p1t1o

You will need a fairly sophisticated guidance system/autopilot. My gut says that the authorities might want to talk to you about attaching guidance systems to huge rockets however...just a hunch.

This question comes up SO. OFTEN! The classic response is: plasma is essentially very hot gas. A gun that fires hot gas, you can imagine, will be very hard to weaponise. Its very much more efficient/effective to generate plasma in-situ on contact with the target, these weapons are commonplace: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge Or you can use the expansion of plasma to drive a projectile: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator Think of it like this: solid high explosive is like stabilised plasma stored in a cold, dense state . Probably the best way we currently have to project it at a target. If you are looking for a real-world approximation of the plasma rifle from DOOM, this is probably about as close as you will get - and considering the validity of the "first response" is pretty damn close actually!: (although "rifle" might be pushing it!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_Star https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARAUDER "Shiva Star was also used to develop an experimental weapon known as MARAUDER for the SDI effort between 1989 and 1995. The idea appears to have been to createcompact toroids of high-density plasma that would be ejected from the device using a massive magnetic pulse.[2] The plasma projectiles would be shot at a speed expected to be 3000 km/s in 1995 and 10,000 km/s (3% of the speed of light) by 2000. A shot has the energy of 5 pounds of TNT exploding; although it caused little or no physical damage, the energy would shower the interior of the target with high-energy x-rays that would potentially destroy the electronics inside. The tests cost a few million dollars a year.[3] The project was scrapped at some time after 1995 because of problems keeping the plasma projectiles stable for the distances required by orbital weaponry."

More like Bore-ion. Also looks too much like "onion". Onion Apollo.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ESASP.393..699B Just how many times is "Orion" going to be used as a project/vehicle name? There are plenty of other space words! "Spaaaaace" for example.

If you've been making planes in stock for a while, you might need to try and refresh the way you build aircraft. In my experience, build an aircraft that looks like it would fly in real life, and it will work in FAR. Use all of the concepts that you know about flight and lift. Not enough lift? You need to look at your wing area, angle of incidence, wing sweep. (I sometimes angle my wings up a bit with respect to the fuselage centreline, increasing AoA when the plane is horizontal on the ground, helps with takeoff run and low-speed handling) Too much drag for your enlarged wings? Bigger/more engines. Wanna go fast? Make it pointy w/swept wings, deltas are nice and stable. Wanna go high, speed not a priority? Long slender, unswept wings. Wanna go supersonic? You'll find it very helpful to use "area ruling". This is a slightly more complex thing than the others, basically, give your aircraft a slight "wasp waist", ie: make it narrower in the middle. Give area ruling a google, you'll get it. Its tricky to optimise but FAR gives you some graphs and things to help. If you still have trouble lifting off, check where your gear are positioned. If they are too far behind your CoM, you will not be able to get the leverage required to rotate on takeoff due to low speeds. Place main gear just slightly behind the CoM. Also try making the nose slightly pitched up when all gear are on the ground. Its not clear what you mean when you say: " Some parts, even stock ones, cause the vessel to get stuck" Note: gear have not been fixed yet, so you are bound to encounter problems on the ground with them. Apparently due to be fixed in 1.2 Tip: do not place main gear too far apart, just "a sensible distance". Dont try and give it a really wide stance to increase stability or anything, you will run into steering issues. 120m/s is quite fast for a takeoff roll, but don't expect to be getting off the ground at stock speeds. depending on the configuration of the craft, expect rotation speeds between about 70-100m/s. Use flaps, and if you know what you are doing, leading edge slats as well. These are useful for improving lift and manouvreability at low speeds. The drag issue with dropped payloads Im unfamiliar with. The SAS issue is quite long-standing, you might be able to smooth things a bit if you find a mod that lets you "tune" SAS response coefficients (does FAR allow this, Im not sure?). Basically its just an issue to do with how the control feedback is generated. One response curve is not necessarily useful in all flight envelopes, and you've just swapped out stock aero for FAR, so its not surprising the SAS wigs out a bit. Hope that helps and its not too basic!

And another generation discovers this old classic I've posted before about how I've had to write an MSDS for water in a professional capacity. This time I'll share a little titbit from RTECS - The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical substances, a Canadian database widely used in the chemical industry. Water, CAS# 7732-18-5, RTECS Ref. ZC0110000 Test: LD0 (Lowest published lethal dose) Subject Species: Human Woman Dose Data: 180gm/kg Route: Rectal Toxic Effects: Sense Organs and Special Senses (Eye) - mydriasis (pupillary dilation) Behavioral - convulsions or effect on seizure threshold Gastrointestinal - nausea or vomiting Ref. : JAMAAP JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association. (AMA, 535 N. Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 60610) V.1- 1883- Volume(issue)/page/year: 104,1569,1935 http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=259116 On a more serious note, you laugh at the DHMO hoax, but all chemicals must be treated seriously in the industry, hyponatremia is not as rare as you'd think, mainly among vulnerable populations. Just see the wealth of data on the Toxnet page on water: https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/a?dbs+hsdb:@term+@DOCNO+8183

But when you listed what you wanted, you just cut+pasted the list of things confirmed as NOT within scope

Not sure if it is a 100% match to your query but a really good (and my personal favorite) experiment that illustrates weird photon behaviour with slots, measurement and quantum weirdness is called "The Quantum Bomb Tester". I hate to refer you to wiki but the page on it has probably a better explanation than I could muddle through. Key points: 1. By using weird quantum things, you can measure sometihng without interacting with it at all. 2. It has been practically demonstrated in the real world. 3. It makes my mind go all funny. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elitzur–Vaidman_bomb_tester

Way to go sherlock!

It seems to me that if one is going to disagree with Stephen Hawking, one needs to do it with a rather large pile of maths attached.

This affects me too, was present in 1.1.2 I imagine it is related to the overarching wheel problems which have not yet been properly tackled, think its a 1.2 thing. IIRC, unity sees wheels and legs as the same thing.

I picked up "homeworld- deserts of Kharak" for 50% off - very pretty, gameplay reminiscent of the originals, very atmospheric. Recommended. Ooh Pillars of Eternity is great! I've been keeping an eye on Exanima too, just fyi: I think I read somewhere that they wouldn't be putting it on sale any time in the forseeable future [which, at £10ish, is hardly a tragedy] will probably pick it up after a bit more development.

Oof! Right in the feelings

Oh My God. I get "many other symptoms" all the time!!

Or you could use a lava lamp to generate your random numbers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavarand

Sure of course, its a hypothetical - "What if cars could make this kind of decision?". We can't rule it out for the unknown future, could be almost inevitable.

@NathanKell Thanks for weighing in (and for tackling thankless bugs!) its immeasurably more reassuring to hear things "from the horses mouth". It sounds like the orbital bug is a right JohnSnow

People do fall for it though, not everyone, but enough to make a difference to profits. People will see the word "designer" and, even if just a small amount, they will subconsciously assign more value to that item. I've worked on marketing studies where people responded positively to all sorts of words, and we were absolutely not allowed to put the word "moist" on the product. All you have to do is look at the gibberish they put on cosmetic products, but the language will test better in focus groups. Society kinda brought the "designer" plague upon itself.

I don't wanna just copy from another list, folks looking for 1.1.3 compatible mods will logically try the spoacedock search feature anyway. Thanks though!

Well, I'd give small children a priority because they have more life left to lose, in a manner of speaking. And neither of those situations call for you to sacrifice *yourself*. But the difference in, ahem, "value" between 2 groups isn't what I think the main difficulty is, that will always be a quagmire: "Is a teacher worth more than a janitor? Is a President worth more than a teacher?" etc. etc. The difficulty that the survey says to me is: "Automatic cars should sacrifice the driver to save 2 people. Except when I'm the driver." Its a tough one. Personally I think that our society is still to obsessed with blame and punishment to be able to accept putting that much control in the hands of a software developer. It will all be roses and sunshine until somebody's daughter gets crushed to death by a car that wasn't initially going to hit her, but swerved into her to avoid someone else, or worse, to avoid something *it thinks* is someone else. I think I actually just decided I'm not a great fan of self-driving cars.

Meh, this is just semantics now. The word "designer" has already become widely synonymous with "overpriced". But also literally, people who "design" crappy trainers are actually designers, to be fair. And a phone whose only difference is the external look: well, the only difference is the design. I think what you want is another class of products called "Engineered". I'd buy some engineered cheese no problemo. Sounds nice.

You can use the reactor to electrolyse the water to hydrogen and oxygen, use just the hydrogen as remass for increased ISP and Im sure we can think of a use for the oxygen, I'm thinking mainly industrial applications rather than breathing gas which can be regenerated.

I picked up the DoWII collection

Darkest Dungeon is cool, style is great and lots of content. Grim Dawn is an excellent ARPG, again tons of content. Prison Architect should fill your indie needs for a while. Its weird how compelling prisons are. Im having a lot of fun with Total War: Warhammer. Factorio is just straight up pure resource management porn for those who like that sort of thing. I picked up Tom Clancy's Rainbow 6 Vegas games for just a couple of quid the other day. I think Supreme Commander is still available for cheap, honestly its still the pinnacle of RTS games, everything since has maybe been a bit prettier, but so many things are dumbed down for mass appeal these days, especially for multiplayer.

You should read Seveneves by Neal Stephenson