|
smjjames
|
 |
« Reply #90 on: January 21, 2012, 10:18:06 PM » |
|
It's up to Raven whether he wants to have a network of ice miners or just use one from someplace such as Pluto.
Don't forget Plutos moons either, they are right there so may as well use them if you want.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #91 on: January 21, 2012, 10:23:58 PM » |
|
Why do something with more whe you can do with less. Pick one body, and carve it out with lasers, strap it on yo spacecraft
Better yet, pick a comet, take a giant slice ( just slice out the nucleus in 1 piece)
And strap it on somrhow
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
smjjames
|
|
« Reply #92 on: January 21, 2012, 10:26:36 PM » |
|
According to Raven, they don't really have lasers, or at least they aren't as advanced as ours are.....
I get your point though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #93 on: January 21, 2012, 10:28:11 PM » |
|
Don't have to have advanced lasers, we use lasers to carve out many things already.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #94 on: January 21, 2012, 10:29:02 PM » |
|
Yeah, but he stated the laser tech is even worse then today's laser tech.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #95 on: January 21, 2012, 10:30:43 PM » |
|
mechanically would be very difficult
Use a blowtorch then
an army of blowtorch wielding ice cutters
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #96 on: January 21, 2012, 10:32:46 PM » |
|
mechanically would be very difficult
Use a blowtorch then
an army of blowtorch wielding ice cutters
But arent blowtorches fucked in the near-vacuum of Pluto's atmosphere? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #97 on: January 21, 2012, 10:33:48 PM » |
|
No
Loxy tanks
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #98 on: January 21, 2012, 10:35:15 PM » |
|
No
Loxy tanks
But Fiah doesn't burn unless in an oxygen enviorment?! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #99 on: January 21, 2012, 10:36:01 PM » |
|
Loxy is liquid oxygen
It'll burn all right.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
smjjames
|
|
« Reply #100 on: January 21, 2012, 10:37:25 PM » |
|
No
Loxy tanks
But Fiah doesn't burn unless in an oxygen enviorment?! Uh, rocket engines? Loxy IS oxygen..... Secondarily, any oxygen ice mined out could be used to replenish the Lox stockpiles. Unless the burnt Lox falls back as burnt snow or something.... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #101 on: January 21, 2012, 10:38:36 PM » |
|
Dammit, I wanted the 100th post smjjames  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ravenshaw
Posts: 0
|
|
« Reply #102 on: January 21, 2012, 10:40:48 PM » |
|
Okay, so we can use Pluto for the ice.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #103 on: January 22, 2012, 05:29:31 PM » |
|
you could. the more i think about it however, i think a comet would be better. A comet is spherelike. Just cut horizontally, two cuts, parralel to each other. you are left over with a huge thick circle, perfect for a sheild and the right shape.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #104 on: January 23, 2012, 01:50:36 PM » |
|
Icarus Graphene
Credit: Adrian Mann
This Icarus concept starship uses Graphene as a shield material to protect the vehicle during the voyage to another star. Icarus Balloons
Credit: Adrian Mann
Another spaceship fuel-mining scheme involves balloon miners in the atmosphere of Uranus, where gases would be collected and processed, and then carried to the fuelling site by smaller tanker spacecraft. Some inspiration  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #105 on: January 23, 2012, 03:05:55 PM » |
|
impracticle.
Graphene is hard to manufacture in large quantities, we've only made several sheets.
Also it comes in thin sheets, if a micrometeriod hit, the meteor would make a dent in the material if not a rip/tear/hole.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #106 on: January 23, 2012, 03:11:04 PM » |
|
impracticle.
Graphene is hard to manufacture in large quantities, we've only made several sheets.
Also it comes in thin sheets, if a micrometeriod hit, the meteor would make a dent in the material if not a rip/tear/hole.
Wait what? did he say we were to make that TODAY? Maybe 20-40 years from now. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #107 on: January 23, 2012, 03:16:34 PM » |
|
yeah he said today or with near-future technology. i think.
also "Also it comes in thin sheets, if a micrometeriod hit, the meteor would make a dent in the material if not a rip/tear/hole."
imagine a perfectly spherical aluminum foil ball. If you shoot a pellet at it, it'll have a hole. If you cover the aluminum foil in a thin bullet proof material and shoot a pellet, your foil ball with have a dent in it. Dents accumulate and are not good.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #108 on: January 23, 2012, 03:17:23 PM » |
|
yeah he said today or with near-future technology. i think.
also "Also it comes in thin sheets, if a micrometeriod hit, the meteor would make a dent in the material if not a rip/tear/hole."
imagine a perfectly spherical aluminum foil ball. If you shoot a pellet at it, it'll have a hole. If you cover the aluminum foil in a thin bullet proof material and shoot a pellet, your foil ball with have a dent in it. Dents accumulate and are not good.
But we would have these things--Several feet thick AT LEAST. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #109 on: January 23, 2012, 03:23:06 PM » |
|
ok, i can see that happening
however, still extremely expensive and unreusable.
A single meteor 5 grams in size would puncture several centimeters of this material (wolfram alpha and a lot of physics formulas).
A micrometor might puncture several hundred meters of ice at high speeds, but ice is so much cheaper, and a better solution.
also metric is awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #110 on: January 23, 2012, 03:31:54 PM » |
|
assuming the cost of graphene goes down 50% each year, very generous, and construction starts in 20 years future technology, the sheild dimensions 10km by 10km by 2m thick, the cost would be 6 billion billion, 3 times the value of the total productivity of humans on earth. ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
FiahOwl
|
|
« Reply #111 on: January 23, 2012, 03:33:08 PM » |
|
also metric is awesome.
but ice is so much cheaper, and a better solution. But you would need a lot more; more weight. Which means the engines would have to be bigger; more hard work. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #112 on: January 23, 2012, 03:39:36 PM » |
|
no. it'd just take longer to accelerate. Human bodies can't sustain more than 1.1G for long periods of time anyway, so no need for very powerful engines. (90 years to accelerate to full speed). Assuming the ship is 10km by 10km by 50 km, a rough estimate, and a density of 0.8g/cm^3 it would be 4 trillion metric tons. Ice sheild at 10km by 10km by 4 km thick would weigh 400 billion metric tons, 10% more, relatively insignificant.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mudkipz
|
|
« Reply #113 on: January 23, 2012, 03:44:04 PM » |
|
some quick calculations; the engine will need a thrust of 4,000 trillion newtons constantly for 90 years to acheive max speed (0.9C)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Print
