Star Ship Polaris

[Vektor]

sojourner wrote:

---

Oh, I am sure it can do alot more technology and size wise. Never doubted that. It's just that the shape does not lend itself to much control aerodynamically. It's a purely ballistic shape.

First, these landers really aren't supposed to perform like F-22 Raptors. They are primarily a way for the Polaris crew to get down to a planet's surface and back.

In atmosphere, I imagine they would operate in a manner similar to a helicopter or a VTOL, with vectored thrust from the main engines and smaller thrusters giving them more than adequate maneuverability. Again, you might not want to engage in a dogfight with one, but it should get the job done otherwise.

[CorporalCaptain]

The UFO's on Gerry Anderson's UFO had a distinctly Apollo reentry module shape, but also in addition had a characteristic spinning belt of beam emitters that could wail on the unsuspecting. This is not the best image of one, but it is good for recognition.

I thought you might like to be reminded of/made aware of Anderson's iconic craft with an otherwise similar profile, so that you can avoid any unintentional resemblance in the atmospheric flight characteristics of your landing module.

For, if your craft moves through the air horizontally while traveling around within a planet's atmosphere, it could easily strongly resemble an Anderson UFO. This could be remedied by making movement from point A to point B on a planet generally ballistic, so that motion is generally along its main cylindrical axis.

[Herkimer Jitty]

You know what's more iconic than an Anderson UFO?

The Apollo capsule.

No biggie.

[junxon]

i think people watching would realise they're neither viewing an episode of UFO or a real life space mission.

unless they're mad.

[JES]

I don't mind the shape of the shuttlecraft. They look like they could work fine. Sure, it would be nice if they looked more like lifting bodies, but I guess that capsule shapes are inherently more compact, which is most certainly in need here!

I'm also loving the shape of the Polaris. All those moving parts are very cool.

I couldn't help but notice that earlier in the thread, it was suggested that the Polaris wasn't going to have energy weapons. I couldn't help but think that such a decision would be a mistake.
The U.S. military has been experimenting with energy weapons for quite some time. Heck, working examples already exist. I am certain that future spaceships that will likely need to defend themselves will have laser turrets, which would make an excellent defense against missiles and fighters.
I'm not certain if it is already too late to say anything that will make any difference, but I figure I'd better speak my mind or forever hold my peace. I think that given the armaments that the Polaris currently has, and the fact that they are all forward facing, she would need some laser turrets for defense. I think that 4-8 placed somewhere on the saucer should be sufficient to give her an adequate coverage.

[CorporalCaptain]

In case it needs clarification, I haven't been critical of the shape of the landing craft, and nor have I expressed any critical remarks whatsoever. In fact, just one post above my most recent, I praised the shape of the craft.

My remarks were merely to remind the team, as I'm sure at least some of them saw UFO once upon a time, that if such a craft is shown flying horizontally, it could resemble a UFO.

If they want it to look like a UFO, or don't think it matters, I'm not objecting. It was just free, unsolicited advice, but it had nothing to do with the shape of the craft.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

There's a line in the script indicating that large ships, at least, have "plasma gun defense" turrets. As far as Polaris itself is concerned, it has missiles for offense and its defenses consist mainly of trying not to get hit.

My assumption about the behavior of the landing boat - which is subject to change if an artist comes up with something really appealing that's different - is that, based upon the design and the placement of the thrusters, it's simply a VTOL like the Apollo LM (except, obviously, single-stage and reusable). It would come in presenting the shielded lower surface, extend its legs and land, then lift off the same way. As much as I like to hark back to Forbidden Planet, the horizontal skimming-along-cruising-to-the-landing-spot behavior of the C57D is not what I have in mind.

[JES]

Oh well... Had to try.

Heh, I can only hope that she succeeds. Given her size, I'm hoping that she is extremely agile, made out of a very tough alloy, capable of polarizing her hull plating similar to the NX, have a combination of the three, because otherwise, one good hit, and she is in for a grand cremation.

She would have to be, since I also read an earlier post saying that the Polaris wouldn't have shields, which is a fair assessment, given what I remember on one program from the History Channel covering future space travel.

It said that it might be possible to create an energy field that could block attacks like energy weapons and stuff using plasma fields. But it would be difficult to create since to give a plasma field those characteristics, it would have to be made out of hot and cold plasma.
The catch is that hot plasma is like similar to the corona of the stars, extremely hot, and would melt the ship, and the crew, so it would somehow need to be sandwiched in between fields of cold plasma, which lacks the hotter forms fiery personality. But it could take quite some time to find a way to utilize it.
Even so, the Air Force, Military, NASA etc. is researching the possibility of using plasma to block out forms of radiation, in a way, similar to the navigational deflector. I don't think that 200-300 years from now, we will have full deflector shields, but we will need some form of navigational deflector for serious space travel, because without it, the risks of being exposed to radiation from stars alone would make common space travel too dangerous. And then there are micro meteoroids (ever see Mission Space, when the ship gets pelted by lots of little meteors?), which can shoot though objects like bullets.

Perhaps a cold plasma field to screen out radiation, combined with the use of gravity manipulation fields to repel foreign objects, could act as a sort of navigation deflector.

Just a thought.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

JES wrote:

---

... because otherwise, one good hit, and she is in for a grand cremation.

Uh...yeah, pretty much. Tough universe.

[Herkimer Jitty]

JES wrote:

---

The U.S. military has been experimenting with energy weapons for quite some time. Heck, working examples already exist. I am certain that future spaceships that will likely need to defend themselves will have laser turrets, which would make an excellent defense against missiles and fighters.
I'm not certain if it is already too late to say anything that will make any difference, but I figure I'd better speak my mind or forever hold my peace. I think that given the armaments that the Polaris currently has, and the fact that they are all forward facing, she would need some laser turrets for defense. I think that 4-8 placed somewhere on the saucer should be sufficient to give her an adequate coverage.

And what's your heat dissipation plan? Or are you planning on letting the laser emplacements cook themselves?

Dennis wrote:

---

defenses consist mainly of trying not to get hit.

Dennis has got the right idea. This is really the most realistic way to defend yourself in space, especially if your ship isn't a warship. You only need point defenses if your ECM and maneuverability are hilariously sad, and you decide for whatever reason, to directly confront your opponent. Space combat is wildly impractical if both participants aren't trying to engage one another, because space is just so darn big.

[sojourner]

^This is not the thread to open up the "whether space combat is possible" can of worms.

[Psion]

Dennis wrote:

---

There's a line in the script indicating that large ships, at least, have "plasma gun defense" turrets. As far as Polaris itself is concerned, it has missiles for offense and its defenses consist mainly of trying not to get hit.

My assumption about the behavior of the landing boat - which is subject to change if an artist comes up with something really appealing that's different - is that, based upon the design and the placement of the thrusters, it's simply a VTOL like the Apollo LM (except, obviously, single-stage and reusable). It would come in presenting the shielded lower surface, extend its legs and land, then lift off the same way. As much as I like to hark back to Forbidden Planet, the horizontal skimming-along-cruising-to-the-landing-spot behavior of the C57D is not what I have in mind.

So it's something like the Delta Clipper?

[USS Intrepid]

Love the look of the lander, and especially love the detail in the vacant docking port.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Psion wrote:

---

So it's something like the Delta Clipper?

That looks like a darn good comparison, yeah.

sojourner wrote:

---

^This is not the thread to open up the "whether space combat is possible" can of worms.

Well, actually, it's not a terrible place for a little bit of that. I'm pretty much of the "movie space combat is nonsense" camp myself. That said, Polaris is intended to be a pretty traditional skiffy space show, so we do have some such sequences - they're brief and limited, but what we do show suggests something at least a little like what you'd see on nuBSG.

If I did a science fiction show based even somewhat on what I think is actually likely or even possible it would be much more cyberpunkish and wouldn't feature interstellar travel at all.

In terms of having such elements I like Avatar better than anything else I've seen lately because it blends the fantasy with a rather uber-NASA-ish vibe and at least a cursory acknowledgement that such trips would take an extremely long time, be incredibly complex and probably never routine. No space wars there.

[Vektor]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

I thought you might like to be reminded of/made aware of Anderson's iconic craft with an otherwise similar profile, so that you can avoid any unintentional resemblance in the atmospheric flight characteristics of your landing module. For, if your craft moves through the air horizontally while traveling around within a planet's atmosphere, it could easily strongly resemble an Anderson UFO. This could be remedied by making movement from point A to point B on a planet generally ballistic, so that motion is generally along its main cylindrical axis.

I don’t think the script actually calls for any such hovering about so it’s really a moot point as far as this particular story is concerned. In a broader context, I would envision its movement very much along the lines of the Delta Clipper (see below).

Either way, a passing resemblance to Anderson's style would probably not be in conflict with some of the subtly retro elements I think Dennis is aiming for with this production.

JES wrote:

---

I couldn't help but notice that earlier in the thread, it was suggested that the Polaris wasn't going to have energy weapons. I couldn't help but think that such a decision would be a mistake… I think that given the armaments that the Polaris currently has, and the fact that they are all forward facing, she would need some laser turrets for defense. I think that 4-8 placed somewhere on the saucer should be sufficient to give her an adequate coverage.

I’m not sure where it was suggested that Polaris doesn’t have energy weapons. The two big guns on either side of the bow are energy weapons. I also plan to include some small point-defense turrets on either side and one at the rear that have only been shown in the sketches so far.

JES wrote:

---

Heh, I can only hope that she succeeds. Given her size, I'm hoping that she is extremely agile, made out of a very tough alloy, capable of polarizing her hull plating similar to the NX, have a combination of the three, because otherwise, one good hit, and she is in for a grand cremation.

I think it should be pointed out that Polaris is not actually a warship, she’s an exploration vessel crudely refitted for combat. I imagine she had a pretty tough hull to begin with, just to be able to deal with some of the natural phenomena the universe is capable of throwing at her, but the unpleasant truth is that one good hit from a real battlewagon would probably finish her.

She is quite quick and agile, as alluded to in the opening pages of the script, which I have reflected in the prominent main engines and oversized maneuvering thrusters. She also has a very good sensor suite and powerful transmitter arrays, which were readily adaptable to ECM functions. She’s hard to see and harder to catch, which (mostly) compensates for her lack of heavy armor, shields or other defensive capabilities.

Psion wrote:

---

So it's something like the Delta Clipper?

That’s exactly what I had in mind when I was fleshing out the original design by Aridas Sofia. The Polaris lander is obviously a bit more squat, which would allow it to fly about in a non-ballistic fashion when the occasion calls for it, but generally it’s either plummeting straight down through the atmosphere or shooting straight back up into orbit.