Math needed for 5-week flight from Earth to Mars

[francisdrake]

This is an old post, but an interesting one! I wonder, if the story has been published in the meantime?

Made a stick model based on Staiduk's skectches, see below.
Design liberties I took:
- The crew module turns 180° between cruise and maneuver orientation, as already proposed by dgatsoulis.
- Only one single boom, with a clevis (fork head) to simplify mechanical design. I would also suggest to delete the telescoping, as this is technically complex. Better to add weight into strengthing the trusses rather than complicated mechanics.
- Added heat radiators to the rear section. If the vessel really accelerates at 0.5 g its engine will be blazing hot! I would rather reduce the acceleration to 0.1 g or even lower. This would only extend the powered flight from 1 h to 10 h, but drastically reduce power consumption and mechanical loads on the vessel.

 

[Lisias]

I would rather reduce the acceleration to 0.1 g or even lower. This would only extend the powered flight from 1 h to 10 h, but drastically reduce power consumption and mechanical loads on the vessel.

Being a luxurious vessel, the passengers would be willing to pay the extra cost for more comfort and convenience - 1 hour tied to a chair is way more convenient than 10.

Aesthetics is also a player. Titanic had one, useless, funnel (only three were technically needed) just because having four funnels made her look more powerful.

I think it's feasible that some eye candyness would be used to Princess Astoria just by the sake of it, even by increasing building and operational costs.

 

[francisdrake]

I did not know that about the 4th funnel of the Titanic!

For the comfort of the passengers I'd rotate the passenger module by 180°. So they can walk around during the acceleration phase and do not need to be strapped into the chairs. This seems more convenient that the original 90° tilt.
Then it is not inconvenient if the acceleration takes a few hours longer.

 

[Lisias]

For the comfort of the passengers I'd rotate the passenger module by 180°. So they can walk around during the acceleration phase and do not need to be strapped into the chairs. This seems more convenient that the original 90° tilt.
Then it is not inconvenient if the acceleration takes a few hours longer.

It makes sense, at least for me.

But let me play the Devil's advocate here: how comfortable would be 10 hours under 0.1G? It will probably be fun for a few hours, but I'm unsure if it will be comfortable for 10 hours.

0.5G can be still somewhat uncomfortable (you will have to learn how to walk without jumping and hitting your head on the roof), but since it's the gravity the passengers will experience for the entire journey, it will be something that the passengers will have no option but to bear it (as seasickness on that luxurious transatlantic voyages).

In such 10 hours span, the chances that people will want to go to bathroom, to drink and/or eat will be considerably higher - and I think that for such activities 0.1G would be a big inconvenience.

---------- Post added 08-25-15 at 05:33 PM ---------- Previous post was 08-24-15 at 08:41 PM ----------

I was playing Devil's advocate on my Devil's advocating, and come to this: on the very same Titanic I mentioned, for the sake of "convenience" there were not enough lifesaving boats in case of disaster (that effectively happened against all the accepted odds). It was found that so many boats would clutter the deck and would cause prejudice on passenger's site viewing.

So there must be a point of equilibrium between passenger's comfort and convenience, technical issues and safety demands.