STL travel

8 posts ยท Oct 27 1998 to Nov 1 1998

From: PeteSlade@a...

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 19:32:10 EST

Subject: STL travel

Because I like the way ships manoeuvre in FT, I've been playing around in my
head with whether there could be any explanation for ships moving in
this non-
Newtonian way.

I've vaguely had an idea that even when moving on the table the ships are
traveling at a significant fraction of light speed, by having their FTL drives
on the verge of commiting them to FTL. In effect they could be drilling a hole
in the real space directly in front of them, and they are continually moving
into a hole that moves ahead of them. This could explain why they
can't just turn sideways/backwards - they're not really moving fast,
they're just falling into a `hole' in front of them. Assuming the `hole' is
slightly larger than the ship, this would allow for a small degree of turn
from
straight ahead being possible - hence the turning arcs we are familiar
with in FT.

Has anyone else thought about this? Any better explanations?

Also: should static targets be easier to hit than moving ones?

From: John Bennett <johnbenn@g...>

Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:00:42 -0000

Subject: Re: STL travel

Dangerous stuff, palaying around in your head, you might find a Gobo in there
doing the same!
[quoted original message omitted]

From: jfoster@k... (Jim 'Jiji' Foster)

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:15:54 -0700

Subject: Re: STL travel

> On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:00:42 John Bennett wrote:

Greta Gobo?

> Because I like the way ships manoeuvre in FT, I've been playing around

Well, I hadn't heretofore, but what if...

<Extreme PSB Mode>

Say that 'cinematic' movement is some manner of grav drive that 'pushes'
against the gravity field of nearby objects in much the same way that a wing
'pushes' against an atmosphere. This would make swooping turns in space
possible and logical within a sun's gravity well.

However, in the fringes of a system or in deep space, there wouldn't be a
solar gravity field to react against, leaving only Newtonian thrusters for
maneuver.

This allows room for both systems in the same universe, and might force
'compromise' ship designs depending on how far from a solar gravity well
operations were likely to occur at.

</Extreme PSB Mode>

Practical? Useful? Probably not, but it's more interesting than work at the
moment.:)

> Also: should static targets be easier to hit than moving ones?

Only if you're playing on carpet and without fabric softner.

-----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/  Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums

From: Thomas Anderson <thomas.anderson@u...>

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:55:32 +0000 (GMT)

Subject: Re: STL travel

> On Wed, 28 Oct 1998, Jim 'Jiji' Foster wrote:

ha! that's in my.login file...

> Say that 'cinematic' movement is some manner of grav drive that

somewhat like the xeelee space drive from steven baxter's xeelee sequence
books. these chaps literally did have wings, but they were really
planar discontinuities in spacetime. it was weapons-grade psb, but that
was the point of the xeelee - sufficiently advanced technology is
indistinguishable from magic and all that. baxter always describes xeelee
craft as having 'vast sweeping night-black wings', a line lifted
straight out of homer's odyssey. well, almost.

also a teeny bit like larry niven's ubiquitous gravity polariser - now
there's a drive! i think the idea was you could flip the sign of the force
between you and a big mass, and so use it to generate lift.

> However, in the fringes of a system or in deep space, there wouldn't

interesting twist.

> This allows room for both systems in the same universe, and might

i can see an captain whose warp drive has been knocked out carefully avoiding
gravity wells to force a newtonian engagement, or a captain with the opposite
problem being confined insystem where his drives work.

Tom

From: Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@c...>

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:10:53 -0500

Subject: Re: STL travel

> Thomas Anderson wrote:

From: Thomas Anderson <thomas.anderson@u...>

Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 08:44:44 +0000 (GMT)

Subject: Re: STL travel

> On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:

aha. i think he may have changed it over the course of his books - not a
totally unheard-of maneuever. in 'protector', pssthpok (or whatever his
name was) reasons that since his polariser is still working, he has freedom of
movement in the solar system. i took this to mean he could fly anywhere,
including up a well. i may well have misinterpreted this; your version
certainly sounds more logical. it also sounds a bit like cavorite, but that's
another issue...

Tom

From: Evan Powles <epowles@p...>

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 09:21:54 +1100

Subject: Re: STL travel

> From: Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@clark.net>

As I remember it, the polariser is a fully functional spacedrive (Kzinti
warships being the most notable users of this technology), the more limited
system you describe is the gravity drag used in one of the Beowulf Schaeffer
stories (and maybe elsewhere as well). I think the short story
"The Warriors" has a Kzin ship pulling tens of gees while light-years
from any star. Presumably the polariser is very expensive or restricted
military technology since despite its fabulous performance it is rarely seen
in stories set later in the history of Known Space.

From: Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@c...>

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 17:47:28 -0500

Subject: Re: STL travel

> Evan Powles wrote: