Buster Charlie

Finally! I've asked for something much simpler in the past, and you're delivering the goods ,only better! It would be nice although maybe not possible, to have a heat overlay style system to check for exposure. But as I've said ,I'm a huge fan of nuclear rockets, but I think this would be a better balance to the LV-National rather than an artificially poor TWR I agree with this, or at least a module manager to reduce the weight of the engines by whatever the shield will weigh. Unless this would lead to drone abuse since you're not modeling non organic damage. Maybe as a stop gap, give the heat shields high shielding, so you could stock a larger size heat shield on your command pod to provide extra shadow

So much hate, I will say that I doubt that all the call of duty people will be hopping on here to destroy the community. I myself would love to play with my spouse, working on building a space station, or a duna colony.

I said before we just need a shameless ripoff called battlestar Kalactica, where you manage a rag tag fleet of survivors through uncharted space while being pursued by the evil robot kylons. Along the way you'll have to gather resources to keep the fleet going. By your fracking command.

I was so being sarcastic in response to the comment that there are not enough parts in stock to justify filtering out unwanted parts. Sorry it was not more obvious.

When are they going to nerf jet engines ? They don't seem balanced when compared to gasoline piston driven propellers... I don't honestly understand why the nuclear rockets need to be "balanced " by making them artificially bad. Being a sandbox game, if players feel they're not fun, don't use them. I know mech jeb is a mod, but people decide not to use it, some people decide to use it. Nobody said "let's make mechjeb 25% of the time purposely destroy the rocket to make it balanced.

I Also Tried To Think Of Plenty Of Single Player Uses Since This Would Obviously Be A Lot Of Work To Implement, Don't Want It To Be Too Narrow Focus.

OR animals.... I read we were not even sure people could survive in orbit, so we sent animals first.

If they add aliens, they should essentially look like different colored kerbals (minions?). And you should be able to fly a ship to their planet, abduct them, put them on a cargo ship back to your solar system and sell them for profit. I know what I'm suggesting sounds terrible in the context of human ethics, but is probably no worse than burning kerbals to death in our death-trap rockets en mass. And in all seriousness it would give an excuse for a new solar system and a new resource gathering mechanic, combined with life support, a real challenge. You can use the radio communication mechanic mentioned in OP to locate other civilisations, and punish them for their foolishness.

Yes thank you so much. I got so frustrated that I couldn't find it again, I'm doing some ship prototyping in sandbox and would like to be able to tweak my design without hyper editing all over the place.

I downloaded a mod a while back and Lost it, but basically you fit ALT-F something key and it made a backup quicksave, loaded your current ship into the VAB, you could edit the ship in the VAB then hit the key again and it would inject your edited ship into the place of your old ship. Anyone here know what im talking about?

But what if the cost of living on a floating Venus base is less than the cost of child support? In all seriousness, the reason why, or economical feasibility, is not required for a conversions on how it could be done, or what is the least worst option.

I know people don't really use mods in ksp, but part of me really finds it annoying to clutter up the VAB with parts I'll never use.

More to the point, shouldn't there be an easy in game GUI method of hiding parts we don't use?

Someone asked why would people go? Why do people go to Alaska? Not to stereotype but beyond the adventitious free spirit pioneer types, you seem to have a lot of people skipping on child support, warrants for their arrest, and lots of drugs and alcoholism. Oh yeah government subsidies. So the down side is our mercury colony is not really affordable for fugitives from justice types. This is why we need to make space colonies follow the same human incentives as all colonies, if we can't get rich off of exploring gold, then we need to either make it subsidised government pork project, a place to send prisoners (g'day), or make life on earth so politically oppressive that people would rather live on mercury. We just need to make space a giant government funded money no object version of Australia, Alaska, or make earth a giant version of [deleted to avoid political topics ] so people have no choice. With any luck, by the end of this century everyone on space colonies will be like Kurt Russell in the thing, a bearded alcoholic McCready with a flamethrower and a stick of dynamite ready to throw his whiskey into the late 70s era chess playing computer of life. Also consider this, another reason to send humans instead of probes is that humans are much better at customer service.

I posted on this, if there is a simulator I think it should look very basic and uninteresting as not to take away they enjoyment of visiting a planet for the first time. I also think, as you mentioned simulators are limited, that any simulator should be dependant on researching a planet just like IRL. So I've proposed the idea of ground based, orbital, and probe based sensors and telescopes that you could target a body with, and over time (based on duration of study, number of sensors,and technology of sensors, and proximity of sensors) you developed more info and better simulators. For example ground based telescopes could let you guess the orbit size, but you need more advanced methods of discovering mass, terrain, atmosphere, temperature, etc. So while early game you just know Duna is there, you have no way to simulate it to any degree. So say you build a satellite in kerb in orbit, now you see its rocky, not a gas giant, it's a certain size, maybe guess it's density, but that could be wildly off, you don't see a thick atmosphere so you can make some aerodynamic guess. So really the next step is a probe flyby, you get a real good look at the surface, some good spectral analysis. So you now have a good enough data set for a fair simulaton, and rough terrain mapping. But if you really want to make sure jeb comes back alive, you drop an unmanned probe onto Duna. You don't know enough to even land it right, but even if it crashes you know almost everything you need to simulate a landing. You know have an atmospheric density map as you transmit while falling, and you know the gravity acceleration, local temperature, whatever. Basically, I'd make simulations and testings as effective as your dataset, and as generic looking as not to replace real flights. I'd also use this to emphasise unmanned probe research on new planetary conquests.

I was honestly thinking a more casual approach. It doesn't have to be 100 percent accurate all the time, I was just thinking that it would get updated on a basis at which people update it. Because right now, there is no such list beyond ckan, which I'm guessing you may be able to poll for data. But there athlete mod authors that reject ckan, so I'm just really looking at ways to take ckans list and complete it

I forgot I posted this idea here (my bad) so I posted an in depth idea here If anyone likes this idea, go to that thread so not to hijack

Yeah I'm not quote sure why people would pick a license that is antithesis to their philosophy. As a mod user, I want to use CKAN, I won't ask for support from a mod if i'm going against the mod creators wishes, but if the mod author maintains their mod on github, and CKAN pulls from github, I'm not entirely sure what's wrong here.

Why don't you just offshoot your mod into a new license and just don't provide any updates or support to a piece of software which you have no control over? Next time you upgrade your mod rename it to SUM DUM 2000! with a new lisence and you're all set!

Artificial Radiation Belt Lifetime From Aerospace Projects Review Volume 1, Number 4 Artificial Radiation Belt Do not launch Orion from anywhere within the "Trapping Region" From Aerospace Projects Review Volume 1, Number 4 Detonating pulse units in space near Terra can create nasty artificial radiation belts. The explosion can pump electrons into the magnetosphere, creating the belt. There are two factors: detonation altitude from Terra's surface, and magnetic latitude in Terra's magnetic field. If the detonation is within 6,700 kilometers of Terra's surface (i.e., further than 2 Terran radii from Terra's center) and at a magnetic latitude from 0° to 40°, the radiation belt can last for years. Above 2 Terran radii the radiation belt will last for only weeks, and from latitude 80° to 90°, the radiation belt will last for only a few minutes. The military discovered this the hard way with the Starfish Prime nuclear test. The instant auroras were very pretty. The instant EMP was very scary, larger than expected (but the test was using a 1.4 megaton nuke, not a 0.001 megaton pulse unit). The artificial radiation belt that showed up a few days later was a very rude surprise. About one-third of all low orbiting satellites were eventually destroyed by the radiation belt. The radiation belts are harmless to people on Terra, but astronauts in orbit and satellites are at risk. Looking at the info I quote above, I'd like to also point out that as I've mentioned before there is such a ridiculous efficiency of this system in the atmosphere (because you can get away with even smaller bombs for the same amount of thrust) that it would be worth it to give up the traditional launch site requirements (Equatorial launches, near infrastructure). I don't know if you can launch nuclear rockets from the south pole, but certainly it'd probably avoid killing that many civilians. On the other hand I think the north end of Alaska might be nice. We could really liquid off the russians and launch them from that tiny island in the berring sea that is right off their coast.

There are worse things than death, you know like living in a society that gave up on itself in the 70's ;P Seriously, where is my supersonic southwest flight?

That's my point. My Reply is simply that I don't have to 'convince' anyone about the Orion Drive, i'm not in a position to make a difference in this, i'm just chatting about the technical side. What really liquided me off about lost potential is, not just the payload size, but the fact that it could put said huge payload into mars orbit in FOUR WEEKS, not you know, a year or two. This alone is why I think we're not serious about space exploration unless we explore fission drives. AS far as cancer, you'd probably get more cancer deaths from stone construction and burning coal (they release radioisotopes)

Not to be rude, I thought this was "Science & Spaceflight > Orion drive and related physics" Not "Politics & Sociology > How to decrease fear of fission"

Mine came right away but got put in my gmail spam folder

Update for Spacedock/CKAN?