Poll Which spacecraft do you think is the most realistic

[jinglesassy]

Hello, i am wondering what vessel you think is the most realistic from the poll choices.

 

[Pilot7893]

Where's the default Dragonfly option?

 

[Urwumpe]

Where can I vote: all of them is made of unobtainium and handwavium.

 

[jinglesassy]

if they were possible which would be the most realistic

 

[Urwumpe]

None of them. The list of unrealistic things in all vessels is soo long, you can be happy if they are not less realistic than the NCC-1701.

 

[garyw]

if they were possible which would be the most realistic

But they are not so it's a pointless question.

 

[Dambuster]

I went for DGIV since I've heard that it would actually be able to fly in real life, not sure about the others though.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I don't know about the fuel source, or the passenger capacity, but isn't XR-2 based on the SR-71?
But of the Orbiter vehicles (and this is just me...), I think the Dragonfly isn't too far off, and the ShuttleA if it were space based only.

 

[jedidia]

only optics. The technology in the XR2 is the same as in the other XR's, and therefore radically different from the SR-71.

DGIV might be the most realistic of them if you fly it on minimal settings. But then it won't be an STO, you'll have to launch it with boosters. (or did anyone ever get the DGIV in orbit with something like close to realistic settings?)

 

[Oceanic]

take the DG-IV, remove two passengers, remove the ejection system, remove the payload-bay, remove the hover-engine, decrease the power of the RCS dramatically, launch on a rocket and only with OMS engines.

this might be possible somewhere in the future but still unobtainium and handwavium need to discovered first.

 

[RisingFury]

The DGIV has the biggest chances. It has nowhere near enough fuel to get to orbit, but if you strap a couple of boosters on it... it might. The XR1 is kinda the same shape and possesses similar flight characteristics.

I've been thinking of building a RC XR5 next summer, but the CG might be a problem... the lift attack point is way far back and the nose is heavy. Might need canards...

The XR2 just doesn't have the wing area to fly effectively.

 

[Andy44]

I would start by picking whichever one of them has the lowest Isp, since that's the biggest fiction of any of the DG series.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

The XR2 just doesn't have the wing area to fly effectively.

I agree, but the F-4 Phantom is proof that if you give a brick a set of engines big enough, it'll fly.

 

[TMac3000]

I would say Shuttle-A (if you avoid the stock Earth-launch scenario like the plague, and start/end all missions from an airless body or space station), and the Dragonfly (though it has no main engine, and is therefore little more than a giant UMMU/EVA pod).

 

[Usonian]

...made of unobtainium and handwavium.

This begs for another poll: Which of these materials is more realistic?

Or is Handwavium a manufacturing process?

 

[RisingFury]

I agree, but the F-4 Phantom is proof that if you give a brick a set of engines big enough, it'll fly.

The problem is the CG......


XR2's only effective wing area are the wing tips, outward of the engines and a little bit inward of the engines. That puts the lift attack point quite far back...

It would probably fly well during reentry, having to hold 40° angle because the body is quite wide, but it wouldn't hold a ~10° glide slope for sure... and the whole thing would be nose heavy.

 

[Andy44]

This begs for another poll: Which of these materials is more realistic?

Or is Handwavium a manufacturing process?

Well, Urwumpe was using "handwavium" in the wrong context. Handwavium is not a material; it's a field of science, like physics or biology.

According to the rules of handwavium, Heisenberg's Principle can be "compensated" (Star Trek transporter) and relativity can be ignored. Also, it's easy to build artificial gravity decks that not only transcend physics, but also continue working years after a ship has been powered down and left as a derelict.

And in the case of the DG vehicles, handwavium is the scientific principle which allows a small rocket engine to have a ludicrous exhaust velocity without melting the structure of the plane's tail.

 

[Eagle]

The XR series become 'realistic' once you downrate the engines in thrust and ISP/Delta v. They're supposed to be nuclear powered and scram engines really are a godsend on ascent. LEO only without refueling.

The DGIV on 'realistic' thrust and delta v settings can't make orbit on its own and needs a launcher.

The retro and hover thrusters are rather unrealistic as well.

 

[Hielor]

Well, Urwimpe was using "handwavium" in the wrong context. Handwavium is not a material; it's a field of science, like physics or biology.

According to the rules of handwavium, Heisenberg's Principle can be "compensated" (Star Trek transporter) and relativity can be ignored. Also, it's easy to build artificial gravity decks that not only transcend physics, but also continue working years after a ship has been powered down and left as a derelict.

And in the case of the DG vehicles, handwavium is the scientific principle which allows a small rocket engine to have a ludicrous exhaust velocity without melting the structure of the plane's tail.

From wikipedia, which of course is never ever wrong P):

The fictional material handwavium is sometimes referred to in situations where the solution requires access to a substance that is physically impossible to create as it defies physics but is convenient to solving a problem in the story. (See also unobtainium, which would probably be possible to create, but only by a great deal of research, development, time, effort, or money, none of which the speaker intends to explain at the moment.)

 

[sunshine135]

None of the above. I vote the Space Shuttle.