Sky_walker

Here is the news: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/F-Cosmic-recycling-2107141.html Google, search in last 7 days for "americium-241 RTG"

As pretty much every thing ever made by humans. Marketing is what makes thing sale. Not on the outside, which is the core feature and allows them to produce more consistent flow of air - and that's pretty much the only reason why you might want bladeless fan, so I would say: it fulfils the purpose. Not particularly. If you treat them like you would treat any other fan - they'll work fine. If you'll start dropping them from heights - they'll break. No magic here. Plastic is plastic. Noone promised you aerospace-grade equipment capable of surviving mach 5 speeds, lol. 640K ought to be enough for anybody - that's my reaction to people suggesting how much RAM is "enough"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I remember - X37 never approached any other satellite, so things like refueling or returning satellites back home are out of question.

Well, it has every sign of it being a scam. And there is no slightest chance for them to get it going in a deadlines they announced. The thing that mazes me though is that they keep on gaining support from various bigger or smaller institutions and companies.... even though good 90% of their project is made of "potential suppliers" / "negotiated vehicles" / "concept studies". There isn't anything I know of that they'd actually design - and that would be mandatory even if we account for 2 years delay to their original plans that we currently know of. BTW: For those curious - last Monday (21st) they had a Q&A on twitter: https://twitter.com/MarsOneProject OMG, I laughed!

There's only 60% chance for an acceptable weather today. So don't get your hopes high. You want rocket to launch safely or fast? Weather isn't something you should mess with.

I'm just not really a big fan of supporting services that go on a clear way towards monopoly. So whenever I can I buy titles away from Steam and I use direct shortcuts to every single game that allows it on a steam itself. So I'm pretty much never on Steam (sadly these days it's impossible to uninstall it completely :/) Nice, thanks The one I'm using comes from this pack: https://imgur.com/a/rRUZp - reminds me more of an existing KSP flags, and looks lovely on "plant the flag" missions: Guy also made a parody version:

Oh my god, now that's a lot of work here! And a lot of clipping... and mods. hehehe I admire your patience.

Now that's enormous The explosion of fairings - looks truly epic. And a very clever work with the upper stage - well done Much better than my simple strap-on-mega-engine It's always nice to see an alternative approach Sorry, I don't use Steam these days, sorry.

Sure - I'll put the link to the post with your version into the first post in a thread if you don't mind o_O wow... that's a part count! The largest ship I tried is 480 parts - and it worked OK. Not buttery smooth, but was perfectly playable. So I shouldn't have any problems with 350.

Solid Rocket Boosters descend on parachutes and are recovered. Then fairings are separated - they're not recovered and drop into ocean. Main stage isn't recovered either and it also does reenter atmosphere. Upper stage remains on an orbit after separating cargo and naturally decays down (that's not simulated in KSP) burning in the atmosphere. Edit: Actually - I looked it up again, and the Ariane 5 ES, unlike all of the other variants, DOES perform final boost after separating ATV and reenters the atmosphere on it's own.

Awesome Here is how it looks like with procedural fairings (by mistake I used egg-shaped fairing instead of a conic fairing - real Ariane 5 fairings are closer to the conic fairings from a procedural fairing mod) : UPDATE: I added link to my original post with a transmission live of the launch event. Here is a news about that with dates in additional time zones.

You mean these made of structural panels? Nah, they look ugly as hell and are rather poor work-around for something that should be stock. So I'll wait for a stock fairings But as said - that's not the only problem, so I didn't wanted to create mess that doesn't appeal to me... feel free though to do whatever you want with the model I seen it with the procedural fairings - and it looks lovely.

There is no thread to discuss forum rules, so this one will do just fine, as that's the mod suspected of breaking them.

As you probably know - on July 29th, just in 4 days, we'll see the last flight of ATV to the International Space Station. Georges Lemaître, or simply: ATV-5 will take off 23:44:03 UTC / 01:44:03 CET / 20:44:03 local time (weather permitted) from French Guiana - live transmission on Arianespace TV. It will set two new records: For ATV series it will be the heaviest supply flight ever bringing over 10 tons of supplies and fuel to the ISS. For Ariane 5 launchers, weighting 20 tons in total it'll be the heaviest cargo ever lifted by the Ariane-series. You can read more about the flight. As far as the future of ATV will belong to it's role as a service module for NASA Orion capsule flights - for now it's the end of ATV as we know it, but it's yet to perform 2 major experiments - first one being a test of the new automated rendezvous system allowing spacecraft to dock without an aid of specially designed reflectors or nav markers on the ISS like all of the other spacecrafts do (so future ESA crafts will be able to automatically dock with everything as long as it has a proper docking bay ), and the second one will be recording deadly reentry of the ATV into atmosphere and transmitting data back behind the vessel to the Iridium satellite while still surrounded by the plasma. So here is my take on it Download Ariane 5 + ATV game version = 1.0.2 Mirror: MEGA Mirror: KerbalX (no subassembly) ATV L-sized, utility vessel build to resupply space stations. Carries FL-R1 RCS Fuel Tank and a Rockomax X200-32 Fuel Tank. Powered by four LV-1R Liquid Fuel Engine it can reach Delta-V of 3531 m/s though you probably want to leave that fuel for refueling . Fun fact: My version of the ATV has got an RCS thrusters setup replicating the one on a real ATV. Action groups: 0 - Toggle solar panels - highly recommended to deploy them as soon as you get out of the atmosphere, as ATV doesn't have any batteries aside of these in command module. This also means you won't have enough power on a very low orbit - at 70km there's enough power for roughly half of the orbital night. But there's enough fuel in 2nd stage to reach relatively high orbit with ease. Data of the ATV with Ariane 5: Total Delta-V: 9 462 m/s Launch Vehicle Delta-V: 5 931 m/s ATV Delta-V: 3 531 m/s Total Mass: 426 175kg ATV Mass: 22 500 Total Price: 102 750,8 Total part count: 64 ATV Part count: 21 Ariane 5 Launch vehicle itself comes included as a sub-assembly. Sadly currently stock KSP is fairly limiting, so here are the problems with a design: - There are no Size 2 gimbaled solid rocket boosters. So I had to reproduce them with four regular boosters stacked. No gimballing though. - There is no Size 3 equivalent of Poodle, so rocket is using Skipper instead with interstage fairing that fragments into multiple parts - Ariane 5 fairing splits into 2 parts, KSP fairing splits into 30(!) fragments - In a real Ariane 5 Solid Rocket Boosters could be retrieved from the Atlantic ocean after descending on a parachutes for review. In KSP however boosters are deployed so early that they have no chances of being retrieved. But in case you'd want to keep it more realistic - replace Advanced Nose Cone - Type B with a parachute as it was in real boosters. - KSP parts in general are much heavier than components of real rocket, and got vastly different thrust to weight ratios. As a consequence this design is capped by Thrust to Weight rato after separating solid rocket boosters - use Kerbal Engineer to debug your design. Currently with ATV onboard TWR will be around 1.0 after separating boosters what with reserve of fuel avaible allows you to safely reach an orbit. During the takeoff Ariane 5 ECA TWR is around 1.82, KSP design has a TWR of around 1.10 with decent cargo. I hope you'll enjoy it Action groups: none Data of the Ariane 5 alone: Delta-V: 9 092 m/s Max TWR: 1.16 Mass: 403 715 Price: 902 00,8 Total part count: 44 Real Ariane 5 + ATV

First idea - great. I'd love to see that in game. No more hassle with building tankers, you got a proper bay to retire your plane after flight - sounds like a great plan. As for the second one - IMHO too much hassle implementing it to what it's worth. I don't see anything beneficial to the gameplay that it'd add minus saving some funds - but funds aren't a problem, quite contrary: we swim in them, so... no thanks, I'll pass.

We're talking here about stock game, not mods.

Yea, I know. There's even been some internet speculation about using that and another ATV-based command module to build a space craft capable of docking with ISS and doing a moon fly-by this way with a one-man lunar descend module attached to the bottom of a command module - or ship would split in half and command module could land on a surface of the moon and then come back up on it's own. Such ship would always be kept on an orbit - astronauts would dock with ISS and use Soyuz to get back down to the earth. After few years it could be used as a base of Mars-exploration vessel with a possible landing on a surface of Marian moons. But... you know - just random internet talk. So far the closest we get to this will be DC4EU and an ATV service module. Sadly - incompatible with eachother (different docking ports) and incapable of lunar landing - though flyby would be within reach.

Yea, me too... on a perfectly flat with huge legs, and retrograde burn while descending on parachutes. Sadly - perfectly flat ground isn't really a common thing in on Kerbin - and otherwise the risk of tipping over is ridiculously high, especially for taller boosters. Hehe, even that is far from easy. ground plays such a huge role, that even on regular grasslands with excellent descend curve - you never can be sure about a proper landing and recovery. IMHO this whole notion of a free boosters recovery is rather silly and never should make it to the game. There have been exactly 0 successful landing of a boosters after commercial launch. At a very best - they descended as planned and dropped into water where they wanted them to do so. We can't even speculate about possible successful recovery rate at this point.

lol Dat logic. Yea, pretty sure. Unless you're trying to make a dumb joke here - in which case you have failed.

And they do have a purpose? I read through your post - and still don't get it. There is no contract that would require any of these.

AFAIK: It's nothing that's used on a launch systems. Even space shuttle boosters had to burn out before abort procedures could take place. Might be wrong though - I was never much into reading about abort procedures.

You want something with meme potential? Think of Romania. Gipsy vampire warlock astronaut. You can't beat that. And their space agency also got a stupid name - ROSA (Romanian Space Agency).

Why the sad face? ESA is the one busy with launching - and ESA is build of all these national agencies, so basically - everything that's achieved by ESA is also achieved by every member There is no country in ESA that would have an independent launch capability - all of the launch vehicles are build in multiple member countries. Even the smallest Vega that was originally designed and founded mostly by Italians on their own. And to be fair - Germans, French and Italians in total account for 56% of ESA budget (comparing to 8.1% for UK and 0.9% for PL), so no wonder that major components of the launchers or satellites are build there. Don't ask me why UK contributes so little to the budget - I have no clue, cause the UK history of space exploration is really long and contains plenty of great episodes... so why the government doesn't seem to be bothered all that much by a space sector remains a mystery for me. Especially now when UK is about to build the space port and perhaps eventually there will be a British-made Skylon.

Poland just today created it's space agency - it'll be called "Polska Agencja Kosmiczna" or in relations with foreign countries: "Polish Space Agency", or short: POLSA. Poland joined ESA in November 2012 and was one of a few member countries that didn't have their own Space Agency. It's objectives will be mainly in coordinating relations of science institutes and private sector with ESA, scientific research, and starting initiatives on both: commercial and scientific fields - major hope is that it'll help with expansion of the aerospace sector in Poland and creating larger engineering base on the universities. Here's a longer read about Polish history in space TL; DR; Communist Poland used to be a part of Interkosmos manufacturing components for space crafts and even sent one astronaut in space. Recently Poland sent it's own satellites - first student cube sat, then cubesat-sized scientific satellite with additional satellites being under construction. Poland for years manufactured various components for space industry - between many Philae lander of the Rosetta spacecraft contains a Polish-made sensor set for measuring soil samples (MUPUS - MUlti-PUrpose Sensors for Surface and Sub-Surface Science).

That's irrelevant to the failure rate or anything we discussed. I think that every KSP player should know very well that soild boosters cannot be turned off in the way liquid can. hehe