jedidia
shoemaker without legs
So the Avatars are THAT accurate? :shock:
Idea ISV Venture Star (Avatar)
- Thread starter Gerdih
- Start date
So the Avatars are THAT accurate? :shock:
Hey, it'd end up being more trouble taking said accuracy out than it would keeping it in genetically speaking, and I'd imagine it'd be pretty unsettling to the operators when they find that something is... missing... 
Izack
Non sequitur
Considering the restraints on cargo, and how much Pandora matériel had to be manufactured in situ, it's a bit of a stretch to think they have an antimatter production facility in orbit.
Do not want! :leaving:
fsci123
Future Dubstar and Rocketkid
The avatars were screwed up like a rusty drill bit...
It was that bad... Like seriously blue skinned cat monkey human tall things with tails and tails attach to their heads it was pathetic and the ideal that these things would be living in the alpha centauri system...
Good video:
Blue rabbits robot chicken
It was that bad... Like seriously blue skinned cat monkey human tall things with tails and tails attach to their heads it was pathetic and the ideal that these things would be living in the alpha centauri system...
Good video:
Blue rabbits robot chicken
Capt_hensley
Captain, USS Pabilli
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
- Messages
- 841
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
- Location
- Alamogordo
- Website
- www.h-10-k.com
The sources that I'm using for my thesis call the total of the program, without on orbit costs estimate to be closer to 300 billion. Which includes all the tooling, and manufacturing costs, the new facilities that were constructed to make parts, and LVs(not shuttle, but SRB refurb and tanks) but not LV operations and launch costs(shuttle turn around), which were close to 30 billion over the lifetime of the station. Remember we paid for the Italians, and the Russians programs and subsidized the Japanese. Nearly 150 billion alone. Included in that are the sims, and neutral buoyancy trainers, new mission control computers and displays, and upgrades in year 7 for nearly all the electronic infrastructure.
Orbital operations and launch costs were about another 30 billion. I say it's all worth every penny.
However, the estimate on my Gateway station are about 1 Trillion.
Last edited:
Hey, the whole thing would be fine if it wasn't for Alpha Centauri B causing instability issues in Alpha Centauri A's habitable zone... :uhh:
But they were totally ridiculous. Not plausible speculative biology at all.
They're just tall, thin humans with blue skin, catlike facial features, a tail, and a neural tentacle thing. Almost like old style aliens, they could almost be humans with prosthetics (and indeed they are, but they're full-body, computer generated prosthetics for human actors).
There are an infinite number of paths that evolution can take, the human form is but one of them. Already evolve a species of dinosaur that has intellect comparable to a human, and it will look nothing like a human (and no, I'm not talking about the green-skinned 'dinoman' reptoid, I'm talking about a dinosaur with human intellect- it'd probably look more like a big-headed hornbill with arms instead of wings). And this dinosauroid is inexorably more related to a human than an alien organism would be, indeed, the alien organism isn't related to humans at all. The dinosauroid actually shares the most basic traits with humans, but an alien creature need not share any (well, it will likely have analogous structures, but they do not have to be the same or even similar).
District 9's prawns still had the basic form of a human, but they looked- and were animated- like they were true aliens, not humans with stuff stuck onto them. Even in an era where near-photoreal evolutionarily plausible aliens can be created, we are still stuck with... Blue Catpeople. And this leaves the majority of people with the silly notion that everything out there that speaks or thinks or makes cave-paintings, will look at least something like a human. But in reality, something that looks only very vaguely like a human would be a spectacular find, and an entirely convergent evolutionary path so as to look exactly (or nearly, as is the case with something like the Na'vi) like humans, would be so improbable so as to not show up again in the entire universe.
And the "people aren't able to have empathy with a non-humanoid character" is also not entirely true, as it is the point of many nature documentaries, as well as cartoons featuring anthropomorphic animals, to create empathy between the audience and a non-human character. Granted, Avatar is a special case, as the story would have not worked at all if the Na'vi didn't look human.
But the most, most annoying thing of all, is that the Na'vi are not only an example of the same old trope of the humanesque organism, but they don't even fit in with the rest of the life on their planet, itself rather well done despite some of the more outlandish concepts and hollywood depictions.
Either way, I have dragged the thread off-topic with another rambling post... oh my.
I did like the way everything, well, most things (save for really intricate or advanced stuff) were made in-situ on Pandora... it is a really interesting geeky spaceflight parallel.
EDIT:
Capt_hensley: Yeah, I would certainly believe a 300 billion figure for the whole thing... I must say that I think that all the awesome photographs we get from if are worth every penny, but I am sure the average member of the public is wondering where all this groundbreaking research is going to... :shifty:
But they were totally ridiculous. Not plausible speculative biology at all.
They're just tall, thin humans with blue skin, catlike facial features, a tail, and a neural tentacle thing. Almost like old style aliens, they could almost be humans with prosthetics (and indeed they are, but they're full-body, computer generated prosthetics for human actors).
There are an infinite number of paths that evolution can take, the human form is but one of them. Already evolve a species of dinosaur that has intellect comparable to a human, and it will look nothing like a human (and no, I'm not talking about the green-skinned 'dinoman' reptoid, I'm talking about a dinosaur with human intellect- it'd probably look more like a big-headed hornbill with arms instead of wings). And this dinosauroid is inexorably more related to a human than an alien organism would be, indeed, the alien organism isn't related to humans at all. The dinosauroid actually shares the most basic traits with humans, but an alien creature need not share any (well, it will likely have analogous structures, but they do not have to be the same or even similar).
District 9's prawns still had the basic form of a human, but they looked- and were animated- like they were true aliens, not humans with stuff stuck onto them. Even in an era where near-photoreal evolutionarily plausible aliens can be created, we are still stuck with... Blue Catpeople. And this leaves the majority of people with the silly notion that everything out there that speaks or thinks or makes cave-paintings, will look at least something like a human. But in reality, something that looks only very vaguely like a human would be a spectacular find, and an entirely convergent evolutionary path so as to look exactly (or nearly, as is the case with something like the Na'vi) like humans, would be so improbable so as to not show up again in the entire universe.
And the "people aren't able to have empathy with a non-humanoid character" is also not entirely true, as it is the point of many nature documentaries, as well as cartoons featuring anthropomorphic animals, to create empathy between the audience and a non-human character. Granted, Avatar is a special case, as the story would have not worked at all if the Na'vi didn't look human.
But the most, most annoying thing of all, is that the Na'vi are not only an example of the same old trope of the humanesque organism, but they don't even fit in with the rest of the life on their planet, itself rather well done despite some of the more outlandish concepts and hollywood depictions.
Either way, I have dragged the thread off-topic with another rambling post... oh my.
I did like the way everything, well, most things (save for really intricate or advanced stuff) were made in-situ on Pandora... it is a really interesting geeky spaceflight parallel.
EDIT:
Capt_hensley: Yeah, I would certainly believe a 300 billion figure for the whole thing... I must say that I think that all the awesome photographs we get from if are worth every penny, but I am sure the average member of the public is wondering where all this groundbreaking research is going to... :shifty:
Last edited:
liber
Member
Anyone know what's size of Valkyrie?
I find this but not shure is that big.
Size:
80.03 meters wide
101.73 meters long
8.0 meters high
I find this but not shure is that big.
Size:
80.03 meters wide
101.73 meters long
8.0 meters high
River Crab
SpaceX Cheer Captain
That's big...that's bigger than a Space Shuttle Orbiter, and, for a more comparable vessel, both longer and more voluminous than Moach's G42-200...
It seems about right from the size we see it in the film.
It seems about right from the size we see it in the film.
Eli13
Fish Dreamer
I agree with him. That thing was a monster even compared to that command craft.
liber
Member
OK,thanks,I'm converting SketchUp model so was not shure what size to use...
Eli13
Fish Dreamer
looks cool. can't wait to try it.
Yeah, it is really big, and that is supposed to carry 37 tons to a low orbit. The Valkyrie may have a lot of fairy-dust in it, but they certainly got right the sense of scale needed to lift things into orbit... this is no orbital C-130 that can carry the same load as your usual C-130...
I also found this image, which illustrates the scale and dimension of the ISV quite well:
Using the overall length/width figures, it would be relatively easy to figure out the relative dimensions of all the major components.
I also found this image, which illustrates the scale and dimension of the ISV quite well:
Using the overall length/width figures, it would be relatively easy to figure out the relative dimensions of all the major components.
Last edited:
liber
Member
But gravity is not same on Pandora and on Earth,so earth 37 tons weight less there. :lol:
Eli13
Fish Dreamer
I thought Pandora had very similar gravity compared to Earth. I didnt see any floaters ( ) or stressed walking on Pandora.
) or stressed walking on Pandora.
liber
Member
I thought Pandora had very similar gravity compared to Earth. I didnt see any floaters (
It's 20% less gravity than on Earth.
Eli13
Fish Dreamer
Really? I learned something new today.
Yeah, but the physics is the same, 37 tons of mass is still 37 tons of mass. It may be 29.6 tons of weight on the surface, but for most of the trip to orbit, the mass is more important (you have to accelerate the mass, not the weight).
The dV to orbit would be roughly the same as on Earth, maybe a little higher with the denser atmosphere... I think I calculated once that the orbital velocity at a set altitude would be higher than on Earth (for some reason, I am not really sure which), which would make the dV to orbit even higher...
Gravity of 0.8G is already much more than lunar gravity, or even Martian gravity... it would not affect walking or movement that much, but it is a semi valid explanation for the gigantism of the organisms, though that is of course mostly due to Rule of Cool.
The dV to orbit would be roughly the same as on Earth, maybe a little higher with the denser atmosphere... I think I calculated once that the orbital velocity at a set altitude would be higher than on Earth (for some reason, I am not really sure which), which would make the dV to orbit even higher...
Gravity of 0.8G is already much more than lunar gravity, or even Martian gravity... it would not affect walking or movement that much, but it is a semi valid explanation for the gigantism of the organisms, though that is of course mostly due to Rule of Cool.
Last edited:
Eli13
Fish Dreamer
True.
What I don't get is why they just didnt nuke Pandora from orbit after they got pushed out. :facepalm: Stupid.
That would avoid the sequel thats bound to happen.
lol i did like avatar though.
What I don't get is why they just didnt nuke Pandora from orbit after they got pushed out. :facepalm: Stupid.
That would avoid the sequel thats bound to happen.
lol i did like avatar though.
Last edited:
Because nukes in space are [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty"]banned by treaty[/ame]. The corporation in the film is allowed to operate and have its security detail on Pandora if they abide by certain rules.
Nuking stuff might not have been that effective, either, and if someone did decide to nuke Pandora, they would have to wait roughly 7 years to ship the warhead there...
And they're actually trying to avoid killing the natives, because naturally it gets bad press back home, until General Ripper goes insane and takes control of everything...
Nuking stuff might not have been that effective, either, and if someone did decide to nuke Pandora, they would have to wait roughly 7 years to ship the warhead there...
And they're actually trying to avoid killing the natives, because naturally it gets bad press back home, until General Ripper goes insane and takes control of everything...
Ark
New member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 2,200
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Pfft, nukes?
Go refuel your ship, fly out to the nearest asteroid belt, and pick yourself out something in the 500 meter size class to drop on the Smurf's shiny tree at about 15 km/s. Let's see their bows and arrows stop that!
Similar threads
