Engineer Wants To Build A Real Starship Enterprise

[Whitestar]

I'm not sure if this has been addressed previously, but there is an engineer who goes by the name of Dan who claims he can build a real starship Enterprise within the next 20 years. All he requires is the necessary funding, which is about $50 billion for each year, which I think is insane! Anyway, he has a website and while I found it an informative and entertaining read, I think this guy has lost his marbles.

See link below:

http://www.buildtheenterprise.org/

Granted, I'm no engineer, but I would imagine that the starship Enterprise design would not be spaceworthy at all, considering such design flaws (in the attached photos below) such as the thin neck section that connects both the outrageously huge saucer section and secondary hull, and the thin warp pylons, thus, making it look very disproportional. Plus, I would imagine that those aforementioned parts would snap off once the ship travels at full impulse speed. What does everybody else thinks?

 

[nsaspook]

He needs to start with something practical before building a full starship.

http://goldenarmor.com/storage/SpaceballsEagle5_0016_Layer6.jpg

 

[mfb]

1 trillion US-$ is "a bit" expensive for a big chunk of metal hanging around in space. The proposed ion drives would give a tiny amount of thrust for all reasonable design values, and its fuel requirements would be a serious issue.
The bad design is another issue.

 

[enigma]

Laugh. Out. Loud.

I think that my training and thirty years of experience as an engineer

What, exactly, did you design in your thirty years as an engineer that makes you think that a spaceship from a science fiction show using imaginary propulsion systems is the most effective method to design something?

 

[Whitestar]

Laugh. Out. Loud.



What, exactly, did you design in your thirty years as an engineer that makes you think that a spaceship from a science fiction show using imaginary propulsion systems is the most effective method to design something?

Just so you know, this "engineer" is not on this forum, so if you wish to contact him, you can reach him at the following site:

http://www.buildtheenterprise.org/

 

[enigma]

I have no interest in contacting him. The question was rhetorical.

Engineering isn't designing things. It's designing things optimally.

 

[D H]

Just to add another rhetorical question: How did this "engineer" who supposedly subscribes to "form follows function" arrive at the completely non-functional design of the Enterprise?

This proposal makes Mars One look downright honest and achievable (which it isn't).

 

[Whitestar]

Just to add another rhetorical question: How did this "engineer" who supposedly subscribes to "form follows function" arrive at the completely non-functional design of the Enterprise?

This proposal makes Mars One look downright honest and achievable (which it isn't).

Really? I was under the impression that Mars One was doable. What makes it impossible?

 

[D H]

Really? I was under the impression that Mars One was doable. What makes it impossible?

That depends on what doable means. Mars One is very doable as a reality series. It has already captured the attention of a huge number of people. As a mission to Mars: No.

The claim "Mars One has developed a realistic plan to establish a settlement on Mars by 2023. This plan is built upon existing technologies available from proven suppliers" is complete nonsense. As a starter, the cost is way too low. So is the timeline. But that's just a starter. It isn't doable now or in the near future, period. There are so many things with this mission that we cannot do right now. Existing technologies? None of those technologies exist. Some exist on the drawing board only. Some are complete unknowns. Some we know damn well we can't do. Growing food, for example. Should everything else work (which it can't), the poor candidates who land on Mars will die of starvation shortly after having eaten the last bit of food brought from Earth.

 

[256bits]

Granted, I'm no engineer, but I would imagine that the starship Enterprise design would not be spaceworthy at all, considering such design flaws (in the attached photos below) such as the thin neck section that connects both the outrageously huge saucer section and secondary hull, and the thin warp pylons, thus, making it look very disproportional. Plus, I would imagine that those aforementioned parts would snap off once the ship travels at full impulse speed. What does everybody else thinks?

Granted some design re-adjustment would be necessary. But aircraft engeine nacelles attached to wings by thin pylons do not snap off when designed correctly. By just by looking at the overlaying skin of a structure one cannot determine the strength of the supporting structure.

The person proposing the investment of this project, lists his 2 main criteria for chosing the from
of the Enterprise as promotion of inspiration and adventure into space, and promotion of private sector investment into space through tourism and as a space port. He even acknowledges that as a space faring vehicle it might not be the best choice.

I would say go for it. Nothing like having a restaurant in space where one can wake up in the moriing and gaze out through a window to see the stars in all their glory and walking down ( or up) to the cafeteria for bacon and egg breakfast for only $899.99 coffee extra only $275.00 ( subsidized prices of course )