NovaSilisko

Can't believe I forgot to post these here: Sharp edges aren't doing so good unfortunately, but the terrain generator works good with up to 128 subdivisions (beyond that you're dealing with more vertices than the engine can handle in a single mesh) without much lag. The generator's multithreaded properly, kinda. It takes a long time to actually make the chunks when they first spawn, seemingly capped to one per frame. Need to figure out how to coerce it into doing more than one so it doesn't take so long. Of course, there's no actual stutter from it doing so, which is nice. Lower chunk counts and smaller planets help, too. Among many other niceties, I also need to apply some Math Stuff™ and puff out the "corners" of the basic cubesphere shape, so the vertices don't get as dense there.

...and eliminate all other revenue streams? Absolutely no way. Why does everyone refuse to believe the logistics explanation and instead jump to conspiracy theories?

hi do I count?

With a big enough stage (if you were to, say, go to the fairing's 5.2m diameter), you could potentially make a stage capable of going all the way to GEO and then returning - at least for smaller payloads. Whatever this stage turns out to be, I'd expect it to be reusable in general, at least in some form...

It was implied to be a replacement for the existing second stage, I think.

What's an ultra-high thrust nuclear ion drive? What? Its surface gravity is 0.029g. About 20% of the Moon's. Small, but not low enough to ignore. Why, though, would having low/no surface gravity remove any requirement for artificial gravity anyway?

True, there's not as much pressure. The atmosphere at that altitude is still 26% of that at sea level. The main issue arises from any torque that might be put on the rocket - if it was a uniform force across the entire rocket it would be fine, but nature is never that clean. Differential force on one part of the rocket versus another produces a torque for which the guidance system has to correct, and given these altitudes are very rough on the rocket already, a sharp gust can overwhelm it. And, if you've ever used FAR in KSP, you know what happens when you tip too far out of the windstream... Falcon is a robust vehicle and. perhaps. could take it. But given the choices are "risk screwing up everything" and "sit tight for a few days longer", I'll choose the second. I trust SpaceX knows their vehicle better than we do, and knows its limits. There have been hints (the notion showed up in documents from the Air Force) that Falcon Heavy will be getting a high-energy upper stage, with some flavor of Raptor engine powering it. Hopefully something comes of that.

70 m/s wind shear, by the way, is about the same as suddenly finding yourself in a category 4/5 hurricane on the way up.

Now it's up on SD: http://spacedock.info/mod/262/Audio%20Muffler Should be on CKAN, too.

Pssst. Hey.

Honestly, it really doesn't look very fun to manuever that cursor around with the analog stick... Things like transferring fuel or crew must be super tedious.

Just keep doing that til we wrap around to tuesday again, then.

Hmm, maybe we should just switch to Devnote Wednesday?

The "replace sensor masts with a giant drone" thing seems like a stupefyingly bad idea. It's not something you can quickly and easily retract in an emergency, it needs to touch down carefully and presumably be re-latched to the ship. Also, why's there a ten meter high giant scissor lift on the back of the ship? The aircraft certainly don't look like they need the clearance.

That doesn't look like the right building. I'm looking at street view images from before they put that up and I don't remember the office front looking like that at all. Unless they moved. I seem to remember it being this building: Behind the "garage door" on the bottom left was a big meeting area for everyone. Or it might have been the building to the immediate right... I really can't remember for sure, it was three years ago. I just know that spiky corduroy facade on that one building didn't exist back when I visited.

I landed for the first time on the Kopernicus planet I've been experimenting with, called Crush. Sort of. Landing under 4.3 gravities is a bit hard.

Did a little update to the first post with new download links - not a new version, just new links as I rearranged my dropbox and the old ones were broken. But there's a note there now too! Maybe, maybe I'll redo this with 1.1 and Unity 5's new audio system but I don't know. I'm more keen on encouraging someone else to take up the task and build a better Muffler; one that's configurable and more realistic.

You could do it with a solar-electric propulsion module docked to the rear of it, actually. It would take a long time, but it would be perfectly doable.

They have deployed a lot of cubesats in recent times, actually. As Nibb said though, they do it just before they raise the orbit of the station to compensate for atmospheric drag, so as to avoid any collision concerns. (re: Gravity, I just sort of made the assumption that they'd moved Hubble to the same orbit as ISS for easier maintenince, which IIRC was a real proposal at one point after Columbia, so the shuttle, if damaged, would still be able to retreat to the safety of the station)

Oh cool, this thread again.

what the hell happened to this thread

I'm fairly confident KSP just doesn't want me to play it. There's always something that, every time I give it a shot after a break, ruins the entire experience...

I started up KSP for the first time in forever and built a lander and sent it to the mun. While landing my orbital velocity went to NaN m/s while still flying. Then I went to IVA mode, and was greeted with a black screen and the deletion of all my UI. Quickloading deleted the universe. KSP relationship status: strained.

God.

Oh, I haven't seen it either. I'm just making a general statement.