From Atomic Rockets: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/fighter.php
-
Nobles of Null is a forum based roleplay site where sci-fi and magic collide. Here, Earth remains fractured and divided despite humanity reaching out to the stars. Worse still, the trans-human slaves of one major power have escaped, only to establish their own Empire, seething with resentment at abuses of the past. Even the discovery of aliens, though medieval in development, has failed to rally these squabbling children of Earth together with its far darker implications. Worse still, is the discovery of the impossible - magic. Practiced by the alien locals, nearly depleted and therefore rare, its reality warping abilities remains abstract and distant to the general populace. All the while, unseen in the darkness of space, forces from without threaten to press in. For those with eyes opened by insight, it is clear that an era is about to end, and that a new age will dawn.
On Space Fighters....
- Thread starter Uso
- Start date
Yes, going by hard science, space fighters are not in any way practical. However, we don't have to go by this, considering our main goal is to have fun. Eschewing space fighter craft is more or less depriving us of a type of roleplay, as well as the people that like it. This is why coming up with some sort of different technology and/or magic (even plural) that enables the same dynamic between naval carriers and aircraft is important. It's a staple of softer sci-fi now, and it's pretty enjoyable to RP our characters acting the maverick. Currently, the idea that the Daqin already have an early version of this technology set has been bounced around, and is something that the human nations can try to pursue, but it's definitely something that can be changed or altered depending on plot interest.
Ideally, we'd be in the age of the warship, and are just at the cusp of the carrier and its fighters, since it's a very exciting moment of change and transition.
Ideally, we'd be in the age of the warship, and are just at the cusp of the carrier and its fighters, since it's a very exciting moment of change and transition.
The problem with that comparison is that in space, there really is no fundamental difference between a fighter and a larger warship; they both operate in the same environment. One can do the tasks of the other, just with varying magnitudes of competence due to size differences.
The question is, what is the narrative importance of space fighters that we must include them? If it's just because of legacy, the shadow of Star Wars looming over us all, I would advise against considering space fighters. Just because it's traditional and that people are comfortable with it doesn't mean it's a good idea that should be perpetuated further.
So let's talk about Star Wars, since it's kinda of infamous for continuing this legacy of space fighters. Why was the idea so effective in those movies? I would say it narrows down the action down to individual acts of heroism. One person, or a small team of persons, are the deciding factors in the conflict. It's harder to create a story around a crew of an entire ship, dozens of people, while also giving them individualism. With fighters, a fighter is an extension of the pilot's personality, their own skill. This is also why mechs are so popular as well. In mech shows, the mech is the pilot's character, literally made larger than life.
In this case, we've identified the narrative benefits of space fighters. However, the scientific realities of space combat cannot be ignored. When it comes to small spacecraft combat, a drone fighter is always going to beat a fighter that also needs to implement biological support. In the setting, we already have one Dr. Knowledgebot, a fully sapient AI. What's stopping him from putting his brain in a small fighter and kicking ass against any Daqin fighter in one on one combat? No amount of biotech is going to allow the Daqin to overcome the mass advantage the drone fighter enjoys.
So instead of putting individuals in fighters, put them in larger ships where the mass difference is negligible. Not single person fighters, but single or double person corvettes or torpedo boats. A little bit of maneuverability is sacrificed in exchange for vastly expanded mission profiles. With these larger ships, it's completely feasible for a manned vessel to venture out into deep space, alone, and even have command over their small army of drones. They can field missiles, conduct point defense, and even support capital grade weaponry. This is essentially what the Huo Xuan Feng Class of the HFR does. It can be operable by just three people while operating a capital grade railgun.
The question is, what is the narrative importance of space fighters that we must include them? If it's just because of legacy, the shadow of Star Wars looming over us all, I would advise against considering space fighters. Just because it's traditional and that people are comfortable with it doesn't mean it's a good idea that should be perpetuated further.
So let's talk about Star Wars, since it's kinda of infamous for continuing this legacy of space fighters. Why was the idea so effective in those movies? I would say it narrows down the action down to individual acts of heroism. One person, or a small team of persons, are the deciding factors in the conflict. It's harder to create a story around a crew of an entire ship, dozens of people, while also giving them individualism. With fighters, a fighter is an extension of the pilot's personality, their own skill. This is also why mechs are so popular as well. In mech shows, the mech is the pilot's character, literally made larger than life.
In this case, we've identified the narrative benefits of space fighters. However, the scientific realities of space combat cannot be ignored. When it comes to small spacecraft combat, a drone fighter is always going to beat a fighter that also needs to implement biological support. In the setting, we already have one Dr. Knowledgebot, a fully sapient AI. What's stopping him from putting his brain in a small fighter and kicking ass against any Daqin fighter in one on one combat? No amount of biotech is going to allow the Daqin to overcome the mass advantage the drone fighter enjoys.
So instead of putting individuals in fighters, put them in larger ships where the mass difference is negligible. Not single person fighters, but single or double person corvettes or torpedo boats. A little bit of maneuverability is sacrificed in exchange for vastly expanded mission profiles. With these larger ships, it's completely feasible for a manned vessel to venture out into deep space, alone, and even have command over their small army of drones. They can field missiles, conduct point defense, and even support capital grade weaponry. This is essentially what the Huo Xuan Feng Class of the HFR does. It can be operable by just three people while operating a capital grade railgun.
I think this is going to become difficult without breaking the conversation down into individual capabilities. First lets talk about a Drone vs a Flesh and Blood (Or sentient robot) crew. In this case a drone will just be any small piece of hardware used to operate a thing. People could be humans or sentient robots... since a Sentient robot will require a decent enough amount of hardware to run on / support equipment / hardening / etc that they might as well be a human anyways.
Drones vs People (vs Daqin)
-------------------------------------------------------
The biggest Drawback of using drones is that they can only do what they are programmed to do. They have limited decision making capabilities. This isn't an issue of you're something like a missile where your mission is very pre-defined and there aren't a lot of nebulous questions to consider. Similarly you also need to be flying something relatively simple since complex or creative questions around self-repair are going to be hard for a drone to solve. If you have a more complex mission to undertake, such as customs enforcement where you'll need to talk to people, investigate their cargo, or possibly be hit with complex questions you're going to want people. Of course you can use a hybrid model and have people operate drones remotely but that starts breaking down when light-speed lag is involved. Similarly if you need to repair and maintain equipment you're going to need someone there to do it in some capacity. You might be using a drone to change out engine parts in the reactor but if something complex comes up you're going to want a human there to troubleshoot.
The biggest upsides of drones are that they are lightweight, durable, and expendable. No one cares if a drone dies, you can always build more. Drones also are lightweight, in that the hardware to run a machine is going to be very small compared to all of the life support requirements, cabin space, food, etc, needed for a human (or even sentient AI). Hardware is also a lot easier to harden than the human body. Sure it is expensive to build a motherboard that can survive 9G, but it is a lot MORE expensive to subject humans to 9G of acceleration.
There are some side benefits that also don't REALLY apply here. Without all the different variables of being in an atmosphere, calculating ballistics trajectory is a lot easier. Drones would have perfect accuracy when shooting and humans would not... but humans wouldn't really be aiming guns on ships in the future anymore than they do today. They would pick out a target and the fire control system would handle the shooting. When it comes to mechanical tasks like that I don't think humans are really at any disadvantage there.
Drones
+ Can more easily handled high Gs long term
+ No one cares if they die
+ Far lighter-weight than having a crew
- Can only do what it already knows how to do
- Anything fun you want to do requires people
People
+ Can handle complex tasks that require creative thinking
+ Anything fun you want to do requires people
- Easily killed
- Can't handle High G
- Expensive
- Requires lots of heavy equipment to keep alive long term
Now lets consider the Daqin. They are somewhere between Drones and People. They can handle complex tasks that require creative thinking, but they don't have the same requirements for keeping them alive in space. Instead of needing all sorts of equipment, they can put their body into stasis in some G-reducing breathable liquid and have their mind run the ship in VR. This is certainly heavy and expensive but not nearly as much as people. You don't need nearly as much life support, radiation protection, food, creature comforts, etc.
Daqin
+ Can handle complex tasks that require creative thinking
+ Anything fun you want to do requires people
+ lighter-weight than having a crew
+ Can handle High Gs long term
- Expensive
- Requires heavy equipment to keep them alive
While there are still drawbacks to using a Daqin on a spacecraft, there are far fewer drawbacks when compared to Humans. While I don't think you would put a Daqin on a missile, I do think you would see Daqin employing smaller craft than humans if for no reason other than the Daqin just need less space for their crew. Daqin will also be able to handle high Gs far better than Humans, so I would also expect Daqin ships to be faster than Human ships across the board as human ships are far more limited by G-forces. If you need a fighter (Or small attack ship) that can accelerate at high G for interception or avoiding attack then as a human you MUST use a drone just because you have no other choice. If you're building a fighter as a Daqin you don't have that limitation.
Small Ships vs Big Ships
-------------------------------------------------
There are a few things that dictate ship size, and in some situations 'fighter' sized craft just absolutely won't work.
Mission
What are you out there to do? For transporting large amounts of cargo you just can't use a fighter because you need to be able to move a large amount of heavy stuff, and even if your fighter has great power to weight you're still limited by your small engine. If you're attacking a starship, you're going to need weapons that can deal damage to it. I would think for classic space-opera style fleet battles out in deep space you are going to need large weapons. Your ship can only be as small as the equipment you need to carry so there is a lower limit to how small you can make things.
Square Cube Law
This cuts both ways. Internal Volume increases faster than surface area. This means for the same thickness of armor, your armor is going to weigh less as a % of your ship's total weight as you increase your ship's size. Similarly, there are some benefits for going bigger that scale the same way. It takes the same amount of space and weight to house a single human regardless of the size of the ship. That means all other things equal a larger ship is going to be weighed down less by its communications gear, control systems, etc, than a smaller ship.
Inertia
On the other end, you're going to need more structural support for a larger ship just to hold the engines in place. Fast maneuvering is going to require a very strong ship, and it is harder to maneuver fast without tearing yourself apart as you get bigger. Sure your straight line speed will probably be better than a fighter (especially long term), but you're going to have a hard time with precise movements.
Cost/Numbers
While you could build one large ship that is objectively better in every way than two smaller ships, that one ship can only be in one place at a time. It can only protect one location, or intercept one ship at a time.
----------------------
So when designing a ship you're going to have to think about all of the above. You're not going to get the same dynamic of fighters vs battleships simply because the battleships in this analogy would also be able to fly. Instead you'd be designing the smallest ship you can that will still carry everything you need to do your mission.
Drones vs People (vs Daqin)
-------------------------------------------------------
The biggest Drawback of using drones is that they can only do what they are programmed to do. They have limited decision making capabilities. This isn't an issue of you're something like a missile where your mission is very pre-defined and there aren't a lot of nebulous questions to consider. Similarly you also need to be flying something relatively simple since complex or creative questions around self-repair are going to be hard for a drone to solve. If you have a more complex mission to undertake, such as customs enforcement where you'll need to talk to people, investigate their cargo, or possibly be hit with complex questions you're going to want people. Of course you can use a hybrid model and have people operate drones remotely but that starts breaking down when light-speed lag is involved. Similarly if you need to repair and maintain equipment you're going to need someone there to do it in some capacity. You might be using a drone to change out engine parts in the reactor but if something complex comes up you're going to want a human there to troubleshoot.
The biggest upsides of drones are that they are lightweight, durable, and expendable. No one cares if a drone dies, you can always build more. Drones also are lightweight, in that the hardware to run a machine is going to be very small compared to all of the life support requirements, cabin space, food, etc, needed for a human (or even sentient AI). Hardware is also a lot easier to harden than the human body. Sure it is expensive to build a motherboard that can survive 9G, but it is a lot MORE expensive to subject humans to 9G of acceleration.
There are some side benefits that also don't REALLY apply here. Without all the different variables of being in an atmosphere, calculating ballistics trajectory is a lot easier. Drones would have perfect accuracy when shooting and humans would not... but humans wouldn't really be aiming guns on ships in the future anymore than they do today. They would pick out a target and the fire control system would handle the shooting. When it comes to mechanical tasks like that I don't think humans are really at any disadvantage there.
Drones
+ Can more easily handled high Gs long term
+ No one cares if they die
+ Far lighter-weight than having a crew
- Can only do what it already knows how to do
- Anything fun you want to do requires people
People
+ Can handle complex tasks that require creative thinking
+ Anything fun you want to do requires people
- Easily killed
- Can't handle High G
- Expensive
- Requires lots of heavy equipment to keep alive long term
Now lets consider the Daqin. They are somewhere between Drones and People. They can handle complex tasks that require creative thinking, but they don't have the same requirements for keeping them alive in space. Instead of needing all sorts of equipment, they can put their body into stasis in some G-reducing breathable liquid and have their mind run the ship in VR. This is certainly heavy and expensive but not nearly as much as people. You don't need nearly as much life support, radiation protection, food, creature comforts, etc.
Daqin
+ Can handle complex tasks that require creative thinking
+ Anything fun you want to do requires people
+ lighter-weight than having a crew
+ Can handle High Gs long term
- Expensive
- Requires heavy equipment to keep them alive
While there are still drawbacks to using a Daqin on a spacecraft, there are far fewer drawbacks when compared to Humans. While I don't think you would put a Daqin on a missile, I do think you would see Daqin employing smaller craft than humans if for no reason other than the Daqin just need less space for their crew. Daqin will also be able to handle high Gs far better than Humans, so I would also expect Daqin ships to be faster than Human ships across the board as human ships are far more limited by G-forces. If you need a fighter (Or small attack ship) that can accelerate at high G for interception or avoiding attack then as a human you MUST use a drone just because you have no other choice. If you're building a fighter as a Daqin you don't have that limitation.
Small Ships vs Big Ships
-------------------------------------------------
There are a few things that dictate ship size, and in some situations 'fighter' sized craft just absolutely won't work.
Mission
What are you out there to do? For transporting large amounts of cargo you just can't use a fighter because you need to be able to move a large amount of heavy stuff, and even if your fighter has great power to weight you're still limited by your small engine. If you're attacking a starship, you're going to need weapons that can deal damage to it. I would think for classic space-opera style fleet battles out in deep space you are going to need large weapons. Your ship can only be as small as the equipment you need to carry so there is a lower limit to how small you can make things.
Square Cube Law
This cuts both ways. Internal Volume increases faster than surface area. This means for the same thickness of armor, your armor is going to weigh less as a % of your ship's total weight as you increase your ship's size. Similarly, there are some benefits for going bigger that scale the same way. It takes the same amount of space and weight to house a single human regardless of the size of the ship. That means all other things equal a larger ship is going to be weighed down less by its communications gear, control systems, etc, than a smaller ship.
Inertia
On the other end, you're going to need more structural support for a larger ship just to hold the engines in place. Fast maneuvering is going to require a very strong ship, and it is harder to maneuver fast without tearing yourself apart as you get bigger. Sure your straight line speed will probably be better than a fighter (especially long term), but you're going to have a hard time with precise movements.
Cost/Numbers
While you could build one large ship that is objectively better in every way than two smaller ships, that one ship can only be in one place at a time. It can only protect one location, or intercept one ship at a time.
----------------------
So when designing a ship you're going to have to think about all of the above. You're not going to get the same dynamic of fighters vs battleships simply because the battleships in this analogy would also be able to fly. Instead you'd be designing the smallest ship you can that will still carry everything you need to do your mission.
Ship Design
------------------------
So why would the Daqin be building fighters?
I agree with Ray that they aren't going to be a revolution in space combat. Going back to the WWII naval analogy they just don't have the speed and attack range advantages over battleships up to a point.
Daqin ships in general should be nearly impossible to beat just because their crew can consistently withstand 9g acceleration. It doesn't really matter what the matchup is, the Daqin will always be able to leave if the fight is unfavorable to them, and they will always be able to catch you if the fight is favorable for them. I think their preference for smaller ships might hurt them on a pound for pound basis but I don't think that means a whole lot if they can dictate the terms of the fight anyways.
The Smallest Fighter
I could see the Daqin having a small fighter-design for use with their merchant ships. Assuming some big ship comes to inspect one of their merchant ships then you might as well have a few small attack craft ready. Because the other ship has to get up close you no longer need to worry about carrying large long-ranged weapons. Similarly you have some options for hiding behind your merchant ship for cover, or positioning yourself to quickly take out the enemy guns on one side and then stay in their weapon blind-spots... tactics that require a bit of creative thinking. Being small and light-weight also maximizes the capabilities of your parent cargo-ship. This fighter could similarly be used in highly traffic'd space like low orbit or near space stations where there are lots of things in your way and large ships might not be able to get in close to do whatever it is you need to do (like support some space-walking infantry). If it was a two-seater or even one seater optionally manned this same craft could be used as a transport shuttle.
The Reasonable 'fighter'
A more reasonable design would be what Ray envisioned: Have a fighter craft but just make it large enough to carry a big gun. It might even be easier on your supply chain to carry a number of different fighter-type craft with specialized tasks. Instead of putting your mega-sensors, guns, lasers, missiles, and defensive equipment on all one craft you could just bring along the fighters that you need for your mission on any given day. I certainly think the Daqin could get away with fielding one-man torpedo boats or even one-man battleships. You can really get that fighter aesthetic with any size ship... just have it return to dock with its carrier when the battle is over.
It's already agreed that, going by the laws of physics, larger ships are generally better for a myriad of reasons. However, the real question isn't about the practicality of having fighters in space. At least for me anyways. In the end of the day, we're here to have roleplay and enjoy ourselves, and that's the basis of my preference for fighters. What we're talking about right now is essentially removing or severely hampering a type of roleplay activity because it is not realistic enough. That is, realistic enough in a setting with Faster-Than-Light travel+communication, catgirls, space elves and magic. I believe we should have fighters in the setting simply because it's fun and people will enjoy it. As you've said so yourself Ray, fighters worked out well in Star Wars since it highlighted individual acts of heroism, and was based on our own familiarity with WWII fighters. I wouldn't go as far as that, but you understand my point. People are going to want this sooner or later. That's why, just as importantly, we come up with a reason(s) why they're more viable than they would be in real life.
Uso made some pretty good points on Daqin mass superiority. The really, only comparable technology would be remnant bio-tech in the human sphere or sapient AI that can be put into a tighter package. I would actually argue that in that regard, the Magnetic Assembly would eventually have an even greater mass superiority over the Daqin, but we're not here to power jerk and argue which faction is better. What needs to be said mechanically, technologically wise has been covered pretty thoroughly at this point, so let's move onto narrative consequences.
Let's assume that space fighters are viable in the setting and implement them. Personally, I still insist on limitations and smart design, like don't have them be do-everything-ships that can move in between space and atmosphere at ease. Going in between space and atmosphere should be a big deal; you're existing one world and entering another.
Look at how much effort Iron Blooded Orphans puts into portraying this moment. The transition is a sign of a new arc in the story. In a controlled environment, say everyday civillian life, sure, space-atmosphere transition is done in an orderly, regular manner, but in a chaotic scenario like sub-orbital or low orbit combat, it should be treated with care and all the consequences said transition occurs.
Anyways, a more important concern is even if space fighters are viable, the way we're justifying them is through heavy biological modifications or complete mechanical, AI control, both of which are largely monopolized by two factions in the setting right now. As it is right now, you can play a space fighter pilot, but you also have to be a Daqin.
One solution here is what we're looking to implement in the rest of the setting: breakup of the major factions. If the Daqin are eventually broken up, not only will there be variances of the Daqin that are playable so not everyone has to play an imperial, but the technology is easier to spread to rest of human society. Still, this means a great shift in the setting, where a biological-ascendance occurs for space-born, so to speak.
Let's assume that space fighters are viable in the setting and implement them. Personally, I still insist on limitations and smart design, like don't have them be do-everything-ships that can move in between space and atmosphere at ease. Going in between space and atmosphere should be a big deal; you're existing one world and entering another.
Look at how much effort Iron Blooded Orphans puts into portraying this moment. The transition is a sign of a new arc in the story. In a controlled environment, say everyday civillian life, sure, space-atmosphere transition is done in an orderly, regular manner, but in a chaotic scenario like sub-orbital or low orbit combat, it should be treated with care and all the consequences said transition occurs.
Anyways, a more important concern is even if space fighters are viable, the way we're justifying them is through heavy biological modifications or complete mechanical, AI control, both of which are largely monopolized by two factions in the setting right now. As it is right now, you can play a space fighter pilot, but you also have to be a Daqin.
One solution here is what we're looking to implement in the rest of the setting: breakup of the major factions. If the Daqin are eventually broken up, not only will there be variances of the Daqin that are playable so not everyone has to play an imperial, but the technology is easier to spread to rest of human society. Still, this means a great shift in the setting, where a biological-ascendance occurs for space-born, so to speak.
Out-of-character, I believe it would be more ideal if piloting is not restricted to those that have extensive gene modifications given how costly and expensive it can be in-character. It' appears to be restrictive regarding character backgrounds and the like. Ideally, the limiting factor is technological. Rather than having the character themselves going through very invasive and life altering augmentation - either becoming a cyborg or getting genetically altered - it'd be an expensive piece of tech in its early days, and the characters are given a shot at it due to being good pilot candidates or something. I had previously floated around the idea of some sort of drive that uses a little bit of Wofleonium to achieve an artificially high speed, but have severely diminishing returns the larger a vessel's mass gets. I don't know how this sort of pseudo-warp drive thing would work, but that's not the important part since we can just come up with something.
Rather, I'm more concerned if this concept is engaging or not in the narrative/RP sense.
Rather, I'm more concerned if this concept is engaging or not in the narrative/RP sense.
The problem is even with some inertial dampener system, bio and cybernetically modified pilots are always going to have an advantage over non-augmented pilots. Suppose you have a system where Wofleonium keeps the internal gravity of a fighter or larger vessel to 1 g, even if the vessel is accelerating at 10 g in the reference frame of the star system. All this means is that you can cut down the Wofleonium costs and power input for augmented pilots, therefore still giving them a mass and power advantage. Their vessels would be able to climb up to 20 g, perhaps only needing enough Wofleonium and power to keep the internal gravity at 5 g.
In conclusion, if you want to be a pilot, you're going to have to cut off your legs, one way or the other, to stay competitive.
In conclusion, if you want to be a pilot, you're going to have to cut off your legs, one way or the other, to stay competitive.
I think augmented pilots being superior to non-augmented ones is perfectly acceptable and makes sense. What I'm interested in seeing for the setting is a low bar of entry to being a pilot, but a lot of room for a character to grow and get better. This would allow players to go through the journey with their characters as well, and do things such as coming to that pivotal point in their story arc where they must make that big leap. Should they have their legs amputated and replaced with cybernetics so blood doesn't pool and knock them out? Then the players can ask themselves, if my character does this, what else will they risk or give up? And for what? To beat that enemy ace? For Freedom? For Democracy? To save their world? Save Humanity?
At what cost?
I want these kinds of things to be possible for players to experience in roleplay. A degree of realism is great, but opportunities must remain open to the players. If we're okay with the current concept, we can go on to brainstorming some sort of device or drive system that benefits small craft, but has exponentially diminishing returns the larger or more massive something gets.
At what cost?
I want these kinds of things to be possible for players to experience in roleplay. A degree of realism is great, but opportunities must remain open to the players. If we're okay with the current concept, we can go on to brainstorming some sort of device or drive system that benefits small craft, but has exponentially diminishing returns the larger or more massive something gets.