Jacke

From my vague memory on these, I think the difference is one is per-solar-panel-part and the other is per-vessel, can't remember which is which.

The USSR designed the very complex T-64 for its own needs. It was only used by them and the best client forces in East Germany and Hungary. To increase the number of more modern tanks, as well as form a basis for an export model, they also built the T-72. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-64 The lessons from the past could also end up applying to current space industry.

Going on less than perfect information, but I think the problem with the 737 Max wasn't that it wasn't sufficient a redesign. Boeing wanted to sell it as a version of the 737 for which pilots with previous 737 ratings needed at most a single-day conversion course. This was to make it look very attractive to airlines. But to jump through this hoop including the almost rubber-stamped certification, the features besides the new engines weren't that well integrated. The 737 Max didn't need a new automated pitch trim system. It needed a readjusted trim system that accounted for the aircraft changes that would give pilots the pitch trim range they would need for all flight conditions. But the procedures for trim especially in certain conditions like engine-out would need more adjusting, which would mean more testing, more re-documentation for new checklists. And for pilots to be thoroughly retrained on the new model and also realise they would need to adjust when moving between 737 versions. The changes were such that the aircraft should have gotten a new model number. But that would increase the cost of pilot retraining as well as other costs for the aircraft. Boeing tried to avoid that and people died. Back to the cost of KSP 2. Yes, USD 60 has been a common game price point for a long time. But what that gets has been getting less and less over the years. And as others have pointed out, that price transferred to many other countries, even next year, will give crap sales. I also worry that the biggest competitor for KSP 2 will be KSP. That could lead to unpleasant things.

Note that KSP is being supported by Squad, which isn't developing KSP 2. Two completely different game studios. There is no easy way to share much more than has already likely been shared of the KSP internals.

Despite the looks, that is an air-cooled Lewis Gun. A real water-cooled machine gun has the jacket closed at the front and an expansion vessel connected by hose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_gun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_machine_gun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1917_Browning_machine_gun (In its later air-cooled Canadian versions, Machine Gun C1 and MG C5, I used the same Browning Machine Gun for many years. )

The only common component is the major superconducting magnet ring. All the other hardware was new and improved. And considering the difference is well into the significant digits, this really does appear to be significant. I think the next steps will be a recreation of this and similar experiments, because that'll be a big career paper, either confirming this trend or refuting it.

Very good analysis. In light of this, what do you think about Elite Dangerous's buy-in Alpha of the Odyssey Expansion? I'm quite surprised at how unfinished so much of what the videos I'm seeing are revealing about it. So many things wrong.

You mean 19th Century, as General Relativity provided the needed correction to predict Mercury's precession accurately.

Firing up the boiler in 2021 would be a waste of fuel.

Kessler Syndrome intensifies.

A good video on the whole event.

Afraid not. That's a sometimes psychological reaction. Humid is one of aeronautic's 3 H's: High, Hot, and Humid, which reduce the density of air and the performance of aircraft. Gases at a given temperature and pressure have about the same number of particles per volume. Nitrogen has molecular mass 28. Oxygen has 32. Argon has 40. Carbon dioxide has 44. Water vapour has 18. Increase the humidity and the density of the air goes down.

And this has me missing @Triop....

AND UNDER WAY!!!

IT'S NOT STUCK!!!

Can you post the lyrics? Because I can't get some of the words. And there's a lot of lyrics here. EDIT: As the original poster hasn't been on for nearly a year, it's alas unlikely.

From the depth of water in the eastern third of the Canal, the bow and forward part of the ship are likely still aground. IT'S LIKELY STILL STUCK!

If it gets to off-loading containers, that's going to be very tricky, as just taking them from the ends of the ship risks putting too much strain in the centre of its length and cracking the keel. And the bow has only been cleared from the bank clays. I'd say the forward third of its length is still upon the shallow bottom of the east side of the Canal.

That's Relic and Nick. And I think a 20,000 TEU freighter might be a bit beyond their skill.

It's what Kerbals ended up with when they tried to make Soylent Green.

The dredged shipping lane is on the opposite bank from the Ever Given's bow. Estimates say at least 1/3 of the length of the ship is aground and the water is not very deep all around it. Costs of blocking the Canal now over 31 billion dollars. This one is going to be way hard to fix. Website to keep track whether the ship is still stuck in the Suez Canal. https://istheshipstillstuck.com/

Grid floors were also part of the original "wet laboratory" design of Skylab's modified S-IVB for launching on a Saturn IB. It was later replaced with the "dry laboratory" design launched on a Saturn V which with the lower mass Skylab replacing the S-IVB.

As @linuxgurugamer has said many times before, details are needed how the issue came about. And you need to upload the whole log file someplace and share the link. To have any hope of tracking down bugs, those are needed.

Wow! Thanks! Is that in KSP 1.11.2? Looks like I'll have to do a whole check of KSC in detail. Way back in 1.6.x when I looked at this, the Main Building didn't exist at Tier 1 and what became the Main Building at Tier 2 and 3 was a death trap, counting as Shores Flying if an EVA Kerbal jumped onto its steps. Couldn't stand up or move. There's more details in the Extra Information on the KSC sheet.

The way things changed with 1.11, it was obvious that it was intended to reverse that with the new system and like giving Kerbals mass, it was intended that EVA propellant be Monoprop in the jet pack and to have a proper conversion. Just like ladder drives have finally been patched, truly wrong things in the game are slowly being fixed.