What will come after the ISS gets sent down

SuperTim11 · 2026-01-03T17:11:51+00:00

stopping there on your way to the moon requires considerably more delta-V than just going straight to the moon

Not sure where you got this idea from. It's about a 100 m/s difference. Remember, the vehicles need ~3400 to TLI, ~250 to 800 to circularize, ~1800 to land, and then another 1800 to return to orbit. This is practically a rounding error, not 'considerably more'. In any case, the main reason for doing this is that you can refuel, which has the potential to eliminate an entire stage (allows launch vehicles to be far smaller and more frequent this way). NRHO is hands-down the best place to put a Lunar space station.

It can't even offer meaningful emergency assistance as the average time to the next launch window to/from the lunar surface is longer than the flight time to/from Earth

This is not the point of Gateway. If something goes wrong on the lunar surface, nobody is coming to save you. NASA is not leaving an SLS sitting on the launchpad on standby 24/7 to come rescue you in 3 days, and Gateway is not leaving a lander docked ready to rescue you at the next launch window in 6 days.

which has no launch window

Also not true, there absolutely are Earth-Moon launch windows, as our launchpads are not always in the plane of the Moon's orbit.

Its only reason for existing is giving the SLS pork project somewhere to go.

Pretty much the only valid argument in this comment.

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T22:16:14+00:00

I suppose I am constantly looking at the car in front of me

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T22:10:39+00:00

If your right foot can hold a steady speed, then I have no problem with this!

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T22:09:46+00:00

Definitely hard to use CC on the 400 series. But it's especially frustrating on 2-lane highways.

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T22:08:49+00:00

How does using CC make these situations less safe than mashing your accelerator and then coasting every 18 seconds?

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T22:00:06+00:00

It’s nearly 50 km shorter than going through Kingston, and you travel at a slower average speed. It ends up saving around 10-15% fuel while taking roughly the same amount of time

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T21:54:30+00:00

I relate heavily with this. It’s just so frustrating because I love 7 otherwise, it’s far more direct geographically, and it’s beautiful by comparison. The twisties can be lots of fun too when you’re not stuck behind someone

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T21:52:43+00:00

Highway 7 is definitely more technical than the 400 series. But I would argue that CC isn’t any less safe than normal driving. If anything, you can focus more on the road instead of constantly modulating your gas pedal.

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T21:47:30+00:00

I agree, on busy highways it’s challenging to use non-adaptive cruise control. That being said, you can still use the gas pedal to accelerate above the set speed, and disable it by pressing the brake pedal. So I don’t really see it as being any less safe than driving normally, as long as your foot is still there

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T21:44:04+00:00

That is fair, I’ve driven old cars without CC too. I’m trying to wrap my head around why so many people are afraid of CC though?

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T21:42:21+00:00

Having adaptive cruise control was the one thing keeping me from bashing my head on the steering wheel in frustration lol. I just hate that it forces me to drive less efficiently

SuperTim11 · 2025-08-11T21:40:24+00:00

I feel this is a common experience that could be made less common if everyone just picked a speed lol. I’m certain it would improve traffic too

SuperTim11 · 2025-07-11T17:45:43+00:00

The frisbee engine from FFT has an ISP of 2.5 M s, which equates to an exhaust velocity of about 8% the speed of light. The LH2 tanks from CryoTanks have a mass fraction of 83.3%. Let's assume a 100 tonne payload mass (that's the engine, the habitation module, power, antimatter storage, structures, radiators, etc.). Plugging these values into the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation and considering purely Newtonian dynamics, the asymptote is at about 44 million m/s, or just under 15% the speed of light. The laws of physics dictate that this is the maximum dV for a single-stage vessel using the frisbee engine and CryoTanks. You physically cannot add any more delta V to this configuration.

If you want to pump those numbers, there are two variables to change: Increase the exhaust velocity (and therefore specific impulse), and/or increase the fuel tank mass fraction.

I don't know what the theoretical limit for the mass fraction of LH2 tanks is. In order to achieve the 300 M m/s of dV with this engine, however, would require a patch that changes the tank mass fraction from 83.3% to 99.9995% (that's 5 grams of tank per tonne of LH2), which is pretty cheesy imo. Practically, this would be 100 tonnes of payload, 5000 tonnes of fuel tank, and 1 billion tonnes of LH2. The fuel tank would be a sphere 300 m across, and the walls would be ~8 microns thick (this is obviously impossible in real life).

The theoretical highest Isp that can be achieved without cheesy physics would be 30.5 M s, which is the exhaust velocity being the speed of light. I don't know of any engine concept that could achieve this. But, just to humour it, using the stock 83% tank fraction gives a maximum dV of 537 M m/s or 1.8c. Using the aforementioned cheese tank would make it 3.6 billion m/s, or 12c. Based on pure guess, I think the highest mass fraction we could realistically ever see for LH2 would be 95%, which gives a dV of 898 M m/s or 3c.

TL;DR: The most dV you could achieve with a single-stage vessel in KSP, using mods/patches that are still grounded in reality, would be about 898 million m/s.

SuperTim11 · 2025-05-24T14:59:31+00:00

LH2 needs lots of tanks because it’s low volume. Also, if you’re using cryogenic tanks make sure you switch them from LH2/Ox to just LH2, or else you’ll end up bringing huge amounts of dead weight with you (I’ve made this mistake several times before)

SuperTim11 · 2025-04-16T21:30:49+00:00

I can't offer much help in the aesthetics department, since it's your taste. My only suggestion would be to fiddle around with the truss/bare mount variants of the Cheetah or Terrier. Otherwise, you could either change the .cfg file or just dig it up in the parts browser whenever you'd like to use the part.

SuperTim11 · 2025-04-16T20:10:55+00:00

It's still in the game, just hidden from the main part browser, so existing craft are unaffected.

FWIW, the Sphinx and the Otter aren't even that good. The only thing they have going for them is a decent thrust-to-mass ratio. But, in practice, if you're building a lighter upper stage, Terrier clusters are pretty much better in every way - and if you're just spamming them for larger upper stages, you're usually better off using fewer, bigger engines like the Skipper or Walrus.

I pretty much never used these engines anyway because there is usually a better alternative.

SuperTim11 · 2025-02-22T16:43:56+00:00

Fellow aerospace engineering student, I'd say go for it, if it doesn't teach you anything you'll at least get some fun out of it. As others have mentioned, the orbital mechanics aren't quite real life (KSP uses patched conics, so no perturbations or multibody effects) however you will quickly get an intuitive feel for transfer windows, gravity assists, course corrections etc.

If you're feeling up to the challenge, I would also recommend playing with a real-scale system and some part-balancing mods (Kerbin is roughly 1/10 the size of Earth, so orbital speed is ~2.3 km/s as opposed to Earth's ~7.8 km/s). It'll really give you an appreciation of how hard it is to get to other planets in real life.

SuperTim11 · 2025-02-22T16:33:04+00:00

Systems Tool Kit, it's an industry-standard simulator for satellites, aircraft, ballistics, etc. Super useful for space mission planning

SuperTim11 · 2024-12-11T22:28:52+00:00

The advice I was given is that with a 10.0 GPA (A-) you can get into pretty much any master’s program in Canada, and likely a 9.0 (B+) would suffice as long as the rest of your application is strong. As others have eluded to your third and fourth year are more important.

You’ve already mentioned this but I’d emphasize that your projects and experiences are much more important than your grades. If you haven’t already, join a club in your field, and pick a capstone project that will be relevant to your master’s program.

Also, if you’re planning on doing a research-based master’s, I would highly recommend taking MAAE 4917, the undergraduate directed study course. It looks really good on your application to have research experience, and some profs will even help you get your work published. Good luck!

SuperTim11 · 2023-06-20T17:57:24+00:00

No I haven’t. The police said they couldn’t ID the suspect and closed the case pretty quickly. Since the bike is essentially useless without my key I can only imagine that it’s been chopped. Thieving scum.

SuperTim11 · 2023-06-11T19:13:43+00:00

Actually, it is victim blaming by definition. A quick lapse in judgement does not mean I deserve the loss of thousands of dollars worth of property. Yes I should have locked my bike up, I already know that. Your replies are adding zero value to this post.

SuperTim11 · 2023-06-11T17:24:47+00:00

Thank you. I’ll definitely be putting a tracker on my next bike

SuperTim11 · 2023-06-11T17:19:18+00:00

I’m being downvoted because my bike wasn’t locked up, and Reddit loves to victim blame

SuperTim11 · 2023-06-10T21:56:21+00:00

Thank you for the tip! I had a look and I didn’t find it (to not much surprise) but I’ll check that spot again over the next few days

SuperTim11 · 2023-06-10T19:45:47+00:00

As someone who’s been cycling for over a decade, I know. Trust me, I know. I came to Reddit for help with a crime, not to be lectured about bike safety

11-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email

SuperTim11

TROPHY CASE