Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you a fan of sci-fi, we have been bombarded with various shapes. Saucer shape like Millennium falcon, dart shape like star Destroyer, or spherical like Death Stars.
Our space shuttles look like planes flying through atmosphere, but that probably not necessary in outer space. Then we have the Star Trek style with saucer on top, curved neck, and stromboli on bottom but with pontoons sticking out or up. That is probably even less necessary. Just too much material with little funtionality.
Will there even be individual fighter craft like F-16s in space? Babylon 5 has interesting take on that. The Earthforces had an X shape individual fighter and the pilot just stood inside, no seat since no gravity.
I think the most efficient has to be the Borg Cubes. Square is always best since even our terrestrial RE is rectangular in shape. But a Cube will have trouble landing quickly on a planet unless they use parachutes.
A spherical shape provides the minimum surface area to volume ratio, which yields better radiation protection, reduced odds of micrometeor impact, lower moment of inertia when turning, and a lower rate of heat loss. But if you're going to spin it for gravity, cylindrical would be better.
A spherical shape provides the minimum surface area to volume ratio, which yields better radiation protection, reduced odds of micrometeor impact, lower moment of inertia when turning, and a lower rate of heat loss. But if you're going to spin it for gravity, cylindrical would be better.
This depends on the mission.
For example, an interstellar craft travelling at even 1% light speed means that the vast majority of intersections with whatever lies in the interstellar medium are going to occur at the front of the craft, so cylindrical with a high ratio of length-to-diameter would be optimal in such a case.
For anything interstellar, a hollowed out asteroid would have advantages. OTOH, "Cities In Flight" was a fun idea - just take NYC and turn it into a spaceship.
There's this article that goes over some concepts. There are a couple of sections talking about design considerations and misconceptions from pop culture.
There's this article that goes over some concepts. There are a couple of sections talking about design considerations and misconceptions from pop culture.
Except the author made the error of thinking the starship Enterprise had bathrooms. It infamously did NOT, leading to speculation that crew members pooed on the floor and set phasers to disintegrate. Mildy entertaining otherwise.
Oh yeah, and rocket propulsion mass/propellant issues only pertain to gravity wells. Once in space, it becomes a time vs. mass issue.
The object I saw in 2015 (witnessed by many) in Colorado Springs appeared to be multi-faceted & it tumbled & spun.
When the F-16s started to pursue, I hate to say this but there was no contest at all. It was ... toying with our fighter jets. They'd close in & the tumble ball would dart faster than the eye could see; straight up or side to side & the jets would criss-cross & double back while it would just hover & spin & 'wait' for them to get close & then it would do it again!
This was broad daylight; at about 11 am. It 'could' have been experimental; Colorado Springs is surrounded by 5 military installations. One of them to the east is the top-secret Shriver AFB & to the southwest, is NORAD.
The shimmering tumble-ball was reflective; making it almost appear translucent & as I said, could have been a military experiment but those F-16s were clearly trying to 'herd' it away from NORAD, which is restricted airspace.
Would there be an advantage to being a spinning, tumbling ball? I suppose there must be, as it definitely seemed to already have the advantage.
The object I saw in 2015 (witnessed by many) in Colorado Springs appeared to be multi-faceted & it tumbled & spun.
When the F-16s started to pursue, I hate to say this but there was no contest at all. It was ... toying with our fighter jets. They'd close in & the tumble ball would dart faster than the eye could see; straight up or side to side & the jets would criss-cross & double back while it would just hover & spin & 'wait' for them to get close & then it would do it again!
This was broad daylight; at about 11 am. It 'could' have been experimental; Colorado Springs is surrounded by 5 military installations. One of them to the east is the top-secret Shriver AFB & to the southwest, is NORAD.
The shimmering tumble-ball was reflective; making it almost appear translucent & as I said, could have been a military experiment but those F-16s were clearly trying to 'herd' it away from NORAD, which is restricted airspace.
Would there be an advantage to being a spinning, tumbling ball? I suppose there must be, as it definitely seemed to already have the advantage.
People have been reporting that same tumbling and wobbling in relation to UFOs for many many years...if this was some experimental aircraft, Id think we would see some evidence of that by now, there would be known aircraft that use it by now.(aircraft doesnt stay
'experimental' forever).
NORAD knows what these things are, its fairly common to see military aircraft being sent up when a UAP is in the area.
A spherical shape provides the minimum surface area to volume ratio, which yields better radiation protection, reduced odds of micrometeor impact, lower moment of inertia when turning, and a lower rate of heat loss. But if you're going to spin it for gravity, cylindrical would be better.
No need to spin the living area, simply split the ship into two parts...perhaps by breaking off the storage and/or power generation areas, and connect them with a tether. Spin away. One good side effect is that the radius of the circle is a lot larger. This implies coasting.
Problem is that it makes a poor visual for movies. It's like you'll never see a an Orion-based idea for propulsion in film since putt-putting around the universe makes for a less-then-optimal dramatic experience.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.