www.ditl.org

LaughingCheese wrote:Soo, is it the conclusion then of this thread that it would be much simpler to make a Star Wars style speeder or even a Trek shuttlecraft levitate using anti-gravity than capitol ships?


Would it be easier to adjust the anti-gravity field on a smaller vehicle?

Smaller vehicle doesn't need as much structural reinforcement as a large vessel. Cube-square law. As a vessel doubles in length, width, height, its mass is 8 times higher, but the structural strength of its crossmembers is only 4 times higher.

Also, look at the requirements for a starship:
1) go to warp
2) other stuff

A floating city has to:
1) stay up
2) other stuff

So the mass needed by a larger ship for staying up will interfere with either going to warp, or its other jobs. A smaller ship can get by with smaller structural support, since if it is half the LWH of a larger vessel, it is 1/8 the mass, and its structural members are 1/4 the strength.

At least, this is my guess.

What about the Klingon BoP in ST IV?
It landed on Earth, with no mention of structural issues, and when it landed in San Francisco's part, sure, there was some wind, but nothing powerful enough to help such a big mass land...
No rockets, apparently using, what, fans to support the ship, small thrusters?
And even when it stops the whaling ship, no rocket exhaust, no incredible downward pushing motion from any kind of rockets to maintain the ship in place...

Voyager landed on a planet to repair its Warp Coils, and again, I don't remember there being huge rocket-like effects...

Wouldn't that point to some sort of Anti-Grav in effect, and the use of simply, much less powerful thrusters for controlled landings?

Probably. Same kind of technology but on a larger scale as a shuttlecraft landing.