- Oct 5, 2017
- 7,599
- 10,167
Um... what?Nah. Different universe. After all, the MC's version of Earth had ballistic shuttles moving people around.
Um... what?Nah. Different universe. After all, the MC's version of Earth had ballistic shuttles moving people around.
One of the conversations you have with Cait. He explains ballistic re-entry as a fast-travel mechanism for quick travel around the world.Um... what?
For me first backup yours saves just in case i deleted the old ahitr application on the phone then i installed the hitr apk opened it once then it says go on ur phone documents look for ahitr_storage then install either the hi res or low res apr into the game folder and doneI've been playing this on android for some time now. What's all this hi-res, android launcher stuff? What do I download for the update?
I'm pretty certain that that never happened.One of the conversations you have with Cait. He explains ballistic re-entry as a fast-travel mechanism for quick travel around the world.
It happens over breakfast.
I don't see a game folder tho?For me first backup yours saves just in case i deleted the old ahitr application on the phone then i installed the hitr apk opened it once then it says go on ur phone documents look for ahitr_storage then install either the hi res or low res apr into the game folder and done
Oh for the love of...I'm pretty certain that that never happened.
Or it could just be airflight with a not totally accurate description? Yes, ascent will burn the same amount of fuel (for any flight that reaches maximum travel height, not so in shorter domestic hops) and there's only more fuel needed for the remainder.Oh for the love of...
Cait: I'll try! Can you please tell me something about your world while we're eating?"
MC: "Let me think..."
scene fades...
Cait:"Woah! So you can travel anywhere!"
MC: "Remember, the further you go, the more fuel you need, the more fuel you burn on ascent."
Cait:"But still!"
MC: "Well, theoretically, yes."
The only transport that fits is ballisic re-rentry.
No, not really. Total ascent for a flight from New York to Cape Town is about the same height as a flight from New York to Chicago -- about 11 km. The extra fuel load for the flight to Cape Town is significant, but the extra fuel burned to reach your cruising height is not. And that is the point the MC is focused on -- fuel to ascent.Or it could just be airflight with a not totally accurate description? Yes, ascent will burn the same amount of fuel (for any flight that reaches maximum travel height, not so in shorter domestic hops) and there's only more fuel needed for the remainder.
(It could also be one level deeper and then correct, though I doubt it, in that the longer the flight -> the more fuel needed -> the heavier the plane -> the more fuel needed for ascent)
Oh for god's sake.Oh for the love of...
Cait: I'll try! Can you please tell me something about your world while we're eating?"
MC: "Let me think..."
scene fades...
Cait:"Woah! So you can travel anywhere!"
MC: "Remember, the further you go, the more fuel you need, the more fuel you burn on ascent."
Cait:"But still!"
MC: "Well, theoretically, yes."
The only transport that fits is ballisic re-rentry.
Because it doesn't fit as well. Sub-orbital balllistics the whole cost is the fuel ascent which is dictated by the great circle you are drawing. Interplanetary travel, as we practice it anyway, has a fixed cost to escape Earth gravity plus a highly variable amount to enter the (often very complicated) orbital path to reach your destination. Voyager 2 didn't use much more fuel than the Venus lander, but it's gone a whole lot further.Oh for god's sake.
He's obviously telling her about the space program, and how in our world we can fly to the moon and other planets. How on earth you get anything else out of that, I have no idea.
Well MC isn't from kerbal anyway. The statement ''the further you go, the more fuel you need, the more fuel you burn on ascent.'' is probably what ordinary people would think about space travel, and although not entirely true, is still not too far from truth and a good explanation for Cait. Think about interstellar instead of interplanetary travels, without all those orbital techniques to save dv, which are hard enough for ordinary people let alone Cait.Because it doesn't fit as well. Sub-orbital balllistics the whole cost is the fuel ascent which is dictated by the great circle you are drawing. Interplanetary travel, as we practice it anyway, has a fixed cost to escape Earth gravity plus a highly variable amount to enter the (often very complicated) orbital path to reach your destination. Voyager 2 didn't use much more fuel than the Venus lander, but it's gone a whole lot further.
brother I dont want to be that guy but I think you are reading a bit too far into thisBecause it doesn't fit as well. Sub-orbital balllistics the whole cost is the fuel ascent which is dictated by the great circle you are drawing. Interplanetary travel, as we practice it anyway, has a fixed cost to escape Earth gravity plus a highly variable amount to enter the (often very complicated) orbital path to reach your destination. Voyager 2 didn't use much more fuel than the Venus lander, but it's gone a whole lot further.
what am i missing hereno in the game is related to you. i wish there was preggo but i doubt it
i see nanami is gracing us in this game View attachment 2823947