magnemoe

Who is true, however one ship failing towards the target you abort unless waiting for next mission is an better option for you.

Bomb pumped xasers is very nice but still not missile range, they simply extend the danger zone around an passing missile, its still very dangerous 10.000 km out but this well inside secondary laser gun range. If we assume good fusion reactors is an thing who is pretty required for an hard sci-fi setting like the expanse. However engines like orion pulse nuclear get much better as larger they are and most fusion design has lower limit on size. So the larger the ship who more efficient your engine is, this makes the missile even weaker. More crazy designs like nuclear salt water or fizzler make more sense for missiles, missile or more likely its warheads will have an second stage, probably an rapid burning solid engine for an intercept trajectory. This is dropped and blow up into decoys while the warheads are stealthy and dark.

The mystery airships are fascinating. Airships was an new bleeding edge technology and they was popular in stories. So people believe they saw them, and its not implausible for them it was an secret military airship project. However military secret projects in peacetime back then was rare. Some students managed to get an tour of HMS Dreadnought pretending to be an African royalty. Dreadnought was an new revolutionary battleship.

Yes and the lifeboat part is the second reason why you want two or more ships. Its also why many of the age of exploration tended to use multiple ships but more useful in space as spaceships don't get separated by storms.

Full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes. Note that back then sea mines was called torpedoes, the self propelled torpedo was not invented until later.

No if not forced as in your homework is checked. In Norway this was true well past then you was 17 year old and the 9 now 10 year mandatory school is done. It was then don on your next level, you could then go for trades like an plumber or an academic track, with some overlap, its an joke in trade schools that electricians is more math heavy than nurses, who is likely true. You are now in an university or higher education position. Likely living away from your parents for extended time for the first time. No homework checks, no parents and a guy down the corridor has an moonshine still and another wanted to build an LAN. Think it was close to 50% fail rate first year. this was 1990-93 +-1 year.

Agree, you also has the danger that if something hit your magazine you blow up even more spectacular. Its an reason why military want explosives who is hard to set off and why gunpowder is so dangerous in large amounts.

Schlock mercenary has the fun idea of puting antimatter in the center of buckyballs https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2005-06-04 No its not practical nor safe or even having good power density for multi megaton blast. But you got mini nukes very small and down to pistol round And it would not work but fun

I wonder if polar orbit or almost polar is an better idea for tourist flights in the future unless you plan to dock. You see more of the world including more northern countries where its more likely your customers is from while still flying over all the rest of the earth.

Now that is weird, how well known is your account to google? Still they should random walk content more than adds? Was at a friend who had build one with his son, we just looked at each other and started making an gunship. An tail turret at the top of crew compartment. An nose gun and some other turrets and lots of missiles under the wings. This was the old version with an crew compartment who was hilariously cramped like most military vehicles.

That is part of the tricks, you want charged plasma from the matter anti matter reaction, this can be used to generate electricity directly or generate trust in a rocket. an hydrogen-anti hydrogen impact just leave very hard gamma rays. Antimatter engines has lots of the same issues as fusion engines, you want charged particles. But fusion is safe, yes its radiation then its running and liner get radioactive because of neutrons but you can simply turn it off. Antimatter only safe mode is dumping it overboard if on an spaceship.

Might be I misunderstood you, smaller rockets don't have FTS, probably because their more mass sensitive and less destructive than huge ones. https://www.google.no/maps/@69.2931753,16.0180229,748m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=no&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDMyNS4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D Here is google map from location, I assume the, patch below the road is construction of the orbital launch pad. Original purpose was launching missiles and sounding rockets who often is the same thing given an upper stage instead of warhead and looks like that is across the road to the north.

Well if you can do interstellar travel you can definitely colonize space

Starship is the largest rocket build and uses explosives in its FTS But as this was low attitude and just at the start of gravity turn it was smarter to just have it fall into the sea than exploding it in the air there fragments might damage the pad falling down.

Now here is an place there an FTS would be bad, it crashed some hundred meters from the launch complex, blowing it up rather than following an ballistic trajectory would probably cause more danger for the pad. Probably man in the loop who said NO. As an Norwegian I saw that clip on VG, but the adds was longer than the clip as usual. Probably not as it would read -1 g, now it could be backwards I say is probably software as you get more data sources, internal navigation, sensors, gps, ground based its get harder making software making sense of it all. So an sensor failed and software messed it up.

Sun does not burn up as in blows up into an red giant. That is in around 5 billion years or as long as earth has been around. That is an serious long time. Now the sun is getting brighter, so earth will be hotter in 500 million years and might be to hot for life in an billion. This is not something an advanced space faring civilization would have any problem with however. As for 2125 that is harder to predict, How do you predict 2025 in 1925? The computer at the 1950 level was scifi. Planes was mostly biplanes but an technology who had promises. Same with cars both would improve a lot. For ships it was an switch from coal to oil, oil was more expensive but ocean liners could refuel faster and the cabins for the ones handled coal could be used as 3rd class cabins. The world would be richer and stuff would be more common and new stuff would be invented. Now for colonizing space, its going very well in 2125, leo is busy, multiple spin gravity space station most for industrial use but plenty for science and tourists. All the rich nerds are free interns after all Price has also dropped, guess an week in leo is below $100K if cheap. Hotels on the moon if you don't want to slum it in leo, multiple Mars bases like Antarctica. Asteroid mining is an thing and is an growth industry but an focus on orbital resources and water.

Fail after one and a half minute. Looked like pitch over was to aggressive https://youtu.be/bykfQ3J4NNc?t=2053 First orbital rocket launch from Norway. Andøya is an launch site but previous only for testing missiles and suborbital rockets to study northern light.

Guess you need an pilot licence to fly one And the reason for the car part as you can not land or take off with an helicopter most places who is densely populated as they are loud. So you need to drive out to an place you can take off and fly to destination, here you also need an landing place and drive to location. The only way to reduce noise is larger slowing rotating rotors and you become an helicopter again, and probably much easier to make an pretty silent light helicopter than an quadcopter. One 80 mm fan of four 40 mm

Plate tectonic is not really recycling so much land, mostly sea bottom. Yes its some then you create mountain ranges like Himalaya during collisions but its so much the last 300 million years. Ice is an much more common destroyer. Prehistory of Norway start less than 10.000 years ago after the ice started melting. And I put an cut off time at 300 million years as you need advanced enough animals that they could evolve intelligence and have an design who make tool use practical. More realistic an two legged dinosaur is your fist go. And not technological. One think who could survive being under ice for a million years is an old mine, yes it will fill with silt who turn to stone. But it would look very weird and its likely one place you also want to mine. And you find this channels of other rock and the ore is gone here, probably also find fossils of mining equipment junk. I'm very sure steel will fossilize much better than bone as it breaks down much slower. Glass, ceramic, probably copper and aluminium last thousands of years so it will be fossilized or the original material. As for something as widespread as humans today, we would discovered it in the 19th century even if half an billion years ago based on the last 500 million years. So many glass bottles for one, mines, tunnels landfills, aluminium engine blocks.

Flapping wings is much more mechanical complex. An propeller is an axis and an bearing, you also need an engine but you need that anyway, they have made flapping wing drones. Might be useful as probably silent and can easy be mistaken for birds. Also agree on your size restrains, largest flying dinosaur had an 10-11 meter wingspan and is estimated weighted 200 kg and an top speed of 130 km/h. https://www.sciencefocus.com/nature/whats-the-largest-flying-animal Scaling it up to a ton would be hard, same with speed. Now large winged birds has an excellent loiter time, assume as they is mostly gliders. For nature, an rotating joint could be useful but as other say how to keep the rotating part alive. Now you could have two animals say female with an male propeller and the female feed the male then not rotating you still has the issue of stability and friction, last how to evolve it.

Spinning around the bottom and gravity is now up. Now its probably simpler to rearrange stuff like showers, toilets, sinks and other furniture in zero-g than using an long bar or wire to generate spin gravity.

Good chance for that. Its obviously classified but if radar stuff you want an large antenna.

Buran has one benefit, you can use it as an heavy lift rocket, downside is that you loose the engines, but think that is worth it. Shuttle had one main feature who would be impossible to extremely hard to do today. Service missions to stuff like Hubble space telescope and building the IIS. So if you replace the Shuttle with Buran and treat it as an special reusable payload I think you are better of.

Yes, its probably wider than the Schwerer Gustav "railway gun" it required an double track. Same with the N1 transporter. Wonder a bit why they did not use double track but probably so specialized anyway, not normal railway track but some sort of geared railway. Also why an turntable rather than locks at the end, looks like the barges are transported sitting on the deck but gates or locks until should be lighter and cheaper, you don't mind if it leaks a bit.

its an camera angle thing.