Which kind of power would future frigates adopt to make them hover in atmosphere?

[aquilux]

Alternatively, TRON. Materialise an artificial construct the same way one returns from the grid. We see this happen at the end of legacy. It has the added benifit that you don't need to send anything but the digitiser a com link and an energy source, and presto! Teleportation.

[ROFLCopter64bit]

Really? This is the least promising future we will have, being stuck on a single planet with some "auguemented reality" and some stupid "hive mind"

Isn't the answer to life to live it luxuriously? And isn't augumented reality the easiest way to get that?

[Holo]

Isn't the answer to life to live it luxuriously? And isn't augumented reality the easiest way to get that?

In an advanced economy, you can do just that. In addition, people who want to explore can.

[M5000]

Large spacecraft will hover in the atmosphere using a high concentration of refined Handwavium-66 and a hyperconflagurator propulsordrive that will effectively provide artificial lift.

[ROFLCopter64bit]

Or we can turn an orbital cannon into a gravity tug!

[Holo]

Large spacecraft will hover in the atmosphere using a high concentration of refined Handwavium-66 and a hyperconflagurator propulsordrive that will effectively provide artificial lift.

Actually Unobtainium-113 has a higher energy density,

[M5000]

Actually Unobtainium-113 has a higher energy density,

Of course, how could I be so blind..

[leopardenthusiast]

Actually Unobtainium-113 has a higher energy density,

Yes, but nobody has any.

[georgexiro]

yeah.. rapid decay is the main problem..

[Malaugrym]

Responding to thread title alone and ignoring actual content: Powerful power.

[PIRATEONTHERUN]

Actually Unobtainium-113 has a higher energy density,

Yes, but Handwavium-66 is easily produced in civilian power facilities and is nearly as efficient.

[Kosmo-not]

What kind of power do you need?...

[nyrath]

Well, as others have already pointed out, the real question is why would one want a future frigate to hover in the atmosphere in the first place? The main reason seems to be "because that's how scientifically illiterate Hollywood portrays spacecraft".

As NASAFanboystated, it makes far more sense for a frigate to stay in orbit and send down landers and/or fighters. After playing KSP for a while one realizes the hideous amount of propellant required to send each gram of mass into orbit. Why should a frigate waste huge amounts of propellant and/or energy to enter the atmosphere, hover the way bricks do not, and climb back to orbit? All the time making itself a huge target for any hostiles on the planet.

A case might be made for a huge ship to land combat troops and armored vehicles, but that sort of craft has no intention of hovering. Again: hovering makes you a target. The higher you hover, the more enemy units that can target you.

It does not matter if you have some sort of unobtanium that allows hovering, the reality is that it is counter-productive.

Outside of science fictional magic tech, it makes more sense to have:

1. Surface to Orbit shuttles
   
2. Orbit to Orbit ships
   
3. Airless-planet landers
   
4. 
   

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/advdesign.php#id--Types

If you have combat on your hands, some of the Orbit-to-Orbit ships will be optimized as warships.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacewarship.php

Inside of science fictional magic tech, you are free to make up any handwavium or technobabble you want. If you want to do the job correct, you will avoid technobabble, and try to figure out the unintended consequences of your postulated handwavium.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/prelimnotes.php#id--On_Shaky_Ground

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/respectscience.php#id--Unintended_Consequences

Edited April 30, 2013 by nyrath

[Groundog]

You could use really long carbon nano tube stilts.

[satcharna]

As an actual physicist (okay, so I don't work with anything even remotely related to spaceflight, but still) I can safely say that future frigates (space war-vehicles, at any rate) are probably going to stay quite far away from the atmosphere whenever possible. Going into the atmosphere is going to consume a lot of power, or if we do get some sort of unobtainium, it is still going to be risky and pointless. Lasers or guided missiles are probably going to be the weapon of choice, and neither benefits from additional accuracy by being inside the atmosphere. We most likely won't even construct them on the surface, because then we'd have to launch them from the surface. Instead, such vehicles would be constructed in orbit by a space-factory of some sort. Travel to and from the vessel would happen on some form of space-plane, which is also how it would be resupplied, perhaps with space stations as intermediaries.

Be a shame if we ever actually do get space-war-vehicles, though. You'd think that with that level of technology, we'd realize how pointless warfare is.

Edited May 4, 2013 by satcharna

[qeveren]

Orion drive, obviously...

[Arlakonud]

Superconductors are the way . Locking the ship in magnetic field and thus allowing it to hover.

[Rune]

Orion drive, obviously...

That would be expensive. Nukes ain't cheap. Without going into what you are doing to the atmosphere of the planet you are landing on...