radonek

Members
  • Content Count

    606
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

306 Excellent

2 Followers

About radonek

  • Rank
    Ex scientia moar struts

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. @Dragon01 @kerbiloid I hate to derail your derailment, but original point was about fabrication difficulty of curves, not about barrel shapes. Boxy barrel that got you so riled up 1) is molded, which is exactly kind of technology that can make curves en masse as easy as sharp edges and 2) just to drive point home, that "box" is actually full of curves. For exactly kind of reasons already stated here. Village itself close to zero. But people, those are invaluable. And lots of other factors exist. Nothing of this has any relation to modern economy, much less rocketry so I don't see your point.
  2. If you stopped watching movie crap and look for some realistic designs, you'll see this is exactly what they are about. However you are confusing crew quarters pressure vessel for ship outer hull. As for bouncy castle – you will learn limits of this once you start punching holes and mounting in stuff like controls and life support. Bigellow-style baloons hung outside the hull may be a good way to provide some additional breathing space for crew, but for anything important like the bridge, you want a nice, solud pressure vessel. Also, if curves pose a challenge for your engineers, they are unlikely to produce a working car, much less a propelant tank. Asteroids. Icy moons. Comets. Certainly not at bottom of a deep gravity well, that's for sure.
  3. I can't say that Civ VI. is any worse then V., but it's not any better either. I do not like cartoony visuals though. As for X-Com, new series is kinda fun but I prefer original shape. In that regard, Xenonauts are a better successor – true to form and with more mature atmosphere.
  4. If you really want go forward with this analogy, say that wooden shields and spears are obsolete and you are still not even close to level of technological division. COADE is base on sound physical principles, but if you arrive at so called battlefield via warpdrive as OP would have it, those principles are deep down the drain. That is nice and reasonable scenario… if you assume usual "rubberhead chauvinism" - aliens are biologically compatibile, have similar technology and so on. I do not. In my book, if those aliens really wanted to wage unplanned war for the planet (which is itself a dubious proposition), they opt for a few strategically placed nanodetonators to rebuild surface conditions to suit their needs, introduction of incompatibile biosphere designed to drive out native species followed by bioengeneering atmospheric conditions closer to requirements. All they need is a genebank with sythetizers, some modifications to a maintenance swarm and perhaps some well aimed asteroids to add missing elements where applicable. They might not even see it as an aggresion, just some terrain improvements for Roadside Picnic.
  5. Not sure bipedal humanoids are plausible either. Obviously, their twodimensional habitat must hinder their comprehension of space, they lack natural ways to manipulate even simplest of carbon nanostructures, their grasp of world elements is limited to crude oxidative reactions.They can't even tell most simple hydrocarbons apart! How can one even start to use natural resources with such handicpap, much less industrialized civilization? Totally implausible :-p
  6. Now THAT explains why current world is dominated by Aztec empire, Quing dynasty and Zulu kingdom. Nah, such crude RKV's are boooring. Now, imagine very small relativistic mass driver fed with tiny slivers of some dense exotic matter. Something that cuts through stuff, makes nice fireworks on contact with ordinary matter and is unstable enough to be just barely held together during relativistic life time. Bonus points for autocatalytic instead of direct energy effects (yes, I'm still intrigued by idea of strangelet weaponry). As for name, I'm torn between "star-destroyer-destroyer (man portable)" and "cheela toothbrush".
  7. No idea, really. Lots of possibilities. Could be simple charged singularity used to shred stuff at close range. Or tiny, unguided evaporation bombs. I intentionally avoided "black hole" term since that is used for stellar mass objects, and those would probably be difficult to toss around even for kardashev-high civilizations. Although, who knows? None of this is my point though, I could as well go for RKV's for instance, or invent some other fun stuff ("calyx hollow" comes to mind). In the end, it makes as much sense as medieval knight trying to come up with "realistic" use of nuclear weaponry. Does it need many blacksmiths to forge? Will it be delivered by cavalry or siege machinery? Instead of answering silly questions, point here is that sensible answer, whatever it ends to be, is not going to involve sticking pointed objects into people. Not because of this or that particular technology, but simply due to energy involved.
  8. Actually, no and this whole discussion does not make sense unless you people stop mixing up technology levels. Any concievable kind of FTL/warp/whatever operates on wholy different technology AND energy level then propulsion buses seen in COADE . "Warping" to sub-light second distance to slug it out COADE style makes about as much sense as using ICBMs to deliver lance cavalry. If you possess technology to manipulate space advanced enough for something like "warp", you don't warp in kinetic battleships, laser dreadnaughts or any other precious museum articles. You send in a singularity bombs.
  9. You are taking the fantasy too much seriously. We all know that in reality, Federation was destroyed five minutes after someone realized there is no need to fuss around with phasers when technology allows you to deploy singularity artillery and spew RKV's.
  10. Yes, but that aircraft is manned. Crew is certainly a good reason to bother with complexity of closed loop. So, was this "Burevestnik" crewed? Or are there other reasons for unmanned misile to go for closed cycle?
  11. The emperor of course. Not that I'd like, but everything else is heresy :-) Seriously though, there is one thing I don't understand. If this was really open cycle nuclear thermal propulsion, wouldn't successful test firing be even less inconspicuous then failure?
  12. Steer clear of pip, you are always better off installing stuff via package manager. Unless you run windows – there you can let pip put stuff into your profile (no admin privileges) and call it a poor man's package management I guess. You add a library to python project via installing it into site-packages (Don't mess with site-packages unless you know how to do that properly, which you obviously don't) put it anywhere and add it to $PYTHONPATH. (Afaik this is what most IDE's do.) just put it into your project. If your library does not pull other dependencies, this is the most simple way to do it. Micropython (upython) is not a library, it's a custom interpreter with trimmed down standard library. Forget about it now, it will only interrest you once you start toying with actual hardware. As for changing syntax, you don't do that. That essentialy equals to creating a new language, and that is way out of your league. You don't need it anyway, you just need to learn how namespaces work, how to cut logic into functions or encapsulate it in classes. In short, learn the freakin language, which is what several people already pointed you to. Man, you have a LOT of learning ahead of you.
  13. Limit factor for KSP engine is not fancy graphics, but physics. Working with multiple moving reference frames aint easy, that's why "better" games/engines tend to have some kind of global speed limit. Only exception I know of is the new Elite. It has _two_ reference frames, one of which have rather severe speed limit and other lacks physical interactions completely. Working around this will be major thing in whatever engine squad may choose for KSP2.
  14. Yeah, you pretty much nailed it. "Free lords" being superintelligent AI's to whom other citizens defer simply because superintelligent AI's are much more able to run the show. Except its quite a bit more complicated, suffice to say it's outright utopistic, yet I don't find it naive or idealistic, just Lightly Seared On The Reality Grill.