0111narwhalz Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Perhaps "cohabitant" is a more appropriate term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, 0111narwhalz said: Perhaps "cohabitant" is a more appropriate term. That'll do. And, with apologies for instigating this detour, lets get back to the story before mods, or author, begin to frown in our direction. Edited January 23, 2017 by KSK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Dilsby Posted January 24, 2017 Author Share Posted January 24, 2017 <--working on the comic and stuff not working properly face. Not to be confused with: <--gees, leave my wife out of this face. Or,: <--no one appreciates my genius face. OK back to work <--my readers really are awesome face Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAL 9000 Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 <-- Jeb Is Flying Face <-- Mort Whenever He Sees What I've Designed And Bankrupted The Space Program To Build Face <-- Jeb When He's Doing Something BadS Face Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Dilsby Posted January 24, 2017 Author Share Posted January 24, 2017 Credit to @Zhetaan for "range safety" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkOwl57 Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 WOOOOOO!!!! NEW- Wait a second... AWAY from the VAB?!?!? WHAT DID YOU PEOPLE DO?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrett Kerman Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 Leonard's eyebrows tho... Spoiler Wut? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Dilsby Posted January 24, 2017 Author Share Posted January 24, 2017 2 minutes ago, Garrett Kerman said: Leonard's eyebrows tho... Wut? Fascinating... next you'll be wondering what that thing is in Nichelle's ear... or why Walter can't pronounce "vessel" correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max_creative Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 I need know is how fast can I read these pages when I get home. Anything with the word "explode or the words "blow up" is automatically awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torgo Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 30 minutes ago, Kuzzter said: Fascinating... next you'll be wondering what that thing is in Nichelle's ear... or why Walter can't pronounce "vessel" correctly. So why isn't the captain 'entertaining' that green alien girl? Or would the alien girls be really be human colored here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 42 minutes ago, Kuzzter said: Fascinating... next you'll be wondering what that thing is in Nichelle's ear... or why Walter can't pronounce "vessel" correctly. It's worse than that - it's irony, Jim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 Seriously though, I love the idea that 'range safety' involves blowing up one rocket - with moar rockets! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dman979 Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 31 minutes ago, Torgo said: So why isn't the captain 'entertaining' that green alien girl? Or would the alien girls be really be human colored here? I do believe that was covered in General Order 35. Leonard can get a very good idea of where they are in that orbit by looking at the last recorded transmission from Micarooni. Because (as you've mentioned before) the speed of plot can be constrained by orbital mechanics, once he figures out the best launching orbit he can calculate how long it took to get there from Micarooni, and then the position on the optimal orbit, roughly speaking. Speaking of orbits, it was supposed to take the Intrepid about 180 minutes to get to Kenlie. It's been 150, almost exactly. Don't you think it might be time to go back to Laythe soon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor of the Titan Squid Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 Is leonard kerman Spock or Mcoy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhetaan Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 @Emperor of the Titan Squid: Leonard Kerman is Spock. DeForest Kerman is McCoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Dilsby Posted January 24, 2017 Author Share Posted January 24, 2017 59 minutes ago, Dman979 said: Speaking of orbits, it was supposed to take the Intrepid about 180 minutes to get to Kenlie. It's been 150, almost exactly. Don't you think it might be time to go back to Laythe soon? Yes it is...very interesting technical challenge, by the way, to have things going on in so multiple locations concurrently and to have to do them "on the clock". Am very glad there's no limit on the number of quicksaves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
something Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 (edited) Well, I recreated those "range safety" devices, @Kuzzter came up with. At high relative velocities, I encountered some aerodynamic instabilities, with the devices flipping basically everywhere but the direction you intend them to... Also on a strictly scientific mission, the tier 2 VAB just laughed at their impact (at about 240m/s). I hence, came up with a device, that does cost 4 times the amount of funds, uses a rapier engine, has a ton of dV, and thanks to some oxidizer, can get into space. For the sake of aerodynamic stbility, I added some wings, canards and fins. Flying it into the VAB (which, collapsed under the impact at 140 m/s), I realized, I just reinvented the Cruise Missile...which is when I realized, it actually was an intercontinental Cruise Missile... Edited January 24, 2017 by something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dman979 Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 36 minutes ago, something said: Well, I recreated those "range safety" devices, @Kuzzter came up with. At high relative velocities, I encountered some aerodynamic instabilities, with the devices flipping basically everywhere but the direction you intend them to... Also on a strictly scientific mission, the tier 2 VAB just laughed at their impact (at about 240m/s). I hence, came up with a device, that does cost 4 times the amount of funds, uses a rapier engine, has a ton of dV, and thanks to some oxidizer, can get into space. For the sake of aerodynamic stbility, I added some wings, canards and fins. Flying it into the VAB (which, collapsed under the impact at 140 m/s), I realized, I just reinvented the Cruise Missile...which is when I realized, it actually was an intercontinental Cruise Missile... Great! Now fly them at each other, and see what happens! If you miss, I'm sure that TAC-SD will help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StupidAndy Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 alright, life lesson number one: NEVER SAY WHATS THE WORST THAT CAN HAPPEN!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkOwl57 Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 6 minutes ago, StupidAndy said: alright, life lesson number one: NEVER SAY WHATS THE WORST THAT CAN HAPPEN!! Bet you said that before the game... *Prepares for American Football flame war* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StupidAndy Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 again, I blame deflategate... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkOwl57 Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 2 minutes ago, StupidAndy said: again, I blame deflategate... But deflategate is for the Pats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Rocket Scientist Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, something said: Well, I recreated those "range safety" devices, @Kuzzter came up with. At high relative velocities, I encountered some aerodynamic instabilities, with the devices flipping basically everywhere but the direction you intend them to... Also on a strictly scientific mission, the tier 2 VAB just laughed at their impact (at about 240m/s). I hence, came up with a device, that does cost 4 times the amount of funds, uses a rapier engine, has a ton of dV, and thanks to some oxidizer, can get into space. For the sake of aerodynamic stbility, I added some wings, canards and fins. Flying it into the VAB (which, collapsed under the impact at 140 m/s), I realized, I just reinvented the Cruise Missile...which is when I realized, it actually was an intercontinental Cruise Missile... Our results appear to confirm each other. When I added four basic fins to each range safety device, it was not maneuverable enough to change direction. The stock "hold target" guidance doesn't seem like it could intercept a cruise missile head-on either, it would have to chase it. EDIT: When I launched both of them at the VAB (at ~100m/s) at the same time they could take it down some of the time. EDIT2: Now they're never destroying the VAB, no matter what I do. Edited January 24, 2017 by Mad Rocket Scientist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Dilsby Posted January 24, 2017 Author Share Posted January 24, 2017 I should mention to all you re-creators that only the top OSCAR-B tanks on those range safety devices are actually filled Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
something Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 29 minutes ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said: Our results appear to confirm each other. When I added four basic fins to each range safety device, it was not maneuverable enough to change direction. The stock "hold target" guidance doesn't seem like it could intercept a cruise missile head-on either, it would have to chase it. Yes, I had the same impression. I also added tailfins and it made the RSD basically unusable in terms of maneuverability which is basically the reason I came up with a Cruise Missile in the end, when trying to improve the RSD. One major point of concern was the low top speed. A rapier engine is basically able to propel a fuel tank at 900-1400m/s which is way too much for the RSD. 29 minutes ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said: EDIT: When I launched both of them at the VAB (at ~100m/s) at the same time they could take it down some of the time. EDIT2: Now they're never destroying the VAB, no matter what I do. I never launched two RSDs at the same time, so I have no idea whether a double impact could destroy the VAB. I single impact seemed to be incapable. Well, finally, I launched the RSD at my Cruise Missile. A direct hit (which is hard enough to score), is able to disassemble the cruise missile, however, larger fragments remained... If it's only the top (2-3) tanks which are filled, that might enhance the aerodynamic stability of the device, but I assume, the range will be limited even further... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.