Slashdot Mirror


Comparing Sci-fi Starship Sizes

LiberalApplication writes "It looks like someone has very lovingly created something that sci-fi fans everywhere will likely want to see; if not out of curiosity, then at least to revitalize the burning, seething, grudges between fanatics of rival science-fiction universes. Starship Dimensions places images of various starships from science fiction settings such as Star Trek, Star Wars, Babylon 5, ID4, Macross/Robotech, Lexx, Freespace, and Battlestar Galactica side-by-side, in scale! The author has also conveniently included football fields, humans, King Kong, and buildings for comparison. You can even drag them around the page and stage your own interstellar battle royale."

494 comments

  1. Mirror? by jclendenan · · Score: 1

    Anyone got a mirror out there?

    1. Re:Mirror? by quantaman · · Score: 5, Funny

      You know it's bad when the first post is requesting a mirror!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    2. Re:Mirror? by FlashBIOS · · Score: 1

      No permissions?

    3. Re:Mirror? by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      It doesn't take slashdot referals. Copy the link into a new browser and try it that way.

    4. Re:Mirror? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What, you can't see the size of your *ahem* starship without a mirror?

    5. Re:Mirror? by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Informative
      The only relic still available is on his old site at fortunecities, the background image is still there which is fairly interesting in itself. I think some other bits of that site might still be there if you can work out the URLs. Nothing on the Wayback Machine for either site.

      Cowboy Neal is doing well today. Earlier his spam story is a dupe, now this one where he kills a site before there'sa "FIRST POST".

      Slashdot needs 1) dupe detection (or at least marking,
      2) some way to mirror low-bandwidth sites (give a veto to the owner)
      3) spellcheck on submissions (ESPECIALLY for the editors)

    6. Re:Mirror? by bshort404 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's a partial mirror:

      http://bshort.com/shipdim/shipdim.html

      Please be gentle.

      --
      -B
    7. Re:Mirror? by punkmanandy · · Score: 1

      its because all the subscribers with their "future" stories viewing used all the bandwidth. now thats a small webserver, or else lots of people are subscribing to slashdot.

    8. Re:Mirror? by jclendenan · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I agree CN's doing really well today... More people need to run Apache on windows boxes, then we wouldn't have this kind of problem.

    9. Re:Mirror? by fbg111 · · Score: 1

      And when Google has wiped the site from their cache.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    10. Re:Mirror? by dalek_killer · · Score: 1

      Anyone have another mirror site out there?

    11. Re:Mirror? by rmarll · · Score: 1

      Please be gentle.

      You must be joking.

      Enjoy your 404.

      Gentle... sheesh. :)

    12. Re:Mirror? by deaddrunk · · Score: 1

      Just think, if prostitution was legal in the US, this sort of website, and possibly the whole internet would be very different.

      --
      Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
    13. Re:Mirror? by pyrote · · Score: 1

      if prostitution was legal in the US
      It's not?

      Someone ought to tell nevada.

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
    14. Re:Mirror? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only cause its eclipsed by the *moon*

  2. slashdotted by neurostar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, it looks like the battle happened before I got there... all the ships are gone already :(

    1. Re:slashdotted by FlashBIOS · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, it is on IIS - I Infrequently Serve.

    2. Re:slashdotted by Ramion · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Slashdot should really really start getting a way to mirror sites that dont look like that can hold the presure and go down as fast as this.

      Its annoying for us that read this site that half the sites you link to dont work.

      Its a pain in the ass for the people that have the sites. Either because they have them at home at some small adsl connection or at a expensive host company that might uphold the /. effect, but then charge the poor person for all the traffic.

      You should really make a client where you mirror it and when people click your link they download the site from slashdot and not the orignal source and then use p2p to share it with other.. A kind of mirror p2p browser. Maybe it could be done with mozilla somehow =)

    3. Re:slashdotted by alphaseven · · Score: 4, Informative
      The site was up on Metafilter yesterday, and it even had trouble handling that traffic. Nice site though, you could choose from a few different resoluctions from 1 metre per pixel up to 2000 metres per pixel. And you could drag the images around to compare.

      The largest was the second Death Star from episode 6, followed by some alien ship from Macross 2, and the ID4 mothership (which held several 24 kilometer city destroyers).

      Also included were ships from Star Trek (the probe from episode IV was huge) Lexx, Babylon 5, Hitchhikers Guide, Battlestar Galactica... that's all I can remember. It borrowed some graphics and the look from skyscraperpage.com.

    4. Re:slashdotted by Courageous · · Score: 1

      That would be illegal. :(

      C//

    5. Re:slashdotted by ReaperOfSouls · · Score: 1

      Hrmmm....Google seems to get away with it all the time...I don't know how many times I have done a search and the site that I was looking for was actually down...Google comes to the rescue and I could view the page in the Google Cache...

      It does bring up an interesting question, is caching pages/images against the law. If so, does that mean that webproxies are illeagal too since they essentually do the same thing, just a more transparent interface...

      --
      Shameless self promotion : The Misadvetures of the in
    6. Re:slashdotted by Courageous · · Score: 1

      Good point. The way Google handles this, they take the cache entries out if you ask. They could get really ass-monkeyed if they ended up causing someone some financial harm (cacheing secured pages; don't know how they'd manage that), but as is, they just are playing as if they won't be sued because of lack of probable damages.

      Copyright law exempts "systems of relays" from copyright violation, otherwise radio franchises wouldn't be able to play over the radio waves across jump points. Some part of the web community is probably hoping things like Google will get defined that way. To my knowledge they haven't yet been, and I'd be surprised if they were. One cannot easily give up one's copy right...

      I suppose Slashdot could just honor the no-spider meta tags, and let the chips fall where they may.

      C//

    7. Re:slashdotted by webslacker · · Score: 1

      The owner of the site has been creating a special section dedicated to Robotech/Macross/Southern Cross/Mospeada, which will be on Robotech.com in a couple days

  3. Slashdotted already? by m0ng0l · · Score: 1

    And only after two posts!!!

    --
    Do you see the FNORDS? I refuse to post anonymously, as I am fireproof!
    1. Re: Slashdotted already? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Funny


      > And only after two posts!!!

      This one's so important that everyone decided to actually read the article before posting.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  4. /.'d before the first post.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Welcome to IIS

  5. /.'ed but who cares? by smoondog · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess comparing spaceship sizes is really important to /. readers. Always reminds me of the scene in "Stand By Me" where the kids argue over the superiority of mighty mouse vs superman.

    -Sean

    1. Re:/.'ed but who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're right, that's just silly.

      Superman is far greater than Mighty Mouse.

    2. Re:/.'ed but who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you cared enough to post about it here.

    3. Re: /.'ed but who cares? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny


      > I guess comparing spaceship sizes is really important to /. readers.

      Maybe they don't realize that sometimes a starship is just a starship.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:/.'ed but who cares? by macshune · · Score: 2, Interesting
      What is the difference between DDoS'ing and Slashdotting? It's not like people are ignorant of the /. effect.

      If you _know_ the site is gonna go down when the story gets posted, then it's the same as DDoS'ing, right?

    5. Re:/.'ed but who cares? by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Are you saying this should have gone in the size-doesn't-matter department?

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  6. MIRRORS by hlprmnky · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    jesus mcFuckity christ!

    Posted: 11:47CDT
    Current time: 11:48:25 CDT

    SITE IS NOT AVAILABLE DUE TO TOO MANY USERS
    CONNECTING

    not even the OPPORTUNITY to mirror!

    Come on people, at least send the site owner an email or IM with a picture of Mr. Goatse and the caption "This is your web server in 10...9...8..."!

    1. Re:MIRRORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      QUESTION: If slashdot postings are put in a queue and it waits there for _at_least_ 20minutes then why aren't they doing this already? If every fricken site linked to is slashdotted all to hell then what's the point of reading slashdot, a round-about DNS check?

    2. Re:MIRRORS by bfree · · Score: 1

      Here's an idea to help with the /. effect. Write an apache mod which keeps track of where requests are coming from and the intensity of them. When the mod recieves the request it can: check to see if you have instructions for this site/url (like mail me on a new /. story link, and make the page a manual redirect for slashdotters, requesting people to mirror it but click on to get the page) or fall back to default actions (restrict simultaneous connections to 100, send mail if limit reached). Is there something like that out there already? The way I suggest the config, you would see the appearnace of subscribers early in a slashdotting and maybe deal with it before the hoards come. You could even have an emergency plan which is kicked in when a site or pages hit another trigger (write a script/program to produce or redirect your site to a less intensive version, or just stop sending out images). Yes you would introduce an extra load on each request (you could make it minimal by clobbering out local requests first), but in the event of a traffic spike of (by your own definition) reasonable proportions you have a greater chance of survival (if 2 million people come beating on your basic server within a minute of each other your fried no matter what you do). People could even setup a routine whereby contributing servers would send back the list of their top spikers, and then get back a longer list of the sites to watch out for (based on other with your top spikers).

      --

      Never underestimate the dark side of the Source

  7. Damnit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's /.'d already please provide mirrors!

  8. Glass houses. by villain170 · · Score: 3, Funny

    This guy has got to have way too much time on his hands.

    Oh wait. Isn't there some kind of saying about people in glass houses shouldn't be throwing something... forget it. I forgot who I am and what I do for a second. :-D

    --

    I am over here... now I am back over here!
    1. Re:Glass houses. by CakerX · · Score: 1

      and not enough bandwith :(

    2. Re:Glass houses. by Cached+Hit · · Score: 0

      Insert a "d" or get off my internet!

      --
      "look ma! no hands!!!" - random amputee
  9. What i want to know.... by Photon01 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What i've always wanted to know is how do sci-fi starships always manage to be the same way up?

    I'd love to be watching star trek, and see a bird of prey fly along upside down in relation to the Enterprise.

    1. Re:What i want to know.... by anti11es · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What's even funnier is that when these always upright ships lose power they "lose" the ability to stay upright and drift on their side or upside down.

    2. Re:What i want to know.... by Apaturia · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What I find even more pathetic is when they have ships surrounding them and say "we can't go anywhere!". Have they not EVER heard of the third dimension? Ya know, UP or DOWN?

      Reminds me of a Futurama episode, where people encircle a ship so that it won't move. The ship just moves up and speeds away. :)

    3. Re:What i want to know.... by TWagers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The reason is that in free-flight, they arbitrarily choose a direction to be 'up' to function as the Z-axis in whatever coordinate/sector/grid system they use. Typically this would be perpendicular to whatever the plane is of your galaxy, so in our case here in the Milky Way, x and y would be across the galactic disc, and Z would be a line going through the core. Totally arbitrary, but helpful to allow humans to 'visualize' their position in the galaxy while warping from place to place. So, to keep things in relative perspective, I assume the computers in the ships are more than happy to 'auto-level' the ship so that it appears that you're in level flight. Plus, I guess it keeps the less-intelligent folks sitting on their couches that don't understand spatial relationships from hurting their fragile little minds. =)

    4. Re:What i want to know.... by Daemonik · · Score: 1

      Babylon 5 did that a few times, most notably in the Aliance's attack on Earth's forces over Mars during the Earth Civil War.

    5. Re:What i want to know.... by jonix · · Score: 2, Funny

      That is cunning...

    6. Re:What i want to know.... by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, how the hell do physics work in sci-fi? At least in games, have you noticed how you move along in space by firing up engines to a constant rate of thrust? In space, this would equal a constant rate of acceleration if you forget about minor gravity variances from nearby planets/stars/what-have-ye because there is no drag in space. Also, it's funny that ships in games slow down merely by decreasing the thrust from said engines... Star Trek does this too if I'm not mistaken, with constant thrust from starship engines...

    7. Re: What i want to know.... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > Reminds me of a Futurama episode, where people encircle a ship so that it won't move. The ship just moves up and speeds away. :)

      Ah yes, the penguin episode. Best Futurama ever.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    8. Re:What i want to know.... by aldjiblah · · Score: 1

      If this is a preferred mode of flight for human brains, why can't we imagine these ships having thrusters in all directions compensating movement and accelleration to that it appears to the pilot as if it's constant thrust?

      --
      sig sig sputnik
    9. Re:What i want to know.... by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      That's because they actually record those scenes underwater, and the "starships" are actually submarines.

      Moya from Farscape is actually just a squid.

      :-]

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    10. Re:What i want to know.... by kliklik · · Score: 2, Informative

      You seem to have played the wrong games. In one of my favorite space-game, Frontier, you speed up, turn your engines off and let the inertion do the 'flying' for you. Then, when the time is right, you have to fire up your retro-rockets to slow down, or rotate the ship 180 and fire the main engines. If you are good, you don't crash into the space station at 10000 km/s

      --
      guru in training
    11. Re:What i want to know.... by SlashdotLemming · · Score: 4, Funny

      The reason is that...

      No it isn't
      You think every race in the universe decided on a standard AND they all use it? HAH!!!
      In my experience as an intergalactic pilot I can tell you that, in general, a ship, while not travelling, is in a position normal to the celestial body that is exerting the largest gravitational pull on it. While traveling, a path is planned to the destination, this path is not a straight line, but a series of arcs and lines, depending on whether or not gravity is being used as a mechanism of propulsion. So, for each point in the path, a ship is either in the position it was in during its last point, or it is in transition to the position it must be in to take the next point of the journey. Often this is dictated by the design of the ship, more importantly, the flexibility of the propulsion unit. If your thrusters have a wide range of motion, then you have a bigger range of what your 'up' position could be relative to your path, and a larger set of choices for path planning
      Now, if we're talking about a super-spectral propulsion mechanism.. err.. oh gods of vacuous matter, I've said too much already.

    12. Re:What i want to know.... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      We can imagine that of course, but it implies that the spaceship designers are intentionally crippling their manuverablility by emulating the restraints of aerial flight. That's a heavy price to pay just to give the human pilots a feeling of intuitive control.

      On a related note, though, one could claim that the preferred way for a human to detect an attacker behind him is by sound. So speakers could be placed inside the cockpit to create audio effects when gunfire or engine thrusters pass close by... thus explaining how they can hear explosions in space.

    13. Re:What i want to know.... by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      Right. I wouldn't surprise me one bit it was just common courtesy to orient your ship(s) all in the same manner.

      It's like shaking with your right hand, driving on the same side of the road, etc.

      So when you look out your viewport you would see the other ship oriented "correctly". Seriously, that would make sense. Just because you spend all your life in space doesn't mean it would be any less disorienting if things were spinning, upside-down, and sideways.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
    14. Re:What i want to know.... by brandonY · · Score: 1

      I feel like a nerd, but I'd like to point out that this is a plot point in Star Trek. Kirk is fighting Khan and realizes that Khan is thinking about the battle in 2D because he's from a long time ago, so Kirk makes sure to make extensive use of all 3 axes.

    15. Re:What i want to know.... by mwolff · · Score: 1

      In Wrath of Khan, Spock mentions that Khan's flying suggests 2d thinking. Kirk then orders the ship to go down something like 1000 kilometers and the battle is eventually won.

    16. Re:What i want to know.... by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      Whoa, I've never watched Babylon 5, but now it sounds really cool. An attack on Earth forces. An Earth Civil War. Mars. This is the kind of stuff I like in Sci-Fi. I should start watching this show. I tried getting into Farscape (a few times), but it never really grabbed me.

      When is Babylon 5 on?

    17. Re:What i want to know.... by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      I understand what you're saying, but Star Trek ships don't use thrust at all. Both the Impulse and Warp Engines work without thrust at all.

    18. Re:What i want to know.... by Ponty · · Score: 1

      And White Stars just can't _help_ but be fancy when they're flying in groups.

    19. Re:What i want to know.... by sjames · · Score: 1

      B5 is also one of the few sci-fi shows I've seen that admits to the existance of bathrooms.

    20. Re:What i want to know.... by kzinti · · Score: 1

      "Z minus 10000 meters, Mr. Sulu"

      Or words to that effect.

    21. Re:What i want to know.... by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Since virtually all movie and TV spaceships have artificial gravity (even when they're still using some archaic V2-like rocket for propulsion, (because freefall is impossible to do on a budget), and the "real" acceleration is almost always going to be along the axis of the ship, it "stands to reason" (mine anyway) that the decks should be perpendicular to the axis, i.e. you're usually travelling "straight up" if you're standing on the deck. This would have the advantage of making the artificial gravity simpler (Don't have to worry much about sideways forces), and should the AG fail, at least you'd fall onto the deck (or more likely, get smeared over it from the thousands of g's they must pull, even on ST impulse power.

      But instead, most seem to have their decks like a sea-going ship or an airliner, parallel to the axis.

    22. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow - can i have some of what you're smoking?

      please?

    23. Re:What i want to know.... by ralphus · · Score: 1

      There have been bathrooms in select episodes of ST:TNG, but never has a toilet been shown.

      --
      Revolutions are never about freedom or justice. They're about who's going to be top dog. -- Kilgore Trout
    24. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny
      What's even funnier is that when these always upright ships lose power they "lose" the ability to stay upright and drift on their side or upside down.

      Actually, when artifial gravity fails, the graviton matrix that supports the inertial effect degenerates, and you get a recoil effect resulting in exactly that. Don't they teach you kids anything in high school any more?

      Wait... This is 2203, right? Because if it's gone wrong and I've jumped too far again, the time cops are going to ki

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    25. Re:What i want to know.... by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      Naw, that's not it.

      Firstly, around half the species with interstellar capability have adopted a left hand axial orientation, so for them it is the Y-axis that points to Galactic Center. Visit POV-Ray for more info on this fascinating issue (unofficial motto: "Ray tracing by aliens, for aliens"). It's all in the thumbs. And, err, finger curl.

      But mostly everyone orienting with their artificial gravity generators in the same plane is just common courtesy. Even if you are about to loose your entire forward phaser bank on his weapons array, it's considered gauche to be so slovenly in your ship maneuvers that you slosh the coffee out of the other captain's cup. Nobody thinks a lapful of hot coffee is funny.

    26. Re:What i want to know.... by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I feel like a nerd, but I'd like to point out that this is a plot point in Star Trek. Kirk is fighting Khan and realizes that Khan is thinking about the battle in 2D because he's from a long time ago, so Kirk makes sure to make extensive use of all 3 axes.

      Right-- but they never do this until it is pointed out ;-) It is like the whole point is that Kirk is thinking outside the box for just long enough to create an ambush and then back to 2D tactics ;-)

      Here is the problem-- the closest thing we have to 3D combat today is aircraft. The problem is that aircraft operate in a sort of "deep-2d" in that up is a costly direction, and most of it happens along a sort of deepened plane..... Furthermore, orientation *is* important aerodynamically, so the things that would be commonplace in space are completely foreign to our existance today.

      This is why I would like to see a completely Newtonian-based Space Combat simulator. Maybe have orbital mechanics for battles near planets.... Would be really cool....

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    27. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is why I would like to see a completely Newtonian-based Space Combat simulator.

      Microsoft was working on accurate SpaceSim for a while (I was a tester). Don't think it amounted to much.

    28. Re:What i want to know.... by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      Microsoft was working on accurate SpaceSim for a while (I was a tester). Don't think it amounted to much.

      Actually I think it woudl be a niche market to have somethign like that be really well done. The controls would take some getting used to, and the whole game could be a little strange. I still think it would be cool, but if it was well done, some people might get annoyed ;)

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    29. Re:What i want to know.... by Lazyhound · · Score: 1

      The Independence War series has full Newtonian physics, except for the lack of gravity/orbital mechanics. Makes for interesting dogfights...

    30. Re:What i want to know.... by SmackCrackandPot · · Score: 1

      My favourite quote from the Battlestar Galactica series: "...We tried reading the system manuals, then the ground came up and hit us..."

    31. Re:What i want to know.... by TheNumberSix · · Score: 1

      The first season is out on DVD box set in both the US and the UK. The Second season is coming out in May in the US. (Don't know about the UK release date.)

      The entire series is already out on video from Columbia House.

      The best thing (and the worst in a way) is that the teevee show was filmed in 16x9, planning for an eventual DVD release. The reason that this turned out to not be so good is that Warner Bros lost *all* of the original 16x9 space scenes, so they had to scrunch it and stretch all the space exteriors to fit 16x9 from 4X3. WTG Warner Bros! (All the interior live-action is in native 16x9 though.)

      --
      Never confuse feeling with thinking.
    32. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "a ship, while not travelling, [is] in a position normal to the celestial body that is exerting the largest gravitational pull on it"

      You might want to tell NASA about this convention, since they generally rotate the Space Shuttle to whatever orientation is convienient to the task at hand. Sometimes they just try to keep the sun shining on the cargo bay so that they can see what they're doing.

      In general, if you're not doing anything in particular while in orbit, you'd probably want your communications anntenae pointed towards the planet.

    33. Re:What i want to know.... by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Check out Independence War 2: Edge of Chaos. It's still got all the trappings of sci-fi combat (lasers you can see, FTL drive to get from place to place, etc) but the combat itself is based around a newtonian model. Fire up your engines and you accelerate, turn them off and you drift. It makes for some fun maneuvers, broadsiding capital ships and so on. It's also incredibly tough to get used to the first couple of times out, since you have to learn how so apply a deft touch instead of the usual all-out burn.

      There's a also mod for the IWar series called Buda5 which re-creates the Babylon 5 universe, since newtonian physics was a highlight of the show's effects.
      GMFTatsujin

    34. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Also, it's funny that ships in games slow down merely by decreasing the thrust from said engines... Star Trek does this too if I'm not mistaken, with constant thrust from starship engines...


      Star trek ships use braking thrusters to slow down, according to Sulu in Star Trek 4, "..The braking thrusters have fired.." after travelling back through time by slingshottingaround earth's sun. Of course, that was a klingon bird of prey, so it may use a different deceleration system...

    35. Re:What i want to know.... by Jerf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One of the sequels to Elite tried accurate space battles.

      It sucked.

      PROBLEM: Any ship with more acceleration then the other ship can always escape. So to deal with this gameplay "problem", they made the enemy ship magically re-appear with magical acceleration so it can take another shot at you.

      PROBLEM: Unless you use an unrealistically slow amount of thrust, you tend to have these ships zipping by each other at the very least hundreds of miles per hour, leaving you with a fraction of a second to meaningfully fire on the other ship, then it's turn back around and do it again. Since you're a human you can't whip around instantly, it take time to move the ship, so every time you miss and come around for another pass, you're going a little faster since you had more time to accelerate.

      PROBLEM: It is virtually impossible to tail someone. If you're matching their thrust vector, you're not pointing at them, you're pointing in the same direction they are. Now, if you had a gunner this might be OK, but when you're both piloting and gunning because whatever the ship info screen says your crew is, it's just you, this doesn't work.

      PROBLEM: It takes time to learn how to land on things! Typically to get somewhere in an airplane-like space simulator you point your ship at it, apply maximum boost, and stop when you get there. Do that in a real simulator and you'll whack into the object (or miss it) at a significant fraction of the speed of light. (The Elite sequel capped speeds at 1/3 the speed of light, presumably to avoid relatavistic effects.) You have to learn to turn at "midpoint", which, inconveniently enough, is also when you're going the fastest and this is fairly hard for a human to do correctly. (If you're on autopilot, it's easier, but if you're on autopilot you're not really playing...) Turn around a little too soon, and you have to creep up on the target object, which might literally take several minutes or even hours (fortunately the Elite sequel had a time compressor). Turn around a little too late and by the time you realize it you're on an unstoppable collision course. *Whack*.

      PROBLEM: "Random" encounters are impossible without cheating. I would routinely see enemies boost across the system, probably hitting the 1/3 light speed, on an intercept course, and the instant they reached me, "suddenly" they're on basically the same vector as me so they can fight me. Reality is they should have zipped across my radar so fast it would be unlikely I would even see them.

      Space is big. By the time ships are moving in real Newtonian mechanics and not taking years to get from Earth to Mars, you're incapable of handling the scales as a human. The computer cheating helps but not enough (and it's frustrating as all computer cheating is). A tactics-level simulator might be cool, but flying around in Newtonian space is no fun at all. If it was, we'd have more simulations based on that.

      Also note this demonstrates space piracy is virtually impossible unless your acceleration is on par with your maximum speed, because you just can't intercept ships to save your life. (Literally, in some cases.)

    36. Re:What i want to know.... by LMariachi · · Score: 1

      Terminus
      Orbit
      Parsec, sort of.

    37. Re:What i want to know.... by SlashdotLemming · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm not the one who modded me "30% Insightful"
      When swaying the ignorant, truth doesn't stand on it own. Belief is gained through confidence and presentation.
      Just look at Fox News!! ;)

    38. Re:What i want to know.... by Rorschach1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Terminus (http://www.vvisions.com/games/details.cfm?ID=28) does a pretty good job of it. Yeah, it's not true Newtonian physics - ships have a maximum speed, and exceeding it causes hull damage and eventually destruction. But it does serve to limit the difference in velocity.

      The Terminus solar system is REALLY BIG. The fact that your top speed is limited means that pretty much anything interesting is going to be clustered around the vortex gate network. But that doesn't mean you have to stay there. I've actually flown from the Moon to the Earth in real time, without using the gate network. Took something like 12 hours. I've pondered the feasibility of flying from Earth to Venus or Mars, but it's not entirely clear if even my huge flying fuel tank of a ship would have enough juice to run the life support for that long.

      The other problem is navigation. The nav comp won't lock on to anything outside your local gate node. You're limited to looking out the window to pick your target. I once flew to Amalthea from a moon with a vortex gate and proved the concept - just had to align myself with visible landmarks. I think the solar system is dynamic in the game, though, so Venus is going to be a moving target.

      I'd recommend Terminus to anyone who likes playing around with games outside of a set story line. Not as fun as the X-Wing and TIE Fighter games as far as pure action goes, but much more like Elite.

    39. Re:What i want to know.... by Rorschach1 · · Score: 1

      That's probably not too far from the truth... your body's pushed down against the deck with a force of 1G. When you lose gravity, your body acts like a spring and pushes you off. Meat doesn't make a very good spring, though, so you're probably not going to go too far.

    40. Re:What i want to know.... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Play Independence War (1 or 2). You can leave the automatics on and fly like a airplane or turn them off and really fly. Guess which way is best for getting killed?

    41. Re:What i want to know.... by statusbar · · Score: 2, Funny
      You think every race in the universe decided on a standard AND they all use it? HAH!!!


      Well, apparently every race in the universe decided on a standard for video and audio formats! So it isn't too far of a stretch...


      Unless maybe the viewscreens in all these ships automatically swap codecs written in a 'universal programming language' - Universal Java Space Edition - UJSE?

      --jeff++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    42. Re:What i want to know.... by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      He was talking about *external* reference vectors, not internal ones.

      On a ship with AG, the internal gravitational direction has no relation whatsoever to your external coordinate system.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    43. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is why I would like to see a completely Newtonian-based Space Combat simulator. Maybe have orbital mechanics for battles near planets.... Would be really cool...."

      Independence War and Independence War II both had completely Newtonian-based space combat. :)

    44. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty much guaranteed that any spaceship will have a fly-by-wire system, so it's not at all unreasonable to expect that it would be designed to work in a way that humans 'expect'.

    45. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is quite possibly the funniest comment I've ever seen anyone post on /.

    46. Re:What i want to know.... by justinkim · · Score: 2, Informative

      The quote was "We were taking a vote when the ground came up and hit us."

      From the only good episode of Galactica 1980.

    47. Re:What i want to know.... by arkanes · · Score: 1

      There's a great game (which, damnit, I can't remember the name of right now) which is a sort of fighter-mission type game - exactly the same as Freelancer, now that I think of it. The cool thing is that you can adjust the physics from "video game" to "full Newtonian" depending on how you feel like playing.

    48. Re:What i want to know.... by Alex+Thorpe · · Score: 1

      I'll second the recommendation of Terminus. It's VERY immersive and feels quite realistic, but gets rather dull sometimes. It's also multiplayer oriented, but not really optimized for Internet-type lag, so I'd love to try a LAN game someday. Windows, MacOS(9), and Linux versions are all on the same CD in the same box; I heard a rumor of an MacOS X version in development.

      Because it is designed with multiplayer in mind, the game is always in real time, and is controlling dozens of AI pilots throughout the entire solar system at all times, so it's a bit CPU intensive for games of its age.(300 Mhz or better) Some things about it feel a bit unpolished, though, giving it almost a shareware feel. It's still worth a look if you want to try realistic space travel and combat in the solar system, save for the Vortex Gates that allow teleporting and keeps the travel times down.

      --
      "Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
    49. Re:What i want to know.... by arkanes · · Score: 1

      Terminus was the game I was thinking of in my earlier post - I like how you can adjust the physics depending on how you feel like playing. The gameplay is basically the same as Freelancer - you have a ship, you get missions, you fly around, that sort of thing.

    50. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But instead, most seem to have their decks like a sea-going ship or an airliner, parallel to the axis.

      Yes, well it would make for lots of extremely small decks in that case, as most of the starships are designed to be very streamlined. Probably to reduce wind resistance. Erm. Yes. Well then...

    51. Re:What i want to know.... by Speedy8 · · Score: 1

      None have you have heard of Tie Fighter have you.

    52. Re:What i want to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "In my experience as an intergalactic pilot I can tell you that, in general, a ship, while not travelling, is in a position normal to the celestial body that is exerting the largest gravitational pull on it. "

      Ha! You're still wrong. Everyone knows that the enemy's gate is down.

    53. Re:What i want to know.... by Cutriss · · Score: 1

      TIE Fighter did not simulate space physics. It was plainly a flight simulator without gravity and some adjustments to inertia. In TIE Fighter, can you rotate your craft with respect to your current path of travel and strafe a target while maintaining your (formerly) forward velocity? Nope. You'll steer right into whatever you're aiming at.

      A lot of people are recommending Elite, Terminus, and Independence War. Another title to look at, from the Myst-era, is MANTIS. This game allows you to operate in either mode - Pure physics, or computer-driven thrust mechanics, basically putting in computer-controlled retro and maneuvering thrusters so that you would effectively steer your craft like a plane.

      Even better, you can toggle this mode off and on, so you can do a pass-by on a capital ship, set your vector, turn off the computer, and strafe along the side of it. *Definitely* a fun tactic to employ.

      Anyone interested in trying this game should look for the enhanced CD version, and not the floppy version. The linked article doesn't mention the existence of it, but it's out there. It came bundled in with a lot of "multimedia PC" kits.

      --
      "Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
    54. Re:What i want to know.... by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      Actually, some folks have beaten you to it. IMHO, the best-thought-out realistic space sci-fi setting, technology-wise, is Albedo. Unfortunately, Albedo "Erma Felna: EDF" is a Furry setting, so if you look it up you'll be deluged by sick fucks. Still, its a really good sci-fi setting with well thought-out ships, technology, etc. The ships are as you describe - decks perpendicular to the direction of thrust. Actually, for modular reasons all ships have standardized deck shapes - all decks are cylindrical and fixed in diameter. The ships are shaped like a giant pill, with the fore and aft sections of the ship flooded with heavy water. Because the ship will always be travelling forward or backwards (backwards while braking) this means the directions of movement are covered, with the fuel tanks doubling as crumple zones for collisions (the fuel is deuterium, reactive only in the atomic sense). The ships are pill-shaped because surface-area must be minimized for FTL cost-efficiency reasons - the entire ships surface must be lined with expensive FTL coils. Weapons and thrusters are low-profile protrusions along the surface of the hull.

    55. Re:What i want to know.... by cduffy · · Score: 1

      FYI: That same dual-mode setup is also available in Vendetta (http://vendetta.guildsoftware.com/). Damn fun game.

    56. Re:What i want to know.... by goodwid · · Score: 1
      This is why I would like to see a completely Newtonian-based Space Combat simulator.

      Take a look at Delta V.

      --

      The net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. -- John Gilmore
    57. Re:What i want to know.... by goodwid · · Score: 1

      I've been waiting for someone to say that. :-)

      --

      The net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. -- John Gilmore
    58. Re:What i want to know.... by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      He was talking about *external* reference vectors, not internal ones.

      I think we were both talking about the relationship between these.

      On a ship with AG, the internal gravitational direction has no relation whatsoever to your external coordinate system.

      I was assuming that the artificial gravity of the ship would have to vary to compensate for acceleration to keep a steady field inside, and that this might be simpler if they were in the same direction.

    59. Re:What i want to know.... by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Internal gravity, you can orient however you want. It'd be simpler to orient it according to ship design, as you said. He was arguing that you should orient the ship's axis according to the external reference points, "autoleveling". You weren't quite talking about the same thing.

      You're right; it makes sense to orient AG according to the ship design.

      I don't see TWager's point; why orient the ship according to the galactic plane just to sooth vertigo? This ain't a sailing ship or an aircraft. There is no overwhelming visual "horizon". Besides, what would you do when traveling directly toward "galactic north"? :-) This reminds me of how ridiculous the ships in Homeworld look when they're traveling up or down; they look like submarines. Iwar is much closer to reality.

      If you're out on the hull in interplanetary/stellar space, you orient your personal perspective to the hull. Otherwise you're courting vertigo. "Up" is "out". In orbit "up" is "out", away from the planet.

      In the ST book "My Enemy, My Ally" they actually use 3d battle tactics pretty decently; Sulu is running the ship thru simulations where he's looping and diving all over the place and confusing heck out of the enemy tacticians. IMHO, most of the orientation in 2d in the movies is done to keep the audience from becoming confused and disoriented.

      It's time for coffee...too early to try to think about this stuff.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    60. Re:What i want to know.... by airbaggins · · Score: 1

      It sucked.

      I took time to learn how to get the most out of Frontier: First Encounters and i still find it the best space simulation game ever. I now use jjffe http://www.jaj22.demon.co.uk/ when i want to play this game, as it gives you direct control over your individual thrusters, should you want it.

      PROBLEM: Any ship with more acceleration then the other ship can always escape. So to deal with this gameplay "problem", they made the enemy ship magically re-appear with magical acceleration so it can take another shot at you.

      This is true, that is why the best ships, IMHO were the ones that offered the best compromise of accelleration to capacity. Which is why, the large Imperial warships were the best, as you had masses of room for weaponary and fast enough accelleration to be able to escape/hunt.

      Also, there's the issue that your target craft has to start slowing down at some point or they will end up in deep space with no fuel. So, also you cannot run forever from pirates, or whatever. I do agree that the magical time accelleration is poorly designed, but the frontier engine was originally written (in assembler) for a Motorola 68000 processor, and realistically speeding up the proper simulation with this processor (nominally 7MHz on an Amiga) is damn near impossible. but if you have the patience, and keep the time accelleration low, then you will find the laws of physics more closely adhered to. the jjffe version has been trying to improve on this slightly, but it's still far from perfect.

      The quick fix is, once you start getting away from the craft(s), keep it (one) as your combat target, and only increase the time compression slowly monitoring the distance. Note the direction that you lose it and try to accellerate the other way, maybe. Also, remember that if you're using the autopilot, it will start slowing you down at some point and give those you've escaped a chance to catch up.

      PROBLEM: Unless you use an unrealistically slow amount of thrust, you tend to have these ships zipping by each other at the very least hundreds of miles per hour, leaving you with a fraction of a second to meaningfully fire on the other ship, then it's turn back around and do it again. Since you're a human you can't whip around instantly, it take time to move the ship, so every time you miss and come around for another pass, you're going a little faster since you had more time to accelerate.

      The idea with hunting down crafts is to match your velocity vector AND your position vector. Now, this does take some time to get right and it requires either some effort on your (or your autopilot's) part on the approach to get these matched closely enough that you can engage in some meaningful combat. You have to be aware, also, that your target might be trying to escape you and just purely accellerating away, and then decellerating hard if you start catching up... it's a tricky procedure sometimes.

      PROBLEM: It takes time to learn how to land on things! .....

      It's a realistic(ish) simulator, not Rogue Squadron. I don't think that's a design flaw... as you say, there is the autopilot, but it does make the effort/rewards ratio of surface mining fairly high (until you hit that precious metals seam).

      Turn around a little too late and by the time you realize it you're on an unstoppable collision course.

      With regards to that, if you're not too close, then you can thrust perpendicular to the planet and try and slingshot it instead (if you're that keen on saving your life, and being pure not using your many save files).

      PROBLEM: "Random" encounters are impossible without cheating.

      In First Encounters, the theory was that pirates followed you through your hyperspace clouds (though there wer

    61. Re:What i want to know.... by belroth · · Score: 1
      Which was badly done - drop down then lift up, crap writing. They should have just changed heading/orientation to point at Khan and blasted , and don't give me any bullshit about the sensors, the same things would apply to what they did.
      Why did the ships have the same orientation anyway? AHHH, the horror, the horror.
      I love sci-fi and most of the physics is just BAD, and Star Wars isn't even sci-fi. (And Battlestar Galactica isn't even entertainment)

      I hate cute robots with no point. Hint: C3PO could be replaced with a Palm.
      The only 2 robots I would consider having valid reason for existing (in their millieux) are those in Forbidden Planet and Lost In Space (I know LIS is a pos film but...)
      And I still like Star Trek, and (oh my secret shame) Andromeda.
      Babylon 5 and Farscape are miles better though, at least they are mostly internally consistent.

      ObNewPollSuggestion: Stupidest Robot in a purportedly sci-fi story:
      The Dagget (my vote)
      C3PO
      R2D2
      Twiki
      Robin Williams
      Cowborg Neal

      --
      I hereby inform you that I have NOT been required to provide any decryption keys.
    62. Re:What i want to know.... by Nize · · Score: 1

      I think this one is for you:

      http://www.x-plane.com/SpaceCombat.html

      Real physics. Great. And, the price is fair.

    63. Re:What i want to know.... by hardburn · · Score: 1

      There was going to be a Babylon 5-based flight sim with Star Furies, which sounds like it would have been pretty close. You could at least spin around while still moving in the same direction, which is a lot more acurate than the "fighting in a gravity-less atmosphere" that Star Wars/Trek tend to use.

      Unfortunately, that game got killed off with the production company ran out of cash.

      --
      Not a typewriter
  10. The Force strikes again by uptownguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hahaha! It is amazing, when you think about it... What other force on the Internet is as powerful as /.? Within 60 seconds of the original article appearing on the front page of Slashdot, the linked site was already taken down.

    Ethical question: Do we owe our linked site owners some advance warning before our herd of tribbles swarms onto their bridge?
    Bonus Question: Is it possible to be karma whoring AND trolling at the same time?

    --


    I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
    1. Re:The Force strikes again by villain170 · · Score: 1

      Ethical question: Do we owe our linked site owners some advance warning before our herd of tribbles swarms onto their bridge?

      Nawwwww! Let 'em fry! It's a great exercise in crisis response...

      --

      I am over here... now I am back over here!
    2. Re:The Force strikes again by uptownguy · · Score: 1

      Nawwwww! Let 'em fry! It's a great exercise in crisis response...

      Well, I suspect that you were just trolling but I am going to respond all the same...

      Isn't there something to be said for not wanting to have to exercise crisis response? Couldn't one be content to have a server that has been designed to handle typical or even heavy loads but one which was obviously never designed for the onslaught of Slashdotters hitting like a tsunami against the beach...

      One could even argue that in this case it isn't an exercise, it is a full blown disaster of a magnitude that most web sites have never seen before! Or do you think lumbering dinosaurs like Slashdot are a dime a dozen? No...I personally think "let 'em fry" isn't the sort of ethical answer I was hoping for...

      --


      I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
    3. Re:The Force strikes again by villain170 · · Score: 1

      Well I must say I was being a bit facetious.

      I definitely think that a crisis could be avoided beforehand if the site owner is notified, creating the possibility of getting some mirrors up before the onslaught ensues.

      --

      I am over here... now I am back over here!
    4. Re:The Force strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really think a slashdotting is that intense? Slashdot isn't a particularly big site, and it handles the load. CNN's traffic dwarfs /.'s on a slow news day, let alone during war coverage.

      Repeat after me, "Slashdot is not the most powerful force on the Internet"

    5. Re:The Force strikes again by Ponty · · Score: 1

      To a guy with a Linux box on a DSL line it is.

    6. Re:The Force strikes again by uptownguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But the very nature of Slashdot lends itself to (1) most readers clicking on the linked article (something you'll never see (sadly) with CNN) and (2) People visiting multiple times in a day to read new articles/visit newly linked sites. This means that all of the visits to the links mentioned in (1) happen in a very short period.

      I think you are underestimating the power that is Slashdot...

      --


      I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
    7. Re:The Force strikes again by DietHacker · · Score: 1

      "...Slashdot lends itself to (1) most readers clicking on the linked article (something you'll never see (sadly) with CNN)..."

      What is the "sad" part? That people do not click or that CNN consistently fails (though not always) to post appropriate, outbound links?

    8. Re:The Force strikes again by Cached+Hit · · Score: 0

      There is really no excuse. I've seen people bitch and moan about a site going down within the first few minutes. But guess what?!?!? Remember the whole paid subscription thing? Yeah, that's where a small group of viewers have the opportunity to verify stories and links. Why don't they fucking notify the webmasters? Good question, don't you think? (obviously not)

      --
      "look ma! no hands!!!" - random amputee
    9. Re:The Force strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we owe our linked site owners some advance warning before our herd of tribbles swarms onto their bridge?

      I have tried to let some sites know by emailing the webmaster just as the story was posted, but it is probably a lost cause. I thing s/he had h[is/er] hands full just about the time the email arrived.

      The email was something like: A story featuring your site was just posted to slashdot.org. You are about to be swamped. Have a nice day.

    10. Re:The Force strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which slashdot are you refering to?

      One of these?

    11. Re:The Force strikes again by pkunzipper · · Score: 1

      Actually you have to use IE to view it, I'm looking at it now.

    12. Re:The Force strikes again by bubblegoose · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually the site was down before it when live on the front page. I was getting some page loads and some 404s while it just being previewed for subscribers.

      --
      I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
    13. Re:The Force strikes again by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      I personally think "let 'em fry" isn't the sort of ethical answer I was hoping for...


      Good lord, if the admins are really freaked out over the load /. creates on their servers, they could always just do a meta refresh to the fabled goatse site. If that doesn't slow down traffic, nothing will. Sort of using the same ethics (or lack of) that was used on them.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    14. Re:The Force strikes again by evilquaker · · Score: 1
      But the very nature of Slashdot lends itself to (1) most readers clicking on the linked article...

      ...then finding it's Slashdotted, and posting comments about it without actually having read it. (As I'm doing right now...)

      --
      To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
    15. Re:The Force strikes again by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 4, Funny

      What other force on the Internet is as powerful as /.? Within 60 seconds of the original article appearing on the front page of Slashdot, the linked site was already taken down.

      You know, according to the Patriot Act, /. could be classifed as a terrorist device.

    16. Re:The Force strikes again by darkonc · · Score: 4, Informative
      Do you really think a slashdotting is that intense? Slashdot isn't a particularly big site, and it handles the load. CNN's traffic dwarfs /.'s on a slow news day, let alone during war coverage.

      Yeah, and a 25 year old harrier may not be much of a combat fighter, but if you pit it against a 1942 mustang it's not going to be much of a fight.

      Slashdot may not be "a particularly big site", but it is built with a large handfull of boxes, it's own routers, etc. and probably a couple hundred megabits bandwidth. Some of the sites that get slashdotted are things that are co-hosted with dozens or even hundreds of other sites on a single box at a large hosting company and (maybe) a 10 megabit pipe.

      I have a friend who's site gets throttled by his (free) service provider with just a couple dozen hits in an hour. Just the slashdot editorial team viewing his site could put him near his limit, much less being posted on the front page.

      My own web site spent some time being hosted on my home ADSL connection. 0.5megabits split over 10,000 /.ers trying to get first post comes to 50baud per viewer -- and that presumes that the old 200Mz P2 that I let do the hosting doesn't collapse under the load. If I had an hour or so warning, I could at least change the box to run level 3 so that the RAM being eaten up by X could be freed up. I might even switch it over to my primary desktop box and/or just mirror it somewhere with the pipe to handle the load.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    17. Re:The Force strikes again by M.+Silver · · Score: 1

      CNN featured a site which subsequently got, er, cnn'd, though it probably got publicized elsewhere. Interestingly, CNN's article about the site being overloaded doesn't reference their own earlier article publicizing it...

      --

      Slashdot's token middle-aged housewife
    18. Re:The Force strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You know, according to the Patriot Act, /. could be classifed as a terrorist device.

      Unless properly targeted.....

      Hey eveyone! Check out the great pr0n at:

      http://www.osamaishere.org

      mirror at:

      http://www.saddamsecretlair.com

    19. Re:The Force strikes again by paganizer · · Score: 1

      Actually, in most situations I would lay odds on the Mustang.

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    20. Re:The Force strikes again by adri · · Score: 1

      Actually, you'll generally find that a slashdotted box on 10megabits of bandwidth dies due to server load, not a lack of bandwidth.

      And thats generally because people don't tune their boxes to run with many files/sockets, they keep running apache when they could be running something like boa or thttpd..

      Case in point: a couple of years ago a good friend of mine decided to host some, lewd pictures of an actress. His machine was immediately swamped as the URL leaked out over the internet. 30 minutes and an install of boa later the load average dropped down to under 0.5 whilst serving out a good 10 mbits.

      (I'm just as guilty - I run apache on my website. But then I don't host my cute stuff there. :)

    21. Re:The Force strikes again by bluesangria · · Score: 1

      if the admins are really freaked out over the load /. creates on their servers, they could always just do a meta refresh to the fabled goatse site.

      *snort!*
      Groovy. Imagine the reaction of parents who try to hit our school website...

    22. Re:The Force strikes again by KFury · · Score: 1

      "Do you really think a slashdotting is that intense? Slashdot isn't a particularly big site, and it handles the load. CNN's traffic dwarfs /.'s on a slow news day, let alone during war coverage."

      CNN doesn't link to external sites, and usually doesn't even name the URLs of sites they talk about, hence no 'CNN effect.'

      Also, the linear chronological nature of /.'s format means that a story goes from zero prominence (well, except for the editors and the 15-minute advance for subscribers) to full blast at the top of the page. CNN's stories, other than 'Breaking News' never starts out in the 'first read' position, and 'Breaking News' *never* has external links.

      Maybe it'd be nice if /. could find a way to stagger publishing of non-time-sensitive stories, but face it: Ners want the latest shit sooner than everyone else. This makes the /. effect a hammerblow instead of just a wind.

    23. Re:The Force strikes again by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 2, Funny
      Just the slashdot editorial team viewing his site could put him near his limit, much less being posted on the front page.

      You mean they view the submitted sites? I'm confused.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    24. Re:The Force strikes again by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I'm interested - why?

      I'm personally a big fan of WWII era planes, but I've never thought they'd have much of a chance against anything that modern.

      A harrier is a pretty sweet plane, too. They'd fare decently in combat, with good pilots, against modern US warplanes. There's a reason why the brits still use 'em :)

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    25. Re:The Force strikes again by paganizer · · Score: 1

      The Korean War era P51-H had a top speed of about 487MPH; main armnament consisted of 6 .50 caliber MG. While they did have a pretty bad radar signature, it was primarily suspected that the reason they didn't fare better against MIG's in the Korean conflict was because the MIG's of the time were essentially just really fast WW2 era planes, armed primarily with guns; fair dogfighters.
      The Harrier, at least the AV8b version, has a similar speed of 550 mph, is focused around the air-to-ground role, and the APG-65 radar system (for boeng rebuilds, which i'm intimately familiar with), with a gau-12 25mm tank killer gun pod with a relatively low ROF, and 4 'winders.

      Mustang is super manuevarable; can dodge winders most likely I THINK; the 25MM gun MIGHT be a problem, but I doubt it.

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    26. Re:The Force strikes again by Pii · · Score: 1
      You can't be serious...

      For starters, the plane is not just in use by the Brits. US Marines use the plane as well, which brings me to my second point...

      The role of this aircraft is Close Air Support, ie: Ground Support. It's not a fighter by any stretch of the imagination.

      "They'd fare decently in combat, with good pilots, against modern US warplanes."

      You are on crack.

      --
      For those that would die defending it, Freedom
      has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
    27. Re:The Force strikes again by opkool · · Score: 1

      If talking on dog-fighting style of air-combat:

      I guess you've never heard of VIFFing maneuvering, the "Vector In Forward Flight"-

      Harrier is a V/STOL airplane, and it can use the vertical thrust jets in combat, so it can "jump" (climb or descend or turn) a bunch of hundreds of feet in a split second. Talk about air combat advantage!

      Also, the Harrier is a small jet (difficult to sea and to aim to) and has no afterburner (difficult to get a lock-on with heat-seaker missiles).

      Harrier pilots are trained in this. At least the Royal Navy pilots. Royal Navy use Sea Harriers as fighters.

      The Harrier can be an "old" jet, but it does the job. (BTW, The newest Sea Harrier, the FA2 model, are from 1993, so they are 10 years old).

      If talking about missile exchange, VIFFing comes handy to avoid incomming missiles. Also, Royal Navy Sea Harriers can use the AIM-120 AMRAAM, wich is about the best mid-range missile around.

      Some links:
      http://www.f4aviation.co.uk/Hangar/2003/sh ars/shar s.htm
      http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects /fa2/
      http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/1 72.html
      http://members.tripod.com/benno7/id32.htm

    28. Re:The Force strikes again by Night0wl · · Score: 1

      I'd like to mention 9/11 at this point.
      CNN went to a single static page then, while Slashdot had continuing article posting w/ full commentary.

      On and off Slashdot would fall to a static page, where as CNN was at a constant static around that time.

      Slashdot got hammered just as much as CNN did during that time, but they survived the blows better then CNN did IMO, and I'm sure others would agree.

      --
      Computational Madness in a round package.
    29. Re:The Force strikes again by SemperFiDownUnda · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen a harrier dog fight? You know that little move Tom Cruise does in Tom gun where he "Puts the breaks on" and the mig flies right on by? Think of that but a Harrier can stand still and track a plane. That and they are super sonic too.

    30. Re:The Force strikes again by darkonc · · Score: 1
      The harrier has both radar and visual seeking missiles (AMRAAM for medum range (50mi) and sidewinders (and others) for shorter range. It also has a five-barrel 25mm cannon on one side and two (single barrel?) 25mm cannons on the other.
      Although the sidewinders are mostly heat seeking missiles (making them probably useless against prop-driven mustangs), there is an AIM-9R optical seeking version which would probably be quite happy hunting down a mustang. Using the AMRAAM, with it's 50 mile range would be rather like hunting Iraqis...
      It has a maximum speed of between 650 and 750 MPH (depending on the source) and a minimum speed of zero (Stall speed, what's that?). According to some sources, it can go supersonic at high altitudes.

      Maneuverability includes the ability to use it's VTOL thrusters in combat -- I expect that the resulting maneuverability would be good enough for it to have been classified as a UFO if seen in the '50s (i.e. "You can't do that with an aircraft!!").

      Although later versions of the mustang had missile capability, I believe that they were 'dumb' missiles (I could be wrong). In any event, I seriously doubt that the mustang's missiles were up to 1990's avionics standards.

      When I talk about the Harrier, I'm speaking about the British navy version -- which was apparently intended as an air defence fighter with secondary roles of ground/sea attack. The US version (and, I think the RAF/Royal Marines versions) seem to be more oriented towards specialized ground attack (close air support) roles.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    31. Re:The Force strikes again by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      This was exactly what I was thinking about when I said a harrier could hold it's own in modern air combat.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  11. Slashdot logic.. by mumblestheclown · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. The site is slashdotted.
    2. it runs IIS.
    3. therefore, microsoft is evil.
    1. Re:Slashdot logic.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      since when did it run IIS? Its so slashdotted, netcraft can't even see it.

    2. Re:Slashdot logic.. by GigsVT · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Apparently the site isn't slashdotted. Even in the Mysterious Future, the index page was missing. Either they heard they were going to be slashdotted and took it down, or it was just very bad timing.

      Another argument for having some sort of instant feedback to the editors on the red articles, if a link is broken on a story like this, what's the point of even running the story?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    3. Re:Slashdot logic.. by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      It appears he was moving the site anyway, so indeed, just bad timing. The google cache of the page says something like "I'm moving the site to new hosting this week, because my hosting service is putting pop-ups on my page".

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    4. Re:Slashdot logic.. by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Well, think about it a minute... it's not helping us slashdotters access sci-fi stuff we want to see. Of course it's evil!

      ;)

    5. Re:Slashdot logic.. by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      It appears he was moving the site anyway, so indeed, just bad timing. The google cache of the page says something like "I'm moving the site to new hosting this week, because my hosting service is putting pop-ups on my page".

      No, that was his old site at fortunecity. The Google cache says he was moving on 31 Jan. The link was to his new one at his pown subdomain.

    6. Re:Slashdot logic.. by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, #3 is the (occasionally unstated) assumption upon which all /. arguments are based. Therefore, you're guilty of circular reasoning.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    7. Re:Slashdot logic.. by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Number 3 is an axiom, not a deduction.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  12. memories.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    has ANYONE had the opportunity to see the page?

    it made me wonder how a "real-life" STARBIRD would compare

    man I loved that toy

  13. Strange ... by itsme1234 · · Score: 3, Funny

    What ? No WV bug comparison ?

    1. Re:Strange ... by Oloryn · · Score: 5, Funny
      What ? No WV bug comparison ?

      They don't actually grow them that big in West Virginia

    2. Re:Strange ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should we care about the size relative to a West Virginia bug?

  14. SpaceBalls by AntEater · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sure none of those ships are as big as the one that they show during the opening scenes of SpaceBalls. That one was BIG!

    "Ludicrous Speed!"

    --
    Alex, I'll take keybindings not used by Emacs for $400....
    1. Re:SpaceBalls by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      "We brake for nobody!"

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    2. Re:SpaceBalls by Aetrix · · Score: 1

      SUCK! SUCK! SUCK!

      --

      "One touch of Darwin makes the whole world kin." George Bernard Shaw
    3. Re:SpaceBalls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's look at this....

      The ship turns into the Maid.... the Maid's ear canal is large enough to allow the Winnebago down it for quite some distance.....nevermind....I just realized I am completely loosing it....too geeky, must go play lawn darts....

    4. Re:SpaceBalls by TwP · · Score: 1

      Sir, she's gone from suck to blow!

    5. Re:SpaceBalls by Sim9 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Mmm, and with the bumper sticker "WE BRAKE FOR NOBODY!"

      Perhaps that's because the ship is so massive it can't... :P

    6. Re:SpaceBalls by gailwynand · · Score: 1

      The ship is too big; if I walk, the movie will be over!

      --
      A pilot, in those days, was the only unfettered and entirely independent human being that lived in the earth.-Mark Twain
    7. Re:SpaceBalls by DarkHelmet · · Score: 1
      I am DarkHelmet!

      My Schwartz IS bigger than yours.

      --
      /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
    8. Re:SpaceBalls by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --LUDICROUS SPEED!!

      "They've gone Plaid!!" .dotgoesheretoavoidthestupidlamenessfilter

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    9. Re:SpaceBalls by ethanms · · Score: 1

      that's what my s stands for... so many painful high school memories...

    10. Re:SpaceBalls by glenebob · · Score: 1

      "Just as I suspected. I'm surrounded by Assholes!"

  15. Questionable results probably by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

    I have to question the accuracy of something like this when they are not even geeky enough to have a web site that doesn't get farked^H^H^H^H^H^Hslashdotted with a couple of hits. Especially running IIS... gah

    --
    The ratio of people to cake is too big
    1. Re:Questionable results probably by TwP · · Score: 1

      Okay big guy! Post your cool website on the front page of Slashdot and we'll see just how "geeky" you are.

    2. Re:Questionable results probably by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      Life without humor, like people without humor, is tedious and routine to say the least. Humor is a great temporary stress reliever because it 'takes you away' from the tedious and routine, two soul-deadening stressors.
      -- Anthony S. Dallmann-Jones, Ph.D.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
  16. Since that site is down... by mansa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here's an interesting graphic comparing ship size.

    -Mansa

    1. Re:Since that site is down... by Lurker · · Score: 1
      Here's an interesting graphic comparing ship size.

      I notice they don't have the Vorlon planet killer ship on there. What was that, 15 miles across or something? In Star Wars, they needed something the size of a moon to pack the same firepower the Vorlons squeezed into a much smaller package. My point? Just that Vorlons kick ass.

    2. Re:Since that site is down... by deathcow · · Score: 1

      Cool graphic, but how big is all that compared to Major Kira's ego? Or Chief O Brien's drinking habit?

    3. Re:Since that site is down... by swb · · Score: 1

      That was pretty good, but it was missing the Death Star from Star Wars. It'd also be interesting to see a US Navy aircraft carrier on there for comparison.

      I was surprised at how tiny the Star Trek ships were.

    4. Re:Since that site is down... by TheNumberSix · · Score: 1

      If you click the x1000 links at the top of the page, new pages are displayed with the larger vessels such as Death Star II, Vorlon Planet Killer and V'Ger.

      --
      Never confuse feeling with thinking.
    5. Re:Since that site is down... by Cleveland+Steamer · · Score: 2

      Nice, but it doesn't include a comparison with a Vogon construction fleet. :-(

    6. Re:Since that site is down... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      " In Star Wars, they needed something the size of a moon to pack the same firepower the Vorlons squeezed into a much smaller package. My point? Just that Vorlons kick ass."

      It's all relative. Unfortunately, this article didn't accurately portray the size of any of the Star Wars ships. You see, the galaxy that the Star Wars universe is, in scale, much much smaller than ours. A 'human' in their galaxy would be microscopic compares to one of us.

      The proof of this is in all the movies. For example, in Empire Strikes Back, the Millineum Falcon's 'light speed' drive doesn't work through most of the movie. Despite this, they're able to jog around solar systems at sublight. This could only happen if stars were very VERY close together. In Return of the Jedi, our fearless characters are caught in an Ewok trap hanging something like 30 relative feet off the ground. R2D2 cuts through the net and they all drop. Not a single injury among them. Weaker gravity? Same thing happens in Attack of the Clones. Senator Amidala falls out of a fast moving transport, hits the sand, rolls a couple of times, and dusts her self off afterwards. Sorry, that can't happen on Earth because it's much, MUCH bigger.

      It's really the only way to explain the inconsistencies in Star Wars about space travel. Think about it. ;)

    7. Re:Since that site is down... by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      What is this, "See how many sites we can slashdot in one story" day? :)

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  17. Google Cache by raider_red · · Score: 1

    Okay, even the google cache of this page has disappeared. Do you think the site will ever be seen again?

    --
    It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
    1. Re:Google Cache by jonix · · Score: 1

      IMHO I think that it has been sucked up by a blackhole called void in the cyberspace.

  18. This is getting out of hand. by Luminair · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Fucking Slashdot should clue in already and stop DOS'ing website owners. It's not funny anymore, it's pathetic.

    1. Re:This is getting out of hand. by Nunza · · Score: 1

      I agree! I find alot of cool websites. I would
      love to share to the readers of /. But, until
      some method of mirror them can be setup I would
      never do what a majority of the readers do..
      Send a link and watch the site crash and burn!

      - Nunza

  19. why do you THINK its slashdotted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    * Resolved zardalu.sytes.net to 156.34.159.224
    * Resolved 156.34.159.224 to stjh1-2016.nb.aliant.net

    in other words, its hosted on someone's home DSL/cable connection, sytes.net is a free thingie like dynip.. WAY TO GO TO LINK STRAIGHT TO THIS!
    slashdot editors are morons

    1. Re:why do you THINK its slashdotted? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      He does have a point, I think at least the /. editors need a "you've DOS'd someone's server" notification so they can remove the link from the posted article.
      Either that or /. really should start caching pages that are linked to.

    2. Re:why do you THINK its slashdotted? by nuclearsnake · · Score: 1

      I totally agree. /. has the money/power/servers/clout to cache a site. Why not do it for a day then drop it? Go maybe 2 levels down, turn the images black&white to save space?

      --
      See the forbiden post Here
    3. Re:why do you THINK its slashdotted? by karlandtanya · · Score: 1
      I don't understand the details of what you just said (e.g. are you saying that this is Joe User running a webserver at his house?).


      But, I have this image of poor Joe sitting there using his computer, and suddenly...the HDD explodes!


      That'll teach him to host interesting content at his house!

      --
      "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
    4. Re:why do you THINK its slashdotted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naughty, naughty! NBTel/Aliant don't allow webservers on that residential-class line.

      Also, fuck Aliant's PPPOE scam. I'm damn glad my non-PPPOE DSL line's contract is grandfathered.

  20. Mighty Mouse vs. Superman by nucal · · Score: 5, Funny
    You're right, that's just silly.

    Superman is far greater than Mighty Mouse.

    I don't know about that - on a Power per Gram ratio, Mighty Mouse beats Superman ...

    Plus, MM has a better theme song ...

    1. Re:Mighty Mouse vs. Superman by martyn+s · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Power per gram ratio is meaningless. We want to know who can beat the other one up.

      And no way does the cheesy cartoony MM theme song beat the John Williams composed SM theme.

    2. Re:Mighty Mouse vs. Superman by ethanms · · Score: 1

      Mighty Mouse wins hands down... no weaknesses like Louis Lane or Kryptonite.

      Plus MM could fly up Supe's butt and tear him apart from the inside out.

      Mighty Mouse had true power, Superman was just lucky his molecules were denser then ours.

    3. Re:Mighty Mouse vs. Superman by 10Ghz · · Score: 2, Funny

      "You just don't get it! Mighty Mouse is a cartoon. Superman is a real guy!"

      "Yeah, I guess so.... It would be hell of a fight though!"

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    4. Re:Mighty Mouse vs. Superman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Mighty Mouse theme song has lyrics. The John Williams score for Superman doesn't.

      Apples and Oranges.

    5. Re:Mighty Mouse vs. Superman by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      But not if Superman were to eat beans for lunch!

      I doubt it would be much different than pushing out a particularly solid poop, anyway. This is superman we're talking about, after all!

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  21. Someone had to say it... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    It's not the size of your space ship that matters, but how you use it.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  22. Hah! by JordanH · · Score: 1

    Not even this mighty fleet of Star Ships can withstand the brunt of a slashdotting!

  23. Image from original site by marlingrando · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can see the image discribed in the original post here Beware, there are a few popups from the link though...

    1. Re:Image from original site by forged · · Score: 1
      The new site will be bigger and better than ever, with tons of full color schematics, new ships, etc. I look forward to seeing you all there!

      Haha, yeah right, so we're all here NOW and we want to see !!! Can we please. Can we now ? What ? ;)

    2. Re:Image from original site by evilquaker · · Score: 1
      Beware, there are a few popups from the link though...

      Popups? Those things still annoy people? Doesn't everyone use a pop-up blocking browser?

      --
      To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
    3. Re:Image from original site by wheany · · Score: 1

      Some even pay for one.

  24. Next on Slashdot... by grondu · · Score: 1

    Mass spectral analysis of the nasal mucus of Kirk and Picard. Who has the best boogers?

    --

    I'm the urban spaceman babe, but here comes the twist... I don't exist

  25. Spaceball I by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

    We brake for nobody.

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  26. SLASHDOT cache by Wehesheit · · Score: 0, Interesting

    We really need a slashdot cache sometimes. You can easily tell this page was hosted on the guys personal webserver on a home DSL connection and it was directly linked to.... BOOM! Email the website owners and create a mirror on slashdot and keep it up for an hour or so. What good does it do to link to a story or cool geeky thing and then not be able to see the damn thing?

    --
    This P.I.G. will walk on the water, This P.I.G. will walk on the sea, This P.I.G. will walk whereever he wants.
  27. no, this is slashdot logic... by bjpirt · · Score: 3, Funny

    4. ....
    5. Profit!

  28. Which would Jesus fly? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 0


    How about instead of this childish fixation on size, give us some specs on fuel economy and MTBFs.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Which would Jesus fly? by bpd1069 · · Score: 2, Funny


      How about instead of this childish fixation on size, give us some specs on fuel economy and MTBFs.

      Don't forget about TCO!!!

      --
      --
    2. Re:Which would Jesus fly? by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      "What does God need with a starship?" - Kirk, ST V

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    3. Re:Which would Jesus fly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ST V
      THE WORST MOVIE EVER

  29. Size is ok, but what about power? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always wondered about that.

    Say, the Vorlon planetkiller vs. the Gunbuster black hole bomb. Maybe the Grand Cannon from the Robotech series? Deathstar?

  30. What's next? by bmantz65 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Comparing penis and breast size in Sci-Fi. "Wow, look at the talleywacker on Picard!"

  31. LOC's? by bckspc · · Score: 1

    How many Libraries of Congress is that?

    No, wait...

  32. Home Connection by Kyoya · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I take it no one noticed the .sytes.net address. He was running that from his home connection via a no-ip type of setup. Odd are good the poor guys computer is now drooling on the floor. That will teach him for doing something geeky and not using the appropriate bandwidth.

    --
    To strive, to seek, but not to yield
    1. Re:Home Connection by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Odd are good the poor guys computer is now drooling on the floor. That will teach him for doing something geeky and not using the appropriate bandwidth.

      Nah, even an ordinary PC can easily saturate the amount of bandwidth ADSL offers. If anything's smoking, it's the router just upstream from him.

  33. Somehow there is something wrong with all of this by wulffi · · Score: 1

    Another site FRIED by slashdot.

    Wouldn't it be possible for slashdot to actually cache the articles like google? or at least provide a google cached link or something?

    Somehow I don't see slashdot being very popular with the owners of fried servers....

    Plus a cache would provide better service to slashdot readers.

    Just a thought

  34. lovingly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it looks like someone else has not so lovingly posted a link to it to slashdot.

  35. Operation Timed Out?!?! by mraymer · · Score: 5, Funny
    What a shocker this is... An article on Slashdot about Starship Sizes... why would that be Slashdotted?

    I mean, it's not like it is the nerd version of a pissing contest... oh wait, it is.

    Nerd1: The Enterprise-E could SO waste a Star Destroyer!
    Nerd2: Nuh-uh! Star Destroyers are so huge, you can't even see the windows most of the time. You can ALWAYS see the windows in the puny little federation starships.
    Nerd1: Look, I don't care how big it is... One quantam torpedo from the Enterprise-E will make it a giant space junkyard.
    Nerd2: You're such a dork!
    Nerd1: No, you're the dork!
    [begin pathetic, uncoordinated nerd brawl]

    --

    "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

    1. Re:Operation Timed Out?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL - you so funnY! You make fun of NERD but hang out at NERD blog!!! You picture the irony in my HEAD!!!! ME laff long time when you so funny that you no like the NERD but you hang out with the NERD!@!!!

    2. Re:Operation Timed Out?!?! by nutshell42 · · Score: 0

      I see, you have experience with such things, don't you?

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
    3. Re:Operation Timed Out?!?! by alumshubby · · Score: 1

      Oh, jeez...I had almost exactly this argument in high school back about '78 or so.

      --
      "How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
  36. Where's the Sleeper Service? Or the puppeteers? by edremy · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Can't see the site, but the image linked clearly isn't going to be covering any GSVs. Come on, they're only 80x30x10 kilometers or so.

    And of course, they aren't even close to the true masters, the puppeteers and their home worlds.

    --
    "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    1. Re:Where's the Sleeper Service? Or the puppeteers? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      Hello? True masters? It's called a Dyson Sphere. 5 little planets don't even compare to a ball the size of a star system.

      Why, even the puppeteers knew that Ringworld outclassed them...

    2. Re:Where's the Sleeper Service? Or the puppeteers? by anagama · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly, GSV=General Service Vehicle.

      Excellent reference to Ian M. Banks Culture series. It is perhaps some of the very best sci-fi around. A couple reviews.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    3. Re:Where's the Sleeper Service? Or the puppeteers? by tengwar · · Score: 1
      Can't see the site, but the image linked clearly isn't going to be covering any GSVs. Come on, they're only 80x30x10 kilometers or so.

      What about the ship in "Golden the ship was, oh, oh, oh" - a million miles across?

    4. Re:Where's the Sleeper Service? Or the puppeteers? by hughk · · Score: 1

      Iain Banks also has Orbitals (Ringworlds) in his Culture universe. The thing is aren't we talking about vehicles, which generally excludes B5, ringworlds and orbitals. A GSV is probably the largests actual moving space ship in current science fiction.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
  37. What about Dr.Who/ by watzinaneihm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How would they draw TARDIS from Dr.WHO series? It was supposed to be shaped like a london police box on the outside (kind of like a phone booth) but was supposed to contain virtually unlimited space on the inside.

    --
    .ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
    1. Re:What about Dr.Who/ by TwP · · Score: 1

      Not exactly a spacechip, though. Yes, they travel through time and space simultaneously, but as all true geeks know, that's cheating.

      And it was only Dr. Who's tardis that was shaped like a police box. A normal tardis takes on the appearance of any local object so that it "blends in" with the surrounds. Dr. Who's tardis was slightly broken and stuck at "polic box" setting.

    2. Re:What about Dr.Who/ by Blackbrain · · Score: 2, Funny

      They are IN the Tardis...How do you think they got them all together for a picture?

      Now you'll have to excuse me, I just got some Kryptonite and need to go teach that Superman bastard a thing or two.

      --
      Where would we be if Wheel had hid her round rock in a cave instead of showing everyone how it rolls?
    3. Re:What about Dr.Who/ by rassilon42 · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't compare the Doctor's TARDIS, but it would be interesting to see the comparison with some of the variations of War TARDISes created for the War before the Timelords and Gallifrey get erased from existance.

  38. If all those ships were together... by Peterus7 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The enterprise would probably start trying to open diplomatic relations with the Death star, and make a new ally, the Babylon 5 alien cruisers would go off against the cylon forces, And the robotechs would get accidently blown up by Stanley Tweedle.

    1. Re:If all those ships were together... by Machine9 · · Score: 1

      Dude, have you ever even SEEN a *real* macross (not robotech-the-raped-version-of-macross)...
      that stoopid hunk of junk is VERY nasty...

  39. mirrors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Anyone have a normal mirror of the site?

    Or how about a BitTorrent mirror of the site stuffed into a directory?

    Damn. I *really* wanted to see this.

  40. faster than light physics by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To be fair, we haven't yet designed an engine that will allow us to move faster than light. Maybe moving through subspace involves a force akin to wind resistance. I know that in Star Commander 2, normal physics applied in star systems and battle scenes, but interstellar travel forced you to use fuel the whole way.

    1. Re:faster than light physics by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 1

      I know, same thing in SC3, which is more or less believable I suppose. The warp-bubble (in SC3 at least) needs to constantly up and thus the drive needs to be constantly online or else the ships would drop out of warp. That while the combat system was more realistic. Not a bad game either. :) Unlike Freespace 2 for example... Drives need a constant thrust vector and when you shut down the engines, your craft comes to a full stop in 2 or 3 seconds in a zero-g enviroment. Also, even moon-sized and planet-size ships don't have a field of gravity, whoopee. Has anyone even got a clue what the introduction of a planet-sized object with gravity in a star system might do? Even the slightest bit of gravitational tug on the earth can be disastrous, ranging from diminishing tides, longer or shorter days, a permanent ice age or maybe even turning our little planet into a raging inferno.

      Also, do objects with such a huge mass not collapse upon themselves by the gravity they generate? Ah well, it's only sci-fi I guess... I mean, star ships, space stations, time travel, mechas, pretty women wearing tight clothes all the time... It's all an illusion. :(

    2. Re:faster than light physics by caouchouc · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind that ships and stations are mostly hollow. The total mass of say, the Death Star, may not have been much more than that of a big asteroid.

    3. Re:faster than light physics by jandrese · · Score: 1

      That really depends on how they're built. The Puppeteer Mk 4 with Hyperdrive 2 was like 95% (from memory) big heavy engine and 5% everything else (including living quarters). The Death Star's mass has been a source of in-depth analysis on the internet. The mass turns out to be important in determining the fate of one little moon of Endor (verdict: Doomed).

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
  41. Google by YearOfTheDragon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Site without images
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: V'Ger (Voyager VI)
    LENGTH: Approximately 98 km.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Originally built by humans and launched near the end of the 20th century for peacful reconnaisance purposes, the Voyager VI probe was intercepted by an evidently technologically advanced race who augmented the probe and sent it back to Earth under a new internal conciousness, resulting in a near cataclysm.
    SOURCE: Star Trek, the Motion Picture (Film, 1982 Paramount Pictures), Drawn by Jeff Russell
    Whale Probe from Star Trek IV, 74 km long
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Whale Probe
    LENGTH: Approximately 74 km. There are numerous conflicting sources for the length of the Whale Probe, but extrapolation from the film has led me to accept this length as being the most likely.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Unknown, although the device was able to communicate with humpback whales.
    SOURCE: Star Trek IV, (Film, Paramount Pictures)
    Marduk Base from Macross II, 50 km diameter
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Marduk Mothership
    DIAMETER: Approximately 50 km. This is the stated length of the RPG version, although the movie version seems to be much larger. Further investigation is needed.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Marduk, the creators of the Zentraedi.
    SOURCE: Macross II, (Animated Film), Drawn by Jeff Russell
    Rama, 50km long
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Rama
    LENGTH: 50 km long, 20 km in diameter.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Large habitat ship
    SOURCE: Rendezvous with Rama, Arthur C. Clark, Drawn by Jeff Russell
    Vorlon Planet Killer, approximately 45km long
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Vorlon Planet Killer
    LENGTH: Approximately 45 km. There are numerous conflicting sources for the length of the Vorlon Planet Killer, but extrapolation from the show has led me to accept this length as being the most likely.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: The Vorlon
    SOURCE: Babylon 5, (Television Series)
    Phobos, moon of Mars, 27km long at longest axis
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Phobos
    DIAMETER: 27 km x 23 km x 20 km
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Moon of Mars
    SOURCE: Discovered in 1877, August 12 by Asaph Hall; photographed by 'Mariner 9' in 1971, 'Viking 1' in 1977, and the Russian 'Phobos' probe in 1988.
    City Destroyer from ID4, 24km diameter
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: ID4 City Destroyer
    DIAMETER: 24 km across, stated in the film.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: ID4 Aliens. Please see notes
    SOURCE: Independance Day (Film), Drawn by Jeff Russell
    Super Star Destroyer from Star Wars, 17.6km long
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Executor/ Super Star Destroyer
    LENGTH: 17.6 km. Please see http://www.theforce.net/swtc/ssd.html.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: The Empire under Darth Sidious (human). Darth Vader's command ship.
    SOURCE: Star Wars Episode V and VI, the Empire Strikes Back, and the Return of the Jedi, (Film), originally drawn by Chad Wilson
    Cloud City, 16km diameter
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Cloud City
    LENGTH: 16 km.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Bespin Mining Colony
    SOURCE: Star Wars Episode V, the Empire Strikes Back (Film), Drawn by Jeff Russell
    Lexx, 10km long
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: LEXX
    LENGTH: 10 km. From original Blueprints used in the design of the ship.
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: The Empire under His Devine Shadow (human). This vessel is a wepon capable of destroying an entire Earth Size planet.
    SOURCE: LEXX (TV series)
    Babylon 5 Space Station, 8454.1m long
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: BABYLON 5/ Deep Space Station
    LENGTH: 8,454.1 m, from http://www.b5tech.com/babylonproject/babylon5stati on/babylon5station.html
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Human. "Babylon 5 is a 8,454.1* meter (five-mile) long, 840 meter diameter, 9.1 billion ton O'Neil class space station, located at a pivotal main jump gate in the Epsilon system."
    SOURCE: Babylon 5 (TV series)
    Macross I & II capital ships
    SHIP NAME/TYPE: MACROSS Sta

    --
    -= If you fight Dragons long enough, you will become a Dragon =-
    1. Re:Google by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      SHIP NAME/TYPE: V'Ger (Voyager VI)

      Blah blah blah... we all know that any of these ships - including the Super Star Destroyer - would get its butt thoroughly kicked by a Culture GSV.

    2. Re:Google by PhoenixK7 · · Score: 1

      I think the ROUs or one of the Affront ships might fare better.

      Though the GSVs are REALLY fucking big if I remember correctly

      Listing of Culture/Iain M. Banks ships

    3. Re:Google by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      . we all know that any of these ships - including the Super Star Destroyer - would get its butt thoroughly kicked by a Culture GSV.

      Or, more likely, a GCV. Mind you, a GCV is something like 2000km long and exerts its own gravity field. While we're talking about the Culture, we should mention that a couple assault ships (imagine a 200m dildo) would waste most of the ships on this list.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    4. Re:Google by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Though the GSVs are REALLY fucking big if I remember correctly

      Yeah, the GSVs are big, fast, smart and can manufacture any reinforcements they need. Starfleet, the Imperial Fleet, it doesn't matter - the Culture would beat them all, hands down.

    5. Re:Google by tc · · Score: 1

      What's a GCV? IIRC the Culture has:

      GSV = General Systems Vehicle. The big-ass mother-of-all-ships (literally) thing, in various different classes (e.g. Continent-class, Plate-class).

      GCU = General Contact Unit. Your general purpose spaceship thingy.

      ROU = Rapid Offensive Unit. Warship.

      LOU = Limited Offensive Unit. Warship.

      VFP = Very Fast Picket. IIRC this is a demiliterised ROU.

      Although I certainly agree that the average Culture ship could thorougly trash even the nastiest thing from the SW or ST universes.

    6. Re:Google by tc · · Score: 1

      Oh, and the Culture ships also have way cooler names. How many SW ships have names like What are the civilian applications? or Anticipation of a new lover's arrival or No more mister nice guy ?

    7. Re:Google by TwP · · Score: 4, Funny

      SHIP NAME/TYPE: Earth (class M)
      LENGTH: Approximately 12600 km.
      BUILDER/COMMENTS: Originally built by God for humans and launched near the creation of the universe for peacful enjoyment of life and relationship. Earth was invaded by evil forces under direct control of Lucifer and has not been the same since. Recall notice has been sent to fix problems introduced by Lucifer. The exact time of the recall is unknown.
      SOURCE: Bible, (Book), Written by God, et. al.

    8. Re:Google by dkh · · Score: 1

      Loved the ship names - "I said, I have a very big stick", said quietly of course.

    9. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where are the Battlestars on this?

    10. Re:Google by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      General Contact Vessel. I guess it might me a GCU, but I don't have a book handy.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    11. Re:Google by Macdude · · Score: 2
      SHIP NAME/TYPE: Earth (class M)
      LENGTH: Approximately 12600 km.
      BUILDER/COMMENTS: Originally built by God for humans [snip]


      The Earth isn't a ship, it's a computer. It was built for the mice by the Magratheans. Haven't you ever bothered to go to Norway and look at Slartibartfast's signature?


      Jeez, kids today--they don't know anything...

      --
      "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
    12. Re:Google by vaylen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Your V'ger size is WAY off. According to the script for Star Trek - The Motion Picture shot 91, http://www.geocities.com/ussmunchkin/Star_Trek_I.h tm V'ger is 82 AU's in diameter. An AU (Astronomical Unit) is the distance from the earth to the sun, or 149,597,870.691 km. That would make V'ger a ridiculously immense 12,267,025,396.662 km in size. Yes that's 12 BILLION as in Carl Freakin' Sagan! I think this size was so ludicrous that they changed the number to make it WAY smaller for the Directors Cut of ST-TMP that came out on DVD last year. I'd like to see that size chart with the 12.2 billion kilometer V'ger on it.

      --

    13. Re:Google by Trogre · · Score: 1

      If you're going to reference a book about life, at least warn people who might not want to know:

      SOURCE: Bible, (Book), Written by God, et. al.
      --- SPOILER WARNING:---
      Plot is discussed, as well as ending.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    14. Re:Google by 1eyedhive · · Score: 1

      the V'ger CLOUD is 82 AU's in diameter, the ship generating it is around 100k long. the CLOUD is HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the ship isn't as big, but still HUGE. must find this site, has been /.'ed

      --
      Logistical Chaos Officer http://www.slagg.org - LAN Gaming in Sarasota FL,USA
  42. Doesnt werk (Re:Since that site is down...) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "ACCESS DENIED
    Site requires local access"

    that sux biog time....

    1. Re:Doesnt werk (Re:Since that site is down...) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the webmaster of the "Star Trek Minutiae" site... it seems my .htaccess script needs a little work. ;-)

      Here's the regular HTML page: click here

      However, the chart that's currently online is over a year and a half old, and rather out-of-date. Certainly nothing compared to the original site...

      Dan Carlson

    2. Re:Doesnt werk (Re:Since that site is down...) by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      Works for me.

  43. Red Dwarf by bstadil · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Do not forget Red Dwarf.

    Based on the guy that paints the last letter in the intro Red Dwarf is around 1Km high, and 8Km long. Width is about 2X height.

    Anyone has better numbers?

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:Red Dwarf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, in "Stasis leak" they take an elevator down 2567 floors...

      On the other hand the show is extremely inconsistent, StarBug for instance is clearly not much bigger than a truck but still it has huge cargo decks and mile-long ventilation shafts!

      But who cares, it's still funny as hell.

    2. Re:Red Dwarf by ozbird · · Score: 1

      On the other hand the show is extremely inconsistent, StarBug for instance is clearly not much bigger than a truck but still it has huge cargo decks and mile-long ventilation shafts!

      Knowing BBC SciFi budgets, the sets are built from left-overs from previous series; obviously bits of the Tardis made it in. :-)

    3. Re:Red Dwarf by donscarletti · · Score: 1
      "It's got to be five miles long."

      "Something like that,' said Peterson.

      Lister squinted out of the window again. "and God, it is ugly!" (Grant Naylor, Red Dwarf "Infinity Welcomes Careful Drivers")

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    4. Re:Red Dwarf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the TV series, "Five miles long and three miles wide" is thrown about at some point...

  44. well duh by Cheapoboy · · Score: 1

    Everyone knows the Lexx would destroy all those other puny starships... its the most powerful weapon in the two universes! Whats the ship from robotech going to do throw that silly big ass hat the captian wears at it? and star trek will what, talk it to death? not to mention Xev is the hottest chick on any sci-fi show, ever.

  45. What about Moya? by RobPiano · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Anyone know how big Moya from Farscape is?

    Rob

    1. Re:What about Moya? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      online:

      The main setting for Farscape: a living starship, a female of a species called Leviathan. She's called bio-mechanoid, meaning part machine and part living organic matter. While she travels faster than lightcc no explanation has been given for exactly how her drive works. (See Starburst.) Her size has not been defined, either, but she's cavernous with hundreds of rooms (called chambers) and dozens of decks. She's a living home in space, but it's a bit of a pity that she isn't also armed. (See also Pilot.)

  46. Peanuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amid all this inane "oh my god, we slashdotted him" dribble, I'm more than a little bit surprised that no-one has brought up Iain M. Banks' Culture vessels (ie. Minds), which outsize just about any of the ships mentioned in the article. Although by just reading the article and not being able to see the actual comparison pages, it would seem this guy has limited his studies to TV/movie sci-fi vehicles (ie. ships of a size comprehensible to average couch potatos and Hollywood audiences) and by doing so left out a significant proportion of the more interestingly-sized candidates.

  47. Re:slashdotted - kinda easy by wiremind · · Score: 1

    As long as the page is pretty simple, no server side scripting.

    The Author would provide to Slashdot their site, compressed, tgz/zip/rar etc.

    Then, we just share the compressed file on bitTorret.

    Seemed to work pretty well for the Matrix trailer. (first use for me of bittorret)

    Kyle

  48. Ships? by Axel2001 · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or am I the only person out there that doesn't like star wars and star trek? I prefer stuff like Orson Welles and things that are somewhat less "Hollywood" sci-fi.

    1. Re:Ships? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just you.

    2. Re:Ships? by crazyphilman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're not alone, dude.

      I thought the original Star Wars series was ok, and worth watching once, but suffered because it was a little too kid-oriented (Ewoks??? Jawas??? too much obligatory cuteness). I don't see why people have to get so obsessed over it (did you see the guys dressing up as Jedi and lining up for the Phantom Menace? Holy Moly). And, the new series kinda sucks. Why did George Lucas make the Jedi into such a bunch of joyless fucks??? No love, no sex, no possessions, can't have fun, can't do anything amusing... Who the hell would join such an organization? No wonder they roam around, kidnapping kids to make new Jedi. Adults would chase them off with pitchforks and torches. ;)

      And, don't get me started on Star Trek. God, what awfulness. At least the original Gene Roddenberry series was an allegory for something. You had the USS Enterprise (named after an aircraft carrier), Klingons (who were basically communist Russians), Romulans (I guess Red China?) and so on. It let Roddenberry examine the cold war without being obvious about it, and he occasionally examined a traditional sci-fi deep thought or two. Not worth obsession or anyting, but amusing. But, God, the new series don't even have that to recommend them! They're so boring and sad... I mean, Jesus, it's all about geek wish-fulfillment: all the crafty techies doing techie things, with supporting women all around them, but never stealing their thunder, and so on. And, they're all so annoyingly typecast: Oh, Klingons are always butch, whatserface is the "sensitive one", the borg chick is cold and aloof... DULL, DULL DULL. Ick, foo.

      And, don't get me started on all the crazy trekkies, walking around with chirping starfleet insignias on their chests... Did you hear about that maniac who spoke to his son only in Klingon for the first two years of the kid's life, making the kid's primary language KLINGON??? What is WRONG with these people? That kid's gonna be a mental case for the rest of his life.

      --
      Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
    3. Re:Ships? by )v(agnus · · Score: 1

      No, he won't grow up to be a mental case, you God-less plick. LOL He'll simply be a talented, multiligual adult that can speak Klingon. I respect that (...and wish I'd thought of it). ~)v(agnus

    4. Re:Ships? by Noren · · Score: 1

      It's people like these who are doing the important work in making Klingon into such a successful modern language! Of course, they should also learn other, equally important languages.

    5. Re:Ships? by crazyphilman · · Score: 1

      )v(agnus inexplicably said: " No, he won't grow up to be a mental case, you God-less plick. LOL He'll simply be a talented, multiligual adult that can speak Klingon. I respect that (...and wish I'd thought of it). ~)v(agnus"

      What's a plick? Is that a Chinese pecker? And, why does my disdain for nut-jobs who abuse their children by forcing them to speak imaginary languages make me "God-less"? I would think that God would probably agree with me on this one.

      As far as your "talented multilingual adult" idea, I can see the kid trying THAT one out on the schoolyard:

      Kid: (calls some other kid a weirdo, Klingonish name, acting vaguely Klingon-y): "Gubba gubba boom-y-k!" (or whatever, I don't follow the series).

      Other kid: "What the fuck was that? What are you, retarded?"

      Kid #1: "I'm not retarded! I'm smart and multilingual, I speak Klingon!"

      Other kid: "HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Hey, Bobby, check out this dork! He says he's a fucking Klingon!"

      Bobby: "What? A cling-on? Like, a turd stuck to hair?"

      Other kid: "That's what he said!"

      Kid #1: "No! I speak Klingon, like from Star Trek."

      Bobby: "I think we had it right the first time, ha hahhahahahaha"

      Other kid: "Yeah, no shit! WAAAUGHHHAHAHAHAHAHA!"

      Kid #1: "Stop it! Stop laughing at me! You're dishonoring me!" (or some other weirdo trekkie response).

      Bobby: "OH MY GOD! HAHAHAHAHAAHA! IF THIS KEEPS UP I'M GONNA PISS MYSELF!"

      Other kid: "OH MY GOD, KID, STOP IT, YOU'RE KILLING US! MUHAHAHAHAHAHA"

      (by now a dozen kids are watching and the teachers have noticed).

      Kid #1: "That's it! Prepare to die!"

      Bobby: "Grab 'im, Richie! Let's show him what a REAL cling-on is like!"

      Richie: "HAHAHAHAH! You're fucked, now, kid! It's SWIRLY TIME!!!"

      (FLUSSSSH!)

      (Later, in the principal's office)

      Principal: Um... Mr. DumbassTrekkie, it appears your son claimed he spoke Klingon? And, started a fight with several other children, which resulted in his getting a swirly?

      Mr. DAT: My son didn't start any fights! He's smart, and the other kids hate him for it. They pick on him all the time!

      Principal: Ummm... Yeah, right. Ok, look, your kid's wacked in the head, ok? He's way too into star trek, so I'm going to suggest you cut his television watching until he gets a little bit more involved with reality. Also I'm going to put in a request for counselling for the boy, and I'm going to recommend that you find some yourself.

      Mr. DAT: "YOU HAVE DISHONORED MY FAMILY..."

      (Here we go again...) ;)

      --
      Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
    6. Re:Ships? by crazyphilman · · Score: 1

      That was some funny stuff! The Onion rocks...

      You know what I think makes the Earth such an amazing and strange place? That even though these particular guys are kidding (and hilariously), there are other guys out there who are *actually* like that. I mean, it's inexplicable. Inconceiveable! But, there it is. The longer I live, the more amazing and bizarre life becomes. Every time you think you've seen it all, you see something else.

      --
      Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
    7. Re:Ships? by )v(agnus · · Score: 1

      I almost couldn't stop laughing at your reply to my reply. You DO make a valid point. Thank you for your good sense of humor. Btw, I am in councelling currently. ~)v(agnus

    8. Re:Ships? by crazyphilman · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your kind reply -- you've got a pretty good sense of humor yourself. ;)

      --
      Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
  49. Spaceballs? by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 1
    It's /.'ed right now, but is the HUUUUUUUUGE ship from the intro to the movie Spaceballs on the list? That beast scrolled along the screen for three minutes!

    1. Re:Spaceballs? by Frak! · · Score: 1

      I remmeber this, the book took two pages of 'section , after section, after section'.

      So it must be a contender, or than the Dyson Sphere on St:TNG which in theory was in orbit of a sun so still moved and was man made.

      Not actually been able to access the site, or mirrors etc so not sure what's there.

    2. Re:Spaceballs? by stj · · Score: 1

      If you remember Spaceballs, that ship transformed into a giant maid with a hoover.

      Now, I'm not sure but the whole thing I think was bigger than the planet it sucked on... Assuming Earth sizes, that would be at least around 15000km. It didn't seem very consistent throughout the movie (or the planet was much smaller).

      --
      iThink iHate iMod
  50. Slasdot at it's best! by Ringlord · · Score: 1

    This really is 'News for Nerds. Stuff that matters'!

    1. Re:Slasdot at it's best! by jcast · · Score: 1

      It's also a slashdotting at its best!

      --
      There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
      -- David D. Friedman
  51. Obligatory... by damien_kane · · Score: 1

    "My favorite sci-fi series' starship is bigger than your favorite sci-fi series' starship..."

  52. poot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perry Rhodan space ships dwarf them all.

    -T

  53. How about the RingWorld? by Lershac · · Score: 0

    Larry Niven... or any from that universe?

    --
    Chuck
    1. Re:How about the RingWorld? by Saeger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      RingWorlds?

      Oh, you mean those giant anthropomorphic orbitals of the far future that assume sentient life will still exist in an old-fashioned humanoid form requiring gravity, atmosphere, day/night cycles, etc.? Pfft.

      RingWorlds are ultimately just as unbelievable as conventional spaceships are... unless... unless you can suspend your disbelief by pretending transhumanism is "Crazy Talk", and that spam-in-a-can is the way things will always be and SHOULD be. Yeeeehaw spacecowboys. :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    2. Re:How about the RingWorld? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *sigh* another evolutionist.

      Boy, are you going to be disappointed if (when) you can see 10^6 years into the future.

  54. bit torrent by minus_273 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    im starting to think that bittorrent should be built into all browsers for webpages....

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
    1. Re:bit torrent by MQBS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is actually a really good idea. Distributed bandwidth for *everything*, if your algorithms are efficient enough it would create ad-hoc caches. The only issue would be websites with rapidly changing data. It would basically overcome the underlying idea of being an end-user, that you cannot pass packets. Instead, you would make every computer into a node and with enough bandwidth...

      Cool. Someone get to work.

      --
      The dream reveals the reality which conception lags behind. That is the horror of life- the terror of art. -Franz Kafka
    2. Re:bit torrent by Saeger · · Score: 1
      For the cached webpage to remain dynamic it would only need to carry with it the logic needed to connect to the remote source database, or databases, if the protocol allowed for the DBs to also be somewhat distributed (& syncronized).

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    3. Re:bit torrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would need more than just dbi access. It would also need all the serverside modules and tools that the original page needs to render. Like mod_perl, python, php, SSI, and any CGI progreams and config files, etc. no easy task by a longshot.

    4. Re:bit torrent by slick_rick · · Score: 1

      They have already done it, it is called FREENET and you can find it on sourceforge.

      --
      apt-get install redhat please god - Me (take it easy, I love Debian)
    5. Re:bit torrent by mr_burns · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This has been brought up in the past. Problem is, BitTorrent really only has big advantages for big files. The publisher still has to tell every client who else is downloading. For something as small as a web page you may as well just serve up the page.

      However, including an mnet hash at the bottom of the article might do something for you. It's optimized for cacheing and serving up popular files. The hash is significantly small enough to be stuck on the end of an article and then no one server gets singled out.

      --
      "Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
  55. Space 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the ships from "Space 1999", that stupid British ripoff of Star Trek?

    1. Re:Space 1999 by darkonc · · Score: 2, Informative
      I disagree that it was stupid, and I definitely disagree that it was a ripoff of Star Trek.

      The Enterprise was a large, well-outfitted High-tech starship willfully exploring space. Space 1999 was a bunch of shell-shocked astronauts trying to deal with interstellar space using vaguely 20'th century technology.

      About the only thing that the two shows had in common was space.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    2. Re:Space 1999 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup. it has the Eagle from 1999. lenght: 68m.

    3. Re:Space 1999 by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1

      I think that Gene Roddenberry (the creator of Star Trek) once said about Space 1999 (paraphrasing here):

      "Moons simply do not go galavanting about the galaxy, and if they did, they'd raise the biggest goddam tidal waves you ever saw."

      --
      Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
    4. Re:Space 1999 by Black+Copter+Control · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't disagree with that.. The premise of the show was that a nuclear waste dump on the other side of the moon went critical and the resulting blast blew the moon out of orbit. Any blast big enough to send the moon out of orbit at high enough speeds to make a trip past mars (much less to any other star in this galaxy) on non-geological time scales would simply turn the moon into a dust ball..

      Some sort of 'wake' might result if they were using a star-trek warp drive on the moon, but this is a different universe with different warp physics than the Star Trek world.

      --
      OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
  56. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MOD UP! This is the shit!

  57. Something's missing... by pVoid · · Score: 1
    I saw the image as well...

    It's nice an all, but where is the 8086 of all ships, the one from 2001??!

  58. Dorkus Galactus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, I thought I was a real dork, but this really takes the cake. I feel better about myself already.

    1. Re:Dorkus Galactus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear ya!

  59. Spaceball One ? by MarkoNo5 · · Score: 1

    Have they included Spaceball One ? Can't see it, the site is /.ed.

  60. Olympic Size Swimming Pools? by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 1

    ... I mean, where are they? My favorite unit of measurement...

    --

    They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
  61. maybe we can piece it together here in the forum. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh my god I actually got to see 1 page:

    ID4 Mothership

    Above are schematics of the colossal Mothership from the movie ID4. Each pixel in the image equals about 4 square kilometers (2km to a side). I have portrayed the Mothership as being roughly 800km long. Although there do not seem to be any reliable sources for this length, I was able to come to this conclusion in two ways:

    1.) During the movie, it is stated that the ship is approximately 550km in diameter. From observations of photgraphs of the ship, we know it to be oblong in shape and therefor this measurement must be of one axis or the other.

    2.) Upon observation of numerous images of the underside of the mothership we can infer from the known size of the city destroyers (24km dia.) that the longer axis would probably come to the length of roughly 800km, while the shorter axis does indeed come to approximately 550km. This keeps in line with the dimensions stated in the movie.

    The movie also goes on to say that the ship has a mass of roughly one 4th the size of the moon, which seemed unlikely to me until my wife suggested a hull created from some incredibly dense material, which makes sense and would protect the vessel from interstellar debris and radiation.

    The ship is at least partially hollow, much of the inside comprising of a vast cavern, a gargantuan open area tens of thousands of cubic kilometers in volume that seems to maintain a misty internal atmosphere. Gigantic towers of unstated purpose seem to span the entire height of the chamber at random intervals.

    Up to 83 City Destoyers nest in large ports on the underside of the vessel until they are called for. The crew or population of the Mothership is not stated, but presumably ranges within the millions, as does probably the total number of auxillary and/or small fighter craft aboard.

  62. Imagine...(it was bound to be said) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comparing these starships versus a BEOWULF CLUSTER!

  63. Re:Google-SVG cache. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one thinking SVG would be perfect. And Google (The mother of all caches) would easily cache it and the text?

  64. What about... by los+furtive · · Score: 4, Funny

    What about the starship in Spaceballs, the one that transformed into Mega Maid?

    "Dear God, she's gone from suck to blow!"

    --

    I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.

  65. I do! (Was: Re:/.'ed but who cares?) by neurostar · · Score: 2, Funny

    I guess comparing spaceship sizes is really important to /. readers. Always reminds me of the scene in "Stand By Me" where the kids argue over the superiority of mighty mouse vs superman.

    I just wanted to make a big battle and make laser noises:

    Pshoo! Whap Whap Whap! zzt! zzt! etc....

  66. Re:Somehow there is something wrong with all of th by AmigaAvenger · · Score: 1

    just in case you hadn't actually read before posting... http://slashdot.org/faq/suggestions.shtml#su900

  67. Football fields? by VampireByte · · Score: 1

    When was the last time any of us saw one of those?

    --

    Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.

  68. Red Dwarf, anyone? by Stween · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Is Red Dwarf not included on the site? (I can't get there, for the site is currently down...)

    If memory serves (and this might just be randomly plucked from a dream), RD was around 5 miles long. How does that compare with the other ships? :)

  69. Mod the parent up! by los+furtive · · Score: 0

    And mod me down!

    --

    I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.

  70. One thing I have to day by TerryAtWork · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Battlestar Galactica was the only one that got it right.

    It was an aircraft carrier in space whereas the Enterprise was a Battleship in space.

    The Federation would have been overrun by a smarter enemy.

    --
    It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
    1. Re:One thing I have to day by erpbridge · · Score: 1

      Well, SDF-1 was, after the fold accident to Pluto, an aircraft carrier in space as well. Actually, it was 2 aircraft carriers brought along for the ride that then were welded to the ship, later to be the arms of the humanoid form.

    2. Re:One thing I have to day by kwan3217 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It really depends on the kinds of weapons a small fighter can support. In the 20th and 21st century, a small plane is capable of carrying a weapon, such as a bomb, torpedo, or missile, large enough to destroy its carrier. If it absolutely positively has to be sunk in 5 minutes, a nuke could be used. A nuke can be carried by any reasonable sized fighter-bomber and will ruin the day of any ship presently afloat. This is the regime of the carriers.

      Suppose defenses start getting really good when someone develops a force field. Now all of the sudden there is no kind of torpedo which can breach the defenses, or if there is, it is too large for a fighter plane to launch. Now in order to kill the enemy you need something like the supergun on SDF-1 or the gravity blast cannon on Nadesico. Both of these ships are basically built around their main weapons. Each weapon weighs many thousands of tons and requires more energy than can ever be extracted from an engine of a fighter. Here we are back in the regime of battleships.

      Enterprise seems to be out of its regime, since photon torpedoes are small enough to be carried by a fighter. Perhaps rather than being a battleship, it is more like an attack submarine? Carrier launched aircraft are an order of magnitude faster than their carriers. Attack subs are basically underwater battleships. They rule beneath the sea because it is presently impossible to build a minisub which is an order of magnitude faster than its carrier. In Star Trek, the starships are invariably faster than their shuttles, just the opposite of a modern carrier. In this case there is nothing a small craft can do which the starship cannot.

      Summary:
      Small fast planes carrying effective weapons lead to carriers.
      Small fast planes carrying ineffective weapons lead to battleships.
      Small slow planes lead to submarines.

      It really all depends on the technological state of the art and the laws of physics.

      --
      Lots of technical and environmental problems are solved by the application of vast amounts of nuclear power
    3. Re:One thing I have to day by Superfreak · · Score: 1

      God, I'm a dork....

      Pretty good insights there - had to throw two cents in. From a couple sources, Photon torpedoes aren't large, but they require *enormous* amounts of power to arm - far too much for a dinky fighter. Matter/Antimatter torpedoes, basically, and the antimatter has to come from the warp engines on the ship. Of course, Trek is really inconsistent on this. A single Photon torpedo is larger than a very, very large H-bomb, but a 600m ship can take one without shields.

      My take - Enterprise = Cruiser Romulan ship = Submarine (can appear and disappear to certain extent, hard to detect) But that analogy breaks down with same weapons used to engage surface/submarine targets......

    4. Re:One thing I have to day by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Battlestar Galactica was the only one that got it right. It was an aircraft carrier in space whereas the Enterprise was a Battleship in space.

      The Enterprise was not a warship, it was an exploration and research ship. Just for fighting, two or three smaller ships could be built and crewed for the same cost and give a lot more firepower and flexibility.

    5. Re:One thing I have to day by TerryAtWork · · Score: 1

      Ok thats a good point - so where were they?

      Space Marines too.. Where were they?

      --
      It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
    6. Re:One thing I have to day by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Ok thats a good point - so where were they?

      Where were who?

      Space Marines too.. Where were they?

      What Space Marines?

      I think ...

  71. Death Star by meekg · · Score: 1

    That surely was bigger, no?
    And how about the Total Perspective Vortex?

    1. Re:Death Star by gerardrj · · Score: 1

      Actually, the largest ship ever built was (or could be) the "Heart of Gold", stolen by the (ex)President of the Galaxy: Zaphod Beeblebrox.

      This simply has to be the case, as the ship would be any size you wanted or needed or didn't want or didn't need as the case may be. All you would need is to calculate just how improbable it would be to have a ship the size you wanted, feed the result in to the computer and fix up a good hot cup of tea for the infinite improbibility drive; brownian motion and all, don't you know?

      The TPV isn't a space ship, but a device you are subjected to. It collapses small minds by forcing the realization of just how insignificant you are in the grand scheme of the life, the universe and everything. Coincidentally, that is the title of one of the five books in the trilogy. :)

      --
      Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
  72. Largest ship of all time. by SexyAlexie · · Score: 1

    The largest ship I've ever read about is from David Weber's books, about Dahak. Dahak is a spherical warcraft, measuring some 8,000 kilometers in diameter. Truly awesome, along with the colossal firepower to shatter planets with gravitonic warheads.

    --
    I'm too sexy for you.
  73. Star Trek thrust by StarKruzr · · Score: 2, Informative

    Incorrect. Impulse engines use the exhaust from a fusion reactor to move the ship; they are a Newtonian drive like any other.

    Warp engines, on the other hand, use asymmetric peristaltic continuum distortion - they essentially "squeeze" the ship through a bubble of distorted spacetime. No local motion takes place, but with respect to the rest of the universe, the bubble of spacetime that encapsulates the ship is moving.

    ph34r my n3rd1n355.

    --

    +++ATH0
    1. Re:Star Trek thrust by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      You're wrong about Impulse Engines. They do not use thrust. They change the velocity of the ship by changing its mass.

      Impulse Engine

      Impulse Engines are NOT a Newtonian drive like any other.

    2. Re:Star Trek thrust by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      I've never seen that before...that is just plain...wacky.

      Not to mention makes no sense. I know, I know, it's Star Trek.

      "Once the plasma stream has passed through the driver coil assembly, it reaches the exhaust port and passes into space. If the coil itself is not engaged, the Impulse Engine reverts to behaving like a simple Newtonian fusion rocket with a performance thousands of times less than its normal capabilities. Under these circumstances the exhaust system is designed to vector the thrust of the engine in order to correct for unusual mass distributions or provide off-axis thrust for enhanced agility."

      [snip]

      "Early space vessels had to mount so called "retro-rockets" in order to slow themselves down as they approached their destination, or else turn their craft backwards and use the main engines to slow down. One further advantage of utilizing the driver coil in an Impulse engine is that this rather cumbersome requirement is removed. The driver coil essentially allows the ship to reduce its mass in order to allow a - relatively - small amount of kinetic energy to create a great deal of velocity. Once the coil is discharged, the ship returns rapidly to its normal mass. The kinetic energy remains constant, so the velocity is vastly reduced without any need to use the engines thrust."

      Yup, it's Star Trek all right. Let the ship return to it's normal mass, and automagically it slows down, because it's *kinetic energy remains constant*. Uh...ok.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    3. Re:Star Trek thrust by bluephone · · Score: 1
      Yup, it's Star Trek all right. Let the ship return to it's normal mass, and automagically it slows down, because it's *kinetic energy remains constant*. Uh...ok.

      Actually, that's exactly how it WOULD work, if you had some form of mass-altering device. Let's say your ship is moving but not accellerating. Turn it on, you mass effectively is half, and the speed your ship is traveling would increase. Turn it off, and your speed would go back to the original value. Just like skaters pulling in their arms go faster, the amount of energy in the system does not decrease, so if suddenly it is acting on a lesser mass, then it's effects will increase. In this case, the impulse engines diminish the mass (it's inherent inertia, really, just like the inertial dampeners help keep everything mostly stable withotu seatbelts) and so the small amount of thrust generated has less effective mass to act upon, thus moving faster. The hacked Nissan from yesterday is a great example. They cut the weight (literally) by over half a ton, and it went faster.

      --
      jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
    4. Re:Star Trek thrust by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Except that kinetic energy is m*v. Cut your mass in half, your kinetic energy gets cut in half. Yeah, I know, it's star trek. Kinetic energy is a end component, not some kind of value you could magically conserve. KE doesn't mean *anything* unless you apply a vector force against it, like an impact. It's just an abstract value.

      Now if they said that this device conserves *inertia* I could halfway accept it, even in ST speak.

      The case of the skater is different. There it's conservation of rotational inertia (decreasing the moment arm).

      anyway....

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    5. Re:Star Trek thrust by Skavookie · · Score: 1

      That site is for a play by email RPG and describes the modified Start Trek universe used in that RPG. It is based on Star Trek but is by no means an authoritative source on Star Trek technology. Note, I'm not saying you're wrong, just that the link you provided does not answer the question "How do impulse engines in Star Trek work?"

    6. Re:Star Trek thrust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You're wrong about Impulse Engines. They do not use thrust. They change the velocity of the ship by changing its mass.

      Wrong. The ENTIRE reason that set of engines is termed "impulse" is because they're Newtonian in contrast to the spacewarp engines.

    7. Re:Star Trek thrust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Propulsion system used aboard spacecraft for travel at subwarp speeds, employing traditional Newtonian action-reaction thrust physics. Full impulse speed is about one-quarter light speed, sufficient for interplanetary travel. Aboard Federation starships, fusion reactors power the engines using deuterium fuel to create helium plasma. Overload of an impulse engine on the damaged U.S.S Constellation, a Constitution-class starship, was once rated at 97.835 megatons.
      [startrek.com]

      Humm...

    8. Re:Star Trek thrust by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      Actually, I believe kinetic energy is (m*v^2)/2 or "one half emm vee squared". m * v is impulse, I think (this I'm less sure of). Impulse is force * (amount of time force was applied), which is basically like saying (m*a)*t, and since a is in m/s^2, and t is in seconds, the final units will be the units of m times m/s or, kg * m/s. And m/s is velocity. So yes, I'm quite sure impulse is m*v. And I'm certain that kinetic energy is "one half emm vee squared".

    9. Re:Star Trek thrust by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      NO, you're WRONG. You might believe that, but you're still wrong. The idea of an impulse engine was not created by Star Trek, and it is still science fiction. Why don't you read the link I posted.

    10. Re:Star Trek thrust by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      You're right; I should have previewed, I meant to say "proportional" to m*v. My bad ;-(

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    11. Re:Star Trek thrust by caouchouc · · Score: 1

      Just like skaters pulling in their arms go faster

      They can only spin faster like this, and it has nothing to do with a change in mass. Rather, it has to do with stored kinetic energy and the seperate displacement of the mass being accelerated by that energy.

      The skater has kinetic energy stored in his/her arms that is sufficient to rotate around a large circumference at a certain acceleration, discounting the obvious effects of friction (think of it as "circular velocity" if you have trouble understanding how any object rotating around a point is in fact accelerating). When the arms are pulled in, the energy is preserved and the acceleration remains the same. There is less distance to cover in each revolution however, so the skater starts spinning faster. Kinetic energy and acceleration are preserved.

      If you were to alter the mass of a star ship accelerating in a straight line, you would certainly alter that acceleration. Whatever velocity it already has, however, it would keep.

      Say a Star Trek ship were heading to a space station with an acceleration of 200 Gs provided by the impulse engines. It has built up a respectable velocity of 0.2 C relative to the station. One second out (approx. 60 km) they cut the engines, instantly reducing their acceleration from 200 Gs to zero. They've returned their mass to normal, though that wasn't even neccessary. Cutting the newtonian thrust would have stopped their acceleration regardless of their present mass.

      Unfortunately, they're still moving at 0.2C. What's worse, the increased mass after the engines are cut is only going to make the inevitable collision that much more energetic. A nuke has nothing on a crash that hard.

    12. Re:Star Trek thrust by caouchouc · · Score: 1

      That page even says they use thrust by forcing plasma out the back.

      It simply states that they use sci-fi technology to reduce the ship's mass while in flight so that very little thrust is required to provide a lot of acceleration.

      It's actually rather silly. If they can manipulate their mass and use artificial gravity to counteract the effects of hundreds of Gs of acceleration on the ship, why aren't they using artificial gravity for propulsion directly?

    13. Re:Star Trek thrust by bluephone · · Score: 1

      Oy, I forgot how bad the /. crowd is with loose examples...

      --
      jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
    14. Re:Star Trek thrust by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

      You're right. How could I forget this? This was prominently featured in an episode of DS9 where they moved the station.

      --

      +++ATH0
  74. Hah the fleet of moons from streaker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you really going to try to to find better than moon sized spacecraft. Oops we're talking TV and movie scifi aren't we never mind.

  75. mod up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    thank you. thank you. thank you.

    fast mirror..for now.

  76. Partial Mirror by bshort404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here's a partial mirror:

    http://bshort.com/shipdim/shipdim.html
    Please be gentle.

    --
    -B
    1. Re:Partial Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, thanks, but you already said that. what's with the dupe? the URL didn't change.

    2. Re:Partial Mirror by bshort404 · · Score: 1

      I was just getting it out from under the parent.
      Thought it might help...

      --
      -B
  77. Andromeda has em all beat. by Mulletproof · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Magog Worldship
    Size: Approximately 1 AU
    Composition: 20 plants structually interlinked within their various orbits orbiting/powered by a small artifical star.
    Armament: Point singularity weapons (no others observed firing.
    Maximum Velocity: Um, all ahead slow ensign.
    Episodes 1-22 & 2-01

    This has to be the largest moving ship I have seen in a movie or series. I don't include Niven's ring worlds or Trek's Dyson spheres simply because they don't go anywhere. Ships go places and blow things up.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
    1. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Ringworld included a description of something essentially the same as the Magog worldship - the Puppeteer Kemplerer Rosette which was clearly going somewhere. Since Ringworld was written well before Andromeda I think you should give it priority.

    2. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by the_arrow · · Score: 1

      What about the Deathstar? It sure is big (allthough not 1 AU), it travels around in space, and it blow things up.

      --
      / The Arrow
      "How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
    3. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by thelizman · · Score: 1

      1 AU is the approximate distance from the sun to the earth. The Kemplar Rosette is beat, hands down.

    4. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

      Sure the Deathstar meets my qualifications as a ship. It moves and blows stuff up :D Actually, the dang thing had to have a similar jump drive as most of the smaller Starwars warships to get from place to place in a timely manner I figure.

      --
      You need a FREE iPod Nano
    5. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the size that matters...

      It's the FORCE!

    6. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as I seem to recall, the deathstar was the size of a small moon, you know that scene "It looks like their heading for that small moon" "That's not a moon. Its a Space Station." So it'd be somewhat smaller than earth's moon. Quite a far cry from 20AU.
      Note: AU = av. radius of earth's orbit 20 AU is somewhere around the orbit of Saturn or Uranus. So the death star doesn't even show up on that scale.

    7. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by shadowbearer · · Score: 1



      But the Ringworld is 2 AU in diameter. It also can move (using EM fields to focus the solar output into a plasma jet). Magog, beat again.

      (Bet that Ringworld also has more square meters of "decksize" too :-)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    8. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

      And I quoth the parent (me):
      "I don't include Niven's ring worlds or Trek's Dyson spheres simply because they don't go anywhere. Ships go places and blow things up."

      --
      You need a FREE iPod Nano
    9. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

      [added]
      The most I've seen ringworlds move is fixing orbits around their component star, where as a the Worldship depleted an entire galaxy and is now actively moving across space, looking for another one to gobble up

      --
      You need a FREE iPod Nano
    10. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 1

      The most I've seen ringworlds move is fixing orbits around their component star

      The Ringworld is capable of moving by firing the defense laser perpendicular to the plane of the ring, moving the star by photon pressure and pulling the ring along. This was proposed by both Nessus and Teela Brown, if I recall correctly, as a means of leaving the galaxy if the ring material was deemed unsuitable for shielding against the Core explosion.

      This was covered in "The Ringworld Engineers".

      An alternative approach, discussed in one of Niven's non-fiction articles, is to use magnetic manipulation of the star to cause a plasma jet perpendicular to the plane, instead of using a photon drive. When you run out of star, you're at a speed that makes a Bussard-style ramscoop feasible, using the ring's (presumed) magnetic field. Solving the deflection problem is left as an exercise for the reader.

    11. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 1

      This was proposed by both Nessus and Teela Brown, if I recall correctly

      Hindmost, not Nessus; my mistake.

    12. Re:Andromeda has em all beat. by spun · · Score: 1

      If I recall, the whole purpose of the ringworld was to move a large population slowely and safely away from the exploding galactic center. As for blowing things up, the defense lasers certainly do that. So the ringworld meets both criteria.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  78. Google Cache - I Loves Ya! by Angel-X · · Score: 1

    http://216.239.57.100/search?q=cache:yUkcySXcpr4J: zardalu.sytes.net/000starshipdimensions.htm+starsh ip+dimensions&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

  79. Re:bit torrent-Security. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's also the small matter of security as well.

    Why not simply have people design web pages that are cache friendly?

  80. Possible other size compare chart? by jake_fehr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Would anyone else like to see one of these made to compare the size of various anime mechs? It'd be like a police lineup of gundams, veritechs, SDF enforcement mechs (Pat Labor), Escaflowne (movie and series), etc....

    Anyone out there with enough knowledge and free time reading this?

  81. Babylon 5 by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's a religious debate, but for my money there's simply no comparison between B5 and just about any other sci-fi series out there. I've watched and enjoyed plenty of the others, but B5 is just something else. It has a fantastically intricate storyline and some great characters, all set in a universe that's futuristic but very credible. The visual effects still look good even today, several years after it was made. Even the theme music changes subtly from series to series to sound more in tune with the story. It's dramatic, funny, triumphant, tragic, poignant, insightful and the only sci-fi that has ever made me cry.

    NB: The episodes are somewhat independent, particularly in the early series, but there is a major story arc that runs throughout. You want to watch it from the start. It only really takes off from about the second series, but there are so many little set-ups (though you won't realise it at the time) that the first series is still a must. I doubt any regular channels are still running it anyway, as the last series was made several years ago. I'd just go and buy the whole lot on DVD.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    1. Re:Babylon 5 by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 1
      However, the ship design sucks rocks :)

      Seriously, those are the most structurally unsound things I ever saw. In space, even though there is no weight there is still mass, Einstein! ;)

    2. Re:Babylon 5 by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      Seriously, those are the most structurally unsound things I ever saw. In space, even though there is no weight there is still mass, Einstein! ;)

      No friction. The impetus on any part of the structure accelerates the whole structure with the same force, unlike in an atmosphere where the various jutting out bits would snap off because of shear forces due to the equality of friction and the inequality of acceleration. That's one of the few things B5 did get right (too bad they abandoned the rotating sections for artificial grav so early on in the series).

    3. Re:Babylon 5 by idontgno · · Score: 2, Interesting
      However, the ship design sucks rocks :)

      Whose, Earth's? They looked pretty solid to me. Clunky, overfunctional, unaesthetic, boxy, like 21st Century U.S. Army stuff. Ugly, but structurally sound for the stresses you can statically design for (acceleration/deceleration, course change, some collision and weapons-fire resistance).

      Besides, I seem to recall that a lot of Earth Alliance stuff is produced in the same system we use in the 21st Century: lowest bidder. Ugly and functional is usually cheaper than pretty and functional.

      Some of the stuff from the other races (Mimbari, for instance) seemed more fragile, but after your technology has mastered localized gravitation control you can reinforce your structure with selective gravity polarization (like Star Trek "Structural Integrity Field"). Make your naval architecture as swoopy and ephemeral as you like, so long as you have still have power while you're maneuvering. (Which, by definition, you do--Newtonian universe, right?)

      By the bye, earlier upthread someone was bemoaning how the stereotypical TV SF space battle always seemed to be atmospheric ("thick 2-D", I believe). B5 seemed to model the 3D Newtonian universe quite well...Starfury fighters cutting thrust, whipping around 180 degrees on the yaw axis, and blazing away with lasers or missiles at whoever's chasing them, coasting along all the while.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    4. Re:Babylon 5 by CaseyB · · Score: 1
      The impetus on any part of the structure accelerates the whole structure with the same force

      Huh? That makes no sense.

      unlike in an atmosphere where the various jutting out bits would snap off because of shear forces due to the equality of friction and the inequality of acceleration.

      Bollocks. Friction will have no effect. But inertia still holds. The engines (assuming they are "pushing" engines, and not something more exotic like space-folders or whatnot) are applying a force only to one specific part of the craft. The rest has to be strong enough to hold together under that force. A "jutting out bit" with a lot of mass on the end will still snap off if you accelerate the main body too fast.

    5. Re:Babylon 5 by reallocate · · Score: 2, Funny

      "He is behind me. You are in front of me. If you value your lives, be somewhere else."

      Best lines I've heard in a sci-fi show.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    6. Re:Babylon 5 by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Wow. I'm sure NASA will be pissed off to hear that all those vibrational and structural studies on the various design generations of the ISS were completely unnecessary.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    7. Re:Babylon 5 by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 1
      Bingo. Give Casey a prize. Granted, some of the B5 ships are okay, but some of them (rather a lot of them!) would be fine as stationary positions, but you wouldn't want to move them. Unless the motive force was applied across everything equally (force field) or the ships go inertialess (E. E. 'Doc' Smith) etc.

      Which would be perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned, it's SF after all. But applying force to physical structures has certain rules in this Universe, and violating those implies either that some rules (like inertia) are void, or that the spaceship is implausible crap :)

      It's not like there aren't implausible crap Star Trek ships, too. Star Wars tends to be a little more plausible- apparently George Lucas is capable of saying 'No, that bit there would just break right off when it moved, do it over', something that J Michael Stryczinski apparently chooses not to do in order to be different, since he's gotta be aware of it- all the B5 ships look like freaking sea jellyfish, it must be on purpose. ;)

    8. Re:Babylon 5 by Zirnike · · Score: 3, Interesting
      We'll skip the Vorlon and Shadow ships... They're way overtech, anyway, and are supposed to look pretty much imposible. A million years of design will do that.

      Exactly what are you talking about, than? The Earth ships are remarkably realistic. The Starfuries are dead on the way I would design a starfighter. The engines are on the tips of the 'fragile wings'? You mean like a 747 or a B52? Why didn't the designers of those place all the engines in the main body?

      What about capital ships? The Hyperion is a huge block. The only things hanging out are turrets, the habitat (I'm assuming, the spinning thing... which is massive, and not structurally unsound) and maybe antennas or something. And if the turrets are a problem, than the turrets on a Abrams are too.

      Or the most fragile looking ships, the Mimbari capships. No weights in the 'wings', so there isn't a problem there that isn't in a basic modern plane. Or the White Star class... Outrigger engines (for maneuverability) held by support wings. Sure, the wings look nice, but so what? I'd design them that way if I didn't need to worry about drag, too.

      Most of the rest of the alien races aren't that bad, either. Only the elder races.

      --
      I'm not shy, I'm stalking my prey
    9. Re:Babylon 5 by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      All the Vorlon ships are alive. You never get to see the inside of one, so there could be anything in there. I always liked to think of them as completely organic, with no solid metal parts at all.

      Possibly bone or other hard organic material that could deform (we know from seeing Kosh's ship in bay 13 that it can alter the surface markings and poke out various tendrils. Also, there is no door, so to get in and out you have to pass through the wall, or have it open a hole.

      The inside would be pretty much a solid lump of whatever the surface is made of - the Vorlons are strongly telepathic, and their ships are alive, there would be no need for controls, dials or displays.

      We know what a Shadow vessel looks like inside - a solid black organic mass with a human/alien body as a computer.

      The way they animated the Starfuries was the best I've seen of space simulation - they could turn around on the spot while coasting on a given vector.

    10. Re:Babylon 5 by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      The ISS isn't in as much of a vacuum as an interstellar ship would be. The upper reaches of the atmosphere at the ISS's altitude are much, much thicker than the interstellar medium in the local bubble. Yes, there are structural needs to be able to withstand acceleration, but we're not talking about the kind of shear forces you'd see in an atmosphere.

    11. Re:Babylon 5 by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      That was one of the best things about B5, IMHO: while they had the requisite futuristic setting, I don't recall a single technological or scientific area that wasn't credible as somewhere we could be 250 years from now. We have faster-than-light travel, but it's not perfect in several ways. We have space stations, but people died falling out of the airlocks before they got them right. We have a time travel loop, but I never saw any logical flaws caused by it. Medical technology has improved, but it still can't cure everything. We've colonised Mars, but they live in enclosed cities, rather than having converted the atmosphere. We've met other races, and some of them are stronger than us. It's all credible.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    12. Re:Babylon 5 by charon_on_acheron · · Score: 1

      I read a book back in the 80s or early 90s that took that into consideration. I think it was called "Vacuum Flowers". There was a spherical craft in space, I don't think it was in Earth orbit, but in it's own orbit. It was basically a ghetto district with living spaces built wherever someone decided to build, usually tethered to the living spaces nearby. There was no gravity field to worry about pulling everything down. But any attempt to move the craft would have ripped everything inside apart because the inertia of all the buildings would have broken the flimsy connections between the living spaces, and they would have all crushed up against the inside of the craft.

      They had to use a special device that put equal pressure on all of the molecules with the craft, like using a magnetic field almost. It wasn't the most interesting book I've read, but it was certainly original, and worth my time.

    13. Re:Babylon 5 by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      All of those things made B5 fantastic - especially the stronger races thing.

      Star Trek can be pretty good on occasion, but with the exception of the Borg and Species 8472, Humanity is pretty much the strongest thing there is, and that gets boring after a while.

      That's the beauty of Stargate SG1 and B5 - you've got to watch your back and keep the locals happy, since they're evenly matched or stronger than you.

  82. What's the difference b/t a /.ing and a DDOS'ing? by fbg111 · · Score: 5, Funny

    When ddos'ers successfully crash your server, they move on to the next victim. When the slashdotters crash your server, they sit around bitching about your IIS POS, till you're back online, then they slashdot you again.

    --
    Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
  83. Scotty! Beam us out! by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Slashdot Readers:
    More power, dammit! Show us your pretty pictures!

    Webmaster Scotty:
    She can't taking anymore Captain! She's givin' us all she's got, but she can't take the slashdotting!

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  84. Anyone read Undocumented Features? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    They've pretty much thrown every class of starship together in one fan-created universe. You've got Super Star Destroyers fighting alongside Mecha from Macross and other series slunging it out against ships from the EA and Starfleet. Check it out sometimes.

  85. awhile back by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    someone suggested, with the 'premium subscribers' of slashdot, that it would be an interesting business idea to buy a subscription to slashdot, and then the moment that an article is in 'the future' scope of slashdot, to immediately contact the homepage...and say "listen, you are going to be taken out. you can pay me $$ and i'll mirror you.". you wouldn't even need to ask for that much, would you? have a t1 or a cable modem with adequate broadband capabilities[ie, able to handle LOTS of connections at once]...poeple i don't think would mind a slow connection in return for actually being able to see what the article is talking about [and there could be a market for fast-connection,..but i don't think most owners of slashdotted articles could afford such a thing :) ]...so why havn't we seen this yet? i mean, i just upgraded from dialup myself, and i'm still on windows 3.1, and i'm too busy...so there's my excuse...what's yours?

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  86. What... no Sulaco or Nostromo?? by tjhanley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can't deny the Alien series...

    --
    --- /. is like tivo for news
    1. Re:What... no Sulaco or Nostromo?? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      The Nostromo itself was quite small - 800 metres or so in length according to the features on the DVD.

      The mining/refinery platform that it towed was the big mother, but the crew never go into it at all, it's just attached to the ship.

  87. Distributed Mirrors Project by ckedge · · Score: 4, Informative


    http://solem.cs.man.ac.uk:8006/cgi-bin/mirror.pl?g et=http%3A%2F%2Fzardalu.sytes.net%2F

    Everyone, add the following URL to your shortcuts, it'll be dang handy if you're a slashdot regular.

    http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~brejc8/mirror/index.html

    Note that by going to the main distributed-mirror page, you can add to the list of mirrors (if you know of others, or if you are creating one yourself.)

    1. Re:Distributed Mirrors Project by nukey56 · · Score: 1

      Now, it's funny when /. can not only break a university site, but an indie-mirror site and all of its mirrors as well.

  88. Star Wars Technical Commentaries by willith · · Score: 4, Informative

    Let us not forget the Star Wars Technical Commentaries, a collection of near industry-quality analyses of Star Wars tech, put toghether by a Ph.D with a lot of time on his hands.

    There's a couple of weeks of engrossing reading there. Highlights include Warships of the Empire, The Endor Holocaust (an interesting examination of probably ecological fallout on the sanctuary moon due to the explosion of the Death Star II), and The Injuries of Darth Vader.

    1. Re:Star Wars Technical Commentaries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Lord! I consider myself a hell of a geek, but:

      The exact cause of Vader's death is a matter of confusion and dispute in some circles.

      ...that's beyond geeky. That's... that's... that's nerdy.

  89. wow by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    idono bout the rest of you but that borg cube was pretty scary...

    up until i saw that babylon 5 station. _wow_. babylon5's world could 0wn the borg collective.

    and Ds9 is a lot smaller than i thought it was. i thought it would have been about 10 times what it was...same with the star wars ships. sure surprised me.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    1. Re:wow by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      up until i saw that babylon 5 station. _wow_. babylon5's world could 0wn the borg collective.


      Yeah, espesially since the ships in Babylon 5 have such kick-ass shields. No, wait...
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    2. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know... those cute one-armed flying drones of Lexx' Mantrid (Season 2) 'assimilated' most of an entire universe, turning everything into copies of themselves flying about and regrouping to form all sorts of structures. Lesson: You can always invent something bigger. How pointless!

    3. Re:wow by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      The Vorlon ships and the White Star class have self repairing hulls, and the ability to absorb a certain amount of weapon fire without taking damage, but otherwise, yeah, no shields.

  90. ship movement by PW2 · · Score: 1

    Thanks!

    I just noticed that the pictures can be dragged around for better comparison - even in the mhts I saved.

  91. Why They Didn't Do the TARDIS by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 1

    Which do you measure, the inside or the outside?
    GMFTatsujin

  92. Re:Play Elite by Bastian · · Score: 1

    Try Elite. It's super old, but you can also try to find its sequel, Frontier. Both are at the Home of the Underdogs.

    Good Newtonian spaceflight for the time. I don't think that stars and planets produce gravity that affects starships, but otherwise spaceship flight is quite realistically implemented.

  93. Re:awhile back-Big Bill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got a better idea. Anyone with a big Slashdot bill? Send it to OSDN for reembursment. That's one way to force OSDN to face the consequences of their actions.

  94. That's no moon... by inertia187 · · Score: 1

    So what about the Death Star? It'd probably make a great background image for this site.

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    1. Re:That's no moon... by Firefly1 · · Score: 1

      As I recall from the 'Death Star Technical Companion' published by the now-defunct West End Games as a supplement for their Star Wars RPG, the 'original' Death Star (seen in A New Hope) possessed an equatorial diameter of 120km; the 'Death Star Mk. II' in Return of the Jedi got to 160km across.

      --
      - White Knight of the Order of Mihoshi Enthusiasts
  95. A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdot by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unfortunately, I think this might be a side effect of the new "mysterious future" feature. If subscribers can see an article 30 minutes before the rest of the Slashdot crowd then that gives them 30 minutes in which to slashdot the relevant server and/or eat up all of the site owners bandwidth cap.

    Looks like uber geeks who can't stand missing out on articles like this one will have to subscribe if they want a fighting chance of reading the relevant article(s). I know the editors here really don't give a damn about issues like site management any more than they have to (witness the number of headlines and summaries that are inaccurate, badly spelt and/or grammatically incorrect, the number of dupes, fakes, etc), but when it's someone else's bandwidth then they really should be trying to work with people rather than against them.

    Offering to mirror articles on non-commercial sites locally for a week or so would be a good start. The story links could point to the local server mirror which after a week could be changed to s simple redirection page pointing back to the original source site. This solution would stop major slashdotting of small "mom and pop"-type sites, and benefit Slashdot readers, Slashdot and the site owners as well. (If ad revenue is an issue, I'm sure Slashdot and the site owner could agree on splitting the revenue that the locally hosted mirror generates. And I'm sure Slashdot could cover itself against any possible legal ramifications with a well-worded contract that clearly illustrates that the content and the consequences of publishing it are the responsibility of the original owner - just like ISPs do all the time and Slashdot does with posts at the moment.)

    I'm not saying that this should be compulsory, but that it should be an option. It seems to be a win-win situation all around, so why wouldn't they consider it?

    Any editors reading this have any comments to make?

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  96. Ancent history. by c.emmertfoster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    See this abusenet thread for the original debate, the Enterprise versus an Imperial Star Destroyer!

    It's especially funny because you thought you were joking.

    --
    We can neither love nor pity nor forgive. If you make a slip in handling us you die!
    1. Re:Ancent history. by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 1
      Star Trek, except in one Voyager expisode, always ignored the usefulness of the transporter against un-transporter-shielded opponents, and so does this analysis. Yes, the gallant crew of the Enterprise could beam an away team over to wreak some small amount of havoc, but why would they do that? I think dumping a major explosive (nuclear, antimatter, quantum, even a chemical MOAB for cryin' out loud) warhead into Nida's lap would brighten his day ever so much more. If the explosion goes from the inside out, uber-thick armor serves only to protect the other guy from the flying debris that used to be the inside of your ship.

      But hey, don't even get me started on the poor widgetology found in the entire Trek universe. We'd be here till next week.

      I don't ask that they bring spent an inordinate amount of time making sure every technology fit together utterly perfectly, but a plot device that depends on characters doing something that is blatantly stupid or ignorant makes me enjoy the show a great deal less.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    2. Re:Ancent history. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Enterprise didn't simply transport nukes for the same reason the U.S. didn't simply nuke Iraq. It's a dishonorable tactic reserved for a last resort.

    3. Re:Ancent history. by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 1
      The Enterprise didn't simply transport nukes for the same reason the U.S. didn't simply nuke Iraq. It's a dishonorable tactic reserved for a last resort.

      Bull hooey. We didn't use nukes because they're so ridiculously indiscriminate, to say nothing of the bad publicity associated with using one. Meanwhile in Star Trek land, they have no problems firing a torpedo but would think twice before beaming one? Same weapon, same target, same goal, just a slightly different means of getting it there.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  97. Woks Beautifully by forged · · Score: 1
    Thank you !!!!

    Can you tell us what's the hit rate at this time ? ;)

  98. Additional spacecraft... by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

    Why don't they compare them to, say, a small moon?

    1. Re:Additional spacecraft... by DavittJPotter · · Score: 1

      OK, I'll do it:

      "That's no moon, that's a SPACE STATION!"

      Sorry, I've never been able to resist quoting that line. :)

      --
      "If there's hope, it lies in the proles..."
  99. Largest space structure size by bradbury · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The largest integrated space structure size (that I've encountered) would be a highly evolved Matrioshka Brain which is a multi-layer Dyson Sphere constructed using molecular nanotechnology. This is significantly larger and a heck of a lot more intelligant than a Magog Worldship. There is not normally enough enough material outside of the star in a single solar system to construct one however, so it would require an extended harvesting process within a large gas cloud or perhaps an extensive process of star-lifting [1] to accomplish this. The maximum size of a Matrioshka Brain depends on the size of the star used as a power source and/or the size to which it is reduced. But a diameter of several light years is not unreasonable. This is determined by the heat radiation limits as specified by Stefan's Law. Unlike Niven's Ringworld or a Magog Worldship which may have significant problems with the laws of physics (holding them together is problematic), Matrioshka Brains do seem feasible.

    Interestingly, when you navigate a Matrioshka Brain one has to take the star with you -- so changing course or speed does take a rather long time.

    1. D. R. Criswell, "Solar System Industrialization: Implications for Interstellar Migrations", Chapter 4 in Interstellar Migration and the Human Experience, Ben R. Finney and Eric M. Jones, (eds.), University of California Press, (1985), pp 50-87.

    1. Re:Largest space structure size by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Hey, it's THE Robert "Matrioska" Bradbury. Read all your stuff.

      Question: In order for a Matrioshka Brain to move (slowly), wouldn't it have to cut out a large section of its shell in order to use the other half of the shell as a solar sail? And, if these Brains are as common as you claim they may be (to account for the missing Dark Matter), shouldn't we be detecting the ass-end of at least a few of these movers?

      Oh, and what if the section of brain to be removed doesn't want to 'die', even if it is supposed to be smart enough to know that it's for the overall good of the hive to find a new star? :)

      (btw, when loading your Dyson Shell page I'm being asked authenticate twice (with login message: "ETI DOCUMENTS"). The page still loads, but it's annoying.)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
  100. You may by falsification · · Score: 1
    You may think yours is bigger than any other, but son, I can assure mine is the the biggest in the galaxy. It is very big.

    News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.

  101. All your base.. by njan · · Score: 1

    ..are belong to us. Iain M Bank's culture GSVs (General Systems Vehicles) own you all. ;).. 26km of pure power. 0:)

    --
    I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you
  102. Man, all these replies are worth reading. [2001] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm replying to this one -- but any of these replies are pretty good.

    We don't really list the 2001 robotic probe and guardian here, because although it had a nice, measurable size from a distance, up close it was -- well, huge.

    "!*! It's full of stars!"

    Anyhow, I liked the thought of 2001 when we think about scales. I also liked the reference farther down this list, about Earth, and being under recall.

  103. Slashdotted : Web Server enhancement by rugwuk · · Score: 1

    Perhaps what really required is a web server that queues requests, especially for low bandwidth sites to a maximum of so many per hour, or something like that. The request itself is trivial to handle and throw away if some resource limit has been reached. I think a feature for apache is in the offing.

    --
    Its one damn thing before another. (Dick Bird 1999)
  104. The Golden Ship by Aardpig · · Score: 1

    In one of Cordwainer Smith's stories ("Golden the ship was"), there was a spaceship the size of a solar system. Most of it was made from low-density foam; therefore, the overall weight of the ship was minimal, meaning that it was agile as fuck.

    The cool thing is that the ship was totally defenseless. However, enemy fleets didn't know this, and were thereby scared shitless by the ship. Great story!

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  105. new "mysterious future" feature by kikta · · Score: 2, Funny

    Something else I'd like to see is someone reposting the "mysterious future" articles somewhere else. That way everyone could get them for free. Why should Slashdot be able to extort money out of people to get something in advance? Especially when there's a question of inadequate bandwidth, e.g. slashdotting. I say fuck 'em. Put those articles on BitTorrent. Ruin this plum for subscribers, because we deserve that service without paying!

    P.S. Yes, this is sarcasm. I just can't help noticing the irony.

  106. Solutions to your problems by einhverfr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Solutions are usually pretty obvious:

    PROBLEM: Any ship with more acceleration then the other ship can always escape. So to deal with this gameplay "problem", they made the enemy ship magically re-appear with magical acceleration so it can take another shot at you.

    Solution-- for larger capital ships this would always hold true, and this is OK. But for the smaller fighters, assume they carry a limited quantity of O2. They can wait it out away from the battle, but they can't go too far or their life-support will run out and the pilot will die.

    PROBLEM: Unless you use an unrealistically slow amount of thrust, you tend to have these ships zipping by each other at the very least hundreds of miles per hour, leaving you with a fraction of a second to meaningfully fire on the other ship, then it's turn back around and do it again. Since you're a human you can't whip around instantly, it take time to move the ship, so every time you miss and come around for another pass, you're going a little faster since you had more time to accelerate.

    One of those jobs for a targeting computer. What do you think fighter airplane pilots use target acquisition radar for anyway? As for accelleration, it would likely be limited to the inertia you want to put on the human body...

    PROBLEM: It is virtually impossible to tail someone. If you're matching their thrust vector, you're not pointing at them, you're pointing in the same direction they are. Now, if you had a gunner this might be OK, but when you're both piloting and gunning because whatever the ship info screen says your crew is, it's just you, this doesn't work.

    Actually flying a fighter designed for manuverability is actually a major problem anyway. My suggestion is to have a tracking computer enhancement which enables one to guide the fighter in a computer-enhanced mode, where a dot on the HUD is moved with a joystick and the computer attempts to compensate. The same holds true for the landing problem. My solution would be to be able to operate thrusters in tracked or untracked mode and allow for computer assisted landings.

    One would probably need some convention for FTL travel in order to make the game more interesting (I like the B5 sort of hyperspace, but other ways would be possible too).

    Most of the problems could be handled by assuming computer enhancements for targetting, landing, and even manuvering... Of course, landing with a damaged computer could be interesting ;)

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    1. Re:Solutions to your problems by Jerf · · Score: 1

      One of those jobs for a targeting computer. What do you think fighter airplane pilots use target acquisition radar for anyway? As for accelleration, it would likely be limited to the inertia you want to put on the human body...

      The problem isn't that it's impossible, the problem is that it's no fun. Just picking targets isn't very entertaining. You'd want a tactical-level simulator, not a flight simulator.

      As for accelleration, it would likely be limited to the inertia you want to put on the human body...

      Not as meaningful as you might like. Compute how long it takes to get to Mars at 1G acceleration some time; 1G is already a decent amount of acceleration. (For a real eye-opener, compute subjective time to get to the Andromeda galaxy at sustained 1G, including relatavistic effects.)

      Most of the problems could be handled by assuming computer enhancements for targetting, landing, and even manuvering... Of course, landing with a damaged computer could be interesting ;)

      Elite had computer assistance, except for targetting, and it did have targetting support for missles. (Missles have their own problems; either they always hit or always miss again because of the huge velocity differences between targets.) Combat was still not much fun, and I really don't think that can be easily repaired, if at all.

      Consult some realistic sci-fi space battles sometime. Perhaps one of the best was in The Gripping Hand by Niven and Pournelle. Then decide if it would be any fun to play it as a game. I don't think so.

    2. Re:Solutions to your problems by arkanes · · Score: 1

      Or ship-to-ship combat as depicted in The Forever War, by Joe Haldeman. You shot your missles or whatever, your opponent shot his missles, you both shot countermeasures, and then you waited 3 weeks to see if you were going to die. And it was all handled by computers, because the humans were unconcious in special fluid tanks to handle the acceleration.

    3. Re:Solutions to your problems by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      Not as meaningful as you might like. Compute how long it takes to get to Mars at 1G acceleration some time; 1G is already a decent amount of acceleration. (For a real eye-opener, compute subjective time to get to the Andromeda galaxy at sustained 1G, including relatavistic effects.)

      Simple solution is to have a universe where combat occurs at relatively short distances and faster-than-light or similar technologies are of limited use in combat but of more use in transport of long distances. This also solves the issue of the size of space nicely because combat would occur at reasonably slow speeds and in reasonably small areas.

      As for targetting computer-- my main idea would be of something like a target aquisition radar where your computer lights up targets and provides HUD enhancements for the pilot to use regarding firing. Missiles cause problems because they are not limited to the acceleration placed on the human body.

      My vision would be:

      Computer-Assisted Targetting System (CATS) with HUD-based information. Computer guidance for missiles (not common).

      Computer-Assisted Manuvering System (CAMS) which could be toggled. When enabled, the computer would attempt to plot a course towards a spot controlled on the HUD with the standard controls. When disabled, engines fire in a coordinated manner but not with any computer assistance towards a guide-point (i.e. it allows one to spin up/down, side-side, and keep moving in the same direction more or less).

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    4. Re:Solutions to your problems by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1
      You shot your missles or whatever, your opponent shot his missles, you both shot countermeasures, and then you waited 3 weeks to see if you were going to die.

      Not to mention no FTL-travel per se. You could jump to different parts of space through worm holes (compressors?), but with relativistic effects, you might end up meeting enemies from the 'future relatively speaking. Or from the 'past.'

      Made for some 'interesting' engagements. (Or rather 'uninteresting' engagements, since the opponenents would'nt be matched.)

      But speaking of zipping by, there was this one engagement where a smaller friendly ship feigned retreat, slingshotted around the compressor, came back with a huge velocity vector (effecting surprise), killed the alien ship, and then spent months retarding and turning back to pick up the survivors from the planet the battle was all about.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    5. Re:Solutions to your problems by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Another solution to this problem is computer-operated fighters. I don't see that as being a problem by the time we get to space, since they're already working on the concept.

      Provided we ever get to space.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  107. Size Doesn't Matter by LegendOfLink · · Score: 1

    It's not the size...it's how you use it.

  108. And... by fizban · · Score: 1

    ...while we speak, TNN and Sci-Fi are going up against each other with different Star Trek movies... Star Trek V vs. Star Trek Generations.

    Oh, the humanity! Which one do I choose? Supremely silly, or just somewhat silly?

    --

    +1 Insightful, -1 Troll. What can I say, I'm an Insightful Troll.

  109. As another random comparison by jmping · · Score: 1

    since were debating irrelevancies, who would win in a battle between Kirby and the KoolAid man? (this was the subject of a discussion between me and some friends a long time ago and I would like to open it up to /.). Remember, Kirby has ultimate sucking in and flying powers, but the KoolAid man can bust through brick walls without effort.

    --
    **When craziness is bliss, 'tis folly to be sane**
    1. Re:As another random comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that is without a doubt the greatest question ever posed!!!(at least to me at 6:00 AM) Id put all my money on the kool-aid man, OH YEAH!!!

  110. Eureka! by snilloc · · Score: 4, Interesting
    /. cannot ask to mirror a site for legal reasons, nor can they just go ahead and mirror it.

    What is needed is for site authors to pre-emptively allow mirroring. This could be done with some kind of apache mod (as somebody has suggested below) or with a simple statement like "Please mirror this site if you're going to post a link to this site that is likely to generate massive amounts of traffic."

    perhaps some sort of web content license that allows for mirroring... Just so that nobody has to ask before either posting to /. or mirroring.

    Seriously though, anybody posting a site about dimensions of sci-fi starships must have some knowledge of slashdot and the possibility of getting /.ed.

    1. Re:Eureka! by arkanes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They can't ASK for legal reasons? I respect Slashdot not wanting to deal with the issues surrounding mirrors, but that's just stupid.

    2. Re:Eureka! by snilloc · · Score: 1
      Well, they can ask, but somebody can always say "no".

      If the /. eds say "Hi, we're planning to bombard your site with traffic. Two questions... 1, is this ok, and 2, we can mirror it if you'd like."

      The answer very well might be "no, you can't link or mirror." By not asking, they avoid the issue of somebody saying "no", but also cut off the possibility of "yes, but please mirror it."

    3. Re:Eureka! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe...

      Then again, google mirrors every site in their database, and they don't ask permission for it. So maybe the real reason slashdot doesn't mirror is because it would only cause the bandwidth bill for slashdot to be higher without offering a

    4. Re:Eureka! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... direct benefit

      (mishit a button and the comment posted)

    5. Re:Eureka! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /. cannot ask to mirror a site for legal reasons

      That can ask what they damn well want to. They choose not to ask. If you don't believe me, take a look at the FAQ. Now, please take heed of the answer: Slashdot didn't want to ask to mirror because they didn't want to wait a few hours to post this "cool breaking story". Hey, it's not as if it's their bandwidth bill, right?

      nor can they just go ahead and mirror it.

      Google does.

      perhaps some sort of web content license that allows for mirroring

      HTTP explicitly allows for mirroring - through caching. Unfortunately, many people just accept the defaults when developing a site, and when you use php, asp, etc, as is the norm these days, caching is disabled per default.

    6. Re:Eureka! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If the /. eds say 'Hi, we're planning to bombard your site with traffic. Two questions... 1, is this ok, and 2, we can mirror it if you'd like.'"

      You don't ask if it's okay. The right to link has been tested repeatedly in court, and it has always been determined that anyone can link to anyone else with no permission required. You simply notify the site that they will be linked, and ask if they would like to be mirrored. If they don't mind the extreme traffic, then they'll just say "no, thanks". If they do mind the traffic and don't want a mirror, then they have two choices -- they can fume and get /.ed, or they can consent to the mirror and stay up.

    7. Re:Eureka! by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The answer very well might be "no, you can't link or mirror." By not asking, they avoid the issue of somebody saying "no", but also cut off the possibility of "yes, but please mirror it."

      You don't need permission to link to a site (I know some stupid sites tried to say you did, but none have held up in court). You don't ask permission, just give warning that you're planning to do that, and ask if they want it to be mirrored.

      With this kind of story, it's been around for a few months and is hardly time sensitive.

      If a site really doesn't want links it can easily just take the page down for a few hours (as the floppy Enterprise site did recently), or just check for a Slashdot referrer and reject it.

  111. Re:Since that site is down: ASCII Theater by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
    Here's a B5 White Star attacking a ST Borg cube:

    .

    (Okay, it was from far away. Do you think I'm stupid enough to get close? Don't answer.)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  112. Yes, unfortunately. by Glytch · · Score: 1

    That's a few hours of my life I'd like to have back. I simply cannot believe that anything with Kei and Yuri (yes, that Kei and that Yuri) can have so little gratutious violence, such light property damage and such low body counts.

    (And NXE sucked hard too. Worcester-3? Good lord.)

  113. a few biggies by tri44id · · Score: 2, Informative
    Sorry no pics, these are from books.

    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Scranton, Pennsylvania/spindizzy drive
    LENGTH: 5Km
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: The first city to "go Okie", leaving an economically depressed Earth in search of paying jobs.
    SOURCE: James Blish, "A Life for the Stars"

    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Hern VI/spindizzy drive
    LENGTH: 3000Km ("considerably smaller than Mercury")
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: Flown across the galaxy by New Yorkers on a mission to destroy the Vegan Orbital Fort.
    SOURCE: James Blish, "Earthman, Come Home"

    SHIP NAME/TYPE: Mars/tweaked space-time elements of quantum descriptors
    LENGTH: 6750Km
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: The Federal Republic of Mars moved their planet to a new system 10,000 light years away in order to escape the oppressive politoco-economic expansionism of Earth's Greater East-West Alliance (GEWA). Mars's moon Phobos was used as a "scout ship".
    SOURCE: Greg Bear, "Moving Mars". The novel won several awards, including the Nebula Award.

    SHIP NAME/TYPE: none.
    LENGTH: 90 million miles
    BUILDER/COMMENTS: The ship was a gigantic dummy, the largest scarecrow ever conceived by the human mind. It was used at least twice, once to frighten away nonhuman agressors from a forgotten corner of the galaxies, once to serve as a diversionary action in the destruction of the dictator Lord Raumsog and seventeen million noncombatants with carcinogenic poisons.
    SOURCE: Cordwainer Smith, "Golden the Ship Was -- Oh! Oh! Oh!"

    --
    Taxation without representation is tyranny! Statehood for DC, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands & Pacific Territories!
  114. Re:Play Elite by rwise2112 · · Score: 1

    I remember playing Elite on my C64 - wireframe graphics and all. It was awesome. Everbody I showed that game to loved it. I loved the way you had to match rotation of the bases in order to dock, and if I recall correctly, it had the music from 2001 in it - or maybe it was just in our heads.

    --

    "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
  115. Re:A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdo by poisoneleven · · Score: 1

    While most of your post contains very good ideas, with the number of stories, working out pay arrangements for the revenue for each site listed does not seem like a workable solution at all. Not that I have a better solution for the ad revenue.

  116. Re:Play Elite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's talking about Frontier when he says that the true Newtonian space doesn't provide much fun.

  117. Another site by termilitor · · Score: 2, Informative

    The site Ex Astris Scientia concentrates on measuring and comparing Star Trek ships, but it's still an impressive effort.

  118. Wot, No Liberator? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    %$#^$@ American-centric media - No mention of the Liberator!

    1. Re:Wot, No Liberator? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      quit your bitch'n. At least it uses meters.

  119. So where's the Marathon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Macross? A Star Destroyer? Even a Babylon station? Pah! I scoff at your puny toys! Folks, the Marathon was Deimos. *DEIMOS!*

    1. Re:So where's the Marathon? by Decimal+Dave · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you know your starship is massive enough when you don't need artificial gravity!

      --

      "Leave the strategizing to those of us with planet-sized brains." -Tycho
  120. That is wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    That picture is completly incorrect. It claims intrepid class starships are 343 meters in length. That is completly untrue. Intrepid class ships are 345 meters in length.

  121. Dyson sphere by Apogaion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Missing from this list is the biggest space structure I've ever heard proposed, the solid Dyson sphere, a modification of a concept proposed by the astronomer Freeman Dyson. A solid Dyson sphere is a shell constructed around a star, so that all the star's energy is contained. One of these built around the Sun at the radius of the Earth's orbit would have a diameter of 3x10^8 km.

    There's an episode of ST:TNG in which the NCC-1701-D crew finds Scottie marooned on the surface of a Dyson sphere, where he has trapped himself in a transporter loop for several decades in order to survive.

    --
    This account verified sig-free since..., uh, never mind.
    1. Re:Dyson sphere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, one big problem with Dyson spheres: by the time a civilisation has the technology to creat eone, it's more than likely they will already be able to create power sources smaller than a sun, utilising the same process (hot fusion). If that is the case, why harness the energy of a sun, when you could just build a little one inside your power generator?

    2. Re:Dyson sphere by Saeger · · Score: 1
      why harness the energy of a sun, when you could just build a little one inside your power generator?

      One problem: why/where are you going to get enough fuel to make the Sun redundant?

      A star contains most of a solar systems mass, so might as well use it.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    3. Re:Dyson sphere by Twister002 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my first thought was "Where is Ringworld?", which was just a slice of a Dyson sphere.

      --
      "For a successful technology, honesty must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." -Feynman
  122. Re:Nerd Pissing Contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damnit dude! If you're going to compare this to a nerd pissin contest at least put it in a language they can understand! You idiot! What dork in a pissing contest speaks like that anyway.

    Well being a devoted slashdotter, I thought I'd translate his humerous post into something the rest of us uber-nerds can read:

    n3rD1: TH3 En+ERprise-3 C0ULD $0 w@$+e 4 $T4R des+rOY3r!
    NErd2: NuH-UH! 5t@R d35tr0y3R$ @R3 so Hu93, j00 C@N't 3v3n $3E the W1ndow$ mO$T 0pH t3h T1m3. J00 c4N Alw4Y5 533 t3h wiNDoW5 iN teH pUnY l1Ttle f3Der@+IOn $t4rShIP5.
    nERD1: LOOK, i dON'+ caRe H0w 8ig It 1S... 0N3 Kw4NtAM tOrPed0 FROm +eH 3N+eRPRi53-3 wILL m@ke 1+ 4 9I@NT 5P4c3 junKy4rD.
    n3Rd2: You'rE 5UcH 4 DOrK!
    n3RD1: nO, Y0U'Re +HE DoRK!
    [83Gin p4+Het1C, UNcOOrdIn@t3D n3Rd 8rAWL]

  123. Re:Mirror? Huge problem with the premise by junkwis_anet · · Score: 1

    1. universe always expanding from arbitrary central start point.
    2. all matter energy projected outward from time=0
    3. depending on time (i.e. existance) and location (x,y,z offset from center) particle density differs.

    4. thus size always differs
    qed

  124. Re: Xev by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...if only she'd do anything beyond pouting and getting it on with anyone who's not completely ugly or called Stanley H. Tweedle. As it stands she's just dull most of the time. Yawn.

  125. Re:A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdo by Snaller · · Score: 1

    Would never work. It would come across as blackmail. "Would you like to pay us to cache your site? You are free to say no but then your site will be trashed tomorrow"

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  126. Deus Ex Machina by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

    The parent of the thread linked to even mentions it. I don't think the Star Destroyer would stand a chance against Berman's stable of "writers". After all, all they have to do is route warp power through the phase inverter and modulate with bursts of flugeron particles and couple the energy through the main deflector dish. This will cause zepton instability in the Star Destroyer's engines and cause them to implode into a quantum singularity. Ditto anything you can trot out from any other sci-fi universe. Of course, the Treknobabble will have to be adjusted accordingly.

  127. So... by Cappy+Red · · Score: 1

    is the acrronym of the day now DRTFS?(where the first word is a negative conjunction and the last a word referring to a cohesive set of paragraphs)

    *honk*

    --
    This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
  128. Surprising by Etriaph · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I was amazed by the sheer total of universes he was able to combine. To find The Gunstar from The Last Starfighter on that site was really amazingly cool.

    Unfortunately, my Star Trek Technical Manual shows the Constitution Class and the Galaxy Class in different scale. On his site, the original Enteprises ship class looks about half as big as the Galaxy Class, which it's not, it's about 1/4 - 1/3. But seeing the size of the Sovereign Class as it compares way up there to the Super Star Destroyer (and it's comparison to the original unfinished Death Star) was even more cool.

    This guy should get an award from someone for his patience.

    --
    "It's here, but no one wants it." - The Sugar Speaker
  129. And now we've slashdotted your mirror. Go us! by Alereon · · Score: 1

    Anyone else want to step up to the plate? We're taking all comers!

  130. B5 ships, by MrLint · · Score: 1

    Well as I cant see the site to know, but im sure if somsoen posted to JMS he woudl be able to give the designed sizes of all the ships

  131. Real air warfare is like that by Animats · · Score: 1
    That's the way real aerial warfare is. Without a good command and control system, defending aircraft are usually in the wrong place at the wrong time. The sky is just too big.

    Air Marshall Dowling fixed that problem during WWII, building the RAF Fighter Direction Center that controlled the Battle of Britain. Information from many sources (radars, ground observers, codebreakers) came in, maps and displays were updated (manually), and orders went out. Ever since, successful air forces have used some comparable system.

    Space is even bigger. A real space battle will require a real command and control system.

    Reality and gameplay don't match up well here.

    1. Re:Real air warfare is like that by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      If that WWII c&c system you refer to is the one I think it is, then it was actually inspired by a system in an old series of book by E.E. Smith. They needed a system to co-ordinate space battles consisting of LARGE (yes in all caps, for reason!) numbers of space craft operating in three dimensions. He also gets around the acceleration problems as well as light speed restriction with a space drive that suspends inertia (suspends only, you regain the speed and momentum you had when you turned it on as soon as you turn it off, so make shure you turn it off when your original vector isn't pointed through something big!)
      The lensman series was seriously space opera, but still a real fun read. by seriously space opera I mean what in book one was a "doomsday weapon of imponderably unbelievable power" wasn't even worth considering as a toy by the end of the second book.
      Worth a read as is His Skylark series. They come into re-print every so often.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    2. Re:Real air warfare is like that by Animats · · Score: 1
      inspired by a system in an old series of book by E.E. Smith.

      No. "Triplanetary" appeared in 1934, but "First Lensman" and "Galactic Patrol" didn't appear until 1950. The Directrix (the Z9M9Z) and the "tank" came ten years after the real thing in the Battle of Britain.

  132. All your mirror are belong to us by spun · · Score: 1

    Somebody set up us the mirror!

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:All your mirror are belong to us by jeroenvw · · Score: 1

      I've got 2x 100MBit behind a 1GBit uplink... just not the original site. Anyone? Mail the tarball to starshipsizes@wolffelaar.nl

    2. Re:All your mirror are belong to us by jeroenvw · · Score: 1
      Fixed, only page ten is missing (according to the supplier, Craig Wyllie).

      Go directly to the mirror

  133. Here is a link to a picture of starship sizes... by mgblst · · Score: 2, Funny
  134. Re:A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That does raise an interesting point. With the new 'subscribscription only' feature of previewing articles 30 minutes in advance, It should be possible then to provide a small amount of 'heads up' room for the target server and try to get the content mirrored off somewhere. Perhaps the mirror would be like Google Cache and provide a local, high bandwidth/capacity server for the content, but say expire the cached content after a few hours to save on space and relieve the initial torrent of hits that the front page ultimately generates

    The parent post puts forward a very nice solution to the /. DDOS attack. Mainly, if the ad revenue was so important, maybe an agreement could be made to split the revenue generated from a /. local mirror between the host (Slashdot) and the original site. For one, they would be getting far more traffic than their server was capable of, and they get revenue. Slashdot would get their articles read without any possible DOS claims and they get revenue from the ads as well.

    It would be very nice to see if the 30 minute delayed posting could be used for more overall useful effect such as a 'buffer' time to set up a mirror

  135. Super Slashdotting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot's in a frenzy! Every mirror listed so far is also down!

  136. Warhead by xixax · · Score: 1

    I really liked the game "Warhead", as well as a Newtonian model, you got a pile of different auto-pilots. They didn't let you cheat so much as do things like stop your ship from spinning crazily out of control after some combat. Also programs like "match course/speed" and "get the hell outta here".

    Also, the Elite manual had a good chapter where David Braben explained why and how he used a Newtonian model.

    Xix.

    --
    "Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
  137. Re:Here is a link to a picture of starship sizes.. by kireK · · Score: 1

    Great... trying to /. the US Military...

    What's next?

  138. Winnabago! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Winnabago should beat them all... ;)

  139. Quotations and soundbites from B5 by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

    That was one of the great things about the show, IMHO. I always liked Ivanova, and CC was brilliant at delivering some of her lines; the "Who am I?" speech was perfect.

    Of course, there were also all those throwaway lines throughout the series that tied up the loose ends four series before you knew they existed. Want to know what happens to Londo and G'Kar? There's a visual cue in the very last episode, but actually you've known since the first episode of series one. Amazing thing, a series around 100 episodes long, spanning five years and dozens of recurring characters, and yet with barely a major loose end throughout.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  140. Think bigger! (Niven) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No Puppeteer Fleet-Of-Worlds?

    No Ringworld? (In one of the books, it was mentioned that the Ringworld could be moved by making the sun jet plasma.)

  141. Re:A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > "C:\My Documents" a concept invented by idiots and only supported by idiots.

    Meanwhile, /home/$USERNAME is The One True Way.

  142. Re:What's the difference b/t a /.ing and a DDOS'in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and then a week after that, the editors post a dupe :)

  143. At least Mars actually /is/ a ship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marsoid: My people worked themselves into extinction converting our planet into a navigatiable space vessel using similar technology tested and proven on another nearby planet!

    Zim: Why would you do all that?

    Marsoid: Because it's cool.

  144. Maybe it's time..... by rfernand79 · · Score: 1

    ...to ask the U.N. for support. "Homepageless victims of /. Relief fund" sponsored by the UN, The Body Shop, Nike and Enron.

  145. Perry Rodan - POINT by Pope+Raymond+Lama · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unlss you will count the Death Star - and even them,
    I'd nedd it's specs, because OLD MAN station
    is probably still larger, Perry Rhodan - a German Sci Fi series, is the clear winner.

    With 2.5 Kilometers in an ordinary battle ship,
    Weapons ranging to tenths of millions of kilometers, they are unmatched.

    --
    -><- no .sig is good sig.
    1. Re:Perry Rodan - POINT by Storklerk · · Score: 1

      OLD MAN was half a share with a diameter of 200 km. Should be a little larger then the Death Star. (It had over 20000 of the 2500m Galaxy-Class-Ultrabattleships on board) But in the Perry Rhodan series there were the Sporeships with a diameter of a little more then 1000 km easily dwarfing the Death Stars. Also there were the Eternal Servants, a robot race. They flew across the universe with some structures mesauring in lightmonth. They win even against the Magog Worldship or a Dyson Sphere. And they were real Starships with FTL-Drives.

  146. Wrong again. by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    Ringworld was stationary(it spun around and moved, but it didn't go anywhere) and would have collapsed without a star in the center IIRC. It was the puppeteers kempler rosette system that was fleeing the galactic explosion.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    1. Re:Wrong again. by spun · · Score: 1

      Well, the pupeteers kemplar rosette was fleeing the galactic center because they didn'ttrust FTL travel. In "Protector," we learn about the Pak, our ancestors that lived in the galactic center. I pretty sure the Pak didn't have FTL when they built the Ringworld. The Ringworld is 200 light-years from Earth at the time of the stories. Earth is about 26,000 light-years from galactic center. Seems obvious that the Pak built it to escape the explosion. I'm pretty sure it's explicitly written that way.

      With a fully functioning array of thrusters around the outside, the Ringworld very well could have accelerated, dragging it's star along with it by electrostatic means. It wouldn't have accelerated very fast, but Pak Protectors lived a long, long time.

      As far as the Ringworld collapsing without a star in the center, no. It would have flown apart from centrifugal force had it not been built from super-dense materials. Without a star's gravity, it would fly apart, if anything.

      I may be wrong about all this, it has been years since I read the books.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  147. here's the answer to your mirror debate, folks by Naikrovek · · Score: 1

    they can certainly ask. the editors don't ask because they don't give a flying crap about a site they link to. if they cared, they'd ask, and put something like this in the story: "original story [here], mirrors [here, here, here, here]. enjoy" its NOT THAT HARD.

    if the site says no, then editors put in "[site] declined our request to mirror their page. smash 'em, /."

    if slashdot mirrors a site with ads, iframes can keep ad-revenue where it belongs. the original site can host the contents of an iframe, (a lot use iframes for ads anyway), so the views and impressions go where they need to go, and the money goes where it needs to go.

    the slashdot editors get PAID for this. this is their JOB. if I did so little improvement over 5 years of my employment somewhere (my estimate of the life of slashdot), i would have lost that job about 4 years ago. revolution is in order.

    you people who say that mirroring is illegal don't know what you're talking about - if you get permission, its legal - PERIOD. all material is automatically copywritten by the person or company writing it and/or publishing it. mirroring without permission is illegal, but mirroring with permission is ENCOURAGED!

    bottom line: slashdot doesn't mirror because they don't give a rats ass. the proof is in the pudding: to this day they still fsck sites up the ass, and don't even have the common courtesy to give them a reach around.

  148. Re:A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    most of the news already has a day delay anyways. except for war news, I haven't seen much first news source stories coming out of slashdot.

  149. Let slashdot do the work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why not have the slashdot servers check the links every 10mins or so. If the site is down then swap the links in the article to a slashdot page that apologises and offers you a cookie that will remember you and link you wanted. So next time you come to slashdot, and site is backup, it will remind you of the article and link you wanted to follow?

    1. Re:Let slashdot do the work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a recent victim of this particular article, I think that such a feature would only create more problems. As it stands, the majority of visitors likely move on and forget about the missing link. Your proposal would only prolong the issue, because as soon as the slashdotted site gets back online, there would be a horde of waiting visitors wanting to go back and look again -- and the server would go offline again!

      Dan Carlson, webmaster of "Star Trek Minutiae" -- the site that will be offline for the rest of the month due to excessive bandwidth usage!

  150. Comparison chart of docking collars? by toybuilder · · Score: 1

    What would really be nice to see is a comparison chart to show compatible docking collars... I mean, seriously, they don't expect to moor disparate ships with rope, do they?

  151. Others by StoatBringer · · Score: 0

    Where's the Death Star? It'd also be interesting to see some of the Culture ships (from Iain M. Banks' novels), like the gigantic General Systems Vehicles (which are so large they not only transport other giant craft, but even have landscapes built in).

    --
    Cress, cress, lovely lovely cress
  152. UPDATE COMING TO ROBOTECH.COM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those of you who have missed out, he has been working with Robotech.com for the past few days and he will have a chart dedicated to Robotech/Macross/Mospeada/Southern Cross on Robotech.com this week.

    The section on Robotech.com will feature all-new drawings that were previously unavailable on his current website.

  153. UPDATE COMING TO ROBOTECH.COM by webslacker · · Score: 1

    For those of you who have missed out, he has been working with Robotech.com for the past few days and he will have a chart dedicated to Robotech/Macross/Mospeada/Southern Cross on Robotech.com this week.

    The section on Robotech.com will feature all-new drawings that were previously unavailable on his current website.

  154. For those of you who missed out by webslacker · · Score: 1

    For those of you who have missed out, he has been working with Robotech.com for the past few days and he will have a chart dedicated to Robotech/Macross/Mospeada/Southern Cross on Robotech.com this week.

    The section on Robotech.com will feature all-new drawings that were previously unavailable on his current website

  155. Re:A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdo by More+Karma+Than+God · · Score: 1

    That's not blackmail, it's a protection racket.

    --
    Go here to create your own Slashdot dis
  156. Re:A solution - temporary local mirrors on Slashdo by Snaller · · Score: 1

    Ooh, excuse my innocence.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  157. Imagine a Beowolf cluster of this guy's web server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with warp power to the hard drives!!

  158. Why build a Dyson sphere? by Djinh · · Score: 1

    Because you can! Why else?!

  159. Let's do it by ourselves, the community. by clarkie.mg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Offering to mirror articles on non-commercial sites locally for a week or so would be a good start.

    I think we can wait a thousand years or so before the slashdot team creates such a feature, even for subscribers (imagine how frustrating it must be for subscribers when they preview a site and it's already slashdotted).

    So let's move and make such a mirror by ourselves. All we need is a URL - say http://www.mysite.net/mirror/ - and when a site - say http://obscure-url.com/slashed.html - is slashdotted, the reader can read the mirror on http://www.mysite/mirror/obscure-url.com/slashed.h tml

    The site owner could even redirect the page and choose to mirror it. Otherwise, a benevolent member of the community would access the mirror site and ask to mirror.

    Any other ideas ?

    --
    Men are born ignorant, not stupid; they are made stupid by education. Bertrand Russel
  160. Re:Somehow there is something wrong with all of th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes, because we all know the FAQ is the be all and end all of human knowledge. has it occurred to you that no matter what the FAQ says, slashdotting of sites is a problem? perhaps the policy on mirroring sites needs to be changed...

  161. Why not put them head-to-head? by Trogre · · Score: 1

    There's some awesome rendered battle movies here.

    Pity the site hasn't been updated since 2000.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  162. Re:slashdotted - kinda easy by pyrote · · Score: 1

    that would be great, but until bittorrent is integrated into my web browser transparently, I'm not going to waste time downloading a zip for a site that may be only a curiosity.

    You are on the right idea... the web being an entity of data, rather than a server/client model would help quite a bit.

    although a few years of that, and a decade or two of advancements in broadband, and we'll be showing how well the server/client model beats patchy cloud arcitectures.

    oh well... eventually we'll get it right.

    --
    THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  163. ...or the Scarran Battle Cruiser by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    or whatever it was called that they did a fly-by several times in the last few episodes. Must have been several km in length. (Judging by John's ship, Moya looks like she's in the neighborhood of 600-1000 feet long?)

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  164. Still down... by Hakubi_Washu · · Score: 1

    Looks like the site is still down, dammit. Anyone got a mirror (Hey, possibly the site was up a minute in the meantime, eh?) ?

  165. wing commander by Clay+Pigeon+-TPF-VS- · · Score: 1

    I never got to see the site, but was there any mention of the ships from the Wing Commander series?

    --
    Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
  166. Jeff Russell says: Sorry about being offline! by Zardalu · · Score: 1

    Hello eveyone,

    Wow, now I see what it means to get "Slashdotted"! My poor little router's toast. Rest assured I am working my butt off to get STARSHIP DIMENSIONS back online ASAP, and am also looking for a mirror, in the meantime thanks for your patience!

  167. Re:What i want to know.... Answer by d.valued · · Score: 1

    If you are in los Estados Unidos and have cable, you can see it on Sci-Fi channel at 9 AM. (Or, more accurately, you can tape it and watch it insead of Enterprise. ;) If you can start tomorrow (15 Apr) do it. "Believers" is an episode which will kick you in the head.

    Otherwise, probably your best bet is to look up The Lurker's Guide, and IIRC they have a guide to where it is elsewhere in the world.

    --
    I used to be someone else. Now I'm someone better.
    Real life is underrated.
  168. MIRROR AVAILABLE!!!! by Zardalu · · Score: 1

    Jeff Russell here;

    here is STARSHIP DIMENSIONS 'lite' (stripped down to accomodate the new traffic):

    http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/merzo/

    Happy scaling!!

  169. MIRROR AVAILABLE!!!!!! by Zardalu · · Score: 1

    Ok here goes, here is STARSHIP DIMENSIONS 'lite' (stripped down to accomodate the new traffic):

    http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/merzo/

    Happy scaling!!

  170. Warhead! by johannesg · · Score: 1

    The game you are asking for is Warhead. It is old and looks crap on todays hardware but the plot, tech, and aliens were great. And it had "real space physics": you could fly in any direction and shoot in any other direction. With real inertia, of course ;-)

  171. Culture vessels and realism by riptalon · · Score: 1

    Sadly lacking are the ships from Iain M. Banks' Culture universe. These not only have great names but are much more realistic than in most scifi. Even a small General Systems Vehicle (GSV) would be up there with a Super Star Destroyer sizewise (and has millions of inhabitants) and a Torturer Class Rapid Offensive Unit (ROU) would kick the shit out of any other scifi warship (couple of hundred metres long, over 90% engine, the rest weapons, controled by an AI, 0 crew).

    It is actually fairly easy to estimate what what warships in space would be like, from a little physics and common sense. Most scifi fails miserably in this regard. The most obvious fact that has a bearing on space warships is that space is empty or nearly so. There is no where to hide and therefore it is very easy to guess what colour a warship would be, black. For the same reason it can also be guessed that the temperature of a warships hull will be 2.73 K (2.73 degrees above absolute zero), to match the temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). Any hotter and its thermal emission will give away its presense, any cooler and it will stand out as a shadow against the CMB.

    Of course there is still many effects (such as passing in front of a star) that could give you away. A critical parameter which determines how battles would play out is at what distance, on average warships could detect each other. Since the speed of light is around 300,000 km/s, if ships can only be detected at less than a million kilometers battles are likely to very short, few second affairs, where the first ship to detect the other and fire a laser (or similar) wins. In this case the sophistication of sensors and camoflage technology will be the deciding factor.

    However if the average detection distance is much greater than a million kilometers then the travel time of the fastest weapon will many seconds or even minutes. Even ships moving at only a few kilometers per second could move a considerable distance in such time. Using laser like weapons would have much of the quality of contempory battleships shelling each other. With significant light travel times you would need to accurately predict the motion of the target to stand any chance of hitting it and evasive action by the target would be possible (although they would not be able to see a laser pulse coming).

    At short ranges lasers or the like would be the weapon of choice but if you are engaging ships at distances of a hundred million kilometres guided missiles, if they could move at a significant fraction of the speed of light, might be of use as well, since at such a distance the light travel time would be many minutes and you are unlikely to hit something at that range with a laser if it is doing any manouvring.

    It should be noted that engagements at very small distances such as those portrayed in Star Wars, B5 etc. would be rather unlikely. Not only is it unlikely that ships would be undetectable down to distances of a few kilometres but if this was the case ship combat would be virtually impossible. Considering just the inner solar system and confining oneself to the within a million kilometres of the plane you are faced with a volume of the order of 10^22 cubic kilometres. Thousands of ships could wander around in such a volume for ever without meeting if they needed to pass within a few kilometres in order to see each other.

    When you consider the whole galaxy it quickly becomes clear that conventional war loses all meaning. I think it is unlikely that ships would detectable at even lightdays if they were trying to be inconspicuous, given the huge amount of gas, ice, dust and rocks that is floating around and reflecting starlight. But even if you could seeing where a ship was days ago is not a great step forward in fighting it (a lightday is very roughly the size of the solar system). The volume of the galaxy

  172. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 0

    "We're not talking about the same thing," he said. "For you the world is
    weird because if you're not bored with it you're at odds with it. For me
    the world is weird because it is stupendous, awesome, mysterious,
    unfathomable; my interest has been to convince you that you must accept
    responsibility for being here, in this marvelous world, in this marvelous
    desert, in this marvelous time. I wanted to convince you that you must
    learn to make every act count, since you are going to be here for only a
    short while, in fact, too short for witnessing all the marvels of it."
    -- Don Juan

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...