www.ditl.org

Gravity and acceleration are not the same thing.
Gravity causes an acceleration. Acceleration is a reaction, while gravity would be the reactent.

Teaos wrote:People say its just like hitting cement, but I've seen a couple of bad dives from 10m where the people were just winded when they landed on what looked about 45 degrees. Hardly like hitting cement.

Deepcrush wrote:Its all about breaking the surface of the water at the smallest point. Like an arrow or spear tip punching through flesh.

Yep. Even at a 45-degree angle, one part is breaking the surface tension of the water. The problems arise when the whole body impacts at the same time, or you impact with a part exposed which offers less resistance to the pressure of the water back towards th body.

Thorin wrote:No understanding of relevant physics.
Check.

And that ladies... well there's only really guys here, so...

And that Guys and Guys is the equivilant of throwing your toys out of the cot.

You Thorin are pathetic. I beat you fair and square on every relivant point. You can't provide any evidence for your points and the above statement reaks of typical teenage insecurity.

How do I not have understanding of the relevant physics Thorin? Please share with the class since you are apparently the local expert on it, I mean you study it, so you MUST know everything about it.

And as I pointed out of so many times, the whole debate didnt hing on the understanding of gravity. Just a firm grasp of logic and common sense, Something you apparently are totally lacking in.

Wow, people are fighting and I'm not a part of it. I feel like something is missing.....

Oh yeah, its me!

Feel free to call each other every name in the book. As was pointed out to me recently, however, just be careful to not misrepresent anybody else's comments or quote out of context.

Thank you. I now return you to your regularly-scheduled catfight.

I wouldn't call it a catfight... catfights are for girls... and they're not girls... they just look like girls.

Beg pardon.

Beg all you want... I don't mind.

Really though, what the hell is the point of the Norway and Saber?

wrong thread, but supposedly they were like escort destroyers, or something. GK has the Norway as "diplomacy-enhanced" or something like that, so I guess it wouldn't even be a real destroyer.

Mikey wrote:wrong thread, but supposedly they were like escort destroyers, or something. GK has the Norway as "diplomacy-enhanced" or something like that, so I guess it wouldn't even be a real destroyer.

We were talking about them in the refit thread which didn't seem right. They don't need any refits or upgrades. So, here we are picking ships that we would use. Why use either of these ships?

Like I said there, I wouldn't - I think htose roles can now be filled by more modern ships, and fewer types. I'm all for streamlining the fleet, too - fewer types of ships for any given role mean easier refits and more efficient refits and production.

Then lets stream line the fleet.

Ships of the line.

Jack of all trades ships.

Dedicated service ships.

What ships would you use for each in the fleet?

Ships of the line.
*Galaxy-class Refit
*Sovereign-class Refit
*Prometheus-class
*Vesta-class

Jack of all trades ships.
*Nebula-class
*Akira-class
*Norway-class
*Steamrunner-class
*Luna-class
*Ambassador-class
*Intrepid-class
*Excelsior-class

Dedicated service ships.
*Defiant-class (Escort)
*Nova-class (Science Ship)
*Olympic-class (Medical Ship)
*Curry/Shelley-classs (Military Transport)
*Saber-class (Scout)

I would say "combat-oriented ships" rather than "ships-ofthe-line," because I'd include here any ships that also fill patrol duties, escort duties, etc.:
- Sovereign
- Akira
- Prometheus
- New Orleans
- Defiant

JoAT's/Explorers:
- Galaxy
- Nebula
- Nova (science/research)
- Intrepid

Dedicated service:
- Olympic
- tug
- Sydney
- any remaining Excelsiors (resupply, training ships, ambassadorial transports, etc.)

Teaos wrote:

Thorin wrote:No understanding of relevant physics.
Check.

And that ladies... well there's only really guys here, so...

And that Guys and Guys is the equivilant of throwing your toys out of the cot.

You Thorin are pathetic. I beat you fair and square on every relivant point. You can't provide any evidence for your points and the above statement reaks of typical teenage insecurity.

How do I not have understanding of the relevant physics Thorin? Please share with the class since you are apparently the local expert on it, I mean you study it, so you MUST know everything about it.

And as I pointed out of so many times, the whole debate didnt hing on the understanding of gravity. Just a firm grasp of logic and common sense, Something you apparently are totally lacking in.

You said the inertial dampers couldn't do it because they weren't separate systems.
They are.
Your lack of understanding of gravity was your inability to grasp that inertial dampers and gravity plating do the same thing - cause acceleration. In the same way as a microwave oven and a microwave oven do the same thing, not in the same way as a microwave oven and barbeque do the same thing.

Stitch, gravity and acceleration are for all intents and purposes, equal. Whether you wish to use m/s^2 or N/kg is pretty trivial.