I tried to modify the best I could ChaoticGravitons Starship to be able to land on its side so that the crew could walk right in. If someone could build a better more stable version that would be great. Maybe SpaceX would try it out on the real thing. Thanks Chaotic for the original build you did a nice job on it.
GENERAL INFO
- Predecessor: Lunar Optimized Starship (HLS) v1.0 - oh btw it has an interior
- Created On: Mac
- Game Version: 0.9.404.0
- Price: $86,807k
- Number of Parts: 1441
- Dimensions: 9 m x 10 m x 49 m
PERFORMANCE
- Total Delta V: 10.9km/s
- Total Thrust: 20.5MN
- Engines: 15
- Wet Mass: 8.01E+5kg
- Dry Mass: 1.13E+5kg
STAGES
Stage | Engines | Delta V | Thrust | Burn | Mass |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3 | 3 | 5.3km/s | 10.1MN | 3.4m | 8.01E+5kg |
4 | 3 | 5.5km/s | 9.9MN | 3.6m | 8.01E+5kg |
7 Comments
- Log in to leave a comment
-
30 ROCKET_MAN
@ChaoticGraviton In the Real competition between SpaceX Starship, Dynetics DHLS and Blue Origin ILV, Nasa will look at a lot of factors before picking one company.
Safety of the crew would be the biggest factor. Dynetics lander will put the Crew the closest to the surface making entry and exit of the vehicle with loads of rock much safer and easier. I like the SpaceX all in one approach but landing on unprepared surfaces with a very tall vehicle full of fuel seems a bit too risky for Nasa. If an Astronaut has a safety issue and needs to get back into the airlock they would have to ride the elevator up and hopefully it works every time.
On its side Starship would alleviate these concerns and allow for the addition of a ramp for a rover or a few steps up for entry. The Large rear vacuum engines would be used for decent until landing when the bottom side thrusters would kick up the rear and land on some type of belly legs with enough clearance for the side engines.
For take off the side engines would fire lifting off the surface and starship would fire the large rear vacuum engines to accelerate back to orbit and earth.
Thats the long answer, the short is Safety.
Maybe its a good idea maybe not but maybe someone out there sees this and improves it then makes it happen in real life.You did a great job on your build. I just wanted to quickly share the side landing idea.
Thanks again. -
26.0k ChaoticGraviton
@ROCKET_MAN what is there to gain from a horizontal take off tho?
-
30 ROCKET_MAN
Not my intent at all. I actually want someone else like CG to build a better horizontal version, Im not an expert builder. Just had an idea that I wanted to share.
I referenced ChaoticGraviton as the original builder in the title and in the description. Sorry if you're offended , again not my intent. -
-
2,407 Tarian
Kid this is just plain blatant plagiarism. Honestly I’m mad at you. Chaotic Graviton spent days building this craft and you have just taken it upon yourself to make a slight knock off of it. That isn’t a respectful thing to do.
-
@ROCKET_MAN landing on its side could lead to accidents like something going wrong with one of the rear engines. If that happened that could lead to higher velocity crashes. Plus it would take a lot more money for side mounted motors. But this could be a good idea if not for the money to be used on reentry.