Subject:
|
Re: Universal Docking Ring ideas?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:42:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
348 times
|
| |
|
|
One quick note: for shuttles, put the docking rings behind a hatch (or
hatches). And put the hatch on the upper surface of the vessel. It would
be really cool if the hatch(es) can open all the way, and the docking ring
would slide outward, to better reach the ring on the other vessel/base.
And I think a non-gendered ring would be much better than gendered
ring-types.
Steve
In lugnet.space, William R. Ward wrote:
> I'm trying to invent a good docking system for my spacecraft. Before
> I invest too much time and effort into it, I'd like to first see what
> other people have come up with. Are there any of you out there who
> have a good design for a docking ring, preferably with close-ups or
> CAD designs available online?
>
> Here are some of my thoughts on the design issues...
>
> 1. Kinds of Vessels - there are three basic types of vessels that I
> can see would need to be considered. Each of these has its own
> requirements.
>
> A. Surface-to-orbit shuttles need to be capable of reentry. So they
> must not have Technic posts sticking out or other things which would
> in the real world burn off. They must be symmetrical and streamlined.
> They shouldn't have doors in the middle of the heat shield (except for
> landing gear).
>
> B. Space stations and interplanetary craft need to be able to mate
> with various shuttle craft. If the docking rings have "sexes" then
> the needs of surface-to-orbit craft will probably dominate which type
> of vessel gets which "sex" of the docking ring.
>
> C. Orbit-to-moon, intra-orbit shuttles, etc. also have no strong
> requirements for aerodymanics or such, as they will never enter an
> atmosphere. But they probably should have the same "sex" as the
> surface-to-orbit shuttles, so they can mate with the same larger
> vessels - again, only if the docking standard has "sexes".
>
> 2. Docking Angle - I would like to have it be possible to dock in more
> than one or two orientations. This is because different ships may
> have various protuberances such as wings, tails, modules, solar
> panels, antennae, etc. which would get in the way of docking. I think
> ideally it should be possible to dock in any of 4 different
> directions.
>
> 3. Size - The minimum requirement is to allow minifigs and gear no
> larger than a minifig to pass from one vessel to another. I don't
> think large cargo units would need to be in a pressurized space as a
> general rule. However if larger access is needed, a separate standard
> can be developed.
>
> 4. Sex - should there be separate "male" and "female" sides or should
> each side be identical? If Technic pegs are used for connecting two
> ships, should all the pegs be attached to one of them, or should each
> ship have half of them? The problem with this is that
> surface-to-orbit craft need to be smooth and symmetrical. You could
> put a peg in diagonal corners on both pieces, and a hole in the other
> two corners, but the pegs on the landing craft would be vulnerable to
> burning off, barring some bulky construction which would protect them.
> So I think it makes more sense for the surface-to-orbit craft to be
> "female": having Technic beams that can receive pegs from the
> "mothership" when docking.
>
> With all that in mind, the design that seems to me to be best is to
> utilize the fact that 6 studs = 5 bricks. By placing the Technic
> studs and the beam-holes with that spacing, you can mount in any of 4
> possible orientations, according to the needs of the shapes of the
> various craft. Since Technic holes are typically mounted between two
> studs, a spacing of 6 studs means that the brick structure would have
> to be 7 studs wide. However, positioned vertically, it would be 5
> bricks tall. So if you can picture a square that is 7 studs wide and
> 5 bricks tall, with Technic pegs and/or holes in the corners, it could
> be rotated 90 degrees and still fit together with its opposite.
>
> Any comments?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Universal Docking Ring ideas?
|
| (...) That would be cool. But it would be bulky, which is why I objected to that idea in my initial post. I've toyed with the idea of using the Technic pieces which are 3 studs long and are 2/3 friction-pin and 1/3 axle hole connector. Lego uses (...) (23 years ago, 7-Apr-01, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Universal Docking Ring ideas?
|
| I'm trying to invent a good docking system for my spacecraft. Before I invest too much time and effort into it, I'd like to first see what other people have come up with. Are there any of you out there who have a good design for a docking ring, (...) (23 years ago, 6-Apr-01, to lugnet.space)
|
11 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
|
|
|
|
