Large scale colonization ship

GW Johnson · 2024-04-22 09:41:37

Myself, I'd forget the argon. It needs to be included in the inert gas to be blown off, for the factor-1.2 rule. That raises the min suit pressure needed to avoid pre-breathe. Otherwise, what Rob has looks much like what I came up with.

GW

tahanson43206 · 2024-04-22 11:05:58

For RobertDyck ...

We (NewMars) seem to be going over and over the same ground.

The atmosphere prescription should ** not ** be in debate after all these years.

However, the forum software does NOT provide a mechanism for easily finding references.

You have to keep repeating yourself every few months.

Please try once again... You've received feedback questioning your use of Argon in your inert gas mixture.

I'm guessing you are using Argon because is is available? Please clarify if that is the case.

Google came up with this:

AI overviews are experimental. Learn more
The Martian atmosphere is 2.6% molecular nitrogen (N2) and 1.9% argon (Ar) by volume. The remaining gases in the atmosphere are:
Carbon dioxide (CO2): 95%
Molecular oxygen (O2): 0.16%
Carbon monoxide (CO): 0.06%
Trace amounts of other gases: Including water, methane, and noble gases
Mars Education | Developing the Next Generation of Explorers
Martian atmosphere - Mars Education - Arizona State University
Mars' atmosphere however is 95% carbon dioxide, 3% nitrogen, 1.6% argon, and it has traces of oxygen, carbon monoxide, water, methane, and other gases, along with a lot of dust. Dust hanging in the air colors Martian skies tan in photos taken from the surface. Relative to Earth, the air on Mars is extremely thin.
nasa.gov
With Mars Methane Mystery Unsolved, Curiosity Serves ... - NASA
Nov 12, 2019 — The results SAM spit out confirmed the makeup of the Martian atmosphere at the surface: 95% by volume of carbon dioxide (CO2), 2.6% molecular nitrogen (N2), 1.9% argon (Ar), 0.16% molecular oxygen (O2), and 0.06% carbon monoxide (CO).
Wikipedia
Atmosphere of Mars - Wikipedia
The atmosphere of Mars is the layer of gases surrounding Mars. It is primarily composed of carbon dioxide (95%), molecular nitrogen (2.85%), and argon (2%). It also contains trace levels of water vapor, oxygen, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and noble gases. The atmosphere of Mars is much thinner and colder than ...
Mars' atmosphere is more than 100 times thinner than Earth's, with an atmospheric pressure of 6.35 millibars at the surface. The skies are also rusty tan in color due to oxidized dust particles from the Martian surface.
Break it down
What gas makes up 95% of Mars?
Ask a follow up...

Please clarify your recommendation on suit atmosphere and pressure. You have repeated this prescription many times.

In the new forum, we have a clean slate and we have the opportunity to create Reference points where immutable decisions are recorded.

I'm not sure how these would be stored, but we have the opportunity, and we have the talent to make something like that happen.

On the ** other ** hand, your recommendations are subject to serious study and quite possibly, correction.

If you have made a mistake somewhere in 20+ years, I hope you can accept correction and merge the corrected information into your design.

We do NOT need to be going over and over and over fundamental environmental decisions.

(th)

Calliban · 2024-04-22 11:58:27

From memory, the reason argon is included in the breathing mixture is that when the carbon dioxide is stripped out of Martian atmospheric gas, what is left is a roughly 60:40 mix of nitrogen and argon. We could go a step further, liquefy the gases and remove the argon. But that is more energy and more design complication. If we don't need the extra processing step, we save money all else being equal. Every design decision comes to down to cost vs benefit.

Last edited by Calliban (2024-04-22 11:59:41)

RobertDyck · 2024-04-22 12:58:34

Atmospheric pressure on Earth at sea level is 14.69595 psi. Oxygen on Earth (near the surface) is 20.946%. That means partial pressure on Earth at sea level is 3.0782 psi. Higher altitude has lower total pressure, so lower partial pressure O2. Boulder Colorado has 2.54 psi partial pressure O2. So 3.0 psi is "pretty good".

Experiments done by the US air force in the 1950s give us more detail. They were interested in what fighter pilots require to remain functional. Cockpits in the early 1950s were not pressurized but aircraft were flying higher. They found fighter pilots could breathe 2.5 psi pure oxygen indefinitely, and operate complex equipment (aircraft controls). At 2.0 psi pure oxygen, they could remain conscious up to 30 minutes, but eventually everyone will black out. At 3.0 psi everyone can remain conscious and think clearly, even middle age individuals who are flabby and out of shape.

Mechanical Counter Pressure spacesuits are lightweight, flexible, simple equipment, and safe. If a gas bag spacesuit gets a pin hole puncture, the astronaut must immediately go inside a pressurized habitat. If an MCP suit gets a pin hole puncture, the astronaut says "ow" and continues to work. If a gas bag suit gets a tear 1 inch long (2.54 cm), he/she better be very close to an airlock and have at least one other astronaut close to help, otherwise he/she is dead. The suit will decompress quickly. If an MCP suit gets such a tear, it produces a nasty bruise on the skin beneath the tear; that's all.

A gas bag suit requires a water cooling system. With an MCP suit, you cool with sweat. Technically the entire cooling system is a 1 litre bottle of drinking water and a hose to your mouth. It can be a PET plastic bottle with a plastic bladder liner. One plastic hose from the bladder to the helmet to deliver water. Another hose from the suit or helmet to the bottle to deliver air. As you drink, volume of water decreases, but that sucks an equal volume of air (oxygen) into the gap between bottle and bladder. Total volume in the bottle remains constant so no back pressure. PET pop bottles are designed to withstand 150-250 psi before they burst. That's way more than suit pressure vs hard vacuum. Murphy's Law states anything that can go wrong will, so simpler equipment means fewer things that can go wrong. Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS)

The first MCP spacesuit was designed by Dr Paul Webb for Apollo on the Moon. It wasn't ready in time. MCP works very well at lower pressure, but has a problem at higher pressure. Apollo was originally designed for 3.0 psi pure oxygen in the Command Module, 3.3 psi pure oxygen in spacesuits. That would allow a 10% pressure loss without trouble. After the Apollo 1 fire they considered a nitrogen/oxygen gas mix, but bottles of two gasses and equipment to balance them was too complicated. They finally used 1 atmosphere whole air at launch, bleading air as the rocket ascended and in space while flushing with pure oxygen. It was 5.0 psi pure oxygen in transit to the Moon, and during the mission. Apollo spacesuits used 3.7 psi pure oxygen. Dr Webb initially designed his MCP suit to use 3.3 psi pure oxygen, but increased that to 3.7 when NASA changed their specification.

Dr Webb expected to require bags of liquid silicone over the palms and back of hands to spread force of the elastic suit. He also expected to require bags in arm pits. Experiments with a test subject wearing a prototype suit in a vacuum chamber found those bags were not necessary.

Later work by Dr Mitchell Clapp in the early 1980s developed an MCP glove intended for the EMU spacesuit used on Space Shuttle and ISS. That was before station construction began, when they were expecting to build US space station Freedom. This glove would be used for station construction. Since the MCP suit used 4.3 psi pure oxygen, his glove was designed for that pressure. Dr Clapp found at that pressure the bags of liquid silicone were necessary. A test subject wore the glove and insert his hand into a glove box. The box was pumped down to vacuum. The test subject reported when he put the glove on, it was so uncomfortable it hurt. Once the box was pumped down so his hand was in vacuum, it didn't hurt any more. Dr Clapp measured angle each finger joint could bend, and counter force of the glove. Compared to a gas bag glove, the MCP glove was far superior in every metric. However, the pain reported by the test subject tells me 4.3 is too much pressure for MCP. Yes, once pressure was consistent across the body, that pain went away. So wearing the suit outside in space (LEO/Moon/Mars) is comfortable; the problem is donning and doffing. That means putting it on, and taking off. The pain happens when the suit is partially on.

Some researchers have tried to devise fancy fabrics with contractile polymers or wire of shape memory alloy. The idea is to don the suit unpressurized then to tighten the suit around the body all at once. Preventing difference in pressure of one part of your body vs another prevents the pain. However, there's a simpler solution: reduce the pressure. At 3.7 psi or lower, the plastic bags of liquid silicone just aren't needed. Dr Webb's first version prototype used 3 layers of elastic fabric. This made donning/doffing easier. But I want to reduce pressure to 3.0 psi because that allows a single layer of elastic fabric without pain, and without any contractile polymers. The suit can be made of Spandex and other fabrics readily available today. Any system to pressurize or release pressure could potentially fail. Removing that system removes a point of failure. KISS

The Oxygen Purge System was a way to maintain pressure in case a gas bag suit develops a leak. With an MCP suit it's simply not necessary. Another large, heavy, and complex piece of equipment in the PLSS backpack that's just not needed.

MCP suit backpack: oxygen bottle, Carbon Over-wrapped Pressure Vessel. Backup oxygen, a smaller COPV. Silver oxide granules to adsorb CO2. Heavier than lithium hydroxide, but can be easily regeneratef by simply baking out the CO2. Granules are compatible with a microwave oven. Ag2O sheet metal requires a toaster oven. The CO2 sorbent cartridge would also have activated carbon to absorb bad smells. That's just charcoal formed into a light foam. Carbon surface absorbs smells, so the idea is to maximize surface area, make foam bubbles as thin as possible. The activated carbon is also reused by baking out. The backpack would also have the bottle of drinking water. Circulate air in the suit by action of breathing, so no fans. Suit controller would be a microcontroller with user interface the size of a smartphone. Pressure regulator on the O2 bottles designed so they can continue to operate with complete electrical failure. Battery the size of a Power Bank for a smartphone.

I could continue with spacesuit design, but the point is this is where the 3.0 psi sui pressure comes from.

For the habitat, O2 is suit pressure subtract 10%. That rule is taken from Apollo, and allows 10% pressure leak in the suit while O2 is still what astronauts are used to. As a check, 2.7 psi is higher than Boulder Colorado, so safe. Boulder is 2.54 psi. Maximum nitrogen is 1.2 times total suit pressure: 3.0 x 1.2 = 3.6 psi. Back off a little as a safety factor, so 3.5 psi. Argon is separate, maximum nitrogen and argon do not add. There's also a maximum argon partial pressure for zero pre-breathe, but they don't add. So adding argon allows increasing total pressure in the habitat while maintaining zero pre-breathe. I could do a fancy calculation of exactly how much argon is the maximum, but adding enough so total pressure is exactly half Earth at sea level is easy. Another way to do it is maintain N2:Ar ratio to equal Mars atmosphere. That makes harvesting easy and increases argon a little. That makes total habitat pressure slightly higher than half Earth at sea level. But if you add a lot of argon it lowers voice pitch. You start to sound weird.

Does that answer your question?

tahanson43206 · 2024-04-22 13:42:47

This post is reserved for possible future use, as it follows immediately after a lengthy post by RobertDyck (once again) laying out the reasons for the Large Ship atmosphere specification.

For Calliban re #1478 ... thank you for working from memory to provide support for the Large Ship atmosphere specification.

For GW Johnson ... Please study the post by RobertDyck carefully, and provide such corrections as seem appropriate. I am interested in putting an end to uncertainty about this part of the Large Ship design. There are a great many other decisions to be made, before Large Ship receives even one monetary unit of funding.

For RobertDyck .... It seems to me that on-Earth validation of your atmosphere prescription should be possible, and because it is of universal interest, more than one Nation may be willing to make the necessary investment to prove the concept.

I am interested in moving the ball on Large Ship, and testing your atmosphere specification is something well within on-Earth capability right now.

At your earliest opportunity, please write a project proposal. The design of the on-Earth facility may fit nicely into existing facilities built for other purposes. We need to start with your vision of what such a facility will look like. Please be careful to avoid placing unnecessary limitations on any part of the design. You are not going to be paying anything, and if we sell this effectively, you would receive income for consulting.

(th)

RobertDyck · 2024-04-22 15:21:32

As Calliban reminded us, back in 2005 and several years later I recommended a Mars habitat air mix that used an N2:Ar ratio the same as Mars atmosphere. This made harvesting "diluent gas" easy. "Diluent gas" is what you mix with oxygen to dilute the oxygen. I gave a presentation at a Mars Society convention about atmosphere harvesting. The idea was to use a multi-stage pressure pump to harvest Mars atmosphere to 10 bars pressure. Freeze in a pressure vessel to -100°C to freeze out most CO2 as dry ice. This would leave carbon monoxide and ozone at dangerous levels. A small rhodium based catalyst warmed to +25°C in the same chamber would decompose 2 O3 to 3 O2. It would also combine 1 O2 + 2 CO to become 2 CO2. That CO2 would also freeze as dry ice. Mars atmosphere doesn't have much oxygen, but it has more than twice as much necessary to convert all CO to CO2. Removing moisture is not intended, but that cold temperature would freeze out so much moisture that remaining humidity is measured in rediculous units. It would be completely dry.

Operate the pump until the pressure vessel maintains 10 bar with no further atmosphere addition. Seal the valve and turn off the pump. Continue to heat the catalyst until CO and O3 are below detection threshold of the instrument, Then turn off the heater. Pressure will drop a little as the top of the vessel freezes to -100°C. Once pressure is stable, open a valve to a large tank to rapidly empty the processing tank. Once pressures in the two tanks equalize, close the valve. Lower pressure will cause dry ice to sublimate, so do it fast and close the valve before it can sublimate.

This will give you a gas that's mostly N2 and Ar, with a small amount of CO2, even smaller amount of O2, and trace amounts of neon, krypton, and xenon.

Add O2 to this for the initial air of a new habitat. CO2 will be higher than you want, but breathable. It will smell stuffy. The only way to remove the last CO2 is with a sorbent. Habitat oxygen recycler will have a regenerable sorbent, so just operate life support until CO2 is down where you want it.

Note the trace gasses are the same ones as Earth's atmosphere. And they're all noble gasses. That means clear, colourless, odorless, and non-reactive. They don't do anything, they're just there.

I don't think we need to replicate the trace gasses on the Large Ship. Do we want to increase argon on the ship so it matches the Mars N2:Ar ratio?

Viking 2 lander measured Mars atmosphere to have 2.7% N2, 1.6% Ar. I believe recent landers and rovers measured something slightly different. It may vary from location to location, and depending on Mars weather.

Void · 2024-04-22 20:12:53

Thats good work! I have added some of it to my list here in post #! https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 13#p190313 (See bottom of post #1).

Done

tahanson43206 · 2024-04-23 10:11:06

For RobertDyck re cleaning of the interiors of space craft ....

In a recent exchange, I reported news from NASA of discovery of mutated microbes on the ISS.

Your reply appeared to acknowledge the discovery but I thought the tone was dismissive.

After letting the exchange sit on the back burner for a while, I've decided to give you an opportunity to expand your presentation.

The material collected on the ISS was obtained (in part) by scraping the metal walls with sharp blades.

I think the subject of how to completely clean (to surgical standards) the interior of a space craft is worth it's own topic.

The critical element that (I suspect) is of concern is carbon. If a method can be found to collect every carbon atom on the surface of a component inside a space vessel, then life (as we know it) is less likely to be a concern.

A method of cleaning to such a degree would be useful on Earth as well.

(th)

RobertDyck · 2024-04-23 11:29:01

I do not believe clearing to surgical standards is necessary. It's a home, people live there, microbes growing on ISS came from the astronauts. Considering the microbes came from the astronauts, I don't think they're a danger to the astronauts.

This is a public place, not just the home for one family. Astronauts come and go. Microbes left by one crew could infect another. But space agencies put astronauts through isolation before launch to ensure they don't bring harmful pathogens. So I think cleaning to the standards of a hotel are reasonable, not to standards of a surgical suite.

RobertDyck · 2024-04-23 12:03:09

This discussion thread is for the Large Ship, so we should address that. I said oxygen generation would be bags of chloroplasts. There will also be aquaponics, but let's address the first system. Chloroplasts will polymerize sugar to complex carbohydrates; which carbohydrate depends on which plant you harvest the chloroplasts from. Peas are the easiest plant from which to harvest chloroplasts, this will be pea starch. The starch will be transported as a thick solution in water down tubes to central life support.

There some starch will be put in a vat with a type of mould. That mould will produce amylase, an enzyme to break down starch into sugar. The mould will be harvested and processed to isolate the amylase. In nature thr mould grows on fruit, and this is how amylase is commercially produced.

Another vat will also receive the thick starch/water solution. This second vat will add amylase, which will break down the starch to sugar. This will be the source of sugar on the ship, as table sugar, for cooking, and other uses.

Yet another vat will grow a microbe on sugar in water. This one will produce oil. There's a company in the UK commercially producing microbial oil. It's practically identical to vegetable oil. We'll use their microbe and process.

Sodium hydroxide is a pure form of lye. Added to oil makes soap. Vegetable oil is too liquid to make a solid bar of soap, so liquid soap. If you use potassium hydroxide instead, it makes an even softer or more liquid soap. The ship will make several types of soap: liquid hand soap, shampoo, body wash (possibly the same as hand soap), laundry soap, dish washing soap. All soap so it can be made on the ship, and so it's compatible with sewage processing. An organic soap can break down into something suitable as fertilizer for hydroponics.

A type of soap will be made to clean walls, counters, floors, etc.

RobertDyck · 2024-04-23 12:27:08

Urine processing:
Water will be extracted by semipermeable membrane. Most water will be extracted by equipment in the cabin or pressure compartment, but more water will be left in urine than on ISS. Concentrated urine will be transported by tube to central life support. There an electrolysis tank will use a semipermeable membrane to extract sodium and potassium. This will produce sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide in the water on the other side of the membrane. This is a standard brine membrane cell. Chlorine gas will bubble off the positive electrode in the urine. Hydrogen gas off the negative electrode in the water. The lye solution will go to a second electrolysis tank with a membrane that will pass sodium but not potassium. This separates sodium hydroxide from potassium hydroxide. We can use them to make soap.

Chlorine gas will go through a semipermeable membrane to remove bad smells. Don't want it smelling of urine. The filter will be back-flushed periodically with water to remove the urine, allowing to flush back into the urine side of the electrolysis tank.

There are other uses. Another tank will bubble chlorine gas and hydrogen gas under pressure through sodium hydroxide solution. This will bind sodium with chlorine to form salt, and hydrogen with hydroxide to form water. The result will be neutral pH salt water. That can be boiled dry at moderate heat in reduced pressure to form table salt.

The same can be done with potassium hydroxide to form potassium chloride, aka salt substitute.

CO2 can be bubbled through sodium hydroxide in yet another tank to form baking soda.

tahanson43206 · 2024-04-23 13:21:36

For RobertDyck re mutation of microbes on the ISS....

I could be mistaken, but I am almost certain you did not read, or even look at, the NASA report.

The microbes found were harmful mutations! They did not arrive with travelers from Earth.

The evolved under the stress of life in the station.

Your ship is inevitably going to become infested with mutations, and your passengers and crew are going to die in gruesome fashion because no one back on Earth thought the issue was important enough.

However, I agree that this is a side issue for Large Ship ... the problem we have here is that SpaceNut has (so far) chosen not to implement suggestions for new categories. I propose we make Large Ship a category. In that case, mutations of microbes could be topic all by itself.

In the present situation, you have one topic that needs to hold everything.

If you would like to have your own category (as you do have in phpBB3), you will have to ask SpaceNut to create it for you.

(th)

RobertDyck · 2024-04-23 14:55:47

Tom, there are a few factors at play. One is certain people want to destroy ISS. Contractors think that if ISS is destroyed, they will get multiple billions of dollars to build a replacement. Let's be very clear: there will never be a replacement. If ISS is destroyed, we simply don't have a human space station. There has been discussion of commercial stations, but unless and until SpaceX Starship becomes operational, that will never happen.

I'm sure GW Johnson want to chime in about metal fatigue. However, remember what happened with Mir. The central core module was 14 years old, nearing end of life due to metal fatigue. However, the other modules were 3 to 4 years old. The Soviet Union had a plan to replace Mir with a new station named Mir 2, but that died when the Soviet Union died. They did build a new core module, and it was sitting in a warehouse. A European commercial company offered to rent Mir. Their plan was to launch the core module for Mir-2, use it to replace the core module of Mir. All other modules for Mir had at least 10 more years. But Russian politicians didn't want western Europe to gain control over Mir, so they rather destroy the station than let that happen. So an entire space station was lost due to politics.

ISS cost billions. Between design, R&D, construction, and missions to the station, it cost over $100 billion US dollars. That's major infrastructure. The pentagon was built in 1943. B-52 aircraft were built between 1952 and 1962. They're still flying. The aircraft carrier USS Nimitz construction began in 1968, entered service in 1975. There are plans to replace it, but it's still in service today. The first module of ISS was launched in 1998. That was the Russian Zarya module, followed quickly by the US Unity module. It really wasn't usable until the Russian Zvezda module in July 2000. US Laboratory module was launched in February 2001. Russian Nauka module was launched July 2021, and iROSA solar panels between 2021 and 2025 (next year). This has to be treated as a capital investment, not a short term expendable. USS Nimitz is 56 years old and will be in service a number of years before it's Ford-class replacement is ready to enter service. ISS must be treated like that.

We've seen a number of politicians outright lie to get what they want. Here in Winnipeg the city claimed the airport terminal building had unstable foundations. First, I saw no evidence of this. Second, if it was true, we have several companies in the city that specialize in repairing foundations for large buildings without tearing the building down. But politicians didn't want to listen, they wanted their new building. The aviation museum asked for the old building, but if that was granted it would demonstrate the old building was sound. So they tore it down. Now there's a fee added to every ticket in or out of the airport to pay for the new building. That fee deters conventions that used to be held here. So when I hear ISS "must" be replaced, I don't believe them.

Also the principle of "not invented here". A number of years ago there was a call for developing food that can be stored long enough for a Mars mission. They pointed out food for Shuttle missions are dehydrated, but must be used within 2 weeks. A Mars mission is over 2 years, typically 26 to 28 months. However, you can buy dehydrated or freeze-dried food at any camping store that is certified for 12 years. Mountain House is one brand of camping food, they tested their food and found it retains flavour for 12 years. It is nutritious and will taste good for 30 years. There will be a flavour change after 12 years, but will still taste good. So the solution for a Mar mission is to buy food from Mountain House, or some other commercial manufacturer. The excuse of asking for NASA funding was just a pork-barrel project, waste of money. So how much of this applies to ISS.

So when I hear there is a microbe on ISS that is dangerous, I'm skeptical. They still have missions to ISS. And they can ship up cleaning supplies.

One reason for designing the Large Ship to park in planetary orbit is so the ship can be serviced between trips. It's not a cycler, it doesn't whiz past Earth at high speed. It will park in Earth orbit and descend to LEO. I would like Mars to do most of the maintenance of the ship, but it can be maintained by both planets. I just said the ship can manufacture soap for normal cleaning. If a new pathogen appears, special cleaning supplies can be provided in LEO to deal with it before the next batch of passengers board.

Void · 2024-04-23 17:45:15

I am intruding. We don't seem to have a plague coming out of the ISS just yet, but I suppose someday one might.

Bed Bugs have been a nasty problem, but it turns out apparently that if you turn up the heat for a bit and lower the humidity, they can be pushed out of survival in a treated location.

Septic Tanks are a method to deal with nasty things emitted from humans. Without Oxygen, those things in many cases are eaten by Anerobic organisms.

There are cycles in nature that are complex, a pest passing from one host to another, but even with complex genetics in such looped organisms, if you understand the weak points, you might end the loop.

It may be true that what does not kill you "May" make you stronger, Emphasis on "May". But drop a piano on me one time from a two-story building and I am at least crippled, and most likely done.

People have been playing in the dirt for a very long time. If the ISS has a problem, it is because the proper treatment has not been prescribed.

A rotation from too cold, to too hot and dry, and then Anerobic, where you introduce the predators that might eat the survivors, may work as a first attempt.

Life can be surprising, but humans can be jerks if they want to.

Done

And this has been used to trick life: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteurization

Catch it when it has thought the threat to it is over, and it tries to reboot.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2024-04-23 18:00:23)

kbd512 · 2024-04-24 12:23:23

If the large ship will be made from steel, which to my knowledge is completely unaffected by UV light, then how about using UV-C laser equipped robots set to "kill mode" after all the humans leave the room?

Given minimal furnishings, a robot could cover every square inch of a room to keep the nasties at bay. We could do the same thing with ventilation ducting to tamp down on mold. A small robot crawls around in the ventilation ducts and blasts the surfaces clean with UV-C lasers. We'd have UV-C lasers permanently mounted to evap coils so that the humidity doesn't breed mold and bacteria.

Void · 2024-04-24 19:53:49

Good One kdb512!

Done

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-05 10:47:47

GW Johnson has been exploring the possibility of offering direct links to his course materials from the Description field of his YouTube videos.

In first attempt to set up links, he ran into a couple of (minor but annoying) road blocks.

I have a YouTube video of a Blender animation I created, showing a simplified version of RobertDyck's Large Ship in flight while rotating.

Today, in order to try to understand the problems GW Johnson encountered, I set up a link to this topic from my Large ship YouTube video, and the link works.

In fact, I am posting ** THIS ** post after having clicked on the YouTube link.

kbd512 and I will be available during tonight's Google Meeting to attempt to assist GW Johnson in achieving the same success.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2024-05-19 19:03:17

For RobertDyck re new home for Large scale colonization ship...

SpaceNut created a new Category called Projects, and he created a new forum for Large Ships, of which yours is certainly one....

You can create additional topics within the Large Ships forum, if you want to concentrate or focus upon particular aspects of the overall design.

I hope this new structure will help you to regain forward momentum. We reached the point of beginning to think seriously about fabrication of the habitat ring in orbit, when everything came to a halt due issues outside our control.

Things appear to have stabilized, so perhaps ??? this might be a good time to resume work.

(th)

RobertDyck · 2024-07-09 09:26:50

Navy configuration, post #1456. I said 3 bunks high like an American aircraft carrier. Standard cabins should have fixed life support and fixed washroom. Plumbing, walls, and window in floor to allow reflected sunlight in illuminate chloroplast bags. This would mean 3 bunk beds per cabin, 3 bunks high = 9 bunks per cabin. And all cabins within the pressure compartment the same, so 8 cabins per compartment. This means 72 bunks per pressure compartment. Or "sub compartment". That's the same number of bunks/beds/berths/racks as described in post #1456. Plumbing that doesn't change is good.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1476 2024-04-22 09:41:37

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1477 2024-04-22 11:05:58

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1478 2024-04-22 11:58:27

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1479 2024-04-22 12:58:34

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1480 2024-04-22 13:42:47

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1481 2024-04-22 15:21:32

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1482 2024-04-22 20:12:53

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1483 2024-04-23 10:11:06

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1484 2024-04-23 11:29:01

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1485 2024-04-23 12:03:09

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1486 2024-04-23 12:27:08

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1487 2024-04-23 13:21:36

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1488 2024-04-23 14:55:47

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1489 2024-04-23 17:45:15

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1490 2024-04-24 12:23:23

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1491 2024-04-24 19:53:49

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1492 2024-05-05 10:47:47

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1493 2024-05-19 19:03:17

Re: Large scale colonization ship

#1494 2024-07-09 09:26:50

Re: Large scale colonization ship

Board footer