Author Topic: MINISTRY of TECHNOLOGY #1  (Read 1100 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Father Tim (OP)

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2162
  • Thanked: 531 times
MINISTRY of TECHNOLOGY #1
« on: June 04, 2011, 06:10:22 PM »
Dr. Jason Winston, expert in Power & Propulsion systems has been placed in charge of designing a new civilian engine.  The 100% fuel efficiency commercial engine utilises Nuclear Thermal technology and lacks any hyper-capability or internal armour.  This project will immediately be followed by a military engine of similar specifications.

Given that Nuclear Thermal engine technology heats and compresses interstellar Hydrogen in a manner analogous to the functioning of an ancient Watt steam boiler & piston, the new engine shall be called the 'Basic Commercial Steam Engine' and the 'Basic Military Steam Engine'.  Finalised designs will be shared with the Senate so that each company may immediately begin work on a licensed copy.

After completing both projects Dr. J. Winston will be moving on to the nine-pounder gauss cannon prototype, needed for our future research into CIWS technology, and a small and large power plant.

Dr. Winston's long-term goals are improved fuel efficiency and a prototype Pebble Bed Reactor.

 - - -

Dr. Ken Mingler, a materials science graduate and expert in defensive systems will be launching several projects to design multiple sensors in the electro-magnetic, thermal, and search radar fields, in varying size installations.  After our initial round of ship component designs are finished, Dr. Mingler intends to work on the promising Jump Point Theory put forward by Drs. Kearny and Fuchida of the California Institute of Technology.
 

Offline Panopticon

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 883
  • Thanked: 37 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: MINISTRY of TECHNOLOGY #1
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2011, 08:59:21 PM »
I don't recall any discussion on CIWS technology, did I happen to miss the memo? It seems that if we are going to research things in the missile/kinetic weapons field it should rather be the missile components for the approved ship classes.
 

Offline mavikfelna

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 157
    • http://www.geocities.com/mavikfelna
  • 2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: MINISTRY of TECHNOLOGY #1
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2011, 12:30:03 AM »
CIWS should not be a technology we're pursing at this time. It's too bulky and too unreliable at lower levels. We would be much better pursing lasers or mesons and turret and tracking speeds.
 

Offline Detjen

  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant
  • *****
  • Posts: 160
Re: MINISTRY of TECHNOLOGY #1
« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2011, 10:33:50 PM »
 Well he did say CIWS technology was a later goal, but the gauss cannon was meant to be researched after our first engine technologies were finished  I belive the Gauss cannon could be delayed some,  perhaps in favor of asteroid mining modules or if we are looking militarily perhaps improved armor or something beneficial to the heavily favored AMX-1a Missile Destroyer the military aims to produce.  I feel as though we could wait a couple of months before we start reseraching into an area of military technology the military itself doesn't seem quite ready to invest in.

The Dazmar corporation again politely (but firmly :P) puts forward its engine design options in the E1/TN Nova for the commercial available engine,   and offers its E10/TN Super Nova as a possible choice for military Nuclear Thermal engines. 

the other military alternative is the Arkayn Mfg NTE-25 Thermal engine.   

OOC: I like using corporate named components for a bit of flavor and also a way to give the corporations purpose
 

Offline Detjen

  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant
  • *****
  • Posts: 160
Re: MINISTRY of TECHNOLOGY #1
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2011, 09:52:27 PM »
Im a bit confused on the research lab allocatment,  how many labs do you want to go to which researcher?