Jump to content

s_gamer101

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    294

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by s_gamer101

    Toggleable Heat Shields

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    On 4/26/2023 at 10:16 PM, caipi said:

    Or what would be the point or difference of your suggestion of non-ablative heat shields compared to existing heat tolerance values already in the parts - and then added (again?) to parts?

    The difference from "heat shield is enabled" to "heat shield is disabled" would be:

    • Visual heat shield plates appear on the part (the texture changes)
    • The mass is slightly increased to simulate their weight
    • The heat tolerance is greatly increased. I suggest to give it the heat tolerance of a 10 meter heat shield
    On 4/26/2023 at 10:16 PM, caipi said:

    Are you suggesting to be able to increase a parts heat tolerance to let's say 6000 via a slider (e.g. "applying a special coating" as real life explanation/justification)?

    Yes, basically. But the mass should increase with it. And the texture should change as well

    Toggleable Heat Shields

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, darthgently said:

    why shouldn't an integrated ablative surface with a slider for amt of ablator be an option in the *editor* as long as mass and cost was adjusted accordingly? Not sure I'm seeing your point.

    You didn't get my point there. My point is: The heat shield should be non-ablative and therefore not even have ablator at all. But if it does have ablator, yes, then a slider would be nice.

    Maneuvering needs a complete overhaul

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted · Edited by s_gamer101

    On 4/25/2023 at 8:39 AM, SirDeadPuppy said:

    this sucks they need a better system or to explane it like how the hell am im suppose to know when a window is?

    Now this doesn't have anything to do with the maneuvering UI. KSP 1 didn't tell you when to launch either. What you are looking for is something like this. (it's for KSP 1 but should work for 2 as well)

    More tips below the spoiler tag:

    Spoiler

    Duna (to which you are referring to as "Mars") is the planet you want to practice with, since you don't have to worry about inclination there. Go to the site that I've linked and use it to calculate the so-called "phase angle", the illustration on the site shows you what this angle is. For now, don't worry about the other angle, that's something you can worry about when you'll do more advanced stuff. Launch your ship to low Kerbin ("Earth") orbit and time warp until Duna and Kerbin approximately have the right phase angle, eyeballing it should be close enough. Then, you need to do your prograde burn on the dark side of Kerbin (the side that currently doesn't get sunlight), as always when travelling to a location in the outer solar system. Plan your prograde burn with a maneuver node. You should now get a Duna encounter with only after just some small adjustments.

    But so much about "the new features make the game more accesible for new players"

    Opt In KSP2 to Geforce Now

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    22 hours ago, ChainofChaos said:

    also able to play it in my Mac too.

    Mac support is planned as far as I know, but not in the near future.

    22 hours ago, ChainofChaos said:

    However, KSP2 requires RTX GPU which I don't currently have

    The performance will almost certainly improve a lot. The performance of the current early acces version is really awful, and I say that as someone who runs the game on an expensive gaming PC and has built ships in KSP 1 that litteraly have thousands of parts. Building ships like some of the bigger ones I've built in KSP 1 is currently pretty much impossible in KSP 2 due to the bad performance, no matter what hardware is used. And the hardware requirements are indeed very high for many people. But I'm pretty sure the devs are aware of that and will make it better, they want to sell the game to as much people as possible after all and not just to some people who borrowed a spare supercomputer from NASA.

    So at some point, you will probably be able to run KSP 2 on your machine.

    Toggleable Heat Shields

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    On 2/27/2023 at 9:05 AM, X52 said:

    An ablator slider would also be nice.

    I think non-ablative heat shields like the one used on the space shuttle would certainly be more realistic and well-fitting for that purpose. In fact, ablative heat shields are really unfitting for anything that is reusable, because in real life, you cannot just refill ablative heat shields as far as I know, because the "ablator" is more or less the heat shield itself.

     

    But I agree with the rest that you said.

    21 hours ago, darthgently said:

    I would throw in here that an engineer + repair kits should be able to replenish ablator

    I strongly disagree. Wikipedia says the following about ablative heat shields:

    Quote

    An ablative heat shield consists of a layer of plastic resin, the outer surface of which is heated to a gas, which then carries the heat away by convection.

    Obviously it would be necessary to add a new layer of plastic resin to the entire heat shield. How an engineer is supposed to do that on an EVA using nothing but some tools available on a spacecraft is already questionable. And also, to add the plastic resin, you'd have to bring plastic resin in the first palce. And to restore a completely depleted heat shield, you'd have to bring almost the entire heat shield's mass worth of plastic resin. And then you could just as well bring another heat shield.

    Design your own command part

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    On 4/3/2023 at 6:03 AM, Superluminaut said:

    Would this sacrifice IVA? Most likely. But we would still have the old parts for those. Although, procedurally generated IVAs could be done, may not always look great though.

    The idea of having some command pods that have IVA and some that don't sounds like something that doesn't fit into the game. Features like IVA need to be constistent. And also, looking at how much effort the devs put into making the game look beautiful, it seems like a step backwards to add something procedurally-generatet that "may not always look great" in my opinion.

    Floating colonies in gas giants

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    On 3/31/2023 at 10:47 PM, sir_frost said:

    The only reliable source of power that can be sourced from a hydrogen gas gigant would probably be wind power.

    this seam counter intuitive when airships glide with the wind. 

    but we make a tall craft with a wind turbine below, hanging like a pendulum beneath the craft.
    the the craft is placed in a way that allows the bottom part to drag in another another region with a different wind direction.
    since it will act like a neutrally buoyant pendulum it would be stable and gravity would counteract the torque from the wind differential.

    the downside is that you would have winds potentially blowing stuff of the platform. since the entire craft would experience relative motion compared to the surrounding atmosphere .

    i have no idea if using wind shear to power stuff will work, but it is a fun thought experiment.    

    I'm not sure if this even makes sense, I'll have to think about it. But do I understand that correctly that you want to place it in a place where there are 2 wind currents exactly above each other that constantly blow with the same speed but in the exact opposite directions? Wind systems aren't constant. And why would such a wind system even exist on a gas giant.

    And also, are there even any plans to add weather to this game? Because if wind won't be properly simulated, I think it would be a bit weird if they'd add wind turbines anyway.

    On 3/31/2023 at 2:28 AM, uglyduckling81 said:

    wouldn't be that hard to figure out. You just need to go deep enough where the pressure is roughly the density of the ocean. Then you could pretty much have anything you wanted floating around down there with enough displacement.

    That would make the base a hard-to-reach place. And I don't think you need to go that deep to make a working balloon

    On 3/30/2023 at 9:37 PM, Nicrose said:

    I'm pretty sure this is already planned. In the most recent AMA they mentioned something about orbital colonies so just park the colony in an orbit of Jool and you're good :)

    That, on the other hand, is truly un-kerbal and sounds just boring in my opinion.

    Why is everyone always looking for a reason why stuff would be usefull in some sort of career mode? Isn't "it is cool" more than reason enough to build something in KSP?

    Floating colonies in gas giants

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    On 3/30/2023 at 2:19 PM, cocoscacao said:

    Also, how realistic would that be? Winds in gas giants would be pretty strong, me thinks.

    Ideed they are, since no mountains stand in their way to even slightly slow them down. Storms on gas giants can easily grow to a size where their winds go around the entire planet and reach speeds of hundreds or maybe even thousands of meters per seconds. So in real life, it might not be advisable to put balloons in there unless you don't care if they regularly circumnavigate the planet on a unpredictable trajectory at an incredible speed (and neglecting the dangers of lightning strikes)

    On 4/2/2023 at 9:50 AM, Nicrose said:

    Ohhhhh I respectfully disagree with that, it just doesn't feel very kerbal imo

    How is a big city built on a hot air ballon floating in Jools atmosphere whith a spaceplane runway on top of it not kerbal in your opinion?

    On 3/30/2023 at 4:28 PM, sir_frost said:

    the other thing we can consider is to build a Venus analogy in KSP 2. 
    a rocky planet with a thick dense atmosphere. and a surface that is perhaps to hot or with pressure to high for vessels to operate.
    in this kind of atmosphere blimps, dirigibles and hot air balloons would all work great. 

    That sounds really unnecessary. What would be the purpose of a planet with a solid surface that cannot be reached with a spacecraft or anythin else in a game about space exploration. A place that is unreachable isn't fun.

    Center of mass indicator that actually shows the center of mass

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted · Edited by s_gamer101

    Okay, this is pure speculation now, but maybe it's because in move mode, the CoM is constantly being updated because the game expects you to move the ship which also moves the CoM while in build mode, it just calculates it once and then stops updating it because someone forgot that CoM can change in build mode too. Which would mean it is rather a bug than the absence of a feature.

    DV for LKO -> Pol Surface

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    10 hours ago, SkyFall2489 said:

    For a mission I'm planning, I need to get from Low Kerbin Orbit to the surface of Pol. Due to mass constraints, I might have a tight delta V budget, and want to know how much delta V I'll need. I think I can pull off a capture assist with Tylo or Laythe, but a full KEKKJ chain on the way to Jool is gonna be too risky. (especially because I'm doing it on an LMP server where I can't quicksave/quickload.)

    If you want to do a Tylo or Laythe flyby, watch out for stuff like Vall moving in the way and compromising the entire flyby route. The trajectory on the map screen isn't perfectly precise when it comes to SOI changes (which is by the way not something the game can be blamed for, because it is mathematically impossible to exactly solve the Kepler equation and I'm pretty sure this is essential for the way KSP predicts SOI changes) so you always have to watch out for unwanted flybys in the Jool system. If you have trajectorys installed and you have faith in the heath resistance of your ship, you could attempt aerobraking at Jool, but I do not even remember if I have ever tried that myself to be honest and I don't know if it is safe.

    Hi!

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    12 hours ago, jounce said:

    wait youre the one who made the jool ssto minus magic wings?

    It is indeed the Lt. Duckweed we're talking to

    39 minutes ago, jounce said:

    use part clipping

    Of course, how did I not figure that out - sometimes I'm really lost

    Hi!

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    9 hours ago, Lt_Duckweed said:

    Using a 0.625m nose cone on the back face of a rapier will only partially remove the back face drag, since it only occludes 1/4 of the back face area.  To fully remove it you have to use at least a 1.25m nose cone.

    This makes sense, but doesn't that overheat in closed-cycle mode?

    Help with Eve spaceplane troubleshooting

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    eXNdQUq.png

    This is my spaceplane. It is supposed to be able to take of from Eve and gain some altitude using its propeller engines that are inside those 3 service bays. (Before anyone is going to say anything about Eve SSTO's, this isn't supposed to be an SSTO, it only has to reach a suborbital trajectory over Eve) Problems:

    • When I teleport it to Eve for testing, most of the times the landing gear gets overstressed pretty soon and just explodes before I even accelerate. How do I make my landing gear more reliable?
    • For the reason mentioned above, I haven't done a proper test flight so far and therefore I have no idea if those propellers have even nearly enough trust. The current propeller setup is as follows:
      • 6 medium-sized breaking ground rotors, each of them has 8 ducted-fan blades attached to it. The deploy angle will be manually adjusted for optimal trust during the flight
         

    Also if you see other stuff that you think is wrong with my design, feel free to tell me

    Fulfilling the contract "Build a new orbital station around Kerbin"

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    18 minutes ago, gaz123 said:

    Doesn't seem to matter.  Still don't get the message that I have not completed the contract. 

    Here's a screenshot of what I get in flight:

    screenshot

    I can immediatly see on your screenshot that you have not fullfilled all the requirements:
    "Build a new station that has an antenna [...]" is not fullfilled. I can see that your station has a docking port and an antenna and I assume it can generate power too, but it is essential for those contract to build the station in the VAB after accepting the contract. Using a previously build craft will not work.

    Procedural wings are ok but don't replace "normal" wings from KSP 1

    in KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion

    Posted

    I can't edit the poll after people have already voted (which makes sense of course)

    24 minutes ago, cocoscacao said:

    We need an option for a resounding no.

    28 minutes ago, Lyneira said:

    I'm with you on the issues you quoted, but I think these can be solved with UI/UX improvements to the existing procedural wing system.

    Now after reading your suggestions I must admit, with those UI imprevements the procedural wings might indeed become a suitable replacement for the old wings and I haven't thought of that before.

×
×
  • Create New...