Author Topic: Building The Gen1 USS Enterprise, Really  (Read 23400 times)

Offline rklaehn

  • telemetry plumber
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1211
  • germany
    • www.heavens-above.com
  • Liked: 92
  • Likes Given: 170
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

Online kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8652
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1123
  • Likes Given: 243
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: 32428
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11172
  • Likes Given: 331
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: 100
  • 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: