I should point out that I'm not good at doing unscripted videos so I kinda rush and ramble a bit here, for example - It was not my intention to make it sound like the coilgun causes literally zero recoil. Also, it's not too clear in the image, but the back of the primary hull is sloped in such a way that the 4 forward-most maneuvering thrusters can be locked to face straight forward for retrograde burns.
Nah man, you were great! Love the unscripted video, it makes you more... human? The scripted ones are almost disconnected, more like a narrator than a person behind the video is how I'd describe it (don't get me wrong, they're perfect for informative videos, but this one is more personable, which I like). Also; amazing ship design and engineering behind it! I especially liked the heat sinks and torpedo tubes.
A minimalist, down to earth, converted Warhorse that uses proper Newtonian Physics for direction control and propulsion.... A wise man once said... "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." Gwen here is, in all honesty, "Perfect" by those standards. The size, scale and addition of a stowed Rover remind me a lot of the Serenity, if that ship were more than just and unarmed transport.
the ship reminds me more of the roci from the expanse, except that ship has no large cargo bay for a rover, and only a few gatling guns instead of auto cannons, both have torpedos
A big issue I see is that the majority of habitable spaces are well forward of the center of mass. Meaning that whenever the ship yaws or pitches, anyone in those compartments will undergo high g-forces.
Sci-fi universes usually have to get around this issue with so-called 'inertial dampeners' fitted to the crew compartments, Stargate's Earth starfighters are a good example. Seeing as he's already admitted to going for anti-grav for convenience i don't think inertial dampeners would be a stretch.
Hey everyone, thanks so much for your viewership and support over the last two years, and thanks for taking the time to check out my work in this video. I'd recommend you go to full-screen as I originally intended these images to just be writing aids for me so they're not brilliantly suited to TH-cam resolution. - Daniel
Oh also there are tricks to making your ship look cooler. Just by taking things from around your place and making them into part to your ship. one thing my graphics teacher told me was don't think about the scope of the projeck just start putting together shapes and it will all come together in the end just remember your idea.
Six years later, and being a sucker for realistic space flight, and a 3D artist, I must confess that I shall incorporate this design in some creation. I love the gigantic blocks for thruster, RCS and crew separated. I loved it.
Overall design reminds me of the _Rocinante_ from The Expanse, I'm sure that was intentional. I like the _Millennium Falcon_ style lift airlock, although I'm not sure how practical it would be. I like that the small, low-mass ship uses coilguns to avoid powerful recoil. Would larger ships in this setting employ spinal railguns, or do you think of railguns as less advanced technology? Looking forward to potentially seeing it in action.
Why does it seem like the Rocinante? It's oriented in a completely different direction, for one, swapping height in the habitable space for length. That alone is a huge difference.
yourcurtainsareugly I think they're referring to the angular hull shape with the autocannons on rotating hard points and a whopping huge drive at the back. I agree with you that it doesn't look a whole lot like the Roci, but it shares some design themes.
Oh no it's not flawless that totally outweighs all the thought, panning and creativity that was put into this ship! Give me a break you fucking asshole.
After spending the last 3 weeks killing myself in dev work for a scifi-ship game...You've revived my love of hard-scifi that I was almost fed up with thanks to trying to code things.
6:19. From Newton's third law you can see that there is always recoil when you are accelerating an object, no matter the mechanism. In a coilgun, not just the coils pull the bullet, but also vice versa. I loved the design of the ship, I just wanted to point this out.
Honestly quite interesting and, true to your word, original. I've been working on my own sci-fi military vehicles, but I'm more focused on ground vehicles. Nice design and vid, SD.
Congratulation on the 100k subscriptions. An interesting ship design. From what I understand you are trying to make something like a ship from The Expanse. I have 3 issues with this design. First the torpedoes being ejected sideways. The larger bay door is more vulnerable (and needs a stronger engine to move a larger part of the hull). As your torpedoes reorient anyway I would make round ports facing sideways. Or I would make forward facing ports and use a less powerful coil gun technology to give them some extra starting speed. Remember that your design for launching torpedoes has no way to get them away from the hull at fast speed. That means that when you turn in combat and launch a torpedo the ship needs to stop turning or risk smacking into the ejected torpedoes. Sitting duck for enemy coil gun for a couple of seconds. Ejecting them sideways also gives less surface for the ejection mechanism to work with (imagine wheels pushing it out either sideways or along the length) so you either need to stay on the same heading longer until the torpedo gets far away from the hull so it's main engine won't damage the hull and you won't smack into it or you need a more powerful ejection mechanism (which will increase maintenance). Either launch them forward so when they get to the target it will have the ships speed in addition to the launcher acceleration (so it will approach faster, meaning less time for point defence) or find a way to get them away from the hull fast. Secondly is your turrets. They are not manoeuvrable enough to work as point defence. If torpedoes are used often enough point defence, ecm and decoys are a must. Or the first torpedo ends the fight. Thirdly is your placement of manoeuvring thrusters. Simple physics will tell you that placing them near the centre of mass is a mistake (levers and points of applying the force). The farther from the centre of mass the less power you need to turn. Also they should be placed equidistant from the centre of mass (or you need variable power RCS and a good operating system to compensate).
I absolutely adore your professionalism and incredible passion you have for starships and sci fi. This channel has so much potential, all thanks to you.
Suggestion; instead of windows in the captain cabin, have an interior wall be coated with the holographic material so the captain can put up what ever they want up as a background and use that as a mcguffin to sho the captain mood.
Nice design. Instead of offering windows in the C.Os cabin and the med room you could add view screens or something. Like large tvs that can play an atmospheric scene or even have a live feed from a hull mounted camera?
Aye, starships should never have windows. If an arm of the military is best suited to man a spaceship it would be the Nave, as spaceships will be like submarines.
You could have such screen in all cabins (bigger for higher-status ones, and then the 'wallpaper' pictures that people choose to display can tell you something about their character.
It's a nice start, I can see the influences of The Expanse as well as Star Citizen and Mass Effect. I do have some critiques and suggestions to ergonomics though. The first is the single-person airlock. I can't for the life of me see why that would be there, especially if it's pointed in the same direction of the cargo bay doors, which also acts as a vacuum bay. I'd move all the EVA suits to the hallway/airlock connecting to the Ops room, as well as perhaps the one connecting to the engine bay as a backup. Either that or have that Locker room connect directly to the cargo bay by itself. That way a crew can jump out of a rack, slide down the ladder, grab their guns and jump in a suit, and jump into the airlock as quickly as possible. Having a single airlock that does the same thing seems superfluous on a military ship, not to mention dangerous with the single-file exit. If there is to be a second airlock, it needs to go up or out the sides. Secondly I have thoughts about the RCS cluster... the idea is interesting, but only if the majority of the mass was in the center. In this design, the biggest open area is in the center it seems. While this may make sense on a real cargo hauler... for military again, not so much. For realism sake's, I'd also address the nozzle sizes. Chemical rockets use nozzles that let the gas pressure of the rocket equal the gas pressure outside. In atmosphere, that leads to narrow and short rocket bells. In a vacuum... it's zero pressure... so you literally want as wide a nozzle as you can possibly get. With them on rotating sockets of course, this poses an issue if you don't make them also very short... which is perfectly acceptable. Of course another solution would be to use perhaps something cooler looking, and that's aerospike engines in the ballsockets. Due to the physics, these engines don't need a bell at all, and automatically adjust for the pressure, which makes them perfect for landing as well. Perhaps even have retractable pylons that each socket rests in, so they extend further out for space flight, and retract for atmospheric. Which of course means the ship would have to rely on aero surfaces for maneuvering, as their primary thrusters are tucked in so close that their effectiveness is servery impacted.
I like it, but....hear me out here. I say we add more rcs thrusters.....we need all of the rcs thrusters. (ACTUAL THOUGHTS): In all seriousness I like it quite a bit but it's weapons are distributed with a massive bias towards a frontal cone of fire thus hampering combat from any other direction, the aft has very little point defense coverage, and if we are going with a high realism sci-fi then long range combat will be extremely difficult as a torpedo from the rear would essentially be impossible to eliminate. The cone of fire is very forward heavy but adding a few pdcs to the rear should eliminate the issue or at least mitigate it. My second issue is the hull, the rcs block is very narrow at both ends and can easily be torn apart. This is a massive weak point and could be counteracted by some ablative armor around the ends or by making it more compact (larger doesn't mean it's better by default). And the sub deck is also a massive danger, a massive ammo stack directly below the primary room and the quarters is just asking for trouble especially if that side has no weapon or pdc coverage. But that's less of a problem as ammo rooms are a necessary danger.
But the ship looks promising... I say Daniels needs to embrace it. Have one or two characters comment it and someone answer "Want one of those? Buy one and go to ########" Or a more reasonable one commenting that this one is lighter and faster.
Yes those are some of the flaws I find as well. Small firing arc for a ship of it's size (needs dorsal and ventral turret), exposed maneuvering thrusters with no back up ones and it also seems to have a poor yaw. Other than that seems solid
Neat! Designing space ships is probably one of my favorite parts of my writing. My only question would be, is there any reasoning to the sorta hour glass shape between the main sections? I imagine that might be a tactical weakpoint, it looks like there's practically no lateral armor there. I like it! It looks a bit crocodilian at the front. If some bandit/raider/military types get a hold of one, they could paint it scaly green and give it a toothy grin decal, maybe call their ship "The Caiman" or "Gharial".
It is one of the worst designs I've ever seen from a purely utilitarian perspective. The directional thrusters are WAY too close to the center of mass meaning incredibly poor turn rate. The torpedo tubes are poorly designed.
Yeah some windows would probably be added in some very non-important points, they'd probably be very small but could be very useful for visual inspections of certain parts of the ship, without the need to put on a suit and go outside, people also like to look outside sometimes, could be good for mental health for longer deployment. Also, i do love the fact you've added heatsinks, something you almost never see! i'm completely in love with this channel and its content and you guys just keep on giving so much goodies. thank you for your hard work!!
I`m going to make a guess that the faction that developed this class only made the one because it was a primarily a technology demonstrator type of vessel to show that the tech on-board it was useful in a spacecraft and later built a less costly version for mass production, similar to the USS Sea jet was for the Zumwalt class destroyer class to test its tumbledown hull. PS. are the auto-cannons dual purpose? Like they`re used for both ship-to-ship and like a CIWS?
I really like it! It looks agile yet sturdy; an engine arrangement that looks applicable in real life while still having a sleek profile. The Guinevere is a lady with brains, brawn, and beauty.
Good Evening! Congrats on making it to 100k, this is a truly amazing channel and i'm glad i discovered it some time ago. I don't know how you would react to criticism, but as awesome and well-reasoned as the Huntress design is, especially in the Sci-fi setting you described at the start of the video, there are a few things that (i find) could be improved: 1- I know it's mainly an aesthetic design choice and a feature of the class or the faction, but i can't overlook that positioning the RCS thrusters so close to the ship's center of mass is suboptimal, because it reduces the angular momentum applied to the ship and thus its rotation speed; the fact that they are of considerable size and (presumably) power, and the gimballed mounting mitigate this effect a little bit, but that's A LOT of wasted energy (and potentially fuel, i don't know how the ship is powered). For a warship as light as this, increased maneuverability means increased survivability. 2- The additional armor plating between the bridge and the armament bays offers a good measure of immediate crew protection, but i feel that it should be extended to cover the two escape pod bays: it wouldn't do much good for a full crew to survive an ordnance accident just to discover that only two of them can abandon ship because the forward escape pods were caught in the blast. 2bis- It also wouldn't be nice to be forced to abandon ship because of said accident involving the life support system, which is dangerously close to the ship's magazine; sure, a magazine detonation would probably vaporize the ship instantly anyway, but for minor accidents an additional plate of armor between those rooms could help in a measure. 3- It's a minor issue, but the hallway connecting the Ops room to the cargo bay and the medbay/CO cabin is a waste of space for a warship this small; i would expand the medbay into the corridor while keeping the Co cabin as it is, so it would have more capacity while using space that would otherwise be wasted. Thanks again for your awesome work in developing this channel, as a fellow sci-fi enthusiast i'm glad to see the genre is very much alive and kicking and with a passionate community. Keep up the good work!
At the risk of being annoying, a few technical notes: - Using big chemical rockets for RCS purposes is interesting, but would probably have poor precision, and require a great deal of fuel as well. Furthermore, the gimbaling of those motors in the necessary manner could actually induce vibrations/etc due to the slight changes in mass balance - A thing that is usually overlooked even by people inclined to realism in sci-fi is that projectile weapons would be essentially useless in any reasonably predictable form of space combat due to detection ranges on the order of hundreds of thousands of kilometers at least (assuming adequate computational power to analyze sensor data, which is a fairly trivial problem to solve). Directed energy weapons are very nearly accessible today, and most definitely will be even in the near future once fusion reactors are developed. (Projectiles of essentially any type would travel far too slowly to hit except at extremely close range. Torpedoes and such would likewise move far too slowly and wouldn't have nearly enough fuel to maneuver meaningfully) - A viable spacecraft of any appreciable size will likely be incapable of atmospheric flight due to the extreme fuel requirements (and the extreme lack of aerodynamics that a practical spacecraft would likely possess). - For any appreciable distance of travel, it is probable that chemical rockets will be impractical even for primary thrust. They're just too inefficient. Various forms of plasma thruster are already theorized or in development, and are likely to be more practical due to their dramatically higher efficiency (thrust levels will be much lower than rockets, however, but the efficiency makes up for that). - Those heat sinks (really, radiators) are interesting, but are likely to be inefficient due to the need to channel waste heat from the rest of the ship to them, and would likely negatively impact mass balance as they are moved. Furthermore, they would likely contribute to a fairly immense aft thermal signature. That said, it's a cool looking ship (though impractical, I'm afraid), and I generally enjoy your videos.
No need to worry about the aft thermal signature, as there is no stealth is space. There could be a good in universe reason for ships using chemical engines, such as abundance of fuel, ease of fuel storage, or no need for power generation, which produces heat. And projectiles have a number of characteristics that complement energy weapons. Combining those two weapon types makes for a balanced ship.
Actually there’s tech we already know of which could accelerate projectiles to hundreds if not thousands of km/s. The limitation is likely to be how fast and how accurate you can aim. Combat may actually be much closer than you’d expect.
@@badbeardbill9956 the thing about space is that it's really really big, and EM radiation goes way faster than any projectile possibly can. So the real limitation is in sensors, not in aiming. With sufficiently sensitive sensors, we should be able to detect ships at tens of thousands if not millions of miles away, if not more. The kind of technology to accelerate a projectile to an appreciable velocity would give off fairly huge EM spikes, which would be detectable literally minutes (at least) before a projectile can reach it's target. The target can then easily move mere meters and the projectile would miss (and keep going). A missile would move much more slowly to begin with, and almost certainly couldn't carry the necessary fuel to both maneuver and accelerate to a high enough velocity to hit anything. Thus, the only practical weapons in space (assuming sensor technology isn't completely neglected) are things that move at or near the speed of light... which means directed energy weapons and particle beams (which raises all sorts of interesting tactical questions)
@@medevilenemy Sensors are going to be able to see every warship from the Sun to the next solar system. This tech already exists, it's only going to improve. Sensor range is dependent on a variety of things, but it's likely that every ship in the solar system will be tracked. And closely too. Space is huge. But you're already making the assumption that ships can aim at appreciable distances. A 1 km long ship at 1 light second would be around 3 microradians. To hit it (ignoring relative motion and possible acceleration in the time it takes light to travel) would require an incredibly advanced targeting system, both in terms of software and hardware. The hardware would be much more advanced than the software - the software is stuff we could develop today. But there isn't a single piece of hardware today that can handle that. Remember, we're talking lasers with immense energies. And we're assuming the ship is 1km long. Ships can be much smaller or they can even orient themselves to expose the smallest cross section. And that's before getting into relative velocities and accelerations. The hard part is going to be the aiming. MatterBeam suggests a 10 meter mirror. Probably has to be reasonably thick to avoid getting destroyed by the laser. Moving that thing would be difficult. Target acquisition and tracking may take so long that by the time you get a firing solution they've already sprayed your hull with kinetic impactors. Particle beams are more efficient than lasers and can potentially be effective weapons. But they suffer similar problems. The best weapons are going to be guns. More advanced guns than we have, but guns nonetheless. The ranges of engagement will likely be less than 0.1 light seconds, mainly due to hardware limitations. This is a fuzzy line but it's just damn hard to hit stuff accurately, especially if you want it done fast. Of course this also means lasers would have an easier time of it as well, but they've been described as blast furnaces that produce coherent light as a byproduct - they do much less damage for a given ship mass and much less for a given energy. Considering the limitations on effective range, guns will likely be the most common weapon, followed by particles beams. Maybe even Casaba Howitzers. Space combat will require fast target acquisition and fast "turn to target." This limits effective range, no matter the weapon used. Lasers are unwieldly and make for inefficient weapons. So guns will be more likely.
Two thoughts; one would be if he adds small maneuver jets, like the ones on the Vipers in the reboot or the RCS thrusters on the Space Shuttle or Gemini capsule might provide the additional, off centerline thrust you're looking for. The other thought would be if the existing thrusters were capable of rotating about 110 degrees, their perpendicular thrust to the centerline of mass might be enough for proper roll, pitch, and yaw delta vees.
Just an engineering perspective and thinking 3 dimensionally the cluster off center (unless the forward section is a lot less dense than I think the other sections are) has advantages and disadvantages. Good for boosting forward thrust, breaking, landing, spinning on main axis or sliding in any direction. However they will use a lot more energy than needed for changing orientation. I would place additional and smaller thrusters as far from the center of mass as possible (leverage applies as long as Newtonian physics are involved) how many or how big these are depends on the rotational force your artificial gravity systems can compensate for, or the crew can handle, however if fixed you need at least 4 in each set, depending on the orientation change needed 1 to 2 in each set will be firing to pivot and then opposite ones would fire to stop the pivot, or different ones if the pivot needs to continue but change again. The big thrusters can help but being closer to center of mass means they need to use a lot more energy to change orientation than those farthest from center of mass, more energy means using more fuel no matter what the source is. To quote an old scifi and social comentary writer TANSTAFL
I know you said nothing was probably going to stay the same from this draft but it looked like it stayed pretty much the same lol. But love the ship. Makes me think about drawing is ship I had in my mind now for years
I think those maneuvering thrust nozzles are going to be good for lateral thrusting but have to articulate really, really fast in order to equal the maneuvering potential of contemporary RCS in pivot axis(plural) with that setup. In a situation where you had to do small corrections alternating yaw/pitch/roll back and forth I imagine the speed they'd need to articulate to create moment arms would be rather prohibitive. I also do believe this engine configuration would severely limit being able to do pivot axis maneuvers while simultaneously lateral thrusting. At least, the thrust would have to be split between maximum turn rate and maximum thrust in any particular axis. That's an unhappy helmsman. For a military vessel of that scale that may need to take some hits, I suggest additional redundancy in the maneuvering/propulsion system is possibly a good idea. Even the Space Shuttle's RCS system is designed with two nozzles for everything ;) If the bridge is designed to the extent of having chairs to reduce G's, it might be a better idea to have it in the fulcrum of the ship to reduce G stresses as the ship makes pivoting axis maneuvers rather than in one of the levers. Miiiight want to streamline the access to the med bay from EVA. If spaceship design had union rules, this would probably be one of them :D
Another brainfart; Those engines would be rather difficult to repair in space given the amount of articulation that they need. Think about all those bearing surfaces that also need to be temperature resistant and the fact that similar metals want to cold weld themselves together in vacuum is an engineering nightmare.
Kudos for you, I really like your ship. As positive criticism/advice I would add that A; don't use chemical engines. I don't know what your ships' engines burn, but if it is something similar to what NASA, Roscosmos (best name for a space agency, hands down) etc rockets use, then your ship would need to carry awfully large containers, or be restricted to short range missions. Just switch to fusion. B; Having 8, directional, moving engines kind of makes the main engine redundant. If you remove the main engine, the four engines toward the back of the ship can happily take it's place. It would also justify having not just one big engine and using rapid spinning manouvers with RCS (like in the Expanse) for umm.. Manouvering. Engines are big, easy targets so having 4 instead of 1 makes sense, just like on a plane because they can be easily shot down. C; MOAHR firepower is always better (or at least welcome) so I would switch out the coilgun turret for a bigger, spinal mounted gun. The ship is obviously very manouverable, so it doesn't make sense to sacrifice firepower for a better firing arc when you already have the latter (by being agile). D; Instead of just hanging around, blocking your PDCs' firing arcs, make the radiators retractable. So instead of widening them to compensate for more heat generated, they're just extended further. Perhaps you can play with the idea that ships build up heat anyway during combat and only cool themselves when safe, leading to situations when your crewmembers are sweating from heat because they've been fighting *insert your antagonist organization here* ships for far too long. In my Sci-Fi (which I sadly didn't work on for a year) I also use thermal clips, like Mass Effect weapons do, but for ships. Ships heat up during high-G burns & combat (or maybe they want to quickly go into heat stealth) and they jettison these clips heated to thousands of degrees. To better facilitate this, ships have a complex maze of heat exchangers that transfer most of the heat onto either the radiators or the clips. E; If you use "gravitic plating".. How much energy does it eat? If huge amounts, then they shouldn't be on military ships (but definitely on pleasure yacts and the like) or restricted to the captains, XO's and guest cabins. Ooor, maybe they're switched off (or among the firsts to be) when that lovely anti-capital ship PRO-TAUN BEEM needs more energy. F; As others have said before me, the midsection of the Genie (maybe Jinni? As in, from the Arabian folklore?) is very weak structurally. I would add plate armor or better yet, four supporting beams connecting Genie's ass and the back of the "head of the crocodile". Next, the engines are too close together and to the center of mass. Move them farther out and they'll work like a charm. Ps.: Idunno if you did the ship's emblem yourself, but if's amazing. Keep up the good work.
I'd suggest the VASIMR drive for the main engine. www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/VASIMR en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Specific_Impulse_Magnetoplasma_Rocket I'd think you'd want RCS in the nose. Think of the Starfury and how it has its RCS as far out on the ends to help improve maneuverability. Also, you should reinforce the bulkheads on the torpedo rooms. Nothing like chaining internal explosions in your ammo to ruin your day. See any video of a Russian T-62/72/82 series tank exploding for why. As for the weaponry I think it's fine. This is a corvette probably similar in size to Serenity. There really isn't much space on vessels that size. With two autocannons that can rotate and cover the rear plus torpedos that have off axis fire capability, even to the rear though inertia will bite you on the ass for any engagement like that, the aft segment is covered.
If you have grav tech of some sort, then a main engine that is fundamentally different than the maneuvering engines could easily make sense. I'd make the aft section larger, so the ship looks more balanced around the middle/RCS/thorax, and make it mostly contain a power generation and fuel section instead of something that looks like a chemical rocket engine. "Drift" would involve the power unit going into overdrive (extending radiators) and either generating a gravitational gradient the ship surfs or some sort of warp/mass-reduction field.
NightRaven 1901 Oh why thank you. Another thing that's mostly missed is armor protection for the drive cones. Nothing fancy, just plate armor so a stray pdc round won't be going to put a hole in your engine. I really like to design spaceships, but somehow they always come off as slightly aerodynamic bricks with back wings (radiators).
NightRaven 1901 If the gravity plates are switched off in combat, does that mean your ships are aligned like buildings, instead of umm.. ships? Or are the intertial dampeners always on? Also, do you use fighters? If so, are those just scouts, or screens or full on, ww2/bsg-style weapons that do the actual job of fighting?
I like the ship, feels good and down to earth. However I would note that it shouldnt be particularly manuverable, due to the placement of the rcs block not being able to take advantage of the lever effect from being far from the center of mass. Of course the g forces at the bow could get nasty, so advantages apply to both ways.
You could estimate the thrust from the size of the expansion nozzle, but my off the cuff assessment is that those things are big enough that you'd probably lose your lunch in a prolonged turn fight.
Jonathan Schmidt Either way, having the rcs spread out would more efficient fuel wise, and you could dial them down to compensate. But with this design you dont need to pump the fuel as far. Still its a very good design and stands out nicely. Though a thing of note as well is the thruster bells should be MUCH wider if this isnt atmosphere capable, because you want the pressure in the bell to be as close to ambient (0psi) as possible to increase your isp. For a real life example, the falcon 9 main stage has the same engines as the 2nd, but the 2nd has only 1 with a huge bell to be efficient.
I like One-Of-a-Kind designs in almost everything. I designed a shiip for some short stories. The ship itself was a prototype, made for a tender to serve as a "combat freighter" but the company lost the competition, went bankcrupt, and the prototype was stolen from a depot by the main charachter a year later.
Want one of us to make a 3 dimensional model of it or even put it in a game mod like Homeworld, Empire at War, or even Space Engineers? No promises it will be pretty, but we'll do the best we can.
What a great design, thanks for sharing it. I love how even with sci-fi tech like artificial gravity the design follows logic and reason for its layout; the maneuvering engines is a brilliant idea. Good luck with your story, I can't wait to see more of it.
I really like the ship and in particular the torpedo system. I would wonder if it has reaction wheels or gyroscopes. it seems like the RCS system is inefficient for orientation and gyros might be a better solution.
I like it, but I do have some thoughts on the design. Mainly I believe that the ship needs more point defense on the dorsal and ventral side (by the looks of the ship and its armaments, torpedoes long range engagements will play a large role and the Guin will need 360 PDC coverage, best choice will be extendable internal 360 PDC turrets)
Yeah you are right about the coverage, but please no extending PDCs the ones on the expanse look horrible and need extra time to deploy before firing. Stupid design for something that needs to be ready at a moments notice.
More weapons? Good grief, the thing is already stacked. Look at the scale. It's tiny but bristling. Which crewman are you going to put planetside to make room for more weapons and their ammo, subsystems, power requirements etc. etc.
I really liked this video. Being someone who loves making his own ships/universes, this was enjoyable to watch. I'd say make more, but that would be asking too much. I for one can't wait to hear more of this universe you're working on.
The radial symmetry of mass seems off from the side view. The center of mass would seem to be slightly lower than the center of thrust in this dimension. This means that with neutral vectoring, forward thrust will also make the ship pitch "down". This will require constant compensation via thrust vectoring, but that's very wasteful and inefficient. Also, the vectoring would reduce the forward firing arc of the coilgun turret, since the ship would have to be traveling at an "upwards" diagonal angle in order to achieve a straight linear movement (essentially, doing the space equivalent of a wheelie).
Love the design and the sound of the world you’ve created has got me interested. I truly admire what you’ve envisioned and I wish I could do what you do.
I want to thank you back your videos along with isaac arthur's made me start writing a sci-fi book Edit/addition dammnit now i have to change one of the names of the ships , i was making a factoin with old english/norse names
Will other factions use other "hard" sci/fi solutions? For example, the Rival faction uses Orion Drives and Casba-Howitzers, large thermonuclear bullets of death The Enemy Orion's are bulky brawlers, linearly fast but wallowing on maneuvers. That brings in the niche for the Huntress Class, highly maneuverable, able to out turn the Orion's and attack the vulnerable pusher plate/piston assembly
I know I have already commented here asking about coilguns and railguns and the difference but I have an important message: Hello Spacedock, Probably like many others, I am a kid with an imagination, and by kid I mean high school student. I first started writing in my seventh grade year with [now that I look back on it] pretty bad science-fiction. Last year, I was browsing TH-cam and I searched up stuff about science fiction. That's how I stumbled across you. As far as I've seen into your channel, your videos have helped me write better science fiction. I recently COMPLETELY restarted a sci-fi story that I was working on for a very long time because the technology and plot elements didn't add up. It's not a bad thing, but a good thing. The fact that these videos helped me write better and look back on my "realistic" sci-fi is something that I take on a personal level. Thank you. PS: I should probably be working on my essay right now.
I mean, by definition, anything that launches a projectile forward will have equal and opposite recoil, right? Or am I misunderstanding your explanation?
If it's supposed to be realistic, yes. If the setting has something like magic, or some other way of accelerating a projectile that doesn't obey newtonian physics, then truly recoilless weapons are possible. Coilguns are realistic weapons though, and really should follow newtonian physics. So yes you're right in that regard.
@Dethglock You need to read up on Newton's laws of motion a bit, dude. That, or learn to phrase things in a less misleading way. Because what you just said made no sense whatsoever.
@Dethglock/videos _"if the coil gun actuates by using a pulling force exerted down the rails of the barrel, essentially dragging the projectile through it, as opposed to pushing it forward, then if anything, it will throw the ship forward a bit."_ No. If the magnetic coils are pulling the projectile forward, then the projectile's inertia is pulling the coils backwards. It ends up exactly the same as if you were pushing it from behind with a spring, or any other firing system. Newton's third law.
Just some spitballing ideas and questions: Where does this get power? What happens when something goes wrong? You should add an extendable/retractable solar array. Artificial Gravity is working in this universe? If So, why need metal lifts when you can just reverse the gravity of an object? (Either explain how people walk in your ship or make sure to add a gravity ring or something like everyone has magnetic boots) The ship is segmented in a way that's make it easy for it to be cut apart by gunfire and sever the main body from the cargo and main thrusters; maybe add dom ribbing or extra amounts if girders or something to keep it together. Where is the fuel stored for the chemicals engines? I'm also an artist by hobby, I'd be happy to help if you would want it. You can contact me on my email: ticsn@yahoo.com
From what I as a sci-fi expert can add to this. 1. I'm guessing this ship would he military fielded, as such should anything of this sort happen, normally they would call for back up. 2. When PlanetSide, ships tend to turn off gravity generators since you don't want those two clashing, as such a lift for the vehicle would be better, and since you already have one for getting the vehicle in, better to just make it go all the way up and secure it. Also less expensive overall.
Jul Kar 'Cerum that’s one thing I hate about space warships in sci-fi; they always use powered lifts in one form or another. Wat happens when/if the power goes out due to battle? Having them also increases the chances of extra damage if the ship takes a hit, in the form of say, an electrical fire or short (don’t forget wat would happen if the ship took a hit from some sort of EMP type weapon, they would be completely and permanently disabled). Furthermore, during battle, wouldn’t it make sense to not have powered lifts draining power away from more critical systems during battle? Yes, at this point, warships would have the ability to transfer power away from non-critical systems, but y have such a useless feature in the first place. Notice how in the history of man, there r only a literal handful of ships that had powered lift systems for the crew. Warships have always used metal ladders.
It's a very nice concept, turbolifts and all, Star trek did a very nice job of it. But when push comes to shove, when on a military vessel, simplicity, efficiency, and reliability is the true defining feature of beauty on those ships.
Lifts are to make sets/filming easier. Otherwise you have to actually have the bits that are supposed to be next to each other actually next to each other, or else you have to make sure there aren't any through sight-lines. The Serenity set for Firefly is an example of not using lifts. BTW: Video games, especially older ones, use lifts in a similar way to obfuscate loading transitions. Though it has become more and more popular to use blind turns instead. Still obvious and odd if you look for it.
I love that your doing this, animated comics are often beautiful motion art pieces with the ability to display a story far more diversely. I’m loving the ship, I kept getting images of what it would look like 3D in my head, meaning it must be a good design. Only thing I have a slight issue with is that the manoeuvring are really close to (assuming) the centre of mass which is rather inefficient. But artistically the design creates an almost abstract triangle(star destroyer), which helps with its original aggressive nature as a war ship. Also I love the idea with the holographic windows, it just makes sense. Thanks for the vid and I would like to see more if it kind in the future :)
Really looking forward to seeing more of your work. Love the fact you have decided to base the ships around regular chemical engines - I think that could be really interesting. Nice work mate.
This is amazing! i love the design of the ship its much more grounded and realistic than others while still allowing itself some liberties and it looks exactly like a small military warship should look. i absolutely love your work, congratulations on the 100k they're very well deserved and here's to 100k more
Gotta say I absolutely love her. She is a wonderful design and I can see you put a lot of detailed thought into the design and it really cones together to make a wonderful ship. I do have one thing that stuck out in my mind, however it is a very minor consideration. In order for the person inhabiting the captain's cabin to reach the galley they will have to either pass through one of the dormitories or otherwise pass through the whole munitions area. I realize that this is a military design focused on a crew of 8 people, but I could see issues if the CO wanted some coffee and had to pass through a bunk room, potentially disturbing crewmen who just came off of third watch, to do so. Like I said, minor detail.
I was a US submariner for 16 years and that is the closest I will ever get to being on a spaceship while being stuck here. BSG pulled heavily from both Navy and submarine influences when it designed the interior of the Galactica. I've been a sci-fi fan for decades and love hardcore, reality-based stories whenever I can find them. I spent a lot of time daydreaming underway that if we had stellar combat craft, patrolling a section of space, this is exactly what it would be like. Or while being on an SSBN, it would be like living on a stealth, strategic mobile missile platform deployed near a hostile moon or planet. Both would play a cat and mouse game...and me in my 20's was going "This is the coolest job ever." But design, form, and function have been and are subjects I have spent a lot of time thinking about. If you want to pick my brain...like say why the captain's cabin or at least a their at sea cabin should be directly behind the bridge. The role of navigation, sensors, and comms. Why hydroponics should be twice the size of its control space and the need for storage for repair parts, repair shops and stores, not just cargo. Why is the ice cream machine on the electrical bus considered vital to ship's operation? I'm you're man. Passageways are narrow to maximize deck space. Cramped does not even come close to describing them. Just offering. It may give it a bit more of a BSG feel and a lot less of Traveler with a heavy Expanse influence. PM me if you want to chat, I'm on FaceBook by the same name.
Congrats on reaching 100K! I can't wait to find out what other stuff you come up with. The amount of detail you've sunk into this one ship while revealing relatively little has certainly piqued my interest. I really hope that you find everyone/everything you need to make this a reality. Keep up the good work!
Rad as heck mate, from one science fiction writer to another I'm really interested in this and don't worry if you think your sketch work is bad you should really see the rough sketches I've got for the protagonists ship
Love the idea of this comic and cant wait to see how it turns out. I also have a rough idea I always thought would be cool, but I’m not a rocket scientist and don’t know if it’s would be viable. Basically: It’s a less a ship and more a deployable defense outpost which can be dropped or shot torpedo style. It would either float freely or attach to something solid like an asteroid, derelict, or even an under-defended station or capital ship. Depending on its size, it would have a heavily if not purely defensive armament of point defense and short range fighters which are designed to dock flush with the hull instead of using a hangar to save space. It’s not designed for long deployments with most space being used for combat facilities such as ammo and fuel storage, communications, computers, and fairly basic cabins and medical facilities, as they aren’t gonna be long and most injuries will likely be fatal. I feel like it would either be a pod shape or flat on one side to allow for easier attachment. Also, I can already see abandoned pods being used as homes, scrapper refineries, terrorist strike basis, criminal hideouts, etc. just putting the idea out there as I can’t remember seeing anything like this anywhere else.
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
I should point out that I'm not good at doing unscripted videos so I kinda rush and ramble a bit here, for example - It was not my intention to make it sound like the coilgun causes literally zero recoil. Also, it's not too clear in the image, but the back of the primary hull is sloped in such a way that the 4 forward-most maneuvering thrusters can be locked to face straight forward for retrograde burns.
Use the coil guns to maneuver the ship and we will forgive you XD
Nah man, you were great! Love the unscripted video, it makes you more... human? The scripted ones are almost disconnected, more like a narrator than a person behind the video is how I'd describe it (don't get me wrong, they're perfect for informative videos, but this one is more personable, which I like). Also; amazing ship design and engineering behind it! I especially liked the heat sinks and torpedo tubes.
Excellent concept for a fictional space craft (and congrats on 100,000)
I swear if the captain of this ship is named Arthur & the head engineer/doctor is Merlin.....
I beg you to do a video about any of the space-ships from the 2009 movie Avatar.
A minimalist, down to earth, converted Warhorse that uses proper Newtonian Physics for direction control and propulsion....
A wise man once said... "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
Gwen here is, in all honesty, "Perfect" by those standards. The size, scale and addition of a stowed Rover remind me a lot of the Serenity, if that ship were more than just and unarmed transport.
the ship reminds me more of the roci from the expanse, except that ship has no large cargo bay for a rover, and only a few gatling guns instead of auto cannons, both have torpedos
Be a fighter make a fighter etc it is proper operation
Because of the rover, i get the feeling of the Normandy.
A big issue I see is that the majority of habitable spaces are well forward of the center of mass. Meaning that whenever the ship yaws or pitches, anyone in those compartments will undergo high g-forces.
I said the exact same thing lol. He just needs to beef up the mid section a bit.
Artificial dampening with that grav plating?
Sci-fi universes usually have to get around this issue with so-called 'inertial dampeners' fitted to the crew compartments, Stargate's Earth starfighters are a good example. Seeing as he's already admitted to going for anti-grav for convenience i don't think inertial dampeners would be a stretch.
My ships use paragravity, but with decks arranged vertically in case it fails.
Hey everyone, thanks so much for your viewership and support over the last two years, and thanks for taking the time to check out my work in this video. I'd recommend you go to full-screen as I originally intended these images to just be writing aids for me so they're not brilliantly suited to TH-cam resolution. - Daniel
congrats dude.
I think a fixed thruster is needed for braking, but i love the design otherwise. It wont be very good at braking is all.
I love your voice
Oh also there are tricks to making your ship look cooler. Just by taking things from around your place and making them into part to your ship. one thing my graphics teacher told me was don't think about the scope of the projeck just start putting together shapes and it will all come together in the end just remember your idea.
Great design, if u do add windows keep them digital. There is no good reason for windows on a space warship.
I love the idea of a ship consisting mostly out of RCS clusters. Absolutely amazing and very original.
Even better a Hab space station module coverd in 3-5 nozzle RCS Clusters
Six years later, and being a sucker for realistic space flight, and a 3D artist, I must confess that I shall incorporate this design in some creation. I love the gigantic blocks for thruster, RCS and crew separated. I loved it.
I came back to this video to remind myself where it all began. I'm so excited for the Sojourn!
You did it Daniel!
Overall design reminds me of the _Rocinante_ from The Expanse, I'm sure that was intentional. I like the _Millennium Falcon_ style lift airlock, although I'm not sure how practical it would be. I like that the small, low-mass ship uses coilguns to avoid powerful recoil. Would larger ships in this setting employ spinal railguns, or do you think of railguns as less advanced technology?
Looking forward to potentially seeing it in action.
themetalstickman You mean MCRN Tachi
Yep, the whole ship screams Rocinante to me
Why does it seem like the Rocinante? It's oriented in a completely different direction, for one, swapping height in the habitable space for length. That alone is a huge difference.
More like a small Battlestar Galactica
yourcurtainsareugly I think they're referring to the angular hull shape with the autocannons on rotating hard points and a whopping huge drive at the back. I agree with you that it doesn't look a whole lot like the Roci, but it shares some design themes.
It seems a little lacking in the fuel department. Especially if you are using chem rockets.
*drift
Just over a year later, seeing The Sojourn come to fruition is a beauty to behold.
Congratulations for the 100K thanks that you showed expanse to me
Aaaaannnd, the sojourn is live folks!! But seriously watching the progression of this story has been just amazing.
This is a fantastically unique, attractive, and well thought design right here!
Poorly thought out design. The thrusters are WAY too close to the center of mass meaning the turning rate of the ship is SLOW SLOW SLOW.
Oh no it's not flawless that totally outweighs all the thought, panning and creativity that was put into this ship! Give me a break you fucking asshole.
After spending the last 3 weeks killing myself in dev work for a scifi-ship game...You've revived my love of hard-scifi that I was almost fed up with thanks to trying to code things.
6:19. From Newton's third law you can see that there is always recoil when you are accelerating an object, no matter the mechanism. In a coilgun, not just the coils pull the bullet, but also vice versa.
I loved the design of the ship, I just wanted to point this out.
You beat me to it.
Not to mention the thrusters responsible for turning the ship are too close to the center of mass which would mean INCREDIBLY poor turn rates.
Honestly quite interesting and, true to your word, original. I've been working on my own sci-fi military vehicles, but I'm more focused on ground vehicles. Nice design and vid, SD.
Congratulation on the 100k subscriptions. An interesting ship design. From what I understand you are trying to make something like a ship from The Expanse. I have 3 issues with this design.
First the torpedoes being ejected sideways. The larger bay door is more vulnerable (and needs a stronger engine to move a larger part of the hull). As your torpedoes reorient anyway I would make round ports facing sideways. Or I would make forward facing ports and use a less powerful coil gun technology to give them some extra starting speed. Remember that your design for launching torpedoes has no way to get them away from the hull at fast speed. That means that when you turn in combat and launch a torpedo the ship needs to stop turning or risk smacking into the ejected torpedoes. Sitting duck for enemy coil gun for a couple of seconds. Ejecting them sideways also gives less surface for the ejection mechanism to work with (imagine wheels pushing it out either sideways or along the length) so you either need to stay on the same heading longer until the torpedo gets far away from the hull so it's main engine won't damage the hull and you won't smack into it or you need a more powerful ejection mechanism (which will increase maintenance). Either launch them forward so when they get to the target it will have the ships speed in addition to the launcher acceleration (so it will approach faster, meaning less time for point defence) or find a way to get them away from the hull fast.
Secondly is your turrets. They are not manoeuvrable enough to work as point defence. If torpedoes are used often enough point defence, ecm and decoys are a must. Or the first torpedo ends the fight.
Thirdly is your placement of manoeuvring thrusters. Simple physics will tell you that placing them near the centre of mass is a mistake (levers and points of applying the force). The farther from the centre of mass the less power you need to turn. Also they should be placed equidistant from the centre of mass (or you need variable power RCS and a good operating system to compensate).
I love how much thought you put into the practicality of the ship instead of just going for look first and function second.
For reference material I would highly recommend the atomic rockets site.
I always have a tab open to that site.
I absolutely adore your professionalism and incredible passion you have for starships and sci fi. This channel has so much potential, all thanks to you.
Happy 100k! It's about damn time!
Suggestion; instead of windows in the captain cabin, have an interior wall be coated with the holographic material so the captain can put up what ever they want up as a background and use that as a mcguffin to sho the captain mood.
"Treat her like a lady and she will always bring you home."-Admiral Lenard McCoy.
Well done Daniel and congrats. The greatest designers are not artist but visionaries. You my friend are a visionary.
Nice design. Instead of offering windows in the C.Os cabin and the med room you could add view screens or something. Like large tvs that can play an atmospheric scene or even have a live feed from a hull mounted camera?
Aye, starships should never have windows. If an arm of the military is best suited to man a spaceship it would be the Nave, as spaceships will be like submarines.
Lord Inquisitor Yes but surley a military vessel of any kind wouldnt allow such a blatant weakness on the hull
Not to mention lasers can pass right though them.
Neon Demon
"Geth do not use them"
You could have such screen in all cabins (bigger for higher-status ones, and then the 'wallpaper' pictures that people choose to display can tell you something about their character.
The quality of the content that's being made from this channel is amazing. Really looking forward to what you're making.
It's a nice start, I can see the influences of The Expanse as well as Star Citizen and Mass Effect. I do have some critiques and suggestions to ergonomics though.
The first is the single-person airlock. I can't for the life of me see why that would be there, especially if it's pointed in the same direction of the cargo bay doors, which also acts as a vacuum bay. I'd move all the EVA suits to the hallway/airlock connecting to the Ops room, as well as perhaps the one connecting to the engine bay as a backup. Either that or have that Locker room connect directly to the cargo bay by itself. That way a crew can jump out of a rack, slide down the ladder, grab their guns and jump in a suit, and jump into the airlock as quickly as possible. Having a single airlock that does the same thing seems superfluous on a military ship, not to mention dangerous with the single-file exit. If there is to be a second airlock, it needs to go up or out the sides.
Secondly I have thoughts about the RCS cluster... the idea is interesting, but only if the majority of the mass was in the center. In this design, the biggest open area is in the center it seems. While this may make sense on a real cargo hauler... for military again, not so much. For realism sake's, I'd also address the nozzle sizes. Chemical rockets use nozzles that let the gas pressure of the rocket equal the gas pressure outside. In atmosphere, that leads to narrow and short rocket bells. In a vacuum... it's zero pressure... so you literally want as wide a nozzle as you can possibly get. With them on rotating sockets of course, this poses an issue if you don't make them also very short... which is perfectly acceptable.
Of course another solution would be to use perhaps something cooler looking, and that's aerospike engines in the ballsockets. Due to the physics, these engines don't need a bell at all, and automatically adjust for the pressure, which makes them perfect for landing as well. Perhaps even have retractable pylons that each socket rests in, so they extend further out for space flight, and retract for atmospheric. Which of course means the ship would have to rely on aero surfaces for maneuvering, as their primary thrusters are tucked in so close that their effectiveness is servery impacted.
Really, really cool ship design. I like the realism a lot.
Can't wait to see what else you may give us to tease your series.
I like it, but....hear me out here. I say we add more rcs thrusters.....we need all of the rcs thrusters.
(ACTUAL THOUGHTS): In all seriousness I like it quite a bit but it's weapons are distributed with a massive bias towards a frontal cone of fire thus hampering combat from any other direction, the aft has very little point defense coverage, and if we are going with a high realism sci-fi then long range combat will be extremely difficult as a torpedo from the rear would essentially be impossible to eliminate. The cone of fire is very forward heavy but adding a few pdcs to the rear should eliminate the issue or at least mitigate it.
My second issue is the hull, the rcs block is very narrow at both ends and can easily be torn apart. This is a massive weak point and could be counteracted by some ablative armor around the ends or by making it more compact (larger doesn't mean it's better by default).
And the sub deck is also a massive danger, a massive ammo stack directly below the primary room and the quarters is just asking for trouble especially if that side has no weapon or pdc coverage. But that's less of a problem as ammo rooms are a necessary danger.
High Inquisitor Ralph
Hence why they are needed
But the ship looks promising... I say Daniels needs to embrace it. Have one or two characters comment it and someone answer "Want one of those? Buy one and go to ########"
Or a more reasonable one commenting that this one is lighter and faster.
Vicho Deivis
Fair enough, I do agree that it is extremely promising but I still would like to point out flaws.
BYZANTINE GALACTIC EMPIRE
Yes those are some of the flaws I find as well. Small firing arc for a ship of it's size (needs dorsal and ventral turret), exposed maneuvering thrusters with no back up ones and it also seems to have a poor yaw. Other than that seems solid
Love that the design is both practical and beautiful.
Neat! Designing space ships is probably one of my favorite parts of my writing.
My only question would be, is there any reasoning to the sorta hour glass shape between the main sections? I imagine that might be a tactical weakpoint, it looks like there's practically no lateral armor there.
I like it! It looks a bit crocodilian at the front. If some bandit/raider/military types get a hold of one, they could paint it scaly green and give it a toothy grin decal, maybe call their ship "The Caiman" or "Gharial".
It is one of the worst designs I've ever seen from a purely utilitarian perspective. The directional thrusters are WAY too close to the center of mass meaning incredibly poor turn rate. The torpedo tubes are poorly designed.
Yeah some windows would probably be added in some very non-important points, they'd probably be very small but could be very useful for visual inspections of certain parts of the ship, without the need to put on a suit and go outside, people also like to look outside sometimes, could be good for mental health for longer deployment.
Also, i do love the fact you've added heatsinks, something you almost never see! i'm completely in love with this channel and its content and you guys just keep on giving so much goodies. thank you for your hard work!!
I`m going to make a guess that the faction that developed this class only made the one because it was a primarily a technology demonstrator type of vessel to show that the tech on-board it was useful in a spacecraft and later built a less costly version for mass production, similar to the USS Sea jet was for the Zumwalt class destroyer class to test its tumbledown hull.
PS. are the auto-cannons dual purpose? Like they`re used for both ship-to-ship and like a CIWS?
They only build one because they realized it was incredibly poorly designed. The guy saw The Expanse and made a cheap knockoff of the ships he saw.
Beautiful. Appreciate the design focusing on a mix of tangible and intangible realism
This is so cool.
Reminding me or f the Rocinante from The Expanse. I'm amazed please keep going.
Also really solid sci-fi, which you informed of so even cooler. For me at least.
In an earlier video he did say the Rocinante was his favorite corvette design so I had a feeling if he designed a ship it would look like that.
I really like it! It looks agile yet sturdy; an engine arrangement that looks applicable in real life while still having a sleek profile. The Guinevere is a lady with brains, brawn, and beauty.
Good Evening! Congrats on making it to 100k, this is a truly amazing channel and i'm glad i discovered it some time ago.
I don't know how you would react to criticism, but as awesome and well-reasoned as the Huntress design is, especially in the Sci-fi setting you described at the start of the video, there are a few things that (i find) could be improved:
1- I know it's mainly an aesthetic design choice and a feature of the class or the faction, but i can't overlook that positioning the RCS thrusters so close to the ship's center of mass is suboptimal, because it reduces the angular momentum applied to the ship and thus its rotation speed; the fact that they are of considerable size and (presumably) power, and the gimballed mounting mitigate this effect a little bit, but that's A LOT of wasted energy (and potentially fuel, i don't know how the ship is powered). For a warship as light as this, increased maneuverability means increased survivability.
2- The additional armor plating between the bridge and the armament bays offers a good measure of immediate crew protection, but i feel that it should be extended to cover the two escape pod bays: it wouldn't do much good for a full crew to survive an ordnance accident just to discover that only two of them can abandon ship because the forward escape pods were caught in the blast.
2bis- It also wouldn't be nice to be forced to abandon ship because of said accident involving the life support system, which is dangerously close to the ship's magazine; sure, a magazine detonation would probably vaporize the ship instantly anyway, but for minor accidents an additional plate of armor between those rooms could help in a measure.
3- It's a minor issue, but the hallway connecting the Ops room to the cargo bay and the medbay/CO cabin is a waste of space for a warship this small; i would expand the medbay into the corridor while keeping the Co cabin as it is, so it would have more capacity while using space that would otherwise be wasted.
Thanks again for your awesome work in developing this channel, as a fellow sci-fi enthusiast i'm glad to see the genre is very much alive and kicking and with a passionate community.
Keep up the good work!
As a artist I really enjoyed this and I wish you well on your project!
At the risk of being annoying, a few technical notes:
- Using big chemical rockets for RCS purposes is interesting, but would probably have poor precision, and require a great deal of fuel as well. Furthermore, the gimbaling of those motors in the necessary manner could actually induce vibrations/etc due to the slight changes in mass balance
- A thing that is usually overlooked even by people inclined to realism in sci-fi is that projectile weapons would be essentially useless in any reasonably predictable form of space combat due to detection ranges on the order of hundreds of thousands of kilometers at least (assuming adequate computational power to analyze sensor data, which is a fairly trivial problem to solve). Directed energy weapons are very nearly accessible today, and most definitely will be even in the near future once fusion reactors are developed. (Projectiles of essentially any type would travel far too slowly to hit except at extremely close range. Torpedoes and such would likewise move far too slowly and wouldn't have nearly enough fuel to maneuver meaningfully)
- A viable spacecraft of any appreciable size will likely be incapable of atmospheric flight due to the extreme fuel requirements (and the extreme lack of aerodynamics that a practical spacecraft would likely possess).
- For any appreciable distance of travel, it is probable that chemical rockets will be impractical even for primary thrust. They're just too inefficient. Various forms of plasma thruster are already theorized or in development, and are likely to be more practical due to their dramatically higher efficiency (thrust levels will be much lower than rockets, however, but the efficiency makes up for that).
- Those heat sinks (really, radiators) are interesting, but are likely to be inefficient due to the need to channel waste heat from the rest of the ship to them, and would likely negatively impact mass balance as they are moved. Furthermore, they would likely contribute to a fairly immense aft thermal signature.
That said, it's a cool looking ship (though impractical, I'm afraid), and I generally enjoy your videos.
No need to worry about the aft thermal signature, as there is no stealth is space. There could be a good in universe reason for ships using chemical engines, such as abundance of fuel, ease of fuel storage, or no need for power generation, which produces heat. And projectiles have a number of characteristics that complement energy weapons. Combining those two weapon types makes for a balanced ship.
Actually there’s tech we already know of which could accelerate projectiles to hundreds if not thousands of km/s. The limitation is likely to be how fast and how accurate you can aim. Combat may actually be much closer than you’d expect.
@@badbeardbill9956 the thing about space is that it's really really big, and EM radiation goes way faster than any projectile possibly can. So the real limitation is in sensors, not in aiming. With sufficiently sensitive sensors, we should be able to detect ships at tens of thousands if not millions of miles away, if not more. The kind of technology to accelerate a projectile to an appreciable velocity would give off fairly huge EM spikes, which would be detectable literally minutes (at least) before a projectile can reach it's target. The target can then easily move mere meters and the projectile would miss (and keep going). A missile would move much more slowly to begin with, and almost certainly couldn't carry the necessary fuel to both maneuver and accelerate to a high enough velocity to hit anything. Thus, the only practical weapons in space (assuming sensor technology isn't completely neglected) are things that move at or near the speed of light... which means directed energy weapons and particle beams (which raises all sorts of interesting tactical questions)
@@medevilenemy Sensors are going to be able to see every warship from the Sun to the next solar system. This tech already exists, it's only going to improve. Sensor range is dependent on a variety of things, but it's likely that every ship in the solar system will be tracked. And closely too.
Space is huge. But you're already making the assumption that ships can aim at appreciable distances. A 1 km long ship at 1 light second would be around 3 microradians. To hit it (ignoring relative motion and possible acceleration in the time it takes light to travel) would require an incredibly advanced targeting system, both in terms of software and hardware. The hardware would be much more advanced than the software - the software is stuff we could develop today. But there isn't a single piece of hardware today that can handle that. Remember, we're talking lasers with immense energies. And we're assuming the ship is 1km long. Ships can be much smaller or they can even orient themselves to expose the smallest cross section. And that's before getting into relative velocities and accelerations. The hard part is going to be the aiming. MatterBeam suggests a 10 meter mirror. Probably has to be reasonably thick to avoid getting destroyed by the laser. Moving that thing would be difficult. Target acquisition and tracking may take so long that by the time you get a firing solution they've already sprayed your hull with kinetic impactors.
Particle beams are more efficient than lasers and can potentially be effective weapons. But they suffer similar problems.
The best weapons are going to be guns. More advanced guns than we have, but guns nonetheless. The ranges of engagement will likely be less than 0.1 light seconds, mainly due to hardware limitations. This is a fuzzy line but it's just damn hard to hit stuff accurately, especially if you want it done fast. Of course this also means lasers would have an easier time of it as well, but they've been described as blast furnaces that produce coherent light as a byproduct - they do much less damage for a given ship mass and much less for a given energy. Considering the limitations on effective range, guns will likely be the most common weapon, followed by particles beams. Maybe even Casaba Howitzers.
Space combat will require fast target acquisition and fast "turn to target." This limits effective range, no matter the weapon used. Lasers are unwieldly and make for inefficient weapons. So guns will be more likely.
1:30
nothing will probably stay the same
some years later:
everything stays the same
Can you move the manoeuvring engines further away from the centre? The further from the centre of gravity they are the more effective they'll be.
Agreed. Real vehicles like the Shuttle have the thrusters at the extreme ends so they provide leverage.
Two thoughts; one would be if he adds small maneuver jets, like the ones on the Vipers in the reboot or the RCS thrusters on the Space Shuttle or Gemini capsule might provide the additional, off centerline thrust you're looking for. The other thought would be if the existing thrusters were capable of rotating about 110 degrees, their perpendicular thrust to the centerline of mass might be enough for proper roll, pitch, and yaw delta vees.
Just an engineering perspective and thinking 3 dimensionally the cluster off center (unless the forward section is a lot less dense than I think the other sections are) has advantages and disadvantages. Good for boosting forward thrust, breaking, landing, spinning on main axis or sliding in any direction. However they will use a lot more energy than needed for changing orientation. I would place additional and smaller thrusters as far from the center of mass as possible (leverage applies as long as Newtonian physics are involved) how many or how big these are depends on the rotational force your artificial gravity systems can compensate for, or the crew can handle, however if fixed you need at least 4 in each set, depending on the orientation change needed 1 to 2 in each set will be firing to pivot and then opposite ones would fire to stop the pivot, or different ones if the pivot needs to continue but change again. The big thrusters can help but being closer to center of mass means they need to use a lot more energy to change orientation than those farthest from center of mass, more energy means using more fuel no matter what the source is. To quote an old scifi and social comentary writer TANSTAFL
They're chemical rockets. No need for leverage
Supportive* William uh, what. Doesn't matter what it is that provides thrust, it still gets more effective the more leverage it has.
It’s a really cool design that reminds me a lot of ships like the Rocinante (which is what I’m guessing you were going for).
Congrats on 100k!
I know you said nothing was probably going to stay the same from this draft but it looked like it stayed pretty much the same lol. But love the ship. Makes me think about drawing is ship I had in my mind now for years
From this ship alone this sounds like the perfect Sci-Fi.
I remember when this channel had only 1000 subscribers, I'm so glad it has grown so much.
I think those maneuvering thrust nozzles are going to be good for lateral thrusting but have to articulate really, really fast in order to equal the maneuvering potential of contemporary RCS in pivot axis(plural) with that setup. In a situation where you had to do small corrections alternating yaw/pitch/roll back and forth I imagine the speed they'd need to articulate to create moment arms would be rather prohibitive.
I also do believe this engine configuration would severely limit being able to do pivot axis maneuvers while simultaneously lateral thrusting. At least, the thrust would have to be split between maximum turn rate and maximum thrust in any particular axis. That's an unhappy helmsman.
For a military vessel of that scale that may need to take some hits, I suggest additional redundancy in the maneuvering/propulsion system is possibly a good idea.
Even the Space Shuttle's RCS system is designed with two nozzles for everything ;)
If the bridge is designed to the extent of having chairs to reduce G's, it might be a better idea to have it in the fulcrum of the ship to reduce G stresses as the ship makes pivoting axis maneuvers rather than in one of the levers.
Miiiight want to streamline the access to the med bay from EVA. If spaceship design had union rules, this would probably be one of them :D
Another brainfart; Those engines would be rather difficult to repair in space given the amount of articulation that they need. Think about all those bearing surfaces that also need to be temperature resistant and the fact that similar metals want to cold weld themselves together in vacuum is an engineering nightmare.
Just seeing this design and plan has me hyped for whatever story you make! Can’t wait to hear more! :D
Kudos for you, I really like your ship. As positive criticism/advice I would add that
A; don't use chemical engines. I don't know what your ships' engines burn, but if it is something similar to what NASA, Roscosmos (best name for a space agency, hands down) etc rockets use, then your ship would need to carry awfully large containers, or be restricted to short range missions. Just switch to fusion.
B; Having 8, directional, moving engines kind of makes the main engine redundant. If you remove the main engine, the four engines toward the back of the ship can happily take it's place. It would also justify having not just one big engine and using rapid spinning manouvers with RCS (like in the Expanse) for umm.. Manouvering. Engines are big, easy targets so having 4 instead of 1 makes sense, just like on a plane because they can be easily shot down.
C; MOAHR firepower is always better (or at least welcome) so I would switch out the coilgun turret for a bigger, spinal mounted gun. The ship is obviously very manouverable, so it doesn't make sense to sacrifice firepower for a better firing arc when you already have the latter (by being agile).
D; Instead of just hanging around, blocking your PDCs' firing arcs, make the radiators retractable. So instead of widening them to compensate for more heat generated, they're just extended further. Perhaps you can play with the idea that ships build up heat anyway during combat and only cool themselves when safe, leading to situations when your crewmembers are sweating from heat because they've been fighting *insert your antagonist organization here* ships for far too long. In my Sci-Fi (which I sadly didn't work on for a year) I also use thermal clips, like Mass Effect weapons do, but for ships. Ships heat up during high-G burns & combat (or maybe they want to quickly go into heat stealth) and they jettison these clips heated to thousands of degrees. To better facilitate this, ships have a complex maze of heat exchangers that transfer most of the heat onto either the radiators or the clips.
E; If you use "gravitic plating".. How much energy does it eat? If huge amounts, then they shouldn't be on military ships (but definitely on pleasure yacts and the like) or restricted to the captains, XO's and guest cabins. Ooor, maybe they're switched off (or among the firsts to be) when that lovely anti-capital ship PRO-TAUN BEEM needs more energy.
F; As others have said before me, the midsection of the Genie (maybe Jinni? As in, from the Arabian folklore?) is very weak structurally. I would add plate armor or better yet, four supporting beams connecting Genie's ass and the back of the "head of the crocodile". Next, the engines are too close together and to the center of mass. Move them farther out and they'll work like a charm.
Ps.: Idunno if you did the ship's emblem yourself, but if's amazing. Keep up the good work.
I'd suggest the VASIMR drive for the main engine. www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/VASIMR en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_Specific_Impulse_Magnetoplasma_Rocket
I'd think you'd want RCS in the nose. Think of the Starfury and how it has its RCS as far out on the ends to help improve maneuverability. Also, you should reinforce the bulkheads on the torpedo rooms. Nothing like chaining internal explosions in your ammo to ruin your day. See any video of a Russian T-62/72/82 series tank exploding for why. As for the weaponry I think it's fine. This is a corvette probably similar in size to Serenity. There really isn't much space on vessels that size. With two autocannons that can rotate and cover the rear plus torpedos that have off axis fire capability, even to the rear though inertia will bite you on the ass for any engagement like that, the aft segment is covered.
If you have grav tech of some sort, then a main engine that is fundamentally different than the maneuvering engines could easily make sense.
I'd make the aft section larger, so the ship looks more balanced around the middle/RCS/thorax, and make it mostly contain a power generation and fuel section instead of something that looks like a chemical rocket engine. "Drift" would involve the power unit going into overdrive (extending radiators) and either generating a gravitational gradient the ship surfs or some sort of warp/mass-reduction field.
If they are really chemical engines, then 90% of the internal volume will be full storage.
NightRaven 1901 Oh why thank you. Another thing that's mostly missed is armor protection for the drive cones. Nothing fancy, just plate armor so a stray pdc round won't be going to put a hole in your engine. I really like to design spaceships, but somehow they always come off as slightly aerodynamic bricks with back wings (radiators).
NightRaven 1901 If the gravity plates are switched off in combat, does that mean your ships are aligned like buildings, instead of umm.. ships? Or are the intertial dampeners always on? Also, do you use fighters? If so, are those just scouts, or screens or full on, ww2/bsg-style weapons that do the actual job of fighting?
Ship looks great! Love that you referenced the Interstellar ships those were so cool
I like the ship, feels good and down to earth. However I would note that it shouldnt be particularly manuverable, due to the placement of the rcs block not being able to take advantage of the lever effect from being far from the center of mass. Of course the g forces at the bow could get nasty, so advantages apply to both ways.
You could estimate the thrust from the size of the expansion nozzle, but my off the cuff assessment is that those things are big enough that you'd probably lose your lunch in a prolonged turn fight.
Jonathan Schmidt Either way, having the rcs spread out would more efficient fuel wise, and you could dial them down to compensate. But with this design you dont need to pump the fuel as far. Still its a very good design and stands out nicely. Though a thing of note as well is the thruster bells should be MUCH wider if this isnt atmosphere capable, because you want the pressure in the bell to be as close to ambient (0psi) as possible to increase your isp. For a real life example, the falcon 9 main stage has the same engines as the 2nd, but the 2nd has only 1 with a huge bell to be efficient.
I feel like "down to earth" is not high praise for an interplanetary vessel :P
I like One-Of-a-Kind designs in almost everything. I designed a shiip for some short stories. The ship itself was a prototype, made for a tender to serve as a "combat freighter" but the company lost the competition, went bankcrupt, and the prototype was stolen from a depot by the main charachter a year later.
Want one of us to make a 3 dimensional model of it or even put it in a game mod like Homeworld, Empire at War, or even Space Engineers? No promises it will be pretty, but we'll do the best we can.
What a great design, thanks for sharing it. I love how even with sci-fi tech like artificial gravity the design follows logic and reason for its layout; the maneuvering engines is a brilliant idea. Good luck with your story, I can't wait to see more of it.
I really like the ship and in particular the torpedo system. I would wonder if it has reaction wheels or gyroscopes. it seems like the RCS system is inefficient for orientation and gyros might be a better solution.
"Windows are structural weaknesses. Geth do not use them." :3
Keep up the awesome work!
I like it, but I do have some thoughts on the design. Mainly I believe that the ship needs more point defense on the dorsal and ventral side (by the looks of the ship and its armaments, torpedoes long range engagements will play a large role and the Guin will need 360 PDC coverage, best choice will be extendable internal 360 PDC turrets)
Yeah you are right about the coverage, but please no extending PDCs the ones on the expanse look horrible and need extra time to deploy before firing. Stupid design for something that needs to be ready at a moments notice.
ER! B36 Peacekeeper could pull off retractable 20mm cannons. I would like retractable CIWs weapons on this thing, I think it’d be a nice touch
How about something like those pd lasers US aircraft carriers have
That can be done by adjusting orientation and using the autocanons
More weapons? Good grief, the thing is already stacked. Look at the scale. It's tiny but bristling. Which crewman are you going to put planetside to make room for more weapons and their ammo, subsystems, power requirements etc. etc.
I really liked this video. Being someone who loves making his own ships/universes, this was enjoyable to watch. I'd say make more, but that would be asking too much. I for one can't wait to hear more of this universe you're working on.
The radial symmetry of mass seems off from the side view. The center of mass would seem to be slightly lower than the center of thrust in this dimension. This means that with neutral vectoring, forward thrust will also make the ship pitch "down". This will require constant compensation via thrust vectoring, but that's very wasteful and inefficient. Also, the vectoring would reduce the forward firing arc of the coilgun turret, since the ship would have to be traveling at an "upwards" diagonal angle in order to achieve a straight linear movement (essentially, doing the space equivalent of a wheelie).
Love the design and the sound of the world you’ve created has got me interested. I truly admire what you’ve envisioned and I wish I could do what you do.
I can taste a lot of Expanse inspiration, which I really like.
I'm writing a PnP style RPG with a lot of inspiration from that too, so yeah 👌😍
This sounds amazing! You knowing the ins and outs of sci-fi doing their own thing is what I've been hoping for forever!
OMG!
a spaceship with a toilet :o
Very good work, I love to see concept art. We all have to start somewhere. Nothing helps that visual representation.
I want to thank you back
your videos along with isaac arthur's made me start writing a sci-fi book
Edit/addition
dammnit
now i have to change one of the names of the ships , i was making a factoin with old english/norse names
What a preposterous design with those vector engines! And don't even get me started with the flanges on the graywater pipes.
Will other factions use other "hard" sci/fi solutions?
For example, the Rival faction uses Orion Drives and Casba-Howitzers, large thermonuclear bullets of death
The Enemy Orion's are bulky brawlers, linearly fast but wallowing on maneuvers. That brings in the niche for the Huntress Class, highly maneuverable, able to out turn the Orion's and attack the vulnerable pusher plate/piston assembly
Really excited for a Spacedock submission that has some significant length to it!
the first ones ship should be nicknamed the Guiney just saying.
I know I have already commented here asking about coilguns and railguns and the difference but I have an important message:
Hello Spacedock,
Probably like many others, I am a kid with an imagination, and by kid I mean high school student. I first started writing in my seventh grade year with [now that I look back on it] pretty bad science-fiction. Last year, I was browsing TH-cam and I searched up stuff about science fiction. That's how I stumbled across you.
As far as I've seen into your channel, your videos have helped me write better science fiction. I recently COMPLETELY restarted a sci-fi story that I was working on for a very long time because the technology and plot elements didn't add up. It's not a bad thing, but a good thing. The fact that these videos helped me write better and look back on my "realistic" sci-fi is something that I take on a personal level.
Thank you.
PS: I should probably be working on my essay right now.
Thanks so much for your kind words. I wish you the best of luck with your writing. :)
I mean, by definition, anything that launches a projectile forward will have equal and opposite recoil, right? Or am I misunderstanding your explanation?
If it's supposed to be realistic, yes. If the setting has something like magic, or some other way of accelerating a projectile that doesn't obey newtonian physics, then truly recoilless weapons are possible.
Coilguns are realistic weapons though, and really should follow newtonian physics. So yes you're right in that regard.
@Dethglock
You need to read up on Newton's laws of motion a bit, dude. That, or learn to phrase things in a less misleading way. Because what you just said made no sense whatsoever.
@Dethglock
Oh okay so you're a complete and utter imbecile then. Do you also believe that the Earth is flat, maybe?
@Dethglock/videos _"if the coil gun actuates by using a pulling force exerted down the rails of the barrel, essentially dragging the projectile through it, as opposed to pushing it forward, then if anything, it will throw the ship forward a bit."_
No. If the magnetic coils are pulling the projectile forward, then the projectile's inertia is pulling the coils backwards. It ends up exactly the same as if you were pushing it from behind with a spring, or any other firing system. Newton's third law.
It could be that he doesn’t understand what recoil is. I know a lot of even gun people think it’s a sideways force, not an axial one.
Congrats dude!! Well deserved 100k, your videos never drop in quality.
Favourite YT channel rn
Just some spitballing ideas and questions:
Where does this get power? What happens when something goes wrong? You should add an extendable/retractable solar array.
Artificial Gravity is working in this universe? If So, why need metal lifts when you can just reverse the gravity of an object? (Either explain how people walk in your ship or make sure to add a gravity ring or something like everyone has magnetic boots)
The ship is segmented in a way that's make it easy for it to be cut apart by gunfire and sever the main body from the cargo and main thrusters; maybe add dom ribbing or extra amounts if girders or something to keep it together.
Where is the fuel stored for the chemicals engines?
I'm also an artist by hobby, I'd be happy to help if you would want it. You can contact me on my email: ticsn@yahoo.com
From what I as a sci-fi expert can add to this.
1. I'm guessing this ship would he military fielded, as such should anything of this sort happen, normally they would call for back up.
2. When PlanetSide, ships tend to turn off gravity generators since you don't want those two clashing, as such a lift for the vehicle would be better, and since you already have one for getting the vehicle in, better to just make it go all the way up and secure it. Also less expensive overall.
Jul Kar 'Cerum that’s one thing I hate about space warships in sci-fi; they always use powered lifts in one form or another. Wat happens when/if the power goes out due to battle? Having them also increases the chances of extra damage if the ship takes a hit, in the form of say, an electrical fire or short (don’t forget wat would happen if the ship took a hit from some sort of EMP type weapon, they would be completely and permanently disabled). Furthermore, during battle, wouldn’t it make sense to not have powered lifts draining power away from more critical systems during battle? Yes, at this point, warships would have the ability to transfer power away from non-critical systems, but y have such a useless feature in the first place. Notice how in the history of man, there r only a literal handful of ships that had powered lift systems for the crew. Warships have always used metal ladders.
It's a very nice concept, turbolifts and all, Star trek did a very nice job of it. But when push comes to shove, when on a military vessel, simplicity, efficiency, and reliability is the true defining feature of beauty on those ships.
Lifts are to make sets/filming easier. Otherwise you have to actually have the bits that are supposed to be next to each other actually next to each other, or else you have to make sure there aren't any through sight-lines.
The Serenity set for Firefly is an example of not using lifts.
BTW: Video games, especially older ones, use lifts in a similar way to obfuscate loading transitions. Though it has become more and more popular to use blind turns instead. Still obvious and odd if you look for it.
Great design! Pretty cool and deeply thought out! Hope to see your vision come to life, as I do mine!
I swear man, you are my favorite channel. Keep doing what you do good sir!
I love that your doing this, animated comics are often beautiful motion art pieces with the ability to display a story far more diversely. I’m loving the ship, I kept getting images of what it would look like 3D in my head, meaning it must be a good design. Only thing I have a slight issue with is that the manoeuvring are really close to (assuming) the centre of mass which is rather inefficient. But artistically the design creates an almost abstract triangle(star destroyer), which helps with its original aggressive nature as a war ship. Also I love the idea with the holographic windows, it just makes sense. Thanks for the vid and I would like to see more if it kind in the future :)
Really looking forward to seeing more of your work. Love the fact you have decided to base the ships around regular chemical engines - I think that could be really interesting. Nice work mate.
This is amazing! i love the design of the ship its much more grounded and realistic than others while still allowing itself some liberties and it looks exactly like a small military warship should look.
i absolutely love your work, congratulations on the 100k they're very well deserved and here's to 100k more
Gotta say I absolutely love her. She is a wonderful design and I can see you put a lot of detailed thought into the design and it really cones together to make a wonderful ship.
I do have one thing that stuck out in my mind, however it is a very minor consideration. In order for the person inhabiting the captain's cabin to reach the galley they will have to either pass through one of the dormitories or otherwise pass through the whole munitions area. I realize that this is a military design focused on a crew of 8 people, but I could see issues if the CO wanted some coffee and had to pass through a bunk room, potentially disturbing crewmen who just came off of third watch, to do so. Like I said, minor detail.
Seemed a bizarre design at first sight, but I really like your ideas. Developed properly this could be really awesome. Congrats on 100k!!
Really like the concept and aesthetic of this craft and really looking forward to seeing your series!
I was a US submariner for 16 years and that is the closest I will ever get to being on a spaceship while being stuck here. BSG pulled heavily from both Navy and submarine influences when it designed the interior of the Galactica. I've been a sci-fi fan for decades and love hardcore, reality-based stories whenever I can find them.
I spent a lot of time daydreaming underway that if we had stellar combat craft, patrolling a section of space, this is exactly what it would be like. Or while being on an SSBN, it would be like living on a stealth, strategic mobile missile platform deployed near a hostile moon or planet.
Both would play a cat and mouse game...and me in my 20's was going "This is the coolest job ever."
But design, form, and function have been and are subjects I have spent a lot of time thinking about. If you want to pick my brain...like say why the captain's cabin or at least a their at sea cabin should be directly behind the bridge. The role of navigation, sensors, and comms. Why hydroponics should be twice the size of its control space and the need for storage for repair parts, repair shops and stores, not just cargo. Why is the ice cream machine on the electrical bus considered vital to ship's operation? I'm you're man.
Passageways are narrow to maximize deck space. Cramped does not even come close to describing them.
Just offering. It may give it a bit more of a BSG feel and a lot less of Traveler with a heavy Expanse influence.
PM me if you want to chat, I'm on FaceBook by the same name.
I like your design . I can't wait for the story to be release!
If you made these plans, I'd say you're an artist. Can't wait for The Sojourn
Congrats on reaching 100K! I can't wait to find out what other stuff you come up with. The amount of detail you've sunk into this one ship while revealing relatively little has certainly piqued my interest. I really hope that you find everyone/everything you need to make this a reality. Keep up the good work!
Very interesting video and I can't wait to see how your ship's development changes as you get to work on the project more!
Very interesting Design, i really like the Realismus you're Putting into this and i'm looking Forward to seeing some more of your Designs Soon😊
Rad as heck mate, from one science fiction writer to another I'm really interested in this and don't worry if you think your sketch work is bad you should really see the rough sketches I've got for the protagonists ship
Congratulations for getting 100,000 subscribers! You've earned it!
The ship design is very nice and I like it very much! I can not wait to get more information about the story!
It's always a good day with a new Spacedock video.
This is why I love sci fi. Wish I could have been there to write with you
I found your channel only recently, but I really really really really like it. Definitely interested to see what this original project looks like.
Love it, I look forward to learning more about Gwen in the future.
i haven't drawn a spaceship in years so i might draw this its really cool concept and i definitely can't wait for more of this story of yours
Very cool on the 100,000. Your ship looks cool! Good luck and can't wait to see your story
Love the idea of this comic and cant wait to see how it turns out. I also have a rough idea I always thought would be cool, but I’m not a rocket scientist and don’t know if it’s would be viable. Basically: It’s a less a ship and more a deployable defense outpost which can be dropped or shot torpedo style. It would either float freely or attach to something solid like an asteroid, derelict, or even an under-defended station or capital ship. Depending on its size, it would have a heavily if not purely defensive armament of point defense and short range fighters which are designed to dock flush with the hull instead of using a hangar to save space. It’s not designed for long deployments with most space being used for combat facilities such as ammo and fuel storage, communications, computers, and fairly basic cabins and medical facilities, as they aren’t gonna be long and most injuries will likely be fatal. I feel like it would either be a pod shape or flat on one side to allow for easier attachment. Also, I can already see abandoned pods being used as homes, scrapper refineries, terrorist strike basis, criminal hideouts, etc. just putting the idea out there as I can’t remember seeing anything like this anywhere else.
Congratulations on 100K subscribers! Your channel is great reference for sci fi ships.
Congrats on 100k. Really like the ship design. Love the the ships name and class name. Really looking forward to seeing it in action good luck
I like the ship design, something that helped me was looking at modern day military war ships and cargo ships