Author Topic: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really  (Read 22768 times)

Offline BTE-Dan

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« on: 05/08/2012 01:33 AM »
And now for some fun thinking outside the box about what we could do in space when ignoring the issues of politics and funding ...

The BuildTheEnterprise (BTE) website describes how to build the first USS Enterprise spaceship, based on technologies within our reach, over the next twenty years.

It has 1g gravity, shielding for missions away from earth, can hold a 1000 people, and can enable the building of large underground bases on Mars and the moon also with 1g gravity. So what are we waiting for?

www.buildtheenterprise.org

Cheers,
BTE-Dan

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #1 on: 05/08/2012 02:48 AM »
I don't know if to laugh or cry....
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline TrueBlueWitt

  • Space Nut
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1992
  • Mars in my lifetime!
  • DeWitt, MI
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 72
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #2 on: 05/08/2012 03:27 AM »
How many years of NASA's budget does it take to get to $1,000,000,000,000?

Offline Nascent Ascent

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 40
“Why should we send people into space when we have kids in the U.S. that can’t read”. - Barack Obama

Offline scienceguy

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 747
  • Lethbridge, Alberta
  • Liked: 65
  • Likes Given: 117
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #4 on: 05/08/2012 03:59 AM »
How were they planning on getting that into orbit? If not, how were they planning to construct that in orbit?
e^(pi*i) = -1

Offline BTE-Dan

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #5 on: 05/08/2012 05:21 AM »
A trillion dollars is $50 billion per year over 20 years. From the site:

“It is proposed that the US dedicate .27% of its GDP each year to the NASA Enterprise program.  …To get some sense of what spending .27% of the GDP each year will mean, consider that between 1963 and 1972, during the Apollo era, the US spent on average .50% of GDP per year as shown in the center column in the table to the right. This is about double the level of spending proposed for funding the Enterprise program.

.27% of GDP will be about $40 billion for the year 2012. $40 billion is certainly a lot of money to spend – but it’s not that much when you consider that the federal budget in 2012 is $3700 billion ($3.7 Trillion). $40 billion seems like pocket change from the perspective of federal spending. $40 billion is 1.1% of the 2012 federal budget. This compares to an average of 2.8% of the federal budget which was spent each year on NASA between 1963 and 1972 as shown in the rightmost column in the table above.”

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8026
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4075
  • Likes Given: 1245
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #6 on: 05/08/2012 06:17 AM »
I don't know if to laugh or cry....
I laughed mostly.
Don't get me wrong: there is nothing wrong with dreaming. But reality is a stinker and always slapping people in the face.

Offline Atlan

  • Member
  • Posts: 69
  • Europe
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #7 on: 05/08/2012 09:32 AM »
Building a ship from a Sci-Fi franchise is not really thinking outside the box. In fact i really cant imagine more inside-the-box-thinking :D There are, even in Sci Fi much more feasible and realistic and efficient designs then this ship.
Your mind is software. Program it.
Your body is a shell. Change it.
Death is a disease. Cure it.
Extinction is approaching. Fight it.

Offline Nathan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 701
  • Sydney
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #8 on: 05/08/2012 10:15 AM »
I'd rather build Serenity
Given finite cash, if we want to go to Mars then we should go to Mars.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4222
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 1035
  • Likes Given: 1933
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #9 on: 05/08/2012 10:42 AM »
Being a Star Trek fan for more than 40 years, on one hand I admire their passion. On the other, I can't believe their naivete - if that's what it actually is. They would be far, far better off forming a movement to push proper funding for both taxpayer/NASA space and better incentives, prizes and tax benefits for private space: so as to accelerate new technologies including Propellant Depots, zero-boiloff cryogenic propulsion, nuclear-thermal, nuclear-electric and nuclear-plasma drives, total life support recycling, radiation shielding, efficient Heavy Lift and re-usable launchers and spacecraft, efficient artificial gravity solutions, advanced space medicine.....

I could go on! In short, all the 'Holy Grails' of exploration technology that will open up the Solar System - all the technologies and procedures that we know are wanted and needed, but in recent years have been deferred by endless budget cuts, lack of leadership and courage, 'Not Invented Here' etc etc.

With stable funding and leadership, and some risk-taking courage, we just might then attain a Space Exploration destiny that points the way toward the kind of wondrous 'Star Trek' like future that these folk are fantasizing about.

I would say to them: Do not pursue a sci-fi fantasy - pursue the glorious reality that is, as of today, just a few years and dollars beyond our reach. Build some real spaceships. Later on, call them whatever you like, Enterprise included. But don't shape it like the fantasy Starship - doing so would be a fetish at best.
« Last Edit: 05/08/2012 10:52 AM by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3011
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 4537
  • Likes Given: 298
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #10 on: 05/08/2012 11:20 AM »

I just wish they would have built the one in Las Vegas!

NA
At least we have the memory of Quark's bar in the Hilton.
« Last Edit: 05/08/2012 11:21 AM by Nomadd »

Offline Nathan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 701
  • Sydney
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #11 on: 05/08/2012 12:02 PM »
I love the "raise taxes slightly" funding method.

Seriously the folks behind this should just be embarrassed At themselves
Given finite cash, if we want to go to Mars then we should go to Mars.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8573
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2631
  • Likes Given: 6720
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #12 on: 05/08/2012 12:27 PM »
Well if we are going to go down this “what if mind game” I guess they should build this first... ;D

http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/chronology.php

http://www.thespacegeneration.com/tag/mark-millis


« Last Edit: 05/08/2012 12:33 PM by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator, Vintage auto racer

Offline BTE-Dan

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #13 on: 05/08/2012 12:44 PM »
Many commenters seem to think because the funding and politics seem impossible that this makes thinking about building the Enterprise not worthwhile. Well, you are entitled to that opinion.

However, the question for those who might find this interesting is: Why is it technically not possible. A magnetically suspended gravity wheel is possible to create 1g gravity. Very scaled up ion propulsion engines are possible. Very scaled up nuclear reactors are possible. If $50 billion per year was sent on a NASA Enterprise program, amazing things could be done.

We can think solely within the pitifully small budget constraints that NASA is handed. But then it is hard to think very big. What - in 20 years or so we take a one-shot mission to Mars? Then we are done with it, just like after we went to the moon. This is why, at least to me, it is fun and worthwhile to think about what could be done if NASA was still funded like it was during the Apollo era. If that is a dream gone too far, well shoot me.

But also, I challenge anyone to show that what I proposed on the BuildTheEnterprise site can't be done from a technical point of view.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32126
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10771
  • Likes Given: 321
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #14 on: 05/08/2012 01:41 PM »

But also, I challenge anyone to show that what I proposed on the BuildTheEnterprise site can't be done from a technical point of view.

It can't, period. It can't meet the requirements you impose on it.

The structure and design is totally wrong for the task.
it is unbalanced
it has no room for propellant.
it has no radiators
The propulsion system can not meeting the 90 day to Mars requirementl
The "magnetically suspended gravity wheel" which I take to mean a centrifuge, is in the wrong plane for control of the vehicle.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32126
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10771
  • Likes Given: 321
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #15 on: 05/08/2012 01:41 PM »
Many commenters seem to think because the funding and politics seem impossible that this makes thinking about building the Enterprise not worthwhile. Well, you are entitled to that opinion.

It is not an opinion, it is reality.  And a really stoopid idea.  There are better ways to spend the money on spaceflight that would advance the craft and exploration.
« Last Edit: 05/08/2012 01:43 PM by Jim »

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1658
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 135
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #16 on: 05/08/2012 01:54 PM »
This is kind of like putting funds together to buy Columbus (or worse, Leif Eriksson) a passenger jet aircraft.

Even in the movie Avatar, the first ships were kilometres long and traveled at a low fraction of c.

Anyway, what's wrong with the solar system anyway? There are fantastic worlds to explore right here. I for one would rather have an affordable ticket to space than an astronomically expensive starship in a couple of centuries. And getting cheap tickets to space will make that starship come a lot cheaper and a lot quicker than before (sort of how you need the Industrial Revolution before you can get aircraft).
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #17 on: 05/08/2012 02:02 PM »
If we were going to start building anything from the Star Trek universe, I would like to start with something basic, like the shuttle craft, first.

Really, if we can't build a mini-bus sized vehicle that can transport crew and equipment back and forth between the Earth's surface and the Earth orbit, then it will never be possible to get to the next steps.

All of the Sci-Fi shows have this type of vehicle. A SSTO vehicle that can basically take off and land on pretty much any flat piece surface. Some unknown propulsion system, but definately not our current chemical rockets.

The Star Trek Enterprise series was supposed to be 100 years before the Captain Kirk series. Probably in the year 2300 or so, right ? Maybe by the year 2200, we will get the SSTO technology figured out. By then NASA budgets won't be an issue.

Offline Atlan

  • Member
  • Posts: 69
  • Europe
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #18 on: 05/08/2012 04:36 PM »
The design of this ship is really bad.....i don't see any structural stability....its like a fragile swan....if u want to stick with Sci Fi, try Perry Rhodan: Simple geometric forms....
Your mind is software. Program it.
Your body is a shell. Change it.
Death is a disease. Cure it.
Extinction is approaching. Fight it.

Offline chrisking0997

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 279
  • NASA Langley
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 210
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #19 on: 05/08/2012 04:46 PM »
It has 1g gravity

you got me excited with this, until I looked at your site and realized you were basically cramming a ring station into the saucer.

yeah, you lost me there.  sorry, but this is a pointless exercise in fanboy dreams
Tried to tell you, we did.  Listen, you did not.  Now, screwed we all are.

Offline rklaehn

  • telemetry plumber
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1210
  • germany
    • www.heavens-above.com
  • Liked: 90
  • Likes Given: 167
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #20 on: 05/08/2012 04:54 PM »
If we are building stuff from SciFi, let's build Babylon 5 instead. At least it is roughly the right shape for a space station that uses artificial gravity. The other human ships in the Babylon 5 universe are much more realistic as well.

« Last Edit: 05/08/2012 05:45 PM by rklaehn »
Try the ISS 3D visualization at http://www.heavens-above.com/ISS_3D.aspx

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8640
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1111
  • Likes Given: 241
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #21 on: 05/08/2012 06:29 PM »
Oh, I thought you ment the construction of the real enterprise,

" class="bbc_img

About 78 years to late by my reckoning...
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline BTE-Dan

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #22 on: 05/08/2012 06:34 PM »
"The structure and design is totally wrong for the task."

I don't think so. You have three engines in the three rear engine hulls. You have a  large saucer-shaped hull to contain a flat gravity wheel, hangers, warehouses for cargo, and to hold the large propellant tanks. The engines and nuclear reactors are also nicely separated from the crew and visitors. They can be jettisoned away in an emergency.

"it is unbalanced"

The three engines handle part of this by throttling each as needed. The gravity wheel can have a counterbalancing wheel as needed.

'it has no room for propellant."

A diagram is included showing that all the propellant volume needed can fit inside the saucer hull. And it also serves as a 1000gr/cm2 storm shelter for radiation shielding. The net volume of propellant needed is scaled up from NASA reference design systems. See diagrams here:
http://www.buildtheenterprise.org/shielding

"it has no radiators"

Yes, it will have radiators, lots of them. I say that on the site. I also say that dealing with waste heat from the ion propulsion engines and nuclear reactors will be a key technical challenge.

"The propulsion system can not meeting the 90 day to Mars requirement"

There are ion propulsion NASA proposals today where analysis shows they can make it to Mars in 90 days. So there is no reason a scaled up spacecraft, the size of the Enterprise, could not do the same.

"The 'magnetically suspended gravity wheel' which I take to mean a centrifuge, is in the wrong plane for control of the vehicle."

I flat spinning wheel can be pushed through space provided proper balance among drive engines is maintained. Yes it might be better to push the wheel along its axis. ... But then it wouldn't be the Enterprise!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32126
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10771
  • Likes Given: 321
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #23 on: 05/08/2012 07:04 PM »

1.  I don't think so.

2.  The three engines handle part of this by throttling each as needed. The gravity wheel can have a counterbalancing wheel as needed.

3.  A diagram is included showing that all the propellant volume needed

4.  Yes, it will have radiators, lots of them.

5.  There are ion propulsion NASA proposals today where analysis shows

6. flat spinning wheel can be pushed through space provided proper balance among drive engines is maintained.

1.  what are your qualifications to make such a statement?

2.  Throttling is not a method to be used "balance" the vehicle.  It means that engines could not be used for their thrust range.  It would like having two engines on one wing running at half thrust offsetting one engine at full thrust on the other wing.
It still does not fix that the vehicle is unbalance and is a poor design.
The saucer mass would not be offset by a gravity wheel (which is not a proper term for it) counterbalance

3.  No, you have not computed the amount of propellant needed to make such a statement.  Saucer is just needed for all the personnel if you would look at the fake plans for the Enterprise.  The propellant required would be large fraction (about 1/3) of the vehicle mass. (See JIMO)

4.  The radiator required size would not be met by just placing them on the hull.  Just the reactors would require around 4 square kilometers of radiators would would look like solar arrays.  (see JIMO)

5.  Proposals, not actual hardware.

6.  The wrong way to build a spacecraft.  It means there no time that the one engine can be shut down
« Last Edit: 05/08/2012 07:13 PM by Jim »

Offline DMeader

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 954
  • Liked: 99
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #24 on: 05/08/2012 07:09 PM »
I don't know if to laugh or cry....

I know. Laugh. Uproariously.

Quote
...dedicate .27% of its GDP each year to the NASA Enterprise program.  …To get some sense of what spending .27% of the GDP each year will mean, consider that between 1963 and 1972, during the Apollo era, the US spent on average .50% of GDP per year as shown in the center column in the table to the right. This is about double the level of spending proposed for funding the Enterprise program.

Maybe the O.P. should propose that Great Britain "dedicate .27% of its GDP each year" to building that neat "Eagle Transporter" from "Space: 1999". A couple of orders of magnitude less ridiculous. Or perhaps duplicate Bowman's pod from "2001". That might actually be useful.

I suppose the O.P. is out seeding his ideas to every space-related forum he can find to drive traffic to his site, so I'll cut him a little slack. But still laugh.
« Last Edit: 05/08/2012 07:28 PM by Chris Bergin »

Online Chris Bergin

Re: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really
« Reply #25 on: 05/08/2012 07:27 PM »
Sci fi fans taking on NASA engineers is too funny, but also a waste of time. We deal with real hardware here.

Locked.

Tags: