tater

Members
  • Content count

    6019
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4268 Excellent

6 Followers

About tater

  • Rank
    Capsule Communicator

Profile Information

  • Location On the side of a mountain in New Mexico

Recent Profile Visitors

4527 profile views
  1. Generally, there is some teasing hype, and the implication that as a "forum" with reasonable dev input/commentary, that somehow players contributing might actually have an input. A fix I made to SH4 actually ended up being incorporated in one of the patches, but when they were talking about SH5, many of us pitched in to make serious suggestions that really needed to be followed (fixing fundamental gameplay failings), only to discover SH5 was already well along, and the effort to fix real problems was replaced with an ability to move around the sub and "talk" to the crew... meaningless "eye candy" that would quickly lose it's shine when the same broken gameplay was what was under the hood. I've seen this in numerous games that I've been an alpha and beta tester for as well. The thing is that the devs in those cases HAD a roadmap, it just wasn't shared, and wasn't the same as the one in the heads of many players/testers. We thought we had input, when the path was long since chosen.
  2. LOL, I never eat there, it never occurred to me... I was thinking closer to this:
  3. Any modern design should incorporate either reuse, or extreme cost reduction, IMO. New Glenn is on track to move close to SLS territory (much lower mass to LEO, but similar volumes), and should that LV be successful, the New Armstrong will by definition be an SLS-class vehicle (since it will be able to put a craft on the Moon and return crew, which means ~140 MT in LEO). Given the goals of BO, plus their design strategy (large and robust for reuse) I would argue that any NA LV will actually exceed this. With the sort of resources poured into SLS, ITS could be a thing, or perhaps a better architecture based upon elements of ITS.
  4. Congratulations on winning the internet!
  5. Really you'd want something scansat like, that would generate the KSP map view at the resolution observed, over the areas covered. A flyby might only make a low res map of part of Duna as it goes by, an impactor probe one area down to a very low-altitude view. The scan level determines the effective altitude of the map zoom on the fly, etc.
  6. A 35 MT lump of steel is not a payload (early SLS will be 70 MT, not 35). If the goal is interplanetary spacecraft, volume matters. The principle selling point of SLS becomes 140 MT at 8.4m diameter, not just the mass. New Glenn will do that kind of diameter, though a smaller mass. Can the payload be assembled on orbit? Then is the HLV more or less expensive then 2 launches, etc? The bottom line is that you need the payload first. You can arbitrarily decide you need 8m, then you can find out later that 9m would be better, but you planned the LV before the payload, so you're hosed. 450 MT to LEO. Now we're talking. It's also mostly reusable, though those drop tanks are likely a non-trivial expense.
  7. Such a fog of war system would be awesome, but only with the following added to it: 1. The solar system is randomly generated, so repeat players don;t already know about them. 2. Data can be gained via instruments on spacecraft that not only unlocks appropriate resolution images of worlds, but also unlocks data about the planets useful in spaceflight. 3. That useful data includes tools to use it (a trajectory planner for atmospheres that works only to the extent you have data on that world's atmosphere, the more data, the better the predictions. Then fog of war is interesting, and maintains a sense of exploration.
  8. If those payloads are not funded to exist when the vehicle does, then you don't need it.
  9. Any HLV program that requires a certain launch cadence (assume, say 2 B$ a year in program costs) needs to have payloads first. Set mission goals, then build a vehicle.
  10. The purpose was as a jobs program.
  11. Why replace SLS when it already has no payloads? Unless you have some payloads, indeed X per year worth, the replacement is "nothing."
  12. They apparently scraped off the top couple of meters of soil in the area (fenced in) where they allow visitors and buried it elsewhere. It churned up the soil quite a bit, and there are some chunks (my piece is about thumbnail sized) mixed into the soil---it didn't hurt that we brought a Geiger counter with us when we went. Didn't feel bad about taking some when the surface is not pristine, anyway, and is new dirt added back to the site. It's open the first Saturday inApril (March?) and October each year. A friend has a sheet about the size of a small dinner plate---when he was stationed at Bliss, they flew up there and landed outside the visitor area were there is a lot more of it and he liberated some.
  13. Messed with the latest SSTU dev version: