Space Opera Apologetics....

[Bamax]

It is certainly true that reality is often wilder than fiction we dream up, but one thing it is'nt is convenient... especially when it comes to space travel.

It is fascinating to both learn and know what is possible to simulate using real physics.

Gravity: Via rotation you need 100-200 meters at LEAST for 1g without causing crew to feel dizzy all day.

The implication is that any longterm manned space vessel must be huge, and if not it needs tethers for separation and rotation of modules, or tethers for connecting with another vessel to rotate 100 meters apart.

Implications: It breaks classic space opera to a degree, since all vessels must be huge by default if a longterm manned vessel. Also the lack of relatively safe and efficient torchship technology means that a space opera setting with a sustained and broadly traveled manned presence in space is simply not happening. Humans require a certain threshold of safety before they come en mass.

Known space technology is not there yet.


So in light of all that, I can accept such scifi conceits as artficial gravity floors, since realistically the setting cannot exist as it is without it.

You cannot have small manned spaceships either without it, unless you travel in pairs with 100 meter long tethers for rotation.

Reality puts definite constraints on the story you can tell, so that is why scifi exists on some level... to tell the stories reality never could.

[Keklas Rekobah]

This free PDF ("Space Settlements: A Design Study") might interest you . . .

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19770014162/downloads/19770014162.pdf

I have used it as a reference for more "realistic" space stations in my Traveller games.

[Arioch]

It's quite possible to have space travel without artificial gravity or inertial dampers... the example that comes to mind is The Mote in God's Eye. Their warships were roughly cigar shaped, and the interior deck layout was like floors in a skyscraper, so that gravity would feel "down" when the ship was accelerating. When not accelerating, the ships simulated gravity by rotating, which means that the interior had to be reconfigured for each mode. The maximum acceleration was 6g, but this could only be done in short busts, since there is only so long a human crew can withstand that kind of g-stress.

In the story that was the precursor to Outsider, I was using this paradigm for the ships: cigar-shaped and limited to 6g and without any artificial gravity. But I was kind of stuck with it; I wasn't happy with how the ships looked, or how complicated the interiors had to be, or the large amounts of time that it took to get anywhere at 6g. So I said "screw it" and embraced the Rule of Cool.

[Bamax]

It's quite possible to have space travel without artificial gravity or inertial dampers... the example that comes to mind is The Mote in God's Eye. Their warships were roughly cigar shaped, and the interior deck layout was like floors in a skyscraper, so that gravity would feel "down" when the ship was accelerating. When not accelerating, the ships simulated gravity by rotating, which means that the interior had to be reconfigured for each mode. The maximum acceleration was 6g, but this could only be done in short busts, since there is only so long a human crew can withstand that kind of g-stress.

In the story that was the precursor to Outsider, I was using this paradigm for the ships: cigar-shaped and limited to 6g and without any artificial gravity. But I was kind of stuck with it; I wasn't happy with how the ships looked, or how complicated the interiors had to be, or the large amounts of time that it took to get anywhere at 6g. So I said "screw it" and embraced the Rule of Cool.

Haha... that is the constraint. The only optimal shapes are severly limited when reality is involved, so creativity takes a backseat, which scifi creators often dislike.

I actually kind of dislike 1g constant acceleration.... purely because it makes RKV's all too easy.

Outsider goes way faster but at least they have long range blast particle beams that make RKV's a lot less likely to survive.


Interestingly I have posited before that 'scifi' ways of moving through space without actually moving can still get you places fast.

I have always been fascinated with the idea of a sublight space translation/warp drive.

Imagine if you could translate or move space past your vessel at 30g?

If you could do that you could at least somewhat compete with outsider races even if your rockets were inefficient modern ones.

Granted Outsider could easily outmanever the moment they come out of warp, but that is not the main advantage of warp anyway.

The main advantage is the ability to reach locations and rendezvous faster than Outsider races ever could.

Why? Outsider races must retro-thrust their absurd speeds to slow to match their destination.

With sublight warp you could literally cut off the warp field and your speed and heading would immediately become whatever it was BEFORE you went to warp.

So the only fuel you ever need to use is to match orbits and little else.... you do not have to accelerate to reach a target... just warp at sublight.

[gaerzi]

I wouldn't worry too much about constraints on how the starship looks -- after all, who says all of it has to rotate? Only the places where the crew is expected to spend over 50% of their time really needs it. Technical areas (engineering, storage, etc.) can be left without artificial gravity.

The main issue of space opera really is distance and time. Generally, space opera behave like seafaring adventures. Visually scaled up, and with kind of a third dimension added when convenient, but otherwise? It's seafaring. You have space pirates, space derelicts, space krakens, space reefs (asteroids), space whirlpools (black holes)...

And when I say "visually scaled up", it's to insist on how the scale of space is only cosmetic. Travel between planets in a stellar system is comparable to travel between islands in an archipelago; and travel between stellar systems is comparable to travel between continents, at the age of sail.

[Cthulhu]

"You would make a ship sail against the winds and currents by lighting a bon-fire under her deck? I have no time for such nonsense."
Attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte.

This was considered a completely reasonable statement just 200 years ago. Today, various space agencies are designing space-ships that can sail across the airless expanse by lighting a nuclear fire under their "decks". Which wondrous technologies will be available in yet another century or two?

Therefore, a writer can very well create any sort of artificial gravity, given enough explanation about its function. Who knows, maybe he'll be spot on?

[Bamax]

The need for super powerful rocket fuel stems from the problem of traversing vast distances in shorter amounts of time.

Alternate solutions include:

Hibernation: Harder than it seems. Scientists IRL gentically modified rats to hibernate so it is possible. Yet genetically modifying humans to hibernate is a slippery slope with a lot of questions about playing god about it. Secondary to that are the issues of ulcers and weightlessness while not moving. To avoid blood pooling in the head and causing extra pressure on the eyeballs thereby damaging them for life with somewhat diminshed vision, a kind of modified fightet pliot g-suit would be required. G-suits put pressure on areas of the body to cause blood to pool where you want it. Yet constant pressure while sleeping for days could easily cause ulcers. Interestingly bears and other mamnals perodically move during hibernation, thus avoiding ulcers.

Time Warp: If time can be warped so crew experience less time than is actually passing then that solves the distance and time problem. To the crew only a few minutes passed of drifting on inertia, when in reality several days passed.

Sublight warp: Warp speed need not be arbitrary. It may be linked directly to main engine thrust. Simply pulse fire the main engines and engage warp, you will warp in that direction at the same warp acceleration without anymore rocket fuel use. Resetting the warp field acceleration after shutting it down would require another main engine pulse, but that is tons of fuel saved. And combined with gravity flooring thrust oriented gravity is no longer necessary at all. And when rear engines are engaged just strap crew into vertical mounted roller coaster seats.

[G. Janssen]

So I said "screw it" and embraced the Rule of Cool.

It's okay to embrace the rule of cool.

Imagine it's the 11th century and someone is writing a story about an expedition from Europe to China that takes place 1000 years in the future. What would be more realistic in retrospect: horsedrawn carriages, or winged carriages that use a magical substance as fuel to propel them through the sky 5 miles up?

Imagine it's the 15th century and someone is writing a story about a circumnavigation that takes place 500 years in the future. What would be more realistic in retrospect: a caravel, or the 800 feet long iron vessel that's powered by the sun and does 25 knots?

Imagine it's the 19th century and someone is writing a story about a trip to Mars. What would be more realistic in retrospect: a gas balloon fired from a huge cannon, or a ship constructed from organic substances, ceramics and metal alloys, equipped with a thinking device and powered by lightning?

So, now it's the 21st century. Who will be more right about future interstellar travel: the authors using only the knowledge that we possess now, or some author who comes up with some fantastic, outrageous way?

[Demarquis]

I recommend this one too: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/ ... lar-vessel

It's a good visual reference for a type of large spaceship design I will call a "Propeller" or "Spoke and Hub", known in other contexts as a "Dumb-bell design." Basically using tethers or pylons to connect a number of rotating modules around a central hub. The authors went into some detail regarding what the inside of such a ship might look like.

Some caveats: The drive type is obsolete (but isn't essential to the overall idea anyway), and the space devoted to agricultural vs other uses is nonsense, and the proposed population (10,000) is way too high if you are aiming as some sort of semi-sustainability, but otherwise very interesting. Scale it down from a "habitat" to a more normal space ship and I think it would be reasonably accurate.