KASASpace

Are we thinking that they are going to be fielded as giant 100 ton 40 feet tall death machines? No, they would be more like 10 to 20 tons, with an array of machine guns and a 20mm cannon. Ground pressure is important, but that's why you have wider feet, and plus in urban combat it can hide behind buildings, but will be spotted from the air, like almost anything else. Not to mention that to prevent falling, a gyro and a powerful motor of sorts will be used. With a low center of mass, too.

Did you read any of the purposes for this ship? Delivering cargo before the ship with crew arrives. No crew, so they can come in whichever ship they wish, and cause there is no crew, you want as little time as possible in interplanetary space, because you can't really afford to carry robot's to repair.

Well, I was thinking of using construction techniques that make things real stiff, like isogrids in the legs as well as light construction. I think mechs could at least be used for urban combat, as in that setting with all the rubble you would need a legged vehicle. However, you would need a gyro for stability probably running directly off of the motor. As well as some sort of hydraulic system, or once we get polymers that act like tendons or something, we can use those. But the problem is really weight, but if you have a light hollow skeleton with a bunch of hollow spaces (launching missiles will produce heat due to the exhaust) for heat sinks. Isogrids, hexagonal construction that is very aircraft like, it could support itself with jets......

If so, what are your thoughts on battlemechs? Usefulness, possibility, technology used. If you don't know what Battletech is, look it up on Google or something. It's a tabletop boardgame that evolved into its own fictional universe with books, video games, and even a (crappy) TV series.

Sillychris said GAMMA photons.

Wow. You do realize that that statement counters itself. Less time in interplanetary space means less likely something will go wrong at that critical moment.......

This kind of thing would be for moving supplies to the colony beforehand for easier setup.

Sorry to say, but I'm quite sure that rocket scientists who have worked at NASA for 30 years know what they're doing.

you were replying to a post about aerobeaking, and while accelerating on orbit you will get G's, but not just IN ORBIT.

A change, yes, but you said what you would be doing in orbit, which I assumed meant after you braked.

I thought of that, but I just wanted to show that even at ~0.3 m/s^2 (~1ft^2) you could get to Mars quick. I, being a space enthusiast, find this fact amazing and shocking. *Is that the Doctor?

IF you got into orbit (somehow) you shouldn't really feel G's.

Yeah... about that.... You see, I got the multiply by 2 from an actual rocket scientist.

It's interesting to people who would like to see us *puts on shades* Take on Space.

This is more for shipping TO Mars, like equipment for the colony, habitats, etc.

Uh huh. Yep, sure. But fuel is just a factor, mass ratio ultimately comes down to how much cargo you want. Plus, a TWR of 10/322 is not high thrust, it's tiny and quite comparable to modern engines. However NASA would never get a Nuclear Lightbulb, just because of the name.

How does that example have anything to do with this discussion.

How would you point them the right way?

Ignoring? No, just not brought up as of yet. This thread started by saying that it is possible to get to mars in less than one month. I'm not going to design the ship, but I know that R&D exists for a reason. Now, you see, I am being quite realistic based on my original post, as this entire thing should be. And I simply referred to the implied ignorance you said earlier.

However most of it is gamma rays and is not usable.

Now that is fantasizing. Remember, distance is relative, as is everything else.

We're closer to NTR than warp.

How do you think everything starts? You are the one being ignorant here. Everything starts as an idea, it is not fantasy, it is more based in reality than your belief that you can't make ideas without designing the entire thing. Now, if we can build a space station, we can build a ship, however, the problem in this case is the propulsion, not the ship itself. In fact, by your logic all any space program ever did is fantasize.

True, but there are lasers that put the heat into one gas and eject all the gas. That's why you would need to get more gas (like something along the lines of Argon)

Oh no! You just ruined the universe. Now seriously, just one tiny little actual factoid, it is called R&D for a reason, and I never said let's do it now, I said eventually when we have the technology.