New ship: Panther Clipper

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

also yes we know exactly the sizes of all the ships as well as the space stations etc and some scale models have been made with internals in them - because initially at least all these ships were meant to have actual visible and useable internal areas.

Ooookaaay, but if I put a module that's class 1 sized in a class 8 slot for example, what happens to all that extra space it doesn't take up?

Also please link me where FDEV released official canon specifics on the volume of the optional internal slots. This is news to me.

i think you need to google hard sci fi!.

I know what hard sci-fi is, no need to condescend. You missed my point and that's okay. You want Elite to be more "realistic", I already said why that's a tall order with it being placed so far into the future.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

A) He didn’t actually say ED was hard SciFi did he now?

B) The FSD has internal consistency.



So why are you comparing the proposed design to the Cutter?

Edit:





Never claimed it was. I was just explaining what is meant when we call something Hard SciFi, as they seemed to struggle with the statement “personally i think Elite should go more on the hard scifi rather than space fantasy”

Koma I'm already discussing this with him in real time, as we speak. Is there a reason you feel the need to act in his stead and speak for him? I feel like it would spam the thread if I provided two replied to every point: Those he made, and that same one he made that you repeat back to me.

By your own logic, how do we know cargo isn’t stored in those wings?

Have you looked at them? There are big holes, ports, and cooling vents running through them like Swiss cheese....

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I know what hard sci-fi is, no need to condescend. You missed my point and that's okay. You want Elite to be more "realistic", I already said why that's a tall order with it being placed so far into the future.

hey i am just replying in kind......

 

[SlickPBW]

That would be in keeping with the original though.

So the Mk 2 should show that they learned from their mistake.

 

[Bob McBobblehead]

How about a Tardis cargo rack. A class 2 Tardis rack could carry 50,000t of cargo. Even a small ship like the Imperial Courier could still jump if you use a FSD booster.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

We also know that 1 tonne of water has a volume of 1 m3, all the cargo is stored in canisters that hold at least that volume, so we can estimate a min volume.

We could probably also measure the size of the canisters we see in game and calculate the size of a cargo rack. - It wouldn’t surprise me if someone hasn’t already tbf.

That methodology is useless though, think about it. I can fill up a cargo rack full of water and I'm told it's X tons. Then I fill up that same rack full of hydrogen or helium (or something more dense than water) and I'm told it's the same tonnage as the rack full of water. How does that make any sense?

This CANNOT be resolved because instead of using internal volume as the measure of a cargo rack, they went with tonnage. Which, of course, is kind of silly because various things have different densities!

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

If you’re using space magic to put 5000T in the PC2, then why does it not apply to the ICutter too?

You either have internal consistency, or you don’t.

I'm not using space magic though. I AM being internally consistent. You must think 5,000 tons is some unbelievable payload or something that requires a Death Star to carry. I'm telling you a ship the size of the Panther Clipper would haul that for breakfast.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That methodology is useless though, think about it. I can fill up a cargo rack full of water and I'm told it's X tons. Then I fill up that same rack full of hydrogen or helium (or something more dense than water) and I'm told it's the same tonnage as the rack full of water. How does that make any sense?

This CANNOT be resolved because instead of using internal volume as the measure of a cargo rack, they went with tonnage. Which, of course, is kind of silly because various things have different densities!

Not really - because the structural design of the cargo rack, its integration into the ship's structure and the effects of ship acceleration on the cargo racks and cargo need to be taken into consideration if the ship isn't going to rip itself apart....

As to cargo density, and using current gen containers as an example, the maximum permissible gross mass of a 20' TEU is 24,000kg while its internal volume is c.33.2m³ - so the structure that holds the container is designed to its permissible gross mass so as not to lose containers or worse at sea (too often, noting that some container ships do lose containers in very bad weather) while the average density of the container's contents cannot exceed 651kg/m³ (less than that of water), allowing for a tare weight of 2,400kg for the container itself. While a 20' TEU could be filled with gold it would likely rip itself apart if lifted or transported as the cargo mass of over 640,000kg would exceed the design limit by c.26x.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

I spent a decade as a Deck Officer on Container ships, I probably under 5,000 tons (and 5,000 tonnes) better than you do.

The Panther Clipper had a Maximum gross mass 2,500 tonne so definitely can’t haul 5,000 tons for breakfast.

What was that about consistency?

And did your container ships fly in zero gravity?

Also we're talking about the Panther Clipper MKII so we don't know what the maximum gross mass is. Nothing I've said isn't 'consistent'.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

Not really - because the structural design of the cargo rack, its integration into the ship's structure and the effects of ship acceleration on the cargo racks and cargo need to be taken into consideration if the ship isn't going to rip itself apart....

As to cargo density, and using current gen containers as an example, the maximum permissible gross mass of a 20' TEU is 24,000kg while its internal volume is c.33.2m³ - so the structure that holds the container is designed to its permissible gross mass so as not to lose containers or worse at sea (too often, noting that some container ships do lose containers in very bad weather) while the average density of the container's contents cannot exceed 651kg/m³ (less than that of water), allowing for a tare weight of 2,400kg for the container itself. While a 20' TEU could be filled with gold it would likely rip itself apart if lifted or transported as the cargo mass of over 640,000kg would exceed the design limit by c.26x.

Robert you make a great point. I guess in the end we just don't have the information from FDEV to make these determinations. As forcefields are in the game (shield generators) one could argue that technology is incorporated into cargo holds to keep everything in place. And that the cargo racks are made of Unobtanium super-matter. Or the whole cargo hold is a zero-G field etc etc. We just don't know.

One could argue inertia itself has been nullified in the Elite universe via technology, as I can SCO boost into a planet at FTL speeds and drop to real-space instantly without my body and ship turning into a fine bloody powder

 

[Robert Maynard]

Robert you make a great point. I guess in the end we just don't have the information from FDEV to make these determinations. As forcefields are in the game (shield generators) one could argue that technology is incorporated into cargo holds to keep everything in place. And that the cargo racks are made of Unobtanium super-matter. Or the whole cargo hold is a zero-G field etc etc. We just don't know.

One could argue inertia itself has been nullified in the Elite universe via technology, as I can SCO boost into a planet at FTL speeds and drop to real-space instantly without my body and ship turning into a fine bloody powder

The lore of this game is that artificial gravity technology does not exist.

As to inertia being nullified in supercruise - I seem to remember something about the FSD creating a bubble where the "rules" are different while in supercruise. Noting that, as a sometime Cutter pilot, there is most definitely inertia while flying that ship in normal space.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

A tonne of cargo is a tonne of cargo.

And the mass, rather than volume is more important on a space craft, which is probably why they use mass for the cargo capacity rather than volume.

But that's pointless to the actual debate here: Internal volume vs outside dimensions of a ship.

A ton of cargo is NOT a ton of cargo in that context. If I'm hauling 10 tons of quail feathers and you are hauling 10 tons of osmium, who needs the bigger ship?

 

[Robert Maynard]

But that's pointless to the actual debate here: Internal volume vs outside dimensions of a ship.

A ton of cargo is NOT a ton of cargo in that context. If I'm hauling 10 tons of quail feathers and you are hauling 10 tons of osmium, who needs the bigger ship?

The cargo canisters are a standard size to fit in standardised cargo racks - so the volume required by a particular mass of cargo is to an extent irrelevant (unless at the very low density end of the scale).

The question is really "how many standard cargo canisters can this ship take".

 

[Joe Cool]

I shall buy it and love it and stroke it and paint it and engineer it then name it The Chuck Norris.

Oh and put my name down for 2,500t cargo capacity in the sweep (10 runs to load a stripped out FC).

 

[mtfatboy3006]

The apparent cargo rack/pod assembly leads me to suspect that at least a large portion of the cargo capacity will not be optional internals, but a new kind of dedicated cargo space. I wonder if we might see more cargo capacity than can be achieved by conventional internal slots but no flexibility to build a zero-cargo-all-hull-reinforcement battering ram. Might this be the first ship with a fixed (or nearly fixed) cargo capacity?

 

[Cosmo]

The lore of this game is that artificial gravity technology does not exist.

Well artificial gravity exists such as habitat rings. What does not exist in the Elite universe is anti-gravity (on-demand, gravity generators).

The apparent cargo rack/pod assembly leads me to suspect that at least a large portion of the cargo capacity will not be optional internals, but a new kind of dedicated cargo space. I wonder if we might see more cargo capacity than can be achieved by conventional internal slots but no flexibility to build a zero-cargo-all-hull-reinforcement battering ram. Might this be the first ship with a fixed (or nearly fixed) cargo capacity?

The PC Mk II might have denser cargo storage which means the canisters are stacked closer together.

 

[Bob McBobblehead]

The apparent cargo rack/pod assembly leads me to suspect that at least a large portion of the cargo capacity will not be optional internals, but a new kind of dedicated cargo space. I wonder if we might see more cargo capacity than can be achieved by conventional internal slots but no flexibility to build a zero-cargo-all-hull-reinforcement battering ram. Might this be the first ship with a fixed (or nearly fixed) cargo capacity?

Sound like a good idea, you'd end up with too many option slots for a large cargo huller using class 8 slots.

1000t fixed cargo slot
x2 class 8
x1 class 7
x1 class 6
x2 class 5
x1 class 4
x1 class 3
x1 class 2
x1 class 1

10 option slots.

This way you can't turn it into a massive passenger ship.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It would seem a little out of character for FDev, but it would be interesting to have a super specialised ship.

.... a specialised ship, with a specialised cargo handling system, would presumably require specialised cargo handling facilities - that would be incompatible with the super-quick loading and unloading of standard cargo canisters.

Noting that containerised cargo replaced other cargo handling methods due to time and labour savings.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

The apparent cargo rack/pod assembly leads me to suspect that at least a large portion of the cargo capacity will not be optional internals, but a new kind of dedicated cargo space. I wonder if we might see more cargo capacity than can be achieved by conventional internal slots but no flexibility to build a zero-cargo-all-hull-reinforcement battering ram. Might this be the first ship with a fixed (or nearly fixed) cargo capacity?

I think this would make sense and is some thing a few of us has suggested in the past a bit like the military slots.
that said I am always worried when FD implement something new. military slots were the perfect opportunity to reel in the anaconda a bit except FD decided "hold my beer" and gave the anaconda some as well

 

[Kamiyoda]

Never claimed it was.

I know, I am agreeing with you, use me as Ammo \o/

I think the convo passed me by though