Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

You could create 5,000+ AU Deepsafe spots from the galaxy map before it was removed?

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Tritanium and Atmospheric Capable Spacecraft  (Read 3662 times)

Wanoah

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 322
  • Sweating spinal fluid
    • Hello!
Re: Tritanium and Atmospheric Capable Spacecraft
« Reply #15 on: 04 Jul 2011, 14:53 »

The tritanium description has never really made much sense. I always suspected that it was meant to be a bit of a joke - "unstable at atmospheric temperatures" == "goes rusty if it gets wet" or similar - but it got a bit lost in translation. I mean, rationally, you wouldn't use a material that was actually volatile as your primary building material for ships and stations that contain atmospheric conditions. If it's unstable in the way that mild steel is unstable in an atmosphere, then no biggie - just give it a coat of paint.
Logged
Nothing worth saying is inoffensive to everyone

Blog | Fiction

Matariki Rain

  • Sweet, gentle Mata
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 827
Re: Tritanium and Atmospheric Capable Spacecraft
« Reply #16 on: 04 Jul 2011, 15:57 »

The tritanium description has never really made much sense. I always suspected that it was meant to be a bit of a joke - "unstable at atmospheric temperatures" == "goes rusty if it gets wet" or similar - but it got a bit lost in translation. I mean, rationally, you wouldn't use a material that was actually volatile as your primary building material for ships and stations that contain atmospheric conditions. If it's unstable in the way that mild steel is unstable in an atmosphere, then no biggie - just give it a coat of paint.

This was a perfectly reasonable interpretation up until we learnt about spoke bombs: "When a Spoke ruptured and the tritanium came into contact with air, it would expand violently, blowing away anything in its immediate vicinity."

(Yes, the problem does seem to be that there's not been a consistent WorldKeeper or New Eden World Guide for EVE.)
Logged

Wanoah

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 322
  • Sweating spinal fluid
    • Hello!
Re: Tritanium and Atmospheric Capable Spacecraft
« Reply #17 on: 04 Jul 2011, 17:46 »

The tritanium description has never really made much sense. I always suspected that it was meant to be a bit of a joke - "unstable at atmospheric temperatures" == "goes rusty if it gets wet" or similar - but it got a bit lost in translation. I mean, rationally, you wouldn't use a material that was actually volatile as your primary building material for ships and stations that contain atmospheric conditions. If it's unstable in the way that mild steel is unstable in an atmosphere, then no biggie - just give it a coat of paint.

This was a perfectly reasonable interpretation up until we learnt about spoke bombs: "When a Spoke ruptured and the tritanium came into contact with air, it would expand violently, blowing away anything in its immediate vicinity."

(Yes, the problem does seem to be that there's not been a consistent WorldKeeper or New Eden World Guide for EVE.)

Yeah. Abraxas has just compounded the error there, I think. There's lots of bits of Eve where the handwaving sounds superficially plausible. Other bits fall squarely in the wallbanging category. I think trit is in the second group myself. :)
Logged
Nothing worth saying is inoffensive to everyone

Blog | Fiction

Katrina Oniseki

  • The Iron Lady
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
  • Caldari - Deteis - Tube Child
Re: Tritanium and Atmospheric Capable Spacecraft
« Reply #18 on: 04 Jul 2011, 19:05 »

"When a Spoke ruptured and the tritanium came into contact with air, it would expand violently, blowing away anything in its immediate vicinity."

What?! That's far worse than I imagined!

I thought trit just becomes less sturdy and stable, more prone to catastrophic failures. I didn't know it freaking blows the frack up!!

Esna Pitoojee

  • Keeper of the Harem
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2095
Re: Tritanium and Atmospheric Capable Spacecraft
« Reply #19 on: 04 Jul 2011, 19:26 »

"When a Spoke ruptured and the tritanium came into contact with air, it would expand violently, blowing away anything in its immediate vicinity."

What?! That's far worse than I imagined!

I thought trit just becomes less sturdy and stable, more prone to catastrophic failures. I didn't know it freaking blows the frack up!!

Yeah... it's not "iron rusts" levels of unstable, it's "sodium burns violently in air" unstable.

That said, I still have to wonder if tritanium is something like carbon - in powdered coal form, it's highly explosive. In compressed lattice form, it's diamond - super-hard, but not very bendable. In another lattice, it's carbon nanotubes - easily workable, but not "hard" in the traditional sense of the word.
Logged
I like the implications of Gallentians being punched in the face by walking up to a Minmatar as they so freely use another person's culture as a fad.

Katrina Oniseki

  • The Iron Lady
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2266
  • Caldari - Deteis - Tube Child
Re: Tritanium and Atmospheric Capable Spacecraft
« Reply #20 on: 04 Jul 2011, 20:00 »

That said, I still have to wonder if tritanium is something like carbon - in powdered coal form, it's highly explosive. In compressed lattice form, it's diamond - super-hard, but not very bendable. In another lattice, it's carbon nanotubes - easily workable, but not "hard" in the traditional sense of the word.

In another lattice, it breaks all the freaking time when you're doing homework.
Pages: 1 [2]