Moss

I support this idea, however it can never be implemented due to a fundamental underlying problem with KSP. Most fuel tanks, science parts and capsules do not often sit flush against other parts with the same sized node. This is because most of them have a bulbous lip on their node, or protrude out slightly. The most egregious examples of this include the FL-T100, the avionics package, the Mark 1 Lander Can and the abomination that is the 2.5m service bay. Even most of the "adapter" parts don't have a consistent grade, joining together multiple adapters to form a large nose-cone results in an uneven and ugly cone. I respect SQUAD's decision to keep the existing models for the sake of aesthetics; it's their game and they can do what they want with it. It does however, inhibit the construction of streamlined looking rocket fuselages. The new spaceplane parts are aesthetically delightful, as each part fits flush. So if you ever wanted the Mk1 Cockpit to have it's nose replaced with a tiny node, you'd want to make sure that all parts able to fit to it have a cohesive body shape and texture. Is this an issue that procedural fuel tanks would fix? To say nothing of how much memory could be saved on models and textures were this the case, my answer is yes. But unfortunately it will never happen.

"Why haven't they fixed this yet?"

Actually that sounds great.

This and a few other things.

I'm quite partial to Iridium. It's dense and intense.

1/10.

I'm sure this isn't a new suggestion, but could Squad see it in their hearts to please add larger heat shields? As it stands the options for adequately shielding large spacecraft are inadequate. There aren't any options for large landers or aerobraking interplanetary ships. It's obvious that most craft that need to enter atmospheres with the hope of returning (I'm thinking of Eve here) are going to be large. Adding multiple heat shields radially just looks tacky, and besides, wouldn't it be nice to have reusable craft where a single heat shield can simply be un-docked and replaced when it runs out? I've experimented by making protective cones out of triangular wings, but these are never aerodynamically stable and add issues with part count. I also refuse to resort to mods or making my own heat shields with config rescale factor.

I bet the twist is that he's the main villain and has been cryogenically preserved. That elbow-padded sweater tho.

You may be looking at their values for thrust at sea level. Or they could have changed their units of measurement in the descriptions.

I've started making huge cones out of wings, actually. We'll see how well that turns out.

Just wanted to ask a question of you all. What's your go-to solution for making heat shielding for very large spacecraft? I know that atmospheric heating in 1.02 is pretty lukewarm, but I like to include them anyway. I suspect that when I get around to a return mission from Eve I'll need to shield a pretty massive lander. I think it would be excellent for Squad to make even larger heat shields to play with, like in the region of 5m and 10m sizes. So do you attach round heat shields radially, make huge ones out of structural panels, use huge fairings, or simply not bother? Interested to see what people say, pictures extremely welcome. Thanks

I want to be fed to some pigs, have it videotaped, and have the footage displayed in an art gallery.

Title says it all. I believe KSP needs the option to enable Kerbal Experience in Science Mode.

Isn't it possible to increase re-entry heat in the settings menu?

I've always thought it was something of a faux-pas to open a thread to vent about something after the original one was closed.

My high-school formal was pretty uneventful. Afterwards though she and I both drank heavily and did... things... in a forest. Which was nice.

7/10. I like it.

You mention that the hope of this thread is to discuss, share and improve the physics config, but you don't want people arguing accuracy or gameplay values in this thread. What sort of input are you looking for?

That's an extremely good question. There's some demand within the KSP community for dedicated radiator parts that can remove heat from your spacecraft. I'm not sure how realistic the KSP heat model is, but it's been shown that parts with high surface area, such as wings, are effective at getting rid of heat through a modelled radiator effect.

The engine has likely become hot through use or has had heat introduced to it by conduction or another source. It's probably transferring it's heat through the craft to the heat shield, which is losing ablator as an effect of this.

Nope. NecroBones.

Complain to blazes on the forums that they haven't fixed the damned things yet.

"Hello, I'm a reference to something!"

I think the points you have made are interesting and relevant. However, you may find that you will receive some negativity for post. This is much less a "review" than it is an extensive list of grievances. I personally think that at it's current state KSP 1.0 is unplayable, but in my opinion, not for any of the reasons you've specified here. My complaints more lie with the illogical tech tree, awful parachute mechanics and "physics-less" heat shields. Besides that, I have a lot of faith in Kerbal Space Program and I respect the concept as a game. I'm just holding out for when it's perfect.

The KSP Wiki seems somewhat neglected at present.