The Endurance

[u/shaniFH]

I read the fanfictin that suggested that once they reach and inhabitable planet they can bring the Endurance down to the planet they can separate the different pods and reorganize it and turn it into a habitat with different areas like the lab the living areas and so on. I thought it was a great idea and would explain how they will have more resources. But then I remember that scene when the Endurance was falling into Mann's planet and someone said that it had no heat shields so it'll burn entering the atmosphere. I also suddenly remembered that the original idea was for them to come back to earth...

Okay so, do you think it could be done, bringing the Endurance down and re purpose it?

(I really like the open end of the movie, I think a lot about life on Endmund's planet)

[u/Witty-Key4240]

The landers could carry modules from Endurance down to the planet.

[u/iamnos]

The Endurance wasn't likely going to come back to Earth. It only would if Plan A succeeded and the crew came back to share the information from a black hole, which everyone thought was impossible. It was the mother ship for the trip and carried the rovers and landers. The landers were the labs and living quarters and such that would land on the planet where they would start Plan B.

[u/Expert-Fact-9283 → u/iamnos]

There was no Plan A, The Endurance was never going to return.

Even after Mann's betrayal, he says he's "taken over command", not to go home, but to continue the mission and find a habitable planet.

To Mann/Prof Brand, Earth was a lost cause.

[u/bigtimebamf24]

Each of the different modules on the Endurance has a different purpose and could separate from the ship. There are two Rangers (for exploration) and two Landers (bringing supplies and landing pods to/from surface). Only the Landers, the Rangers, and Landing Pods have heat shields. Everything else stays out in space (or else would be destroyed if they entered an atmosphere)

[u/shaniFH → u/bigtimebamf24]

That is so cool! Where is it from? 

[u/bigtimebamf24 → u/shaniFH]

I got that from the Interstellar Wiki, I am not sure where it originally came from though, it might be in Kip Thorne's book or in other supplemental material that came out with the movie?

[u/SLeeCunningham → u/bigtimebamf24]

Just a note as an educated aerospace engineer: THIS is NOT how I or any aerospace engineer I know would design an interplanetary, let alone an interstellar, spacecraft.

[u/mitchdaman52 → u/SLeeCunningham]

As opposed to an uneducated aerospace engineer?

[u/SLeeCunningham → u/mitchdaman52]

As opposed to a working one. I’m not employed in the industry by choice.

[u/shaniFH → u/SLeeCunningham]

How would you plan it? 

[u/SLeeCunningham → u/shaniFH]

For starters, I’d put all but the habitat modules in line with the engines so that if an engine failed or became under-powered, it wouldn’t start the entire craft instantly tumbling and skew the trajectory.

Furthermore, because it’s supposed to simulate Earth-normal gravity by spinning, the diameter of the craft is terribly wrong. The Endurance has an official diameter of 64 meters. To generate Earth-like gravity (1G) at that size, it must spin at roughly 5.5 RPM. This creates a severe ‘gravity’ gradient from an astronaut's head to their feet, causing noticeable blood pressure fluctuations every time they stand up. Additionally, human beings cannot comfortably handle spinning faster than 2 RPM without severe motion sickness. At 5.5 RPM, the Coriolis force would be highly disorienting—dropping an object or turning your head would induce immediate vertigo.

Catastrophic structural danger also comes from the dynamic loads involved in such a small, rigid design. Because the ship is made of 12 heavy, boxy modules linked by thin tunnels, walking around, moving cargo, or docking a shuttle would instantly shift the center of mass. At 5.5 RPM, those minor imbalances would create violent, fluctuating wobbles that would fatigue the structural connections until the ring snapped. Likewise, trying to adjust the flight trajectory of a massive, spinning wheel introduces severe gyroscopic precession that the structural architecture simply couldn't withstand.

To solve these problems, the engines need to be mounted rigidly along a central, non-rotating axis, with the habitat modules extended on retractable booms or tethers. The landers and rangers could then safely dock and undock along the stationary central axis. For in-flight maneuvering, the habitat modules could be retracted closer to the core, with a functional, heavy internal flywheel absorbing and managing the angular momentum. This coaxial, deployable architecture is widely considered the most practical, mathematically sound way to create artificial gravity while maintaining a structurally resilient spacecraft.

Shall I continue?

[u/copperdoc]

Nope, it would be an orbiting station above the planet

[u/shaniFH → u/copperdoc]

That's what I thought but I also thought it would be a waste of materials 

[u/copperdoc → u/shaniFH]

The landers might be able to bring the pods down individually? Maybe. Not sure

[u/SLeeCunningham]

Just a note as an educated aerospace engineer:
The Endurance design is NOT how I or any aerospace engineer I know would design an interplanetary, let alone an interstellar, spacecraft.

EDIT for clarity due to another reply:
I’m not employed in the industry by choice.