NiL

0_o I agree about photons being a propellant, of cource, but they are generated from pure energy. If i will use a non-expendable light source (like heating a metal plate to produce IR radiation) and a ~non expendable energy source (solar panels), how would ship's mass decrease? I mean a metal plate can lose some matter due to outgassing and stuff, but it is not part of the ship's propulsion process.

Ocean platform?

The problem is that rocket test site with killed people are on land and not even on the shore; the closed zone in way in the sea. So it can be turbopump explosion on a test site (i think rockets cannot fly with exploded turbopumps) OR reactor gutts scattered across the sea. That's confusing, because my version (basically similar to your reactor gutts) does'nt explain it either.

If you capturing expelled propellant, you are creating a fuel loop. Just like if you took a hose and connected it to both sides of the pump. You can pump fuel around the loop as fast as you like (can connect a nuclear reactor to your pump), but you will not move. You can use energy to generate photons and expel them from the back of your rocket. It's called "photon rocket" and it doesn't need propellant, just energy. Thrust is non-existent (your engine is a lightbulb), but it doesn't violate the laws of physics.

It sounds convincing, but what's with the large closed sea zone and Serebraynka ship?

I don't think that drinking alcohol solution of iodin from pharmcy can help a lot, but thanks for information, i didn't know that

Fuq, i just went out for a couple of minutes to collect some information when it was a russian rocket explosion thread, and now it's all about magnets and HOW NTRs WORK, i dunno what to do with it, will upload stuff abot explosion anyway. 1. I messed out, its not the part of Barentsovo sea, but Beloe (White) sea. Also "Serebryanka" ship, wich is a specialized ship intended for collecting nuclear waste (i was surprised to know that something like that exists, but it is) was spotted near the closed area. The map of closed area: It's closed up to 10th of September because of a russian Defence Departament (Minoborony) request. Someone in the thread said that it could be a destrusction of a missle on a carrier with RTG power source for keeping propellant cool, but i highly doubt it - because there was a fire on a rocket test site in Nyonoks (a city just under the closed zone on a map above), background radiation there was 5 times over the normal for a short time AND in the same time part of the sea looking a lot alike the trajectory of a rocket was closed. I doubt that a single RTG could pollute that much of an area, also if that was an explosion on a ship, why woud you close an area near the shore (near the rocket test site)? People are scared and buying iodine (because there's a myth that it protects from radiation) and/or joking about season 2 of "Chernobyl", that piece of paper in the phrmacy's window says "All the iodine was sold out": Nyonoks radiation level measured by some guy Wait, is this thread now THAT dank? That guy with magnets is proposing to capture expelled fuel, lol?

About the explosion: Russia just closed a huge part of Barwntsovo sea (Barenz sea? Dunno how to translate) near Archangelsk (and, i believe, Severodvinsk, in wich people spotred a high background radiation too os somewhere there too)

So i'm ukrainian (can understand russian), surprised, that so little is known in enlish-speaking internet segment about Burevestnik (it's a bird, afaik Mallard) rocket (also btw sorry for my bad english, i hope it is understandable). So russian economy is pretty f-d up because of political reasons and government needs something for propaganda and constantly promising big projects like moon base in 5 years (was in 2008 lol), new Armata tank (only 2 prototypes were built) and stuff. In 2018, after one of the new laws, which i don't know how to translate (is "pension" a word in english?), people were upset, and Putin had a 1.5 hour presentation with some really crappy animation of a new nuclear super-missle with unlimited range, wich would be "invisible to US early detection system". He said a couple of silly things (20 000 m/s cruising speed - in lower atmosphere lol), so nobody was thinking that he was even a little bit serious. Sorry about politics, i understand that i can be somewhat unobjective, that's what i heard and believe. After that there were no information about the rocket (i remember a russian article about problems with new rocket testing, but it was really vague). That's the story. Now info about Burevestnik from 2018 presentation and russian wikipedia (may not be true, i mean «20 km/s in the lower atmosphere»...) NATO codename: SSC X-9 Skyfall It's a winged rocket It has unlimited range Uses literally "a nuclear engine" (ядерный двигатель) - wich... err... Better translates as "atomic engine", in russian it can mean everything from thermonuclear scramjet ot Orion drive to NTR. NERV-style engines in russian called "ядерные ракетные двигатели" (nuclear rocket motors), not just "ядерные двигатели", it's a big difference and can lead to mistranslations. It uses a solid fuel booster to launch According to some not very trustworthy articles that i found it has a nuclear thermal engine that uses air as reaction mass (that makes it similar to an ancient US Project Pluto) - it makes sence (russia can do it), but contradics Putin's and russian Defence Departament (Minoborony)'s claims about the rocket being hypersonic (20 km/s is obv silly, but in general...) and also contradicts that info about explosion (about "liquid-fueled engine). Some sources claim that rocket is 9m long, 1.5m in diameter and has a 3m long solid booster on the start. The power of Burevestnik's "nuclear engine™" is estimated (by that source) as 760 kVt. English Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M730_Burevestnik Video from 2018 presentation with animation and some strange test video (time - 1.20):

I've been researching that idea for a past couple of days. 1. Landertron mod is less used than Comfortable Landing mod, but anyway both is just a couple kb of code, so i think own code for SRB-assisted landing could be included - to have less dependencies and remain more stockalike. 2. Pea could be slightly revamped to have a 1.25m mount on the top, decouler part should be changed to be 0.625m, and togglable 1.25m shroud should be added to the decoupler part. It would enable a couple of things: A. Normal parachute usage - 1.25m one would fit perfectly, returning the capsule it's original round shape for Vostok replicas. B. Clamp-o-tron docking port would also fit - can your MK1 pod do this™? BTW, MK1 would still be useful because of being a lot more modular. C. In that form and with the dumped ablator it could be used as a Soyuz orbital module with Pomegranate. D. And also it woud enable usage of LES both as a separate pod and as a part of a Soyuz. 3. Onion could be changed to resemble a LK lander cabin by adding a slight bulges on both sides - one for entry hatch and one for attaching an inflatable airlock. They should not be too large so Onion could still be used as a Vostok pod. Also decoupler bit at the bottom could be made more light (sorry for that phrasing - english is, obv, not my first language). I mean, all Squad landers have a crew of two, it's just logical to dedicate a two-kerbal pod to be a lander (i personally hate that, but it's just my personal opinion). 4. Soyuz pod probably could be resized to a 1.85m bottom and 0.625 top dimensions - to both enable usage of Making History parts for Soyuz SM, making Zond-style crafts with Clamp-O-Tron Jr. on top (coz now it's not wery useful) and to continue MH theme with Clamp-O-Tron Jr. compartible pods (new adapter to MK1-3 for it, Gemini pod, LEM pod - it should've been called "Making uses for C-o-T Jr."). Also for gameplay balance reasons maybe it shoudn't have a hatch - that would prevent MK1-3 from being useless compared to a new lightweight 3-crew pod and also create a reason for Orbital Module to exist - i mean, kerbals don't suffer from lack of space in thir pods, so 1.25m Clamp-o-Tron adapter and airlock is a good reason for OM to exist. And you'll still be able to use Soyuz pod without OM in a Zond configuration, but also without ability to EVA (early career missions and stations resupply?). 5. Retro-rockets probably should be added to all the pods, because they are useful. Perhaps they should be activated with staging (like normal SRBs), but could also have activation settings in right mouse button menu - like being fired "X seconds before touchdown" or "at Z altitude" (after staging, of course). I think altitude activation is better, because it's simpler of a game mechanic and does not need trajectory calculations, just altitude readings. With standart SRB thrust and fuel level settings it will allow full customisation of a landing assist burn, while remaining simple and user-friendly. Also it should have a "toggle instant fire" button (the name is self-explanatory) wich hides "fire altitude" bar, or instant fire should be set automatically when "fire altitude" bar is set to max. The bar probably should have a logarhytmic scale - like first santimeter of the bar is "0.1-1m", second - "1-10m", third - "10-100m", 4th - "100m-1km" and 5th sets "instant fire". Instant fire option is for use built-in motors as separatrons for Soyuz OM or as a 2nd stage kick-motors on a Onion lander. They would probably need to have a dV of ~5-10 m/s and atmo TWR of ~1.25 on Kerbin - to alow landing assist of a pod with extensions (players are creative), but not function as LES of some veird sort. As i understand, it's not too hard - to slightly change models in Blender and add .cfg's. However, my skills in both modeling and cfg-wrighting are non-existent. If someone with that skills would do that - it will be a great mod. In fact, i have a couple of ideas about revmping other Making History parts to make them both useful and cool-looking - idea of a shiny metal 1.875m Atlas/Titan tanks bothers me so much, also with new "remove from symmetry" feature togglable ladders on a landing legs could be added (even through they are not MH parts). As soon as i will have my computer in reach, i will try to do something with models (some time ago, btw, i could't pull out even a fuel tank, so idk...). Maybe we should turn that into some sort of community project like ReStock and stuff? Maybe first step could be changing thread's name to something like "ReMaking history: community MH parts revamp", lol.

Wow, where did you get this inflatable habitation module from? I been looking for something like that for ages!

Would be REALLY cool IMO. That pods are pretty much useless right now, and players use fairings and part clipping to make Soyuz pods. And with your idea they can keep the old-shaped round pod (Pea) for Vostoks and Soyuz orbital modules. Ejection seats could also be added to Gemini pod, because a real Gemini had ones - and it will partly fix the problem with LES tower beeing too big for all the pods exept the MK1-3. In fact, maybe ejection seats are too new of a game mechanics, so maybe Squad can left Pea just with ablator and decoupler, re-making other pods as you said. For me personally your idea sounds so great, that i think there should be at least a mod to do this (just change models and add support for Landertrons and Ejection seats mods).

It's certanly a mod conflict. I run 70 mods (3.7 GBGameData) on 4 GB RAM and load time is about 20 minutes (the game crashes often, but it's, err, expected). You should update your KSP to 1.7, they really fixed performance a lot (on 1.5 i had to wait a couple of hours for KSP to load with 2.7 GB GameData)

Actually i have the exact same problem (with crashes). And i noticed we are both using USI MKS, which is outdated. I installed it with all the other mods so cannot telll if it is it, but before i newer used it and newer have such crashes (but also had 1gb less mods, so dunno). Could it be MKS or mod conflict between MKS and something? Are you using USI LS?

No, neither in VAB or in flight. Well, for example OKEB-75 panel was flat and fitted good to many rockets, now it's shroud is very extruded and OKEB-500 looked so nice being like a giant monolithic field of solar panels (but now it's much more flat while folded, which is nice), but it's just a matter of habit for me, i guess. And i just cannot express how i miss the old very short curved panel (which name i cannot remember, ironic) and Tweakscale support for curved panels in general. Of course they were very thick and kinda ugly for that matter, but i used them for all my spaceplanes back in the days and the very short one was really useful for powering literally everything that needs a medium amount of EC. Other than that all the new panels looks amazing - now i am just addicted to using the Orion one for every single vacuum craft. Just three parts which must be having a different animation mechanic or so: OKEB-150R, OKEB-25R, OKEB-75R. The OKEB-150R behaved like that in the old versions of NFS too, but i thought it maybe meant to be like that (and with other two solar panels glitched up like that after the update i am now sure thet it isn't intended to). For taking screenshots i used a fresh KSP install without DLCs and with only NFS installed from CKAN, but that glitch is still there both with manual installing in an empty Gamedata or full modded install with both DLCs (so it's not a mod conflict clearly). I use no -forceDX11 or -forceopengl stuff, but in case - when i tried -DX11 (some time ago, reinstalled KSP a couple times since then, so unrelated directly), there were a texture glitches (some turned pitch black), maybe it matters. Specs - Win8.1, 4 gb of RAM (potato computer, yeah), Nvidia GeForce 9600 GT, drivers and DirectX is up-to-date (idk maybe it matters). P.S. When folded, that leaning parts are blinking like clipped parts, idk khow to say it more clear.

Also what about "NFS legacy pack" with all the old panels, but retextured as new and shiny? I know that they are "not realistic", "impossible" and all that, but at the same time they are pretty cool.

I have a NFS issue - some solar panels (Starship panels as an exapmle) is not folded properly - solar panel is clipping out of the housing. It does not affect physics at all, but looks kinda ugly. I will add images later, if neeeded. IDK, maybe it should be like this?

Huh, and on 30th new DLC coming out? So much nice things coming soon!

Wait, here [ https://www.seagate.com/files/www-content/our-story/trends/files/idc-seagate-dataage-whitepaper.pdf ] they saying that total amound of digital data on Earth alreay was 33 zettabytes in 2018 (!!!) and predicted to be 175 zB in 2025. Oh shi... I think an extra SLS block II launch with 200t of DNA-drives is needed.

Well, wikipedia says that according to 2007 study there was a 281exabytes of digital information on Earth, soo i think even if 90% of it is just copies you still need way more than 1 exabyte to store it, huh. However, Google proceses ~20-30 petabytes per day, AT&AT handles a 20 petabytes per week stream of data, archive.org holds about 50 petabytes, so i think 1-2 exabytes'll be enough to entertain crew during a year of flight or so, but if you want something like a copy of the whole Internet for lets say an interstellar decade(s)-long trip, portable source of scientific knowlege or so, 50-100 exabytes may be requred (althrough 9-month Mars trip Google cashe may still fit on Starship ). And also the amount of digital data on Earth is growing logariphmicaly fast, so you'd beter hurry - in 5 years you'll need something about a couple of zettabytes, espicially for "scientific data"™ and VR games with 16k textures, lol)

Btw why modders don't use stock reflective textures from stock structural plates? I mean SXT uses stock textures, why couldn't other mods use already existing in the game tools to make cool shining parts?

Ты просто задавал целью платформу и потом нажимал "сесть к цели"? Мехджеб не идиот, эта функция обычно используется, чтобы садить лендеры рядом с базой или типа того, поэтому мехджеб всегда садится, собсно, слегка в стороне, чтобы при посадке не поверить то, на что садишься. Я не помню, как там с настройкой этого параметра - в смысле наверняка можно поковырять сам плагин, но надо знать, как это работает, я не знаю и не пробовал, так что тут ничем помочь не могу, кхех. Вообще спроси в англоязычных KOS и мехджеб-тредах, где и как изменить этот параметр, наверняка же не у тебя первого проблема. Хотя, насколько я знаю, люди часто KOS используют, но опять же, если ты можешь посадить ракету с КОС, то .длл поковырять тем более. Мехджеб вообще довольно неточный, у меня он за пол-километра от цели иногда садит, я даже не думал никогда о том, чтобы использовать его для посадки на баржу. Вообще можно ещё в последний момент взять контроль на себя, с высоты 300-500 м самостоятельно посадить должно быть не трудно, если топлива не впритык, особенно с КЕР-ом.

It would be great if you added some pics?

What's with cargo Starship version? I am sooo excited to finally start using cargo Staship insted of old Space Shuttles, they are really looks ancient compared to other parts of my near future-style space programm. I mean, I don't teally need crew version because i can use Skylon-style SSTOs to send kerbals to the space station in KEO and Orion-style vehicle to transfer crew to other planets, but when it's time to launch a ~50t of construstion materials (especially to other planets) or new 3.75 station modules... It's something that cannot be done with Skylon and still too light for vasting huge partially-reusable New Glenn-style vehicles, but just fine for fully reusable Starship, that can also serve as heavy cargo lander... Meh, i just can't wait!!!