Space stations
Space stations
what sort of structure/rules do we have for the construction of space stations?
-
- Posts: 1383
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:33 pm
- Location: McCallavre, Straylight, Shireroth
- Contact:
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 3:26 am
- Contact:
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
In theory the best way to do it would be to have a vote on if it is feasible, then roll a dice/flip a coin/use random.org/watch radioactive atoms decay to see if it "makes it", with like different odds for different things, e.g. satelites, tarsica bases, space station components, rockets
and space stations shouldn't really be allowed to have been lifted up in bulk
and also, I don't think magic would be feasible in space It's too much like cheating
and space stations shouldn't really be allowed to have been lifted up in bulk
and also, I don't think magic would be feasible in space It's too much like cheating
Yeah. I would prefer to build a space station before a base on Tarsica. maybe it's my twisted Hammish thinking.
I think we should have it that each piece should be taken into orbit at a certain interval. So we don't ave super massive stations appearing. The random.org should be used, but it should be that is is very unlikely things go wrong so countries go into recession putting the kitchen in.
I think we should have it that each piece should be taken into orbit at a certain interval. So we don't ave super massive stations appearing. The random.org should be used, but it should be that is is very unlikely things go wrong so countries go into recession putting the kitchen in.
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
yeah most probably...
we'll need odds for:
Satellite:
- Launch
- Positioning in orbit
- Kept in orbit check perhaps? every month or so?
Tarsica mission:
- Launch
- Movement to Tarsica
- Landing
- - Return mission:
- - Launch from Tarsica
- - Movement to Micras
- - Landing (depends on type? crash landing? controlled crash? perfect land?)
Tarsica base:
- Launch
- Movement to Tarsica
- Landing
- Base construction
- Base check-up every month or so?
Deep space probe:
- Launch
- Movements between planets?
- Planetary gravity slingshots?
- Landing? (depends on type?)
Micras orbital base:
- Launch (different for starting part/addition peice)
- Positioning in orbit
- Connection to base
- Base check-up every month or so?
we'll need odds for:
Satellite:
- Launch
- Positioning in orbit
- Kept in orbit check perhaps? every month or so?
Tarsica mission:
- Launch
- Movement to Tarsica
- Landing
- - Return mission:
- - Launch from Tarsica
- - Movement to Micras
- - Landing (depends on type? crash landing? controlled crash? perfect land?)
Tarsica base:
- Launch
- Movement to Tarsica
- Landing
- Base construction
- Base check-up every month or so?
Deep space probe:
- Launch
- Movements between planets?
- Planetary gravity slingshots?
- Landing? (depends on type?)
Micras orbital base:
- Launch (different for starting part/addition peice)
- Positioning in orbit
- Connection to base
- Base check-up every month or so?
Maybe this could get it's own thread and we could edit is and add to it as we agree on likelihoods. Here are some suggestions though for likelihoods:
I based these on my own knowledge of physics and what would be nice round numbers. Judging by the number of satellites in orbit over earth, it should be relatively easy to launch one.Satellite:
- Launch - 17:20 [Reason: looking at the amount of research and how often these things occur, this seems likely that it would succeed]
- Positioning in orbit - 7:10 [Reason: very difficult, but these things would have been greatly researched]
- Kept in orbit check perhaps? every month or so? 99:100 [Reason: Space Debris, and other occurrences haven't happened too often in the last 40 years on Earth]
That's just 2. But I want to make sure we get these right slowly, rather than wrong fast.Tarsica mission:
- Launch 17:20 [Reason: Relatively easy, but some human error can be made (eg. that one that blew up)]
- Movement to Tarsica 29:30 [Reason: failures don't happen too often, but things like Apollo 13 may occur]
- Landing 3:5 [Reason: Possibly most difficult procedure in the mission]
- - Return mission:
- - Launch from Tarsica 9:10 [Reason: Easy, but things can go wrong]
- - Movement to Micras 29:30 [Reason: like I said before, things don't go wrong here as often as other places]
- - Landing: I think that there should be different ones for different landings, as some nations have access to seas, some don't.
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
USA193? the satellite that "doesn't exist" currently crashing through the earth's atmosphereLewis wrote:Maybe this could get it's own thread and we could edit is and add to it as we agree on likelihoods. Here are some suggestions though for likelihoods:
Satellite:
- Launch - 17:20 [Reason: looking at the amount of research and how often these things occur, this seems likely that it would succeed]
- Positioning in orbit - 7:10 [Reason: very difficult, but these things would have been greatly researched]
- Kept in orbit check perhaps? every month or so? 99:100 [Reason: Space Debris, and other occurrences haven't happened too often in the last 40 years on Earth]
Yeah we should start with satellites and Tarsica missions as these currently exist, then work on the other stuff later.I based these on my own knowledge of physics and what would be nice round numbers. Judging by the number of satellites in orbit over earth, it should be relatively easy to launch one.
That's just 2. But I want to make sure we get these right slowly, rather than wrong fast.Tarsica mission:
- Launch 17:20 [Reason: Relatively easy, but some human error can be made (eg. that one that blew up)]
- Movement to Tarsica 29:30 [Reason: failures don't happen too often, but things like Apollo 13 may occur]
- Landing 3:5 [Reason: Possibly most difficult procedure in the mission]
- - Return mission:
- - Launch from Tarsica 9:10 [Reason: Easy, but things can go wrong]
- - Movement to Micras 29:30 [Reason: like I said before, things don't go wrong here as often as other places]
- - Landing: I think that there should be different ones for different landings, as some nations have access to seas, some don't.
Landing would have to depend on landing type, you have considered landing in the ocean, but a couple try and land on land (with a much higher failure rate)
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
This would mean, however, you have to define each part of a space mission, what you have to do and so on. Last time I tried do that linked with a trading system it was laughed down ...
Andreas
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact: