All Activity

Do it again and take pics this time.

That was a big job. Congrats.

Blue rockets are the best rockets.

Nice avatar.

NASA is now opening up the Mars Sample Return mission to the commercial space approach. The usual NASA government financed approach is estimated to cost ~$10 Billion. But following the commercial space approach it probably could be done at literally 1/100th that at ~$100 million including launch cost. I had estimated it as less than ~$200 million using the Falcon Heavy as launcher: Low cost commercial Mars Sample Return.
 http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2023/07/low-cost-commercial-mars-sample-return.html This could get ~750 kg back from Mars with the Falcon Heavy as the launcher. However, it probably could in fact be launched on the Falcon 9. The Falcon 9 can launch about a quarter of the mass of the Falcon Heavy to Mars, for all the in-space stages, so estimate the sample size returned from Mars of ca. 180kg. At a $40 launch cost of the reused F9, then all together with all the in-space stages, the mission cost probably could be less than than ~$100 million. Such a low mission cost probably could be paid for by advertising alone. But to encourage participants to take up the task of such a fully privately financed mission, NASA could offer a prize of say $200 to $500 million to whoever could accomplish it, with some smaller incentive prizes to those who accomplish some key required steps. Bob Clark

That's an oops on my part. I've caught the exact issue elsewhere but not there. The loop temperature value is the same as the shutdown temperature value. In SterlingSystems\Engines\zPatches\SystemHeatFusionEngines.cfg go to line 70 and raise the value there. The shutdown temperature for the ICF engines is 2000. You stack them via their stack nodes. What you saw features custom configs that scale them very far in one axis and raises their power to match their custom length. Look closely and you'll realize the part is literally stretched.

Yes, rocket engines are hungry. It burns even more LOX. This is the main problem with cross-feed and drop tanks, you have an flow usually only seen in hydro plants. Yes some large water handling systems might handle many ton's second but here pressure is low and bubbles and cavitation is not an issue.

Welcome to the forum game. Just an FYI it's kinda a mess here

I guess we'll see about that, won't we?

When there's more to it. I'm so burnt out on KSP1 gameplay and the game really hasn't deviated enough from that core to make it interesting again. To be sure it looks fantastic; I've had a lot of fun flying and driving around Kerbin but there's really no draw beyond that. Plus, the wheel options are literally terrible, they need far more torque or parts to increase torque or new part options (low gear, maybe) so we can climb steeper grades. Also the bugs around driving need to be fixed, the physics reset after 1km has killed too many of my rovers. Overall I really like the game, bugs aside, but it needs more of its own personality and less "KSP1 but better".

Awesome design !

I don't think that accounts for the necessity of innovation and commitment that will be required. A micromanaged society is very brittle. An internalized ethic of team effort will emerge the more survival is paramount, but squashing the individual is the last thing you want to do in that situation as it is from that freedom that solutions emerge A young child too young to have the cognitive capacity to deeply empathize is not the same as a sociopath. Way to broad a brush. And I've seen empathy emerge in children much younger than the norm. Individual differences

Sociopathy requires no malicious intent, just a disregard for the right and wrong, and ignoring the rights and feelings of others. I have yet to meet a 1 week old with regard for anything beyond their own discomfort, and perhaps bright colors. (It looks like they do not even start showing attachments to caretakers until 6 weeks)

Yes, but I'd say not comparable. One solution required multiple experts working for months to identify a cause and fix it, while the other involved a single expert knowing the system so well that they could immediately recognize the pattern of faults and know the solution. Both problems could have resulted in loss of the mission, but one was solved with only seconds within which to find a solution. That's not to say that this Voyager patch isn't impressive as heck, but it's a different category of impressive than "SCE to AUX".

Piaget would point out that it is not through maliciousness that younger children are egotistical. They simply do not have the cognitive capacity to be otherwise at that point. Being able to imagine another's pov is cognitively demanding. It is important that during their younger years that they are treated ethically as that modeling will click once they are able to understand Interesting theories. Something about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence comes to mind. Smells like hermeticism wherein the world is viewed as a prison to be escaped from. I cannot see it that way. I'm grateful to exist. What a time to be alive!

Has anybody noticed any difference between the models? I assumed they were the same but haven't actually compared them closely. Smaller methane tanks would open up some opportunities for tiny planes. I would even like to see smaller jet engines. Maybe an rc-sized radially attached jet or something.

Are you referring to the Delta-V required from launch to orbit? If so, you should describe your launch process so that we can understand your problem. A really basic mistake I did when I first tried to go on a polar orbit in KSP, a long time ago when I didn't know anything about orbital mechanics, was to first launch into an equatorial orbit and then perform a 90° plane change maneuver to bring it in polar. I soon learnt a better way is to launch due North (or South), and perform a similar launch profile as for an equatorial orbit but with a different direction. This brings the spacecraft on an orbit close enough to polar so that correction maneuvers are cheap. The optimal launch profile is to compensate for the planet's rotation

We are working the issues with the ventral fin, and many others besides. In the meantime:

When I experience this I try to find some fun or joy in it. It's hard, but coming at it with the attitude that these are tasks you hate and have to slog through makes it so much worse.

A quick search on 'child developmental psychology' mentions Piaget's 4 stages of cognitive development. According to that, it is in the 3rd stage(7-11 years old) that "children also become less egocentric and begin to think about how other people might think and feel." I fail to see how you can be empathetic if you never even consider how others might think or feel. (I would suspect that many people never actually achieve that level of interpersonal awareness, but that is the theory at least)

hm. ill do that when i have time

They won't cancel the project over us not engaging. I know why you are thinking that, and thats because you are applying principles of supply and demand. Publicly traded companies like Take Two and their shareholders are so full of themselves they think they can make their own rules. Shareholders will ask "why is the engagement plummeting on the IP you said would start making money this year? Create engagement or we will sell your stock! I am supposed to make x amount of money this quarter!" Also, we need to face facts here; no use skirting the point anymore. The KSP2 we were promised HAS been cancelled. It was cancelled a long time ago. Right now, we are all awaiting a game called KSP2, but it is actually the KSP equivalent of that horrid "Microsoft Flight" that attempted to make Microsoft Flightsim easier to play. Just like KSP, once players figured out it was watered-down, they went back to playing FSX.

This is not how Principia works. Gravitational forces are applied to the vessel, not to its parts. Vessels can have hundreds of parts, the performance would be horrendous. Consequently, there are no tidal effects.

Thanks! I'm not super interested in booster re-usability. I'll check these out. And I should have clarified my original post, I built the sounding rocket and the downrange rocket from the RO tutorial, but nothing else.