Topic: A Teacher's Request (Read 4307 times)

Pharaoh · « **on:** January 19, 2006, 11:20:49 am »

Howdy all

I have a request for the modeling community. I'm a science teacher, and I'm working on putting together a year long project that would encapsulate my entire curriculum, so that we would be able to use a familiar framework over the year to edify concepts learned in class. The basis for this project is a fictitious manned mission to an earth-like planet discovered by the next generation of optical telescopes (the development of these telescopes is real, though the discovery is not....yet).

In order to give the students a sense of realism, I am hoping to include a number of graphical aids. I would like to have a model of the ship to show them, as they will be responsible for helping to 'design' parts of it, or at least account for the necessary infrastructure and functions for an extended deep space mission.

If anyone is up to the challenge, I'm looking for a model for a reasonable deep spacecraft. Nothing Trek-ish. I've seen several models, from NASA and elsewhere, showing ships with exposed framework, self contained living-working areas with separate drive areas. I'd like for there to be sizable solar panel arrays (for use once in orbit of this new world), and reasonable (though not huge) living spaces. I'll post a link to a diagram containing some ideas developed by NASA and Boeing over the years.

http://www.astronautix.com/craftfam/martions.htm

In particular, I thought the designs in the upper right (SAIC) with the large aerobrake were interesting.

I'm just a teacher, so I'm kinda poor and couldnt afford to pay anyone. However, I would of course give full credit to the modeler in question, if anyone would like to try the challenge.

A rendered version shown in lunar orbit would be the idea picture to inspire some young minds (stemming from the Moon to Mars concepts being developed by NASA). However, I know that'd be alot of work.

Well, theres my request. Thanks for reading, and I hope someone will be up for the idea

Post here, and I'll provide my email address to we can stay in contact. Thanks!!

FoaS_XC · « **Reply #1 on:** January 19, 2006, 11:34:49 am »

This is a frigate in a line of ships i am/have-been designing. Is this something along the lines you are looking for?

Pharaoh · « **Reply #2 on:** January 19, 2006, 02:34:32 pm »

Thats pretty nice

It's a bit more advanced then what I was envisioning; I was picturing modules as opposed to a self contained 'block' style unit. Thats probably a lot harder to model though; lots of separate modules gotta up the poly count quite a bit heh.

Tus-XC · « **Reply #3 on:** January 19, 2006, 03:05:27 pm »

i'll try something this weekend see what i can come up with in my free time

Starforce2 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 19, 2006, 07:58:22 pm »

them telescopes are going to kick butt, esp the one they're going to replace hubble with. You know there are some ships on fleetdock 13 that have habitat rings and ion or nuclear engines (which we already have in use or have the ability to create) but the models are old and a bit crude. Perhaps something like that?

Magnum357 · « **Reply #5 on:** January 21, 2006, 01:29:23 am »

Can I ask what year this "Hypothetical" ships is suppose to be built in? Like is it something in the present time, or near future, or are we looking at something that is in the distant future? And what type of Drive system will this ship use? I mean, if its just simple rockets like we see today, it would take it centuries to reach the next solar system, or are we using some sort of advance propulsion system?

Also, that link you provided doesn't seem to work.

Starforce2 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 21, 2006, 01:35:18 am »

works for me, may have been temorarily down.

Magnum357 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 21, 2006, 02:21:07 am »

Ok, its working now. Also, I must ask, what type of mission is this ship suppose to do? I assume its just a one way trip for the crew. If so, I would imagine it would need some sort of Landing craft. And is this suppose to be a colonizing mission? If so, most likely this ship would need to be pretty big to bring along all the needed equipment.

Pharaoh · « **Reply #8 on:** January 23, 2006, 02:19:51 pm »

Good questions Magnum

The mission would be a 'near future' mission, so the ship shouldn't look too advanced. It would need to have an advanced drive system (FTL), consider it a 'breakthrough' and first application. I'm still considering what means I'll use, whether fusion power using something like the Tokomak (sp?) design or just something other (high energy sweat molecules squeezed from middle school gym clothes heh).

The means of propulsion is not the vital part. If the ship has some visible means of propulsion (NOT warp nacelles, too advanced for my kludge

) it would be enough. I would like it recognizably 'primitive' though, not the sleek starbuggies y'all are normally usin' round here

The mission would be scientific, not to build a colony. It would not be one way, but would be long duration (9 months to 1 year). Some form of lander would be needed. I'd intended to use NASA's CEV to get the command crew to lunar orbit, where the ship would launch from (NASA has a nice animation of the CEV liftoff, which I'd make use of).

The basis of the project is the visit of our mission to a distant, earth-like world. I would use the mission to tie in to a wide range of topics covered under our 7th and 8th grade curriculums; Energy and Motion, Space Science, Astronomy, Geology/Earth Science, Meteorology and Climatology, Biology, even Paleontology and, perhaps, Archeology and Communications (I haven't decided if there will be intelligent life, I'm leading towards 'no'). The class would go through topic lessons, then apply what they learned by aiding the ship's crew, setting up experiments, analyzing data gathered by the crew, suggesting courses of action, problem solving, etc etc.

Hope that answers your questions. Thanks for the interest!!

J. Carney · « **Reply #9 on:** January 23, 2006, 02:24:33 pm »

+1 for the idea!

Interesting lesson plan... I wish there had been teachers like you around while I was in Middle School- I might have spent more time paying attention to the class than I did to the cheerleaders.

OlBuzzard · « **Reply #10 on:** January 23, 2006, 02:55:58 pm »

Just a few questions:

1. Would the concepts from something like 2001 be too far advanced (ie: rotating drum or cylinder types used to "create artificial gravity")

2. If so ... has anyone looked at some of the proposals that NASA did several years ago ( approx 25-30 ) on the first concepts of long distant space travel with in our own solar system.

-----------------------

points to ponder:

I dont have the ability to do the "skeletal frame work" .. but it essentially utilizes a number of Saturn 5 type (or the upper portions) that are assembled in space (presumably from a more sophisticated space station than was actually built.).

It has been speculated that if such a ship were built it would more than likely utilize this sort of structure in the early stages of these types of development in order to make use of current technologies. The primary reasons are as follows:

1. Availability of vehicles capable of launching, and moving drive systems (engines) that are capable of space flight into position. Even though the shuttle is one of the best systems for this ... it can not carry the huge engines needed for such long distance trips.

2. Cost of development. While it is true newer systems are already being planned, it would still be more cost affective to use components such as "housings" and fuel tanks, modify and add to them.

3. When building it would be good to remember to have multiple back up systems, including redundant living quarters, fuel cells and yes ... even engines.

4. Some of these components would also double as living quarters for colony that might be established depending upon final designs for descent vehicles and (or) the possible establishment of an orbiting satelite station.

just a few thoughts .. I do hope this is not too far beyond your established paramiters.

intermech · « **Reply #11 on:** January 24, 2006, 09:24:52 am »

These could be used for anyone willing to mess with them:

Pharaoh · « **Reply #12 on:** January 24, 2006, 10:18:47 am »

Buzz,

I did indeed have in mind a sort of 'skeletal' framework with various modules attached, something like a logical extension of the ISS, but built for travel. I agree that redundancy would be necessary, but I have to keep in mind that I'm dealing with 8th graders....they are not totally sane

And, they'll get a bit confused if I make it TOO complex. Maybe a dual drive system, one using fusion rockets for in system propulsion, and another using something esle for interstellar flight.

Interstellar Machine,

Love the modules! Nice detail, and looks very near-futurish

OlBuzzard · « **Reply #13 on:** January 24, 2006, 10:40:46 am »

Actually ..

To look at it another way ...

Think if it as a glorified "space station" for lack of a better term. It is modular, easy to assemble in space, and yes ... the "skeletal" idea is why I refer to the space station look. Obviously it would also be made considerably more streamline for travel. There should be 3 sets of fuel tanks... primary, secondary, and on board resupply as an emergency potential emergency back-up. (Let's face it ... no repair stations or refueling stations either). The same thing would be said for the solar collectors .. at LEAST 2 sets.

The boosters would more than likely resemble something of an up-dated version of one of the sections of the Saturn 5 .. or several Tritons strapped togeather.

OlBuzzard · « **Reply #14 on:** January 24, 2006, 12:06:39 pm »

Actually .. I was not talking about a "weak" structure... only as a matter of illustration in contrast to a ship that is completely covered with "skins" to appear more like a "spaceship".

That old Federation cargo ship is closer to what I had in mind. It is more compact and more adapt to "travel".

The one thing that might change would be the style or types of canisters or cylinders for fuel. Those would appear closer to the industry standard for such devices.

At least now we are on the right track.

(and yes .. I am at work again .. and don't have access to any of my photoshop or Wings stuff to build this up right now.)

sorry ...

Antivyrus · « **Reply #15 on:** January 24, 2006, 07:21:05 pm »

Don't know if this is what your looking for but I christened her the "Santa Maria". So because she's an Earth-like planet exploration vehicle (ELPEV for short). She has a duel propulsion system, a fusion reactor for interplanetary trips and as a buster for deep space trips, and two advanced ion drive engines for deep space missions.It has 4 habitat modules which house crew quarters, work stations, labs, and hydroponics. The hydroponics serves two areas, one its a food source for the travelers and also backs up the carbon dioxide scrubbers. At the nose of the vehicle a housing for a reusable landing craft, it also holds retractable solar cells for use for power while in obit around a planet.

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #16 on:** January 24, 2006, 09:06:52 pm »

I drew up a sub-light cruiser using technology available today, sent the text proposal to the Moon to Mars thing, didn't hear anything back from that. I know I have it around here somewhere, it just may take a an hour or so to find it...

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #17 on:** January 24, 2006, 09:55:47 pm »

OK, I found them and scanned them in. Liberty1 and Liberty3 are the same ship, although Liberty1 is a much earlier version, and I like the way Liberty3 looks too. Liberty2 is the same ship, after two refits. The first one being an artificial gravity refit, which also allowed it to deal with a weapon defecieny to the immediate Broadside arcs. The second refit slapped a pair of warp engines on it and allowed it to make a quick (Warp 1.8 ) jaunt to Alpha C.

The Original design was equipped to have a crew of about fifty. All sections of the ship have their own life-support systems. All the living quarters for the crew would be stationed on the Gravity deck, most food supplies and the small rec room would be here as well. The Command deck housed the bridge, Sickbay, Computer and Weapons systems. The Cargo Section is modular, the foreward underside houses the two short range shuttlecraft that allows the crew access to planetary surfaces, and other locations. The shuttlebay is the only permanent section in the Cargo section. The rear underside doesn't get removed often, this is normally where Fuel, and other non-food supplies are stored. The entire top of the Cargo section can be removed easily and replaced by one of several modules. The normal one is a massive Cargo bay, equipped with two-four worker bees for cargo transfer. Another common one is a Flight deck. The Ship would essentially be turned into a Fighter carrier (although the technology for space fighters is a bit off, you want to plan ahead for these things). Two more would turn the shiip into a passenger carrier and a Marine Transport. The Engine room housed the Main Fusion/Fission (whatever was available when construction was nearing completion) reactors and provided thrust using the same method. The Primary mission of the Liberty class Starships, as I called them, is solar expolaration and construction. Liberty would be able to transport science crews and supplies to outposts on the Moon, Mars and anywhere else we can put them. But as we continue to push the envelope of space travel, we would be remiss not to arm such a ship. Even if we manage to put aside our differences and form a peaceful hegemony on this planet, not everyone is going to be satisfied. Pirates and Klingons could pop up, and if we have an unarmed fleet, we have problems.

http://www.geocities.com/ooq_sidewinder/Liberty1.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/ooq_sidewinder/Liberty2.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/ooq_sidewinder/Liberty3.jpg

Tus-XC · « **Reply #18 on:** January 24, 2006, 09:56:54 pm »

linkies don't work... btw you can attach images to the thread

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #19 on:** January 24, 2006, 10:15:13 pm »

Can I now? Last time I tried Geocities complained about external links....

Interesting...I wonder when they added that...

Pharaoh · « **Reply #20 on:** January 25, 2006, 09:33:08 am »

Anti, those are excellent! They look much like what I had in mind, very nice! I don't suppose you have any with the solar panels extended? Might look very cool

Lots of great detail.

2 questions:

1. Have you ever considered putting an aerobrake on the bow? Not that its vital in any way, just an interesting concept.

2. Do you have any plans to skin and render that model?

Thanks!

Tus-XC · « **Reply #21 on:** January 25, 2006, 03:28:52 pm »

for something as big as that, i would think aerobreak would be rather ineffective, and probably a hinderance, unless of course your goal was to take the whole ship in. as i see it i would want avoid it as much as possible. Once that thing enters LEO, it will have more than enough of a planets atmosphere to deal with. retros would be your best bet

Pharaoh · « **Reply #22 on:** January 27, 2006, 10:22:41 am »

There are 2 reasons I was thinking about the aerobrake.

1st, it makes a good tie in to talk about atmospheric density and discussing the development of space technology (different means of reentry, etc).

2nd, fuel considerations. You'd burn more having to retro-fire into orbit. An aerobrake would lower fuel use, and thus fuel mass to be carried (offset by the mass of the aerobrake itself, of course, but that could be jettisoned after perhaps).

Its nothing vital, just an interesting idea.

Tus-XC · « **Reply #23 on:** January 27, 2006, 07:35:02 pm »

Quote from: Pharaoh on January 27, 2006, 10:22:41 am

There are 2 reasons I was thinking about the aerobrake.

1st, it makes a good tie in to talk about atmospheric density and discussing the development of space technology (different means of reentry, etc).

2nd, fuel considerations. You'd burn more having to retro-fire into orbit. An aerobrake would lower fuel use, and thus fuel mass to be carried (offset by the mass of the aerobrake itself, of course, but that could be jettisoned after perhaps).

Its nothing vital, just an interesting idea.

Aye aero breaking does save you fuel, however were talking about a research vessel (ie something bigger than a normal satelite, bigger than a shuttle, etc) dropping into LEO, and then having to break back out again, which won't be easy by any regards, i would almost say that you would be better off retroing at a higher orbit (geostationary or higher, roughly 42,000 km) to conserve fuel for breaking away than using aerobreaking at LEO (Low earth orbit btw, but essetially 200km above the surface of an earth like planet) and using up (possibly) more fuel for the break away, i could be wrong, but i would have to check the delta Vs to see which one would conserve more.

just my 2 cents worth of astronautical engineering knowledge

Antivyrus · « **Reply #24 on:** February 04, 2006, 11:45:18 pm »

update on the Santa Maria
texture WIP

E_Look · « **Reply #25 on:** February 05, 2006, 02:43:23 pm »

Hey... that IS nice work!

Riskyllama · « **Reply #26 on:** February 05, 2006, 04:42:50 pm »

the only thing i dont quite get is the twisty region. It doesnt look that secure through there.

Antivyrus · « **Reply #27 on:** February 05, 2006, 07:18:36 pm »

Quote from: Rus'kah son of L'amaas on February 05, 2006, 04:42:50 pm

the only thing i dont quite get is the twisty region. It doesnt look that secure through there.

I agree and I'm planning on straightening that out for the final product , it looked good in side view but otherwise looks like an accident waiting to happen

Pharaoh · « **Reply #28 on:** February 06, 2006, 10:35:40 am »

Nice work, Antivyrus! Looks better every time I see it

Antivyrus · « **Reply #29 on:** February 06, 2006, 10:10:32 pm »

Pharoah
have you heard of the program called Celestia? if not here a link to it http://www.shatters.net/celestia/
its a free application but one i believe would be a great teaching tool
heres screen shot of Io with Jupiter as a backdrop taken from within Celestia

Pharaoh · « **Reply #30 on:** February 13, 2006, 10:21:34 am »

Anti,

No, hadn't hear of Celestia. However, we do use something similar, called Starry Night. Excellent program, really grabs the students's interest.

Starforce2 · « **Reply #31 on:** February 13, 2006, 05:49:37 pm »

ahh...astronomy geeks!

News:

Topic: A Teacher's Request (Read 4307 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

intermech

Topic: A Teacher's Request (Read 4307 times)