OrbitHangar
Addon Comments
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 3,832
- Reaction score
- 13
- Points
- 0
OHM Station Plipinas-1
- Thread starter OrbitHangar
- Start date
Pipcard
mikusingularity
This person used [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=4075"]Station Shipyard[/ame], and frankly, I think it needs less solar panels. I don't want to hate this guy, though.
Vast fury
New member
yeah, napalm's right... At least we would at least get a glimpse: dry:
Capt_hensley
Captain, USS Pabilli
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
- Messages
- 841
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
- Location
- Alamogordo
- Website
- www.h-10-k.com
For my Gateway Station...
I did some figures based on "tongue in cheek" 5 year near tech, and got the same quantity of panels as ISS(16) with only a 7% size increase(length). The productivity and life span were dramatically increased from ISS @nearly 20% effective at 20 years on orbit to Gateway @over 90% effective at 50 years on orbit. Gateway is in a higher(GEO) orbit and is exposed to greater radiation factors which promote degradation, the near tech figures seem to withstand this test.
The figures come from the past 50 years trend in making better cells to collect energy, and better materials to stunt decay and loss of effectiveness.
I'd say based on the structure size in the pic above 70% fewer panels are needed if the same figures I used turn out to be right.
The control system required alone for the above, would be mind boggling at best, and nearly impossible to maintain. However the quantity of modules seems OK. IMO It has even less than my Gateway station.
I did some figures based on "tongue in cheek" 5 year near tech, and got the same quantity of panels as ISS(16) with only a 7% size increase(length). The productivity and life span were dramatically increased from ISS @nearly 20% effective at 20 years on orbit to Gateway @over 90% effective at 50 years on orbit. Gateway is in a higher(GEO) orbit and is exposed to greater radiation factors which promote degradation, the near tech figures seem to withstand this test.
The figures come from the past 50 years trend in making better cells to collect energy, and better materials to stunt decay and loss of effectiveness.
I'd say based on the structure size in the pic above 70% fewer panels are needed if the same figures I used turn out to be right.
The control system required alone for the above, would be mind boggling at best, and nearly impossible to maintain. However the quantity of modules seems OK. IMO It has even less than my Gateway station.
Last edited:
