Spacescifi

Members
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

44 Excellent

1 Follower

About Spacescifi

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Even so, 900 meters would mean 0.5 g's, or half of 1g. Which is more than mars and the moon's gravity. Centrifugal force will pull the crew to the edge or ends, and 50% of Earth gravity will still pull really good. My point is that the bigger a scifi spaceship is, the more it is subject to centrifugal force affecting the crew. Assuming the Behemoth vessel is also an air flying SSTO, suddenly quicker turning becomes mecessary. I am at the point that I realize I have to insert fiction to make scifi starship designs that are non-optimal with known physics optimal in scifi. Some call them inertial dampeners. Mine would be a specific fictional array of devices emitting antigravity repulsor waves in sync with the ship's roll, yaw, or forward acceleration. Thus centrifugal force due to yawing in space would be repelled so as to negate it's effect on the inside of the ship. Neither would the crew fall backward when the ship flew forward, nor fall to the sides when it rolled. On the other hand, the ship would still be subject to gravity from falling to a planet. Interestingly, if you watch closely, the millenium falcon seems to operate in this manner. Meaning it's forward acceleration has zero effect on the passengers, but the gravity of the planet does effect it, shown by the robot falling on the ceiling when the ship flew upside down. (Fixed it)
  2. I knew that. I merely mix reality and scifi see what fits and what does'nt. Basically, with good enough internal design and a few hull modifications, I could make even this design a viable SSTO, provided I have sufficient thrust constant acceleration.
  3. I like saucer starship desogn, including this: That said, the engines are off place, and even if I put them properly in the center and behind the ship the crew would fall backwards. That does not even include the centrifugal gravity issues. To solve the centrifugal gravity issues, I would make the inner deck walls concentric. The outer most ring deck would be a swimming pool. The next outermost deck would be the crew area, as would be the rest of the inner decks. In the event of manevering or acceleration, the crew would run with oxygen masks to the outer ring pool, grab onto a holding beam and foothold underwater, and ride out the acceleration and manevers until they are over. The hand and footholds would keep them from flying loose, and the water would make them safer if anyone did fly loose.
  4. I really do not have a problem with this in a fictional setting. Moving entire worlds? No thanks. Takes too long and really unnecesary. I would sooner connect a portal between world's and siphon off an ocean to terraform rather than spend years moving a planet into position to crash it into another. Also, is not water on other worlds radiated? Like you cannot just thaw it out and drink it righr? It must be treated or processes somehow or else you get cancer? Sea water around nuke blasts is known to be radioactive due to salts and minerals in the water. I guess what I am saying is that space water won't be pure watet by anymeans due to cosmic rays ionizing the minerals and salts in the water.
  5. A setting where big spaceships actually land on planets. It does not utilize smaller shuttles because it is primarily a liquid tanker shaped like a thick saucer. It needs to carry as much fluid as possible so it can ship it to developing colonies inhospitable to life naturally. Also it has scifi engines with the necessary power to do all of that without nuking all in it's immediate wake. So turning in a reasonable amount of time would be reasonable during air flight. If I wanted spaceflight to have more forced encounters, I could simply have the warp/FTL method auto-adjust the spaceship's speed and trajectory to the destination target on dropping out of warp. The rest would be course corrections and slowing for landing/intercept. Afterall, that is what popular scifi already does essentially. It is not as if they ever mention adjusting for speed or trajectory before going to warp. They just always arrive that way. Yes... I realized that some form of fiction is required to make a scifi shape like a saucer work when it flies forward. Instead of inertial dampeners though... Antigrav pods: insulates a crew member from g-force via the spaceship's acceleration, centrifugal force, or even a planet or star. Makes them weightless in the small pod. Rest of ship is still normal. Only in the antigrav pods is it always weightless. The bridge is also ALWAYS weightless. Because desparate maneuvers are a lot easier to make when the crew is not effected. The only restraints now are the structural integrity of the saucer.
  6. Of course. Sci-fi is by nature forced to tell the story that anyone wants to tell. Ideally, you would make a spaceship specifically optimal for the place it is going to. But that would be impractical if a lot of planet hopping around occurs for characters. Unless one big mothership had a bunch if parasite craft. Some optimal for gas giants, others for moons, and still others for mars and or earth or venus types.
  7. I realize too that if you make the crew module a cylinder and put it inside a gyroscope, then you can flip the ship anyway you wan't and still have the crew being pulled toward the floor. Timing is everything. Position too, as the module/gyroscope would need to be at the ends/perimeter for centrifugal g-force. At the very least I learned that even with scifi tech, space travel physics favors small crews rather than big ones for space travel.
  8. True. Suffice to say, a comfy crew/passenger quantity is a smaller one. Not a huge one. True. I am looking into what happpens when scifi meets up with reality. Blending the two is insightful for a scifi creator.
  9. Well a manned scifi starship can only have a few purposes. Passenger liner, or colony transport. In popular scifi, spaceships can use some FTL jump or warp drive to get rather close to a planet. In other words, travel times would not be really long. Thus the reasons I have made my conclusions. Centrifugal gravity? Constant acceleration? It can do both. EDIT: Earth has a revolution evert 24 hours. If it were faster it could compete with gravity. But it is'nt, which is good for us. We would be dead.
  10. Normal physics. According to google, 900 meters is all it takes for 1g via rotation. Huge ships would still subject crew to only living in certain areason the spaceship. I guess what I am saying is that a lot of the space for amassive spaceship cannot be utilized by a scifi spaceship crew during maneuvers. On the other hand, a smaller radius, or a shorter length spaceship could utilize more of it's space for the crew.
  11. Length or radius please. If it is 97,000 tons but only as long as 8 feet then you won't get 1 RPM by rolling, yawing, or pitching. A faster RPM would be required.
  12. With a 900 meter radius or length, simply pitching or yawing it at ONE revolution per minute creates 1g at the ends/perimeter. Thus, it dawned on me that there really is an optimal size for manned scifi spaceships. 900 meters or more means that crew cannot be located anywhere near the ends or perimeter during maneuvers. Whenever the ship pitches, rolls, or yaws, the crew would be at the mercy of falling/pulled toward the ends/outer edge. So a 900 meter saucer is a better spacestation than a starship, as crew cannot use the outer rim area anywatly during manevers. This applies even if one had a scifi drive thay could accelerate for hours on end. It would still be subject to LONG turn rates that also cause g-force along the rim. So in conclusion, as much as I like big and massive starships in scifi, they really are not practical for manned spacecraft due to long turn rate times and g-force. Who wants to take one whole minute just to roll, yaw, or pitch the spaceship? Any faster and the g-force at the ends/perimeter is higher. A more optimal size for manned scifi spacecraft is like the size of your average western home. It would take a higher RPM to do g-force with that, and I doubt anyone is going to blast their RCS like it's a gravitron ride anyway. What do you think? Are massive scifi starships practical or impractical for manned spacecraft because of long turn rates and g-force at the ends/perimeter,
  13. Hmm... so slow speed light rocket really are a waste of breaking physics? Unless the thrust of slow light speed rocket is dramatically greater than chemical rockets. Then you could just pulse fire it to orbit like an orion battleship. The only issue I have with the direct matter to photon conversion drive is... it would nuke all in it's wake. Ideally I want high thrust that can last for hours while not nuking everything behind the ship. Seems like a direct conversion to superluminal photons is the only solution. I think one could use less superluminal photons than regular photons as exhaust, therefore avoiding nuking all in it's immediate wake.
  14. So lemme get this straight. A mass conversion rocket that converts it's fuel mass 100% into slower than light photons would have rocket thrust but expend the fuel mass at chemical rocket rates? Which means why even bother?
  15. Yes, we are discussing and walking on untrodden ground. We cannot go where no man has gone before, but we can sure talk about it. More than likely I am wrong about what happens to a photon once it becomes superluminal. And that's okay. I am only an aspiring scifi writer anyway. The way I see it, spacetime is the box that light inhabits. Light diffuses slowly but surely across it. If the speed of light were faster, I see either one of these possibilities. 1. Superluminal light stays concentrated for much longer. Which means FTL LIDAR and laser cannon become a practical matter. Overpowered and may break many fictional popular settings likely, but so what? We are considering the implications. 2. Superluminal light diffuses (spreads) much faster across spacetime. Which means getting it to be a laser or LIDAR would be impossible even if you put your superluminal laser right on the target to be zapped. 3. Good for space propulsion.