Graham Belmont (email@example.com)
Wed, 29 Nov 2000 03:47:47 -0600
>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.
This is where suspension of disbelief comes into play. In anime (well, most
anyway), constant thrust = constant velocity, nobody has to worry about
deadly space debris, despite all the wreckage floating about, the human body
contains roughly 8 gallons of blood, sound travels in vacuums, etc...
Now, if Kuberic were to direct anime, many of these space issues would be
taken care of. Then again, the man was a nut case, and would put giant
floating star children and monoliths everywhere.
But back to the issue...
IRL, a Ball would be much more efficient than anything humanoid or anything
resembling an aircraft. But given the space at hand for fuel and ammo,
they'd have to be transported en masse by something along the lines of a HLV
(or any other take off/re-entry capable vehicle), and make numerous stops
for refueling and reloading, making them damn vulnerable. Until they make a
Ball Mk II, or something along those lines ;)
::crosses fingers for Bandai to release a PG Ball::
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Nov 29 2000 - 18:31:23 JST