Subject:
|
Re: Air lock and ship docking discussion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:36:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
633 times
|
| |
|
|
> An octagonal crawl-through hatch, if one can succeed in making it, should • be
> very believable -- and, hopefully, pleasing to the eye.
I made a small lander that used an octagonal plate. The hatch
itself is still rectangular, but the plate was octagonal, was a
crawl-way, and had warning strips and lights around the
hatch. Personally, I think it would have made for a better
docking port than as a hatch on a lander:
http://www.necrobones.com/legos/images/368.jpg
http://www.necrobones.com/legos/images/334.jpg
--
-Bones-
Keeper of swords, fluffy dragon, RenGeek, MDRF Rennie,
RenMerc, Kingdomality Dreamer-Minstrel, INFP, Water Rat,
Rogue #458, 62.6% FaireFolk Corrupted, 27.5% Evil.
= http://www.necrobones.com/armory/ = The Dragon's Hoard Armory
= http://www.necrobones.com/ = NecroBones Enterprises
John J. Ladasky Jr. wrote in message ...
> In lugnet.space, Jon Palmer writes:
> > I've been thinking about my ship's air locks and its mechanism for
> > docking to another vessel that would be too big for its interior bays.
> > My ship will have 2 personnel air locks and I know roughly where there
> > location will be. It will have one docking ring for other ships and again • I
> > know where I want to put it but haven't given a lot of thought on how it
> > will look or work.
> > In an earlier post Pat Justison proposed that we could have a standard
> > design which could be implemented on different ships or stations. I think
> > this is a VERY cool idea.
> > In a long thread a while back there was a discussion about the • geography
> > of local space. I believe this was pertaining to the creation of a .space
> > world and community. It strikes me that Pat's idea would be a great way to
> > further bind the .space community together in a fairly simple way.
>
> Indeed. I'm not sure that the idea was Pat's, however.
>
> Tom McDonald proposed his airlock as a standard design back in this • message:
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/space/?n=6
>
> It's a very nice design (the use of pegs and beams is well thought-out, and • I'm
> likely to steal that part of the idea), if you start from three • assumptions:
>
> 1) Your spacecraft design has room to spare. The walls are thick, and • there are
> two doors.
> 2) There's a reason to want an airlock that accomodates a *standing* • minifig.
> In other words, you're working in an environment that has artificial • gravity.
> 3) You consider it important to preserve cabin pressure under all • circumstances.
> In other words, you want a double-door airlock.
>
> Think back to the Gemini and Apollo LEM spacecraft, not long ago. When the
> hatch was opened, the entire interior of the spacecraft was open to space.
> There was no room or weight budget on these ships for a dedicated, • double-doored
> airlock, large enough for a person (and their space suit, plus some wiggle
> room). Now, on many missions the Shuttle has such a chamber, mounted in • its
> cargo bay. However, there is no gravity in the Shuttle when it's in orbit, • so
> the chamber can be of any shape. And the door can be a lot smaller, since • the
> person/minifig can crawl/float through, instead of walking.
>
> But maybe extravehicular activity is not a major concern for your • spacecraft.
> (There's very little EVA in most sci-fi. The only sci-fi story with EVA • that I
> can recall at the moment is Asimov's "Foundation's Edge." IRL, NASA does • much
> more EVA.) Maybe the hatch almost always opens into the docking port of • another
> vehicle, or into a breathable atmosphere. In that case, you can get away • with a
> single door on the ship, which greatly simplifies the interior design.
>
> I haven't said anything about this for a while. However, shortly after the
> original discussion ended, I concluded that we Space Datsville hopefuls • will
> probably still end up with at least two or three different types of airlock
> design. Some of them may be able to join to each other, others not.
>
> I like Tom McDonald's design, for the situation it was intended to address. • For
> a spacecraft that I'm presently building, I'm working from the opposite
> assumptions -- a zero-gravity environment, and the need for only one door. • I'm
> trying to make the door frame from (among other pieces) four of those • 45-degree,
> three-stud bricks -- the kind you see in step 18 of the instructions for • the
> 6949 Robo-Guardian:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/scans/6000/6949/6949-06.html
>
> An octagonal crawl-through hatch, if one can succeed in making it, should • be
> very believable -- and, hopefully, pleasing to the eye.
>
> --
> John J. Ladasky Jr., Ph.D.
> Department of Strucutral Biology
> Stanford University Medical Center
> Stanford, CA 94305
> Secretary, Californians for Renewable Energy <http://www.calfree.com>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Air lock and ship docking discussion
|
| (...) Indeed. I'm not sure that the idea was Pat's, however. Tom McDonald proposed his airlock as a standard design back in this message: (URL) a very nice design (the use of pegs and beams is well thought-out, and I'm likely to steal that part of (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
