Revised (Fan-Fic) Space Speeds & Fuel Mass for VFs

[ShadowLogan]

The following work is a fanfic re-write of the Veritech Fighter space performance statistics for the 2E RPG (applicable to their “universe” only) to get more realistic values (other non-fiction sources are also used, in addition to the animation). The information is presented to be flexible in how GMs choose to use it.

Things to be aware of with regard to space travel:
1. if deployed from a vessel, the mecha at ZERO relative velocity will actually have a velocity equal to the carrier’s.
2. Delta-V/speed will not change because of mode while in space
3. Low latitude locations launching in easterly direction with a low angle inclination (relative to the equator) make for an easier time to get into orbit as the planet gives the craft a “free boost”. This could explain the VF-1 in TMS acting as a TSTO or SSTO vehicle depending on the episode.

I am pretty sure I have taken everything the 2E RPG main books (Manga vol. #1-3) have stated that is applicable in working this out. I have chosen to ignore two references: what is/isn’t trans-atmospheric for VFs (greater technical continuity, that means at minimum they all have the same Delta-V capacity, the Beta is shown to have a much greater capacity than other VFs so this is reflected here) and one of two conflicting statements about the Alpha-Z. When it comes to the mass figures, unless it is specifically said to be in a given state it is assumed to be Dry.

Thrust values where independently derived values for the amount of thrust generated (based on assigned/derived values of Isp, propellant load, and burn-time). They are not connected to the OSM/uRRG in anyway (any overlap is purely coincidental at this point).

All Figures assume a crewmember contributes 100kg of mass (pilot and life support gear and supplies) for each seat (Alpha/Beta combined assumes 1pilot for each section). For simplicity I treated the various engines type/modes as ignoring the others’ propellant supply, and performance is considered to be rated in a vacuum (not sea level).

Noted figures for a given mecha are:
Dry Mass: per 2E RPG, unless otherwise specifically specified in the RPG text it is treated as Dry even if nothing is stated.
Payload Mass: maximum PER 2E RPG with general description of it following
Engine Type/Mode: this treats a given engine type/mode as part of an array (1 or more engines) that contribute and is broken down into:
--Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode. These are the primary means of propulsion operating in a less fuel-efficient manner for increased thrust. Reverse thrust without a change in orientation (entire craft or simply the engines) can be done with ~50% thrust capacity from this engine array.
--Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode. In this mode the main engines trade thrust for increased fuel efficiency. Also used for determine how much reactor fuel is left, and to power the attitude thrusters. This basically uses waste material from the reactor directly, where high thrust mode mixes it with additional material for increased thrust at the expense of fuel-efficiency.
--Secondary Engine Array(s): These would be engines that are not primarily used for propulsion, but do not qualify as attitude thrusters. GM’s option if they each have their own independent propellant supply or a common one in case of multiples. There may be more than array, but each array is grouped together and may be mode limited in actual practice (not considered here).
--Strap-on Engine Array(s): These are engines available for use that are not built-in systems (VF-1’s FAST Pack or GBP-1S, or the Alpha’s main engines when connected to the Beta)

Each Type/Mode will (generally) list its respective values for the following:
Thrust of the Engine Array in question (TOTAL thrust of a given array).
Burn-Time at Maximum Thrust, engine as capable of throttling down to achieve longer burn times.
Propellant/Fuel Mass: total amount of propellant/fuel carried for a given engine Array.

For simplicity (with the low-thrust mode/reactor only) I have decided that PC canisters are filled with SLMH laced with a PC fuel additive (improved performance) allowing any SLMH vehicle to easily switch to the PC standard. Engines are optimized for either straight SLMH or SLMH/PC combo, with no performance alteration for SLMH using the combo, but the Combo engines cannot generate the same performance when using straight SLMH (~1/3). The number in parenthesis is the number of cells needed for operation (low thrust/reactor), and is derived from the idea of roughly 1cell per dry metric ton of mass (rounded to the nearest even number) for VFs (VHTs and other mecha may use a different ratio) at this time.

Mass Flow Rate: the rate the engine array consumes fuel/propellant at Maximum Thrust, if throttled down will use less for longer time.
Isp: This is the specific impulse of the engine configuration. This is a measure of fuel efficiency of the engine in question.
Delta-V: This is the total velocity budget of the mecha in the listed profile (either empty of payload, or carrying a mass equal to the above mentioned payload). The practical value of a mecha carrying payload will fall somewhere in between as payload is expended. Multiple engine arrays can contribute for higher speeds.
This is a budget figure, so any increase or decrease in velocity would be deducted from the pool.
Maximum Acceleration: maximum amount of G forces experienced from engines per second, also limits how much Delta-V you can use per second.

Note: in a few instances the mecha are described when connected to other hardware (GBP-1S, FAST Pack, Alpha/Beta). In these cases when that extra hardware is removed the remaining propellant supply (or burn-time) in the section of the mecha does not change from what was spent. You may have to recalculate the remaining Delta-V for the new mass configurations.
There are several ways to use the stat blocks and a mix is even possible:
Ultra Realistic Movement: This involves using the Delta-V and associated values along with calculations of trajectories. This probably is overkill as far as level of detail, but it would be possible to do so with the appropriate background information and automation to speed things up. In this model you need to track everything (Delta-V, Burn-Time, mass expended).

Fantasy Movement: This involves using the Delta-V as a revised top speed using an atmospheric approach taken by Palladium Books. May be combined with Resource Management for plot purposes.

Semi Realistic Movement: This is a medium between Ultra-Realistic and Fantasy Movement. The main difference is that here one assumes a straight-line path as in the Fantasy Movement instead of the true curved trajectory of the Ultra Realistic Movement (which would effect travel time). In this case you can generally get away with just tracking the Delta-V (or Burn-Time) figure as it is expended and from there do the math to work out the remaining stocks for burn-time and propellant mass. If back tracking from Delta-V does not appeal, one would also track the burn time (expressed in terms of maximum thrust) as it is used. From that point the Burn Time remaining will also tell you how much propellant is left using some basic math.

Alternatively you could simply use the acceleration values as some fan approaches do and track the burn-time to allow easy determination of remaining propellant/fuel supply.

Resource Management: The propellant/fuel mass figures can be used to exchange supplies between separate types of mecha (ex. top off a Logan’s tanks when you find a trashed VF-1 that still has SLMH in it’s tanks), it will also allow easier transportation of fuel/propellant reserves (can said support vehicle tow/carry x-amount of surplus is much easier to work out than y-hrs worth).


EDIT NOTE: I have revised the initial post completely

[ShadowLogan]

VF-1A/J/S Valkarie
Dry Mass: 15000kg
Payload Mass: 4657.5kg (Gunpod, Full Wing Load)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 214.37kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 600.00 Seconds (10.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 63.56 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.11 kg/s
Isp: 206,349.21 seconds
Delta-V: 8,500.00 meters per second empty (30,600.00kph), 6,499.48 meters per second max payload (23,398.13kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.44G (14.12m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.10G (10.83 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.61kN
Burn Time: 172,800.00 Seconds (2,880.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 371,428.57 seconds
Delta-V: 6,940.86 meters per second empty (24,987.10kph), 5,305.86 meters per second max payload (19,101.10kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.04m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.03m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Backpack
Thrust (Total): 101.94kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 420.00 Seconds (7.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 22.27 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.05 kg/s
Isp: 196,031.75 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,165.80 meters per second max payload (7,796.88kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.69G (6.77m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.53G (5.16m/s/s)

VF-1R Valkarie
Dry Mass: 15000kg
Payload Mass: 4675.58kg (Gunpod, Full Wing Load)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 267.96kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 600.00 Seconds (10.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 63.56 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.11 kg/s
Isp: 257,936.51 seconds
Delta-V: 10,625.00 meters per second empty (38,250.00kph), 8,116.94 meters per second max payload (29,220.98kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.81G (17.75m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.38G (13.53 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.76kN
Burn Time: 172,800.00 Seconds (2,880.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 464,285.71 seconds
Delta-V: 8,676.07 meters per second empty (31,233.85kph), 6,626.26 meters per second max payload (23,854.54kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.01G (0.05m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.04m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Backpack
Thrust (Total): 101.93kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 420.00 Seconds (7.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 17.81 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.04 kg/s
Isp: 245,039.68 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,163.74 meters per second max payload (7,789.46kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.69G (6.77m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.53G (5.15m/s/s)

VF-1D Valkarie
Dry Mass: 15000kg
Payload Mass: 4657.5kg (Gunpod, Full Wing Load)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 214.37kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 600.00 Seconds (10.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 63.56 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.11 kg/s
Isp: 206,349.21 seconds
Delta-V: 8,444.20 meters per second empty (30,399.12kph), 6,466.80 meters per second max payload (23,280.48kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.44G (14.12m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.10G (10.78 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.61kN
Burn Time: 172,800.00 Seconds (2,880.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 371,428.57 seconds
Delta-V: 6,895.24 meters per second empty (24,822.86kph), 5,279.16 meters per second max payload (19,004.98kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.04m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.03m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Backpack
Thrust (Total): 102.62kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 420.00 Seconds (7.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 22.42 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.05 kg/s
Isp: 196,031.75 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,169.16 meters per second max payload (7,808.98kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.69G (6.77m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.53G (5.16m/s/s)

VF-1 GBP-1S
(A/J/S) Valkarie
Dry Mass: 31200kg
Payload Mass: 1207.5kg (Gunpod, no wing load, full GBP-1S)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 267.96kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 600.00 Seconds (10.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 63.56 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.11 kg/s
Isp: 257,936.51 seconds
Delta-V: 5,131.37 meters per second empty (18,472.93kph), 4,940.95 meters per second max payload (17,787.42kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.87G (8.53m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.84G (8.23 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.76kN
Burn Time: 172,800.00 Seconds (2,880.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 464,285.71 seconds
Delta-V: 4,187.65 meters per second empty (15,075.54kph), 4,032.16 meters per second max payload (14,515.78kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.02m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.02m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Backpack
Thrust (Total): 211.28kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 420.00 Seconds (7.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 36.93 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.09 kg/s
Isp: 245,039.68 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,728.15 meters per second max payload (9,821.34kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.69G (6.77m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.66G (6.50m/s/s)
Strap On System Main Engine Array(s): GBP-1S
Thrust (Total): 345.11kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 540.00 Seconds (9.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 40.93 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.08 kg/s
Isp: 464,285.71seconds
Delta-V: 5,950.00 meters per second empty (21,420.00kph), 5,729.12 meters per second max payload (20,624.83kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.12G (10.98m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.08G (10.61m/s/s)

VF-1 FAST
(A/J/S) Valkarie
Dry Mass: 23000kg
Payload Mass: 5347.5kg (Gunpod, Full Wing Load, Full FAST)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 267.96kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 600.00 Seconds (10.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 63.56 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.11 kg/s
Isp: 257,936.51 seconds
Delta-V: 6,950.40 meters per second empty (25,021.44kph), 5,645.33 meters per second max payload (20,323.19kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.18G (11.57m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.96G (9.41 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.76kN
Burn Time: 172,800.00 Seconds (2,880.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 464,285.71 seconds
Delta-V: 5,673.24 meters per second empty (20,423.66kph), 4,607.34 meters per second max payload (16,586.42kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.03m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.03m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Backpack
Thrust (Total): 155.93kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 420.00 Seconds (7.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 27.25 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.06 kg/s
Isp: 245,039.68 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,300.98 meters per second max payload (8,283.53kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.69G (6.77m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.56G (5.48m/s/s)
Strap On System Main Engine Array(s): FAST
Thrust (Total): 546.18kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 540.00 Seconds (9.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 64.78 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.12 kg/s
Isp: 464,285.71seconds
Delta-V: 12,750.00 meters per second empty (45,900.00kph), 10,356.01 meters per second max payload (37,281.64kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 2.41G (23.63m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.96G (19.18m/s/s)

VF-8 Logan
Dry Mass: 6500kg
Payload Mass: 184.9kg (Gunpod, Hardpoints to Max (MRM))
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 98.48kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 570.00 Seconds (9.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 7.93 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 722,222.22 seconds
Delta-V: 8,500.00 meters per second empty (30,600.00kph), 8,268.50 meters per second max payload (29,766.60kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.52G (14.91m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.48G (14.51 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.30kN
Burn Time: 604,800.00 Seconds (10,080.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 14.40 kg (8 Cells)
Isp: 1,300,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 27,785.92 meters per second empty (100,029.31kph), 27,029.51 meters per second max payload (97,306.24kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.05m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.04m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Guardian Mode Feet/Chest
Thrust (Total): 36.67kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 510.00 Seconds (8.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 2.78 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 686,111.11 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,756.14 meters per second max payload (9,922.10kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.57G (5.59m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.55G (5.40m/s/s)

VFH-10 AGAC
Dry Mass: 16800kg
Payload Mass: 1948.5kg
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 266.18kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 540.00 Seconds (9.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 20.29 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.04 kg/s
Isp: 722,222.22 seconds
Delta-V: 8,500.00 meters per second empty (30,600.00kph), 7,621.77 meters per second max payload (27,438.37kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.61G (15.79m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.44G (14.11 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.61kN
Burn Time: 604,800.00 Seconds (10,080.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 1,300,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 21,707.79 meters per second empty (78,148.04kph), 19,465.41 meters per second max payload (70,075.48kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.04m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.03m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Tail, Battloid Feet/Blades
Thrust (Total): 88.69kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 540.00 Seconds (9.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 7.12 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 686,111.11 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,540.49 meters per second max payload (9,145.76kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.54G (5.30m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.48G (4.70m/s/s)

VFA-6H/I Alpha
Dry Mass: 16700kg
Payload Mass: 1368kg (gunpod, full internal missiles)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 250.58kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 570.00 Seconds (9.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 6.72 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67 seconds
Delta-V: 8,500.00 meters per second empty (30,600.00kph), 7,860.09 meters per second max payload (28,296.32kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.52G (14.91m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.41G (13.79 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.91kN
Burn Time: 1,209,600.00 Seconds (20,160.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 3,900,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 65,510.66 meters per second empty (235,838.38kph), 60,581.80 meters per second max payload (218,094.48kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.01G (0.05m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.01G (0.05m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Arms, Groin
Thrust (Total): 93.34kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 510.00 Seconds (8.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 2.36 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.00 kg/s
Isp: 2,058,333.33 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,620.01 meters per second max payload (9,432.04kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.57G (5.59m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.52G (5.14m/s/s)

VFA-6Z Alpha
Dry Mass: 16700kg
Payload Mass: 1368kg (gunpod, full internal missiles)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 271.71kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 570.00 Seconds (9.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 6.72 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 2,349,397.59 seconds
Delta-V: 9,216.87 meters per second empty (33,180.73kph), 8,522.99 meters per second max payload (30,682.76kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.65G (16.18m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.52G (14.95 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.99kN
Burn Time: 1,209,600.00 Seconds (20,160.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 4,228,915.66 seconds
Delta-V: 71,035.66 meters per second empty (255,728.38kph), 65,691.11 meters per second max payload (236,488.00kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.01G (0.06m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.01G (0.05m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Arms, Groin
Thrust (Total): 93.34kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 510.00 Seconds (8.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 2.17 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.00 kg/s
Isp: 2,231,927.71 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,620.00 meters per second max payload (9,432.00kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.57G (5.59m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.52G (5.14m/s/s)

VFA-6X Alpha
Dry Mass: 16700kg
Payload Mass: 1462.5kg (gunpod, full internal missiles)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 250.58kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 570.00 Seconds (9.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 6.72 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67 seconds
Delta-V: 8,500.00 meters per second empty (30,600.00kph), 7,819.43 meters per second max payload (28,149.95kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.52G (14.91m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.40G (13.72 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 0.91kN
Burn Time: 1,209,600.00 Seconds (20,160.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 28.80 kg (16 Cells)
Isp: 3,900,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 65,510.66 meters per second empty (235,838.38kph), 60,268.56 meters per second max payload (216,966.82kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.01G (0.05m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.01G (0.05m/s/s)
Secondary Engine Array(s): Arms, Groin
Thrust (Total): 93.34kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 510.00 Seconds (8.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 2.36 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.00 kg/s
Isp: 2,058,333.33 seconds
Delta-V: 2,833.33 meters per second empty (10,199.99kph), 2,606.45 meters per second max payload (9,383.22kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.57G (5.59m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.52G (5.11m/s/s)

VFB-9 Beta
Dry Mass: 29500kg
Payload Mass: 8890kg (full internal and wing racks)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 861.29kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 1,020.00 Seconds (17.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 41.35 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.04 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67 seconds
Delta-V: 29,659.00 meters per second empty (106,772.40kph), 22,812.36 meters per second max payload (82,124.50kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 2.96G (29.03m/s/s), fully loaded it is 2.28G (22.37 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 1.82kN
Burn Time: 1,209,600.00 Seconds (20,160.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 57.60 kg (32 Cells)
Isp: 3,900,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 74,354.86 meters per second empty (267,677.50kph), 57,194.02 meters per second max payload (205,898.47kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.01G (0.06m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.01G (0.05m/s/s)

VFA-6H/I & VBF-9
Dry Mass: 46200kg
Payload Mass: 10258kg (Per Contributing)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 861.29kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 1,020.00 Seconds (17.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 41.35 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.04 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67 seconds
Delta-V: 18,925.18 meters per second empty (68,130.65kph), 15,500.00 meters per second max payload (55,800.00kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.89G (18.54m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.55G (15.20 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 1.82kN
Burn Time: 1,209,600.00 Seconds (20,160.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 57.60 kg (32 Cells)
Isp: 3,900,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 47,449.96 meters per second empty (170,819.86kph), 38,863.45 meters per second max payload (139,908.42kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.04m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.03m/s/s)
Strap On System Main Engine Array(s): Alpha Main
Thrust (Total): 250.58kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 570.00 Seconds (9.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 6.72 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67seconds
Delta-V: 3,077.98 meters per second empty (11,080.73kph), 2,520.74 meters per second max payload (9,074.66kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.55G (5.39m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.45G (4.42m/s/s)

VFA-6Z/VBF-9
Dry Mass: 46200kg
Payload Mass: 10258kg (full internal and wing racks)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 861.29kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 1,020.00 Seconds (17.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 41.35 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.04 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67 seconds
Delta-V: 18,925.18 meters per second empty (68,130.65kph), 15,500.00 meters per second max payload (55,800.00kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.89G (18.54m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.55G (15.20 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 1.82kN
Burn Time: 1,209,600.00 Seconds (20,160.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 57.60 kg (32 Cells)
Isp: 3,900,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 47,449.96 meters per second empty (170,819.86kph), 38,863.45 meters per second max payload (139,908.42kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.04m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.03m/s/s)
Strap On System Main Engine Array(s): Alpha Main
Thrust (Total): 271.71kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 570.00 Seconds (9.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 6.72 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 2,349,397.59seconds
Delta-V: 3,337.57 meters per second empty (12,015.25kph), 2,733.33 meters per second max payload (9,839.99kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.60G (5.88m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.49G (4.80m/s/s)

VFA-6X/VBF-9
Dry Mass: 46200kg
Payload Mass: 10352.5kg (Per Contributing)
Main Engine Array: High Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 861.29kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 1,020.00 Seconds (17.00 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 41.35 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.04 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67 seconds
Delta-V: 18,925.18 meters per second empty (68,130.65kph), 15,474.20 meters per second max payload (55,707.12kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 1.89G (18.54m/s/s), fully loaded it is 1.55G (15.17 m/s/s)
Main Engine Array: Low Thrust Mode
Thrust (Total): 1.82kN
Burn Time: 1,209,600.00 Seconds (20,160.00 minutes)
Propellant/Fuel Mass: 57.60 kg (32 Cells)
Isp: 3,900,000.00 seconds
Delta-V: 47,449.96 meters per second empty (170,819.86kph), 38,798.77 meters per second max payload (139,675.57kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.00G (0.04m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.00G (0.03m/s/s)
Strap On System Main Engine Array(s): Alpha Main
Thrust (Total): 250.58kN
Burn Time at Max Thrust: 570.00 Seconds (9.50 minutes)
Propellant Mass: 6.72 kg
Mass Flow Rate: 0.01 kg/s
Isp: 2,166,666.67seconds
Delta-V: 3,077.98 meters per second empty (11,080.73kph), 2,516.54 meters per second max payload (9,059.54kph)
Maximum Acceleration: 0.55G (5.39m/s/s), fully loaded it is 0.45G (4.41m/s/s)

EDIT: The Table here has been revised.

[Seto Kaiba]

Truth be told the simplest fix to the RPG space travel model is to toss out the Mach 5 bit about orbit.

Well, not quite... the simplest fix is to ignore the problem altogether, and acknowledge that the RPG is operating under the old "cinematic physics" set of conventions. What you've got here is a lovely, but slightly inaccurate, solution that adds a degree of additional complexity that really isn't necessary. Then there are the issues with your actual numbers...

Low latitude locations launching in easterly direction with a low angle inclination (relative to the equator) make for an easier time to get into orbit as the planet gives the craft a “free boost”. This could explain the VF-1 in TMS acting as a TSTO or SSTO vehicle depending on the episode.

Or we could go with the official answer, that the VF-1 Valkyrie's engines are powerful enough to reach low Earth orbit while the Alpha's... y'know... aren't. Harmony Gold's following the OSM line there, which is totally consistent with the animation's contents for the obvious reason. Naturally, since the RPG is at least trying to follow Harmony Gold's OSM-inspired line on it all...

I did some work for a fanfic re-write of the Veritech Fighter space performance statistics for the 2E RPG (applicable to their “universe” only, though the series does have an influence) to get more realistic values. [...] Thrust values from the uRRG website are also used to give more depth (mass consumption rates, which allowed other calculations), though I did create a low/high thrust modes with a constant relationship value in order to get the PC fuel mass to a reasonable level consistent with an estimates from the show ("Curtain Call").

Using the uRRG's information as a basis for anything is always a bad idea. There are just too many failures of research or basic arithmetic there to treat it as anything more than comical. It's not really meant to be a reference for anything but their own fan fiction series anyway. Some of their basic numbers are correct, but when it comes to things like a fighter's fuel capacity, they're so far wide of the mark that they're not so much in left field as they are in a different field entirely. Possibly a field on another planet entirely. The RPG, sadly, isn't much better... its info being largely copy-pasted from an assortment of Macross sites without recourse to little things like checking that their numbers still made sense when they change the details.

(I don't think it occurred to any of them that liquid metallic hydrogen is ten times as dense as the fuel originally used for those OSM stats, etc. It's weird to see such a neat and graphic depiction of just how badly the RPG short-sold everything.)

[ShadowLogan]

Then there are the issues with your actual numbers...

Elaborate please.

The information used in this project is derived from:
- uRRG Thrust Figures (NOTHING ELSE FROM THE uRRG was used), values that you have IINM said in the past are OSM.
- the 2E RPG (provided the bulk of the fixed number values)
- utilizes established equations to derive some information (Delta-V, Burn Times, etc)
- utilize known Delta-V requirements for certain maneuvers (was generous and reduced them to ignore losses due to gravity/air drag as the airbreathing mode cancels them out in many cases for orbital insertion) as goal
- also used a NASA estimate for a Fusion Rocket Engine as a starting point on PC/SLMH Isp values
- also used a NASA estimate for a dual thrust mode Nuclear Fission Rocket Engine (that's why the Isp changes between low/high thrust, though in the NASA engine thrust did not change so drastically.)
- the show/TSC itself (more limited to specific instances)

The Project's scope is limited to only applying to the 2E RPG, not the show (somehow that bit was cut from the initial post, I'll fix that shortly). The only personal bias I had with the numbers was setting the Delta-V goal for an empty configuration for all but the Beta (which carrying a loaded Alpha has a much higher requirement to meet as displayed in the show/TSC). That goal was set to create greater technical continuity between the sagas not possible with blind application of the OSM.

Or we could go with the official answer, that the VF-1 Valkyrie's engines are powerful enough to reach low Earth orbit while the Alpha's... y'know... aren't. Harmony Gold's following the OSM line there, which is totally consistent with the animation's contents for the obvious reason. Naturally, since the RPG is at least trying to follow Harmony Gold's OSM-inspired line on it all...

But even the VF-1 demonstrates that its orbital capacity is limited (ep3 STTO, ~Ep30 TSTO, FTS comic as TSTO), which can be explained in realistic terms. None of this technically violates what happens in the show/TSC as it explains why we see what we see as far as displayed launch capacity without needing to resort figuring out why so many of the known VFs to come after VF-1 don't have this capacity even though it isn't a stretch.

HG's stance with the Alpha is a mess and contradictory. I have no desire to go over this again at this time.

[jaymz]

Well for example the max acceleration of the VF-1A with it's engines over boosting is only about 2.49g not 3+

23 000kg of thrust x 2 (23 metric tons of thrust x 2) / Standard Take of Weight of 18.5 metric tons = 2.48647649 r about 2.49g

Standard thrust is only 1.24g

[ShadowLogan]

Well for example the max acceleration of the VF-1A with it's engines over boosting is only about 2.49g not 3+

These engines are (IIRC) not in Overboost, they are at max sustainable thrust w/o it per the uRRG thrust figures.

The ~3G is also in a clean empty config (no payload mass), with maximum (not standard) payload it would be reduced to ~2.3G in the case of the VF-1. Adjusting the takeoff weight to a similar state in your math does yield ~3G as calculated before.

I'll adjust the initial post to show that G force is in an empty state as that would be the maximum it could do (thought that would be obvious given the "empty" state has a higher Delta-V than a "loaded" state).

Note that 2.3G is in a maximum configuration:
15,100.0kg dry mass VF-1
4,657.5kg payload mass (gunpod, 4 wing hard-points are at maximum load)
19,757.5kg total plus pilot and fuel (these last two do not count as payload, not sure if you are factoring those mass figures in or not)

[jaymz]

Well for example the max acceleration of the VF-1A with it's engines over boosting is only about 2.49g not 3+

These engines are (IIRC) not in Overboost, they are at max sustainable thrust w/o it per the uRRG thrust figures.

The ~3G is also in a clean empty config (no payload mass), with maximum (not standard) payload it would be reduced to ~2.3G in the case of the VF-1. Adjusting the takeoff weight to a similar state in your math does yield ~3G as calculated before.

I'll adjust the initial post to show that G force is in an empty state as that would be the maximum it could do (thought that would be obvious given the "empty" state has a higher Delta-V than a "loaded" state).

Note that 2.3G is in a maximum configuration:
15,100.0kg dry mass VF-1
4,657.5kg payload mass (gunpod, 4 wing hard-points are at maximum load)
19,757.5kg total plus pilot and fuel (these last two do not count as payload, not sure if you are factoring those mass figures in or not)

And those numbers are not accurate.

I'll see your uRRG numbers and raise you Macross Mecha Manual numbers Standard take off weight of a vf-1 is 18 500kg and the standard thrust of the engines is 11 500kg per engine for a total to 23 000kg of thrust or 1.24g's of acceleration.

With dry mass being 13 250kg that makes dry mass max acceleration 1.75g

Standard payload withthe above numbers works out to be 4 250kg

http://www.macross2.net/m3/sdfmacross/v ... lkyrie.htm

[Seto Kaiba]

Elaborate please.

Sure thing.

The information used in this project is derived from:
- uRRG Thrust Figures (NOTHING ELSE FROM THE uRRG was used), values that you have IINM said in the past are OSM.

Er... not quite, no. I'm not sure if it'd more accurate to say you're misremembering, or that you're applying something that I've said in reference to a few specific values to the entire scope of the thing. It's true that some of the basic stats that the uRRG cites are from the OSM, but the volume of correctly-cited material is pitifully small. On top of that, much of the material drawn from the OSM has been "amended" or "adjusted" such that it is no longer substantially accurate, often with their bizarre failures of basic arithmetic or spatial awareness. The vast majority of the material added to embroider those basic facts is complete BS.

What's more, the areas of detail that are accurate are not consistent between articles. The VF-1's main engine thrust is cited accurately (barring their inconsistent rounding practices), but they misidentify the engines in the "backpack" as the NBS-1 high-thrust verniers and invent a ventral vernier that doesn't exist. The Super Pack's thrust is cited correctly with the usual rounding errors, but the propellant capacity isn't even in the correct units, let alone an accurate number. They made up the number for the Armored Valkyrie's engines as well. They list the unboosted service ceiling around 1/3 of the actual number, etc. Compare that to the Alpha's entry, where they got even the physical dimensions wrong, cited a new thrust figure they made up for the main engines that looks to be about half-again their actual output, then assumed that the fighter had overboost, and applied it only to the sub-engines for no clear reason, and calculated the thrust output of the sub-engines incorrectly. Their reaction mass and run-time numbers are their own invention, as are most of the other details that follow.

- the 2E RPG (provided the bulk of the fixed number values)

And yet, you didn't cite those correctly either... never mind that those were cited incorrectly by Palladium's writers too.

Look, for instance, at the empty/dry mass you cited. Let's see how that compares to what's in the various sources. This one's for the VF-1:
OSM: 13,250kg (13.25t)
RT.com: 13,300kg (13.3t)
uRRG: 13,300kg (13.3t)
RPG (2E): 15,000kg (15t)
You wrote: 15,100kg (15.1t)

Now, it's easy to see where the extra 50kg came from between the OSM and uRRG/RT.com number. The uRRG authors had some very inconsistent rounding practices, and rounded the 13.25 up to 13.3. RT.com got its info from them, so that's how it got 13.3. Hell alone knows where 15t came from in the 2nd Edition RPG, considering most of its info was copy-pasted out of Macross sites. The info given for the packs doesn't state whether the weight (mass) is the pack alone, without its armaments, operational weight, etc. and we can't even have an educated guess because the knee-jerk random change has no context and doesn't marry neatly with any available official data.

EDIT: On a related note, 100kg is almost certainly overestimating the mass of the pilot + life support gear. Most of the life support apparatus is part of the fighter's cockpit, not the pilot suit. The suit itself has no given weight in the RPG, but it's nowhere near 20kg in the OSM. I could understand 20kg+ for a pilot in CVR-3 tho...

- utilizes established equations to derive some information (Delta-V, Burn Times, etc)

But you ignored some available information from official sources regarding burn times, on the Super Pack for instance. The burn time for the rocket boosters alone is 150 seconds (more on later models) at maximum thrust.

- also used a NASA estimate for a Fusion Rocket Engine as a starting point on PC/SLMH Isp values

Which is rather a significant and fatal error for your argument, as none of the above use a fusion rocket engine. The RPG, of course, doesn't go into any depth about how the engines work. Nor, for that matter, does the uRRG. If you were to go to the OSM, you'd find that the engines work more like Star Trek's impulse engine concept, which is something like a fusion plasma rocket combined with an incredibly high-powered MPD arcjet.

That goal was set to create greater technical continuity between the sagas not possible with blind application of the OSM.

Which, sadly, missed the mark by a large margin due to some faulty assumptions.

But even the VF-1 demonstrates that its orbital capacity is limited (ep3 STTO, ~Ep30 TSTO, FTS comic as TSTO), which can be explained in realistic terms.

But it already has a sane, coherent, official explanation... it doesn't need another one that downgrades its capabilities for absolutely no reason.

HG's stance with the Alpha is a mess and contradictory. I have no desire to go over this again at this time.

Now THAT much is spot-on.




Just as a fun bonus, if you actually sit down and work out the mass of the original source material VF-1 fuel load vs. the load for the 2nd Edition RPG's SLMH-driven VF-1 from the available information, the difference is quite staggering. On an OSM VF-1, a full fuel load is barely .1t, the much greater mass (for less effect) of the 2nd Edition RPG version's is a little over 1.2t without any option packs, and climbs astronomically when they're added. It really makes working with the RPG numbers all but impossible if you actually want things to line up.

[ShadowLogan]

@Seto & Jaymz
To clarify and to avoid repeating myself. THIS only applies to the RPG universe OR if you prefer Palladium's interpretation of the current show universe.
This basically means that PB's universe/interpretation (version) is treated as correct for their version, not other versions of RT that exist. So it doesn't matter if the Infopedia or some other source has conflicting information, in this context the RPG is correct for their version. Objections of this nature (ie non-RPG source says this) are going to be ignored.

.. not quite, no. I'm not sure if it'd more accurate to say you're misremembering, or that you're applying something that I've said in reference to a few specific values to the entire scope of the thing.

It might be the latter due to specific instances (IIRC stock VF-1 & Alpha, don't think we touched on others). I'd actually have preferred not to have used the uRRG/OSM in the first place, but that creates a limited data (no burn time which factors into several other things). I suppose I could assign MY OWN T/W to calculate replacement thrust values... (though I'm sure you'd object to that to).

And yet, you didn't cite those correctly either... never mind that those were cited incorrectly by Palladium's writers too....

I know why the Dry Mass is off for my numbers to the RPG, in the Spreadsheet that I used to do all the various calculation the cell for the dry mass also includes the crew. Said fact merely slipped my mind when I did those posts (I'll adjust the initial post).

I know what you are saying about some of the mass figures being un-descriptive in the text in some cases, so I applied them as the dry mass uniformly. And the Armor Packs are something I wanted to skip.

EDIT: On a related note, 100kg is almost certainly overestimating the mass of the pilot + life support gear. Most of the life support apparatus is part of the fighter's cockpit, not the pilot suit. The suit itself has no given weight in the RPG, but it's nowhere near 20kg in the OSM. I could understand 20kg+ for a pilot in CVR-3 tho...

100kg works out to approx. 220lbs, which does leave margin for larger pilots (Roy, Ben, Lunk-size we see in NG who almost certainly are going to mass more). While some of the life support hardware might be part of the dry mass of the mecha in question, the consumable aspect would not be (air, water, etc), plus the pilot's equipment (suit, survival gear). And the suits do contain lifesupport gear of their own (even in TMS).

I'd rather be over than under in this case given that people do come in various sizes.

But you ignored some available information from official sources regarding burn times, on the Super Pack for instance. The burn time for the rocket boosters alone is 150 seconds (more on later models) at maximum thrust.

I am being consistent with the PB version, which doesn't place burn time limits on the VF-1 packs (ASC ones it does), though it would make no sense to give the packs longer endurance times than the baseline model.

I also went with a dual thrust mode (each individual supplies) because that was the only practical way these mecha can have drives with the endurance stated as mentioned in the original post (unless you think you can squeeze in ~20metric tons of SLMH into the Alpha, Beta, VF-1, and AGAC, the alternative is to make the drives more efficient but that runs into other issue)

Which is rather a significant and fatal error for your argument, as none of the above use a fusion rocket engine.

Not really. There are different types of fusion (D-D is less energetic than D-He3), and setups for a fusion rocket (which I'm not entirely sure which type/setup NASA was referencing). Star Trek's Impulse engines basically ARE fusion rocket engines going off this description: (http://www.startrek.com/database_article/impulse-drive)

The NASA value does help as a reference object and starting point, and prevents values from appearing completely out of left field.

But it already has a sane, coherent, official explanation... it doesn't need another one that downgrades its capabilities for absolutely no reason.

I don't see how this is down grading the VF-1 from the show (visual/dialogue) and 2E RPG. The (stock) VF-1 still has better capabilities (acceleration, payload) than anything but the Beta (in this project), even with the least efficient drive (about the only draw back). Even from the show perspective this wouldn't be a downgrade given the only instance of SSTO operation had the mecha recovered shortly after (which would be consistent IMHO with the 8.5kps capacity previously laid out), had they gone farther from a Delta-V perspective it could be raised, but they did not which suggests the VF-1 could be running close to dry at that point.

[Seto Kaiba]

This basically means that PB's universe/interpretation (version) is treated as correct for their version, not other versions of RT that exist.

This strikes me as being more than slightly disingenuous, as you're drawing on material from outside the "interpretation" of Robotech presented by Palladium to a much greater degree than you are Palladium's material. Practically none of the info that went into your calculations came from the RPG itself. This is not, of course, particularly surprising... since what's actually in the RPG is schizophrenically inconsistent in the best of times, and offers almost none of the requisite details.

In that light, I don't think you can honestly claim that your work is somehow independent of other sources, because you yourself are drawing heavily on other sources. Your statement that you'll ignore objections based on those sources just smacks of "I'll ignore anything that differs from my own opinion", which smacks of a rather weak argument when your own position is just as dependent on the facts you're saying don't apply.

Moving right along...

It might be the latter due to specific instances (IIRC stock VF-1 & Alpha, don't think we touched on others). I'd actually have preferred not to have used the uRRG/OSM in the first place, but that creates a limited data (no burn time which factors into several other things).

Regardless of your personal dislike for it, the simple truth is that the numbers in the RPG are every bit as OSM derived as those in the Infopedia, and rather more than the wildly inaccurate coverage in the uRRG. You can no more separate the Robotech RPG from that material than you could yourself from your arms. You would honestly be doing better if you used just the OSM information, because at least then you've have useful information like thrust, propellant volumes, and such...

I suppose I could assign MY OWN T/W to calculate replacement thrust values... (though I'm sure you'd object to that to).

That would have even less basis in fact than your current, rather inaccurate, estimations do... so yes, I probably would be objecting to it on the grounds that it would be a distortion of the evidence.

I know why the Dry Mass is off for my numbers to the RPG, in the Spreadsheet that I used to do all the various calculation the cell for the dry mass also includes the crew. Said fact merely slipped my mind when I did those posts (I'll adjust the initial post).

Please refer to my previous statement about 100kg being a very unlikely number for the combined mass of the pilot and the life support system. There is very little life support hardware built into the pilot suit, and it's very light and low-impact, for practical reasons. Almost all of the life support hardware is built into the cockpit of the fighter itself. 80kg would probably have been a lot closer to the mark, though I'll admit there were some significant statistical outliers like Roy and Hayao/Ben, who both massed over 100kg. (Mean body weight for Asians is about 60kg, mean for fit westerners being around 70kg.)

I know what you are saying about some of the mass figures being un-descriptive in the text in some cases, so I applied them as the dry mass uniformly. And the Armor Packs are something I wanted to skip.

The problem, as I alluded to in my previous post, is that the descriptions provided in the books themselves indicate that it ISN'T a dry weight figure in some cases (e.g. the Armored Pack) and doesn't say in others (Super Pack). Your conclusions are faulty because your basis is faulty and inconsistent. Never mind that the base masses cited for the VF-1 don't say if that 15t weight is dry, empty, or what. It's much higher than the actual, correct weight of 13.25/13.3t, which does point toward it not being a dry/empty reading. The same goes for the Super Pack, which cites a figure much higher than what's correct and doesn't qualify it. It's too high to be empty by 2t, and it's too low to be fully loaded. Therefore, what is it? Is that mass the pack with no fuel, but fully armed? Is it the mass with just the conformal tanks filled but nothing else? Is it the mass with the minimum operating volume of fuel? We can't say.

Though, as a side note, the value given doesn't match any of the above possibilities for the Super Pack... the only one that's close is the mass with the conformal tanks filled but nothing else, but that's still off by about 1.5t assuming they were filled with SLMH like they should be. Just further examples of why the Palladium numbers are a really, astonishingly bad choice for this...

I am being consistent with the PB version, which doesn't place burn time limits on the VF-1 packs (ASC ones it does), though it would make no sense to give the packs longer endurance times than the baseline model.

So, you just pulled a random number out of your arse then?

I also went with a dual thrust mode (each individual supplies) because that was the only practical way these mecha can have drives with the endurance stated as mentioned in the original post (unless you think you can squeeze in ~20metric tons of SLMH into the Alpha, Beta, VF-1, and AGAC, the alternative is to make the drives more efficient but that runs into other issue)

Oy... I think you're juggling the fallacious triangle of bad information, bad assumptions, and faulty conclusions. Most of the blame lands on you for that, since by your own admission you're mixing internally inconsistent information from the RPG with other information from other sources that you're simultaneously claiming aren't applicable. Things work out much easier if you aim for maximum consistency, and treat the OSM/official RT explanation of the Alpha's capabilities as accurate rather than trying to dignify the dramatic-license scene from RTSC with anything other than scorn. Of all of the fighters you've covered, only one is a true long-range space fighter... and only then when it's laden with extra booster rockets and such. The others are short-range space fighters that rely on having a carrier close-by. The Logans, AGACs, Alphas, etc. don't NEED much greater efficiency or vast volumes of propellant because they never stray far from their carriers or piggyback onto other ships when traveling more than short distances.

Trying to impose realistic orbital maneuvering onto material that very firmly adheres to tropes like old-school dogfighting and conveniently close planets isn't just a bad idea... it's downright Sisyphean.

Which is rather a significant and fatal error for your argument, as none of the above use a fusion rocket engine.

Not really.

Yes really. Let me explain where you went wrong.

There are different types of fusion (D-D is less energetic than D-He3), and setups for a fusion rocket (which I'm not entirely sure which type/setup NASA was referencing). Star Trek's Impulse engines basically ARE fusion rocket engines going off this description: (http://www.startrek.com/database_article/impulse-drive)

Yes, but NASA's consideration for fusion /turbines/, which is what the RPG actually describes these engines as, indicates a different breed of propulsion. The official descriptions given in NASA's brief are suspiciously similar to what Masahiro Chiba cooked up back in '83 for the detailed description of the VF-1's reaction engines, though minus the ion engine component (since NASA's aren't space engines as well).

Using NASA's numbers also runs into a number of problems, since their projections for fusion turbine fuel efficiency show a VF-1 ought to have a continuous service time of at least 16 days of non-stop flight with a full fuel load, not 48 hours.

You're reading a lot into the very brief, curtailed description of impulse engines on StarTrek.com. The descriptions provided in the series itself (including a very graphic one given from inside a drive system), and the descriptions in the "writers bible" issued to directors and writers indicates that the impulse engine is actually more ion engine than fusion rocket. The fusion reactors provide high-energy plasma used for power generation and propulsion, with part of the generated power being put toward electromagnetically accelerating the plasma earmarked for propulsion use before it enters (and energizes) the driver coil assembly that generates the mass-canceling subspace field on its way to the thrust-vectoring nozzles.

[ShadowLogan]

@jaymz
Thrust values are known to change between Sea Level and Vacuum operation, so it is entirely possible that in the vacuum of space the engines would create different acceleration values than when operating at sea level in Earth's atmosphere (off hand I don't think it's a fixed ratio, but never really looked into it).

This strikes me as being more than slightly disingenuous, as you're drawing on material from outside the "interpretation" of Robotech presented by Palladium to a much greater degree than you are Palladium's material. Practically none of the info that went into your calculations came from the RPG itself

I don't see how the use of real world equations and values is disingenuous when bringing the RPG closer to reality, which is basically one of the reasons for this project.

About the only questionable values I used (and even agree with you on, though for different reasons) come from the uRRG, and I did not have to use them. They do not factor in to high thrust Delta-V numbers or the propellant mass involved (they do in low thrust mode IIRC, and high thrust values that factor in time).

Where/how the RPG arrived at their mass figures and endurance times is irrelevant to this project, that is what THEY say they are for their version/universe. Which is what I am working in w/re to this project (RAW), anything used from another version is minimized, and I put the RPG as subject to reality (equations used, NASA info). While players can/do house rule, not everyone does it the same (hence the adherence to RAW coupled with reality so everyone is on the same page).

Please refer to my previous statement about 100kg being a very unlikely number for the combined mass of the pilot and the life support system

Still that DOES explain why the Dry Mass was off from the listed 2E RPG values, and by a uniform amount based on crew size, as that is what I was using for a crew members mass contribution. We will have to agree to disagree on the 100kg for the pilot and life support as I would rather be over than under in this matter since a lighter crew contribution results in a bonus as opposed to a penalty.

The problem, as I alluded to in my previous post, is that the descriptions provided in the books themselves indicate that it ISN'T a dry weight figure in some cases (e.g. the Armored Pack) and doesn't say in others (Super Pack).

Agree, but unless it was clearly stated what the value is I applied a uniform interpretation that it was dry. Otherwise I would have to make a note on why I took it as "X" for each case, in this way it limits bias (though only really effects the VF-1). IIRC of the dry masses involved that are in the Infopedia only the VF-1 has a different mass (it isn't hard to adjust for the lower dry mass for the stock VF-1s).

Yes, but NASA's consideration for fusion /turbines/, which is what the RPG actually describes these engines as, indicates a different breed of propulsion. The official descriptions given in NASA's brief are suspiciously similar to what Masahiro Chiba cooked up back in '83 for the detailed description of the VF-1's reaction engines, though minus the ion engine component (since NASA's aren't space engines as well).

Fraid not. They are subject to the same equations I used. Doesn't matter if the engine is Ion, Chemical, NTR, Fusion, VASMIR, turbine, etc they all are subject to the same equations.

Using NASA's numbers also runs into a number of problems, since their projections for fusion turbine fuel efficiency show a VF-1 ought to have a continuous service time of at least 16 days of non-stop flight with a full fuel load, not 48 hours.

The caveat though is that that is in an atmosphere correct, not the vacuum of space (which is where I am looking at). You are also assuming the VF-1 is as fuel efficient about it as the NASA study.

The fusion reactors provide high-energy plasma used for power generation and propulsion, with part of the generated power being put toward electromagnetically accelerating the plasma earmarked for propulsion use before it enters (and energizes) the driver coil assembly that generates the mass-canceling subspace field on its way to the thrust-vectoring nozzles.

There is no reason that an Ion Rocket Engine cannot be powered by a Fusion Reactor, so it is still a Fusion Engine in a manner of speaking. People do at times refer to Electric Propulsion systems (Rockets) by their power source (Nuclear-Electric, Solar-Electric).

[jaymz]

That may be but your own calculations do not take that into account either and use the basic formula of engine thrust divided by unit mass so I am not sure why you are even bringing up sea level versus various altitude level accelerations.

[ShadowLogan]

That may be but your own calculations do not take that into account either and use the basic formula of engine thrust divided by unit mass so I am not sure why you are even bringing up sea level versus various altitude level accelerations.

It is not possible to correct for it (AFAIK) based on the uRRG (or even the M3) listing (and I highly doubt the OSMs goes into that much detail somewhere to allow one to correct for it) is why. That explains the differences as far as I'm concerned, even without adjusting for it in the calculation that used Thrust directly.

[Seto Kaiba]

Thrust values are known to change between Sea Level and Vacuum operation, so it is entirely possible that in the vacuum of space the engines would create different acceleration values than when operating at sea level in Earth's atmosphere (off hand I don't think it's a fixed ratio, but never really looked into it).

Looking at the actual evidence, this does not appear to be the case... the engines used on VFs appear to be designed to operate precisely as well in space as they do in atmosphere, barring concerns like reactant consumption rate. Thus far, I believe only one craft even tangentially connected to the subject matter (the Macross franchise's VF-22) has had a different set of capabilities listed for space operations as opposed to atmospheric flight. Of course, that's more of a limit imposed on atmospheric flight due to heat transfer issues than anything...

I don't see how the use of real world equations and values is disingenuous when bringing the RPG closer to reality, which is basically one of the reasons for this project.

It is when you announce that you've used material from other sites, specifically for matters relating to thrust, and ignore one of the few examples of that information actually being properly available... turning your nose up at it when it's pointed out.

Where/how the RPG arrived at their mass figures and endurance times is irrelevant to this project, that is what THEY say they are for their version/universe.

It IS relevant, because you're making unsupportable assumptions about what their figures precisely represent. You made the assumption that the masses given were empty/dry weights, and that doesn't appear to actually be the case for most Macross Saga entries, which is particularly evident in the entries for the Armored and Super Packs.

Fraid not. They are subject to the same equations I used. Doesn't matter if the engine is Ion, Chemical, NTR, Fusion, VASMIR, turbine, etc they all are subject to the same equations.

Only if you go on the faulty assumption that there's only one propulsion system active there... as I've pointed out, there's more than just the fusion reaction providing thrust there, so using any of those as a metric for estimation is going to be a little off. Well, more than a little...

The caveat though is that that is in an atmosphere correct, not the vacuum of space (which is where I am looking at). You are also assuming the VF-1 is as fuel efficient about it as the NASA study.

Yes, but you'll note that the RPG makes pretty much zero consideration for space endurance... by design. The 48 hours worth of operating time listed is, like all the other performance data, for atmospheric service. It still demonstrates aptly enough that the RPG's numbers are, by in large, malarkey. Also, you're assuming I made that assumption. I actually did not... I went the other way, assuming the VF-1 is guzzling fuel at a rate NASA's study would've been horrified by. The numbers I arrived at otherwise were really quite damning for the Alpha.

[ShadowLogan]

Looking at the actual evidence, this does not appear to be the case...

That is using non-fiction sources for evidence, not some fiction source to provide evidence. And the OSM is by definition a fictional source.

It is when you announce that you've used material from other sites, specifically for matters relating to thrust, and ignore one of the few examples of that information actually being properly available... turning your nose up at it when it's pointed out.

A. The Thrust value is a special case. I'd rather be consistent with where the information comes from than going OSM here and here, but here I pulled it out of now where. The uRRG may or may not have done that, without footnotes one really can not tell, if you think the uRRG got something wrong take it up with them, not me. I'd be just as happy to work out my own thrust values when I get the time.
B. I did not try to hide the fact.
C. The reality based information is necessary, otherwise one would not see a reason to do this project in the first place.
D. My treatment of the OSM is nothing new, so should hardly be surprising. It'd be nice if the Infopedia was more complete in this matter, but it isn't. Consequently the use of OSM numbers not in a specific RT source are the same as fan-fiction as far as I'm concerned.

Only if you go on the faulty assumption that there's only one propulsion system active there... as I've pointed out, there's more than just the fusion reaction providing thrust there, so using any of those as a metric for estimation is going to be a little off. Well, more than a little...

It is not a faulty assumption. Those equations work the same way for any reaction based form of propulsion. It doesn't matter if you are RH throwing some debris he carried with him on a space walk, Opening an air tank (MMU, SAFER, etc), using the force from a chemical reaction to expel mater, or heating a fluid to expel, etc they all are subject to the same equations in this case.

Also the RPG makes no mention of a second type of propulsion system being involved in the main engines (I don't think even the Infopedia makes mention of that the last time I checked).

Yes, but you'll note that the RPG makes pretty much zero consideration for space endurance... by design.

Actually my thinking is to treat the RPG time as strictly the reactor's ability to create power not propulsion, with propulsion provided by a separate propellant load not listed in the RPG (in atmosphere it could use air, so have an unlimited supply). I don't intend the above to be a one-size fits all approach, GMs are free to ignore it in full or parts of it (this is advertised as a fan-fic revision after all).

I added the low thrust mode based on reactor waste mainly to get a more useful interchangeable SLMH fuel load stat for power generation (1HR supply on a VF-1 may/may not be the same as 1HR on a VF-8/VHT/VFH-10 after all). The propulsion aspect was included to give greater mobility if one wanted it.

[jaymz]

That may be but your own calculations do not take that into account either and use the basic formula of engine thrust divided by unit mass so I am not sure why you are even bringing up sea level versus various altitude level accelerations.

It is not possible to correct for it (AFAIK) based on the uRRG (or even the M3) listing (and I highly doubt the OSMs goes into that much detail somewhere to allow one to correct for it) is why. That explains the differences as far as I'm concerned, even without adjusting for it in the calculation that used Thrust directly.

So in other words you are using flawed data to get your thrust values the exact same way I used the accurate data (data you didn't even take into account as far as I can tell) to get thrust values, neither of which can account for atmosphere versus space differences.

I am still at a loss as to why you are even bringing up space versus atmosphere when your numbers for thrust were achieved using the exact same methods as mine yet yours used flawed data and min used the accurate data.

Are you saying the differences between your numbers and mine can be attributed to the differences between space and atmosphere? That seems an odd stance to take take since you never evne tried to use the numbers I used in the first place....

[jaymz]

Consequently the use of OSM numbers not in a specific RT source are the same as fan-fiction as far as I'm concerned.

Would that not make the uRRG information essentially fan-fiction then since A ) They are not official in any capacity and B ) much of their work is pulled from their asses and does not match OSM from the original shows in most respects?

[ShadowLogan]

Yes I do view the uRRG information as fan-fiction. In any case the uRRG was used, get over it. If you want me to recalculate with "corrected" from uRRG thrust values (in kN) fine, post the thrust value and the mecha in question.

I can also tell you that right now the only thing this set has in common with uRRG values comes from Thrust (and what ever else might be duplicated in the 2E RPG), anything else is coincidental (ex. Alpha and Beta do have similar propellant mass, but much larger Delta-V capacity than the uRRG gives them) as the rest of their material wasn't even considered or even looked at when doing this.

[jaymz]

I already have for the VF-1.

And no need to get hostile. Just making sure where you are coming from. If accuracy is your goal, uRRG is a pisspoor place to go for it. If not then knock yourself out, use whatever you wish. I use uRRG myself when, and only when, I cannot find information on a particular mecha or vehicle. I use them ahead of the RPGs as well.

In fact my order of importance and value in regards to Robotech are as follows:

Robotech.coms Infopedia (except for where Macross OSM contradicts the Infopedia then I sue that followed by the Infopedia)

uRRG

RPGs

Fan Material - in some cases I may use this in place of uRRG or the RPGs if it makes sense to do as some fan material is better vetted and researched than uRRG and RPGs are.

So now that we've established you are doing what you are doing an not necesairly what may be the most accurate, carry on. I look forward to seeing more of the non Macross stuff actually. Meaning non-VFs

[Seto Kaiba]

Looking at the actual evidence, this does not appear to be the case...

That is using non-fiction sources for evidence, not some fiction source to provide evidence. And the OSM is by definition a fictional source.

Let's take a moment and remind you that the technology in the show is not modern technology, but is in fact a product of advanced alien technology. Evidence internal to the material is just as viable, if not moreso, than assumptions based on a handful of theoretical technologies. You've misapplied real-world information here several times, as we've already pointed out... basing your assumptions on the engines being something other than what they actually are, for starters.

Your numbers are off and your argument flawed because your methodology is wrong.

A. The Thrust value is a special case. I'd rather be consistent with where the information comes from than going OSM here and here, but here I pulled it out of now where.

2E's information principally comes from the OSM. So if you wanted to be consistent with where the information is coming from, consult the OSM. This ought to be common sense.

C. The reality based information is necessary, otherwise one would not see a reason to do this project in the first place.

This's been said in a few threads lately, but very few people see any reason to do something like this because neither Robotech nor the originals depict realistic space flight. Your "reality-based" information looks superficially nice, but essentially has no value and no basis in the series because your computations are based on a variety of false assumptions that don't match the actual content of the material you're claiming to have based it on.

D. My treatment of the OSM is nothing new, so should hardly be surprising. It'd be nice if the Infopedia was more complete in this matter, but it isn't. Consequently the use of OSM numbers not in a specific RT source are the same as fan-fiction as far as I'm concerned.

You do realize that, by that logic, the RPG is fan-fiction, right? It's almost exclusively OSM numbers.

Also the RPG makes no mention of a second type of propulsion system being involved in the main engines (I don't think even the Infopedia makes mention of that the last time I checked).

Neither of them offer ANY details regarding propulsion other than effective speed, which means your claims to have based this on the RPG are... well... failing the BS sniff test in quite a spectacular way.

Actually my thinking is to treat the RPG time as strictly the reactor's ability to create power not propulsion, with propulsion provided by a separate propellant load not listed in the RPG (in atmosphere it could use air, so have an unlimited supply).

While this works for the Alpha and Beta, all available evidence suggests that this approach does not work for the majority of Robotech's mecha. Flawed methodology equals flawed results.

[ShadowLogan]

@jaymz
Wasn't getting hostile. More frustrated.

I already showed that the G force, does work with the numbers assumed (I might be wrong about the thrust in overboost, I did not pull the numbers fresh from the uRRG but from a previous project involving them and over/max-boost isn't noted there since yesterday I pulled it up to compare stats).

For myself if working in a specific RT universe/version it has priority over others (and unlike HG, I DO consider RT to be a multi-verse rather than try to cram everything into a single mess). Fan-fiction level sources are just that fan-fiction sources, different fans might rate them differently, but they are still fan-fiction sources.

et's take a moment and remind you that the technology in the show is not modern technology, but is in fact a product of advanced alien technology.

Modern or Futuristic, it would still happen (it's in the math). While you could make an engine (even today) to compensate to give static thrust at sea level and vacuum by controlling variables, the question is why would you when higher thrust is regarded as better (and in this case the Vac thrust is more efficient than at SL for the same engine)?

2E's information principally comes from the OSM. So if you wanted to be consistent with where the information is coming from, consult the OSM. This ought to be common sense.

And the uRRG also used the OSM for their information, why sift through various sites looking for a single stat that is easily found at the uRRG that in all likely hood is OSM (the majority of the time)? In either case I'm currently working to get rid of the uRRG thrust values from being involved.

You do realize that, by that logic, the RPG is fan-fiction, right? It's almost exclusively OSM numbers

Not really. The RPG is an authorized/sanctioned take, which doesn't make it fan-fiction by definition. HG gets to deceide what is authorized, just because they practice cribbing notes from the OSM, doesn't mean everything should be considered cribbed (and we know that is the case given changes we can point to between the various stories).

While this works for the Alpha and Beta, all available evidence suggests that this approach does not work for the majority of Robotech's mecha. Flawed methodology equals flawed results.

Actually it also holds up for the SLMH vehicles to.

Incidentally if one wants max thrust (uRRG/OSM) for the 2E RPG duration take the Low Thrust Fuel Supply and increase it by a factor of x1,000 (actually a bit more, but close enough) for SLMH vehicles, PC mecha need additional material comparable to the VF-1. This is in fact why I felt it necessary for the low/high thrust mode combo (Low Thrust is 0.09% of the uRRG max thrust, no over-boost)

That works out to ~15-20 metric tons in many cases for full thrust for 2E RPG durations at the specified efficiency. For comparison modern USAF fighters (F-15/16/22 & A-10) don't carry this much internally going off their Fact Sheets (@ af.mil, USN site doesn't list capacity).

[Seto Kaiba]

I already showed that the G force, does work with the numbers assumed [...]

Aye, which is the reason your numbers don't work... the numbers assumed are off by a considerable margin.

You do remember that old adage about what happens when you assume, right?

While you could make an engine (even today) to compensate to give static thrust at sea level and vacuum by controlling variables, the question is why would you when higher thrust is regarded as better (and in this case the Vac thrust is more efficient than at SL for the same engine)?

At the risk of giving the simple, obvious answer... "to provide consistent handling of the craft across all regimes, therefore enabling the pilot to perform almost exactly as well in space as he does in atmosphere with minimal adjustment". It hardly matters why, though. The facts are what they are.

And the uRRG also used the OSM for their information, why sift through various sites looking for a single stat that is easily found at the uRRG that in all likely hood is OSM (the majority of the time)?

I really, truly hope that question was rhetorical... or sarcastic... or anything other than serious, really.

Just in case it wasn't, let me lay it out nice and explicit-like.

As everyone, their dog, and their dog's cousin should already know by this point, the uRRG is not a reputable source or in any way reliable. Its information was never intended to be a reference guide for Robotech in general, only for a fan fiction series penned by its authors. Though the authors list a double handful of OSM sources as having been referenced when writing the articles, very little was actually used, and a fair percentage of that wasn't copied correctly or contains errors or fallacious assumptions introduced by the uRRG's authors. (For an example, see the previous post on the uRRG's coverage of the VF-1.) Most of the time, they don't identify what material came from where, or how much was cited for their articles. Because of this, Robotech fans tend to unknowingly assume that their information came from an OSM source when, most of the time, it does not.

So, to answer your question directly... the reason you'd do better to check other, reputable sites like the Macross Mecha Manual, Macross Compendium, or GearsOnline, you're practically guaranteed to get accurate data. When you consult an unreliable, mostly-BS mess like the uRRG, it's substantially more likely that you're going to come away with information of the wildly-inaccurate type the way you did.

You do realize that, by that logic, the RPG is fan-fiction, right? It's almost exclusively OSM numbers

Not really. The RPG is an authorized/sanctioned take, which doesn't make it fan-fiction by definition.

You asserted that use of the OSM numbers not from a specific RT source was the same as fan-fiction. The RPG cited its numbers directly from the OSM, not from any Robotech source. Therefore, by your definition, the RPG is fan-fiction. The information in the RPG was principally copied from the OSM directly, with a few minor errors introduced along the way. In the case of the Macross Saga sourcebook, it's less a Robotech book than it is a Macross book with a tissue paper thin veneer of Robotech-ness.

(Which is fine, because that's basically Harmony Gold's stance on it too...)

That works out to ~15-20 metric tons in many cases for full thrust for 2E RPG durations at the specified efficiency. For comparison modern USAF fighters (F-15/16/22 & A-10) don't carry this much internally going off their Fact Sheets (@ af.mil, USN site doesn't list capacity).

That's considerably more fuel than any of them actually carries... just another example of how off your assumptions are.

Using the VF-1 as an example, as it has far and away the most capacious fuel tanks of the lot based on official (reliable) materials, you're off by a factor of about 12.5x-16.7x. Working out the VF-1's fully loaded fuel capacity is a snap, since we're well aware of the projected mass per cubic centimeter of liquid metallic hydrogen and the capacity of the internal tanks on the VF-1. It's 1,201.15kg, or 1.2 metric tons. Even attaching the conformal tanks from the Super Pack would barely get the fuel load over 5.4 metric tons. One would generally take it as a bad sign when your estimate is off by an order of magnitude or more...

(It's 5,477.6kg with the load in the conformal tanks, if you care.)

EDIT: Very slight math error, accidentally had a 9 instead of an 8 in the hundred-thousandths place, resulting in a .16 gram error.

[ShadowLogan]

I really, truly hope that question was rhetorical... or sarcastic... or anything other than serious, really.

All of the above.

I don't treat the uRRG as a reliable source, I treat them as convenient. Neither of the sites you listed cover SDC:SC mecha leaving a glaring hole in coverage (2/5ths of the basic VFs in the RPG books).

You asserted that use of the OSM numbers not from a specific RT source was the same as fan-fiction.

And the RPG is a specific RT source (RPG books used here do appear in the Infopedia Bibliography, no OSM books appear there).

That's considerably more fuel than any of them actually carries...

It is possible to lower the value, but the part you missed is when i said at the specified efficiency. If you assume the engines are more efficient, you can lower the value obviously. Nothing in the sources I USED indicates an actual useful measure of capacity (kg or liters) so it's only more fuel if you compare your fan-fiction version of the RT fighter in question to this fan-fiction version.

[Seto Kaiba]

I don't treat the uRRG as a reliable source, I treat them as convenient.

But you pay a price for that convenience... it's the almost-total lack of anything resembling accuracy that fatally undermined your math there.

Neither of the sites you listed cover SDC:SC mecha leaving a glaring hole in coverage (2/5ths of the basic VFs in the RPG books).

Well, yeah... because the creators of Southern Cross dropped the ball HARD, and came up with practically nothing in the way of information. The uRRG's information is, if anything, worse than no information at all on that front, due to their terrible standards for accuracy and basic math.

And the RPG is a specific RT source (RPG books used here do appear in the Infopedia Bibliography, no OSM books appear there).

True, but how much of what's in the Infopedia's Bibliography is actually part of Robotech these days? Almost none of it...

The OSM books may not be listed in the Infopedia's bibliography, but they're the ones that have had the most influence on the actual substance of the RPG and Robotech itself, far more than anything else.

It is possible to lower the value, but the part you missed is when i said at the specified efficiency. If you assume the engines are more efficient, you can lower the value obviously. Nothing in the sources I USED indicates an actual useful measure of capacity (kg or liters) so it's only more fuel if you compare your fan-fiction version of the RT fighter in question to this fan-fiction version.

We don't need to ASSUME anything, we KNOW the engines are more efficient because your math is so wildly off.

Perhaps you might want to consult more reliable sources next time... that way you'd have such useful things as the fuel mass (in kg), fuel volume (in liters), and other useful data. This stuff ain't hard to find.

[ShadowLogan]

We don't need to ASSUME anything, we KNOW the engines are more efficient because your math is so wildly off

No we don't actually KNOW how efficient the RT engines (at least for the RPG) are compared to the OSM versions.

If we did SLMH/PC vehicles would have endurance figures equal to OSM values in the 2E RPG, but as you've pointed out they don't. That means either the units don't carry the same amount of fuel OR the actual fuel efficiency is different OR some combination of the two compared to the OSM.

True, but how much of what's in the Infopedia's Bibliography is actually part of Robotech these days? Almost none of it...

The OSM books may not be listed in the Infopedia's bibliography, but they're the ones that have had the most influence on the actual substance of the RPG and Robotech itself, far more than anything else.

While I am willing to admit they have OSM influences, we can not say to what extent those influences extend beyond what is actually listed/used.

As far as the bibliography is concerned, need I remind you about the mess that goes into making continuity in RT.

it's the almost-total lack of anything resembling accuracy that fatally undermined your math there

From a RT accuracy standpoint I view the OSM to be as accurate as the uRRG in the matter. Any information used from them is fan-fiction until it appears in an actual RT-source.

[Seto Kaiba]

No we don't actually KNOW how efficient the RT engines (at least for the RPG) are compared to the OSM versions.

To be precise, we don't know ANYTHING about the engines in the RPG except their alleged endurance with a full fuel tank... not thrust, nor any other factor, which makes this whole exercise of yours rather a massive waste of time, doesn't it? The entirety of what you have there is based on sources outside the RPG and, truth be told, outside Robotech.

If we did SLMH/PC vehicles would have endurance figures equal to OSM values in the 2E RPG, but as you've pointed out they don't.

True, but as Harmony Gold's policy has always been the very sensible "when in doubt, consult the OSM", one could manage a decent guess if they did their research properly. The only thing that changed was the type of fuel being used, and what precise process is being used to fuse it. The OSM furnishes us with the thrust, fuel tank capacity, and almost all the other necessary details, and the RPG tells us what fuel is being used and the runtime, from which we can calculate the fuel mass and approximate the efficiency. All the information is there, you just didn't use it.

(Indeed, the best explanation I can think of for the VF-1's mass being given incorrectly was an attempt to estimate what the extra mass of the heavier SLMH fuel would be, and add it to the Valkyrie's base weight. It gets closer than any other estimate.)

While I am willing to admit they have OSM influences, we can not say to what extent those influences extend beyond what is actually listed/used.

Sorry... but no.

Truth be told, it's not actually all that difficult to tell what books were used and what parts of what article were drawn from where if you're halfway familiar with the material. The influence of the OSM stands out as readily as basketball player in the Lollipop Guild.

From a RT accuracy standpoint I view the OSM to be as accurate as the uRRG in the matter.

Which is an odd view to take, since the actual, official Robotech "accuracy" standpoint is that the OSM is just about the most reliable source you can lay hands on for Robotech. The OSM is fundamentally the basis for the content of the 2nd Edition RPG (they use it substantially more heavily than the RT series itself), and the official Robotech stats too. In this instance (and most others) it's the single most reliable and complete source of information available.

[ShadowLogan]

I wouldn't call that policy sensible, I'd call it lazy resulting in a mess (which may be what HG is shooting for). And my view may be odd to take, but it is what it is (I'd rather RT define itself on its own instead of borrowing unnecessarily from the OSM to define itself).

We do know that some figures don't match regarding the engines (endurance), which casts serious doubt about the other values associated with the engines being reliable from the OSM given how the math can workout (at least as it applies to the RPG-verse).

Nor would I call this project a massive waste of time on several fronts:
-estimate of the PC cell mass is in the numbers (useful to know for pulling off heists)
-can easily convert the SLMH mecha in question to PC cells at 1:1 mass contribution level if one does not want to use SLMH as reactor fuel (or traded in for IMU builds) and limiting its role to reaction mass (hydrogen is still the best substance for this).
-can easily share supplies of fuel and reaction mass between different mecha types that utilize the same material (can't do that with the written RPG material beyond PC Cell count), at least in so far as has been covered
-it shows the OSM numbers can be made to have a minimal influence w/RT
-more realistic space flight speeds are used (trip times would be more reasonable) in setting performance
-shows that trans-atmospheric capacity is not all that hard to give to all the VFs given their technology base

[Seto Kaiba]

I wouldn't call that policy sensible, I'd call it lazy resulting in a mess (which may be what HG is shooting for).

Nah, they're shooting for something consistent with the animation itself... for which using the OSM makes perfect sense. I don't think you can get more consistent than using the material created by the people who actually created the story and characters and mechanical designs and all.

And my view may be odd to take, but it is what it is (I'd rather RT define itself on its own instead of borrowing unnecessarily from the OSM to define itself).

Yes, it is what it is... and what it is is entirely inconsistent with what you professed to be doing here. Namely, coming up with a viable representation of space performance based on the RPG, which uses the OSM almost to the exclusion of RT's animated material.

We do know that some figures don't match regarding the engines (endurance), which casts serious doubt about the other values associated with the engines being reliable from the OSM given how the math can workout (at least as it applies to the RPG-verse).

Or, the obvious explanation would be that, since the standard approach is to treat the OSM as one of the most reliable and authoritative sources for RT, that the difference is simply in the Robotech version's substantially less advanced fusion reactors are consuming that same volume of fuel at a greater rate. After all, the VF-1's mass changed only a little, which could be down to the increased mass of the different fuel used (the numbers are very close, and the Macross Saga book's mass representation is not consistently empty/dry mass), and its dimensions didn't change, so the internal volume remains the same.

Heck, one would expect that it would consume fuel at a greater rate since the RPG asserts that it somehow sprouted a third powerplant in the upper torso.

Nor would I call this project a massive waste of time on several fronts:
-estimate of the PC cell mass is in the numbers (useful to know for pulling off heists)

Um... isn't their exact mass in kilograms written right on the line art? That would kind of make estimation unnecessary, and thus a waste of time.

-can easily convert the SLMH mecha in question to PC cells at 1:1 mass contribution level if one does not want to use SLMH as reactor fuel (or traded in for IMU builds) and limiting its role to reaction mass (hydrogen is still the best substance for this).

There are already rules for IMUs, so this seems kind of superfluous... and considering all the drawbacks involved, I'd expect more folks to want to go the other way. All that's needed for that is a rough estimation of the internal volume that can be devoted to fuel, and the mass per cubic centimeter of SLMH (which is easy to get).

-can easily share supplies of fuel and reaction mass between different mecha types that utilize the same material (can't do that with the written RPG material beyond PC Cell count), at least in so far as has been covered

But, since every generation's mecha use different types of fuel (IIRC, the Macross Saga's use SLMH, the Masters Saga's use "SLMH-V", and the New Generation's use protoculture cells), isn't this kind of a boondoggle anyway?

-it shows the OSM numbers can be made to have a minimal influence w/RT

By pulling numbers out of one's arse to the point where the result bears no resemblence to anything Robotech? I think you may want to re-examine your approach. If anything, this is just an admission that your work was done incorrectly due to a desire to ignore the existing, OSM-based information in the RPG and elsewhere.

-more realistic space flight speeds are used (trip times would be more reasonable) in setting performance

For a game that doesn't include rules for realistic spaceflight... based on a show that doesn't depict realistic space flight. I fear you may have missed several important points along the way.

-shows that trans-atmospheric capacity is not all that hard to give to all the VFs given their technology base

Which runs counter to the actual content of Robotech... and raises questions about why every VF except the VF-1 and Beta was built to sub-par specifications. *slow, sarcastic applause*

[ShadowLogan]

Nah, they're shooting for something consistent with the animation itself...

Which they can pull off without resorting to the OSM material. Yes it would involve them doing some work (which we know HG really isn't keen on doing hence we can call it lazy).

Or, the obvious explanation would be that, since the standard approach is to treat the OSM as one of the most reliable and authoritative sources for RT, that the difference is simply in the Robotech version's substantially less advanced fusion reactors are consuming that same volume of fuel at a greater rate

Doesn't work like that. You can't simply alter one number in the OSM stats like this without additional repercussions.

According to mahq.net (don't really care if it is accurate for the OSM, just go with it), the OSM version of the Alpha has a 10day fuel capacity and 1.8kps Delta V. The RPG lists an endurance of ~1/2 month of constant operation (for simplicity lets call it 14days). That will result in a 40% increase in fuel efficiency AND Delta-V assuming mass figures remain constant between the two versions, the mass flow rate for the fuel then changes to keep the thrust constant. The higher fuel efficiency will also have other repercussions (internal engine pressure, temp. of material involved), to the point that the only thing the two engines would have in common is their thrust value.

There are already rules for IMUs, so this seems kind of superfluous...

Unless the Genisis Pit book added to the IMU construction rules, in this case there aren't clear rules since they don't define the effects of the conversion (ie how many PC cells for how many SLMH hrs results in how much PC cell hrs of use), merely that it can be done. Examples in the book aren't consistent either.

But, since every generation's mecha use different types of fuel (IIRC, the Macross Saga's use SLMH, the Masters Saga's use "SLMH-V", and the New Generation's use protoculture cells), isn't this kind of a boondoggle anyway?

For PC itself it isn't necessary or considered here since the mecha that use cells are easily convertible (ie 1cell in type A is equal to 1cell in type B). Though if I ever get around to the other mecha it might be helpful (Zent/Masters mecha PC supply for example).

With SLMH and reaction mass (if using it) supplies for the mecha it is not quite as clear cut how much transferring quantity X endurance from type A to type B translates to with endurance for the receiving mecha. 1hr on the VF-1 supply might be equal to 3.5hrs on the Logan/Agac, then again the VF-1 might simply have smaller tanks than those mecha (or some combination).

Macross VF-1 does use SLMH-V (pg67 TMS SB). Some of the fusion platforms might not mention the fuel type though. There are 3 different grades of SLMH mentioned in Masters SB (SLMH, SLMH-V, SLMH/B) depending on where one looks. I'm not looking to trade different grades of the stuff, I'm looking at trading the same grade between fuel compatible platforms (all VFs that use SLMH use the SLMH-V variety).

For a game that doesn't include rules for realistic spaceflight...

Agree it doesn't include a realistic spaceflight model, but the only thing this addresses is the speeds involved at minimum, other factors can also play plot points. At the listed speeds in the books, trip times in space become long (though if you add in minimum orbital velocity, trips times become far more reasonable).

Which runs counter to the actual content of Robotech...

Actually it doesn't. We see boosters (and carriers) used for high latitude launch locations. That would be consistent with giving VF-1/6/8/10 minimal trans-atmospheric capacity since they could not launch from any latitudes w/the capacity they have. That means it does not run counter to RT's animation (the end all be all decider).

[jaymz]

Sidenote - I THINK Genesis Pits did have rules for converting from PC to SLMH. I haven't gotten the book yet just trying to remember what was said about it after it came out.

[glitterboy2098]

Sidenote - I THINK Genesis Pits did have rules for converting from PC to SLMH. I haven't gotten the book yet just trying to remember what was said about it after it came out.

no it doesn't.

it has mention that resistance groups usually refit their SLMH mecha to use protoculture, but provides no information on how that is done, whether the change frees up any space, alters performance, or any other information.

and it doesn't mention PC to SLMH at all. given that the post-reflex point UEEF would certainly try switching back to SLMH if it was as simple as an engine swapout, i don't think it is feasible to convert PC using units to SLMH fusion at all.

[jaymz]

Sidenote - I THINK Genesis Pits did have rules for converting from PC to SLMH. I haven't gotten the book yet just trying to remember what was said about it after it came out.

no it doesn't.

it has mention that resistance groups usually refit their SLMH mecha to use protoculture, but provides no information on how that is done, whether the change frees up any space, alters performance, or any other information.

and it doesn't mention PC to SLMH at all. given that the post-reflex point UEEF would certainly try switching back to SLMH if it was as simple as an engine swapout, i don't think it is feasible to convert PC using units to SLMH fusion at all.

Thanks for the correction, as I said I haven't gotten the book yet and was going of memory of conversations had about it.

[Seto Kaiba]

Nah, they're shooting for something consistent with the animation itself...

Which they can pull off without resorting to the OSM material. Yes it would involve them doing some work (which we know HG really isn't keen on doing hence we can call it lazy).

Considering Harmony Gold's absolutely spectacular track record with doing anything even vaguely original, I honestly doubt it.

It's only sensible for them to use the OSM, since the Robotech series is nothing more than a shallow derivative of the original three stories. Harmony Gold does a lot of lazy things... the Shadow Chronicles, for instance... but their using the OSM as the basis for their official stats isn't the result of laziness, it's common freaking sense. You just don't like that doing so draws a line under how under-capable the VF-1's alleged successors are.

Doesn't work like that. You can't simply alter one number in the OSM stats like this without additional repercussions.

Simply denying it won't make it untrue, ShadowLogan. Harmony Gold does it all the freaking time, they take an OSM detail, slap a superficial change onto it (usually one of terminology), and pass it off as otherwise identical. In this case, as the change in question is one from a superior-to-fusion power source to conventional nuclear fusion, the implications ought to be fairly obvious. Either the VF-1 is generating less power but consuming its fuel at the same rate, or, as the RPG's own numbers point to, the VF-1 is simply consuming its fuel faster.

According to mahq.net (don't really care if it is accurate for the OSM, just go with it), [...]

Sorry, but no... if I call you out on pulling numbers out of your own arse, I'm obliged to also object to you pulling numbers from someone else's arse too. MAHQ doesn't even have a MOSPEADA section, come to that. The difference in what your completely made-up BS numbers for the Alpha say and what some other random guy's completely made-up BS values say is immaterial, because both sets of information have no basis whatsoever in the material you're trying to relate it to...

Unless the Genisis Pit book added to the IMU construction rules, in this case there aren't clear rules since they don't define the effects of the conversion (ie how many PC cells for how many SLMH hrs results in how much PC cell hrs of use), merely that it can be done. Examples in the book aren't consistent either.

The Genesis Pits book talks about them going from SLMH to protoculture, and the cell lifespan of protoculture is, at least within the RPG, a known value. There is no need for propellant-related concerns because what they're converting are a heap of older, non-orbit-capable designs.

Agree it doesn't include a realistic spaceflight model, but the only thing this addresses is the speeds involved at minimum, other factors can also play plot points. At the listed speeds in the books, trip times in space become long (though if you add in minimum orbital velocity, trips times become far more reasonable).

*sigh* Not that I haven't pointed this out before too, but that hardly matters when the movie the core book was based upon takes almost obscene amounts of artistic license with the distance between Earth and its moon.

Nothing about space travel there is being taken realistically, so none of that matters a damn.

Actually it doesn't. We see boosters (and carriers) used for high latitude launch locations. That would be consistent with giving VF-1/6/8/10 minimal trans-atmospheric capacity since they could not launch from any latitudes w/the capacity they have. That means it does not run counter to RT's animation (the end all be all decider).

Yet we clearly see that the VF-1 is orbit-capable on its own, with no reference made to where (the location of Macross island isn't even given). Nowhere is it qualified that the VF-1 needs aid to reach orbital altitudes on its own, merely that the booster is there to do so swiftly and without burning the VF-1's own fuel reserves. None of the other fighters demonstrate any kind of orbital or near-orbital capability, and require other, orbit-capable craft to ferry them into orbit or beyond in the series, never mind the official materials coming right out and saying as much.

[jaymz]

actually Seto mahq.net does have a Mospeada mecha section....

[Seto Kaiba]

actually Seto mahq.net does have a Mospeada mecha section....

Calling that a MOSPEADA section would be doing it a kindness... almost none of what's there actually comes from anything resembling the MOSPEADA OSM. It's mostly stuff copied from Robotech fan sites like the aforementioned and terminally irresponsible uRRG.

[jaymz]

actually Seto mahq.net does have a Mospeada mecha section....

Calling that a MOSPEADA section would be doing it a kindness... almost none of what's there actually comes from anything resembling the MOSPEADA OSM. It's mostly stuff copied from Robotech fan sites like the aforementioned and terminally irresponsible uRRG.

Now now I never said it was ACCURATE just that they do in fact have a section....

[Seto Kaiba]

Now now I never said it was ACCURATE just that they do in fact have a section....

Touche, sir.

Still, if even MAHQ can't get its facts straight and separate the Robotech fan-made information from the real deal, that'd at least explain how ShadowLogan missed the mark so completely.

[ShadowLogan]

Considering Harmony Gold's absolutely spectacular track record with doing anything even vaguely original, I honestly doubt it.

I know. HG has a minimal effort standard for doing things it seems. Still it is something that they could pull off, they just don't want to put the time and effort in.

In any case this is advertised as a FAN-FIC revision of the Space Speeds and Fuel mass in the title (has been from day-1). I am not saying these are canon, or trying to pass it off as such. Your objections seem to center on the lack of using the OSM for additional data, even though you know I seek to minimize (preferably ignore) use of OSM information.

MAHQ doesn't even have a MOSPEADA section, come to that. The difference in what your completely made-up BS numbers for the Alpha say and what some other random guy's completely made-up BS values say is immaterial, because both sets of information have no basis whatsoever in the material you're trying to relate it to...

I do not care if the site was accurate, its numbers where used to illustrate the consequences that would result from changing one seemingly simple figure (endurance in this case) to match the 2E RPG's value for said figure. If the RPG has changed any values from the OSM, they have a far greater reach than it might appear. The values are very interconnected, which is apparent when one is familiar with even some of the math involved. You can't simply alter the one value, without effecting others. And at this point, if one is altering the OSM numbers they might as well do all new numbers because that is what you will end up with a new data set that has (potentially) some coincidental overlap.

To use the VF-1, if 16days of operation is possible in space per the OSM as you assert vs the 2days for the 2E RPG. You would need to carry ~8x the mass in fuel (figure is eyeballing it) due to the loss in efficiency to retain a similar the Delta-V capacity (which is a factor in determining if a vehicle can enter orbit). It also effects other engine data (pressure and temps. involved) that is related to that one value. The craft is now heavier, so won't have the same acceleration profile resulting in more alterations (it wouldn't be as agile for ex.).

The Genesis Pits book talks about them going from SLMH to protoculture, and the cell lifespan of protoculture is, at least within the RPG, a known value. There is no need for propellant-related concerns because what they're converting are a heap of older, non-orbit-capable designs.

I think you misunderstand what I am getting at and the full scope of how those numbers can be used in a campaign.

Yet we clearly see that the VF-1 is orbit-capable on its own, with no reference made to where (the location of Macross island isn't even given).

We also can clearly see that the VF-1 does need assistance for some surface-to-orbit mission profiles (in other words limits are placed on the capacity). The alternative is that the craft did not achieve orbital velocity in Ep2/3 (meaning they still need the boosters in RT).

While this project does give all the VFs trans-atmospheric capacity, it also put limitations on that capacity. The show itself does not conflict with this model, only the malleable written background take. At no time does anyone state any limitations on a given craft that would require a booster or carrier to enter orbit in the show (all 85episodes, not even TSC or Sent OVAs if you want to include them). What the show suggests is that IF the craft do have the capacity, they can not use it from any location on Earth to get into any orbital profile around the Earth.

[Seto Kaiba]

Still it is something that they could pull off, they just don't want to put the time and effort in.

Even if Harmony Gold didn't (justifiably) see fixing what isn't broken as a horrible idea, it's extremely doubtful that they'd be able to come up with anything that fits even remotely as well as what the people who actually created the content of the series itself came up with. Just look at Shadow Chronicles. Their attention to detail is so poor they forgot the Alpha fighter needed the Beta to make a trip to or from the moon in the series, and animated the Shadow fighters with an engine they don't actually have according to their own official coverage of the design.

In any case this is advertised as a FAN-FIC revision of the Space Speeds and Fuel mass in the title (has been from day-1). I am not saying these are canon, or trying to pass it off as such.

No, what you ARE trying to pass it off as (from the very first post) is something fundamentally based on the RPG and some related material that you thought was from the OSM. The truth of the matter is that it has no basis in anything, not even the RPG, and is more wishful thinking than an effort to actually reflect the performance of any fighter in any version of the Robotech material.

Your objections seem to center on the lack of using the OSM for additional data, even though you know I seek to minimize (preferably ignore) use of OSM information.

No, my objections are based on the issues outlined in the previous paragraph.

[ShadowLogan]

@Seto
It is in the title of this thread that it is a fan-fic, and the second paragraph. I don't see the need to constantly remind people about it in the body of the text, when it's in the thread title (visible in the "Post Subject" field, and the window's Title Bar). As a Fan-Fic it can take liberties with the material chosen, and have said what those liberties are, and what it is based on. That I have chosen to frame it within the context of the RPG doesn't make it canon, it is still a fan-fic and presented as such.

I'm also in the middle of revising it to remove the uRRG influence (ie the thrust values by assigning my own) leaving the RPG as the sole source for RT based numbers (the rest come from real equations and reality based requirements/precedence).

Near as I can determine No one is forcing anyone to use these results in any particular manner (certainly not myself), so I don't see where you are getting that from. It should go without saying that one does not have to use them, but there are a variety of ways one can use them should they decide to in their games.

[Seto Kaiba]

Go back and read the second paragraph of the first post again chief. The one opening up with the words fanfic and all.

Ah, thanks for poking your oar in without bothering to... y'know... actually read anything.

Next, recognize that he isn't trying to say the OSM isn't the OSM, that it isn't correct, or even that it shouldn't apply, merely that for his purposes, it does not apply. His...purposes...pretty blantant his intent here.

Before you start attempting to lecture anybody, you should first make sure you understand what you're objecting to. You missed the point with depressing thoroughness, my friend.

What I am objecting to is not that he didn't use the OSM, though that borders on nonsensical when the RPG he claims to have based this material on is substantially less Robotech than it is OSM. It's that he's presenting his numbers, and claiming they're based on content from the RPG, the series, and (sarcastic fingerquotes) "OSM-related" sources, when, in truth, those numbers are a blatant arse-pull with no relation whatsoever to the sources they were allegedly based on.

[jaymz]

@Gryphon - I think the point Seto is trying to make is that Shadow has said his sources are the OSM-related yet the numbers he has used do not corallate (SP ? ) at all with what the number actually are. It isn't a mater of interpretation when one says they are using OSM related numbers yet the some numbers in fact are not OSM at all. I do not mean the ASC numbers either. I know hey are none for that part of the series.

[jaymz]

No worries, just like to make sure everyone is on the same page

[jaymz]

@Shadowlogan - 2 questions so I can better understand how I could use this and they are sort of tied together.....

1 - Delta-V - Is this while keeping enough fuel to decelerate back to zero?

2 - Max Burn time - is this using ALL fuel on board or only half in order to allow for deceleration?


Edit - a 3rd question....

3 - did you come up with the efficiency at which the engines burn fuel at max thrust versus low thrust? It obvious by your numbers above that low thrust burns fuel more efficiently in order to get higher delta-v's (and in a few cases WAY higher Delta-v's) in all units except the VF-1's and the Alpha X/Beta combination.

Edit 2 - A 4th question...

4 - Is your max burn time at low thrust or max thrust?

Edit 3 - removed question 5 because the number i asked about is actually there I had just missed it.

[ShadowLogan]

And now I am in this argument, when all I want is to see where this was going.

That is a good question.

My plan was to start with the VFs and then expand it to other mecha/vehicles PCs might use in some way in space. I think that is still what I'm going to do. The second part is more difficult owing to the larger sampling pool (~45 configs vs ~17 configs in the 2nd post, granted some can be simplified down in both cases), and varying requirements. May or may not consider adding external fuel tanks (conformal or drop, haven't decided yet) and noting any secondary/RCS engines in a similar manner to the main engines.

[ShadowLogan]

@Jaymz
1. Delta-V budget in a realistic model would be the sum total of any change in velocity (speed) caused by the engines. If you increase your speed by X, you would subtract it from the Delta-V pool. If you then decrease by speed by Y, you would still subtract that amount from the Delta-V pool. Once the Delta-V pool is at Zero, the engines are unable to operate as they are out of fuel. The practical value will actually be between the listed loaded/empty config as the mecha gets lighter from expending ordnance.

If using a simplified atmospheric approach I would simply treat it as a revised top speed.

2. That is the total amount of time the engines can burn at maximum thrust for High Thrust Mode (increase and/or decreases together). Throttling down would allow longer burn times. At max thrust real fighters have endurance measured in minutes.

The Low Thrust mode burn time is based on the 2E RPG's stated operational time/range of the mecha.

3.

did you come up with the efficiency at which the engines burn fuel at max thrust versus low thrust?

All engine efficiency between low/high thrust modes is based on the Isp difference between a specific NASA concept that added an "afterburner" (their wording not mine) to a NERVA type NTR rocket engine for extra thrust (LANTR if anyone wants to look it up). It is treated as a fixed relationship value for this project, though in reality it wouldn't be given contributing factors involved (that I am not even going to consider at this time).

I established a relationship value derived from the stated operating endurance (adjusting for increase in speed by model that did not effect endurance) as Isp can factor in burn-time with some equations. The relationship value (ex 1.0, 0.7, etc) is then factored into a static Isp value of 1,300,000sec SLMH (x3 for PC based on the A/B's fusion generator's performance, not it's endurance, as it was more conservative given the lack of knowledge concerning how much energy is in PC compared to fusion). The 1,300,000 is derived from a NASA estimate of 130,000sec that was modified by a factor of 10x (necessary to keep PC cell mass close to "Curtain Call" at the listed low thrust percentage), which is possible if the NASA estimate is a near term estimate and not top of the line.

It obvious by your numbers above that low thrust burns fuel more efficiently in order to get higher delta-v's (and in a few cases WAY higher Delta-v's) in all units except the VF-1's and the Alpha X/Beta combination.

Yes low thrust is more efficient. It's really the only way to get hours of constant use out of the engines as the RPG asserts unless you want to give them huge fuel supplies and Delta-V budgets to match.

Keep in mind that those low thrust Delta-V values are built up over hours of use where the High Thrust Delta-V can be thought of in terms of a few minutes. Nor is that the same amount of time, the Alpha/Beta operate for ~1/2 month constantly (I treated 1/2month as 14days), the Logan/AGAC get 1week (7days), and the VF-1 gets 2days out of Low thrust.

[jaymz]

1- ok so what you are saying is IF I get my VF up to full loaded delta V then I have no way of decelerating?

2 - Wouldn't throttling down use fuel as well since you have to expend thrust in teh opposite direction in order to decelerate?

3 - Is there a simple way of explaining this as in High thrust burns X amount of fuel per second of thrust and low thrust burns Y? Your entire explanation had me oging...why would i bother with this it's more work than I am willing to do. It would be 4 simple lines added to your above listings. High Thrust fuel burn rate loaded/empty and Low Thrust fuel burn rate loaded/empty. This would make it WAY easier for other people aside from you (since yo are the one calculating all of this) compare the fuel usage to aside from the different Delta V's. Especially in instances like a patrol scenario where you'd be using low thrust on patrol then move to high thrust during combat then back to low thrust. Also maybe add a "Cruise thrust" which would be somewhere between High and Low. I know it makes the stat block longer but more info like I have just suggested would make using the information a lot easier for those of us not knowing or wanting to know the formulas involved in all this.

4 - If you were to do a simple additions to the stats above then this question becomes un-needed as we'd know how quickly in burns fuel at high and low (and/or cruise) thrust rates.

[ShadowLogan]

1- ok so what you are saying is IF I get my VF up to full loaded delta V then I have no way of decelerating?

Correct. Financially Delta-V is analogous to a (insert period of time) Budget in this case.

2 - Wouldn't throttling down use fuel as well since you have to expend thrust in teh opposite direction in order to decelerate?

Yes throttling down would still use fuel, it would use less fuel for less thrust. Because it uses less fuel though, it lengths how long it can create thrust.

Basically look at the Thrust (force) generated in this manner instead of F=m*a:
Thrust = mass flow per second (how much being ejected) * exhaust velocity (how fast the ejected material is traveling per second)

If Thrust is lowered, that means either the mfps, ev, or both have to also lower for everything to balance.

3 - Is there a simple way of explaining this as in High thrust burns X amount of fuel per second of thrust and low thrust burns Y?

Fuel Consumed can be found by taking the Fuel Mass (given mode) / burn time (sec, total) to get fuel consumption at max rate.

Delta-V per second/unit of mass is not so straightforward because it will be constantly changing. As the mass goes down, they will get more speed out of a given unit of mass.

4 - If you were to do a simple additions to the stats above then this question becomes un-needed as we'd know how quickly in burns fuel at high and low (and/or cruise) thrust rates.

From a practical standpoint, a player and GM really only need to concern themselves with only a few stats presented directly (and maybe a few indirect that can be calculated). The rest is more for those who want to be overly precise about things. This is not created with a set way of using the stats since different player groups will have different ideas on what would be practical in actual practice.

Personally I would probably use the Delta-V for revised top speed in the Palladium approach to space movement (my main beef here with it is the speeds they use, not the basic approach itself). The fuel mass figures are still useful in some situations as they allow easy conversion of SLMH supplies between a mix group of mecha. I think a mass figure in this case is also useful in some situations so players have an easier idea of how much fuel they can transport. Etc.

[jaymz]

1 - ok that's what I thought

2 - maybe a reverse thrust value is needed then?

3 - I think you missed my point. Why not just add it to the stat block and save people from having to do the math themselves? Also, I understand the need for "realism" but really if you want to use it practically you need a touch of simplicity. Making it so you have to constantly re-calculate mass is something most people will want nothing to do with. Stick with a "loaded" and "empty" value and give people the numbers. Less work needed generally translates as more people willing to give it a shot.

4 - From a practical standpoint you want it so it is also simple to use, yes? having to calculate things like adjusted mass etc, in my opinion, adds a level of complexity that will serve only to slow game play down.

Unless I am missing the point, you are trying to set up something that people will actually want to use it right?

EDIT -

For example, Dream Pod Nine uses a thrust vector movement system in the Jovian Chronicles game. They simplified it so that instead of worrying about mass adjustment, you had thrust values that used burn points. Each unit had X number of burn points.

The units had a listing in G's that when multiplied by ten gave you your thrust points. It took some getting used to as vector movement can be confusing (especially using 3 vectors as found on a hex map) but once we got used to it, it ran pretty smoothly. What about trying to determine something like that, that could give you the realism you are looking for but simple enough anyone could look at it and say "I'll give that try"?

[jaymz]

Really, patrolling from the moon in an alpha (which is what we see in TSC) was a huge faux pas by HG and should never have been portrayed as such without a base ship of some kind (a Horizont even) to get them at least part way there.