magnemoe

Yes, now this would be an mono culture who might be taken out by diseases. Not seeing how it could evolve intelligence in any way. I say you make something like the trees and many creatures on Pandora in the Avatar movies, that feels so created however, someone designed that stuff. You still has to link up continents.

An valid point also 2.4 km/s is lunar escape velocity. On the other hand the moon get plenty of micro metrorite impacts coming in faster and the larger one will kick up fragments to. So yes you can hit stuff on the other side of the moon or in moon orbit but risk is low I say. For nearby stuff it might be an major issue unless you use landing pads. Landing on an grind might work best.

Yes, Uranus is is visible with the naked eye if you have good eyesight. But its very dim and moves slowly so even if described it was seen as an dim star.

Its some sort of weird drider like statue outside our lunch room. Its on a roof in an backyard so it can only been seen from some offices. An serious weird place for an statue, suspect it ended up there after getting rejected from an better position. And not an drider, only 6 legs and some part going down past the hip.

An excellent point, so you need special landing pads or some low powered landing thrushes using cold gas or steam? 2-3, is high 2.3 km/s is moon escape velocity. This will be an increasingly larger problem with more activity on the moon.

That is one solution if you have an landing pad. Also having an wall or putting the landing pad down in an crater would help. For large landers having landing engines high up would help a lot. This would only be used for the last 100 meters an small lander would have to use less efficient engines either slow flow or probably engines who disperse the exhaust fast

It doesn't list the ratio of crashes per flight, but we have a number for miles/kilometres per accident. If we can find the average distance of a flight in those early years, we could make a fairish comparison In 1918 it had been produced over 100.000 planes so it had been millions of landings. I say its also a bit unfair as you had an good chance of surviving an engine out in a WW 1 plane.

Agree, but my thought is that hydrogen only look blue burning is then next to an SRB so shuttle flame looks blue

Yes an 100 year bug. Now its a bit interesting that none thought of arming planes designed to be used in an war, but planes was just 11 years old. Balloons was common for artillery spotting as they was established technology and stay up for hours being tethered and with an phone line down. Planes could do deeper recon like spotting build up of forces in the rear indicating an assault. The first real combat missions of planes was taking out the balloons.

Agree, but Delta heavy also had orange flames It might be an artifact of having the SRB burning next to the hydolox engine making them look blue?

Like peeing on an electric fence I think it would work pretty well. Now this would require grounding so I don't see how it worked with the drone but an conductive liquid would likely short of at least the cheaper ones.

Prefer rockets as they has an chance to become vaporware during launch

Saw this idea somewhere else, this was kind of an barrel extension to a railgun, I say it scales hard with distance between the rails so it would not work for an 30 mm gun but might for battleship sized shells. On the other hand launching stuff like icbm or fighters an coilgun probably is better. I also saw an fun idea using an shell with an coil to let the shell do the changing magnetic fields, make the shells more complex but not an issue for autocannon rounds.

A bit necro but I assume they use it to test aging of stuff exposed to space. Yes you can do this on the IIS but then its public, you could also carry an radiation source to add more radiation on sample, again something you can not do on the IIS. Yes its kind of overkill but its an internal project and has some capability dragon lacks. Dragon probably also don't have the security rating.

It has been an common high school and student prank to lift up and carry small cars many teachers used but it was mostly putting it between two trees, pilars or dumpsters then perhasp rotate the car so the bumpers touched them. I was at an class party at an cabin during the winter, no place to park so we just drove the cars off the road and into the snow, as we was 30 it was just to bump them up on the road again. A bit harder with an electric SUV.

US thing an 1 MW laser can kill ICBM reentering. 300 KW will kill anything softer like planes and missiles. Now something like an battleship shell has so much steel its probably even harder. So say 5-10 MW for the standard secondary armanent. Lasers inside the atmosphere would have losses, but above 1 MW you burn an hole in the air, you are limited by line of sight anyway. One interesting thing about lasers is that the laser and the turret is separated so you can have more turrets than lasers. As your landed you don't need to use the bottom guns. You could also have some much more powerful lasers in the hundres of MW as as main guns. Then you have missiles but they are offensive weapons then landed. In space you can do stuff with missiles like dropping lots of small kinetic kil projectiles to deal with incoming missile swarms but on ground you are limited to attacking larger targets. Lasers planed for combat has an 30- 50 cm final mirror. large mirrors is nice in space then you want as long an range as possible but not much of an issue if range is limited to 20 km anyway.

I say the close in and medium weapons would be lasers, they don't run out of ammo. More of an question, why land in orbit its few weapons who can reach you but on the ground its possible to overwhelm the defense. Not saying they would not use missiles but they would be more of an offensive weapon.

Yes without FTL an interstellar empire is impossible, communication is too slow, trying to hold the empire together is way harder. One issue is that your colonies will drift away from you culturally and also genetic, more so with genetic engineering. Grow large enough and over long enough timelines you you run into aliens you made. Isaac Arthur made some videos about this saying this is an Fermi paradox solution, an civilization might feel threatened by the increasing alien colonies. So its an limit to growth. Now the lack of Dyson swarms is more alarming as its an easy solution and even good fusion generate heat. And if Mars was was like earth 400 million years ago we would colonized it in the 80's

This is pretty interesting ChatGPT can not show an filled to the brim glass of red wine. Its an idiotic simple concept but its rarely done as its seen as stupid and rude, and its even fewer images of it.

Agree, now did any falcon 9 upper stages failed the planned deorbit burn and came down over Europe.

An good point, I tend to do that most of the time going to Minmus, however i assume the mission would be designed around this, simply making the lander with an larger living space might make more sense. As the dV for landing and takeoff is just an faction of the moon the increase in weight would not matter that much. You would then take the empty lander upper stage back to earth orbit.

Sounds a lot like an SCP story, an undead battleship who would be bad. Also more realistic than some of the other SCP ship stories as it was lost, not destroyed.

Redirecting to hit the moon would give some great seismic data, capture would be better but also harder.

I say they cut closer to land, this is something who has to be agreed on with Bahamas.

We have two ways of doing this first is a steam turbine, second is thermocouples, later is less effective than steam engines but has no moving parts. Make an thermocouple with an efficiency as an steam engine.