Nicholander

Kryten, this discussion of what the R-7 is called is pointless, but to me, calling the R-7 Soyuz just the "Soyuz" Makes as much sense as calling the Saturn V the "Apollo". Argument over.

Cantab: I think they then dismantled the one which flew into space after the accident, and if you don't know it's name was "Snowstorm". cpast: *Sigh* Calling it the R-7 Soyuz is correct. For example, look at the similarities between the original R-7 that launched Sputnik and nuclear war-heads, and the original Atlas, both the Mercury and the ICBM. Both are distantly related to there modern versions, the R-7 Soyuz-U and the Atlas V, but they both have some small similarities. The R-7 still has the basic first stage with 4 side boosters, and the Atlas, well... The first one was a stage and a half, and now it's completely changed, and the only thing similar being the diameter of the core booster. If you say that it's called the Soyuz because it's so different then the original, then why is the Atlas V called the Atlas though it's almost completely different then the one which shot the Mercury astronauts into orbit? And in comparison, the R-7 Soyuz-U and the R-7 Semroyka/Sputnik are MUCH more related.

Wow. Just Wow. You're awesome! Also, are you taking requests? (Someone could send a few pictures of something they've made in KSP and you could make it in MS Paint) And could you also name the 10 spacecraft there?

Yes, I see that cheap LV's are good, but I think over the Long-Term reusability wins out, even if it is implemented as fly-back stages and such.

Okay, but I think it's actually the "R-7 Soyuz", but just calling it the "Soyuz" would be like calling the Atlas V the "V".

I have a request: Do Prominatus and it's moons form my Kerbol+ idea: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88952-Kerbol-Planets-Pack-Idea Read my thread and make the planets described in that, but also take these statements into consideration. Make Prominatus very similar colored as Neputune, 9000 KM diameter (Larger then Jool), and have rings like saturn that are similarly colored as itself. For Daphy, make it Blue-ish, because it's essentially a tiny fluffy blob of rings. For Potatus and Fonso, make Potatus more Potato colored, and make Fonso have some canyons. (If you can mange that level of detail), and it should look more like it has an atmosphere 2 atmospheres dense. And for Mania, make the side facing Prominatus look like Europa, and the side facing away from it look like Io. Yeah, first I want you to make Prominatus and it's moons, and then after that Hypat and Siliskus, here are statements for those: Hypat: Just as described in the thread, giant Titan from space. Flark: Boring moon with faint rings. Brutat: Generic asteroid moon. Fut: As described in the post. Siliskus: Make 2 similar versions, one with a comet effect, and one without it. Like I said, first Prominatus, then Hypat and Siliskus, But I sure do hope that you do a wonderful job making these!

Yay, it's not dead! Also, you could just not use 64 bit. I use 32 bit.

Moar Boosters, it's not called the Soyuz. It's called the R-7, the R-7 is the LV, the Soyuz is a manned spacecraft. CaptainArchmage, yeah I see that. The Energia itself was also a master piece, able to lift 100 tons to LEO, and would have given humanity the opportunity to launch huge things into space since the Saturn V, but even THAT was also canceled. Also, there are actually quite a few unfinished Burans, but the most finished one was sold to Kazakhstan. (Maybe the Russian SpaceX could then buy it from them? And that nearly finished one's name is Ptichka)

cpast, they never recovered any cores because they hadn't developed the system, and the failure of the Soviet economy in the late 80's and early 90's drastically slowed down development, and development was ended in 1993.

Hmmm... Like I said, I don't know a lot of stuff about the subject. So maybe you're right, but the Russian SpaceX could modify the Buran to make it cheaper. (I would put an example here, but I don't know one).

Kryten, they only flew the Energia's core twice, though the Zenit rocket uses modified Energia side boosters as it's core. And I think they where going to EVENTUALLY make the side boosters recoverable, but with the cancellation the Buran program and everything related to it, so went the Energia and it's reusability.

Well, from what I understand, the Buran was actually better the the shuttle in many ways, such as the more reusability. (The side boosters of the Energia could be more cheaply recovered from the Kazakhstani dessert then the SRBs from the Atlantic, and I think they planned for the main Energia core booster to be recoverable, though it would require reentry tiles) EDIT: Perhaps you could look at this Buran-Shuttle comparison: http://www.k26.com/buran/Info/A_Comparison/a_comparison.html

I've been wondering, after quickly creating some scenarios in Orbiter about some fictional Buran missions, would Buran every fly again? I think probably not, though I'm not an expert on that type of thing, So if it does somehow happen, I think either a private company would recreate a Buran (And Energia!) (Like Excalibur Almaz: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excalibur_Almaz#Spacecraft), or the Russian Federation could somehow decide to restart the Buran program. What do you guys think? (That's why there's a poll) (As I said, I don't know about this type of thing. So Sorry if this thread has caused you to face palm while think "Why does this person believe THAT about the Buran!?!?") EDIT: I created A poll on a different website for (In the super unlikely event that it did happen) who would recreate the Buran: http://vote.pollcode.com/19985915 For Other, you should post a comment. EDIT2: Doh! Just realized I typoed Ever! Sorry guys!

When I'm launching large Soviet/Russian rockets ,Usually in RSS. Perfect for when I'm going to launch the propulsion module for my "Gagarin" Mars Transfer Vehicle Both great for any generic launch.

I hope Luis Vidali replies soon, but K^2, when do you think you'll be done with the sim? (Like how many days?)

Mazon Del, are you going to send an Email to Luis Vidali about the bacteria? Or have you already done it?

Hmm... that immune system in low G is a good idea.

Yes Majon Del, could you ask Luis Vidali about how much research has been done on bacteria in partial-gravity, and what kinds of bacteria would not negatively effect the mosses. Also, what do you guys think the pressurized area's walls should be made out of, and what shape should it be. (Sorry if it's all ready been answered before in our very long thread, but I think it should be a sort of 3D ovular shape, as I made in my diagram on the previous page)

I suppose so, but StretchyTanks can't go into cube sized shapes yet.

Certainly, someone should make a "Mini-mod" which has our CubeSat, and does this sort-of count as a basic design?: I didn't include any antennas because we don't know which antenna(s) we will get, and everyone looks different.

As this thread is stickied, I think it's already pretty popular within the KSP community. And, we probably are going to make a video with KSP (Probably with RSS), though it should be made on a computer which is WAY better then mine.

If we eventually go to Phobos, there will be no landing legs. When it's VERY close to the surface, it will slow down it's velocity to almost zero, and then "Fall over" onto it's side, probably with a "Cushion" to prevent any Magda of the equipment. This prevents the need for landing legs.

K^2, I don't have a RCS package (Actually never heard of that type of thing before). So I understand, engineering and designing LATER, first simulations. Though on the hardware you mentioned, that all has to fit in a 0.5U area, because the other half will be taken up by the pressurized area. I see how that is possible (They sell 0.5U on many CubeSat websites), but since we will also need systems controlling the pressurized area, which will certainly be a tight squeeze. So we will probably haft to use "Home-made" components, which is fine. Also, maybe you should make a reasonably good visualization of our CubeSat (Pressurized area with plants) and put it on the first post on the new thread you're going to make after you're done with the sim you're creating. christok, I say we name it KerbSat (But there still would be a poll here on the KSP forums), and we'd probably hire a 3D graphic artist to make a visualization similar to the ones other crowd-funded CubeSats have.

I started playing when 0.13.3 was the newest version, but my first manned interplanetary mission (To Duna), was in 0.23.5.

Sorry a little late reply, but I agree with you on that. Also, along with simulations of things like electrodynamic tethers and magneto-torques, should we also start engineering and designing the CubeSat? Though, we could just push for later until we are done with the simulations.