<text> STUDY PROCEDUREAsk each student to choose a science fiction technical device to analyze. Outline for the student a suggested study approach:(1) Study existing technology (space shuttles, space stations, lasers, robots) similar to the selected item.(2) Decide what about the studied item is like today's technology.(3) Decide what about the studied item is unlike today's technology.(4) Explain what new way of doing things has to exist in order for the science fiction item to work.(5) Finally, for extra credit, design (add to the original sketch) items overlooked by the science fiction author that should have been included to make the science fiction device work.</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text>Learn With Science Fiction/Space Technology</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_26881.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> CONCEPTStudents analyze space science fiction rockets, robots, etc. found in movies, comics, and novels. They are asked to find: (1) What about these devices is possible with today's technology? (2) What about these devices is probably not possible with today's technology? (3) What new technology is needed to make these science fiction devices work? </text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text>Learn With Science Fiction/Space Technology</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_26871.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> BACKGROUNDFrom an editorial letter to AD ASTRA, June 1990:"Science fiction is not only the best way to predict the future, it has also helped to create the civilian space program."Name any other method of attempting to forecast the future...including the work of professional scientists...Read their predictions five or ten years after they were written. Pitiful! Science fiction writers, on the other hand, have predicted virtually every aspect of our modern worldΓÇöoften 30 or more years before the events came to pass." Ben Bova, Chairman, National Space Society Board</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text>Learn With Science Fiction/Space Technology</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_26394.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> But before criticizing Bob, consider the Shuttle Derived Launch System sketched by designers for the Lunar/MarsExploration Initiative. The vehicle is said to utilize five SSMEs and four SRBs. But alas, these five engines have lost their appetite. They dine from the same sized External Tank (ET) which previously fed three SSMEs. The ET should be drawn as much taller or broader than depicted in the sketch. When the responsible engineers were asked about this, they responded, "It is just an artist's concept, not backed by analysis." This is, perhaps, thesame explanation most sci-fi illustrators offer.</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text>Shuttle Derived Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_41457.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Advanced Shuttle: Drawn by Bob McCall</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> The Shuttle drawn by Bob McCall, one of the most accurate illustrators from a technical point of view, has a sizing problem often made by NASA advanced spacecraft designers as well. Adding additional engines to an existing spacecraft does not necessarily enhance the capability proportionally. In this case, ten Main Engines (SSMEs) are shown instead of the three presently used. In order to benefit from the additional thrust, the volume of the cargo bay must be somewhat larger than shown. The upscaling of the cargo bay appears to be about 150% judging from the perspective shown. Yet, ten engines would indicate a capability of placing 165,000 pounds in orbit rather than 50,000. The volume of the Shuttle payload bay should be 230% larger, rather than just the 150% shown. Also, Bob's configuration would be a challenge at lift-off. Lengthening the present External Tank (ET) for added fuel would make it as tall as a 50 story building. Seven SRBs would be needed, and more than five are impossible with the ET's present circumference.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_10691.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The sketch is inaccurate in showing Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSMEs) operating without an External Tank (ET). Such a maneuver would use the Orbital Maneuvering System (OMS) engines or the Reaction Control System (RCS) jets, not SSMEs. Firing SSMEs in such a hair-pin turn over the short distance shown (90 degree yaw at 100% SSME thrust) would destroy the Orbiter. Also, loss of oxygen from the Station would be enormous. Station personnel are shown working on the Shuttle in an oxygen atmosphere .</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text>Shuttle as Depicted in "The New Wave"</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_26086.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The hangered Shuttle being serviced in a space station hanger has many technical problems, including: (1) no spinning artificial gravity system is indicated, yet all walk erect under a g-force on the station hanger floor; (2) the Orbiter is also not tethered though it is stationary on the hangar floor; (3) the volume of oxygen (air) within the hangar is quite large, as witnessed by the spacesuitless servicing people; and (4) at the opening of the hangar door, the outrushing air would blow the Shuttle into the partially opened door, unless vent ports slowly released the interior atmosphere (no such ports are shown on the space station though four vents are accurately drawn on the side of the Shuttle). These are used to vent Earth's atmosphere to space during Shuttle ascent. The loss of such a large amount of atmosphere would be a very poor space station design practice. Put the service personnel in spacesuits.</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text>Shuttle as Depicted in "The New Wave"</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_9660.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Imperial Space Explorer Ship (Layzell)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> The ultimate communication antenna is draw by the artist. Itis the size of a ground-based antenna rather than a spacecraft type.Its size would prove difficult to stow, if not impossible. It wouldlop-side the vehicle c.g. and be torn off in atmospheric flight, especially in the deployed position shown. A number of descent rockets suspend the craft above the planetsurface, which is too rugged for landing. Note the pontoon-like landing pods for sleding into a landing. This, of course, would not work for rugged terrain. The LEM (Lunar Excursion Module) used a descent engine to suspend the craft above the lunar surface in the event of rough terrain. The purpose of the rear sphere is a mystery. Perhaps, it rotatesto and fro, right and left, about the circular tunnel as a thrust bubble, allowing the rear rocket port to be directed, providing guidance.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_4459.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The saucer-shaped living/crew quarters was included by theauthors to appeal to the flying saucer craze. Originally, the saucer was to be detachable. Though the initial Star Trek series failed to detach the saucer in any of the episodes, the later series has included episodes where the saucer detaches. The cylindrical module also holds crew and serves as the centralstructure to which the two propulsion modules attach. The outrigger propulsion pods feature antimatter propulsion, a technology which has not yet been achieved, though possible on paper. If achieved, the ISPs of such engines would exceed cryogenic (OX/H2) propulsion by factors of a 1,000. An impulse drive is alluded to as is a molecular/atomic decomposition/recomposition technology ("Beam me up, Scotty.")</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_16241.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The purpose of the generation ship is to explain how men cross the light year distances to the stars, an impossible trip even with atomic propulsion approaches. The solution is simply to draw a world-craft travelling in space. Other solutions include Faster Than Light Drive (FTL), an impossibility based on the theory of relativity set forth by Einstein.Suspended animation or hibernation is proposed to remove the needfor large amounts of food and water for the centuries long trip, buttwo centuries in a deep freeze makes a dull trip for the spacetraveler and reader. Then, who wants to awake in a microwave oven?The generation ship makes a better story: a world in space withits unique social problems and ecological challenges. More unbelievable than the impossibility of placing a billion ton space world on a ten mile a second trip to the stars would be finding people to take the trip knowing they would never arrive. Noah had faith for 40 days adrift at sea, but 400 years! </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_21579.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The Tom Swift Flying Saucer wasconceived in 1956. It, like most Sci-fi saucers, exhibits no translational propulsion system. The tentacle-like grabbers descending from the saucer orifice are unique. Like the saucer, no means of translation or direction control is indicated. Yet, the hapless astronauts are powerless to escape the grasping jaws. Also, the astronauts are subject to gravity, yet the saucer hovers without rocket or heliocopter rotor assistance.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_31175.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The viewing window on this craft is totally inadequate. Trying to double park this relic would be a ticklish task. However, the artist has apparently seen rocket engines with their large plumbing pipes, because he does an adequate job of drawing them. The relic looks like it is returning to the hanger, perhaps, afternoticing the ground crew left off its skin by mistake. A problem with depicting rocketship relics is that materials don't rust or corrode in space as automobiles do on Earth. To show corrosion and decay on a pure spaceship is totally inaccurate from a scientific point of view. (Rust requires oxygen.) However, as a result of LDEF studies, we know there is pitting as a result of space particles striking the spacecraft skin. The sun could blister spaceship paintΓÇöjust no rust and sooty exhaust. </text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text>Spacecraft Relics</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_24021.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The craft looks more like a dragster than a spacecraft. No thrusters are indicated for orientation, an oft forgotten detail. No communication antenna is shown, a much repeated error. Note an aerofin on the aft top of the craft as well as the streamlining which is inconsistent with the lack of a covering skin for engines and tanks, a no-no for space/aircraft. Apparently, the artist decided to show off the mechanical and ignore the obvious impossibility of entering atmospheres without adequate air-shielding of protruding plumbing and tankage. Another glaring omission is a crew hatch, required on all mannedvehicles. Can you find one? I couldn't. The crew is locked in the vehicle like the Japanese fighter pilots in those final days of WWII when they were told not to return. Their cockpits were latched and locked from the outside.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_23783.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> Sci-Fi illustrators and authors know of their reader's fascination with both the past and future. The present bores sci-fi fans. For this reason, the concept of the future looking to the past, movies like MAD MAX do well. An oft shown scene is a futuristic vehicle flying above a defaced Statue of Liberty which has been ravaged by time and atomic warfare. The illustrator depicts technology and space mechanisms even though he does not understand the physics and technology involved. Use of detail creates an illusionary spacecraft which appears real. The card of the Relic-ship is an example of this. The rocket exhaust would never burn sooty as though the engine needs a ring or value job. All fuels burn with white water vapor and bright flames as by-products, not a sooty oily appearing exhaust. Such an exhaust coloring in a vacuum is an impossibility, however, it succeeds in giving an appearance of an aged spacecraft relic.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_2940.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> The popularity of war movies, comics, and science fiction isreflected in the art of military space vehicles. Most artists attempt to draw military spacecraft simply as modified military aircraft. Of course, this is altogether inaccurate from a physics/technology point of view, as demonstrated from the following cards. </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_45351.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> This magnificent likeness of anApollo lunar lander type vehicle was the April 1939 cover of "Amazing Stories." Careful examination of the vehicle reveals great emphasis on mechanical design: a massive bulkhead with through bolts on the upper structure, ball and socket landing gear joints, and support struts throughout. Much is left out though. Where are the engines, a communication antenna, and thrusters for control?</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>6</id>
<text> Lunar Lander (1939)</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_19326.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> This landing craft is pictured on a planet's satellite other than Earth's Moon. The planet in the distance appears to be Jupiter. The crew must have landed on Callisto (4870 km dia., distance from Jupiter 1,883,000 km). Though the gravity is somewhat more than the Moon's, the artist in the year 1965 chose not to draw a LM-like craft but rather a direct ascent approach. Perhaps, the artist was not following the Apollo Program.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_18929.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Planetary Landers: Jack Coggins (1954)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> Using outboard engines for ascent indicates the Descent stage is not left on the planet but is to be reused. On the other hand, the outboard engines may have served as "OTV" (Orbital Transfer Vehicle) propulsion between planets and will remain with the thrusting Descent Stage on the planet. If we reverse the scenario of the scene, and conclude the scene shows ascent rather than descent, the outboard engines might have served as descent propulsion as well as OTV rocketry. In either case, it appears the artist may not have considered the utility of leaving the landing gear, etc., on the planet surface as did the Apollo Lunar Module. Finally, note the mechanical design of the landing gear. Foot shocks appear automotive, perhaps, assisted by strut shock absorbers in the lower vehicle.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_43215.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Planetary Landers: Jack Coggins (1954)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> Study of the cover painting reveals two interface seams across the large vehicle, indicating three stages of approximately the same size. Such a design would provide for an Apollo Lunar Module-like descent stage remaining on the planet after ascent stage lift off, a support module for consummables and supplies for the same purposes as the Apollo Service Module (SM), and finally, a capsule-like crew station for Earth atmosphere reentry. Such a configuration, drawn seven years before the U.S. Mercury spacecraft, shows a depth of understanding of spacecraft design.Examination of the rocket plume does introduce questions about the craft. Note that the outboard cluster of engines are dormant while a core engine provides thrust. The extended landing gear indicate all three vehicles are, most likely, descending for a planetary touchdown. In such a case, the outboard engines would probably be for ascent. (See next card) (Continued on next card.)</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_42501.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Planetary Landers: Jack Coggins (1954)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> The previous card features three alternative vehicle designs for landing on a planet or satellite body such as the Earth's Moon. Each vehicle utilizes multiple (clustered) rocket engines. Such configurations provide a safety margin should a single rocket fail. Additionally, Coggins shows multiple propellant tankage for both fuel and oxidizer. Again, redundancy offers reliability, considered in the design of the Apollo lunar lander. Coggins correctly depicts crew modules as somewhat streamlined structures for entry into planetary atmospheres. No such requirement existed for the Apollo lander's touchdown on the atmosphereless Moon.Happily, Coggins provides a communication antenna and adequate viewing ports for the crew. Apparently, the planet in the background is Mars (depicted in hues of red). (See next card)</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_43392.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Planetary Landers: Jack Coggins (1954)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>card</layer>
<id>1</id>
<text>Three types of planetary landers are depicted by cover artist Jack Coggins in this "Thrilling Wonder Stories" cover of the Winter 1954 issue. The largest of the vehicles is much like the Grumman designed Apollo Lunar Module, as is the lower center lander. However, the lander drawn to the far lower left features an Apollo-like Command Module capsule design with the addition of landing struts. Coggins' art features most of the options considered by designers of the Apollo spacecraft. See the next card for more.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_21354.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> Painted in October of 1960 by Bonestell This is an interesting concept. The lander has a descent stage, but the ascent stage is a space plane. A space plane similar to a Shuttle does allow for Earth reentry, and its size is fairly realistic compared to the landing stage. Such an approach might have worked if the thermal technology of materials would have been more advanced in the era of the sketch. The lander size (five times the LM) is realistic judging from a comparison of astronauts to engine thrust nozzles. These appear as J-2 size, 200,000 pound thrust, engines rather than those derived from Von Braun's concepts, which are F-1 sized developing 1,500,000 pounds of thrust. Also, the Bonestell drawing shows only two of these J-2's. The fuel tanks appear of reasonable size. The actual single engine Lunar Module descent stage used a 10,000 pound thrust engine. </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_5376.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Scene from the 1948 Movie "Destination Moon"</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> The moon rocket, poised for a return launch to Earth, has a V-2type design. How such a rocket could ever land on Earth after travelling to the Moon is a mystery. A single stage rocket does it all in this concept. Yet, a similar V-2 design could only lift hundreds of pounds from Germany to England during World War II. Closer examination reveals insight of technical merit by the artist. The V-2 clone has added two wing-like fins where a jet's wings might be. A thin stabilizing rib along the body of the rocket suggests a return flight through Earth's atmosphere like that of an Air Force X-15, although no deployable landing gear is indicated. A ladder is included to reach the lunar surface from the hatch, sixty feet above the Moon's surface. This might have been a very "giant step for man" and also a fatal one without the ladder, even in 1/6th gravity.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_13308.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Lunar Craft Based on Von Braun Design</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> The artist, Bonestell, consulted with Von Braun and Ley, formerWW II German rocket experts. The use of clustered rockets is a most remarkable prediction of the configuration of the Saturn 5.There are many other similarities to Apollo's Lunar Module (LM). Some of the differences include: (1) the scaleΓÇöit is much too grandious. Too large. Too many engines; (2) the size of the engines, compared to men in the sketches, is the same as the huge F-1 engines used for Apollo's Saturn 5 first stage; and (3) the fuel for the sketched Lunar Craft's 30 F-1's is not nearly enough. The fuel tank size would be six-times Saturn V's first stage. The blast at lift-off in 1/6 gravity would accelerate the crew at a scale similar to Jules Vernes' shotgun launch system. The crew probably would not survive the acceleration. Yet, the lunar spacecraft does appear authentic, unlike laterdrawings of Starwars fighters. Also, communications are indicated.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_21146.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Early Lunar Landing Concepts in Sci-Fi</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> During the late 1950s and early 1960s, a controversy arose in NASA and scientific circles as to the best approach to landing on the Moon. Two concepts flourished: the direct ascent mode and the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous mode (LOR). Additionally, the type of landing craft related to these alternate approaches was debated. These same options were forecast in the following cards of science fiction artwork.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_32687.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> Science Fiction Past and Present (1920s-1990s)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> The 1928 "Model T" lander sketched by Paul is in certain ways as different from Di Fate's 1986 "Ford Thunderbird" lander as their automotive counterparts. Paul's vehicle lacks fuel tanks. It appears as simply a mission-module type interplanetary habitat for crew ferry between planets rather than the "lunar lander" type craft depicted by Di Fate with its numerous fuel tanks clustered about the descent engine core. Additionally, Paul's craft lacks most essential spacecraft systems. Where is a communication antenna? Orientation control thrusters? A propulsion system? The 1986 art amply attends to these essentials except for reaction control thrusters, a usual omission even in the 1990s. However, both artists portray deployable landing gear with broad footpads similar to those used by the Apollo lunar lander.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_41101.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> Science Fiction Past and Present (1920s-1990s)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text>The previous card shows two issues of the popular science fiction magazine "Amazing Stories." The left issue, published in November 1928, features a painting by Frank Paul of space tourists exiting their planetary lander and setting foot on a lushly vegetated satellite of Jupiter. Nearly 60 years later, the cover of "Amazing Stories" (at right) was published (July, 1986). The cover artist, Vincent Di Fate, also depicts a planetary lander touching down on a solar system body other than Earth. Comparing each artist's understanding of space technology shows not only advancement in space technology, but also science fiction artistic realism. As a result of planetary explorers like Pioneer and Voyager, depicting a Jupiter satellite as a space traveller's Hawaii now appears implausible. The lifeless scene characterized by Di Fate is typical of most planetary satellites of our solar system. (See next card)</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_43749.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text> Though interesting, this picture is technically inaccurate. There is no EVA backpack, tether, or pressurized suit to provide life-support for the space travellers. They simply wear coveralls and a motorcycle-like helmet. The view of Earth indicates an altitude of about 50,000 miles or more. This would be in space, a vacuum lacking oxygen to breathe. Perhaps, these men are already dead. They may be dead creatures known as Zombies, which would be another unscientific idea. Additionally, the laws of physics are violated by the descending space travellers. Each is drifting toward Earth in orderly fashion with no indicated propulsion system to de-orbit. Though they are orbiting the Earth, they appear as sky-divers in a zero-g state aside the orbiting ship. A manned maneuvering unit (MMU) would be required to descend in such a way toward Earth. </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_18178.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>The astounding price indicates how very old these magazines are.The design of the 1930s rescue vehicle would astound NASA designers of the Space Station Freedom rescue craft, CERV. The vehicle escapes potential disaster aboard the blimp-like space station, but faces certain disaster reentering Earth's atmosphere in such a nonaerodynamic shape.Viewed with magnifying glass, the scene in the cabin reveals an astounding crew station for a rescue vehicle: pictures hung on the wall, clock with hands (not digital) indicating the apparent time of the disaster to be five minutes to twelve (just before lunch).The artist of "Astounding Science Fiction" updates Verne's shotgun barrel launcher with silos. Note the enormous 100 foot diameter hex head nut. Imagine the size of the wrench! Who would hold it? </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_12670.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Early Popular Pulp Science Fiction Magazines</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text>NOTE: *The close resemblance of the spaceship to a tram or bus with bus-like windows for passenger viewing.*Clustered rockets offer a solution to sizing of the propulsion system.*The space bus offers several passenger decks as might be found on an ocean liner's upper and lower decks.*The "Wonder Quarterly" illustrator, Frank R. Paul, "The Great Paul,"predicts an EVA with a pressure suited astronaut, life support tethers, and guidance gun (later created by NASA using compressed gas rather than combustible propellant). These are remarkable predictions for the year 1929, despite the childish "Tonka Toy" appearance of the bulbous spacecraft.*The massive armor plate appearance of the spaceship further indicates the general lack of knowledge of space technology in 1929.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_12177.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Scene from Movie: Die Frau im Monde (1929)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text>The consultants who were used on this movie were early German rocket scientists. Their sizing of the Earth launch rocket is remarkably close to that of a Saturn V moon rocket and a space shuttle.The need for a VAB (Vertical Assembly Building) is depicted. This is a remarkable forecast, forty years prior to Apollo 11's trip to the Moon.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_16892.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>The image shows massive rocket fins for aerodynamic stability which are apparently composed of concrete rather than aluminum. Early concepts of rockets viewed the enormous stress of launch as requiring stout structures. This concept would be much too massive.Though the illustrator for "Frau im Mond" (German for "The Girl in the Moon") erred, the author, a woman named Thea Von Harbou, consulted German rocket scientists for technical advice on accuracy.The film version of the book was technically much more accurate.Regardless of how accurate the book and movie became, they did predict the advent of women cosmonauts and astronauts long before Valentina Tereshkova and Sally Ride.</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_38545.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Scenes from "Round the Moon" (Jules Verne)</text>
</content>
<content>
<layer>background</layer>
<id>16</id>
<text> Verne did predict weightlessness, as did his illustrator in this drawing. A 100 years later science fiction comics have Shuttle hangers and service personell at one g, though in orbit. But Verne speculates zero-g at only the midpoint of the journey where the gravity of Earth and Moon zero out. This is inaccurate, though we know of libration orbits where the Earth's and Moon's gravitational attraction balance satellite and spacecraft orbits. Verne wrote that firing of the space projectile caused the three passengers to be knocked out (a gross understatement). He correctly predicts the size of the first Moon crew as three men (same as Apollo)and accurately sizes the Columbiad as about the size of an Apollo CM. However, Verne did foresee some real science with his attachment of a type of retro-rocket to "break the fall" of his craft on reaching the Moon. Though his retro's extremely small thrust is a scientific joke. </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_20361.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>Jules Verne knew there was no atmosphere in space; his illustrator, however, did not, drawing a man waving to those on Earth. Verne was proud of his novel's scientific accuracy, yet he shows total ignorance of many scientific laws.His 900 foot cannon contained 200 foot of explosives. Sunk in the ground, it fired a 9 ft diameter capsule/bullet with walls a foot thick.Based on Verne's data, the projectile would have a muzzel velocity at the barrel's end of 1,200 yards per second, not the 12,000 yards per second calculated by Verne. At this velocity, the space bullet and contents would have gone straight up 12 miles then fallen to Earth killing all within. Of course, they would have already expired becoming a puddle of red jelly at the base of the shell, having gone from zero to 24,545 miles an hour in 500 feet, if we use Verne's figures. At such an acceleration, a 170 pound man would weight 3,422 tons. </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_11157.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>1. Newton's Third Law: Every action requires an equal and opposite reaction2. Einstein's law: Energy = Mass times the Speed of Light Squared (i.e., the speed of light is the fastest speed possible. The speed of light is a constant equal to 186,000 miles a second)3. Existence of centripetal force: F = M times velocity squared/R4. The law of gravitation: Force = G (M times m)/distance squared5. The gas law: Pressure times Volume = a constant times Temperature </text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_29864.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>1. Propulsion (engine): FTL, Cavorite, Antigravity paint, solar wind, wharp drive, fission drive, fusion drive, etc.2. Guidance (steering): Not usually indicated, spherical drivers3. Life Support (air to breathe): Generation ships, hibernation suspended animation via cryogenics4. Cabin Structure (living quarters): space arks, space stations, impractical aeroshapes5. Communications (radio): telepathy6. Thermal (protection from heat and cold in space and during reentry): Not usually addressed7. Displays and Controls (switches and gauges): Standard, video</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_40670.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<text>1. Propulsion (engine)2. Guidance (steering)3. Life Support (air to breathe)4. Cabin Structure (living quarters)5. Communications (radio)6. Thermal (protection from heat and cold in space and during reentry)7. Displays and Controls (switches and gauges)</text>
</content>
<name></name>
<script></script>
</card>
card_39631.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE card PUBLIC "-//Apple, Inc.//DTD card V 2.0//EN" "" >
<script>on mouseuprepeat with y = 1 to 100set cursor to busyglobal t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6,t7,t8,t9,t10,t11,t12,t13,t14,t15,¬t16,t17,t18,t19,t20,t21,t22,t23,t24,t25,t26,t27,t28,t29,t30,¬t31,t32,t33,t34,t35,t36,t37,t38,t39,t40,t41,t42,t43,t44global t0, x, r,hat,straw,buff1,buff2,count1,count2,¬t45,t46,t47,t48,t49,t50,t51,t52,t53,t54,t55,t56,t57,t58,t59,t60find whole t0get the resultif count1>=3 and it is not empty thenput the number of this card into hatput the foundchunk into buff1show message boxflash 2exit mouseupelseif it is not empty thenadd 1 to count1add 1 to xput "t"&x into rset lockscreen to truego to "State/benfits/stack"send "mouseup" to button "GlobalFind"elseput the number of this card into hatput the foundchunk into buff1exit mouseupend ifend ifend repeatend mouseupon enterkeyglobal t1,t2,t3,t4,t5,t6,t7,t8,t9,t10,t11,t12,t13,t14,t15,¬t16,t17,t18,t19,t20,t21,t22,t23,t24,t25,t26,t27,t28,t29,t30,¬t31,t32,t33,t34,t35,t36,t37,t38,t39,t40,t41,t42,t43,t44global t0,x,r,hat,straw,buff1,buff2,count1,count2,t45,t46,t47,¬t48,t49,t50,t51,t52,t53,t54,t55,t56,t57,t58,t59,t60hide message boxfind whole t0put 0 into count1put the number of this card into strawput the foundchunk into buff2if straw = hat and buff1 = buff2 thenadd 1 to xput "t"&x into rset lockscreen to truego to "State/benfits/stack"send "mouseup" to button "GlobalFind"end ifend enterkey</script>
.iso/pc/programs/mac/spcrftns.hq/Spacecraft in Sci-Fi (1)/BMAP_9760.png){kind=link}
.iso/pc/programs/mac/spcrftns.hq/Spacecraft in Sci-Fi (1)/PATs.png){kind=link}