Jump to content

peewee69

Members
  • Posts

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

12 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is probably one of the safest bets to make given the nature of human behaviour
  2. All of your comments are true about all the other absurdity from last man on earth, but despite it all it was the nose first reentry that I found just too stupid not to mention. How could the entire team of X number of people never have seen a capsule reentry? Surely someone at some point could have said "errr, guys, I think capsules enter bottom first". Any maths whizzes out there wanna calculate the odds of putting, say for example, 10 people in a room together and NONE of them are aware of such a basic fact? Surely you'd have better odds of winning the lotto?!
  3. I know it's not sci-fi, but I have just watched an episode of The Last Man on Earth where a crew capsule re-enters nose first! Such a basic flaw, how did nobody on the production team not know?
  4. In terms of financial returns from Starship development, surely space mining ops are more feasible now? How much mined material could SpaceX land back here on Earth?
  5. I've been building lots of very specific function craft, which results in lots of rendezvous & docking manoeuvres. And lots of vehicles everywhere which is becoming a bit of a headache!
  6. I cannot decide if the better strategy for a career game is to design missions for single-use, or to build infrastructure & re-use as much as possible? How do you play?
  7. Really great story for you fans of autobrake; https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8012215/amp/Tesla-Model-X-automatic-brakes-stopped-two-families-crushed-tree-Storm-Dennis.html
  8. In the new "Lost in Space" on Netflix, in the first episode during the scene with the ship crashing, the computers display a distance to impact in meters, but the computers voice reads out in feet, both of which have the same numerical value. Not exactly scientifically inaccurate, but an error which caused me to not bother watching it anymore...
  9. Actually, this only applied to the distance between the first and second satellites due to a slight launch timing error of about 10 days. Given that your maths calculates the travel time around Kerbol of 0.57° per day, then this should lead to an error of about 5.7° degrees, which should make up the difference between your calculated value of 24° and the measured value of 30°. When the 3rd satellite arrived into it's designated orbit, it was indeed about 24° from the 2nd. Thanks so much for the reply, I can now sleep at night! This is what I usually do for local satellites. However, I didn't much like the thought of doing this for the deep space satellites as it would involve waiting for many years before the constellation was fully operable, and I have a contract which will need the deep space coms up and running in no more than 4 years.
  10. I want to design a "one ship fits all" rescue craft that is capable of dragging the whole stranded crew capsule back down to Kerbal for a safe recovery. My question is this; what types of crew pods am I likely to encounter? Do all crew pods spawn, or is it just a select few? And if so, which ones?
  11. I wanted a deep space relay network and so went through various calculations, working out that I would need a constellation of 5 relays in a circular 17.7 Gm Solar orbit. So I decided that the best way to get them to their appropriate orbit would be to launch them 1 at a time in intervals equal to 1/5 of Kerbin's orbital period. I calculated this to be aprox every 85 days (given that it take 426 days to orbit Kerbol). As long as I followed the same trajectories for each launch, they should all end up at aprox 72° apart from one another, right? WRONG! Instead, they have ended up at about half the intended distance to one another (around 30° or so). Why?
  12. I know, I know; we haven't even got EP1 yet, (but I am looking forward to it!). I have been thinking a lot about what I would like to see for the next expansion pack and wanted to share my ideas and invite you all to share yours! My idea; KSP: The Search For Life I would like a more substantiated reason to do science, other than just unlocking new parts. I would like the data to actually mean something, be useful in some way. So, in The Search For Life, you would take various measurements in the Kerbol system looking for that "sweet spot" where life may exist. The goal (finally! an end-game to KSP!) is to prove extrakerbestrial life in the fastest time possible, posting your results to an online leader board. This would have to happen in a randomly generated system of planets and moons, which would have to be discovered by telescopes first before any missions could be sent there. Perhaps one of the bodies could even host intelligent life and a Kerbal would have to be sent there to make first contact. What are your idea's?
  13. I think then it must be a bug. Interestingly, my RoverMate on my surface rover also doesn't detect an anomaly while parked right next to one, despite having 100% detection rate!
  14. I think that DNS 1 should be enough to cover Kerbin's SOI. If you are using basic antenna's, you must have them deployed to work.
  15. Yes, but the RoverMate only works within 10km (I think). I did make my first anomaly hunter with this core, but it found nothing in a 75km polar orbit. Not sure why I didn't use the MK2, but probably because the FOV was too low. Does the probe permanently forget the anomaly after detecting it the first time? Or will an anomaly be put back into the randomised detection pool again? I find it difficult to believe that in the first few hours of searching it was detecting several anomalies, but now it doesn't detect anything over the course of 3 days!
×
×
  • Create New...