Bartybum

Members
  • Content Count

    270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

122 Excellent

About Bartybum

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree. I think the best case for this game would be to be KSP 1 (although a proper career mode), as well as 2. It really needs to explore the same stuff the first did, as well as all the new stuff too.
  2. What can I say, I have magic powers
  3. Could this not be solved fairly easy with some programming? Check whether the ship's a dirigible, and if it is and it's at a standstill then freeze it in place. The only real problem I could see would be weather currents affecting the ship's position
  4. Oh no no, I mean have a mining ship that takes raw resources to a nearby processing facility. To separate helium and hydrogen there may be some more complex and heavy equipment required than what can be afforded on a spacecraft.
  5. A derrick/floating installation kinda seems superfluous if you think about the logistics of the whole operation. At its most basic, the derrick is just a floating pump with a reactor to power it. If you have a tanker ship that needs to rendezvous with the derrick to load the gas, then you're burning through a lot of fuel to slow all the way down, collect it and then get back into orbit. You'll end up chewing through all that dV just to stop and hook up with a pump. At that rate you may as well just carry the pump with you, scoop up the gas, and take it to an orbital refinery. If you're flying a ship with an efficient fusion reactor then you have no need for a mining installation to begin with.
  6. As long as you have an atmosphere, you can have lift. Assuming you have a flying fusion reactor that can scoop up the hydrogen and extract energy from it without violating energy conservation laws then it's totally possible. In reality though, a permanent fusion aircraft would be neither possible nor responsible, because of material fatigue life and safety precautions (what if you experience a reactor shut down in flight? That's a likely goodbye sweet prince). Eventually you'd need to punch back into orbit, dock with a newer transport and then discard the old one. At that rate, it's likely more convenient just to have a dirigible. To be honest, while they are cool as hell, I wouldn't really see any purpose in having dirigible installations/colonies versus orbital counterparts equipped with atmospheric skimmer aircraft to handle mining. Assuming compact fusion works, I feel like there's less material speculation with orbital installations anyway.
  7. I probably should've asked about density rather than pressure.
  8. Wow, now isn't that spicy. Cheers peeps
  9. Are floating bases in gas giants even possible in real life? Would the pressures and temperatures not be too high for current material capabilities?
  10. I think it's not even remotely worth worrying about
  11. I consider myself in the core group, because I think options are necessary to help cater to more casual and inexperienced players, which has been the general consensus here AFAIK. However, I've seen no indication of us in this thread wanting mods to be made standard. I also don't agree with the idea that we have an agenda to rush the game. To me opt-out is by far the way to go - this is the game, and if it's too hard for your liking, here's some things you can disable to help you along. Balance the game to be played to its fullest first, and then sort the other stuff out.
  12. Amen, wouldn't mind if people were kinder to each other. Big deal if someone wants weapons in stock. I don't care much for weapons either, but there's no need to gate-keep over different tastes. "WeApOnS dOn'T bElOnG iN KsP" Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, maaan Peeps definitely need so be a bit more tolerant of one another.