Simerge spacegame

Developer board for project simerge
It is currently Wed Jun 10, 2026 3:39 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Skylark
PostPosted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:51 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:07 am
Posts: 104
Light, atmosphere capable, short distance space vehicle. Mainly used to transfer cargo from ground to orbital relay stations. It is equipped with a Xava type hybrid engine (hypersonic ramjet + antimater-mater compound MPD thruster). Due to it's small size it can fit only a compact sized power plant. Combined with high performance cells it brings up the necessary 30GW power to leave the gravity well.

Characteristics of Skylark:

Manufacturer: Corinth Dynamics
Vehicle type: Ground-To-Space jet
Wing span: 49,8 m
Length: 44,35 m
Height: 12,5 m
maximum acceleration (in vacuum): ?
Basic weight: 735 t
Cargo Weight + Fuel: max 600 t
Conventional Engine: 2x Xava AMH-1F each 12.7MW to 35.2GW
FTL Engine: n/a in standard versions
Powerplant: Nanom 7C-525 compact 5GW to 25GW (standard equipment)
Cells: Tesla UP-20A high performance cells at 20GW
Shields: Only thermal

Image
Image

Design Proposition: Alesto
Model author: Jonathan "deus siddis" Kelly


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 3:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:06 am
Posts: 11
Updates:

Image
Image

Image
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:03 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:07 am
Posts: 104
I noticed a small issue.
The cargo hatch can make a problem with docking. Usually the cargo area should be hermetically locked when docked to the station. Simplest would be to assign an extra airlock for cargo?
Also there are other solutions. One which is compatible to your current design would be minicontainers inside the ship. Then a station would have something like a crane picking out the containers from the vessel. But for the second case it would be better if the hatch wings are sliding somehow inside instead swinging outwards.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:06 am
Posts: 11
Alesto wrote:
But for the second case it would be better if the hatch wings are sliding somehow inside instead swinging outwards.


Luckily, this can be done easily. A single hatch door can slide backwards inside the hull, just above the reactor.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:24 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:07 am
Posts: 104
Good. Then we can go for the sliding door variant.

There is an important I forgot. We need to design a docking interface used by the stations. These should be compatible with Skylark and desirable with all coming freighter types we will have.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 2:38 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:07 am
Posts: 104
I've taken a look how the interior could be planned. For me it seems that there is not enough room for crew area. Possibly we could move the reactor behind the cargo area. What would you think?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:06 am
Posts: 11
Alesto wrote:
There is an important I forgot. We need to design a docking interface used by the stations. These should be compatible with Skylark and desirable with all coming freighter types we will have.


The Skylark, being an aerospace craft, has a specific curved geometry around it's cargo hatch. So to create an interface that hermetically seals to it, plus other freighter designs, something special will be needed. What should work best is for the Skylark to extend a level, square docking interface of its own to meet the station's.

As for the station's interface, it would need to be designed around all of the small or specialized freighters that don't use large exterior containers. The challenge here is only the Skylark has been modeled, so we don't know exactly how the interfaces of the other freighters will look yet.

Alesto wrote:
I've taken a look how the interior could be planned. For me it seems that there is not enough room for crew area. Possibly we could move the reactor behind the cargo area. What would you think?


I already did this actually. 8-)

There really isn't enough space for it in the middle section. Further, I think we should go back to your original idea that the reactor is not directly accessible by the crew. The technician can manage it from the cockpit with a remote interface, but for him to go to the reactor room he'd have to travel through the cargo bay, which would be so packed full of cargo there would be no room for him to pass through.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:34 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:07 am
Posts: 104
Deus Ars wrote:
The Skylark, being an aerospace craft, has a specific curved geometry around it's cargo hatch. So to create an interface that hermetically seals to it, plus other freighter designs, something special will be needed. What should work best is for the Skylark to extend a level, square docking interface of its own to meet the station's.


One alternative. The other one could be to model openings on the top of the transporter. When docking to a stations, heels are attaching from the station's dock interface to them.

Deus Ars wrote:
As for the station's interface, it would need to be designed around all of the small or specialized freighters that don't use large exterior containers. The challenge here is only the Skylark has been modeled, so we don't know exactly how the interfaces of the other freighters will look yet.


You're right. We will need to be a little careful here. Possibly it's the right time to think about standards on dock interfaces.

Deus Ars wrote:
I already did this actually. 8-)

There really isn't enough space for it in the middle section. Further, I think we should go back to your original idea that the reactor is not directly accessible by the crew. The technician can manage it from the cockpit with a remote interface, but for him to go to the reactor room he'd have to travel through the cargo bay, which would be so packed full of cargo there would be no room for him to pass through.


Maybe wo could have something like a maintenance corridor below the cargo bay (possibly also connecting to each minicontainer inside the bay) and ending by the reactor area.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Sat Oct 02, 2010 2:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:06 am
Posts: 11
Alesto wrote:
One alternative. The other one could be to model openings on the top of the transporter. When docking to a stations, heels are attaching from the station's dock interface to them.


Yes, you could have "slots" the dock interface goes into. That would get around the curvature issue as well.

Quote:
You're right. We will need to be a little careful here. Possibly it's the right time to think about standards on dock interfaces.


It could be. On the other hand, it can be difficult to design things without building them fully in 3D. There's a lot of precision dimensional issues that don't become apparent until you've done that.

How best to proceed with this could have a lot to do with how many different container classes and ship classes you ultimately want to have in Simerge?

Quote:
Maybe we could have something like a maintenance corridor below the cargo bay (possibly also connecting to each minicontainer inside the bay) and ending by the reactor area.


There's no room under or anywhere around the cargo bay, I'm afraid. Space is tight on this craft.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Skylark
PostPosted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 11:02 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:07 am
Posts: 104
Okay. Then we can abandon the option to have direct access to the reactor and only make it accessible from outside as a new option. Leaving the ship is of course always possible.

Deus Ars wrote:
It could be. On the other hand, it can be difficult to design things without building them fully in 3D. There's a lot of precision dimensional issues that don't become apparent until you've done that.

How best to proceed with this could have a lot to do with how many different container classes and ship classes you ultimately want to have in Simerge?

What do you think then, if we leave the docking interface question aside and make something like a dummy interface which we can easily replace in the future after we have enough ship class types?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group