June 2018

    McDonalds vs McDowells


    MadFrenchie

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2018
    Nyctelios said:
    It likely wouldn't stink quite so much if SC hadn't decided to give it a name that is literally 2 letters different from EVE's "Venture."

    /Facepalm
    Yeah, but as much it is a PR problem the name makes a hell of sense for a ship designed to do what it does.
    It's a video game.  These ships utilize technology that's imagined and, by realistic accounts, impossible.  I don't buy the "they're limited by function!" argument.

    Has anyone found another ship that this closely resembles either of these?  I've looked through the Reddit, assuming if there was one that predated EVE's Venture, it surely would've been found and posted.

    EDIT- I also image searched "pincer style spaceship" and "forklift style spaceship" per the article author's comments on their popularity, but nothing immediately came up that that was very close to these two ships at all.

    image
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 18,666
    Scot said:
    Lots of JCB's, cranes and so on look similar. It comes from the design conforming to utility of function. SC has a question mark over it in my eyes, as does every indie MMO, but this is just nonsense. 
    That is a very thin argument.  This is a video game, not an engineering project.

    Not only that, but they're designing spaceships that utilize technology that doesn't exist at all in real life.  As such, they are not really limited by the confines of "utility of function."
    That depends on the tech level, if this was Star Trek I would agree somewhat, SC and EVE are not so advanced. Form can only ignore function when the SF setting allows it. The most obvious way to build such a mining ship is a C or Y shape.
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502

    Has anyone found another ship that this closely resembles either of these?  I've looked through the Reddit, assuming if there was one that predated EVE's Venture, it surely would've been found and posted.

    There's this one,



    If this is what CCP used as inspiration for their Venture then it's clearly quite different, the overall design has similarities but you could never mistake them for being the same ship. CIG's Vulture on the other hand is just too reminiscent of the Venture.
    MadFrenchie
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 40,722
    Man... SC now has a Hornet and a Vulture... and a Constellation... and a planned star system named Vendetta.  The Hornet I forgive them for as it's from Wing Commander but the rest of it... they be trollin' harder than Valve from where I'm sitting.

    /s

    (Name your ships and star systems whatever the hell you want; there are over a hundred of each planned) 
    Well you know, all the good names have already been taken right?
    Phaserlight

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing ESO - Blackwood at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2018
    Scot said:
    Scot said:
    Lots of JCB's, cranes and so on look similar. It comes from the design conforming to utility of function. SC has a question mark over it in my eyes, as does every indie MMO, but this is just nonsense. 
    That is a very thin argument.  This is a video game, not an engineering project.

    Not only that, but they're designing spaceships that utilize technology that doesn't exist at all in real life.  As such, they are not really limited by the confines of "utility of function."
    That depends on the tech level, if this was Star Trek I would agree somewhat, SC and EVE are not so advanced. Form can only ignore function when the SF setting allows it. The most obvious way to build such a mining ship is a C or Y shape.
    EVE literally has jump clones.  Cybernetic implants, hell faster than light travel alone puts the setting way beyond the realm of "it has to check out!"

    What about a mining ship that generates a short-distance wormhole that immediately transports chunks of rock to a local forward operating station?  Why not?

    No, I don't buy that argument.

    EDIT- the argument that these things need to check out in general holds little weight to anyone who has studied space travel for any amount of time.  Radiation exposure means we currently have little hope of colonizing other planets without an atmosphere akin to our own.  Muscle atrophy, bone density loss, higher risk of mutations like cancer due to aforementioned radiation exposure...  The list goes on and on.  Those issues don't need to be addressed in a game.  It's escapism, the whole point is to go beyond the limitations of real life.

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Nyctelios said:
    Scot said:
    Scot said:
    Lots of JCB's, cranes and so on look similar. It comes from the design conforming to utility of function. SC has a question mark over it in my eyes, as does every indie MMO, but this is just nonsense. 
    That is a very thin argument.  This is a video game, not an engineering project.

    Not only that, but they're designing spaceships that utilize technology that doesn't exist at all in real life.  As such, they are not really limited by the confines of "utility of function."
    That depends on the tech level, if this was Star Trek I would agree somewhat, SC and EVE are not so advanced. Form can only ignore function when the SF setting allows it. The most obvious way to build such a mining ship is a C or Y shape.
    EVE literally has jump clones.  Cybernetic implants, hell faster than light travel alone puts the setting way beyond the realm of "it has to check out!"

    What about a mining ship that generates a short-distance wormhole that immediately transports chunks of rock to a local forward operating station?  Why not?

    No, I don't buy that argument.

    EDIT- the argument that these things need to check out in general holds little weight to anyone who has studied space travel for any amount of time.  Radiation exposure means we currently have little hope of colonizing other planets without an atmosphere akin to our own.  Muscle atrophy, bone density loss, higher risk of mutations like cancer due to aforementioned radiation exposure...  The list goes on and on.  Those issues don't need to be addressed in a game.  It's escapism, the whole point is to go beyond the limitations of real life.
    Because it's a sci-fi. A proper sci-fi. Not those movies for dumb people and teens sci fi wannabes.

    If you could use small shot distance wormholes to gather basic material imagine how that would affect the entire world and how things would work if said tech would by applied to any other task.

    You know...



    THINK.
    No, you think.  One of the leading theories for colonizing MARS (y'know, that planet IN our solar system) would require genetic engineering of our species.

    Not to mention that the entire game completely skirts the issues of FTL travel.  Are you serious?

    image
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,254
    Scot said:
    Scot said:
    Lots of JCB's, cranes and so on look similar. It comes from the design conforming to utility of function. SC has a question mark over it in my eyes, as does every indie MMO, but this is just nonsense. 
    That is a very thin argument.  This is a video game, not an engineering project.

    Not only that, but they're designing spaceships that utilize technology that doesn't exist at all in real life.  As such, they are not really limited by the confines of "utility of function."
    That depends on the tech level, if this was Star Trek I would agree somewhat, SC and EVE are not so advanced. Form can only ignore function when the SF setting allows it. The most obvious way to build such a mining ship is a C or Y shape.
    EVE literally has jump clones.  Cybernetic implants, hell faster than light travel alone puts the setting way beyond the realm of "it has to check out!"

    What about a mining ship that generates a short-distance wormhole that immediately transports chunks of rock to a local forward operating station?  Why not?

    No, I don't buy that argument.

    EDIT- the argument that these things need to check out in general holds little weight to anyone who has studied space travel for any amount of time.  Radiation exposure means we currently have little hope of colonizing other planets without an atmosphere akin to our own.  Muscle atrophy, bone density loss, higher risk of mutations like cancer due to aforementioned radiation exposure...  The list goes on and on.  Those issues don't need to be addressed in a game.  It's escapism, the whole point is to go beyond the limitations of real life.
    Ever heard of sand bags as radiation shielding ? Stations in lava tubes ? Lead storm shelters surrounded by water tanks ? Electromagnetic shielding ? Etc. We have about two dozens concepts to solve that problem - had it for 50 years in some cases. It is a lack of will that holds us back - not even money. Certainly not technology. 

    You may want to do some research first before "abandoning all hope" ;-) 


    Have fun
     
    Scot
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2018
    Erillion said:
    Scot said:
    Scot said:
    Lots of JCB's, cranes and so on look similar. It comes from the design conforming to utility of function. SC has a question mark over it in my eyes, as does every indie MMO, but this is just nonsense. 
    That is a very thin argument.  This is a video game, not an engineering project.

    Not only that, but they're designing spaceships that utilize technology that doesn't exist at all in real life.  As such, they are not really limited by the confines of "utility of function."
    That depends on the tech level, if this was Star Trek I would agree somewhat, SC and EVE are not so advanced. Form can only ignore function when the SF setting allows it. The most obvious way to build such a mining ship is a C or Y shape.
    EVE literally has jump clones.  Cybernetic implants, hell faster than light travel alone puts the setting way beyond the realm of "it has to check out!"

    What about a mining ship that generates a short-distance wormhole that immediately transports chunks of rock to a local forward operating station?  Why not?

    No, I don't buy that argument.

    EDIT- the argument that these things need to check out in general holds little weight to anyone who has studied space travel for any amount of time.  Radiation exposure means we currently have little hope of colonizing other planets without an atmosphere akin to our own.  Muscle atrophy, bone density loss, higher risk of mutations like cancer due to aforementioned radiation exposure...  The list goes on and on.  Those issues don't need to be addressed in a game.  It's escapism, the whole point is to go beyond the limitations of real life.
    Ever heard of sand bags as radiation shielding ? Stations in lava tubes ? Lead storm shelters surrounded by water tanks ? Electromagnetic shielding ? Etc. We have about two dozens concepts to solve that problem - had it for 50 years in some cases. It is a lack of will that holds us back - not even money. Certainly not technology. 

    You may want to do some research first before "abandoning all hope" ;-) 


    Have fun
     
    No, you need to do more research.  The lava tubes don't eliminate the radiation exposure completely, nor does it really take into account solar proton events that would bombard the planet due to it's lack of a magnetosphere.

    And way to try and (ineffectively) attack one part of my point, ignoring the myriad of other detrimental effects long-term space travel and habitation of alien planets presents to us as a species.

    Shit people, next we'll hear bitching about how shitty it is superheroes like Thor fight hand-to-hand when it obviously makes more sense for him to grab a railgun and pwn those noobs.  Jesus, it's fiction.

    EDIT- colonizing other planets requires literal reproduction on those planets.  Currently, NASA won't even send up an astronaut that's pregnant because of the dangers to the fetus.  Damn near EVERYTHING about sci-fi, apart from the human condition, is fiction.

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Here's a Smithsonian article detailing the issues of reproduction in space:

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/houston-we-might-have-some-major-problems-making-babies-space-180954828/

    image
  • sgelsgel Member EpicPosts: 2,197
    edited June 2018


    lol

    Classy CCP 
    MadFrenchieErillionOctagon7711

    ..Cake..

  • HeraseHerase Member RarePosts: 993
    They have a similar shape, but when you get down to the detail, they're different. Engines, Arms, cockpit, they all designed different. 

    Overall both just look like a forklift/impact crusher pimped out into a space ship

    Just turn this on it's side, mirror it, stick a cockpit in the middle and you pretty much got the ship shape.

    Won't deny, they probably used the EVE ship as a reference, but to imho, they are different. 




    MadFrenchie
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    sgel said:


    lol

    Classy CCP 
    Good on CCP for having a sense of humor about it!

    image
  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,464
    Bah, this was a complete waste of time. 
    --------------------------------------------
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,254
    Erillion said:
    Scot said:
    Scot said:
    Lots of JCB's, cranes and so on look similar. It comes from the design conforming to utility of function. SC has a question mark over it in my eyes, as does every indie MMO, but this is just nonsense. 
    That is a very thin argument.  This is a video game, not an engineering project.

    Not only that, but they're designing spaceships that utilize technology that doesn't exist at all in real life.  As such, they are not really limited by the confines of "utility of function."
    That depends on the tech level, if this was Star Trek I would agree somewhat, SC and EVE are not so advanced. Form can only ignore function when the SF setting allows it. The most obvious way to build such a mining ship is a C or Y shape.
    EVE literally has jump clones.  Cybernetic implants, hell faster than light travel alone puts the setting way beyond the realm of "it has to check out!"

    What about a mining ship that generates a short-distance wormhole that immediately transports chunks of rock to a local forward operating station?  Why not?

    No, I don't buy that argument.

    EDIT- the argument that these things need to check out in general holds little weight to anyone who has studied space travel for any amount of time.  Radiation exposure means we currently have little hope of colonizing other planets without an atmosphere akin to our own.  Muscle atrophy, bone density loss, higher risk of mutations like cancer due to aforementioned radiation exposure...  The list goes on and on.  Those issues don't need to be addressed in a game.  It's escapism, the whole point is to go beyond the limitations of real life.
    Ever heard of sand bags as radiation shielding ? Stations in lava tubes ? Lead storm shelters surrounded by water tanks ? Electromagnetic shielding ? Etc. We have about two dozens concepts to solve that problem - had it for 50 years in some cases. It is a lack of will that holds us back - not even money. Certainly not technology. 

    You may want to do some research first before "abandoning all hope" ;-) 


    Have fun
     
    No, you need to do more research.  The lava tubes don't eliminate the radiation exposure completely, nor does it really take into account solar proton events that would bombard the planet due to it's lack of a magnetosphere.

    And way to try and (ineffectively) attack one part of my point, ignoring the myriad of other detrimental effects long-term space travel and habitation of alien planets presents to us as a species.

    Shit people, next we'll hear bitching about how shitty it is superheroes like Thor fight hand-to-hand when it obviously makes more sense for him to grab a railgun and pwn those noobs.  Jesus, it's fiction.

    EDIT- colonizing other planets requires literal reproduction on those planets.  Currently, NASA won't even send up an astronaut that's pregnant because of the dangers to the fetus.  Damn near EVERYTHING about sci-fi, apart from the human condition, is fiction.
    Fun. Let's talk business, shall we ? What is the penetration depth of a solar proton in Martian regolith ? Of gamma rays ? BTW Mars has a magnetosphere - it's just not global (anymore), but frozen in and localized. As we know ever since the 90ies (Mars Global Surveyor). 

    Your "myriad detrimental effects" have engineers working on it since 1923. Some of which I had the privilege to meet. Artificial gravity from rotation? Space nuclear power for fast transfer solutions ? EM shielding ? Hydrogenated boron nitride nanotubes for neutron shielding. Give them money, they do it. 

    NASA is not sending up pregnant women because workers law forbids it anyway. There is even an (unofficial) manual for sex in space (no, I will not link a source ;-) ). There is no reason why a pregnant woman should be in space - yet.  Not to mention the medical emergency aspect. When it comes to long duration missions there is already a lot of scientific literature regarding mixed crews and possible "complications". 

    You could also colonize with fertilized eggs in deep freeze storage and a small core crew. But yes, the natural solution is simpler :-) 

    And Thor  does not have a railgun because the massive recoil would seriously disrupt his flight pattern. Newtons law will not be denied ;-) At least he does not have to worry about battery pack weight and volume. 

    Do you want more research ? I can offer you 32 years of it ;-) 


    Have fun 
    bartoni33
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member EpicPosts: 3,167
    'Never ask your readers to believe in more than one impossible thing.'  -  Advice from some serious SF writers.

    With Space Opera though, you can probably get by with a couple.


    The ship thing is sorta making a mountain out of  a molehill.  Wouldn't mean much, except for SC  already being so filled up with mountains and molehills.

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • DurzaxDurzax Member UncommonPosts: 87
    Wing Commander ships:
    https://cdn.wcnews.com/wcpedia/images/P2freij.png

    https://www.google.com/search?q=wing+commander+ship+images&client=opera&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjm_dD3qdbbAhVB4YMKHV-bC5AQsAQIJg&biw=1598&bih=870

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catamaran 
    Real life ship design from the 1960's well before any of these video games, then we have all the book and movies that came before even those.



    Clearly stated that the Drake Dragonfly was the inspiration for the Vulture.

    You goons need to up your FUD game, your lazy half-assed attempts are extremely boring.
    KyleranMadFrenchieBabuinixBarrikor
  • sgelsgel Member EpicPosts: 2,197
    edited June 2018
    Yeah goons... up your FUD game you lazy haters/leavers!!!

    ..Cake..

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2018
    Erillion said:
    Erillion said:
    Scot said:
    Scot said:
    Lots of JCB's, cranes and so on look similar. It comes from the design conforming to utility of function. SC has a question mark over it in my eyes, as does every indie MMO, but this is just nonsense. 
    That is a very thin argument.  This is a video game, not an engineering project.

    Not only that, but they're designing spaceships that utilize technology that doesn't exist at all in real life.  As such, they are not really limited by the confines of "utility of function."
    That depends on the tech level, if this was Star Trek I would agree somewhat, SC and EVE are not so advanced. Form can only ignore function when the SF setting allows it. The most obvious way to build such a mining ship is a C or Y shape.
    EVE literally has jump clones.  Cybernetic implants, hell faster than light travel alone puts the setting way beyond the realm of "it has to check out!"

    What about a mining ship that generates a short-distance wormhole that immediately transports chunks of rock to a local forward operating station?  Why not?

    No, I don't buy that argument.

    EDIT- the argument that these things need to check out in general holds little weight to anyone who has studied space travel for any amount of time.  Radiation exposure means we currently have little hope of colonizing other planets without an atmosphere akin to our own.  Muscle atrophy, bone density loss, higher risk of mutations like cancer due to aforementioned radiation exposure...  The list goes on and on.  Those issues don't need to be addressed in a game.  It's escapism, the whole point is to go beyond the limitations of real life.
    Ever heard of sand bags as radiation shielding ? Stations in lava tubes ? Lead storm shelters surrounded by water tanks ? Electromagnetic shielding ? Etc. We have about two dozens concepts to solve that problem - had it for 50 years in some cases. It is a lack of will that holds us back - not even money. Certainly not technology. 

    You may want to do some research first before "abandoning all hope" ;-) 


    Have fun
     
    No, you need to do more research.  The lava tubes don't eliminate the radiation exposure completely, nor does it really take into account solar proton events that would bombard the planet due to it's lack of a magnetosphere.

    And way to try and (ineffectively) attack one part of my point, ignoring the myriad of other detrimental effects long-term space travel and habitation of alien planets presents to us as a species.

    Shit people, next we'll hear bitching about how shitty it is superheroes like Thor fight hand-to-hand when it obviously makes more sense for him to grab a railgun and pwn those noobs.  Jesus, it's fiction.

    EDIT- colonizing other planets requires literal reproduction on those planets.  Currently, NASA won't even send up an astronaut that's pregnant because of the dangers to the fetus.  Damn near EVERYTHING about sci-fi, apart from the human condition, is fiction.
    Fun. Let's talk business, shall we ? What is the penetration depth of a solar proton in Martian regolith ? Of gamma rays ? BTW Mars has a magnetosphere - it's just not global (anymore), but frozen in and localized. As we know ever since the 90ies (Mars Global Surveyor). 

    Your "myriad detrimental effects" have engineers working on it since 1923. Some of which I had the privilege to meet. Artificial gravity from rotation? Space nuclear power for fast transfer solutions ? EM shielding ? Hydrogenated boron nitride nanotubes for neutron shielding. Give them money, they do it. 

    NASA is not sending up pregnant women because workers law forbids it anyway. There is even an (unofficial) manual for sex in space (no, I will not link a source ;-) ). There is no reason why a pregnant woman should be in space - yet.  Not to mention the medical emergency aspect. When it comes to long duration missions there is already a lot of scientific literature regarding mixed crews and possible "complications". 

    You could also colonize with fertilized eggs in deep freeze storage and a small core crew. But yes, the natural solution is simpler :-) 

    And Thor  does not have a railgun because the massive recoil would seriously disrupt his flight pattern. Newtons law will not be denied ;-) At least he does not have to worry about battery pack weight and volume. 

    Do you want more research ? I can offer you 32 years of it ;-) 


    Have fun 
    All of that is still is largely geared towards specifically the radiation exposure; the artificial gravity helps address muscle atrophy, though.

    Nothing to help blunt the detrimental effects observed in animal species reproduction studied in space, including lower viability.

    And all of this in the context of trying to pigeonhole a developer's creativity in terms of spaceship design.  Tell me, since there's currently no plausible solution to even approach traveling the speed of light, much less successfully traveling faster by any means, how is 100 explorable solar systems any more far-fetched than a mining frigate that isn't one particular shape?


    You know that Alpha Centauri is multiple light years away.  There's currently no known way for us to even approach the speed of light- which means traveling between star systems would take years- much less FTL travel.  Yet, nobody's picking any bones there, because gameplay trumps realism damn near every time.

    And you're not telling the whole truth about pregnant women reference NASA.  They make astronauts sign a waiver to liability for any effects radiation in space causes to sperm or egg.  They absolutely won't send a pregnant woman into space, not even for scientific purposes, because the dangers are both real and unethical.

    As for your Thor counter, why would you assume Thor does all his fighting airborne?  In fact, in the context of Marvel movies, he rarely does fight airborne, because he can't technically fly (well, maybe recently now that he has "unlocked" his inner power, but he very clearly explains in Ragnarok that he doesn't fly so much as sling himself around with his hammer).  Point stands: he could eliminate targets from much longer range, without endangering himself, with a railgun.  I mean, is he just stupid or what?

    image
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 18,666
    Now we are talking about something more interesting than how close gaming ships look. :)

    That wormhole you talked about, think of the energy needed to create one, that's why form would still follow function. Besides most SF settings have technology levels which do not make sense right across the board.

    In real life the heavy lifting will be done by robots, Mars will have the habitats ready before we have a colony there. Just like when the oceans of the world were first explored it will be done at great risk, our risk adverse culture is possibly holding us back more than anything else.

    We may well have robotic mining craft mining the asteroids by then, maybe with a human pilot for supervision. I wonder, whose version of a mining spacecraft will it look like? ;)
    MadFrenchie
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,254
    edited June 2018
    Erillion said:
    Erillion said:
    >snip <
    Ever heard of sand bags as radiation shielding ? Stations in lava tubes ? Lead storm shelters surrounded by water tanks ? Electromagnetic shielding ? Etc. We have about two dozens concepts to solve that problem - had it for 50 years in some cases. It is a lack of will that holds us back - not even money. Certainly not technology. 

    You may want to do some research first before "abandoning all hope" ;-) 


    Have fun
     
    No, you need to do more research.  The lava tubes don't eliminate the radiation exposure completely, nor does it really take into account solar proton events that would bombard the planet due to it's lack of a magnetosphere.

    And way to try and (ineffectively) attack one part of my point, ignoring the myriad of other detrimental effects long-term space travel and habitation of alien planets presents to us as a species.

    Shit people, next we'll hear bitching about how shitty it is superheroes like Thor fight hand-to-hand when it obviously makes more sense for him to grab a railgun and pwn those noobs.  Jesus, it's fiction.

    EDIT- colonizing other planets requires literal reproduction on those planets.  Currently, NASA won't even send up an astronaut that's pregnant because of the dangers to the fetus.  Damn near EVERYTHING about sci-fi, apart from the human condition, is fiction.
    Fun. Let's talk business, shall we ? What is the penetration depth of a solar proton in Martian regolith ? Of gamma rays ? BTW Mars has a magnetosphere - it's just not global (anymore), but frozen in and localized. As we know ever since the 90ies (Mars Global Surveyor). 

    Your "myriad detrimental effects" have engineers working on it since 1923. Some of which I had the privilege to meet. Artificial gravity from rotation? Space nuclear power for fast transfer solutions ? EM shielding ? Hydrogenated boron nitride nanotubes for neutron shielding. Give them money, they do it. 

    NASA is not sending up pregnant women because workers law forbids it anyway. There is even an (unofficial) manual for sex in space (no, I will not link a source ;-) ). There is no reason why a pregnant woman should be in space - yet.  Not to mention the medical emergency aspect. When it comes to long duration missions there is already a lot of scientific literature regarding mixed crews and possible "complications". 

    You could also colonize with fertilized eggs in deep freeze storage and a small core crew. But yes, the natural solution is simpler :-) 

    And Thor  does not have a railgun because the massive recoil would seriously disrupt his flight pattern. Newtons law will not be denied ;-) At least he does not have to worry about battery pack weight and volume. 

    Do you want more research ? I can offer you 32 years of it ;-) 


    Have fun 
    All of that is still is largely geared towards specifically the radiation exposure; the artificial gravity helps address muscle atrophy, though.

    Nothing to help blunt the detrimental effects observed in animal species reproduction studied in space, including lower viability.

    And all of this in the context of trying to pigeonhole a developer's creativity in terms of spaceship design.  Tell me, since there's currently no plausible solution to even approach traveling the speed of light, much less successfully traveling faster by any means, how is 100 explorable solar systems any more far-fetched than a mining frigate that isn't one particular shape?


    You know that Alpha Centauri is multiple light years away.  There's currently no known way for us to even approach the speed of light- which means traveling between star systems would take years- much less FTL travel.  Yet, nobody's picking any bones there, because gameplay trumps realism damn near every time.

    And you're not telling the whole truth about pregnant women reference NASA.  They make astronauts sign a waiver to liability for any effects radiation in space causes to sperm or egg.  They absolutely won't send a pregnant woman into space, not even for scientific purposes, because the dangers are both real and unethical.

    As for your Thor counter, why would you assume Thor does all his fighting airborne?  In fact, in the context of Marvel movies, he rarely does fight airborne, because he can't technically fly (well, maybe recently now that he has "unlocked" his inner power, but he very clearly explains in Ragnarok that he doesn't fly so much as sling himself around with his hammer).  Point stands: he could eliminate targets from much longer range, without endangering himself, with a railgun.  I mean, is he just stupid or what?
    If Thor is stupid - i do not know. You have to ask him. However, even standing on the ground and holding a railgun the recoil will blast him back significantly. Actio equals reactio. And a railgun shot is one hell of an "actio". 

    I am not quite sure what point you try to make w.r.t. pregnant female astronauts. As no one here claims that NASA - or any space agency - is sending them up. You seem to be arguing with yourself here. 

    Finally - the colonization of space. Even with lower than lightspeed ships. At 5 % the speed of light - absolutely achievable with currently known technologies - mankind would colonize the whole Milky Way galaxy in less than 2 million years. Sounds a lot, but on a geological scale that is just the blink of an eye . Even humanity already exists for double that time period. 



    And with the SC ships depicted here it would be much faster - either via quantum drive (which is a technology like Star Trek that does NOT require FTL and is compatible with relativity theory). Or with wormholes - which are also known as Einstein Rosen bridge. 

    So - there may be more science in there than you may think.


    Have fun 
    MadFrenchie
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2018
    Scot said:
    Now we are talking about something more interesting than how close gaming ships look. :)

    That wormhole you talked about, think of the energy needed to create one, that's why form would still follow function. Besides most SF settings have technology levels which do not make sense right across the board.

    In real life the heavy lifting will be done by robots, Mars will have the habitats ready before we have a colony there. Just like when the oceans of the world were first explored it will be done at great risk, our risk adverse culture is possibly holding us back more than anything else.

    We may well have robotic mining craft mining the asteroids by then, maybe with a human pilot for supervision. I wonder, whose version of a mining spacecraft will it look like? ;)
    The power source needed can be explained away through discovery of alien tech (think Mass Effect) if needed.  That's why I hold the position that Sci-Fi, specifically space-based, leaves a very wide berth for the creators.  Just like in fantasy, how all things are possible through "ancient magics" or other explanations.

    If we wanted to go ultra-realistic then as you say: if drones can do the job just as well, there's an ethical imperative to remove the pilot to avoid the chance of incident.  Consider that, in air travel here on Earth, something like 80% of incidents are directly or indirectly attributed to a lapse of situational awareness by pilots/ATC.  Drones don't have lapses in situational awareness.  If they do, the cost is merely expressed in dollars and cents, not human lives.

    EDIT- Typos!
    Post edited by MadFrenchie on

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.