Arugela

Wouldn't that mean that any, "company," can simply get a bunch of accounts and wishlist their games to seem legit. That seems like a bad system. I didn't know they hid games either. I wonder if we are missing anything good because of it.

If we lived several hundred years ago you could open up a trade to china. Start a violin company and make small fur mittens for all the other worlds kittens. Today... no clue. Ironically skinning a cat is now a crime. And there are 0 ways to do that just like there is to deal with anything else in life. It's like we've been pinned into a single option or less for everything... https://www.bobvila.com/articles/soundproofing-windows/ Bob Vila has your back!!

I wonder if they will back port that into ksp1. I had a similar idea about letting users define such things in the vehicle area. I was saying nbody because I thought someone said it reduced some calculations per part in relationship to ships and gave higher parts count.

This is basically like his second example. Gain speed at the ocean, but get as fast as possible at sea level. Unless I'm missing something. I get between 1100m/s and 1350m/s. Then allow it to build up vertical velocity and punch past 28,000km. Although my last attempt blew it self up mysteriously at 1200m/s. Might have been that I had heat gauges off and didn't notice something. Edit: BTW, once gaining vertical velocity/climb rate, don't let it drop for anything. It will let you cruise past the 20k-28k gap extremely fast on rapier fumes. Any slow down will get you stuck like mud. I've been using around 250m/s climb rate to get past. It might be able to be lower. I'm not sure what altitude. I think the closer to the water the better. Except to nose down a little to get between 360 and 400m/s. I haven't tried letting it nose up after 500m/s without additional speed gain. That might work for the 70k fuel version. That might net it more delta v in space from oxidizer. I may have been trying to get it to too high of a velocity. This plane was originally designed around having stacked engines. It had around 64-72 stacks with a nuke, rapier, whiplash, and toroidal spike. Although It started with just nuke and rapier and I added in with different designs. This meant it originally used similar to example 3 to get to orbit.

Newest version of my 1000t cargo to orbit plane. I've made a major breakthrough. https://www.dropbox.com/s/1j0tsawt6zqmp07/KB-52 1_10_1_2939 x108 8_7_2 PI test.craft?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/19dujzrhf8s6mir/KB-52 1_10_1_2939 x108 9_0_0 PI test.craft?dl=0 <- New version with 90k Fuel. https://imgur.com/a/drAOPRN Still working out small things like if i can get away with 70k fuel to get to orbit. You are aiming for as fast as possible before using up 70k fuel at 98,100 lf remaining. Might change the fuel to 90k if needed. 70k is better for in space DV. Might need to change out two fuel tanks for liquid fuel. But the aerodynamics are basically perfect at high speeds. Just have to figure out how to get to 400m/s faster to start gaining speed. If I can do this with the current fuel this ship is basically maximized as far as abilities. Edit: BTW, I used to make it to 400m/s in 15000 lf usage. That means 153,000 remaining in the current configuration. Having hard time achieving this now. I'm currently hitting this at about 25k use or 143,000lf. If the latter part can be aggressively speed up this might be doable. BTW, this thing can maintain perfect heading to 00.0 degrees of control. It occasionally needs to be tapped back in the other direction. This does allow for very minute dips of the nose for speed though. This is imperative to gaining speed. Tapping up and down at lower speed can be costly. It's something I"m still testing for low speed gains. High speed is about getting past mach 4 and as close as 5 to possible within the fuel allotment. Edit: Some of the roll stability was lost at higher speeds. Not sure how as I was afk. (It was user error. Fuel tanks were not burning symmetrically..) 780 parts(2 are an old marker for the potential empty spot from fuel/cargo being removed.) Takes several hours to get to orbit real time. I think a max of 11 minutes in game time. Not sure with new more optimized speed gains. I've almost made my perfect cargo SSTO. After god knows how many years. This big change happened after I change the tail wings then put the COM as close to the COL as possible in the new position. Once you get to high speeds you can nudge the nose down to get insane speed gains. Like 50m/s or more per nudge. Not sure on max speed yet. It may max out near 1400-1500m/s. This requires lots of manual adjustments to maximize speed gains. To get off the runway you have to hold up at the end of the runway about where those last two sets of shapes are. Then hold up to 10 degrees and keep it until you get fast enough or high enough. I usually hold up to 10 degrees then let it drop a little then pull it back up. Watch out for splashes though. Not sure if gaining altitude is better first. Still working out the most optimal early flight.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e74e/9c6feafccd37cfcfdea893ba36436a7c9dc2.pdf This is going to be stupid, but can this be applied to only ship parts and not the general universe? If so can we have loose parts and then start to simulate proper connections to the parts and get a better overall result. Lets say the parts aren't unrealistic. We have compartmentalized components in real construction. Can we do more realistic physics for ship connects and then simulate connections between them. And then even possibly have the connections and parts simulated separately or something that allow multithread/core part simulation. Couldn't we get real flex for this?(This would require parts made of parts for individual part flex over ship flex.) The connections between parts could even be part of ship construction. You could choose different types of welding or other things to connect the part with more realistic connection strengths. Would it help to make the connections like objects? Technically they are. A weld is a bunch of metal. If physics can be multi core in general. Can that be increased to make up for the parts connection and increase overall parts count? Or is that not the limit of parts count? Could gpu compute then be used to aid the cpu or vice versa?

Yea, it really is a paradox.

This would solve basically every fuel issue I've had in game. I like big craft and physically emptying tanks is a giant pain in the butt. The only other thing like this that would help are indicators for drag like outside so I can find drag bug from things like clipping and cargo. Basically a wind tunnel or similar simulator. I would think artificially simulating the data with existing displays like when you hit F12 would be easy. It doesn't need to be live compute. Just enter a variable number to see the end results and the drag values in the vehicle building areas to see the end results and resolve them without having to fly the vehicle. It would make it so much easier to be able to see drag lines inside with a set of given values to see if the drag lines are off of what the should be.

Always on is doable if they add automation(You could even automate refueling launches or set paths for mining ships to deliver fuel to places and for stations to fix their orbits.). Which then leads to ideas for more gameplay because it will need more. It's not bad if you are hoping to get a more complex game. Like more stuff to do on a planet. Once mining and stuff are automated it starts to turn into an offline rts potentially. Which could have fun stuff continuously added to it. I used to play a game called, "Alien Legacy." It would probably be like that a bit. To put that in perspective. That would make KSP minimally like a 25 year old game. But with improved graphics and physics. If they don't want to add combat, they could add other types of stuff from other game genres that are non fighting/exploration based. Or other things like resources or sciency. Maybe making a giant building or dyson sphere or something stupid for fun. Then maybe add in sim city logic. I would think that could be minimally done without physics based objects. They already have the ground work. Then KSP2 could be different by being voxel instead of non interactive 3d. KSP1 could be like survival games like arc. But without damage or parts counts. Unless they add it to allow meteors to hit stuff. Then they could use reduced parts counts as it doesn't matter to aero or anything. Basicaly fuse the parts into a single giant building with an unpackager to modify it. They coudl still add the same things as in the combat part of alien legacy. But just have it be passive and for gathering resources or something restricted. Then add onto it more in other ways. This wouldn't have to change KSP. It could just add layers and more options for gameplay. You could still stick to primitive ships/launches and infastructures. And always on could be an option also. A tick box could be added to pause while offline or have it run and simulate. Or atleast simulate for what should have happened while offline depending on the variation or chosen version.(They could add both) The rest of these ideas could be added regardless of offline play. In fact always on with automation, or just automation, would fix problem with large stations for the moment. If you can do it and not have to be near the station. No lag. 8)

Mine for resources on the ground and sell it. It's the not so new cheat! 8) This may let you get money to burn. Keep optimizing an array to get more and more money. I think one of the resources makes more than others, but I forget which one. Not sure on time to money ratios.

Please tell me someone put at least 1000 flags onto a ship to get into orbit. You could make a flying base with it. Haven't done flying bases in ages. I used to have a ship that could float across duna. It was great. I want one of those to exist again. They make great surface explorers and delivery ships. Could go good with a massive hauler ship to deliver goods. If only we had bases to deliver too.

That would be hilarious as all the super rich move to the moon and live in houses that look like slums. They would quickly become space hillbillies and the cycle would be complete.

Can you saturate a lens from the side and change aspects of a light going through it? Or anything else like heat. Any thing that can effect the light in any way can be used. Even changing the heat of the device the light goes through could be used as it could send a signal to something as calibration or purposeful data change. Here's a funny idea. You could literally throw a rock in your computer. You hit it with light and other things. You read and calibrate from many angles. You use that to run various things through to get end results with reads. This could be used for many thing. One being fun things like DnD. Specialized toys for table top. although that would be one of a million applications. Rocks, btw, are heavily laden with materials. So, instead of having a specialized device you can pick something up from your yard and check it for usefulness(easy when attached with some electronic subsystems or other sufficiently advaned optic or other computer methods). Different rocks different materials and results. It could literally be a switch for endless applications. Especially if you are using more than just light. Sound/vibration, temperature and many other things could be used. It's just a matter of what needs to be done to get to sync with the optics level. which can be done with many different read/write nodes to the rock. You could paralelize them to sync sufficient data. Or with multiple rock to fill in the blanks depending on use. There are endless ways to do this. Optics is the return of a lot of potential compute methods as it's very physical in nature. Ironically as it's presumed not to be physical.

Actually I was wondering if you could use things like overlap on purpose as a processing method. Why avoid it when you can use a subsystem to help utilize it(or really good alignment.). You could take expected results and modify it to whatever you want. Unless I'm missing something(which is easy). I was assuming you could employ asymmetric means to get data or processing you couldn't otherwise. Optical may lead to an increased means of processing information if you don't restrict yourself to just the normal logic we use in electronic and treat optical as a new beast. Why stick with simple point to point processing when optical allows more? I'm assuming radically new things can be done at this point. Not sure what signal to noise ratio is for light. Have to look that up. I thought light avoided such things all together. Although with my base idea I'm intentionally taking all such things and trying to use it to process more information for much more robust systems. Take heat and other attributes also. Then allow software to decide when needed. It can be used for observation or within various means to process data. And if it's relevant, can't light be run through fiber optics or isolated with physical medium to control saturation at various points. Especially if you want to use it like I just mentioned. If you can predict the results of the use of different medium you could even use that to process information. Anything sufficiently predicted is a method of processing information. I imagine with the ability to read or separate light physically there might be a lot of methods to do this. With a subsystem I assume there is a little time to read and retransmit on a separate node to separate or other things to utilize the data in other means along the path(s). There should be a lot of very useful ways to utilize all aspects of light. I'm also assuming a massive potential combination of different sized devices. Use different things in different ways. larger things can be good for changing out later for instance. Smaller things are good for space and material cost issues potentially. And large can be good for early adoption or other utilizations of space in the opposite direction depending on it's functionality. Plus combined medium like light/electronic could be overlapped on purpose to get rid of normal weaknesses where needed. Assuming it's not being used. I would assume some of this could be done to electronics too. Don't know at what cost though. I'm assuming optical could get more out of it though. And that it may particularly be useful to employ these methods for it. If sufficient means are produced you can process at the node along buses and within dedicated ships. In fact they could take on whole new purposes as chips could be considered much weaker. Or a means to manipulate the bus data. Methods could be even left up to software with sufficient versatility. Which I'm assuming exists in abundance. And should be developed if possible. That should help make up for cost as the bus is a giant chip. A possibly modifiable chip with ships inside it. I went with 32 bit because of the ability for monitor technology to produce it easily. If you can get more bandwidth then yes that would be fantastic. Optical hypothetically could do this by the driver being more powerful or by splitting the data or other things. Or I'm assuming. I'm assuming also that this for initial users might be worth the extra cost. Particularly if you could increase current servers or supercomputers massively. Unless it would already be cheap enough for home computers. I would kind of hope the diverse means I mentioned to process would allow cheaper means to get home versions earlier as the increased adaptability of optical may allow earlier cheaper methods with sufficient overlap in design. Plus a wider more interesting means of new adoption on all sides. If you can just switch out nodes for instance it's a lot better than buying whole new boards. So, it may come with new versatility in upgrading. Or even changing out the hardware per software run if you want in the extreme if desired. Especially when you hit limits in various direction like frequency and space of the optical device to get certain results. Although more means should exist to make alternative too because of all of this. And since were assuming 32bit at a varied nanosecond response time you are getting more than 32 bit from a normal computer. Although that could allow it to be used on older computers. The same with smaller bit ranges. With sufficient design changes and parallelizing or other methods this could be applied to much older computers for fun. the same end results could even be achieved for the most part depending on where and how you offload the processing. The bit depth would only matter if you are doing a very direct simulation of a current computer somehow with optical. Also, fun note: Board designs could change also. You wouldn't need static boards. You coudl change multiple aspects of boards and use them all in varied intermixed ways. You could have solid board with permanent parts, solid boards with adjustable replacable parts. You could have partial boards that stick together and are stiffened to allow interconnecting for various reasons like physical distance for optical or similar for electronics. You could have flat boards or even use the interconnects to make them bend on purpose into shapes. You could then also have variations like lego blocks of various sizes and shapes making 3d patterns etc. Both 3d boards and 2d boards could be used to make 3d processing shapes as you could use nodes with different height optics or have the board have the light paths to varied effects. And as you develop node technology you can take every single tiny quality and use it to process. You don't have to be stuck to one thing at a time. Unless you have to be. If you are stuck to one at a time you can inter switch them with software if it's useful for different applications at the different times or split them do to at the same time. Depends on how much redundancy you want per node. And optical can utilize space more than electronic potentially as you can use accuracy and distance to compute potentially. If you can swap the data between colors/frequencies while retaining the data you can easily use space for both accurate methods or inaccurate methods to deal with physical space constraints/computes or other issues.. Many other issues as it can be used for compute itself. Basically everything an be used to compute. No matter how stupid or how small or insignificant. And the more it's combined with the more useful any one thing can become. The combination of the potential of accurate and inaccurate data can also have wide applications. Very wide applications! 8d The difficulty should be figuring out all the methods of compute and then utilizing them. One of those is using calibration for cheaper parts to get starter boards for home use. IE cost! You could also start to radically start incorporating other means like audio processing or anything else every conceived. It doesn't have to keep up to be useful. There could be uses. So, we could get back to far more than just optical and electronic.

I know one trick. But it's very cheaty. It involves stacking engine in a way where the thrust doesn't hurt each other, but has full thrust. it can also get out of hand very quickly. but if don't care you can reduce engine nodes quickly and change around parts for part count efficiency and possibly better aero etc.

If those are realistic enough those could mess up software potentially. If it can be made to think it's farther away and has more time to react it might make them respond later getting in hits. Assuming that is relevant to the software. I'm assuming there are lots of model kits that have those. https://www.google.com/search?q=soviet+model+kits+missile&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjQqq_dib3rAhXGf6wKHb02DrUQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=soviet+model+kits+missile&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQA1CtvAZYgMMGYOXDBmgAcAB4AIABZ4gBjAaSAQM2LjKYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=_4lIX5CvEsb_sQW97bioCw&bih=648&biw=1376&client=firefox-b-1-d I don't know if this was real. But I think I made one of these in ksp before! ><

Couldn't you just add a rotating belt around the outside or inside like with a jet engine and let it pass air through with some electric or other controls to get a similar effect? Particularly if they can be designed to be either used during normal use or the airflow completely restricted and the outside surfaces made aerodynamic when not in use. Or have them used in flight as a different form of stabilizers with varied aerodynamic qualities based on configuration or other needed things.\ If they are in the wall of the booster and inside or outside flap could open allowing air to pass through. This could then have varied speeds and flap controls to adjust the effect. Isn't that how fanless or other round fans work? And it could rotate around or within or inside the walls of the booster in any spot air can be passed through in any way. Outside of potential cost or ease of ability to make or attach, I would think inside would be better. And is it that hard to put a simple blade inside the body around the outside. I'm assuming their must be some reliable enough methods for this. And for maintenance. I would think it could improve aerodynamics over those weird cheese grate things on the outside.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/301975/references#references I posted another thread on this from my own ideas a while back. It creates the throughput to make a home computer a super computer. I don't understand why these don't exist. I'm pretty sure that mixed optical and electronics could be useful as they could be do calibration work and potentially get around other issues. Especially to start with. It would add a massive single core which would basically be good for this and other games like it. Or it could be an entire system that is handed off too from a basic system and then allows the base system to stay in super low power mode. It could be easily driven by a gpu or other chips. With microled coming out it should give the ability to massively boost existing computer power. And give the nature of optical it can be processed in a million way to utilize the throughput. Including specialized output from the optical. You can easily separate and drop down the data to send back to another component or similar. And various things with a driver being able to switch bitdepth/color or other things could be used to control data on top of physical paths for light. It should allow increasing attributes to be used in order to process information on top of any actual traditional gate logic being built. Part of one idea would be to use bit depth along different color lengths. This could change the speed of the wavelength to either change the timing to swap datas arrival time or to do similar to make it fold in data like a deck of cards potentially in many many ways. Optical should hypothetically bring in an era of basically unlimited software and hardware combinations and functionality. The limit will be actually thinking them all up. Micro led driving at 500ns would be 1 petabyte of througput. 1ns would get you half of an exobyte of througput. This at 32 bit. It seems like we are already at the point this is better than pure electronic. I'm assuming it a matter of effort to design sufficient means to utilise and control it. Which we should have. I randomly think of enough things separately. If enough are made up you could combine things to control data however you want. There wouldn't be a lot of things needed to be developed to do this. Could a mirror with a synced microled light be used to manipulate the data at a node? Or does light not combine in that. Are there any ways reflections and angling can get it to effect the output? If it can be done even in the smallest way you can use it to manipulate data. IE, you have a 32bit or other reduced stream(or increased) and then have it reflect at a node with different light to effect the data. You could paralleling and shift the data into colors(frequencies)/depth or whatever else and use this to recombine to process higher bit depth information. It can be increase or decreased to any size and utilized as many times as needed. If you can add a synced(or purposely unsynced) reprogrammable light at each node you can hypothetical process anything. You are basically folding and shifting data into itself in a way that get the results. This can be done to the point it acts like gates or in different manners with more predictive simple software with the data preconfigured sufficiently. All can be used at once. They were looking at this back in 1989. This has to be more feasible now. If not it should close. It has to be at least useful for enhacing existing suptercomputers or networks. Also, to deal with output data and size of software you could easily use logic to compress data with logic similar to encryption. with the speed of optical computers you could unpackage or package large streams of data into small packets and live unpackage on either end or store. Let alone if you aren't worried about live data and have time to allow it to run longer to increase the data size or run the software in chunks. You could literally waiste nanoseconds of throughput to sequence the software in a way it could be controlled with light frequencies and have it run in many layers in order to get it to run and control the data output. I wonder if this would help with physics. If you don't need the calculation every second you could layer like you do with OS and other computer layers and simply have it arrive on time. Frequencies or color shifts could be time with hardware that can make it change layers or arrive between layers and be used in different ways by read sensors or other utilizations. I'm assuming the current issues are either cost or security. I don't think raw ability to process is the limit atm. One easier method of getting data to components is to shrink down the color bit depth going to a smaller component. This can be done in many ways. Including ignoring other data and having data in the needed spot and treating a higher stream as a lower one. You might even be ableit o have variable data. And anything within x-y depth on the higher bit stream would still be treated as x in a lower bit. This could also be done in many way. An alternative is to actually separate the data into a smaller stream and send it to the component. Optical should open up computers to basically infinite combinations. Unless you build one that does all of it. Then you just need software to choose what to do. I'm pretty sure all methods can be combined to boot. You can also use things like heat and calibration methods to help or add new ways to control the data flow. And any bad processing can be used. You don't need accuracy as you could use a subsystem or other things to shift and make it automatically do what it should at any given node. Or you can purposely do this to process in various ways. This in itself could be a massively power way to do this to do similar to gates or other higher bit depth changes. Another is to do complex geometric processing. If you know what it should be and shift it you can do real live geometry. Say you have a cube design with read sensors representing real positions. It could even use ambient light(assuming you can predict and control the proper outcome.) and then shift to the correct data for a circle. The hardware could be put in actual geometric positions to get real data. And increasingly complex patterns could be layed over each other. the shifting could also allow improper positions so you can get read/write heads that should share a space both working. This could also allow other shapes that are inaccurate to be used to layer processing more efficiently potentially. Assuming you even need to do that. At minimum to make such a reflector you could use the equivalent of a triple diode with two inputs. Or some way to get lossless read head and redo the image with a new microled. Basically what they do with electric signals. redistribute it. Not sure if that is useful though. Could you combine frequencies if accurate enough and layer them and use that. If a read head can deal with the logic at the end or you know what the logic should be it might not matter. In fact having both would give more ways to process information. combined and non combined light could add more data per moment to utilize making even more throughput. which can then be used or sacrificed during use. Parallelizing things gives infinite ways to separate and combine data. And bit depth can be near infinitely increased or decreased and used or sacrificed for the sake of various tasks. Yea, I now this is a bus. This would be processing on a bus! Anything else can be added into it giving far more processing overall and in much more complex/robust combinations. And if quantum ever comes out and can send data faster across space with no physical connection this could expand it more. Assuming it sends data faster. There was that method where they are supposed to sink up over a distance live. Assuming that has no lag. that could lead to ways to process geometry and other things that is impossible now. Maybe literally do what are currently impossible calculations. Maybe this concept could be used: The simplest application would be filtration methods. This could be combined with various recombination methods. This could do something like parelelize then use the led method to modify on single sections of data and then recombine with programmability. You could also try to make the filters programmable. That could also take the place of using synced up microled with reflectors. Assuming that even works. Which if you can recombine light it would have too in essence. Although if a read head method could be used it could be combined if it doesn't sacrifice anything. Could this game get full physics with such throughput? It could also get rid of the need for expensive video cards. Unless you want one to drive the microled programmable nodes. You could also use the color depth in a single color or across colors. This could be used to different effects as the data might arrive a split second later. This could then read and sequence and retransmit. Assuming that saves time and the subsystem is fast enough or another method used. You could also scale color depth into a single color or spectrum to change various aspects of the data. This could pair with distance for static arrays or whatever other trick could be applied. Alot could be done with data structures in the bit. and it could be adjust in many ways to control or change data. Especially if you know your data well enough.

Yea, you could modify your face to look disappointed in a silly way. You would be genetically disappointed. And you could use your phone and make it change your face temporarily to an emote. You could then text with your face! Clint Eastwood level of disappointment! By that time emotes will have enough pixels to do memes like this. And hence realistic facial features.

Convert this into a primitive gyroscopic attack vehicle: Part of the logic is to be so stupid the enemy is in shock or laughing and doesn't have the ability or as fast of a reaction in response. Or any AI is so confused by the unidentified object it can't figure out a correct response. Although it may not have to identify it. Unless the odd movement messes up it's calculations. Or tie up it's systems trying to calculate the correct response. IE, it's so stupid it might work. You could also fill it with ball bearings and have it break on impact or something. (or release them up close.)

You could span them out like a shotgun and hope. If you put it in the path of enough other things it may hit something eventually. If you really want to be mean. Certain trajectories and the pattern of release of the rocks could increase the odds greatly. And you save on materials! Reusable or reloadable would make it even funnier. And like you said several shots could be made with bypass's. I assumed you just get the satellite into the path of the other satellite and then decrease relative velocity and release the rocks in the path with enough velocity to hit and destroy or to make it impossible for it to dodge the incoming stuff. The rest is just placing the rocks in the correct place and the getting out of the way or reacceleration. If it's hard to detect rocks you might get several releases. Not sure how much a rock can take before breaking apart though and not working. If not maybe it could disable weaker parts of a satellite. Assuming it can't just go through. You could even release those old rockman toys as a joke. You could try to give him robotics! 8d His rock form would put all thrusters in the same directions and he could adjust to adjust thrust. Just need some added control parts. Or vintage muscle man figurines!!! 8D The advantage of muscle man toys is that they are probably easy to remold. https://www.google.com/search?q=he+man+vehicles&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiSwquAoZrrAhUNb60KHfjeDxMQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=he+man+vehicles&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzICCAAyAggAMgIIADIECAAQHjIGCAAQCBAeMgQIABAYOgYIABAFEB5QvB1YryNgmiloAHAAeACAAbcCiAGADJIBBzMuMS4yLjKYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=x0g2X9LCMY3etQX4vb-YAQ&bih=648&biw=1376&client=firefox-b-1-d The greatest military technology of them all. HE MAN!!! The Russians would die of laughter as their entire satellite fleet died from crappy 80's and 90's toy lines!

It does with a tiny ion rocket on it's butt. Or if released knowing where it had to go from a base satellite. A tiny satelite with rocks from your driveway could reduce the world to nothing in a single trip. I doubt the russians are being that clever though. If it happens we'll just have to build better satellites with the inherent ability to dodge.(or more so.)

Can't you just put a rock in space to accomplish this? Literally you could use sticks and stones and send us back to the stone age.

That is why I posted the video of the first parts of the blast. I don't know if it shows anything new. It does show stuff though. I would be interested in if it confirms or deny's anything we currently think. I haven't seen any other super close up video footage besides it. 0:35-0:49 It sounds like it could be fireworks. But I don't know. It's also a little weird sounding for fireworks. Does anything in the video give solid evidence as to what was happening?

I wonder if this is Raxxla related. How long has that name and this mission been planned?