Subject:
|
Re: Space Cargo Container Standard?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Mar 2004 20:17:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
692 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Nick Kappatos wrote:
> I don't see this as being an issue for the MoonBase. I see it being more
> necessary for a MB rail or track system, but even then it doesn't need to be
> "nailed down" like the MB corridors have to be. If the MB corridors don't line
> up, then that's a LOT more work to get the module up to code.
>
> If a container is meant to fit on a door, I would imagine it's up to the builder
> to take that into consideration to fit the basic dimensions of the door. If
> it's meant to travel throughout the MB without ever leaving the comfort of the
> pressurized environment, that again is on the builder.
>
> The word "container" is a pretty broad term. There's room for all kinds of
> containers, in many capacities.
>
> Also, it took a lot of work & discussion before the MB corridor standard came to
> be. Changing it now, to fit an as-yet undefined (and possibly unnecessary)
> standard for containers would be jumping the gun.
>
> -nk
I agree that this is more of a container standard than a MB standard. I'm not
sure Jeff was talking about modifying the MB standard at all. I think his point
is that we should try to make the container standard conform to the MB airlock
standard for added container functionality. Specifically, that the container
could be used as a "poor man's" moonbase expansion, or interface.
From a logistics POV, I think it's impractical to transport containers through
the corridors of a MB module. The corridors are geared toward minfig movement,
not container movement. I think it makes more sense to find an unused airlock
and mount the container to it with the proper material handling equipment.
To muddy the waters further, an 8 x 8 container would work as a wonderful
transition point between a standard MB module and a non-standard 32 x 32 module.
They might allow for an even more organic growth potential than the current MB
standard allows.
-Duane
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Space Cargo Container Standard?
|
| (...) This is what I meant. I added another post I talked about one way you could use these modules (similar to how MPLM's are used on NASA's space shuttle and ISS). Here's the article: (URL) To muddy the waters further, an 8 x 8 container would (...) (20 years ago, 26-Mar-04, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Space Cargo Container Standard?
|
| (...) I don't see this as being an issue for the MoonBase. I see it being more necessary for a MB rail or track system, but even then it doesn't need to be "nailed down" like the MB corridors have to be. If the MB corridors don't line up, then (...) (20 years ago, 25-Mar-04, to lugnet.space)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
