[011]
TrevMUN
Current Version
Changed line(s) 10 from:
n
It\'s also not simply a matter of how much percentage of the mass can be given over to fuel and engines; larger mass warships are still going to require a \'\'lot\'\' more fuel than small mass starfighters, regardless of whether or not they can perform like a starfighter. That\'s something that\'s almost universally true regardless of whether the setting has SpaceFriction; you might not need to constantly apply thrust, but you \'\'will\'\' need to burn fuel to change velocity and direction--and fuel is one of \'\'the\'\' most important logistical factors in warfare.
to:
Changed line(s) 10 from:
n
It\'s also not simply a matter of how much percentage of the mass can be given over to fuel and engines; larger mass warships are still going to require a \'\'lot\'\' more fuel than small mass starfighters, even if they can achieve the same rates of acceleration. That\'s something that\'s almost universally true regardless of whether the setting has SpaceFriction; you might not need to constantly apply thrust, but you \'\'will\'\' need to burn fuel to change velocity and direction--and fuel is one of \'\'the\'\' most important logistical factors in warfare.
to:
It\\\'s also not simply a matter of how much percentage of the mass can be given over to fuel and engines; larger mass warships are still going to require a \\\'\\\'lot\\\'\\\' more fuel than small mass starfighters, regardless of whether or not they can perform like a starfighter. That\\\'s something that\\\'s almost universally true regardless of whether the setting has SpaceFriction; you might not need to constantly apply thrust, but you \\\'\\\'will\\\'\\\' need to burn fuel to change velocity and direction--and fuel is one of \\\'\\\'the\\\'\\\' most important logistical factors in warfare.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
to:
It\\\'s also not simply a matter of how much percentage of the mass can be given over to fuel and engines; larger mass warships are still going to require a \\\'\\\'lot\\\'\\\' more fuel than small mass starfighters, even if they can achieve the same rates of acceleration. That\\\'s something that\\\'s almost universally true regardless of whether the setting has SpaceFriction; you might not need to constantly apply thrust, but you \\\'\\\'will\\\'\\\' need to burn fuel to change velocity and direction--and fuel is one of \\\'\\\'the\\\'\\\' most important logistical factors in warfare.
Changed line(s) 12 from:
n
I suspect that\'s why you wrote at length about a feasible design for engine placement on a large-mass warship. However, that doesn\'t have anything to do with this trope--speculation like that would be more fitting on another trope page\'s Analysis section, something dedicated to bigger warships.
to:
Is that why you wrote at length about a feasible design for large-mass spacecraft? Engine placement on large warships doesn\\\'t have anything to do with this trope--speculation like that would be more fitting on another trope page\\\'s Analysis section, something dedicated to bigger warships.
Changed line(s) 10 from:
n
Also, bear in mind: the stardestroyer.net article isn\'t referenced as an attempt to discredit the idea of large-mass spacecraft. It\'s there to show that small-mass combat spacecraft have their own \'\'intrinsic\'\' advantages, and are therefore viable. The particulars of a setting will vary wildly beyond that.
to:
Also, bear in mind: the stardestroyer.net article isn\\\'t referenced as an attempt to discredit the idea of large-mass spacecraft. It\\\'s there to show that small-mass combat spacecraft have their own \\\'\\\'intrinsic\\\'\\\' advantages, and are therefore viable. The particulars of a setting will vary wildly beyond that, depending on the author\\\'s personal tastes.
Changed line(s) 10 from:
n
Also, bear in mind: the stardestroyer.net article isn\'t reference as an attempt to discredit the idea of large-mass spacecraft. It\'s there to show that small-mass combat spacecraft have their own \'\'intrinsic\'\' advantages, and are therefore viable.
to:
Also, bear in mind: the stardestroyer.net article isn\\\'t referenced as an attempt to discredit the idea of large-mass spacecraft. It\\\'s there to show that small-mass combat spacecraft have their own \\\'\\\'intrinsic\\\'\\\' advantages, and are therefore viable. The particulars of a setting will vary wildly beyond that.
Changed line(s) 8 from:
n
The stardestroyer.net article, however, discusses the problems that come with large-mass objects; [[SquareCubeLaw you can\'t simply upscale a small ship\'s design into a battleship]]. The larger warship\'s construction requires entirely different structure just so that the ship can withstand the stresses imposed on it. This is where the bit about less cost required to build, maintain, and operate smaller ships comes in--the increase in cost and structural materials is touched on in the article considering certain case examples.
to:
The stardestroyer.net article, however, discusses the problems that come with large-mass objects; [[SquareCubeLaw you can\\\'t simply upscale a small ship\\\'s design into a battleship]]. The larger warship\\\'s construction requires entirely different designs, engineering methods, and structurally stronger materials, just so that the ship can withstand the stresses imposed by its own mass. This is where the bit about less cost required to build, maintain, and operate smaller ships comes in--the increase in cost and structural materials is touched on in the article considering certain case examples.
Changed line(s) 4 from:
n
#1. Small manned combat spacecraft are nonsensical and bad science fiction.
#2. Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
#3. Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
#2. Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
#3. Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
to:
#Small manned combat spacecraft are nonsensical and bad science fiction.
#Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
#Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
#Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
#Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
Changed line(s) 4 from:
n
1. Small manned combat spacecraft are nonsensical and bad science fiction.
2. Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
3. Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
2. Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
3. Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
to:
#1. Small manned combat spacecraft are nonsensical and bad science fiction.
#2. Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
#3. Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
#2. Large-mass warships are the only feasible form of manned combat spacecraft.
#3. Any small combat spacecraft must either be guided missiles or some sort of AttackDrone.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I don\'t see its use as inaccurate. While it\'s true that the article does not directly address the viability of small-mass ships versus large-mass ships, it \'\'\'does\'\'\' demonstrate that large-mass warships are not automatically better just because they\'re larger in mass.
to:
I don\\\'t see its use as inaccurate. While it\\\'s true that the article does not directly address the viability of small-mass ships versus large-mass ships, it \\\'\\\'does\\\'\\\' demonstrate that large-mass warships are not automatically better just because they\\\'re larger in mass.
Changed line(s) 8 from:
n
The stardestroyer.net article, however, discusses the problems that come with large-mass objects; [[SquareCubeLawyou can\'t simply upscale a small ship\'s design into a battleship]]. The larger warship\'s construction requires entirely different structure just so that the ship can withstand the stresses imposed on it. This is where the bit about less cost required to build, maintain, and operate smaller ships comes in--the increase in cost and structural materials is touched on in the article considering certain case examples.
to:
The stardestroyer.net article, however, discusses the problems that come with large-mass objects; [[SquareCubeLaw you can\\\'t simply upscale a small ship\\\'s design into a battleship]]. The larger warship\\\'s construction requires entirely different structure just so that the ship can withstand the stresses imposed on it. This is where the bit about less cost required to build, maintain, and operate smaller ships comes in--the increase in cost and structural materials is touched on in the article considering certain case examples.
