Would an anaconda float?

Straylight0

S
Just checking whether an Anaconda would float on water; I'm fairly sure it would, but might have made a huge -up.


An Anaconda is about 150m long from the another thread. If it's about 20mx20m cross-section, this gives it a volume of 60000 cubic metres (6x10^6). Shipbuilder gives the mass of a trading conda, not too dissimilar from my exploring one, at about 1000 tonnes or 1x10^6 kg.


Most of the volume of my ship is taken up with hydrogen fuel, liquid density 70kg/cubic m, or 80 or so for deuterium. Or air, about 1kg/m^3. Water (seawater isn't much denser than normal) has a density of about 1000 kg/ cub.m. That gives a net buoyancy of about 900 kg/ cm (not bothering converting to Newtons). For 60000 cub.m that's 54 million kg buoyancy, 54,000 tonnes, comfortably above the weight, even if I've made some big miscalculations of volume. The problem might be being too buoyant and bobbing around uncontrollably!
 

Apos

Apos
Well, it's supposed to be air tight, so water wouldn't leak in for sure.

But your thrusters would most likely be severely damaged since they are so exposed.
 

Drink!

Drink!
Hard to say with out the correct weight and size. Something to remember is even if it did float, wouldn't it be balanced. (not a dev joke:) )
Looks like the heaviest parts of the ship are not located in places that would put the center of gravity in the middle of the ship. It may float, but the rear end will be under water with the nose poking out.
 

Vasious

Vasious
Apos said:
Well, it's supposed to be air tight, so water wouldn't leak in for sure.

But your thrusters would most likely be severely damaged since they are so exposed.
Click to expand...

And do they lead to the Power Plant, they seem to be exhausting from it
 
Last edited:

Avering

Avering
I do believe it would float, as it is significantly lighter than it's water displacement. Since even modern "smaller" cargo ships have a 20000 tonnes of deadweight, and still be able to float nicely, the Anaconda with that size and the measly 400-800 (if packed) tonnes is rather light.
 

Straylight0

S
Ships are supposed to be able to handle planetary landings, so I assume the thrusters must be corrosion-resistant at least. Handling liquid would probably have to be a deliberate design, taking it we'd know whether they could or not.

Is there a place that says where the various systems are located? Being colourblind I can't see the subsystem targets in the game, or the arrows pointing to the space station entrance come to that.

Nephthys isn't a witch, but she does look an awful lot like a U-boat. Come to think of it, the boatlike shape of the 'conda probably isn't a coincidence. She may not be a Moray but it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think they were designed for water landings.

I haven't seen my cats spin on yoghurt, but they can eat it...
 

Morbad

Morbad
An Anaconda would blow away in a stiff wind.

Fully loaded the thing is less that a quarter the mass of real vesses/structures of similar volume that float on water.

It's also a space ship and thus obviously waterproof.
 
Last edited:

Vasious

Vasious
Morbad said:
An Anaconda would blow away in a stiff wind.

Fully loaded the thing is less that a quarter the mass of real vesses/structures of similar volume that float on water.

It's also a space ship and thus obviously waterproof.
Click to expand...

Air tight, yes, but water proof?
 

Apos

Apos
Straylight0 said:
Ships are supposed to be able to handle planetary landings, so I assume the thrusters must be corrosion-resistant at least. Handling liquid would probably have to be a deliberate design, taking it we'd know whether they could or not.

Is there a place that says where the various systems are located? Being colourblind I can't see the subsystem targets in the game, or the arrows pointing to the space station entrance come to that.

Nephthys isn't a witch, but she does look an awful lot like a U-boat. Come to think of it, the boatlike shape of the 'conda probably isn't a coincidence. She may not be a Moray but it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think they were designed for water landings.

I haven't seen my cats spin on yoghurt, but they can eat it...
Click to expand...

It's less a corrosion problem and more of a clogging issue. Corrosion is rarely a short-term issue, unless its extreme acids we're talking about.

Especially if, as mentioned, the thrusters are directly linked to your powerplant.

Vasious said:
Air tight, yes, but water proof?
Click to expand...

Air proof is by default water proof as well. It's the other way around that might not apply.
 
Last edited:

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Vasious said:
Air tight, yes, but water proof?
Click to expand...

water is denser than air therefore if it is airtight (which it has to be to keep the air in in space) then it is water tight.

the issue would be how it would cope with the forces of having to land it on water without ripping it to bits, along with getting water in the engine components as already suggested.


edit corrected the deliberate mistake ;)
 
Last edited:

Vasious

Vasious
Mad Mike said:
air is denser than water therefore if it is airtight (which it has to be to keep the air in in space) then it is water tight.

the issue would be how it would cope with the forces of having to land it on water without ripping it to bits, along with getting water in the engine components as already suggested.
Click to expand...

Water proof vs water tight was where I was going.

We know this can float, and is rated to 5500 fathoms

300px-Moray.png
 

Sandmann

Sandmann
Straylight0 said:
Just checking whether an Anaconda would float on water; I'm fairly sure it would, but might have made a huge -up.


An Anaconda is about 150m long from the another thread. If it's about 20mx20m cross-section, this gives it a volume of 60000 cubic metres (6x10^6). Shipbuilder gives the mass of a trading conda, not too dissimilar from my exploring one, at about 1000 tonnes or 1x10^6 kg.


Most of the volume of my ship is taken up with hydrogen fuel, liquid density 70kg/cubic m, or 80 or so for deuterium. Or air, about 1kg/m^3. Water (seawater isn't much denser than normal) has a density of about 1000 kg/ cub.m. That gives a net buoyancy of about 900 kg/ cm (not bothering converting to Newtons). For 60000 cub.m that's 54 million kg buoyancy, 54,000 tonnes, comfortably above the weight, even if I've made some big miscalculations of volume. The problem might be being too buoyant and bobbing around uncontrollably!
Click to expand...

Buoyancy is a matter of the mass of the water (or other liquid) displaced vs the mass of the object displacing it. If the mass of the water displaced is greater than the mass of the vessel displacing it, it will be positively buoyant - ie: it will float. Sea water's actually more dense than fresh water, but for the sake of the argument we'll assume you want to float it in a lake of fresh water at sea level. 1 cubic meter of fresh water weighs one metric tonne at sea level so if your ship displaces (at most) 60000 cubic meters of water and weighs only 1000 tonnes it should easily float. The mass of y our cargo will impact that too of course, but you've got a lot of leeway. All this assumes pure H2O in an earth-like environment at 1 Bar ambient pressure.

That's not to say the ship will SURVIVE. For a start as has been pointed out you have thrusters, fuel ports, radiators and who knows what else on the surface of your ship that were designed for a vacuum, not immersion. Also something that most people forget (including JJ Abrhams in Star Trek when he submerged the Enterprise) being airtight isn't enough to survive being submerged. A spaceship is a pressure vessel designed to keep pressure IN. A ship or submarine is a pressure vessel design to keep pressure OUT. Unless a spaceship was designed to be submerged there's a decent chance it'd just crush under the weight of the water.

[Source: I'm a PADI Open Water SCUBA Instructor]
 
Last edited:

Straylight0

S
I could have made an error of about fifty times in the volume and it would still float, I was more worried about dropping a factor of 1000 somewhere :)

We don't know how the thrusters work; they seem to expend virtually no mass when they propel the ship, and not a huge amount of energy (compared to fuel tank size) either.

Mind you, I think that there must be at least some kind of limited antigravity in the game. If a ship can launch/land vertically, its upward thrusters would be able to accelerate it at least at "g" when weightless, and they don't come close to that.

My money's on exotic matter in the FSD causing physics to go weird around them even when inactive; might explain how dogfighting speeds are akin to those of WWI....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom