MeticulousMitch

I tried simulating this mount in BeamNG.drive to the best of my ability - it seems for a modern 2-door car a static load of around 10g should be achievable without any severe deformation. Of course, if the load is fluctuating wildly or if it goes into the 20+ g range, nasty stuff starts happening. Also probably worth considering that an average convertible would have somewhat lower overall rigidity than a coupe, due to lacking a roof.

I was curious to see how much power a black hole of 1600 tons would output through Hawking radiation, and according to this site the figure is 33 gigatons per second. I immediately thought of the What If? scenario where an indestructible hair dryer of absurd (although still around 10 000 times less than the black hole) power is accelerated past escape velocity simply by the reaction force of the superheated plasma around it. But would this happen to a black hole? I get the feeling that with so much energy being emitted nearby, the black hole would be explosively ejected into space, but then again I am not sure whether basic action/reaction momentum transfer is valid at an event horizon...

Go to en.spaceengine.org immediately and download Space Engine for free. This program will give you an idea of the scale of a galaxy, along with practically unlimited examples of realistic and interesting planetary systems.

May have been mentioned already but sound delay is almost never depicted properly, even in serious movies. You'll always hear an explosion immediately no matter how far away it is viewed from. Even worse is when a shockwave is depicted racing towards the camera and the explosion sound has already been heard!

If we're only considering overpressure from the blast, then it would certainly be survivable, though perhaps with ruptured eardrums. In an uncontrolled rocket failure the combustion is fairly slow, more like a fire than an explosion. This much can be seen from the intact engine cluster: at 150 feet even a 1-ton charge of TNT produces insufficient overpressure to cause lung damage, and that kind of blast would obliterate the engine cluster. (adapted from http://dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA286212) radiant heat is probably not a grave concern as the fireball is confined to the centre of the barge and only lasts a couple seconds. I would be far more concerned about flying debris at that range, so while you may be OK at the edge of the barge, diving underwater would be a safer option.

That Cracked article is appalling. Quantum entanglement cannot be used to transmit information at faster-than-light speeds. http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/fasterlight.php

What you need to do is head right on over to http://en.spaceengine.org/, and download SpaceEngine for free. After a couple hours of exploring the universe you should have a grasp on what's plausible, and a whole bunch of new ideas for exoplanets too. Most of what you've described, I've seen somewhere in SpaceEngine.

Assuming the ship is made entirely of FL-T400 fuel tanks, my framerate drops below 60FPS if the part count is over 465. I could probably get away with a higher part count if I also used massless parts. If this was in orbit and you stuck an LV-N on it, you would get a delta V of over 17000m/s, which is just about the theoretical maximum for a single stage rocket in KSP.

Overview: The Isosceles spaceplane is a 3-man, science equipped craft which doubles as an interplanetary engine stage. Ideal for missions to Duna, Laythe and the smaller moons, this craft features the original [thread=34917]STABOJET[/thread] configuration which gives unprecedented stability during trans-atmospheric flight, as well as an LV-N thruster for space operation. The Isosceles is the first in a line of spaceplanes incorporating [thread=34917]STABOJET[/thread] technology. The winged configuration allows for more precise landings in the atmospheres of bodies such as Kerbin, Laythe and Duna. For interplanetary missions, the Isosceles CT Variant is docked to a Science Station with a large fuel tank. The ER Variant replaces the two crew pods with additional fuel tanks for extended range science missions. In a Laythe mission the Science station acts as an orbital fuel depot with enough capacity for 4 full refuels, followed by a return to Kerbin orbit. It is possible to plant flags and take samples on all of Laythe's equatorial islands in a single mission. How to reach orbit: 1.) Press 1 to engage turbojets. Take off and climb at 45 degrees. 2.) At an altitude of 10,000m, reduce pitch to 30 degrees 3.) at an altitude of 15,000m, press 2 to engage LV-N engine 4.) when the turbojets are no longer producing thrust, press 3 to shut them off. Circularize the orbit using the LV-N. Throttle should be 100% throughout. The craft will remain controllable during asymmetric flameout. Key commands: 1: Turbojets only. 2: Turbojets and LV-N. 3: LV-N only. Download: Isosceles CT Isosceles ER Science Station

I think you've just one-upped Boston Dynamics and created the freakiest-looking robot ever. And that music... D:

100 Kerbin days was the best I could manage. The SOI boundary seems to be quite unstable if you approach it very slowly.

Returning from a Duna/Ike double landing with thousands of science points, only to find that Kerbin's surface has disappeared and you just explode when trying to land on it. 0.23.5, no mods. This has happened both times I've tried returning from Duna in career mode.

Landing (and takeoff) is too difficult in KSP solely because of the landing gear wheels, which have zero tolerance for side slip. You will flip over if even the slightest amount of drift occurs, because the wheels' lateral coefficient of friction is infinite. Offsetting this slightly is the fact that the wheels are also too strong, so hard landings are a bit more forgiving.

Rover wheels, definitely. They don't have proper physics in the way that everything else in the game does, and they are essentially on rails - turning hard enough will flip any rover, no matter how low to the ground it is. Infiniglide is another major one. Crashing your plane and seeing wings and control surfaces just floating slowly through the air. Landing gear that can't support the weight of your heavy lander.

Good luck getting to Moho and back.

Here are 2 of my tugs. The one on the bottom managed to get the class C asteroid into a 100x100km equatorial orbit. I deorbited it with the craft on top - a tug which masses 600 tonnes in orbit, and is probably capable of capturing class E asteroids. It also has 35 LV-N engines.

I didn't lose my account, but I did lose almost all of my posts and 90 rep. I have not been back here much since then.

Try picking up a detailed flight simulator like DCS World. You'll probably find it quite easy and enjoyable after wrestling with the controls of un-airworthy craft in KSP. Or, if you want a more sedate experience, Space Engine is a great way to simultaneously learn more about the universe and blow your mind. You may no longer be satisfied by games that don't reflect reality; I know that KSP has spoiled me in that regard. If I'm not learning or creating anything, I quickly lose interest. And KSP will probably suck you back in eventually. You'll be daydreaming at some point and spontaneously think of a really good idea for a mission to Moho, or an awesome mothership, etc. There's no such thing as an ex-KSP addict.

It's difficult to imagine a space elevator lasting millions of years without maintenance, especially considering factors like continental drift. We also don't know how to build one yet.

Your task is to create an orbital museum that will preserve modern cultural and scientific artifacts for millions of years. Primary objectives of the museum would be: 1.) Stability. The museum needs to remain in an indefinitely stable orbit, so as to avoid colliding with the earth or moon or being ejected into interplanetary space. Propose Geosynchronous/Lagrangian, etc. 2.) Preservation. The museum must protect its contents from radiation in the long-term, and possibly incorporate a pressurized section for the preservation of biological samples. 3.) Ease of access. Easily achievable orbits are preferred over orbits which are difficult to reach. Furthermore the design of the station should probably facilitate easy access to the items on board. 4.) Visibility. If possible the museum should be visible in the night sky with the naked eye, so that it is easily rediscovered after civilization-ending catastrophe. Feel free to speculate on how to achieve the above points, as well as what artifacts such a museum might contain: Books? Vehicles? Websites? Biological specimens? Artwork? Films? Examples of certain technology? How large might this station be, and how much would it cost to construct? Finally, if you have a better idea for preserving our current civilization, propose it. It may be better to have multiple museums, or even a different concept entirely. If some intriguing ideas come out of this I will create 3D artwork depicting such a station.

Architecture. Statistically a risky degree with the current building recession, but it got me an enjoyable job after I graduated last year.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of people have little interest in science (and will make whatever excuses they can to avoid it), but I would strongly caution against blaming that on whichever belief system they adhere to. As a Christian myself, I find the study of science to be a deeply humbling experience - as Einstein famously quipped, "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible". I find that my own existence is infinitesimal in both time and space, and yet I have been given the ability to apply logic and reason to understand the workings of the entire universe. This is the sense of awe that fuels my interest in science.

Theory a: They have already reached their terminal velocity in whatever substance they are falling through. Theory b: They aren't falling; they're being pushed along a flat surface that you're looking down on. Theory c: They're not really blocks, they're actually clusters of liquid crystals viewed through a polarizing filter.

OK, here's my result: 21.24 tons. I lost one part after the collision, but gained another from the wall, so I did break even

I'm attempting this now. Should have a decent result to show pretty soon.