makinyashikino
-
Posts
146 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by makinyashikino
-
-
I wanna be as stringent as possible. If I have to do a rescue mission, I'll bring the claw with me to pick up the fuel-less ship.
-
Bump. I really like this idea. Maybe debris that's left alone around Kerbin or Solar SOI would "Disappear" and in the future, when you find an asteroid, it has bits of that stage embedded in it!
-
ive also been wondering this although more to do with real life
e.g.
If you have a space Station at Geo orbit with a gappler on it.
you send a rocket up to an Ap of whatever geo is at
the station will reach the same place as the rocket at the same time
The rocket would slow down to 0 m/s at ap
at this exact time the station would fire the grappler what would happen once the grappler attatched to the rocket?
You wouldn't need a grappler if you timed the docking right. But doing this would be worse than achieving orbit then changing Apoapsis because burning straight up is incredibly fuel inefficient. Also, atmospheric drag lowers your horizontal speed and you would pretty much need to time it perfectly. Complicated but theoretically do-able.
-
I think what's more important I think is what we will use to store that energy.
-
Use it all up. Then we'll have to find an alternate source of energy.
That's very shortsighted.
-
We know how to do it, we simply lack materials and material technology to contain it in a fashion suitable for power generation.
Well, knowing how it works is quite different from ACTUALLY doing it. the problem is it's been "50 years away" for 50 years now, it's gonna take time. What we need is modern technologies to solve our problems
-
two words: NUCLEAR FUSION
it'll make every other fuel we ever depended on obsolete
Too bad we don't know how to do it yet
-
I've always been a fan of the nuclear option but with a twist. Rather than load-balancing stations as are currently used, dump excess generation into water hydrolysis plants to generate hydrogen during off-peak times. When everyone turns the kettle on during the breaks in the football, dump some capacity back into the grid (rather than bringing whole stations on and offline). The match kicks off again, no-one's making a cuppa, fire up the electrolysis rig again.
Why generate hydrogen you may ask? Because most current petrol combustion engines wouldn't need a huge amount of modification to run on hydrogen. And hydrogen combustion is somewhat more emission-free than hydrocarbon combustion - the only combustion product being water. So not only are you generating power without recourse to fossil fuels you also in one fell swoop render a large proportion of the vehicles on the road emission-free. With a fuel supply made from water. No new technology needed at any stage.
A valid question (if it's as simple as I think it is) is why this hasn't happened yet. The answer I suspect lies in how much money the entire oil industry would be willing to throw around if their survival depended on it. There're entire nations that would collapse overnight if a setup like this was proven to work.
edit: and why nuclear to do this, not solar panels etc? I'd rather lose a handfull of green fields to nuclear power stations, than lose a vast amount more land to the silicon of solar panelling. Though it's not to everyone's taste nuclear does have power density on it's side in comparison to most other methods of generation.
But would hydrogen combustion engines run on clean water exclusively? If we used clean water, we would strain our dwindling freshwater supplies even more, as the millions of cars in the US alone would consume insane amounts of water. If it could run on wastewater, then our problems would be solved, as we could use wastewater from the hydrolysis and nuclear plants, or even seawater if it didn't corrode the engine.
-
In your opinion, what fuel or way of generating power is the best for replacing our dependence on fossil fuels. Is it Nuclear or renewable sources. Biofuel or Hydrogen fuel cells. Discuss.
In my opinion Nuclear and Solar are our two best bets. Nuclear gets a bad rap, but it's mainly bad management and outdated hardware that create these problems. With state of the art engineering and computers, we could built much safer plants. And solar is becoming more efficent constantly, as well as cheaper. I think that solar roads is an incredible engineering challenge, but it would solve all of our problems.
-
What intakes are you using? Could you post a picture of your craft?
-
Maybe things that re-enter the atmosphere, it would do a series of checks to see if it is recoverable or not, rather than just deleting the parts that fall back outright. Like Speed, under a certain amount of m/s? okay, it survives re-entry, does it have a parachute? Okay, it survives landing. Did it fall over land or water? Increase refurbish cost for saltwater if water. etc.
EDIT: Ninja'd! I really should have checked the last page!
-
when i send a probe, i must check EVERYTHING. i have a check list:
will the probe work with a nuclear reactor failure?
can the probe survive a colision with a space station, a space shuttle, and a refueling probe?
Is there any radiator?
on each probe there must be 3 docking ports: 0.65m, 1.25m, and 2.5m.
what's the Delta-V of the probe?
2.5m!?!?!?!? Augh how BIG are your probes?!?!
-
Sound Idea, don't see why not.
-
With .24 adding a contract system, does this mean that we also will get money in the game? What will it be called? If so, then it will finally feel balanced.
-
confirm there is no life on it, and dump it on Mercury
If anything could survive on MERCURY, a vacuum with no atmosphere and the insane surface temperatures, I think they could survive a little nuclear waste.
-
I actually re-considered Minmus.
My 2 final choices are:
Eve and Minmus
I haven't been to eve yet though.
Eve? Unless you enjoy one way trips, or lots of driving. Bases there are very impractical.
EDIT: WOO 100th post!
-
Personally I always thought it would be cool to have procedurally generated systems created for each game. Keep things fresh and new for each campaign. Though the existence of planets and other bodies that exist for everyone is a cool community feature.
It could easily just be a different mode. . .
FYI Devs have said that they wouldn't do procedural gen planets because they want the same experience for every player. But this would be a neat mod.
-
Use it to generate more power, duuhhh.
Decay heat + thermocouples, deep in a mine.
You mean like the ones they had on Voyager and Curiosity? I wouldn't imagine those would produce too much power...
-
What if our universe is simply a stick figure laying rocks for millions of millenia?
Consider the 5 Minute Universe Thought Experiment: Imagine that a god, one that likes a good joke, created the universe 5 minutes ago, everything was create to make the appearence that the universe was billions of years old, with light made in transit from stars billions of light years away, to our memories being fabricated. Think about it: that chair you siting in would likely be where you were born, puffed into existance with memories of a past that never was and completely unaware of your own spontanous birth. You reading off a computer that puffed into being with you, reading posts that were never truelly posted but simply came into existance with a false history and peopling thinking falsy that they made those post... How would you know? Assuming this god did a perfect job there would be no way to prove the universe was 5 minutes old and all observation and all evidence and all your memories would exist to convince you otherwise. There would be no way to truelly know.Now if you want to crawl into a corner and enter a solipsistic catatonic stupur, I would not judge.
I've thought about this before, it terrifies me to no end, because for all I know, it could be true.
-
I am a fan of the Traveling wave reactor.
I was wondering if scientists could use breeders to change waste into usable uranium, in that case we could launch it when it is waste, to mars or the moon. If we ever do go to colonize these places, we could use the now-enriched uranium to produce power for the base.
-
As in, only used internally by the developers. I'm guessing it's a sort-of automatic feedback system that can be used to track players' progress, see what gets used and what doesn't, where people are getting stuck, etc... It's probably extremely valuable information to have because it doesn't rely on players manually submitting feedback.
Thank you! I didn't realise what they meant by internal use only, should've known
. But didn't KSP already track stats or was that only CPU specs? -
What do achievement stats mean? Do they track your launches, your failures? How many kilos of snacks lost to the cold abyss of space?
-
Yes! I would love to know if someone responds to something I said, rather than having to search through a sea of subscribed threads that get multiple posts daily. Other forums do it, I mean hell the rinky-dinky forums I used to run did that.
-
I realise that this is kinda poor advice, especially from an "Answering your question standpoint" but you could always just Hyperedit your way into Moho flyby, it's kinda cheaty I know, but you would fix your problem.
Old Debris
in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
Posted
I feel like that would be a bit disappointing, or fun maybe, like archaeology, in SPACE!
depends on it's execution. Maybe it would give you a science bonus or something? But then I think some people would be pretty pissed to send a mission all the way to an asteroid only to find a part...
Unless it was a new part... Maybe you could "Discover" parts left in space, if .24 has stranded kerbals launched by other companies, why not assume that they launched a "prototype" rocket, that's how the kerbals got caught in LKO anyway. You could get a part slightly down the tech tree? or even something completely new