TheBigDog Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 I need to find a cool name for my design. Hmmm.... For now I am calling it the "Prophesy". I like that. The Prophesy. Ok, lets get into dimensions. The diameter is about 200 meters. This means that the sections are around 50 meters in length and ten meters across with a rounded square cross section. This allows multiple decks in each section. The total floorspace would be on the order of 64800 square meters(over 16 acres, almost 700,000 square feet). Stretched out that is 7.5 kilometers to walk the full length of all the sections including the joints that connect the sections at the ends of the spokes. Some of the spokes are crawl tubes that allow you to move to the service areas of the center sections. One of my ideas is to have the floor sections of the crew area "floating" like on a waterbed. This water supply would be used for all crew hydration and hygiene needs. It would also act as a damper to insure that weight is always evenly distributed to all the sections keeping the spinning ship in perfect balance. The the whole crew were to move to a single section their weight would force water out of that section and into the others, keeping the weight of all the sections equal. With a big enough waterbed and some computerized pump help you would not be able to get the ship out of balance if you tried. The six cargo bays are 20 meters in diameter and 75 meters deep. They do not contain atmosphere. They are for storage of probes, satellites, shuttles, etc that are used for extravehicular investigation. There is access to these sections via airlocks from the center section. They can also be used for storing foodstuffs, medicine, and biological samples in a frozen environment. The center section is the zero G science bay. It has atmosphere. It is the docking bay for entering and leaving the ship to docked vehicle. The main tank is mostly chemical propellant for the probes and shuttles. At the end with the engine the nuclear fuel is stored. The nuclear fuel is enough to burn for 100 years without interruption. The is a very big storage container. The whole thing would be assembled in orbit. The ship itself will never enter an atmosphere. That is the purpose of the shuttles and probes. It could in theory be used to start a very small colony on another planet as a limited capability generation ship. About as small as would be feasible. or it could explore our solar system for generations returning to earth every couple of years to take on new crew and equipment. And I don't think any of the engineering is beyond what we could begin assembling almost immediately. Lets do it. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted May 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Ok, while the poll is not conclusive (I wouldnt mind a few more votes) it is evident that anti-matter is the preferred method. Could the people who voted other please elaborate, what is your other method or propolsion? I am thinking up a few designs myself but am yet to get it down on paper - I normally find something wrong before I get that far.. maybe I will just start tinkering tonight :hihi: Keep up the good work guys :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFaithfulStone Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 I'd just like to add real quick that I thought one of the best (plausible) fictional space ships was The River of Stars from "The Wreck of the River of Stars." Even if it doesn't survive the book, it was one of the more thorough fictional space ship designs I've ever read. TFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Puffs out his chest, and quotes in a manly manor: I REALLY hope we get back to the starship pretty quick. Anyway, I'm still looking for old material I wrote on The Turtle. I will say this. My original FTL idea was using the Quantum Gravitational Discontinuity (QGD). That was why the outer hull was there. It was the "gravtenna" that used a standing wave on the outer hull to drive the ship FTL. the hull had to be seamless, that's why the huge ice tank served as a heat sink. Any heat generated by people, or the plasma turbines would collect inside the hull until "breakout" at the end of FTL, when the hull could be opened and release the excess heat. Under that concept, much of the design makes sense. (would it look like this?) On the gender confusion issue.. thank you very much. You have given my wife MUCH to laugh about :singer:. All I hear now is "Wanna check out my blueprints honey?" <Sigh> On the flip side, I suspect the circumspect critiques of my mostly nutty suggestions will likely be a bit more vocal :phones: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Note on the Poll Jay. If the ship is to leave the solar system, I would suggest removing the solar option :singer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted May 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 If the ship was to leave the solar system it would only be going to alpha centauri, any further and it becomes *to* long, besides the solar sail can be used to get between star systems so long as it reaches a fast enough speed before it leaves the first system. Ideally it should have a duel drive system one that is of the FTL nature :singer: but thats not crucial to the design, not just yet anyway. My designs are on way, just have a few touchups to make first :phones: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted May 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Without any further ado... here it is :singer: ok, not what you expected - I hope so, I was going for 'out of the box'! So quick run down - solid spherical shell, the two big rings are atom smashers - for creating anti-matter on the fly, the box in the middle is an extremely large modified pebble bed uranium fission reactor, the black lines from the middle are LINAC's + maintainence access, the red spots are where the anti-matter can be reacted - notice that the major axis along which the ship would travel has a crossover of the anti-matter creating rings so those spots get double output for accel and de-accel, while the others are for manouvering. The crew can shoot around the outside in compartments much like Pyro's but not a full circle, I am trying to think of a way to maintain g gravity even during acceleration.. not quite there yet! J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 The crew can shoot around the outside in compartments much like Pyro's but not a full circle, I am trying to think of a way to maintain g gravity even during acceleration.. not quite there yet! J Interesting design J Well, we apparently have anti-matter drives and soon will have FTL drive, so pick your technology. Gravity generators would do nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Without any further ado......the two big rings are atom smashers - for creating anti-matter on the fly...JQ, excuse me for asking a potentially embarrasing question but...If the two atom smashers are to be used for creating anti-matter,exactly what supplies the energy to run the atom smashers? Anti-matter? :eek_big: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 In response to one of Mr. Kayra's perceptive questions: Why don't I just put an axle and spokes on my ring of habitation cars and spin them, losing the MagLev system in the process? Because the spokes have to move through a huge volume bisecting damn near the entire ship. Structural strength is therefore sacrificed, because I cannot have structural members that go "through" the mid-plane of the ship. Volume for storage and infra-structure is sacrificed, because the spokes need that volume to spin through. I would have to shorten the landers. Elevators to the hub would be nice, inasmuch as they are easily understood and visualized, but kinda like having to fly from Dallas to Atlanta to make a connecting flight to Fort Worth. PS: And I like MagLevs!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Maybe a dumb question... Is the vacuume of space cold enough to use low temp superconductors integrated into our designs that would not require other means of refrigeration? Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFaithfulStone Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Well, we apparently have anti-matter drives and soon will have FTL drive, so pick your technology. Gravity generators would do nicely. Ha ha ha. Personally, I'm against putting FTL on the ship unless you could explain it so that it's entirely self consistent. (Which of course is impossible.) I don't have a problem with antimatter since it's a well established phenomenon, and we actually CAN make it. Nor do I have a problem with fusion, since it also a well established phenomenon that CAN be duplicated. Gravity generators, Nuclear Reactors that fit in a suitcase, FTL - these things are impossible given known PHYSICS, not just known technology. I say that we posit for the purposes of this project that money is no object. For some reason we absolutely MUST get off Earth. (Perhaps the Fithp are attacking.) R&D into things we know are possible shouldn't be a problem. If it's a question of technology or money, let's gloss it. If it's a question of physics or self-consistency let's address it. (That is, you can't have a coal-fired spacecraft accelerating to half the speed of light by expelling steam out it's back-end.) TFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 JQ, excuse me for asking a potentially embarrasing question but...If the two atom smashers are to be used for creating anti-matter,exactly what supplies the energy to run the atom smashers? Anti-matter? :eek_big: The large pebble fed reactors he mentioned :( Jay-qu, what is the reason for bringing along the anti-matter production, instead of just the anti-matter? Sounds like this might be an exploration ship that was not intending to return. Even then, mass wise you might be better off bringing along just the anti-matter. In response to one of Mr. Kayra's perceptive questions: Why don't I just put an axle and spokes on my ring of habitation cars and spin them, losing the MagLev system in the process? Because the spokes have to move through a huge volume bisecting damn near the entire ship. Structural strength is therefore sacrificed, because I cannot have structural members that go "through" the mid-plane of the ship. Volume for storage and infra-structure is sacrificed, because the spokes need that volume to spin through. I would have to shorten the landers. Elevators to the hub would be nice, inasmuch as they are easily understood and visualized, but kinda like having to fly from Dallas to Atlanta to make a connecting flight to Fort Worth. Mr Kayra.. I like that :shrug: Sorry for all the questions Pyrotex, I just like things to make sense... and that does. PS: I like maglevs as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Ha ha ha. Personally, I'm against putting FTL on the ship unless you could explain it so that it's entirely self consistent. (Which of course is impossible.) I don't have a problem with antimatter since it's a well established phenomenon, and we actually CAN make it. Nor do I have a problem with fusion, since it also a well established phenomenon that CAN be duplicated. Gravity generators, Nuclear Reactors that fit in a suitcase, FTL - these things are impossible given known PHYSICS, not just known technology. I say that we posit for the purposes of this project that money is no object. For some reason we absolutely MUST get off Earth. (Perhaps the Fithp are attacking.) R&D into things we know are possible shouldn't be a problem. If it's a question of technology or money, let's gloss it. If it's a question of physics or self-consistency let's address it. (That is, you can't have a coal-fired spacecraft accelerating to half the speed of light by expelling steam out it's back-end.) TFS Hear hear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Could the people who voted other please elaborate, what is your other method or propolsion?I envision doing the travelling without the need of some external ship. Somehow folding spacetime and travelling as is. No ship. Racoon 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 I envision doing the travelling without the need of some external ship. Somehow folding spacetime and travelling as is. No ship. cheapskate :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFaithfulStone Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 I envision doing the travelling without the need of some external ship. Somehow folding spacetime and travelling as is. No ship. What will you use to fight the giant brain at the end of the book? I know - The Power of LOVE. My engines run on pure unadulterated hate though, so we'll probably have to battle it out in an eons long war among the stars. TFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts