Spacescifi

Haha... there are no secrets. Since all of them boil down to abuse of other lives or themselves or both. Or at least the attempt.

Thanks. So with high energy engines, how wispy the exhaust is depends on how much propellant we are burning. More means higher thrust, more wispy means weaker thrust but more propellant burn time? Or is it the other way around?

The media I presume does not depict rocket plumes in space correctly. Even Ad Astra showed bulb shaped plumes in deep space, and many video games do too. From what I have seen, the answer seems to be that it depends. I have also seen that a funnel cone plume is fairly common in space, but I wonder if it would even be possible to get a bulb shaped plume in space since there is no air pressure to pinch the plume at all. I know plume color depends on propellant plus the heat imparted to it. I have read that super efficient antimatter thermal rockets would not have much of a visible plume, since so little propellant is required for high thrust. So what is it? What do you know on this subject?

I like the idea, but how long we talking? For example, two 500 meter wide spacecraft? Bigger spaceships will require greater length to get proper rotation going. And the reel line must be strong enough not to snap.

It would either be one giant leap or one giant mistake for mankind. Either way, it would hold interest. Not boring as say... mars. Since it woukd be much easier to exploit in LEO.

Try this scenario and science your way to completion. So after decades of drone spacecraft pushing a kilometer wide/thick asteroid into low earth orbit, now it is up to us to figure out a way to optimize it as a spacecraft. How? Drill holes into it for the crew. Place refinining facilities on it and a nuclear feactor for processing. Use processed chemicals from the asteroid as propellant. Pros? You have a lot of propellant mass Cons: Your inertia will be tough to cancel out. It is safe to say that any spacecraft this heavy is going to need to go nuclear. To make most efficient use of it's propellant. Mission: To the moon and mars. Shuttle craft docked to the big rock. How feasible are asteroid spaceships? Would'nt they face possibly structural disassembly issues under 1g or close acceleration? Unless artificially strenghthened with braces? Or does it simply depend on how hard/solid he asteroid is to begin with? Iron good, porous airy holed dirt bad? What are your thoughts on all this?

Another example of reality being nothing like scifi. Space is arguably the most hostile environment to lo life known. It would pribabably be best to use the robo-ships to push a big asteroid inti LEO. It would take several decades, but once there you woul dtill into it and turn it into a giant rock-et with processing facilities to extract liquids/gases that are used for obboard rockets. In the end, it would have far more shielding and mass,than we could get to space withouy rezorting to many launches.

Cute. I remember plenty of times where I have felt like/or said "You're upsetting/scaring the pets/kids" to to teens or adults. Your aliens seem to be inspired by Star Trek's Andorians... right? Although their reproduction does not play much of a role in the show, it's in the lore.

So if we ever get metallic hydtogen it would make great... if expensive to make shielding? EDIT: Or perhaps not? Metals and cosmic rays tend to scatter well.

I was talking about the shield between the cosmic ray and the human body. I also think you knew that. Hydrogen I have read tends to absorb/block radiation well. EDIT: Ditto what he said.

Some materials (it depends) will lead to more deadly scattering of cosmic rays than others. It's a complex subject.

Not really sure what you mean by earth being a shield. For those living on it yeah, the sheer mass of air and the magnetic field do wonders. But the ISS is in virtually vacuum, with only the magnetic field around it. As for the thick shielding, the material used effects what kind of radiation is absorbed. At any rate, if the crew encounter any of these rays that pass through the ship, it won't do them any favors. I read somewhere that six feet thick of concrete would block all those cosmic rays... but trying to launch that would require a bunch of cosmic rays... hello project Orion again .

Interesting. I am curious. How intelligent/non-intelligent are the drones? What? Are they like the workers? What do males and females do? Rule the drones? I toyed with changing humanoid ways of reproduction once. Like what if a humanoid laid eggs? Or what if... well I won't get into changing how reproduction goes down, can't talk about that here. Yet I did find that to be hard... since it defies how we know humans to look. It is easier on non-humanoids

Are you aware that Earth's magnstic field shields the ISS? A stainless steel starship travelinf for months or a year will get more than the ISS. I may not be an expert on rocketry like some here, but I do know stuff across,a wide array of subjects. As a writer it was required.

Smart, but we and he will find out if it is fast enough... or not. Surgery in low or zero g to cut out a tumor would be... interesting.

Humanity has tried just about everything. The inca economy was similar. From my memory of reading on various articles, if an average commoner refused to work they would execute that person. https://www.google.com/amp/s/io9.gizmodo.com/the-greatest-mystery-of-the-inca-empire-was-its-strange-1198541254/amp

True. Months of spaceflight seem counterproductice to that. Faster drives would be ideal, but we know project Orion will probably never see the light of day so it is almost pointless for me to suggest it as a possible solution.

Elon is designing a stainless steel starship. But won't steel react with the cosmic ray particles in space and do damage to the crew? Cancer? They may be shielded by other materials somewhat, but in general, thicker materials shield better, but space is a limited thing on a spaceship optimized for long range travel.

For me it is their behavior. How it is different from humanity. Some will seek to answer the why via popular ideas, but I am only interested in their ongoing goals. To a large degree that fits their behavior, since in my work, each fictional race I tailor made for a specific purpose which drives them to do what they do. There still is room for individuality within this too, so everyone need not act exactly the same. What about you? What fictional alien concepts do you find most interesting and why?

This video below is informative, as it a test drive of a nuclear lightbulb. What I learned: 1. Thrust is still kinda weak. The drive needed boosters to get to orbit. In space no less. This is no SSTO unless your cargo load is very, very, light. 2. It does not like long burns, as the heat load goes up so high that you need to radiate the heat away somehow. 3. The main positive is that it does not burn through it's propellant/fuel quickly, but considering the fact that constant acceleratiom at fast speeds (1g) will likely overheat the engine sooner ir later, you would have to coast plenty of times inbetween anyway. Increasing travel time. I know KSP is not totally realistic, but I tend to think this assessment is more correct than many of the more rosy predictions of the nuclear lightbulb. Basically it seems like an improvement over the NTR, but at the price of not being able to tolerate long constant burns. He did mention that with sufficient radiators even long burns would be possible, but such inertial mass tends to cut into propellant even more during retroburns, offsetting the speed advantage by requiring more propellant in the long run. It's funny realky from a worldbuilding fictional perspective. I was half tempted to write a fictional alien race who could use open cycle NTR abd orion pusher plates without any radiation effects on their health. Yet because I did not want to get into the research of that... I did'nt. Still... it would be nice if that stuff did'nt kill us. Or if we could make a clean, fallout free orion.

If a disc glided nose first that may provide optimum slow down while not giving too much g-force. Really, it seems that there really is no one size fits all vehicle for space travel, unlike in scifi. A saucer may be more optimal in a thinner atmosphere like mars to help slow reentry faster. Really though, I think spaceship class types of the future could be named after what planet they are rated for reentry for. A spacecraft rated for Earth reentry is Terra class, while one rated for Mars reentry is Martian class and so on. Orbital ships would be optimized as well. Space travel really does not seem to favor jack of all trades crafts.

Rocketry is really complex when you weigh the balance of thrust vs how long your propellant will actually last. LH would be fine to use as you say, but I would only keep just enough to use it all up, since if this is an interplantary trip (the moon), it will be vaping away in the tank the whole time anyway. Metallic liquid methane would be a great scifi thrust propellant though, inasmuch it would be more dense compared to the less dense liquid methane. I am all for simpler designs, popular scifi art tends to mislead, so blame my choice of intake fans on that and minimal knowledge of them. Use nuclear lightbulb to augment the ducted airflow for thrust. I would be fine with intake ducts, is'nt that what a ramjet is anyway? Or maybe a scram jet? No... it's simpy what it sounds like... an open duct way leading to the nuclear lightbulb chamber no? At any rate I know project pluto had an intake duct, but also fan blades if I recall correctly. But it was not designed for space orbit anyway. Why saucers? Star Trek fever I guess, and I love the look. In spite of their drag, or perhaps because of it they do offer some benefits: Reentry can be slowed faster by entering belly first. More drag. In order to avoid those expensive heat tiles I could pull an Elon Musk idea and design the hull to 'sweat' to cool. Basically it pumps water or some cool liquid within the outer hull and sprays it outside to cool the hull of the vessel as it reenters the atmosphere. And it looks cool for scifi stories. But do not get me wrong. If I do a saucer, it had better be functional.

Thanks. I thought there had to be good reason why aircraft only use roof fans for VTOL. Now I know. Thanks to the knowledge of you and others, I now can create a scifi saucer SSTO that could reasonabbly fly. Currently the idea is a thick 'pancake' saucer, with a row of rocket nozzles covering the back, and now I know that the 'corners' of the front of the saucer would be where the air intake fans would have to go, as the front nose would just be hull. It would mostly be propellant and crew going up, with smaller SSTO's docking with it in orbit to offload needed gear and antimatter fuel for long haul spaceflight. We do not need antimatter to reach orbit. A nuclear lightbulb with LH can do it. Liquid metallic methane is another option though... a scifi option for launch fuel. Indeed. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jWsfzt0_PLE

The idea of a flying saucer is not new, but I wanted to know if having intake fans on the roof of the saucer is viable to suck up sufficient air for the cluster of rocket engines in the rear? Or do intake fans only work best when they are opposite the thrust hitting the forward air headon? (Note the intake fans) (Those port openings could easily be air intake fans). Engine used is nuclear lightbulb rocketry, with liquid hydrogen as launch fuel, and a tank of liquid methane for vacuum flight. Also air breathing capable due to reactor and air intakes.

I must be immune because I am adverse to it. Yet I am strongly effected by the force of gyrotity. Like a salad and a steak all at once inside your mouth. Awesome.