Notices
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: what makes a good starship

  1. #1 what makes a good starship 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4
    http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/photo.php?pid=258075&id=100000697662945

    Thoughts?comments? tell me what you think. what do you as people think would be neccary for the perfect starship. you can ues theoretical technology as well


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,096
    Site not available when I looked just now.

    Ideally a starship should be able to travel a lot faster than light speed so get to other star systems in days or weeks. If not, then suspended animation capsules where people can lay dormant for centuries if necessary without aging, controlled by a series of master computers (ie: you cannot trust just one.)

    A starship should be well shielded. Even at just a fraction of light speed, a speck of dust hitting it would go off like a bomb, and space is full of dust as far as such a ship is concerned*. And then there is larger stuff, from rocks you could hold in your hands which would go off like anti-matter at such speeds to rocks bigger than a house which would destroy just about any shield, like a huge nuclear bomb going off. If a spaceship could jump into some form of completely empty subspace for the voyage, problem would be solved.

    * E E Doc Smith had huge ships which were tear drop shaped as they travelled so fast that the odd few atoms about acted like travelling through air, so friction, and slowing the spaceship down.

    Ideally some form of FTL detector system to warn of what is ahead so possibly avoid any dangers if you can see far enough ahead.

    Slower than light spaceships would possibly be hollowed out asteroids on centuries long trips. They would be travelling to planets we know can support our kind of life, and we may even have detected life on them. Certainly vegetation and water.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1
    How about energy shield concept? would it be suitable for starship defense against space debris?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor jrmonroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,444
    Everyone knows that one big warp drive is easier to operate than several smaller ones, but if it breaks down, youíre out of luck and usually in the middle of nowhere. So definitely, several smaller drives are better even though itís more of a hassle synchronizing their matter/antimatter ratios and complex retention/repulsion phase angles. Just make sure that you use identical units, which means that their warble flanges are interchangeable, and this cuts down on spare parts costs and storage. Redundancy is a must!

    Also, some hull manufacturers cut costs by making hulls out of interlocking polyphasic VLCMS (very low carbonĻ microcrystalline structures). But they simply canít compare with the good olí VNC (virtually no carbonĻ) monocoque ceramic models. More letters in their acronym does NOT mean itís better. Stick with the tried and true. I tell you what Ö when you slip down below light speed, you can run smack dab into an uncharted asteroid or comet (especially in frontier sectors). Dirty snowballs arenít so nasty, but those ferromagnetic types will ruin your day. Youíll lose an interlocking panel a lot faster than cracking one of those monocoque hulls. Besides, with a ruptured hull of either type, youíre not going anywhere fast anyway. Remember the old saying: Buy cheap, get cheap!


    ĻIf youíre unfamiliar with hyperlight hull dynamics, and it seems like you are, carbon atoms (because of their poly-axial symmetries) will resonate at certain warp speeds, and theyíll actually migrate and form polycarbons, which can bore sizeable channels in the hull and cause nanofractures. Hull manufacturers are supposed to check their products for carbon content and distribution throughout the hull, so make sure your ship comes with a COA (Certificate of Analysis), and make sure itís for your specific hull ó especially with previously-owned ships. Always get it documented!

    :wink:
    Grief is the price we pay for love. (CM Parkes) Our postillion has been struck by lightning. (Unknown) War is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. (Bono) The years tell much what the days never knew. (RW Emerson) Reality is not always probable, or likely. (JL Borges)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberia
    Site not available when I looked just now.

    Slower than light spaceships would possibly be hollowed out asteroids on centuries long trips. They would be travelling to planets we know can support our kind of life, and we may even have detected life on them. Certainly vegetation and water.
    Good Point, there are no accelerated orbit manned space stations.

    What makes a good spaceship, control over human metabolism

    The answer to this question, requires the inclusion of BIOLOGY. Space development, is dependant on biological advancements, for example. SKIN, is an organ, which must be viewed as an intestine. Following this philosophy, execretions from the SKIN, must be able to be recycled harmlessly by organic bacteria. This in turn, helpful bacteria, is able to produce a form of solid norishment/liquid.

    I think once this step is mastered, experiments in accelerated orbits involving sustainable kinetic reactions can take place. Very simple, early experiments can involve the doppler effect with various energies. Accelerated Orbits, are capable of duplicating, gravity on earth. To a measure which will prevent BONELOSS, muscle loss. A sustainable accelerated and crew of 2 to 4 persons is possible, but an allowable time of less to 1 to 2 years, to begin and sustain the accelerated orbit. And a slightly larger time to dissolve the orbit. Early experiments may consist entirely of beginning the ordit and ending the ordit over a length of 5 to 6 years. (ok i was imagining an accelerated orbit involving 2 planets)

    I can imagine a simpler one can be maintained around the earth, still requiring advancements in biology viewing the skin as an intestine capable of substituting the natural intestines for solid waste removal.

    The skin is made up of two main layers called the epidermis and the dermis. It also has a number of appendages like hair, nails and sweat glands
    Skin has the ability to remove heavy particles - nail
    skin has the ability to remove protein - a digestive by byproduct
    skin has the ability to remove sodium - a cellular by product

    1. Skin must be chemically modified to excrete all of the above through out the skin mass organ (without direct environment stimulus)

    2. Natural intestine function must give up its priority for waste processing, to the skin.

    3. These steps are possible, but will not become easily achievable without human experiments

    4. Space development ultimately depends on the steps we are able to take to make these processes easier to come by, our view of incarnated individuals and law breakers must take a different direction in the future of industrialized civilization

    5. Unlike hollywood, space development is to a degree largely unique to the SPECIES involved. Certain fundamentals must be developed by that SPECIES, which aids in more complex decisions and conclusions. Certain sociological, and psychological development must also take place in the process, aiding in the stability of more pronounced space activity - of the next generation.

    6. (whoops i'm going to stop at SIX). Skipping these steps can dangerously represent themselves in later developmental phases....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6
    What would make a good Starship?

    Tachyon Field Emitter (Faster Than Light Engine)
    Photonic Field Emitter (Light Speed and Slower Engine)
    Graviton Studded Deck Plating (Artificial Gravity)
    Atomic Reoraginzers (Replicators) (Used to create anything)
    Mirco Dyson Sphere Power Generator (Power Source)
    Atmosphere Purifier (Environment Control)
    Advanced Medical Bay
    Degrading Tachyonic Field Projector (Communications)
    Tractor/Repuslar Beam
    Deflector Array (For all those pesky Dust Bombs)
    Energy Retardant Armor
    Sensors (Close Range, Long Range, Internal)
    Cargo Bays
    Launch Bays
    Shuttles
    Satellites
    Drones
    Large Computer System
    Science Equipment
    Good Crew
    Great Captain.
    To create the future Roddenberry made in Star Trek minus the fighting.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,096
    Quote Originally Posted by giva007
    How about energy shield concept? would it be suitable for starship defense against space debris?
    The problem with an energy shield is that to make one stable in the first place would require a lot of effort, and then if you subject it to great energy, the first thing that is going to happen is that it will become unstable and collapse. Another ship could insert a probe into it and siphon off all the energy, so the ship's energy.

    Better if you can have a very highly refractive outer coating to the craft, or even an absorption coating if you can channel the energy and shoot their own energy back at the attacking craft.

    'Doc' Smith pointed out a problem half a century and some ago that in space there is no heat dissipation. If you shoot a laser beam of one billion ergs at someone and it is 99% effective, you are left with 10,000,000 ergs of unwanted energy which will probably make itself known as heat in your weapon.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,096
    If you told someone 200 years ago that we could cross the Atlantic in 5hours, then asked them how you think we do it, they might come up with some kind of super sailboat, full of sails everywhere. They would never dream of Concorde.

    I hope it is the same for FTL travel because I begin to have doubts that it is possible, and even doubts that Man can travel at even a decent fraction of the speed of light. If time dilation slows down the organics of a person, how about the electrics? If they fire at the wrong times, you get the equivalent of a computer crash in a human being. If the electrics don't experience time dilation the way a body does, they could fry your brain as your body slows down but they do not, so hit targets and travel along nerves with far more energy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •