Forums of the Megaverse®

http://www.nuc.umr.edu/nuclear_facts/spacepower/spacepower.html

124 pounds?

Natasha wrote:http://www.nuc.umr.edu/nuclear_facts/spacepower/spacepower.html

124 pounds?

Not the same. that gets energy from radioactive decay. If you had enough radioactive material to generate mega damage blasts from radiation energy alone, then the reactor core would DO more damage than the guns naturally.

It says in Rifts that the "nuclear reactors" are micro-fusion.

I'd say about 40 lbs.

How about this as a good rule of thumb: 10-15% of the total robot weight.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Natasha wrote:http://www.nuc.umr.edu/nuclear_facts/spacepower/spacepower.html

124 pounds?

Not the same. that gets energy from radioactive decay. If you had enough radioactive material to generate mega damage blasts from radiation energy alone, then the reactor core would DO more damage than the guns naturally.

It says in Rifts that the "nuclear reactors" are micro-fusion.

I'd say about 40 lbs.

actually, the rules for reactors and their destruction work better if their atomic fission.

the only mention of fusion is in a minor fluff peice contradicted by multiple other entries, and a small portable fusion plant that according to fluff can be used to replace a robots powerplant.

glitterboy2098 wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Natasha wrote:http://www.nuc.umr.edu/nuclear_facts/spacepower/spacepower.html

124 pounds?

Not the same. that gets energy from radioactive decay. If you had enough radioactive material to generate mega damage blasts from radiation energy alone, then the reactor core would DO more damage than the guns naturally.

It says in Rifts that the "nuclear reactors" are micro-fusion.

I'd say about 40 lbs.

actually, the rules for reactors and their destruction work better if their atomic fission.

Besides the impossibility of sustainging a fission reaction in such a small thing, i've never seen any rules for a reactors destruction other than it shuts the bot down.

actually, you only need a softball sized bit of fissile material to sustain fission. and rifts bots and PA might well use a special design like a subcritical reactor, that uses less than critical mass augmented by a particle beam to 'jumpstart' the chain reaction.

as for rules: Pg 226 of the Rifts Main book. its in the railgun section. MG style railguns use a nuclear power plant. damaging or destroying the plant will contaminate the area with deadly radiation.

fusion generators don't give off deadly radiation when damaged or destroyed. they just stop. fission plants do, since the fissile materal is very radioactive.

also check out pg 214, under the robot vehicle systems. nuclear power plants are described as having "and effectively unlimited fuel capacity and power source", and working for years. fusion plants are fuel hogs, multiyear fuel capacity is pretty much impossible. fission reactors on the other hand, require no more fuel than what is built in, and that will last years, even decades without requiring changing.

also note the mention that the self destruct might damage the nuclear power supply, releasing deadly radiation. see my comments above about the railguns. fusion doesn't release radiation when damaged, but fission does.

CS Navy talks about the CS making atomic weapons from the fissile byproducts from nuclear powerplants of CS warmachines. Plutonium required for warheads is a natural byproduct of nuclear reactors, albiet in very small amounts.


now, for fairness, and to keep the one mention of fusion powered bots, i'll conceed that some bots, especially ones built closer to PA109 or by advanced factions like the NGR, might use Fusion instead of fission. fusion is safer, but harder to start and maintain. its also probably more expensive.

Merc Opps page 113*
Portable fusion power plant weighs exactly 48 lbs, provides power output "equal to a large robot vehicle", the size of a large suitcase or large trunk.


Praise me now


* If you do not own merc ops buy it now!

note: Equal to =/= same as.

the merc ops item is a good guide though. fusion is more compact than fission, so a robot's plant is probably going to be heavier. even a fusion plant on bots will be heavier, due to extra gear and fuel.

so about 100 to 200 lbs is my guess, bigger bots will have heavier plants.

glitterboy2098 wrote:note: Equal to =/= same as.

the merc ops item is a good guide though. fusion is more compact than fission, so a robot's plant is probably going to be heavier. even a fusion plant on bots will be heavier, due to extra gear and fuel.

so about 100 to 200 lbs is my guess, bigger bots will have heavier plants.

its specifically states that the plant can be installed as replacement for a vehicle power plant.

replacement =/= same as either.

you can replace a V8 engine with a hybrid engine, but that doesn't mean the V8 was a hybrid.

the evidence of 20 years worth of sourcebboks is that most nuclear powerplants are fission, not fusion.

glitterboy2098 wrote:replacement =/= same as either.

you can replace a V8 engine with a hybrid engine, but that doesn't mean the V8 was a hybrid.

the evidence of 20 years worth of sourcebboks is that most nuclear powerplants are fission, not fusion.

when has a single said anything except nuclear?

actually, nuclear applies to both fission and fusion. ts the way things are written. like how many entries specify "average energy life", which is a trait of fission, not fusion. fusion has a fuel life, only fission is where the length of time you can draw energy be an issue.

or how nuclear rockets overheat and have to cooldown. not a trait of fusion, which gets rid of heat through its thrust. only an indirect cycle atomic jet fits the rifts entries.

of how about pg 26 of the RMB, under mechanical engineer? where atomic engines are mentioned in relation to nuclear power plants.


RUE represents a retcon, trying to shoehorn in 'fusion' while retaining all the rules and entires that only work right with fission.

rat_bastard wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:replacement =/= same as either.

you can replace a V8 engine with a hybrid engine, but that doesn't mean the V8 was a hybrid.

the evidence of 20 years worth of sourcebboks is that most nuclear powerplants are fission, not fusion.

when has a single said anything except nuclear?

Well, technically, a couple from Phaseworld mention fusion and micro fusion power plants. But ya I don't think any nation on Rifts Earth has (re)discovered fusion power, not even Triax. My Chaos Earth books on loan, and I cannot remember if they had fission plants pre-cataclysm. If they did, ARCHIE should have access to that data as well.

Kevin simply didn't get that detailed when he penned RMB. Nuclear was nuclear. Keeps things simple I guess.

TY for the Merc Ops portable nuke plant, Rat, good find.

asajosh wrote:Kevin simply didn't get that detailed when he penned RMB. Nuclear was nuclear. Keeps things simple I guess.

You'd think so.

lather wrote:

asajosh wrote:Kevin simply didn't get that detailed when he penned RMB. Nuclear was nuclear. Keeps things simple I guess.

You'd think so.

Well, I guess it keep things simple if you let it...
On the flip side, it creates good debate and discussion on the boards

asajosh wrote:

lather wrote:

asajosh wrote:Kevin simply didn't get that detailed when he penned RMB. Nuclear was nuclear. Keeps things simple I guess.

You'd think so.

Well, I guess it keep things simple if you let it...
On the flip side, it creates good debate and discussion on the boards

That's why they're here, I guess.

asajosh wrote:How about this as a good rule of thumb: 10-15% of the total robot weight.

This works for me.

However, I would pick one specific percentage since players would campaign for 10%, especially if they are going for stealing it.

GE's Ecomagination project includes nuclear power.

NASA scientists are likely working nuclear power, too.

If they can overcome people's fear of nuclear power, then it could catch on. And in 90 years who knows what state it will be in.

And, imagine yourself 90 years ago trying to project 90 years into the future.

I have ruled that it is a fuel cell that uses a fuel that is made of common elements but requires a great amount of energy to make into fuel. but thats just my way o making it make sense to me.

There exists two types of science fiction. Both are fiction, but one is realistic fiction. It is ok to ask for it. It does not have to be that way though, of course.

Natasha wrote:There exists two types of science fiction. Both are fiction, but one is realistic fiction. It is ok to ask for it. It does not have to be that way though, of course.

I always thought the distinction was 'science fiction' and 'science fantasy', though I guess nowadays it's 'hard sf' and 'soft sf'.

Qev wrote:

Natasha wrote:There exists two types of science fiction. Both are fiction, but one is realistic fiction. It is ok to ask for it. It does not have to be that way though, of course.

I always thought the distinction was 'science fiction' and 'science fantasy', though I guess nowadays it's 'hard sf' and 'soft sf'.

as it is, both are Science fiction. if you ignore the science, its just fiction.

in this case, science backs up fission, while fusion is backed by a weak retcon attempt and a vague fluff peice.

feel free to use whatever you want, but RIFTS was written originally as using fission, and so it will remain in my games.

Actually on the Bionics Sourcebook there is a mention that most vehicles, power armors and robots of the Rifts setting (phase world or not) uses a "Nuclear battery" of sorts. I dont recall the page but if I recall it right it is a item in the various cybersystems described.

The point is: Rifts vehicles (principally power armors and small vehicles) dont use nuclear or even fusion reactors for power source. They use a type of battery. Nuclear, but still a battery.

Just my two cents.

That's a broad term though. Several different things qualify as a 'nuclear battery'.

Natasha wrote:That's a broad term though. Several different things qualify as a 'nuclear battery'.

True but they are not reactors or power plants of any sort either.

Nightmaster wrote:

Natasha wrote:That's a broad term though. Several different things qualify as a 'nuclear battery'.

True but they are not reactors or power plants of any sort either.

True true. I just had "what is their weight?" in mind when replying.

Natasha wrote:

Nightmaster wrote:

Natasha wrote:That's a broad term though. Several different things qualify as a 'nuclear battery'.

True but they are not reactors or power plants of any sort either.

True true. I just had "what is their weight?" in mind when replying.

It will varies.

Man sized power armors would most probably weight some pounds. Someting between 20 pounds to 50.

Large sized power armors like the TX-1000 Ulti Max (Sourcebook 1) most probably will weight around 100 to 200 pounds or more.

Vehicles of most types will have batteries weighting around 100 pounds.

Robots could or not use the battery system since they would be needing an amount of energy higher than a power armor. In my opinion those are the ones that could be using a actual reactor. It will varies with designer. The coalition would be using more reactors in their robot vehicles thanks to the low technology they have in comparission to the NGR that would be only using reactors in their most large and energy consuming vehicles like the Dragonwing robot and the Devastator.

Of course that is just my thoughs on the matter based on the info you get with the bionics sourcebook regarding nuclear power sources.