Talk:Repulsor engine: Difference between revisions

m
no edit summary
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
 
Line 4: Line 4:


:It's a little ambiguous, but you're probably right. Pulled it. --<b>[[User:Dragonclaws|<font color="#800080">Dragon<font color="#DE397E">c</font>laws</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:Dragonclaws|<font color="#6600D8">talk</font>]])</sup></b> 03:55, 30 April 2017 (EDT)
:It's a little ambiguous, but you're probably right. Pulled it. --<b>[[User:Dragonclaws|<font color="#800080">Dragon<font color="#DE397E">c</font>laws</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:Dragonclaws|<font color="#6600D8">talk</font>]])</sup></b> 03:55, 30 April 2017 (EDT)
== Reactionless drive? ==
Does the new info from Warfleet confirm the Repulsor Engine to be a reactionless drive? Cos that sounds like something the Forerunners would've of used instead of Reaction drives. Wouldn't a reactionless drive be more advanced then a reaction drive or would it not matter. I know the Covenant likely got the repulsor engine tech from Forerunner tech but it still seems odd to me that they'd use a reactionless drive when the Forerunners didn't assuming i'm right about the nature of the engine. Or does it not matter as to the nature of the tech or how advanced it is, only the speed and velocities that's it's capable of and it's advantages or disadvantages?
[[User:The Divine One|The Divine One]] ([[User talk:The Divine One|talk]]) 10:44, 5 November 2017 (EST)