You mean they aren't?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

You mean they aren't?

screwedmorethenonce
To:[hidden email]
From: "James Gibbon" <[hidden email]> |
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:12:05 +0000
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Design of working alien spacesuit

After all, if you go down the route of making the alien designs
look sensible from a human technology point of view, you'll have
to put wings (or rotor blades) on your UFO models as well .. :)

James

I thought that they were rotor blades and were two hundred times more
efficent then human designs, due to alien tech.
Oh well, another belief shot to hell.
One thing I had wondered about though. The suits seemed to be very
tough, yet the slightest impact to the faceplate seemed to shatter
it, thus killing them.
Shoody workmanship or bad writing?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: You mean they aren't?

jamesgibbon
"screwedmorethenonce" wrote:

> I thought that they were rotor blades and were two hundred times
> more efficent then human designs, due to alien tech.

Well, if you mean the plectrum-shaped structures that surround
the hull, I wouldn't call them 'rotor blades' exactly. But your
point about alien tech is exactly the point I was making - it may
not make sense according to out own present understanding of
technology, but as Arthur C Clarke said, "any sufficiently
advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic". The same
principle can apply to the alien suit designs


> One thing I had wondered about though. The suits seemed to be very
> tough, yet the slightest impact to the faceplate seemed to shatter
> it, thus killing them.
> Shoody workmanship or bad writing?

I suppose shatterproof glass was a bit less common back then ..
it's fair to say it wasn't that well thought out, I suppose.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: You mean they aren't?

Anthony Appleyard
"screwedmorethenonce" wrote:
> One thing I had wondered about though. The suits seemed to be very
> tough, yet the slightest impact to the faceplate seemed to shatter
> it, thus killing them. Shoddy workmanship or bad writing?

James Gibbon <james.gibbon@v...> wrote:
> I suppose shatterproof glass was a bit less common back then ..
> it's fair to say it wasn't that well thought out, I suppose.

When UFO was made, what was real-world technology like in making
tough visors for motorcycle and riotsquad helmets, and transparent
riotshelds? If I had to design and make a working spacesuit now,
alien-type or other, I would make the faceplate out of transparent
polycarbonate, not glass.