HOME | DD
Do-Mo β Space battle cruiser...again...
#3d #3ds #battlecruiser #big #centrifuge #concept #fusion #future #gauss #model #nuclear #realistic #rocket #saturn #space #spaceship #titan #gimbal #vls #rocketpunk
Published: 2018-12-07 18:11:50 +0000 UTC; Views: 16127; Favourites: 209; Downloads: 111
Redirect to original
Description
Felt like doing something with this one again, but in the end, I just slightly retouched the textures on it.
Old image: Link
Related content
Comments: 55
Large chunks of this design was very fast and loose, it's a bit of an old design, from when I knew a lot less than I do now, but at the same time, I'm rather fond of it, so I tend to handwave at it a lot. The main issue with the nozzle is that it's SEVERELY undersized, with it being smaller than Daedalus one, but thrust being something like 10 times stronger. Yes there are supposed to be droplet radiators here, but hardware issues prevented me from rendering them, to make them look better I'd always animate them with particles, but that takes a serious toll on rendering times. Those are also highly undersized.
Thrusters stick out so much since the idea was for this to be a "maneuverable battlecruiser", despite the bulky look, it's still supposed to be soft, so preferably avoiding slugs instead of tanking them. They are quite large due to my tendency to exaggerate details. In the same vein, if you zoom in, you'll notice bolts and nuts the size of truck tires, excellent for mass reduction, as you may imagine :)
π: 0 β©: 1
Actually, there are a number of parameters for nozzle design and you might be able to go for a smaller one, or justify this one, if you have the proper caveats. Β Daedalus design was thermally limited, and if you add cooling you can go smaller if you want.
π: 0 β©: 1
The idea here was that the nozzle would be cooled, similar to an RS-25, but on a larger scale (hence so many doodads on the bell exterior), though I still think this one is too small for the thrust. I vaguely remember reading an article on that very topic on Atomic Rockets site, and there were diameters mentioned, with active cooling included, but mine were still WAY of. I don't mind at this point. For my own fictional universe this is pretty much the peek technology, so either way it has some handwavium included. The next time I do an ICF engine bell I really like the idea of making a giant one, and trying to make a functionally looking ship around it!
π: 0 β©: 0
This desing is cool, but I think that something more similar to the military designs shown in The Expanse would make more sense.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you. Could you elaborate on that? Which part of the design are you referring to?
π: 0 β©: 1
The entire ship. No offense, your ship is cool, but I think the designs used in The Expanse are better. Look, for example, to the Donnager ( expanse.fandom.com/wiki/Donnag⦠), the Rocinante ( expanse.fandom.com/wiki/Rocina⦠) and the Scirocco ( expanse.fandom.com/wiki/Sciroc⦠). In comparison with them, your ship looks much like a crude, early stage prototype or an improvised warship.
π: 0 β©: 1
No offense taken! 
I like The Expanse, and I will completely agree with you that their ships are prettier(much much better looking). It would be weird if they weren't, since those are professionally made for a tv show, while this is something I do as a hobby. The thing is that it's hard to compare them directly, similar to how it's hard to compare, let's say, ships from The Expanse and those from Star Trek, they just went for a different style. When it comes to realism, The Expanse has that tone, however what is shown is very far from it, with their designs having some highly illogical features. Which shouldn't be a problem since the show still looks great, and everything fits nicely in its universe. What I'm doing is leaning a lot more to a realistic side, still far from being completely there, but closer than The Expanse. In a way, if you're comparing this to a crude, early prototype (relative to The Expanse), it actually comes as a compliment, since that is something I was going for, most of the ships I made have very visible and recognizable exposed parts, with crude non-streamlined hulls. For me, it's more fun to design something like this, relying more on shapes than textures.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, in that case, keep up the good work! 
π: 0 β©: 1
I took a lot of inspiration from Orion's Arm Universe, even before I started posting some of the stuff here, especially from stuff made by William Black. So don't worry, I'm already keeping my eye on those designs
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you so much for making us happy with your work! Very few people focus on realism and do not forget about radiators in space ...
I look forward to your next work!
Such a question: capillary radiators were shown on the old version, but they are not here. I guess that they are simply hidden, but after all, in the movement, they are best able to cope with their duties. Why not turn them on?
π: 0 β©: 1
That's a very nice comment to receive!
The model itself is completely unchanged from the previous version, the only thing that's been changed are the textures, so it still has all of its heat sinks as before. Those radiators are foldable liquid droplet type ones. And why they aren't deployed in this imaged? Lack of time. As you may have noticed, I like to render these images in the huge 8K resolution, that way, you can always zoom in and see the details, or even print it out if you want. Obviously it takes a while to render in this size, especially with all the shadows, bumps, subtle effects...and my own lack of optimization in some areas. And then come the droplet radiators, because I want to keep these models ready for animation (if I ever decide to animate them, which I hope will happen eventually) those radiators aren't just a texture, they are made with particle generators, and that's a lot of particles to render, with all of them having a mildly reflective texture and glow on them, they more than double the render time(which is already 1h+). And I just didn't feel like leaving my computer to run that, when I had other things to do, and I don't really have a top of the line PC, so it does occasionally crash if I make it render something like that, making me waste several hours for nothing.
Not sure if you where interested in this behind the scenes part, but there you have it
π: 0 β©: 1
No, you are completely wrong. All of us (and I am 100% sure in this) are very interested in how such large and detailed works are created. Believe me, very few artists do something so detailed and with such a large resolution, so I really liked your answer and was interesting.
And once you said about the "animation", then this question: would you like something complicated (like opening radiators and rotating residential compartments) or something simple (just rotating around its axis)?
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you very much for the kind words, it really is nice to hear stuff like that, especially since I believe I'm eclipsed by many other great artists, like William-Black , MacRebisz or Deamoria ... just to name a few...
No, much more complicated(or megalomaniacal, which ever you prefer), I would like to make animations of these ships doing stuff, like fighting each other, or performing some interesting maneuvers. As for those animations you had in mind, the models themselves already have all those parts animated in program(since I like realism, I like to make some parts with simple motions already animated, just to make sure everything fits right, and to make it easier to pose for images), but I don't really render entire sequences. Again, it would take a while, and it doesn't seem interesting enough(to me) to justify the time investment. Here, this is one of those test renders sendvid.com/ndc8pakm a very old version of this ship, older than even the first post I made on deviantart, obviously it's very rough, the droplets are to fast(or nonexistent), but you get the idea. I believe that's also the longest of those animations, other are usually just a few seconds or of a single specific part.
π: 0 β©: 1
Em. Of course, the names you mentioned are very well known, but I still have a slightly different opinion about you
The animation is just awesome, and you donβt need to say that itβs simple! This animation shows the many highlights of the ship action! Shooting and maneuvering / moving is great, but such animation is very important in understanding the work and in a more vivid and visual way to help the imagination! So I also vote for such a "simple" animation
And such questions:
1. You did not think to create a ship that will fight in orbit? For example, a ship for dropping amphibious capsules or a ship firing kinetic shells at the surface?
2. Perhaps I am mistaken, but you do not use the Laser in your ships. Why wouldn't they use it?
3. We would not have thought of making a model range of standard cargo containers (those cubes on ships) and their fillings. For example a hangar for shuttles, auxiliary and so on?
(sorry for my bad english (((if something is not clear - ask again.)
π: 0 β©: 1
1. As for firing kinetic shells, or drooping just about anything on the surface, pretty much any ship could do that, it should be easier than hitting a moving target in space, so, even this ship could do it. And for fighting in orbit or "amphibious" capsules, I started doing something like that (I referred to it as "variable environment attack craft"), but still haven't finished it. It should be finished in the near future, but I can never be sure about those things, since I'm not very organized about this stuff. I try to steer away from making orbiters(even though I did one in the past), since realistic looking aerodynamics are much more demanding then those for a space faring vessel. I also started working on some other stuff that could work in this category, but for Venus, Titan, or even gas giants, which would be a combination of a zeppelin and a spaceship, that should also be finished sometimes in the near future(maybe).
2. Generally I'm not a fan of lasers, lots of waste heat, and other problems with them, and while they are more precise, it may be harder to block a kinetic slug. I did make a Casaba Howitzer(which is kind of similar to a laser), which can be seen carried externally on the last pirate ship I made. Also, I started making(but never finished) an "anti laser drone", which would be a drone(obviously) that when deployed would try to position itself between the ship and a laser targeting it, made with ablating materials and multi layered armor plates, intended to act as a mobile shield. So, it could happen that I make a "laser destroyer" or a "particle weapons cruiser", they would still fit in, it would just mean that these ships so far where dedicated to different roles. For now, I prefer warships that are similar to the modern day naval warships, with similar tactics in mind, for me personally it's more interesting to imagine(not saying that the alternative is boring).
3. Those cargo boxes are my version for an evolution of intermodal container, acting as an external extension, like an external hard drive on a computer(before, we also had external modems, external sound cards etc.), but they could have different purposes other than cargo. Like you mentioned, they could also be hangars, which I did show in a very old post here (this one). Another one that is close to being finished is a prison version...kind of cruel sounding, but basically, a prison box in which prisoners can safely be transported and moved between ships, without them ever actually leaving the box. So yeah, they could be pretty much whatever, even additional weapon systems (like the modern day Russian "club-k" system)
π: 0 β©: 1
1. Wow! I look forward to it! It will be very interesting to look at such devices, especially on airships, in your performance! In general, the idea that a spacecraft can shoot at the surface is most likely true only for "Siegfried" with its main caliber "2x 1500mm Gauss Gun". The rest of the ships, for example, the same "Ann Veronica", the caliber of the projectile does not allow to successfully pass the atmosphere and cause significant damage to the enemy. Although this refers more to planets with a dense atmosphere (such as the Earth). But that's my personal opinion
2. Understandable. But, in theory, a chemical laser should cope well with the removal of heat by simply discharging waste reagents into space. But the drone is interesting, the truth against shells and rockets, it will not be as effective.
3. Great! I look forward to the new boxing! But I asked about the device boxes. For example, are they airtight or not? Or how is leaving and getting into the box? Is there a special mast for mooring or only thanks to the maneuvering engines of the ships? The same question about maintenance: is it inherently a garage or is it possible to fully repair / re-equip a ship?
π: 0 β©: 1
1. As far as I understand "orbital bombardment", direct fire would be highly inefficient. Actually, if you did manage to pull it off, it would cause a lot of damage, but the projectile would need to be chunky, since most of it would evaporate upon reentry. Also, you waste a lot of energy by directly shooting at things, it's unnecessary. A better option would be to "de-orbit" something, basically, placing it in orbit, orienting it the way you want to(so it falls on the rights spot), and letting it drop. It would still hit with high speed and energy, even more so if it had a booster to accelerate(or maneuver) it near the end. Another benefit is that it doesn't need to be anything special, it could just be a rock, a bunch of rocks, metal rods... Directed meteors, dangerous stuff. Something even civilian ships could drop. Another option is to use missiles in a similar fashion the way modern ICBMs are supposed to work. If you're already in space, it really shouldn't be hard to "bombard" someone on a surface of a planet.
2. Like I said, this is mostly a matter of preference in what I do, it could change in the future.
3. Oh, I misunderstood you there. Yes, the boxes are supposed to be airtight, obviously, weather they are pressurized or not is a matter of preference (I guess some cargo would benefit from a complete lack of air or just some gases?). All boxes have my "universal docking port" on them, the circle you can see at the top of them in this image, you can see the same circle as a part on every docking port of every ship I ever made, the docking ports have different sizes and components on them, but they all have this 1,8m round segment on them, so any ship(or any box) can dock with another, and this is also how you would enter the box from a ship(or another box). As for attaching or detaching them, this ship would use its bug ships to do it (Harp ), you can also see that Carthage cargo ship has some similar(but larger) ships to do it (example ), an also, there are these , which I really need to redo...I imagine it's better for large ships to carry those little guys to do the carrying and help with docking etc, they could also perform maintenance and other tasks. But also, you can see here on this one that some cargo ships would also have cranes on them to help load the boxes on other ships, so if I made a fleet tender, it would carry a mix of bug ships, and cranes.
Not sure if I understood your last question, correct me if I didn't
π: 0 β©: 1
1. Ok. I understood. Although my personal opinion is a little different. Yet shelling from orbit is relatively cheap and (compared to missiles) with numerous Reelgan shells is much more effective. You can hit a greater number of nodes and points in the defense / supply area, without its complete destruction (such as when hit by a meteorite). In this case, the accompanying damage will be much (in theory) less than from the fall of the meteorite. And in terms of costs (again, in theory), the transport of Reelgan shells is cheaper and simpler than rockets. They take up less space and are not so demanding on storage conditions. But this is again my opinion.
2. Ok. Got it.
3. Great! For such reasonableness we love you!
No, all is fine. You answered my question. Boxes are sealed, have the ability to move between them and a variety of goods. This is quite enough to understand that in one box can be a variety of raw materials, and in the next a small workshop for the production of the necessary consumables for the ship.
And one more question. In your work in only one ship, namely the Laurus Nobilis class, there is a closed system of life-support. Do you plan other ships with such a system?
π: 0 β©: 1
I think that system on Laurus Nobilis is a bit small for such crew size, so it might not be enough to fully sustain them, mostly "assist" them in extending their supplies, and give them something green to work on and be around, while in such deep space. Though it might be enough, I'm not sure, I didn't think too much about it back then, and I still don't know specifics on how much volume would you need. I imagine many of my ships would have something like that on the inside, since many of them are envisioned as something privately owned, so it would probably be quite common to have internal rotating hydroponic garden, fish tank, algae tank, or some mix of it. It makes sense, it gives you something to take care of, might clean air, and provides food - lowering your expenses. But, you probably meant if I was going to make stuff that has such systems integrated into its design, and externally visible? And yes, I do plan on doing more stuff like that, one idea that I had was a "floating sea aquarium", a ship with a large self sustaining aquarium, containing fish of varying sizes, it could be a floating restaurant, or a tourist attraction...however, so much water would be too much mass to move around easily, so this will likely become a space station. I also had a similar idea about a floating "park", with trees and fruits inside, but that too will probably become a space station. Other than that, I have yet to make more large deep-space ships, or nomadic space colonies, both of which I do plan on, and those would definitely need to have closed of, or self sustaining systems on them.
π: 0 β©: 1
1. Well, approximately calculate how much volume is needed for a renewable system.
Attention, then very theoretical calculations!
Let us take as a basis (as the most successful and having the most complete information) the Soviet experiment on creating the BIOS-3 (this ) closed-loop system of 1972. In a room equal to a volume of 100 cubic meters (two rooms of 20 square meters each and a height of 2.5 meters) managed to create a closure of water and oxygen by 99% and food by 60% (although there are other data) for three people. It was mainly vegetable food, and meat (the remaining 40%) in the form of canned food. Let me remind you again, it was 1972.
Now about the protein / meat component. The "BIOS-3" experiment, unlike the Chinese experiment, did not have a protein component. This was intended to be done later, but was never implemented. By the protein component, I mean either insects or fish / birds / animals. Personally, I vote for the fish, as their content will occur in the pool, and this in turn is a reserve of water. It is always possible to reduce the number of fish, and then increase it, but it is very useful to give the ship additional amounts of fuel, especially when it is very far from gas stations! Although the easiest way to get animal protein is just insects. They will (theoretically) feed on plant waste. Such a plant-> insect chain is much easier to implement and loses less than a plant-> insect-> fish / bird / animal chain.
And of course it is worth talking about the positive and negative side of such a system. In the negative side is to write down its size. It will be quite large: for the 20 members of the crew of Laurus, Nobili will need about 700 cubic meters (taken with a large margin for unforeseen situations). It's a lot or a little hard to say. According to approximate calculations, the same volume can be clogged with freeze-dried rations, and there must be some place left. But unlike this diet, we will have to keep more water, oxygen supply and a lot of consumables for cleaning. It is also worth considering the psychological effect of such a system. The people participating in the BIOS-3 experiment had fresh bread every day (due to 14 ages of wheat) and fresh vegetables (6 ages). It seems to me that such a diet (from fresh produce) is much more beneficial for the crew than canned food.
And some conclusions.
Theoretically, with the introduction of planting / care / harvesting automation, the multi-tier cultivation of some plants and the introduction of the protein component of closure will be 99% for water and air, and 95% for food. The remaining 5% are such things as tea, coffee, sugar and various exotic products that are included in the menu for the psychological support of the crew. For example, canned pineapples or milk. It is also worth remembering that losses in such a system, although minimal, will occur. But it will be much easier to fill them up, just add a little fertilizer or carbon dioxide to the system, which is very convenient for long-term missions.
2. Yes, as you have noticed, I am wondering whether such systems will be visually (or in the description of the ship).
As you rightly noted, such systems will most likely (partially) be on the ship as a supplement to the diet, supply the crew with fresh food, help clean air / water and reduce costs for consumables. The simplest of this is of course chlorella for air purification. Such a balloon will not be very noticeable, and may well be hidden inside the ship, as one of the systems. Something more complicated, like the same greenery on the crew's table, will already require a visual indication of the presence of a hydroponic farm.
You have a very correctly shown such a system: it is divided into several rooms independent of each other, which in the event of some unforeseen occurrence (illness or accident) will not allow colonists to die from hunger. Approximately must be with a swimming pool with fish. Several swimming pools with fish, and one decorative (open) for the psychological relief of the crew.
3. Wow! Big spaceships for deep space! Space nomadic colonies !!! This is just great !!! It is incredible and very intriguing! I hope I will see it in your performance !!! I really hope so !!
(Oops, sorry for such a big message. I just find the closed life support systems very interesting.)
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't mind long messages, and this was an interesting read. By this account, it seems like I've actually allocated enough volume for food production on Laurus Nobilis, those 6 cylinders have a volume of about 1500 cubic meters (250 cubic meters each), and there is an additional beneficial circumstance, that ship is supposed to be a "hopper" that goes from cometh to cometh, collecting water ice(and possibly other volatiles), purifying it and converting it to fuel, oxygen and water, which increases a margin of error even more. Basically, giving the crew more comfort. So it turns out that they may possibly even have room for some plants that would be there just for their psychological support, which was also proven to be beneficial since, if I'm remembering this correctly, people in those experiments tended to spend their free time with plants, in a way bonding with them. That, or more variety.
Thank you, this was useful data, I haven't done research into this, but I probably would have at some point, so its good to have BIOS-3 article for references. The closest I've done to that was researching what bare minimums a human needs to survive, which to my amazement turned out to be - extremely minimum. With reserves, minimums come to less than 4kg of matter a day (food, water, oxygen), with a large portion of it(97,5% for water) being recyclable in some way and reusable for consumption. It wouldn't be pleasant, but with right management, a human could be sustained by expending a really small amount of volume for storage and some effective machinery.
π: 0 β©: 1
Wow. 1500 cubic meters is enough to grow food for 20 crew members. Even there will be a place for a "green corner". True, it is very important to remember the lessons of Biosphere-2. (This ) and her mistakes. Trees become fragile without wind, and oxygen levels can drop dramatically due to the uncontrolled growth of organisms. Therefore, the place to relax is likely to be quite difficult in the device. Or vice versa, a simple clearing with bushes and grass.
Yes, you correctly remember that a lot of time was spent on sowing / care / cleaning. Therefore, I identified one of the conditions for increasing the percentage of renewable resources - automation of planting / care / harvesting processes. Like that. (It )
I agree. A closed life support system allows you to implement "we are carrying 100 kilograms of fertilizers which will be enough for ten years, and not 100 kilograms of food, which is enough for a week." The main problem, as I said before, is precisely in the size of the system itself and the problems in its maintenance. The same chlorella very well processes carbon dioxide into oxygen, but it is difficult to eat it. Theoretically, if the chlorella itself is treated with bacteria that will decompose it, then it can very easily be put into circulation. Or as food for plants, or as food for insects (which in turn will eat fish). Well, it is also very useful to introduce a small force of gravity for ... Oops. I was brought back again
Thank you so much for talking! If you have questions about the life support system and its components, feel free to contact us! (I can answer most of the questions even today
π: 0 β©: 0
A much more realistic design than most out there.
π: 0 β©: 1
Inspired by realism. Even though I tend to take some liberties and hand wave around stuff I know little about, it's still interesting to try and create something interesting within realistic boundaries.
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you! I don't really like reposting the same stuff, but this one just turned up so nicely that I had to upload it
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you.
I'm surprised by how many people still like this one...
π: 0 β©: 0
As long as no one goes over my helmet!
π: 1 β©: 0
Looks like something from 2001: A Space Odyessey.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's good, it's a style I'm leaning towards. However, I doubt I'll ever be able to achieve the gorgeous elegancy Discovery had.
π: 0 β©: 1
Discovery was nice, considering the era when it was envisioned.
"Open the pod bay doors, Hal."
π: 0 β©: 1
I'd say it holds up really well, even in current era. Back then, I can't imagine what it would be like to see something like that, especially with prevalence od space enthusiasm.
"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
π: 0 β©: 1
Considering we're still using 'Wiley E. Coyote' technology just to get into space.
"What's the problem?"
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh no, I believe the CR90 is a much much cooler and iconic design, no way would this compare to it. Especially with the perfect amount of greebles over its hull. Besides, this is supposed to be the "big ship", very different from the rebel corvette. Still, I guess its good if this brings to mind ideas of such awesome ships
π: 0 β©: 0
Enders Game ? If not, either way, looks cool !
π: 0 β©: 1
No, it's my own design, a pretty old one, just retextured a bit. I didn't really consider it, but it does have some similarities with Enders Games spaceship.
And thank you
π: 0 β©: 0
Interesting design as always. Thought about stereo-pair of two sensor masts myself - but in this case, doesn't it being shadowed by the forward RCS?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
And thank you again! This was the very first ship I ever posted on deviantart, still think it's one of the better ones I made.
Forward and aft RCS towers come to the same height, which is just under the sensor "dome" on the mast, so they wouldn't shadow it, however RCS exhaust would. If, for some reason, it was very important to not shadow over it, other thrusters could compensate quite easily, or smaller thrusters that are imbedded into the towers could be used(hard to see them, but they're there). Still, with the ridiculously oversized forward facing sensors, sensors on the mast wouldn't really need to scan anything in the front of the ship, instead they would primarily be used to scan the area above, bellow, and on the sides of the ship. There are more sensors to cover any and all blind spots, hard to see them, but there are some stationary ones between the spherical fuel tanks, behind the aft RCS towers, those long flat things. There are those domes on the head of the ship, near the VLS silos. And finally, there are some decently sized ones on those huge cannons, those can rotate independently.
π: 0 β©: 1
You kinda inspiring me to get back to modeling myself, heheh.
I see. But considering this is primarily artillery ship, I suppose, that main task of the mast sensors (mix of HF doppler radar and facette-shaped 360deg AESA?) is range aquisition for targeting. This is the only task, which may require stereo sensors - everything else is more lukely to de solved with some smaller sensor arrays, embedded into the hull. And in this case - it will have some problems "looking" directly forward on target with extremely sharp to-axis angle (directly in front of the ship). I am not aware of supposed tactics, though, so it may not be a problem.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
1 | Next =>