[Spaceships] Are spaceships unrealistically cheap?

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by GreatWyrmGold

On a tangentially-related note, I think that including kind of generic vehicle-design system similar to GURPs Spaceships would be a good idea. There are already seeds of it in the Spaceships system, they just need to be generalized better and cross-checked to make sure that a space-fighter isn't cheaper than an air-fighter.

There's no special reason why a space fighter should cost more than an air-fighter. The space fighter needs a better life support system, but it doesn't need to be streamlined, and that removes a lot of expensive development and makes construction of its outer hull rather more forgiving. If the space drives of that setting cost less than a jet engine, the space fighter probably should be cheaper than the air fighter.

[Pomphis]

OTOH a space vehicle will need significantly more powerful sensors than a car or airplane. It will move a lot faster and so should detect dangers at much greater distances than a car or airplane has to (orbital junk vs. bad weather vs. a bump in the road).

[Anthony]

The normal way of handling macroscopic space hazards is to assume they're too rare to actually bother with specialized systems.

[Lord Azagthoth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The normal way of handling macroscopic space hazards is to assume they're too rare to actually bother with specialized systems.

Junk is becoming a big problem in Earth's orbit.

https://www.orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.g...o-gallery.html

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Lord Azagthoth

Junk is becoming a big problem in Earth's orbit.

https://www.orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.g...o-gallery.html

The solution to that is to clean it up if there is any significant traffic, because otherwise you have cascade failure. You don't see them leaving wrecks on the freeway either for the same reason.

[Anthony]

Yeah, in any setting with viable beam weapons it's not going to be hard to sweep junk out of orbit. It's been proposed with basically modern lasers.

[Flyndaran]

The best defense is a good offense?
That still sounds like putting all your eggs into a tissue paper basket.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

The best defense is a good offense?
That still sounds like putting all your eggs into a tissue paper basket.

Well, you usually also have enough armor to withstand dust level impacts, and for things that are actually mission critical you might want some repair or backup capability, but we have a pretty long record of incredibly flimsy spacecraft that survive just fine. There's just not much out there, and unlike water and ground craft, most damage simply doesn't matter; spaceships are actually hard to disable because they can't sink, crash, spin off the road, etc.

[Flyndaran]

I suppose another issue is that armor optimized for tiny meteoroids are near useless against larger more weaponized impacts. So I suppose that type of protection would just be shoved under the rug in Spaceship designs.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Pomphis

OTOH a space vehicle will need significantly more powerful sensors than a car or airplane. It will move a lot faster and so should detect dangers at much greater distances than a car or airplane has to (orbital junk vs. bad weather vs. a bump in the road).

Power isn't a problem. For sensors in general the expensive part is the processing electronics, and space is a much cleaner and less cluttered environment than that which a 'air fighter' has to operate in.