• Launch Day is nearly upon us! Head over to this thread and share your thoughts before, during, and after Crew Dragon finally lifts off.

first interplanetary spaceships

Page 4 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
I wholeheartedly agree Alp. It's too bad that so few sci-fi productions seem to use as their sources the kinds of books you refer to. Instead, the settings and stories seem to center on the arrogant idea of mankind completely conquering and subjecting nature, and they have the gall to extend that false sense of security and subjection of nature into the vastness, and the unknown of outer space.

It's pathetic, really. They seem to imagine this future where everybody is calm, cool, rational, and totally in control of not only themselves, but the technology, the ship, and the surrounding Universe. It makes for boring and flat science fiction, IMO, because it doesn't grab hold of the always present human sense of danger and how bad things can happen.

It is of course in part a result of our own sense of the conquest of nature, and the resulting complacency that derives from it. (Like the attitude that no virus or plague could really get at us today.) A Universe without danger and risk, conflict and realization, is a boring Universe. (I could name a certain sci-fi show that comes to mind, but we've already been there! ;) )

And I wouldn't want to change this thread any more than we already have, if you know what I mean.
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
Wow there are some really good points raised here, Zen let me just quote you on something you said:

It's a peculiar thing about Americans. We love to fancy ourselves as this bold and adventurous people, always willing to test and push the boundaries and bravely go beyond. Similar to the big talk about free speech and "freedom", much of it seems to be just that these days, 'talk'.
I myself live in the UK and have often said that living in a democratic society is a good thing, especially when it comes to free speech. However free speech is not all what it’s cracked up to be, after all who’s listening? It’s all very well being able to wave banners about in Parliament Square or outside the Whitehouse, but at the end of the day the powers that be do not care. They’ll just look out of the window and have a good laugh at the idiots outside who think they can make a difference by peacefully marching waving banners, that’s why history has taught us that many peaceful demonstrations have often ended in violence, because people get to the point when they believe that violence is the only way to make people sit up and take notice.

Anyway enough political garbage let’s get on to the good bits. Science fiction does make it look easy doesn’t it. To see all those gleaming starships of the Federation makes you feel all warm and fussy inside knowing that one day mankind will assert himself amongst the stars and make loads of interesting alien friends, enjoy the holodecks and get jiggy with Deanna Troi. HOGWARTS! Is what I say to that, and after what you guys have written here I suddenly totally get Stargate Universe. I thought it was a bit slow in taking off, no bad guys or mega CGI space battles, but I think that’s what the writers have intended. Here we have a group of people who are trying to get home on a spaceship which is flying apart at the seams. You don’t need alien bad guys, because you have bad guys on the ship, or rather people who don’t see eye to eye, making survival that much more difficult. I wonder if it was like that on Apollo 13, a situation in which the men are fighting for survival in order to get home, and back at mission control you have dozens of technicians and scientists trying to find a way, at some point there had to be instances where people fell out because of conflicting opinions.

We do indeed have the foundations and technology to establish a spacefaring society, but unfortunately there are so many conflicting opinions out there that it is an impossible dream at the moment. In the sixties NASA supposedly was all about taking our first tentative steps into the cosmos and expanding our knowledge of the universe. Since the Apollo missions manned exploration of our solar system has stalled dramatically, so was NASA’s moon missions in the late 60’s and early 70’s just about beating the Russians because if it was then that’s the first step towards failure.

As a new decade approaches and NASA prepares to go back to the moon in 2020, China, and India are also in the running for the moon. If NASA’s only drive in the next decade is to beat the Chinese to the moon then they have failed in their ideals which should be to establish a permanent lunar outpost and use it as a stepping stone to places like Mars.

Scientists like Gerard Oneill, Freeman Dyson and T.A Heppenheimer took the Mercury and Apollo missions, used them as templates and then speculated about where we would be if we had remained on the moon. It is highly likely, if NASA would have kept pushing then we would be on Mars, even have bases established on asteroids in the belt, and be busy mining minerals not found on Earth. It is a case of ‘What if’

What I have tried to demonstrate with this post is take conventional science and adapt it. I may have said this before, but there is no mention of warp drives, hyperspace engines or improbability drives. So am I still in the realms of science fiction or speculative science, like the three men I have just mentioned? Which is why is will go designing spaceships that one day may well be a reality, ok maybe not exploring other solar systems but our own which is very possible within the next 100 years.
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
JasonChapman,

If you haven't already downloaded them yet, you might want to take a look at these:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/3d_resou ... index.html

They might be good for "style" references. I've been meaning to d'load them and take a closer look to get a good theme going for my own models.

One thing you can do is download something like Cassini then go and get a nice artist's schematic of it which shows all the components. Then, figure out what components you need in your new spacecraft and model them after Cassini's, with some adjustments.

Of course, the "mother of all current NASA projects" is in there "The ISS!" It's a whopping 46meg or so in 3ds and 64 in lwo format. I have no idea how many polys it is. I gotta format a new data drive and clear some room before I start working with it. :)

Enjoy!
 
M

mj1

Guest
You know, all of this pie in the sky stuff is great, but I think it is really time for NASA for start focusing on doing this for real. I think they can get there by taking this path:

1. Establish a long term project to create a deep space solar explorer ship that is built and launched from LEO. It will take 30 - 40 years to get there, but now is the time to start work on it.

2. Forget about the Constellation moon project. It is rehash of Apollo and a waste of time and money. Also, don't worry about going to Mars until we are REALLY ready to go there, and can do it safely and cheaply.

3. Get NASA completely out of the LEO business. Let the private companies, like SpaceX and such handle cargo hauling. NASA has been there and done that. Help them further develop their launch capabilities where needed and use them as ferry services to haul cargo to and from LEO as needed for construction projects, supplies, and satelites. They do this stuff better, faster, and cheaper anyway.

At this point, manned space exploration does not have the resources (funding) to anything in the short term. I think at this point, instead of doing stuff on the cheap, which you can't do with manned missions anyway, we should go ahead and look long term. Plan for 30, 40, or even 50 years or whatever it will take to develop a decent space economy. Many of us will not live to see it anyway. Instead of wasting money on stuff like the Ares boosters, NASA should be doing a lot more R&D work to help people figure out how to live, work, and build things in space long term.
 
S

SpaceXFanMobius57

Guest
Jason, do one for a system that makes cheap and easy acess to leo!

The problem of spaceflight today is getting to space, thats where most of the expense is!

Also, how about solar system colonies! Like colonies on the surfaces of moons, such as Jupiters Callisto (NASA acually did a study about this) and the transportation services for them! I imagine most of the colonies would be underground, but they would have infastructure on the surface as well!

Boring out the inside of an asteroid and living in the middle would provide quite a bit of radiation protection true?
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
(NASA acually did a study about this)
Its seems these days NASA spends more time doing studies, and actual space exploration, am I the only one who thinks that their new rocket Ares is more of a step backwards.
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
JasonChapman":sylpuuaj said:
(NASA acually did a study about this)
Its seems these days NASA spends more time doing studies, and actual space exploration, am I the only one who thinks that their new rocket Ares is more of a step backwards.
It might be a step backwards in some respects. But, NASA's goal is to play the role of "Explorer." They go out, explore, then come back and tell us what they found and how we can go there ourselves and survive.

So, what if their step backwards actually leads to great leaps forward in exploration? A ladder can get you to the third floor of a building. It may not be as fancy or loaded with capability but, it gets you there just as well as an expensive elevator.

I would much rather see NASA flying awesome, complex spaceships loaded with gimcrackery and bells and whistles. Yet, those are very expensive and require a huge amount of support. Is it worth developing a whole new series of exploratory vehicles if that development would set our exploration programs back several decades?
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
Hi guys, I meant to put this picture up a few weeks ago. Its the finished version of the SM2 or at least as finished as I can make it. I'm currently working on a project which I am calling a Nebula Scoop, I will put a new model on as soon as possible thanks
Jason

http://www.scifi-design.com

 
H

HopDavid

Guest
JasonChapman":2g3nbknv said:
Hello,
Thanks for the comments, and support. I'll get back to you later and comment at what people have said. MeteorWayne don't put me in the Unexplained just yet, because I think we can reach a compromise.

Off to work now.
Jason, your work is beautiful. I believe your work would fit in at the Deviant Art Space Club.

This club has generated mixed emotions for me. Much of the work is very well done in terms of visually interesting imagery. Many of the participants are very enthusiastic about space.

On the other hand, many of these artists are very naive. It is rare to find one that has taken the time to educate himself in orbital mechanics and astronomy.

Humanity is close to a huge cusp in history, a new age of exploration. We have the technology, but not the will, to take the first steps. I believe it is artists, musicians and writers who set our mental climate, our zeitgeist. And I believe it is within the power of these to inspire us to accomplish great things.

So I'm pleased that you're showing some effort to educate yourself. Others have already given you a lot of material but I would like to suggest J. S. Lewis' Mining the Sky
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
Wow! Thanks for those comments,
You know I have thought about putting together a book illustrated with some of my designs and theorising what might be possible. Whenever I come on here and see how many people have viewed this post it does bring a smile to my face, over 5000 since June, which makes it one of the most viewed posts on this forum. You have to ask yourself why have some many people been interested in what an unknown artist has to say about space exploration.
When I first made the post I was afraid it would be put in the unexplained section along with bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster but instead I was put in the scifi section which suits me fine. I have always believed that a good many people on this forum work in the aerospace industry and I am more than grateful that the moderators have allowed me to share my thoughts with them, if only to entertain.
I do not pretend to know the ins and outs of warp drive or faster than light travel but I understand the concept that one day we may be able to achieve these kinds of speeds. Most people who have contributed to this post I think are optimistic about our future and believe that we are capable of much more. It was forty years ago since Armstrong set foot on the moon, and since then we have done absolutely nothing about manned space exploration. Yes we’ve sent probes and rovers out, but digitally streamed scientific data will never be as powerful as human experience. Whenever I think of Armstrong stepping out of the lunar module and gazing out over the lunar surface I can see what he sees and feel what he feels, and I’m guessing many people have the same feelings. When I look at a Martian rover sent by NASA I feel nothing because I simply cannot connect with a machine, back in 1969 billions connected with Armstrong, Aldrin and Colins.
I have a few books now on spaceship design, including Chris Foss’ 21st Century Foss which I think is spectacular. I plan to push forward my designs now both on my website and forums like this and I have some new ones on the drawing board. I’ll have a look at the sites you highlighted and get back to you.
Thanks
Jason

www.scifi-design.com
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
So here we go with another madcap spaceship from yours truly. Actually it’s more of a mining vessel than anything. There has been plenty of talk of mining the moon, asteroids Mars and other celestial bodies which is all very well for minerals and such.

However say in the distant future we start to colonise other planets in other solar systems. They will probably have moons and things to mine. However not all planets have natural gas to extract, so what do you do? You get it from the nearest gas nebula that’s what. As we know nebulas have large amounts of gas which can prove very useful if you have a planet to terraform. This planet may be in early stages of development and naturally will take a few million years before single cell organisms started to form, so you help it along with the necessary gas from a nebula, making the planet habitable within a few years, depending on where it is and whether or not it’s still being bombarded with meteors.

This model is still in its early stages of development and I am working quickly to get it looking more like a mining vessel. I’ll have more soon.


 
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
Transportation tanks? Where are those transportation tanks going to transport you, exactly?

No offense Jason. I'll say it again. While I enjoy and appreciate your art work, the bottom "engine" stage of your ship--fourth post up above-- looks uncannily like my hiking stove from 8 years ago. (Albeit turned on its side.) :shock:
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
Hi Zen,
I'll take onboard what you said about the engines and endevour to come up with with something a little less gas cooker looking.
Anyway as far where the tranportation tanks are going, they go to whoever needs it. This is a perminent nebula station, think of it as an intergalactic gas refinery station, where space tankers come and take these transportation tanks away to other parts of the galaxy.
 
C

clandistine1

Guest
Hello Jason,
Something i would like to point out is that the scoop has to be proportional to the engines... for your craft i would say a good two time the width of the space craft it self at the very least
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
Hello clandistine1,
Thanks for the input, you raised a very good point there, I hope to get crackinf with this at the weekend.
Cheers
Jason
 
C

clandistine1

Guest
MeteorWayne":k06xv79b said:
Unfortunately, according to Mr Einstein (whose ideas have been repeatedly proven with great precision), since it would take converting the entire mass of the entire Universe to energy (using the E=mc^2 formula) to accelerate any object with mass to even close to light speed, you might just want to skip that faster than light design :)

Wayne
And all of that energy again to stop
 
V

Valcan

Guest
clandistine1":1gj3fqh7 said:
MeteorWayne":1gj3fqh7 said:
Unfortunately, according to Mr Einstein (whose ideas have been repeatedly proven with great precision), since it would take converting the entire mass of the entire Universe to energy (using the E=mc^2 formula) to accelerate any object with mass to even close to light speed, you might just want to skip that faster than light design :)

Wayne
And all of that energy again to stop

I dont think anyone needs to neccessarily Break the laws of relativity so much as bend them or find a loop hole.

I figure our first interstellar ships will have to be based around there cargo/function, propulsion, etc. At first though exspect Something vaguely cylindrical with lots of bits on it. :mrgreen:
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
clandistine1":2dozm9xc said:
Hello Jason,
Something i would like to point out is that the scoop has to be proportional to the engines... for your craft i would say a good two time the width of the space craft it self at the very least
It could be a magnetic field, guiding charged particles in for collection. So, a slight luminescence extending away from the cone and projected forward of the ship might be appropriate.
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
interplanetary spaceships

Ok I'm back, well actually I haven't been away, its just I haven't had a decent computer, and I still haven't, I just swiped my wife's laptop for a few hours. Anyway I have had this model on the drawing board for the last few months, its a science research vessil. I am looking over that nebula spaceship I was designing and I will put it online soon.

For all you fans of 3D modelling out there 3D Max and Maya are starting to combine, there are some awsome new modelling tool on Max, a sculpting tool which they have on Maya.

Enjoy!



 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
Re: interplanetary spaceships

JasonChapman":36on9l18 said:
...For all you fans of 3D modelling out there 3D Max and Maya are starting to combine, there are some awsome new modelling tool on Max, a sculpting tool which they have on Maya.
WHAT?

They're combining? Last I heard, they were still keeping them separate. Autodesk Max&Maya 2011.

Or, do you mean they are starting to support the same types of features?

Next off, I'm looking at either Modo or Lightwave for my next 3D package. I've got an old copy of 3dsmax but, I'm just not as good with it right now as some other programs and the learning curve is very steep. Plus, it's pretty outdated so I just use it for a few functions and can't see using it as a main modeler unless I had a lot of plugin packs I'm not willing to buy.

I'm finishing up a 3D spaceship model myself for a competition. It's from a movie though so, it's not realistically designed. The focus is on a full model including interiors so, it's also a smaller type of ship. I have a week or so to finish up and then another month for the texturing work which should go a good deal faster. When I've finished the geometry, I'll post it with some test textures.
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
I'm not sure if Max and Maya will totally merge, And you're probably correct in saying each package is supporting similar features. The new sculpting tool in Max, which you usually find in Maya increases creativity by a factor of ten. The spline modelling tool is better as well. I've been using max for over ten years now, and I still only know bits and bobs.

Please put you spaceship online, the more the merrier
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
JasonChapman":dzpxvwx0 said:
..Please put you spaceship online, the more the merrier
A portion of the interior, just an AO render to do a render check. The model is a scale model of a little known spaceship in a very popular movie. I used refs from the production company's design docs for building the set.



Note: I had made a portion of a screen without correcting for smooth shading in the render which has since been corrected. Model will be all quads.
 
J

JasonChapman

Guest
I've never gone to that much detail, must be a small ship. Most of the ships I create are huge, it would take me forever to create every deck, bulkhead control panel. Can't wait to see the finished model. May I ask what popular film its from, or will I know as soon as I see it?
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
JasonChapman":39me0ujt said:
I've never gone to that much detail, must be a small ship. Most of the ships I create are huge, it would take me forever to create every deck, bulkhead control panel. Can't wait to see the finished model. May I ask what popular film its from, or will I know as soon as I see it?
The conditions of the competition dictated the size of the model because it was required that it have a fully modeled interior. So, doing a stardestroyer or the Enterprise wasn't an option. :) The conditions were also such that it must be as close to commercial grade and as close to something like a production model as possible. Hence, the two month period for modeling and texturing.

I'll give a blatant hint: Some people will go ape over it. ;)

To date, I have never seen a spaceship model of that ship in any capacity, much less one with an interior and which will be commercial grade.

Note: It will definitely have a retro feel because.. it's retro. I'm using the original design blueprints for it and sticking to them religiously.
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
JasonChapman":3dl8ge26 said:
...Can't wait to see the finished model. May I ask what popular film its from, or will I know as soon as I see it?
I did a quick and dirty render for you.



This is just the main hull. No textures at all and I only did a flat map just to get it to render for this render. The canards, wings and engines aren't in yet. The cockpit window area will be cut in by hand when the cabin is finished as they have to match up exactly with the ports in the cabin and the glass has yet to be put in so that area is just rough, for now and shows a few bumps. (Just aft of the vent openings, still within the main vent recesses on the hull though.) The stern bulkhead is just a placeholder object, hence the smooth shading artifacts present in the render. The centerline bulge is just where I joined the halves together for the export and collapse the dynamic geometry (somewhat analogous to smoothing groups) and won't be in the final hull. There are a couple of other artifacts, here and there, I'll clean up before the final export. (Like the small striations fore of the recessed vents and a small one you may not be able to see near the emergency escape hatch (Small round hatch.))

No booleans were used in the model because... booleans are evil. Cutting in the escape hatch by hand on that surface was a PITA and then getting it to work appropriately in all stages of subdivision so it matches the hull took a bit of geometry wrangling. It's all quads so no tris were harmed during the creation of the model. ;) It's constructed for use in Poser but, any program that can import wavefront object files (which is virtually all of them) will be able to make use of it. There will be some components rigged especially for Poser so that rigging won't translate to every program. If it is going to be animated, new rigging would have to be made for those programs that conformed to their requirements. (Not really difficult as only a few cabin items would have organic type rigging with surface deformations.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts