DDE Posted December 7, 2023 Share Posted December 7, 2023 A Chinese shipyard wants to jump onto the rake of nuclear-powered commercial vessels https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202312/1303089.shtml Sorry, but that's going straight into this thread for now. The problems are not technical but economical and political. The most recent ship, the Sevmorput', was basically not allowed into anywhere besides North Korea. The Savannah, besides being a poor freighter, was apparently also crippled by red tape in the 1960s, long before Chernobyl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted December 9, 2023 Share Posted December 9, 2023 Nuclear power makes more sense who larger and faster the ship is, this can offset the much higher running cost, for one you can not hire the cheapest sailors you can find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted December 24, 2023 Share Posted December 24, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 Alternative General Dynamics A-16, a.k.a. if you don't stop asking us to put that whirr-BRRRRT onto the poor Viper, we're gonna sell you this Spoiler Found on VK as Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blufor878 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 2 hours ago, DDE said: Alternative General Dynamics A-16, a.k.a. if you don't stop asking us to put that whirr-BRRRRT onto the poor Viper, we're gonna sell you this Hide contents Found on VK as I was gonna make a Jedi joke but you beat me to it. Dang... Alternatively you can yeet it from the underside of a modified C5 galaxy or 747. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 Spoiler "Hold up, this looks like a KDY product..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blufor878 Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 13 hours ago, DDE said: Hide contents "Hold up, this looks like a KDY product..." No, not enough greeblies. And where are the TIE/LN's supposed to fit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 https://graphicsnickstevens.substack.com/p/on-the-n1-competitors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Dyna Soar as a crew escape vehicle on the booster, looks like: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AckSed Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) This has become the Hazegrayart thread. Not complaining, just remarking - they're good at digging out the strange and somewhat plausible. On that note, absolutely check out that video's description for a 40-page article on reusable booster concepts. Edit: There's a two-stage HTHL spacecraft that's called... POBTATO. POBTATO! Its second stage is a flying wing and it didn't rely on mid-air refueling, so I suppose they just leaned into its wide shape. Edited February 14 by AckSed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 27 minutes ago, AckSed said: Edit: There's a two-stage HTHL spacecraft that's called... POBTATO. POBTATO! Its second stage is a flying wing and it didn't rely on mid-air refueling, so I suppose they just leaned into its wide shape. https://media.defense.gov/2021/Apr/06/2002615086/-1/-1/0/RECOVERABLE BOOSTERS.PDF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthgently Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 31 minutes ago, AckSed said: This has become the Hazegrayart thread. Not complaining, just remarking - they're good at digging out the strange and somewhat plausible. It does make sense though given that Hazegrayart is practically the visualization of the topic. Except they do take it off paper and paint fantastically in pixels. Their vids always make my day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSaint Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 3 hours ago, tater said: Dyna Soar as a crew escape vehicle on the booster, looks like: Waste not, want not.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 Nuclear Ferry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunlitZelkova Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 11 hours ago, tater said: Nuclear Ferry When does this image date from? I don't recall the early 1970s, planned post-Apollo Reusable Nuclear Shuttle carrying such a lander, and I don't recall the RNS being re-proposed at a later date. The 80s and SEI stuff had conventional engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 5 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said: When does this image date from? I don't recall the early 1970s, planned post-Apollo Reusable Nuclear Shuttle carrying such a lander, and I don't recall the RNS being re-proposed at a later date. The 80s and SEI stuff had conventional engines. Unsure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCalories Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 (edited) One of my favorites is the F-15N Sea Eagle. This fighter jet could've taken the Tomcat's job, but the Navy turned McDonnell Douglas down due to many factors, including that A) the F-15 was a CTOL craft from the start, and navalizing it would present a lot of issues, but also mainly that B) it couldn't carry AIM-54 Phoenix missiles (or at least not as many) as the F-14. I could barely find any good pictures of it, but here is what I could find: Edited March 10 by TwoCalories Found one more picture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrandedonEarth Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 2 hours ago, TwoCalories said: One of my favorites is the F-15N Sea Eagle. This fighter jet could've taken the Tomcat's job, but the Navy turned McDonnell Douglas down due to many factors, including that A) the F-15 was a CTOL craft from the start, and navalizing it would present a lot of issues, but also mainly that B) it couldn't carry AIM-54 Phoenix missiles (or at least not as many) as the F-14. I could barely find any good pictures of it, but here is what I could find: Does the F-15 even have any decent attachment point for the arresting hook. How much re-design would that have taken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCalories Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 7 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said: Does the F-15 even have any decent attachment point for the arresting hook. How much re-design would that have taken? The CTOL F-15 already has a hook, as well as pretty much any CTOL US aircraft, except that it's only for emergencies, and cannot be used in a CAT/TRAP situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blufor878 Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 Found this while browsing shipbucket First off, those last few variants! Second, I've never thought of combining Delta blue AND orange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 https://falsesteps.wordpress.com/2016/10/10/stcaem-cab-a-mouthful-of-a-mars-mission/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watermel00n Posted March 24 Share Posted March 24 8 hours ago, tater said: https://falsesteps.wordpress.com/2016/10/10/stcaem-cab-a-mouthful-of-a-mars-mission/ Really like the curved heat shields on this concept Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunlitZelkova Posted March 24 Share Posted March 24 (edited) 18 hours ago, tater said: Say what you want about old space but they were totally justified in knocking down this proposal. Shuttle showed that reusability with 1970s technology was not what it was cracked up to be. X-33 went on to show 80s and 90s tech wasn’t up to the task either. If Ariane group had tried to get state funding for this, I don’t think we would have gotten a European module for Space Station Freedom/ISS. EDIT- When it comes to quite a few decisions I think it’s fine to say, “Gee, would have been nice if it would be this way,” but to say that the people who made the decisions were dumb is to judge them with hindsight, which is unfair. Even everyone (ULA, Ariane… whoever else was looking to build a next gen rocket)’s decision to forgo reusability in the late 2000s and early 2010s even as Falcon 9 reusability dev was ongoing were justified IMO. Unfortunate, but made with reasoning that was sound at the time. Edited March 24 by SunlitZelkova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthgently Posted March 24 Share Posted March 24 (edited) 1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said: whoever else was looking to build a next gen rocket)’s decision to forgo reusability in the late 2000s and early 2010s even as Falcon 9 reusability dev was ongoing were justified IMO. Unfortunate, but made with reasoning that was sound at the time. To some extent, but the budget to do hopper testing is relatively small and with control circuitry cost, mass, and power consumption dropping exponentially at the time I think it fair to say many missed an obvious opportunity to at least test the waters with a few jumping grain silos. RC enthusiasts were doing amazing things making all kinds of programmable, autolanding, acrobatic helos, quadcopters, etc. I think what happened at SpaceX was simply grabbing low hanging computational fruit that many others simply were in denial was relevant, because ... tradition? Maybe? Edited March 24 by darthgently Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.