01-01-2017, 04:25 AM | #51 |
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: England
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
I think if I were trying to use a Star Trek ship in GURPS I'd start with the volume rather than mass. We know how long (roughly) most starships are (though there are inconsistencies!) and so can estimate a volume and can check it because we know how many decks a given starship has (the common ones anyway), and how tall a human is. With mass I get the feeling the writers of each episode just made up a number, so I'd take it with a pinch of salt. Though given that GURPS Spaceships is a mass-based system there's always going to be some error in conversion. Star Trek isn't consistent itself so I think you just have to come up with something which "feels" right.
Edit: If it's any use a while ago I discovered a webpage with guesses at volumes of starships from Star Trek and Star Wars here Last edited by Crystalline_Entity; 01-01-2017 at 04:29 AM. Reason: Add link |
01-01-2017, 08:07 AM | #52 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
Quote:
If we go all the way back to FASATrek one of the developers has said that they took the 190,000 ton figure for gospel and then took the Official deck plans and tried to allocate that mass with their design system. They ran ort of stuff to spend mass on by about 20,000 tons and just put the rest into the warp engines which were then listed as 170,000 tons in the design system. Neutronium shielding or something. At least it explains why the secondary hull has so little effect on the ship's center of mass. :) The odd thing is that there was an Enterprise (NX-01) episode where they used the corridors in the nacelles as a radiation shelter (while the warp engines were offline) because they had massive shielding. So I wouldn't go to all the trouble of the volume-based approach. I have no idea of the densities involved.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
01-01-2017, 02:24 PM | #53 | |
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Heartland, U.S.A.
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
Quote:
__________________
|
|
01-01-2017, 02:50 PM | #54 | |
Join Date: Dec 2012
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
Quote:
__________________
Warning, I have the Distractible and Imaginative quirks in real life. "The more corrupt a government, the more it legislates." -- Tacitus Five Earths, All in a Row. Updated 12/17/2022: Apocrypha: Bridges out of Time, Part I has been posted. |
|
01-01-2017, 08:46 PM | #55 | |
Join Date: Feb 2007
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
Quote:
But whether that story is true or not I do not know.
__________________
HMS Overflow-For conversations off topic here. |
|
01-01-2017, 09:01 PM | #56 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
Quote:
The Apollo Command Module wasn't tremendously dense. At least it floated by itself. It was n't very stable in the water without help but it did float.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
01-01-2017, 10:23 PM | #57 | |
Join Date: Feb 2007
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
Quote:
__________________
HMS Overflow-For conversations off topic here. Last edited by Johnny1A.2; 01-01-2017 at 10:50 PM. |
|
01-02-2017, 06:42 AM | #58 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: traveller
|
Re: Star Trek Shuttles
Depends: it was also relatively flimsy, to save mass. A ship with more open space but thicker scantlings might balance out close to the same density. Really, there are too many variable to say.
|
Tags |
star trek, star trek spaceships |
|
|