Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:19:22 -0400
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 07:11:22 -0400, Sea Wasp wrote
(in article <46E677DA.4000203@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):
David Friedman wrote:
Means the same thing. The ship is floating (well, at least we hope so)
therefore the mass of the water displaced is equal to the total mass of
the ship.
Indeed it is.
But it isn't equal to the total volume of the ship, which was the claim
that the previous poster made--some of that volume is above the
waterline, and so doesn't correspond to displacement.
Actually, it pretty much DOES, if you read his whole description:
One cubic metre = 1 tonne displacement.
This is true for WATER. A cubic metre of STEEL is one hell of a lot
more (I don't remember the density of steel offhand, but I'm betting
it's somewhere around 5-10x water).
The formula gives you the mass of water displaced by the ship (more
or less; depends on whether it's salt water or not).
GT = KV, where GT is Gross Tonnage, K is a constant, and V is the volume. K
for merchants is less than one. K for warships is pretty close to one, 'cause
warships have bigger (and heavier) engines than merchants, and have weapons,
which weigh a lot and are made of materials denser than, say, wheat, and
warships also have armour. Depending on which alloys you're using, steel has
a density of 7 to 8 tonnes per cubic metre. To keep things simple, I used
K=1.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
.
- References:
- Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Michelle Bottorff
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Sea Wasp
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Michelle Bottorff
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Sea Wasp
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Bill Swears
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Sea Wasp
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Bill Swears
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Ric Locke
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: J . J . O'Shea
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Michelle Bottorff
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: J . J . O'Shea
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Michelle Bottorff
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: J . J . O'Shea
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: FennelGiraffe
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: J . J . O'Shea
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: David Friedman
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Ric Locke
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: David Friedman
- Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- From: Sea Wasp
- Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- Prev by Date: Re: SFWA Folds its ePiracy Committee - For Now
- Next by Date: Re: Questions (Space)
- Previous by thread: Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- Next by thread: Re: Cause this isn't Star Wars...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|