henryrasia

Not at this pace we aren't. Let's first put something in LEO and then we'll talk over the celebration party, ok? What is the to-do list for next week? I say we all put some signature immediately with a link to this thread (like I just did), is anyone half way decent in photoshop? We can use pictures of the cubesat in KSP at this point if no one will draw a cool mission patch/banner (I don't think Rareden is replying...). Shameless promotion is good, guys! See, I'm not great at these things, but I managed to come up with at least SOMETHING. I should hope you do the same. At least try to make a better one, but if you're that lazy just use this: [CENTER][SIZE=4]Check out the [URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86010-KSP-Community-CubeSat"][B][COLOR="#FF0000"]KSP Community Cubesat Project[/COLOR][/B][/URL] [I][U]We can into space![/U][/I][/SIZE] To send an actual cubesat into actual space![/CENTER]

Alright then, so the experiment will be to 1) Discover the relationship between gravitational pull and moss growth, more specifically: a) The mathematical relationship between pull and growth rate, growth direction, and growth strucutre (if we have a microscope) Specific points in that relationship for: i) Gravity "threshold" (minimum gravity at which moss realizes where "down" is) ii) Optimum growth gravity (just in case it's between 0 and 1 g, as it would help in planning long-term space missions. Also, determining WHAT causes it to grow so well would be important, again only if we have a microscope, as it might be "fake growth" or something like that, don't ask me I'm a rocket scientist not a biologist!) So now the mission would be starting out slow, see what happens, speed up, see what happens, repeat. This is nice for data collection (moar data!!!) and structural integrity safety (we'll stop if things seem like they're going to breaking down, ok K^2? ). One issue I do see, though, is that the moss will be growing at 0.3 gs or whatever after a time of growing at 0.2 g and 0.1 g, so how will results be reliable and useful? Also, just how fast will the moss grow? Because if it takes too long we may lose the cubesat before the mission is complete (~3 weeks with COTS hardware? In LEO?). Unless we're willing to revamp mission time and/or hardware (stretch goals? ). PS. Sent message to Rareden, didn't replied yet.

Ooooohhhh... Shiny. But does he do logos and such? Nicholander, I'll go ahead and send him a message explaining our project and requesting his assistance. About the experiment, I just realized: What is the point of observing growth of moss that has been genetically engineered to respond to gravity? I heard the "threshold" of gravity or if the relationship between Gs and growth is logarithmic or linear or what have you.

Rareden? Never heard of him. But hey, if you message him and he's up to it lets do it! K^2, what do you mean beyond 1G? Aren't we keeping it to 0.16g (moon) and 0.38g (Mars) precisely because it's never been done before and it's results would be relevant and interesting? Anyways, people, seriously, let's get weekly goals, or are we not participating in the cubesat conference? Has anyone even taken a look at the page?

Also, it's 4 weeks until the conference here. So if we're going to sign up to attend we'll need a general design with capabilities and objectives (maybe even mission and logistics plan) as the conference is serious and everyone there mean business. Also, it's quite pricey so I couldn't br going there just to fool around, I need questions to ask, things to look out for and to note down, and things to talk about and self-advocate. Honestly, we need to be a LOT more aggressive in what comes to promotional campaigning. If someone would do a decent "mission patch" for a forum avatar or "agency" flag/symbol to put in the forums signature with a link to this thread I'd go around shamelessly spamming every single thread with this. I mean, if youtubers were to promote us that'd be a huge leg up for us (HOCgaming did a series on KSP artificial gravity, for example). But we do need SOMETHING to show for ourselves. PS. We're all talking about a rocket launch, but take a look at this: non-rocket space launch systems. Also, so I'm not biased: rocket launch systems

But we digress. Well, until the end of the year we have 7 weeks, how much do we need to get done each week? And to the people afraid this will turn into a job: well, it kinda is rocket science (space science?). It is going to feel like a job, except our stakes aren't so high to actually be one. Again, it will "feel" like one. Especially to the people who are going to actually build/launch/operate the cubesat. Taking this lightly will only going to be a gargantuan waste of time and money. Am I the only one who feels this way?

We need to remebmer that we are relying a lot in public hype, so having an external hd camera might be worth it. Just a thought.

Yeah, hopefully we can get some sort of respectable design by then. About the camera, first of all we need to know what kind of data we're looking for. Just "take pictures of it" isn't a good mission objective at all. What I thought would be interesting would be to have a microscope to look at the cells. Then, another use would be using a camera to adjust or confirm position/rotation and take cool pictures! But for that we'd need video, is there no way to stream video at a lower quality and then have full HD pictures be taken, compressed, and THEN beamed down to the ground? Also, is the power requirements so big a big battery wouldn't do the trick? Walkie-talkies last a LONG time with tiny batteries so... Anyways, for the camera/microscope duo I thought having one single camera that rotated around a pivot could serve to 1) Observe mulitple petri dishes with one camera 2) take peeks outside through a cover-able porthole (remember, the moss must stay in darkness most of the time to avoid an extra variable, plus it would need CO2 if it received light IIRC). And finally the microscope part could be done with fixed lenses in front of the petri dishes, and when the camera looked through them it would be magnified. This would also allow for both magnified and non-magnified images of the moss (if we place the lense smartly). Just wanted to say that, hope to hear your thoughts!

Oh... my... god... Check this out! It's right here in my city! Whaaaat??!!! Quickly see if and how can I represent / ask questions!!! December 8th!

Finally, now the first post isn't misleading anymore One thing that I've noticed we can start doing right now is a bit of shameless self-advertising (we need to get that done someday why not start now? It's one of the few cost-less things we all can do). But for that we'd need a nifty forum signature with a logo, a drawing, mission name and slogan or whatever. We need dat marketing guys! Does anyone know anyone who's good at making these things? I've seen a lot of cool stuff in the forums so... It'd also be cool to format and illustrate the first post / Google doc, like a banner. People read more visually, so we should start doing that.

Yeah! That's the spirit! I really think we shouls have a name (though that's a low priority). I think it should be unrelated to KSP and more to the fact we are a bunch of noobs (effectively) making a space program. The slogan could be: "We can into space" (referencing also some internet culture). NERVAfan, we should definetly prefer to use off-the-shelf components to minimize liabilities (they could even be space-graded already!). But we should at least have a price range to know how much to ask in the kickstarter. Also have a list of capabilities to show off in it as well. Having a "range" will also allow us to make concrete stretch goals such as "double battery size for faster transmission" or whatevesr it may be. K^2, Deplyable solar panels? Hmm... Do we really need that much power? We should begin with answering that. Also, the whole thing is going to be spinning wildly for 3 weeks straight, would't that cause structural stress on deployable panels and be minimized with surface panels? On the other hand we could have them along the axis that does not spin, but then it would have to be spinning at the same crazy velocity backwards to "stay still". I know they can move to track the sun, but at that speed for 3 weeks? I'm not dismissing it, but we should look into that.

Not if this is this will be an actual, real life space mission. We need specifics: Materials, components, designs, dimensions, spacing, prices, physical requirements (resonance frequency, pressure and stress limits, heat limits, radiation limits, etc), and many other things NERVAfan should have read in the books. And yes, we're very behind in that respect. And Nicholander, that's a great deadline list. I would only say that we can compress the designing/prototyping/testing in less time. Also, the kickstarter and negotiations don't take time to do, per se, but yes a long time waiting. We should probably be doing things while those are going on. I say we have the concept of the cubesat completely done before the end of this year (no prototype though) and while that happens K^2 would do the sim. BTW are you using STK? Cause you should probably use something made instead of coding something from scrach, if nothing else to avoid bugs.

NO NO NO NOOOO!!! No kickstarter before having a solid project to show. That's how kickstarters fail: no one believes you're going to deliver and if you don't, a second kickstarter is out of the question because you've lost credibility. The best kickstarter is the one that could still be made without it, but not as quickly / as good as if with the money. At the very LEAST we need to have a prototype built before starting. So we should get to work on that. I agree we're running late on ourselves. We're not hired, so we need to set up our own deadlines.

K^2 glad you're back! Have you seen the doc? I thought it'd be good to have a place with all the information. And thank you, astropapi, I agree that we're not making the progress we should be doing. I know no one is to blame, but we should be getting through research and decision-making faster than we are. That's why I thought of assigning responsibilities to people so that their efforts would be more focused. I just don't feel like we actually believe we're going to carry out an actual space mission, and so the tone of the designing process seems very hypothetical and as just a exercise for thought. I do not know if you will agree with me on this, but there's the problem: I don't know you guys, and I'd like some kind of confirmation that we're actually doing this. How will we cause hype for a kickstarter if we're not hyped ourselves? I can say I am! Let's do this team!

Hey, guys, let's focus on the first mission for now, alright? We should create a to-do list, I'm going to start one on the doc and PEOPLE, PLEASE, YOU CAN EDIT THE DOC AS YOU WISH (as long as you respect what other people have done). I can't do this on my own, we need to work TOGETHER. EDIT: For example, we have no one on structure. And I just thought about this: instead of metal, carbon fiber. Yes, it's more expensive, but it's stronger and lighter,which might pay for itself in launch costs (or not, I don't know).

There you go, please add your own description!

Just leaving this here, the link for the doc of the project: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jR2B_M67cITTBtV_PDMoioVQp3bnCTR85ecQeVKmpWI/edit?usp=docslist_api I'm going to add mission objectives later today.

Yeah, NFUN, we all are. Anyways, here's my map:

Quick suggestion! What about an "emergency mode" where your kerbals use up less resources? Now that we have reputation that can be penalized for balance (having missions on "emergency" isn't good press...). Also, how about a stasis mode where they require almost nothing at all (maybe only in the hitchhiker module) to incorporate with interstellar travel and other things. This would require money to put kerbals in/out of stasis and the ship would not be controllable until a fixed date. Thanks for reading! Amazing mod, BTW, congratulations!

Great, we're waiting for the info, Mazon! Now, I just had an idea that'd be most useful later on. Everyone should state their timezones and latitudes, even if general. If you're afraid of giving you coordinates, a city would be enough. This is to know when each person is reachable and how opportune their global position is to this project (tracking and all that). I'll just go right ahead and post mine now!

Is it going to be total darkness? On second thought, that'd probably be easier for luminescence control (rather than 45 min spinning sunlight 45 min total darkness). I think he means IR as a method of nightvision that wouldn't affect plant growth. But in that case we'd need and IR light up there. What wavelength is the least absorbed by the moss Mazon Del?

I feel that we just started discussing with seriousness in the last few dozen pages. So 100 pages of dead weight. Also, this thread is misleading in the sense it gives the impression this is a thought-experiment on a Phobos mission. But that's just my humble opinion, of course.

OK, OK Let's sort this mess out Priority Number 1 Organize the project Order of business Get a team together. Set up a roadmap. Determine responsibilities. Create a schedule. We can only figure out the specifics of the work after we get this done. It doesn't need to be military-strict, but we need some kind of tasks assigned to different people. Of course we'll be flexible and understanding if things don't go smooth, we're not exactly on a contract with anyone. We need to have a more cohesive group to start skype meetings or whatever. I mean, I want this project to fly, not just as a thought experiment. So I ask, honestly, who will join me?! We should start a new thread only for this particular mission, this one's getting dragged. How can we organize this project? There are some free project management software out there (bitrix24 and producteev) IF YOU'D LIKE TO JOIN THE PROJECT MESSAGE ME be sure to add what you can/would do. No requirements besides enthusiasm! No, seriously, even if you're good at nothing we'll accept you. We have plenty of vacancies.

No I was making two separate points: #1) Kerbal experience is a good idea to make kerbals useful. However a better (more realistic) integration of that would be #2. #2) KSP should have more tycoon-style mechanics it claims it is going to have. In this case have an "research department" separated from a "part development department" and add a "part building department" and a "engineering team" to the VAB. I really should learn animation in order to get this vision across... If only :'(

Oh my god, people, that's what he means!!! If you have skilled engineers they'll be able to improve the hardware. Remember KSP is technically a haphazard space program, so it makes sense that engineers could improve upon basic specs. The only thing is that er don't have an "engineering" or "part building" department. Hell, we don't even have proper "research" or "development" departments yet, only tech tree placeholder system (I hope it's a placeholder...). I think the devs should look more into tycoon style games. Including the sim-city (yes, even the new one) and xenonauts ways of tackling those mechanics (or Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager, both old and new versions). KSP claims to be a tycoon style game when finished, but it barely even resembles one. I have a vision for this game that I think many people want but don't know how to voice it, all I need is any skill with computer animation... Finally, if we're not getting a "part development" or "engineering department" mechanic then kerbonauts are the ones that will have to have the perks. So there's that.