| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Davey Talvanen
State War Academy
Caldari State
3
   |
Posted - 2014.10.16 18:06:20 -
[1] - Quote
According to physics I should be able to reach C (speed of light) in any ship yet a max speed is imposed |
Rems Issus
Associated Descendants of Eve
Vanguard.
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 20:04:57 -
[2] - Quote
You could, yes. But ask yourself; Can your ship survive the forces at work beyond those given limits? Can any of these hulls survive an amount of speed that high without buckling, sans warp field? Can your engines give you enough output to get you there while remaining intact? Think of the top speed as being how fast a given ship can be moving without damaging itself- At least that's always what I have assumed it was intended to represent.
~*~{Posting on my main, come at me bro}~*~
|
Ibrahim Tash-Murkon
Inter Vivos Trust Service
101
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 21:56:50 -
[3] - Quote
As I understand it the explanation is that warp drives, even when not in use, create a "drag" on spacetime which acts very much like friction as if ships are surrounded in a fluid. Hence, submarines in space.
_"I give you the destiny of Faith, and you will bring its message to every planet of every star in the heavens: Go forth, conquer in my Name, and reclaim that which I have given."-á- _Book of Reclaiming 22:13
|
Tavin Aikisen
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
300
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 21:57:46 -
[4] - Quote
Rems Issus wrote:You could, yes. But ask yourself; Can your ship survive the forces at work beyond those given limits? Can any of these hulls survive an amount of speed that high without buckling, sans warp field? Can your engines give you enough output to get you there while remaining intact? Think of the top speed as being how fast a given ship can be moving without damaging itself- At least that's always what I have assumed it was intended to represent.
Agreed. It's not the maximum capable velocity. It's simply the best maximum operating velocity. It's going to be very difficult to maneuver above those speeds or more importantly, slow down. No point accelerating "forever" only to spend "forever" slowing down...
In addition, as you approach light speeds, your mass approaches infinity (depending on which physical laws you're referring too).
_Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home. _
-Cold Wind
|
Horus Taber
GamerZZAlliance
Imperial Army of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 01:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Not sure if we are talking speeds other than warp or just the ships maximum speed in general but technically every ship in EvE is capable of breaking the laws of physics already being capable traveling hundreds of times faster than the speed of light. Here is an example with an Amarr shuttle...
The Maximum warp of this shuttle without any modifications is 5.0 Au/s.
Now for those who do not know this I will explain a bit about an Au:
An Au is the Astronomical Unit of measure being that of the distance between the earth and the sun and measures 149,597,871 kilometers.
The speed of light or C in mathematical terms is 299,792.458 kilometers / second
Now that we have our variables listed, we now know that the Amarr shuttle in question has a max warp speed of
747,989,355 Km/s and when you divide this by the speed of light (C), we find that the ship is capable of traveling at 2,495x the speed of light.
Now there are a couple of theoretical explanations for this being possible in the EvE universe, the most plausible and one that could still lead to physics not being completely broken based on our current understanding of it, would be that of our ships being capable of producing there own wormholes to traverse the vast distances needed. The other would be that of utilizing the anatomy of what is currently a theoretical particle called a tachyon which is able to create a field of -mass or "imaginary mass" which thus makes it able to increase velocity while decreasing it's energy need. This phenomenon would allow for faster than light travel.
Both are of course theoretical in quantum physics. But just try to imagine such a speed. To travel that much faster than the speed of light you would only be able to view your past self until the ship came to a stop since you "present" self cannot be seen.
I look forward to seeing where this post may lead in this discussion :-) |
Horus Taber
GamerZZAlliance
Imperial Army of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 01:51:52 -
[6] - Quote
Not sure if we are talking speeds other than warp or just the ship's maximum speed in general but technically every ship in EvE is capable of breaking the laws of physics already being capable traveling hundreds of times faster than the speed of light. Here is an example with an Amarr shuttle...
The Maximum warp of this shuttle without any modifications is 5.0 Au/s.
Now for those who do not know this I will explain a bit about an Au:
An Au is the Astronomical Unit of measure being that of the distance between the earth and the sun and measures 149,597,871 kilometers.
The speed of light or C in mathematical terms is 299,792.458 kilometers / second
Now that we have our variables listed, we now know that the Amarr shuttle in question has a max warp speed of
747,989,355 Km/s and when you divide this by the speed of light (C), we find that the ship is capable of traveling at 2,495x the speed of light.
Now there are a couple of theoretical explanations for this being possible in the EvE universe, the most plausible and one that could still lead to physics not being completely broken based on our current understanding of it, would be that of our ships being capable of producing their own wormholes to traverse the vast distances needed. The other would be that of utilizing the anatomy of what is currently a theoretical particle called a tachyon, which is able to create a field of -mass or "imaginary mass" which thus makes it able to increase velocity while decreasing its energy need. This phenomenon would allow for faster than light travel.
Both are of course theoretical in quantum physics. But just try to imagine such a speed. To travel that much faster than the speed of light you would only be able to view your past self until the ship came to a stop since your "present" self cannot be seen.
I look forward to seeing where this post may lead in this discussion :-) |
Davey Talvanen
State War Academy
Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 06:11:32 -
[7] - Quote
Rems Issus wrote:You could, yes. But ask yourself; Can your ship survive the forces at work beyond those given limits? Can any of these hulls survive an amount of speed that high without buckling, sans warp field? Can your engines give you enough output to get you there while remaining intact? Think of the top speed as being how fast a given ship can be moving without damaging itself- At least that's always what I have assumed it was intended to represent.
Speed itself does not exert forces only acceleration does so we need to look at maximum acceleration in m/s/s for speed stats. For examle : My badger is capable of 94 m/s of speed but should be capable of 100000 m/s of speed. And also why do the engines run constantly when they should just burn once and then shut off |
Tavin Aikisen
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
300
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 11:59:14 -
[8] - Quote
Davey Talvanen wrote:[quote=Rems Issus] but should be capable of 100000 m/s of speed.
How do you gather that?
Quote: And also why do the engines run constantly when they should just burn once and then shut off
A combination of artistic license and the "drag effect" that was mentioned earlier (which is in the old scientific lore articles). But you are correct in that regard.
_Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home. _
-Cold Wind
|
Davey Talvanen
State War Academy
Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 18:18:31 -
[9] - Quote
Tavin Aikisen wrote:Davey Talvanen wrote:[quote=Rems Issus] but should be capable of 100000 m/s of speed. How do you gather that?
Any ship accelerating at 1 m/s/s can hit 100000 m/s after 100,000 seconds
|
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
325
|
Posted - 2014.10.18 11:33:08 -
[10] - Quote
Davey Talvanen wrote:Rems Issus wrote:You could, yes. But ask yourself; Can your ship survive the forces at work beyond those given limits? Can any of these hulls survive an amount of speed that high without buckling, sans warp field? Can your engines give you enough output to get you there while remaining intact? Think of the top speed as being how fast a given ship can be moving without damaging itself- At least that's always what I have assumed it was intended to represent. Speed itself does not exert forces only acceleration does so we need to look at maximum acceleration in m/s/s for speed stats. For examle : My badger is capable of 94 m/s of speed but should be capable of 100000 m/s of speed. And also why do the engines run constantly when they should just burn once and then shut off
The engines aren't burning constantly. Every time you change direction, they go out while you're ship repositions itself, then they fire up again. Also notice how your speed drops while this happens. There's a lot of resistance there, almost as if space was fluid or something.
My favourite explanation is still that New Eden is in a part of space where dust density is incredibly high, making space work like a fluid because of all that friction. |
Esna Pitoojee
Offworld Trading Company
Ethical Carnage
449
|
Posted - 2014.10.19 01:32:58 -
[11] - Quote
Ibrahim Tash-Murkon wrote:As I understand it the explanation is that warp drives, even when not in use, create a "drag" on spacetime which acts very much like friction as if ships are surrounded in a fluid. Hence, submarines in space.
This has been the "fanon" explanation for a long time due to the lack of any solid canon explanation.
- An on-line warp drive creates "drag" on a ship using one. Warp drives are online (though not active) whenever you are logged on and in space with it.
- Shutting down a warp drive is a time-consuming process, especially after combat. This is why ships take time to vanish from space, unless we go through the shutdown process before logging on.
- Just cutting off the power to a warp drive without properly shutting it down causes a catastrophic explosion which destroys the ship it is on. |
Luna Lapointe
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.23 04:42:09 -
[12] - Quote
Davey Talvanen wrote:According to physics I should be able to reach C (speed of light) in any ship yet a max speed is imposed
Oh lord....
"According to physics" is a terrible phrase to open with.
No, you can not reach the speed of light through ordinary acceleration alone. That would require an infinite amount of energy, not to mention the relativistic effects (you can't have any particle with mass moving at the speed of light, since it's relativistic mass would then be infinite as well)
Warp drive drag and inertia dampeners very nicely explain the submarine-like flight of ships in EVE.
All of this is of course moot when you consider warp speeds in EVE make light seem like a two-legged horse at the Kentucky derby. |
Bastion Arzi
Mortis Angelus
The Kadeshi
141
|
Posted - 2014.10.27 14:47:21 -
[13] - Quote
why according to physics should u be able to reach near relativistic speeds again? |
Enya Sparhawk
Black Tea and Talons
20
|
Posted - 2014.10.28 01:06:31 -
[14] - Quote
According to physics???
What are you a 'caveman'?
Owen Levanth wrote:My favourite explanation is still that New Eden is in a part of space where dust density is incredibly high, making space work like a fluid because of all that friction.
I think you greatly undestimate the phenomenal amount of various forces at play in any given solar system...
Luna Lapointe wrote:No, you can not reach the speed of light through ordinary acceleration alone. That would require an infinite amount of energy, not to mention the relativistic effects (you can't have any particle with mass moving at the speed of light, since it's relativistic mass would then be infinite as well)
Luna makes a good point here... except that I'm going to add two ideas to it:
1. What is ordinary acceleration? (I speculate that this would be anything 'natural' in the universe; hence the constant 'C'. Don't even get me started on dark energy and folding space between two distant points.)
2. That it wouldn't require an infinite amount of energy; you would just have to become energy (mass would adjust accordingly).
Essentially, you would try to maximize the effects of a culmination of energy forms (resonances) over just an infinite amount of one or one at a time...
Also, If you didn't have the drag from warp drive then you wouldn't have the warp... the two go hand in hand with the one being a necessity for the other (take your pick)...
Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne
Déan gáire...Tiocfaidh ár lá
|
Dradis Aulmais
Ignite Llc.
V.L.A.S.T
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 01:48:13 -
[15] - Quote
You will eventually reach the point of demenishing returns. A rocket at a certin point will require more fuel per unit speed then original launch. Example if you need 1 pound of fuel to go 1/km a second for every 1/km over 50/k a second speed will require x2 exponental increase of fuel for the same 1/k second increase. So 2 pounds to go 51, 4 pounds to go 52 etcetera. (The numbers are made up don't shoot me) There's a very scientific reason for this, which I don't remeber off the top of my head. So your ship will have a max speed for after that speed your fuel usage will be problematic |
Tavin Aikisen
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
311
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 06:41:19 -
[16] - Quote
Dradis Aulmais wrote:You will eventually reach the point of demenishing returns. A rocket at a certin point will require more fuel per unit speed then original launch. Example if you need 1 pound of fuel to go 1/km a second for every 1/km over 50/k a second speed will require x2 exponental increase of fuel for the same 1/k second increase. So 2 pounds to go 51, 4 pounds to go 52 etcetera. (The numbers are made up don't shoot me) There's a very scientific reason for this, which I don't remeber off the top of my head. So your ship will have a max speed for after that speed your fuel usage will be problematic
That's assuming you're increasing your acceleration or flying against an opposing force which requires constant thrust. Theoretically in space you don't burn your rocket continuously to maintain your vector.
The reason is do with thrust specific fuel consumption, which you correctly identified. Specifically it starts getting into considerations of enthalpy of the rocket exhaust nozzle, entropy and all this other business I'd rather not go into.  .
But this is similar to why our airlines don't zip around in fast aircraft like the Concorde. Sure it's a quick flight, but it's not cost effective for fuel. Those engines simply require more to maintain higher speeds. (Remember those aircraft provide constant thrust to maintain flight, otherwise the drag slows you down once you stop 'firing your engine').
"Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home."
-Cold Wind
|
Dradis Aulmais
Ignite Llc.
V.L.A.S.T
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 23:08:24 -
[17] - Quote
Tavin Aikisen wrote:Dradis Aulmais wrote:You will eventually reach the point of demenishing returns. A rocket at a certin point will require more fuel per unit speed then original launch. Example if you need 1 pound of fuel to go 1/km a second for every 1/km over 50/k a second speed will require x2 exponental increase of fuel for the same 1/k second increase. So 2 pounds to go 51, 4 pounds to go 52 etcetera. (The numbers are made up don't shoot me) There's a very scientific reason for this, which I don't remeber off the top of my head. So your ship will have a max speed for after that speed your fuel usage will be problematic That's assuming you're increasing your acceleration or flying against an opposing force which requires constant thrust. Theoretically in space you don't burn your rocket continuously to maintain your vector. The reason is do with thrust specific fuel consumption, which you correctly identified. Specifically it starts getting into considerations of temperature of the rocket exhaust nozzle, enthalpy, entropy and all this other business I'd rather not go into. . But this is similar to why our airlines don't zip around in fast aircraft like the Concorde. Sure it's a quick flight, but it's not cost effective for fuel. Those engines simply require more to maintain higher speeds. (Remember those aircraft provide constant thrust to maintain flight, otherwise the drag slows you down once you stop 'firing your engine').
I bow to superior knowlege |
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Cynosural Field Theory.
1416
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 16:34:14 -
[18] - Quote
your ship will never be able to accelerate past the speed of light C (assuming Einstein is correct). The distance or better the space that your warp bubble transfers in time (lol) is something entirely different.
Actually, while in warp, your ship better not move at all ....
TunDraGon is recruiting!
"Also, your boobs [:o] " -á
CCP Eterne, 2012
"When in doubt...make a di++k joke."-áRobin Williams - RIP
|
Vulxanis Viceroy
Offworld Trading Company
Ethical Carnage
165
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 19:23:43 -
[19] - Quote
Because game mechanics. The speeds they reach in warp are scientifically impossible, jumpdrives, jumpgates, wormhole mechanics, etc. CCP looked at science and went "Well that's inconvenient... meh, let's lose it." and threw science out the window.
Basically, just like in star trek, it just has to sound scientific enough to be plausible. Doesn't actually have to make sense in the real world. The laws of physics look at EVE, and cry.
Fide et honore.
Curious about Roleplay in EVE? Message me & I'll help you!
(IC note: Vulxanis only responds to "Lord Draconis".)
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
CODE.
3855
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 05:27:45 -
[20] - Quote
Tavin Aikisen wrote:Dradis Aulmais wrote:You will eventually reach the point of demenishing returns. A rocket at a certin point will require more fuel per unit speed then original launch. Example if you need 1 pound of fuel to go 1/km a second for every 1/km over 50/k a second speed will require x2 exponental increase of fuel for the same 1/k second increase. So 2 pounds to go 51, 4 pounds to go 52 etcetera. (The numbers are made up don't shoot me) There's a very scientific reason for this, which I don't remeber off the top of my head. So your ship will have a max speed for after that speed your fuel usage will be problematic That's assuming you're increasing your acceleration or flying against an opposing force which requires constant thrust. Theoretically in space you don't burn your rocket continuously to maintain your vector. The reason is do with thrust specific fuel consumption, which you correctly identified. Specifically it starts getting into considerations of temperature of the rocket exhaust nozzle, enthalpy, entropy and all this other business I'd rather not go into. . But this is similar to why our airlines don't zip around in fast aircraft like the Concorde. Sure it's a quick flight, but it's not cost effective for fuel. Those engines simply require more to maintain higher speeds. (Remember those aircraft provide constant thrust to maintain flight, otherwise the drag slows you down once you stop 'firing your engine').
The Concorde was fuel inefficient due to fluid dynamics at and around the speed of sound, which is an 'earth only' issue.
Basically the method used by a 747 to generate lift does not work above about 0.85 times the speed of sound, and so totally different wing designs are required, and those wing designs are far less efficient.
None of this applies to space, however.
Basically EVE does not use either Newtonian or relativistic physics, it instead uses some variant of a submarine simulation in order to improve gameplay.
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
& Vote #2 Tora Bushido
|
Azazel The Misanthrope
Animadversion Tactical Operations Index
Legion of Immortal Corporations
38
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 19:43:07 -
[21] - Quote
Davey Talvanen wrote:Tavin Aikisen wrote:Davey Talvanen wrote:[quote=Rems Issus] but should be capable of 100000 m/s of speed. How do you gather that? Any ship accelerating at 1 m/s/s can hit 100000 m/s after 100,000 seconds
I am sure that is what they thought about the shuttle Columbia too. |
Azazel The Misanthrope
Animadversion Tactical Operations Index
Legion of Immortal Corporations
38
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 19:50:06 -
[22] - Quote
Luna Lapointe wrote:Davey Talvanen wrote:According to physics I should be able to reach C (speed of light) in any ship yet a max speed is imposed Oh lord.... "According to physics" was a terrible phrase to open with. No, you can not reach the speed of light through ordinary acceleration alone. That would require an infinite amount of energy, not to mention the relativistic effects (you can't have any particle with mass moving at the speed of light, since it's relativistic mass would then be infinite as well) Warp drive drag and inertia dampeners very nicely explain the submarine-like flight of ships in EVE. All of this is of course moot when you consider warp speeds in EVE make light seem like a two-legged horse at the Kentucky derby.
Technically if any object has infinite mass its apparent mass becomes zero; once an object reaches a velocity relative to C its increasing mass is nullified. |
Tavin Aikisen
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
334
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 23:07:32 -
[23] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
The Concorde was fuel inefficient due to fluid dynamics at and around the speed of sound, which is an 'earth only' issue.
Basically the method used by a 747 to generate lift does not work above about 0.85 times the speed of sound, and so totally different wing designs are required, and those wing designs are far less efficient.
None of this applies to space, however.
Basically EVE does not use either Newtonian or relativistic physics, it instead uses some variant of a submarine simulation in order to improve gameplay.
I'm specifically talking about the engines and instantaneous fuel burn, not total, for which flight speed is a significant factor.
My point was that if you increase engine speeds; more fuel is used. Simple as that. Regardless of whether that engine is attached to a wing or the back of the astronaut's chair and whether or not the aircraft can actually generate lift if required (and thus would need to offset with increased thrust).
Actually the engines of the Concorde at or around the speed of sound were the most efficient. At comparable speeds to the 747, the Concorde's SFC is less than a 747 (< 0.5 in imperial units), even though it uses a turbojet engine. Its total flight profile was where the fuel costs came in (specifically on the ground where a lot of fuel is wasted), and the fact it only carried 100 passengers, or roughly a quarter of a 747. Those turbojets are far more efficient at higher speeds than any turbofan. But its SFC at those speeds is also also 3 times higher.
"Remember this. Trust your eyes, you will kill each other. Trust your veins, you can all go home."
-Cold Wind
|
Saul Elsyn
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
136
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 00:17:52 -
[24] - Quote
'Drag' in EVE is caused by the warp drive's effects on local space, as well as various inertial compensation techniques used within the ship.
For some reason starships in EVE have their warp drives effectively 'always on', thus the 'drag' effect is due to the warp drive resisting the movement of the ship, effective creating a form of 'subspace drag'.
For comparison, a microwarp drive basically works just like a normal warp drive. The effects of the subspace distortion cause shots which normally would have missed to be pulled toward the ship, hence why signature radius balloons when a MWD is activated. |
Davey Talvanen
Zero's Legion
6
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 05:55:22 -
[25] - Quote
Saul Elsyn wrote:'Drag' in EVE is caused by the warp drive's effects on local space, as well as various inertial compensation techniques used within the ship.
For some reason starships in EVE have their warp drives effectively 'always on', thus the 'drag' effect is due to the warp drive resisting the movement of the ship, effective creating a form of 'subspace drag'.
For comparison, a microwarp drive basically works just like a normal warp drive. The effects of the subspace distortion cause shots which normally would have missed to be pulled toward the ship, hence why signature radius balloons when a MWD is activated.
I see, so the warp drive aides a distortion on space time reducing speed of travel
Also sorry for the first post I meant according to the standard laws of physics if I am in a spaceship accelerating with infinite fuel I can reach 99.9999999999 recurring percent of C
|
Bob Maths
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 17:16:16 -
[26] - Quote
Eugene Kerner wrote:your ship will never be able to accelerate past the speed of light C (assuming Einstein is correct). The distance or better the space that your warp bubble transfers in time (lol) is something entirely different.
Actually, while in warp, your ship better not move at all ....
It wasn't Einstein that first proved or even suggested E=mc^2 , the relativistic factor is Lorentz's and the energy-mass equivalence proposal is Umov's. Lorentz's factor is what we're discussing here and yes it's correct, even in 'warp' space as now we're dealing with another layer of relativistic effects (i.e the object appears to be travelling faster from A but B is in fact travelling slower) as you need to contradict the laws of physics inside your own frame (a galilean concept cough)
Davey Talvanen wrote:Saul Elsyn wrote:'Drag' in EVE is caused by the warp drive's effects on local space, as well as various inertial compensation techniques used within the ship.
For some reason starships in EVE have their warp drives effectively 'always on', thus the 'drag' effect is due to the warp drive resisting the movement of the ship, effective creating a form of 'subspace drag'.
For comparison, a microwarp drive basically works just like a normal warp drive. The effects of the subspace distortion cause shots which normally would have missed to be pulled toward the ship, hence why signature radius balloons when a MWD is activated. I see, so the warp drive aides a distortion on space time reducing speed of travel Also sorry for the first post I meant according to the standard laws of physics if I am in a spaceship accelerating with infinite fuel I can reach 99.9999999999 recurring percent of C
Not really as you're going to be considering its energy capacity and actual ability to exert enough force to do work on the object in question at a certain point - lets call this a zenith - so that it accelerates significantly and isn't in fact introducing work to accelerate it to the zenith's velocity to overcome the deceleration caused by the ever increasing inertia of this none-uniform body. If you have an infinite mass of fuel that we could somehow instaneously transport to the ship in question as it is depleted, we still need to understand the chemistry and energy in its bonds.
Warp drives just artificially reduce the distance you're traversing at every point in the field, there isn't a 'pull' but rather a displacement that would cause the misfires, as the 'space' is not there, to in fact be hits.
|
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Cynosural Field Theory.
1443
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 09:38:27 -
[27] - Quote
Davey Talvanen wrote:According to physics I should be able to reach C (speed of light) in any ship yet a max speed is imposed
wow...according to physics you say...nice physics you got there...
TunDraGon is recruiting!
"Also, your boobs [:o] " -á
CCP Eterne, 2012
"When in doubt...make a di++k joke."-áRobin Williams - RIP
|
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
462
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 16:12:00 -
[28] - Quote
Davey Talvanen wrote:According to physics I should be able to reach C (speed of light) in any ship yet a max speed is imposed
As some have already stated, the warp drives used in our ships add an extra to the local space around our ships (fluid-space) and the engines attached to the ships can only put so much pressure against that "fluid" which would be acting in a non-newtonian manner. Once that limit is reached the ships accelerate no faster, as various components cannot handle the stresses being used against them. Afterburners extend this by incorporating safety overrides at the allowance of more speed (at the cost of increase capacitor useage to keep the hull intact), while MicroWarpDrives dip you into the warp layers, whilst still keeping you in "real" space - much like how pond skaters skitter ontop of the water, but don't break its tension.
In relation to warp drive speeds, I've always imagined it as space being layers of an onion, with the higher warping AU ships being able to punch down lower into the numerous layers - an interceptor can get to the speeds because of an oversized warp engine compared to its mass, whilst the opposite is also true: a freighter is so massive, the warp drives can only just make it dip into to the first layers.
Blessed are those that carry the Empress' Light; with it they destroy the shadows
|
EdwardNardella
Collapsed Out
Overload Everything
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 18:30:52 -
[29] - Quote
Arline Kley wrote:In relation to warp drive speeds, I've always imagined it as space being layers of an onion, with the higher warping AU ships being able to punch down lower into the numerous layers - an interceptor can get to the speeds because of an oversized warp engine compared to its mass, whilst the opposite is also true: a freighter is so massive, the warp drives can only just make it dip into to the first layers.
While this does not fit in with how most FTL transport supposedly works in fiction or theoretical reality I like it as an explanation as to why warp speed varies! |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
1839
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 00:17:23 -
[30] - Quote
I've not actually read an official explanation for it yet and most of the explanations I have read seem a little weird to me, as in, they make me ask more questions... If a warp drive slows a ship down that much (a couple hundred m/s is pretty slow in terms of space flight), why aren't there ships that don't have warp drives? They would have a pretty big tactical advantage. They could not go anywhere other than where they are stationed (or they could be carrier bound) but I guess in a lot of situations, the ability to move would be worth more than the ability to possibly warp somewhere?
If the spaceships in the game were to behave like actual ships in space would/might, the game would be dramatically different and fighting in spaceships would be much less like locking and F1ing things and probably much more about spending 3 hours to line up that perfect shot that's going to instantly cripple another ship and that shot would be fired from such a great distance away that the combat would probably just look like an actual spreadsheet with a space background, with ships moving so fast that trying to look at them would probably end up being boring.
There are some people who have built 'weapons' into their spaceships in KSP. You should look up some of those videos on Youtube and then imagine everything going on at 5-10x the speed and everything being 5-10x further away from each other.
I guess in short, the game would play out entirely differently if it wasn't submarines in space, stuff like taking a stargate or docking with a station would have to be super carefully executed... people might crash into planets, moons and suns all day (which would be funny)...
I should really read up a bit more on Eve lore.. why do planets and moons and stars not move and why are asteroid belts static collections of rocks in space? I guess the simple answer is because Eve is a rather simple and easy to grasp simulation of how space looks so we can put fancy spaceships and explosions there. The lore answer is probably going to be all sorts of complicated and throw up more and more counter arguments and questions. Just think of Eve as a different universe with different laws of physics =p |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |