Darnok
-
Posts
1,266 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by Darnok
-
-
Does that means those can be used in KSP?
-
On 2.11.2016 at 6:09 PM, natsirt721 said:
I suppose that the docking ports themselves would provide the torque, but it would have to be a very small value.
I don't think this will work though. Imagine 2 vessels docked by 2 docking ports. If you rotate one, do you break the link on the other? The torsional stress might be strong enough to tear parts off of one or both vessels. It would require a lot of safeguards to be done properly.
Mechanic would be disable while multidocking ports would be detected?
Or we can have different approach with usage of pilot skills. Choose what angle we want during docking and wait until pilot maneuvers ship for desired docking angle.
-
Tau-6 AF I
weight: 8.7t
parts: 24
Tau-6 AF I C
weight: 7.2t
parts: 25
info: cargo bay
More photos http://imgur.com/a/S8Yri
-
-
18 hours ago, DrunkenKerbalnaut said:
My understanding is that a low gravity, yet dense atmosphere could be a thing, it would just have to be crazy thin, and made of generally heavy vapor/particulate.
Venus like planet would be nice...
-
-
24 minutes ago, Chris_2 said:
What is up with all these people with their obsession to build (clones of) jet fighters anyway?
There is more plane parts than rocket parts, so making planes is more enjoyable than making rockets...
-
Rocket parts needs love as soon as possible, but if I would want more plane parts...
We could use solid booster with node on the top, at diameter of http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Sepratron_I or a bit larger, so it could be used as "rocket" for jet fighters and booster for really tiny rockets. Same size reaction wheel and probe core in single part would do the job.
Large plane cabin, because not every plane is space shuttle.
Different larger wings shapes and Big-S type wings with modular design like square wing connector.
MK2 battery with 1000 power and reaction wheel 15-20.
MK2 to 2x1.25m flat adapter.
MK2 to 3x0.625m and 4x0.625m adapters.
Same with MK3 size, would be nice to have some flat adapters.
more EDITs:
Less pointy MK1 and MK2 crew cabins would also be nice.
Buoy/floater for planes starting from water (and for boats would be great).
Single futuristic jet engine mounted to MK2 node same with air intake.
MK1 cargo bay like part, but with jet engine inside for small VTOLs and again same for MK2 size (since we have docking ports like that why not have jet engines?
).
-
-
3 hours ago, radonek said:
Guys, you are completely missing the point. Guns are not important. All Darnok's "volunteer" crew will die-off in matter of weeks in series of simple equipment failures. End of story, guns never enter the equation.
It is only matter of scale of colony.
3 hours ago, radonek said:We are talking 100% artificial environment here, anything and everything around can be dangerous if mishandled.
Large cities like New York seem as well 100% artificial, yet people commit crimes there
It is not matter of where colony is located (US was colony as well?), only its size and way of thinking that "maybe nobody finds out" and I get more food, more oxygen, more whatever is expensive and desirable by society.
People are even buying fake facebook likes (which is not only 100% artificial, but also 100% virtual) and you expect that nobody is going to steal anything in Mars colony?
-
28 minutes ago, tater said:
The Space Race was a PR battle over geopolitics. Utterly different risk thresholds applied. Ejection seats were never meant to always be in Shuttle, it was solely for man-rating the craft.
Which means live doesn't matter when order comes
28 minutes ago, tater said:ITS will not replace anything. This thread is about SpaceX, and it needs to stay on topic, but that's not the way NASA buys stuff now, or ever in the past. Maybe that will change someday, but it's not even on the horizon right now. Major projects will involve multiple contractors, as they have since Washington ordered the first large Frigates for the USN.
This thread is also about "future plans" and new markets for SpaceX products, to me, looks like plans for future.
SpaceX is private company and I can't see anything wrong with idea that would allow using ITS by foreign governments or by rich private people. Lockheed and Martin are selling military tech to other countries, so why SpaceX wouldn't sell space tech to new markets?
-
1 minute ago, tater said:
Yeah, "mission" flights are fine, the issue is the "colonization" glop. The problem (on topic to SpaceX) is that flag planting missions are NASA territory, and are substantially less ambitious than ITS, unless somehow space agencies buy ITS flights for "mission" based use (round trips). This would be ideal, as it could mitigate some expense, and provide useful data. The trouble of course is that NASA is a very involved customer for contractors, and would not buy seats, they'd demand all sorts of redundancies that would not be ideal for ITS. Look at Mars Direct, and how it was altered into the Mars Reference Mission/Architecture. It was made substantially more complex... because NASA (they are necessarily risk averse for human missions).
And that is why they send astronauts without radiation shield on Moon and disable Space shuttle abort mechanism
As for ITS it could replace entire planned lunar space station? Not to mention it could make Earth space station/space hotel in one go.
Even used by governments or super rich bankers as additional security something like "space air force one", since on orbit should be a lot safer during nuclear conflict? -
Now Devs have to add new capsule and landing legs
-
5 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:
We have deliberately sent signals meant to be decoded by an unknown extraterrestrial receiver.
Ok, but sending text "world peace" or 10000 tweets is going to look like noise from receiver point of view?
If we would convert any post from this discussion into radio signals like we do normally during communication how would this message look like?
SETI would even classified it as "possible intelligent message" or just one more random noise? -
24 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:
You must be trolling here, right? Sending instable personalities to Mars and giving them guns? What could possibly go wrong?
Criminals wouldn't have guns... read again, I was saying that guns are for volontiers.
-
37 minutes ago, p1t1o said:
Ok, fair point, however what we do transmit is incredibly information-dense, which stands out significantly from random or regular signals. The paper itself presupposes that the signals are intended to get our attention, but that is part of the problem, I think the author has pre-supposed quite a lot.
To be honest though, I dont know enough to say it is definitely bunk.
That is because your text is complex message, but what if you would have to transmit something simple... like signal from distant probe that would carry only one message "probe is alive"?
27 minutes ago, KerikBalm said:Also, the signals we send, while not just primes, are still highly complex. This signal has no variance, its a very very simple signal that couldn't encode any more data than the following: ..................................................................................................................... (ad infinitum)
So my idea that those are probes sending super simple message that they still "alive" is still valid
What I found, at least strange, reading about scientists looking for other civilizations is that they are looking other civilization that wants to be found. While we are civilization that doesn't transmit anything, because we are too afraid that someone finds us
-
2 hours ago, p1t1o said:
Complete lack of things like prime numbers or other commonly accepted intelligence indicators in the signal. Was there any data in the signal at all? Not much of a "signal" otherwise. Unless its buried in the paper but I figure that would be in the conclusion somewhere...
Just look at our regular communication we are also not using any prime numbers.
You assume that those signals are for communication purpose with "new neighbours", not regular communication with other outposts/space stations/probes of some advanced civilization . -
20 minutes ago, Chabadarl said:
Giving people gun is the very first thing that can make people murderers....Right because they can't murder you with knife, bat or piece of steel
If having gun means you are murderer then you should be very afraid of every police officer or soldier in your country.Mars or any other colony is going to need guns, so people would be able to protect them selves from criminals...
20 minutes ago, Chabadarl said:I really don't see the point of using criminals when you will find over-competent, multi-skilled and very motivated contributors that are willingly going up there.
...since you want to sent there skilled volontiers, you can't assume that each one of them is going to like each other person. If colony is going to last longer than year or two, then some people may argue over things, just like on Earth plus psychological factor of constant danger and little space could make weaker minds confused and more aggressive.
Without basic technology for defence against hostile people you would risk lives of all members of colony.
-
58 minutes ago, Rakaydos said:
234 civilizations using the exact same frequency of laser.
What's so special about that frequency?
They could be all communicating with each other on same frequency?
-
3 hours ago, radonek said:
if one of them decides to kill everyone, there is little you can do to stop it.
You can give everyone of them a gun, bullets are little and pretty good at stopping murderers
-
Nice, I can see some potential new KSP parts
-
6 minutes ago, Majorjim! said:
No. We can already change the wheels grip levels Ect, on the fly, changing suspension settings is more realistic than having magical control over the wheels grip levels. :-)
IMO we should be able to change all parameters, but only using Kerbal engineers, it would solve the problem and be realistic
-
17 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:
Because spending billions to send potentially uncooperative and unskilled labor to build and maintain vital equipment in a high-tech space colony is a recipe for disaster.
They would have two options, be cooperative or they will die. Since their lives depends on each other they would motivate each other to do their job right.
If thief can disable your car-alarm and steel car then he is skilled enough to drive mars-rover for few kilometres and prepare ground or unload equipment for next experiment site.
Mars colony, with criminals from Earth or without them, will need laws and punishments... what if someone steels something? What if one person kill another? That is also interesting part of colony concept
-
31 minutes ago, Northstar1989 said:
We have no reason to believe anything unusual will occur under 38% gravity, so that MUST be our assumption unless proven otherwise. Anything else is unscientific.
It is very scientific to think that same living organism is going to have different behaviour in two different environments. What needs to be proven is how much different behaviour will that be.
If you are making assumption that same organism is going to act in same way in two very different environments, then you are the one that should deliver proof, since this claim makes all hypothesis about evolution questionable.
42 minutes ago, Northstar1989 said:we must proceed from the baseline assumption that it doesn't- because any other baseline assumption would require us to invent new physical processes and principles, without data or evidence for their very existence- and would thus be highly unscientific.
It would be scientific and cautious.
).
Em drive good news...
in Science & Spaceflight
Posted
It is pushing away from "space". If you consider space as particle then it makes sense, but this makes quantum physics and relativity wrong... that is why EM inventor didn't wanted to explain "how does it work?" on his own