Community > Forum > Technology & Science > Starships

Starships

Posted by: Star_Voyager - Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:06 am
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 73 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Starships 

Are Starships likely to happen soon?
Yes 19%  19%  [ 8 ]
No 81%  81%  [ 34 ]
Total votes : 42

Starships 
Author Message
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
avatar
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:56 am
Posts: 1104
Location: Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:52 am
It's not really the decades of travel that you have to worry about: it's more like the constant 400C+ temperatures that the nuclear reactor runs at constantly. The problem will not be freezing, but keeping your reactor from melting down.

Also, since you referenced Sirius and the idea of habitable belts around other stars: the habitable belt is defined as an area in which an Earth-like planet would have Earth-normal conditions. Farther out, and it will be Mars-like. Closer in, and it will be Venus-like. If there is no such area around a star (i.e. when the temperature is just right, the radiation is too intense), the start is deemed UNinhabitable, and that's the end of that.

_________________
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Daniel Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering

In Memoriam...
Apollo I - Soyuz I - Soyuz XI - STS-51L - STS-107


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:32 pm
The 400°+ are the temperature of and inside the reactor currently - the reactor will be that hot and he wil have that temperature and it is a problem.

But first this is not the initial situation at the beginning of my considerations - the initial situation was what will happen regarding temperature if there were no such reactor. The reactor that propells the star ship might be separated from the habitated part of the ship.

Second - given such a reactor now and its very high temperature the question is what will happen to the temperature elsewhere in the ship - outside the reactor.

Consider for example a space ship of the size of Star Trek's Enterprise - a huge star ship compared to the private orbital vehicles to be expected in the ASP competition and compared to the current raw designs of the vehicle for a manned Mars mission. At what rate would the temperature of the reactor given to all rooms, cabins, chambers and so on, that humans can be expected to be working or living in? And at what rate will these places of the ship loose temperature to the interstellar space? It won't be a problem in the room where the reactor is but there are places in the star ship to be expected where it would be a problem.

The problem you are mentioning will exist too if such a reactor will be used and to use its temperature for replacing temperature losses would contribute to the solution for places farer away from the reactor. This will require a medium and an infrastructure to distribute the temperature - but will the rate of distribution be sufficient? Which medium is the best, the optimal one? Which way could the ship be isolated against losses? Is that possible at all?

In all rooms etc. the temperature should be nearly identical because of health.

Still I don't trust how such a star ship could be kept at a temperature required for humans and to prevent the ship from becoming frozen.

The ship would be a habitable place at a Sirius-like star too because it would be a habitable place in the deep dark cold interstellar space too - the difference simply is that it is an artificial place that can and would be habitated. Around Sirius it would have access to a source of energy that doesn't exist in the interstellar space - it would have that access at Sirius but it would have to stay at a distance where Sirius couldn't warm the ship up tp earthian temperature. At that distance there still would be access to Sirius energy because of Sirius' much higher and intense radiation. That was my point - I wanted to argue that approaching such a star wouldn't solve the problem of loosing temperature. To solve the problem by approaching to a star that would have to be a sun-like star.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
User avatar
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 pm
Posts: 1361
Location: Austin, Texas
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 1:52 pm
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
It won't be a problem in the room where the reactor is but there are places in the star ship to be expected where it would be a problem.
Ekkehard, this is so unlike you!
Usually you propose a solution to some problem and I tell you it won't work and you argue endlessly that it really will. Now you have done the opposite, stated a problem that you think is very difficult to solve and I am saying , no, it is easy to solve, and you are arguing that, no, it is really difficult!
There is really no problem to distribute waste heat from a reactor to all parts of the ship. Many technologies exist and are used on Earth now. Steam pipes and hot air ducts for example. Even if the main reactor that propels the ship is idle, some power will be needed for lights, life support, communications, and so on. This will generate waste heat too. Apollo 13 got very cold after the power was shut down because the electronics in the cabin give off a lot of heat. That is why computers have cooling fans.
Trust me on this one. Ample heat will be available. The biggest challenge will be disposing of the access heat efficiently.


Back to top
Profile WWW
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 2:43 pm
Hello, Peter,

first it seems to necessary to state an impression: You often seem to misunderstand me because you take statements, issues and post of mine in a special sense I didn't have in mind and didn't post anyway. You said that you have studied Physics and/or Astronomy and you seem to understand most of my posts physically, astronomically, technically and technologically ONLY. Yes - many times I am talking technically, technologically, physically or astronomically - BUT many times too I am talking economically, politically and much more.

I didn't state a problem here when I revived this thread - I simply missed the considerations of losses of temperature here. And I said that explicitly. I consider this thread to be a study on a project that migth become reality in the very far future.

I am used to do studies by my job, profession and studies at university. This study here is a technological study - that means that it has to consider each technological requirement to meet the purpose of what is subject to this study here.

This purpose is carrying humans through the interstellar space. Purposes now have an economical aspect - availability of all technologies and equipment required to achieve that purpose. "All" means that the study has to be complete.

That I missed something meant that I should add it - to achieve a higher degree of completion. There may have to added more.

The thread is going now becauseIi added an aspect.

Currently there is a new misunderstanding - I never said that the temperature and/or energy canot be distributed. What I said really is that there is a rate of loss of temperature to the interstellar space. And if there were no source of temperature that can replace the loss then the star ship, its inner and all what is in its inner would be frozen during the decades of its journey.

Now there are such sources imaginable - the reactors under discussion and there energy or temperature can be distributed.

But this is now answer top the question if the amount of temperature or energy brought per second to all the rooms etc. of the ship is equal to the amount of temperature going lost into the interstellar space or if it is less.

The answer to this question - temperatures delivered by the reactor minus temperatures lost equal to question mark - depends on the volume of the ship, the place of the reactor, the shape of the ship, the number of reactors, the isolation of the ship and probably much more.

So the considerations I missed might have impacts on the design and the architecture of such a ship. Wrong design or wrong architecture may mean that the purpose wouldn't be achieved (death of the humans, forced to go to the wrong place or something else) An this is an economical aspect. Technological design and technological architecture are allocation in terms of Economics.

Unfortunately you didn't understand it this way and I am not confident that you now will understand it right. I have in mind a wide range of aspects here because a star ship and its interstellar journey are that a huge challenge.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:05 pm
Posts: 173
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 2:43 pm
you can never predict the future.
Who predicted the computer revolution that occured from 1950-1980? That's less than 50 years. It got from Eniac to handheld devices. (Yes there were handheld programable computers in the early 80s, I own one and I am amazed that this is a device is almost as old as I am and still works.)
Anyways, lest I get sidetracked: if there will be a good reason to buid a manned starship, mankind will build one, in less time than you think.
We got to the moon in less than 10 years, admitedly some of the technology was there, but what made the difference was the budget.
"If money comes, they will build it" :):):):):):):

_________________
Thank you very much Mister Roboto
For helping escape when I needed most
Thank you
Thank you


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 2:48 pm
Hello, 109Ace,

to whom are yur responding?

I don't try to predict the future and I don't argue that a star ship never will be built. I simply state requirements and analyses of them - that's required for success of the project. And it can accelerate its eveolution and development.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
User avatar
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 pm
Posts: 1361
Location: Austin, Texas
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 2:51 pm
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
But this is now answer top the question if the amount of temperature or energy brought per second to all the rooms etc. of the ship is equal to the amount of temperature going lost into the interstellar space or if it is less.
It will be equal or more. Regulation will be by dumping more heat to space if an area gets too hot. The problem of having too little heat at some location will probably never occur, or if it does, redistribution of available heat will be easy.


Back to top
Profile WWW
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 3:07 pm
That's satisfying answer here. there is a causal-logic relation between the size of the reactor, the place of the reactor, the efficiency of the reactor, the kind of the reactor and the number of reactors at one side and the volume, shape of the ship at another side, the isolation of the ship at a third side and the efficiency of distribution of heat at a fourth side. This don't claim to be complete already. A certain relation has to be kept -a larger ship may mean the requirement of a larger reactor - or a larger number of reactors or differnet place of the reactor and so on.

And it seems as if there were differences of temperature to be expected between different regions of the ship because distribution of heat requires time - regions close to the reactor(s) will get heat earlier than others. The regions closer to space might get it later in one design and architectur - if only one central reactor is in the center of the ship - while they might get it earlier if there are a lot of reactors all placed in the regions close to space (where in turn some of their heat might go into space which isn't desired)

...

The problem under the aspects under which I am looking to it is that especially you, Peter, are arguing by something like promises and forecasts.

...



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Walker
Space Walker
User avatar
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:05 pm
Posts: 173
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:03 pm
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
Hello, 109Ace,

to whom are yur responding?

I don't try to predict the future and I don't argue that a star ship never will be built. I simply state requirements and analyses of them - that's required for success of the project. And it can accelerate its eveolution and development.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


hey. I was just replying to teh original poster. Didn't mean to interfere with your debate. :)
Btw what is a Diplomat Engineer, I think it's a European thing because I haven't met any here. I am an Engineer, I'd like to be able to call myself a Diplomat as well...

_________________
Thank you very much Mister Roboto
For helping escape when I needed most
Thank you
Thank you


Back to top
Profile
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
User avatar
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 6:15 pm
Posts: 1233
Location: London, England
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:47 pm
109Ace wrote:
Btw what is a Diplomat Engineer, I think it's a European thing because I haven't met any here. I am an Engineer, I'd like to be able to call myself a Diplomat as well...


An Engineer that works on Diplomats? Makes repairs, servicing, upgrades that sort of thing? :) Oils the wheels of commerce possibly?

_________________
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
avatar
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 1:25 am
Posts: 887
Post    Posted on: Wed Apr 27, 2005 7:07 pm
Zubrin's NSWR constant 1g thrust launch vehicle would be good.

This would be better than orion in that a Nuclear Salt Water Rocket's thrust is constant. Only the fusion Orion Max--and anti-matter photon rockets perform better than a 90% NSWR solution if achievable.

Such a craft would have to be rugged--and would therefore be a perfect fit for the Sea Dragon concept of Truax. A massive rocket is towed out to sea with only kero in the first stage. Sea Water is separated into LOX/LH2 into the first and second stages, with LOX only going to the first stage, and hydrogen going to a NTR payload--or seawater mixed with the nuclear material for the NSWR. Thus the bulk of your proepllant is found at sea, and launch is far from land. Once the NSWR is in space--it fires in such a way as to send its exhaust away from Earth and you have a steady 1 g ride.

The beauty of an NSWR system is that plumbing tech is about all you need.


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Thu Apr 28, 2005 8:15 am
Hello, 109Ace and Andy Hill,

The "Dipl." in "Dipl.-Volkswirt" or in "Dipl.-Ing." hasn't anything to do with the word Diplomat. "Dipl." is a special german term as far as I know and is going to disappear - by law the angloamerican bachelor/master-system has been introduced. It will be there in parallel to the "Dipl."/"Magister"-system for a while and then no more "Dipl."s will be given. "Dipl." means "Diplom" and nobody who has it will leave it - it is guaranteed to him by law. I would have to look to Ancient Greek to translate "Diplom" but it simply is an academic degree which means that someone has written a scientific study to prove that he knows to do scientific work completely and that he has successfully accomplished exam in some or all sub-disciplines of his science.

The "Volkswirt" in "Dipl.-Volkswirt" means "Economist" whereas the "Ing." in "Dipl.-Ing." means "Ingenieur" which is "Engineer" in English (explanation only to be complete - you will have recognized already I think.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Moon Mission Member
Moon Mission Member
avatar
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:56 am
Posts: 1104
Location: Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA
Post    Posted on: Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:54 pm
So what's wrong with that system?

Of course, I have a problem with giving people Baccalaureate (aka Bachelor's -- yep, that's where it comes from) and Master's (a holdover from the old Guild systems) degrees in things such as "Women's Studies" (why no Men's Studies -- check out http://www.womensstudies.umd.edu/) and "Film Studies" (C'mon, a degree in watching movies? http://www.essex.ac.uk/filmstudies/ -- apparently the insanity is not limited to the US). Why not just establish a department of Underwater Basket Weaving? (No, it's not actually for real) Not to mention all those damned business and law majors....

Just think of all the asinine degrees and people that you have to look forward to, Ekkehard, now that some genius has decided to implement out system of awarding degrees.

_________________
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Daniel Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering

In Memoriam...
Apollo I - Soyuz I - Soyuz XI - STS-51L - STS-107


Back to top
Profile
Moderator
Moderator
avatar
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Post    Posted on: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:03 pm
From my point of view there is nothing wrong with the german system - and the angloamerican system is alright too.

But it has turned out that nobody outside the native German speaking countries or nations knows what the german titles mean. This proved to be barrier or obstacle if someone having a german university degree looks for a job in the US, the UK or elsewhere where German is not the native language and where not that much people understnad German.

Aditionaly there has been an inflation of titles here in the past.

Because of this it's reasonable to apply the angloamerican system in Germany in the future - it will simplify communication, talking, information and looking for jobs and remove the burden to get insight into our german system of titles from native English-speakers. The territory and number of native English speakers is larger than that of native German speakers: US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, at least some caribbean countries, Ireland and some more.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 578
Location: Zurich
Post    Posted on: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:16 pm
Ekkehard Augustin wrote:
From my point of view there is nothing wrong with the german system

Except when you want to go for a professorship ... what a mess. They have the same system here in Switzerland too. In the US (and other places) you do a tenure-track thing (i.e. Associate or Assistant Professor) for some years before a star chamber of your elders and betters make a political decision about whether or not you should be allowed to become a full professor ... but here in Teutonia you have to do a Habilitation (which more or less a period of years of extended torture) before a star chamber of your elders and betters make a heavily political decision about whether or not you should be allowed to become a full professor.

But I digress, and massively.

DKH

_________________
Per aspera ad astra


Back to top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests


© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use