Ten Key

Wow. First overtime Super Bowl ever.

If I remember correctly, a reusable first stage allows SpaceX to reduce its manufacturing bottleneck and (potentially) maintain a higher number of launches per year. That in turn allows them to spread their fixed costs over a larger number of launches, reducing the cost of each individual launch.

I will admit I'm not well versed on the subject. A cursory search of the internet made it sound like Polaris had teething issues, and its limited accuracy made it difficult to use against hardened military targets. Poseidon seemed like a more mature technology that could convincingly match or outperform any other strategic delivery system. And at that point, even the most ardent lunatic (read: the USAF ) had to concede there was no point in developing a space-based deterrent. Polaris certainly deserves to be part of the discussion. But I was trying to make the point without cluttering things up too much.

And if you don't respect it, even a store bought firework can kill you.

I can see that, actually. The space race, presented without context, does seem out of place, almost as if it popped out of a Hollywood movie set. In order to understand the space race (and Project Apollo), one must fully consider the context. Manned spaceflight was sparked by one world changing technology. . .and it was ended by another. In the aftermath of World War II, decades or even centuries of military theory were suddenly replaced with the doctrine of mutually assured destruction, a "stand off" state in which no one has the ability to win a nuclear war. The fear is thus: If your opponent ever believes they can win a nuclear exchange, they might be tempted to risk a first strike before their window of opportunity closes. In such an environment, the perceived reliability of your nuclear arsenal becomes paramount to your survival. Here's what the timeline looks like. . . 1957 -- Launch of Sputnik 1 and 2 1958 -- Launch of Explorer 1 1958 -- Founding of NASA 1959 -- Atlas Missile Enters Service as America's First ICBM 1961 -- April 12th, Orbital Flight of Yuri Gagarin 1961 -- April 17th, Bay of Pigs 1961 -- May 5th, Suborbital Flight of Alan Shepard 1962 -- Orbital Flight of John Glenn 1962 -- Cuban Missile Crisis 1961-1965 -- Unmanned Ranger Program Lunar Impactors. Nine attempts, only last three probes successful 1963 -- Titan II Missile Enters Service as ICBM 1963 -- Manned Orbiting Laboratory Announced 1963 -- John F. Kennedy Assassinated 1965 -- First Manned Gemini Flight (Grissom/Young) 1965 -- Manned Lunar Mapping and Survey System Initiated 1967 -- Apollo 1 Fire 1967 -- Soyuz 1 Crash 1967 -- Unmanned Lunar Orbiter Program successfully maps lunar surface. Manned LMSS Cancelled 1967 -- Outer Space Treaty Signed 1968 -- First Successful Test of Poseidon SLBM 1969 -- July 20th, First Manned Lunar Landing 1969 -- July 31st, Mariner 6 Unmanned Mars Flyby 1969 -- Manned Orbiting Laboratory Cancelled 1971 -- Poseidon SLBM Enters Service 1971 -- Mariner 9 Successful after being reprogrammed remotely to adjust to unanticipated dust storms 1972 -- Last Manned Lunar Landing 1976 -- Unmanned Viking Mars Landers 1977 -- Unmanned Voyager 1 and 2 Probes launched All right, now, watch this time lapse video of every nuclear test through 1998. Pay attention to the dates, particularly the first satellite launches (1957) and the first manned spaceflights (1961). These nuclear tests are essentially the US and USSR attempting to prove to the other side that their nuclear deterrent works and that nuclear war is unwinnable. But of course, proving the bombs work is only half of the equation. It doesn't do you any good if you can't also prove that you can reliably deliver those bombs. If it seems like the space race was born from the mind of a Hollywood propaganda director, well, it kind of was. The Jupiter rocket that launched Explorer 1 was a nuclear missile. The rocket that launched Sputnik was a nuclear missile. The rocket that launched Yuri Gagarin was a nuclear missile, as was the Redstone that launched Alan Shepard. The Atlas that launched John Glenn was America's first ICBM, capable of reaching the Soviet Union from launch sites in the US. The nuclear deterrent of both nations relied on these missiles, and what better way to show them off in a non-threatening manner than manned spaceflight? See? We are so confident in our missiles that we're going to put people on them and shoot them into space! Why was America so panicked about the initial set backs in the Mercury Program? Because each failure of the Atlas missile called into question the reliability of our nuclear deterrent and, potentially, could have triggered a nuclear war. So the early acts of the space race could be considered a propaganda project that was very, very real. Today, 50 years removed from the events of the space race, this seems ridiculous. But it wasn't at the time. The Titan II that launched the Gemini spacecraft was also an ICBM, but by this time the development of submarine based missiles was beginning to change the nuclear deterrent equation. A dead president, bureaucratic inertia and the strange pressures of the Cold War kept Apollo alive long enough to realize a manned moon landing, but from there. . . Eleven days after Neil and Buzz took those historic first steps, Mariner 6 flew by Mars, followed a few days later by Mariner 7. It didn't get a whole lot of press at the time, but it was another step towards the end of manned spaceflight that had begun some years earlier. Beginning in 1961, and culminating in 1965, NASA launched nine Ranger spacecraft at the moon with the intention of getting the first close up photographs of the lunar surface. The program was marred with failures, and was emblematic of the state of unmanned probes at the time-- only the last 3 probes actually worked. The early attempts at robotic spacecraft were very bad indeed. In 1963, the Air Force announced its intentions to develop the Manned Orbiting Laboratory (essentially, a manned spy platform) and in 1965, NASA and the NRO began work on the Lunar Mapping and Surveying System, a special module that would replace the Apollo LM and allow the crew to map the lunar surface from orbit. Then, in 1967, the Apollo 1 fire killed astronauts Grissom, White and Chaffee, and shortly thereafter the Soyuz 1 crash took the life of cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov. At the same time, the unmanned Lunar Orbiter Program successfully mapped the lunar surface, and the manned LM&SS was quietly cancelled. The Manned Orbiting Lab was cancelled in 1969. Then, in 1971, the unmanned Mariner 9 orbiter arrived at Mars to find the planet shrouded in global dust storms so severe that its mapping mission was placed in jeopardy. Earlier probes would have mindlessly photographed the storm, but controllers on the ground were able to reprogram Mariner 9 to wait out the storm and perform its mission once it had passed. In less than ten years, improvements in computing and electronics had shifted human astronauts from mission critical necessities to very expensive luxuries. The last Apollo landing occurred in 1972, and from then on it was clear-- human beings were no longer needed for space exploration. The military lost interest too, beyond robotic recon satellites. . .the US and USSR didn't sign the Outer Space Treaty because they were suddenly feeling charitable. They signed it because submarines had made space based weapons platforms obsolete. Manned spaceflight lingered on in the form of the space shuttle, but by and large the shuttle existed mostly to keep the people working on it employed. No President wants to take credit for killing that many jobs. The exploration never stopped though, and the technology developed during the space race would go on to drive dozens of robotic missions that would forever change our view of the universe and our place in it.

I don't use autopilots or docking aids. I enjoy flying the ship myself-- docking maneuvers using nothing but the navball and the view out the window are a lot of fun.

The Ares booster and the Altair Lander were scrapped. Orion is still with us, if only just.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/torchships.php

My first exposure to computers came at the tail end of elementary school. Our teachers weren't really sure what to do with the high tech gadgets that were suddenly dropped in their laps, so we ended up using them to learn touch typing. We were also taught how to touch type on an adding machine, or a "ten key", as they're sometimes called. We would eventually get one of these "computer" things at home, and I taught myself a little bit of BASIC, but I would not use a computer in school again until college. And at that point, my programming skills were not where they needed to be and I paid for it. But I could type. And ten key. And I got my first real job one summer during college because none of the other applicants could pass the typing test. There is no such thing as wasted time. Certainly there are instances where it could be put to better use, but it is never truly wasted. And that's basically my excuse for the amount of time I kill on this forum.

This is an old thread, so some of the stuff about KSP's "dumb" drag model no longer apply, but it's one of the best general aircraft tutorials I've seen.

That was harder to find than I thought it'd be. Although writers almost always use continuous thrust in stories set in the BattleTech universe, the technical manuals seem to be a bit more vague on the issue. Almost as if someone did the math and realized how impractical continuous acceleration at 1 G really is.

I thought he was talking about Penny Arcade Gabe. I am now coasting through my morning with a welcome sense of relief.

And this, I think, is the crux of the problem. You can't have a functioning tech tree if you aren't willing to let the early parts go obsolete. And a functioning and sensible tech tree is a critical part of a well balanced career mode. One way of sidestepping this problem may be to include multiple versions of certain parts in career mode. So the first stayputnik you get in career mode is a prototype that has stats appropriate to its place on the early tech tree, and then later on the player has an option to research an "uprated" version identical to its sandbox counterpart. This would allow all the parts in sandbox to be balanced against each other, while providing a managed progression on the tech tree for career mode.

That means the tech tree is giving you newer probe cores way too early.

It can be done. Is the problem with the part though? Or is the problem with the tech tree?

If I remember correctly, BTSM development halted at version 1.04. The mod author may pick it back up again once Squad stops making major changes to the game. Unfortunately, the BTSM release thread was one of the posts eaten in the recent forum glitch.

I usually end up putting a cheap satellite into low Kerbin orbit that's aligned on Minmus' orbital plane. I find it a lot easier to eyeball the satellite's much closer orbit and then launch directly into its orbital plane.

I missed the Space X launch watching this. I regret nothing.

Several years ago now some friends and I decided to all try out Bioware's The Old Republic as a group, and while the gameplay was pretty bad, the conversation portions of the game were rather interesting. Conversations in The Old Republic work very similarly to Mass Effect, with the exception that grouped players go into the conversation together. Each player makes a dialog choice at the appropriate times, and whomever "rolls" the highest number wins and their character says their line. Losing a roll (or opting out) gives you points that increase your odds of winning the next roll. The conversations were "on rails" of course-- each decision point normally offered one stereotypical "light side" and one stereotypical "dark side" choice, with a few "neutral" options spread throughout. Given that we were all playing Republic characters, our conversations were almost universally one "light side" response after another. The quality of the writing and voice acting kept it from being boring. But what was fascinating to me was that, even with such a restrictive system, you could still get some very dramatic, player driven character development. Periodically, someone would break ranks and select the "dark side" choice, and it was in those moments that you'd start to feel the characters emerge from what was otherwise a very controlled experience. Character development doesn't come from dialog. It comes from choices. Put meaningful and difficult decisions in front of your characters, and they will tell you who they are.

It sounds like you might have a posture problem, actually. I had this happen with a game once. . .my seating arrangement was fine, but I was trying to focus so much that I would end up hunched forward without realizing it. Try to pay some attention to how you're sitting while playing, maybe try a foot rest of some sort. You might try turning down the brightness on your monitor a bit and see if that helps. That's more of an eye strain issue, but. . .it couldn't hurt to try.

A good way to visualize it is to imagine a vertical line running up from the ground through your landing leg. As your lander starts to tip, it will pivot on the landing leg. As long as your lander's center of mass doesn't cross your imaginary line, you're okay. If your COM ever crosses that line, you are going to tip over. A wide lander with a low center of mass can survive a severe tip. A tall lander with a high center of mass doesn't have to tip very far at all before it is doomed.

Of note: Lunokhod 2 set a record for total distance covered on the surface of another planet that stood for 40 years. Opportunity finally broke the record in 2014. NASA's LRO was able to locate Lunokhod 2 on the surface. The pictures are pretty neat. http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/posts/699

For what it's worth, Venera 5 and 6 were atmospheric probes, not landers. Both failed well above the surface. Venera 7 was the first spacecraft to land successfully.

URLs for images have to have the file extension in them in order for the forum's auto embed to work. So the URLs need to end with .jpg or .png or what have you. For Imgur, use the "direct link" option. It includes the file extension.

This seems like a great way to wind up in the emergency room.