Rakaydos
-
Posts
2,522 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Rakaydos
-
-
3 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:
That spawns an idea for rotating sections; it would be a throwback to the old trireme rowing ship days: Using stationary bikes to spin up / spin down the rotating section.
"RIDE, ye curs, ride hard, I want this barrel up to 2G for calisthenics or it'll be half water rations!"
Doesnt work. Friction will despin the ring as the bikes come to a stop. You'd have to keep the bikes running continuously, and the spin rate isnt going to be enough for significant gravity.
-
6 hours ago, kerbiloid said:
Light athletics in magnetic boots.
Also horse riding with magnetic horseshoes..
Just dont get thrown.
-
Speaking of Lunar sports, Lunar Blitzball Waterpolo.
-
ZeroG drone quidditch.
-
2 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:
The graphic Beccab showed is interesting. I guess I always expected some variation on what Neutron is doing, given that the payload could just slide straight forward. With that illustration, deployment is going to be slightly more complicated - but I can't see any reason why it should not work.
Also - every graphic I've seen of a manned lander shows no nose deployment stuff - just side doors and elevators. I guess I kind of expected a good 1/3 to 1/2 of the structure to be where the command crew sat (and yes, I know everything is automated so it does not matter where they sit... but traditions, you know).
The short explanation is that heat shields dont fold well, without a lot of difficult and expansive (and heavy) extra engineering. It's easier to have a 1-sided door open 90 degrees, set decoupler strength to 0 and rotate out of the way.
-
1 hour ago, mikegarrison said:
The thing is, if there is no life on Mars, we learn very little about the origins of life.
If there *is* life on Mars, we potentially learn a great deal about the origins of life. Because if it is related to life on Earth, we can be fairly confident that both planets were seeded from outside. (Note, I am not trying to imply that they would have been seeded by some intentional entity.) And if the life we find is unrelated to life on Earth, then it drastically increases the odds that life developed without a seed on both planets. AND that life is common. (There is a third option -- life developed on one of the two planets and then spread to the other, via the same mechanism that brings Martian meteorites to Earth.)
All this information goes out the window as soon as we contaminate the planet with Earth-based life.
Not really, if we find a strain of bacteria eerily similar to one found in the environs of JPL, Kennedy, Baikonur, or Boca Chica, we can be confident that it's not a martian strain. Genetics research can easilly tell if life diverged millions of years ago, or decades ago.
-
You just know that the first Mars landing testbed will be literally shrink-wrapped on the launchpad, sterelized, launched, and cut free in orbit
-
1 hour ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:
That's my problem with the alarm rhetoric... There are a lot of assumptions and a range of possible outcomes. Instead of explaining that, the lazy journalist picks the most alarming possibilities and states those in affirmative language as if it is a foregone conclusion and inevitable result.
I find it counterproductive.
Would you be any less skeptical if it said 30 years instead of 10? I prefer they post accurate projections, with the understanding that climate predictions will never be precise.
-
Are you assuming the rate of melting will remain constant, and not vary as temperatures rise as as more ice breaks off and is exposed by cracks and rotting?
The article is about a specific glacer that is going to break lose and start dumping land locked ice into the sea "in the next 5 years", so that's in addition to the current rate of melt. (reminder that landlocked ice entering the ocean doesnt NEED to melt for sea level rise, as it displaces it's mass of water as soon as it enters.)
-
This was on NPR this morning...
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/13/a-major-antarctic-ice-shelf-could-shatter-within-five-years.html
-
Fundamentally, this is the difference between a linear accelerator and a circular one. It doesnt matter if we're talking bows vs slingstaffs or rail launcers vs spinlaunch
A circular accelerator trades having to deal with (the illusion of) Centripetal Force (which isnt a force but is an artifact of a rotating frame of reference blablabla) in exchange for only needing to build one loop, and not hundreds of kilomoters of track. The circular launcher still needs the equivilant of hundreds of KM of track to get up to speed, but it uses the same track over and over.
-
7m max diamiter, but Peter Beck called it a "5m class fairing", so it only fits payloads that fit in "normal" 5m fairings.
-
13 hours ago, sh1pman said:
Neutron looks more like a rocket from 2030s. Up to date, with minor improvements over competitors - but nothing revolutionary like full reusability, large scale orbital prop transfer, OP engines (nuclear or bimodal), SSTO capability, etc.
Note that there's nuthing fundamentally preventing Rocketlab from constructing an upper stage with Starship Quick-Disconnects, that's able to use any Methalox tanker in orbit.
-
18 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:
I am not a fan of when one of the world's richest people instructs his employees that they must work over a holiday weekend in order to save their jobs.
But besides that, it's been clear for some time now that Musk has been promising that Raptors will be build very quickly and at near-miraculous cost. This in order to support constant orbital launches of Starships. Which will carrying, um, something? I guess?
Basically he created his own customer for Starship with Starlink. So the profitability of the whole venture comes down to whether people want to pay for Starlink. Guess we'll see.
The statistics of starlink are such that if he builds it, people WILL come. The problem lies in the vast gulf between "beginning construction" and "steady state profitability." And from the sound of it, the Ver2 Starlink sats were designed from the ground up for Starship's capability, are already gearing up for production... and the raptor manufacturing apparently isnt keeping up.
-
Oh, is Porche making an all-electric Tank Destroyer?
-
7 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:Just wait til it meets 300kg IXPE.
…which is getting surprisingly little press considering it’s launching into a 500-km equatorial orbit from the Cape.
"That doesnt sound too hard. My car can go 500 km between recharging/refueling..." -the public
-
29 minutes ago, magnemoe said:
Standard crewed starship is supposed to have an around two story pressurized payload bay with an large hatch. It will be depressurized then unloading. Yes you could store the arms there but the second part of my idea was also to recover satellites to earth or an low orbit refurbish facility who would be size limited with the standard crew version.
Much more so then you have to add the arm systems.Sounds like a job for a full cargo variant. The aft cargo pods (in the engine bay) are always open to space but protected on launch and entry, so in my mind they make a better place to have utility arms equipped.
-
4 minutes ago, magnemoe said:
This, one favorite of mine is the shuttle starship. Smaller crew cabin as you will have an say 4-8 crew for some weeks. Larger un-pressurized cargo bay. an heavy arm but 1-2 light
Typically one for holding the target the second holding an astronaut or various tools. or parts.
Able to work from LEO to geo, Lunar orbit and L1 and 2. We all know we will need one of these fixing future space telescopes
Couldnt you just use a standard crew starship, with utility arms in the aft cargo?
I'm already assuming that the Depot has a fueling arm that mates with other vessels QD ports, tucked in the aft cargo.
-
6 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:
I mean, how does the alloy strength at low temperatures relate to the strength at high temperatures?
It doesnt. By coincidence, the right recipe of stainless has a good strength at low temperatures, and ALSO has a high melting temperature.
-
9 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:
I mean its Starship version.
The Starships should be unified, shouldn't them? A base model for various purposes.The "base model" is much more flexible than you seem to understand. There's heat shields on all the ones that will return to earth, but depots will have cryogenic insulation instead, and Lunar Starship is a customized build for NASA's HLS program that's built on the same line as Starship, but has a bunch of one-off features and will never return to earth's surface.
-
6 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:
It should be another Starship or another purpose of Starship?
If the latter, then no difference.
If the former - why do you call it Starship? It's a lunar zeppelin.Cryogenic strength - in what sense?
Please make yourself aware of the Artemis plan of record regarding Lunar Starship, Tanker Starships, and Depot Starships before continuing this line of questioning.
-
11 hours ago, magnemoe said:
Well now Musk has to go on the first manned mars mission
The two seconds who step down have tongue twisting names, think Tamils. Just if you wanted to disqualify Musk for not being an pilot or scientist.
Send Kimbal as the head botanist. (Elon's brother, who's been working on hydroponics-related stuff)
-
2 hours ago, magnemoe said:
Still assume they will use the end to end for refueling. The quick disconnect port is not very suitable for docking and is designed for pretty high pressure transfer.
Rear to rear makes it easy to get good mechanical connection, is save and make it easy to use RCS to settle fuel and then use pressure difference to transfer.Using RCS to settle fuel here will be very complex and will put a lots of stress on the quick disconnect connect port.
I suspect it will be an asymetric approch. Tanker has arms in the skirt that can connect and brace against standard quick disconnect ports.
-
On 11/16/2021 at 9:09 PM, SunlitZelkova said:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20030063128/downloads/20030063128.pdf
This 2003 NASA study chooses Callisto as a target.
Not sure what Elon was thinking. On Ganymede's surface, you get 50-80 mSv per day. The limit over the course of five years for Earthly employees involved with radiation is 100 mSv...
So how much of that gets through a space suit?
Space borne sports, music and snacks.
in Science & Spaceflight
Posted
That's not a solution, that's delaying the inevitable. You cant build up any significant angular momentum in the ring that way.