Derivative

I did a rough figure of size in the game by flying a scout over the longest section of each mothership in the first game, but I would like to know a very close measurement of the motherships at their widest, longest, and tallest sides. This would help to picture their size if they were on the ground and next to the highway when driving.

atmawpn

I seem to recall vaguely a thread that discussed a similar topic. Unfortunately, I cannot really recall the actual title of the thread.

What I do recall is that it was determined that a Qwaar Jet class heavy cruiser, or its Kushan Avatar class equivalent, would easily dwarf a Sovereign class starship. (An example of which would be the USS Enterprise E)

reki

Crossroads inc.

Well, I don't know about you, but in HW-2, I utlized the auto tracking 'Move' option to measure things. Basically I flew a harvester to the end of the ship I wanted to measure, and then dragged the Move bar to check its length.

That rather simple meathod lead me to the following lengths:
Hilg Destroyer 500 meters
Hilg battleCruiser 800 meters
Dreadnaught 1200 meters
Sajuuk 5000 meters
Bentus 5500 meters.

Some dang big ships to be sure... For an interesting size comp, you can check out this pic I whipped up:
http://photobucket.com/albums/b389/...=Sizesheet2.gif

Derivative

Thats what I did, but I was hoping to get a more accurate size than 7Km. It'll take me a while to read though that link provided by reki. Thanks.

Starblade

The only size I remember is that the Kushan Mothership is 7km tall.

Noir

X-box sized

JAL-18

Actually, realistic estimates put the Mothership at no more then 1.5 km tall.

Starlight

I have read throught the archived thread at the heated debate on ship sizes. In HW ships are in units, and the Mother ship stands 7000 units tall, an interceptor is about 55 units long.

Huge argument about if these are meters or not, with no conclusive proof.

I extracted all the HW models and imported them into Autocad.

I have also extarcted a number of HW2 models and imported into Autocad.


The HW2 ships appeared to be much smaller, interceptor 17 units long and this would equate to a modern F15 fighter of now, so the argument looks like HW models are wrong scale wise, ie 1 unit does NOT equal 1 metre.

Also both HW and HW2 have the EXILES ship and this allows a comparison of the two model scales. The HW2 ship is 0.6 times the size of the HW one, so I think it is reasonable to scale the HW units by 0.6 to get a more realistic comparison between HW and HW2.

By the way this makes Bentus 5300m long, Sajuuk = 4000m long

This makes the HW mothership 4200m high, this also makes a HW interceptor 34m long.


By the way the Balcora gate has a clear internal diameter of some 3300m!!

If you would like images and some data ask and I will see what I can do.

Hope that helps.

Merturk_NB

well, they do have a true scale mod out there somewhere. google it up

JAL-18

The true scale mod doesn't change the fact that a HW1 interceptor is still 56 units long. It just makes that apperant on the screen. (NLIPS scales the ints up to be several hundred units long!)

Starlight, I don't remember seeing any Homeworld ships in Homeworld 2. Which units did you use for your comparison?

Starlight

In the HW2 big files is a unit named - neu_transport.hod

edit - when extracted by the HOD tool, it has the name : neu_transport_prisonshipold.obj

When you extract this and view it, it is the original EXILE ship (sublight) they travelled to kharak on.

As this is the same model, I used that as a comparison - reasonable assumption.

not sure where it is used in the HW2 game, I think it forms part of the prison station map? a transport, not sure on this bit.

I have continued extracting ships and have come accross a few issues.

The new higarran mother ship is only 2500m high, but that then fits in with its ability to pass through the Balcora gate.

Even with scaling of the HW ships by 0.6 it still makes the old mothership just huge in comparison.

The only refernce in the HW manula to dimensions was the Scaffold, the model can be extracted from HW big files. Before scaling down it was around 4700m long, and scaled down its approx 2800m long. The HW manual states that the scaffold was 26km long......hmm I think we have to either disregard the manuals stated dimension or if we scaled the models, they would be 10 times the size, or the manual should have said 2.6km long maybe?????

Derivative

You have the files in autocad? I would like to aquire those files. I don't have autocad right now, but when I get my own computer, I should. I wish to compare the homeworld ships to a ship I designed in autocad. I don't have the ship in 3d though (yet), just 2d side views.

Starlight

Just let me know when you do have it, so I can save it in a compatable version, I am using Autocad 2005, I have used Autocad since 1985 and use it daily at work, but I rarely get to use 3D on it.


Image of Autocad ships :

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...eworldships.jpg

JAL-18

Starlight, can you post the dimensions for the HW2 ships? I can figure the HW1 ships out on my own, just as long as you give me the HW2 prison ship data.

Exciting find!

Edit: and on the prison ship - was it a high detailed version or just the regular HW1 model?

Starlight

Prisonship is low polly.

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...risonships1.jpg

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...risonships2.jpg

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...risonships3.jpg

Sajuuk - Length 3981m, Height 895m
Drednaught - Length 1132m, Height 446m

Exile Prison Ship - Length 1180m, Height 414m

Higaran Crew Transport - Length 972m, Heigth 44m

Higaran Battlecrusier - Length 962m, Height 100m

Vagar Mothership - Length 2600m, Height 851m

Tomorrow I will try and provide more detail.

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...worldships2.jpg

cheers

Starlight

Crossroads inc.

Your Sajuuk came out to only 3981 meters? Very curious. I guess it throughs in to question the whole accuracy of the "Move Measuring" System used in HW-2

When I parked a resourcer at the rear of Sajuuk, and draged it to the nose. it came out to around 5000 meters.

ALso, what is the blue in your Cad images, and why are those parts shaded? Further more, whats with a HW-2 Prison ship? I have no memory of it.

Starlight

The different colours are because unlike HW1 the modles are made up of several files.

There is a core file (main body)
A secondary file (coloured extra detailing bits)
Big warships then have many smaller files with their turrets and gun barrels in each file.

The shading is to see them solid rather than wire frame. The colour was just to highlite it while adding the files together to build the one object.

On the length issue ? we could still assume that HW1 is the correct dimensions, in which case we would need to scale up the HW2 ships, this would make Sajuuk - 6635m long, based on the assumption that the two prison ships are the same size, as they are the same model.

If there is no direct comparison between HW1 and HW2, there could be a scaling factor in HW2 like NLIPS that increases the size in game, or the in game measurement could be a little course in its measurement, it is after all a ship movement tool in game and not a CAD measuring tool

Just some thoughts.

edit--

Give me a short while and I will post some explaining pictures of the multiple files for you :juggle:

Okay some images to explain the coloured sections in my cad drawings.

First two screen shots showing the two files in explorer3d:

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...3dexplorer1.jpg

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...3dexplorer2.jpg


Second

Sajuuk main body in wireframe and then shaded in Autocad

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...rld/sajwire.jpg

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...ld/sajshade.jpg

Third

Sajuuk extra detailing parts in wire then shaded in Autocad

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...sajbitswire.jpg

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...ajbitsshade.jpg

Fourth the combined model with coloured bits

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...sajcompwire.jpg

http://www.dreamrealitystudios.co.u...ajcompshade.jpg

Starblade

Sajuuk seems a little chunky in those last two pics. Maybe it's just because of the angle.

In any case, great job on finding the Prison Ship in the HW2 files.

Crossroads inc.

Well... Using my own measuring system, I did up a little scale size a while ago... Hope ye enjoy!


Skohotintot CityShip 8000 Meters ((My own creation))
The Great Harbour ship of Bentus 5500 Meters
Sajuuk 5000 Meters
Bentusi Tradeship 1500 Meters ((Very poor quality pic, looking for better))


Dreadnaught 1100 Meters
Victory StarDestroyer 900 Meters
Hilgaarin BattleCruiser 800 Meters
Old Republic Dreadnaught 600 Meters
Hilgaarin Destroyer 500 Meters
Carrack Cruiser 300 Meters
Hilgaarin Marine Frigate 200 Meters

All "Measurments" where done by flying a fighter to the end of an obgect, then draging the 'Move' marker out to the front and measuring the Meters indicated.

NESEN_RENSC

First of all I must say that my own independent analysis of the ships concurs with Starlight's second estimate. In assuming that the HW1 ships are the actual size, and using the prison ship as a reference model, sajuuk comes to 6635m long. or thereabouts. (give or take about 5-10 meters for general innacuracies).

One thing that many people havent discussed, which is a closely related issue, is the mass of the ships. The ship stats included in the .big file are grossly incorrect. According to this file the Heavy Cruiser weighs in at only 10,000 tons. Even the Mothership has a mass of 10,000 tons. I drive a small 20' box truck for work that weighs in at 15 tons. The US WWII Iowa Class battleship is 887 feet long (roughly 295.6 meters) and it weighs in at 57,216 tons. Based on this evidence it is my opinion that the weights of the ships as presented in the original HW manual are the most realistic. Therefore the Heavy Cruiser should have a mass of 800,000 tons, not 10,000.
And the Mothership has a mass of 5,000,000 tons, not 10,000.

Derivative

If thats the mass, then whats the min. amount of enegry required to move that ship?
125,000,000 j ?

JAL-18

NESEN: Iowa's displace 57,000 tons of water - big differance.

Diabolical

Interesting, i'd just like to quote something from the orriginal homeworld manual I have in my hands right now.
"The next step was to construct the orbiting scaffold where the Mothership would be built. This framework took 10 years to complete and is the single largest structure ever built.
New disciplines in macro engineering had to be created to complete this construction yard. The scaffold measures 25.6 kilometres long and is stationed in middle orbit around our world".
Now take a look at this screenie I just took and compare the hight of the Kushan mothership to the length of the scaffold.
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/2056/comparison3fe.jpg

NESEN_RENSC

Derivative,
who know what the minimum energy required is to move that mass in space. Im sure the fact that deep space has very little inertia working against the ship would require far less energy than if the object were on the earth (or other planetary body) where the atmoshpheric mass provides resistance. The problem in space is actually, in reality, getting the object to STOP.

JAL-18,
Yes, Im aware that the Iowa displaces 57,000 tons. But ship weights are measured in long tons, which is to say 2,240 pounds/ton as opposed to the normal 2,000 pounds/ton. One gallon of water weighs 8 pounds. Its a simple matter of physics. In order for the ship to displace mass, it must be of equal or greater mass in order to move it. You cant take a 2 pound stone and expect it to displace 10 pounds of water. Therefore the Iowa must have equal mass (or more) of the water that she is displacing, which is just over 57,000 tons.

Diabolical,
That is interesting. Ive been reading the manual, I have it here in front of me as well. I must not have paid too much attention to that part. Unfortunately, it seems that much of the material from the manual didnt translate into the game in fact. Especially regarding sizes and weights, etc. Even the stats in the Cataclysm manual dont conincide with the HW manual, and many of the ships are the same! I guess it comes down to a question of "what do we accept as being canon"? If we accept the manual, then parts of the .ship files are wrong, and if we accept the .ship files as truth, then much of the manual is in error.

Starlight

I think we have to assume that the manual was writen without full integration to the final game data, as many manuals appear with these type of errors.

I think that we have to discount the 26km scaffold. This may have been an early size touted in the developing stages of the game, the manual being written before the major game building occured because the first half is just background history.

I expect they looked at such a huge model and went ... how the hell to see a 20m (or 55m .peo model) long fighter against a 26km tall ship. you will never be able to see the two items in context, and so the scale of the mother ship was reduced rather a lot in size to make it more feasable to see with the other craft (still required Nlips though).

I then expect that as the first half of the manual was back story, it was not checked for errors relating to in game aspects and this little QA aspect slipped through.



Firstly I do not know what people think about using the HW1 ships as the base size, I will have to go back and do some size checking, both with scaling the models and comparing with in game dimensions (approximate).

Secondly as far as mass is concerned, do not think a WWII battleship on Earth will be the same mass as a large war ship in space.

If the vessel is built in space and not designed to transit atmosphere, then it does not require huge great solid metal construction, and could be built with large amounts of composite materials making the basic structure very strong yet very light. The same applies to the Armour. Modern tanks do not use simple solid steel, they use a composite of metals ceramics and other classified materials to allow a huge armour capability for considerably less weight that the equivalent steel plate.

Take a formula one (or indy car for yanks) they are constructed from a fully carbon fibre shell which is imensly strong yet increadibly light weight. Just scale this up, add new and as yet undiscovered material compounds that they might be using in the future and you get a much lighter craft yet called a fighter, cruiser, etc.

Also, do not confuse a modern jet fighter with a space fighter. A modern jet fighter has at best some 10-20 (burst) shots from its cannon (probably wrong here, just a guess) and maybe 10 missile shots if its armed that way.

The fighters in Homeworld have an almost unlimited ammo, or at least vast ammo supplies for hundreds of shots. Also a modern jet fighter is not required to provide life support in deep space where temperature go from incredibly cold to incredibly hot in seconds when you cross the shadow of a planet.

I see no problem in a space fighter being 56m long considering its using advanced lightweight materials and armour to protect and cover engines, lifesupport, ammo, guns, etc. The composite materials will almost certainly require 5 to 10 times the volume of a much more dense material to achieve the same effect, hence a 56m fighter.

Also remember that a modern fighter basically has no armour as a whole craft. Only the cockpit will be mainly armoured. The modern fighter relies on speed, maneouver, better weapons, defensive counter measures and pilot skill to avoid being hit. Every modern fighter that takes a missile hit will be eliminated and a good chance it will be eliminated or at least forced to retreat if hit by cannon fire.

Please do not get sucked into this comparison of our land and sea based technology and space vehicles, they are not the same, only in name and tasks can you consider them the same.

:bombface:

Crossroads inc.

Bah, Bumbers, Calculations, Forumlas!!!

Why can't the simplest thing be the correct one? I LIKE My 5000 meter Sajuuk

Diabolical

Meh, i've always liked the idea of the ships being incredibly massive lumbering things truely designed to be self contained worlds sailing the void.
As for scale and mass it doesn't really bother me that a fighter would litterally have to be hundreds of metres long to to be in scale in this context as it is just a game to me and I can just imagine they are much smaller than they look in game and it would be impractical if i had to try an manage tiny little specks of dust.

Starlight the composite materials used in tank armour are denser and heavier than steel hence why they are used as ballistic defense materials as steel would be torn to shreds by modern anti tank weaponry.

But even if a ship was 5 kilometres long using for some reason light and thin composite armour against hypervelocity slugs it would with the internal structures, engines (which would be hundreds of metres in length and depth themselves) a full ship building factory and many other internal systems weigh a hell of alot more than a 500 metre long construct from this day and age.

Derivative

If the mass in space is at rest, it will stay at rest. I'm talking about the energy required to move that mass from 0m/s to 50m/s, which will require energy. once at 50m/s then you don't have to fire the engines anymore. I can tell you how much power (in watts and in horsepower) it will take to start moving that mass when I get home and find my physics equations.



This is why I shall always design spaceships in autocad first.

Starlight

I do not say the mass figures being used for HW1 or 2 are right, just that because a WWII battleship weighed 57000 tons, and was 295 m long, does not equate to a 295 m long Space ship being the same weight.

I agree, a 5km long space ship would weigh a hell of a lot, just not 5000m divide 295 = 16.9 times 57000 = 966,100 tons.

By the way, the bismark appox 51700 tons and 248m long had almost half her weight in armour. No replace that with a considerably less mass, hugely more volumous material composite (along the lines of some form of balistic crumple zone) and armour plate and you can make considerable weight savings.

Do not be constrained by current modern knowledge for armour, it is a compromise of size, mass and cost for the task required. Space ships do not have the same size problems but do suffer from mass and cost issues. :gnight:

Starlight

I just loaded up HW2 and move measured Sajuuk, I get approx 3900m to 4000m in game which is rather close to the 3981m the 3D model produces. I think you need to recheck your ingame move measure, because to be 1000m out is a HUGE difference 1.25 times the length. If you rearly do get 5000m, then there is a scaling difference between out two games and I do not see that as a possibility.

I would be interested in some one else providing a check measurment in game. :thumb:

Diabolical

*Nods* Agreed it may just work that way but we might also find that it may just be the opposite in the future with new ballistic defensive materials ending up weighing a great deal more than they do now to be more effective against projectiles travelling rediculous velocities.

Of course untill we do get there we won't know for sure, the ships might end up weighing great deals more in comparrison to current world technologies.

Crossroads inc.

*checks*

By-Gum, just about 4000 meters... Why did I have 5000 for so long? Bugger... ((Feels all embaressed)) Well Seems Sajuuk needs to be resized on my pic, but im curious how the scaling for the others are.

The Size Comparison sheet should be to scale of the other ships. Bentus I just rechecked at being between 5400 and 5500 Meters. And the Hiig BC and Destroyer come out around 800 and 500 meters respectivly.

Derivative

As I said earlier in post #29, I would do the physics to figure out how much it would take to move that ship from rest. I know its off topic, but its still interesting. I also didn't check my math.

5,000,000 short tons equals 4,535,923,700 Kg. In the .shp file of the kushan mothership, it says the acceleration is 10 m/s² and the top speed is 50 m/s. so it takes 5 seconds to get to top speed. KE (kinetic energy) is 1/2 mv² and delta KE is work. (1/2*4,535,923,700*50²)- (1/2* 4,535,923,700*0²) = 5,669,904,625,000 J power equals work over time, 5669904625000/5 = 1,133,980,925,000 watts, or 1,520,693,207.7 HP (horsepower) and there’s four main engines on that mothership, so each engine has to produce at least a quarter of those numbers above. and 5 million tons moving at 50 meters per second is the same as (using momentum here) a two ton (1,814.4 Kg) car moving at 449,992,429 kilometers per hour (279,612,332 miles per hour)-this isn't past the speed of light.


How tall are those ships crossroads?

NESEN_RENSC

It seems only logical to me that if one is going to do a complete size comparison and analysis of the ships of the homeworld games that one starts at the begginning. Using the HW1 ships as the base and comparing the cataclysm ships and the HW2 ships to them seems the only logical way of doing it. (Especially since HW:C and HW2 both have a "prisonship" model that can be compared directly to the prison ship model of HW1).

I fail to see how a space warship would have less mass than a modern day battleship.
Even if the ship was built in space, as you say, then it most certainly would require a great solid metal constuction. In order for the ship to be habitable it needs to be able to withstand the pressure of the vacuum of space continuously for its entire lifetime, and that's including any damage it may suffer during combat. This is why Star Trek, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica and others all have ships that are made of metal.

Its true that modern tank armor is comprised of composite materials, however, a modern tank isnt under threat of bursting like a balloon if a round pentrates the armor.
Any composite armor used in a spacecraft would have to be tough enough to withstand the forces of depressurization without blowing completely apart, AND would have to be dense enough to stop any rounds or missiles fired at the ship.

The biggest problem with your supposition for calculating the mass of the vessels is you are assuming that they are constructing the ships out of some mythical material. Its probable that they may be using some newfangled composite material, however, there is nothing to suggest that they are. The references and in the ingame cut-scenes clearly show them harvesting asteroids in order to acquire the necessary material to construct the mothership. Most asteroids have Iron-ore and other metals embedded in them. It seems clear that the homeworld ships have a least a moderate amount of metal in their construction.

Also, there is no reason not to compare the homeworld fighters to modern day craft. The biggest difference is that the homeworld ships dont require aelerons, or fins or even wings as they dont need to create lift to move around. A modern jet-fighter carries missiles and ballistic rounds, whereas the homeworld fighters only seem to carry bullets. If you were to convert all of the volume area that the missiles were to take up a fighter could carry significantly more bullets. A modern jet-fighter can carry several thousand rounds. Just imagine how many a homeworld ship would be able to carry. Tens of thousands?

Modern jet fighters DO have basic life support systems. At the altitudes that the pilots fly these days there is very little oxygen and it is very cold. Modern planes are equipped with heaters and oxygen tanks for the pilot. The biggest difference is that the homeworld ships would have to have better heaters. It seems probable that the heaters would be small enough to incorporate into the seat or suit of the pilot as space itself is -273C. A pilot who ejected in space wouldnt survive very long without a heater close by.

JAL-18

The problem with using Homeworld 1 though is that a HW1 interceptor is 56 units long. If that translates into meters, you've got single-pilot craft flying around that are half the size of a football field!

I direct your attention here

Starlight

I have not played Cata so it is news to me that it also has a Prison Ship model, could someone tell us what size that is :?:

Also, The vessels in HW2 scale very nicely in their own game using move measure. I Think they are more accurate than HW1 and probably more realistic in dimensions. This would scale down the HW1 ships, making an interceptor around 34m long instead of 56m long.



Funny how the space stations and shuttle are built using the same principle as simple aircraft, hollow tubes (in their basic form). relatively light weight compared to their size !!!!!!!!

Also the pressure is relativelty only a light 1 Atmosphere (breathable) there is no need to have a higher pressure. A submarine diving to depth would be subject to much higher pressures and therefore requires a much stronger hull.



I did not say there was no metal within the construction, I am saying review what we know about current space craft and space stations - Light weight tubular constructions, not heavy warship bulkheads and heavy plating to withstand space flight !

Chrome

Space flight's rigors is one thing.

Flying into the weapons range of ion cannons, rail guns, missiles, and torpedoes, all the products of which will travel at a sufficiently fast speed to do severe damage to a hull when they impact...and having zero Trek-style shields in their way is quite another.

When flying into battle, what kind of hull would you prefer: a lightweight tubular construction intended to keep atmosphere and heat inside, and the cold vacuum outside, or a nice bulky metal hull that can withstand not just atmospheric pressure, but the impacts of all those weapons I just mentioned above?

Common sense people. The shuttle and the ISS are not being asked to fight in an interstellar war against an enemy with heavy cruisers like the Qwaar-Jet. How can you expect them to have any construction BUT what is neccessary for them to do the job they are designed to do--in peacetime?

omega

Well not to mention the bigger and heavyer it is the more engine power requiered to move it ever notice why the Mother ship and supercap classes move so slowly its there mass and sizes.

Starlight

Actually the movement of the Homeworld series is all wrong for space, so you have to discount it really.

1) If you have engines capable of creating some acceleration, if you keep firing them the vessel will just keep accelerating untill you stop firing the engines

2) Having stoped firing the engines, the ship will continue at its current speed until you applie an opposite force equal to that of the accelerating force.

3) To apply this stopping force requires either large engines at the front, or you must rotate the ship around to face 180 degrees and fire the main engines to decelerate to a stop.

The mother ship could continue thrusting and could reach fighter speeds all be it in a straight line.



You must remember that the reason mass drivers (rail guns) are required is to accelerate the projectile to high enough speeds to have a chance at hitting a moving target at some distance. The projectile does not have to be a heavy size shell, only a thin penetrating object to punch through any armour and hull.

I did would not use the shuttle as a fighter / warship, only their principle of construction still applies. An armour plating attached to a thin skin hull with a light weight structurally strong inner structure. Consider a modern sports car and racing cars, they use tubular frame chasis to achieve the same rigidity and strength of larger solid steel cosntruction. A bulkhead made out of composite carbon fibre would be very strong yet very light weight compared to the equivalent steel bulkhead. The only reason it is not used in modern ships and buildings is a cost issue and the fact that the weight is not such a problem when compared to a racing car.

You do not need the steel mass of a WWII battleship, you could build the same hull (inner bulkheads, etc) out of light weight yet as strong modern composites and have the same size vessel weigh a fraction of its original all steel construction.

P.S. I am a Structural Engineer who has considerable sailing and boating knowledge and my best friend has a degree in Aeronautical Engineering and we have discussed this matter before.

The structure required to keep atmosphere in is thin, the armour to keep weapons out could be a very thick armour plate and composite with crumple zone construction, making the occupied hull only a small fraction of the ships size.

Riess

I don't believe much of the ships's armor is devoted to keeping in the atmosphere, either. It would actually be pretty stupid to fill a whole warship with precious air and face the risk of decompression with every hit.
Most likely only the bridge section is pressurized at all, maybe some parts of engineering, too, where constant maintenance is needed.

One hole in an empty ship doesn't do much. One hole in a ship filled with air is rather bad.

Sajuuk Cor

I share that view. I guess that most ships in Homeworld, except the Motherships, are driven by only a handful of people, as most systems are automatic anyway. I guess a standard capital ship up to battlecruiser size can be used by a crew of about twelve to fifteen men: three watches of four men (pilot, gunner, engineer, hangar operator) plus captain and a few officers. A carrier or shipyard would take slightly more for operating the hangars and production facilities, but I guess these can be operated with a crew of thirty to fifty men each. Only the motherships are probably really populated with a few thousand crew members each, not counting cryogenically frozen colonists or crew members. How else could the Hiigarans with about 600.000 total population ever hope to maintain a defense fleet strong enough to defend the planet? 600.000 is only a medium-sized city these days... and how did Kiith Somtaaw with only a few thousand members manage to build a fleet strong enough to defeat the Beast? I guess a major factor in losses are fighter pilots, although these probably escape death in escape capsules (i.e. sealed cockpits) and are rescued after the battle.

Starlight

Back to the subject of this Thread

We should each state our own preference for which version is the Base Size and therefore which dimensions we believe are right

I feel that the HW2 ships have a solid standing as the Base dimensions for two reasons.

1) The game engine is improved and you can get very nice move measurements to match the 3D models and the dimensions for a fighter appear to be more acceptable to most of the community - about 17m long.

2) If we use the two Prison ships to scale the HW1 ships down, making a fighter approx 34m long, we can assume that the difference between these two games comes to improved technology a better understanding of space craft and more access to resources to utilise more fancy composites and rare minerals for construction.

This would equate to our current knowledge that as technology progresses, we can miniaturise it and so the HW2 ships are smaller than the HW1 ships

Some one said CATA had the prison ship, I will see if I can get hold of a copy and extract the 3D model from it as a comparison, but I expect it’s the same as HW1 because I thinks it’s the same HW1 engine but tweaked, but I could be wrong there ??????

Lets state our positions and come to a consensus of opinion regarding the size, before discussing construction, etc.

Riess

Cata doesn't have a prison ship model included, as far as I know, but it' reusing several HW models, so the size relations of Cata ships are fairly easy to deduct.

I say HW uses a different measuring system than HW2, regardless of the common Prison Ship model. A 20-25 m long fighter I can imagine. 50 m is a bit much.

Matter of opinion though. The only ones wh can really use the info are the Requiem war modders.

NESEN_RENSC

Ill drop the ship construction subject for now, although I still disagree.

Having stated your reasoning for using the HW2 ships as the base, I must admit makes a certain amount of sense.

The HW:C prison ship is never seen in the game, but it is included in the .big file, in the derelict folder. It is exactly the same size as the HW1 ship. This makes the HW:C ships the size ratio as the HW1 ships, so they would also need to be scaled down in order to be compared to the HW2 ships.

Has anyone thought of using the cutscene screen of the pilot standing next to the Taidani corvette to get an accurate size?

Starlight

Is that cut scene from Cata, do not remeber it in HW1

Starblade

That's not a cutscene. That's concept art.

Riess

Didn't the taii corvette with the people standing next to it appear in the final cutscene of HW?
Anyway yes, that would make a reasonable size comparison.

No1lives4ever

I believe so Riess.

That would be this picture right?


Also i would like to point out this concept, estimate a human to be about as big as the seat.