Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

space ship design


danielost
 Share

Recommended Posts

what design do you think a mars ship should be. i think it should be Enterprise shape. i am a Trekkie.

we will have to assemble any ship for a mars mission in space due to the size of the shielding and size of the ship itself. needing that we need to feed the crew. yes i know we are close to having food replicators, but even that requires supplies.

since we have to build this ship in space it will need to be designed to be able to carry out more than one type of mission.

Edited by danielost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

a ship would do, and I think its to early to make a space ship so big such as the enterprise

Edited by MissJatti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the current NASA baseline Mars transfer vehicle:

nasamtvcopernicus.jpg?width=750

Or possibly something like this if we go for a solar electric drive:

Z211-350x139.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

a ship would do, and I think its to early to make a space ship so big such as the enterprise

such a ship wouldn't have to be as big as the Enterprise. i am talking about a ship big enough for say a ten man crew not a thousand. yes i know the Enterprise has a crew of around 500. but the shape can be the same. the components would have to fit in our launch missiles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do we need 'launch missiles'? :unsure2:

at the moment that is what we are using. cargo space inside a missile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at a guess it will be a long narrow type.. a long cylinder.. prob some kind of rotating section for artificial gravity area.. remember guys.. we do not have shield tech.. so the nose of the ship will be heavily armoured ..

be along the lines of this kind of thing

l67136-mission-to-mars2-18941.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at a guess it will be a long narrow type.. a long cylinder.. prob some kind of rotating section for artificial gravity area.. remember guys.. we do not have shield tech.. so the nose of the ship will be heavily armoured ..

be along the lines of this kind of thing

l67136-mission-to-mars2-18941.jpg

at a guess it will be a long narrow type.. a long cylinder.. prob some kind of rotating section for artificial gravity area.. remember guys.. we do not have shield tech.. so the nose of the ship will be heavily armoured ..

be along the lines of this kind of thing

l67136-mission-to-mars2-18941.jpg

ships like this would be to easy to just throw away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at the moment that is what we are using. cargo space inside a missile.

A missile and a rocket are not the same thing. There are missiles that are not rocket propelled, just as there are rockets that aren't missiles.

Missile: Self propelled guided weapon. (modern usage)

Rocket: A vehicle that uses rockets for propulsion.

The correct name you are looking for is launch vehicle.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ships like this would be to easy to just throw away.

What does the look of a vehicle have to do with its reusability ?

The Enterprise may be cool looking, but from an engineering standpoint it doesn't make any sense. Its engine placement would make it incredibly unstable. There is a very good reason why spacecrafts allways have their engines on the centerline, not in nacelles on top of them. It would be a very unpleasant experience to actually travel on a spacecraft made like the Enterprise. :rolleyes:

Its fine to like Startrek, but please don't think it have anything to do with real engineering.

People who are interested in a more detailed look at how spacecrafts might look like in the real world, might want to take a look at this site: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/basicdesign.php

Its really great. :tu:

Edited by Noteverythingisaconspiracy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A missile and a rocket are not the same thing. There are missiles that are not rocket propelled, just as there are rockets that aren't missiles.

Missile: Self propelled guided weapon. (modern usage)

Rocket: A vehicle that uses rockets for propulsion.

The correct name you are looking for is launch vehicle.

except that every thing we have launched into texcept the shuttle has been missile based. doesn't matter the fuel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does the look of a vehicle have to do with its reusability ?

The Enterprise may be cool looking, but from an engineering standpoint it doesn't make any sense. Its engine placement would make it incredibly unstable. There is a very good reason why spacecrafts allways have their engines on the centerline, not in nacelles on top of them. It would be a very unpleasant experience to actually travel on a spacecraft made like the Enterprise. :rolleyes:

Its fine to like Startrek, but please don't think it have anything to do with real engineering.

People who are interested in a more detailed look at how spacecrafts might look like in the real world, might want to take a look at this site: http://www.projectrh...basicdesign.php

Its really great. :tu:

in the star trek universe, a fed destroy only has a disk and engine pod.center line. an engine pod off center would mean you don't have to flip the ship to slow or stop.

Edited by danielost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

except that every thing we have launched into texcept the shuttle has been missile based. doesn't matter the fuel.

It is the purpose that matters. The Soyuz launcher began life as an intercontinental ballistic missile. But now it is not a missile (except in the strict literal definition of the word) it is a launch vehicle. The word rocket is derived from the Italian rocchetta, which means a spool of string. But that hardly applies nowadays!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its fine to like Startrek, but please don't think it have anything to do with real engineering.

Are you saying that the dilithium crystals used as moderators in matter-anti matter warp drive engines are not real engineering!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

star trek is as close to engineering and science that the writers could get and still have a show or shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

~

~

Oh dear lawd ... at this pace we'd never reach Mars ....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always loved this design. discg.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

star trek is as close to engineering and science that the writers could get and still have a show or shows.

You really shouldn't try to apply engineering to shows like Star Trek or Starwars. They are fiction. Just enjoy them as entertainment.

Do you watch the Hobbit or Game of Thrones and try to work out how dragons can fly ?

Edited by Noteverythingisaconspiracy
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enter the Hogwarts and the Flying Brooms ...

~

~

... Oh but Madam Hooch ... Don't you get saucy with me young man ... ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really shouldn't try to apply engineering to shows like Star Trek or Starwars. They are fiction. Just enjoy them as entertainment.

Do you watch the Hobbit or Game of Thrones and try to work out how dragons can fly ?

no, but scientist have. i know star trek is fictional, what i said is the (original) show was as close to engineering as it can get and still have a show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.