Joseph Riggs (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Wed, 29 Nov 2000 01:45:43 -0800
Peter Carranza wrote:
> In space, wouldn't a Ball be more efficient than an MS? Esp. if it had 360
> degree cameras and verniers? Is a humanoid shape functional in space? For
> that matter, why should space fighters resemble the atmospheric aerodynamic
> cockpit/fuselage/wing jets? There is no friction in the vacuum of space.
It probably would be more efficient. In fact, this was the original idea behind the
setting of the game Jovian Chronicles (i.e. attrition units that were built like pods).
JC quickly changed into a setting with more Gundam-esqe vehicles, and suffers the
unfortunate fate of being hammered both by the hard-science types (who debate the
usefulness of humaniod mecha, and streamlined space fighters), and the mecha fans (who
are sometimes uncomfortable with the hard science aspects). The only advantage I can see
to a space-based unit with limbs would be to mount some thrusters on the end of the
limbs, and achieve a more precise vector of thrust (since the limb, and thus the
thruster, can be pointed in the exact direction that you need it to be). Other than
that, I doubt there would be a single advantage that a humanoid unit would offer over one
resembling a Ball.
As to why space attrition units look the way they do in anime? Because they look cooler
(we hope...), and will sell more toys that way.
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Nov 29 2000 - 18:28:30 JST