Hcube

It's been a pretty long time since 1.0 came out, and the U5 update hasn't even gotten in the hands of the Q&A testers yet. And it's a good thing ! I'm pretty sure that this couldn't be called a "rush"... 1.0, now, that was some rushed update, not because of subjective changes, but because of objectively bugged content and features deleted in extremis (*cough* heat gauge memory leak *cough* fairing base mass *cough* the barn is gone *cough* assymetric burnouts still around *cough*). I don't think that U5 will be rushed like 1.0 was. I trust the devteam !

Pretty much impossible without any other data... It looks like Ca(OH)2 is a double acid so you should know what couple you are working with. It also looks like it is a weak acid but i can't really tell for sure... that should be given data, along with solubility values. Then the pKa of the couple you are working with are always good to have. Then, pH=-log© or pH=-pKa + log( [base]/[acid] ) should do the job....?

THANK YOU. That's where the barn problem is (in my opinion) : why are we starting with the Mercury program ? If we were starting with sounding rockets and V2s, (aka starting with probes and .625m engines), the barn would fit per-fect-ly into the game, and the announced military-kinda-revisited-barn stuff would fit even better. But even though, the "craptastic" (as you wonderfully say ) theme should be dumped at all costs and sent to Dres.

I'm sorry, but as a Bach lover and harpsichord/piano player, i can not let this remain unpunished, i must react... : No, No, and NO ! There are NO Bach piano works. Terrible anachronism. Bach did not ever compose a thing for piano. Pianos had not even been invented at that time. He barely saw the very early pianofortes and the end of his life !! Playing Bach on piano because you don't have an harpsi by hand is alright (and actually pretty understandable since harpsichords don't run around the streets nowadays), but playing it/listening to it on piano by choice is pure blaspheme ! Gross ! It sounds completely wrong. Of course listen to whatever you want since it's all a matter of taste, but now when you will listen to Bach on piano at least you will know how bad of a profanation it is.

I'm a keyboard (Any kind of instrument with a keyboard will do ) player myself so i play/listen alot of bach (on harpsichord not piano you savages!) and French composers like rameau couperin and stuff. Also some piano music : Schubert, satie, etc etc ! Not gonna mention titles otherwise it will take days OP : @ your sig : there are no wrong notes. -Miles Davis

You guys are forgetting an important aspect of the positive loop mechanic : when temperature increases, a lot of ice and snow from the polar caps and more generally from cold areas on the planet melt, thus heavily lowering the albedo of the planet, wich then absorbs a lot more energy from the sun. this is actually a very very important factor. Maybe it's the answer to your problems? I have a graph somewhere with the albedo, temperatures, and diverse CO2 and oxygen isotopes from foraminifera, i'll try to find it later (don't count on it, my notes are a hot mess )

There is a similar closed-cycle life-arium in a FabLab in my town... it's basically a huge aquarium with algae, enormous LED panels, a lot of pipes and... some fish ! It is completely autonomous (or at least it is what they told me). I guess replacing the fish with human beings would be very hard ! since the whole thing is big already (like a whole room) and only supports a few fish

Yeah, without pictures we can't help you. I'd advise you to download a craft that can do a mun landing-and-return (sometimes there are tutorials that provide a craft file) and do it step by step following the tutorial, just like if someone was holding your hand and then you will understand a bit how it works, and try to do it on your own. It's really not *that* hard with a good spaceship. And you shouldn't be using mechjeb at this point (in my opinion) EDIT : whoops i was replying to the OP and the first posts... i've read further now *facepalm*

Tough choice... I'd say Titan II/Gemini, for the history, the looks and the sound it makes when the turbopump starts... Also an Ariane lover (they make the APCP for the boosters in my town ! ), especially Ariane 4 and Ariane 5. I have yet to see the SLS flying, but it sounds pretty badS from what we can see !

Best: Gattaca. It is truly amazing, it has everything, and even rockets and space ! good actors/acting, plot and universe. Middle : not sure, i always either like a movie or dislike it. If it's middle/meh, i tend to consider it simply bad... so i'll give another one i like : The right stuff : just awesome Worst : must be captain america. During the whole movie i kept wondering wether it was a parody or not. Turns out it isn't. It is actually so bad, wrong and ridiculous that it could be a good parody.

My inner monologue has the voice of ULA's launch commentator...

Surely a RTG would be more than enough to melt the ice... that is nuclear and has been used a few times, people are OK with that. But i don't think it's going to happen

Thanks for your answers guys i was proven wrong and am learning a lot in this thread

I can only agree with you, i totally understand your point. But what i meant about "they died anyway" part is by no means that i thought that search and studies should be stopped, but that it is not huge great news and that it does not deserve the place it has right now in the media titles... Still not sure about the part with "knowing what went wrong will help prevent similar errors", because while this is very true in rocketry (cf CRS-7) i am not sure that finding what went wrong on the 777 will change anything to its design, its maintenance or the way it is flown since the triple7 is a very common and very reliable airliner (only 5 or 6 critical failures iirc).

i am so very tired of the fuss about this debris right now. It literally is all over the news (atleast in my country), and on popular media channels it comes along with a bunch of wrong explanations from "specialists", talk-shows were they talk a lot but say nothing, and a lot of BS. It is literally everywhere : "debris will be analysed in France, hooray" ; "debris was loaded on the plane and is about to depart from La Réunion" ; FLASH NEWS : "debris has arrived in France, and is currently waiting in a warehouse"...etc If ever the data that will be recovered from that flaperon tells something about the crash, ie wether it was a depressurisation, explosion, terrorist attack, engine failure..., (wich is highly unlikely assuming that the flaperon does not contain computing/memory units->no flight data stored in it, and has spent roughly a year and a half kn saltwater), would it really change anything ? do we actually care wether it was an engine failure or a depressurization ? The passengers died anyway. I doubt that finding traces of kerosene on a flaperon, indicating an engine fire blahblahblah will change anything to that... Am I the only one fed up with that story and feeling that way ?

i would say equatorial since gilly is not a place i would visit very often, and equatorial is the best if you want to do an Eve return mission. When doing one of those you will aim for an equatorial landing site so that you will get the much-needed rotation boost when lifting back up! this way, you will be on the same plane as your refueling station, refuel, and head back to kerbin !

I don't know why you guys are even discussing the specs of the reaction and the ecological aspect... Good luck with stocking ozone in the first place ! this alone makes it impossible/not viable. Not even talking about the fact that it is a toxic gas (and it smells!)

I guess it could shield the craft from charged particles of the solar wind, but i don't think that electromagnetic radiation like UV, Xray and gamma rays (the dangerous ones) can be repelled by a magnetic field this way.

well, at 119000m above jool the force acting on you is ((jool mass*ship mass)/(119000^2))*(6.67*10^-11) newtons N, so your thrust should be equal to that... but then your mass will decrease as you burn propellant so the force of jool acting on you will decrease and thus you will need to throttle down the engine that's about it ! no need for surface gravity value, just jool's mass I don't know why the gravity stats ae off, but since Jool is gaseous it may have a surface that is not defined very well and that could be the cause of discrepancies... anyway the wiki is old and rarely updated !

well, with the internet connection i have right there (vacation!), loading the main google search page takes about 3 to 4 minutes, that's pretty much why i asked here ! thank you !

Hey yeah i watched it too ! i wanted to look for shooting stars at first but obviously it's very hard to see any during a blue moon so i observed some lunar craters with 8x binoculars and i could see everything... it was very nice this night ! By the way, does anyone have a map of the visible side of the Moon with the locations of diverse probe and apollo landings ? i couldn't find any after an extensive 5minute-search and i'll rep anyone that can provide a link ! thanks

Came across this... It's all either stupid sophisms, misquoted, bad sources, false, or plain BS. It's particularly funny from #30 to#35. I Also laughed/facepalmed when i read the very end of the article with the author's bio...

1000 tons ! ?? urgh ! for a fly-by, aim for less than 60 tons on the pad !

No need to look further... here is your problem. For a flyby mission this is way too big... Just use the smallest probe possible and then go with a few oscar-Bs and an ant engine for around 3000ms of delta V. And this will be super light... then the lifter can be a 1.25m rocket, very small and very cheap. The whole thing should be super light. Just don't use the mainsail for this kind of stuff ! the skipper can be good for super-heavy ships but mainsail is inefficient, heavy and overkill for the job

i haven't tried it (didn't bring my calculator on vacation) but something you wrote bugged me : the equation you copy-pasted uses the neperian logarithm (ln) along with decimal powers (10^x) and you wrote it yourself using the neperian logarithm and the exponential (e^x) function. Maybe you messed up here ? just an idea