Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

Void · 2025-06-15 12:35:05

Then what if for the cylinder bottom half that might do a sub-orbit or full orbit, a heat shield was something that you put on it as if armor on a knight?

The real shell of the cylinder would have the ablative heat shield which is the emergency back-up. The Active Cooling Shield would be slipped over that and clamped down.

So, when the cylinder returned from a mission, you would do primary service to it by exchanging the outer heat shield component.

Upon an exchange with a new Active Cooling Shield, then the Cylinder could be stacked again on a Superheavy, and have a new Main Tanks assembly put on top of it.

If the emergency ablative heat shield had been burned from an Active Heat Shield failure, then of course greater repairs would be mandated.

After a Active Cooling Heat shield had been used once it would require complete analysis and refurbishment or scrapping depending on the results of the analysis.

But if you had more Active Cooling Shields, then this would minimize down time for the 6-9 raptor engines and header tanks, etc. of the Cylinder bottom half of the 2nd Stage.

Ending Pending

Void · 2025-06-15 13:36:23

The first time I saw an inversion was the Blue Origins Moon lander, with propellant tanks on top, engines and crew below.

So, this inversion might be somewhat similar.

As the cylindrical bottom part does not all have to be pressurized, extendable landing legs could be contained in the cylinder shell along with Header Tanks, Avionics, and maybe a smaller crew/cargo compartment.

This could allow for a tower catch and yet the legs could be in there to extend out of the bottom skirt in the event that was desired.

The cylinder reduced of the dry mass of the main tanks, might be lighter, so that the landing legs don't need to be as substantial.

While sub-orbital for the cylinder and small engines for the Main Tanks is an option, going full orbital with the Main Tanks might be an option as well in which case the Main Tanks will not need any substantial form of propulsion.

The Main Tanks also will likely need subdividing as when you disconnect the Main Tanks from the cylinder, the propellants in the tanks feeding the raptors, needs protection or it would be lost to space.

So, this would add complexity. Even so, extra structure would simply be more metal to orbit.

There would be multiple options to transfer propellants between chambers to prepare for separation. Or you would simply burn the main chambers until near empty, and separate. Other chambers could hold various fluids/propellants.

If Magdrive is able to run on an Aluminum/Lithium Alloy, then it might be able to come down into sub-orbital and take charge of the Main tanks. But it would have to be very powerful engines to do that.

There would only be the trip time from the launch from Florida for instance to the reentry half way around the world.

It is a fun set of Puzzles at least though.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-06-15 13:43:47)

Void · 2025-06-15 14:14:02

If a Magdrive or Neumann Drive process can be matured and expanded sufficiently then it might be possible to use tank materials to go and clean up large chunks of Space Junk.

I even wonder if we could take the ISS to a higher orbit and decommission it instead of dumping it back to Earth.

If the materials could be put to salvage/reuse, then perhaps it has value for that. At the very least it might be converted to radiation shielding, maybe propellants for Magdrive or Neumann Drive.

Inverted thinking again. So much was spent to get it into orbit, maybe it could have value if lifted to a higher orbit by efficient Magdrive or Neumann Drive.

Ending Pending

Void · 2025-06-16 09:47:51

So, Blue Origin has in my opinion suggested the first inverted ship, with the propellants "Above" the cabin and landing engines.

https://www.blueorigin.com/blue-moon

I suppose adapting that to a two-part Starship 2nd stage would be somewhat complicated by the downcomers you would need to pass the propellants from main tanks on top, though the lower portion to the raptors.

So, the lower part might be like a torus or doughnut, perhaps the downcomers could disconnect and travel to orbit with the Main Tanks.

Something like this again:

If it is possible to enter the cylinder/torus/doughnut sideways into the atmosphere, then the cylinder can have a one time emergency ablative heat shield as Starship already now has, and then for primary heat shield a literal primarily metal shield that can be strapped onto the cylinder. The heat shield would be actively cooled probably with Methane evaporation.

I now want to try to borrow thinking from Stoke Space. It's upper stage has engines that overhang the 1st Stage. They could fire from the ground up, and so do work all the way from the surface to orbit.

I don't know how well that could work for the imaginary spacecraft I am thinking about. Of course you don't want to melt the 1st stage by having engines firing too close to its tank walls.

https://www.stokespace.com/nova/
Image Quote:

OK, that is a bit of a long shot, I don't think that raptors could be used overhanging the expanded perimeter as they would probably be too violent.

Perhaps some smaller engines in a pattern resembling what Stoke Space is doing.

In any case if you could expand the diameter of Starship larger than Superheavy, then if you are able to do a sideways entry with a strap on Heat Shield, you have a larger surface area which may allow for slightly lower reentry temperatures on the Heat Shield.

Of course it would also cause greater atmospheric losses during launch, but if you could fire perimeter engines, maybe that could be helpful against gravity losses????

One thing I like about strap on Heat Shields, is it may be possible to manufacture them on the Moon. Either Actively Cooled or completely Ablative. If they were substantial enough, they might even allow the ship to survive entry from the Moon at much greater speed than LEO. That and the possibility that Oxygen might come from the Moon even to LEO, would make settling the Moon a useful endeavor.

One version of the ship would have it retain its main tanks and be refilled to travel to the Moon.

Yes, I know these are wild ideas, but just maybe some of it or a cousin to such ideas may be useful in the future.

Ending Pending

.

Last edited by Void (2025-06-16 10:18:42)

Void · 2025-06-17 20:29:45

I would like to transfer a concept from another topic to this one: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 62#p232262

I am going to look at this for the Moon, and express opinions about adaptation of the Starship line of technology to it.

3 Ship Interplanetary travel configuration:

But I will make some changes. The configuration does not have to be that way.

The primary idea would be to make a Starboat or a Starship-Shortie, and mate it will what basically would be considered to be a depot with Electric rocket engines. If for the moment we ignore the idea that Magdrive or Neumann Drive can be sized up, then this version would perhaps have Argon as its propellant. As it would not travel to Mars, solar power may be acceptable and nuclear may not be, in proximity of Earth.

So, you make some kind of a small ship, Mini or Shorty. You give it a depot to carry with it all the way to the Moon. The small ship will not have enough propellants to travel to the Moon and land and then fly back to the Earth, unless it has the Depot.

So, the small ship and at least one depot ship will couple and it will be possible to transfer Methane and Oxygen to the small ship. The will proceed at a rapid rate to the Moon to orbit it, avoiding the major harms of the Van Allen Belt. The Depot will remain in orbit, and the small ship will land.

Then when it's business on the surface of the Moon is done, the small ship will ascend, and link up to the Depot and get refilled.

The two ships will part, and the small ship will head back rapidly to Earth. The Depot will use electric propulsion to return over a longer period of time, using solar electric power and Argon.

The small ship might airbrake one major event, to acquire the surface of the Earth and land. Or it might attempt to achieve an orbit of Earth. It also might do more than one Air Braking event, but of course the Van Allen Balts are a concern for that.

Eventually it could be true that the small ship could acquire Oxygen from the surface of the Moon. And so then not need so much of it from the Depot.

It is claimed that there is a lot of Platinum family metals available in some craters of the Moon, so the focus on the polar areas might want a modification.

https://www.newscientist.com/podcasts/1 … hyperworm/

I would speculate that with modern Robotic Labor on the Moon, the small ship I have suggested could bring some of it back to the Earth to pay for a Lunar and other space programs.

While the side braking method of Starship looks good, I want to explore another possible option.

This is not high art, but might convey some notions:

The "Shorty" would have landing legs for the Moon, that are not shown.

The triangle that says Earth Assent Cone, would be taken off from the Ship in LEO, perhaps repurposed.

In a more ideal future reality a one-time heat shield made on the Moon would be placed on it when it landed on the Moon. As you can see, it can have a "Footprint" larger than the diameter of the ship.

If that cannot be created then perhaps and expandable heat Sheid that has been considered for the Vulcan Engine recovery might be used: https://spaceexplored.com/2022/10/27/vu … ield-test/

Maybe something like this: https://www.nasa.gov/missions/tech-demo … -the-test/ Image Quote: inflation-01.gif?w=720

So, they have the right idea. Eventually though a heat shield from Lunar Materials and also Oxygen from the Moon.

And in my drawing I have pirated the idea for the cabin/cargo above the engines and under the propellant tanks.
You can see that concept from Blue Origin here: https://www.blueorigin.com/blue-moon
Here it is again: https://spacenews.com/nasa-selects-blue … ar-lander/
Image Quote: bluemoon-sld.jpg?resize=1536%2C864&quality=89&ssl=1

I don't think that there needs to be that much human traffic to and from the Moon. Most work on the Moon might be performed by robots of various sorts.

It would be a "Blue-Sky-Day" if all of these components could be joined into a good machine with acknowledgment to those who created the various parts.

Starship Superheavy is the big lifter though!

Ending Pending

The ship if it intends to land on Earth could go heat shield first into the atmosphere, and when appropriate might be able to drop the heat shield, or not, depending on what would be below.

The rest of the trip down it might fall sideways like Starship with Flaps and Moters.

Then finally and engine landing like Starship.

Last edited by Void (2025-06-17 21:18:30)

Void · 2025-06-29 20:47:51

I don't really have a good place to think about VELO in gas giant and ice giant planets. Perhaps it is an impossible task.

Along with VELO I want to consider Ascender.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_low_Earth_orbit

Ascender: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … ajaxhist=0

Elsewhere I have wondered if you could include a rectenna into the structure of the Ascender.

If power plants were in orbit of Saturn, or Uranus, or Neptune, they might be able to beam microwave power into an Ascender. Jupiter would be levels more difficult, I expect.

If Ascender is lighter than air in the atmosphere of Earth, by way of lifting gas, for the gas and ice giants, heat might be the way to float. That and perhaps airfoils, if you have power to propel the ship.

There could possibly be a method to scoop atmosphere along the way and use some of it for propulsion.

The major asset to get would be Deuterium and Helium-3. That perhaps could be used in power plants in orbits of the planets, to send power by way of microwaves to the Ascenders.

One of the alternatives to try would be to have one or two ascenders on the ends of a Rotavator. So, then each Ascender would dip into the upper atmosphere at sub-orbital speeds which might work a bit better.

Maybe one Ascender on the end of a rotavator, with a counterweight on the other end of the tether of the rotavator.

I only suggest this as it might eventually be possible to do such a thing.

Perhaps there is genius that could take this am actually find a better way. So, best to mention it and risk being foolish, than to not try.

Having an endless source of Fusion fuel would be quite an asset to a solar system wide civilization.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-06-29 21:07:33)

Void · 2025-07-01 08:39:01

I would like to explore a "Wedge-Gutter-Scoop-Method", for atmosphere interactions. Ascender has inspired me to consider this idea.

Historical atmosphere scoop concepts:
https://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/5d7274c5994db
Quote:

Scoopships

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_mining
Quote:

Scoopers
A scooper would be a vehicle that gathers and transfers gases from the atmosphere to an orbital station.[1]
Skyhook
A Skyhook (structure) is similar to a space elevator, such a device would be used to pump gas to an orbital propellant depot.

While a "Wedge-Gutter-Scoop-Method" might be free flying, it also might be attached to a tether, such as a rotavator for different results.

Technologies that I think might be incorporated or adjacent.
1) Ascender.
2) British Skylon
3) Ramjets/Scramjets?

This post could help an understanding of what is understood but may help to point out what is not understood, and what we might want to have better understanding of.

JP Aerospace is the designer of Ascender as far as I know: https://jpaerospace.com/
https://wavelabs1.artstation.com/projects/ZGAyX1
Image Quote: wavelabs-jp-aerospace-ascender-6000-render-8-2.jpg?1633532185
Image Quote:

The above device, if it wanted to shed momentum could belly flop. There is a great hope that because it is a lighter than air craft and so has a favorable ratio of surface area to mass, the atmospheric heating would not be as intense as for normal spacecraft.

However, it could be that the desire is not to lose momentum but to accumulate it, so the wedge would present only it's windward edge to the atmospheric flow. Then if you put gutters on the leading edges, I have hopes of channeling the windward flow from nose to the two tails of the wedge.

This may allow the gas flow to be channeled/retained, while it cools off by radiating heat. So, then this is a sort of a scoop, but the final scoop would be at the two tail ends of the craft.

At those points you might want to put some kind of an engine, such as a ram jet or scramjet???

However, if this is all that is done, then typical aircraft limitations on payloads and energy would rule the situation, unless an external energy source could be added.

Of course I am thinking of having the crafts shell be involved in a rectenna to receive power from microwave projectors either on the surface of a world or in orbit of it.

To make this work better then I suggest that the rectenna could be a true triangle that includes the space between the two arms of the Ascender shown in the above drawings.

A ramjet or scramjet here might not involve the burning of fuels, (Or it could), but also the microwaving of the planetary atmospheric gasses channeled by the gutters to each of the two tail engines.

But I also want more than this, I want to collect the scooped gasses also, to liquify them into a payload tankage in the ship. Skylon apparently has some strange method to flash cool atmosphere. At least that is the impression I have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(s … n%20system.

I wont pretend that I understand Skylon, but I am attracted to what seems to be a sort of magic engine system, that just might be applied to the Ascender.

If free flying, the Ascender would be coping with a higher level of stress at high speeds.

If attached to a tether, if might have a slower speed in the atmosphere.

Here is some work from Isaac Arthur: https://isaacarthur.net/video-tag/rotovator/
Quote:

Upward Bound: Skyhooks
In this episode we examine the Skyhooks and Rotovators, technology designed to lift grab spaceplanes or rockets at far slower speeds than normal and lift them into space at a fraction of normal launch costs. Boeing's "Hypersonic Airplane Space Tether Orbital Launch --...
read more

https://isaacarthur.net/video/upward-bound-skyhooks/

Of course any tether system with an Ascender attached to it would have to be rather stout.

Anyway, some things to chew on, who knows, maybe an acorn, or not-acorn.

Ending Pending

Problems I already understand with using a tether.
1) The tether will have atmospheric drag, if you lower the scoop into the atmosphere.
2) The Ascender would need a hinge or bearing on the attachment to the tether, in order to present the ascender properly to the atmosphere.

So, maybe not so good, unless the rectenna can receive enough energy to make up for the drag.

There are multiple worlds that this might be made to work for, and they are not all alike, so maybe it could work for at least one of them.

1) Earth
2) Venus
3) Mars
4) Titan
5) Triton
6) Pluto
7) Eris (If an atmosphere were inflated for it with fusion energy heat)
8) Saturn
9) Uranus
10) Neptune
11) Jupiter (Very unlikely)

So, two main flavors.
1) No Skyhook, just the Ascender.
2) With Skyhook, using the Ascender.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-07-01 09:42:04)

Void · 2025-07-01 10:49:17

If not microwaves, then perhaps lasers: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … r-AA1H7qzC Quote:

DARPA smashes wireless power record, beaming energy more than 5 miles away — and uses it to make popcorn
Story by Ben Turner • 1w •
2 min read

Truthfully although these things are of interest, perhaps they are as much as 50 year off for common practice, that is if they work out even.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-07-01 10:50:06)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#101 2025-06-15 12:35:05

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#102 2025-06-15 13:36:23

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#103 2025-06-15 14:14:02

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#104 2025-06-16 09:47:51

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#105 2025-06-17 20:29:45

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#106 2025-06-29 20:47:51

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#107 2025-07-01 08:39:01

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#108 2025-07-01 10:49:17

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

Board footer