Artifical Gravity & Inertia Dampers

[Patron Zero]

Likely this has been hashed-over before but I've never really gotten a grip on the subject, no pun intended.

I understand the function and necessity of grav-plates in a starship's decking, that's pretty much a no-brainer but where does the function of inertia dampers come from ? More-so is it a separate set of hardware working alone or in-conjunction with said gravity generating units if not a sub-system of that.

Also can artificial gravity be 'aligned' on a starship operating inside a gravity well of a planet as to re-orientate such perpendicular to the natural force ?

 

[Fritz_Brown]

The consensus is (I'll probably get raked over the coals for saying that ) that inertial damping comes by virtue of the drive field encompassing the ship. Since you're inside the drive field, there is no motion for you. Even if that's not your view, any inertial damper would be a part of the drive engine - a basic safety interlock would be "no inertial damper = no drive above .2-.3G".

Most folks assume (from what I've seen) that the only way to produce gravity inside the ship is with plating. So, you can't walk on the walls of your ship unless you made the walls of grav plating. If you want to change how you orient to local grav, you would normally have to turn the ship about. If you do put plating on the walls, however, then you could switch back and forth.

And, I think most folks agree that internal gravity is separate from any inertial dampening. (Otherwise you couldn't invent all those wonderful anti-hijack Pong systems! UP! down. UP! down. UP!....)

 

[McPerth]

My view has always been that the Inertial Compesors are just some tunning of the grav plates coordinated with the maneover drives by the computer, so nullifying the acceleration from the drives (and form any external gravity field) and setting the own gravity inside the ship.

So, the fact that they require their own (independent from artificaial gravity) volume, mass, power and cost in MT (the craft design system that I know to include them) is just for some more precise grav plates and sensors.

 

[samuelvss]

The consensus is (I'll probably get raked over the coals for saying that ) that inertial damping comes by virtue of the drive field encompassing the ship.

IMTU, the maneuver drives do not create a "drive field," but rather are big, pushy, nuclear-firey things aft. In Bk2/5, "streamlining" includes grav drives which essentially nullify (plus just a little) the exterior gravity.

And, I think most folks agree that internal gravity is separate from any inertial dampening. (Otherwise you couldn't invent all those wonderful anti-hijack Pong systems! UP! down. UP! down. UP!....)

IMTU, inertial damping is internal gravity, just run differently. One is directly tied to the maneuver drives, the other is part of life support. The normal, "life support" gravity is capable of simple manipulation to provide support to cargo handling, and passenger comfort in staterooms. The "inertial damping" grav is not controlled on the same circuits, and turning it off requires major manipulation of hardwired, trebly-redundant-type systems.

Because they are different systems, with very different controls and purposes, they are referred to inertial damping and internal grav (or just "grav".

Just like in a car, if I said "check the oil," the mechanic would check the engine oil, even if there are other systems that used oil. Usage tends to follow function.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

Likely this has been hashed-over before but I've never really gotten a grip on the subject, no pun intended.

I understand the function and necessity of grav-plates in a starship's decking, that's pretty much a no-brainer but where does the function of inertia dampers come from ? More-so is it a separate set of hardware working alone or in-conjunction with said gravity generating units if not a sub-system of that.

Also can artificial gravity be 'aligned' on a starship operating inside a gravity well of a planet as to re-orientate such perpendicular to the natural force ?

my take:

the grav plates are built into the ships decking and the costs are included in the hull costs and/or subsumed into the room costs (ie the grav plates for your stateroom are included in the costs of buying the room)

the inertia dampers are part of the grav plates, and are controlled by the ships computer core to cancel out expected or predictable accelerations (I,e, the ships own movements, or a incoming missile, but not a bomb going off inside the ship).

Also can artificial gravity be 'aligned' on a starship operating inside a gravity well of a planet as to re-orientate such perpendicular to the natural force ?

I say yes, it can. if you can cancel out a 6 g acceleration, you can cancel out a 1g pull form a planet. you can also align the gravity with the walls or ceiling if you really wanted to.

 

[martletsquire]

Grav Plates and Inertial Comps

Two simple definitions

1. Grav Plates hold you down.

2. Inertial Comps keep you from being tossed around.

Inertial compensators keep you standing perpendicular to the grav plate, and compensate for delta V (acceleration changes) from both the maneuver drive and any radical heading changes, such as evading maneuvers. Compensators are what keeps you from turning into pasta sauce or breaking bones or a thousand other things that can happen if suddenly your body is subjected to a massive acceleration change.

Most ships below 3g that lose their inertial comps would just cause stuff to break, spill, slosh and so forth, as long as they are going in a straight line.

Add spin, yaw or pitch at multi-g levels will increase the potential for stuff to break. Think of the deckhands on an Alaskan crab boat in rough seas, or a flight attendant walking down the aisle during an extremely turbulent flight (plane drops 1000 meters in a few seconds, the stew is on the roof, plane rises due to an updraft, stew is on his/her knees.)

High g loads, either in a direct line, or especially in a maneuver, can cause massive internal and external damage to the sophont who gets stuck in one of these incidents. Think of fighter pilots and their pressure suits. Even with the best suits, the pilot (sitting down, strapped in) still has to do some serious physical changes like crunches to keep from blacking out. Now imagine doing that while sitting on the fresher wearing skivvies. Yuck. Or while banging away at the flamerdaminger while hanging upside down in the power room doing emergency repairs during a battle.

David Weber in one of his Honor Harrington books deals with a ship that loses their inertial compensators during acceleration. Ship can be recovered. People turned into goo. Blech.

 

[HG_B]

The consensus is (I'll probably get raked over the coals for saying that ) that inertial damping comes by virtue of the drive field encompassing the ship. Since you're inside the drive field, there is no motion for you.

That's how I do it. The M drive is a GRAV drive. The ship and everything in it 'falls' in the direction of the gravity created around the ship. Then I have grav plates on the deck plates where people operate for artificial grav. Of course this means that there is no inertia compensation if you de-orbit using atmospheric braking rather than using the M drives... :devil:

 

[whulorigan]

Of course this means that there is no inertia compensation if you de-orbit using atmospheric braking rather than using the M drives... :devil:

It also means that any ship with a Reaction (or other non-gravitic drive) has no inertial compensation.

This would affect HEPlaR Drives, Fusion Rockets, and Thrusters (which I assume means the Strong-Nuclear Force based Thruster Plates from MT), all of which are mentioned at the top of p. 363 as other drives that are not described in the T5 Core Rulebook, and are all non-gravity based.

 

[HG_B]

It also means that any ship with a Reaction (or other non-gravitic drive) has no inertial compensation.

Correct. Primitive craft align their decks perpendicular to direction of thrust.

This would affect HEPlaR Drives, Fusion Rockets, and Thrusters (which I assume means the Strong-Nuclear Force based Thruster Plates from MT), all of which are mentioned at the top of p. 363 as other drives that are not described in the T5 Core Rulebook, and are all non-gravity based.

I haven't studied T5 in depth nor will I be playing it so, not a concern. I don't use MT drives in my game. I use MgT Grav drives. Low tech drives like HEPlaR are brief blips on the TL timeline (late TL 8) and are replaced at TL 9 by Grav drives.

Makes it more interesting and far more logical that people aren't using artificial grav before artificial grav is available.

 

[aramis]

My view: Inertial Compensators are NOTHING BUT A/G plates that aren't aligned to the floors.

In other words, AG & IC are all one integrated system.

 

[Carlobrand]

I don't recall CT offering any consistent details, though the designs of the ships clearly implied some form of inertial compensation. How it works is mostly to the game master's imagination, but the ship designs imply that it is able to deal with external forces as well as the ship's own drives; the buffetting involved in navigating through an atmosphere would otherwise necessitate some sort of belted seat for all occupants in order to keep people from smacking their heads into the ceiling.

MegaTrav offered us inertial compensators as a distinct system apart from engines and the grav plates, so in that system it's not the drives that are protecting you, it's a separate system. The compensators become available at the same tech level as the grav plates - which is one tech level later than the anti grav drives appear, perhaps implying that the level of fine control needed requires a bit more techological advancement. Interestingly, the compensators draw less power and cost less than the grav plates for the same volume and mass of machinery, even though they could at times be called on to counter forces of up to 6 G's. That implies that it's something more than just grav plates on the walls, but honestly it confuses me - I would have expected the opposite.

Mongoose, I don't know, nor GURPS nor T5; sorry.

 

[HG_B]

How it works is mostly to the game master's imagination, but the ship designs imply that it is able to deal with external forces as well as the ship's own drives; the buffetting involved in navigating through an atmosphere would otherwise necessitate some sort of belted seat for all occupants in order to keep people from smacking their heads into the ceiling.

That would only be the case if you were using a ship like the space shuttle. That type of extreme buffeting comes from using wings for lift rather than something like a Grav drive. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a problem unless you were flying through a tornado or something.

 

[Carlobrand]

That would only be the case if you were using a ship like the space shuttle. That type of extreme buffeting comes from using wings for lift rather than something like a Grav drive. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a problem unless you were flying through a tornado or something.

So ... the flat Scout would not have problems with turbulence?

 

[HG_B]

So ... the flat Scout would not have problems with turbulence?

You are misunderstanding. The turbulence you experience in an airplane is GREATLY magnified by the fact that the craft has wings. Without wings, it is nothing to worry about unless you are flying into REALLY extreme weather like a tornado or a violent thundercloud. Which is EASILY avoidable.

The Scout is a dart, not a wing.

An analogy for non-pilots: Motor boat vs. sail boat. The wind suddenly changes directions or suddenly picks up. Which craft rolls more?

 

[Carlobrand]

You are misunderstanding. The turbulence you experience in an airplane is GREATLY magnified by the fact that the craft has wings. Without wings, it is nothing to worry about unless you are flying into REALLY extreme weather like a tornado or a violent thundercloud. Which is EASILY avoidable.

The Scout is a dart, not a wing.

So, if I'm in that dart, slicing my way through atmosphere toward the lowport facilities, I am going to experience no turbulence? Or I am going to experience less turbulence than a cigar with wings would experience? And, if less, then what would you compare it to? How does a gamemaster describe it to his players as the players' ship is racing groundward? The answer says whether or not I can walk down the hallway without clutching at a handrail or can sit comfortably in a regular chair with a glass of wine on the table before me. Or, whether I can save the player from certain doom by having an unexpected updraft knock the hijacker's aim off.

 

[HG_B]

So, if I'm in that dart, slicing my way through atmosphere toward the lowport facilities, I am going to experience no turbulence?

I already answered that. Reread what I wrote.

Or I am going to experience less turbulence than a cigar with wings would experience? And, if less, then what would you compare it to?

Take what you get in an airliner and divide by about 10. So, you might slosh your wine a little in what an aircraft pilot would consider heavy turbulence.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Correct. Primitive craft align their decks perpendicular to direction of thrust.

As it should be.

Take what you get in an airliner and divide by about 10. So, you might slosh your wine a little in what an aircraft pilot would consider heavy turbulence.

My only problem with this concept is that, regardless of "turbulence", you have a G-issue because of the deceleration. It might be smoother, but you'll still be pulling at your harness. (Or, you take forever to decelerate.)

Obviously, it's up to you as the referee, but I can't see the deck plates providing compensation unless they are oriented to the acceleration plane. Gravity is not a magic force - it operates as a vector. And, the deck plates (in most deck plans) are oriented wrong to counteract the drive-based acceleration.

 

[HG_B]

As it should be.


My only problem with this concept is that, regardless of "turbulence", you have a G-issue because of the deceleration. It might be smoother, but you'll still be pulling at your harness. (Or, you take forever to decelerate.)

The way Grav drive works in my game (MgT) is that the entire craft is affected by the G-drive. (in MgT Grav drive doesn't need an external gravity well from a planet to work) It is a gravity field that pulls the ship. Thus, you don't feel it as everything is moving at once. Like free fall in orbit. You are under the influence of 1 G but can't feel it.

 

[Carlobrand]

...Take what you get in an airliner and divide by about 10. So, you might slosh your wine a little in what an aircraft pilot would consider heavy turbulence.

So, under more typical circumstances, no more maybe than what I used to feel standing on the subway platform when the train ran past, or maybe what I might feel in a well-made elevator.

...My only problem with this concept is that, regardless of "turbulence", you have a G-issue because of the deceleration. It might be smoother, but you'll still be pulling at your harness. (Or, you take forever to decelerate.)

Obviously, it's up to you as the referee, but I can't see the deck plates providing compensation unless they are oriented to the acceleration plane. Gravity is not a magic force - it operates as a vector. And, the deck plates (in most deck plans) are oriented wrong to counteract the drive-based acceleration.

I think the question arose because I was saying the compensation system likely responded to external forces as well as the ship's drive. The design of the ships makes clear that there's a way of countering the ship's drive, but dealing with the ship's drive is straightforward: grav plates in opposition to the drive, both slaved to the computer so that they can be precisely timed to counteract each other. Dealing with external forces requires a system capable of very rapidly and very accurately responding to unexpected changes. It is possible to conceive of a system that operates in sync with the ship's drives (since the drives aren't going to do anything until you tell them to) but that is not quick enough to deal with unanticipated externally applied forces, in which case we give thought to how turbulence and other forces would be experienced.

HG points out that in the absence of a wing, the typical Traveller ship is not going to behave like the typical airliner.

The way Grav drive works in my game (MgT) is that the entire craft is affected by the G-drive. (in MgT Grav drive doesn't need an external gravity well from a planet to work) It is a gravity field that pulls the ship. Thus, you don't feel it as everything is moving at once. Like free fall in orbit. You are under the influence of 1 G but can't feel it.

Which could work just as well for CT - I think. I may be forgetting something.

 

[HG_B]

So, under more typical circumstances, no more maybe than what I used to feel standing on the subway platform when the train ran past, or maybe what I might feel in a well-made elevator.

That's probably the best known analogy.

Which could work just as well for CT - I think. I may be forgetting something.

Could be. I think it was pretty silent on the subject but my memory isn't what it once was...