HvP

Having a longer exposure time for dim objects is not a problem when using a fixed camera to image an object that is not moving relative to the frame. I have a feeling the JWST team are more than qualified to figure out how to do that considering that that's exactly how the James Webb telescope is meant to capture its images anyway. That's their expertise.

For me it looks like embedded tweets take either take several seconds to load in or fail to load entirely leaving just the unformatted placeholder text.

From the article "One of the spacecraft on the USSF-44 launch is a microsatellite named TETRA 1 built by Millennium Space Systems, a subsidiary of Boeing." So, you may just be right.

Half of me anticipates Starship entry tests because I want to see history being made. The other half of me anticipates Starship entry tests because I want to see this comment thread finally move on...

I imagine that this is the most likely reason. This is a private flight, and there is no expectation of public domain like there is for NASA flights. Netflix is sure to have a contract with the participants for a media embargo on most of the footage filmed and a licensing right to broadcast it first.

I was aware that observations of gravitational lensing and light echoes had been used to map the distribution of matter surrounding interesting phenomena. But it had never occurred to me that they could be used to see a predicted "replay" of a supernova. This is exciting!

I'm curious as to how accurately the booster can control roll on the way to the catching mechanism. It seems to me that even a very small rotation along the roll axis can move the catch points several degrees inward/outward around the barrel of the booster. If the catching arms are tangentially straight where they meet the side of the booster then they are likely to miss the catch points entirely unless roll control is perfect. A curved catching claw would solve this problem, but it doesn't allow for those tank treads which they want to move the booster in and out.

@Yalcore Welcome to the forum and to KSP. One possibility is that you accidentally added a liquid-fuel only tank to your craft. The ones that say "Rocket Fuel Tank" have the liquid fuel and oxidizer mixed at the right proportion so that they should drain everything evenly. The tanks that just say "Liquid Fuel" don't have any oxidizer in them and are meant to be used with jet engines and the nuclear Nerv engine because they don't use oxidizer. With most rocket engines any extra liquid fuel on your craft won't get burned because there isn't enough oxidizer on board to mix it with.

This is somewhat surprising. Not because he wanted to leave BO and join SpaceX, but because employees in the technology industry with access to proprietary information usually have non-compete clauses in their contracts. It's known that Amazon has quite a broad 18 month non-compete agreement, and at one time were even enforcing it against temporary warehouse workers. On a related subject. I believe the behavior we've seen from Blue Origin regarding lawsuits and PR is rooted in Bezos' desire not to compete in the rocket industry, but to dominate the rocket industry. Who's gonna tell him that was never going to happen? (Edit to add: after checking the SpaceX thread I see now that the unenforceable nature of most non-compete clauses has already been discussed.)

Glad I could help! The advantage of this game is that it gives you so many options to create. Sometimes that means having many options to create havoc. But that's fun too!

What's happening is that components below your engines are blocking the thrust from those engines. The game doesn't model exhaust flow around parts in the exhaust flow of the engines. If there is anything within a certain distance of a straight line coming directly aft of the engine then it assumes the thrust is getting blocked by the ship and you will have no net forward velocity. That's why your craft worked when you put the engine cluster behind the main vessel. There was no longer anything blocking the engine exhaust. Even a small winglet in the path of a jet engine won't allow exhaust flow around it. There literally can be nothing placed directly in line below the path of the engine exhaust within about 20 or 30 meters of the engine (I'm unsure of the exact distance required.) Solutions include rotating your engines so that they aim slightly away from the center-line so that the line of thrust will bypass parts below them; or mounting your engines with nothing under them or at least on arms long enough so that nothing is blocking their exhaust. Be sure to account for engine thrust vectoring, too. Those "Thud" engines have a very large gimbal angle and could very easily aim back towards parts of your craft during hard pitch and yawing. If that happens then the line of exhaust will be blocked on one side of your vessel but not the other, leading to an uncontrollable situation.

I'd just be happy if there was a way to level the ground in a rectangular area large enough for a surface base.

Please forgive the embedded video, but I thought this was not only relevant, but charming as well. YMMV

Just in the last few days I have seen articles about a startup group formed by former SpaceX engineers to market commercially produced electric speedboats. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/01/ex-spacex-engineers-commercial-electric-speedboat But otherwise, all-electric boats of different scales are already a thing. Both Denmark and Norway have been using electric ferries in a few ports for a while now The Swedish company X-Shore is now selling their all-electric Eelex pleasure craft in the US. And New Electric in Amsterdam can convert a variety of different boats to all-electric operation for custom orders. So it's certainly feasible for someone with the means and knowhow. (edit: partially ninja'd by @GuessingEveryDay, hah)

The Starships have all been landing using engines that are firing from off-center placement because some get turned off on the way down. This means that they are gimbaling well enough to compensate for the weight of the entire craft being off-center. They can handle the difference of having tiles on one side.

It's just trying to keep your plane pointed in the forward direction. But, because there is little to no forward movement the tail fin doesn't have any wind passing around it to affect the plane's orientation, so the SAS tries turning even more. My recommendation is to simply leave SAS off until you are moving fast enough to begin lifting off the runway. By then there is enough atmospheric control for the SAS to get proper feedback.

Hello @SkyLimit and welcome to KSP and the forums. The reason you have no delta-v in that craft is because you're using the wrong fuel type for your engine. Most rocket engines, like the Spark, require a "Rocket Fuel" tank that carries liquid fuel and oxidizer - not mono-propellant fuel. RCS engines and thrusters use the mono-propellant in the type of RCS tank that you used on your craft. Mono-propellant cannot power standard rocket engines. There are four different fuel tanks in the game, which you can learn about in the wiki HERE. Liquid fuel only tanks carry jet fuel for planes and also power the nuclear LV-N "Nerv". Rocket fuel tanks carry the fuel and oxidizer mixture that powers standard rocket engines. They also power a special type of RCS thruster called "vernor" engines which are more powerful than the standard RCS thrusters. RCS tanks carry mono-propellant for RCS thrusters and the "Puff" mono-propellant engine. Xenon tanks will only work with the "Dawn" electric ion engine. Technically, solid rocket motors come pre-packed with their own solid rocket fuel already, so there is no separate tank for them. When you right-click the engine or fuel tank in the parts list the information panel will have text that identifies the type of fuel that it needs/provides.

"an aircraft entered the “keep out zone”, which is unreasonably gigantic. " Maybe the no-fly zone is unreasonably large and maybe that's a topic that should be debated. But they are there for the safety and security of not just the community, and passengers of those flights, but also for national security concerns. Regardless, significantly increasing the pace of launches, as Musk wants to do, will only increase the chances of low probability encounters happening.

The rotation of the space station accelerates anything in contact with the floor through friction. This imparts inertia to someone in contact with the floor. Inertia causes a mass to travel in a straight line - tangent to the rotating circle of the station. But since you would be inside that rotating station the floor curves inward and interrupts your straight line, causing you to remain in contact with the floor, further accelerating you along its inward curve as long as the station keeps spinning. Do not confuse this with actual gravity, because it isn't. It's centripetal (or centrifugal) force. Microgravity is a real thing because all objects with mass have some small amount of gravity, but that is completely overwhelmed by the centrifugal effect. Tom Scott has an excellent Youtube video about this -

Our bodies can only feel acceleration when parts of our bodies are pushed or stretched which activates the nerves that sense those forces. On the ground the surface of the Earth pushes against our feet which transfers that force to our bones, muscles, nerves and inner ear (for balance.) In orbit both the astronauts and the ship they are in are both in free-fall. Just like in a falling elevator, the person and the thing they are riding in are all falling at the exact same rate in the same direction - floating. So there is nothing to push against and there will also be no feeling of acceleration.

Agreed. I always used the Craft Manager mod which has more functionality including moving/copying craft, adding tags, and the ability to rename vessels and folders which is very much lacking in the new stock file manager. It's also really bugging me that the drop down list for what folder you are saving to reverts back to the "default" folder after you revert to the VAB. I usually reverted because I need to make changes, and I need to save those changes to the same craft file in the same folder I was just working with. Frustrating. I'm still going to work with this new stock system for a while to see if I can get used to it before trying the mod again. I also just went through and organized all my craft into folders after importing my old save.

Hello @LasagnaLicker and welcome to the KSP forums. I haven't had time to explore it much yet. But it looks like you first use the "Open" button to bring up the craft loading window. You can then: Highlight a currently existing folder on the left side of the window Choose "New Folder" at the bottom Create all the new folders you want, and they can be nested within each other depending on which folder you have highlighted when the new ones are created Then, once you have set up the folders: Select a craft you want to move and press the "Load" button which will open it in the editor Then hover your cursor over the lowermost portion of the "Save" button and a drop-down list will unfold to show you your existing folders. Click the radio-button in that drop down list to select a folder and then click "Save" This will save a duplicate copy of that vessel in that folder. You will have to go back into the "Open" craft menu to then select and delete the original craft file from the default folder if you want to. I haven't found a way to drag-and-drop craft between folders, or to duplicate craft files from within the menu in game. However, you can create the folders and move the craft files directly from outside of KSP using your operating system file folders (while KSP is not running, preferably.) If you want to do this you can look in your KSP directory under "KSP_win64\saves\*the name of your sandbox or career save*\Ships" with folders nested under both the "SPH" and "VAB" categories.

In the main settings under General / Gameplay there is an option for "Advanced Tweakables." You'll want to make sure that advanced tweakables is enabled.

Remember that only engineers can be used for EVA construction mode. Pilots and scientists won't work.

@maddog59 I've had a problem similar to this before. If I remember correctly, the workaround I found was to click the little plus sign (+) in the staging stack to add a new blank stage to the staging column for every docking port between your engines and the root part. Then drag those empty stages to the top of the staging column. This worked for me when it happens, but I can't always reproduce the problem that makes it necessary. I also cannot remember if it works in the VAB, but it did work in the flight scene.