Gargamel

I'd like to have my name capitalized please. Gargamel Especially since it doesn't count towards the name change, but I'll probably never change from this one any ways :P. Thanks! Oh, and it needs to be a rule, mods need to quote the user before replying so their original name is saved for posterity :).

From what I can tell from reports I have read, and the video of the explosion itself, the target was a hillside in a very remote valley. No collateral targets were present, hence why the local command decided to use the MOAB. In this case, the mile blast radius is indicated to have a >50% kill expectancy at that range. I read that on some DARPA page years ago when they came out with the MOAB, so don't ask me for the source, as I don't have the link anymore, but feel free to refute if you feel necessary. Not true. Not all explosives use pure blast wave as their destructive mechanism. A Hand grenade has a very small blast radius where the pressure wave will kill, but yet the shrapnel will still be lethal at a range many times larger than the blast wave will be. A Rocket propelled grenade is another explosive that does not rely on explosive force to kill. When striking it's target, an RPG fires off a shape charge that bores a hole into the target, and injects a cone of molten copper. This copper spalling is what is lethal, in addition to what expansive gases enter the target. This is why a chain link fence offset about a meter from a target's side is the best protection against a RPG. The RPG will hit the fence, and most likely not be triggered as it tries to push through the links, and fall to the ground. If it does go off, the separation from the intended target will force the shape charge to become ineffective, as there is no material that it is in contact with. You'll end up with a target with a big scorch mark, but no hole. An incendiary bomb use very small amounts of explosive pressure to spread flammable materials over large areas. While a WP or Napalm bomb might be lethal if you are standing very close to it, the intense fire it creates will kill you at a much greater range. In the case of the MOAB and other Air fuel Bombs, the initial explosion is designed to spread a highly explosive material over some area, and when it has reached the correct Air/Fuel mix (I believe this is done by trial and error at design time, I don't believe there's a sensor on the bomb), that material ignites. This secondary explosion is what causes the shock wave that is destructive. A regular bomb in this case would not have the tunnel penetration that a FAB would. If you had a FAB the same size as a conventional bomb, the FAB would not put as big a hole in the ground, but would be lethal out to a farther distance. This is why The MOAB was used, it would penetrate the tunnels farther, causing traumatic and lethal pressure injuries (as opposed to explosive injuries) to anything inside.

That's me too. I dunno what my first post was, it's lost to the ether.

Yes, that's kinda click bait, Nye is still alive as far as I know, but it's on topic, so read on. Started a new job the other day, working this big bruiser type guy running a machine. On day one I wear this shirt: A couple other guys there actually got it and knew what it meant. This bruiser (whos a nice guy, this just isn't in his wheelhouse), looks at me, thinks for a minute, and asks me if I like Harry Potter. After saying I do, I tried to explain lovecraft to him. I saw it fly right over his head. Next day, I wear this shirt: I see him reading it, and thinking, so I wait. Eventually He points at Nye and says "I know who he is, but he's dead, how did he run for president?". I'm pretty sure he was thinking of Mr Wizard, (Linked for you youngins who never saw it), but that still threw me for a loop. I can't wait for next week when I can wear more of my quirky shirts just to confuse him. I'm especially looking forward to the Donner Party Trail Mix shirt.

110011 in binary is 51 in decimal. Gotta love that.

I was talking about docking ports, unless you mis-spoke. I haven't noticed any ejection force, but that may be due to the fact my ships are quite heavy in comparison to the force of undocking. Usually my ships just sit there, and I fear them redocking by accident (I know theres a built in buffer).

If you are really needing zero force seperators, why not just use docking ports? I've never noticed any force from those.

Or are we talking implementing a HUD on an actual mobile device? There's a mod for that, but it takes a lot of coding on the user's device end to implement it.

There is something to be said for the use of autopilots (like mechjeb) in these situations. You plan your manuever manually, and then you let the AP fly it for you. Especially when you have high part count ships, and that 15 minute burn in game is more like 45-60 IRL. Then you can go eat dinner, or work or whatever during those burns, with the confidence that it will shut down when the burn is complete.

If you happen to miss the CoM of the 'roid when 'docking', you can always let the claw gimbal free and then recenter your axis of thrust into the CoM, then lock down the claw again. I've ended up with weirdly attached ships this way, but it works.

Yes sir! Muchos gracias!

One method I have found to reduce part count is to use a welding mod. (I don't have a link, sorry). Once I established the fact that I could build a station in space, and had made quite a few, I figured I'd cut out the busy work and HyperEdit a station into place. I build the majority of the structure in the VAB, and then using the weld mod, turn it all into one piece. Lights, ports, anything that needs to work, I add after the weld. With some designs, that reduces part counts by >50%. I still end up launching and attaching modules later, but the lag is nominal then. I understand if some people would consider this cheating (and I guess it is), or would be opposed to it on purely aesthetical reasons. But when I've been there done that, I don't feel the need to reinvent the wheel every time around. If you do want to build in space, there is the Konstruction mod (I believe that's what it's called). It has a bunch of cranes and rover parts, but it's main use to me is the docking ports. The are nearly identical to the stock parts, but when you have to of them docked, you can have them "weld" together, and they disappear, fusing the modules together, and reducing your part count by 2 each time. Depending on how you build your stations, that can save you 20-30 parts each time.

I'll have to look into this. Love my space mouse, never thought to use it in KSP. Saitek is pretty good about their peripherals. Especially if it comes with programming software that lets you customize each control. I have a few arduinos sitting on my bench here that I have been eyeballing for a KSP controller for some time. One of these days.....

I'm kind of a nit when it comes to the SSTO definition, as anything that uses one stage to get to orbit qualifies, not just spaceplanes. But in your example, I'd think it still falls into a SSTO, as your are not dropping expended tanks or engines, just a cowling for aero. If there was a mechanic in game to shield the engines, and then open those shields, it's the same thing as your design.

Launching a new crew to my station, I saw this beautiful sunset with the Mun and Minmus. Of course, pictures of the Mun at sunset never turn out that great.... Was fast scrolling through, had to back up and ask... wait... wut? How do you get the fuel back out? And wouldn't that add a heap load of mass to the tank?

Why is it people refuse to read an entire thread, especially a short one, before responding? All that leads to is fracturing of the discussion.

I woke up from a dead sleep bothered by this. Booted up desmos to check, and that is the wrong function. I meant Sqrt(x), not 1/(x^2).

So Here's what I came up with: Heat shield on the bottom, chutes for braking, 4 radial Thuds for power, nose cone is also a tank, 2200ish DV, 1.6 TWR on kerbin surface. Successfully tested a landing and ascent on Duna.

with the NF engines, my smaller lander has around 2k DV in it, and the 7 seater has about 1400. I'm a little worried about TWR though once on the surface. I'll take a look at The aerospikes too, I have plenty of LFO on the ship too, as that's what my RCS thrusters require.

Well, I'm not planning on landing on Eve, I know the difficulties. But I will be adding an interstellar mod eventually, so there will be more targets with atmospheres eventually. And it's not an internal bay, it's a niche in the design of the craft that allows for other ships to dock there. I already have 4 ships docked in it, I'll probably be getting rid of the smaller 2 man vessel in lieu of this one. And I don't want a space plane. DV requirements aren't that much of a concern, as it will be low orbit landings and launches.

I'm having trouble coming up with a design. I have a large mother ship that carries some smaller ships. I want a lander that will be capable of landing on atmospeheric bodies (Duna, Lathe, Eve maybe not so much :)). It needs to be small and simple. It's probably that I'm stuck in a design paradigm with this, and I need ideas. I'd prefer all mono prop for propulsion, as it reduces part counts and size, I am using Near future, so it has some really nice mono engines. But How do I get a heat shield, engine, and docking port all inline at the extremities of my ship? I'd prefer an inline docking port as the "docking bay" area of my mother ship is kinda confined, and I find inline docking easier to build. I also want the heat shield to be resuable, is there a mechanic for re upping the ablative material? I could use the inflatable heat shield with radial engines.... hmmm..... ideas?

My printer is 480 cu in, and cost me about $500 3 years ago. The next one I'm looking at is bigger, and about the same cost, with a lot more features, and higher accuracy. I think you need to take a closer look at things of this nature. I build a variety of things for a living, from furniture to motion control robotics on occasion (rare occasion). Reducing slop is very easy, jsut make the structure more rigid, which means using parts scaled appropriately. The cost of scaling up things like we are talking about follows a path similar to Sqrt(x), when done correctly. The difference in stepping up scale is reduced with each step you take.

Yes, you can tap (I don't use a controller FWIW, but I plan on getting one eventually), but it's just not the same as being able to ease into something with the stick. On the flip side, try driving your car someday like you would if you only had a keyboard to control it. Sharp, jerky motions on the wheel. It's interesting, then sickening, then somebody yells at you. Some things are just better controlled not by a keyboard.

I would argue that once the basic parts are accounted for, scaling a printer up in size in trivial compared to base cost. If you can build a Delta that will do 200m, there is no difference in know how, just a few bigger aluminum arms and longer belts/screws. That's for building rockets, if you want a bigger base, that's more, but building tall thin things is fairly easy to scale up.

Love this antenna. Just hooked one two up to my mother ship: A suggestion, perhaps as an additional mod using the same,or very similar model: This looks like it would be an awesome space radio telescope. Perhaps making a version that had science return similar to other telescope mods? Irregardless, I'm going to make me one, with 4 wings rather than two (part clipping!). Thanks guys!