And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
This is demonstrating that artists aren't engineers, nor economists. Tons of pointless airfoil, on a ship that will never see an atmosphere, thus adding tons of deadweight mass the engines still have to move around. Which cost ridiculous sums of money per pound to get them in orbit in the first place. IOW, pretty; but also stupid and farcical.
This is why actual spacecraft look like Skylab, the ISS, and the lunar lander, and not the Enterprise nor Klingon battlecruisers, and why modern aircraft look like they do, and not like steampunk dirigibles.
Actually, we have. Just none with people on them. Yet. So based on what we know, which of the seven or eight closest candidates will require aerodynamic wings, d'ya suppose?
Cool picture, looks like a single stage to orbit vehicle. What is the source material?
ReplyDeleteThis looks like the source: https://deniboy.artstation.com/
DeleteIs it coming or going?
ReplyDeleteLooks like an inter-galacitic tick...
ReplyDeleteLooks like an artist's rendering of a proposed future spaceship. Not a fan of the design.
ReplyDeleteLooks like there's a TOYOTA Emblem on the bottom...
ReplyDeleteCHECK THAT!! It's a Ukrainian Knockoff of a Toyota Emblem. Friggin NAZIs
ReplyDeleteSwordfish? Chainsaw?
ReplyDeleteDo aerodynamics matter in space ?
ReplyDeleteA kinder gentler Klingon cruiser
ReplyDeleteGoing to deliver its payload on the Martians.
ReplyDelete- WDS
after watching an old show about the sr-71 blackbird last night it doesn't look that far fetched.
ReplyDeleteThis is demonstrating that artists aren't engineers, nor economists.
ReplyDeleteTons of pointless airfoil, on a ship that will never see an atmosphere, thus adding tons of deadweight mass the engines still have to move around. Which cost ridiculous sums of money per pound to get them in orbit in the first place.
IOW, pretty; but also stupid and farcical.
This is why actual spacecraft look like Skylab, the ISS, and the lunar lander, and not the Enterprise nor Klingon battlecruisers, and why modern aircraft look like they do, and not like steampunk dirigibles.
Because, you know, we have built so many interplanetary cruisers...
ReplyDeleteActually, we have.
DeleteJust none with people on them. Yet.
So based on what we know, which of the seven or eight closest candidates will require aerodynamic wings, d'ya suppose?