WestAir

Atrophy is a direct result of a cells inability to intelligently adapt. I'm sure in the far future when we know everything about microbiology, and synthetic cells and DNA are common practice, decay will be an issue of the past. Just remember to invest in "smart cells". (I haven't yet decided if I am joking or not.)

I have issues loading that gulfstream. It just sits on the runway. Ended up throwing some rockomax thrusters on it and it still won't budge. Removed the rear wheels and it still floats like it had real wheels. Not sure how to "unstick" it from the runway.

Thanks for the advice guys. I re-installed FAR, made sure the heat shield was NOT clipping through, and now I'm hitting 300m/s at about 10,000 meters (instead of hitting 700m/s at sea level). You guys rock, (Going to keep the settings on hard. Those 3,000m/s re-entry speeds don't really heat my pod up that much)

Evening, I apologize if this has been asked before, but I would like to know if there was a way to remove the parachute destruction above 300ms feature. My drogue shoots tear beyond this speed and I find it difficult to slow the 1man pod down below 500ms with FAR installed. I've exhausted many hours trying to slow the early capsule below mach 1 to no avail. Even the most gentle, 60km perapsis reentry results in a 700ms @ impact return. Being able to slow my descent with drogues would be appreciated. Thanks in advance for your help,

Looks like they might have found this one.

To be fair, during WWII the US was able to turn most of its private, service-based manufacturing plants into war infrastructure in shorter time. There's little reason why the World can't put every man, woman, and child to work on survival infrastructure with equal zeal. The economy would probably boom 2000 points just from the news alone of a "All hands on deck strategy."

You guys are way too optimistic. 90 years is a pretty solid ETA and even that might be optimistic. If we were discussing Luna, 2030 might be a fair prediction.

Is it possible at all to have a celestial object with a positive or negative charge?

Question for your intelligent types, Is it possible to create a celestial ball of either electrons or protons? I know the weak force is something like 38 orders of magnitude weaker than magnetism (and same charged particles repulse each other), but is it possible for gravity to overcome the repulsion and form an electron or proton star? If it could exist, what would it look like?

Depends on the manufacturer. Boeing likes to list their ground to tail measurement as tail height. Others just use the term height, and there are even other manufacturers (usually defunct ones like Douglas) that don't use a term at all, and just have a graph with numbers. I imagine this is another one of those "fulcrum" and "datum/moment" cases where we depend on the manufacturer to decide. As an aside, I've never seen anyone list the height of a retractable gear aircraft with the gear stowed (clean). I'm not sure if it's because it's too difficult to get accurate measurements or if it's because wings tend to deform during flight so the height of the aircraft changes depending on wing load.

My vote is still on improbable. I have a hard time seeing an air carrier be more effective than a water supercarrier. A lot of the super carriers strengths come from the armada of subs and missile cruisers and support craft around it.

1. Not at all, unless it were an airship. At that point, you'd be smarter to simply make it a flying missile cruiser than an aircraft carrier. And at that point, you'd just be better off with a real missile cruiser. [barring in mind that because the sea has no nationality but airspace does, ships make far better platforms than aircraft.]

Visible light would shift into the furthest possible extent of gamma rays at C. Probably with a wavelength the size of a single point in space I'd imagine.

Going back to this thread, I have to ask what you meant by this phrase. Either we're using a warp drive and both the traveler and the people back home aren't under the influence of near-C time dilation, or, we're flying at 0.9999c and the crews time is slowed. Speeding or slowing their time does nothing for those on Earth: The trip will always take ~1 lightyear to go 1 lightyear. Unless you slow down the passage of time on Earth to match the velocity time dilation on the ship - which would be pretty epic.

Then you would have the VASIMR engine.

Common trope. You see it a lot with airplane moves (Average John Smith whose only real experience with aviation involves paper airplanes, finds himself in the cockpit of a badly damaged 747 and manages to land it onto the runway without incident) or car moves (Average Lucy Jane who recently only worked at Sears, is tasked with saving hero John Smith and manages to drive a Ferrarri, backwards, through 6 O'Clock traffic while being chased by 12 assassins, and does so without scratching the paint). It's especially used in sci fi (Luke. X-wing. 0 days training. C'mon, that T-16 Skyhopper isn't exactly the same as an X-Wing starfighter!) But I always enjoy the trope because I like rooting for the little guy.

Good job China. And they wanna build the LM11 in 2 years? We need to team up.

By the time we even need lunar robots they'll probably be autonomous enough to only need intermittent piloting. Programming a robot to dig trenches isn't necessarily the most complex of tasks. (This is me assuming. I have never worked in computer programming )

I figured the only risk was from burns but I assumed the damage would be immediately evident: "Oh god I'm burning. Run away!"

Going to take a moment to say that K^2 has afforded a lot more citations for his claims than the opposition. From a neutral perspective, I'm not sure why he's even bothering to continue arguing with someone who is obviously incorrect.

K^2, why stand away from it if it's only outputting non ionizing EMR?

I have heard that gravitationally induced time dilation causes the person closer to the larger gravity well to see time slower, and unlike velocity induced time dilation, all observers agree that time is going slower for those closer to the center of gravity. I imagine with exotic matter that creates negative gravity, the effect could go in reverse (all observers see the person near the exotic mass as having faster time) - but it's also possible that there is a hard limit. (I.E, you can't make time go faster than the natural global dilation of the cosmic microwave background observer, only slower). But I'm just guessing here.

Does this count if only part of your orbit is below the Karman line?

If you broke reality and pushed your camera faster than C, what would things look like as you caught up with photons from behind?* *You also have a machine that separates space and time so you can modify the space (speed) vector without changing the time vector

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a singularity can be orbited just like any other body. That's like saying "Given that they seem to be interested in settling on a planet near a star... yeah, no."