• 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.

Warp Drive Poll

Warp Drive Poll

  • Total voters
    70
  • Poll closed .
T

TKalbfus

SOC-14 1K
For those of you who like Warp Drive How would you like it to work? Here are some general assumptions for starters. The Traveller Warp Drive replaces the jump Drive and fits in standard starships and is the same size, mass, volume and price as the corresponding jump drives by number. In otherwords a warp 1 drive has the same volume, mass, cost and fuel requirements as a jump 1 drive per module. But they behave differently.

Option 1: The Star Trek Warp Drive
Warp 1 = 1c 1 parsec in 3.26 years
Warp 2 = 8c 1 parsec in 4.8 months
Warp 3 = 27c 1 parsec in 1.4 months
Warp 4 = 64c 1 parsec in 2.64 weeks
Warp 5 = 125c 1 parsec in 9.5 days
Warp 6 = 216c 1 parsec in 5.5 days

Option 2: The Linear Warp Drive
Warp 1 = 100c 1 parsec in 11.9 days
Warp 2 = 200c 1 parsec in 5.9 days
Warp 3 = 300c 1 parsec in 4 days
Warp 4 = 400c 1 parsec in 3 days
Warp 5 = 500c 1 parsec in 2.4 days
Warp 6 = 600c 1 parsec in 2 days

Option 3: The Linear Warp Drive B
Warp 1 = 200c 1 parsec in 5.9 days
Warp 2 = 400c 1 parsec in 3 days
Warp 3 = 600c 1 parsec in 2 days
Warp 4 = 800c 1 parsec in 1.5 days
Warp 5 = 1000c 1 parsec in 1.2 days
Warp 6 = 1200c 1 parsec in 1 day

Each Jump drive uses up its dedicated Jump fuel in 5 days.
 
Linear Warp B is closer to the range of the Traveller Jump Drive, but in a 3-d star map setting, there are alot of stars within a 6 parsec sphere, as a referee I'd probably choose the first linear warp.
Notice the Star Trek Warp Drive is kind of useless unless you have at kleast warp 4 or ar vary patient. If you use a warp 1 or 2 drive, your character is going to age alot and need alot of consumables. I prefer to cut to the chase and start with a 100c or 200c warp 1 drive. A 1c warp 1 drive is good only for npcs who don't mind spending a major fraction of their lives in transit. In fact going 0.999999c is better than warp 1 because at least you have time dialation to shorten the perceived transit time.
 
I saw this poll, and I saw how the question was posted. Basically there is no way I can vote, because to me the information as presented is not sufficient to make a definitive conclusion. So I went back and did a little homework. This is what I got when I plugged the numbers in, keeping in mind that a week is seven days long, not five, and discounting the +/-10% variance in Book 2:

Code: 
Star Trek Universe
Warp =     Jump      = Velocity (c)
 1      0.019178082       1
 2      0.153424657       8
 3      0.517808217      27
 4      1.227397256      64
 5      2.397260265     125
5.5     3.190753413     166.375
 6      4.142465738     216
6.5     5.266780803     274.625
 7      6.578082168     343
 8      9.819178046     512
 9     13.980821870     729
10     19.178082120    1000
Code: 
Linear A
Warp*        =      Jump     = Velocity (c)
4.634469197	1.917808212        100
5.837716342	3.835616424        200
6.681613926     5.753424637        300
7.353362519     7.671232849        400
7.920580486     9.589041061        500
8.416361216    11.50684927         600
8.85967207     13.42465749         700
9.262515882    15.3424657          800
9.633026514    17.26027391         900
9.977000638    19.17808212        1000
Code: 
Linear B
Warp*       =      Jump     =   Velocity (c)
5.837716342     3.835616424        200
7.353362519     7.671232849        400
8.416361216    11.50684927         600
9.262515882    15.3424657          800
9.977000638    19.17808212        1000
10.60150091    23.01369855        1200
11.15990855    26.84931497        1400
11.6673427     30.68493139        1600
12.13404899    34.52054782        1800
12.56732911    38.35616424        2000
*for the warp factors here, an error of +/- 2% is present due to having to cube root the given velocity.

If Linear A and Linear B have Jump and Warp corresponding on a 1 to 1 basis, then yes, they are faster. But are they accurate? I don't think so. That is how I feel. But I also know I am swimming upstream here, in that my view is in the extreme minority.

Now I don't know if it's the way I'm explaining this, the tools I'm using to explain this, or something else entirely, but as of now I wash my hands of this debate. Especially now that the physicists have begun latching onto Warp Drive as perhaps the only real form of FTL travel, as hyperspace requires a dimension we cannot see, which means it's a dimension we cannot access because we can't reference it in our 3D universe.

Look here and see what I'm talking about. This stuff is good enough that I'm actually putting it into my house rules (my Supplement 0).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by Strephon Alkhalikoi:
... Especially now that the physicists have begun latching onto Warp Drive as perhaps the only real form of FTL travel, as hyperspace requires a dimension we cannot see, which means it's a dimension we cannot access because we can't reference it in our 3D universe.
Click to expand...
We can reference it, on paper anyway. We just don't know how to make the paper model into reality. Yet. Warp drive (Compressing and expanding space arround the ship) is still a more likely FTL model, but either one right now requires more power than can even theoreticly produce.
 
Originally posted by MichaelL65:
We can reference it, on paper anyway. We just don't know how to make the paper model into reality. Yet. Warp drive (Compressing and expanding space arround the ship) is still a more likely FTL model, but either one right now requires more power than can even theoreticly produce. [/QB]
Click to expand...
Worst proble with hyperdrive is that we have no reason to beleive it would be any faster.

The Alcubierre warp no longer needs incrediblw amounts of energy. Chris Van den Broek postulated a metric that only requires a few grams of negative (not anti-) matter to form the warp bubble.
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9905084

This is sometimes called the TARDIS metric.
 
This is sometimes called the TARDIS metric.
Click to expand...
It looks something like a telephone booth, says 'Police Box' and it is bigger on the inside than it is on the outside. It also makes a horrible screeching sound when it comes and goes.
 
In space, no-one can hear you <<scree-eech>>...

But the van den Broek warp bubble is bigger inside than out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My preferred WF Calculation is WF^WF=C

Thus
WF 1 = 1_C = 1189.9_D/Pc
WF 1.5 = 1.84_C = 647.7_D/Pc
WF 2 = 4_C = 297.47_D/Pc
WF 2.5 = 9.88_C = 120.41_D/Pc
WF 3 = 27_C = 44.07_D/Pc
WF 3.5 = 80.21_C = 14.83_D/Pc
WF 4 = 256_C = 4.65_D/Pc
WF 4.5 = 869.87_C = 1.37_D/Pc
WF 5 = 3125_C = 9.14_H/Pc
WF 5.5 = 11803.06_C = 2.42_H/Pc
WF 6 = 46656_C = 1.53_M/Pc
WF 6.5 = 192281.2_C = 22.28_S/PC
WF 7 = 823543_C = 5.2_S/PC
WF 7.5 = 3655606.79_C = 1.17_S/PC
WF 8 = 16777216_C = 0.26_S/PC
WF 8.5 = 79443957.17_C = 0.05_S/PC
WF 9 = 387420489_C = 0.01_S/PC
 
A stutterwarp is like any other sort of warp, it has a rate of travel that it apparently moves through space. However a true warp drive is continous FTL travel through space. Stutterwarp is a series of quantum jumps in very short succession producing the same effect as a warp drive.
 
Y'know, I had always assumed -- for Technobabble purposes -- that the Traveller Jumpdrive made use of the Einstein-Rosenberg principle. That is to say, that what a Jumpdrive was doing was OPENING -- not MAKING! -- a sort-of Wormhole. The Jumpdrive opened "this" end of the Wormhole, then the ship moved into it, but then the Wormhole closed behind the ship, pushing it along. The Drive is constantly "pushing open" the Wormhole, while the collapsing wormhole behind the ship keeps pushing it along.

I know that that isn't, exactly, the way Jumpdrives have, historically, been described. But that's what's always made the most sense to me.
 
LordVince said:
Y'know, I had always assumed -- for Technobabble purposes -- that the Traveller Jumpdrive made use of the Einstein-Rosenberg principle. That is to say, that what a Jumpdrive was doing was OPENING -- not MAKING! -- a sort-of Wormhole. The Jumpdrive opened "this" end of the Wormhole, then the ship moved into it, but then the Wormhole closed behind the ship, pushing it along. The Drive is constantly "pushing open" the Wormhole, while the collapsing wormhole behind the ship keeps pushing it along.

I know that that isn't, exactly, the way Jumpdrives have, historically, been described. But that's what's always made the most sense to me.
Click to expand...

THat's referred to in TNE's FF&S as a "Keyhole Drive" - in TNE, it has different size and fuel requirements.
 
savage said:
So where did stutter warp fit into your poll. Seems to me this is a traveller site?

Savage
Click to expand...

Now that MgT published its 2300AD version, I guess you had your long (nearly 10 years) waiting answer...
 
McPerth said:
Now that MgT published its 2300AD version, I guess you had your long (nearly 10 years) waiting answer...
Click to expand...

Yeah. I didn't loose any sleep over it. And I don't buy MgT much.

I was really just looking for better explanations that tie the original poll to Traveller a little better. (2300AD, FFS,...old magazine articles, etc).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Spinward Flow
CT Only: 30 ton Strike Fighter (TL=11)
Replies
16
Views
858
kilemall
K
Spinward Flow
CT Only: 16 ton Light Fighter (TL=9)
Replies
2
Views
666
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
CT Only: SIE Big Clipper
Replies
14
Views
1K
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
CT Only: Long Night Tramp
Replies
18
Views
466
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
CT Only: Long Night Clipper
Replies
17
Views
720
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
Back
Top