Meecrob

Does this mean you actually think the launch will go well? If you thought it would blow up, you'd have"been concerned" afterwards

Hold on a sec...I didn't know @kerbiloidhad two accounts! I'm just messing...no harm intended.

Thank you; what you just stated is exactly what I'm getting at. It seems to me that the stars are like a natural analogue GPS that we don't have to launch satellites to utilize.

I mean how do you navigate between GPS constellations? With regards to Starship, my first thought was "Wow, Elon really wants to launch on 4/20." I really hope not, because I don't think I can handle the onslaught of "Yo, dudes! I was so high while I watched that rocket go so high" comments.

Thanks! But I mean its flight endurance...I know its got long legs and will be filming the test attempt, but taking off early to observe the starship flight is confusing me....Unless they launch to texas, then refuel, then launch for the photo flight. But I'm just guessing.

...showing off its got a bigger gas tank than my car if its launching this early. Edit: seriously, is it landing there or orbiting the launch site?

Root extensions are there to lower the stall speed/increase the operational range of degrees of angle of attack...kinda the same thing but from two different directions. Vortex generators are there to basically un-turbulate airflow in regular flight (low AoA). They are not there to help you if you decide to do aerobatics. Root extensions are specifically for high angle of attack flight. Obviously they are like one big vortex generator, but the design regime is totally different, hence the different aerodynamic shapes. Edit: These are vortex generators: This is a root extension: They are two totally different things...

Also, GPS is a signal that can be lost or jammed. IGU is self contained. I think I am missing something here...but it seems to me (obviously I'm NOT a rocket scientist) that GPS is a dead end for space. What do you do between the GPS of Earth and the GPS of the Moon or Mars or any other destination in the solar system that we hypothetically set up a GPS around? Have a "Milky-Way Positioning System" out by the Oort cloud?

I'd imagine there is also an inertial guidance unit in there somewhere at least for backup within LEO, and possibly for development of the guidance system for Starship beyond LEO.

Okay, you got me on that one, but the price is a bit steep for where the demo is at.

I guess I'm getting at the fact that the dollar value is inconsistent with the experience. I get that more people than me have excess disposable income to spend on things like this, and don't mind. [snip] The audience has spoken and its a general consensus that this is cool for a demo, but its not a full game. Correct me if I am wrong.

Looking at the launch site? I mean, I'm happy for you, enjoy the performance, but many people are not able to. Its not a realistic purchase point. Just like a Ferrari or Lamborghini is not realistic to most people. I bet they both have the same bugs as KSP2 also.

Yes, they are updating...just like any project that released, an incomplete product should be updated. I still don't get why making a crap product into a less crap product deserves praise. There is no timeline, and no rhyme or reason to the bugs they fix. That is their prerogative, and it is my prerogative to think that despite how hard it is to patch, and despite how hard it is with pressure from PD/T2, the game still kinda sucks.

Its 2023. These FPS are abysmal. I get that KSP takes math to run and that isn't the optimal regime for a processor, but like c'mon. I can play other games at 100 FPS with the same computer. Maybe I'm wrong, but a game that starts on a low FPS because you have to launch, isn't ready for the big leagues yet.

This is what I was trying to get at. Its great they are fixing things, don't get me wrong, but its a long road to 1.0

I'm not getting upset. I get that its EA. I don't want to re-hash the arguments about it. I simply do not get why people are praising them for cleaning the crap out of their pants...I thought that they should do this, no? They are cleaning up their mess and I hope its an awesome game at the end. Now, its not. I very much appreciate that the devs are fixing it. I don't think that selling a broken game, then fixing it deserves praise. Edit: Practice medicine? Sorry, I don't get how you came to that conclusion. I never mentioned that they should do that. I just want a game that works. I get it will take time to get KSP2 to that point, I'm merely saying that they sold us on a game, and its half that right now...making it 5/8ths a game is good, but its not a full game yet. P.S. devs: take your time, I'm not complaining about the timeliness of anything...just make a good game, like we all know you can. We will be here.

Seriously? Obviously no games have zero bugs. When they make you pay money for a game that doesn't work properly, its assumed fixes will be made. I don't think its above and beyond the scope of a game developer to un-screw the game they charge money for.

Bugfixes are not that impressive considering they are not supposed to be in the game to begin with. Its kinda like if I pooped my pants, and then cleaned it afterwards. You'd probably think "yeah, you might want to do that"

IIRC, it was basically a management sim where you unlocked new parts, then hit a button for an RNG to tell you if you landed or blew up. Its been a while, but I remember being underwhelmed.

My bad, I was hesitant to reply, since I know you are very knowledgeable, I thought you misread it is all. Edit: or I had misread.

I think @tomf is trying to say that Starship is not re-entering nose first, but rather with a healthy angle of attack so the body will be doing much of the work of keeping the plasma flow away from the rest of the structure.

Haha...orbit. Edit, Didn't they use a SPAC to IPO?

I hate to play this card, but 19 years is a short amount of time. There are many, many companies that have seemed solid for decades and then collapsed overnight. I'm not suggesting Take Two is heading this direction, but its short sighted to think companies have any goal of lasting a long time. Some do, of course, at present, but its almost like you speak of your steam library like life insurance.

While I am surprised someone actually wants to use the launcher, surely you can imagine someone wondering what is up when they paid for a game, try to start it, and it doesn't work. "Not good" seems appropriate. I mean it is literally not "good" that someone cannot play the game they paid for. Perhaps you interpreted their comment as "my game doesn't work, therefore KSP2 got shutdown" ?

Well it does look more like male anatomy than female.