Starship design question

[Xenophon13]

Why do earth ships always look like this?

or this:

or this:


Is there an advantage to the linear design, or is it just because we're used to our naval vessels being long and thin?

[Sea Skimmer]

A linear design makes a fair bit of sense because it means the engines can be tightly clustered and have all the ships load right in front of them. So in linear acceleration , the ships structure is primarily subject to compression but not a lot of tension or shearing. If you spread the engines wider and made the ship wider it'd have to be built stronger and thus would have more mass and go slower. This is one of several reasons why modern rockets are long and slender. Long length does present a liability when turning, but one which can be managed since in space you face no real drag, and you can change the orientation of the ship without changing its direction of travel.

i wouldn't endorse the design of any of the ships in those pictures though. All the random protrusions make no sense and would carry a heavy structural penalty.

[Stark]

I think it's because 'alien' ships generally look fucking retarded and are defined by fins or crystals or whatever rather than 'spaceship design'. Linear layouts have good qualities around weapon coverage too, although 'hard science fiction' (lol) would place the decks in an counter-intuitive way.

[Ford Prefect]

I think it's because 'alien' ships generally look fucking retarded and are defined by fins or crystals or whatever rather than 'spaceship design'. Linear layouts have good qualities around weapon coverage too, although 'hard science fiction' (lol) would place the decks in an counter-intuitive way.

Are you complaining about placing the decks perpendicular to the axis of thrust?

[Stark]

No, I'm just saying that's what 'hard science fiction' people do, because of physics. I just have little time for 'hard science fiction'.

Like good old Traveller where one ship has properly positioned decks, and EVERY OTHER SHIP IN THE ENTIRE GAME doesn't. Wheeee.

[Oskuro]

And also because they are reminiscent of modern naval (metal grey) vessels, or similar to the Sulaco.

[Stofsk]

No, I'm just saying that's what 'hard science fiction' people do, because of physics. I just have little time for 'hard science fiction'.

Like good old Traveller where one ship has properly positioned decks, and EVERY OTHER SHIP IN THE ENTIRE GAME doesn't. Wheeee.

Shit... I'm gonna take a stab in the dark and guess you're referring to the Broadsword merc cruiser? Because yeah, I like that ship. And every other ship ever designed for the game is... not like it at all.

[Havok]

*AHEM*

[Gramzamber]

You know what? Give me beautiful yet impractical Earth ships over those boxes any day.

[Oskuro]

*AHEM*<snip pic>

Woah, that bitchslap hurt man!

[phred]

You know what? Give me beautiful yet impractical Earth ships over those boxes any day.

Is that an Oberth? And where did you get that pic?

[Batman]

I don't know WHAT that is, but it's definitely not an Oberth. An Oberth was what we saw scouting the Genesis planet. The one that got blown away by Kruge. You know, USS Grissom.

[phred]

I guess not. But they do look sorta similar, yes?

[BLACKSUN2000]

The ship in question is Calnus from Star ocean until the end of time, which has awesome ships

I think this one of them...

[BLACKSUN2000]

Whoops The Calnus in Question is from "Star Ocean: Second Story" there are multiple "Calnus" ships kinda how there are multiple ships named "Enterprise" in Star Trek...which Star Oceans ships tend to resemble.



Sorry for the double post, but I had to correct my mistake.

[Nyrath]

No, I'm just saying that's what 'hard science fiction' people do, because of physics. I just have little time for 'hard science fiction'.

Like good old Traveller where one ship has properly positioned decks, and EVERY OTHER SHIP IN THE ENTIRE GAME doesn't. Wheeee.

Would that be the Ashanti High Lightning or the Broadsword Mercenary Cruiser?

[Xenophon13]

*AHEM*<snip pic>

Woah, that bitchslap hurt man!

ST is kind of a special case... I mainly mean those (movies/games/etc.) that don't have the (time/budget/motivation) to make unique starships. The linear design does make sense though.

[Stofsk]

No, I'm just saying that's what 'hard science fiction' people do, because of physics. I just have little time for 'hard science fiction'.

Like good old Traveller where one ship has properly positioned decks, and EVERY OTHER SHIP IN THE ENTIRE GAME doesn't. Wheeee.

Would that be the Ashanti High Lightning or the Broadsword Mercenary Cruiser?

I asked him this earlier, but my guess is the Broadsword. It's the only official Traveller ship design that I know of where the decks are arranged perpendicular to the axis of thrust. I thought the AHL was just another standard Traveller Big Ship where the decks are arranged like it was a naval analogue. The Broadsword is a really interesting design and I just wish the whole game had did their designs based off that kind of layout.

[montypython]

An ovoid starship design with the deck plan oriented towards the central axis would be an interesting design to see if that hasn't been done already.

[Batman]

An ovoid starship design with the deck plan oriented towards the central axis would be an interesting design to see if that hasn't been done already.

Explain 'towards', please. If you mean 'perpendicular to' so thrust from the main engines would provide pseudogravity what recommends an ovoid design over a cylindrical one? If you mean 'alingned ALONG the central axis, that's the classic aping wet navy designs soft SciFi design with artificial gravity et al so again, why ovoid?

[Batman]

Explain 'towards', please. If you mean 'perpendicular to' so thrust from the main engines would provide pseudogravity

Which is useless, since the main engines wouldn't be firing the vast majority of the time! And, if they are, unless you are using magic, it'll be a tiny acceleration.
Sort of a nitpick, but one that has been annoying me for some time now.

I'll take your word for it. Personally I don't find single g turnover courses all that inconceivable but then I routinely fuck up basic math so...

If you mean 'alingned ALONG the central axis, that's the classic aping wet navy designs soft SciFi design with artificial gravity et al so again, why ovoid?

There's another layout type too: the radial one, where the decks are layers going into the core from the outside. This is the only one if you use rotational gravity, since down is toward the outside, which changes as you rotate about the axis.

I have to admit I completely FORGOT about that one but the point stands-I don't see how an ovoid would provide any advantages over a cylinder. If anything the ovoid would be WORSE as the 'gravity' at the outer rim would noticeably vary depending how close to the bow or stern you are.

[Stark]

I asked him this earlier, but my guess is the Broadsword. It's the only official Traveller ship design that I know of where the decks are arranged perpendicular to the axis of thrust. I thought the AHL was just another standard Traveller Big Ship where the decks are arranged like it was a naval analogue. The Broadsword is a really interesting design and I just wish the whole game had did their designs based off that kind of layout.

Yeah, it's the Broadsword. It's a far 'harder' design than everything else in Traveller (the game with both plasma AND fusion guns). 4 removable shuttles that are like 20% of the ship's volume!

[montypython]

The radial deck-layout ovoid vessel (which was what I was envisioning originally) can have uniform gravitational force in an inhabited uniform cylindrical central body, with the narrower bow and stern regions occupied by machinery. Biggest reason for an ovoid shape off the top of my head is possibly relativistic streamlining, possibly.

[Jusu]

Hmm, since this is ships in TV Scifi (not bringing in Anime here, most of their stuff is...eh), what do you all think with the nBSG Galactica and Pegasus? I always thought the fact the Galactica's flight pods retracting into the main hull would provide an extra measure of integrity and possibly help prove to be the key to her survival. Galactica relied more on structural design for integrity, rather than armor (although I'm sure Pegasus had a similar design as well) to survive. By my last count, the only time the Galactica jumped without retracting its pods was in in the last episode, and she broke her back. But I'm also sure being pounded on by heavy arty helped contribute to it.

So I wanted to ask. Are Earth ships shaped the way they are mainly due to our familiarity in building stuff like it? Big, impressive things with bulky angular designs made to withstand damage?

Also as a side note, in terms of visual impressiveness. The Pegasus remake was damn way better than the Galactica or Basestars. Or it could be the fact she dished out pain in ways I never saw the Galactica do.

[Nyrath]

I asked him this earlier, but my guess is the Broadsword. It's the only official Traveller ship design that I know of where the decks are arranged perpendicular to the axis of thrust. I thought the AHL was just another standard Traveller Big Ship where the decks are arranged like it was a naval analogue. The Broadsword is a really interesting design and I just wish the whole game had did their designs based off that kind of layout.

Yes, I like it too.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nyrath/set ... 724051592/