Jump to content

sgt_flyer

Members
  • Content Count

    1,807
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,788 Excellent

2 Followers

About sgt_flyer

  • Rank
    Capsule Communicator

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Couldn't they scale it up to limit g forces by using a maglev vacuum tube (hyperloop style, in a circle), with several 'exit ramps' climbing on mountainside at various headings (so you can target a few different orbits) Though, friction will still be insane when the stage leaves the tube (use a MHD to limit air friction maybe one it leaves the tube ?) For large circular facilities with a magnetic tube, LHC is 26km diameter for example much more reasonable than a 50m catapult on lateral G forces... Of course, the initial investment is much higher :p
  2. Use both a parabolic primary mirror and a parabolic secondary mirror, or a lense as a secondary. you'll be able to concentrate sunlight in a very small area (depends on the distance at which you want to focus your secondary) No need to make the light fully coherent the beam between the secondary and the focal point will be smaller than your secondary Now, if the primary mirror is polished enough (recommanded to limit thermal transfers...) , your space mirror would double as a very powerful space telescope
  3. nifty updates on the rcs (the new small rcs will be nice on my constellations of small commsat - allow to very precisely tune the satellites orbits Would be nice to have some variants for the place anywheres too. maybe a sideways variant to place nearly 'flush' with hulls - imagine a vernor's shape, but with a nozzle and exhaust channel parallel to the shape, like on the space shuttle's nose and nose's sides. (At least, a place anywhere's 7 variant with the same style of mount as the small one, instead of the big ball :p) replicating the shuttle's RCS arrays is quite part
  4. Hello - wet workshop skylab was only a proposal, so it could have been launched with a S-IB lower stage. However, skylab was launched on S-V lower stages fully equiped as a dry workshop. (Skylab was still built from a modified S-IVb - but it was fully equipped on ground) The main problem with wet workshops is reamenaging the fuel tanks after launch. most of the useful equipment would be difficult to assemble once in orbit (the large parts have to be broken up to fit through the docking ports, etc) you’ll need several subsequent launches to ferry in the needed equipment (not rec
  5. Well, we would need the following basic capability for the factory part - the factory part can build another factory part - you can dock multiple factory parts to build bigger things The probe would then need the basics for to setup a self growing factory : 1) the factpry part itself ^^ 2) resource scanning systems (Scanning satellites, small lander / rovers with scand, etc) 3) either drills, mining rovers, or enough basic resources to build those with the factory part 4) enough electricity to make the above. 5) communications (if autonomous
  6. if you have a spaceship which has an engine capable of giving thrust constantly between point A and point B, you accelerate during the first half of the flight, then you flip around and decelerate during the second half. The Brachistochrone trajectory is the one that will give you the shortest flight time between A and B given your acceleration and deceleration (and that will result in arriving at a correct speed at your target, and not simply fly by it :p) those kind of rocket engines don't exist in real life (yet ?) the spaceships in the series The Expanse are typicall
  7. Interesting video - it could likely help for a lot for normal launches of monster rockets, but would likely need a way to switch to higher quality physics (up to full simulation) as you approach edge cases for the loaded learned set. as seen in the video, edge cases (fast moving objects) are not registered by the trained AI currently - and ksp can quickly have high speed collisions (staging too early side boosters, etc) Now, the AI would be needed to be thoroughly trained with rigid bodies, and more importantly to be able to work on random rocket builds
  8. Well, interstellar comms are going to be a problem though - you’d need new kinds of antennas / laser based transmissions to be able to have the necessary signal strength (based on ksp’s current signal system) at interstellar distances. maybe controlling probes in other solar systems will only be feasible if you set up a control station manned with kerbals in that system. (Kinda like in Remote tech 2 where you need a manned local space station to eliminate most of the signal delays)
  9. I meant to provide possible ingame justifications on why the current no delay comms gameplay exists. - as you said yourself - comm delays would likely not make a good gameplay experience. (At least, not for most people) as for KSP1, the remote tech 2 mod can provide comms delay. (Though, it also comes with a flight computer in order to preprogram the manoeuvers and execute them at a specific timing)
  10. Well, for pure gameplay purposes, the comms delay would be difficult to play out. It could be justified in severals ways though - 1- you could tell that your manual manoeuvers of the probe is simply a preprogrammed action sent some time before the manoeuver begins 2- the kerbals are more advanced than us in rocket AIs, so the probe is capable to manoeuver on it’s own in order to reach it’s mission goals (though, being a kerbal AI, it can mistime it’s manoeuver or perform the wrong one ;)) nevertheless, as they plan mod support for ksp 2, there would more than like
  11. I wonder if, alongside the new srb's, squad will add a bigger and more powerful version of the separatron too ? (Maybe more streamlined without those struts the current separatron's have)
  12. Yeah - if they use n-body , they would need to recalculate all of orbits in the kerbol system (which is unstable in nbody) (Unless they mix on rail and n-body ?)
  13. Havok demoed a unity plugin at GDC this year for their physics engine There's 5000 entities dropped into a planet gravity well at around 18 mn mark - ksp would be reduced to a crawl with that - i hope the devs will at least test that plugin
  14. Well - to one in on the hyperfission / fusion thing : i think one of the most effective fission reactor concepts would be dusty plasma reactors. (A fission fragment reactor derivative) - one of the key things it enables is direct conversion to electricity (way more efficient than carnot cycle, or even brayton cycle) Plus, dusty plasma reactors can also be used as vacuum based rocket engines (very high theoritical ISP) Now, regarding the fusion reactor research, there's two research projects in europe that i think are quite complementary - Iter and Wendelstein 7X Iter to help lea
  15. Breaking ground has the kal-1000 controller part, which is a sequencer that can manage multiple parts at once on a timeline (looping and ping-pong possible of the sequence) - all of that with bezier curves (so the controlled parts can vary their speeds during animation). Since last patch, the sequencer can also trigger actions (decoupling, engine ignition, etc)
×
×
  • Create New...