ISO Standard Human Spaceship: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(update links) |
(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead. #IABot (v2.0beta9)) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
Existing spacecraft have so far had a mixed record: modern rockets and atmospheric landers tend to be white and aerodynamic, but blockier than sci-fi space fighters and only sometimes winged. Craft designed solely for vacuum are totally unaerodynamic, but extremely spidery and jumbled, covered in reflective foil (for heat management) and held together by networks of pipes and struts, looking much less solid than sci-fi capships. |
Existing spacecraft have so far had a mixed record: modern rockets and atmospheric landers tend to be white and aerodynamic, but blockier than sci-fi space fighters and only sometimes winged. Craft designed solely for vacuum are totally unaerodynamic, but extremely spidery and jumbled, covered in reflective foil (for heat management) and held together by networks of pipes and struts, looking much less solid than sci-fi capships. |
||
On the other hand, the products of the emerging private spaceflight industry often feature curvilinear quasi-retro stylings which bear a close resemblance to [[Retro Rocket|early sci-fi rockets]] of the zeerust school. Contrast the lines of the Scaled Composites SpaceShip series with those of the Soyuz capsules, or even with the Space Shuttle. (Mind you, the SpaceShip series are just pop-up suborbitals, and reentry from Mach 3 (SpaceShipOne) or 4 (SpaceShipTwo) is between 40 and 70 times less energetic (and thus easier) than reentry from orbital velocity. SpaceX's [http://www.spacex.com/dragon.php Dragon] is orbital, and quite chunky-looking. On the other hand, an [[wikipedia:Single-stage-to-orbit|SSTO]] usually has enough empty space inside to [[wikipedia:Ballistic coefficient#Satellites and reentry vehicles|greatly ease the pain of reentry]], and while you can still get [[wikipedia:McDonnell Douglas DC-X|fairly]] [[wikipedia:VentureStar|blunt]] designs, you can also get [http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/skylon.html this]...) |
On the other hand, the products of the emerging private spaceflight industry often feature curvilinear quasi-retro stylings which bear a close resemblance to [[Retro Rocket|early sci-fi rockets]] of the zeerust school. Contrast the lines of the Scaled Composites SpaceShip series with those of the Soyuz capsules, or even with the Space Shuttle. (Mind you, the SpaceShip series are just pop-up suborbitals, and reentry from Mach 3 (SpaceShipOne) or 4 (SpaceShipTwo) is between 40 and 70 times less energetic (and thus easier) than reentry from orbital velocity. SpaceX's [http://www.spacex.com/dragon.php Dragon] is orbital, and quite chunky-looking. On the other hand, an [[wikipedia:Single-stage-to-orbit|SSTO]] usually has enough empty space inside to [[wikipedia:Ballistic coefficient#Satellites and reentry vehicles|greatly ease the pain of reentry]], and while you can still get [[wikipedia:McDonnell Douglas DC-X|fairly]] [[wikipedia:VentureStar|blunt]] designs, you can also get [https://www.webcitation.org/67QY7IR0a?url=http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/skylon.html this]...) |
||
Also, some of these designs actually make some sense. For example, after the first two missions [[NASA]] decided to leave the external tank of the Space Shuttle un-painted because of the extra weight that pretty white veneer added (to give you an idea, the paint on a 747 jetliner weighs hundreds of pounds), not to mention the fact that it all burned up when it fell into the atmosphere anyway. For deep probes our designs are pretty non-blocky only because they are not meant for any kind of combat. Wings may be used on craft [[Space Plane|intended to work in atmosphere as well]] (like [[Battlestar Galactica|BSGs]] Vipers), even though it wouldn't probably be very practical to make a dual-purpose craft like that given the hugely different conditions, especially when considering the different atmospheres and gravities of alien worlds. Unpainted metal or reflective exteriors may also be justified if the ship is intended to fly near stars: this would reflect the light assist the ship in [[Space Is Cold|staying cool,]] similar to the way that skyscrapers in the southern USA and other hot places tend to be designed with reflective glass exteriors. |
Also, some of these designs actually make some sense. For example, after the first two missions [[NASA]] decided to leave the external tank of the Space Shuttle un-painted because of the extra weight that pretty white veneer added (to give you an idea, the paint on a 747 jetliner weighs hundreds of pounds), not to mention the fact that it all burned up when it fell into the atmosphere anyway. For deep probes our designs are pretty non-blocky only because they are not meant for any kind of combat. Wings may be used on craft [[Space Plane|intended to work in atmosphere as well]] (like [[Battlestar Galactica|BSGs]] Vipers), even though it wouldn't probably be very practical to make a dual-purpose craft like that given the hugely different conditions, especially when considering the different atmospheres and gravities of alien worlds. Unpainted metal or reflective exteriors may also be justified if the ship is intended to fly near stars: this would reflect the light assist the ship in [[Space Is Cold|staying cool,]] similar to the way that skyscrapers in the southern USA and other hot places tend to be designed with reflective glass exteriors. |
||