• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

98 Excellent

1 Follower

About Spacescifi

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I really like the spaceship in the video. It is highly accurate of what a space freighter coukd look like... with cargo on the exterior. I will base some of my scifi freighters on the design, just rounding off the crew modules more, as well as the cargo pods to be mire cylindral. The Moon... should be more profitable than Mars for a long time coming... especially after we get a rail to orbit launching facility operational. Yes? The kind without humans, but with enough humanoid aliens to sub for them while still behaving differently in fundamental ways.
  2. I think advertisements would be far more important, as would couriers. The supply chain is space traffic, and if you REALLY want to bury the competition then you must divert as much space traffic to your space food empire as possible. How? Several ways. 1. Stronger broadcast signals. 2. Pay courier vessels to intercept and dock with cruiser liners on their way to the competition. For that matter, you could intercept them with entire fleets of fastfood ships. They would not run out of food quickly that way.
  3. Imagine if you will a fastfood company that has conquered so much of Earth that they want to expand their empire into space. Basically... space habitats at la grange points and also moon bases and LEO stations. Provided space traffic was good enough via constant acceleration thermal antimatter rockets, could a ruthless fastfood company conquer space? For example, the founder of mcdonalds drove the original creators of the restaurant out of business by building a mcdonalds right next to the original but renamed restaurant. Could all these shenanigans still happen? Since that implies a supply chain like no other, since last I checked, no cows are on the moon.
  4. Provided that weight was not an issue and we had a torch drive rocket of sorts... could we avoid the fuel intensive artificial gravity method as well as the rotational gravity method by swimming inside pools in the spaceship? I know such is not viable IRL because of weight, but provided my OP scenario could swimming provide enough exercise to keep the body healthy enough while coasting? The good thing about swimming is that it exercises all the muscles, so combined with resistance weights and a breather, the crew could get a more effective workout while coasting. Without the hazards of rotation (it does have them) nor the waste of propellant via 1g acceleration. You may discuss.
  5. The balloon network is tethered to the ground for several reasons... refilling gas among them. Several kilometer long hoses could pump fresh gas as needed. I believe the balloons could be pumped via hoses from a facility on the ground. Beyond that make the balloons of materials that leak the least.... if the balloons can be made to not leak at all make it so. And the balloons must be massive. Still easier than other non-rocket launch assist schemes I have seen... since the weight is so low weight it can actually work... nor does it have to fight the lower atmosphere.
  6. Going straight up is the fastest way to get to space... I was thinking of using the ballloon floating network for getting small payload spacecraft into space using less propellant. Maybe even smaller SSTO'S. I do not know if the propellant savings is enough to justify the system, since the rocket still must fight gravity to reach orbital velocity.... it just does'nt have to deal with the lower atmosphere anymore, which is also the region that requires the most propellant in the first place. I like your analysis though. I think a floating network that was tethered at an angle would be more useful, since one could actually use it to to achieve some of the sideways velocity needed for orbit. But you are right, rockets are still needed in the end. BONUS: You coukd use the angular tethered system to SLOW spacecraft during reentry so long they have enough propellant to fly through the rings. Hmmm... suddeny winged spacecraft may make a comeback. What should I call this system? Since I don't think I it is similar to other pooular ideas like a space elevator or a space fountain (whatever that is). Magnets I think are awesome though, and the future of spaceflight, if designed by people like me... is very much magnetic.
  7. Not necessarily... that is an engineering problem which is solvable. It just requires a fundamental redesign. Make the floating launch network only vertical. Station upright rocket below it on a large magnet base. Make the bottom of rocket also magnetic so that it lifts off the magnetic base, then use the ringed vertical tethered network to ascend up into the upper atmosphere where the air is sparse. The big magnet base would repel rings headed it's way. And I hope and presume one could design the magnetic accelerator rings so that they repel rings from one another. Power and cooling, if solved, would be all we need for it to works. Physics allows for it.
  8. Take a rocket and speed it off a roller coaster track and through lightweight magnetic rings suspended by balloons. Tether the balloon/magnetic ring network to the ground. The objective, a floating magnetic railway that can be constructed on the ground and float upward into high atmosphere. Once there, rockets or spacecraft could be magnetically accelerated into space. What challenges would need to be overcome? Magnets powerful enough to accelerate the weight of the rocket thru eac succeeding ring. Tethers strong enough to not break. Honestly I say we could do this with modern technology. Save propellant on lightweight rockets and spacecraft at least. You may discuss the challenges and viability of this concept.
  9. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is held in high esteem in the classical realm of music. Personally, I favor his violin sonatas (music with a violin and piano only) above all else he did. Why? His other stuff can be quite bloated with too much music. Mozart has a way of varying notes in his music rapidly, so rapidly that if his music were a story, it would be like lots of stuff happening all at once. It is actually difficult to keep track, so that hardly any Mozart music can I hum a tune to. Why? His music changes direction so much it is near impossible to remember a tune to it. Nonetheless, I still love some of his violin sonatas, since while I cannot hum them, they are quite pleasant and pretty to listen to. Also.... probably more importantly, Mozart's music is free. If you know where to look. Just ask me and will show you where.
  10. Good answer. At any rate the answers are strangely enough... worth looking into both for real life applications AND scifi creation. Back to your topic on batteries though... I think that metallic gases (does not have to be metallic hydrogen) are the answer. Since they may make for better super conductors... although I do not know if that means better batteries. But I do know that a cursory look at solid glass made from gas shows that it has interesting and useful properties. So there is that. I dunno... cellular computers? I read somewhere that we have managed to store more information using cells or something organic than traditional digital storage can. Makes sense actually... how else are all those crime cold cases solved?
  11. I believe that all technologies have a growth stage that ends at a stagnation point that cannot go any further.... without making something new altogether For example: The wheel. It started out basic, but from it, we developed an artficial air bladder based wheel called a tire, which is not the original, it is something new. Yes you can improve the tire, but you can only do so much to it or risk creating something that is not a traditional tire (a sphere tire for example). That even happens at a macro scale. If you take a star and keep adding more mass what you get won't be star according to current understanding, just a dense nebula. Since the radiation pressure would be absurdly strong enough to keep the star mass from compressing enough to become a star. So what technologies do you think have maxed out their growth or will shortly? They cannot be improved upon without developing altogether different technology? You may discuss.
  12. Such a system could be used for a kind of networked floating orbital launch ring system. Granted you would have to use helium or something, but you could save propellant that way and tether the network to the ground. Rocket could clear the lower atmosphere without propellant and engage rockets higher up. Cheap is of less concern in scifi. Nonetheless... nitrogen is weakly repelled by magnetism whereas oxygen is weakly attracted. With an uber field you could blow air with magnetic fields alone while the oxygen separated from the nitrogen. Sonething tells me if electricity arcs are in play that the oxygen might combust though... which might be a problem (explosion). Magneto would probably be on fire... as would probably any ship using an uber magnetic field with electricity arcing from it.
  13. So I was watching some youtube vids on magnetic induced wind as well as research on magnetic repulsion of ionized air and I thought... this could make for a good rocket SSTO assist. The challenges are mutiple though, so this will be a futuristic technology. Challenges to be solved one day by future men and women are: 1. How to make or design an uber magnet that won't tear itself apart under constant operation (they break in mere moments nowadays)? 2. How to design a fuel source that has a high enough power withought being too heavy to lift off the ground for flight? 3. Partially solved. How to manipulate electomagnetic fields so that air is repelled below the the ship, generating lift? We akready have magneto aerodynamic lifters on the books, just nothing much designed yet, but at least the physics does not say no. Extreme possibility of possible realistic scifi use in the future? A donut shaped SSTO with two rear rocket nozzles at one end. VTOL is acomplished by ionizing the air around the shlp and repelling it downward while the ship lifts up. Expect a light show, lots of lightning, maybe even a scifi looking shield made of ionized plasma emitting from the hull of the ship. Maybe even an artificial aurora borealis... who knows? Point is, with a powerful enough magnetic fields and precise control, along with a way to ionize surrounding air, you can VTOL anywhere there is sufficient atmosphere. Once air gets too thin you switch to rocketry for orbit. Pros: Any planet with an atmosphere you can VTOL without expending propellant. Also with precise control over the magnetic field and ionized air interaction, you could use it to literally thrust vector in ANY direction you want, since the air is your reaction mass and the engine is rhe magnetic fields emanating from the ship while the fuel is the power source. Cons: Do not try landing on the moon unless your ship is equipped with beefy landing thrusters and propellant to match. Also do not engage fighter jets scifi style in the air on earth while using the magnetic lift propulsion. You would likely lose... hard. Since every bullet and missile shot in your direction... if ferromagnetic at all... wouls ruin your day once it got near you. It would'nt likely miss. Also because of ionization, your ship is literally leaving an ozone trail in the atmosphere in it's wake, but that would fade in time so long you did'nt go crazy with thousands of mag lifters flying everyday continuously. You may discuss. Anything I missed? Or perhaps you know about this subject. Thank you.
  14. Tachyons are purely theoretical and probably do not exist. The only interest I have in them is using them as rocket propellant... but I have a few questions... assuming anyone knows. 1. Tachyons would go no slower than light speed and always move faster than light it is said. So if that is the case, what kind of engine would it look like? Not sure if it would even look like a rocket nozzle. 2. I ended up abandoning my idea for FTL photon scifi rockets, since someone elsewhere calculated that if the speed limit of light was ignored and we used newtonian physics to calculate, a photon's energy would also go up... in other words, you still get a death ray exhaust photon rocket even with FTL photons I thought I could get by using less FTL photons, but doing that either results in pitiful thrust if too little, or still death ray exhaust if sufficient. Question? Would tachyon rockets emit all types of deadly cerenkov radiation? Or would the exhaust be invisible and barely interact with anything? Thanks.