Jump to content

Lukaszenko

Members
  • Posts

    357
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lukaszenko

  1. I think it was more for us than for the aliens. Logically it doesn't make sense, but somehow form a human standpoint, it does. I guess that's in line with what Nibb31 wrote.
  2. You can get science by detecting graviolies while orbiting various biomes. I don't recall that being possible previously.
  3. I also like the change, as it's more realistic. "Grandpa been using it at the farm since '23 and it worked darn fine" is no reason to hate the change imo, especially since the old way was just wrong. However, as someone pointed out, the change would make more sense if there were more choices. My question is, would it make sense to not have more engines, but simply to have multiple variants of existing engines (perhaps even make them tweakable) so that you can choose where it will function best? My understanding is that the Merlin atmo and vacuum engines are the same, except with a piece of the bell chopped off. Would this same concept work with all, or at least most engines?
  4. I'm not sure this makes sense, but can you use a Munar gravity assist to help with getting captured by the Mun? I'm pretty sure that it won't help you on the first pass, but can you use the Mun to get your orbit around Kerbin to more closely match the Mun's, with the result that on the next pass you will need less Dv to get captured by the Mun? I'm at work, so I can't really check if this even makes sense right now.
  5. As has been mentioned, it all comes down to how much somebody will pay for it. That's what it's worth. YOU might not care about gold, I don't much either, but many people do. Maybe it's for stupid reasons or maybe it's not, but it doesn't change the fact that enough people want it and are willing to pay for it, and there's not much of it. And that's why it's expensive. Again, the reasons WHY they want it are beside the point. People like the bling. People like rarity. People like status symbols. Marketing takes advantage of these and more to further add value. Don't underestimate the value people place on looking good (or rich). Again, you might not give two ....s, but with 7 billion people, somebody does. And if that somebody has money, well, sometimes all it takes is one.
  6. Maybe slow down, too? Especially in the lower atmosphere.
  7. I do simply for realism. Seems wrong to claw directly into fuel tank in order to transfer some resources.
  8. There's plenty of evidence for relativity, and crucially, none against it. No offense Darnok but you clearly don't understand it enough to dismiss it. Anyway, as everyone has said, the speed of light is CONSTANT for everyone, and there is no fixed frame of reference. You can only say that something goes this or that fast relative to something else. What this means is that you don't need to use the USS Impossible as a though experiment, because WE are already in such an experiment. There the already objects in the universe relative to which WE are moving at 0.9999999999c, and yet we don't need infinite energy to get up and go to the bathroom. The point is that when you do get up and go to the bathroom, or even send a spaceship to Pluto, you or the spaceship will not exceed the speed of light. The best you can do is add more digits to the 0.9999999999c, and warp time and space as needed to ensure that c is never reached. Sounds crazy, but there are actual engineering examples where they had to take this effect into account.
  9. I don't know, but it's simple enough to calculate (I assume, I've never actually done it ) that if I was going to go that route I would just make the spreadsheet myself. That way I'd have a better understanding and trust of the numbers.
  10. I'll guess that by the time/if we'll really have to answer this, we'll already have mind downloading/ uploading and we'll be switching bodies at will, which will make OP's question moot.
  11. I have this too, with multiple ships. Right below 1000 km you can't toggle warp anymore. I have to make all corrections before then, and then warp to just above the atmosphere. And then my ship usually gets destroyed
  12. I don't get what you're saying with this part. It's clearly better to do a suicide burn when landing (which is as close to periapsis as possible) than to try to kill the speed elsewhere, no?
  13. Dude, batteries have been known to explode under normal everyday use. We're talking about interplanetary aerobraking in superheated plasma here. Don't sell yourself short. http://globalnews.ca/news/1714748/why-lithium-ion-smartphone-batteries-keep-exploding/
  14. But I think the point is that no one really knows. It's where our theories break down, both mathematically and otherwise. A little layman's background on the topic which you probably already know: Relativity deals everyday objects all the way up to astronomically large and heavy ones. It deals with gravity. It is very successful in describing how these things behave. Quantum physics deals with very small things, atomic level and below. It deals with atomic forces and also electromagnetism. It is also very successful in describing how these things behave. However, these two theories have practically nothing to do with each other. Relativity is hard to understand, and Quantum physics...well, you just can't understand it. Somehow unifying these two theories into one theory that encompasses everything is the holy grail of physics, but is so far elusive: The Theory of Everything. A black hole is a very heavy object (relativity) squeezed into a sub atomically small (quantum physics) space. The point is that basically, if we know what happens in a black hole, we know everything (or vice versa, whichever comes first).
  15. The new Deadly Reentry came out just yesterday. I could never play the game and fully enjoy it without it.
  16. As others have mentioned, albeit perhaps not as clearly as I am about to, DO NOT ADD MORE ENGINES. The less engines you have the better. Just make sure you have enough thrust to get off the pad and go up (more than 1.0 TWR in the atmosphere). As has been mentioned, it's all about how much fuel you have moving how much mass. Engines are NOT fuel, they are mass. Therefore they decrease the Delta-V of your rocket. They are of course necessary to get moving, but use as few and as light engines as possible.
  17. I started using FAR as soon as it was released. Not so much for its unforgiving realism, but for all those voxels!Seriously though, now when I make a realistic-looking streamlined rocket, I know that it's for a reason besides the one I have to make up in my mind. Much appreciated also that Squad gave us more tools to make streamlined rockets with!
  18. You're obviously overdoing the aerocapture/ aerobraking, so no wonder you lose delta-V to make up for it. WHEN DONE RIGHT, aerocapture/ aerobraking can be a very efficient method, but again, you have to do it right. This is easier said than done, as you're basically walking a tightrope. In real life aerobraking is done VERY conservatively, where it takes many months and many passes through the atmosphere to get the final orbit. Aerocapture has never been performed, presumably due to its difficulty. That said, in KSP you can always save/revert, so that removes most (all?) of the difficulty.
  19. Maybe the failure is not fun, but designing to avoid it IS, and that's arguably most of what this game is about. You can also always quicksave, which is pretty much what everyone does unless very experienced and confident. Either way, currently you pretty much can't fail in this way. I tried to burn up by flying a lander can (with NO heat shield) into the atmosphere at 8000 m/s and still nothing broke. I stopped there looking for the limit because probably even if I came in a straight line from Jool I wouldn't exceed it. I won't hold my breath for it to get fixed to my liking. I AM, however, holding my breath for DRE.
  20. The reaction wheels also don't saturate, although this might be for the best since many real-world methods of de-saturating them probably cannot be used, not to mention that rotational momentum can be cancelled by simply time-warping. They're also overpowered, but then so are other things for the sake of gameplay (such as the EVA suits). There's other small things that I think can be exploited if you're really bored, such as being able to "walk" a spaceship across space simply by shifting its center of mass around.
  21. Apparently catching a coin in mid air is more "random" than letting it fall to the ground, due to the fact that coins are usually biased. Interesting video on the topic:
  22. Perfectly reasonable indeed. Except clearly engineers should cost more to hire. In the game, too.
  23. Just to clarify, I'm not talking about going from .90 to 1.0 I saw a slight speed-up there but still had adequate time to go browse some forums or take a quick nap. I'm talking about going from 1.0 to 1.0.2 That was supposed to be a few quick bug fixes, not the gaming equivalent of a nitrous kit (at least in regard to loading times). Just quite shocked about the whole thing. Don't really know what to do with myself, but I guess I'll just have to roll with it
  24. I just updated to 1.0.2 and it seems to load about 3-4x faster, no kidding, than 1.0. Wth I had this whole ritual set up checking my web pages and whatnot while it was loading and that's all gone now Am I the only one experiencing this? Did I install 1.0 wrong or something?
  25. I've done it with deadly reentry and FAR. It's definitely harder to get aerocaptured (sometimes impossible, as g-loading is also an issue), but it's definitely more realistic and fun. I would always simply aim high in the atmosphere and bring extra fuel to get captured (and keep in mind that an aerocapture has never actually been performed in real life). Jool aerocapture was actually pretty forgiving, I presume because the planet is so big that you can spend extra time in it's atmosphere.
×
×
  • Create New...