Technical Ben

It is. By gravity... just because reference frames or language changes, does not make the statement incorrect. If they said it's "suspended on [something not right]" that is different. It can "hang on nothing" or "hang on the forces holding it". (cititation: http://www.howitworksdaily.com/how-does-our-solar-system-stay-suspended-in-space/ and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/suspended?r=75&src=ref&ch=dic ) Which is another way of looking at the topic. Sometimes our misunderstandings are only in language... we need to work really hard on understanding each other.

Gotta comment on that. I only work in a shop, but customers are exactly the same... "I need this now, like mine broke down last week, but I was working, so could not get in. Can you deliver for tomorrow?!", me "yes, it's £20 next day to your door with unpacking..." customer, "waaaaaiit... you want me to pay, nah I'll take the 7 day free delivery thanks..." Lol.

We already have small scale examples of this. I would assume the same continues. Large catastrophes do mean those working hard to help others stand out more, do more, and succeed more during those times, but I don't see it as the creating force of those people. People themselves decide to do good, treat others well, or not. Thankfully we can influence others to do good, to some degree, so it's worth the effort trying. But changing humanity for the better? While we rightfully aim for that goal now, we hope for something stronger than ourselves to achieve it.

Brilliant! There needs to be an option for "cinematic launches" in KSP stock.

Downloading now... right now! (Why was this not a thing before!) That clip is me. Soooooo me. It's like they videoed me as a kid just for that film.

That's right. It's also important to understand why someone believes what they do. As said, with my friend who does not believe in the luna landings or dinosaurs, I could blame religion. That would be stupid of me, their religion did not tell them those two things. But they saw lies else where, in politics and business (really, those places will state up is down, and bankruptcy is profit ), and extrapolated too far from there into history and other things. I know in time they will understand where it's right to draw the line. I was (and usually still am) the one asking stupid questions. Though I don't ask "Why do you not sell energy efficient kettles" (asked at work, tried hart to explain, they did not believe me), but instead "why do we assume that, why do we still do that, did anyone actually check?" Asking in not a problem. Avoiding the explanations, avoiding the hard work, is. (PS, I'd also not agree with every explanation, some fields believe things they do without evidence because of long standing assumptions that become written law, but I still understand their viewpoint)

Make flying saucers with the new fairings?

And how would you feel if someone asked "how do sheep knit jumpers anyhow?" Or "where do they get the pink sheep from for my jumper" or said knitting was fake as we all know jumpers come from cotton? Granted, people do not do that with things they do know, but they often do it with things they do not know, sadly.

Plan a very long journey...

(off topic) Nice. What results do you get? What GPU do you use? I've been wondering if it's worth going 4k for some applications.

10/10 The real deal!

Someone said that to me. I forgive them, because I know some of their history, so know they are not to blame for missing the obvious. I politely said "oh, that's right... what about when you take a photo in the day... are there any stars?" the answer was no. I said "the same here, no stars". Wait, they said, on earth the sky blocks out the stars. "No it does not, you can see some really bright stars in the day. The sun blocks out the stars, not the blue sky/air." At that point the penny dropped. Which was not enough to move the direction of the train, but did help the driver understand where they are going and why. Hopefully in the future they can figure out if they are on the right track, and where to turn off. (PS, some things in life are faked. Many things are not. Knowing which is which is the most important thing, when it comes to things that effect our life. Some things don't matter though)

Internally consistent logic. The setup is a mosquito living as a human, not a setup of a mosquito living as a human with gender roles reversed. It's the same with any mistake (though little) in film or writing. It's like a poor note out of an orchestra... it may be small, but someone dropping a drum or a triangle WILL be noticed and pointed out as not part of the performance. It's silly to pretend it was part of the performance, and sadly while music understands that, other forms of entertainment do not... and seem to revel in it at times ("B" movie comedies ).

Not sure how to get Sarnus in... so Dolas is the destination. Our telescopes tell us it has planets... so that's good... right? That's all we know so far! Travel time is likely to be around 50 years (Kerbal Years in game). Will report on how the first burn goes on the test craft. Oh, I need to name that spares/test craft too, what name should I give it? I've started the burn, and will see if the save/mod game holds up. If no crashes, will post more pics and videos. [update] Might be able to get the travel time down to around 19 years depending on how much fuel I'm willing to burn through. Most efficient burn Double the DV, but half the time (with aerobreaking I hope!) That last burn will be over 8k dv in one go... 1 hour 45 mins.

(Thanks, IMG fixed, forgot FF now hides HTTP prefix... darn "progression") Yep, should be, especially as they updated it kindly to 0.90. Sadly my old craft built ready for this, and orbiting Jool lost struts and structural integrity in the 0.90 update (must be a tree refactor or something in the save files that breaks them). So these rebuilds are simpler, for a quick re-do. The addition of KIS should make things a little more interesting than I planned though. So, we have our first decision. Which system to aim for?

Yep. Wheels tend to be good at reducing friction. So it's effectively a treadmill covered in ice or oil. Without the wheels, or with wheels that have high friction, then yes, the aircraft gets through backwards and all that the result with give. (crash?!)

This. This is why I stopped watching 90% of movies released... it just... why? [On topic] Not really. Those rocks should then be pushed at an extremely quick rate. They still fall at the normal speed. For it to be even remotely realistic... no nothing. I have nothing. A bridge about to collapse is fine. One partially collapsed ok. But collapsed underneath you, or it's own supports at any point (clearly like nothing beneath that one), and your going down quickly.

It's vertical weight is bared with it's gears. That's up and down. So movements in other directions do not apply. Your imagination on skids is not very good. Try imagining with something more tasty. Like Jello, custard or icecream. Now make our conveyor out of Jello, or custard or icecream, and our wheels will be replaced by skids (made of ice cream cones of cause). As there is very little friction, our river of flowing dessert just does nothing to slow down our aircraft. It's like trying to take off from ice... it can be done. So, unless the wheels melt, fuse into a solid lump, and dig into the ground, they have little effect on stopping the craft. If our aircraft on skies can take off, so can the aircraft on a treadmill. Once our skies start to dig in, is about the same point a wheel would start to slow the aircraft. So the question is not "can an aircraft take off from a treadmill" but "can an aircraft take off with broken wheels". That depends on each aircraft, some produce enough thrust, most do not (see carrier launched craft as an example. ). PS, breaks are not wheels. As much as parachutes are not the ground. Breaks work by increasing friction. Our treadmill does not, it can move 1mph or 1million mph, the friction stays (roughly) the same. Though I do agree at some point friction will overtake it... at which point you sheer off the wheels and get to the point of "broken aircraft" trying to take off again.

With a frightening revelation, the Kerbals have decided to concentrate on a bright hope ahead... As they had feared, the Kracken has arisen (all my craft bugged out in my previous save). Reports suggest that within a few decades, Kerbol will barf out a small eruption of highly energised particles from it's Photosphere (so I started a new save). These will not harm our Kerbals on Kerbin, but will make space travel almost impossible! They have one mission, and one goal. They need to find a new system to explore! They need to go interstellar! (Yes, I'm trying interstellar travel... stock!) So here are my plans for them. Two ships. They are untested, as is the Kerbal way. We have little resources and few crew. I'm aiming for a mainly stock ship. With Mechjeb for readouts/planning (and emergency maneuver). However, for such a long distance mission, KIS is being used for spares, repairs and redesigns in flight. The "LongBurn One" is the main Kerbal crew habitat and landing craft ready to explore new planets. With a heat shield and plenty of DV, we hope the Kerbals can survive long cryo sleep to their destination. To aid them, a ship full of spares, will also be sent, just ahead of them it will also scout out the location of planets and possible landing spots.

You could use one of the attachment mods to put struts in. That's what I'm planning for my interstellar craft (test to see if it's possible in KSP ).

Horse meet car, time to see the pasture. In a serious reply, I think that Squad do think of the community before taking action. But most of these features were always going to be added down the road (re-entry heat etc). I'm not sure how or why this is a problem for Mods...

Get a plane, take away the wheels. It flies. Wheels are irrelevant to it's forwards motion. They can have skies, launch off a rocket/plane/ocean/carrier etc. If they wheels spin then the craft can move forwards. If you have friction on the wheels so as to move the aircraft back/slow it, then no it will not take off, but by that point your practically pushing it back, which is hard or impossible on a conveyor with wheels, you'd have to glue the wheels down to prevent the aircraft from taking off. To make it easier to understand, change the question to "can a helicopter take off from a conveyor moving at any speed" the answer is also "yes".

All advances for hydrogen can be used on electric/artificial petrol first. So we are as far away from a hydrogen fuel system as we are from fusion power sources.

They cannot form or act on their selves. Which is a requirement for "life". Yes, we process food from other animals, and so we could not live apart from our biosphere. However, food source exempt, we can survive anywhere and continue acting/procreating. Viruses cannot. Thus are not life. We could not for example find Viruses living on Mars in absence of another biosphere. We could though find people living on Mars (providing they took some vegetables with them). We can also find all other forms of "life", such as bacteria etc, should they exist else where. For example, we could find all the DNA for all it's worth on another planet. It would not though be "alive" in it's own isolation, as it could do nothing but sit there for eternity (in reality it would decay without maintenance, just as a virus dies without a host to replicate it). It may appear that a virus is as much a part of the living creature it comes from, though a failed/diseased part, as a cancer is. Though a cancer is "alive", it dies when separated from the system that supports and feeds it. A virus is just a simpler form of this error in replication/function. So we could say a virus is as much "alive" as my arm is. But we don't consider either to be "living things" in their isolation, as they are part of something else, and the "something else" is what makes up the whole of the living thing we consider.

One of the silly things in Pacific Rim, was less the robots, and more how a (warning spoiler!!!, though one mention in the opening credits)... creature could survive 1 or more nukes at point blank range.