Topic: Are we go for Mars?

[Stormbringer]

Power supplies see post concerning new Nuclear Reactor type coupled with RTGs and new 50% efficiency solar cells.

Earth magnetic field strength: merely half a tesla ( I think). Most child's toy magnets produce more powerful fields. the charged ionosphere and atmospheric depth are what really shield earth from most radiation.

Shielding: please see my post citing and linking to a new polymer shied that is being studied which would make light wieght shielding practical.

I'm sorry to be so brief but I don't have a lot of time right now. I will join the discussion in earnest in a couple of days.

[J. Carney]

Quote:
2.  The Liberty would be armed. Preferably with Laser Cannons and Missile Launchers, but should Lasers prove to be unfeasable, a suitable alternative could be found.

Laser Cannons? Who has laser cannons that can do more than 'fry' electronic components? As far as I know (and I'm kinda up on U.S. Army equipment) we have no real 'hard kill' laser weapons. If you want armaments, all you are going to get is some kind of  CONVENTIONAL  missile- and it'll be pretty hard to convince people on that one- especially all these other countries that are planning manned space missions. Nukes would be out of the question- not for any political reasons beyond the simple one of arming the ship in the first place- but simply because of cost ... those things are pretty expensive.

Enclosing the fuel tanks is a great idea- I'm all for that one. I'd much rather have even a 1/16 inch piece of alluminum between my gas tank and the dusty void than nothing at all, especially when there is a return trip involved. If you build it piece by piece outside of the atmosphere (and it looks like this one would be made that way) there is no real 'vessel weight' consideration. You'd only have to worry about one more trip, which is expensive, but not very for the extra insurance that even minimal protection from the elements would offer.

As for the crew- you couldn't feed the 60 man crew of your ship for the whole 16-month round trip mission to Mars without stocking a pantry the size of the average Wal-Mart! We definately need a larger crew than 3-4, like Appolo was ment to support, but simple restrictions on storring provisions for more than about 10-15 would make any number larger that very impractical. Even growing some food in Hydroponic gardens, you'd still lose out because it would be more space efficient to just store nonperishable food items than attempt to grow a renewable supply.

I like the idea of going big and in style; and I like the idea of sneakingly making the whole thing a fesibility study for a real-life System Defense Ship, but we need small steps. We are still new at this 'crawling outside the crib' thing... we need to take it slow or we'll bust our bottoms in a big way.  

[Lieutenant_Q]

whoops...hehe...your right about the crew part...I was getting my ships mixed up. (A future Warp 1 refit of the Liberty had a crew of 60...not the original)  Permanant Crew would be 16. (she could handle up to 40 on her grav deck if need be, more if they dont mind spending most of the trip in zero-g or under acceleration gravity)

As for Weapons, sure Laser Cannons are not the hard kill type yet, but these would be one of the last things added to the ship, five years from now.  If we still don't have the hard kill lasers by then, a small naval gun is not all that hard to construct, and in some ways, could possibly work better than a Laser.  Conventional Missiles are a must, If for whatever reason a Nuke is needed (Armageddon type situation), it can be shipped up to the ship.  

[J. Carney]

Just remember that nasty law of motion that says when you fire a naval gun in zero-G your ship is going to leave the firing locale at the same speed and in the oppisite direction as the shell. We'll need something without recoil- how are rail guns looking these days?  

[Stormbringer]

Also google the search string criteria:   "cold Plasma shields" to see an article on a more star trek like shielding schema being researched now.

[Stormbringer]

Laser weapons that do destroy more than circuits are a reality. The ABL is in early prototype and testing stage but is scheduled to be operational by 2007. The THEL system has destroyed Katyusha rocket volleys and FROG volleys. The Navy has it's own system it is testing. Future generations of the ABL system will be carried on the F-22. a technology has been developed for perfectly synchronizing powerful ( relatively speaking) but tiny LED lasers by the millions. The ABL system combines the output of several LASER Modules into one beam much like the Death Star's LASER in Star Wars. FEL research has resumed with a system just short of weapon strength. THat would be a LASER-particle beam hybrid.


This Laser Update brought to you by a hopeless sci and tech geek.

 

[J. Carney]

Cool... I'm not too much on the aircraft orstrategic weapons front. Glad our Gov't (in it's infinate wisdom) didn't close down those projects when ol' Slick Willie decided to finish killing the American military. Maybe in the near future I can forget having to carry around a -16 that hangs up when you look at it funny in a dusty room. LASERs would be far more low maintenance.

[TalonClaw]

Quote:
2.   The crew needs something to prevent an accidental collision with space debries.
 

Even a small meteor moving at a high velocity could pass right through the spacecraft.  Passing through a meteor or dust storm could totally incapacitate the spacecraft.  The Enterprise had a deflector dish to deal with this.  I don't think we are near that kind of technology yet.