llertag86

After some experimenting, wow, this is a ridiculous challenge, as the drain valve thrust is dependent on the tank its attached too it is best to go with the largest tank available for the largest amount of stock thrust; but then it exponentially increases the consumption. just getting over the first hill by the space center is a challenge as the larger the craft the harder it is to turn as landing gear don't turn. It would be easier to use rover wheels to at least turn but then its impossible to legitimize the run for not using any other propulsion. According to your rules convert-o-trons are allowed which kind of defeats the purpose but would take an incredibly long time to coast and refuel every few kilometres if your lucky. I would suggest redoing this thread as a flight challenge, speed challenge or see if people can lob something into orbit or elsewhere using the valves.

Well I assume with a faring there are no aerodynamic forces experienced by entities inside of it, so I opted to use a cargo bay to prevent Jeb from getting to friendly with the atmosphere, according to the aerodynamic overlays he still experiences drag but this time no overheating problems. Run speed 1238m/s Turned the craft around to have a land landing as I am not going to keep experimenting with fuel and engines as I have it set to burn every last drop to hit max speed and coast in for a landing. proof Jeb experienced drag over the trip, forgot to take a photo at max engine burn so the next one is from a failed attempt as I didn't pay attention to the altitude, 8 Wiplash and 6 Vector for peak performance Run submission with max speed of 1238m/s Jeb thinks he's flying but we have a drone core in front of him set to ignore all dangerous inputs from the pilot and his joystick.

Put some strain on my computer with all the engines but it held also had to redo part of the mission to show my Munar gravity assist to get to Minmus, had a lot of trouble getting home as I didn't fly it too well and it keeps losing control after the last asparagus stage falls but after Jeb got out and pushed once it was enough to get the Periapsis down into the atmosphere and then land, could squeeze some more out of it by dropping the heat shield and a battery next time but would probably need a redesign to get enough delta v for a Munar landing. The Monoprop explorer Mass: 99.999 tons flight to orbit could have gone better, the next was redone with a similar delta v margin just as proof of the Munar gravity assist after several attempts to get a munar gravity assist to get back into the atmosphere due to what seemed to be insufficient delta V eventualy just gave up and gunned it when facing retrograde on Minmus and had Jeb push with his jet pack expending approximately one full tank of eva monoprop, then it was just several flybys to bleed off speed and land turns out the parachute was sufficient to land with the empty tank though the landing gear burned up on final entry Launch from KSC: 15 pts Launch mass under <100 tonnes: 0 pts Reach LKO orbit: 50 pts Crewed (with safe return): 40 pts Enter Munar SOI: 35 pts Enter Minmus SOI: 45 pts Minmus orbit: 15 pts Crewed Minmus landing: 40 pts Total 240 pts

I realize my assumption on the elevators was made hastialy, I saw this render and assumed it as fact, now thinking about it ladder rungs seem reasonable for the exterior on the leeward side of starship since they shouldn't affect aerodynamics too much, still it would be a long climb with having to hook yourself to every other rung to not fall off though that may be just an in-flight consideration. That or electromagnetic grippers / boots which would be cool. As far as when, how and where to decommission a starship has alot of variables, as they are currently iterating the design I find it conceivable to use an older model as a base proving the concept that it can land and maintain its integrity for long periods of time. I would think even the Mk1 could get to the moon, though I agree its questionable economics without the data on the cost to use as a display piece, recycle or use for training purposes. This is just a discussion on its feasability after all. I agree useable volume is in interesting concept and one that is not always easy to understand from picturing it in the mind. Vertically I agree you will get the most useable volume so long as you have tall ceilings however as consequence astronauts now have to keep track of items on a 4-5m tall circular wall, usable space but not always easialy used with placing objects above ones head. Internal surface area is also important, 10, 9 dimaeter disks are less surface area to work with than even two floors going going through a horizontaly oriented starship as now its easier to mount things to the 'wall' without worry at least for the lower half. As far as cutting up a starship for base building, we would either need a crane or orient it horizontaly in order to move said pieces, when we ahave that capability we would in principal also be able to orient the whole ship on its side. I see it as time vs effort problem, also considering variables such as air lock positions connecting to expanding base, radiation protection etc. I'm just not convinced its worth the effort to cut it up vs just putting it horizontal at least for an initial base. Once you have some infrastructure sure, it makes sense, basicaly recycling steel.

There are a lot of good points made, I was originally thinking about this being done to one of the two cargo craft that would be sent ahead to Mars 2 years in advance. However, since SpaceX is looking to take advantage of NASA funding for moon missions I applied the idea for a moon base. In principal I believe humans prefer living in long flat structures rather than tall cramped structures, Plus it’s a whole lot easier to cover with dirt for radiation protection like this. Than like this Sure you could seal in a StarShip like above, but building the printer to enclose the 50m tall StarShip seems ridiculous for initial mass constraints for both the Moon and Mars. StarShip could be approximated as a 1 room apartment 10 stories tall (rounding up for story= 5m) However if horizontal it then would be 2 maybe 3 stories of ~45m long hallway, or think of a modified submarine outline which I believe gives more living space for astronauts to stretch out in plus no need for an elevator or the problems that come with it.

Presenting the SpaceX StarShip Starbase: S.S.S.S. As seen above the basic premise of the idea is to reorient a landed StarShip to the horizontal position Taking a page from the Apollo Venus mission proposal for the 1970's Logistics aside, what are the advantages of an unflyable StarShip As a base/ Starbase? The StarShip is cited as having appx. 1000M^3 of habitable space internally. However this is above the fuel tanks and only accounting for ~1/3-1/2 of the ship volume. If the tanks were drained, you now have approximately between two and three times the volume. Bear in mind 1000m^3 is about the internal volume of the ISS! For further comparison its roughly ~150/ 300 Apollo LEM’s internal volume. Other Advantages, 1. Once horizontal it could be covered directly by lunar soil or have a thin tarp draped over it and then covered providing radiation protection and protection from micrometeorites. 2. Ease of access, instead of having to use the proposed elevator for going to and from the crew quarters the air locks would now be at ground level, though depending on design may be sideways but still usable. 3. For a moon trip in theory SpaceX could get away with just three vacuum engines allowing more cargo to the lunar surface. 4. Prefabricated base ready on arrival, instead of relying entirely on inflatable structures initially crew will have a nice area to work, sleep and prepare for base expansion whether on the Moon, Mars or wherever. 5. In theory the in development fuel transfer system could be designed to be removable within an airlock bulkhead. Back of the envelope calculations for StarShip (These are my guesses only, if you have better data please expand upon this idea) Diameter 9m, height 50m, Assuming cone is ~5m also containing the forward fuel tank V= Pi(r^2)(h/3) area of cylinder Pi*(r^2) *H with draining the tanks V = Pi(4.5^2)*45m + Pi(4.5^2)(5/3) V ~= 2970m^3 Obviously it would be significantly less as 9m is the exterior diameter but even with factoring in 20mm of steel for the hull assuming that floor thickness and tank thickness are similar we still have over 2000m^3 of usable space! Next question, how to orient to horizontal? As the ship is not designed to land horizontally this does pose a challenge but solvable. The benefit of all solid celestial bodies in the solar system that humans have desire to visit have less than one g of surface gravity. On the moon 1/6 and Mars 1/3. In assuming that StarShip has sufficient structurally sound an anchor and winch system could be set up to safely lower the ship without compromising its habitability. There are probably other ways of setting up such a system but in my mind going through the thought experiment you need at least four cables. Two pulling on either side near the top of Starship and two anchors at the base to prevent sliding. Once Starship has tilted sufficiently in the direction you want it to be in you can take away one cable as gravity is now doing the work for you. It will then be a relatively simple matter of lowering Starship to the ground assuming you anchored your winch system sufficiently beforehand. Alternatively depending on the torque that the RCS system can give on the ship it may be able to slow its rotational decent down to a survivable angular speed though I find this unlikely. From Wikipedia, StarShip’s empty mass ~ 120,000kg on the moon that translates to a weight of ~196kN admittedly the forces would be different I will get around to doing proper calculations later but a 45mm (1.75") diameter steel cable would be capable of handling the load. Less would likely be sufficient and admittedly this would eat into cargo mass but considering the advantages it may be a small price to pay compared to shipping a similarly voluminous area for a first outpost. Besides steel is recyclable and the new area we just opened up will need it for dividing into floors, walls etc.