The original TV series version of the Enterprise.
A tribute to Gene Roddenberry and physical space
- Thread starter shawn12
- Start date
I have been talking to some rocket scientists and there maybe issues with the different structures of the ships and supersonic flight and heat coming into the atmophere. The TOS might be the most unstable platform for the mission for a bunch of reasons. Not that anything is ruled out yet, just things to consider to get one physically in space. This also depends on it staying in orbit or coming back.
MIT has told me they can build the ship if I put the project together, they really liked the idea, as has everyone I have spoken with so far.
There are also new materials for bring things back through the atmophere.
Whatever ship has to be able to withstand the supersonic flight, and heat, in which there are ways to work it. Its all still technically possible.
This is a real attempt I am doing to try and accomplish the goal.
Andrew is helping with consulting, MIT and Masten space systems to name a few. But, I also have and am working on others.
I have to say, I personally think Andrew does awesome work!!!
MIT has told me they can build the ship if I put the project together, they really liked the idea, as has everyone I have spoken with so far.
There are also new materials for bring things back through the atmophere.
Whatever ship has to be able to withstand the supersonic flight, and heat, in which there are ways to work it. Its all still technically possible.
This is a real attempt I am doing to try and accomplish the goal.
Andrew is helping with consulting, MIT and Masten space systems to name a few. But, I also have and am working on others.
I have to say, I personally think Andrew does awesome work!!!
Those are good points... For structural integrity and to a proper tribute, send up the D. Gene still created it, and it's more likely to survive a landing. 
[lol Generations.]
[lol Generations.]
Those are good points... For structural integrity and to a proper tribute, send up the D. Gene still created it, and it's more likely to survive a landing.
Yeah, just tie Troi up and lock her in the closet!
You guys, do know that Andrew Probert on the thread here designed the 'D' yes? With Gene of course.
One of the issues I am working on is permission from the "powers that be" to make a replica of the orginal or D for actual space. I am not sure about this yet. I do however have Andrew's new Ship the 'F' which he graciously would contribute for the mission, which looks structurally perhaps the best for actual space. But nothing again is ruled in or out yet.
I also have someone looking over the ships for design and space flight. It will require any ship being modified for space of course. It also depends on if it stays up there or comes back to earth and the small science payloads on it.
When I am ready here soon, everyone will be able to participate in whatever way they choose and if she flies and I am working very hard to achieve that goal, get your name onboard an Enterprise flown into space. It again, will carry some science experiments for middle school through to college that are yet to be determined. This I hope will help create future scientists for space exploration, as well.
Mike, it would be fired into space in a rocket. Then released. Thanks for the comments Mike. I am doing this as a tribute to Gene, to see an Enterpise in space, for science education and because it should be done and would be historical for sure.
Gene made a huge difference in my life personally, as did all the star trek actors, artists and everyone involved over the years. A starship and an imagination.
"Let's make sure that history never forgets the name Enterprise." Picard
It won't I am sure, but this will certainly add to making history for an actual Enterprise Starship in space and be a fantastic tribute to Gene and celebrating his vision, while teaching future scientists.
Everyone's comments really help here. Thank you.
One of the issues I am working on is permission from the "powers that be" to make a replica of the orginal or D for actual space. I am not sure about this yet. I do however have Andrew's new Ship the 'F' which he graciously would contribute for the mission, which looks structurally perhaps the best for actual space. But nothing again is ruled in or out yet.
I also have someone looking over the ships for design and space flight. It will require any ship being modified for space of course. It also depends on if it stays up there or comes back to earth and the small science payloads on it.
When I am ready here soon, everyone will be able to participate in whatever way they choose and if she flies and I am working very hard to achieve that goal, get your name onboard an Enterprise flown into space. It again, will carry some science experiments for middle school through to college that are yet to be determined. This I hope will help create future scientists for space exploration, as well.
Mike, it would be fired into space in a rocket. Then released. Thanks for the comments Mike. I am doing this as a tribute to Gene, to see an Enterpise in space, for science education and because it should be done and would be historical for sure.
Gene made a huge difference in my life personally, as did all the star trek actors, artists and everyone involved over the years. A starship and an imagination.
"Let's make sure that history never forgets the name Enterprise." Picard
It won't I am sure, but this will certainly add to making history for an actual Enterprise Starship in space and be a fantastic tribute to Gene and celebrating his vision, while teaching future scientists.
Everyone's comments really help here. Thank you.
Just curious. Why does it have to be able to reenter the atmosphere? Spaceships named Enterprise haven't had the best of luck in that area. Just leave it up there transmitting a transponder signal and maybe a live video feed of its' view from orbit of the Earth.
Captain Rob, it doesn't have to be retrievable really, but that would be nice because then it could go into the smithsonian museam.
I don't want to see it burn up in the atmosphere either or crash on the moon.
However, like I mentioned before I am also looking at the possiblity of putting it into a lagrange point. There it would stay in orbit longer.
"The Italian-French mathematician Josef Lagrange discovered five special points in the vicinity of two orbiting masses where a third, smaller mass can orbit at a fixed distance from the larger masses. More precisely, the Lagrange Points mark positions where the gravitational pull of the two large masses precisely cancels the centripetal acceleration required to rotate with them."
http://www.physics.montana.edu/faculty/cornish/lagrange.
html
Both issues have cost factors and different science involved and pluses and minus with them.
Orginally, I wanted to send it out after the voyager spacecraft into deep space, but that really has cost factors and complex issues. Like "gravity assist" around the other planets to get it into deep space and out of the pull of the suns gravity.
I'll know more pretty soon, when I hear back from some of the experts on the different issues and will post about them as I learn more as well. This is part of the science and science education on it all of course.
I don't want to see it burn up in the atmosphere either or crash on the moon.
However, like I mentioned before I am also looking at the possiblity of putting it into a lagrange point. There it would stay in orbit longer.
"The Italian-French mathematician Josef Lagrange discovered five special points in the vicinity of two orbiting masses where a third, smaller mass can orbit at a fixed distance from the larger masses. More precisely, the Lagrange Points mark positions where the gravitational pull of the two large masses precisely cancels the centripetal acceleration required to rotate with them."
http://www.physics.montana.edu/faculty/cornish/lagrange.
html
Both issues have cost factors and different science involved and pluses and minus with them.
Orginally, I wanted to send it out after the voyager spacecraft into deep space, but that really has cost factors and complex issues. Like "gravity assist" around the other planets to get it into deep space and out of the pull of the suns gravity.
I'll know more pretty soon, when I hear back from some of the experts on the different issues and will post about them as I learn more as well. This is part of the science and science education on it all of course.
At 150 miles in altitude, an object would need to be traveling around 17,000 miles per hour in order to maintain orbit (the shuttle orbiter would orbit at around 150-200 miles).
If it hits the atmosphere at that speed, it will fry to a crisp. The space shuttle's heat shielding tiles range from 1 to 5 inches thick, which would greatly constrict the size and shape of the thing. In short, I'd say you can forget about getting it back.
Launching into the orbit enjoyed by satellites has its own problems. To get a circular orbit, you need maneuvering thrusters on the gizmo itself to correct its orbit from the elliptical orbit it gets at launch. Unless you want it to have an elliptical orbit, I guess. In any case, you pretty much lose your chance at a photo-op of the thing, unless you also have a camera in that payload that will float along nicely and take pictures.
Scoring those high-altitude satellite orbits is costly, too. The costs for just low earth orbit are about $5,000-$11,000 per pound. Higher altitude means more money.
Launch costs to send something whizzing out of the Solar System after the Voyager spacecraft are impossible to calculate, as only special-purpose 'mission-built' stuff ever does that (i.e., nobody's commercially putting probes out there). I would hope that if that were done, it would be a real probe launched...
Anyway, to not put too much of a damper on things, I'll suggest the most likely way for something like that to happen:
1) The final STS mission flies one out the cargo doors for a photo op, before the shuttle is grounded forever, in honor of the first shuttle constructed, the Enterprise - named after the iconic Trek ship. Like I said, you'd have to work quickly to get THAT done on time... but it would be fitting, given the context. It would really need to be retrieved after the photo/video ops are done, because it's not safe to leave debris hanging around these days; there's enough space junk posing hazards as it is. We already had a collision between a US and Russian satellite, which sounds crazy - so much space, such little objects - until you consider that all these objects are put in 'optimal' orbits and are therefore competing for room in the 'navigable channels', so to speak. Otherwise you'd need to pack the thing with thrusters so it could de-orbit itself safely (and burn up) which would add to the weight, size, etc.
2) X-prize publicity stunt. Only other option I can think of, really, as the future of US manned spaceflight is veering toward the commercial end. We're sending staff and supplies to the ISS on Russian Soyuz rockets, ferchrissakes.
3) The not-so-awesome-but-still-kinda-cool option - an astronaut takes a small handheld model to the ISS and takes it out on a spacewalk. It would need to be tethered. Sort of lame compared to what you were hoping for, but it would still get some mentions on the 6 o'clock news and probably light the blogosphere/news aggregator/TrekBBS world on fire for a few days (probably in the reverse order; it'll hit the internet by storm first and you'll hear about it on the news a week later, like that homeless radio announcer guy).
If it hits the atmosphere at that speed, it will fry to a crisp. The space shuttle's heat shielding tiles range from 1 to 5 inches thick, which would greatly constrict the size and shape of the thing. In short, I'd say you can forget about getting it back.
Launching into the orbit enjoyed by satellites has its own problems. To get a circular orbit, you need maneuvering thrusters on the gizmo itself to correct its orbit from the elliptical orbit it gets at launch. Unless you want it to have an elliptical orbit, I guess. In any case, you pretty much lose your chance at a photo-op of the thing, unless you also have a camera in that payload that will float along nicely and take pictures.
Scoring those high-altitude satellite orbits is costly, too. The costs for just low earth orbit are about $5,000-$11,000 per pound. Higher altitude means more money.
Launch costs to send something whizzing out of the Solar System after the Voyager spacecraft are impossible to calculate, as only special-purpose 'mission-built' stuff ever does that (i.e., nobody's commercially putting probes out there). I would hope that if that were done, it would be a real probe launched...
Anyway, to not put too much of a damper on things, I'll suggest the most likely way for something like that to happen:
1) The final STS mission flies one out the cargo doors for a photo op, before the shuttle is grounded forever, in honor of the first shuttle constructed, the Enterprise - named after the iconic Trek ship. Like I said, you'd have to work quickly to get THAT done on time... but it would be fitting, given the context. It would really need to be retrieved after the photo/video ops are done, because it's not safe to leave debris hanging around these days; there's enough space junk posing hazards as it is. We already had a collision between a US and Russian satellite, which sounds crazy - so much space, such little objects - until you consider that all these objects are put in 'optimal' orbits and are therefore competing for room in the 'navigable channels', so to speak. Otherwise you'd need to pack the thing with thrusters so it could de-orbit itself safely (and burn up) which would add to the weight, size, etc.
2) X-prize publicity stunt. Only other option I can think of, really, as the future of US manned spaceflight is veering toward the commercial end. We're sending staff and supplies to the ISS on Russian Soyuz rockets, ferchrissakes.
3) The not-so-awesome-but-still-kinda-cool option - an astronaut takes a small handheld model to the ISS and takes it out on a spacewalk. It would need to be tethered. Sort of lame compared to what you were hoping for, but it would still get some mentions on the 6 o'clock news and probably light the blogosphere/news aggregator/TrekBBS world on fire for a few days (probably in the reverse order; it'll hit the internet by storm first and you'll hear about it on the news a week later, like that homeless radio announcer guy).
Anticitizen, thanks for your comments.
According to Dr Hoffman at MIT and another rocket engineer I have talked to it can be brought back. There are new moldable ceramic materials they can use for the outershell of the hull and new ballute technology for reentry.
http://www.space.com/563-fly-higher-fly-lighter-ballute-technology-aimed-moon-missions.html
The cameras are a part to figure out still, but also doable I believe.
"Scoring those high-altitude satellite orbits is costly, too. The costs for just low earth orbit are about $5,000-$11,000 per pound. Higher altitude means more money."
This I do understand.
"Launch costs to send something whizzing out of the Solar System after the Voyager spacecraft are impossible to calculate, as only special-purpose 'mission-built' stuff ever does that (i.e., nobody's commercially putting probes out there). I would hope that if that were done, it would be a real probe launched..."
This I have basically ruled out already. To costly for sure and much to involved to make it really happen. That will have to wait for a real enterprise in the future.
I won't be able to put it together in time for a shuttle flight for sure. Would have liked to see it go up in the enterprise shuttle though, that would have been fantastic.
As far as orbits and such that will be up to others like MIT and the ones that control the launch and flight and funding. Your sure right, I don't want to hit anything or create more space debri, but again that would be up to the flight control and mission details. I won't personally be controlling the ship.
So far things are moving forward quite well. No technological reasons why it can't be done, either in orbit or even brought back.
"The not-so-awesome-but-still-kinda-cool option - an astronaut takes a small handheld model to the ISS and takes it out on a spacewalk."
I am working hard more for a small real ship that has a small science payload, built by students and used for educational purposes and a real tribute to Gene. I think if your gonna do this, try to do it with a ship the size of a man, and that it has the added value of the science projects for education.
I appreciate your comments and information on it all and understand what your saying here. It is a huge project for sure and a lot of details yet to work out. This is part of the project, the science of putting it all together to make it work hopefully.
The actual ship is still a very important issue here, especially from the "powers that be" that need to approve a TOS or D replica or if I go with a totally new ship designed by Andrew the 'F'. The other issue with the ship is which one could be best modified for actual space. We shall see.
Again, everyone's comments are very helpful and appreciated. Thanks
According to Dr Hoffman at MIT and another rocket engineer I have talked to it can be brought back. There are new moldable ceramic materials they can use for the outershell of the hull and new ballute technology for reentry.
http://www.space.com/563-fly-higher-fly-lighter-ballute-technology-aimed-moon-missions.html
The cameras are a part to figure out still, but also doable I believe.
"Scoring those high-altitude satellite orbits is costly, too. The costs for just low earth orbit are about $5,000-$11,000 per pound. Higher altitude means more money."
This I do understand.
"Launch costs to send something whizzing out of the Solar System after the Voyager spacecraft are impossible to calculate, as only special-purpose 'mission-built' stuff ever does that (i.e., nobody's commercially putting probes out there). I would hope that if that were done, it would be a real probe launched..."
This I have basically ruled out already. To costly for sure and much to involved to make it really happen. That will have to wait for a real enterprise in the future.
I won't be able to put it together in time for a shuttle flight for sure. Would have liked to see it go up in the enterprise shuttle though, that would have been fantastic.
As far as orbits and such that will be up to others like MIT and the ones that control the launch and flight and funding. Your sure right, I don't want to hit anything or create more space debri, but again that would be up to the flight control and mission details. I won't personally be controlling the ship.
So far things are moving forward quite well. No technological reasons why it can't be done, either in orbit or even brought back.
"The not-so-awesome-but-still-kinda-cool option - an astronaut takes a small handheld model to the ISS and takes it out on a spacewalk."
I am working hard more for a small real ship that has a small science payload, built by students and used for educational purposes and a real tribute to Gene. I think if your gonna do this, try to do it with a ship the size of a man, and that it has the added value of the science projects for education.
I appreciate your comments and information on it all and understand what your saying here. It is a huge project for sure and a lot of details yet to work out. This is part of the project, the science of putting it all together to make it work hopefully.
The actual ship is still a very important issue here, especially from the "powers that be" that need to approve a TOS or D replica or if I go with a totally new ship designed by Andrew the 'F'. The other issue with the ship is which one could be best modified for actual space. We shall see.
Again, everyone's comments are very helpful and appreciated. Thanks
MikeS, these are Andrew's preliminary sketches but the basic concept is there.
http://www.webpotential.com/falcon/EnterpriseF/
http://www.webpotential.com/falcon/EnterpriseF/
The structure of the 'F" is thicker and may make the better actual candidate for real space flight and room needed for a small science payload for student education. Still designed by Andrew, who desinged the D and who worked with Gene on it. Personally, I really like the ship, it slightly reminds me of a cobra getting ready to strike somewhat.
The other issue still is to be able to create a replica with permission to use TOS or D. That still may or maynot fly.
I didn't know Gene personally, but I think the future ship would be a great tribute to his work and vision, especially one created by Andrew here. In the same way Gene and the creators went from the TOS, to the D when Gene was alive and working on them. He wanted a modern ship for the Next Generation. Not that I am against in anyway the Tos or D for the mission, its what one is best suited and useable for the mission.
The other issue still is to be able to create a replica with permission to use TOS or D. That still may or maynot fly.
I didn't know Gene personally, but I think the future ship would be a great tribute to his work and vision, especially one created by Andrew here. In the same way Gene and the creators went from the TOS, to the D when Gene was alive and working on them. He wanted a modern ship for the Next Generation. Not that I am against in anyway the Tos or D for the mission, its what one is best suited and useable for the mission.
He created a design that combined the "organic feeling of the 'D' with some of the angularity of the 'E'."
Sorry to hear your not keen on it Mike. Maybe it will grow on you or maybe not. I appreciate the honesty.
Personally, I like it and not just saying that, I really think she's cool looking. Of course its also important to remember its a rough draft.
Sorry to hear your not keen on it Mike. Maybe it will grow on you or maybe not. I appreciate the honesty.
Personally, I like it and not just saying that, I really think she's cool looking. Of course its also important to remember its a rough draft.
I was watching a episode of science trek last night.
So much actual science has gone into the shows and ideas created from the shows and that Gene, wanted the science to be believable makes me even more determined to get an Enterprise in physical space. We have the technology.
The ship could be built at MIT and be a science project for middleschool up through college. That they could film a science documentary of it. That it would be an awesome tribute to Gene and star trek. That it would be an historic event like the one below.
Only one private satellite has gone up and been returned and that was recently.
"It's just mind-blowingly awesome. I apologize, and I wish I was more articulate, but it's hard to be articulate when your mind's blown—but in a very good way."
— Elon Musk, SpaceX founder, regards the return of the Dragon capsule, the first time a privately developed spacecraft has been recovered safely on its return from low-Earth o...rbit. Reported by the BBC, 8 December 2010
It could even be space x that flies an Enterprise up. I am sure they are star trek fans like Scaled Composites and Burt Rotan and Richard Branson are as well. No shortage of fans in the actual space and space flight communities. I know because I have also been talking to quite a few of them already and so far everyone really likes the idea.
So much actual science has gone into the shows and ideas created from the shows and that Gene, wanted the science to be believable makes me even more determined to get an Enterprise in physical space. We have the technology.
The ship could be built at MIT and be a science project for middleschool up through college. That they could film a science documentary of it. That it would be an awesome tribute to Gene and star trek. That it would be an historic event like the one below.
Only one private satellite has gone up and been returned and that was recently.
"It's just mind-blowingly awesome. I apologize, and I wish I was more articulate, but it's hard to be articulate when your mind's blown—but in a very good way."
— Elon Musk, SpaceX founder, regards the return of the Dragon capsule, the first time a privately developed spacecraft has been recovered safely on its return from low-Earth o...rbit. Reported by the BBC, 8 December 2010
It could even be space x that flies an Enterprise up. I am sure they are star trek fans like Scaled Composites and Burt Rotan and Richard Branson are as well. No shortage of fans in the actual space and space flight communities. I know because I have also been talking to quite a few of them already and so far everyone really likes the idea.
More on ballute technologies.
Ballute Reentry Technology
A ballute (the term is derived from a combination of the words balloon and parachute) is an inflatable device that provides a large drag area to slow a vehicle entering an atmosphere. To date, vehicles entering the Earth's atmosphere rely on a layer of thermal protection material, either ablative or non-ablative, which tends to be heavy and expensive. The ballute system offers a more lightweight alternativehttp://trekbbs.com/content-photo.php?photoid=434.
http://andrews-space.com/content-main.php?subsection=MTA0
Sophisticated balloon technology could help steer hypersonic spacecraft
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/40969
Ballute Reentry Technology
A ballute (the term is derived from a combination of the words balloon and parachute) is an inflatable device that provides a large drag area to slow a vehicle entering an atmosphere. To date, vehicles entering the Earth's atmosphere rely on a layer of thermal protection material, either ablative or non-ablative, which tends to be heavy and expensive. The ballute system offers a more lightweight alternativehttp://trekbbs.com/content-photo.php?photoid=434.
http://andrews-space.com/content-main.php?subsection=MTA0
Sophisticated balloon technology could help steer hypersonic spacecraft
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/40969
Another very possible technology for a ship materials.
The 'sci' behind the 'fi'
A public television program explores the ways real science is starting to catch up with the futuristic visions in Star Trek.
David L. Chandler, MIT News Office
"The program also features Institute Professor Emeritus Mildred Dresselhaus, as well as Tomas Palacios, assistant professor of computer science, talking about the properties of carbon fibers and a recently discovered material called graphene, a single atomic layer of carbon, which is the strongest material known. Dresselhaus points out that carbon fibers have been an essential enabling technology for a variety of technologies in the space program, to the point that “the space industry wouldn’t exist without carbon fibers."
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/star-trek-1211.html
Why Graphene Won Scientists the Nobel Prize
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/10/graphene/
The 'sci' behind the 'fi'
A public television program explores the ways real science is starting to catch up with the futuristic visions in Star Trek.
David L. Chandler, MIT News Office
"The program also features Institute Professor Emeritus Mildred Dresselhaus, as well as Tomas Palacios, assistant professor of computer science, talking about the properties of carbon fibers and a recently discovered material called graphene, a single atomic layer of carbon, which is the strongest material known. Dresselhaus points out that carbon fibers have been an essential enabling technology for a variety of technologies in the space program, to the point that “the space industry wouldn’t exist without carbon fibers."
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/star-trek-1211.html
Why Graphene Won Scientists the Nobel Prize
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/10/graphene/
Similar threads
- Locked
