Yellowburn10

While I'm not entirely sure yet, chances are it will involve the color yellow.

You could repack the chute with a kerbal, but you're out of luck for autonomous missions.

I just don't get it. What is it about these clouds that has rustled everyone's jimmy's? Maybe I'm just some blind sap who has no artistic taste, but these clouds look pretty serviceable, great even, and look no different to the clouds we've seen before. But everywhere I look I see nothing but criticisms about them. Am I missing something here? Also wow that plane looks pretty.

Man, new players are going to be so spoiled. Imagine having this kind of information available to you right off the bat when we first played KSP1.

Walt putting his hazmat suit to good use Haven't tried to go to the discord myself yet, but from what I'm hearing I think it would be best to wait

This is most likely nothing more than just my thoughts, but I wonder if this message is kind of a subtle refence on how certain kraken attacks can induce sudden FTL speeds, and in this message it was showing how it lead them to the discovery of interstellar travel. Probably not the case, but certainly would be a very kerbal way to discover such things!

Yeah, it kind of makes me wonder what sounds they'll even use in space, if any. Like, it's understandable that you can hear the engine in your own rocket in space, but what about in multiplayer? Will others rockets be silent?

Beat me to the bump! I wasn't really aware of the speculation of an 8th planet from this new mun anomaly until today, but if any of it is true, then perhaps the idea isn't as dead as I initially thought!

I'm not stopping. Being so close to KSP2's release it made me realize all the things I haven't done in this game. Heck, I've owned this game for years and I haven't even visited every planet yet.

What do clouds have to do with any of that? Last I saw, the fixation everyone had was on the cloud design, not whether or not kerbin will have things to do on it other than just leave it.

Devs: *Creating early access version of the game focused on validating the main foundations of it's code* Everyone in this thread: Yeah but the clouds though.

I think this is our first full view of the new KSC here. While it's a bit far away to make out small details, it seems to have everything we know so far in a single frame. Something that I can't help but notice though is how they have all the buildings on the eastern edge of the launchpads and near the end of the runways. Either someone messed up on building planning, or the devs did this on purpose to give failed launches the potential for a little more *boom* if ya catch me.

Was out testing a VTOL that I plan to use for Laythe exploration. I think I'm getting the hang of these precise landings.

Seems more to me like they're landing pads for reusable boosters, but that's just me. Perhaps both?

Ok, admittedly, it has been a while since I learned all this stuff a while ago, so I checked up on the ksp wiki for a refresher. It states the density of eve's oceans is 1.5 tons per cubic meter, and is pretty close to hydrogen peroxide in density (1.45 tons per cubic meter), which can be used as a monopropellant. The whole thing about rocket fuel is more so implied rather than a stated fact, but it's at least headcannon for me. Also, I did mean kerosene when I said keralox, kind of a force of habit at this point to say the latter.

Wait, I just thought of something. Since liquid fuel is now considered methalox, what does that mean for the oceans of Eve? It's basically considered common knowledge that it's oceans are considered to be full of rocket fuel. However, it's density make it more consistent with something like keralox. Methalox is not dense enough to match whatever Eve's oceans are made of, so... now what?

I was one of the many people who had wanted and waited for the addition of the arguably infamous gas planet 2 for ksp1. Since there is now a sequel coming out soon that has the benefit of interstellar travel, and with it a myriad of other planets that could be found among the stars, it really feels that the idea is truly in the trash bin. But, should it? Would anyone really be against having gas planet 2 in the Kerbol system? I mean, it can't be exactly like what was originally planned, otherwise Eeloo would be a moon, and it's been around long enough on it's own that it doesn't feel right stripping it away from it's current position. Also, there is now a proper Saturn analog in the Deb Deb system, so using gp2's original idea of that being a Saturn analog in the Kerbol system seems somewhat redundant. Perhaps then it can be more of an analog to one of the ice giants, Uranus or Neptune? I don't know. But again, I ask, with the introduction of new star systems, does it make sense to still want a gas planet 2? What are your guy's thoughts?

To be fair, I never did say you couldn’t make more advanced engines with keralox, just that it was harder. The soviets worked their butts off to make their engines as good as they were, so I won’t knock them for that. It just took the US a lot longer and used other fuel types to make engines that were as state of the art.

I interpreted it to mean that keralox is a fuel type that has produced several powerful engines over the years, while also being a very crude burning fuel compared to things like methalox or hydrolox. Now I'm no rocket scientist, so anyone feel free to correct me, but from what I understand in real life keralox rockets are relatively cheep and have comparatively simple designs, and it's fuel is very dense, meaning it's fuel tanks don't need to be as large. But it have can have issues with soot and are harder to work with more complex engine designs. Meanwhile methalox is cleaner burning and are more efficient, as well as not having as much limitations on rocket engine design. While methane does need cryogenic considerations, keep in mind that liquid oxygen does as well. In fact, both are chilled to around a similar temperature for fuel, so since lox needs to be cold anyways, everything we know about that could be applied to methane as well.

At first I came from this read with mixed opinions about the whole methalox thing, but now that I've had some time to process, this probably was the best option in the end to do. If you are adding multiple fuel types to the game, but still want to keep some of the simplicity KSP1 had with it's fuels and engines, an all round fuel type for most legacy engines does seem like the best choice to go for. While it's not perfect, methalox does fit the best with what KSP1's liquid fuel can do, which, let's be honest, is essentially magic powder. What fuel in exsistence can power conventional rocket engines (some that don't even take the same fuel), jet engines, a nuclear powered engine, vernor engines, and could be found and extracted from any celestial body in the solar system? Not even methalox fits all these, but it's still the best fit for what they're looking for. And while it would have been nice to have a little more variety in fuels than just methalox and hydrolox, that's something that can easily be fixed by mods. As for the change in the Mammoth engine, first of all RIP, but this change makes sense when you think about it. What is Mammoth 1 but 4 swivels taped together? That's not that hard to recreate on our own, especially if they give us some kind of adapter for it. Heck, this would be like if instead of having an adaptor tank for the Mastodons in the making history DLC, they had made something like Mammoth 1 and put all 5 Mastodon engines into one clustered engine. Then for KSP 2 they just replaced that with a single big engine and had the adapter for the 5 engines like we do now. Not really much different. (Also, just would like to point out, a real life Mastodon is considered a smaller variant of a Mammoth, so having the Mastodon engine be the F-1 and the new Mammoth being the F-1B I think is a genius move on their part)

Yeah, I had a few visual mods installed, but I had removed them just to see if something was happening with that, and nothing happened. I actually did most everything else you suggested first with no avail. I figured from there it wasn't some sort of phantom force or anything, along with what I said earlier. Heck, on the craft in question, I had a staged rocket that had no power or control, and even that still wanted to spin as well. Or at least it tried, I could see that whenever I time warped the engine gimbal on it would be straight, but when I would return to normal time it would immediately twist to the side again.

Whoa, hey, pressing alt-x actually worked! Thank you!

I've started to have this problem more often in my current 1.12.4 save, but sometimes for no reason that I can see, my spacecraft begin to turn a certain direction and won't stop. It's not from any phantom forces, I can see in the bottom left that the pitch/yaw/roll indicators are active without me doing anything or having SAS on. Is there anyway to fix or prevent this, or does anyone even know why this is happening?

I think there could be a simpler solution. The devs talked about once you have a station, base or colony set up, automatic resupply missions can be set up. So, let's say that a station in LKO needs to have fuel resupplied every so often to keep it's orbit in check. If you don't, then the orbit will decay until it burns up and crashes onto the planet.

I promised more pics, and here they are! I've decided to dub this ship the A-33 "Albatross" SSTO. It has the capability of bringing approx. 33 tons to LKO, making it perfect for my current needs of bringing up satellites, modules of space stations and, currently, helping to assemble a Duna mothership as seen in some of these pictures. It is definitely a brick in the atmosphere, but I'd say it flies surprisingly well for it's size. The hardest part about it is getting a proper reentry to land on a runway, I've yet to master it myself. The main trouble is once it stops slowing down from the atmosphere it starts plummeting like a rock, so you kinda have to keep a very steep angle of attack and pull up at the last minute if you want enough speed for a smooth landing. Despite that though it's still very fun to fly and looks good doing it.