Energy Technology

Research and Development in SotS2.
Post Reply
User avatar
Mecron
Kerberos
Posts: 38311
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 7:26 pm

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Mecron » Sun Apr 24, 2011 8:12 pm

no suicide ships

User avatar
Gwenio
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:59 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Gwenio » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:37 am

BlueTemplar wrote:He repeatedly said that there would be no new power tier above AM... but several new techs about how that power was used.

I was just thinking about an idea about what could be a possible refinement to antimatter... and don't you think that a "gas station" around a black hole would be a cool idea? (though it might fit better in a RPG setting...)


Eh, unless we have to worry about fuel production capabilities that is not really useful.

-----

I wonder if there will be techs to make the generators less prone to blowing up your ship on critical hits... As there has been mention of armoured capacitors in SotS II, it would seem likely.

Azrael Ultima
Posts: 3030
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:20 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Azrael Ultima » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:01 am

I wonder why people always think reactors blow up. Even fission reactors don't blow up, they melt. Fusion reactors would just stop working as they can't sustain the fusion process anymore(the only natural fusion processes happen in gigantic flaming balls for a reason).

The only one that could conceivably explode would be an AM reactor, and even then, a properly designed and constructed one shouldn't have more AM inside it than is neccessary to keep running. Which is obviously an amount unfit to just utterly destroy it.


I'd be more worried about the fuel tanks getting hit... reactor hit should just make the ship a sitting, unarmed duck.
I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts.
The zeppelin of bluster Feldman excoriated Freddy with suddenly popped into a cloud of humility. (David Grand, The Disappearing Body, 2002)

Launch apathy protocols. Visual rotational thrusters engaged. Scroll command to HAND/DEXTER/02 received. Submitting pressure request to location Left Mouse. Visual augur confirms hit on Planetary Annihilation General Discussion.

Ringsead
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 2:16 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Ringsead » Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:18 am

Azrael Ultima wrote:I wonder why people always think reactors blow up. Even fission reactors don't blow up, they melt. Fusion reactors would just stop working as they can't sustain the fusion process anymore(the only natural fusion processes happen in gigantic flaming balls for a reason).

The only one that could conceivably explode would be an AM reactor, and even then, a properly designed and constructed one shouldn't have more AM inside it than is neccessary to keep running. Which is obviously an amount unfit to just utterly destroy it.


I'd be more worried about the fuel tanks getting hit... reactor hit should just make the ship a sitting, unarmed duck.



Very very true... its just a convenient way of getting rid of clutter that would bog down systems I think.
This ship had a name, its name was Robert Paulson...

User avatar
LaDoncella
Posts: 655
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:17 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by LaDoncella » Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:07 pm

I guess you never heard of Chernobyl then.
Image

Azrael Ultima
Posts: 3030
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:20 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Azrael Ultima » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:10 pm

If you want to tell your crew to turn of all safeties on the reactor and run it in ridiculously dangerous ways(for extended periods of time), go ahead. Other than that, Chernobyl was an exception, not the rule, brought into existence by a whole wagonload of people being idiots.
I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts.
The zeppelin of bluster Feldman excoriated Freddy with suddenly popped into a cloud of humility. (David Grand, The Disappearing Body, 2002)

Launch apathy protocols. Visual rotational thrusters engaged. Scroll command to HAND/DEXTER/02 received. Submitting pressure request to location Left Mouse. Visual augur confirms hit on Planetary Annihilation General Discussion.

User avatar
nickersonm
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 11:02 pm

Re: Energy Technology

Post by nickersonm » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:19 pm

LaDoncella wrote:I guess you never heard of Chernobyl then.

That was only a steam explosion, though, not the fuel material exploding.

User avatar
Gwenio
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:59 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Gwenio » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:41 pm

Azrael Ultima wrote:I wonder why people always think reactors blow up. Even fission reactors don't blow up, they melt. Fusion reactors would just stop working as they can't sustain the fusion process anymore(the only natural fusion processes happen in gigantic flaming balls for a reason).

The only one that could conceivably explode would be an AM reactor, and even then, a properly designed and constructed one shouldn't have more AM inside it than is neccessary to keep running. Which is obviously an amount unfit to just utterly destroy it.


I'd be more worried about the fuel tanks getting hit... reactor hit should just make the ship a sitting, unarmed duck.


Engines and fuel tank (except with ships that have fuel tank dedicated sections like ERs and tankers) are likely in the same place, so what is the difference? (for the purpose of them taking a hit)

Setokaiva
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Setokaiva » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:43 pm

Hello? there are still pockets of radiation around the area. Chernobyl was the worst nuclear power plant disaster to ever occur in the world to this day. Read it here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
Be the master of your fate, be the captain of your soul, but do not hesitate, should the chance befall you, to be the slave of your heart. ~Robert Brault

mattosika
Posts: 276
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:04 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by mattosika » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:52 pm

Setokaiva wrote:Hello? there are still pockets of radiation around the area. Chernobyl was the worst nuclear power plant disaster to ever occur in the world to this day. Read it here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster



No one said it wasn't. Only that the cause of Chernobyl's reactor explosion was caused by human error. I really don't even see how people get 'explosion' out of 'meltdown'. The word for the disaster clearly spells out what happens. The reactor melts down.

As far as I know not a single ship in the nuclear powered portion of the US Navy has never exploded spontaneously, or been mishandled so badly that it caused the reactor to melt down.

Heck I'm surprised they can pick Chernobyl's background radiation out of the rest of the radiation from the bombs we and the Soviets test burst in the air during the Cold War.

User avatar
LaDoncella
Posts: 655
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:17 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by LaDoncella » Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:46 pm

Azrael Ultima wrote:If you want to tell your crew to turn of all safeties on the reactor and run it in ridiculously dangerous ways(for extended periods of time), go ahead. Other than that, Chernobyl was an exception, not the rule, brought into existence by a whole wagonload of people being idiots.

I bet that Fukishima incident is also the exception..
"Hello mister alien, could you stop shoting at us? We have a fission reactor here and even with all of our safety protocols it may blow up if you damage it, and would make us look bad. Thank you."
I mean its very unlikely that a military spaceship equiped with a fission reactor is gonna be shoot by angry aliens. :roll:

nickersonm wrote:
LaDoncella wrote:I guess you never heard of Chernobyl then.

That was only a steam explosion, though, not the fuel material exploding.

The result, overall, is the same. Radiation for the people, party time! :roll:
Also I bet that an internal explosion capable of "tearing off and lifting the 2,000-ton upper plate, " in a spaceship is pretty much the death for it, or at least that compartment .
Image

mattosika
Posts: 276
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:04 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by mattosika » Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:57 pm

LaDoncella wrote:
nickersonm wrote:
LaDoncella wrote:I guess you never heard of Chernobyl then.

That was only a steam explosion, though, not the fuel material exploding.

The result, overall, is the same. Radiation for the people, party time! :roll:
Also I bet that an internal explosion capable of "tearing off and lifting the 2,000-ton upper plate, " in a spaceship is pretty much the death for it, or at least that compartment .


Because, logically, any race that that achieves FTL capabilities still relies on water's reaction to heat to generate power. :roll:

User avatar
LaDoncella
Posts: 655
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:17 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by LaDoncella » Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:03 pm

mattosika wrote:Because, logically, any race that that achieves FTL capabilities still relies on water's reaction to heat to generate power. :roll:

space monkeys certainly do :roll:
Image

kdonovan
Posts: 819
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:23 am

Re: Energy Technology

Post by kdonovan » Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:12 pm

mattosika wrote:Because, logically, any race that that achieves FTL capabilities still relies on water's reaction to heat to generate power. :roll:


Well they're going to be relying on something and that something may be subject to damage.

[Whether the system would be designed to minimize mass or maximize safety in the event of battle damage is an open question - moving mass in space at relativistic + speeds has to be an enormous expense - and perhaps the most important consideration with ship design is to keep this to a minimum and accept risks due to battle damage.]

While I agree the idea of the fuel exploding is unlikely, and that the reactor may not explode, a seriously damaged reactor, whose shielding has been breached, is likely to produce enough radiation to kill or incapacitate the crew. If a reactors cooling system is damaged it might also produce enough heat to do serious damage to the ship or crew - though perhaps the most likely mechanism is by melting any reactor shielding and then flooding the whole ship with lethal levels of radiation.

Whether heat or radiation, it seems unlikely others ships would be close enough to suffer much from this though - however SotS ships do seem to operate quite close to one another given how vast space is and the speeds they are operating at.

Zalzidrax
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 11:22 pm

Re: Energy Technology

Post by Zalzidrax » Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:36 am

If you're crew compartment can't survive a small steam explosion and a bit of radiation, it has no business being in space combat anyway. Yeah, yeah that's glib oversimplification, but still. You would need a fair bit of radiation shielding just to keep the crew from getting cancer from being in open space.

Though antimatter explodes on contact with any normal matter so I'm having a hard time seeing how you'd make that "safe"... exotic matter cladding or something very weird? Still that only makes it not explode if you lose power, it wouldn't solve the problem of an actual hole in the antimatter storage.

Post Reply

Return to “The Tech”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest