Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shdwlrd

  1. Neither was I, but as I said, I could be wrong. There are other ways to nerf the jet engines, but limiting them to less than half of their theoretical max service ceiling is just wrong. I expected the jet engines in KSP to operate at 10km at differing efficiencies, but was sorely disappointed that most can't even reach that altitude. I mean their fuel efficiency already sucks, and their thrust is abysmal compared to their RL counterparts, at least what they can do is let us have semi-realistic service ceilings for the different engines. Thanks for mentioning that LGG, that's the reason I've never wrote a patch for the jet engines in KSP. I can't wrap my head around the whole curves thing for settings. The more I tried to learn about them, the more confused I got.
  2. Can't deny the physical traits of Kerbin. But as stated from the Wiki: The atmosphere of Kerbin is patterned after Earth's U.S. Standard Atmosphere (USSA), though with the vertical height scale reduced by 20%. Kerbin's "base" temperature and atmospheric pressure can be very closely approximated using the equations of the USSA, where Kerbin's geometric altitude, z, is converted to Earth's geopotential altitude, h, using the equation: . Since I'm no Math guru, I can't run the formula for both Kerbin and Earth. But looking at the graphs for both Kerbin and Earth, it looks like Kerbins atmospheric pressure is actually higher at the relative altitudes until 65km. But at that point, I can be wrong.
  3. These are for Earth, but if I remember correctly, the atmosphere for Kerbin is scaled directly off Earths' atmosphere. So turbo fans should have the exact same performance as the real life counter parts. PS, just checked before posting, Yes, Kerbin's and Earths atmospheric pressure is the exact same. Kerbin has a thick, warm atmosphere with a mass of approximately 4.7×1016 kilograms, a sea level pressure of 101.325 kilopascals (1 atmosphere), and a depth of 70,000 meters. The atmosphere contains oxygen and can support combustion. Source: Kerbin - Kerbal Space Program Wiki Atmospheric pressure, also known as barometric pressure (after the barometer), is the pressure within the atmosphere of Earth. The standard atmosphere (symbol: atm) is a unit of pressure defined as 101,325 Pa (1,013.25 hPa), which is equivalent to 1013.25 millibars (unit now deprecated),[1] 760 mm Hg, 29.9212 inches Hg, or 14.696 psi.[2] The atm unit is roughly equivalent to the mean sea-level atmospheric pressure on Earth; that is, the Earth's atmospheric pressure at sea level is approximately 1 atm. Source: Atmospheric pressure - Wikipedia
  4. Not a bad idea. I would love to display some of my more memorable ships.
  5. I can't agree more. There needs to be more variety for jet engines. More placement, size, performance options. True one piece nacelles for under wing, on wing, on fuselage. They also need to be tuned to better show the real performance of jet engines. Even the smallest turbo fan is rated to ~9.3km. (Most efficient altitude, not max ceiling.) Most commercial bypass turbo fans ceiling is 13.7km. Some military turbo fans with reheat can exceed 15.5km. (I'm not including the SR-71, A-12, & U-2 as they were specially designed to fly above 19.8km.)
  6. They make an appearance in the trailer video and others. So there is a good chance that they will be stock.
  7. Maybe they are going to rely on Valve's Proton for Linux game play. (Or some other Windows to Linux translation program.) Maybe they already have someone running the game in Linux using translation software and they are reporting no major issues. We just don't know. Linux for the M1 chip, that was quicker than expected. There maybe hope for an Apple exclusive build in the future.
  8. The people who are working on them are artists 1st, coders if need be. Intercept could be responding to play testers gripes or someone crunched the numbers and seen that there was no good options for handling heat without spamming radiators.
  9. Yay!!! No more spamming radiators to deal with high heat parts. Also making radiators look stylish is a great bonus.
  10. I'd rather have the 100m beams. It would make the interstellar ships quicker to design and piece together. If Intercept keeps with the scale of parts shown in the trailer, the small spherical tanks are ~40m in diameter, the large ones are ~120m in diameter. Basically think FFT sized parts as stock. (I've said it before, a lot of the super sized parts shown in the trailer looks to be from an older version of Roverdude's FFT mod.) Longer parts will be necessary. Which, in my opinion, would be awesome to have. No more tedious duplication if short parts if you want a ship larger than 100m yet alone 1km ship. A huge savings of processing power because you don't have to use 2000 parts to make a 1km ship, you only need a few hundred parts total.
  11. The goal of any space program is to avoid any uncontrolled explosions. Not create them willingly.
  12. But the images show have an atmosphere, Rask and Rusk obviously don't have atmospheres. They are barren rocks. We also don't know the gravity of these planets. Any off gassing, debris could be thrown directly into space. Any gasses that may remain, would be so thin it wouldn't matter much.
  13. As it would be in real life. Not every planet can or will support life like NMS. Nor is it reasonable to think every planet should have it's own theme to it. Rask and Rusk is different than any other planet will be in KSP. They are breaking up while slowly spiraling to their doom. How is that boring? Do they need an amusement park added to each planet to make them more different? There probably will be, but you will have to stay on the planet and explore it to find the interesting bits to it. No, it was politics that killed the thought of a moon base, not that there was nothing up there. We don't even know what is exactly on the moon and there is plenty we can learn from the moon. The only reason anyone is trying now is to say they are the first to establish one. Basically political bragging rights, nothing more. (The same reason why the Apollo program was greenlit.)
  14. It isn't possible as far as we know. The way the planets are made doesn't allow modifications to the planets textures and colliders in game.
  15. Caves may not be possible or not implemented upon release. There has been many debates about the feasibly and technical details on how to add caves.
  16. You caught my error. It's backwards Spanish. If you used chatterer, the modders do the same with English. It's all reversed audio.
  17. Why even discuss warp drives? It has been said already; no warp drives, jump drives, worm holes, star gates, basically no FTL drives or ways to circumvent the hard way to travel to new star systems will be added into the game. FTL travel will be mods only.
  18. You can tell the size by the SSTOs on the nose of the ship. They are a typical 30-40m length for smaller SSTO space planes. (Let it sink in that you can barely see them in some of the screenshots.) Yeah, that ship is about 1km long.
  19. Hasn't the 'base in a box' idea already been confirmed?
  20. You can keep the comments fairly broad to avoid false triggers. There is still a bunch of typical situations and operations that dialog would have to be written for. That is if you real want to use a real language. If you continue to do the reverse Spanish gibberish, you really don't have to worry about the different spoken languages. Just don't make the comms completely random, so you know when to expect them. No more jump scares because of random comms. I'm a soft pass on this idea. I liked chatterer until I didn't. For me it's mainly personal reasons why I don't want it. Technical and logistical reasons are minimal as stated above. I'm more thinking about how annoying it will become after time. I'm thinking about the waste of storage space after I stop using it.
  21. You're talking like a stock sticker or full texture replacement? The reason I mentioned flags is KSP1 does have large placeable decals that are based off the custom flag system. If you're referring to texture replacement, we'll have to see how the models and textures are being done after release.
  22. It's already been confirmed that you can recolor your craft, buildings, suits. You can even do metallics that will reflect the surroundings. Adding custom flags, should be available to do since you can do it in KSP1. We think you will have some ability to customize your Kerbals, but that hasn't been officially confirmed yet.
  23. There will be dedicated colony and base buildings in KSP2. You won't have to worry about building your own. Glass for canopies and wind screens for custom built cabins, it's a nice idea.
  • Create New...