Re: Long post - RE: [OFFICIAL] Freighters/Merchants question

A note on cargo's and containers if I may:

While the sphere is the best shape for mass 'bulk' cargos, this is only 
(really) if it is a cargo with no 'inner' containers. (Bulk foodstuffs,
liquids, 
bulk ore, etc.) As the sphere does not allow a really efficient loading
of 
containers due to curved walls.
(Dome folks have to deal with this 'fact' on a regular basis as most 
furnishings as well as storage items come shaped in a square or
rectangular shape :o)

The elongated hexagon shape is actually a good idea as most of it's
internal 
space is easily subdivided into smaller hexagons.

Another thought is 'stacked' hexagons that can be peeled off the 'stack'
for 
removal. All the hexagons have attachment points on one side for
attachment to 
the 'hardback' (backplane) of the ship and forward and aft attachments
to 
attach them to the 'stack' of the next container.

ISO (International, not Interstellar :o) containers come in an
assortment of 
'styles' depending on what they are to carry and how. The ones I usually

worked with were side-opening, in that one whole 'side' was a set of
doors that 
could be opened to load/unload the container. (Ours were also
'wood-floored' to 
allow us to nail dunnage and bracing to secure the cargo. Others had
eyelet's 
in the floor and ceiling for cargo straps or steel banding.) The others
have 
either end-doors or a combination of the two types. The 'frame of these 
containers is a 'box' of steel beams with connectors at each 'joint' for
connecting to 
crane or truck mounted lifting devices and to interconnect with other 
containers and the securing apparatus of the ship, truck, or rail car.
I should mention there is another type called the 'folding' ISO frame
which 
is basically a bottom frame and two end frames that can fold down when
not 
transporting cargo to allow storage and shipping.

As for 'getting-them-down' devices, with a fairly simple computer
control and 
inflatable drag break structure, (and parafoils) you could have the 
containers themselves enter an atmosphere and land automatically. For an
interface 
craft there are several ways to make a large 'cargo' up/downloader. (In
fact that 
is what one person called such an idea for transporting real 'bulk'
goods down 
to Earth from space. The Downloader was a non-powered glider with the
cargo 
capacity of a standard supertanker. The idea was for getting the oil
from Titan 
to Earth :o)

One would be a crew compartment and engine compartment that is hexagonal
in 
shape and the same size as the 'stacked' modules mentioned above. Since
FTs 
background assumes 'gravitic' control and drives it would be simple to
make an 
engine module using the same dimensions of the cargo modules and use
those to 
lift and lower cargo containers.

C=crew or automated guidance section  X=cargo module  E=engine module

  CXXEXXEXXE

No need for wings or heavy reentry equipment. And also ideal for airless

planets or space-to-space transfer craft.

On the other hand if you need wings and reentry equipment, there was an
idea 
of a 'flatbed' aircraft that was pursued in the mid 80s. It was found
that the 
drag of an aircraft as subsonic speeds was not all that effected whether
the 
body behind the nose section was streamlined or not. This lead to the
idea of 
a low-slung aircraft used for hauling cargo that was either NOT
streamlined at 
all, (the illustration I saw was a 747 sized aircraft hauling a couple
of 
large cranes and heavy earth movers literally rolled onto the 'flatbed'
and 
strapped down and flown :o) or the possibility of a RORO
(Roll-On/Roll-Off) 
container aircraft.
Due to the 'hardback' being only the lower part of the aircraft the need
to 
fit a cargo into the fuselage constraints was less and you could, 
(theoretically anyway) load larger amounts of cargo than the standard
aircraft 'volume' 
would allow. (The engines were mounted above the wings rather than
below. This is 
a usable method, and proven, just not used much.)

A reentry craft could be made the same way. Large wings and a high angle
of 
attack entry would keep the heating on the lee side of the craft, (upper

portions) much lower and allow for an 'open' entry approach. Keeping the
high drag 
attitude until below hypersonic, (probably supersonic too) would keep
the cargo 
from experiencing significant heating.

Just some ideas and thoughts.

Randy