Rizzo
Well-Known Member
I think I have a potential solution to the speed standard controversy.
Acceleration in space is entirely dependent on thrust and fuel. If you have the equipment to induce motion and an infinite supply of fuel to power it, you can theoretically accelerate to an infinite speed... that is until you wish to change your direction!
Being able to turn and maneuver at high speed is vastly more difficult than doing the same at low speed. So perhaps maneuverability should be the qualifier. Rather than say your ship has a top speed of .4 before it is inexplicably unable to generate thrust we could keep the same rating while still respecting physics by saying that it cannot maneuver at speeds greater than .4. Using this concept wouldn't even significantly change spacecraft dogfighting since most of those engagements do not occur at top speed.
But this is only a concept, what does SARP think?
Acceleration in space is entirely dependent on thrust and fuel. If you have the equipment to induce motion and an infinite supply of fuel to power it, you can theoretically accelerate to an infinite speed... that is until you wish to change your direction!
Being able to turn and maneuver at high speed is vastly more difficult than doing the same at low speed. So perhaps maneuverability should be the qualifier. Rather than say your ship has a top speed of .4 before it is inexplicably unable to generate thrust we could keep the same rating while still respecting physics by saying that it cannot maneuver at speeds greater than .4. Using this concept wouldn't even significantly change spacecraft dogfighting since most of those engagements do not occur at top speed.
But this is only a concept, what does SARP think?