• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

79 Excellent

About enewmen

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

1,025 profile views
  1. I doubt the final version will be anything like the trailer. MS Flight Simulator already looks excellent in the pre-alpha (for example) and shows pre-alpha should at least show-off the graphics engine, physics, and UI - without the content, testing ,etc. Anyway, I hope you're right and I can dream the KSP2 game-play will be like the trailer.
  2. Again. Happy New Year 2020! I totally appreciate the continued development! I think Kopernicus will be important for a LONG time because it may be a year until KSP2 arrives. From viewing the pre-alpha gameplay, I don't think it looks much better than KSP1. So we still need Kopernicus for lots of interstellar exploring.
  3. YES. Take off from Kerbin, land on EVE, THEN takeoff from EVE and land on Duna, THEN takeoff from Duna and land on the Mun, then RETURN and Land on Kerbin. Possible refuel in orbit needed after landing on 2-3 heavy planets. The warp-drive is often used to save on fuel for travel and reaching orbit. A large folding radiator is also needed for a long & slow decent on heavy planets/moon (Kerbin/Eve/Laythe, etc) . EDIT: You didn't think I'll leave the Kerbals on Eve's surface?
  4. Ha Ha. I was so worried about never reclaiming vehicles and re-using precious liquid fuel for the next mission. I harvested anti-hydrogen and after 1 year (Kerbin time) made a comfortable 1.8 Billion. I think I can afford to reclaim some vehicles now. Previously I made a nice 90 Million recovering anti-matter.
  5. Here are my example that can land on the Mun, Duna, and EVE - all the same ship. And of course takes off like an airplane to Kerbin orbit and lands. No cheats, just using USI life-support, Near Future, and of course KSPI. It has supplies and life-support for 100 days. Also stuffed a mobile science lab to reset experiments. I can also do the Breaking Ground surface missions. The main engines are folding Warp, nuclear turbo-jet, and the Vista Fusion (scaled down to 2.5m and weight centered on the bottom belly). Radiators are not stacked, they just fold out when high-above a planet. I upgraded the fans to nuclear turbo-jet because it worked better on Duna. The clamp on top us used mainly for controlling on the top-centered surface for non-atmosphere takeoff & landings. I also upgraded with power-receivers later so all power needed can come from beam-power while not in an atmosphere. I also tried to use OPT space-planes, but the stock planes seemed to look & work a little better. When in an atmosphere, it flies like an airplane. In no atmosphere, it lands like a lunar lander. My humble 2-cent example.
  6. Yes, the warp drive makes a great SSTO. But the problem is how to get it back to the Kerbal Space Center - THEN attach another bulky/awkward payload to the same SSTO warp vehicle. Reusing a SSTO is difficult, that's why I'm looking for a cheap/disposable rocket as well. I guess the only way to make the SSTO re-usable is to have the SSTO (after it came back to the KSC) attach with the payload using clamps and wheels. If I can make the SSTO nicely reusable, then I can also make low-tech SSTO planes usable as well. It sees like a correct/re-usable SSTO is a lot of work to be useful. Any ideas?
  7. Hi all. I'm getting fairly high-tech now. But I'm still looking for an expendable high-tech & low cost way to launch heavy payloads to Kerbin sub-orbit. I'll rather not use some very expensive nuclear engine or an anti-gravity warp-engine worth much more than the payload. I always end up using huge/dumb solid booster engines. The closest thing I can find is the Deliverance. Any ideas? Thanks!
  8. I think I found another problem. I'm able to run the Vista at FULL power with NO reactors on board.. I disable the reactor, then I can get 800kN from the Vista. I did this before thinking there is a reactor built-in to the Vista engine fusing liquid deuterium & liquid tritium, then got full power. With a reactor giving power, I need a VERY Powerful > 1GW to get good thrust. If another reactor is necessary, then I don't see any advantage over the Plasma Wakefield Accelerator. The screenshot shows how I got the 800kN. I just disabled the Antimatter and CP.
  9. Agree. I'm hoping KSP2 doesn't get "dumbed down" too much. Personally, I hope to see some advanced on/off settings. Like N-body physics, speed of light = real SOL delays in radio communications & relays (need a pilot for deep space if you can't wait hours/days to get/send a probe response, YEARS if going interstellar in GU ! ), full life support (supplies, water, electric, agroponics, etc) like in USI, ray tracing on/off (dedicated hardware or shader based) Etc. With all this, NASA, SpaceX, etc can use KSP for early planning for real missions to help find obvious problems. Keep advanced setting off for simple (mostly early stock KSP1) missions, just want to do SSTO or watch huge monstrosity rockets take off/blow up, etc.
  10. Hi. It looks like the Vista Fusion Engine lost all it's power moving from TO Used to get 800kN thrust. Now just 34-35nK, even with large radiators and a powerful antimatter reactor. The new Vista Engine doesn't seem to generate much power anymore. Please see the screenshots. Thanks!
  11. While I agree trailers should not be compared with the real game, there should be a huge improvement from a small low budget team 10 years ago (Squad did an amazing job!). KSP2 is now owned by Private Division/Take2, should be able to afford more, and use 2020 tech. The Witcher 3 is nearly 5 years old, so expecting a full DX11/12 implementation is too much? Seems to me KSP2 is begging to be ray-traced for the deep-space high-contrast feel , you get the idea: my 2-cents worth. High contrast video example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFC71rFejvo https://youtu.be/70fFSa-3TAA Huge areas in high detail is also possible. ALL of planet Earth is rendered here in real-time ACTUAL Pre-Alpha gameplay. This even has full weather and a fully working cockpit! Only requires a GTX 1070, 16 gigs RAM, 4-core CPU. This gameplay looks better than the KSP2 trailer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TY56kA8oY0 Here is an example of what the Unity engine ray-tracing is capable of in real-time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG7DDXwYpD0 An Nvidia demo in real-time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNmhJx8yPLk Procedural fractally-landscaped planets done in 1982 no less. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKOwIVjwSPc
  12. It seems KSP2 won't come out until AFTER March 2020.It could take a long as early 2021. The delay keeps me VERY interested in GU and I hope GU development continues (already played a ton of KSS). GU with additional systems can make a very long carrier mode and it seems there will be plenty of time for that. https://www.pcgamer.com/kerbal-space-program-2-release-date-multiplayer-everything-we-know/ Personally I'm disappointed with KSP2. The KSP2 Pre-Alpha gameplay graphics looks more like KSP1 than the KSP2 trailer - not the photo-realistic high-res texture tessellation/high polygon count/ray-traced look. The Pre-Alpha KSP2 gameplay also has flat, backward looking interface (viewed from closed door previews). I hope all this gets fixed before the KSP2 release. Also, plenty of modding can still be done on KSP2 when released !
  13. @zer0Kerbal & Zorg: Did a clean CKAN minimal install, this time ONLY installing Near Future "Cryogenic Engines" - that also installed the B9 dependency . Worked this time. Thanks!
  14. I have the same problem. The only way I could fix it was to manually remove the B9PartSwitch. Can't remove using CKAN because B9 is required by Near Future "Cryogenic Engines" (Nertea). I have the Community Resource Pack installed.
  15. Some RCS are not able to use tweekscale. I only checked these, maybe there are more. HeFt-5 doesn't have what LiFt-5 does.. Is this intentional? Please check, thanks! BTW, I find the 5-way RCS with high ISP very useful - also without needing extra mono-propellant.. EDIT: I think this is made by Near Future, not KSPI-E. Apologies.