JoeSchmuckatelli

Correct me if I'm wrong - but even if launch cargo capacity = landing capacity on Earth, wouldn't the max cargo a SS could land at any one time be equivalent to three standard shipping containers worth of stuff? To me that seems militarily insignificant. You are certainly not supplying much more than a Battalion with this. Also, given the proliferating shoulder fired AA missiles and theater denial vehicles out there... You don't want SS to land anywhere close to the hot zone. It might be good for delivering critical shortfalls to a secure, rear area like @SunlitZelkova's AIM's for F-35s idea... But again for regular military logistics it's fairly insignificant, per load. Run a fleet like we do with C5 Galaxy and you might change those numbers. Edit - let me add that the PR / morale boost potential for using SS in the Disaster Relief scenario is far more likely... But as I think about it - the news howling about 'The US landed a Freaking Starship full of weapons just outside of Dictatorstania!!!' would be a PR coup / morale boost, too. (one that could only be beaten by 'Dictatorstania shot the US Super Starship out of the sky!!!')

This is a VERY different game from KSP2, even if they share some elements. I don't think it will compete with KSP2, directly, but they both might turn out to share some of the same demographics w/r/t playerbase. (Space-interested people who like to build and explore).... But the gameplay is SOOOOOOOOoooooo different from what I expect (or even want) from KSP2. That said: it's likely to be a game I might buy. There are elements I like. I especially liked that the crab things did not automatically attack (I assume that, had the player shot one, they'd all attack). It was a cool design choice to allow players to just avoid certain fauna. Still - it's ultimately a story-driven FPS with a space exploration theme and base/ship building elements. KSP2 is... KSP, too.

That's actually a nice feature: if you had a section in the K-Pedia about the chutes and efficacy of use, you could refer to that during the construction phase of the probe/lander and actually set the correct parameters in the VAB (or later if you forgot). That would be a cool combo of 'useful and informative science' in-game and 'real-world' (game) applications.

That's certainly an impressive accomplishment in that timeframe. Question: I've seen numerous reports that in a lot of places the rapidly built stuff is also rapidly degrading stuff (water leaks, crumbling concrete, fascia/cladding falling off in sheets - I'm not talking about the criminally negligent stuff, like bridge & building collapses, but rather the 'lipstick on a pig' thing where it looks good initially but then the problems start to emerge shortly after occupation - mold, water leaking, wall paper bubbling, tiles falling off that kind of thing). What kind of domestic response is there to the safety issues and loss of value to purchasers/users of buildings that should see decades of utility becoming degraded in 3-5 years? Are there consumer protections for folks who buy a lipsticked pig?

I actually envision something even simpler than that. Functionally, doing science in KSP did nothing more than grant the player points to unlock parts of the tech tree. I don't actually want to change that. All I want is the added 'record' of science done in a way that builds the K-pedia and player 'knowledge' about the different bodies. Honestly for no reason other than it would be fun and give context to new players about why you click the various modules beyond mere points and prospective scientists about what kind of things scientists do with spacecraft. My ulterior motive? My 12 year old daughter. She's never played KSP, but loves space. She's very interested in science - but doesn't know a lot about it, yet. Playing a game that teaches about physics and spaceflight is awesome - and I think it can be a phenomenal tool for expanding awareness of all the science people do with access to space (astronomy, planetary science, etc etc.)

We already know the answer. Syria and Afghanistan. The OPFOR got actionable Intel and material / direct support from one or both of Russia and China). Neutral party's civil infrastructure is supposed to be immune from the conflict - and generally are - presuming they're not providing aid and comfort to a belligerent. However, shipping (or any logistics, including aircraft and ground transportation) that are traveling to, and especially within) a belligerent are targetable. (Germany declared the waters around GB as a war zone (c.f. 'No Fly Zone') - warning everyone that all ships might be interdicted - and yet the sinking of the Lusitania cascaded into the US entering WWI). Should the US and either or both of China and Russia become direct belligerents - nothing in Space is safe. However, so long as the conflicts are carried out by proxies - Space should be safe. (The current unpleasantness is also a good example - Putinstan hasn't shot down any satellites, either). This is a really good point - but I see it in a broader light (assume that you recognize this as well): the immediate risk for China isn't someone using Starlink access for military purposes... Its losing control of the info-space within China. Should its people get free, uncontrollable access to the internet, they can no longer control the narrative and the whole coercive 'social credit' system implodes. This is very true and originates in the Grenada debacle

Good point - but I'm envisioning 'canned' reports that you can unlock along the way. I certainly don't want to have to actually analyze the science! I just think it would be fun and educational to have stuff about the planets revealed along the way as players progress - they can unlock and build their own Kerbilopedia in stages by skipping around doing science or deliberately doing something that will expand their knowledge of the target body. Like - if you run a temp check at Kerbin's Shores you get an entry about that added to your K-Pedia. When you repeat this while Flying Above Kerbin's Shores you ge an additional entry. Repeat in a different biome - more information about Kerbin. Before long, you know everything you can about the various biomes of Kerbin (=the page is almost full) - but then maybe you noticed that you forget to get a soil sample from Kerbin's Desert and can tell that from glancing through the K-Pedia.

I've been thinking about your post for a while. It would have been a brilliant addition for SF to have added capabilities to the Starlink satellites. Like a seriously, brilliant, good idea for someone to have leaned in on what SX was doing and added capabilities to the satellites and piggy back off that. Unfortunately, I don't think the US government is that nimble. I'm also not sure whether there are laws or regulations that might hinder such a plan. My impression is that the US likes to draw a line between defense owned and operated satellites and those with a decidedly civilian purpose (not that they are against taking advantage of (&buying) commercially available services). That last part makes me think that if SX added capabilities (purely independently) to their satellites, then SF might be a customer - but not a controller. IOW - China might perceive Starlink as a threat - but that does not necessarily mean that the constellations are legitimate military targets. (Which - let's be frank, is a distinction that China likely cares nothing about). The odd thing about people is that we generally judge others by the way we understand ourselves... So it's likely inconceivable for China that SX isn't hosting military or government controlled capacity even if we think it unlikely. Edit - which is to say... If SF isn't adding capabilities to the SL constellations - they should be.

Zeesh! https://www.space.com/news/live/nasa-artemis-1-moon-mission-updates "Nail added there are more issues forthcoming: there appears to have been a pressure limit exceeded during fueling in the liquid oxygen for the upper stage, and a small grass fire has emerged nearby the launch pad. It is unclear what the grass fire was caused by, and agency officials have their cameras on the area to monitor the smoke coming out of the grass. It is unclear what impacts these issues would have, if any"

The idea posted in the other thread - a kind of Civilopedia (Kerbilopedia?) that 'fills itself out' or gets revealed over time as the player conducts science is an elegant concept. I think something like that would be a cool thing - where you can review the specifics of the target body and maybe that helps you with mission planning or ship construction. It would also be a way to make doing the run make sense beyond 'oh look, I unlocked the gravity probe - quick let's run a few missions with that onboard so I can unlock radiators, next' thing.

These are great descriptions, thanks! I never realized how much handwavium was used to allow ships like this in SciFi. Just operating the rotating section during the coast phase with zero maneuvering while rotating makes absolute sense (now that I think about it with the right frame of mind!). Between you and kerbiloid I now 'get it' and feel kinda silly for even asking the question. Funny how you don't know what you don't know!

Sometime in the 90s I spotted the ISS while the Shuttle was docked to it. I was in the Southern Arizona desert and it was a very bright, fast moving dot that I tried to resolve with binoculars... But it was so jumpy that it wasn't worth it. I recently commented on a picture of (a Falcon or some other rocket) stage separation taken from a ground source - so I know it's possible. However if I recall correctly, the image was shot by Uber-professional gear in a dedicated gimbal (practically military hardware). I suspect that there are high end gimballing trackers in the Enthusiast ($$$) end of the amateur astronomy world that could be used to allow you to resolve SS with a commercial scope - but satellites cross so fast I'd think you would have to use a camera to get pictures (I. E. I doubt you could eyeball it)

Interesting read - thanks!

My son starts high school this fall. Excited, I wandered around the campus during a parent's event looking for my favorite part of high school: the shop classes. Mostly, I wanted to see what toys they had in the wood shop, as that's my forte, but I thought it would be cool to see if they still had 'Auto-Shop' and 'Machine Shop' classes that my friends enjoyed. Nope. The school's 'Shop' area had CAD boxes, CNC machines, Additive Manufacturing stations and 'Robot Lab'. (what, am I old, or something???) How JWST's first science images will blow us all away - Big Think This is a pretty decent 'anticipatory' piece. Best we can do: the Webb team is not going to let anything slip before the 12th it seems

I'm a sucker for tank info, tis true. Allow me to share this: Does the tank have a future? | The Economist

My fault, probably... Although I can't think why my posts would be so tribbling.

Not 100% sure - but I'm guessing the US back then was a more supportive environment... and didn't need to be reminded as much. Today's America? Space is... Oh look! Another Chinchilla video!

IB4L

That was awesome! -- oddly, the deeper I went, I actually experienced a sense of anxiety as I watched the last bit scroll by. What an accomplishment! (meant both ways)

we are featuring MIRI’s medium-resolution spectroscopy mode and sharing our first spectroscopic engineering data. Once the spatial alignment and image quality of the several bands are well characterized, the MIRI team will prioritize calibrating the spectroscopic response of the instrument. This step will include determining the wavelength solution and spectral resolution throughout each of the twelve fields of view using observations of compact emission-line objects and diffuse planetary nebulae ejected by dying stars. We show the exceptional spectral resolving power of the MRS with a small segment of a spectrum obtained from recent engineering observations of the active galactic nucleus at the core of Seyfert galaxy NGC 6552. Once these basic instrument characteristics are established, it will be possible to calibrate MRS so that it is ready to support the wealth of Cycle 1 science programs due to start in a few short weeks.” (From the blog) ... Looking like Webb might offer a tad more granularity than Spitzer.

Sometimes math is not the answer!

Man - I could not have put this in words any better than that! Wish I could give you 10 likes!

Would you want some sort of reviewable, persistent and updating report about the celestial bodies and their biomes to view in-game? Edit: I think we need a Kerbilopedia that populates as players unlock modules and perform science on or about various celestial bodies and the respective biomes. While in KSP, the player would 'do science' and simply get points towards unlocking tech-tree levels, I envision a slight rework to that system. ~ OP STARTS ~ Perhaps some kind of spectroscopy reports or trace-gas / elements display that you can review about the different destinations? Or are you OK with the 'did science' and points thing? ... For me - I'd like to have a 'folder' or page for each of the stars, planets & moons - one that gets updated when you do science. Spectroscopy of the visitable stars Biome specific reports of trace elements and gasses Ore concentration etc. Not that any of these are necessary - but for the sort of role playing of space exploration and communicating to the youth about what space science is like that KSP offers I think having a persistent "science gathered" and "what we know about celestial body x" file players could add to and refer to along the way would add to the immersion

10 months to go... No sense of doing much more hype than they've already done. It's like @Gargamelwrote some time back: dropping too much info in the trailer makes it less likely for people to go see the movie. I would not expect much more than a few developers updates before the release announcement next year.

That is one of the secret weapons on American tanks - the spare pair of hands for maintenance. Tanks break down constantly and need a lot of attention. Beyond the crew - the logistics & maintenance tail of a tank unit is huge and enormously expensive. The fuel train alone is redonkulous... And because the darn things are heavy and treated rough... Something is almost always broken. But They are effective. (meaning I'd be cautious about drawing too many conclusions from recent events)