Show me more realistic space ship depicted in movies, video games,

File: houston.jpg (32KB, 456x324px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 456x324px

>>14185732
> realistic space ship depicted in movies
Pretty sure that I can, for pretty obvious reasons.

File: 1407153446706.jpg (316KB, 2288x1712px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 2288x1712px

>>14185732
>he wants realism on the board about giant ass robots and literal magic

Now, this thread is pretty obviously bait, and if not (which is dreadfully unlikely) it's in shit taste and mindset, but if you'd wanted actual spaceships you want /g/, /tg/, and /egg/.

>realistic space ship

So you only want us to post Nasa's and USSR's shuttles?

File: 8zL3JlL.jpg (315KB, 1919x1199px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1919x1199px

>>14185775

>Realistic spaceships
>Not wanting a mixture of Napoleonic and WWII naval warfare in space

File: 1200101712390.gif (22KB, 536x400px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 536x400px

>>14185792
>not wanting a radish

File: moonlight-mile.jpg (69KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1280x720px

>>14185732
>Realistic
>Literally uses unobtanium powered warp drives.

It's not fit to kiss the boots of Moonlight Mile.

File: planetes-946731.jpg (125KB, 800x1227px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 800x1227px

Yo.

>>14185764
>>14185778
>[current year]
>still believing people actually left Earth orbit and survived going through the Van Allen belt

m8s...

>>14185971
>[current year]
>...
Leave.

File: hermes00.jpg (37KB, 350x205px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 350x205px

Since finding it I've quite liked Weir's original design sketch for Hermes from the Martian. He think the movie one looks cooler, but I think his design is both more realistic and original. The movie design would be shit at aerobraking.


>>14185844
It doesn't use a warp drive. It uses a combination of Photon Sail (For Earth depautre and arrival) and Antimatter rocket (For planet of space catpeople arrival/departure). The Unobtainum is used for the magnets used to contain the antimatter.

They put an absurd amount of thought into the thing given that it appears for a couple minutes. If they put half as much time into the plot as they did the ship we might have gotten a memorable movi

>>14185993
Thanks for your input, shitposter.

>>14185999
amazing trips

is it too late to be friends?

>>14186010
I don't make friends with bad shitposters, sorry.

>>14185990
Yeah, but they didn't. And that still means that there's a shit ton of anime with more realistic spaceship designs then that.

>>14186099
Like?

I hope Avatar 2 has more of those cool power suit knife fights.

File: Screenshot062.jpg (570KB, 1750x2500px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1750x2500px

>>14186124
The AMP suits were pretty cool.

>>14186099
There's anime ships bette than the Venture Star , but discounting all of the work put into designing a realistic ship because the plot of the movie was shit is dumb.

>>14186132
Werent they basically mining/construction equipment and the PMC basically just slapped guns on them and called it a day?
I can't see why a military would buy a mech with a giant fucking window that could be penetrated by an oversized arrow.

File: 1200104268820.png (52KB, 415x197px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 415x197px

>>14185983
This, can't even $CURRENT_YEAR correctly. Fucking pleb-tier.

>>14185990
What exactly am I looking at here?

Also, how do the Avatar people even make that much antimatter?

File: 2001.jpg (91KB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 540x304px

>>14185801
JUST ON THE BORDER
OF YOUR WAKING MIND

>>14186375
antimatter gets trapped in magnetic field of gas giant that pandora orbits
they collect it somehow

>>14186202
excuse me sit where are radiators

>>14186375
>What exactly am I looking at here?
Habe you read The Martian? This is what Andy Weir originally pictured the ship from it to look like. The ship is shaped like a cone to provide a smooth profile for aerobraking. During cruise the cone "splits" in half. Two "semicones" are extended out from the core of the ship and the ship is put into spin to simulate artificial gravity.


>Also, how do the Avatar people even make that much antimatter?
Through the magic of plot


>>14186429
Cutting room floor. They wanted to include them but higher ups said no.

File: OrionDiscovery[1].jpg (190KB, 1600x845px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1600x845px

>>14186429
Here, have some concept art for the movie. Motherfucking nuclear pulse drive.

>>14186456
>Habe you read The Martian?
I have, yeah, but I thought I remembered the ship being connected to the reactor with a tether and the whole dumbbell assembly spinning.

File: DiscoveryOrion.webm (1MB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 600x338px

>>14186462

>>14186490
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-sWM-nGTsk

>>14186456
The Martian fucking sucked as a book, though

>>14186549
You think so? I loved it.

File: the_martian.png (62KB, 638x316px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 638x316px

>>14186552
The Martian was a book written for a very specific group of people. People outside that group would likely not enjoy it. That said people outside that group have shit taste so their opinions can be discarded.

File: 1448534564608.jpg (13KB, 312x203px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 312x203px

>>14186552
let me clarify:
it was a cool idea, with cool math, realism, etc, but jesus god the writing was so childish, at least in my opinion.

The dialogue was hard to get through, and when he decided to change one of the units of his interim calculations to "pirate-ninjas" I just fuckin checked out.

>>14186567
yeah sure, buddy

>>14186568
this
faggot needed to remember he's on mars not facebook

File: 1356794561007.jpg (18KB, 450x338px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 450x338px

>>14186567
god, XKCD is such a self-congratulatory wankfest

>>14186568
>>14186575
Didn't really have a problem with that. Maybe I'm just not deep enough immerged into the whole "normies get out REEEEE" culture.

>>14186591
it was more "horrible morons get out, I hate how all these characters are written, REEEEEEE"

I mean I chuckled at a couple parts, but fuck me, man.

I'm an engineer and I write better than most of that.

>>14186552

Haven't read the book, but my major problem with the film was it just wasn't that emotive. When I saw the trailer and all those people gathered in Times Square and London and stuff I fully expected to be in floods of tears at the ending because everyone was gathering together as one for a single thing. Which is a very powerful message. And when he was rescued I just kind of went "that's nice, good for him" and nothing more. And I cry fairly easy. I dont know what was wrong or missing, but while the science and plot was good, I just never connected with it emotionally.

Goddamnit /lit/

File: 1356938048479.jpg (55KB, 960x700px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 960x700px

>>14186621
>implying i'm from /lit/

>>14186144
Hollywood executive meddling happened. "We need to see the actors' faces and emote!"

I has people in stasis for 6 years in microgravity.

Those people might as well be 80 years old and made of jello by the time they get to the end of the ride.

File: s_nagaoka_4_large_01.jpg (606KB, 1800x900px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 1800x900px

>>14186412
>this_nigga_gets_it.txt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U52sP25ynE&fmt=18

>>14185801
>>14186412
>>14186996
I love you sometimes, /m/

File: Expanse nuke torpedo.webm (2MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x404px

>>14185732
Fuck your realism.

File: rockets_of_the_world.jpg (1MB, 3322x5079px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3322x5079px

STEP UP OP

>>14187011
does seem a bit odd that a space torpedo would still be dick shaped
wouldn't it make more sense to make it a cube or something?

>>14188411
I'd say something like smaller end-on profile for enemy CIWS etc

plus in general the engine is going to be cylindrical re: combustion chamber -> nozzle, etc, so you might as well just stack horizontally out from that for storage reasons

>>14187040
the shuttle was SHIT

SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT

but goddamn was it pretty

File: Planetes Episode 26 P5.jpg (32KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 1280x720px

> obligatory link
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/index.php

>>14185732
Avatar actually failed on key point when adapting Charles Pellegrino's design.

For starter the ship is named "Valkyrie", I don't understand how they mixed it up with the shuttle.
Then it's is supposed to be incredibly long to protect the crew from engine radiation.
It's a choice but they also abandoned the Fountain-style heat radiator
And the tech level to build one and operate it is beyond the roof, if we could make one, it would likely not look like 20th century technology, too many clutter.


More unforgivable : they don't even show it in operation. Some people wouldn't even know it's a spaceship.

>>14185732
Any real one?

File: Von Braun - Planetes.jpg (135KB, 1456x1087px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1456x1087px

>>14185990
To be fair, they copy pasted the concept from somewhere else.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/slowerlight.php#id--Go_Fast--Starships--Valkyrie_Antimatter_Starship

And knowing James Camerons he was certainly the only one who knew anything about it (he work with Pellegrino, no surprise).

>>14189661
Seeing as Pellegrino was a consultant on the design, I think we can forgive them for taking a bit of artistic license with his original concept. Besides the actual Valkyrie concept would be pretty shitty at colonization. If I recall correctly the payload was a measly two people + life support.

>>14185781
Was he autistic?

File: 1401175515566.jpg (60KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1024x576px

>>14189686
How can you say shitty when that's literally the most efficient rocket you can hope ?

At least if you intend to move stuff FAST, all bet are off if you talk about laser-boosted solar-sail with sail retrobraking.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/slowerlight.php#id--Go_Slow--Laser_Sail--Laser-Pushed_Lightsail

...that or beaming the data to a factory to rebuild the humans and their consciousness there.

I'm also taking the "Interstellar Ramjet don't work" view

File: USAF Orion.jpg (136KB, 1213x557px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1213x557px

>>14189713
I didn't say it was shitty. I said it would be shitty at colonization. Two people + a minimum of supplies per ship isn't exactly the best approach for colonizing other stars. A fast ship like the Valkyrie is better suited towards exploration, scouting out ahead to find the best spots to send larger, less efficient, and much much slower colonization ships.

File: 1329255912632.jpg (508KB, 3484x2040px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 3484x2040px

>>14189729
Things is that the Valkyrie is the design that would scale the best with size. You can put any weight being the engine as long as it's out of the stream and by pulling rather than pushing you are saving the most in structural mass.


On an unrelated note, ORION "Nuclear Pulse Propulsion" are actually pretty shitty (its horrible to use in orbit for one thing). I'll be glad when people will know better than surfing on nuke power.

>>14187040
Never heard of the Buran before. Pretty neat thing.

>>14189920
The issue is assuming off the shelf tech, the Orion is the only one that we can do NOW that is both high impulse and high thrust besides say nuclear salt water drives or nuclear open cores (and those require some nuclear engineering work)

>>14189920
Orion is fine to use in Orbit. The pulse units used are small so the EMP effect isn''t very big. In addition the earth's magnetic field isn't uniform so if you perform your main burn in the right part of your orbit , the emp effect can be minimized. At any rate Orion isn't really for orbit-to-orbit, its real power is surface to orbit. No other realistic proposed rocket designs matches the lifting power that the larger Orion proposals possessed. Gas Cores and NSW rockets can barely match the smaller ones.

File: shuttle lift off.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>14190362
Its just a slavic knockoff of the shuttle.

>>14190565
I wouldn't call it a knock off. Similar requirements led to similar designs. If anything it could be argued that Buran was superior due to its use of liquid boosters (Which is what NASA wanted before politicians forced them go with Solids b/c mai jerbs > NASA's wants), the ability to fly autonomously(Which NASA avoided because Astronaut egos). and the ability to launch with a larger payload in place of the orbiter (Which NASA never got the funding to do). Although the last one is due to the decision to mount the engines on the Energia Rocket rather than on the Buran orbiter itself, which meant that unlike the shuttle you had to buy all new engines every flight.

File: 3rd times the charm.webm (804KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

804KB, 640x640px

>>14190604
Private enterprise will make space great again.

File: 1428476882795.jpg (229KB, 2354x912px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 2354x912px

>>14185732
did someone say realistic Yamato

File: muh_dick.gif (39KB, 400x256px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 400x256px

>>14190668

>>14190668
>Realistic
>Doesn't have triple 25's
>Doesn't have the stern catapults
3/10 the Emperor is displeased

>>14188411
Roscinante is somehow capable to be used in earth like atmosphere and gravity, so yeah.

>>14185732

This seems a weird question to me. It'd be like an 1800's person asking for you to show him realistic aircraft designs and then when you show him a plane him getting upset and asking where the hot air goes? He can't know what a realistic design is because the science and engineering isn't there to make one yet.

Neither is ours. If it was, we'd have realistic spacecraft. Not "got to the Moon but can't reach any further" air balloons spacecraft, but "can theoretically go anywhere" airplanes spacecraft. Our science and engineering has hit a limit and until that limit is broken we can't go to another planet, never mind another system or galaxy. We might never do so.

Until we can design one though, none are realistic, and asking for realistic ones is really just asking for ones like the stuff we have now or that meet what we are familiar with, but more so. Which is less realistic and more believable, for a given value of suspension of disbelief.

>>14185854
>Manga
>Not the anime designs
You fucked up, anon. The anime was the hard sci-fi part of Planetes. The manga had them in bloody fishbowl helmets.

>>14190614
Fourth if you count the one that exploded in the air, right?
But didn't they already land one on the ground earlier, anyway? What's so important about landing it on a barge?

File: Thunderbird_5.jpg (42KB, 449x440px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 449x440px

>>14185732
>>control+f
>>pic related not found

Come on /m/

>>14192523
Good thing that's not what he's talking about. Also, I thought the manga was always better than the anime? Or at least, that's what Getterfags say. :^)

>>14192794
Eh, I think Planetes is about 50/50 when it comes to the manga and anime. It's a bit like Patlabor, both are good entries that do different things, both are worth viewing. The manga is much more about the actual Von Braun mission and has all this philosophical stuff about space and mankind. Tanabe isn't the viewpoint character and Locksmith gets some development beyond autistic mad genius. The anime's more hard sci-fi slice of life, the plot's more about the countries of Earth trying to control space and we see Hachi through Ai's eyes. One has Ninja NEETs on the Moon, the other does not.

>>14192647
barge means the boostback burn is smaller, which means larger payloads can still be brought to orbit while the lower stage gets reused.

File: nuclearotvdiagram_by_william_black_small.jpg (1MB, 4000x4500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x4500px

>>14190401
> The issue is assuming off the shelf tech, the Orion is the only one that we can do NOW that is both high impulse and high thrust besides
> besides

Key word.
Put aside that said Nuclear-pulse engine would in fact be a technical nightmare and unreliable for both the "launch" ability we attribute it but also the Interplanetary. We already have NERVA design that are more efficient and can be made high-thrust if we cared for that.

>>14190558
> Orion is fine to use in Orbit. The pulse units used are small so the EMP effect isn''t very big

You would be creating bomb shrapnel that STAY IN ORBIT every single time you need to Leave or Enter orbit. The EMP is the least of its problems, it really have no future as developing better engine will be preferred to trying to make this one work.


It's really time we stop embellishing this "current tech potential" just because it sound cool to ride on explosion.

File: endeavour_by_sketchboook-d8zaog5.jpg (145KB, 1024x1448px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1024x1448px

I don't know why we've moved away from the whole "Just strap it to the side of a fuel tank" design

>>14193417

Possibly because it's neither efficient or cheap.

>>14193422

>Space Travel

>Efficient
>Cheap
>Physically Possible

Choose Two

>>14193417
Cost, mainly.

File: jort-van-welbergen-1-page-design-doc-2.jpg (760KB, 1920x2715px) Image search: [Google]

760KB, 1920x2715px

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns.php
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns2.php
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/artgallery.php

Important note :
The picture is NOT actually for a Game.
It's an artistic project AS IF it was for a Game.

I'm telling you before you get your heart broken.
Also, you'll now have KSP 34bits with tons of mods to get close

File: jort-van-welbergen-lrlrm-arrival-at-mars-v6.jpg (851KB, 1549x2536px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 1549x2536px

I wish movie-maker were capable of creating story around setting as carefully detailed.
Also I don't think you can still use the "There's no money in that" excuse. People are dead bored of classic SF design and are getting curious for actual space physics.

What it would take is a Consultant to fuse whatever action-packed plot they want with any already existing Hard-SF world that have already been written THEN murder Executives and PR service before they can "dumb the movie down".

>>14185732
Which way around does it go? Where's the engine? Where are the habitats?

File: IsvDiagram.jpg (100KB, 600x396px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 600x396px

>>14193615

Green arrow is direction of travel, purple arrows are direction of thrust

>>14192777
>bongs

File: KHsUq.jpg (374KB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 3264x1840px

>>14193694
>bongs

File: oh god my sides.jpg (45KB, 640x370px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x370px

>>14185775
>implying NASA would EVER name a ship after a fucking astronomer

Who ever made that has clearly never worked there.

>>14193709
What does any of that have to do with what he said, autismo?

>>14193709
Are you the guy with the NASA hateboner who's been popping up in spaceship threads every time?

File: tmp_24568-7513_original-604428336.jpg (44KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 500x375px

>>14185732
Planetes
Space brothers

Nice try though.

File: tmp_24568-Royal_Space_Force_Poster397090073.jpg (83KB, 580x822px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 580x822px

>>14185732
Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise

Forget this one.

File: 1461643855358.jpg (105KB, 613x1268px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 613x1268px

>>14193709
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(spacecraft)

>>14193719
might be one of those insufferable /kspg/ faggots that took over that general

>>14185971
it's not like they choose a trajectory that has them lingering in the belts. They take less than a tenth of the radiation it takes to cause minor sickness.

>>14186462
>>14186490
>banning literally the one good use of nuclear explosives just to appear peaceful and progressive
>politicians in charge of anything
if that shit was allowed we'd be able to send probes to alpha centauri right now

>>14193785
I've always wondered, is Planetes actually a good engaging series? Every time I see it brought up it's just for hard sci-fi wank threads like this. I never see anyone talk about the actual content of the show

>>14193939
I really liked it, even with the hard sci-fi it has a lot of heart. Give it a chance Anon.

>>14193647
What's the shield for?
Also, are we talking the same kind of photon sail that Stephen Hawking just proposed to accelerate a phone to relativistic velocities with? If so, do they have a base station laser on Pandora?

>>14193417
The Columbia disaster. Strapping the vehicle to the side of a tank full of cryofuel creates too much risk of it being damaged by falling ice, so everyone's moved back to the "stack it on top of the fuel tank" design.

>>14193939
It's really hit and miss. It can be obnoxiously melodramatic and have cringe-worthy attempts at comedy, and some of the plot details don't make sense. But then it also has some really good moments. The latter half of the show is better than the first.

I think the hard scifi part is the most interesting thing about it though.

>>14193404
>Put aside that said Nuclear-pulse engine would in fact be a technical nightmare and unreliable for both the "launch" ability we attribute it but also the Interplanetary. We already have NERVA design that are more efficient and can be made high-thrust if we cared for that.
There's not a solid core design out there that can match the thrust of an Orion. The only nuclear rockets that are on its level are Nuclear Salt Water Rockets (Which would be much harder to develop than Orion) and Open Cycle Gas Cores, which have their own set of problems.
>You would be creating bomb shrapnel that STAY IN ORBIT every single time you need to Leave or Enter orbit. The EMP is the least of its problems, it really have no future as developing better engine will be preferred to trying to make this one work.
What shrapnel? The bomb units and the oil would be completely vaporized by the blast. The resulting plasma would either be moving at escape velocity, kicked out of orbit or dissipated to the point where its the same density as the rest of the trace bits of air in LEO. The effects wouldn't be any different than the exhaust of other rockets.
>It's really time we stop embellishing this "current tech potential" just because it sound cool to ride on explosion.

>not wanting to surf nuclear explosions into space


>>14194124
In case they hit a speck of dust while cruising at .7c

>>14195544
I give you the pure thrust, but that's Assuming it's harder to develop than a Nuclear-pulse thruster (which is much more complicated than it appear).
Also classical NERVA engine can be throttled down and vectored more easily, and that's saying something since Nuclear reaction take time to be put in and out of motion.
Anyway I think nuclear propulsion will only get great when it will be time for fusion.

> What shrapnel? The bomb units and the oil would be completely vaporized by the blast.
Nuclear blast don't mean "physical matter disappear and nothing is left" especially if you want a directional blast which imply resistance. You will have shrapnel surviving the blast and staying in highly eccentric orbit.
As for escape velocity, I suppose some material would indeed reach it, in some context only and depending of the orbited body. Also plan your PR speech for dozen of radioactive shell de-orbited into the atmosphere.
There's a simple math for that but I don't have data, simply said : if the blast velocity isn't higher than Escape velocity ...self-explaining. And if said blast isn't strong enough to instantly accelerate the shrapnel you won't get a second chance.

So no, it's not "just like other exhausts".

>not wanting to surf nuclear explosions into space

I kneel to this argument, it was a lost cause to think otherwise.

>>14194124
> What's the shield for?
Looking at the data it's also a "mirror shield" when the Valkyrie is in sail-mode pushed by lasers around Mercury.

>>14193417
Just want to let you know that I have successfully replicated and flown a Space shuttle in KSP, with all main thruster on the shuttle.

>>14195544
>In case they hit a speck of dust while cruising at .7c
What if they hit a speck of dust while accelerating at 0.6c?

>>14193939
You never see people talk about the content because the content is more /a/ and has been discussed to death. I personally think it's some of the best that anime has to offer but some beg to differ.

>>14196287
It'll punch a slightly smaller hole in the first layer of the shield.

>>14197272
But the shield is on the wrong side while they're accelerating.

>>14186375
>Also, how do the Avatar people even make that much antimatter?
Presumably whatever also enables them to generate a light beam for the photon sail, with power somewhere in the "sum of sunlight hitting Mercury" orders of magnitude.

>>14196234

>Nuclear blast don't mean "physical matter disappear and nothing is left" especially if you want a directional blast which imply resistance. You will have shrapnel surviving the blast and staying in highly eccentric orbit.
As for escape velocity, I suppose some material would indeed reach it, in some context only and depending of the orbited body. Also plan your PR speech for dozen of radioactive shell de-orbited into the atmosphere.
There's a simple math for that but I don't have data, simply said : if the blast velocity isn't higher than Escape velocity ...self-explaining.

Nowhere did I say that the exhaust turns to nothingness. Vaproized =/= disappears. The entire mass of the pulse unit, bomb, control system, and propellant, as well as the oil sprayed on the pusher plate. is converted entirely into plasma. Clouds of plasma don't exactly like to stay together and if unconstrained as it would be following the detonation of a pulse, they will rapidly dissipate. By the time this matter cools to a point it be able to be solid, it will have dissipated to a point where there will be any point where there is enough mass to form shrapnel.

The only time you need to be concerned about shrapnel is if a pulse unit misfires.

>>14193939
It's certainly my favorite animu and mango. Every side character or story ties back into the main plot very well.

File: 20141216_orion1980_1200_by_macrebisz-d8a1mmf.jpg (671KB, 1200x1636px) Image search: [Google]

671KB, 1200x1636px

>>14199533
You overestimate a lot the ability of a Nuclear explosions to vaporize stuff. Especially in space, with weaker bombs meant for propulsion... and worse for shaped charge which are MEANT to resist most of the explosion and focus it in a direction.

The result would be the mass of each bomb's containment turned into armor piercing bullets which don't need to be more than 1mm wide to punch through any station and satellite we are likely to build.

The ORION design was imagined with no consideration for long-term infrastructure, before we started tracking debris and when Space Exploration was about punching our way to new place regardless of the cost.
With those you didn't need a "port station", it was to be launched/built into orbit as its own base &resupplied like a warship at sea.

>>14185732

Go back to bed James. Nobody cares about dances with wolves in space.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izQB2-Kmiic

File: 1395727713063.jpg (41KB, 495x480px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 495x480px

>>14193713
You need to get your eyes checked because you are clearly blind.

>>14193719
Same with you, I was clearly mocking astronomers not NASA you mouth breather.

>>14193891
>Galileo

Are you seriously comparing a pre-modern astronomer responsible for one of the greatest discoveries in human history to some pseudo-celebrity pot head? Don't make me laugh. It's amazing how many morons there are in this thread.

>>14207424
Maybe you shouldn't have worded it so fucking poorly.

File: drunk astronaut.png (1MB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1366x768px

>>14193939
I'm just popping in from the front page, so I might not have the same perspective of an /m/ regular (what do you people call yourselves again?) but yes, it was fantastic. I don't even care all that much about the hard sci-fi aspects of it in fact I originally watched it because somebody on /wsr/ recommended it for the romance, which was pretty good, but the show was seriously solid and definitely worth watching. Tanabe a cute.

With that in mind, actually, something has been bugging me since I saw it in the first place: there are some rooms on the space station ISPV 7 with artificial gravity, and some without. Pic related, it appears that the living quarters are all zero-G while the offices are all under the influence of artificial gravity. My question is, how would this actually work? Are parts of the station rotating while others aren't? How are they connected, and how would you move from a zero-G part of the station to one with artificial gravity? If anybody ITT knows of how that could work I'd really appreciate it if they could tell me, because it's been bothering me for ages now. Thanks.

>>14185971
Are you suggesting not only that they didn't, but that it's literally impossible that anyone ever could/will?

File: stanfordtoruscolonyfull_by_william_black-d6knii8.jpg (567KB, 4000x3302px) Image search: [Google]

567KB, 4000x3302px

>>14211372
>My question is, how would this actually work? Are parts of the station rotating while others aren't? How are they connected, and how would you move from a zero-G part of the station to one with artificial gravity? If anybody ITT knows of how that could work I'd really appreciate it if they could tell me, because it's been bothering me for ages now. Thanks.

Yes, being realistic PLANETES use centrifugal force for pseudo-gravity.
Yes, some part rotate while other don't.
And it would work, still it would typically happen at specific junction (here at the center of the station)
Still...it work but creating a (long duration, BIG, and airtight seal between rotating parts will be a new and difficult engineering achievement.

And I'm not talking of transferring electricity, let alone fluid. We know how to do that but it's particularly difficult.
It's funny but the most difficult in Space Colonization isn't much in the sheer size of the project but the little details required to actually live there.

For example, if it was necessary nobody know how to do surgery in space, with all fluid floating around.

>>14211799
>And I'm not talking of transferring electricity, let alone fluid.
I was thinking more about people, really, since people aboard ISPV 7 can apparently move between no-gravity and artificial-gravity rooms without needing some kind of suit or anything. Presumably, I mean. It's just odd to realize that although the show shows people in both kinds of rooms, it never shows people moving from one kind to another.

So, the inside of the station would be rotating faster, and have a higher pseud-gravity, is that true? Maybe the supposedly zero-G environments aboard ISPV 7 were actually still rotating, just much slower than the central areas. This would mean that the apparently zero-G areas of the station would actually still have a very small amount of pseudo-gravity, but low enough that it appears to be zero-G. Is that physically feasible? I have no idea how wide the station would have to be for that to make sense.

File: Space colony from PLANETES.jpg (172KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1920x1080px

>>14212269
Okay, hope I get you better.

# physiology speaking
Realistically the human bones "melt" in 0G and our hearth need to adapt as at first astronaut get a "bloody head". No so fast however that within the Animes alternating from 0G to 1Gravity every days + future medicine can't avoid it.

# station design
Actually, the closer you get from the center, the slower it get (in term of relative velocity).
Also, it would be nightmarish and pointless for spacecraft to dock to ANY rotating station, so you'll avoid it if you can.
So a "particularity" of space habitat would be the requirement to get close/at the center of rotation to be able/ease the transition between Non-Rotating (0G) & Rotating (~1Gravity) part.
In case you got confused : the 0G part of ISPV-7 where spaceship dock are NOT on rings, but on what is not rotating.
There's a good sight of this just at the beginning of PLANETES, after the intro.

A classic representation :
- You are in the 0G part where spacecraft are docked
- Going close to the the axis, you go in a 0G hub where the wall seem to be rotating slowly.
- For a small-rotating-station you grab a ladder on these wall and descend into the rotating part.
-...Or you take an elevator.
As people "go down" they will start feeling the centripetal force more and more, all the way to 1G.

A less classic one, if the station is small (and generally less than 1G) :
- You are in 0G corridor that form a ring.
- Beyond it is another corridor that move "horizontally" quite fast.
- In between is a conveyor-belt, moving more slowly.
The idea is to grab the conveyor to get some speed, which as it rotate will leave you moving toward it, walking on it. Then match speed again with the moving-corridor.

For numbers (and everything) :
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/artificialgrav.php#id--Spin_Grav_Math

>>14193831
They actualy just used voshod/soyuz rocket from what can tell from youtube clips of that anime.

>>14216249
Large space station, and still no reactors. Yeah, solar panels look coll, they add variety to design, but why woudl anyone use it on such large settlement.

>>14216296

Presumably because the sun produces something like 400, 000, 000, 000kw of power every second and will continue to do so for billions of years. We can currently only convert a tiny fraction of the power that hits a solar panel in to electricity and can't really store it even if we did, but that might not be true in the near future of Planetes.

File: 2001.jpg (611KB, 1046x1553px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 1046x1553px

(completing)
>>14212269
> This would mean that the apparently zero-G areas of the station would actually still have a very small amount of pseudo-gravity, but low enough that it appears to be zero-G. Is that physically feasible? I have no idea how wide the station would have to be for that to make sense.

First, you are assuming that the entirety of the station is moving as one block. There's not a lot of reason to do so unless you can't design the airtight-seal, and even then, this is an unlikely solution unless you can stop/start the rotation of the station/ship at moment notice.

Second.
This is "feasible" but you would need to rotate veeeeeeery slowly the ring/module, and the trade-off will be to make the station EXTREMELY wide for the tips to reach 1G.

Third,
A last solution is to have the ship capable of docking directly at the very axis of rotation, see 2001, but in return it mean you only have to place where you can dock ship.

>>14216249
>Realistically the human bones "melt" in 0G and our hearth need to adapt as at first astronaut get a "bloody head".
I thought this was kind of curious myself, because I was aware of this fact, but the dormitories aboard the station were apparently 0G. I have heard, however, that sleeping in 0G is actually really comfortable, so maybe that's why.

>Actually, the closer you get from the center, the slower it get (in term of relative velocity).
That's what I thought, that does make more sense.

I do think that part of what's really neat about Planetes was its scientific realism, but it's true that focusing on that makes the unexplained things (things we don't know how to do yet) that much more obvious sometimes.

Thanks for the link, I've been meaning to read Heinlein and I really like the example here. Informative, too. This stuff about the Coriolis effect is fucking neat as well, that must be a pain to work with on a rotating space station lol. No offense intended, but English isn't your first language, is it?

>>14216296
Unless you have huge energy requirement you don't need a nuclear reactor. ISPV-7 is barely the size of a small town.
ex : a Fission reactor on a Aircraft-Carrier is at 90% for its propulsion.

Also, solar-panel outside of atmosphere gain more energy from the sun than on the surface of Earth. It is also unlikely to explode and pour plasma into the station if something fail on it.

I'm the one who should be shocked that you think a NUCLEAR reactor is needed.

>>14216306
>There's not a lot of reason to do so unless you can't design the airtight-seal, and even then, this is an unlikely solution unless you can stop/start the rotation of the station/ship at moment notice.
Ah, well that's why I was asking about the seal in the first place. My main question is precisely about that seal, how it would be feasible to connect one massive rotating part with another non-rotating part. Like I said, if this were impossible, you would have to have one big-block rotating station -- which, as you point out, would be very impractical.

>A last solution is to have the ship capable of docking directly at the very axis of rotation, see 2001, but in return it mean you only have to place where you can dock ship.
That was another thing I'd considered, but it doesn't seem very practical, especially for a space station as big as the ISPV 7, which IIRC appears to have several "ports" for spaceships to go in and out of. At the very least, the guys never seemed to have much trouble taking the Toy Box out whenever they wanted to, which (because of their lowly status) would probably much harder if the space station only had one place to exit from.

>>14216319
>ISPV-7 is barely the size of a small town.
It is? Shit, I was under the impression it was much larger than that, somehow. I mean, it has an entire mall in it. I guess that doesn't mean it's that large, though, I didn't even consider that.

File: 11210919906_78ffe19273_h.jpg (609KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

609KB, 1200x1600px

>>14216316
No english isn't my first language, though I've been told that I could pass as a native (probably due to poorly educated kids but still...).

"Planètes" realism do fail at some part (for dramatic or comedic reasons). For example it follow Hollywood logic that "all spacecraft are a sneeze away from falling into the atmosphere", when actually no small-explosion or debris impact could make the difference they want.

Also, "Planètes" work from the idea that space-industry is extremely profitable and need human being up there. Realistically you would use robot/drones from as far as the communication-time-lag allow you to.


The link is simply the best there is.
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/prelimnotes.php

You'll learn both REAL ROCKET SCIENCE, and how to write awesome SF story that don't feel cheesy (unless you really like blue skinned amazons living in Venus' Jungle)

File: perguntascomdoedoes1.300164729_std.jpg (27KB, 365x163px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 365x163px

>>14216362
>I've been told that I could pass as a native
You've been lied to. Your prose is very obviously not that of a native English speaker.

File: B1japsubmarinewithradialengineplanecutaway.jpg (147KB, 1022x715px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1022x715px

>>14216327
> the seal
I said it would be a great technological achievement to make a really big one that last forever, but you can lessen the difficulty by making it smaller. You don't need a seal-ring as large as the stations' ring. Only as large as the corridor you walk in.

And there are out-of-the-box ways to bypass ROTATING-airtight-seal entirely (if needed).
Imagine an airtight-module with 2 docking ports. The module is on motorized rails. Let's say it start linked to only the non-rotating part.
- You fill it up with cargo/crew then close the door and "undock"
- Motor make it roll along the rails until it match the speed of the rotating-part.
- You "dock" to it, open the door and voila.

Also, have trust in human science, our society is already chockfull of technological marvel that defy physics. We simply got too used to it to notice, by 2100 we might not even flinch at the idea of a MATRIX-level VR game.

To stay on that "rotating airtight seal". It is basically already what we use to have boat propellers transit from air to water.
Or as you hear it often : If NASA had the budget of the US Dpt of Defense we would probably have a base on the moon "just to keep the budget used"

>>14216403
>Your prose is very obviously not that of a native English speaker.
Same to you Anon, same to you.

>>14216362
why did nasa make such hideous design decisions with this guy and with their lunar rover prototype?

Just looks...wrong

>>14216643
No, actually, he sounds fine, and he's right. You would not pass for a native English speaker if you speak like you write. Sorry. I didn't say anything earlier because it would have been unnecessary and rude, especially considering that you and I were talking about space stations, not English. You clearly have a working knowledge of the language, but it's clear from your posts that your conjugation needs work.

>>14216646
Because function takes precedent over form.

>>14186575
You gotta keep yourself from going crazy somehow.

File: 1290895744513.jpg (106KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1280x720px

>>14186575 >>14217098
Reminder that from a moon-base the internet will have a 4 seconds lag at BEST.
And no cable will help you.