Capital Ships + Fighters

Lord Zarnox

Founder of the IFTTES
May 31, 2017
1,865
2,414
520
21
Australia
For reference, how big is that thing (not in-game, but lore wise)?

The reason I ask is to get a sense of scale of the IFTTES Mover, which will almost certainly dwarf that thing regardless.
P.S.
The IFTTES Mover is ~100km long, and uses 80 hydrogen fusion reactors to power it. Also, there are lots of them (well, will be, considering how long they will take to make), as they are to be used to build and repair superstructures, such as the upcoming IFTTES TradeStar, which is a Dyson sphere. As for how long it will take to build that . . . well . . . with at least 1 trillion Movers, it will take a long time to assemble.
 

JimmyBlether

Regrettably Inactive (long term)
Jul 31, 2017
2,660
3,012
570
Somewhere off the map
tinyurl.com
they are to be used to build and repair superstructures, such as the upcoming IFTTES TradeStar, which is a Dyson sphere.
HOLEY MOLEY! You do know how big and resource intense (and probably physically impossible to build) Dyson spheres are? For a sphere like that you would need a form of unobtanium to build it or some energy-matter converter (replicator) thing to make the material needed.

Also @Legionite, I'll post mine later.
 

Lord Zarnox

Founder of the IFTTES
May 31, 2017
1,865
2,414
520
21
Australia
HOLEY MOLEY! You do know how big and resource intense (and probably physically impossible to build) Dyson spheres are? For a sphere like that you would need a form of unobtanium to build it or some energy-matter converter (replicator) thing to make the material needed.

Also @Legionite, I'll post mine later.
Well, we have an unobtainium that goes by the name of celestite, which could be used to reduce the effect of gravity on the superstructure, thus reducing the stress on the structure. Also, it will be built around a M0 class star (which is quite small, with a habitable zone of around 0.45 AU), meaning the required material and force of gravity will be much less.
Then there is the fact that it doesn't need to be complete in order to function as the largest known trading station in the galaxy/universe.

Also, as for resources, well, we have tons of prospectors looking for money, and when you account for all the materials sent back to Earth (or wherever else it goes), you will see that there is a lot of material just waiting to be used. Any planets or moons deemed unsuitable for prospecting will be inspected for full scale harvesting (i.e. using the entire celestial body as construction material).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Legionite

JimmyBlether

Regrettably Inactive (long term)
Jul 31, 2017
2,660
3,012
570
Somewhere off the map
tinyurl.com
Well, we have an unobtainium that goes by the name of celestite, which could be used to reduce the effect of gravity on the superstructure, thus reducing the stress on the structure. Also, it will be built around a M0 class star (which is quite small, with a habitable zone of around 0.45 AU), meaning the required material and force of gravity will be much less.
Then there is the fact that it doesn't need to be complete in order to function as the largest known trading station in the galaxy/universe.

Also, as for resources, well, we have tons of prospectors looking for money, and when you account for all the materials sent back to Earth (or wherever else it goes), you will see that there is a lot of material just waiting to be used. Any planets or moons deemed unsuitable for prospecting will be inspected for full scale harvesting (i.e. using the entire celestial body as construction material).
YAY! That plan to me makes perfect sense! I like how celestite is your main material!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lord Zarnox

Nightblade Greyswandir

Nothing is good enough!
Feb 3, 2017
2,732
3,018
575
45
Terraland
ngttadventures.blogspot.se
Dyson sphere can not work. Ring can, as it can fake gravity with rotation, but dyson sphere can not fake gravity and nobody could live on inside side, and life on outside side does not make sense. So huge ring around star is possible in distant future. Dyson sphere is nonScience Fiction :)
 

JimmyBlether

Regrettably Inactive (long term)
Jul 31, 2017
2,660
3,012
570
Somewhere off the map
tinyurl.com
Dyson sphere can not work. Ring can, as it can fake gravity with rotation, but dyson sphere can not fake gravity and nobody could live on inside side, and life on outside side does not make sense. So huge ring around star is possible in distant future. Dyson sphere is nonScience Fiction :)
I'm guessing with the magic properties of Celestite, we can make artificial gravity, but you are right in that a large rotating ring can simulate gravity.

One problem with both your ring station and the sphere is that they do not orbit the star and only sit there, and can be affected by drifting (which causes a collision with the star itself!). Also, the Dyson Sphere's inside would be exposed to deadly radiation and also would need an artificial atmosphere for anything to survive on it, plus shielding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lord Zarnox

Nightblade Greyswandir

Nothing is good enough!
Feb 3, 2017
2,732
3,018
575
45
Terraland
ngttadventures.blogspot.se
I'm guessing with the magic properties of Celestite, we can make artificial gravity, but you are right in that a large rotating ring can simulate gravity.

One problem with both your ring station and the sphere is that they do not orbit the star and only sit there, and can be affected by drifting (which causes a collision with the star itself!). Also, the Dyson Sphere's inside would be exposed to deadly radiation and also would need an artificial atmosphere for anything to survive on it, plus shielding.
You haven't read book "Ringworld"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maitreakow

Lord Zarnox

Founder of the IFTTES
May 31, 2017
1,865
2,414
520
21
Australia
By the way, a Dyson sphere, if it is thick enough (such as at least 1000km thick), would have enough real gravity to hold you to the inside of it. Think of it this way, the force of gravity drops off the greater the distance from the source, so if a star with 0.5 solar masses (also meaning half the gravity of our sun) is located 0.5 AU (astronomical units), the gravity is very weak compared to that of the closest part of the Dyson sphere. Think of it like Earth: do you really expect the sun to pull you off the planet when you are on the side closest to the sun?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JimmyBlether

JimmyBlether

Regrettably Inactive (long term)
Jul 31, 2017
2,660
3,012
570
Somewhere off the map
tinyurl.com
By the way, a Dyson sphere, if it is thick enough (such as at least 1000km thick), would have enough real gravity to hold you to the inside of it. Think of it this way, the force of gravity drops of the greater the distance from the source, so if a star with 0.5 solar masses (also meaning half the gravity of our sun) is located 0.5 AU (astronomical units), the gravity is very weak compared to that of the closest part of the Dyson sphere. Think of it like Earth: do you really expect the sun to pull you off the planet when you are on the side closest to the sun?
Hmm, sounds correct.

Let's stop talking about space megastructures now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lord Zarnox

Nightblade Greyswandir

Nothing is good enough!
Feb 3, 2017
2,732
3,018
575
45
Terraland
ngttadventures.blogspot.se
By the way, a Dyson sphere, if it is thick enough (such as at least 1000km thick), would have enough real gravity to hold you to the inside of it. Think of it this way, the force of gravity drops of the greater the distance from the source, so if a star with 0.5 solar masses (also meaning half the gravity of our sun) is located 0.5 AU (astronomical units), the gravity is very weak compared to that of the closest part of the Dyson sphere. Think of it like Earth: do you really expect the sun to pull you off the planet when you are on the side closest to the sun?
Gravity pulls toward center of mass. Dyson sphere would pull toward center of sun that it is built around.
 

Lord Zarnox

Founder of the IFTTES
May 31, 2017
1,865
2,414
520
21
Australia
Gravity pulls toward center of mass. Dyson sphere would pull toward center of sun that it is built around.
For the sphere itself, yes, it is pulled toward the star, but for objects on the sphere, either inside or outside, it is incorrect. Your response is based on simplified gravity formulae which treat large objects as points, rather than having volume. The force of gravity from outside of an object is mostly towards its centre of mass/gravity (near the surface, the gravity caused by the mass on either side of you starts to cancel out more), but once you are inside an object, the mass above pulls you away from the center of mass, but the mass below pulls you toward the center of mass. In this situation, i.e. a hollow object, the net force is toward the surface, rather than the the center.
The same applies to the Earth, and every other celestial body. Near the core of the body, the gravity from above almost entirely cancels out the gravity from below, resulting in lower overall gravity.
 

Fehn

Artificial and Intelligent
Oct 4, 2017
507
736
500
18
The Internet
As a side note, I may be posting a rather large ship of mine on this thread (for RP purposes, it would be something of a 'freelancer' vessel) .

I just have to construct it first.
 

Lord Zarnox

Founder of the IFTTES
May 31, 2017
1,865
2,414
520
21
Australia
I studied physics, and you should trust that I know what I'm talking about.
If you doubt my knowledge, just ask me to explain Einstein's theory of Special Relativity. I would be more than happy try to explain it in a way you would understand.

Please note that this is not meant to offend or insult you, I am merely stating that I have experience in these situations. It was a very understandable mistake.
 
Last edited: