|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:25 am
Aye, that'd do the trick.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 2:52 pm
Just pondering how long the ship/city should be now, given it needs to serve as dock for many an airship.
Fun Fact! Graf Zeppelin II was 245 metres in length, and 46.8 metres in diameter.
EDIT: According to my calculations, it would have to be TOO BIG TO TURN ROUND. Oops.
Before you ask; yes, I did enter 'Science Fiction' into my caluclations.
EDIT II: And would barely be able to move. Sails are your best bet.
Why? Why did I have to apply common sense to this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:15 pm
Fleet of proper-sized Airships?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:35 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:44 pm
I lauugheed at the illustrations OH HO HO HO like that
Also, I was watching Castle in the Sky today RIGHT? AND I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS.
Just so everyone knows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:50 pm
CATSUITS! I lauugheed at the illustrations OH HO HO HO like that Also, I was watching Castle in the Sky today RIGHT? AND I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS. Just so everyone knows. Castle in the Sky is awesome. Also small. A flying city would be awesome, but isn't going to work, at least not in the way everyone wants. I proper this: many of the worlds thinkers and adventurers have migrated to an island. There, they have built whatever they, as individuals, please. Some have built conventional houses. Others have built there houses upon floating platforms, and now live in the sky. Others have done the opposite, and built there homes underground, or laboratories underwater to study Krakens. Many still haven't settled down at all, and roam about in airships or submersibles.  Easy on the brain, and there is something for everyone (I hope).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:51 pm
Wouldn't an island be more vulnerable to pirate attack, as its even slower than a massive airship?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:53 pm
True, but an island would have no danger of crashing to the ground.
Plus, there is no reason you must settle down on the island; plenty of airships to adventure in, some of them still pretty big.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:05 pm
A flying city wouldn't turn fast, but I bet if you get it into certain atmospheric currents you could get it up to a pleasant cruising speed.
And pirate attacks are why you have a squadron of fighters at the ready.
Further, at this point I feel it pertinent to point out a philosophical paradox.
If the Anachronism itself is not a city in the air, it will become necessary for some mad genius in the Anachronism universe to put a city in the air. Why? "Because they ALL said it COULDN'T BE DONE! They LAUGHED at me! I'LL SHOW THEM ALL! MUHUHUHUHUHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!"
And then once some crackpot puts a city in the sky, and it isn't the Anachronism, that makes a non-airborne City of Anachronism merely the second most daring and adventurous place in the universe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:31 pm
Alas, that mirrors my thinking also. The flaw in that, though, is that the process could be repeated ad infinitum.
Since it isn't, clearly there is a point at which things must stop (at least for now), and who is to say where that point is?
*sigh* This designing business is proving quite bothersome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:39 pm
You just have to figure out what exactly you're designing. Are you designing the most logical place in the universe, or the most fantastic?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:48 pm
I'm trying to design something fantastic that doesn't throw common sense out of the window.
~
EDIT
Thank you, Mylian & CATSUITS!, for you have got me thinking.
Specifically, that my reasoning that the city would have to move nimbly and fast is flawed. I must ponder this further.
To everyone: I would appreciate any and all suggestions you would care to send my way. I would love to know what you want from the Anachronism.
Also: why?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:59 pm
Then you're trying to design for two primary goals at once instead of one, which means you're doing the authorial equivalent of pulling your punches.
This guild is called Anachronism. If we weren't all more than happy to suspend a bit of disbelief for something inspiring, we wouldn't be here. 3nodding
~Edit
I'm a Discordian, making people think is just one of the occupational hazards. ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:05 pm
Personally, I find the image of a majestic airship swooping down far more appealing than any city up in the skies, don't see much point putting it there, myself.
Whilst I'd be more than happy to design a flying city, I can't help myself but be put off by it not making sense; 'tis purely involuntary.
Personally, I prefer Verne to Wells.
When Verne did something, like shoot people to the moon in a giant cannon, he would try and make sure it actually worked scientifically ~ and, often, he wasn't far off. I like this approach.
Wells, on the other hand, imagined-up Cavorite ~ an element which counters gravity ~ which, frankly, I think is the lazy option.
~
EDIT: I'm a part time Discordian.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:24 pm
If you want a flying city: why? and what do you want it to do once it's up there?
If you don't: why not? is there something you'd rather 'the Anachronism' was?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
