• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Flyers and Airports

Truly a most powerful beast :)

She gets three siriometer to the kilogram of kibble! A mighty steed indeed.

Overlord-(Anime)-Anime-Ainz-Ooal-Gown-Narberal-Gamma-2350723.gif
 
Last edited:
You could have also put a Mobius Strip on the outside. Either way, Love that one too.

Side Note: Have you ever seen a Maine Coon Cat try to fit inside of a shoe box?
 
"For beasts and beast-drawn
vehicles, 1 ton (a measure of
volume*) is also 1000 kg in a
wheeled cart on level ground."​

**EDIT**
missed the most important fact...
this is gravity dependent. if this beast is born and raised on a planet with 5g gravity and can pull 1 displacement ton.. that is a very different measure from one born on a 1/2 g world...

the coefficient of friction even with wheels would be increased. 1 dton has the same mass.
weight is the gravitational force exerted on an object and the object it is gravitationally bound to.
mass is amount of matter maing up the object.
*aka Displacement ton

But isn't a displacement ton meant to indicate a specific volume of space (1.5 m by 1.5 m by 3.0 m)? Such a volume of space would not have a fixed weight. So, I'm not sure I understand the indented (quoted) text (it seems to be confusing or somehow combining two different meanings of the word "ton"). How can a specific volume be "assigned" a specific weight, regardless of what it is a volume of? :confused:
 
But isn't a displacement ton meant to indicate a specific volume of space (1.5 m by 1.5 m by 3.0 m)? Such a volume of space would not have a fixed weight. So, I'm not sure I understand the indented (quoted) text (it seems to be confusing or somehow combining two different meanings of the word "ton"). How can a specific volume be "assigned" a specific weight, regardless of what it is a volume of? :confused:

Certain units of cargo are combined mass-volume units.

The most commonly used is the TEU. Which has a limit of roughly 21 metric tons, and 41-42 cubic meters.

http://www.soytransportation.org/Stats/Containers_WhatsATEU.pdf

Registry Tonnage (aka Cargo Capacity) for ships is likewise the lesser of 2.8316 cubic meters (100 cf) of hold or 1.01 metric ton of capacity. (Noting that capacity is maximum safe laden displacement, and displacement tonnage is in 35 cf submerged and, at oceanic standard reference, that's 2240 pounds... the UK imperial ton, aka long ton.)

The Traveller displacement ton, while different in mass limit and volume, is similarly a conjoined unit. 14 cubic meters or 10 metric tons mass (based upon FF&S and Brilliant Lances limits for not needing to recalculate thrust).
 
But isn't a displacement ton meant to indicate a specific volume of space (1.5 m by 1.5 m by 3.0 m)? Such a volume of space would not have a fixed weight. So, I'm not sure I understand the indented (quoted) text (it seems to be confusing or somehow combining two different meanings of the word "ton"). How can a specific volume be "assigned" a specific weight, regardless of what it is a volume of? :confused:

As Per Aramis.


Also metric, makes a direct link between mass, weight, and volume
It is easiest to see the link with water.

1000ltrs of water at 4 degree celsius (waters least expansive temperature) fills a volume of 1m cubed and has a mass of 1000kg at standard atmospheric pressure.

Also mass is fixed, weight is not.
The weight is gravity dependent
Pressure has an effect on mass as it compresses greater amount of material into the same volume. (ie: high pressure gas, hardened steel, compressed dried sponge....)
 
But isn't a displacement ton meant to indicate a specific volume of space (1.5 m by 1.5 m by 3.0 m)? Such a volume of space would not have a fixed weight. So, I'm not sure I understand the indented (quoted) text (it seems to be confusing or somehow combining two different meanings of the word "ton"). How can a specific volume be "assigned" a specific weight, regardless of what it is a volume of? :confused:

Kilograms are not weight. They are a volume. Kilograms times gravity is a weight. Basic physics in any basic physics text.

So the weight, and thus the beast power, would be variable dependent upon where the beast came from (local to the planet or an import) and what the local gravity is.


Thus 1000 kg on a 5g planet being pulled by the example beast also from the 5 g world would be the same beast power (approx) as the 5000 kg on a one g world being pulled by that same 5g model beast.
 
I think he was just using the backstory of the cart as a sort of cultural referent, like roman chariots and standard gauge train tracks. He just expressed it badly.

You might say he was putting the cart before the beast.
 
Sorry, I accidentally used "weight" in place of "mass" in my previous post. The point I was trying to make was that one cubic meter does not have a mass of 1000 kg; rather, one cubic meter of water has a mass of 1000 kg. But Aramis's explanation, if I understand it correctly, means that the dimensional ton as a unit is the lesser of a given volume and a given mass - thus either 1.5 m by 1.5 m by 3.0 m of empty space, or a smaller space filled with an object with a specific mass (1000 kg?).
 
Sorry, I accidentally used "weight" in place of "mass" in my previous post. The point I was trying to make was that one cubic meter does not have a mass of 1000 kg; rather, one cubic meter of water has a mass of 1000 kg. But Aramis's explanation, if I understand it correctly, means that the dimensional ton as a unit is the lesser of a given volume and a given mass - thus either 1.5 m by 1.5 m by 3.0 m of empty space, or a smaller space filled with an object with a specific mass (1000 kg?).

It's whichever results in more used or less available. Exactly the same for real world wet-navy ships.
 
To OP's original point, could we work out what HP means in the general sense, get appropriate performance to engine/lift/atmo, and get vehicle maker corrected, or at least the runway lengths?
 
To OP's original point, could we work out what HP means in the general sense, get appropriate performance to engine/lift/atmo, and get vehicle maker corrected, or at least the runway lengths?

The issue is that every world in the game could have very different results.. that is why the vehicle maker is the way it is.
Intentionally vague and setting free.


Things like lift effects are based on gravity and atmospheric density. To quantify such would require a tech manual the size of the Library of Congress or the British Library...
The vehicle maker works and doesn't require a master degree. The abstractions are there for a reason.
 
The issue is that every world in the game could have very different results.. that is why the vehicle maker is the way it is.
Intentionally vague and setting free.


Things like lift effects are based on gravity and atmospheric density. To quantify such would require a tech manual the size of the Library of Congress or the British Library...
The vehicle maker works and doesn't require a master degree. The abstractions are there for a reason.

Well, actually, airplanes SHOULD perform differently in different atmospheric environments, and no I don't believe it does require a huge database.

Among other things, simple altitude changes available right here on Earth causes different performance envelopes with aircraft AND missiles, so even doing a simple increase in altitude should be handled even assuming size 8 standard atmo.

We aren't shooting for even the complexity in SPI's 1970s AirWar much less a modern computer sim, so complex aerodynamic modelling is not needed, nor are we concerned with any air-breather/prop plane with performance much past the SR-71.

But you should be able to define a given lift with inputs of weight, engine power, what alt and cruising speed the engine and aircraft is optimized for, it's stealth capacity against targeting systems, maneuverability, and cross-reference against a G-atmo matrix.

With a definition per planet size of what altitude constitutes what thickness of atmosphere given starting values.

Pretty sure a Piper Cub is going to have a tough time getting to an 11,000 foot ceiling when sea level is already thin on a small planet, lack of Gs should help but the air is going to get mighty thin mighty fast.

This matters when your adventure plan is to escape over 12000 foot mountains but the plane can only go 9000 feet, requiring a hair raising run through valleys and passes.

This affected the Russians in fighting the Afghans for instance, the Hinds did not have the power to go over some of the mountains and they endured being fired down upon by the tribesmen.

So why not expend a little effort and get it right, or at least righter?
 
Back
Top