GoSlash27

It's been a while, but I'm finally able to play KSP again in small doses. The Eve Express II completed it's maiden flight from the surface of Eve. The results were... underwhelming 935 M/sec orbital velocity and 54.1 KM altitude. I'll give it a few runs with different profiles, but I don't think this one's gonna cut it. Best, -Slashy

I disagree. The X-1 program was the first to methodically and scientifically study the sound barrier and defeat it, generating the knowledge base necessary to build generations of supersonic (and eventually hypersonic) airplanes. You could dive Me-262s and make sonic booms forever and not learn anything about the sound barrier. The X-1 was the first airplane designed to explore the transsonic and supersonic regimes and survive it. Yeager was the first to accomplish it. That's about as "groundbreaking" as it gets in my book. Best, -Slashy

You wouldn't necessarily hear mission control, since it was common practice at the time to run full duplex comms. One freq to talk up and another to talk down. But since the frequency they allegedly intercepted this on wasn't in that band, it wouldn't have been a standard comm channel anyway. What I find especially fishy is this: The protocol for the comms is all wrong for Soviet space transmissions of the day. Make/ break tones are all wrong and the lingo doesn't fit the standard practices of the day. What makes me *really* skeptical is some of the other "intercepts" they claimed, such as a cosmonaut skipping off the atmosphere when his retro rockets fired the wrong way, sending him into an escape trajectory. We have all played enough KSP to know that "accidentally" reaching escape velocity isn't in the realm of possibility. But this all doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just that it's questionable at best. It's bad form to state as a matter of fact that it did happen without some sort of proof. Best, -Slashy

I've updated your entry and I look forward to your next run Best, -Slashy

The description is misleading at best and false at worst. It is an actual sound clip of a female, but the "cosmonaut in distress" part is an allegation. It was *not* picked up on a Soviet space frequency, but rather an ameteur satellite frequency. Neat film and compelling story, but they oversold the basis for it. (edit) Ninja'd by Lajoswinkler! I'm not going to go out on a limb and declare it a hoax or truthful. I'm just saying that the description contains some statements of "fact" that are unsupported. Best, -Slashy

Kryten, No reason, I suppose. Could it be that others are buying phones and giving them to these people to destroy? Or maybe they're stealing them? Best, -Slashy

Clearly, nothing. He'll happily skip from subject to subject for as long as it takes to avoid discussing anything of substance. But don't take my word for it, review the last 30 pages and decide for yourself. Best, -Slashy

Tsevion, Congratulations! You've just invented the first successful flying saucer! Any idea on why it disassembled over Eve? I see by the screenshot that it was headed mainly down and the kraken drive was off. Just too much speed for the control surfaces? Maybe if the nose had been pointing up? Best, -Slashy

Monthar, Well done! Do you have a name for this entry? Best, -Slashy

There were several pilots who broke the sound barrier prior to Yeager according to the records. Some of them even survived. He was the first to do it in level flight intentionally under controlled conditions. But it wasn't just him. He was part of a team. Best, -Slashy

Honestly, that would seem to be a waste of a serviceable phone. It wouldn't prove anything other than you can break any cell phone if you apply enough force. Everybody already knows this, and that's not the issue Apple is dealing with. The issue is that the 6+ can be bent so easily that the mere act of sitting down with one in your pocket is sufficient to ruin it. The i5S, Galaxy S4, and Note 3 never had a problem with this. Best, -Slashy

I've been wondering: Where are all these people getting smart phones so cheap that they can just drop them/ dunk them in water/ smash them with their bare hands?? It's a paradox. I mean... if someone spends hundreds of dollars on a smart phone just to destroy it, then they're dumb... but if they're dumb enough to throw away hundreds of dollars for nothing, they wouldn't have the money to afford a smart phone, let alone a half dozen of them. /perplexed...

Anyone else think of Nathan Thurm when reading this, or was it just me?

Left handed INTJ. Just the type who would get into KSP. Best, -Slashy

Oh, batteries are legal. You just get a bonus for not using them. The reason was to encourage development of legal entries for a previous challenge; Reach for orbit Best, -Slashy

Actually, the link that I posted agrees with yours. I made the (silly) assumption that people were going to actually *read* it before knee- jerking. Best, -Slashy

This is the exact same paradox that is presented by looking in a mirror. The image in the mirror is reversed on the lateral plane (left/ right), but is *not* reversed in the vertical plane (up/down). Your nav ball is inverted, and should be thought of as being viewed from the inside instead of outside. Nothing else going on here beyond that. Best, -Slashy

http://www.universetoday.com/114802/there-are-no-such-things-as-black-holes/ Food for thought.

"With FAR" being the key phrase. The rules call for stock aerodynamics, and that's why. Best, -Slashy

Wow! I'm, like... on Mars an' junk!!

Banned for excessive Mel Brooks movie references.

Tsevion, I became convinced of that during our time working on the Eve SSTO effort, which is why the rules of this challenge are so strict for control surfaces. One control surface for use as an empennage. It must be locked and must be oriented vertically. This serves to make infinigliding (or even just a competitive advantage) impossible for this challenge. This is borne out by the result; nobody has as yet managed to achieve orbit in this challenge, though several people have achieved orbit in other challenges using locked control surfaces. Best, -Slashy

I don't consider this to be a Samsung vs. Apple thread exclusively. iOS, Android, Windows, or Blackberry... all the different makes and models out there/ different end user needs. This gives us a reason to have an intelligent discussion and share our experiences... even if the OP actually intended this to be another Apple fanboi bash-fest. As for the iPhone 6+ bending woes... I won't pile on. Hopefully this leads to new innovations across the board and doesn't scare Apple away from bigger screens. Best, -Slashy

Unfortunately for me, I'm old and busted I have back and neck problems that are aggravated by playing KSP, so I haven't been able to play it for over a month now!! I'm hoping to get back into it once I've rehabbed enough. Best, -Slashy

Just goes to show how tough a job this really is, at least in stock aero. I've made an infiniglider that carries a useful payload to orbit, and a glider with control surfaces and drop tanks that made it, but I've never been able to make a full-on SSTO glider that could reach orbit. Best, -Slashy