Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > The Expanse Bad Science Roundup

The Expanse Bad Science Roundup (Page 2)
Thread Tools
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 12:01 PM
 
If they’re suited up, how do they shoot-up with acceleration milk?

Along the lines of acceleration milk, Stanislaw Lem had a nifty (and awful) idea where the emergency preservation/acceleration milk system used an injector that rams you in the face so hard it shatters your jaw.

The guy who used it was in a “slowly running out of air” situation, so it took him awhile to muster up the will to hit the button.


Edit: they had non-smashmouth versions for non-emergencies. The emergency one needed to get you filled up ASAP. It also filled your lungs, so it needed to move a large quantity.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 3, 2022 at 01:41 PM. )
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 02:09 PM
 
Phun phact I just discovered looking for info on how easy it is to put on a space helmet: current models have an integrated foam block for nose scratching.



Phun phact edit: apparently visors need to be replaced often enough they designed the next-gen helmet with one that can be swapped without sending it back to Earth.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 3, 2022 at 02:30 PM. )
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 02:24 PM
 
The acceleration juice here does not fill body cavities. You'd need that for super-high Gs, along with tanks for personnel. This stuff is a cocktail of blood thinners, stims, and some other drugs. To allow full bloodflow to continue at Gs that would normally knock you out. They routinely go up to 10 Gs, and can push it to 30. The juice concentration needed to go higher than 30 reaches toxic levels, and would require dangerously high blood pressure.

High Gs and juice are not recommended for the elderly, sickly, or wounded. This is what killed the MCRN 1st officer at the end of 1x04. He ordered a high-G departure, but he already had at least one bullet in him. He bled out during the maneuver. He knew it would happen, which is why he gave command authority to everyone presently aboard.

I suspect all suits are made compatible with seat-based juice application. But it requires more expensive seats, so anyone looking to save money uses the neck adapters. Military ships are known to burn money for small advantages, like getting juice in fast enough to shave a few seconds off reaching high Gs.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 03:16 PM
 
Yeah… the milk in the LEM story was generally used for “hibernation” during long-term acceleration at high-Gs. They just also used it in emergencies with the aim of keeping someone alive long enough to be found.

I was thinking about the military in terms of the milk injectors. Assuming it’s standard procedure to suit-up for combat, they’d need a suit model. I mean, you don’t want to stab through the suit.

What corporate ships would do is more complicated. They might not have a suit up for combat protocol but rather a scram protocol.
     
MacNNFamous
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2020
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 03:42 PM
 
You could stab through the suit, modern chemo ports are basically an impervous layer of self healing silicone that lets needles go in an out without contaminants
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 03:53 PM
 
They do appear to have self-healing suit technology, so I guess stabbing through the suit doesn’t matter. My bad


Edit: still may want a port, just so you don’t need to use a giant gauge needle.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 06:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Most of the above reasoning doesn't hold if helmets are quick and easy to put on.
Just use a mag-lock.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 08:55 PM
 
There is the connection(s) to the life-support backpack. Which presumably connects to both suit and helmet.

Actually, there is evidence they use mag-locks for such connections. Can't cite the scene until you get into a later season. What ep are you up to?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 3, 2022, 09:50 PM
 
About to start S2E1.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 01:12 AM
 
Got through three episodes. The FedEx pods got an actualol out of me. Amos is the best character ever. He reminds me a bit of Animal Mother in Full Metal Jacket.

Today’s bad science complaint was from my dad. They hide the blue alien shit around an abandoned mine, which was a tiny rock surrounded by tinier rocks.

He noted the tinier rocks wouldn’t just hang around like that. They’d either get pulled in to the tiny asteroid or wander off.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 02:08 AM
 
So, space helmet visors you can open have existed since the Mercury program.

Woops!
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 04:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
He noted the tinier rocks wouldn’t just hang around like that. They’d either get pulled in to the tiny asteroid or wander off.
Or they're in (very slow) orbits of the asteroid. Also, the missile will have orders to hold station. So it doesn't drift away from the camouflage rock.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 02:05 PM
 
My understanding is for an orbit to happen, the inertial force vector of the object and the gravitational attraction vector need to be the same length and at 90° to each other. If any of those are off, it will either crash or wander off.

It would be highly unusual for that many rocks to fulfill all three requirements, no?

What are they even supposed to be? Tailings?
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 02:48 PM
 
I don't have any inside history on the location.

It sounds like you're assuming circular orbits. Most orbits are elliptical, with rare exceptions. Like trojans, horseshoe orbits, or halo orbits.

If the secondary objects are the result of blasting, all that's required is they don't have enough energy to escape, and no part of their ellipse intercepts the primary object. Initial orbits are likely to be highly eccentric. Given enough time, they'll tend to collide with each other, which will eventually reduce the number of secondaries, and will favor orbits that are closer to circular. ie - the collisions will end when each remaining object has its own orbital band. No longer overlapping with another. Given the tiny gravity involved, and the tiny orbital velocities, I'd expect this to take anywhere from years to centuries.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 05:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I don't have any inside history on the location.
I was assuming it would be a forensic analysis.

What would cause that debris to be separated from the main body with so little force it couldn’t escape the asteroid’s almost infinitesimal gravity?

To phrase my last post more generally, aren’t the precise circumstances which would cause the scenario unusual and rare?

I don’t feel like doing the math exhaustively right now, but Ceres has a diameter of about 1,000km, and the escape velocity is a bit over 500m/s. Simplified EV goes down in proportion to diameter. At 100km diameter, which seems way bigger than what we have here, a properly braced pro pitcher should almost be able to launch a fastball out of orbit.

The diameter of Eros is less than 20km BTW.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 4, 2022 at 05:42 PM. )
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 08:17 PM
 
No need for math. Mother Nature handles it automatically. A kind of natural selection.

They blast an asteroid. Yielding a cloud of debris with random velocities. Secondary collisions will mix that up even further.

Bummer - there was no gold ore after all. The miners move on to the next asteroid.

Blast debris that was above escape velocity departs immediately.
Blast debris that was below escape velocity, but intersects the asteroid, returns to it.
Blast debris that was below EV and doesn't intersect, remains in orbit.

So the only debris hanging around the asteroid years later, is debris below EV. Strange. I'd expect above-EV fragments to hang around for years, in order to confuse later travelers that are hiding blue alien crap.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2022, 09:52 PM
 
The math part is the EV, which might be about, I dunno… 20mph.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 12:13 AM
 
Today’s bad science: aren’t you going to be able to deal with acceleration best with your head pointed in the direction of the acceleration? The couches lay them flat. Edit: I’m probably wrong about that


Drag about Miller (I guess).
( Last edited by subego; Aug 5, 2022 at 01:16 AM. )
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 02:36 AM
 
If you are upright, gravity tries to pull your blood to your feet. Causing you to faint. The only worse position would be head-down, where the high blood pressure in your head would stroke you out. Yes, maximum protection comes from lying flat against high Gs.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 02:52 AM
 
Yeah, I messed that one up, but here’s a different one.

Wouldn’t I want a decent percentage of my interplanetary ballistic missiles to launch from orbit?
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 05:02 AM
 
I never thought of that one.

We use a nuclear triad, so there are multiple locations to worry about. They launched 1/2 of their missiles. Perhaps they used the surface ones, so as not to give away which satellites had hidden military payloads.

With a drive as efficient as the Epson drive, there's no advantage to start from orbit. And they're probably much easier to hide on the surface.
     
MacNNFamous
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2020
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 11:23 AM
 
Dang subego keeps trying to swing and bad science but keeps hitting airballs.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 05:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Today’s bad science: aren’t you going to be able to deal with acceleration best with your head pointed in the direction of the acceleration? The couches lay them flat. Edit: I’m probably wrong about that
From actual personal experience, it is easiest to tolerate high Gs - and do anything active - in a seated, reclined position. Every Mercury/Gemini/Apollo/Shuttle launch was accomplished with crew members in a seated position.

I was a centrifuge volunteer at Brooks AFB (when it was still an AFB, and when they still had the USAF Armstrong Labs). I got past 9Gs on a few occasions, and the first was in an F-15 seat; pretty upright, and pretty darn challenging. Later in an F-16 seat, which is built with a recline to help pilots handle the Gs, it wasn’t quite as challenging. Note that ANY experience of 7 Gs or higher IS CHALLENGING.

The seated position helps with blood flow management. If you’re flat, the G forces are going to keep your blood pretty much where it is, essentially trapping the blood in your legs. With hips and knees flexed, the blood in the upper legs (more there than lower legs) can join the trunk circulation.

Managing high Gs requires some “interesting” activities to keep the G forces from pulling all the blood out of your head. When experiencing more than about 5 Gs, the individual needs to perform a “Valsalva maneuver”, where you inhale, hold it in, and squeeze your abdominal muscles to help put pressure against the abdominal aorta. This reduces the G-induced blood flow away from the head by narrowing the effective diameter of the abdominal aorta. Of course you gotta breathe, and there’s a technique to that.

A G-suit helps too; it’s a wrap around the upper legs and lower abdomen that is automatically inflated by the aircraft when the G force exceeds some set limit. Between the Valsalva maneuver and the G suit, it’s possible to handle multiple 9+G maneuvers and actually fly.

Cool points here: my first 9G run was only a couple of days after John Glenn did his Space Shuttle qualification run. For the Shuttle runs, the centrifuge was configured with an actual Shuttle seat, and Senator Glenn only had to manage 3-4Gs. A decent roller coaster can give you short periods of 5Gs without trying…

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 05:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacNNFamous View Post
Dang subego keeps trying to swing and bad science but keeps hitting airballs.
I pointed out the official miss on the water config of Ceres.

subego was right about depicting low-G in asteroids. Miller's digs in Ceres should be around 1/4 G, but actors mostly move around like they're in 1 G. The main cast does better much of the time, but a stage full of extras can't seem to pull it off. Or aren't trying. And would need wire help with the bouncy high-walking you see from Apollo footage.

To be fair, getting the low-G right would require time and an enormous budget just by itself. Lots of retakes because someone in the background slipped up.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 06:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I never thought of that one.

We use a nuclear triad, so there are multiple locations to worry about. They launched 1/2 of their missiles. Perhaps they used the surface ones, so as not to give away which satellites had hidden military payloads.

With a drive as efficient as the Epson drive, there's no advantage to start from orbit. And they're probably much easier to hide on the surface.
Good point about the efficiency. I was imagining a bigger fuel burn to get off the planet, however the efficiency has a political implication I’m not sure has been worked out.

6 hour burn at 30G plus 350 tons of ship. No warhead to speak of.

If I did the math right, point that at something and at impact we have a gigaton explosion.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 5, 2022 at 06:44 PM. )
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 5, 2022, 07:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
And would need wire help with the bouncy high-walking you see from Apollo footage.
Phun phact I discovered looking up stuff I was wrong about:

That walking style is at least partially because the suit restricted their movement.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2022, 09:32 AM
 
Here’s my analysis of my analysis so far.

What my dad got right: highly improbable physics “art directed” the debris around the asteroid where they hid the blue alien shit.

What my dad got sorta right: light gravity is poorly represented. I personally cut them slack on this due to The Expense. They do say the gravity is lighter, so that part is right. Also, bird.

What I got right: sound in space is poorly represented, the ships would be more cramped, and I have extremely high confidence in my observation about ubiquitous suit recharge points.

What I got sorta right: issues with the visor. Yes, poppable visors exist, but they all use the pressure differential to assist in locking, like an airplane door. In other words, they’re all inside the helmet. It’d take a lot to ditch a self-locking paradigm for one where there’s a constant force trying to blow the visor open.

Open questions: rotary cannon cooling in space, whether they’d use tracers, and whether they’d be able to so effectively deal with human targets.

What I got wrong: acceleration couches, issues with active coolant for cannons freezing, orbital nukes, and probably something I forgot. I caught the first one.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 6, 2022 at 12:12 PM. )
     
MacNNFamous
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2020
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2022, 10:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
From actual personal experience, it is easiest to tolerate high Gs - and do anything active - in a seated, reclined position. Every Mercury/Gemini/Apollo/Shuttle launch was accomplished with crew members in a seated position.

I was a centrifuge volunteer at Brooks AFB (when it was still an AFB, and when they still had the USAF Armstrong Labs). I got past 9Gs on a few occasions, and the first was in an F-15 seat; pretty upright, and pretty darn challenging. Later in an F-16 seat, which is built with a recline to help pilots handle the Gs, it wasn’t quite as challenging. Note that ANY experience of 7 Gs or higher IS CHALLENGING.

The seated position helps with blood flow management. If you’re flat, the G forces are going to keep your blood pretty much where it is, essentially trapping the blood in your legs. With hips and knees flexed, the blood in the upper legs (more there than lower legs) can join the trunk circulation.

Managing high Gs requires some “interesting” activities to keep the G forces from pulling all the blood out of your head. When experiencing more than about 5 Gs, the individual needs to perform a “Valsalva maneuver”, where you inhale, hold it in, and squeeze your abdominal muscles to help put pressure against the abdominal aorta. This reduces the G-induced blood flow away from the head by narrowing the effective diameter of the abdominal aorta. Of course you gotta breathe, and there’s a technique to that.

A G-suit helps too; it’s a wrap around the upper legs and lower abdomen that is automatically inflated by the aircraft when the G force exceeds some set limit. Between the Valsalva maneuver and the G suit, it’s possible to handle multiple 9+G maneuvers and actually fly.

Cool points here: my first 9G run was only a couple of days after John Glenn did his Space Shuttle qualification run. For the Shuttle runs, the centrifuge was configured with an actual Shuttle seat, and Senator Glenn only had to manage 3-4Gs. A decent roller coaster can give you short periods of 5Gs without trying…
That's cool AF, why were you doing that?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2022, 10:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
they all use the pressure differential to assist in locking
As a space geek interlude, the helmets supposedly do this too, though I can’t visualize yet how that works while still letting the helmet remain removable.

In regards to the ease of attachment and removal, from what I understand removal is intentionally more difficult than it could be to cut down the probability of it happening by accident. Generally speaking, this seems to translate to them also being more difficult to put on. I’m told the idea is you want three separate actions involved to remove.

Because of the pressure lock, helmets can’t be removed in a vacuum, but I get the impression the visor mechanism has enough leverage to break the seal.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 6, 2022 at 12:19 PM. )
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2022, 04:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacNNFamous View Post
That's cool AF, why were you doing that?
Several reasons. My "regular" job was not taking up all of my duty time. Even when you're a Senior NCO, if you're not busy, somebody will find something for you to do. Usually not something fun, cool, or even useful.

There I was, avoiding being assigned busy work, so I signed up. It got me out of the office for several hours a couple of times a week. It got me "hazardous duty pay," of about $120 a month, too. And it was an interesting physical challenge, which my regular job didn't offer.

More to the point, I was literally contributing to real physiological research into the effects of high Gs on the entire body. It was NOT a fun task, but it was satisfying in that I was helping others in a variety of ways.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2022, 04:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
if you're not busy…
This just sent me flying off into a rage about how much I hate this, and its cousin “the faster you get the job done the less we pay you”.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2022, 06:51 PM
 
Yep, it’s that way. Mostly in the Air Force it was because “standard manning” was below 80% of authorized positions. There was always stuff that needed doing, and only so much of it could be planned or scheduled. Not a “good reason” to keep people busy, but a not-so-awful rationale.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2022, 09:03 PM
 
Well, if there’s stuff to be done, that’s different, and I certainly get volunteering as a prophylactic against being volunteered.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2022, 12:47 PM
 
Only saw an episode and a half last night. No bad science, though I’m not sure I understand Martian ground tactics.

“Be sure to stay close so one grenade can take out the entire squad, and whatever you do, don’t get behind cover.”


Actually, those wrist cannons seem silly. The shorter the barrel the less the propellant propels. There’s a reason soldiers are “riflemen” and not “pistolmen”. Also, enough with the rotary shit already.

Also, also, might want to get some mini-missile lock-on.


Edit: anybody here play RIFTS™? Mini-missiles rawk.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 8, 2022 at 05:09 PM. )
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2022, 06:59 PM
 
I’m trying to cut some slack to the arm cannons, but the best I can come up with is it might be an okay option at shorter ranges and/or tighter surroundings (like boarding a ship, which I assume is something Marines are for).

The big problem is the bullets are so small. I mean, I didn’t take calipers to the screen, but 3mm is generous. Unless the shot is lucky, this won’t stop a soldier jacked up on adrenaline and (presumably) combat drugs. The shooter needs to dump a lot of ammo into the target.

With technological assistance, I imagine this could be done reliably, but the longer the range, the more technological assistance involved. There’s going to be a crossover where a rifle makes more sense. Why not both?
( Last edited by subego; Aug 8, 2022 at 07:22 PM. )
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 8, 2022, 08:35 PM
 
The Goliath suits are power-assist, like an exoskeleton. So you could run around with them, even in Earth gravity, and not feel like you're lifting weights.

Rotary guns are for high rates of fire. Higher than a single barrel can endure without overheating. Like say, if you board, and need to clear a corridor. In the original Star Wars, when the Imperials boarded Lea's ship. Imagine how much faster the Storm Troopers could have cleared the corridor if they'd had a single minigun. Instead of everyone using single-shot blasters.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 12:57 AM
 
That’s what I said… it may be an appropriate design for a boarding action, but not border patrol at 500 meters.

Also, just like the with the bigger brothers, no convection cooling on the surface of Ganymede or in a depressurized ship, but a smaller barrel will radiate heat faster.

This is without getting into the ridiculous quantities ammo a soldier would need to carry, lower bullet speeds due to short barrels, blowing your own fucking hand off with it, etc.


Not to mention, if I’m flinging these micro-pebbles at people, it’s more like “David” suits.
( Last edited by subego; Aug 9, 2022 at 01:29 AM. )
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 01:01 AM
 
What’s the problem for Martians with the horizon? My dad and I couldn’t puzzle that out.

My dad speaks French, so the French words in Belter Creole are starting to sell him.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 02:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
What’s the problem for Martians with the horizon?
um ... episode and time? This isn't ringing a bell for me.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 02:18 AM
 
It’s near the end of season two, with the Martian Marine (Draper) in New York. It’s a little difficult to get something exact at the moment.

The person she trades her bone-density meds to teaches her what she needs to do to get used to a horizon, and says that after a few weeks her brain would compensate naturally.

Having a horizon comes up a bit earlier as yet another thing Earth takes for granted.

It’s possible I totally misunderstood.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 06:07 AM
 
Ah, I do remember that. In my opinion, it's a mild dose of agoraphobia. All Martians live in domes or other pressurized locations. Indoors. When they're outside, they are in a suit or vehicle. Still seeing things through glass. Seeing to a vanishing point without a barrier requires one to be outdoors. The only Martians who see that are the dead ones who step out a pressure lock without a suit.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 01:33 PM
 
Makes sense. I guess my dad and I thought even though it was always in a suit, Draper has been “outside” enough to be used to big spaces.

Of course, the scale of the problem is going to be a relative thing.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 06:46 PM
 
I was thinking about the Goliath arm cannon, and what cocks this design up is the short barrel.

The barrel length determines the maximum amount of energy imparted to the bullet. Whatever energy the Goliath bullet has, it could have more with a longer barrel.

That said, if the bullet is light, a small amount of energy can hurl it at extreme velocities, and if the bullet is tiny, it concentrates the force of this extreme velocity into a small area. The Goliath bullet would punch through things just as well as larger bullets with maybe 5 (or more) times as much energy.

That’s great, but unless it’s a lucky hit, what stops a person is the kinetic energy the bullet dumps in them. This is the drawback of a tiny, hyper-velocity bullet. It doesn’t deposit much kinetic energy into the target because it zips right through them.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2022, 06:53 PM
 
Maybe punching holes is enough. Especially if most fighting happens in space or reduced atmosphere. ie - anywhere except the surface of Earth.

Using a very small caliber would limit range in a full atmosphere. But that only applies on Earth or within large facilities. Like Ceres or big underground facilities. Interior spaces long enough to impact range. They could still use the integrated small rockets of the suit for such situations. Though I'm sure they only carry a few rockets per suit.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2022, 11:03 AM
 
“Maybe enough” is not what a soldier wants to hear about their primary weapon.


Gun geekery: gravity will cause drop. Atmosphere will bleed velocity and cause deflection. Spin stabilization helps counter deflection, but the efficacy will be determined by bullet length. All else equal, longer bullets are heavier, which means less velocity.

Everything in gun design is a trade-off.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2022, 02:40 PM
 
Supply officer: Ok soldier, here is your God-level BFG. It will always get the job done.
Soldier: Sounds good. What's the range?
Supply Officer: Weren't you listening? It *always* gets the job done. No fine print.
Soldier: Wow. I've often dreamed of a gun with no trade-offs ... *reville sounds*
Soldier (awake): Damn. Not again.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2022, 02:52 PM
 
In the real world, barrel length is only partly responsible for the maximum amount of energy imparted on a bullet. If the propellant is fully burned while the bullet is in a short barrel, it imparted all the energy it could to the bullet, whatever the length of the barrel.

Most people assume that longer rifle barrels mean both more accuracy and more velocity. This is not the case with modern rifles and cartridges. If the bullet is designed to be accurate (for example it has excellent aerodynamics, and its mass distribution is perfectly uniform), it only needs to have sufficient spin imparted on it to remain on target. Likewise - as above - if the cartridge is designed to push the projectile at an optimum velocity in some arbitrary barrel length, then it will do so in a barrel of at least that arbitrary length.

In some cases, real world rifle cartridges suffer impaired velocity from being fired in overly long barrels. Fortunately, there’s no such thing as “over stabilization,” so an overly long of the barrel can’t make the projectile less accurate.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2022, 03:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
In the real world, barrel length is only partly responsible for the maximum amount of energy imparted on a bullet. If the propellant is fully burned while the bullet is in a short barrel, it imparted all the energy it could to the bullet, whatever the length of the barrel.
I believe there’s a misunderstanding. What I’m saying is we can burn more propellant in a longer barrel. As in, the round can contain more propellant because it has more barrel.


More gun geekery: so I didn’t get whacked by the pedant stick, I made my original statement applicable to either chemical or magnetic propellant. If it’s just chemical the design is really screwed because what actually determines maximum energy is the interior volume of the barrel. To impart the same amount of energy into a 10mm bullet and a 1mm bullet, the 1mm barrel needs to be 10 times as long.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2022, 04:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
More gun geekery: so I didn’t get whacked by the pedant stick, I made my original statement applicable to either chemical or magnetic propellant. If it’s just chemical the design is really screwed because what actually determines maximum energy is the interior volume of the barrel. To impart the same amount of energy into a 10mm bullet and a 1mm bullet, the 1mm barrel needs to be 10 times as long.
Pedant stick incoming...volume of a cylinder is based on the square of the radius, so you would actually need a barrel that's 10^2 as long.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2022, 05:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I believe there’s a misunderstanding. What I’m saying is we can burn more propellant in a longer barrel. As in, the round can contain more propellant because it has more barrel.
That’s true. With a longer barrel you have more “barrel time,” which equates to more time to burn more propellant and thus theoretically increase velocity.

However, that may not be necessarily useful or desirable. The recoil energy of any firearm - the “push back” against the shooter - is a function of the mass and velocity of the projectile. Even a fairly small mass, pushed at high enough velocity, can cause “undesirable” recoil. The mass of the weapon can mitigate this, but only to a point.

As to railgun-type weapons, I don’t know if there’s a point at which the accelerator can no longer add energy to the projectile. I need to research that.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:41 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,