[PL_Harpoon]

Hey, I decided to hop in again.
And again with some new ideas. This time I have a rather distant plans of creating a complete conversion, in a brand new more realistic "universe". In general, you are a space fighter pilot around year 2300. It's about only 100 years after humans colonized other Sol planets/moons and your job is to simply protect your colonies. Everything is very low-tech comparing to FS. There's no subspace, FTL, shields, aliens and other common SF stuff. I plan to use semi-Newtonian physics (as close as FS2 engine can be).
I've just begun in a few days, so there's not much to show.
Right now you can see two ships, carrier and a fighter:

Carrier:


680m long, can carry up to 8 squadrons, but most of the times has just 4 with other docks containing replacement fighters.
Crew: about 100 + up to 96 pilots.
Armament: 144 fully automated double missile launchers, 48 small laser cannons.
Ship is in constant need of supply and escort ships, mostly leading a whole battlegroup.
Fighter:



One seater, about 15m wide.
Armament: 24missile banks, 2 gun mounts (for either lasers or gatling guns). The cockpit is also an escape pod.


I'll show you some more when I'm finished texturing them.

What do you think?

[Luis Dias]

A few days?

I love the way you lie, baby. Those things are awesome.

And show really good production skills. So I think you are more than up for the job. Good luck!

EDIT: Just to note a potential problem. Are those solar panels?

Please tell me those aren't solar panels! They wouldn't make any sense in that battleship!!

[PL_Harpoon]

Well, yes, they are solar panels. Assuming they are hi-tech comparing to what we have now, and can harvest much more energy from sun and considering the fact, that they produce energy without generating too much heat and that sun is almost always in sight, you get a very reliable source of energy. You can run every system just on them leaving fuel only for engines.
And in case of battle you can always rotate them in a way that there's a little chance of getting hit. I'm even considering some way of retracting them for a battle.

And BTW, for all those coders out there. Is there a way to change the default AI behaviour, like for example make them use afterburner after turns, or start evading missiles sooner?
And is there a way to create backward engines that look just like normal ones but ignite only when your using backward thrust?

[Woolie Wool]

I'd suggest using autocannons, coilguns, or other forms of dakka instead of laser weapons if you're going for erect throbbing hard sci-fi. Lasers are a pretty inefficient way to attack spacecraft, kinetic weapons provide much more damage per joule.

[Droid803]

lasers are good for missile interception though, since they have...minimal travel time.
they'd probably be platform mounted.

[Flaser]

I'd suggest using autocannons, coilguns, or other forms of dakka instead of laser weapons if you're going for erect throbbing hard sci-fi. Lasers are a pretty inefficient way to attack spacecraft, kinetic weapons provide much more damage per joule.

Blanket statement that contains a lot of assumptions and therefore may be not true under a lot of conditions. Things to consider:

1. Available power on spaceships. (Lasers need a lot of juice, then again so do a lot of nuclear-electric propulsion systems).
2. Forms of propulsion availible. (Is there FTL and what limitations are placed on it?)
3. Amount of delta-v ships can operate with, amount of acceleration available. As these go up, it becomes ever easier to dodge incoming kinetics and makes lasers more worthwhile as you're only dealing with light-speed lag.
4. Constraints of cooling. (Do you use heat-sinks that have time limit on them, do you use pure radiators, maybe you expend coolant in battle that carries hard operational constraints). Space is not cold, it's empty... getting rid of heat is tricky.

...those are the basics for hard sci-fi.

[Luis Dias]

I actually disagree with the solar argument there, Harpoon. If you check the numbers, the output of solar panels is extremely low in, say, the current distance towards the sun. It would fare terribly in Jupiter or Uranus, even if you would be able to harvest the entire radiation coming in. We are talking about orders of magnitude between what these panels would produce and what a battleship filled with powerful weapons, entire crews, fast maneuverability, and ability to wander around a solar system, would require.

It also makes little sense when you have the very real possibility of just having a nuclear reactor inside the ship, like current subs and carriers.

Also, it makes for a very weak spot to be targeted. Just shoot the solar panels and you can be further ignored. Compare it with an internal nuclear reactor that may be residing in the core of the ship.


Dunno nitpicking. You might just ignore all this and go ahead with your idea anyway. It's not as if the FS engine will stop you from doing this design just because it wouldn't make sense in real life.

[Woolie Wool]

I'd suggest using autocannons, coilguns, or other forms of dakka instead of laser weapons if you're going for erect throbbing hard sci-fi. Lasers are a pretty inefficient way to attack spacecraft, kinetic weapons provide much more damage per joule.

Blanket statement that contains a lot of assumptions and therefore may be not true under a lot of conditions. Things to consider:

1. Available power on spaceships. (Lasers need a lot of juice, then again so do a lot of nuclear-electric propulsion systems).
2. Forms of propulsion availible. (Is there FTL and what limitations are placed on it?)
3. Amount of delta-v ships can operate with, amount of acceleration available. As these go up, it becomes ever easier to dodge incoming kinetics and makes lasers more worthwhile as you're only dealing with light-speed lag.
4. Constraints of cooling. (Do you use heat-sinks that have time limit on them, do you use pure radiators, maybe you expend coolant in battle that carries hard operational constraints). Space is not cold, it's empty... getting rid of heat is tricky.

...those are the basics for hard sci-fi.

These have nothing to do with what I stated, which is that kinetic weapons and guided missiles provide superior damage output for the power you have available. Lasers are very inefficient weapons compared to kinetic guns; just because your craft can support them doesn't mean they're a particularly good choice.

FTL is irrelevant because combat with weapons other than missiles that have their own FTL drives or some sort of soft-sci-fi FTL "Minovsky Particle" weapon is impossible at FTL speeds. If it's a "shortcut" type FTL like FS subspace rather than "true" FTL, then the same rules apply as for realspace combat.

As far as delta-V goes, unless you have truly insane magic-tech propulsion systems, kinetic weapons will not be easily dodged at close range (assuming the attacker has managed to reduce the relative velocity between the ships to the point where direct fire weapons can be used at all), and lasers will diffract too much to be effective at longer range. For long-ranged combat guided missiles with nuclear warheads are superior to lasers.

[Droid803]

What the **** is going to diffract a laser in space?
Those 3 hydrogen molecules per cubic meter?

If your focusing lens isn't a piece of crap, your laser will keep together pretty damn well in space.

readmoarprojectrho?

(then again, maybe I'm reading too much of that)

[Woolie Wool]

Laser beams are not 100% perfect; even the most advanced laser has a degree of beam divergence. Over a long enough distance, this divergence will render the weapon ineffective.

[Droid803]

My laser beams are 100% perfect.
What now.

I got some really good focusing/tuning equipment that can divert the beam perfectly.

We're just talking the physical constraints now of the actual design, not engineering difficulties. lasers have infinity range.

With such a system missiles are obsolete! I'll intercept them all before they come close!

I know you all love your spaceships mauling each other at trafalgar range with big howitzers and missile tubes, but honestly, nothing's going to get close to a well-built laser array.

EDIT: Clearly i'm a laserfanboy and you like your kinetic guns. There's no real answer so let's stop dickwaving.

[Woolie Wool]

Not really.

Also, disregarding "engineering difficulties" is stupid when designing a fictional universe or fictional spacecraft, as engineering limitations play a huge role in deciding what organization X can build and what its constructs can do.

Also, defensive laser arrays (a much more practical use for a laser than as a ship-to-ship weapon) will have limitations of their own, and with enough missiles/submunitions one will eventually get through, and with nuclear warheads the damage inflicted will be catastrophic.

[NGTM-1R]

Also, disregarding "engineering difficulties" is stupid when designing a fictional universe or fictional spacecraft, as engineering limitations play a huge role in deciding what organization X can build and what its constructs can do.

I'm sorry, you seem to have missed the majority of fiction ever written.

[Woolie Wool]

Are you saying that the majority of fiction ever written puts no limitations on what engineers and manufacturers in that universe/in certain factions can and cannot achieve? That's flat-out nonsense.

[Droid803]

No, he's saying you can put whatever limitations on what engineers and manufaturers in that universe/in certain factions can and cannot achieve that they want.

[AtomicClucker]

Rocketpunk vibes going strong here with the models. also the fighters scream echoes of Babylon 5 in a good way. Just put more fire into it.

[PL_Harpoon]

I actually disagree with the solar argument there, Harpoon. If you check the numbers, the output of solar panels is extremely low in, say, the current distance towards the sun. It would fare terribly in Jupiter or Uranus, even if you would be able to harvest the entire radiation coming in. We are talking about orders of magnitude between what these panels would produce and what a battleship filled with powerful weapons, entire crews, fast maneuverability, and ability to wander around a solar system, would require.

It also makes little sense when you have the very real possibility of just having a nuclear reactor inside the ship, like current subs and carriers.

Also, it makes for a very weak spot to be targeted. Just shoot the solar panels and you can be further ignored. Compare it with an internal nuclear reactor that may be residing in the core of the ship.


Dunno nitpicking. You might just ignore all this and go ahead with your idea anyway. It's not as if the FS engine will stop you from doing this design just because it wouldn't make sense in real life.

Ok, you convinced me. Stay tuned for the next design.

As for lasers, I like them too and you will see a lot of them here BUT there will be no (or almost none) Ship-to-ship battles. Lasers don't have infinite range and torpedoes are easy to kill before they reach their target. Besides, who would want to send their "billion dollar ships" for a close range engagement where they will end up extremely damaged at least when you can at the same time send a squadron of bombers (much more expandable) which can destroy your enemy's ship without exposing your own. That's, BTW, one reason for space fighters in the future IMHO.
As for heat management there's one excellent way of disposing heat: engines. Since they throw out hot gas energy anyway... But just in case that there's a lot of heat to get rid of and little thrust on the engines, there's a system at the back of the fighter, filled with another (unnamed so far) gas which is then heated and extracted through vents at the back (you can clearly see them on the model).
BTW, all craft use some sort of gas instead of rocket fuel.
The cockpit module also serves as an escape pod.

And last, but not least here's a few pics of that fighter with textures:






Got any ideas how to name it?
Also, I'm renewing question about engines and AI edit.

[Black Wolf]

That's amazing. Have you textured that in the time since you posted the model pictures before? if so I'm even more impressed. Really good job.

[PL_Harpoon]

Well, yes. I posted the first pics right after finishing modelling the fighter and the same goes for textures.

[Black Wolf]

Wow -if you can texture stuff like that at that pace all the time, this mod could really go somewhere - traditionally texturing speed is slow, and a real modding bottleneck.

OK, initial jaw dropping over - I do have one suggestion - you should delete those missile models from the main model, as FSO can display external missiles - i.e. you can set the mesh up so that the ship starts with 24 missiles, and then fires them off one by one over the course of the mission, causing them to deplete. As your mesh is now, it will always have those missiles pointing out, even when you've run out of ammo. Keep at least one example of the missile mesh, though, and you can use it to generate the pof for the missile, so ingame it will look just the way it does now.

As for a name, well, that's not so straightforward, given that this is a non FS universe mod - you have every possible option open to you. It might be best to set some themes (all fighters might be named after old weapons (the GTF* Sabre or GTF* Pike) or predatory animals (GTF* Panther, GTF* Huntsman etc.)



Some other general things to consider - the armament you've proposed for your carrier is I think slightly too heavy for the FS engine - AFAIK, there's still an upper limit on subobjects of around 100 (A coder can confirm this  it's not mentioned on the engine limitations page of the wiki), which, in turn, limits the number of single part launchers to 99 (as you need at least one subobject for the hull, often more if you want to do anything fancy (rotations, destroyable parts etc.) Additionally, even if the engine isn't limited that way any more, 200 odd turrets is going to make life hell in close - that may be what you're going for, but I suspect it might make the game a tad less fun to play.

For your backwards engines, I'd suggest using this:

http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Ships.tbl#.24Thruster:

To make it work properly, your forward thrusters will probably need to be set up using the same system, as opposed to the standard in-pof thrusters. To see this feature in action, check out the Beyond the Red Line demo. Your best bet for modifying AI is a custom AI_Profiles.tbl - check it out on the wiki - http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Ai_profiles.tbl . Not 100% sure it can do what you want it to though, unfortunately.



*Obviously, GTF is the FS prefix, you'll be using whatever prefix you choose.